Notices
Results 1 to 29 of 29

Thread: Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifice,

  1. #1 Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifice, 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    675
    Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifice, it is penance for sin.




    8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
    (New Testament | Hebrews5:8)

    Yes, even though Jesus was perfect, he was still able to learn, and grow. One way to define perfect would be a being who eternally progresses. Perfection then is always in evolution.
    Suffering comes from sin.

    Sacrifice is done for or to God.

    If Jesus/God sacrifices to or for himself as God then I submit that this is not a sacrifice.

    If you were to sacrifice something to yourself, where is the sacrifice? All you have done is transferred something from your right hand to your left. In other words, no sacrifice at all.

    If Jesus was doing anything with his death, it would then have been atonement for his sins.

    We all learn from our mistakes and sins.
    Thank God Eve chose to eat of the tree of knowledge or we could not learn as Jesus did.

    Was the death of Jesus a penance or an atonement for his sins?


    Regards
    DL


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 Re: Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifi 
    Forum Sophomore Gods servant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    173
    the guy with snake avatar


    Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifice, it is penance for sin.




    8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
    (New Testament | Hebrews5:

    Yes, even though Jesus was perfect, he was still able to learn, and grow. One way to define perfect would be a being who eternally progresses. Perfection then is always in evolution.
    Suffering comes from sin.

    Sacrifice is done for or to God.

    If Jesus/God sacrifices to or for himself as God then I submit that this is not a sacrifice.

    If you were to sacrifice something to yourself, where is the sacrifice? All you have done is transferred something from your right hand to your left. In other words, no sacrifice at all.
    8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
    (New Testament | Hebrews5:
    why do you talk so much sh&*. were did you get this scripture from, grammer is like f* up and hello!, did you read the chapter about his death and resurrection ?


    If Jesus was doing anything with his death, it would then have been atonement for his sins.
    another sh* talk. whats sins are you claiming" JESUS" committed?

    We all learn from our mistakes and sins.
    Thank God Eve chose to eat of the tree of knowledge or we could not learn as Jesus did.

    Was the death of Jesus a penance or an atonement for his sins?
    another failure!
    perhaps, if eve did not eat fruit of knoweldge we won't be the genocide manics we are + so many immoralities we humans have, but that is for another question. = noob


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 Re: Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifi 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by Gods servant
    the guy with snake avatar



    another failure!
    perhaps, if eve did not eat fruit of knoweldge we won't be the genocide manics we are + so many immoralities we humans have, but that is for another question. = noob
    Jesus/God used genocide against man. A sin of high order.

    Reason enough to atone I think. Do you?

    Regards
    DL
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Sophomore Gods servant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    173
    do you have some hatred against chiristian "god". your general view of christian so messed, i can't w8 for you next question.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Re: Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifi 
    sox
    sox is offline
    Forum Masters Degree sox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Uk - Scotland
    Posts
    598
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatest I am
    One way to define perfect would be a being who eternally progresses.
    A bad definition IMO. Surely something which is perfect no longer has to progress?

    And something which eternally progresses is furthest from perfection.?

    __________________________________________________ _____________
    "Happy is the man who can recognise in the work of To-day a connected portion of the work of life, and an embodiment of the work of Eternity. The foundations of his confidence are unchangeable, for he has been made a partaker of Infinity." - James Clerk Maxwell
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 Re: Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifi 
    sox
    sox is offline
    Forum Masters Degree sox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Uk - Scotland
    Posts
    598
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatest I am
    Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifice, it is penance for sin.




    8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
    (New Testament | Hebrews5:8)

    Yes, even though Jesus was perfect, he was still able to learn, and grow. One way to define perfect would be a being who eternally progresses. Perfection then is always in evolution.
    Suffering comes from sin.

    Sacrifice is done for or to God.

    If Jesus/God sacrifices to or for himself as God then I submit that this is not a sacrifice.

    If you were to sacrifice something to yourself, where is the sacrifice? All you have done is transferred something from your right hand to your left. In other words, no sacrifice at all.

    If Jesus was doing anything with his death, it would then have been atonement for his sins.

    We all learn from our mistakes and sins.
    Thank God Eve chose to eat of the tree of knowledge or we could not learn as Jesus did.

    Was the death of Jesus a penance or an atonement for his sins?


    Regards
    DL
    Come on, you can't be serious? This is something even children under the age of ten are taught at school.

    The death of jesus was for OUR benefit. It had nothing to do with anything he had done.

    __________________________________________________ _____________
    "Happy is the man who can recognise in the work of To-day a connected portion of the work of life, and an embodiment of the work of Eternity. The foundations of his confidence are unchangeable, for he has been made a partaker of Infinity." - James Clerk Maxwell
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by Gods servant
    do you have some hatred against chiristian "god". your general view of christian so messed, i can't w8 for you next question.
    Should I respect a God that uses genocide against mankind?
    Should you?

    Regards
    DL
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8 Re: Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifi 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by sox
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatest I am
    Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifice, it is penance for sin.




    8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
    (New Testament | Hebrews5:8)

    Yes, even though Jesus was perfect, he was still able to learn, and grow. One way to define perfect would be a being who eternally progresses. Perfection then is always in evolution.
    Suffering comes from sin.

    Sacrifice is done for or to God.

    If Jesus/God sacrifices to or for himself as God then I submit that this is not a sacrifice.

    If you were to sacrifice something to yourself, where is the sacrifice? All you have done is transferred something from your right hand to your left. In other words, no sacrifice at all.

    If Jesus was doing anything with his death, it would then have been atonement for his sins.

    We all learn from our mistakes and sins.
    Thank God Eve chose to eat of the tree of knowledge or we could not learn as Jesus did.

    Was the death of Jesus a penance or an atonement for his sins?


    Regards
    DL
    Come on, you can't be serious? This is something even children under the age of ten are taught at school.

    The death of jesus was for OUR benefit. It had nothing to do with anything he had done.
    Any that use a scapegoat to absolve their responsibilities for sin are immoral.

    Jesus/God sacrificing himself to Jesus/God is not sacrificing anything.

    Regards
    DL
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Sophomore Gods servant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    173
    you a lost cause.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by Gods servant
    you a lost cause.
    Thanks for the explanation.

    Regards
    DL
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11 Re: Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifi 
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Quote Originally Posted by sox
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatest I am
    Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifice, it is penance for sin.


    8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
    (New Testament | Hebrews5:8)

    Yes, even though Jesus was perfect, he was still able to learn, and grow. One way to define perfect would be a being who eternally progresses. Perfection then is always in evolution.
    Suffering comes from sin.

    Sacrifice is done for or to God.

    If Jesus/God sacrifices to or for himself as God then I submit that this is not a sacrifice.

    If you were to sacrifice something to yourself, where is the sacrifice? All you have done is transferred something from your right hand to your left. In other words, no sacrifice at all.

    If Jesus was doing anything with his death, it would then have been atonement for his sins.

    We all learn from our mistakes and sins.
    Thank God Eve chose to eat of the tree of knowledge or we could not learn as Jesus did.

    Was the death of Jesus a penance or an atonement for his sins?


    Regards
    DL
    Come on, you can't be serious? This is something even children under the age of ten are taught at school.
    Sunday school, not school, right?

    The death of jesus was for OUR benefit. It had nothing to do with anything he had done.
    Killing for the benefit of others. What a nice, pleasant lesson to learn for children.
    Religious Fundamentalist Club - Member #1.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman SuperflyTNT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    41
    God, is GIA still going on?
    The cake is a lie. I saw it, but it was not really there and merley a trick of the mind...

    If people of the world acted together to make it a harmonous world. We wouldn't need to wait 2000 years for a messiah; we'd save it less than 24 hours...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Sophomore Gods servant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    173
    [quote]Killing for the benefit of others. What a nice, pleasant lesson to learn for children.[/quote

    .lol
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    675
    Vicarious redemption or offering a scapegoat is shirking our responsibility to step up and take our own blame and punishment for our actions.

    This is immoral. To allow someone else to suffer pain or punishment for our own actions shows lack of character.

    A simple example.

    A classroom full of teenagers is at work and the teacher has his back to the class.
    Someone calls out a curse towards the teacher.
    He asks for the culprit to step up and gets no response.
    He offers a punishment to the whole class-hell-, if the culprit does not rise.
    No one does and eventually an innocent student rises to save all the others from hell.

    What should the culprit do. Step up, or shut up and let the innocent suffer punishment?

    I submit that the right thing to do is step up and take his own punishment and not allow the innocent to sacrifice himself for the class.

    People have pride. For the guilty to carry this shame of not stepping up is a blow to pride.

    To let an innocent fall for us is immoral.

    I hope this little scenario explains my position satisfactorily.

    Do you agree with the conclusion?

    Regards
    DL
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15 Re: Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifi 
    Forum Masters Degree Golkarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    510
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatest I am
    Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifice, it is penance for sin.




    8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
    (New Testament | Hebrews5:8)

    Yes, even though Jesus was perfect, he was still able to learn, and grow. One way to define perfect would be a being who eternally progresses. Perfection then is always in evolution.
    Suffering comes from sin.

    Sacrifice is done for or to God.

    If Jesus/God sacrifices to or for himself as God then I submit that this is not a sacrifice.

    If you were to sacrifice something to yourself, where is the sacrifice? All you have done is transferred something from your right hand to your left. In other words, no sacrifice at all.

    If Jesus was doing anything with his death, it would then have been atonement for his sins.

    We all learn from our mistakes and sins.
    Thank God Eve chose to eat of the tree of knowledge or we could not learn as Jesus did.

    Was the death of Jesus a penance or an atonement for his sins?


    Regards
    DL
    Some Christians would say the loving 'part' of God, the part that wants us to go to heaven because He loves us, is sacrificing to the 'just' part of God, that wants us to burn in hell for all the terrible things we've done. I'm not saying I agree with this, but I could debate it, just remember I'm playing devil's advocate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Masters Degree Golkarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    510
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatest I am
    Vicarious redemption or offering a scapegoat is shirking our responsibility to step up and take our own blame and punishment for our actions.

    This is immoral. To allow someone else to suffer pain or punishment for our own actions shows lack of character.

    A simple example.

    A classroom full of teenagers is at work and the teacher has his back to the class.
    Someone calls out a curse towards the teacher.
    He asks for the culprit to step up and gets no response.
    He offers a punishment to the whole class-hell-, if the culprit does not rise.
    No one does and eventually an innocent student rises to save all the others from hell.

    What should the culprit do. Step up, or shut up and let the innocent suffer punishment?

    I submit that the right thing to do is step up and take his own punishment and not allow the innocent to sacrifice himself for the class.

    People have pride. For the guilty to carry this shame of not stepping up is a blow to pride.

    To let an innocent fall for us is immoral.

    I hope this little scenario explains my position satisfactorily.

    Do you agree with the conclusion?

    Regards
    DL
    I wish the Christians on this forum were smarter so I wouldn't have to stick up for them. As the Christian understands it, the entire class is guilty, except one. Not only guilty but infinitely guilty (b/c God is infinitely pissed because he is infinitely good). So there is only two ways of doing this, infinite punishment (hell) or putting those sins on someone who is infinitely good (thus the good and the bad cancel out), I guess death on a cross is the punishment for being neutral.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17 Re: Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifi 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by Golkarian
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatest I am
    Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifice, it is penance for sin.




    8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
    (New Testament | Hebrews5:8)

    Yes, even though Jesus was perfect, he was still able to learn, and grow. One way to define perfect would be a being who eternally progresses. Perfection then is always in evolution.
    Suffering comes from sin.

    Sacrifice is done for or to God.

    If Jesus/God sacrifices to or for himself as God then I submit that this is not a sacrifice.

    If you were to sacrifice something to yourself, where is the sacrifice? All you have done is transferred something from your right hand to your left. In other words, no sacrifice at all.

    If Jesus was doing anything with his death, it would then have been atonement for his sins.

    We all learn from our mistakes and sins.
    Thank God Eve chose to eat of the tree of knowledge or we could not learn as Jesus did.

    Was the death of Jesus a penance or an atonement for his sins?


    Regards
    DL
    Some Christians would say the loving 'part' of God, the part that wants us to go to heaven because He loves us, is sacrificing to the 'just' part of God, that wants us to burn in hell for all the terrible things we've done. I'm not saying I agree with this, but I could debate it, just remember I'm playing devil's advocate.
    What terrible things have the vast bulk of us done in 120 years that should return 1200000000000000000000000000000+ years in hell?

    Even if Hitler spent 1000 yrs in hell for each death that he caused, this by God's standards of an eye for an eye, would be unjust by His own standards.

    There is no devil.

    Regards
    DL
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Masters Degree Numsgil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    708
    It's not penitence. Think of it like this: you have to be 100% awesome to be with God (Heaven). 99.99% awesome doesn't cut it. So if you're not with God, then you're damned. Since only one guy was ever 100% awesome, he has to absorb our unawesomeness for us to get in to heaven.

    What I never understood was how Jesus could absorb our sins and still remain perfect afterwords. Wouldn't it make more sense if Jesus was eternally damned and the rest of humanity got to get in to heaven?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by Numsgil
    It's not penitence. Think of it like this: you have to be 100% awesome to be with God (Heaven). 99.99% awesome doesn't cut it. So if you're not with God, then you're damned. Since only one guy was ever 100% awesome, he has to absorb our unawesomeness for us to get in to heaven.

    What I never understood was how Jesus could absorb our sins and still remain perfect afterwords. Wouldn't it make more sense if Jesus was eternally damned and the rest of humanity got to get in to heaven?
    If the jesus you know is the Jesus/God of Noah's flood then he will be for using genocide against mankind.

    As to sin. To me, to accept vicarious redemption by using a scapegoat is an immoral act in itself. Jesus would not submit us to such.

    We are responsible for our actions, not someone else. If we do not step up then it is we who act in an immoral way. Right?

    Regards
    DL
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Masters Degree Numsgil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    708
    OT God killing people is not an immoral act. People killing people is. With God it's like a rancher culling the herd.

    Anyway, you can personally find scapegoating immoral, but it's really the cornerstone of the whole Judeao-Christian religion. Muslim too, I think. So it's not internally inconsistent for these religions to use scapegoating to cleanse the sins of practitioners.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by Numsgil
    OT God killing people is not an immoral act. People killing people is. With God it's like a rancher culling the herd.

    Anyway, you can personally find scapegoating immoral, but it's really the cornerstone of the whole Judeao-Christian religion. Muslim too, I think. So it's not internally inconsistent for these religions to use scapegoating to cleanse the sins of practitioners.
    You might remember that those religions want sheeple for culling, not people.

    Culling the herd, no. Decimating the herd and putting himself out of business, yes.

    Culling is a small % of the herd. Culling 99.9% is just too stupid for words. If you can't agree with this then follow your stupid master and hope to be the .01% that is not, LOL, culled.


    1: to select from a group : choose <culled the best passages from the poet's work>
    2: to reduce or control the size of (as a herd) by removal (as by hunting) of especially weaker animals ; also : to hunt or kill (animals) as a means of population control.

    I do not see decimation in this dictionary description.

    Regards
    DL
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    2,116
    Golkarian wrote:

    I wish the Christians on this forum were smarter so I wouldn't have to stick up for them. As the Christian understands it, the entire class is guilty, except one. Not only guilty but infinitely guilty (b/c God is infinitely pissed because he is infinitely good).
    Sometime the topics brought up by stupid atheist are so inanely ridiculous, they do no even merit a reasonable answer or explanation.

    I would disagree that God is “infinitely pissed.” I think it is more that He is infinitely disappointed that men choose to take the path that leads them away from eternity in his presence. But this is not a punishment meted out by God, it is a choice made by the individual person. God is not responsible for what happens outside His sphere of influence in eternity. (I do not think God created eternity, but rather only the physical aspects of our Universe.)

    It is not a matter that God desires to punish sinners. If that were the case, “the entire class” would be punished with no hope of evading the punishment. The Bible says that God [knowing their fate] takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. God apparently has a “place” in eternity which is under His control and it is a place of total holiness into which He will not permit the unholy to enter and, therefore, none of us is eligible to enter under that standard. He has, however, provided a way to gain admittance.

    If you are standing outside the theater and do not have a ticket for entry, is the doorman punishing you when he does not let you come in? Is he punishing you because you have neglected to obtain your entry pass?

    Now then, what if He gave you $15 and showed you where the ticket booth is? So now you take the $15 and stick it in your pocket and complain that the doorman is unreasonable and punishing you for not letting you in?

    That is more like what a Christian believes. The Christian believes that when our physical body ceases to function as a living organism, something called a soul or a spirit survives and exists in a different way for all eternity. The Christian believes there are (at least) two possible existences in that eternity – one of them in the presence of a holy and just and loving God and the other(s) someplace else which is less desirable.

    Christians generally believe that the price of admission into God’s presence is the substitutionary death of Jesus as the payment for the ticket, much like the doorman provided a means for admission to the theater. Jesus was the only one who ever actually lived a life worthy of admission into the presence of God and that price of admission is willingly shared to all who will accept it.

    One can refuse to take advantage of hs ticket, but the results are on him, not God.
    Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein

    If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope mitchellmckain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Golkarian
    I wish the Christians on this forum were smarter so I wouldn't have to stick up for them. As the Christian understands it, the entire class is guilty, except one. Not only guilty but infinitely guilty (b/c God is infinitely pissed because he is infinitely good).
    I wish some of the atheists on this forum were smarter. I find it difficult to distinguish between the dumb attacks and the dumb defenses, both putting forward the dumbest ideas of what they think Chrisitanity is about. Please don't defend dumbness of any kind. Let the dumber ideas of Christianity be shredded so that those who speak them can be educated.


    Quote Originally Posted by daytonturner
    Sometime the topics brought up by stupid atheist are so inanely ridiculous, they do no even merit a reasonable answer or explanation.
    Not only that but they adopt a Soviet strategy of ignoring all explantions and repeating the same dumb attacks over and over and over again. This is the way that the ideology of Marx could hold sway over half the world despite being about the dumbest nonsense you can imagine.


    Quote Originally Posted by daytonturner
    God is not responsible for what happens outside His sphere of influence in eternity. (I do not think God created eternity, but rather only the physical aspects of our Universe.)
    Hmmm... This is a very interesting thing for you to say. I don't use usually use this concept of "eternity" but despite that, this sounds a great deal more like my kind of Christianity and the sort of thing I would say than the usual Christian rhetoric that I hear. I would be very interested to hear if this is something you have read in Christian literature somewhere.
    See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

    I now have a blog too: http://astahost.blogspot.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Professor Obviously's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    1,415
    Quote Originally Posted by Numsgil
    It's not penitence. Think of it like this: you have to be 100% awesome to be with God (Heaven). 99.99% awesome doesn't cut it. So if you're not with God, then you're damned. Since only one guy was ever 100% awesome, he has to absorb our unawesomeness for us to get in to heaven.

    What I never understood was how Jesus could absorb our sins and still remain perfect afterwords. Wouldn't it make more sense if Jesus was eternally damned and the rest of humanity got to get in to heaven?
    Maybe Jesus is like a black hole compressing the sins into a infinitely dense singularity.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    2,116
    Mitchell asked:

    This is a very interesting thing for you to say. I don't use usually use this concept of "eternity" but despite that, this sounds a great deal more like my kind of Christianity and the sort of thing I would say than the usual Christian rhetoric that I hear. I would be very interested to hear if this is something you have read in Christian literature somewhere.
    I don't think I have read this anyplace but have merely tried to put Bible concepts together to figure out how I see eternity and what kind of a role God must have there. I don't expect anyone to agree with me; it is only my way of trying to understand within myself.

    I think my starting point is that if we believe God created the Universe, we must believe something predates the Universe. For lack of a more complete concept, we call that predate something eternity which we also consider will post-date the Universe should it come to an end. So, it follows that God existed in eternity before time began and will exist there after time ends.

    The biggest problem with considering eternity is that our finite minds cannot seem to grasp the ideas of timelessness and placelessness. We can give lip service to those ideas, but I don't think we can do a whole lot more.

    At to timelessness in eternity, I think if you asked most people they would say that eternity means endless time. I do not see it that way.

    On a recent TV show about pets, someone commented that if you could ask a dog what time it is, he would say, "It's now, it's now, it's now!" It occurred to me that not only does the dog always accurately know what time it is, he may have a better concept of time in eternity -- it is always now. Interestingly enough, that is not a time we can achieve. We are always in the past or projecting to the future. We just cannot fit ourselves into now. If we think of now in the future, by the time it gets here, it is already in the past.

    Finite time, to me, represents a measurement of space. It is part of how we determine the distance from here to there. Even when we say something is 50 miles away, we tend to think of it as being about an hour away by car. In days gone by, they thought of it as a trip of a couple of days, maybe more. But those of us who use miles find it difficult to understand distances as measured in kilometers. We do not readily think of a 80K trip being approximately an hour trip. That one I can figure because I know that 50 miles is also 80K. But if you hand me a distance of 113K, I will have difficulty understanding just how far that is.

    But the main reason eternity is timeless is because it is also placeless, a concept that seems to conflict with the idea of heaven and hell which sound like "places."

    To me, eternity is one "place" if you could call it that. But like the U.S. is one place, it has more than one jurisdiction. I cannot guess how many "jurisdictions" there are in eternity, but I would guess there are at least two -- one which is under God's influence and whatever is leftover could be one or many jurisdictions beyond God's influence, it would make no difference.

    I don't know if anyone else has expressed eternity in these terms, but this is sort of what makes sense to me.
    Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein

    If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Masters Degree Numsgil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    708
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatest I am
    Quote Originally Posted by Numsgil
    OT God killing people is not an immoral act. People killing people is. With God it's like a rancher culling the herd.

    Anyway, you can personally find scapegoating immoral, but it's really the cornerstone of the whole Judeao-Christian religion. Muslim too, I think. So it's not internally inconsistent for these religions to use scapegoating to cleanse the sins of practitioners.
    You might remember that those religions want sheeple for culling, not people.

    Culling the herd, no. Decimating the herd and putting himself out of business, yes.

    Culling is a small % of the herd. Culling 99.9% is just too stupid for words. If you can't agree with this then follow your stupid master and hope to be the .01% that is not, LOL, culled.
    They have a strong tradition of authoritarianism, if that's what you mean. This might be against modern sensibilities, but the whole Judeao-Christian-Muslim tradition is thousands of years old. Authoritarianism works well in subsistence societies.

    As for the culling, I assume you mean the flood? Let's suppose your a rancher with 10000 heads of cattle. Oops, a rabid dog got in to your coral, and now 9800 heads of cattle have rabies. Rabies is terminal, so you don't have a lot of choice, you have to kill the 9800 infected cows.

    Of course that's an extraordinary circumstance. But by the same token the flood was just a one time thing. He hasn't done anything like that before or since. Or maybe the damage to humanity was not the primary goal. I always imagined dolphin prophets talking about a brief time of plenty where for a few months the world was theirs.

    Or another interpretation: the flood was a baptism for the planet. God tried to get everyone to build a boat, but only Noah and his family and livestock would listen.

    That also assumes a literal interpretation of the flood. A more realistic version is that the story is either 1. allegorical 2. a local phenomena 3. a travelogue, recording a migration by boat.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Masters Degree Numsgil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    708
    Quote Originally Posted by Obviously
    Quote Originally Posted by Numsgil
    It's not penitence. Think of it like this: you have to be 100% awesome to be with God (Heaven). 99.99% awesome doesn't cut it. So if you're not with God, then you're damned. Since only one guy was ever 100% awesome, he has to absorb our unawesomeness for us to get in to heaven.

    What I never understood was how Jesus could absorb our sins and still remain perfect afterwords. Wouldn't it make more sense if Jesus was eternally damned and the rest of humanity got to get in to heaven?
    Maybe Jesus is like a black hole compressing the sins into a infinitely dense singularity.
    Haha, maybe the sinful singularity warps the fabric of morality

    I wonder what the schwarzchild radius for morality is...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by Numsgil
    Quote Originally Posted by Obviously
    Quote Originally Posted by Numsgil
    It's not penitence. Think of it like this: you have to be 100% awesome to be with God (Heaven). 99.99% awesome doesn't cut it. So if you're not with God, then you're damned. Since only one guy was ever 100% awesome, he has to absorb our unawesomeness for us to get in to heaven.

    What I never understood was how Jesus could absorb our sins and still remain perfect afterwords. Wouldn't it make more sense if Jesus was eternally damned and the rest of humanity got to get in to heaven?
    Maybe Jesus is like a black hole compressing the sins into a infinitely dense singularity.
    Haha, maybe the sinful singularity warps the fabric of morality

    I wonder what the schwarzchild radius for morality is...
    In an endless universe every possibility becomes a probability.

    Regards
    DL
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope mitchellmckain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by daytonturner
    Quote Originally Posted by mitchellmckain
    Quote Originally Posted by daytonturner
    God is not responsible for what happens outside His sphere of influence in eternity. (I do not think God created eternity, but rather only the physical aspects of our Universe.)
    This is a very interesting thing for you to say. I don't use usually use this concept of "eternity" but despite that, this sounds a great deal more like my kind of Christianity and the sort of thing I would say than the usual Christian rhetoric that I hear. I would be very interested to hear if this is something you have read in Christian literature somewhere.
    The biggest problem with considering eternity is that our finite minds cannot seem to grasp the ideas of timelessness and placelessness. We can give lip service to those ideas, but I don't think we can do a whole lot more.

    At to timelessness in eternity, I think if you asked most people they would say that eternity means endless time. I do not see it that way.
    It is not this concept of eternity which interested me, but rather this idea of a reality outside of God. It was the implication of your words that there is a natural order which our existence is confronted with, and thus it is not a matter of choosing how we are afflicted by God but a matter of choosing whether we will avail ourselves of God's help in dealing with this reality.

    I have been in recent discussions about the nature of the resurrection and the resurrected body as explained by Paul in 1 Cor 15, and I see in His words a very clear declaration that this is a spiritual resurrection of a spiritual body. But this annihilation of all ideas of space and time in a timeless-dimensionless eternity seems to point towards what I could only call a bodiless resurrection which I certainly don't believe in. I can well believe in a resurrected body that has nothing to do with the atoms and molecules of physical matter but I don't see how I could call something a body at all if it has no spatial quality of extention or temporal quality of motion.

    I do believe that God and all that is spiritual exists outside space and time, BUT I would take that to mean that they are outside the objective measures of PHYSICAL space and time and not that they that are innately timeless or dimensionless. We HAVE a subjective sense of space and time, and so I believe that a spiritual entity would have its own "measure" or sense of its own space and time within themselves and this being outside space and time only means that there is no external spatial-temporal order that they must all fit into, athough they might participate in such an spatial-temporal order as part of a relationship with others as they choose.

    The idea of a spiritual resurrection is only defensible on the basis that the spiritual is MORE real and substantial than the physical and not less than the physical in any way. This make the significance of the resurrection that of establishing this fact that the spiritual is very very real. The very fact that God is spirit should bring complete clarity and substance to the realization that the spiritual is greatest and most substantial reality, compared to which it is really the physical which is lacking in reality, solidity or substance.
    See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

    I now have a blog too: http://astahost.blogspot.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •