Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't have to worry about sin then why did Jesus have to be crucified? We are all sinners. Homosexual acts are sin as are premarital sex and extramarital sex... Selfishness ... Lying...stealing, gossiping, swearing with Gods name . We all probably sin at least 10 times a day. Having a homosexual wedding ceremony probably takes it to outright rebellion levels against God similar to having a satanic wedding ceremony , but I'm sure those people probably don't care .

See... as someone who wasn't raised Christian, I never understood why Jesus has to be crucified in the first place. How does Jesus dying translate to forgiveness of sins? Couldn't God just forgive your sins himself? Why the son/middleman? What about all the thousands of other human beings who were crucified on a cross? Why did they have to die? What was the value in their suffering? Was their suffering less than Jesus, even though they underwent the same horrendous torture?

Ok, this is a theologically complex question, but my understanding is that "sin" has a cost. It is like gravity in that it is part of the reality that God created us in. God could just magically erase sin, I guess, and God could also let us zoom around like Superman but that is not the reality we live in. God could also just make us love him and be perfect, but that is also not the reality we live in- we would just be robots in that case. We have free will, and one of the results of that is sin, and the cost of that sin is death and judgment. Jesus took on that penalty for us. Suffering is the cost of free will and sin. The world we live in is imperfect, which is why there can be great suffering all around us. But our suffering is trivial in the larger scheme of things- that eventually we will live in Heaven with God forever, if we believe in Jesus.

I get that. From a raised-Muslim person like myself it's still strange, as Muslims are taught that it's us against ourselves - we are always judged, and we answer to God fully for everything we did in our lives, no middleman needed. [fwiw I don't believe that either, but it is a little easier to digest].

But so what was the point of Joe Schmoe suffering on the cross, alongside Jesus, and undergoing the same exact amount of pain and torment?

Jesus is God incarnate, there is no middleman. God became human, and experienced everything a regular person experiences- feeling cold, hungry, suffering, friendship, etc. He was not rich or powerful or anything like that, just a regular person. There is no point to any suffering. Not of children in Syria or people on the cross or people in concentration camps or anyone else. We suffer because we live in a broken world. The point is not to make the world perfect, or to be perfect ourselves. We will never completely fix the world or be perfect. The point is to know and love Jesus, and to grow closer to him. Growing closer to Jesus and becoming a better person are two things that feed into each other- as we know God we want to be better, as we become better we want to know God more.

Thanks for completely, repeatedly ignoring my question.

Huh? I thought I did.

The thousands of other people crucified by the Romans in the exact same manner, undergoing the exact same suffering as Jesus... what was their gift? Why is their (equal, possibly even elevated) torment ignored? What was the point of them dying on the cross, those thousands of other people who were brutally crucified? Is their suffering less? And if so, why?

Well, again, I am not some sort of expert, but they are not God. God chose to live as a human, suffer, die (and I guess depending on your interpretation descend into Hell), and pay the cost of death. Because God took on that cost, we do not have to.

I will never claim this makes logical sense. Christianity, when practiced right, is much more compelling in practice. To forgive your enemies, to love others as yourself, to love God, is to show who Jesus really is.

Thank you for this admission - I sincerely appreciate this.

I think this is just why I can never reconcile religion (I'm not claiming that I think Christianity is illogical - I was raised Muslim, and think Islam is equally illogical).

But ethics like loving others as yourself, forgiving enemies, are hardly exclusively Christian values. They pre-date Christianity in other texts and teachings, and are not confined to any one belief system. I know that religion (and mostly the stuff about death) can bring a lot of comfort to a lot of people. But to be a decent, compassionate, kind human being... none of that need be bound to religion and/or belief in a deity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Satan totally says homosexual sex is not a sin .

If so, with that kind of power, then Satan (Shaytan in Islam) are gods, and none of the Abrahamic religions are monotheistic. And yes I know the whole "fallen angel" thing, but it's still a power that God gave to another sort of god, and God wants to see play out for his own amusement, which is not very compassionate at all. God can stop Satan/Shaytan - otherwise, they're not omnipotent. It's all sort of gross and disturbing.

Uhh... what are you talking about?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a homosexual isn't a sin. Having homosexual sex is a sin.

So anal sex among a heterosexual married couple is a sin? Oral sex between a heterosexual couple is a sin?

I think the PP meant that two people of the same gender having sex is a sin, not how they do it... but I had a good giggle.

But what exactly is it, that makes it a sin? Is it the non-procreative sex? Is it two people sharing the same chromosomes being in a close, intimate, but non-sexual relationship? If so, lots of close friendships among same-sex friends may be called into question.

Or, the non-procreative sex of heterosexual couples. What exactly is the sin line?

+1000

The idea that a god would create people a certain way and then say, "oh by the way, you must deny your nature or you're going to hell, sorry" is crazy. I can't even imagine wanting to have a relationship with a god like that.

Being predisposed to a certain sin does not mean that you are going to hell. We are all predisposed to sin. People who are tempted to have sex outside of marriage are predisposed to the exact same type of sin.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Satan totally says homosexual sex is not a sin .

If so, with that kind of power, then Satan (Shaytan in Islam) are gods, and none of the Abrahamic religions are monotheistic. And yes I know the whole "fallen angel" thing, but it's still a power that God gave to another sort of god, and God wants to see play out for his own amusement, which is not very compassionate at all. God can stop Satan/Shaytan - otherwise, they're not omnipotent. It's all sort of gross and disturbing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a homosexual isn't a sin. Having homosexual sex is a sin.

So anal sex among a heterosexual married couple is a sin? Oral sex between a heterosexual couple is a sin?

I think the PP meant that two people of the same gender having sex is a sin, not how they do it... but I had a good giggle.

But what exactly is it, that makes it a sin? Is it the non-procreative sex? Is it two people sharing the same chromosomes being in a close, intimate, but non-sexual relationship? If so, lots of close friendships among same-sex friends may be called into question.

Or, the non-procreative sex of heterosexual couples. What exactly is the sin line?

+1000

The idea that a god would create people a certain way and then say, "oh by the way, you must deny your nature or you're going to hell, sorry" is crazy. I can't even imagine wanting to have a relationship with a god like that.

Anonymous wrote:Satan totally says homosexual sex is not a sin .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a homosexual isn't a sin. Having homosexual sex is a sin.

So anal sex among a heterosexual married couple is a sin? Oral sex between a heterosexual couple is a sin?

I think the PP meant that two people of the same gender having sex is a sin, not how they do it... but I had a good giggle.

But what exactly is it, that makes it a sin? Is it the non-procreative sex? Is it two people sharing the same chromosomes being in a close, intimate, but non-sexual relationship? If so, lots of close friendships among same-sex friends may be called into question.

Or, the non-procreative sex of heterosexual couples. What exactly is the sin line?

Anonymous wrote:Satan totally says homosexual sex is not a sin .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't have to worry about sin then why did Jesus have to be crucified? We are all sinners. Homosexual acts are sin as are premarital sex and extramarital sex... Selfishness ... Lying...stealing, gossiping, swearing with Gods name . We all probably sin at least 10 times a day. Having a homosexual wedding ceremony probably takes it to outright rebellion levels against God similar to having a satanic wedding ceremony , but I'm sure those people probably don't care .

See... as someone who wasn't raised Christian, I never understood why Jesus has to be crucified in the first place. How does Jesus dying translate to forgiveness of sins? Couldn't God just forgive your sins himself? Why the son/middleman? What about all the thousands of other human beings who were crucified on a cross? Why did they have to die? What was the value in their suffering? Was their suffering less than Jesus, even though they underwent the same horrendous torture?

Ok, this is a theologically complex question, but my understanding is that "sin" has a cost. It is like gravity in that it is part of the reality that God created us in. God could just magically erase sin, I guess, and God could also let us zoom around like Superman but that is not the reality we live in. God could also just make us love him and be perfect, but that is also not the reality we live in- we would just be robots in that case. We have free will, and one of the results of that is sin, and the cost of that sin is death and judgment. Jesus took on that penalty for us. Suffering is the cost of free will and sin. The world we live in is imperfect, which is why there can be great suffering all around us. But our suffering is trivial in the larger scheme of things- that eventually we will live in Heaven with God forever, if we believe in Jesus.

I get that. From a raised-Muslim person like myself it's still strange, as Muslims are taught that it's us against ourselves - we are always judged, and we answer to God fully for everything we did in our lives, no middleman needed. [fwiw I don't believe that either, but it is a little easier to digest].

But so what was the point of Joe Schmoe suffering on the cross, alongside Jesus, and undergoing the same exact amount of pain and torment?

Jesus is God incarnate, there is no middleman. God became human, and experienced everything a regular person experiences- feeling cold, hungry, suffering, friendship, etc. He was not rich or powerful or anything like that, just a regular person. There is no point to any suffering. Not of children in Syria or people on the cross or people in concentration camps or anyone else. We suffer because we live in a broken world. The point is not to make the world perfect, or to be perfect ourselves. We will never completely fix the world or be perfect. The point is to know and love Jesus, and to grow closer to him. Growing closer to Jesus and becoming a better person are two things that feed into each other- as we know God we want to be better, as we become better we want to know God more.

Thanks for completely, repeatedly ignoring my question.

Huh? I thought I did.

The thousands of other people crucified by the Romans in the exact same manner, undergoing the exact same suffering as Jesus... what was their gift? Why is their (equal, possibly even elevated) torment ignored? What was the point of them dying on the cross, those thousands of other people who were brutally crucified? Is their suffering less? And if so, why?

Well, again, I am not some sort of expert, but they are not God. God chose to live as a human, suffer, die (and I guess depending on your interpretation descend into Hell), and pay the cost of death. Because God took on that cost, we do not have to.

I will never claim this makes logical sense. Christianity, when practiced right, is much more compelling in practice. To forgive your enemies, to love others as yourself, to love God, is to show who Jesus really is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a homosexual isn't a sin. Having homosexual sex is a sin.

Says you. Jesus never said this.

sigh.. Jesus never said pedophilia was a sin, either. Really, does He need to explicitly state something is a sin for a Christian to believe that? Why do we have the OT, and the rest of the 23 books in the NT?

Ugh times two. You can't infer ANYTHING from an absence. Logic, people.

I guess something pp is suggesting, but not directly saying is that homosexuality was considered a sin by the church for 2000 years... Was that really homophobia? The early Christians died for their faith. Did they really not know what they were doing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't have to worry about sin then why did Jesus have to be crucified? We are all sinners. Homosexual acts are sin as are premarital sex and extramarital sex... Selfishness ... Lying...stealing, gossiping, swearing with Gods name . We all probably sin at least 10 times a day. Having a homosexual wedding ceremony probably takes it to outright rebellion levels against God similar to having a satanic wedding ceremony , but I'm sure those people probably don't care .

See... as someone who wasn't raised Christian, I never understood why Jesus has to be crucified in the first place. How does Jesus dying translate to forgiveness of sins? Couldn't God just forgive your sins himself? Why the son/middleman? What about all the thousands of other human beings who were crucified on a cross? Why did they have to die? What was the value in their suffering? Was their suffering less than Jesus, even though they underwent the same horrendous torture?

Ok, this is a theologically complex question, but my understanding is that "sin" has a cost. It is like gravity in that it is part of the reality that God created us in. God could just magically erase sin, I guess, and God could also let us zoom around like Superman but that is not the reality we live in. God could also just make us love him and be perfect, but that is also not the reality we live in- we would just be robots in that case. We have free will, and one of the results of that is sin, and the cost of that sin is death and judgment. Jesus took on that penalty for us. Suffering is the cost of free will and sin. The world we live in is imperfect, which is why there can be great suffering all around us. But our suffering is trivial in the larger scheme of things- that eventually we will live in Heaven with God forever, if we believe in Jesus.

I get that. From a raised-Muslim person like myself it's still strange, as Muslims are taught that it's us against ourselves - we are always judged, and we answer to God fully for everything we did in our lives, no middleman needed. [fwiw I don't believe that either, but it is a little easier to digest].

But so what was the point of Joe Schmoe suffering on the cross, alongside Jesus, and undergoing the same exact amount of pain and torment?

Jesus is God incarnate, there is no middleman. God became human, and experienced everything a regular person experiences- feeling cold, hungry, suffering, friendship, etc. He was not rich or powerful or anything like that, just a regular person. There is no point to any suffering. Not of children in Syria or people on the cross or people in concentration camps or anyone else. We suffer because we live in a broken world. The point is not to make the world perfect, or to be perfect ourselves. We will never completely fix the world or be perfect. The point is to know and love Jesus, and to grow closer to him. Growing closer to Jesus and becoming a better person are two things that feed into each other- as we know God we want to be better, as we become better we want to know God more.

Thanks for completely, repeatedly ignoring my question.

Huh? I thought I did.

The thousands of other people crucified by the Romans in the exact same manner, undergoing the exact same suffering as Jesus... what was their gift? Why is their (equal, possibly even elevated) torment ignored? What was the point of them dying on the cross, those thousands of other people who were brutally crucified? Is their suffering less? And if so, why?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a homosexual isn't a sin. Having homosexual sex is a sin.

Says you. Jesus never said this.

sigh.. Jesus never said pedophilia was a sin, either. Really, does He need to explicitly state something is a sin for a Christian to believe that? Why do we have the OT, and the rest of the 23 books in the NT?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a homosexual isn't a sin. Having homosexual sex is a sin.

Says you. Jesus never said this.

sigh.. Jesus never said pedophilia was a sin, either. Really, does He need to explicitly state something is a sin for a Christian to believe that? Why do we have the OT, and the rest of the 23 books in the NT?

Ugh times two. You can't infer ANYTHING from an absence. Logic, people.