the 18th chapter of ezekiel http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Ezekiel-Chapter-18/ with all thier rules and thier belief in a need for an atonement? The chapter basicly says that people are responsable for thier own sins and that in order to be redeemed all they must do is change thier ways. Plain simple no extra guilt about causing jeezis pain and suffering. In fact the whole idea of a atonement completely contradicts what the chapter has to say. Did any of you wonder about this topic as a TBM? If so what were your thoughts at that time. I honestly can't even remember seeing the chapter untill I found it on my own and by then I was so brainwashed from being in the middle of my mission that I didn't give it much thought.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/26/2011 04:47PM by luckychucky.

Of course there should be guilt for causing others and Jesus to be disappointed in you. No one is perfect and making mistakes caused you to feel guilty. But as a Christian we have our sins forgiven if we ask and repent. And it is expected that you will not make the same mistake. What is hard to understand about that? If you repeatedly sin then you are far from being a Christian.

honestone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of course there should be guilt for causing others
> and Jesus to be disappointed in you. No one is
> perfect and making mistakes caused you to feel
> guilty. But as a Christian we have our sins
> forgiven if we ask and repent. And it is expected
> that you will not make the same mistake. What is
> hard to understand about that? If you repeatedly
> sin then you are far from being a Christian.

What is hard to understand about that is that many self-described Christians interpret it differently. No wonder non-Christians are confused! In my travels through different denominations and groups, I've been perpetually confused. Same Bible, different take on it. Who's right?

I've been wondering since childhood - if we're born "imperfect", through no fault of our own (other than in Mormon theology when it is, apparently, our fault due to our PE antics) why should we beat ourselves up for "making mistakes"?

As for not making the same mistake again - isn't that what grace is about? We're imperfect, we sin, we cannot, apparently by the design of God, atone for ourselves so we constantly need grace to be forgiven - and so the ongoing cycle goes throughout our lives.

>What is hard to understand about that?

It could be hard to understand if it's a different inculcation of dogma from birth than the one others have had.

It could be hard to understand if it's not rational or consistent.

It could be hard to understand if 100 different Christian groups interpret the scripture differently from each other (Is truth 100 versions of the same words? We decry Joseph Smith for his three versions of the first vision. How much more erroneous could 100 versions be?)

It could be hard to understand if it's not making sense.

>If you repeatedly sin then you are far from being a Christian.

According to any doctrine I've read in mainstream Christianity and even in offshoot groups, humans are sinful and will continue to sin from youth to death ("born in sin...die in sin"). I have always felt frustrated, being a perfectionist, that no matter how much effort I expend I will never be "perfect". Even as we pray and ask for forgiveness, even at the moment we supposedly receive it, we're still imperfect, according to time-honoured Christian doctrine.

Everybody, according to Christianity, "repeatedly sins".

It's what makes it all so bloody depressing.

Except for grace.

Which all too many Christians shrink down into a tiny package and parcel it out frugally, even to themselves.

My intense study and observation of this facet of Christianity is that the interpretation is varied, the ideas are irrational and the application is inconsistent.

We're born imperfect, which is something that is thrust upon us, not of our own doing (except in Mormonism). We are always going to be imperfect, no matter how rigidly we hold ourselves, how much effort we exert, how many rules we stringently obey or what we accomplish in life. We need grace to get through our mortality but it is, according to all-too-many Christians, in short supply and grudgingly parcelled out. And even then, we're still sinful.

That's about how it goes, as far as I can ascertain.

Why outsiders don't understand it or can't believe it makes perfect sense to me.

Unlike a lot of Christian doctrine itself (especially when considered through the prism of 10,000 different denoms, all with their own explanations for even the most basic of tenets).

That's why it's so "hard to understand".

For starters.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/26/2011 06:56PM by Nightingale.

I already said that...we are not perfect and won't ever be. We know that because of grace we are forgiven.But we don't go on and on about feeling guilty once we have repented. And we don't have a middle man to repent to. We repent directly to God. And yes, we are to try not to repeat our sins. We are to learn from our mistakes. Rather common sense don't you think???, but also Biblical.

I am not going to talk about all those 100 denominations you speak of. That does not interest me. What interests me is following JC if I am a Christian. I will not concern myself about others whose beliefs often only differ slightly. And those that differ a lot well they are like Mormons to me. They don't believe in grace....or they believe in miraculous healing. They may have secret handshakes, believe the world is coming to an end any minute. They may believe in works as a means to heaven....many works... so they can achieve the highest level of heaven. This is totally against the Bible. But the Bible says works are part of following JC. God would not split people up into levels of heaven, by the way. Anyone who is not religious will dwell on all these whacko belief systems as though all are the same. It is very unwise to lump believers into one big group. We are as different as each flower that blooms. But thanks for sharing your take on it all.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/26/2011 06:56PM by honestone.

honestone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I already said that...we are not perfect and won't
> ever be.

Well, then, perhaps you could convince your fellow imperfect Christians that seem to think they are so good they can tell ever one else how to live, to mind their own imperfections and leave the imperfections of others to the others?

I am not responsible for all the other Christian groups. But nice try.

OHHHHHH, NOOOOO, let the gays suffer at the hands of your fellow Christians, you claim to have no responsibility for what THEY do to everyone else, you will not be critical and stand up to your fellow Christians, nooooo.

But when someone is critical of Christianity, wow, you jump all over those people.

Great example of the Christian double standard. I'm not talking about taking responsibility for them, I am saying how about being critical of their wrongs as you are critical of the perceived wrongs people say about Christian. Gezzz, I NEVER said that you needed to take responsibility for them.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2011 12:09AM by MJ.

MJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OHHHHHH, NOOOOO, let the gays suffer at the hands
> of your fellow Christians, you claim to have no
> responsibility for what THEY do to everyone else,
> you will not be critical and stand up to your
> fellow Christians, nooooo.
>
> But when someone is critical of Christianity, wow,
> you jump all over those people.

Interesting. What "suffering" are you referring to? I know tons of Christians, but don't know any homosexuals suffering at their hands.

WM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting. What "suffering" are you referring to? I know tons of Christians, but don't know any homosexuals suffering at their hands.

Once again we meet a blind xian.

Ever heard of prop 8?

Ever heard of the Westboro Baptist Church?

I can't believe you said you don't know of xians being unkind to homosexuals.

brian-the-christ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WM Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Interesting. What "suffering" are you referring
> to? I know tons of Christians, but don't know any
> homosexuals suffering at their hands.
>
> Once again we meet a blind xian.
>
> Ever heard of prop 8?
>
> Ever heard of the Westboro Baptist Church?
>
> I can't believe you said you don't know of xians
> being unkind to homosexuals.


I don't know much about the Westboro Baptist Church, but from what I've read, I'm not sure they are "unkind" to gays. Seems to me they are unkind to dead soldiers and their families and friends.

Prop 8? I think I missed something. What does Prop 8 have to do with anyone (including homosexuals) suffering at anyone's hands, let along Christians'?

How about all the gays that have been tortured by Christian sponsored electro shock therapy? The gays that can not marry their long term partners because of Christian backed efforts like Prop 8? I personally know a couple of gays that were nearly beaten to death by attackers claiming that "god hates F--s".

Perhaps you do not know of the suffering because you blindly defend the perpetrators can never get to know the victims.

MJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How about all the gays that have been tortured by
> Christian sponsored electro shock therapy?

Christian sponsored electro shock therapy? What church is this that does Christian sponsored electro shock therapy? (and, btw, electro shock therapy is still done as a medical treatment, isn't considered torture (that was in the news a couple days ago).


> The gays that can not marry their long term partners
> because of Christian backed efforts like Prop 8?

That isn't because of Christian backed efforts like Prop 8, that's because of what marriage is. Homosexuals can get married, they just have to find someone to marry. They like to say that we are denying them what we have, but that's not true. They allow them EXACTLY what we have! To marry someone of the opposite sex. And that's what they can't stand. I guess they want something special.




> personally know a couple of gays that were nearly
> beaten to death by attackers claiming that "god
> hates F--s".

And you know for sure those people were Christians? I doubt it, because Christians don't do things like that. That would be the opposite of what a Christian is called to do. You conveniently forget the cases where people have been attacked (one lady in Chicago was murdered), had their homes, businesses and cars vandalized, got death threats, for daring to openly say that they don't believe homosexuality is acceptable and instead have the Bible's view of it.


> Perhaps you do not know of the suffering because
> you blindly defend the perpetrators can never get
> to know the victims.

Hmm. . I guess I could say the same of you.

You asked how Christians reconcile something. We've all given you an answer about how *we* personally reconcile these two (non-contradictory, btw) concepts. Due to this response, you now want us to be responsible for the beliefs/teachings/actions of anyone who ever claimed to be a Christian (or actually was a Christian)? That's silly.

And for the record, one's religious beliefs do not always dictate political opinions. I try to keep the two separate as much as possible, and I definitely hold some political positions that inherently contradict my moral beliefs about what a person *should* do. There's a difference between *should* and *legally required*.

My expedience has taught me that the only way Christians reconcile so many contradictions, and there ARE CONTRADICTIONS is via cognitive dissonance.

It also does not make sense because you read into the post what you WANT to read. In responding to a post where is EXPLICITLY said I did NOT want a Christian to "take responsibility", you claim that I want Christians to take responsibility.

It will start making sense when you stop putting words in my mouth and start dealing with what I actually said.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2011 02:36PM by MJ.

honestone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What interests me is following JC if I am a Christian.

Where do you get the rules for following JC? From the Bible?

Then you're going to be completely unable to follow Jeebus, because the NT is a work of fiction.

I've attended dozens of xian services in my life and never once has a pastor indicated that the NT is a work of fiction. That it has no existing source documents. That it consists of four "gospels" three of which are derived from Mark. That there is not a single verifiable story in the gospels that is documented by an independent third party.

Ever heard of the Gospel of Q?

Sad that someone who wants to follow Zombie Jesus doesn't have the wits to question the sources that invented this whole xian myth.

Very sad.

But Ezekiel 18 contradicts the notion of "The Atonement".

"20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.

22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.

23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: [and] not that he should return from his ways, and live?

24 But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, [and] doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked [man] doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die."

No need mentioned there for guilt or even for Christ. I think the NT beyond gospels is just more crap made up to control people beyond the measures mentioned in Ezekiel.

I am an athiest and really dont think the belief in a god is of value. However I simply don't understand why xtians and mormons take an idea that could be so simple and then turn around and complicate it with more bs.

Do you know anybody who has refrained from that long, long list of sins of omission and commission (in Ezekiel 18) and kept all God's statutes (meaning ALL of them, including those listed in Leviticus) for his entire life? Part of his life? A single day?

I mean, who can perfectly avoid menstrous women (never mind being a menstrous woman from time to time), and who always feeds the hungry and clothes the naked? Keeping the whole law simply can't be done. And if we break the law in one point, we've broken the whole law (James 2:10).

It seems to me that many Christians just ignore the parts of the bible they do not like or is not convenient at the time.

Yes, honestone, I have seen this from almost every Christian I have ever known. And what I say below all comes for what has been posted here.

And how many times here have we been told that the bible stories are not literal and need to be interpreted into something other than what they literally say in order to be understood?

Or that the bible was meant for the times it was written.

Or that the first half of the bible isn't taught by many Christian Churches and we should really only pay attention to the last half...

No, it seems to me that Christians don't really believe they have to do what the Bible actually says and that the stories can be interpreted to mean what ever they are needed to say.

...aply in OT times because it hadn't happened. People lived under the Law at that time and the Law provided the only means of being seen as righteous in God's eyes.

I don't remember anything like that. Was I not paying attention (again)?

Thats not as much a mormon idea. Some of my xtian aquaintences have mentioned that they believe the big j gets to suffer more for each sin you comit.

I no longer found any of it hard to understand when I finally gave myself permission to look at the evidence and admit that is all manmade nonsense, just like mormonism. I don't believe a word of it , and it is no wonder every religion interprets things differently.

Just be a kind and thoughtful and descent person, and you will have peace. No worries here.

You and I make at least two once upon a time tbms who reconciled such inconsistancies in a similar fassion. It sounds like another common way of doing it is to ignore the inconsistancies.

There is no inconsistency in this passage, altho' some things aren't clear to those who don't

understand the relationship of the Old Testament to the whole of Scripture. This chapter doesn't, by

itself, tell the whole story. Altho' it isn't mentioned in chapter 18, all sin must be punished,

(scripture has always taught), there is no "free lunch" in that respect. In the Old Testament [under

the Old Covenant], when one had sinned, they were to go to the priest and offer a sacrifice up to God

for their sins. (without the shedding of blood there can be no remission of sin (Heb 9:22)). So even

OT sins had to be punished and paid for with a sacrific - the bigger the sin, usually, the bigger (and

more expensive) the animal that had to be sacrificed (doves, lambs, goats, ox, etc). The animal's

sacrifice didn't actually really pay for a person's sins, but it was accounted to them as payment (a

"downpayment) for the real payment which would come later. The animal sacrifice was accepted by God as

a token (so that, on paper, they were forgiven, because they were, in faith, looking forward to the

sacrifice of the perfect Sacrificial Lamb on the cross (Jesus). When God set up this sacrificial system of payment for sins, it was meant to be a picture lesson to show the Jews that sin required a costly [bloody] payment, (sin is serious and a grave issue to God) and also to show them the picture of the sacrificial Lamb who would come centuries later to take away the sins of the world. Jesus didn't die only for the sins of those who would live after Him (us), but also for all those during His time and before His time who were seeking God in faith, looking forward in faith to the promised coming Messiah who would make payment to God for the sins of all mankind (or all those who would live righteously, in all the history of the world). One is made righteous by faith, faith in the promise (and in the OT, one showed their real faith by obeying God's prescribed payments for sin).

...because it is so grounded in falsehoods.

You're worshiping a sow's ear, my friend; just take a step back and you'll see.

Yep, no Jesus mentioned here. Forgive yourself of own sins, and realize that there is no negative, only the negative you create.

Forgiveness = pre-fall state. No more rules then, just partake now of the tree of life and live forever!

... it sure is fun watching Olympic grade mental gymnastics!

Timothy

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2011 02:52PM by MJ.