RE: How can a Christian reject part of the Bible and still call themselves Christian
October 10, 2016 at 7:08 pm
(October 10, 2016 at 6:26 pm)Lek Wrote:(October 10, 2016 at 6:11 pm)Rhythm Wrote: -and when they don't...but there is no other, meaningful, objection? When they are good people who do good things...what....then?
We must accept that we are sinners and need to be covered by the sacrifice of Christ. This is true no matter what religion we are or whether we have read the bible and know what his biblical name is. If we try to be the best and most and most moral person in the world, we will do many goods deeds, but we will not be with God for eternity.
I "must" not accept anything of the sort.
Even if, in the asymptotically infinitesimal chances that your myth, as you state it above, is fact, it is still immoral.
And since I do not want any part of your gods immoral deal, I would not accept it, even if it was true.
Punishing all of humanity for his mistake in putting the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the garden with people who would not understand it was wrong. Immoral.
Punishing all of their offspring in perpetuity for the 'sins' of their parents. Immoral.
Substitutionary atonement. Immoral.
Punishing people for eternity for not being gullible enough to believe he exists. Immoral.
Here's a question for you...
Why couldn't god just have forgiven humanity without the sacrifice, the belief in unevidenced stories, the eternal worship, the need of faith, etc?
I have the ability to forgive the drunk driver that killed my dog when I was a teen, without anything in recompense from the driver. Why am I able to do something that your god seemingly is unable to do?
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
