Here We Go Again!

[genkaus]

The short answer is God's Creation, God's rules.

The shorter answer is tyranny.

The wonderful thing about salvation is you do not have to completely understand it to accept it.

And the less you understand the better off you are.

[Reforged]

I also don't see how Christianity redeems sins....I can see Christians redeeming themselves from sins, but I can't see how Christianity does that, it particular the sacrifice of Jesus.

There is a video by darkmatter about this, let me post it.

The short answer is God's Creation, God's rules. The wonderful thing about salvation is you do not have to completely understand it to accept it.

You don't have to understand something to accept it?
Brilliant, got a situation for you.
Someone comes up to you screaming he is a prophet and announces
"Jesus is in my cock. Don't question it, just get on your knees and start pleasing it to receive the warm, gooey salvation it casts out to all true believers."
Considering you don't fully understand this concept he is preaching and that you have no reason to disbelieve unless you try it out what do you do?
To deny the possible opportunity for a unique type of salvation simply for lack of understanding would seem unforgivable by your logic.

[Drich]

You don't have to understand something to accept it?
Brilliant, got a situation for you.

As I do you. Do you understand Gravity? Completely? Even On a micro/Macro level? (If you do you are ahead of most scientists, because a discovery channel/Morgan freedman show says that gravity works one way on a large planetary scale and completely backwards on a very small/micro scale and no one knows why) Yet you accept it? Or do you not believe in Gravity either because you do not have a complete understanding of it?

What I was saying about salvation was There isn't a written test to proove you understand/can accept salvation. All you need to know is that the creator of the universe says if you want to spend eternity with Him you must redeem yourself through the process He has provided. God does not punish those who can not completely phathom the need for redemption. It is the same for the one who understands what has been revealed as it is the one who simply aware of the need for the redemption of his sins.

[greneknight]

You don't have to understand something to accept it?
Brilliant, got a situation for you.

As I do you. Do you understand Gravity? Completely? Even On a micro/Macro level? (If you do you are ahead of most scientists, because a discovery channel/Morgan freedman show says that gravity works one way on a large planetary scale and completely backwards on a very small/micro scale and no one knows why) Yet you accept it? Or do you not believe in Gravity either because you do not have a complete understanding of it?

What I was saying about salvation was There isn't a written test to proove you understand/can accept salvation. All you need to know is that the creator of the universe says if you want to spend eternity with Him you must redeem yourself through the process He has provided. God does not punish those who can not completely phathom the need for redemption. It is the same for the one who understands what has been revealed as it is the one who simply aware of the need for the redemption of his sins.

Oh, that's so STUPID! For gravity, there is a whole body of EVIDENCE for it. Tough mathematical calculations etc that you don't understand because you're not a physicist. But there is a huge load of evidence for it and it has been tested and proven right. As for your belief in the Bogeyman in the sky, there is bugger-all evidence. Zilch evidence, zilch calculation, just plain stupid empty-headed speculation from supposedly divinely revealed texts that can be proved wrong that I have been asking to debate with Christians because I can PROVE it false and yet there are no brave takers and you still dare to compare such trash with science. This is not just cowardice. It's stupidity.

[Angrboda]

As I do you. Do you understand Gravity? Completely? Even On a micro/Macro level? (If you do you are ahead of most scientists, because a discovery channel/Morgan freedman show says that gravity works one way on a large planetary scale and completely backwards on a very small/micro scale and no one knows why) Yet you accept it? Or do you not believe in Gravity either because you do not have a complete understanding of it? {...SNIP...}

Oh, that's so STUPID! For gravity, there is a whole body of EVIDENCE for it. Tough mathematical calculations etc that you don't understand because you're not a physicist. But there is a huge load of evidence for it and it has been tested and proven right. As for your belief in the Bogeyman in the sky, there is bugger-all evidence. Zilch evidence, zilch calculation, just plain stupid empty-headed speculation from supposedly divinely revealed texts that can be proved wrong that I have been asking to debate with Christians because I can PROVE it false and yet there are no brave takers and you still dare to compare such trash with science. This is not just cowardice. It's stupidity.

Evidence =/= understanding. We have evidence of gravity, that doesn't mean we understand it.

[Mystic]

Ok Drich, what about people whom never came across the message of the gospels? What would their path of redemption be?

[Reforged]

You don't have to understand something to accept it?
Brilliant, got a situation for you.

As I do you. Do you understand Gravity? Completely? Even On a micro/Macro level? (If you do you are ahead of most scientists, because a discovery channel/Morgan freedman show says that gravity works one way on a large planetary scale and completely backwards on a very small/micro scale and no one knows why) Yet you accept it? Or do you not believe in Gravity either because you do not have a complete understanding of it?

What I was saying about salvation was There isn't a written test to proove you understand/can accept salvation. All you need to know is that the creator of the universe says if you want to spend eternity with Him you must redeem yourself through the process He has provided. God does not punish those who can not completely phathom the need for redemption. It is the same for the one who understands what has been revealed as it is the one who simply aware of the need for the redemption of his sins.

Not really answering the situational question I gave there Drich.
Feels abit like a side-step move to be honest.

[Darkstar]

Evidence =/= understanding. We have evidence of gravity, that doesn't mean we understand it.

True, but we don't have the same evidence to support the validity of 'sin'. One of my better teachers in high school said that he didn't like the term 'morals' because it implied religious affiliation, and religious morals were usually flawed. He would use the term ethics.

Likewise, I don't like the term 'sin'. Sin is synonomous with bad deeds, but it is not necessarily always the same. Many theists use the existance of objective morality as 'proof' of god, but how objective do they mean? In ethics, a situation and course of action are analyzed to see if the action is ethical. With sin, a preset group of rules of thumb is followed (i.e. the ten commandments). However, the commandments are badly flawed, omitting things like rape, child/domestic abuse, slavery, etc. and putting blasphemy and missing church on the same level as murder. (Well, at least we know where their priorities were...)

[Angrboda]

Evidence =/= understanding. We have evidence of gravity, that doesn't mean we understand it.

True, but we don't have the same evidence to support the validity of 'sin'. One of my better teachers in high school said that he didn't like the term 'morals' because it implied religious affiliation, and religious morals were usually flawed. He would use the term ethics.

Likewise, I don't like the term 'sin'. Sin is synonomous with bad deeds, but it is not necessarily always the same. Many theists use the existance of objective morality as 'proof' of god, but how objective do they mean? In ethics, a situation and course of action are analyzed to see if the action is ethical. With sin, a preset group of rules of thumb is followed (i.e. the ten commandments). However, the commandments are badly flawed, omitting things like rape, child/domestic abuse, slavery, etc. and putting blasphemy and missing church on the same level as murder. (Well, at least we know where their priorities were...)

I don't typically do ethics, it takes me away from my core specializations and inappropriately wastes valuable time I could be using for other analysis.

However, in your case, I have an even better justification for avoiding it altogether.

[Drich]

Ok Drich, what about people whom never came across the message of the gospels? What would their path of redemption be?

:^) is it your belief that a cermony or a specific version of Christianity is indeed Christianity? Meaning all of the followers of that brand of christianity is indeed Christian? If so which one, and what of all who don't follow that version?

In the End the writter of Hebrews tell us that we are all going to be rightly divided and judged (the Christian and non Christian alike) and our personal proclaimations have little to do with our eternal status. It is our hearts that are judged, and our motivies will be all laid bare to which we will have to give an account. For the 'Christian' it is not a matter of proclaimation that saves him it is a matter of attonement offered, accepted and approved by Christ. To the one who has not been offered, you can put your mind at ease that he too will be judged in the same way. For the same blood that saves a man when he accepts Christ, and condemns a man when he refuses Christ covers all of those who never knew Christ. Meaning God doesn't need us to live 70 years of our lives to accuratly judge us. He knew us before we were born. Our lives are for us to know and accept His final judgement. God will judge them in every aspect of their lives accuratly and fairly.