What Major Intellectual Issue Most Keeps You From Accepting The Christian Narrative?

[drfuzzy]

---

It wasn't. Even if you argue that it doesn't count as scapegoating, even though it's very similar, setting up something like that was cruel and wrong. No one should suffer for crimes they didn't commit. No one should be put in a position where they're going to suffer and die unless they beg someone else to spare them, and accept something gruesome and wrong as payment. That's a sadistic choice. It's something villains in media do, because it's so fundamentally wrong it shouldn't need explaining.

---

---

Ok so then by that logic, why does anything have to die on order for you to eat? Why is it their fault you're hungry? No creature should suffer and die for the sole reason of satiating your hunger...

Why is that not just as sadistic?

---

---

Also, lest we forget, he did not do it of his own choosing. When the day came for him to do it, he made it clear he didn't want to. "Let this cup pass from me", and all that. It happened anyway. If someone agrees to have sex with someone in the future, and then changes their mind when the agreed upon day comes, it's still rape if it happens anyway.

---

---

You forgot the whole "nevertheless, not my will but thine be done" and "no man take my life but I lay it down" part.

---

---

Interesting.  Billions of billions of people live and die just fine without having some fantasy original sin expunged by some imaginary pagan bronze-age immoral blood ritual sacrifice.  I was raised Pentecostal, but I have realized that I have no need for your god-boy to spend a few hours nailed to pieces of wood for my mental or physical well-being.  In fact, I am many orders of magnitude better off for having rejected that puke-making slavish "washed in the blood of the lamb" crap.  You can make assertions about your delusional fantasies all day, enjoy wasting your time.

You really won't know the answer to that question until you're at the point of death...

Oh yeah, the "wait until you die, you'll be SORRY then" retort.  Wow, that one is old.  And you obviously haven't died, so you don't know.  And the idiots who told you that lie didn't know either.  The fantasy of some reward for ONLY those gullible enough to say they believed whatever the priest told them, combined with the threat of eternal torture for anyone who had enough functioning brain cells to say "hey, this makes no sense" was very effective.  But the vicious idiocy of the whole tale is one BIG reason it's not worth believing.  

IF there is a deity, and IF there is an afterlife (despite both concepts being completely irrational and illogical) then I'm taking my chances that - - my lack of gullibility will be understood.  I'll take my chances that if there is a deity, it is not even remotely like the vicious, stupid, evil monster described in the Bible.

[Chad32]

No, it doesn't. You can't just eat only fruits and leaves for the rest of your life. Certainly you can't only feed that to small children. What Jesus says can't be taken literally. You can't just live off of spirit energy.

It is evil. The death of an innocent, especially right after they plead with the person in power not to let them die, is evil.

Fruits and leaves..what? Also man shall not live by bread alone....

You cannot sustain your natural life with spiritual food, or your spiritual life with natural food, you need both, but in terms of importance spiritual food is the greater need, since you are going to die regardless of what natural food you eat, but spiritual food grants eternal life.

You seem to be going off topic here, and I don't even know how to respond to the idea of spiritual food. I just know that you can't get all the nutrients you need to sustain yourself healthily without something dying. Thus it's not wrong to kill for nourishment. But nobody had to come down in physical form and get brutally killed just for "spiritual food". If so, it implies that the god you worship is weak or uncaring.

[chimp3]

Jesus! What an exempler! Knowing your going to be sacrificed like a chicken in a Santaria ritual yet you keep up the charade. 30 something + plus man dies a virgin! Turns water into wine, but never gets wasted! Shameful! There is always a grift in the system. It is the duty of youth to not bend over to their parents worldview, but to create a new world view that their kids can rebel against. 

I rebelled against my parents. My kids rebelled against me. Progress! Jesus, of all people,  should have rebelled against his parents!  He got the shaft by submitting to an abusive Father and an enabling Mother. But, by 30 years old, you are responsible for your own actions.

[Astreja]

In keeping with the analogy the food that Jesus provides, to partake of that means one would never hunger or thirst again, so there's no need for a next meal...

But where's the fun in eating only once, then never again?

Or in having all the meals supplied, and not getting a chance to cook?

Really doesn't sound like my thing.  More of a DIY type.

---

IF there is a deity, and IF there is an afterlife (despite both concepts being completely irrational and illogical) then I'm taking my chances that - - my lack of gullibility will be understood.  I'll take my chances that if there is a deity, it is not even remotely like the vicious, stupid, evil monster described in the Bible. {emphasis mine}

^^^ This x 1000.  If someone believed in me -- or claimed they believed in me -- out of fear of hell, or because they lusted for life after death, I'd be rather insulted.

[Joods]

I've gotta love how people pull ONE post I made out of an entire thread that was written two years ago.

[Pat Mustard]

I like the analogy of the demon infested pigs running off a cliff.

Of course when you look up the geography you realise that scene was a later insert written by somebody who knew nothing of Iudea. Neither Gerasa nor the later correction Gadara are anywhere near the sea of Gallilee, making the story absurd and pointing out that it's a lie.

[downbeatplumb]

Except that atheists are responsible for the most atrocities, thereby making belief that a God does not exist absurd...

Not atheists, socialists. Get it right.

(sorry, socialists are usually atheists too.)

Socialism is a good thing.
It is working for the good of all rather than a few.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Except that atheists are responsible for the most atrocities, thereby making belief that a God does not exist absurd...

I recognise this as the English language but the chosen words are strung together in a meaningless way. I suspect that there may be a secret code being deployed here.

[downbeatplumb]

Except that atheists are responsible for the most atrocities, thereby making belief that a God does not exist absurd...

I recognise this as the English language but the chosen words are strung together in a meaningless way. I suspect that there may be a secret code being deployed here.

Atheists are not responsible for the most atrocities. 

The holocaust was catholics.(In the US it looks like the protestants want to start up round 2)
The holy wars of the early modern era catholic V protestant
Crusades Catholic V muslim.
The massacre of the cathars, slaughter of "witches" all religiously motivated.
The murder of the maya and Aztecs killing hundreds of millions catholics V whatever the native population believed.
etc etc etc.

Centuries of Christian killing, stamping out all who questioned their faith.

Did you ever wonder why Christians are "god fearing"?

[Huggy Bear]

Except that atheists are responsible for the most atrocities, thereby making belief that a God does not exist absurd...

I recognise this as the English language but the chosen words are strung together in a meaningless way. I suspect that there may be a secret code being deployed here.

Meaningless? Really Matilda? Ask yourself why you're the only one in the thread unable to understand what I said... the problem just may be you.