CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Society › Spirituality › Where is spirituality taking us? Is it getting dangerous?

Where is spirituality taking us? Is it getting dangerous?

Started by Zachary Cox69 · · 👁 10 views · 220 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Zachary Cox69Scott Nguyen5casualtiger2wearyowl29mellowbadger0loneskipper10Jacob Cooper5goldeneagle2Joseph Bailey41frozenstag9cosmicdriver42Anthony Perez9David Vaughn75darkravenThomas Nelson25Benjamin Taylor6bluemason3hollowpuma762Thomas Turner2Paul Rogers94Andrew Gomez6goldenjackal6frozengull2neonmarlin39 …
frozenstag9 frozenstag9 Member
45 messages
joined Oct 2019
#61 ·
David Vaughn75 said:So why on earth would you throw a quote about testing Him in my face?

You totally missed my point here.
Look, you swear by the miracles in the Bible and all that—but what if some guy walks up to you today, claims he’s the Son of God, and tells you to follow him? If he starts claiming he can walk on water, would you actually buy that? You say there’s no reason not to believe the Bible, but fine—so why wouldn't you apply that same logic to someone making those exact same claims right in front of you today?

Don't try to pull a fast one on me now. You were the one who explicitly stated that Paul tested God.
Now, suddenly, you can't even own up to that? It's like a toddler who soils their diaper and then looks at Mom like, "Hey, don't blame me, I didn't do it!"—it's just not working.
🤣
Zachary Cox69 Zachary Cox69 Active MemberOP
72 messages
joined Oct 2019
#62 ·
Thomas Nelson25 said:I feel like when people go through those physical trials—you know, like how some cultures do it—they’re basically just trying to reach up toward the divine.

Personally, I just think the people doing that are plain old fools. Fanatics.
Anthony Perez9 Anthony Perez9 Regular
311 messages
joined Apr 2019
#63 ·
Zachary Cox69 said:
=Unknown;76912931

What a complete failure of a spiritual teacher—if he couldn't make them understand something that simple within a year or so—that his role wasn't to be a militant liberator for the state of Israel from the Roman occupation, but rather a peaceful redeemer of humanity's sins. It was a mission of peace, not war!
What kind of idiot would miss the chance to clarify that? To show he was a peacemaker, not a terrorist. Were the apostles mentally slow? Or was Jesus just blind? 😵

If I weren't worried about getting banned, I’d tell you straight up: you're being a total fool here. Your take is shallow. Look, as a Christian, I'm trying to explain this to you—Jesus came to liberate people from sin, not from earthly rulers. But it just won't sink in. They were primarily looking for liberation from foreign rule, much like how Americans might feel regarding certain systemic injustices. That was their focus. Later, once they saw the risen Jesus, they never viewed him as a way to break the Roman occupation again. Get it? Why don't you try explaining the actual importance of this to someone who's being dense.

The whole point of a teacher is to make it clear that he isn't a militant Jewish Messiah, but a universal peacemaker. It's the exact opposite of what they had in their heads. How could Jesus not have explained that clearly to them? FOR GOD'S SAKE, if he hadn't, then the apostles and those 72 followers would have gone around preaching that they planned to join Jesus in an armed revolt against the Romans! And that's no joke—that would have been incredibly dangerous!

This is superficial and totally detached from reality. They preached the Kingdom of Heaven, not an earthly one.

LATER??? After Jesus came back from the grave and cleared things up? Seems a little late for that, doesn't it? It's almost as if Jesus Christ INTENTIONALLY led them to believe he was an armed rebel (selling everything just to buy swords!), so they would preach it that way—making it look like the Messiah-Christ fit the traditional mold, which would lead the Romans to catch and execute him for insurrection.
Jesus was a great deceiver of the apostles.

Again, too shallow. He taught them to "turn the other cheek," "love your enemy," and "forgive seventy times seven."

As a former Catholic, I know the dogma and the faith well. Ask yourself why Jesus deceived the apostles. He wasn't so clueless that he didn't see how they viewed him—as a militant savior for Israel. That's what they believed right up until he appeared after his death. lol What a joke.

Just imagine if they HAD gone out and told the crowds: "Hey, we messed up before; Jesus wasn't a militant liberator, he was actually the peaceful Savior from sin—born of a perpetual Virgin from God—so go get baptized!" And then masses of Jews flocking to be baptized. Ha ha ha.

You’ve clearly never actually encountered Catholic Jesus. You’ve obviously stepped too far into the occult—that’s why you’re so confused.

Look, it doesn't specify what kind of snake it was—whether it was venomous or not—and it definitely doesn't say he was bitten (which is what you're assuming). But it's obvious the locals were incredibly superstitious. It's just one of those silly stories meant for the naive... "No, the snake didn't hurt him, just like Jesus proclaimed!" lol

Where is your head at? Seriously. They think Paul committed some massive sin against God and that God is punishing him with a snake bite—but then, seeing that he was bitten and nothing happened, they view him as divine. It's crystal clear to anyone with sense. Apparently not to you.

I couldn't care less—I'm just sitting here having a beer. If you end up in hell, who cares? Not my problem.

Coward. 🙂

That's shallow. Look, as a Christian, I'm trying to explain to you that Jesus came to save people from sin, not from earthly politicians. It just won't sink in. They were primarily looking for liberation from foreign rule, much like how Americans once looked to break free from oppressive regimes.

So basically, Jesus Christ shows up to Americans during the "frontier" era, teaching them about the kingdom of heaven and love, while they're sitting there thinking he's come with weapons and angels to liberate them from their oppressors (whom they're supposed to love and turn the other cheek to, etc.). 😂
And Jesus apparently didn't bother explaining his actual mission. 😂

Who’s actually clueless here? Jesus or the fools he was teaching?
Why couldn't he find anyone sane, instead of people stubbornly insisting he was a military Messiah meant to rule Israel?

Because they were treated unfairly; a third of their land was snatched away. That was their main focus. Later, when they saw Jesus resurrected, they never again viewed him as the liberator from the Roman occupation. Get it? You try explaining the nuance to someone who's being dense.

While Jesus was teaching them, these people were out preaching about gearing up for an armed revolt. So is it any wonder Jesus was executed by a Roman official court for rebelling against the Roman Empire? He really should have done a better job explaining his purpose to the apostles. 😂

They basically landed him in deep trouble. And honestly, he had some blame in it.

All this talk about Jesus's return from the dead, after he supposedly taught them everything, is a joke.
People have always wanted to peek behind the curtain of death to see what it's actually like.

The New Testament cuts off right there, when it should actually be starting the real story of what God said after coming back from the dead (since the apostles finally caught on!!). That would have been a hell of a read. But nope. Nothing. Jesus just repeats himself like an old parrot, saying everything follows the Old Testament, and tells them to go study that instead.

This is superficial and totally detached from reality. They preached the kingdom of heaven, not some earthly political takeover.

What did they tell people when asked about their miraculous Leader? That he came to lead them to the kingdom of heaven, or that he'd free them from the occupiers through an uprising? 😒

Instead of preaching, they grabbed swords (though their Jesus did tell them to sell everything just to buy gear).

Deep as a puddle again. He preached: "turn the other cheek," "love your enemy," and "forgive seventy times seven."

The enemy’s going to end up facing eternal torture in Jesus's hellish gulag anyway. 😲

You've clearly never even encountered the Catholic Jesus.

Aren't you a Protestant? Ever actually met a Protestant Jesus?
People have an Jesus for every mood.

You've obviously fallen down the occult rabbit hole. That explains why you're so lost.

Looks like someone's getting worked up. 😛

Where's your head at? In the clouds? They think Paul committed some massive sin against God and that God punished him with a snake bite—then, seeing he was bitten and fine, they decide he's God. It's obvious to anyone with half a brain. Clearly, you aren't one of them.

You made up the snake bite thing. As did the venom part, and the whole idea that they saw him get bitten. You're just spinning tales and twisting God's word.

I'm just chilling, sipping a beer, and if you end up in hell, who cares? Not my problem.

Why would you care if someone gets sentenced to eternal torment in the fire?
Even the folks on this forum or your neighbors.
Just sipping your beer and waiting for God to settle the score with everyone "unconventional"... by roasting them forever... Cheers!

It’s got nothing to do with spirituality, or pretty much anything else for that matter. Religions are a hazard, not spirituality. But plenty of people wrap themselves in that "spiritual" label just to stroke their tiny egos. Religion loves to brag about its own holiness.
Zachary Cox69 Zachary Cox69 Active MemberOP
72 messages
joined Oct 2019
#64 ·
Anthony Perez9


So, did the apostles preach about Jesus as a military leader or as the Messiah? You've presumably read the New Testament—so why are you talking nonsense?

The New Testament cuts off right when it should be getting good—describing what God actually said after rising from the dead (since the apostles finally caught on!!). That would've been a hell of a story. But nope. Nothing. Jesus just keeps repeating like an old parrot that everything follows the Old Testament, so they should probably go study that instead.

You have the Acts of the Apostles and the epistles. Have you actually read them or not? I doubt it.

Instead of a spiritual message, they armed themselves with swords (which is exactly what their Jesus encouraged—sell everything just to buy weaponry).

Who armed themselves? Only Peter had a knife.

Are you a Protestant? Did you just touch upon the Protestant version of Jesus?
It seems everyone has their own version of Jesus.

No, I'm a Christian—close enough in faith to any Catholic or Orthodox person, provided they are true followers of Christ.

You made up the snake bite. As if it were a viper. And as if they even saw he was bitten. You're inventing things and twisting God's word.

Based on how everyone else is reacting, it’s pretty clear. You just need to use your head. Seems like that might be a bit too much to ask from you, at least for now.
Anthony Perez9 Anthony Perez9 Regular
311 messages
joined Apr 2019
#65 ·
Zachary Cox69 said:
Anthony Perez9


So, did the apostles preach about Jesus as a military leader or as the Messiah? You've presumably read the New Testament—so why are you talking nonsense?

The New Testament cuts off right when it should be getting good—describing what God actually said after rising from the dead (since the apostles finally caught on!!). That would've been a hell of a story. But nope. Nothing. Jesus just keeps repeating like an old parrot that everything follows the Old Testament, so they should probably go study that instead.

You have the Acts of the Apostles and the epistles. Have you actually read them or not? I doubt it.

Instead of a spiritual message, they armed themselves with swords (which is exactly what their Jesus encouraged—sell everything just to buy weaponry).

Who armed themselves? Only Peter had a knife.

Are you a Protestant? Did you just touch upon the Protestant version of Jesus?
It seems everyone has their own version of Jesus.

No, I'm a Christian—close enough in faith to any Catholic or Orthodox person, provided they are true followers of Christ.

You made up the snake bite. As if it were a viper. And as if they even saw he was bitten. You're inventing things and twisting God's word.

Based on how everyone else is reacting, it’s pretty clear. You just need to use your head. Seems like that might be a bit too much to ask from you, at least for now.

The apostles made it clear they believed the whole time that Jesus was the one who would liberate Israel from the occupiers (the Jewish Messiah=Christ). So, what exactly were they preaching everywhere, and how did they answer when people asked them about their Leader?

Who armed themselves?

Everyone Jesus told to sell everything they had, grab the coins out of their bags, and buy swords with that money.

Only Peter had a knife.

? For slicing carrots?

Jesus and his little followers—who actually believed he came to liberate Israel—were surrounded by 600 armed soldiers at the Mount of Olives, a spot famous for gathering rebels and self-proclaimed messiahs looking to storm Jerusalem, stir up the crowds, and drag them into an armed conflict.

Quote:
Aren't you a Protestant? Did you touch some Protestant version of Jesus?
There are plenty of different versions of Jesus out there.
No, I'm a Christian, close in faith to any Catholic or Orthodox person if they are true followers of Christ.
What kind of following is that? "Christian" is just a broad label, but inside that, you’ve got specific groups that basically hate each other while pretending they’re the only true Christians and everyone else is lost.

Quote:
You made up the snake bite. Just like you made up that it was venomous. And that they saw him get bitten. You're inventing and twisting things, distorting God's word.
Based on the reactions here, it's pretty obvious. You just need to be able to think for yourself. That seems a bit too hard for you, at least for now.
I'll forgive all the insults directed at me. There you go, I'll turn the other cheek. 🙂
Zachary Cox69 Zachary Cox69 Active MemberOP
72 messages
joined Oct 2019
#66 ·
Anthony Perez9

The apostles made it clear—they were in on it the whole time. They were convinced that Jesus was the one who would finally liberate Israel from the occupiers. So, regarding the Jewish Messiah—the Christ—what exactly were they preaching out there? How did they handle things when people started asking questions about who their Leader actually was?

Look, I already told you—it’s all right there in the text. It clearly explains exactly what they were preaching after Jesus ascended to heaven.
Are you even reading? That’s exactly why you’re so out of the loop. When people saw that Jesus was alive—that was the turning point—they finally realized who He actually was. They understood He was the Messiah sent to liberate the people from sin, not just some political figure meant to free them from the Roman occupation.

To everyone Jesus told to sell everything they own—to empty out their pockets and take that cash and buy swords instead.

Some people lie because they’re bitter—it's pure malice. Others? They just don't know any better. The Bible puts it this way:
NATO is basically telling them: "Look, if you've got cash on hand, go ahead and use it—grab what you need. But if you're broke? Well, then sell your shirt just to get a sword."
Luke 22:37—I’m telling you, what’s written has to play out through me: I’m going to be counted among the villains. Seriously, everything meant for me is coming to pass.
Luke 22:38 — They said to him, "Look, Lord, here are two swords!" He replied, "That's enough."

Jesus and his followers—who honestly thought he was there to liberate Israel—found themselves surrounded by 600 armed soldiers on the Mount of Olives. It’s a spot notorious for being a hangout for rebels and self-proclaimed messiahs—the kind of people who gather there just to march on Jerusalem and try to spark an armed uprising among the crowds.

You’d have to be either completely clueless, incredibly shallow, or just plain malicious to think that.
Jesus healed that man whose ear had been sliced off—the one Simon Peter struck with his sword when he lashed out at the high priest's servant, Malho. He fixed the ear right then and there.
John 18:11 NATO Jesus says to Peter: Put your sword back in its sheath.If the Almighty Father hands me a cup—am I really supposed to refuse it?
It’s common knowledge that his teachings centered on things like "love your enemies," "turn the other cheek," and "never pay back evil with evil." And so on.
So, how could someone like that actually lead a rebellion? Honestly—only an idiot would think that's possible.

What does it actually mean to be a follower? Calling someone a "Christian" is such a broad, vague label—but once you look closer, you see all these distinct, divided groups within it. It’s honestly wild how they can spend all their time hating one another while simultaneously claiming they’re the only ones holding onto the true faith and everyone else is just lost.

There are plenty of people like that—honestly, I’ve been to quite a few ecumenical gatherings myself where Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and Protestants all sat together for Mass and prayer. For instance, right here.
The recent ecumenical gathering at an Evangelical church was quite something—really made you think about how we all approach faith. It wasn’t just a formal meeting; it felt like a genuine attempt to find common ground between different traditions. It’s easy to get caught up in the labels and the specific ways we practice our faith, but seeing people come together like this reminds me that the core mission remains the same. We aren't just checking boxes or following rituals—it's about that deeper connection to the truth. Even when the theological nuances differ, there's a shared heartbeat when it comes to the message of the Gospel. I kept thinking about how often we focus on the walls we build around our denominations instead of the bridge being built through prayer and dialogue. It’s a bit like how different branches of a family might disagree on politics or lifestyle, but at the end of the day, they still share the same bloodline. In the same way, these gatherings serve as a reminder that we are part of a much larger story. It isn't always easy—there are going to be disagreements, and let's face it, some traditions are more rigid than others—but that’s where the growth happens. You can't have a real conversation without a little friction. If we want to truly understand the depth of our calling, we have to be willing to sit at the same table.

Look, at the end of the day—you reap what you sow. Once you stop the lying, the spitting, and the constant attacks and mudslinging, there won't be any insults left to deal with. Honestly, just like everything written above—these aren't even insults; they're just a straight-up diagnosis.
Anthony Perez9 Anthony Perez9 Regular
311 messages
joined Apr 2019
#67 ·
Zachary Cox69 said:
Anthony Perez9

The apostles made it clear—they were in on it the whole time. They were convinced that Jesus was the one who would finally liberate Israel from the occupiers. So, regarding the Jewish Messiah—the Christ—what exactly were they preaching out there? How did they handle things when people started asking questions about who their Leader actually was?

Look, I already told you—it’s all right there in the text. It clearly explains exactly what they were preaching after Jesus ascended to heaven.
Are you even reading? That’s exactly why you’re so out of the loop. When people saw that Jesus was alive—that was the turning point—they finally realized who He actually was. They understood He was the Messiah sent to liberate the people from sin, not just some political figure meant to free them from the Roman occupation.

To everyone Jesus told to sell everything they own—to empty out their pockets and take that cash and buy swords instead.

Some people lie because they’re bitter—it's pure malice. Others? They just don't know any better. The Bible puts it this way:
NATO is basically telling them: "Look, if you've got cash on hand, go ahead and use it—grab what you need. But if you're broke? Well, then sell your shirt just to get a sword."
Luke 22:37—I’m telling you, what’s written has to play out through me: I’m going to be counted among the villains. Seriously, everything meant for me is coming to pass.
Luke 22:38 — They said to him, "Look, Lord, here are two swords!" He replied, "That's enough."

Jesus and his followers—who honestly thought he was there to liberate Israel—found themselves surrounded by 600 armed soldiers on the Mount of Olives. It’s a spot notorious for being a hangout for rebels and self-proclaimed messiahs—the kind of people who gather there just to march on Jerusalem and try to spark an armed uprising among the crowds.

You’d have to be either completely clueless, incredibly shallow, or just plain malicious to think that.
Jesus healed that man whose ear had been sliced off—the one Simon Peter struck with his sword when he lashed out at the high priest's servant, Malho. He fixed the ear right then and there.
John 18:11 NATO Jesus says to Peter: Put your sword back in its sheath.If the Almighty Father hands me a cup—am I really supposed to refuse it?
It’s common knowledge that his teachings centered on things like "love your enemies," "turn the other cheek," and "never pay back evil with evil." And so on.
So, how could someone like that actually lead a rebellion? Honestly—only an idiot would think that's possible.

What does it actually mean to be a follower? Calling someone a "Christian" is such a broad, vague label—but once you look closer, you see all these distinct, divided groups within it. It’s honestly wild how they can spend all their time hating one another while simultaneously claiming they’re the only ones holding onto the true faith and everyone else is just lost.

There are plenty of people like that—honestly, I’ve been to quite a few ecumenical gatherings myself where Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and Protestants all sat together for Mass and prayer. For instance, right here.
The recent ecumenical gathering at an Evangelical church was quite something—really made you think about how we all approach faith. It wasn’t just a formal meeting; it felt like a genuine attempt to find common ground between different traditions. It’s easy to get caught up in the labels and the specific ways we practice our faith, but seeing people come together like this reminds me that the core mission remains the same. We aren't just checking boxes or following rituals—it's about that deeper connection to the truth. Even when the theological nuances differ, there's a shared heartbeat when it comes to the message of the Gospel. I kept thinking about how often we focus on the walls we build around our denominations instead of the bridge being built through prayer and dialogue. It’s a bit like how different branches of a family might disagree on politics or lifestyle, but at the end of the day, they still share the same bloodline. In the same way, these gatherings serve as a reminder that we are part of a much larger story. It isn't always easy—there are going to be disagreements, and let's face it, some traditions are more rigid than others—but that’s where the growth happens. You can't have a real conversation without a little friction. If we want to truly understand the depth of our calling, we have to be willing to sit at the same table.

Look, at the end of the day—you reap what you sow. Once you stop the lying, the spitting, and the constant attacks and mudslinging, there won't be any insults left to deal with. Honestly, just like everything written above—these aren't even insults; they're just a straight-up diagnosis.

Like I told you, that's just what they were preaching. After Jesus ascended to heaven.You write pretty well.[/I]

Are you even reading what I wrote? Before they started spinning fairy tales about how Jesus rose from the grave to clear everything up—without actually saying what he cleared up—they believed he was the Jewish Messiah expected to save Israel from the occupiers. So, what were they telling people who asked about their Teacher? They told them he was the Jewish Messiah who would liberate Israel from the occupiers through rebellion and "help from God."

You clearly haven't been reading. That's why you're so out of the loop. Once they saw that Jesus was actually alive, it finally clicked who He was—the Messiah sent to set people free from sin, not some political figure meant to liberate them from the Roman Empire.

Too little, too late. They spent all that time hyping him up as the one who’d liberate Israel from the occupation. What a joke.

Some people lie because they’re malicious, others just don't know any better. The Bible says it like this:
NATO’s basically telling them: "If you've got the cash, grab it now. Same goes for the gear. If you're broke, sell your shirt and buy a sword instead."
Luke 22:37—look, I’m telling you, what's written has to play out through me: being counted among the criminals. Seriously, everything meant for me is actually happening.
Luke 22:38 — They told him, "Look, we've got two swords right here!" He just looked at them and said, "That's enough."

So you're actually admitting He told them to take it? He's dumping every cent he has left, even selling off his own clothes.I guess I'm here. Go buy some gear for that slaughter..

Only someone totally clueless, shallow, or just straight-up malicious could actually think that.
Jesus healed that guy's ear after Peter cut it off, then told him:

So you've got armed apostles surrounded by 600 soldiers, and this guy swings a sword trying to take someone's head off, but misses and just clips an ear instead. Then comes the magic trick where Jesus magically puts the ear back on like nothing happened. What a joke.

Everyone knows his whole deal: "Love your enemies," "turn the other cheek," and "don't pay evil with evil." Stuff like that.

Hypocrite. He didn't forgive the Jews for anything, even though they were his actual enemies. He was constantly cursing them and insulting them at every turn and through every single parable.

So, how can someone like that lead a rebellion? Only an idiot would think that.

You called all the apostles idiots, but then you're the idiot for taking them as disciples if you couldn't manage to explain anything to them during a whole year of teaching.

There are people like that; for instance, I've been to plenty of ecumenical gatherings where Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants held Mass and prayed together. Like this, for example

That's just throwing sand in people's eyes. They are never going to unite. Never. The only thing that "unites" them is when they feel threatened by secularism or Islam.

A final word to you: you reap what you sow. Once you stop lying, spitting, attacking, and slandering, there won't be any insults left. Actually, just like what was said above, these aren't even insults—they're just a straight diagnosis.

You described yourself perfectly. 🙂

One last tip: watch out for rattlesnakes or copperheads out in the Texas brush. Don't go relying on Jesus's saying that it won't hurt you, or Paul's habit of dodging snake bites because he's too "spiritual." 👍
Thomas Nelson25 Thomas Nelson25 Regular
582 messages
joined Jan 2021
#68 ·
Zachary Cox69 said:Personally, I just think the people doing that are plain old fools. Fanatics.

Maybe—or maybe not. He’s probably trying to say you can actually enlighten some folks this way.
It’s basically just a more hardcore version of yoga, right?..

I mean, you could even argue that Jesus Christ walked this earth in a similar fashion.
Basically, by going through massive physical pain and suffering.
Zachary Cox69 Zachary Cox69 Active MemberOP
72 messages
joined Oct 2019
#69 ·
Thomas Nelson25 said:Maybe—or maybe not. He’s probably trying to say you can actually enlighten some folks this way.
It’s basically just a more hardcore version of yoga, right?..

I mean, you could even argue that Jesus Christ walked this earth in a similar fashion.
Basically, by going through massive physical pain and suffering.

Jesus didn't need to suffer for His own sake, but for ours. He took our sins upon Himself, even though He was without sin.
Thomas Nelson25 Thomas Nelson25 Regular
582 messages
joined Jan 2021
#70 ·
Zachary Cox69 said:Jesus didn't need to suffer for His own sake, but for ours. He took our sins upon Himself, even though He was without sin.

That's some heavy stuff...

I'm not much of a believer, so who knows, right?
Anthony Perez9 Anthony Perez9 Regular
311 messages
joined Apr 2019
#71 ·
Zachary Cox69 said:Jesus didn't need to suffer for His own sake, but for ours. He took our sins upon Himself, even though He was without sin.

He came to glorify himself. Himself/the Trinity/the Father. Setting Himself up on a throne right next to the Almighty Father. Total egomaniac.

According to Greek Ivo:

"My soul is overwhelmed, what can I say? 'Father, rescue me from this hour?' No, I came for this very hour! Father, glorify Your name!" Then a voice came from heaven: "I have glorified them and will glorify them again!"

He took our sins upon Himself.

He didn't want to according to the three Greeks' little story. He shed bitter tears and begged the Father to spare him from that fortress of misery and agony meant for humanity. He wanted to dodge it so everyone could just end up in hell, gnashing their teeth. Only God's silence to His cries forced Him to go through with it, so the whole Trinity could be glorified. lol

yet he was without sin.

He lied to his brothers, the apostles, and the people, stole donkeys, cursed, raged, spat on certain racial groups, terrified parents, disrespected parents, said they should be hated, whipped merchants selling temple supplies, threatened to kill a prophetess's kids, promised to send the apocalypse riders to destroy the world in flames, etc., etc.

The guy basically invented the concept of eternal gnashing of teeth in hell. 🥱 👎

Enough with the propaganda about this guy Jesus on this subforum. 😠
Benjamin Taylor6 Benjamin Taylor6 Regular
577 messages
joined Apr 2017
#72 ·
Zachary Cox69 said:Jesus didn't need to suffer for His own sake, but for ours. He took our sins upon Himself, even though He was without sin.

It’s honestly wild how many people still buy into these religious fairy tales.
David Vaughn75 David Vaughn75 Regular
626 messages
joined Sep 2015
#73 ·
Zachary Cox69 said:Jesus didn't need to suffer for His own sake, but for ours. He took our sins upon Himself, even though He was without sin.

Honestly, I’m just sitting here scratching my head over this sentence.

I mean, seriously—why can't God just forgive our mess-ups without having to put His own Son through a crucifixion?
bluemason3 bluemason3 Veteran
1.1K messages
joined Jun 2016
#74 ·
He could have chosen either himself or the sin, but the myth of sacrifice—using proxies (like animals in the Middle East or burning fields back home in the Midwest)—to transfer and destroy a community's sins is pretty common. It’s an archetypal, even psychological, moment found in many human cultures.
Zachary Cox69 Zachary Cox69 Active MemberOP
72 messages
joined Oct 2019
#75 ·
Thomas Nelson25 said:That's some heavy stuff...

I'm not much of a believer, so who knows, right?

I was just replying to your post. What's the issue now?
Zachary Cox69 Zachary Cox69 Active MemberOP
72 messages
joined Oct 2019
#76 ·
David Vaughn75 said:Honestly, I’m just sitting here scratching my head over this sentence.

I mean, seriously—why can't God just forgive our mess-ups without having to put His own Son through a crucifixion?

Here is how a Catholic priest explained it:
"Right from the start, humanity chose to distance itself from God's presence through sin. It was probably the hardest, most painful decision anyone could ever make—and once that gap was there, we had no way to fix it ourselves. We couldn't bridge that void. Only God's infinite love, which has guided people throughout history, could reach back out to us. The Son of God became man—He took on our reality, endured injustice, and died so that we could become adopted children of God and find our way back to Him. In that sense, Christ became the New Adam, sparking a new creation—the Kingdom of God—which is already beginning to unfold here on earth. The death of the Son of God is the ultimate act of love for all mankind. Like you mentioned regarding the Psalms, no one can pay a ransom for themselves. But that’s exactly why Holy Scripture tells us: 'This is love: not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son as an offering to atone for our sins' (1 John 4:10); 'But God demonstrates His own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us' (Romans 5:8)."

The Catechism of the Catholic Church covers this topic extensively in its own chapter—I'll drop a link here because I think you'll find it pretty helpful: http://www.katolici.org/katekizam.ph...=r_vidi&id=237

Also, Professor Ivan Karlić goes into great detail in his article "The Condemnation and Death of Jesus of Nazareth," looking at the historical, social, and theological reasons behind Christ's death: hrcak.srce.hr/file/40376

BTB,

Father Damir
David Vaughn75 David Vaughn75 Regular
626 messages
joined Sep 2015
#77 ·
You’re just circling back to the exact stuff I already told you I don't get.

So, look—can God actually forgive people's sins without Christ being nailed to that cross? A straight yes or no.
And if He can, why on earth would God send His own Son to bail us out from the judgment of that very same God?
Zachary Cox69 Zachary Cox69 Active MemberOP
72 messages
joined Oct 2019
#78 ·
David Vaughn75 said:You’re just circling back to the exact stuff I already told you I don't get.

So, look—can God actually forgive people's sins without Christ being nailed to that cross? A straight yes or no.
And if He can, why on earth would God send His own Son to bail us out from the judgment of that very same God?

No! That's my answer.

God is a righteous God—a God of justice. Even our legal system doesn't just let people walk free without cause.
A violation leads to a penalty. If someone admits they're guilty and shows remorse, they might get a lighter sentence, but they aren't just "forgiven" and set free instantly.
Even in your view of Hinduism, there's a consequence. It's basically "you reap what you sow"—which is why souls move through different levels of existence, right? haha.
The apostle writes something along the lines of: "Through one man, Adam, sin entered us all (our sinful nature), and through another, Christ, comes liberation."
Look, nobody is perfect; everyone has fallen short, and we're all sinners—some more than others. For those who hand over their sinful nature and their sins to God and truly repent, that sin is placed on Christ. It's taken out of them—it's gone. But there's a catch: men and women still need to strive to sin less. Even after handing those sins to God, they won't suddenly become flawless. They're just seeking forgiveness. You've probably read the story of the Prodigal Son. God's love has no limits—He loves us and understands us—but the law of justice demands satisfaction. God forgives when we repent because there is someone who sacrificed Himself for us.
Think of it like this: if the law hits you with a massive fine... a penalty you simply can't pay... and someone else steps up and pays it for you, the law lets you go, right?
David Vaughn75 David Vaughn75 Regular
626 messages
joined Sep 2015
#79 ·
Zachary Cox69 said:No! That's my answer.

God is a righteous God—a God of justice. Even our legal system doesn't just let people walk free without cause.
A violation leads to a penalty. If someone admits they're guilty and shows remorse, they might get a lighter sentence, but they aren't just "forgiven" and set free instantly.
Even in your view of Hinduism, there's a consequence. It's basically "you reap what you sow"—which is why souls move through different levels of existence, right? haha.
The apostle writes something along the lines of: "Through one man, Adam, sin entered us all (our sinful nature), and through another, Christ, comes liberation."
Look, nobody is perfect; everyone has fallen short, and we're all sinners—some more than others. For those who hand over their sinful nature and their sins to God and truly repent, that sin is placed on Christ. It's taken out of them—it's gone. But there's a catch: men and women still need to strive to sin less. Even after handing those sins to God, they won't suddenly become flawless. They're just seeking forgiveness. You've probably read the story of the Prodigal Son. God's love has no limits—He loves us and understands us—but the law of justice demands satisfaction. God forgives when we repent because there is someone who sacrificed Himself for us.
Think of it like this: if the law hits you with a massive fine... a penalty you simply can't pay... and someone else steps up and pays it for you, the law lets you go, right?

Look, God sets the rules and God judges based on those rules—so basically, God can bail me out of any penalty whenever He feels like it. I mean, if He's actually Almighty, why wouldn't He?

Whether Jesus exists or not doesn't change a single damn thing about that logic.
Anthony Perez9 Anthony Perez9 Regular
311 messages
joined Apr 2019
#80 ·
What’s the point of all these church dogmas about Jesus when it comes to spirituality?
There’s probably a subforum for this kind of stuff...

Zachary Cox69 said:Here is how a Catholic priest explained it:
"Right from the start, humanity chose to distance itself from God's presence through sin. It was probably the hardest, most painful decision anyone could ever make—and once that gap was there, we had no way to fix it ourselves. We couldn't bridge that void. Only God's infinite love, which has guided people throughout history, could reach back out to us. The Son of God became man—He took on our reality, endured injustice, and died so that we could become adopted children of God and find our way back to Him. In that sense, Christ became the New Adam, sparking a new creation—the Kingdom of God—which is already beginning to unfold here on earth. The death of the Son of God is the ultimate act of love for all mankind. Like you mentioned regarding the Psalms, no one can pay a ransom for themselves. But that’s exactly why Holy Scripture tells us: 'This is love: not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son as an offering to atone for our sins' (1 John 4:10); 'But God demonstrates His own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us' (Romans 5:8)."

The Catechism of the Catholic Church covers this topic extensively in its own chapter—I'll drop a link here because I think you'll find it pretty helpful: http://www.katolici.org/katekizam.ph...=r_vidi&id=237

Also, Professor Ivan Karlić goes into great detail in his article "The Condemnation and Death of Jesus of Nazareth," looking at the historical, social, and theological reasons behind Christ's death: hrcak.srce.hr/file/40376

BTB,

Father Damir

So he basically made them flawed just so they'd end up tumbling into hell.
What were they missing while standing right next to "God—aka true love, happiness, prosperity, and wisdom"?
Either it's some scabby God... or his creatures are just crazy. Take your pick.

"This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as a propitiation for our sins" (1 John 4:10);

Well, it does say he "sent his Son," since the Son begged the Father three times NOT to send him. (Columbus 12:7) 😂

"But God shows his love for us in this: while we were still sinners, Christ died for us." (Romans 5:8)

And look, he's still alive. So who's really doing who? (Columbus 12:7)

The Catechism of the Catholic Church covers this topic quite extensively in an entire chapter, so I'm sending you a link that I'm sure will be very useful: http://www.katolici.org/kaekizam.php...=r_vidi&id=237

A one-sided Catholic manifesto? For what?

Similarly, Professor John Karlić, in his article "Judgment and Death of Jesus of Nazareth," thoroughly examines the historical, social, and theological elements of Christ's death: hrcak.srce.hr/file/40376

He doesn't have anything to do with historians or actual science.

He began his studies in philosophy and theology at the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. (for three years), and continued at the Pontifical Theological faculty (PFT) "St. Bonaventure" in Rome, where he graduated in theology in 1988. That same year, he enrolled in graduate studies at the same faculty (specializing in dogmatic theology/christology) and earned his Master of Theological Sciences degree.

So, just a blowhard with some church-issued (worthless) "degrees."

Crazy Damir

😵
Insane...

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads