You're a Thief!

[Divine Insight]

Just for the record this post is written for decent people to read. If you actually are a thief, then this post isn't going to make much sense to you.

Let's say that someone comes up to you and says the following:

"You are a thief! All you do is think about how you can get over on other people. All you do is look for opportunities to take what doesn't belong to you. You don't care about anyone but yourself. And you need to change your evil ways."

What would be your first reaction?

Well assuming that you are a decent person and you know these accusations are false, your first reaction would most likely be to ask this accuser, "Where in the world did you even get such a horrible idea about me?"

You know that the accusation is false right? So it's clear to you that all that really needs to be done here is to convince this accuser that these accusations are false. And even if you can't succeed in convincing the accuser that the accusations are false, you still know that they are indeed false accusations.

So, now if these accusations were made by some author of 2000-year-old religious texts what would change?

Would you suddenly think, "Gee, I must be a thief who is out to get over on everyone, and I don't care about anyone but myself"?

Surely not?

Questions for Debate:

Why should any decent person believe in an ancient religion that makes accusations toward them that they know to be false anymore than they should believe some stranger who just now came up to them making all manner of false accusations about them today?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 13 by Divine Insight]

This religious cult proclaims that you are a sinner from the womb to the grave. No one can escape the accusation of being a sinner in Christianity. That's the whole point to the cult.

Except Mary in Roman Catholicism...we couldn't have Jesus being born from a sinful woman, so Mary was declared to be without sin herself.
Just ignore the problem this creates, just ignore the fact that this means Jesus is now no longer needed.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 17 by MadeNew]

First of all, you hate God, thats pretty clear, and thats something in that list.

I dislike the character called God from the Bible. That character comes across as that list of nasty adjectives that Richard Dawkins famously said.

However, this does not mean that I believe that that character exists. Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars is a nasty character. I do not believe that Palpatine exists. Lord Voldemort is a hypocrite and a liar, in the Harry Potter books. I do not believe that Voldemort exists.

I don't buy that you are sinless DI, not for a second.

Then what of the list of 'sins' from Romans?

Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

What is it that I or DI do that is 'unrighteous? Do you know anything about us? Are we fornicators? Are we wicked? Do we covet? Are we malicious? Are we envious? Are we murderers? Do we debate (well, I've got to give Paul that one, this is a DEBATE website ) Are we deceivers?
My good name, and that of DI, has been slandered. I'd like to sue the Christian religion for defamation of character.

You can say that all you want, and i have nothing more then to take your word for it, and that would be taking another humans word for being sinless.

Much like how you take Paul's word and the gospel authors that we are in fact sinners. They too were human beings. Why are you taking their word that you and I and everyone else are horrible people?

Sin has been shown to be true in everyone i know, even my father, a man i respect more then any other person i know, has clearly sinned.

Is your father that list from Romans? Wicked, murderous, covetous etc?

My friends, my teachers, my siblings, and yes myself. All of these people have sinned, but your sinless?

Do you remember earlier your claim that we have free will?

God grants everyone free will,

Great. Then I choose not to do or be any of those horrible things Paul says I am.
Now what happens?
In order for what Paul says to be true, I have no choice, no free will, BUT to do all those horrible things.
But I don't. I have not done them. I am not doing them and I choose not to do them.
In order for your earlier free will claim to stand, this then means that I am not sinning right now. And if I am not sinning, then what Paul says is not true.

Which is it MadeNew? Do I as an ex-Christian do/become all those horrible things Paul says in Romans, even against my free will choice not to be? Or am I not those things and thus, Paul is telling porkies?

Maybe in your eyes, which is the problem, I bet Hitler thought he was a good person..

I don't like the way this is worded. In my eyes, which is the problem. This implies that DI is a problem simply because he has a different view than yours.
And yes, Hitler would have thought he was a good person. Doesn't establish that he actually was. Just what he thought of himself.

Christianity exposes sin,

What does the list from Romans 'expose'? Rather, it slanders, it accuses.

and guides people to faith and repentance

Let's hypothesise that right this minute, I become a Christian again. Of that list from Romans...what do I have to repent for? This is an honest question.

then there are the people who don't even believe in sin. Not believing in sin is the very root of the definition of a psychopath.

Here's six links to six different dictionaries defining what a psychopath is. Notice that not one of them even mentions sin.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/psychopath
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... Psychopath
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/diction ... psychopath
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/psychopath
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... psychopath
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/psychopath

I await your rebuttal, for you to provide evidence that psychopaths are anywhere defined as having anything to do with 'sin'.

In fact, I demand an apology. According to you, DI and I and all the other non-believers are psychopaths, simply because we don't believe in sin.

And God told us there is evil and sin in the world.

I don't believe this claim.

We have the ability to live faithfully throughout it

If I become a Christian again today, I would necessarily have to believe that during my 15 odd years as an ex-Christian, I was all of those horrible things Paul says in Romans, even though I would retain the memories of not being those things, and that I supposedly (according to you) had the free will choice not to do them anyway.

God told us to beware false prophets, like evil dictators.

In my eyes, no-one is a prophet. No-one has ever proven themselves, in my eyes, to actually be a real prophet.

And Jesus suffered and died on a cross, while living faithfully.

So did I suffer throughout my childhood.

If some evil person killed you, i have a hard time believing you would pray for their forgiveness,

Why would that person necessarily have to be evil? Was it an accident (say, a car crash)?

by what you are writing i would guess you would curse God in that situation.

But I don't curse God! I don't curse God for anything that happened in my life BECAUSE I DO NOT BELIEVE HE EXISTS.
Now, if it turns out he actually DOES exist (which I believe is not true), then yes, I would. He'd have been an enabler of my sister's rapes.

Well Christ laid down his life for you, a sinner, so that you could live faithfully.

Then I'm not a sinner. I exercise the free will you mentioned earlier to not be a sinner anyway, and even if I do some horrible things, well..."Christ laid down his life for me", so I cannot be considered a sinner anyway. My 'sins' are forgiven, isn't that the usual spiel from Christianity?
If you still consider me a sinner, then this means Christ's death on the cross had no effect whatsoever.
That, and you're judging me, which goes against the famous line of "Judge not, lest ye be judged".

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to Divine Insight]

If you believe yourself to be a “decent person,� then I can’t imagine why you would have any interest in Christianity. Jesus made explicit statements about calling sinners, not the righteous. If you think of yourself as a righteous and decent person then more power to you. I’m not sure why you would be bothered by the fact that other people believe themselves to be in need of mercy.

DING DING DING, we have a winner!
I do not mean to be rude or sarcastic, but this is the problem with Christianity. The moment I consider myself a decent person, then the [strike]snake oil[/strike] what Christianity is 'selling' loses all power.
I have to necessarily consider myself a horrible person in order for the claims of Christianity to have any allure. Look at what MadeNew wrote above

even my father, a man i respect more then any other person i know, has clearly sinned. My friends, my teachers, my siblings, and yes myself. All of these people have sinned,

He believes himself and everyone he loves to be horrible people.
I don't. I don't consider MadeNew to be a horrible person. As far as I know, you and he are debaters on DC&R. I have no knowledge that you have done anything horrible, so I will not slander you as such. Unlike what Paul does.
Now look what MadeNew said about DI (and all other non-believers by extension).

then there are the people who don't even believe in sin. Not believing in sin is the very root of the definition of a psychopath.

MadeNew calls me a nasty name, simply because I don't believe his religious doctrine of sin.
Pretty sure that goes against the code of conduct on this site...

[MadeNew]

[Replying to post 16 by MadeNew]

You know, I have read what you have written like fifty times.
You really have no idea that you have cited sins with biological motives, have you? You think that citing extremes of "sin" you have knocked out the less extreme, but still hell-raising ones. You say rape, when checking out a women is enough for Jesus to send you to hell.

Christianity has taken your biological motivations, told you they were bad, and had you apply to "God" to get rid of them.

Christianity has just made this clear. There is no grey area in Christianity, and there is a huge grey area in nonbelief. What sex is immoral and what is moral? They have no good answers for this, and Jesus did. Living pure outside of marriage.

The word impurity is used as if they have taken something pure and mixed it with something making it impure. Sex is a holy thing, it is a good thing, but what happens is that people take it and mix it with unholy, impure, perversion. The make sex into something immoral. They make something pure into something impure. There is no grey area with God.

Or maybe you can shed some light on this issue. What is right and wrong when it comes to sex? Because i think we all can agree that some types of sexual activity is grossly immoral and some types are perfectly moral and healthy. Christianity has not compromised on this, but what about you? Can you determine right from wrong when it comes to sexual activities? Please do. How can we determine right from wrong and not be compromised by evil things? How do you determine such things in your life?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 24 by MadeNew]

Can you determine right from wrong when it comes to sexual activities? Please do. How can we determine right from wrong and not be compromised by evil things? How do you determine things such in your life?

I determine such by figuring out if it harms anyone against their will, and usually try to avoid it.
If you and I were in a relationship and you didn't like bondage, not one bit, I wouldn't do it to you. However, if I liked bondage, I would view it as perfectly acceptable for you to do it to me. Replace "bondage" with any other sexual practice, and I hope you get the point.

Look at what you wrote about your own family members up above. You said

even my father, a man i respect more then any other person i know, has clearly sinned. My friends, my teachers, my siblings, and yes myself. All of these people have sinned,

You rail against us non-believers for sinning, for not believing that we are sinners, and then you lump your own family members, people you claim to love, right in with us.
If I was railing against a type of person, I wouldn't lump my own family members in with them (e.g. if I was railing against [people of ideology or political persuasion], I wouldn't lump my family members in with them).
Why is it that when you disagree with DI, myself and others, you are all too quick to lump people you claim to love in the same camp as myself?

There is no grey area in Christianity, and there is a huge grey area in nonbelief. What sex is immoral and what is moral?

This right here is the problem. Let's say you like anal sex, and so does your partner, but your Christian denomination (whatever it is) says no, says its immoral. Why are you letting them dictate what you and your partner do in the bedroom? As long as you're (both of you) are careful not to hurt the other, where do questions of morality come into play?

Sex is a holy thing, it is a good thing, but what happens is that people take it and mix it with unholy, impure, perversion.

And here's the thing. What you're going to say next, what you say constitutes pure sex, and what constitutes impure sex, is your completely subjective opinion, and the completely subjective opinion of your religion, just with a god label stamped on to it to try and give it the authority to meddle in people's lives.
I know of Christian denominations that are fully accepting of homosexual marriage, and homosexual relationships and activities, and other groups that are not accepting of such. Both are voicing their subjective opinions with a God label.

[MadeNew]

[Replying to post 24 by MadeNew]

Can you determine right from wrong when it comes to sexual activities? Please do. How can we determine right from wrong and not be compromised by evil things? How do you determine things such in your life?

I determine such by figuring out if it harms anyone against their will, and usually try to avoid it.
If you and I were in a relationship and you didn't like bondage, not one bit, I wouldn't do it to you. However, if I liked bondage, I would view it as perfectly acceptable for you to do it to me. Replace "bondage" with any other sexual practice, and I hope you get the point.

So any consensual sex is fine? Even if it is grossly perverted? I mean even the Bible tells us that to sin sexually is to sin against your own body, and not against others (1 Corinthians 6:18). They say "Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body."

Do you think watching pornography is fine? If you watch Ted Bundy's last interview he told us that his actions of serial killing started with his obsession of pornography.

(warning graphic verbiage)
Do you think consensual perversion is fine? Like orgies? Or prostitution? Or like 2 girls 1 cup, where people poop on each other and eat it. Is that stuff ok because it is consensual?

Look at what you wrote about your own family members up above. You said

even my father, a man i respect more then any other person i know, has clearly sinned. My friends, my teachers, my siblings, and yes myself. All of these people have sinned,

You rail against us non-believers for sinning, for not believing that we are sinners, and then you lump your own family members, people you claim to love, right in with us.
If I was railing against a type of person, I wouldn't lump my own family members in with them (e.g. if I was railing against [people of ideology or political persuasion], I wouldn't lump my family members in with them).
Why is it that when you disagree with DI, myself and others, you are all too quick to lump people you claim to love in the same camp as myself?

I don't know what you are talking about. I said my dad is a sinner, just like my friends, my siblings, and even myself. I said i am a sinner as well... It isn't like I'm trying to demonize you, and to outcast you. Everyone is a sinner, we are all in the same boat. Every Christian is a sinner, and so is everyone else, the difference is the acknowledgment of sin, and not that you guys are worse then any of us.

There is no grey area in Christianity, and there is a huge grey area in nonbelief. What sex is immoral and what is moral?

This right here is the problem. Let's say you like anal sex, and so does your partner, but your Christian denomination (whatever it is) says no, says its immoral. Why are you letting them dictate what you and your partner do in the bedroom? As long as you're (both of you) are careful not to hurt the other, where do questions of morality come into play?

Sex is a holy thing, it is a good thing, but what happens is that people take it and mix it with unholy, impure, perversion.

And here's the thing. What you're going to say next, what you say constitutes pure sex, and what constitutes impure sex, is your completely subjective opinion, and the completely subjective opinion of your religion, just with a god label stamped on to it to try and give it the authority to meddle in people's lives.
I know of Christian denominations that are fully accepting of homosexual marriage, and homosexual relationships and activities, and other groups that are not accepting of such. Both are voicing their subjective opinions with a God label.

Determining whether actions are in line with Christianity, is a lot different then coming up with your own morality based on whatever you feel like at that time.

Where determining what God wants for your life, is totally different then determining what you want for your life.

"For I came not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me."~Jesus Christ

[Willum]

[Replying to MadeNew]

You don't need me. Christianity's two-thousand year history of murder and genocide in the name of a murderous and genocidal lord speak for themselves. (Referring of course to God's acts in the Old Testament.)

You (plural) can look at someone, lust after them, forget about it and go to hell because of it, in the spirit of Martin Luther and Jesus. If you believe that, but I won't.

You can claim a morality only Christianity has made clear, but I tell you what:
It would take a real idiot to no only hold with Christianity's basic precepts, and we find other cultures actually not only have their own, but improve on these very immature, however beneficent principals.

The ten commandments are obvious to an eight year old, except for the bits about there being more than one god, but you should honor only one. There are other philosophers and cultures who think those ten disrespected laws are quaint.

For example, Roman Law is what we follow, and it was invented by Rome's pagan empire. Any of Jesus' law that we follow are simply coincidence.

This Judeo-Christian philosophy is still circling the drain that technology and science circled in the Dark Ages. Remember, the Dark Ages? When Christianity's rise made science in-lawful. Do you need reminding of the results? No progress, and the murder of folks like Galileo (Wjjo didn't repent) and the Spanish Inquisition.

Just imagine if philanthropy and philosophy didn't have to worry about offending imaginary creatures, or resting upon false foundations.

As a segue, consider - people say there will never be peace in the Middle East. Why? because people are making judgments based on philosophy that hasn't caught up with the times. Jewish and Muslim parties are murdering each other for no modern reason.

In regards to your last challenge directed at me personally:
I have no difficultly determining right from wrong, in any scenario. My morality is easy - always make the decision that benefits the most people.

If God has a problem with that, he can tell me, or suffer himself.

[MadeNew]

[Replying to post 27 by Willum]

Hey man, lets not get off topic... You raised the question of biological sins. Do you believe that "benefiting the most people" is biologically in our nature? Do you think, "always choosing what benefits the most people" is an objective take on morality? Do you think that is always the right thing to do?

That doesn't seem like an "easy" choice to me. That sounds like you would have to make immense considerations for every choice you make morally. I would guess that you probably make 99% of your decisions with out even thinking about your "easy" choice of morality.

Also, you didn't really answer my question...

What is right and wrong when it comes to sex? Because i think we all can agree that some types of sexual activity is grossly immoral and some types are perfectly moral and healthy. Christianity has not compromised on this, but what about you? Can you determine right from wrong when it comes to sexual activities? Please do. How can we determine right from wrong and not be compromised by evil things? How do you determine such things in your life?

[Willum]

[Replying to post 28 by MadeNew]

Again, you don't need me - it is pretty typical for the Judeo-Chritian culture to avoid the subject of genocide and murder of their own practices and their god's, and focus on harmless practices of sin and sex.

I am afraid my answer doesn't change:
What is right and wrong when it comes to sex?
What benefits the most amount of people or harms the least? That's my answer.

[MadeNew]

[Replying to post 28 by MadeNew]

Again, you don't need me - it is pretty typical for the Judeo-Chritian culture to avoid the subject of genocide and murder of their own practices and their god's, and focus on harmless practices of sin and sex.

I am afraid my answer doesn't change:
What is right and wrong when it comes to sex?
What benefits the most amount of people or harms the least? That's my answer.

Im not at all avoiding the subject of genocide and murder. I am a Christian, and Christ commands us not to take part in these kinds of behaviors, in fact Christ taught us that even hate is like murder and is a sin. Christ forgave sinners, Christ prayed for the forgiveness of people murdering Him, Christ is the pinnacle of righteousness.

If someone wants to go commit genocide and claims to do it in the name of Christ, they are grossly butchering the righteousness that Christ taught, and they are not representing the faith.. This is more of an Ad Hominem and a Strawman toward Christianity then a legitimate criticism... Unless you can show that Christ supports these things you are talking about, it is a fallacy against Christianity.


But Hitler exterminated Jews to benefit the germans, as he saw it. Do you condemn him on the basis of your moral understanding? Is it wrong for people to castrate other humans in the name of eugenics, to benefit our future population, on your understanding of morality? Would it be ok to enslave a few people to benefit the existence of a mass population, according to your understanding of morality?