The Prodigal Son for debate

[Divine Insight]

I just watched the video posted by Otseng in the Holy Huddle forum. It's a story I'm well familiar with.

However there appears to be a grave contradiction in this story. The obedient son who had become jealous at the end of the story was supposedly upset that his father had killed the fatted calf to celebrate the return of the prodigal son.

Buy then the father turns to is righteous son and says, "Everything I have is yours".

How is this not a contradiction? According to the story the righteous son was upset because his father wouldn't even give him a goat to share with his friends. (see video @ 3:15) But now the father is claiming that everything he has also belongs to his righteous son.

Is the son only just now being told that everything his father has is also his free for the taking? If that's true then what's up with him complaining that his father never gave him so much as a young goat?

These are the kinds of self-contradictions that tend to always plague the Biblical stories.

Sure, from a purely moral perspective, we can make some kind of moral justification for this tale as being nothing more than a moral parable. However, that doesn't change the fact that the parable contains serious contradictions.

The righteous Son in this story apparently felt that his father would not permit him to take a young goat and share it with his friends. In fact, the mere fact that the righteous son was so upset about this implies that the son had actually requested this in the past only to have his father deny him.

So the story appears to me to have some serious self-contradictions associated with it.

Question for debate: How is this parable not self-contradictory?

Note to Otseng: Great video production by the way. It's not your fault that the original story contains these contradictory inconsistencies. If what the father claimed was true (that he would deny nothing from the righteous son), then why would the righteous son have any reason to be jealous of the prodigal son?

The story shoots itself in its own foot with this extreme contradiction concerning the righteous Son. He was upset about something that supposedly didn't even exist. Supposedly he could have had a young goat to share with his friends anytime he wanted and apparently just didn't know. This seems a bit problematic to me.

[JJ50]

The Biblical image of the god character is highly unpleasant and creepy.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 37 by SallyF]

Why is it easy to understand?

It's easy to understand what hell is supposed to be. It's simply a place of unimaginable horror and torture. Who can't grasp that?

What is difficult to understand about a hell is why any truly intelligent benevolent God would have ever created such a place in the first place.

Torturing people for eternity serves no useful purpose. Unless the God simply has an endless need to satisfy his own sadistic urge for endless vengeance.

So it's easy to understand what hell is.
But it's not easy to understand why any intelligent entity would create such a place.

[JJ50]

People have different ideas of hell, the idea of people burning in hell for all eternity is crazy, imo.

[Peds nurse]

[Replying to post 4 by Divine Insight]

The stories should be perfect and flawless in terms of containing any contradictions.

Hello DI, it has been a while! I hope you are doing fantastic!

This particular sentence stuck out to me. When people judge what is perfect and flawless, there will always be discrepancies because our views on flawless varies. The story in my eyes, is totally flawless in respect to God. Even though I stray away from my faith at times, being selfish in my pursuits, I always go home to my Father (God), and ask for forgiveness. He accepts me, just like the father in the story. The other son that had been faithful, had faulty thinking. He thought he deserved more and jealousy has a way of altering our perception of reality. We should always be more grateful for the returning of the lost, than thinking that we deserve more for staying the course.

[Divine Insight]

We should always be more grateful for the returning of the lost, than thinking that we deserve more for staying the course.

Why? Because this is what the dogma teaches?

Don't you ever question whether this dogma actually makes any sense?

Not only this, but I'm not even justifying the older son being jealous or wanting attention, etc. In fact, this is precisely what's so ungodly about this religion. This religion never allows for real people. All it wants to do is condemn everyone for every little thing.

And by the way, you say:

Even though I stray away from my faith at times, being selfish in my pursuits, I always go home to my Father (God), and ask for forgiveness. He accepts me, just like the father in the story.

But why would you keep doing that if you actually believe this God is real?

And is the motivation for your actions truly "selfish"?

There are a lot of good reasons for doubting and rejecting this religion that do not require selfish motivation. In fact, I can't even think of a selfish reason associated with my rejection of Hebrew mythology.

To the contrary clinging to a religion in the hopes of having my ego preserved forever in a state of eternal paradise would be far more selfish than rejecting the religion because I see it as being immoral and ignorant.

The idea that rejecting this religion is an act of selfishness is part of the dogma that tries to lay a guilt trip on anyone who dares to consider that the religion might be false.

In short Peds, I don't see these apologies for this religion as being valid apologies for any "God". To the contrary, all I see are people who have been indoctrinated into a religious dogma defending that dogma at all cost.

Just think about it. In order for Christianity to be true all Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, etc., must have all purposefully and knowingly rejected Christ as God's only begotten Son.

How can you even think that such a thing could possibly be true?

Yet it has to be true if Christianity is true. All of these non-Christians have to be people who hate and reject the God of Christianity. There's simply no room in the Christian dogma to allow for "other religions" to be true.

These Abrahamic religions were created specifically for the purpose of supporting tribalism between cultures.

[Peds nurse]

We should always be more grateful for the returning of the lost, than thinking that we deserve more for staying the course.

Why? Because this is what the dogma teaches?

No, it is because it is what Christ teaches.

Don't you ever question whether this dogma actually makes any sense?

Christ did not come to the world to reason with the minds of people, nor did He come to justify what we do. His Spirit will always work contrary to the desires of the flesh.

Not only this, but I'm not even justifying the older son being jealous or wanting attention, etc. In fact, this is precisely what's so ungodly about this religion. This religion never allows for real people. All it wants to do is condemn everyone for every little thing.

Condemn? We do enough of that on our own. Jesus said, "I did not come to the world to condemn it, but to save it."

Even though I stray away from my faith at times, being selfish in my pursuits, I always go home to my Father (God), and ask for forgiveness. He accepts me, just like the father in the story.

But why would you keep doing that if you actually believe this God is real?

I keep doing this because I love Christ, and I desire to pick up my proverbial cross, and walk the way He did. I desire to love like He did, to forgive like He did, and to give grace as freely as He gave it to me. In my marriage, I don't stop asking for forgiveness when I am in the wrong just because I am married. I love my husband, and as long as he is alive I will ask for forgiveness when I am wrong.

And is the motivation for your actions truly "selfish"?

Absolutely it is selfish. I want to do what I want to do, but not what He calls me to do. What other word could there be for it?

There are a lot of good reasons for doubting and rejecting this religion that do not require selfish motivation. In fact, I can't even think of a selfish reason associated with my rejection of Hebrew mythology.

Good for you DI, but we are not held to the same standard. Sorry

To the contrary clinging to a religion in the hopes of having my ego preserved forever in a state of eternal paradise would be far more selfish than rejecting the religion because I see it as being immoral and ignorant.

You think it's my ego that I want to preserve? Why would I want to preserve that? I am not all that and a bag of chips. I desire to be where God is. I love Him, it has nothing to do with me at all and everything to do with Him.

The idea that rejecting this religion is an act of selfishness is part of the dogma that tries to lay a guilt trip on anyone who dares to consider that the religion might be false.

Why would you think you are being selfish for rejecting this religion? I don't think you are selfish at all. We are held to different standards. Our measuring sticks are far different.

In short Peds, I don't see these apologies for this religion as being valid apologies for any "God". To the contrary, all I see are people who have been indoctrinated into a religious dogma defending that dogma at all cost.

That is your opinion DI, it is not fact.

Just think about it. In order for Christianity to be true all Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, etc., must have all purposefully and knowingly rejected Christ as God's only begotten Son.

How can you even think that such a thing could possibly be true?

I don't understand why it can't be! In order for something to be true, all people have to believe that truth? Is that what you are saying?

Yet it has to be true if Christianity is true. All of these non-Christians have to be people who hate and reject the God of Christianity. There's simply no room in the Christian dogma to allow for "other religions" to be true.

It seems that you see things in black and white. Rejection of truth does not equal hate. Because other people believe in other God's does not mean they hate Christianity, nor does it discredit it's truth.

[Divine Insight]

Condemn? We do enough of that on our own. Jesus said, "I did not come to the world to condemn it, but to save it."

Speak for yourself. I don't condemn anyone.

Besides, isn't Jesus a bit of a hypocrite since he also claimed that only few will make it into the kingdom of God? How does he intend to save the world when he preaches that only few will be saved?

I keep doing this because I love Christ, and I desire to pick up my proverbial cross, and walk the way He did.

How can you love someone you never met?

I desire to love like He did, to forgive like He did, and to give grace as freely as He gave it to me.

So why not just do that then?

In my marriage, I don't stop asking for forgiveness when I am in the wrong just because I am married. I love my husband, and as long as he is alive I will ask for forgiveness when I am wrong.

Why are you wrong?

And what do you do in the case when he's the one who is wrong and won't agree with you that he is indeed wrong? That's usually what causes problems in marriages.

You can hardly force your husband to admit that he's wrong when he refuses to agree with your claim that he's wrong. Marriage is a two-way street. It's not up to you alone to constantly be the one who is wrong.

And is the motivation for your actions truly "selfish"?

Absolutely it is selfish. I want to do what I want to do, but not what He calls me to do. What other word could there be for it?

In that case you apparently don't want to do what Christ wants you to do. Why is that? Do you disagree with what Christ wants you to do?

There are a lot of good reasons for doubting and rejecting this religion that do not require selfish motivation. In fact, I can't even think of a selfish reason associated with my rejection of Hebrew mythology.

Good for you DI, but we are not held to the same standard. Sorry

Who are "we"?

I'm a human on planet earth. Are you?

I don't believe in choosing sides in religious tribal wars. In fact, that's something I would like to see become a thing of the past.

See, your religion already has you excluding me as someone who doesn't belong to the group of "we" that you identify with.

To the contrary clinging to a religion in the hopes of having my ego preserved forever in a state of eternal paradise would be far more selfish than rejecting the religion because I see it as being immoral and ignorant.

You think it's my ego that I want to preserve? Why would I want to preserve that? I am not all that and a bag of chips. I desire to be where God is. I love Him, it has nothing to do with me at all and everything to do with Him.

So you are a totally selfless person when it comes to Christ with the exception that you don't want to do what he wants you to do because of selfish motivations?

I don't think that's ever going to make sense to me.

The idea that rejecting this religion is an act of selfishness is part of the dogma that tries to lay a guilt trip on anyone who dares to consider that the religion might be false.

Why would you think you are being selfish for rejecting this religion? I don't think you are selfish at all. We are held to different standards. Our measuring sticks are far different.

I don't think I'm being selfish for rejecting this religion. That's an accusation that Christians tend to accuse people of.

And when you say that we are held to different standards again, why should that be the case. What is the difference between you and me that we should be held to different standards?

In short Peds, I don't see these apologies for this religion as being valid apologies for any "God". To the contrary, all I see are people who have been indoctrinated into a religious dogma defending that dogma at all cost.

That is your opinion DI, it is not fact.

That's exactly correct. In fact, wasn't it stated as an opinion? I was describing what "I see", I don't recall saying anywhere that I was claiming to state a fact.

Just think about it. In order for Christianity to be true all Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, etc., must have all purposefully and knowingly rejected Christ as God's only begotten Son.

How can you even think that such a thing could possibly be true?

I don't understand why it can't be! In order for something to be true, all people have to believe that truth? Is that what you are saying?

No, I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that, if it's ok to believe in any of those other religions, then it can't be important to believe in Christ. And that is something that Christianity cannot tolerate.

Yet it has to be true if Christianity is true. All of these non-Christians have to be people who hate and reject the God of Christianity. There's simply no room in the Christian dogma to allow for "other religions" to be true.

It seems that you see things in black and white. Rejection of truth does not equal hate. Because other people believe in other God's does not mean they hate Christianity, nor does it discredit it's truth.

It doesn't matter. Don't forget Christianity isn't just about Christ. There's a whole Old Testament dogma that must necessarily be true first if Christ is to be the Son of Yahweh. And in that dogma Yahweh makes it clear that "Thou shalt not have any other Gods before me". Therefore all these other religions "save for perhaps Judaism and Islam", are placing other Gods before Yahweh.

Not only this, but there's even a problem with Islam. If you allow that the Islamic Allah is Yahweh, then you have extreme theological problems because you would then also need to recognize the Quran as being the infallible "Word of God" as well as accepting that Muhammad was indeed God's last true prophet.

So this issue become a theological can of worms.

All that can be done about it, and all that most Christian theist actually do about it, is just ignore the problem and pretend it doesn't exist.

That's how they tend to fix all their theological problems.

~~~~~~

By the way Peds, I'm not arguing for a godless world of pure materialism. For all I know there may very well be a God. Perhaps when we die good people will be rewarded for being good and bad people will need to face the consequences of their nasty actions. I'm not saying that these things cannot be true.

All I'm saying is that Biblical theology cannot be true as it is written.

Also there's a far cry between true "justice" versus just giving some people pure paradise while others pure hell. Talk about things being black and white. Yet that's the Christian narrative.

I think one reason so many people cling to these ancient tribal religions is because they somehow got it in their mind that either these ancient fables must be true, or there is no God and pure materialism must be all there is. So because of this false belief, they argue to their grave that the religion they were indoctrinated into must be true. It just has to be true because the alternative of no magical essence to reality is simply more than they are willing to face.

But it doesn't need to be like that at all.

[Peds nurse]

Condemn? We do enough of that on our own. Jesus said, "I did not come to the world to condemn it, but to save it."

Speak for yourself. I don't condemn anyone.

Hello DI, hope you are feeling great today!

Well, it would seem, that I feel very different about your lack of condemnation. It's a very slippery slope to condemn a religion without including the people.

Besides, isn't Jesus a bit of a hypocrite since he also claimed that only few will make it into the kingdom of God? How does he intend to save the world when he preaches that only few will be saved?

Because Jesus is insightful and knows the hearts of people. He knows that the easier path to follow is the wide road, and most will take it.

I keep doing this because I love Christ, and I desire to pick up my proverbial cross, and walk the way He did.

How can you love someone you never met?

Well, because I know the character of God and I have a relationship with Him through the Holy Spirit He has given me.

I desire to love like He did, to forgive like He did, and to give grace as freely as He gave it to me.

So why not just do that then?

Human nature gets in the way sometimes. Even Paul says, I do that which I don't want to do, and the things I want to do, I do not.

In my marriage, I don't stop asking for forgiveness when I am in the wrong just because I am married. I love my husband, and as long as he is alive I will ask for forgiveness when I am wrong.

Why are you wrong?

And what do you do in the case when he's the one who is wrong and won't agree with you that he is indeed wrong? That's usually what causes problems in marriages.

I am not perfect, of course I am wrong sometimes....are you married? How do you know what causes problems in a marriage?

You can hardly force your husband to admit that he's wrong when he refuses to agree with your claim that he's wrong. Marriage is a two-way street. It's not up to you alone to constantly be the one who is wrong.

Thanks for the marriage tip. I disagree with you, because I never said I was the only one ever wrong....moving on.....

And is the motivation for your actions truly "selfish"?

Absolutely it is selfish. I want to do what I want to do, but not what He calls me to do. What other word could there be for it?

In that case you apparently don't want to do what Christ wants you to do. Why is that? Do yoIu disagree with what Christ wants you to do?

In your life, you always did what your parents and employment asked of you, 100% of the time?

There are a lot of good reasons for doubting and rejecting this religion that do not require selfish motivation. In fact, I can't even think of a selfish reason associated with my rejection of Hebrew mythology.

Good for you DI, but we are not held to the same standard. Sorry

Who are "we"?

I'm a human on planet earth. Are you?

You+me= we. We do not believe the same thing. My accountability is different than yours.

I don't believe in choosing sides in religious tribal wars. In fact, that's something I would like to see become a thing of the past.

See, your religion already has you excluding me as someone who doesn't belong to the group of "we" that you identify with.

You cannot have your cake and eat it too. You deny the precepts of Christianity but then are offended because you are not a part of it? I find this rather odd. What do you want?

To the contrary clinging to a religion in the hopes of having my ego preserved forever in a state of eternal paradise would be far more selfish than rejecting the religion because I see it as being immoral and ignorant.

You think it's my ego that I want to preserve? Why would I want to preserve that? I am not all that and a bag of chips. I desire to be where God is. I love Him, it has nothing to do with me at all and everything to do with Him.

So you are a totally selfless person when it comes to Christ with the exception that you don't want to do what he wants you to do because of selfish motivations?

I am admitting that I am not perfect. I am admitting that I don't want to go to Heaven to preserve my ego, but rather to be in the presence of God.

The idea that rejecting this religion is an act of selfishness is part of the dogma that tries to lay a guilt trip on anyone who dares to consider that the religion might be false.

Why would you think you are being selfish for rejecting this religion? I don't think you are selfish at all. We are held to different standards. Our measuring sticks are far different.

I don't think I'm being selfish for rejecting this religion. That's an accusation that Christians tend to accuse people of.

I feel as though you are doing a whole bunch of word play. I did not say you were being selfish, as a matter of fact, I even stated that. Perhaps you subconsciously have to defend your position?

And when you say that we are held to different standards again, why should that be the case. What is the difference between you and me that we should be held to different standards?

I am a Christian who believes the Bible as the inherent word of God. You have made it very clear, that you do not believe the Bible as truth. Of course we are going to have different measuring sticks.

In short Peds, I don't see these apologies for this religion as being valid apologies for any "God". To the contrary, all I see are people who have been indoctrinated into a religious dogma defending that dogma at all cost.

That is your opinion DI, it is not fact.

That's exactly correct. In fact, wasn't it stated as an opinion? I was describing what "I see", I don't recall saying anywhere that I was claiming to state a fact.

Just think about it. In order for Christianity to be true all Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, etc., must have all purposefully and knowingly rejected Christ as God's only begotten Son.

How can you even think that such a thing could possibly be true?

I don't understand why it can't be! In order for something to be true, all people have to believe that truth? Is that what you are saying?

No, I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that, if it's ok to believe in any of those other religions, then it can't be important to believe in Christ. And that is something that Christianity cannot tolerate.

What do you mean by tolerate? I am not following your logic at all, because I understand you saying that if it's ok for other people to believe in other Gods, then it can't be important to believe in Christ. I don't understand that rationalization at all. If I believe that a diet is healthy and it is backed by science, according to your logic, the healthy diet cannot be believed as beneficial because there are other people who believe in other diets.

Yet it has to be true if Christianity is true. All of these non-Christians have to be people who hate and reject the God of Christianity. There's simply no room in the Christian dogma to allow for "other religions" to be true.

How is this problematic? We believe that God is the God of the universe. Period. There are no other God's. If other people want to believe in the spaghetti monster, alright, have at it! Other people's belief's don't discredit the Bible.

[Divine Insight]

Well, it would seem, that I feel very different about your lack of condemnation. It's a very slippery slope to condemn a religion without including the people.

I don't see it as a slippery slope at all. You didn't write the dogma so you have absolutely no responsibility at all for anything it says. All you have done is accept that it must be true.

Because Jesus is insightful and knows the hearts of people. He knows that the easier path to follow is the wide road, and most will take it.

Or so the myth goes.

Well, because I know the character of God and I have a relationship with Him through the Holy Spirit He has given me.

In other words, this God had darn well better live up to your expectations of what you expect his character should be otherwise you'll be extremely disappointed in God.

Human nature gets in the way sometimes. Even Paul says, I do that which I don't want to do, and the things I want to do, I do not.

Paul appears to have been a seriously confused and troubled man. That much I accept.

I am not perfect, of course I am wrong sometimes....are you married? How do you know what causes problems in a marriage?

Like Jesus I chose not to marry.

And to not procreate as God had commanded men to do.

Like Jesus I refuse to obey the demands of Yahweh.

Thanks for the marriage tip. I disagree with you, because I never said I was the only one ever wrong....moving on.....

Yeah, but what do you do when you feel that you are right and hubby is wrong but refuses to agree with you that's he's wrong?

That's when you face a situation where you no longer have any control. Admitting that you're wrong when you're wrong is the easy part.

In your life, you always did what your parents and employment asked of you, 100% of the time?

Of course not. In fact, I hope you don't think that God would expect anyone to just do whatever their parents or bosses tell them to do. What if your parents are criminal and are asking you to do immoral things?

Let's not forget Peds, I see Christianity (and the whole Abrahamic shebang) as nothing more than a scam where authoritarians are trying to get you to bow down to authority using an invisible God as their excuse.

You+me= we. We do not believe the same thing. My accountability is different than yours.

With respect to what? Are you saying the Biblical God has different rules and criteria for different people? And if so, where did you get that idea?

You cannot have your cake and eat it too. You deny the precepts of Christianity but then are offended because you are not a part of it? I find this rather odd. What do you want?

I'm not offended because I'm not part of it. In fact, we can take religion out of this entirely. Imagine that I'm a black man being constantly belittled and outcast by White Supremacists. Shouldn't I feel that the White Supremacists are treating me as though I am sub-human? It wouldn't be that I want to be like them, but rather I would simply want them to view and treat me as a valid human too.

Religious prejudice really isn't much different. Christians tend to speak of non-Christians as though they are inferior in some way (i.e. sub-human).

So I'm not looking to become part of Christianity. I just want to be recognized as being part of humanity. On equal footing with all other humans. This is one reason I'm passionately against the Abrahamic religions. They encourage tribalism and prejudice.

I am admitting that I am not perfect. I am admitting that I don't want to go to Heaven to preserve my ego, but rather to be in the presence of God.

You must necessarily believe that being in the presence of God is going to somehow be good for you. Otherwise why would you want to be in the presence of God? You probably don't want to be in the presence of Satan, and that's no doubt for precisely the opposite reason. You probably figure that being in the presence of Satan would not be an enjoyable experience.

So wanting to have the better experience is still a motivation based on what you believe that you would prefer.

I am a Christian who believes the Bible as the inherent word of God. You have made it very clear, that you do not believe the Bible as truth. Of course we are going to have different measuring sticks.

This is true. But if the Biblical God is true, then only one measuring stick would be correct.

What do you mean by tolerate? I am not following your logic at all, because I understand you saying that if it's ok for other people to believe in other Gods, then it can't be important to believe in Christ. I don't understand that rationalization at all. If I believe that a diet is healthy and it is backed by science, according to your logic, the healthy diet cannot be believed as beneficial because there are other people who believe in other diets.

That's not what I'm saying at all.

According to Christianity God arranged to have Jesus crucified to pay for the sin of man, and only those who acknowledge this and accept it on their behalf can be saved.

Therefore in your analogy above people who believe in other diets might actually die from poor health. So this means that all non-Christians, which would include Jews and Muslims as well as all other religions, are doomed.

How is this problematic? We believe that God is the God of the universe. Period. There are no other God's. If other people want to believe in the spaghetti monster, alright, have at it! Other people's belief's don't discredit the Bible.

Sure they do. It's not that the Spaghetti monster has to have any reality. It's simply that the people who believe in the Spaghetti monster must actually believe in Yahweh and Jesus and have willfully chosen via informed free will choice to reject Yahweh and Jesus even though they know that Yahweh and Jesus are the true God.

So what I'm saying is that every non-Christian on the planet must actually believe that Yahweh and Jesus are real and have simply chosen to reject them in favor of pretending to worship other false Gods.

Surely you can see how silly that is?

In fact, this would have needed to be true of the Canaanites in the Bible as well. This is how we can know that the story of the Canaanites is totally man-made and cannot be a true story. The authors of the Bible gave themselves away when they made up that story.

[otseng]

So, what does please God? It is simply recognizing and admitting that we are unworthy. We cannot do anything that would cause God to accept us.

And I'm supposed to enthusiastically embrace the idea that there is nothing I could do that would cause God to accept me? Why in the world would I ever want to believe such a dismal negative thing as a matter of pure faith?

Salvation is offered as a free gift, not as a result of anything we can accomplish. Why would someone more enthusiastically embrace another religion where good works are required and no guarantee if their good works are sufficient?

In fact, I think this is why Christianity invented eternal punishment in hell. They started to realize that just plain dying wouldn't be compelling. So instead they invented the concept of "Everlasting Punishment" for those who refuse to comply.

I believe the concept of hell as believed by modern man is far different than what is described in the Bible. Jesus certainly didn’t threaten sinners to accept him or they’d be cast into hell.

Does this sound like a religion designed by a loving intelligent God? Or does it sound more like something men would make up to try to get people to obey the authority of their man-made religion?

I think it’s a bit of both. Whether Christianity is true or false, I think we can safely agree that there are many man-made ideas in Christianity. But, just because there are man-made ideas, that does not then conclude that Christianity is false.

It's not that some of these Biblical parables might apply to a few bad apples, but in Christianity they try to make out like these parables are speaking about every single human being.

Well, I think it’s somewhere in between a few bad apples and every single human being.

So, what does please God? It is simply recognizing and admitting that we are unworthy. We cannot do anything that would cause God to accept us.

It's an extremely masochistic religion in terms of any kind of self-esteem. Don't dare think that you are worthy of God. How extremely arrogant that would be.

I think the claim that we are worthy of God is what would be extremely arrogant.

Was there absolutely nothing he could possibly have done to please his father? Is so, then it would be no wonder that he's so frustrated. Who would want to live with a father who is impossible to please and will always consider you to be unworthy of him.

There’s nothing in the story suggesting that obedience and good works are required for the father to love them. Even before the younger son said a word when he returned, the father ran to him, embraced him, and kissed him. God even loved the older son. He had given him his inheritance also. He did not command him to attend the party for his younger brother, but had tried to reason with him. And he reminded the older son that he had the best reward already - himself.

It's just not an inviting scenario as far as I can see. I would want to live with a God who views me as unworthy to even be in his presence.

To those that think they are worthy, they are unworthy before God, but to those who think they are unworthy, they are worthy before God.

1 Pet 5:5 “God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.�

Not only this, but this would then mean that Christianity has absolutely nothing at all to do with morality. To the contrary, all Christianity would amount to is admitting that we're all immoral and could never be moral even if we wanted to be.

I wouldn’t say Christianity has “absolutely nothing� to do with morality.

In terms of a relationship with God, personal morality has nothing to do with it. There is nothing that we can do to gain God’s favor. What is required for a relationship with God would be accepting God’s free gift of salvation - whether it be for the vilest sinner or the godliest saint.

In terms of relationship with others, we certainly have to be moral. We are commanded to love others and to be a model of Christ and to serve others.

Well, to begin with the whole thing about "Fairness" seems to me to be an immature mindset (i.e. a way that only young children might think). Why should a mature adult care whether someone else gets recognition and they don’t?

Exactly. The older brother’s mindset was an immature mindset. I’m not saying Christians should have this immature mindset or that the Bible is condoning it.

I actually understand the Eastern concept of coming to realize that we aren't the ego. In fact, Deepak Chopra wrote in one of his books a list of things that an enlightened person would know. One of them was a loss of any fear of death. When I read through his list I figured that I must be "enlightened" since everything he had on the list was true for me. I don't fear death. I don't want the bigger scoop of ice cream. And if I don't get credit or attention for anything it's not a problem. I don't lust for attention or recognition. In fact, like Richard Feynman, I'd prefer not to have the attention.

In fact, I believe that the real historical Jesus was most likely trying to teach the principles of Buddhism in his home culture. When Jesus spoke of being "born again in spirit", that's exactly what he was talking about. He was talking about losing the ego.

That’s a possibility.

Jesus certainly wasn’t coming to get any attention or recognition. If he was the son of God, he never made that clear. He avoided associating with the upper class and religious leaders and hung around with sinners. He didn’t come to be served, but to serve. He never pursued money or power. And he willingly laid down his life knowing full well that he would be crucified.

I agree that crimes require consequences. I disagree that punishment is useful for much of anything. In fact, I hold that if punishment is required to teach someone something, then there's a far deeper problem. Either lack of communication, or some form of mental health problem. Both of which a God should be able to deal with and fix.

What do you mean that crimes require consequences if it’s not punishment? What kind of consequences are you referring to?

Instead they believe that everyone is reincarnated.

Why do you believe that everyone will be reincarnated?