Rescued by Mary

A place to discuss Catholic topics and issues

Moderator: Moderators

Rescued by Mary
Student
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:57 am

Rescued by Mary

Post #1

Post by Rescued by Mary »

[center]RESCUED BY MARY


Once upon a time, there was a man who was lost at sea;
a sea of doctrinal confusion and despair.

He had been tossed to and fro, by wave after wave for many days,
until finally, he had reached his demise,
he would drown.

Suddenly, he spots something on the horizon!
His hope is renewed.
And then, as suddenly as it appeared, a huge wooden ship pulls up alongside him,
with Eternal Father written across the bow.

He looks up and sees the Captain of his Salvation in the wheel house,
with the Holy Ghost as Her main Sail.

But wait, there more. There’s someone running up the Vessel’s starboard side,
with something in hand.
It’s a Woman!

She leans back and heaves Her buoy with rope attached.
It lands besides him.

He reaches out and grabs the lifesaver with his last dying breath
before he goes under for good.
Without strength and exhausted, he can do little more.

She begins to haul him in, hand over hand;
he’s amazed by Her strength and unflinching determination.

Finally, as She reaches out to grab him by the hand,
he looks up to notice Her sleeves are rolled up,
revealing Her powerful forearms and weather beaten hands.

He realizes whoever this Woman is, She’s been doing this for a long time.
And as She clasps him tightly, he looks up and realizes -
It’s Mary!!


She pulls him safely on board,
as She turns and looks up towards Her Soverign.

They briefly meet eye to eye,
as He turns His mighty wheel, and sails away.


RbM[/center]

Rescued by Mary
Student
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:57 am

Post #11

Post by Rescued by Mary »

Divine Insight wrote:
Rescued by Mary wrote: What more could Jesus Christ do to show His Love of the Father for
you?
First off, according to you Mary is the Savior, not Jesus. :roll:

Insight. Mary is not God, just His Mother. My peom was about being "Resuced" by Mary - Not "Redeemed" by Her, O.K.?

And what exactly do you think Jesus did? Get himself crucified?

No greater love has a man than to lay down his life for another?
He came for His own and they rejected Him, Insight.
He willingly layed down on that Cross, for you. He did sweat blood, remember - it's not like He wanted to do it, man!!!

Why would you ever believe a myth about a God who sends his only begotten son to be beaten and nailed to a pole my mankind just so he can forgive mankind?

What sense does that even make?

Why should a God offer us forgiveness if and only if, we condone having his son beaten and nailed to a pole?

The offer of forgiveness in not contingent upon our condoning the crucifixion. It predeeds it. What you are contemplating is whether the Atonment is subjective or objective - Changing us or changing God. Just what does the death and suffering do Christ accomplish anyway, right?

God is a vengeful and wrathful God before the Atonement and then becomes a loving and forgiving God afterwards ??? Is that it ?

Prehaps the Atomnent was designed to change us, Insight, and not God. Maybe God has always been loving and forgiving and the Aronment in no way changes Him, but you and I instead?

You have turned our attention to the nature of the Atonement and its necessity. Few go there. You are a thinker, Insight.

There have been many theories of the Atonment that have been developed over the years, Insight. This what you have been articulating is what you learned in Catechism class, right? You are Baptised Catholic aren't you Insight...

As a result of Adams sin we become slaves of satan and Jeusus pays the price for our redemption - The substitutionary theory of the Atonment. It is strictly a forensic transaction - penal in nature.

The governmental theory of the Atonment - God punished sin to promote the overall good of His Moral Government.

The Benevelence theory of the Atonmnet...

Google around Insight, think about things a little bit more.




Also, what are the wages of sin supposed to be in this religion? Being beaten and nailed to a pole? No. That's not the wages of sin. In the religion the original wages of sin was death. Permanent death. Spiritual death.

In fact, the reward for being sinless is to be resurrected after you die and give eternal life in heaven.

What happened to Jesus in these fables? Did he die spiritually and permanently?

No he didn't. On the contrary he was supposedly resurrected and then physically ascended to heaven taking his physical body with him. And it ends "Happily ever after", with Jesus sitting at the right hand of God ruling over his heavenly kingdom for the rest of eternity. Does that sound like the wages of sin? Is that permanent spiritual death? No it isn't.

So how could Jesus be said to have paid the wages of sin of for anyone when he supposedly got precisely the reward for being a saint?

The fairytale isn't even well-written or well-thought-out. It's just a conglomeration of superstitions that contradict themselves every step of the way.

Insight! Man, this is great stuff! Look - there are answers to these difficulties that you have been articulating. Consider:

"The soul that sinneth it shall die" [Ezekiel 18:20]

But as you have pointed out the soul that sinneth does not die!!! How do we explain this? If Christ were to have fulfilled the letter of the law than He would have had to die eternal death as you have said. But He did not. When we sin we do not die!?! We live. So this "satisfaction" theory of the Atonemnet has problems.
Prehaps Jesus fulfilled the sprit of the law, Insight. And you have been chasing ghosts.

Please consider a short story that I have written about this very subject: I wrote this upon my fathers death.

"King Edwin Josephus of Dutchington"



And like I say, the whole thing that you're being saved from is the wrath of the jealous angry God himself. If Jesus was God incarnate, then he's the biggest drama queen there ever was. He's totally hung up on himself. All he cares about is being worshiped and obeyed as the center of attention lest he'll throw a temper tantrum and hurt someone.

There's nothing moral about this God myth. It's disgusting from the word go.

You ask me what love is. Well, it's not nailing people to pole, or burning witches on stakes, or cursing women to have greatly multiplied sorrow in conception and childbirth. I can assure you that none of those thing have anything to do with love.

It's not about creating a hell fire and threatening to cast decent people into eternal damnation if they fail to cower down and worship you ego.

I can't even think of anything in the religion that represents love.

Yes, it's true that some of the things that Jesus supposedly taught do appear to be quite loving. But most of those were flat-out rejections of what had been previously taught by the God of Abraham in the Old Testament.

The God of Abraham had people judging each other and stoning sinners and heathen to death. He had them stoning their own children to death, instead of simply teaching them how to be better parents. :roll:

That's not only unloving, but it doesn't even represent intelligence or wisdom of any kind. On the contrary it's a blatant lack of both.

Jesus did renounced those horrible things. Jesus taught people not to judge one another and not to cast the first stone. I personally believe that Jesus got his higher moral values from Buddhism. He clearly wasn't the son of the God of Abraham, he didn't even agree with that God.

The God of Abraham had people seeking revenge as in an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Jesus taught people not to seek revenge, but instead to turn the other cheek and forgive those who trespass against you. Again, he no doubt got these more loving moral values from the Buddha, he most certainly didn't get them from the God of Abraham.

Insight, the eye for an eye precept was designed to limit the revenge to the scope of the offence and to go no futher.. Get it?

Jesus Christ was the God of Abraham

Jesus had nothing to do with the God of Abraham. And if Mary was his mother, chances are the Joseph was his father, unless Mary had already been pregnant from a previous relationship with another man.

Jesus was not a demigod. He was most likely a Jewish Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva. That makes far more sense than anything else. The rumors about him being a demigod are just outrageous superstitions that clearly can't be true.

True love is to love Jesus for the man he was. If the only way you can love Jesus is because he's offering you eternal life, then that's not love at all.

Insight, this is true Catholicism, man! Fear of punishment may be a good motive not to offend God's law but it won't last for long.

You have spoken well that a true love for God is not rooted in a hope of reward either. We do not have true love for God only for what we can get from Him.

But to just love a man falls short for an answer to my question of you - What is Love.

You referenced Jesus teachings but never really answered that question. You talked a lot about what love is not but not really what it is, Insight.

"Loving the man Jesus" Insight - Jesus said if you love Me you will keep my commandments...



Here's a question for you now.

Do you condone having Jesus beaten and nailed to a pole to pay for your sins?

Payment theory of the Atonment? Let's think about it, Insight...

I would personally never do that, not even to save my own soul. To me that would be the lowest thing I could ever stoop to.

Saint Longinus was the one who thrust the spear into Jesus side, Insight...

And if you don't condone this, then how can you claim to have accepted it on your behalf?

To accept it on your behalf is the same as offering to do it.

Would you nail Jesus to a pole to pay for you way into paradise?

"Pay" hmmm...


Or perhaps you feel that Mary will let you sneak in through a back door?

Insight, be real careful with Mary, O,K.?

Then like Pontius Pilate you can wash your hands of the whole crucifixion thing.



[center]KING EDWIN JOSEPHUS OF DUTCHINGTON
[/center]


Once upon a time, there was a great King. Long, long ago, in a land far, far away, King Edwin Josephus of Dutchington ruled over a vast Kingdom that stretched as far as the eye could see, from horizon, to horizon…

Now King Edwin was a very kind and loving King, and could often be found throughout the various townships of Dutchington, mingling with the peasants and common folk, fellowshipping with them and listening to their concerns with great care and pity. All of his loyal subjects loved their kind King. With such grateful affection they would shower him with gifts and kisses as he would pass their way; so appreciative of his compassionate ruler-ship. King Edwin, truly, was a very wise and benevolent King.

Many years had passed with much peace and prosperity throughout King Edwin’s reign. Every man treated his neighbor justly, following the King’s example with contentment. Until one day, a very troubling trend began to develop – men began to bear false witness against their neighbor. It started with just a single incident; but soon became an epidemic, spreading like wildfire throughout the entire Kingdom. Almost without warning, the eyes of men became darkened, one after another, until truth could hardly be discerned. Men could no longer see to appreciate, and fell into disillusionment and despair.

It would seem that the very stability of the Kingdom would be called into question. And so, regrettably, the King was forced to issue a decree –

“The next man caught lying, will have both eyes put out.�

The Seal of King Edwin was placed upon the decree and it was posted throughout every corner of Dutchington. So perplexed and disheartened was the great King with the conditions that had developed, men losing their ability to see truth, that he thought such drastic measures necessary, though one man may lose his sight, lest his entire Kingdom should fall into darkness, and all would be lost.

Well, it didn’t take long. Once the King’s decree was posted,

“The King’s decree! The next man caught lying, will have both eyes put out,�

...word seemed to travel almost overnight. The scourge of bearing false witness came to an abrupt end. No one wanted to be blinded. No one wanted to do or say much of anything for quite some time; a lot of soul searching, but no talking. No one was talking. Until one day, it happened - the unthinkable. Someone was caught lying. In a remote village on the outskirts of the Kingdom, a man had deceived his companion and wrought great pain and sorrow. His speech having betrayed him, no question as to his guilt, he is placed in the stockade, to await his fate.

When word reached the Throne as to what had happened the order was given that the man should be brought before the King’s Court for a speedy and judicial resolution of the matter. The next morning, at daybreak, a royal brigade in all of its pomp and ceremony was dispatched many days journey to bring the accused to trial. Of course, news of these events spread quickly throughout Dutchington. And soon, one thing would be in the minds and on the lips of every soul in the Kingdom: What would the King do? For during the journey from village to village on their way back to the King’s Court, what was revealed would shock and horrify all those who would discover what no one dared tell the King.

And finally, they arrive, and hurriedly place the prisoner in the dungeon below. The next morning, the man bound hand and foot, his prison garb tattered and torn, is brought before the King with his chains and shackles clanking, as the sound echoes throughout the King’s Court.

The dirty and besheveled man, guards on either side clasping his fragile and defeated frame, is marched up before the King as he sits upon his Throne in his high and lofty position. And there, he collapses under the heavy burden of exhaustion and shame. With guilt and condemnation now having dealt their crushing blow, upon the face of his loving King he cannot bear to gaze.

And at that moment, a piercing hush falls over the halls of justice. As everyone stands in utter silence, frozen in time, the deafening reality of what has happened slowly begins to fall over the countenance of the King as his eyes fall upon the accused for the first time.

The man who was to have both eyes put out, the man who was caught bearing false witness, was the King’s only son.

All of those who had gathered there that day, the King’s generals and royal ensemble, would be utterly breathless in anticipation of the King’s decision. What had consumed the thoughts and hearts of everyone in all of King Edwin’s vast domain would finally be decided. What would the King do? Would he show mercy, and forgive his son, his only son? Or would he exact strict justice and carry out the full sanction of the law? And put out both eyes of his son, his only son?

Surely he would show mercy towards his son that he loved so much, many had said. King Edwin was such a kind and loving King, they thought; there’s no way he could blind his only son, lest he be seen as harsh and unmerciful, and his love be called into question. But others would reply the King is a just King with a high regard for the law; he must enforce his decree lest his integrity be called into question.

And so, faced with such a dilemma, the King knew instantly that his decision would have a profound effect throughout his entire Kingdom for all his subjects, and for all time.

The King did not hesitate. He called immediately for his most trusted general, Lexingthor the Great, and commanded that he bring forth the pot of hot coals and the hot poker.

Behold the scene: Upon the general’s speedy return, the guards stoop down to grab the King’s son under his arms and pull him to his feet, as the clanking of his chains echo throughout the Court, and down the avenues of his soul. The King gives the order, and his general steps forward as he slides his leathery hand behind the neck of the broken young man, and then places his right hand upon the hot poker’s handle with a firm grip. He removes the hot poker from the coals of fire, and with a quick, involuntary glance, the hardened general looks back towards his Sovereign as he raises it to eye level.

Noting his slight hesitation, the King nods with sorrowful approval and assurance, and looks away. And as the guards firm their grip upon the young man’s trembling frame, the general pushes forward the hot poker’s sharp tip, and with a shallow gasp from the crowd, and then a short pssst, he puts out one of the King’s son’s eyes…

And then, the King does something that shocks everyone gathered there that day. King Edwin sets aside his Crown, rises from his Throne, and stepping down from his high and lofty position he divests himself of his Kingly robes, and stands before his son as his mighty general and guards step aside.

King Edwin then grabs the hot poker as he places his hand upon the shoulder of his son. And as his son raises up his head, to look upon his father’s face for the last time, the King raises up the sharp tip of the red hot poker, and then, the Noble King puts out one of his own eyes, drops the poker, and as the two look eye to eye, the King says, “loose him, and let him go, now.�

And so, the one-eyed King of Dutchington upholds the integrity of the law, and shows mercy at the same time. Although the letter of the law is not fulfilled, the spirit of the law is fulfilled. In order to fulfill the letter of the law, it is true, that both eyes of the King’s son would have to be put out. And although the King would have shown his respect for the law in doing so, his mercy would have suffered.

And had the King pardoned his son from the penalty of the law, his sense of justice would have been called into question. Either way, the Kingdom suffers. So, King Edwin puts out two eyes, one of his son’s, and then, one of his own. And although it doesn’t satisfy strict justice, it satisfies public justice. By providing a strong deterrent to future moral wrong in putting out one of his son’s eyes, the King upholds the integrity of his decree.

However, the King also does something far more important. He provides a much greater deterrent to future moral wrong than the sanction of the law ever could – the love and affection that the King shows for his son in substituting one of his own eyes for that of his son, with such a selfless act of pity and compassion, would give rise to a love within his subjects for their Sovereign that they had never experienced before.

They would now serve him, not out of fear of punishment or hope of reward, but because they now knew how much the King really loved not only his son, but them as well. King Edwin puts out one of his own eyes, not only that his son might see, but to promote the overall good of the Kingdom and everyone who would live there.

And every time they would see that one-eyed son, they would be reminded of the severity of disobedience, and to what lengths the King would go to uphold the integrity of the law, not sparing the eye of even his only son. But more importantly, every time they would see their one-eyed King, they would be reminded of what a loving and compassionate King they served, not sparing his own eye from the hot poker’s edge, in an act of selfless love for his beloved son, and Heir to the Throne.

Yes, the people would always remember their one-eyed King. And every time they would think of him, they would be reminded of how much he loved his one-eyed son, and all of the Kingdom, for generations to come.


RbM

[center][/center]

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Post #12

Post by Divine Insight »

Rescued by Mary wrote: No greater love has a man than to lay down his life for another?
And many mortal men do that every day. And they don't even have a promise of eternal life. If Jesus was God he knew that he had nothing to risk. How could God die? It would have been superficial drama that would have been totally meaningless to an eternal God.
Rescued by Mary wrote: He came for His own and they rejected Him, Insight.
But everyone didn't reject him. On the contrary according to the gospels Jesus supposedly had thousands of followers who loved him. The only people who hated him would have been a few Jewish Pharisees. Hardly the whole world.
Rescued by Mary wrote: He willingly layed down on that Cross, for you. He did sweat blood, remember - it's not like He wanted to do it, man!!!
What do you mean it's not like he wanted to do it? It would have had to have been his idea from the get go.

I certainly didn't ask him to do it for me. Did you ask him to do it for you?

Besides, why would a supposedly omnipotent God need to go through this sacrifice to "save" others? Who would he be saving them from?

According to the Bible we're being saved from this God's own wrath.

When mortal men lay down their lives for others it's because they are up against enemies that they can't defeat any other way.

This Biblical God would be more akin to some crazed mad-man walking into a crowded mall with a machine gun threatening to mow down everyone there, but instead he's arrested by the Pharisees and put to death. You call that an act of heroism?
Rescued by Mary wrote: Prehaps the Atomnent was designed to change us, Insight, and not God. Maybe God has always been loving and forgiving and the Aronment in no way changes Him, but you and I instead?
I've always been a loving and forgiving person. In fact, I'm so loving and forgiving that my friends often say that I let people walk all over me and take unfair advantage of me.

So perhaps this is why Christianity makes no sense to me?

If you were a hateful evil person before you accepted Jesus into your heart, then I can understand where you are coming from. But for me personally that kind of scenario makes no sense.

When I first read the stories about Jesus I just continually nodded my head in agreement with all the moral things he preached. As far as I'm concerned he stood up to that horrible God of Abraham from the Old Testament and basically told that God to take a hike.

Jesus was the first character in the Bible that I could actually identify with, save for possible Noah.

Speaking of Noah, isn't it strange that the Biblical God is so schizophrenic that in the Old Testament he hates the world so much he floods it out, but then in the New Testament he loves the world so much that he gives his only begotten son to save mankind from his own hateful wrath?

If there were any truths to these fables this God would be in dire need of psychiatric care.

Rescued by Mary wrote: There have been many theories of the Atonment that have been developed over the years, Insight. This what you have been articulating is what you learned in Catechism class, right? You are Baptised Catholic aren't you Insight...
No, I don't believe in Catholicism. I was raised by a very loving Protestant Free Methodist family. I won't go into the details of my history with studying the Bible, but I'm very glad that Protestants protested against Catholicism. That was a very wise thing to do. Now they only need to take it a little further and reject the whole "Christ" thing.

Jesus was most likely a Jewish Mahayana Buddhist.
Rescued by Mary wrote: As a result of Adams sin we become slaves of satan and Jeusus pays the price for our redemption - The substitutionary theory of the Atonment. It is strictly a forensic transaction - penal in nature.

The governmental theory of the Atonment - God punished sin to promote the overall good of His Moral Government.

The Benevelence theory of the Atonmnet...

Google around Insight, think about things a little bit more.
Oh bother. Don't tell me about all these lame apologetic theories. I've heard them all time and time again. In fact, I can just about guarantee that you'd be extremely hard-pressed to come up with one I haven't already heard.

They all fail, IMHO. Every single last one of them.

You say, "Jesus pays the price for our redemption."

What price did he pay? Physical suffering? A lot of people have suffered far worse than Jesus did. People suffer physical and emotional pain every day. Some of them to extreme degrees. Are they then "paying the price" of their redemption? Moreover, if physical pain is the price for redemption, and Jesus paid that price for all mankind, then why is there still physical pain in this world?

The idea that Jesus' physical suffering paid for anything is an untenable idea to begin with.

The wages of sin is death. Permanent physical and spiritual death. The reward for being sin free is eternal life in paradise.

In these fables what did Jesus get? Permanent spiritual death? No. He was resurrected from death and ascended to heaven and supposedly still lives today in heaven and will have eternal life. That's not the wages of sin.

If Jesus was the payment for the redemption of mankind, then the check bounced when he was resurrected.

There is no way to make sense of these fables and rumors because they weren't well-thought-out to begin with and they make no sense.
Rescued by Mary wrote: Insight! Man, this is great stuff! Look - there are answers to these difficulties that you have been articulating. Consider:

"The soul that sinneth it shall die" [Ezekiel 18:20]

But as you have pointed out the soul that sinneth does not die!!! How do we explain this? If Christ were to have fulfilled the letter of the law than He would have had to die eternal death as you have said. But He did not. When we sin we do not die!?! We live. So this "satisfaction" theory of the Atonemnet has problems.
Prehaps Jesus fulfilled the sprit of the law, Insight. And you have been chasing ghosts.
The spirit of what "Law"? Are you forgetting that this is a God who used to drown out sinners in a Great Flood. He's a lawless God who just does whatever he wants. He has no "laws" that he needs to adhere to.

Rescued by Mary wrote: Please consider a short story that I have written about this very subject: I wrote this upon my fathers death.
The story is quite interesting, but it doesn't save the Biblical God. Like I say, the biblical God drowns out sinners one day, and then supposedly sacrifices his son to save the world the next.

So there is no consistency in the Bible. You're short fairytale was a totally different story altogether.

Also, you're story is about a mortal Kind. Not an omniscient, omnipotent, creator of all mankind.

The problem with Christianity is that it condemns everyone. It condemns all men to being sinners, which is nothing short of hogwash.

There is no loving way to get to this God. The only way to obtain this God's love is to confess that you're worthless scum and that this God had no choice but to have his son butchered on a pole to pay for your disgusting unworthiness.

If I'm as unworthy as the Christian religion demands, then I wouldn't want any part of the heaven that it supposedly offers anyway.

Why would I want to go to some heavenly paradise where I'm totally unworthy of being?

If my creator is so utterly lame that he can't even create so much as a single solitary worthy soul then he's a totally inept creator to begin with.

Christianity can never be made to make any sense. It's founded on the condemnation of the human spirit. There is nothing of value in it at all.

It's a religion of pure condemnation. Even to be saved you must confess that you actually deserved to be condemned. :roll:

It's an oxymoronic religion. In order to be accepted into the heaven of this God you must be a totally despicable person. Good people simply aren't permitted entrance.

There is no way that a good person can be loved by this God. It's forbidden.

Rescued by Mary
Student
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:57 am

Post #13

Post by Rescued by Mary »

Divine Insight wrote:
Rescued by Mary wrote: No greater love has a man than to lay down his life for another?
And many mortal men do that every day. And they don't even have a promise of eternal life. If Jesus was God he knew that he had nothing to risk. How could God die? It would have been superficial drama that would have been totally meaningless to an eternal God.

Jesus was a mortal man, Insight. Was He not? The Glory set before Him was the Glory that He would share with us. This was His "reward." Christ did not face the Atonment for the promise of what He already possed.... How could God die? Insisght, do you realize what you are asking me?

Consider the all important relationship between Jesus Christ and His Holy Mother. We cannot consider Christology without considering Mariology. The two are inseparable; both the issues and the Persons.

Jesus Christ – One person with two natures, hypostatically united within one person: Two natures that are united in one man but yet not intermingled in any way. Two distinct natures that are separate from each other but yet together in one person; the man Jesus Christ!

I can discuss the Trinitarian Nature of the Godhead and how that man Christ could die and God's Son in the Flesh of Mary. But God cannot and did not die in His Divinity. I do not understand the Trinity, Insight. No theologian has rejected Catholicism as a result of this. A Mystery I can accept. A contradiction I cannot. There is nothing in the revealed truth that contracicts known truth, Insight.


Rescued by Mary wrote: He came for His own and they rejected Him, Insight.
But everyone didn't reject him. On the contrary according to the gospels Jesus supposedly had thousands of followers who loved him. The only people who hated him would have been a few Jewish Pharisees. Hardly the whole world.

You misunderstood me here. His own who rejected him was His Nation, not the world. Even his Apostles forsook Him and fled, remember?
Rescued by Mary wrote: He willingly layed down on that Cross, for you. He did sweat blood, remember - it's not like He wanted to do it, man!!!
What do you mean it's not like he wanted to do it? It would have had to have been his idea from the get go.

I certainly didn't ask him to do it for me. Did you ask him to do it for you?

No one would have know their need for a saviour unless they were made aware of this fact, Insight. This is why they don't ask, they don't know.!

Besides, why would a supposedly omnipotent God need to go through this sacrifice to "save" others? Who would he be saving them from?

According to the Bible we're being saved from this God's own wrath.

Yes, because of their own guilt, Insight. You are quilty. You are. God's Law is just and pure.

When mortal men lay down their lives for others it's because they are up against enemies that they can't defeat any other way.

You should rethink this one, Insight. Honour and chilrary would have never been a part of history were it not for Mary. Many a brave Catholic knight has layed his life down for his Queen in battle - not defeat!

This Biblical God would be more akin to some crazed mad-man walking into a crowded mall with a machine gun threatening to mow down everyone there, but instead he's arrested by the Pharisees and put to death. You call that an act of heroism?

Insight, something tells me you are smarter than this. Christ whipped the Pharisees out of the Temple. Beat their ass good, but was never accused of it at His judgement, was He? Now you are confusing the God of the old Testament with the God of the New. Make up your mind, Insight. Get your stories straight.
Rescued by Mary wrote: Prehaps the Atomnent was designed to change us, Insight, and not God. Maybe God has always been loving and forgiving and the Aronment in no way changes Him, but you and I instead?
I've always been a loving and forgiving person. In fact, I'm so loving and forgiving that my friends often say that I let people walk all over me and take unfair advantage of me.

So perhaps this is why Christianity makes no sense to me?

If you were a hateful evil person before you accepted Jesus into your heart, then I can understand where you are coming from. But for me personally that kind of scenario makes no sense.

When I first read the stories about Jesus I just continually nodded my head in agreement with all the moral things he preached. As far as I'm concerned he stood up to that horrible God of Abraham from the Old Testament and basically told that God to take a hike.

Jesus was the first character in the Bible that I could actually identify with, save for possible Noah.

Speaking of Noah, isn't it strange that the Biblical God is so schizophrenic that in the Old Testament he hates the world so much he floods it out, but then in the New Testament he loves the world so much that he gives his only begotten son to save mankind from his own hateful wrath?

If there were any truths to these fables this God would be in dire need of psychiatric care.


Insight? Have you no insight into yourself?? Read what you have said about yourself carefully here. You are so loving and forgiving that you can't forgive God.


Rescued by Mary wrote: There have been many theories of the Atonment that have been developed over the years, Insight. This what you have been articulating is what you learned in Catechism class, right? You are Baptised Catholic aren't you Insight...
No, I don't believe in Catholicism. I was raised by a very loving Protestant Free Methodist family. I won't go into the details of my history with studying the Bible, but I'm very glad that Protestants protested against Catholicism. That was a very wise thing to do. Now they only need to take it a little further and reject the whole "Christ" thing.

Jesus was most likely a Jewish Mahayana Buddhist.

What happened Insight? With you mum? Huh? You came from a loving family you say. Let's tak about it some. A little later...
Rescued by Mary wrote: As a result of Adams sin we become slaves of satan and Jeusus pays the price for our redemption - The substitutionary theory of the Atonment. It is strictly a forensic transaction - penal in nature.

The governmental theory of the Atonment - God punished sin to promote the overall good of His Moral Government.

The Benevelence theory of the Atonmnet...

Google around Insight, think about things a little bit more.
Oh bother. Don't tell me about all these lame apologetic theories. I've heard them all time and time again. In fact, I can just about guarantee that you'd be extremely hard-pressed to come up with one I haven't already heard.

They all fail, IMHO. Every single last one of them.

You say, "Jesus pays the price for our redemption."

You haven't been listening, Insight. Where did I say that Jesus "payed" for our sins or articulated the payment theory of the atonment in any way. My short story was the opposite!


What price did he pay? Physical suffering? A lot of people have suffered far worse than Jesus did. People suffer physical and emotional pain every day. Some of them to extreme degrees. Are they then "paying the price" of their redemption? Moreover, if physical pain is the price for redemption, and Jesus paid that price for all mankind, then why is there still physical pain in this world?

The idea that Jesus' physical suffering paid for anything is an untenable idea to begin with.

The wages of sin is death. Permanent physical and spiritual death. The reward for being sin free is eternal life in paradise.

In these fables what did Jesus get? Permanent spiritual death? No. He was resurrected from death and ascended to heaven and supposedly still lives today in heaven and will have eternal life. That's not the wages of sin.

If Jesus was the payment for the redemption of mankind, then the check bounced when he was resurrected.

There is no way to make sense of these fables and rumors because they weren't well-thought-out to begin with and they make no sense.


You are repeating youself, Insight. I've already addressed these points in my last post. There was no forensic payment of a debt. Look - If Jesus payed for our sins - Who received the payment? God? The Devil? Make some sense out of what you are saying, man. Clearly define what you are rejecting and why.
Rescued by Mary wrote: Insight! Man, this is great stuff! Look - there are answers to these difficulties that you have been articulating. Consider:

"The soul that sinneth it shall die" [Ezekiel 18:20]

But as you have pointed out the soul that sinneth does not die!!! How do we explain this? If Christ were to have fulfilled the letter of the law than He would have had to die eternal death as you have said. But He did not. When we sin we do not die!?! We live. So this "satisfaction" theory of the Atonemnet has problems.
Prehaps Jesus fulfilled the sprit of the law, Insight. And you have been chasing ghosts.
The spirit of what "Law"? Are you forgetting that this is a God who used to drown out sinners in a Great Flood. He's a lawless God who just does whatever he wants. He has no "laws" that he needs to adhere to.


Insight, God's Law is an expresion of His Divine Nature. Rightarianism says we must do the right thing because it is the right thing to do. But wait, God's Law is not a arbitrary list of thing not to do. They are an expression of who and what He is. Love. If everyone obeyed the Ten Commandments what would the world be like?

Rescued by Mary wrote: Please consider a short story that I have written about this very subject: I wrote this upon my fathers death.
The story is quite interesting, but it doesn't save the Biblical God. Like I say, the biblical God drowns out sinners one day, and then supposedly sacrifices his son to save the world the next.

So there is no consistency in the Bible. You're short fairytale was a totally different story altogether.

Also, you're story is about a mortal Kind. Not an omniscient, omnipotent, creator of all mankind.

Read between the lines, Insight. It tells a different story. One of a loving King (God) who redeems His people. Oh hey I'm no Hemingway, O.K.?

The problem with Christianity is that it condemns everyone. It condemns all men to being sinners, which is nothing short of hogwash.

There is no loving way to get to this God. The only way to obtain this God's love is to confess that you're worthless scum and that this God had no choice but to have his son butchered on a pole to pay for your disgusting unworthiness.

If I'm as unworthy as the Christian religion demands, then I wouldn't want any part of the heaven that it supposedly offers anyway.

Why would I want to go to some heavenly paradise where I'm totally unworthy of being?

If my creator is so utterly lame that he can't even create so much as a single solitary worthy soul then he's a totally inept creator to begin with.

Christianity can never be made to make any sense. It's founded on the condemnation of the human spirit. There is nothing of value in it at all.

It's a religion of pure condemnation. Even to be saved you must confess that you actually deserved to be condemned. :roll:

It's an oxymoronic religion. In order to be accepted into the heaven of this God you must be a totally despicable person. Good people simply aren't permitted entrance.

There is no way that a good person can be loved by this God. It's forbidden.
Insight, what you are articulating is protestantism. Of the worst sort. Some kind of Lutheran smut that our wills are totally depraved and usless because of the "fall" of Adam. This is not Catholicism !!! You are of great worth to God, Insight! John and Charles Wesley never advocated what you are rejecting. They took to field preaching because he church of wouldn't let him in the front doors!



Redeemed at such a great cost because of this fact !

I care about you Insight. As a person - a human being - and I am a Catholic O.K. ?



If you were the only soul on earth Christ would let you hammer that nail so that you might be saved.

Give the Pope a chance, Insight. Go to Mass.

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Post #14

Post by Divine Insight »

Rescued by Mary wrote: I do not understand the Trinity, Insight. No theologian has rejected Catholicism as a result of this. A Mystery I can accept. A contradiction I cannot. There is nothing in the revealed truth that contracicts known truth, Insight.
Same here. I have no problem with mystery this is why I embrace mysticism. But blatant contradictions I cannot. And the Hebrew mythology is riddled with blatant contradictions.


Rescued by Mary wrote:You misunderstood me here. His own who rejected him was His Nation, not the world. Even his Apostles forsook Him and fled, remember?[/color]

What would you have his Apostles do? Protest against the Romans who were carrying out the will of the Jewish Pharisees. Those Apostles would have just been hung on cross right next to Jesus like common thugs. They weren't stupid.

Moreover, what was Jesus getting himself crucified for in the first place? That was his own stupidity. Had he followed his own teachings he wouldn't have gotten himself into such a stupid mess in the first place. He should have practiced what he preached.
Rescued by Mary wrote: No one would have know their need for a saviour unless they were made aware of this fact, Insight. This is why they don't ask, they don't know.!
Saved from what? A demonic satanic God who would otherwise hurt them?

That's one of the greatest contradictions in this whole religion. You need to believe in a God who hates you and is out to get you before you even need to be saved from him. :roll:
Rescued by Mary wrote: Yes, because of their own guilt, Insight. You are quilty. You are. God's Law is just and pure.
I'm guilty of what exactly? Please elaborate.

Rescued by Mary wrote: You should rethink this one, Insight. Honour and chilrary would have never been a part of history were it not for Mary. Many a brave Catholic knight has layed his life down for his Queen in battle - not defeat!
Honor and chivalry existed long before the time of Jesus or Mary. :roll:

Why do Christian fanatics always seem to think that the Bible is a first for everything. It's not. Even the highly moral teachings of Jesus were taught centuries before by men like Lao Tzu, Confucius, and the Buddha. Jesus had absolutely nothing new to offer at all.
Rescued by Mary wrote: Insight, something tells me you are smarter than this. Christ whipped the Pharisees out of the Temple. Beat their ass good, but was never accused of it at His judgement, was He? Now you are confusing the God of the old Testament with the God of the New. Make up your mind, Insight. Get your stories straight.
So even you see the difference between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New. Clearly it can't be the same unchanging stable and dependable God, and therefore the whole religion breaks down because in order to Christianity to work it has to be the same God in both the Old and New Testaments.

There's another contradiction for you. ;)






If you were a hateful evil person before you accepted Jesus into your heart, then I can understand where you are coming from. But for me personally that kind of scenario makes no sense.

When I first read the stories about Jesus I just continually nodded my head in agreement with all the moral things he preached. As far as I'm concerned he stood up to that horrible God of Abraham from the Old Testament and basically told that God to take a hike.
Rescued by Mary wrote: What happened Insight? With you mum? Huh? You came from a loving family you say. Let's tak about it some. A little later...
I see no reason to believe that you could comprehend the concept of love when you are so hung up on associating love with gruesome crucifixions and kings poking people's eyes out with hot pokers. :roll:
Rescued by Mary wrote: You are repeating youself, Insight. I've already addressed these points in my last post. There was no forensic payment of a debt. Look - If Jesus payed for our sins - Who received the payment? God? The Devil? Make some sense out of what you are saying, man. Clearly define what you are rejecting and why.
I reject the idea that Jesus was a demigod, born of a virgin woman who was impregnated by a God, and was specifically sent to Earth to be crucified in association with the salvation of mankind in any way shape or form.

You can twist that into a pretzel shape any way you like, it's still not going to be palatable. No matter how you twist it you're still stuck with a deeply sick demented God.
Rescued by Mary wrote: Insight, God's Law is an expresion of His Divine Nature. Rightarianism says we must do the right thing because it is the right thing to do. But wait, God's Law is not a arbitrary list of thing not to do. They are an expression of who and what He is. Love. If everyone obeyed the Ten Commandments what would the world be like?
If everyone obeyed the Ten Commandment it would still be a dog-eat-dog world riddled with disease and natural disasters. In fact, if you removed every single human being from the universe, you'd still end up with a universe riddled with what we call "sin" and "evil". So mankind doesn't have much to do with it at all really.

Besides, most atheists don't do things that would be in violation of the Ten Commandments save for perhaps the stupid egotistical ones about worshiping God. I think that's the first four. So there's only like 6 left after that.

Christians don't own morality. The ten commandments are mostly just common sense that was common to just above every religion ever created by mankind. At least in terms of the moral content (like I say, after you dump out the jealous God commandments)

Read between the lines, Insight. It tells a different story. One of a loving King (God) who redeems His people. Oh hey I'm no Hemingway, O.K.?

Hey, I find far higher moral values in other religions, like Wicca, Taoism, and Buddhism. The ancient Hebrew moral values were often quite immoral actually.
Rescued by Mary wrote: You are of great worth to God, Insight!
I would have been worth a whole lot to the Biblical God as a counselor. I could have helped him out on many occasions. All he had to do was ask and I would have helped him solve his problems intelligently. ;)

Rescued by Mary wrote: I care about you Insight. As a person - a human being - and I am a Catholic O.K. ?
Well, that's good. I hope everything goes well for you too.
Rescued by Mary wrote: If you were the only soul on earth Christ would let you hammer that nail so that you might be saved.
I wouldn't do it. I would simply accept death. After all, why would I even want to live for eternity with a God who so anxious to have people nailed to a pole?
Rescued by Mary wrote: Give the Pope a chance, Insight. Go to Mass.[/color]
Are you kidding me?

I have absolutely no problem with God RBM.

All God needs to be is more benevolent than me, and I won't need to be "saved".

On the other hand, if my creator is not as benevolent as myself then why would I even want to be saved by it? No one needs to be saved from me?

The Christian God simply isn't anywhere near as loving, compassionate, or benevolent as myself. This is why I know that it necessarily has to be a fake mythology. A supreme creator of this universe simply can't be that messed up.

How could God be a lesser being than myself when it comes to compassion and benevolence? It simply isn't possible.

Any religion that has a God that I personally need to fear is necessarily a false religion.

It's as simple as that.

Rescued by Mary
Student
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:57 am

Post #15

Post by Rescued by Mary »

Rescued by Mary wrote:

Yes, because of their own guilt, Insight. You are quilty. You are. God's Law is just and pure.


I'm guilty of what exactly? Please elaborate.


Insight. Let's ask you mom? I'll go with what ever she says.

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Post #16

Post by Divine Insight »

Rescued by Mary wrote: Insight. Let's ask you mom? I'll go with what ever she says.
My mom's dead. But I'd be quite happy to go by her report card. I'm sure she would have me being a far greater saint than I would confess to myself. :D

In fact, when she was alive she assured me that I have nothing to worry about in terms of making it into heaven. Not that I would have worried about it anyway, but she would give me a passing grade for sure.

Jesus would too, I'm quite sure.

In fact Jesus taught, "Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven"

Well, I judge no one. I condemn no one. And thus far I have forgiven everyone.

So if the words that have been attributed to Jesus have any merit at all then I am guaranteed that when I die and I'm standing before the gates of heaven they will open automatically like the doors to a Walmart Supercenter and I'll just walk right in with no questions asked.

There will be no judgement day for me, because by Jesus' promise, "Judge not, and ye shall not be judged"

Since I have judged no one, I shall not be judged, so says Jesus the Almighty Christ himself.

Care to argue with the words of Jesus? ;)

Rescued by Mary
Student
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:57 am

Post #17

Post by Rescued by Mary »

Divine Insight wrote:
Rescued by Mary wrote: Insight. Let's ask you mom? I'll go with what ever she says.
My mom's dead. But I'd be quite happy to go by her report card. I'm sure she would have me being a far greater saint than I would confess to myself. :D

In fact, when she was alive she assured me that I have nothing to worry about in terms of making it into heaven. Not that I would have worried about it anyway, but she would give me a passing grade for sure.

Jesus would too, I'm quite sure.

In fact Jesus taught, "Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven"

Well, I judge no one. I condemn no one. And thus far I have forgiven everyone.

So if the words that have been attributed to Jesus have any merit at all then I am guaranteed that when I die and I'm standing before the gates of heaven they will open automatically like the doors to a Walmart Supercenter and I'll just walk right in with no questions asked.

There will be no judgement day for me, because by Jesus' promise, "Judge not, and ye shall not be judged"

Since I have judged no one, I shall not be judged, so says Jesus the Almighty Christ himself.

Care to argue with the words of Jesus? ;)


Insight - You get an A for judging not lest you be judged!

There is just one small problem with your forgiveness though...

I've listed just a few :



that evil bimbo Eve is our Mother.

because of God's lame ability to create

such an inept creator?

the creator is a complete idiot

such a hateful jealous God

fables made up by male-chauvinists.

type of behavior we often see from religious fanatics.

a sick demented God who can't forgive people

Jesus was God incarnate, then he's the biggest drama queen there ever was. He's totally hung up on himself.

All he cares about is being worshiped and obeyed as the center of attention lest he'll throw a temper tantrum and hurt someone.

Biblical God would be more akin to some crazed mad-man walking into a crowded mall with a machine gun

If there were any truths to these fables this God would be in dire need of psychiatric care.


problem with Christianity is that it condemns everyone. It condemns all men to being sinners, which is nothing short of hogwash

Moreover, what was Jesus getting himself crucified for in the first place?

That was his own stupidity.

Had he followed his own teachings he wouldn't have gotten himself into such a stupid mess in the first place.

He should have practiced what he preached.

Jesus had absolutely nothing new to offer at all.


[strike]You're short fairytale was a totally different story altogether[/strike].


Insight - It seems that you have forgoten to forgive God...


.

Rescued by Mary
Student
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:57 am

Divine Insight's opinion of Himself !

Post #18

Post by Rescued by Mary »

Divine Insight's opinion of Himself !



I've always been a loving and forgiving person. In fact, I'm so loving and forgiving that my friends often say that I let people walk all over me and take unfair advantage of me.

So perhaps this is why Christianity makes no sense to me?

you were a hateful evil person before you accepted Jesus into your heart, then I can understand where you are coming from. But for me personally that kind of scenario makes no sense.

I have absolutely no problem with God RBM.

All God needs to be is more benevolent than me,

The Christian God simply isn't anywhere near as loving, compassionate, or benevolent as myself.

How could God be a lesser being than myself when it comes to compassion and benevolence

My mom's dead. But I'd be quite happy to go by her report card. I'm sure she would have me being a far greater saint than I would confess to myself.

In fact, when she was alive she assured me that I have nothing to worry about in terms of making it into heaven. Not that I would have worried about it anyway, but she would give me a passing grade for sure.

Jesus would too, I'm quite sure.

Well, I judge no one. I condemn no one. And thus far I have forgiven everyone.

There will be no judgement day for me,

Since I have judged no one, I shall not be judged

.

Wow Insight you really got it goin on, dude

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Divine Insight's opinion of Himself !

Post #19

Post by Divine Insight »

Rescued by Mary wrote: Wow Insight you really got it goin on, dude
Well, if your a Christian I would most certainly hope that you do to. For if you believe in Jesus there's no excuse for you to ignore what he taught:

"Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." - Jesus the Christ.

Are you doing as you've been told to do? Or are you wallowing in excuses? :-k

Surely you don't think that Jesus would be so foolish as to ask you to do something that you are incapable of doing?

So, yes, from a moral perspective I am indeed perfect just as Jesus had suggested that we should be. I would certainly expect that every sincere Christian is also morally perfect without exception.

I don't even believe that Jesus was a demigod and I still behave in a manner that he taught, and I'm not even trying. For me it just comes naturally. ;)

As far as your post filled with my quotes about the ancient Hebrew mythological God, I'm not passing judgement on anyone. It's a fictional character. That would be like passing judgement on Superman or Spiderman. They are just fictional characters. I'm just pointing out how we can know that this is indeed a fictional picture of God.

I judge no one.

But clearly you do as you seem to be judging me to have judged God. #-o

This is a gross misunderstanding on your behalf.

In fact, this is a very good reason why it makes sense not to judge other people because most of the time our judgments are based on a totally erroneous perspective.

So, yes I am perfect like Jesus. And if you're a Christian who actually believes that Jesus was a demigod who was sent to give you instructions on how to behave then you should take his advice and be perfect too.

Don't you trust Jesus' teachings? :-k

ndf8th
Sage
Posts: 517
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 7:13 am
Location: North Europe

Post #20

Post by ndf8th »

Could Mary be modeled from Isis and Horus?
and many other Goddesses.

I come to think of The Goddess Mercy that gave name to the word
to have mercy on somebody. Chinese name her Guan Yin
and she exist under other names too.

Motherly love and care seems universally known
so most likely Christians needed to have such
and then when Luther did the Reformation God
himself got seen as the Motherly God that cared about us. ???

Post Reply