Christians are Revolting - Sean Lauren

Debate specific books

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20499
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 336 times
Contact:

Christians are Revolting - Sean Lauren

Post #1

Post by otseng »

This thread will debate the book Christians are Revolting: An Infidel's Progress, by Sean Lauren.

We will go through the book one chapter at a time and discuss the contents of each chapter. I anticipate we'll spend several days on each chapter and then move on to the next one. Please avoid jumping ahead, but you're free to discuss previous chapters (for those that join late). We'll end the debate with each person giving a general overview of the book. The thread will then be closed.

If you'd like to participate, sign up here.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20499
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 336 times
Contact:

Post #101

Post by otseng »

ElCodeMonkey wrote:So sinning one time doesn't necessarily make me a sinner by identity even if I am one who sinned. I see "sinner" as an identity of sorts. It is one who lacks true repentance and continues on sinning without a care. God knows our hearts, so he knows if we're truly repentant or just saying "sorry" with a scowl. So even though I often miss the mark, it is not my practice. It is not my identity. I care. I am not one who practices sin, I am one who accidentally sins. It's not practice if it's not intentional.
If that's the case, then I don't think there's any objective way to determine if someone is a sinner. Perhaps there's not even an objective way for God to determine.
I'm confused because you say here that God will judge fairly but the thing you said was unfair was how God was judging.
I don't have much of a problem thinking that something might be unfair from my perspective, but still believing an authority will try to judge fairly. Many people have accused the moderators of being unfair. I can't totally convince posters that the mod team is trying to be fair. But, they would have to have faith in us that we are trying to be fair.
God should have a much better communicative ability for such important things as eternal life and damnation unless confusion is all part of the shtick.
Well, God never said the road is wide that leads to life and many are those that will find it. So, it's not necessarily a requirement for God to make things clear and easy to have eternal life.

Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12235
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Post #102

Post by Elijah John »

otseng wrote:
ElCodeMonkey wrote:So sinning one time doesn't necessarily make me a sinner by identity even if I am one who sinned. I see "sinner" as an identity of sorts. It is one who lacks true repentance and continues on sinning without a care. God knows our hearts, so he knows if we're truly repentant or just saying "sorry" with a scowl. So even though I often miss the mark, it is not my practice. It is not my identity. I care. I am not one who practices sin, I am one who accidentally sins. It's not practice if it's not intentional.
If that's the case, then I don't think there's any objective way to determine if someone is a sinner. Perhaps there's not even an objective way for God to determine.
So if one sin makes a person a "sinner" than what about the converse? Does one saintly act make one a saint? Say, throwing oneself on a grenade in order to save one's comrades in arms? "No greater love"...After all.

Or is there a double standard at work here, and the "one act" standard defines a person only when it works in the negative?

If you want a standard , what about the standard of a way of life? The person who is habitually seeking God and seeking to embrace the good, vs the habitual sinner, who could care less, and is bent only on personal gain even at the expense of others.

Fr. Andrew Greely called thiese contrasting ways of life one's "fundamental option". To seek to live a good and Godly life, or to live only for one's self.

Daniel Boone put it this way. "I try to do my best, and trust in God's mercy for the rest".
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

User avatar
ElCodeMonkey
Site Supporter
Posts: 1587
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:49 am
Contact:

Post #103

Post by ElCodeMonkey »

[Replying to post 101 by Elijah John]

That is quite the excellent point! A single act couldn't define people or else we'd all be walking paradoxes!
I'm Published! Christians Are Revolting: An Infidel's Progress
My Blog: Friendly By Nurture
The Wisdom I've gleaned.
My Current Beliefs.

Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12235
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Post #104

Post by Elijah John »

Also, if "one sin doth a sinner make" or "one lie doth a liar make" then it can be argued that the Bible is a liar of a book, based on one error, or one lie alone. Matthew 16.28 comes to mind.

The Bible, like people, is a mix, of the good and the not so good. A person or a book can be good, without being perfect. As David says in the Psalm, "YHVH is merciful to us, for he knows we are but dust."
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

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

Post #105

Post by Divine Insight »

otseng wrote: The problem is one sin is all that's required to disqualify someone from heaven. Unlike other religions, good works does not compensate for any sin committed. Now, do I think that's fair? No, it's not fair. But what I would like to believe does not override what the Bible has to say.
My question to you at that point would be to ask why you believe that the Bible is the word of a God? If you think the God described by the Bible is being unfair, then why would you believe that this represents any actual God, especially a fair and just one? :-k
otseng wrote:
What good is a book that is so utterly unclear and divisive? Is it right to "know" that we're trying our best and therefore every other sect is clearly blind and wrong?
I wouldn't say it's "utterly unclear and divisive". But, I do think we all need to be critical of our beliefs and try to put them to the test. It's one of the reasons I started this forum. And due to this forum, my own beliefs have changed. Unfortunately, most people are not willing to have their belief challenged.
But isn't there a major problem here?

You have the entire Bible to read. If you can't gain a clear and decisive understanding from reading the Bible, (and one that you agree with as being intelligent, just, and fair), then why should you need to seek other people's opinions on these things?

I have a major problem with a God who will supposedly cast us into a state of eternal damnation (whatever that might entail) whilst leaving us grappling to try to figure out precisely what we must do in order to avoid this horrible eternal fate.

Wouldn't this be a God who is basically "shooting craps" with human souls. What if I get it wrong? What if (as is clearly the case) that I don't even see where this entire religious theology could be from any actual God. Especially not an intelligent, fair, and just one. And this is especially important in this case because this God is supposed to be the epitome of righteousness, fairness, justice, and moral integrity. A God who is supposedly loving far more than vindictive toward the objects of his creation (a trait that hasn't even been exhibited by this God throughout the entire Old Testament.)

I mean, we can talk about Jesus until the cows come home. But a loving forgiving Jesus can hardly make up for a ruthless vindictive Yahweh. Not only this, but even Jesus talks about only few making it into eternal life. This necessarily leaves the vast majority of humans to be cast into eternal damnation.

When we think about this from a practical perspective wouldn't we need to be extremely arrogant to believe that we might be among the "few" who make it into eternal life?

To be perfectly honest with you, if only a few people make it, even though I consider myself to be a very loving, caring, fair, and decent person, I still wouldn't be so arrogant that this would place me in a small group of a "few" people who will obtain eternal life.

Christians also seem to act like (and obviously believe) that just about anyone can easily make it into heaven. They have no problem at all believing that they and their loved ones will make it to heaven.

Yet doesn't this fly in the very face of Jesus proclaiming that only "few" will make it?

That's certainly going to rule out the vast majority of Christians to be sure.

It seems to me that this religion requires a believer to assume quite a lot in favor of their own destiny to eternal life.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20499
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 336 times
Contact:

Post #106

Post by otseng »

Elijah John wrote: So if one sin makes a person a "sinner" than what about the converse? Does one saintly act make one a saint? Say, throwing oneself on a grenade in order to save one's comrades in arms? "No greater love"...After all.
I think one important point here is who is a sinner or saint from God's perspective, not from man's. Bringing back the example of Adam and Eve, all it took was one sin to get kicked out of Eden. Besides that one sin, they could've been considered to be saints.

If people can get to heaven by doing good works, Jesus coming to earth and dying on the cross would be pointless.

If it's purely based on our attitude towards doing sin and good works, how can that be objectively judged? Suppose Bonnie has pure intentions of doing good and Clyde has no intentions of doing good. But, Clyde ends up doing more good and sinning less than Bonnie. Which of them can enter heaven?

Also, the one sin criteria also helps resolve for me the issue of do babies who die go to heaven? Since they have not sinned, they can get into heaven.
If you want a standard , what about the standard of a way of life? The person who is habitually seeking God and seeking to embrace the good, vs the habitual sinner, who could care less, and is bent only on personal gain even at the expense of others.
Most people do not live by either of these two extremes. I would say nobody lives by either of these all the time.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20499
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 336 times
Contact:

Post #107

Post by otseng »

Elijah John wrote:Also, if "one sin doth a sinner make" or "one lie doth a liar make" then it can be argued that the Bible is a liar of a book, based on one error, or one lie alone. Matthew 16.28 comes to mind.
I'm not saying that everything can be labeled in an either/or scenario. The context is who can have an eternal relationship with God? Who can enter heaven? In this context, it's a either going to heaven or not going to heaven. What is the criteria?
The Bible, like people, is a mix, of the good and the not so good. A person or a book can be good, without being perfect. As David says in the Psalm, "YHVH is merciful to us, for he knows we are but dust."
Yes, people are a mix of good and bad.

BTW, another view of mine that has changed is I do not claim the Bible is inerrant. So, yes, even the Bible can contain errors. What I do claim is the Bible is inspired by God and authoritative. The Bible can still be the standard for all Christian doctrine and truths, yet, it still can contain errors.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20499
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 336 times
Contact:

Post #108

Post by otseng »

Divine Insight wrote: My question to you at that point would be to ask why you believe that the Bible is the word of a God?
Good question, but in the context of this debate, I think it's an implicit assumption that we're assuming the Bible can be considered authoritative. Sean cites the Bible in his book regularly and I don't think he ever argues the Bible is not the word of God.

User avatar
ElCodeMonkey
Site Supporter
Posts: 1587
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:49 am
Contact:

Post #109

Post by ElCodeMonkey »

otseng wrote:Besides that one sin, they could've been considered to be saints.
And apart from a multitude of greatness and perfection making their saintliness, they might be considered a sinner.
otseng wrote:If people can get to heaven by doing good works, Jesus coming to earth and dying on the cross would be pointless.
You are reducing the entire life of Jesus down to a single act of death. He preached for 3 years about the kingdom. Something that had seemingly very little to do with who he was and his death. So much so, that his disciples didn't even know he was going to die until the time came to which they didn't believe him and denied it. His 3 years of teaching was all about belonging to the kingdom via a "holy" (or righteous-minded) spirit--not how he was going to die for them. He taught "the way" into the kingdom and denounced the message of the Pharisees. He uprooted religiosity and implanted godly mindsets. This was not nothing by any stretch.
otseng wrote:If it's purely based on our attitude towards doing sin and good works, how can that be objectively judged?
This is God we're dealing with. Give him some credit. Is it truly easier to believe that he needed blood sacrifices and perfection, knows all the hearts and minds of every soul, yet cannot come up with a better metric for his kingdom than a belief in one's mind that can easily be changed with physical trauma to a particular region of the brain?
otseng wrote:Suppose Bonnie has pure intentions of doing good and Clyde has no intentions of doing good. But, Clyde ends up doing more good and sinning less than Bonnie. Which of them can enter heaven?
Totally up to God to decide. It's not a mere measure of good and bad behavior. It's about belonging to a particular way of life. Not necessarily the successes, but mostly the desire. And not just a velleitous desire or a claim for desire without truly desiring. God knows our hearts, after all. I have a "desire" to lose weight but I do nothing to improve it. Thus, it is not truly a desire after all but a velleity, and certainly not a way of life. If Clyde is merely accidentally "doing good" then his "way of life" is still not that of the Kingdom. Choosing this way of life is also possible with or without a particular cultural upbringing. People everyone can choose to live for good or self. God can figure it all out even if we cannot know the hearts of others. We can, however, know our own if we are honest. And God knows whether we are honest or not.
otseng wrote:Also, the one sin criteria also helps resolve for me the issue of do babies who die go to heaven? Since they have not sinned, they can get into heaven.
This question has no truly satisfying answer for any religious doctrine apart from claiming they never received a soul and/or are immediately snuffed. This only has a satisfying answer in the Simulation theory where we are in a giant AI-creating computer for future "heavenly" AI bodies if we meet their particular specs. In such a case, there is no hell and only a potential for heaven. Unborn babies simply don't make the cut and there's no truly moral conundrum about it. We have no rights to eternity or being created or left alive. They become as they were before they were: nothing.

otseng wrote:
If you want a standard , what about the standard of a way of life? The person who is habitually seeking God and seeking to embrace the good, vs the habitual sinner, who could care less, and is bent only on personal gain even at the expense of others.
Most people do not live by either of these two extremes. I would say nobody lives by either of these all the time.
Well, that fits the "few there are" theory then, eh? Again, perfection is not necessary. God knows our hearts even if we stumble.
I'm Published! Christians Are Revolting: An Infidel's Progress
My Blog: Friendly By Nurture
The Wisdom I've gleaned.
My Current Beliefs.

Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12235
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Post #110

Post by Elijah John »

otseng wrote:
Elijah John wrote: So if one sin makes a person a "sinner" than what about the converse? Does one saintly act make one a saint? Say, throwing oneself on a grenade in order to save one's comrades in arms? "No greater love"...After all.
I think one important point here is who is a sinner or saint from God's perspective, not from man's. Bringing back the example of Adam and Eve, all it took was one sin to get kicked out of Eden. Besides that one sin, they could've been considered to be saints.

If people can get to heaven by doing good works, Jesus coming to earth and dying on the cross would be pointless.

If it's purely based on our attitude towards doing sin and good works, how can that be objectively judged? Suppose Bonnie has pure intentions of doing good and Clyde has no intentions of doing good. But, Clyde ends up doing more good and sinning less than Bonnie. Which of them can enter heaven?

Also, the one sin criteria also helps resolve for me the issue of do babies who die go to heaven? Since they have not sinned, they can get into heaven.
If you want a standard , what about the standard of a way of life? The person who is habitually seeking God and seeking to embrace the good, vs the habitual sinner, who could care less, and is bent only on personal gain even at the expense of others.
Most people do not live by either of these two extremes. I would say nobody lives by either of these all the time.
Did Adam and Eve repent? The story omits this consideration. And are you certain that the purpose of the story is to teach the "one sin" doctrine?

Agreed, people don't live one way or the other all the time. But as a basic emphasis of one's way of life. Sure, the "sinner" sometimes does good, and the saint, sometimes falls. But repentance is the remedy, not the orthodoxy of "right belief". I've encountered some nasty Christians who presume on their salvation because they've got the "right belief". One person I encountered kissed his cross as he spoke ill of his neighbor. And preached Armegeddon. (I literally encountered such a person in the woods)

And it seems you're repeating one of Paul's non-sequitors. (which I bolded). Couple of things. Not saying we don't all need God's mercy, even those who do good works. I am saying God's mercy is not confined to the cross, or else there would be none saved in the "Old" Testament. I am saying one often (not always) demonstrates a receptive and humble attitude of heart by one's lifestyle of good works. It's the attitude that God honors. Jesus speaks often about heart, and about going beyond the letter of the Law. If not verbatim, that's the spirit of his teachings."Seek ye first...".

Also, is abiding by Jesus teachings of the Sermon on the Mount considered "works"? Did Jesus explain that? Is traveling the "staight and narrrow" considered "works"? Is forgiving and asking for forgiveness, "works"? Is repentance "works"? Jesus said if we do those things, we shall live. Was he preaching "works"?

Getting back to the the bolded sentence. Implied in that statment is that dying on the cross was Jesus only reason or main reason to come to earth. What about his teachings? Also, if you grant for the sake of argument that we can be saved by abiding by God's will (works), how does that does not necessitate the conclusion that Christ's death on the cross was in vain? As an atonement perhaps, but there are other purposes for martyrdom. Jesus died for his beliefs, for one. Jesus death and resurrection is God's vindication for his teachings in the face of opposition, is another. He was faithful unto death, and suffered the ultimate consequence of "persecution for righteousness sake", ie martyrdom. And God vindicated him by raising him. Whether by a literal resurrection, or the triumph of his Church and teachings, and the endurance of the mystical, risen "body of Christ".

All that is just as valid an interpretation as his death being an atonment. Why not? Isn't Paul's blood atonement teaching really his theological interpretation of the crucifixion-resurrection event?

And again, I point to the appendix of Sean's book. Plenty of "anti-sacrifice" verses there, a whole section. So salvation by repentance and obedience is Biblical too. In fact, several of Sean's cited verses, indicate that God prefers these things.

And in a twist of Paul's assertion, if we can be saved by faith (belief) alone, what's the point of repentance? Why does grace have to be tied to "faith" (meaning in this case, "right belief"? Or does it. Does God honor those who seek Him? Those who are responsive to his will? Doesn't the Tanakh and Jesus too teach salvation by God's grace and repentance?

Are we conflating Jesus and Paul here? It can certainly be argued that the two preached "different Gospels". In effect Jesus preached the Father and his mercy, and Paul preached Jesus and his death.
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

Post Reply