My friend was trying to explain how in the Christian religion they believe Jesus “Died for our sins.” Now I don’t understand this, usually when someone dies FOR something they’re dying for something good. For example; Soldiers die to protect certain rights, freedom and people. So to me it would make more sense if Jesus dyed FOR the goodness of all. Am i making sense? Can someone explain this to me.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
@lifetimeclimber, I don’t believe in ANY religion, because they’re ALL bullshit.
The theme of religion is to become a better person? Haha. Haha. This.. is hilarious.
That’s just bigotry, feeding your ego some bullshit about being a better person than others. Lame.
That’s exactly the weakness that religions exploit to make people submit, that’s what it’s really all about, making people submit.
I’ve read the bible thrice. Doesn’t change the fact that it’s all bullshit.
It’s not at all one continuous story, it’s a ton of short stories.
And they’re all born from misconceptions. Idiots who read the ancient holy texts and misinterpreted/distorted it beyond recognition, turned it into a fuckin fairytale when it was originally about real stuff that works.
But, by all means, cling to your rotten ship if you want to. Doesn’t harm me. In fact, it makes things a lot easier for me if people cling to idiotic beliefs and general delusion, although I detest that shit.
@manimal, Haha calm down buddy, I don’t believe in any religion either. I was simply pointing out that they do have value even if you don’t think so. I assure you I’m not a bigot feeding my ego bullshit. Have you never heard of self improvement? Being a good person? Treating others the way you want to be treated? I’m sure that’s all bullshit though and was created to “make people submit.” Every single religion in the world preaches about treating other people with love and respect, while also loving and respecting yourself. I don’t know how that is possibly a bad thing. Sure, there are bad things in religion. Much like there are bad things on the internet, but instead of saying the entire internet is bullshit, we simply find the good sites and use those. Much in the same way, we take away the good things from christianity, buddhism, islam, whatever it is and utilize them.
@manimal, Becoming a better person than others? Not possible, you can’t be a better me anymore than I can be a better you. But yes, that idea fuels judgementality, people should introspect and find their own psychological balance but also figure out the most appropriate ways to behave toward one another. The failure in this by others means you protect yourself from them, an appropriate response.
However, religions being systems of control, yes self-control, and a lot of them are wrong about the distinction between tolerance and apathy, just as they are not clear on the distinction between offering help with guidance versus judgementality.
The thing is that a lot of the mass controls religions engage in are actually the result of a Theocratic institution, these that define or redefine meanings in terminology to steer behaviour in a direction that suits them and this defies the intended balance and appropriateness the religion was designed for.
The thing is that some religions encourage freethinking and building the confidence in people to trust their own judgement, rather than demanding conformity to a blueprint of what is acceptable or not. Generalizing religions as mass control mechanisms is not accurate to negatively connote it when self control is an ideal when combined with strength in freedom of choice.
This is an interesting topic because there is no proof to either side regardless that Jesus was or was not the only begotten son of God (Besides the bible and other religious texts, which can be taken as fiction or non and literally or metaphorically).
Granted God is a perfected being who is eternal and does not fault. The bible says in various instances that if God were to do something wrong like lie or say something different than the gospel taught that he would cease to be God. There are Universal laws in each realm and each dimension of space. These laws are governed by a universal energy that binds every creature on this planet and in the universe. We are born with an innate sense of right and wrong (can also be changed drastically by societal norms), but in general we know when something is wrong or does not feel right. We have an innate sense of higher power and good and evil seen throughout history across diverse cultures.
Christ was sent to Earth for multiple reasons. Yes the resounding reason was to die for our sins and allow us all to be saved in the Kingdom of heaven. Here is the rest of it. Like stated in this thread previously in the early Jewish religion sacrifices were given to God for worship and repentance. These animal sacrifices can be described as a lesser law or lesser order. There was nothing that allowed man to redeem himself of his error being human. God knows we are human and we WILL constantly make mistakes.
Jesus is sent to the world to receive a body of flesh. To be an example to others and be baptized. To establish a church or religion “biblical Christianity” (Which many truths of his established have now changed via various Christian sects and the Creed of Nicaea in the year 325 A.D.) And Ultimately establish a new law of sacrifice or higher order of sacrifice which no longer required men to kill bodies of flesh (animals). The Son of God bled from every pore in his body in the Garden of Gethsemene taking upon him the sins of the world. And later was hung on the cross becoming the ultimate sacrifice of a body of flesh.
I guess the point to your question is God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son. The worth of souls is great in the sight of God. Christ being the valiant son that he was knew what he would experience but chose to be the one to be sacrificed for humanity. Our whole point on this Earth is to receive bodies and be tested in order to return to the God who created us and live in his glory in happiness for eternity. No unclean thing can dwell in the presence of God so therefore there must be a way to be made clean again after the errors of the human flesh prevail over us. The way we do that now is by repenting in the name of Christ confessing your sins to God reconciling for those sins and changing your ways to sin no more.
I don’t think that “not harming others” is the right principle, but opt for “treat others appropriately” because some times it is appropriate to harm others, namely when they intend malice and often in the case of a greater appropriateness, general eg: Choose to save a bus of kids over a bus of grannies. Why is that right-er? Just for potential, not because of quality or morality.
I think there are beneficial things we can do, this is not morality but logic, avoiding pain and making things easier or creating an environment where other logical constructive benefit can exist.
Things that don’t harm others are reasonable choice, as long as the consenting chooser is not becoming a burden due to personal harm, or as long as their choice to engage it is has a certain standard of objectivity, as addictive situations remove choice and a bias for compulsion takes over.
Quite often, and I think it is ideal, people choose to benefit themselves over others. These actions are best weighed by the chooser in a reasonably objective manner, accounting how much harm to others can be compared to personal gain. People have to remember that when they are kind to others, generally others are kind in return, the potential of a personally smoother flowing existence depends greatly on the friction you cause with others, and the smoothness of their existence.
I believe in people developing free-thought and having the confidence to act according to the spirit of their own design in what is appropriate and beneficial by their own standard of objectivity, personal versus collective.
I also believe that everyone has strength and weakness that they should indentify, focus on the strength and build a surplus to buy help for the weakness. This is a problem when a persons weakness is judging when they should allow others to assist, an ego fault. It is also a problem when someone does not have the confidence that they have strength, or if they cannot stop focusing on weakness.
Generally this interdependance of society gives each of us what we need to maximize our balance both psychologically and in appropriate interactions. Depending on someone else is earned, not charity, as those who help gain help themselves in the area they are weak, they have personal motive for helping as their help buys them help.
That is a simple standard blueprint for a religion, besides actual details in personal development of these sentiments and motivators, that is basically the fundamentals of what people should know in the goal of personal psychological balance and how they interact, all to get the most out of life. Every aspect relies on each our personal judgement on how to manifest the principle.