Customer Discussions > Christianity forum

The absurd Christian doctrine of atonement


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 51-75 of 283 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2012 9:46:51 AM PST
Celsus says:
Lao

>>A+D = ...Adam and Dave? <<

Sorry, that should have been A+S for Adam and Steve.

In my line of work A+D is a term we use a lot, meaning alcohol and drugs. My accidental use of it here indicates I must be due for retirement.
But thanks for alerting me to the error.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2012 9:58:05 AM PST
Celsus says:
Lao

>>Craig, do even the Christians think you something of a goofball for adding in your wacky Kabbalah/Numerology to the many-times translated words of the bible, as if the ENGLISH language version would have some numerical significance? <<

The numbers relate to the Strongs Concordance references to the original Hebrew. He was just showing that the word 'day' translates as a 24 hour period.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2012 10:52:09 AM PST
Celsus says:
Vicki

>>Isaiah 53, in regard to the atonement.<<

No, it doesn't. The passage is an allegorical reference to the nation of Israel and cannot possibly refer to Jesus. This is especially clear when translating direct from the original Hebrew, instead of relying on the Greek Septuagint, as Christians tend to do.
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt1001.htm

Check out this verse, translated from the Hebrew:

10 "Yet it pleased the LORD to crush him by disease; to see if his soul would offer itself in restitution, that he might see his seed, prolong his days, and that the purpose of the LORD might prosper by his hand."

Notice it says the Lord will "crush him by disease", and that he "might see his seed" and "prolong his days". This doesn't sound like Jesus at all. He didn't die by disease, nor did he produce "seed", nor did he live a long life. So you really do have some major problems to overcome here.

>>Isaiah 7:14, Isaiah 9:6-7 in regard to his divinity<<

These say nothing about God's atonement plan; nor do they even apply to Jesus. Take the 7:14 passage. In context we see that the passage refers to a civil war between Israel and Judah. The birth of the child (conceived in the normal way by Isaiah and his mistress) was to be a sign that the planned siege of Jerusalem would fail, and this detail is only included to provide a time frame for what follows (ie, the birth is merely a side issue). It goes on to prophecy that the land would be forsaken of both its kings, become overridden with briars and thorns, and that Samaria would be plundered by the king of Assyria. In context we see the passage has nothing whatsoever to do with the life of Christ, nor does it even say anything about a virgin birth, since the woman in question was obviously supposed to conceive in the normal way. There is no way any of this refers to the virgin birth of Jesus. So Christian are really grasping at straws in their attempts to shoehorn their messiah into the OT texts.

>>Psalm 16:9-10, in regard to rising from the dead<<

Nope. This wont work either.
From the Hebrew Bible:

9 Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth; my flesh also dwelleth in safety;
10 For Thou wilt not abandon my soul to the nether-world; neither wilt Thou suffer Thy godly one to see the pit.

How does this apply to the Christian atonement? Is this the best you can do?

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2012 11:01:06 AM PST
Craig says:
Sorry, that isn't numerology. I cut and pasted a verse from a program that uses Strong's number system to define words. It has been used for a long time as a help for understanding the translation of a word. If you want to see how it works you can go here:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Gen&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#top
I was posting to Iatric and knew he would understand what it was.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2012 11:01:31 AM PST
Craig says:
LOL that's what I was wondering.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2012 11:02:20 AM PST
Craig says:
Thanks Celsus.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2012 1:22:25 PM PST
Vicki says:
Dear James,

You asked :"Vicki, do you believe a born-again Christian should never become sick?"

No.

Think of Paul and his "thorn of the flesh" which has been speculated to be an ongoing health problem of some kind.

God can perfect us, even as we endure illness. He can give us strength, understanding, and His grace to get through life's troubles.

Posted on Dec 10, 2012 2:15:35 PM PST
Alan says:
Vicki,

i read somewhere that the "thorn in the flesh" was a reference to Paul's homosexuality.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2012 2:24:57 PM PST
Vicki says: "Dear James, You asked 'Vicki, do you believe a born-again Christian should never become sick?' (You answered) No."

Well then, you have a problem. Earlier, Celsus said "Don't you find it a little strange that the Old Testament says nothing about this wonderful atonement plan?" Your reply was "Isaiah 53, in regard to the atonement."

Have you ever carefully read and understood Isaiah 53? Permit me to summarize it for you. Isaiah 53:4-5 states, "But he lifted up our illnesses, he carried our pain; even though we thought he was being punished, attacked by God, and afflicted for something he had done. He was wounded because of our rebellious deeds, crushed because of our sins; he endured punishment that made us well; because of his wounds we have been healed." [New English Translation]

Isaiah 53 unambiguously describes the benefits of the atonement which include SALVATION, "He was wounded because of our rebellious deeds, crushed because of our sins," and NO SICKNESS because "he lifted up our illnesses, he carried our pain," and "endured punishment that made us well."

I'm sure you believe you're saved (born again), but apparently you get sick. But the atonement states you should not become sick if you are born again. So what's up? I submit either 1) you are not born again, or 2) Jesus' death did not enable the atonement promise of Isaiah 53. What do you say?

Posted on Dec 10, 2012 2:36:41 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 10, 2012 2:37:59 PM PST
Alan says:
James,

This is very interesting, I have never heard matters put this way before. I expect somebody will come along soon and say that your interpretation is incorrect, because in the original Hebrew or possibly in the Greek, Latin or English translations, a specific word means the opposite of itself, or means anything other than it says. This will of course prove that you are wrong and that traditional church teaching as always is infallible.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2012 3:49:28 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 10, 2012 4:45:24 PM PST
We'll see what transpires, Alan. Did you note Celsus's earlier post concerning Isaiah 53:10? I checked it out, and it's right.

http://www.amazon.com/forum/christianity/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx77WQHU8YS50Z&cdMsgID=Mx3MA38ZSK5TUEF&cdMsgNo=53&cdPage=3&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=Tx1NO09XCHTLOMQ#Mx3MA38ZSK5TUEF

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2012 8:26:17 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 10, 2012 8:26:48 PM PST
Celsus, Actually, it says alot, where the suffering servant shall take on the sins of many, (Isaiah 53;10,12) and be led like a lamb to the slaughter, (Genesis 22:8, John 1;29). Peace always in the Most Precious Blood of Christ

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2012 8:35:09 PM PST
brunumb says:
So with Jesus taking on all of the sins in the world, everyone gets to go to heaven. That's cool.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2012 8:36:42 PM PST
Bru, No, not at all, (Revelation 2:23, Matthew 16:27, Matthew 7:21, John 5:29). Peace always in the Most Precious Blood of Christ

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2012 8:47:31 PM PST
brunumb says:
So it's just like a lottery then. The act of atonement was just a bit of high camp theatre.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 11, 2012 5:37:02 AM PST
All objections to religion aside, the need for atonement is a fundamental aspect of human psychology. It finds expression not only in religious beliefs but in secular behavior as well.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 11, 2012 5:45:09 AM PST
Vicki says:
Dear James,

You asked :"What do you say?"

Thank-you for sharing your interpretation of Isaiah 53. It is very interesting. I don't agree with it, but it is very interesting.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 11, 2012 5:50:06 AM PST
Vicki says:
Dear Alan,

You said :"i read somewhere that the "thorn in the flesh" was a reference to Paul's homosexuality."

I've also read that Paul's affliction could have had to do with an ongoing temptation towards sinful behavior of some kind. The Bible doesn't give us specifics, possibly so that we can all identify with Paul and his "thorn in the flesh"-whether it was physical, emotional, psychological, or spiritual.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 11, 2012 6:03:33 AM PST
Alan says:
Vicki,

It is impossible to 'diagnose' such 'conditions' in historical figures, but interesting nonetheless. Paul does seem to have had some sort of major acute neurological pathology, perhaps related to disturbance in the temporal lobe, possibly a form of epilepsy or vascular event. I suppose this might have been an ongoing problem but of lesser degree. However if the 'thorn' was a reference to homosexuality it might go a long way to explain Paul's obvious sexual hangups.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 11, 2012 7:16:53 AM PST
Vicki says:
Dear Alan,

I've heard about the epilepsy theory, too, as well as a theory about some kind of eye problem, due to a comment Paul made to one congregation. I see no "obvious sexual hangups" in Paul, however. I see a different morality than what our culture has today, but that doesn't mean that Paul was hung-up on sex, IMO.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 11, 2012 7:22:00 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 11, 2012 8:41:41 AM PST
Vicki,

Why or how don't you agree with it? The words are very plain as to meaning. Please provide details for your view.

BTW, Matthew 8:17 also verifies Isaiah 53:4-5 when he states, "This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah: 'He took our illnesses and bore our diseases'." Bear in mind, you accept all of this as God's inerrant word.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 11, 2012 8:31:03 AM PST
Astrocat says:
Alan, that's what I think, that is, that Paul was homosexual.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 11, 2012 8:32:20 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 11, 2012 8:32:45 AM PST
This was confirmed recently by the discovery of the diary of his longtime companion, Philemon.......

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 11, 2012 9:43:03 AM PST
Cue the fan fiction!

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 11, 2012 11:33:37 AM PST
:)
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Christianity forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Christianity forum
Participants:  32
Total posts:  283
Initial post:  Dec 7, 2012
Latest post:  Jan 20, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions