Are Trolling Fuckwits Worth The Trouble?

[JerryJohn]

Kinich Ahau wrote

I've had some thoughts about Jesus's faux sacrifice.

Maybe by being portrayed as the ultimate sacrifice he saved millions of goats and sheep from an untimely death on the altars of your god. Therefore he didn't come to save mankind at all but only to save the lives of the poor desert livestock.

Maybe that's why Jesus was so often portrayed with sheep. It looks like Francis of Assisi had the correct interpretation of the lord's purpose. Please explain.

You'll have to clarify the Francis of Assisi interpretation of the Lord's purpose. I am not familiar with his theology. Baptists are mostly Bible alone types.

I do believe he was a Catholic saint so maybe Judge will know given his background in Catholicism. I can't answer that question without some verification of his thoughts on the Lord's purpose.

You already know the answer to your previous question about what the difference was before and after the sacrifice of Jesus.

I am quoting this paragraph without a link sadly I don't have it anymore.
Hope Smelly won't get on my ass for it.

Sin requires a sacrifice and the shedding of blood to atone for those sins

Thus:
Question: "Why did God require animal sacrifices in the Old Testament?"

Answer: God required animal sacrifices to provide a temporary covering of sins and to foreshadow the perfect and complete sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Leviticus 4:35, 5:10). Animal sacrifice is an important theme found throughout Scripture because “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Hebrews 9:22).

Jesus was the final answer to sin and thus the new covenant. His sacrifice by dying on the cross and shedding blood changed this animal sacrifice to Jesus atoning for sins and living a sinless life meant animal sacrifices were no longer necessary after that. Jesus was the Messiah to do so awaited for in the OT.

Question:
Why then, do we no longer offer animal sacrifices today?

Animal sacrifices have ended because Jesus Christ was the ultimate and perfect sacrifice. John the Baptist recognized this when he saw Jesus coming to be baptized and said, “Look, the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29). You may be asking yourself, why animals? What did they do wrong? That is the point—since the animals did no wrong, they died in place of the one performing the sacrifice. Jesus Christ also did no wrong but willingly gave Himself to die for the sins of mankind (1 Timothy 2:6). Jesus Christ took our sin upon Himself and died in our place. As 2 Corinthians 5:21 says, “God made him [Jesus] who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” Through faith in what Jesus Christ accomplished on the cross, we can receive forgiveness.

This requires repentance and is a tough sell to atheists I do admit.

K, you obviously know quite a bit about theist "stuff." I know you reject it but I am impressed with the knowledge that SOME atheisst on this forum (for the most part, I won't name names) have on theism. Their rejection of it comes on study and that is important.

JJ

[JerryJohn]

Davin wrote

I'm pretty sure this is the real truth. I bet these local theist idiots are too afraid to handle the truth. Jesus was a sheep fucker, that's why he kept going on about his flock, lambs, and being a shepherd.

Who the fuck even thinks about fucking sheep, you misguided freak and fool. What are you an expert in bestiality from personal experience?

[Sinfidel]

JerryJohn wrote

Who the fuck even thinks about fucking sheep, you misguided freak and fool. What are you an expert in bestiality from personal experience?

The Great Bestiality Panic

The Salem witch trials of 1692 are well known, but there were other outbreaks of extreme religious fervour in Puritan New England. One of them was the Bestiality Panic in New Haven, Connecticut. People there were preoccupied by the perceived problem of bestiality, an attack on God’s order which threatened to breed unnatural monsters. This fear wasn’t unique to English Puritans: in 17th century Sweden the same fear made it taboo for a man to enter a milking parlour.

One victim of the panic was the spectacularly unlucky George Spencer. He was ugly, bald and one-eyed, and in February 1641 a sow produced a piglet which was also ugly, bald, and one-eyed. On the basis of his resemblance to the piglet, Spencer was immediately arrested and accused of bestiality. This was a capital offence, and Spencer denied it until he was told by one of the magistrates that 'he yt confesseth and forsaketh his sins shall finde mercie'.

Taking this as an offer to let him off if he confessed, Spencer pled guilty – whereupon he was told that the mercy in question would come from the Lord, as the court was sentencing him to death. He retracted his confession, which left the Court with a problem: capital cases needed at least two witnesses, and in this case there were none. So they came up with an ingenious solution: Spencer himself counted as one witness on the strength of the confession they had tricked out of him, and the pig was the other. On the 8th of April they were both executed.

Another man named Thomas Hogg wore a steel truss for his hernia, and because it kept cutting open his britches, a lot of people in the colony were familiar with the sight of his scrotum. When a sow had two deformed piglets people thought that they looked like Hogg (whose name can’t have helped). In particular they thought that the deformed eyes of one piglet reminded them of his scrotum. He was canny enough never to confess, so they couldn’t hang him – though they did whip him for 'general lewdness'.

http://qi.com/infocloud/puritans

[Sinfidel]

Andrew66 wrote

I'll believe it when I see it.
I could look for old Muslim posts to see if the responses are relatively tame.

Here's something about Muslims for you to enjoy. I' sure you'll read it......


https://theintercept.com/2018/01/27/...e-disappeared/

[JerryJohn]

Sinfidel wrote

http://qi.com/infocloud/puritans

So what? What does this have to do with Baptists?

JJ

[Davin]

Russia is a piece of shit country.

[dogpet]

Davin wrote

Russia is a piece of shit country.

Yeh but.

[Kinich Ahau]

JerryJohn wrote

Sin requires a sacrifice and the shedding of blood to atone for those sins

Thus:
Question: "Why did God require animal sacrifices in the Old Testament?"

Answer: God required animal sacrifices to provide a temporary covering of sins and to foreshadow the perfect and complete sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Leviticus 4:35, 5:10). Animal sacrifice is an important theme found throughout Scripture because “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Hebrews 9:22).

Jesus was the final answer to sin and thus the new covenant. His sacrifice by dying on the cross and shedding blood changed this animal sacrifice to Jesus atoning for sins and living a sinless life meant animal sacrifices were no longer necessary after that. Jesus was the Messiah to do so awaited for in the OT.

Question:
Why then, do we no longer offer animal sacrifices today?

Animal sacrifices have ended because Jesus Christ was the ultimate and perfect sacrifice. John the Baptist recognized this when he saw Jesus coming to be baptized and said, “Look, the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29). You may be asking yourself, why animals? What did they do wrong? That is the point—since the animals did no wrong, they died in place of the one performing the sacrifice. Jesus Christ also did no wrong but willingly gave Himself to die for the sins of mankind (1 Timothy 2:6). Jesus Christ took our sin upon Himself and died in our place. As 2 Corinthians 5:21 says, “God made him [Jesus] who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” Through faith in what Jesus Christ accomplished on the cross, we can receive forgiveness.

This requires repentance and is a tough sell to atheists I do admit.

I am no nearer to understanding this. It is just mumbo-jumbo to me.
What sacrifice did Jesus actually make?

As an atheist sin is a meaningless concept to me. One can't even conflate sin with secular law, the only way it can be described is as things that displease god. As a non-believer I don't care for your god's particular set of rules. I don't believe in moral-absolutism and to me things such as abortion or thinking lewd thoughts are not wrong.

Jesus didn't change a thing in the world. All he and the future church did was leave behind a bunch of fantastical unverifiable promises that there would be rewards for people that follow the fantasy. Obviously this wishful thinking would be very seductive to the superstitious and ignorant people of earlier centuries and a boon to the institutions that are churches. I think that people of this time have less of an excuse even though indoctrination from childhood is a very powerful thing.

I'm curious whether you think Jesus changed anything other than leave behind these unverifiable promises of an afterlife?

[Sinfidel]

JerryJohn wrote

Sin requires a sacrifice and the shedding of blood to atone for those sins

Thus:
Question: "Why did God require animal sacrifices in the Old Testament?"

Answer: God required animal sacrifices to provide a temporary covering of sins and to foreshadow the perfect and complete sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Leviticus 4:35, 5:10). Animal sacrifice is an important theme found throughout Scripture because “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Hebrews 9:22).

https://www.bobyandian.com/christian...e-sacrificeDec 14, 2016 - 3 “If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the ... The priest gave the final examination and approval for the lamb to be used for a sin offering. ... Only a spotless animal could take the sins of the congregation.

Like you, the priests were greedy and selfish, and wanted only grade A1 meat for dinner.

[Sinfidel]

So JJ, tell us why you failed this gullibility test......

[Andrew66]

Sinfidel wrote

Here's something about Muslims for you to enjoy. I' sure you'll read it......


https://theintercept.com/2018/01/27/...e-disappeared/

Why the fuck would I enjoy this?

So you support Islam in the war on terror? Is that your point, America evil Muslims innocent?

What better solution do you have to control the increase in Muslim terror stemming from the middle east smart ass? Obama used drone strikes too, in case this is an Anti Trump thing.

[Andrew66]

Kinich Ahau wrote

I am no nearer to understanding this. It is just mumbo-jumbo to me.
What sacrifice did Jesus actually make?

As an atheist sin is a meaningless concept to me. One can't even conflate sin with secular law, the only way it can be described is as things that displease god. As a non-believer I don't care for your god's particular set of rules. I don't believe in moral-absolutism and to me things such as abortion or thinking lewd thoughts are not wrong.

Jesus didn't change a thing in the world. All he and the future church did was leave behind a bunch of fantastical unverifiable promises that there would be rewards for people that follow the fantasy. Obviously this wishful thinking would be very seductive to the superstitious and ignorant people of earlier centuries and a boon to the institutions that are churches. I think that people of this time have less of an excuse even though indoctrination from childhood is a very powerful thing.

I'm curious whether you think Jesus changed anything other than leave behind these unverifiable promises of an afterlife?

KA, I personally don't take the Bible so literally as JJ does.
The sacrifice of animals in my view was just a sacrifice to atone for sins - maybe if the Bible were written in modern times we would have to sacrifice money (currency) or our I phone - something we value.

Jesus obviously sacrificed his mortal life, and underwent incredible suffering during his crucifixion.

The Christian belief is that one's sins are "paid for" by Christ's sacrifice, which was otherwise unwarranted (Christ was innocent of wrong doing). The need for the universe to balance wrongs with rights, or justice is a concept similar to Karma. It is a Christian equivalent.

From an atheistic perspective, Jesus was at least a moral teacher. The Golden rule is spoken for Jesus's lips.

God Bless you KA - we love you!

[Kinich Ahau]

Jesus sacrificed his mortal life? Millions of people lose their mortal life every year. Young and old, many in gruesome circumstances and many with much more than three days of excruciating pain. Whats the big deal with Jesus? I've suffered fucking chronic back pain for twenty years, Jesus suffers for three whole fucking days and we are supposed to be impressed?

The real message of the story is that we can all be released of the pain and suffering which is so common to so many during life and live in a happy place in the clouds pain free. Sounds great but this fantastical little promise is a complete fantasy and something that can only be taken on "faith". No wonder religion was dubbed the opiate of the masses.

What changed in the world after this supposed sacrifice? Nothing! As someone who has never been indoctrinated with christianity, sin is meaningless to me. (read above) How did Jesus balance the rights and wrongs of this universe? This is what I mean by mumbo jumbo, it's just nonsense.

And as far as the golden rule goes it was common currency well before the time of Jesus. I can agree that Jesus is portrayed as a moral teacher but none of what he supposedly taught was new or ground-breaking. I say portrayed because as you know already I don't believe the Jesus written about in the gospels even existed.

Who's we?

[Andrew66]

Kinich Ahau wrote

I am no nearer to understanding this. It is just mumbo-jumbo to me.
What sacrifice did Jesus actually make?

As an atheist sin is a meaningless concept to me. One can't even conflate sin with secular law, the only way it can be described is as things that displease god. As a non-believer I don't care for your god's particular set of rules. I don't believe in moral-absolutism and to me things such as abortion or thinking lewd thoughts are not wrong.

Jesus didn't change a thing in the world. All he and the future church did was leave behind a bunch of fantastical unverifiable promises that there would be rewards for people that follow the fantasy. Obviously this wishful thinking would be very seductive to the superstitious and ignorant people of earlier centuries and a boon to the institutions that are churches. I think that people of this time have less of an excuse even though indoctrination from childhood is a very powerful thing.

I'm curious whether you think Jesus changed anything other than leave behind these unverifiable promises of an afterlife?

A bit more my dear.

Jesus did have a big impact on our present society, hence "left behind" alot.

Jesus's teachings of "love they neighbour" and charity are taken seriously by 2. 5 billion believers that Jesus had an intimate connection with our Creator. The result is the Earth's number 1 charity to help the poor, the Christian Church.

And there is common ground between the majority of secular law and Christian Law - thou shalt not murder for example. There are just a few area's were secular morality and Christianity may differ - there is debate about whether it is "moral" to have an abortion and about whether it is a sin to act on homosexual impulses.

The Pope (leader of Christian Church) is leaning towards greater acceptance of the LGBTQ community. Abortion is a tougher one, even Secularists debate whether it is OK to kill a child, just because they are young (in mother's womb).

[Smellyoldgit]

Andrew66 wrote

The result is the Earth's number 1 charity to help the poor, the Christian Church.

Some might disagree ....

You god-botherers appear at no.6 - doing stuff in Haiti & the Dominican Republic, and another bunch at no.10 in Africa - where I'll wager they're looking to harvest a few needy, gullible souls.

The Borgen Project’s quest to end extreme poverty is shared by countless people and organizations. A truly overwhelming number of non-profits are working to end poverty, and it can be hard to know where you should donate money. Here’s a list of 10 charities that fight poverty that all received 4-star overall ratings from Charity Navigator, a well-known charity watchdog organization.

Top Charities that Fight Poverty

1) K.I.D.S. (Kids in Distressed Situations): This large organization improves the lives of children living in poverty around the world. They provide new clothes, toys, books, and other products, as well as shelter and medical care. They’re also extremely well-run, spending 99.5% of their budget on programs, rather than fundraising or administrative overhead.

2) Concern Worldwide US: This non-governmental organization has been working towards the elimination of extreme poverty since its founding in 1968. Work, including emergency response and long-term development, is mostly focused on countries ranked in the bottom 40 according to the UN Human Development Report.

3) International Rescue Committee: This enormous organization directed over $350 million to those in need in 2011. They provide emergency aid in 42 countries, aiming to permanently improve life for victims of violence and oppression.

4) SIGN Fracture Care International: This non-profit works to provide orthopedic treatment to trauma victims in the developing world by training and equipping local surgeons. Proper treatment minimizes the financial burden placed on trauma victims and their families, giving them hope and fiscal security.

5) InterAction: This is a coalition of U.S. based NGOs that are aiming to eliminate poverty on an international scale. The partnerships allow each individual organization to multiply its impact by providing important connections, insight, and capital.

6) International Child Care: The Christian health development organization is working to alleviate many of the causes of poverty in Haiti and the Dominican Republic. By providing vital medical care for children and their families, ICC allows them to lead happier, healthier lives in less danger of falling into poverty.

7) Fistula Foundation: This organization funds the treatment of obstetric fistulas in the developing world. Obstetric fistulas occur when labor is obstructed during childbirth. They leave women incontinent, which can ruin her life. Her husband, family, and community often abandon her because of her smell. This injury is common when women give birth at home without access to trained medical help, and can be fixed with $450 surgery.

8) VillageReach: Since 2000, this organization has worked to improve the developing world’s access to healthcare by partnering with businesses, governments, nonprofits, and other organizations. They aim to strengthen local infrastructure in underserved rural areas, and facilitate the delivery of medical supplies. This effort specifically helps fight rural poverty by allowing remote communities to lead better, more fruitful lives.

9) Action Against Hunger (ACF-USA): This organization’s efforts are primarily aimed at ending global hunger. Their work saves lives by fighting malnutrition, especially in times of crisis or conflict. Programs are integrated with local and national systems to ensure long-term solutions that tackle the underlying causes of malnutrition.

10) Life In Abundance: This interdenominational Christian organization aspires to empower the local Church to end poverty in Africa’s developing areas. Their programs aim to create holistic community improvement by focusing on health, financial security, education, and social participation. By encouraging and enabling local Church leadership, long-term transformation is achieved and African families rise out of poverty.

We'll save the amassed non-charitable wealth of christ-stained organisations for later.