Not necessarily. I think you have a very poor understanding of Christian theology, which contributes to your offhand denigration of said religion.
Let us being with your premise about being born into sin.
Properly understood, original sin is when our first human ancestors disobeyed God in some way. We were given free will, the capacity to choose evil or good, and we didn't choose good. The fruit of the Tree of Knowledge could be real or allegorical. As a result of this disobedience, humanity has a harder time making its way through a creation that, admittedly, God could have make a paradise.
Because he's merciful, millennia later (what is a few centuries to the creator of the universe that is ancient beyond reckoning) God became man in the person of Jesus. Jesus suffered and died to make up for humanity screwing up. Still, things are still pretty rough, with death and disease and all that, but through suffering, we are built up, like an athlete training for competition.
Do you wish me to continue on about what is necessary for salvation?
What is absurd about christian theology? Literally translated it's the logic of God. Is the idea of God logical? If so, what does that mean? And if not, what else could explain it all, systematically?
You misunderstand. The begotten son is God Himself and not an offspring. This means in order to reconcile the relationship between God and man, God sacrificed Himself to save you so that you can spend eternity together instead of seperated.
"objectively" lol. The irony of you saying that, while being a sort of gnostic nihilist, is not lost on me. Put down the Nietzsche bro.
Anyway, if you're going to trash the religion, you at least ought understand it enough to trash what it really is, rather than what you think it is. To quote Yoda, "that is why you fail."
That being said, in short: Jesus died for all of humanity. By the grace of God those who don't believe him could possibly by saved by living a moral life as dictated by a property formed conscience, and further, belief alone in Jesus as your savior isn't enough.
Perhaps you misunderstand salvation with sanctification? All that is needed for salvation (the assurance of your eternal soul having a place set with God forever) is to honestly know Jesus Christ is God in the flesh and when you know Him you know the Father. In conjunction with this you must know you cannot save yourself from fallen nature and thus fallen eternity, God Himself is the only cure! Sanctification is allowing your life to be transformed further into Gods 's image(Jesus). God breathed life into everyone of us and when we come back to Him(salvation), then together, while building a relationship, God's Holy Spirit is working with your heart and mind to think and act more aligned with God's ways (sanctification). To finish it off, when you die and meet the Father, He will complete the work you've both done together and that is what we call glorification.
Post script to avoid misunderstanding; I do not mean to suggest work gets you to heaven, it doesn't, faith in the diety and power of Christ, (His death and ressurection) to save gets you into heaven. The relational work with knowing God better is the logical next step when you love someone and are trying to understand their love for you and I hope everyone to have that with God.
I can tell you're a man of good will, so in short I'll just say that the doctrine of justification by faith, which long predates Protestantism, is like promising short cut on a long and grueling walk. But, people have been debating this for a long time, and nothing new is going to said here of all places.
I know a lot about you, because you post long esoteric pseudo philosophical and surprisingly personal and emotional ramblings on here that I, to my detriment, have actually read. Does that surprise you?
Because participation in Christianity in America is on a steep decline, likely due to the internet and access to information, something Christians have been against for thousands of years (I wonder why.) Evangelicals, being flush with cash, have realized that the conspiracy community is one avenue to drum up new recruits as they deem participants in this community to be easily influenced. And they aren't entirely wrong. But the influx of pro Christian "users" in the community isn't only ironic, it's one of the more obvious attempts at shilling, and a true conspiracy. Bring it up and you'll soon find your name in the mod logs.
I must add to your last sentence... a true awakening is realizing the joke and laughing as you either join or leave. Whichever you choose is all ok in the end.
Christianity originated from the Church of Mithras and an improvised variant of ancient Semitic religion (Baal worship). It's the point for them to implement the feeling of guilt so THEY become God Emperors as you starve to death.
a) choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) represents contract law among choices. This is why the many feel in debt (contracted) to others. The few industrialized this contract law to gain control over the many as RELIGION; noun (Latin religio) - "to bind anew".
b) being able to perceive within perceivable implies being a partial within a whole, hence "apart" from one another. The few suggest the many e pluribus unum (out of many; one) aka tempting them to draw together aka "contraction".
c) living within the process of dying represents being resistance (life) within velocity (inception towards death); which implies the struggle to resist (living) temptation (dying). Now if one is being tempted by others into contraction (drawn together) then resistance meets resistance; hence grinding each other down through contact over apartheid.
corrupted their social values to the extent that there's almost no difference
a) once again "e pluribus unum" (out of many; one) as a suggested "norm" for behavior...following leaders; chained to commands; flowing with the mainstream; lockstep within the party-line; participating in movements; joining interest groups; nations as a label to consent to instead of as "a people" to be; repression over expression...
b) suggested SO'CIAL, adjective [Latin socialis, from socius, companion.] - "to mix in converse; cohabitation; togetherness" tempts one to ignore perceivable apartheid; hence being partial (living) within whole (process of dying).
c) suggested values tempt one to ignore being evaluation (perceiving) within value (perceivable). Consenting to suggested value tempts one to ignore evaluating choice for the choices of others suggesting values...that implies self devaluation.
feeling indebted
The process of dying is impressing upon those living within. Resisting that represent the expression of growth; while ignoring to resist represents repression. Those who repress growth feel depressed by the burden of the impressing loss. The parasitic few first suggest value to gain consent by the many to repression; afterwards they rebrand the feeling of depression into "debt" to them; exponentially growing debt which mimics the ongoing process of dying.
Only self discernment gets one out of this self inflicted state of mind; which requires resisting the temptation of suggested information and the adaptation to perceivable inspiration. Every piece of suggested information one consents to uphold within ones memory, tempts one to hold onto more of it; hence increasing the burden exponentially.
Nature teaches all of this through inspiration...impression for compression to expression aka inhale (chest); compress (lung); exhale aka eat; draw nourishment; excrete etc. Hold food and drink in and notice how nature forces one to "let go"...apply this to suggested information and free your memory to allow access to perceivable inspiration.
Holding onto anything within the process of dying doesn't sustain the living...it drowns resistance needed to sustain life. Resisting grows resistance.
the atheists are almost more guilt ridden than anyone out there
That's because the believer of suggested athe-ism represent the non-believer of what all the others are believing. They didn't take a step away from suggested beliefs; they consent to not believe all of them.
Now instead of believing vs non-believing use the origin...wanting vs not wanting suggested information. That way you can see that the believers consent to want a specific belief; while the non-believers consent to not want all of the beliefs. It doesn't matter if one chooses want or not want...both sides consent to suggested (want) over perceivable (need).
karma
Those who consent to the suggested choices of others are tempted to ignore the consequences of choices. On the other hand...those who suggest choices are tempted by all the consenting choices to feel assured...no matter the consequences.
Meanwhile for the partial (choice) within the whole (balance)...each choice has consequences for every other choice within balance, hence the need to adapt to ever changing circumstances.
In Christian theology, Jesus died for all of humanity.
Not necessarily. I think you have a very poor understanding of Christian theology, which contributes to your offhand denigration of said religion.
Let us being with your premise about being born into sin.
Properly understood, original sin is when our first human ancestors disobeyed God in some way. We were given free will, the capacity to choose evil or good, and we didn't choose good. The fruit of the Tree of Knowledge could be real or allegorical. As a result of this disobedience, humanity has a harder time making its way through a creation that, admittedly, God could have make a paradise.
Because he's merciful, millennia later (what is a few centuries to the creator of the universe that is ancient beyond reckoning) God became man in the person of Jesus. Jesus suffered and died to make up for humanity screwing up. Still, things are still pretty rough, with death and disease and all that, but through suffering, we are built up, like an athlete training for competition.
Do you wish me to continue on about what is necessary for salvation?
What is absurd about christian theology? Literally translated it's the logic of God. Is the idea of God logical? If so, what does that mean? And if not, what else could explain it all, systematically?
You misunderstand. The begotten son is God Himself and not an offspring. This means in order to reconcile the relationship between God and man, God sacrificed Himself to save you so that you can spend eternity together instead of seperated.
The Knowledge revealed is of our own death.
Our afterlife is what we do unto others.
We are beholden to every person, animal and plant on whom we rely for sustenance and succor.
Without other people, animals or plants you would be dead.
"objectively" lol. The irony of you saying that, while being a sort of gnostic nihilist, is not lost on me. Put down the Nietzsche bro.
Anyway, if you're going to trash the religion, you at least ought understand it enough to trash what it really is, rather than what you think it is. To quote Yoda, "that is why you fail."
That being said, in short: Jesus died for all of humanity. By the grace of God those who don't believe him could possibly by saved by living a moral life as dictated by a property formed conscience, and further, belief alone in Jesus as your savior isn't enough.
Perhaps you misunderstand salvation with sanctification? All that is needed for salvation (the assurance of your eternal soul having a place set with God forever) is to honestly know Jesus Christ is God in the flesh and when you know Him you know the Father. In conjunction with this you must know you cannot save yourself from fallen nature and thus fallen eternity, God Himself is the only cure! Sanctification is allowing your life to be transformed further into Gods 's image(Jesus). God breathed life into everyone of us and when we come back to Him(salvation), then together, while building a relationship, God's Holy Spirit is working with your heart and mind to think and act more aligned with God's ways (sanctification). To finish it off, when you die and meet the Father, He will complete the work you've both done together and that is what we call glorification.
Post script to avoid misunderstanding; I do not mean to suggest work gets you to heaven, it doesn't, faith in the diety and power of Christ, (His death and ressurection) to save gets you into heaven. The relational work with knowing God better is the logical next step when you love someone and are trying to understand their love for you and I hope everyone to have that with God.
I can tell you're a man of good will, so in short I'll just say that the doctrine of justification by faith, which long predates Protestantism, is like promising short cut on a long and grueling walk. But, people have been debating this for a long time, and nothing new is going to said here of all places.
I know a lot about you, because you post long esoteric pseudo philosophical and surprisingly personal and emotional ramblings on here that I, to my detriment, have actually read. Does that surprise you?
Yes but also give them your money and give more and never stop giving and oh yeah that's right they don't pay taxes on it either....
Because participation in Christianity in America is on a steep decline, likely due to the internet and access to information, something Christians have been against for thousands of years (I wonder why.) Evangelicals, being flush with cash, have realized that the conspiracy community is one avenue to drum up new recruits as they deem participants in this community to be easily influenced. And they aren't entirely wrong. But the influx of pro Christian "users" in the community isn't only ironic, it's one of the more obvious attempts at shilling, and a true conspiracy. Bring it up and you'll soon find your name in the mod logs.
Faith is belief in lieu of evidence.
I must add to your last sentence... a true awakening is realizing the joke and laughing as you either join or leave. Whichever you choose is all ok in the end.
Christianity originated from the Church of Mithras and an improvised variant of ancient Semitic religion (Baal worship). It's the point for them to implement the feeling of guilt so THEY become God Emperors as you starve to death.
False.
a) choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) represents contract law among choices. This is why the many feel in debt (contracted) to others. The few industrialized this contract law to gain control over the many as RELIGION; noun (Latin religio) - "to bind anew".
b) being able to perceive within perceivable implies being a partial within a whole, hence "apart" from one another. The few suggest the many e pluribus unum (out of many; one) aka tempting them to draw together aka "contraction".
c) living within the process of dying represents being resistance (life) within velocity (inception towards death); which implies the struggle to resist (living) temptation (dying). Now if one is being tempted by others into contraction (drawn together) then resistance meets resistance; hence grinding each other down through contact over apartheid.
a) once again "e pluribus unum" (out of many; one) as a suggested "norm" for behavior...following leaders; chained to commands; flowing with the mainstream; lockstep within the party-line; participating in movements; joining interest groups; nations as a label to consent to instead of as "a people" to be; repression over expression...
b) suggested SO'CIAL, adjective [Latin socialis, from socius, companion.] - "to mix in converse; cohabitation; togetherness" tempts one to ignore perceivable apartheid; hence being partial (living) within whole (process of dying).
c) suggested values tempt one to ignore being evaluation (perceiving) within value (perceivable). Consenting to suggested value tempts one to ignore evaluating choice for the choices of others suggesting values...that implies self devaluation.
The process of dying is impressing upon those living within. Resisting that represent the expression of growth; while ignoring to resist represents repression. Those who repress growth feel depressed by the burden of the impressing loss. The parasitic few first suggest value to gain consent by the many to repression; afterwards they rebrand the feeling of depression into "debt" to them; exponentially growing debt which mimics the ongoing process of dying.
Only self discernment gets one out of this self inflicted state of mind; which requires resisting the temptation of suggested information and the adaptation to perceivable inspiration. Every piece of suggested information one consents to uphold within ones memory, tempts one to hold onto more of it; hence increasing the burden exponentially.
Nature teaches all of this through inspiration...impression for compression to expression aka inhale (chest); compress (lung); exhale aka eat; draw nourishment; excrete etc. Hold food and drink in and notice how nature forces one to "let go"...apply this to suggested information and free your memory to allow access to perceivable inspiration.
Holding onto anything within the process of dying doesn't sustain the living...it drowns resistance needed to sustain life. Resisting grows resistance.
That's because the believer of suggested athe-ism represent the non-believer of what all the others are believing. They didn't take a step away from suggested beliefs; they consent to not believe all of them.
Now instead of believing vs non-believing use the origin...wanting vs not wanting suggested information. That way you can see that the believers consent to want a specific belief; while the non-believers consent to not want all of the beliefs. It doesn't matter if one chooses want or not want...both sides consent to suggested (want) over perceivable (need).
Those who consent to the suggested choices of others are tempted to ignore the consequences of choices. On the other hand...those who suggest choices are tempted by all the consenting choices to feel assured...no matter the consequences.
Meanwhile for the partial (choice) within the whole (balance)...each choice has consequences for every other choice within balance, hence the need to adapt to ever changing circumstances.