TheMessenger

@The Tr0ll T0ll

"You basically just asserted that all the kids that die of hunger in the third world every day deserve to be dead because they are human."

First, if you're speaking of children that die too young to understand their own sinful nature, then no, I don't believe they are condemned.

Second, your overall assertion ignores our sinful nature. We're not condemned simply because we're human. We're condemned because of our sinful nature. Just one sin proves our nature and even without knowing the bible, just one violation of what our own conscience told us what was "right" is our proof.

Morally bankrupt is what we all are. The gospel message is provided to us all by the grace of God.

"...it's that kind of smug assertion that innocent starving children are somehow "sinners" that deserve it that irks me."

I make no assertion in a "smug" manner. We are all facing an eternal life and death situation. I shared my initial post KNOWING it would NOT be received well. I don't mind the criticism and mocking from others. I personally deserve no better, but it's the salvation of others that I desire.

@sonicspike41

"So we should believe in god because he tells us he thinks we're not worthy and must die..."

Well, our "worthiness" is based upon our holiness. All of our consciences will bear witness to the fact that we're all sinners. Even just one sin proves that fact. Even if we don't know the bible, our conscience will bear witness to number of times we've even ignored what we thought was the "right" thing to do versus what we actually did.

"...then we have to feel guilty and afraid because he sent his son to die?"

Exactly the opposite. He sent His son to die to pay the price we could never pay ourselves.

"Let's also not forget that the only accounts we have of him ever existing are from stories mostly passed down through generations and recorded 50+ years after the events happened."

Incorrect. If you're talking about the gospel accounts of Christ. Three of the four gospel books were written within about 20-25 years of Christ's death. One was written around 60 years after the fact, but it was by one of Jesus' own disciple. Every other letter of the New Testament is addressed to specific churches or individuals. There are no "generations" in between Christ and the writing of any of the New Testament books.

As for there being no other account of His existence, that's actually not in question by any historian of that era (whether they are Christian or not). Tacitus Copernicus and Josephus are two well-known historians employed by the Roman emperor in those days. Both write of Christ and His death and the role of the local governor, Pontius Pilate. The Jews have more reason than any other to want to deny His existence and they can't. The only attack they can make is to debate whether He was truly the Son of God or not.

"...let's also remember that the bible is a mix of metaphors and 'truth' so tightly interwoven it's almost impossible to tell where one ends and the other begins"

Impossible to address this holistically, especially without any examples. That said, the gospel accounts (i.e. the four books describing the life and ministry of Christ) can be read quite literally. Yes, Jesus does speak in parables which can be rich in symbolism, but an understanding of the culture and history of that day clears up any potential confusion.

"I do however have a problem with people like you who assert that they're wholly right, everyone else is wrong, they know all the answers, and that everything is what they say it is."

I, myself, am a sinner who has no hope without Christ. I'm a fairly wealthy man in a material sense. Well-educated and well-traveled before I learned the truth four years ago (in my mid-30s). I say this because I have no hidden knowledge nor any divine wisdom of my own. Everything I share is from the Word of God.