Human Entitlement

Is it not obvious that only man, as a species, is saddled with the cognitive problem of hypothesizing his own "eternal fate" which causes him to invent religion as a palliative ?

A very intelligent question.

IF Adam was created imperfect and IF he was created with sin, man would indeed be able to redeem themselves.

Very true smiley. Yet if Adam were created perfectly and if sin is external, why shouldn't man have to prove their own perfection over sin? Why bail us out with a savior? Either way I can't fathom why God wouldn't make man handle this themselves. And I can't accept the mercy argument if what Adam and Eve did was really such a bad thing to do.

Very obvious, but not my point.

What point ? The concepts of God, Fate and Savior are co-extensive psychological constructs revolving around a perception of our "limited control over our destiny". Believers play out a mental game between "free-will", "self-interest"and "faith in a divinity". That game is distraction from thinking about the unpalatable alternative of the futility and insignificance of their existence.

...(timed out)...
In accordance with my first post with which you concur, It is my contention that ALL religions, with or without "saviors", are attempts to ameliorate Shakespeare's observation above.
So what are you looking for here?..an rhetorical attempt by Christians to logically justify their creed ? Logic is hardly one of their strong points when they operate the catch-all clause "God moves in mysterious ways" ! Or maybe you want a Muslim to come along and agree with you that no "savior" is required. And would not this would be equivalent to some one arguing the merits of table tennis over lawn tennis because the former had no "volleying" involved ?

I am happy to disclose my own understanding chap. I will condense it so as not to write novella, but more detailed specifics are available on request.

In the beginning Adam and Eve were created to live forever as subjects of Gods kingdom, they were to fill the earth and subdue it. On advice however, they rejected God as ruler in favor of being able to decide for themselves what is good and bad, thus choosing sin. Because they chose sin, they forfeited access to the tree of life and in turn they died within that very "yom" (translated - day) (remember God conditioned death in Eden "in the "yom" that you eat of the tree you will die")
So through one man sin entered the world. The wages sin pays are death, so as sin is inherited throughout the human population, we all owe a debt that is payable only in death.
Because Adam forfeited a perfect life, only a perfect man could repurchase us from that debt, so Jesus, aptly known as the second or last Adam lived and gave up his perfect life as fore-payment for our sins, so if we fulfill the requirements of subscription to his ransom, all those that exercise faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life. He can restore us to perfection (washed clean in the blood of the lamb) and life on the Earth as he originally intended under his rulership.

So the ransom sacrifice to me, only makes sense if man was created and lost perfection. If Adam was not perfect, we could easily have sacrificed one of our own by way of repurchase.

References - Genesis 2:17, Genesis 3:22, Romans 5:12, Romans 6:23, John 3:16, Psalms 34:22, Psalms 37:11, Revelation 21,3-5, Matthew 26:28, Hebrews 9:22,1 Peter 3:18-22, Revelation 7:14

It could be described as speculation, but it is how I make sense of it all.

Well written and I'm sure most Christians would accept that explanation smiley, which is fine. But it just seems like that's what you want to happen. You want Jesus to come and make the world right because it's EASIER than trying to get people to make the world right.

Here's my take on the Jesus story. If Man waits to be saved, rather than saving themselves, Man will eventually die out. I think that's a challenge that'd be more logical to God than handing Man a savior (for the Entitled of course). I think God wanted Man to experience creation like He does. I don't think Adam and Eve were punished by God, but forgiven. And I think God wants Man to achieve God's level of perfection by themselves.

God is not my problem, religious entitlement is. If God does exist, religions are what gives God a bad name. Religions don't care about making the world better, they care about their own belief of Entitlement. The splits in religions show this better than anything.

Honestly, for as much as I don't want to believe it, a part of me thinks they could be right. Expect in a wrong way. The thing about the Bible is, if it truly holds a message from God, that message should still exist no matter how much Man alters the text. It's ridiculous to believe that the Bible hasn't been 'revised' over the centuries to fit various human motives(hell we're doing it now with the easy to read modernized Bible thats been created). But that message should still exist, if God really does exist, even if if that message doesn't plainly come out and tell us like it once did.

You really have to question some of the stuff in the most popular book the world has ever known. There is a reason why the Bible holds that distinction, and it's kinda scary that most are believing the stuff that probably isn't God's true message.

An interesting take Mikey, but how would you suppose we go about getting man to make the world right? Scripture tells us that it does not belong to man to direct his own step, and that man will dominate man to his own injury. This is something we see throughout the world that we live in, wars pain and suffering are rife, then there is sickness and poor health.

Do you believe that we were intended to live this way?

If you are really interested in interpretative drift I suggest you might expand your reference frame beyond the bible, to other "savior" texts e.g.
http://galileounchained.com/2012/04/15/jesus-just-one-more-dying-and-rising-savior/
Of course if you are coming to this as a theist you will be reluctant to indulge in such an expansion,

If the scriptures are true and Man has no choice in their fate, why was Jesus on Earth basically telling people to be better people? Sometimes I think people forget that their savior Jesus was actually on Earth teaching people to do good. Why do you think Jesus would try to get people's act together if it didn't matter? Instead of focusing on what happened to Jesus after he died, Christians should be focused on what he was trying to do when he was actually alive and DOING something.

I do think we are the way we are because of God. I think God gave Man the ability of Conscious Experience so we can know what it's like to be like God. To know what's good and what's bad and how each has consequences, except we have to experience those consequences to truly understand them and how they affect us as a whole. Problem is, everyone is waiting to die for their reward (damn religions), and don't really care what is happening right now. We shall see how far that gets humanity I guess. Good luck getting rid of war believing it doesn't matter because life isn't the REAL reward.

Man has every choice in his own fate.

What Jesus taught and did here on earth matters a great deal. A christian by definition should walk in the pattern that Jesus set, thus becoming just like him. He showed us how it was supposed to be done. But do not forget that his primary ministry was to preach about the coming kingdom, its characteristics, its purpose, and how it was the means through which man can be redeemed. He also taught the standards that his followers must uphold in the meantime, how they could qualify to enter into the kingdom. Man is not redeemed unless he meets the criteria for redemption, That criteria is found primarily in his teachings.

Think about any kingdom, if you are unable or unwilling to abide by its laws and standards, you are incarcerated or removed in order to protect the mission vision and values of said kingdom. Likewise, why would God want in his "new earth" people who have no inclination toward his guidance? Sadly, christianity in its majority have no idea with regards to what the title Christian actually means.

The "reward" you speak of is twofold, and it is not just about when we die. Living by Gods standards today brings rewards in itself, those that work hard to uphold the true principles of Jesus teachings will have a better quality of life and they will improve the earth around them, but they will also get to be a part of Gods reform when the time comes, when those who "exercise" faith in Jesus, might not be destroyed but have everlasting life (john 3:16) Again the christian majority fail to recognise the benefits of the principles of Jesus teachings

So ultimately I would agree with you that people who think God has no standards, and that the sacrifice means you can just sit back, do nothing and collect a reward at the end just for believing are going to get a rude awakening. A real christian works to become christlike, and as you yourself suggest, should seek to improve the world around them.

They all prove what I'm saying fresco, Man has this problem that they feel that they are entitled to a savior instead of fixing their own world to make it LIKE HEAVEN while we are ALIVE. Why take the chance of death to find out if Heaven is real when it could be possible on Earth! And humans are really not as helpless and pathetic as certain religions make us out to be. We put people in outer space. Man can do anything if THEY actually try. Look around, the proof is eveywhere. Hell, I'm chatting with you, aren't I?

-Man has every choice in his own fate
-Scriptures tells us that it does not belong to Man to direct it's own step

Explain that conundrum, both thought/written by YOU.

You are blinded by HUMAN concepts of the bible. Which is why the world is the way it is.

Everything is a conundrum if you wish it to be so. Consider an illustration

An apprentice is given a task to do by his mentor.
His mentor gives instructions on how best to complete the job and takes a step back to see how he would do. The apprentice however chooses to reject his mentors advice, and does the job his own way. He hashes the job. The mentor then has to take over and has to repair the damage done.

The apprentice had the power of choice, but it did not belong to the apprentice to decide how best to do the job.

Again you are using a human concept to try and explain God and why God does what he does. Yes, the master/apprentice argument works for us humans because we know that such things happen. But the master/apprentice are just doing some mundane job in context. Not creating living creatures who are conscious of their own existence like God did. Creatures that HAVE to fix their mistakes anyways in order to keep surviving.

Seems like in God's eyes the apprentice (Man) has to fix their own mistakes. If this weren't true I think God would've already fixed things by now. Like right after Adam and Eve's alleged cause for bringing sin into reality. In the human sense, God should've stepped in, destroyed Eden, and started from scratch. But God didn't so I don't believe your example is accurate to predict why God does what God does. It only predicts what Man does.

The idea that man cannot conceive Gods ways or the words of the bible is common in mainstream Christianity. Unfortunately it is not an idea I subscribe to.

The illustration was merely intended to dispel your conundrum my friend. It does however have some parallels. The job of the master/apprentice though would not be creation, for what part does man play in creation? The job is ruling mankind, and we the apprentice have made a booched job of it.

Why didn't God just destroy mankind? His power is not in question, his right to rule mankind is. History of Mankind shows that displays of power to quell a rebellion is not justice, it would merely highlight the question raised over Gods right to rule to all those watching on. In order to answer the question in a way that it would never need be answered again, he needs a resounding answer. How long do you suppose he should have waited before stepping in?

Back to the master and the apprentice, the master allows the apprentice to prove that his way does not work, but he did not allow him to booch it beyond redemption. Once the masters direction is proven as the best way to do things, he can once more step back, and allow his apprentice to continue work with progressively less direction.

How many models for rulership have man deployed?

A slight adjustment to the illustration. If the master is running an internship with the intention of taking a number of apprentices on full term to work for his business. All of his apprentices are struggling to do the job well, as they are untrained, what do you think the master would look for in those he will employ to work for him when the time comes?

I would guess Man's part in creation would be 'that which is being created' and really nothing more. Certainly not an apprentice of God. Did people really create computers to be our apprentices?

God's Rule and Kingdom. Did God really create Man to Rule over Man? Is God really bringing His Kingdom? A kingdom is a human form of Government, with a clear caste system. Inequality is what kept the King or Queen in power to Rule over everything in their Kingdom. Inequality. Human concept which proves itself every day we live. Really God, you couldn't think up something original that Man would obviously never be able to discover? And a Monarchy to boot. Why not a democracy? I'm sure you'd get voted president every time! Again, I think you want God to be a King instead of a normal guy you could relate to. But that's your right and I respect that.

God already has a resounding answer, we're still here, aren't we. Maybe that's what God wants and I guess God get's what he wants. Which would seem for us to do this ourselves with NO help whatsoever, because we were created so we CAN.