Was Jesus without sin?

That just shows how cruel God is. He wants people to suffer all of their lives by inflicting them with poverty.

 

Would you like for God to hold everyone's hands. I can only imagine the squalling you'd do if that were the case.
God allows everyone to make their own decisions. What can i say.

 

You shouldn't have validated his inane comment with a response.

God does not want anyone to suffer.

 

Oh. well i thought he was actually that clueless. but only in a good way. lol

 

nah, he is not

 

So if you choose not to believe in me, it would be cool for me to torture you forever right?

After all, you think that it's not immoral.

 

So you believe that torturing people for all eternity for not believing in you is moral?

 

Argument from popularity fallacy.

People who worship the Buddha as a god pervert his teachings.

 

Are you sure?

Genesis 3:16 (CEV) = Then the LORD said to the woman, “You will suffer terribly when you give birth. But you will still desire your husband, and he will rule over you.”

Leviticus 17:16 (CEV) = If you don’t take a bath, you will suffer for what you did wrong.

Numbers 14:33 (CEV) = Your children will wander around in this desert forty years, suffering because of your sins, until all of you are dead.

Deuteronomy 28:27 (CEV) = The LORD will make you suffer with diseases that will cause oozing sores or crusty itchy patches on your skin or boils like the ones that are common in Egypt. And there will be no cure for you!

Deuteronomy 31:17 (CEV) = and I will be so furious that I will abandon them and ignore their prayers. I will send disasters and suffering that will nearly wipe them out. Finally, they will realize that the disasters happened because I abandoned them.

2 Chronicles 21:15 (CEV) = You will be struck with a painful stomach disease and suffer until you die.

Isaiah 29:2 (CEV) = I will still make you suffer, and your people will cry when I make an altar of you.

 

Read my post on the Trinity and you won't be confused.

 

The answer is that it would not be just to not judge sinners, and God is just.

 

He seems to ignore posts that provide that answers he asks.

 

Because of judgement for their sin.

 

It did. Adam and Even fell from grace by their original sin and mankind needed saving ever since.

 

What a Christian thing to say.

 

How do you get that?

 

This suffering was caused by the sins of the people.

 

Torturing someone for all eternity for not believing in you is just?

 

Then you admit that God exists. That is fantastic news.

 

Can you provide a link to the posting wherein such a belief on my part has been stated? I didn't think so. More of your misrepresentation of material facts ... in other words, more of your evil imaginations.

 

That's what your God does and you state that your God is moral, so clearly you must believe that torturing people for all eternity for not believing in a God is moral.

Or do you actually have principles and are willing to call out your God for its immorality?

 

Where are you getting torturing someone for all eternity? Much of the concept of hell is based on doctrine that is not in the Bible.

But the separation from God is the reward for sin. Jesus offers salvation from sin because he bore our sin for us on the cross. That is the Christian doctrine.

But I personally agree that the concept that a just God would condemn those simply because they do not have the proper belief system is hard to reconcile.

 

Then it would appear that you have a problem with the fact that God is a jealous God. Wouldn't you get a bit upset if your wife went about town whoring around with any Tom, Dick and Harry that presented themselves to her? (Forgive the gender specific example... it is equally applicable to the opposite gender). A spouse is supposed to be faithful to his/her mate.

The notion of the 'jealous God' is inferred in the Ten Commandments... "1: Thou shalt have no other gods before me. "

 

I'm not sure what your point is? I didn't say anything about God being jealous or not or my view on it.

 

Back to the OP (I have skipped all posts since), one of the definitions for 'sin' as mentioned in Strong's Concordance, is "missing the mark." The mark being God as the standard. "He who says he has not sinned is a liar, and the truth is not in him." And "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God."

And so man continually 'sins' or fails (misses the std) in his walk upon this earth. His only hope is to accept God's free gift of Righteousness, which is not earned nor deserved, but given for believing on the work on the cross of a Righteous man in his stead. We as believers have "His righteousness!" Which also means, "Right-standing with God."

Jesus had to be w/o sin to be an acceptable sacrifice for atonement of sin. The OT "type" that pointed to the Lamb of God as the eternal & perpetual sacrifice for like mankind, is requiring a 'spotless lamb, w/o blemish." The spot/blemish is a type of sin. (no, BM, dont know if Jesus was w/o freckles & moles)...it was a 'spiritual 'type'. One must understand 'types' of the past pointing to future events, and the physical pointing to the spiritual.

And so, for Jesus to be an acceptable sacrifice for 'others' sins and be an atonement for mankind, He HAD to be sinless!!