One of the primary foundations of Christianity is immoral, and this would be vicarious redemption, where you can throw your sins onto someone elses shouders. This is simply one example of scapegoating. When sins are taken away simply through prayer, this takes away personal responsibility, which is perverse and immoral. A man would not need to seek the forgiveness of those he wronged, but all a man need to do is seek the forgiveness of Jesus. In a sense, this robs us somewhat of our ability to love our fellow man, for if we can transgress against others and not need their forgiveness to be absolved of our sins towards them, the only word that comes to mind to describe such an individual that would make this statement would be deranged. Also, christianity teaches us to love our fellow neighbor as we would love ourself, which is impossible, so we are always guilty of this crime. It demeans the term of love by making it a compulsory action. Another example, a God-follower relationship can be called a sadomasochistic relationship. To show absolute love to a being that will show love back until you make a mistake, then once again, you are "a worthless and dirty sinner". The God-follower relationship, by definition, fits the sadomasochistic relationship, which is perverse, unhealthy, and unethical. One more point would be that Christianity is a totalitarian system. If there is a God who could do these things and demand all these things of us, who is eternal and unchanging, we would be living under a dictatorship in which there is no chance for appeal, and one that could never change. One that knows our thoughts and can convict us of thought-crimes, and can condemn us to eternal punishment for actions in which we simply have the urge to take.

-This argument is borrowed from Christopher Hitchens, truly a wise individual.

"where you can throw your sins onto someone elses shouders." this has nothing to do with christianity don't know where you came up with this. Reason being for our sins being forgiven was cause christ was the ultimate sacrifice for our sins. That is because before Jesus walked this earth, people would sacrifice animals and other objects for forgiveness of their sins. But Jesus came and did away with that and sacrificed himself for our sins so we no longer had to sacrifice animals and things.

The definition of vicarious redemption, which is one of the primary principles of Christianity, is for someone to serve a punishment for another. In a large sense, it is the same with sacrificing animals and such, as in the Old Testament. This is unethical because it takes away personal responsibility. For an individual to take peoples sins upon himself so that they attain "forgiveness", then what is the point of any individual to right any wrongs towards any individuals they have hurt when all that is needed is a guilty conscience and to simply pray? This does not heal any transgression felt by anyone that this person hurt. An example would be an inmate on death row for murder. If a man asks God for forgiveness, then has he no need to ask the family the one he murdered for forgiveness? Vicarious redemption robs individuals of personal responsibility in regards to righting their transgressions towards their fellow man. Sacrificing animals is the same thing. By a life being taken, their transgressions towards their fellow man are forgiven. Any individual that would say "Do not seek the forgiveness of the person you have injured, for all you need is mine," is a callous person, to be so bold as to give that message. Simply put, Christianity does illustrate some excellent morals, but at the same time, it robs of morals also.

Christopher knows a different God and a different christianity than I do.




1.There is no escaping personal responsibility. Prayer does not remove consequences, it provides us strength and guidance to not repeat the offense or to find a better path after that point.

2.Loving my neighbor as myself is not impossible for me, though it may be for Christopher.

3.My Lord NEVER stops loving me, just like with my earthly father, he taught me that actions have consequences and those consequences(even his discipline) have nothing to do with his Love for me.

4.God nor Jesus were ever recorded to have called anyone "dirty' or "worthless"

5.Having laws does not make a dictatorship, America has laws and breaking those laws has consequences but America is not a dictatorship.

6. We all stand before God in judgement, like an earthly judge, that will be our 'appeal' process and it will be totally up to HIM to pardon us or not.

To truly follow the example of Christ is not sinful, the sin is in misuse or rejection of his example.

you have it all wrong though lol. God forgives us of our transgressions. Meaning he forgives us of our mistakes and/or when we stumble. We can not go kill someone with the thought doesn't matter i'll just ask for forgiveness. Because then the asking would be in vein. Would not be solemly asked of. As a christian we are to try our best to be perfect, and of course God knows we'll stumble time to time and offers forgiveness. But one can not do something evil in the thought doesn't matter God will forgive me when i ask of it.

Jesus may forgive but Pagans / Wiccans hold you responsible.

And how exactly does sacrificing a lamb pay for your sins you commited? Isn't it the lamb that had to pay and not you?

Christianity teaches that one only need God's forgiveness, not to make amends with the person or persons one's actions inflicted pain upon. So, as long as a thief has God's forgiveness, he should not attempt to repay the individual in which he stole from? Personal responsibility is not just making sure the transgression does not occur again, but is also to make amends for the transgression which occurred. If a person steals money from another person, and that money would be used for that person's welfare, does prayer simply absolve it all? The other individual is still at a loss. Personal responsibility would be making amends with the individual hurt by one's actions. To love your neighbor as you would love yourself is impossible. You will always have problems with at least one individual that are irreconcilable. This makes it impossible. One of the biggest examples would be 9/11. Can you say honestly, that in your heart, you forgive those men that hijacked the planes and crashed them? To love thine enemy and turn the other cheek plays into this as well. It is a fundamental of Christianity that when sins are committed, that we lose face in the eyes of God. People do good things out of this sadomasochist relationship. People do good things in the hope that when they die, they will be rewarded, and if they dont, they will suffer eternally. When a sin is committed, we pray for forgiveness to "escape the fate of damnation." The difference between a democracy and a totalitarianship is that in a democracy you can not be convicted for a thought-crime. In the eyes of God, you can easily be convicted and condemned for a thought-crime, same as in a totalitarian government. We are supposed to stand before God in judgement with the ability to appeal simply because Jesus was killed. This is similar to the barbaric practices of killing animals and offering human sacrifices to be absolved, or at least have the opportunity to be. Christ was a good moral teacher, I agree, but the sheer arrogance that you dont have to right your wrongs to your transgressees, as long as you "ask me for forgiveness and promise not to do it again" is totally unethical.

but nevertheless we will be judged on our actions here on earth. It is a judging not a sentencing, we will have a chance to explain our side and why we did that action as such. And yes it does tells us to make amends, maybe not in those specific words but still does. Tells us to be loving to everyone even our enemies. So if someone steals something from you and the next week or so you feed that person dinner, is that not showing forgiveness to that person for his/her transgressions upon you. And shows that you are trying to make amends with that person.

I don't see a lot of difference between these people who are constantly railing against christianity and those people who keep knocking at my door wanting me to come out in the yard and pray with em

either way is still people pushing their beliefs on others

Gods forgiveness does not relieve us of asking for forgiveness from the person(s) we have hurt or offended. These are 2 totally different
aspects. God forgives us when we ask with a humble heart, ready to turn away from the action and live differently (repent).
Asking the people we have hurt shows true remorse, though it can never undo what was done, or the consequences, it is the first step towards healing. In fact we are instructed to go to those we have hurt and ask their forgiveness. Whether they do or not is irrelevant,
Because God forgives unconditionally.

Jesus came to die for our sin- not that we could not accept responsibility for our actions- infact when we ask for forgiveness we do just the opposite- you have to admit you have done something wrong to realize you need to be forgiven in the first place.

There is no dictatorship, God gives us free will. We can choose to love him or not. Just like you choose to love a girlfriend.

Im not sure if you are a parent, but just as we love our children when they mess up God does not stop loving us. He may not approve of our behavior but He loves the person He just hates the sin.
I may not love everything my son does, but I love HIM.

I choose to forgive because It sets me free from holding onto anger and malice which makes people hard and bitter.

Everyone has a right to believe as they choose- that is free will.

I choose to follow my faith in God as He has never failed me.

Forgiveness does actually require making amends with those you have wronged,(Luke 19:8-10). I am not sure where the idea that skipping this step was encouraged or supported by God or the bible. As to being condemned for a thought crime, I am not sure this is or is not so. Not all people or all christians do good deeds to escape 'damnation' anymore than those who commit sins do so to be damned. People have conscience which plays a big part in what they choose to do or not do. Having differences, even irreconcilable ones, does not mean not having love. There are things about myself I am not pleased with and want to change but its very hard to do,,I will never approve of these things, but I still love myself.

exactly, that is the best way to put it. Relating how we feel for our children and how we act when they do wrong compared to how God will be towards us. When one of your children tells you a lie do you throw him/her out of the house and forever disown the child? No, you two work it out and you forgive that child. I'm not pointing directly at you, am meaning this universal for everyone.

How am I wrong? There have been many instances where, in a situation of a death row inmate, the man or woman would do their best to ask for the familys forgiveness. In some situations, the individual was not able to earn their forgiveness, but in a lot of circumstances, the individual was able to attain the forgiveness of the family. So, to say that attempting to show the family true remorse and earn their forgiveness is simply in vain, is assenine. When a person has the thought that they can do whatever they want simply because all they have to do is pray or that they are in God's favor, they are categorized in two groups. The first would be sociopaths, and the second is psychopaths. A mental disorder can be the cause, and so can religion. Even with the point of being in Afganistan, or Iraq, we are supposed to be there to "fight ISLAMIC terrorists." If you feel we are right for being there because we should kill the ISLAMIC terrorists, then you are either a sociopath or a psychopath. They are terrorists. So, if you feel we are right because as a Christian nation, its our duty to kill the Islamic radicals, then you are simply a sociopath or psychopath caused by religion. By calling it a "Christian nation fighting Islamic insurgents" there is such arrogance associated with that view, of a religious superiority. I will call anyone who agrees with the former policy this because these "christians" forgot one of their most core values, "to love thine enemy and when attacked to turn the other cheek".

I agree with all but the last line. We only have two cheeks, we are at some point supposed to learn instead of continuing to volunteer to be slapped,,and that lesson doesnt apply to self defense(although self defense is more of an IN the moment action than a plotted and planned invasion).

Gods forgiveness does not relieve us of asking for forgiveness from the person(s) we have hurt or offended. These are 2 totally different
aspects. God forgives us when we ask with a humble heart, ready to turn away from the action and live differently (repent).
Asking the people we have hurt shows true remorse, though it can never undo what was done, or the consequences, it is the first step towards healing. In fact we are instructed to go to those we have hurt and ask their forgiveness. Whether they do or not is irrelevant,
Because God forgives unconditionally.


But doesnt those last two sentences kind of negate everything else beforehand? Whether they do or not is irrelevant. Because God forgives unconditionally. If its irrelevant, then is there truly a point in seeking redemption from those we hurt? If its irrelevant, then the rest is redundant with the belief system.



Jesus came to die for our sin- not that we could not accept responsibility for our actions- infact when we ask for forgiveness we do just the opposite- you have to admit you have done something wrong to realize you need to be forgiven in the first place.


But for someone else to die for one's sins, that is scapegoating. I admit, I have committed wrongs, but I have never looked to someone else to fix it for me, I did it myself. I have taken the personal responsibility, not looked to a "savior" to handle it for me.


There is no dictatorship, God gives us free will. We can choose to love him or not. Just like you choose to love a girlfriend.

Thats the thing, it is totalitarianistic. If you dont do all God says, youll just burn for all eternity. If you choose not to follow, youll burn for all eternity. Either accept it or enjoy eternal suffering. This is the mindset of any totalitarian dictatorship.

So, since theres a pretty big response, I will just address a list in this field.

1) A basic fundamental of Christianity teaches to do good things so youll go to heaven. This is a mindset in which Christianity openly beats into peoples heads. It is this fundamental belief which takes away from good deeds, and turns them to things done out of selfish desire. Also, for anyone that would make ammends with one they wronged because of their faith, it is unethical. One makes ammends with another because their moral compass dictates that it is the right thing to do, not to get on the good graces of God.

2)In a person that is wronged, for them to be the one to make amends, that also robs the transgressor of personal responsibility. Encouraging the individual to take responibility is beneficial. Also, you are right, you dont throw your child out. You show the child that the action was wrong, and the child asks forgiveness. Even in a parent/child relationship, the transgressor takes personal responsibility in making amends with the transgressee.

3)Thou shalt not covet a neighbors possessions. This is one of the best examples of a thought-crime. One of the ten commandments, but a person doesnt have to take action to violate. It is one of the purest examples of a thought-crime. This commandment is bogus anyway. In the words of George Carlin, "Without coveting a persons possession, there would be no economy. You see Bob has a boat, and you want to get a bigger boat than Bob's." Also, one of the biggest driving forces in Christianity, in regards to conscience, which is pummeled into youths at a young age would be to absolve your wrongs with God, as not to burn in Hell. It is this driving force within the Christian conscience that motivates a person to do good deeds and veer away from committing wrongs, because the moral compass is based on a Pass-Fail method.

I will call anyone who agrees with the former policy this because these "christians" forgot one of their most core values, "to love thine enemy and when attacked to turn the other cheek".


I agree with all but the last line. We only have two cheeks, we are at some point supposed to learn instead of continuing to volunteer to be slapped,,and that lesson doesnt apply to self defense(although self defense is more of an IN the moment action than a plotted and planned invasion).

The point of turning the other cheek is that we dont allow ourselves to be constantly "slapped", but not to seek retaliation or revenge. In the words of Ghandi, "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." This is simply another way of putting it.

God looks at our hearts. We cant pretend with God. He knows our thoughts our intentions even tho on the outside others may be fooled. We cannot slip God off and on like a rain coat.
That is not what He is there for.

I am a follower of Christ, a beliver in God.
I know I am forgiven, however I still reap what I have sown in my past. There are rippling effects of my past mistakes...It does not mean that I am not forgiven.

We do reap what we sew, but if all we need is God's forgiveness, and not necessarily the forgiveness of those we hurt, then that is an unethical view. This does not bestow a sense of personal responsibility. Doctrine teaches that as long as we get God's "thunbs up", then it doesnt matter that we have hurt others or that we even should seek their forgiveness. Nobody has to "take God off and put God back on" because the message is as long as we feel guilt, all we do is ask God for forgiveness and thats the end of it.

I am an atheist. I look at religion from a logical perspective. Christianity is a religion that has its doctrines translated from dead languages to other dead languages, to other dead languages, then translated for monarchs of time periods to fit their rules and views to subjugate the non-nobility, then translated some more. Christianity is a religion filled with irreconcilable contradictions. The Virgin Mary, being one. There was no mention of the Virgin Mary in old transcripts until over 300 years after the death of Jesus (342 A.D.). There are so many stories similar to the birth and life of Jesus a few thousand years before his birth (i.e. Horus). The resurrection is supposed to be the truest sign that he is the son of God, but yet, in Christian doctrine, Lazarus rose from the dead, all the graves of Nazareth opened and the dead rose and greeted those they were close to in life, so doesn't that kind of take away from the resurrection of Jesus? By Christian definition, they would be the Sons and Daughters of God also, and thus God themselves, to be able to transcend death in the same manner in which Jesus did. And alas, many people claim that this country was founded on Christianity. Many of the founding fathers were against Christianity and religion altogether. Even Thomas Jefferson, one of the most popular founding fathers, took the New Testament, took out the portions of Jesus performing miracles and about his speaking of God, and formed a book called "The Ethical Teachings of Jesus Christ". Jesus was believed to be a good ethical teacher, but this country was not founded as a Christian country, despite how hard Fox News may claim it to be. We call ourselves a Christian Nation, which is perverse. Many take from the Constitution, but only segments. The separation of church and state was placed in it for a reason. Religious views should have no place in regards to the secular, for the illogic should not overtake the logical. From an ethical and scientific viewpoint, Christianity doesnt hold up much. The gospels were taken not from eye witnesses, but a few decades after the death of Jesus, to recount his lifes works. So its not based on eye witnesses, but people who heard it from someone who heard it from someone. My personal view is that gossip a lot of times tends to be not so accurate, especially 20 or 30 years down the road.

You betcha!