"Sin" is an artificial construct, devised by the entirely human authors of religion. Eliminating this word from the lexicon would greatly advance the race.

God created everything in heaven and earth, supposedly. So, sin is part of everything. God therefore created sin. He then created imperfect beings, but was somehow astonished that his imperfect beings and sin might be attracted to each other. I'm no god, I think I would have seen that coming. So, knowing all this and being omniscient, god punishes us for the sins he created in the first place and knew we were going to commit. Still scratching my head, I then wonder why he sacrificed himself (though he didn't actually, because he came back) for the sins he created and we committed, that he knew were going to happen. And he does this to atone for our sins, which he created, though you can't atone for anyone else's sins, even if you created the sins in the first place and knew they were going to happen. Have I got this lunacy about right?

@David1955 Yeah, traditional Christianity never made much sense. The word Sin was invented in Europe around 1400. It was an archery term that measured the distance from the center. It was an interesting choice when they did the English translation. Then they redefined it to mean something completely different. Same goes with every thing else in the bible. Don't sell yourself short though. "is it not written ye are Gods." Finally, if Jesus was more of a God than you or I, who was he praying to?

@Seminarian himself, Brad, he was praying to himself. Apparently.

@David1955 Yes, and I'd go further. When you read the temptation episode with Satin on the Mount of Temptation, he is arguing with his own ego as well. Both events take place on a high place. Biblical Mountains represent the human higher consciousness. That interpretation always works. No matter which story you choose.

@Seminarian spoiler alert. Jesus never existed, or certainly the religious Jesus never did, so isn't this all talk about fables, or at best historical fiction, as we call it now: invented story over a historical setting?

"Freewill"? An omniscient being creates you and the universe around you, which results in you being you. But then its your "fault"? The idea of freewill is an excuse for superstitious/religious scum to duck out of having to excuse all the horror that happens in the world. The 25,000+ children who die of starvation every day? Freewill?

Freewill? If you worship a "God" that lets this happen, you worship evil.

@David1955 I think you are basically right; I personally believe he was a descendant of Solomon and later, the High Priest Jason. So, he would be a distant cousin to the temple Pharisees . He could have been a Mystic Jewish Priest as well. But, that's a long way from what Christianity teaches today. There are clues which led me to this conclusion sprinkled throughout the Christian Scriptures.

@David1955, @Observer-Effect I've never been a big fan of the word Worship. That word opens a whole can of worms for me.

Then you have gotten your fair share of free will arguements. For some reason after hearing what you said they ignoore it and cry free will. Did I mention that your case destroys the free will argument?

@DavidLaDeau Gotta love that 'free will' argument. A supposedly ominiscient being, who knows everyone's choices prior to them having been made, sets about to create a universe, which includes beings who, while they are alleged to be in its/his/her image, are in reality, as far beneath their creator as a bug is beneath these beings!

The concept of an omniscient creator removes, in reality, free will, because to the omniscient being, the future is just as indelible as the past. In other words, what the omniscient being sees to be the future, thus makes it so--the future is as factual as the past--and removes the free will decisions of its/his/her subjects. Sure, it might seem like we're making freewill choices, but we're really only actors in a play, with a script that has already been written.

@DavidLaDeau yes, we are as always on the same page. I left out 'free will' which they think, falsely, gets them out of trouble. It doesn't. They then fall into a non interventionist god by implication, which means prayer, churches, faith etc is utterly irrelevant. As a final act of desperation they try to argue that God intervenes sometimes but it's all a big mystery. Laughable and absurd, which they know as I walk away chuckling. Another notch on my belt. Time for lunch.

@DavidLaDeau, @p-nullifidian yes. All it takes is a little applied logic. I saw these contradictions as a teenager.

@David1955 Actually I saw them also but it did not in any way stem my belief. I bought into the "I'm just too stupid to understandmthing. Then I realized that there were thinga that could not be true. I could not have free will and an all knowing god. God could not forgive all sins and not forgive blasphephmy at the same time. My god COULD NOT exist.