Wrong, I think I already explained that those who were not privy to Christianity and simply lived their lives to the best of their abilities based on what they knew, would go to heaven. No just God would condemn someone from birth. We all have a chance to secure heaven as an eternal destiny. We will be judged based on what we do know, not based on what we don't.
But this is simply your interpretation or one commonly expoused by modern day Christian apologists. Where did this come from? What is the basis of this belief? I have studied the Bible and even the Torah and Talmud and there is nothing to justify any of this. If anything, if you read the ancient Jewist texts in context, there may not even be a "hell" in terms of how the Christian Church adopted that theology.
This is simply a way to rationalize your own beliefs with a rigid belief system. Human compassion and empathy is not compatible with Biblical punishment. You have to go back to your explanation in the god who creates a beautiful girl but then condemns her to eternal torture simply because she rejected him wanted her own freedom as being "perfectly acceptable".
But this is simply your interpretation or one commonly expoused by modern day Christian apologists. Where did this come from? What is the basis of this belief? I have studied the Bible and even the Torah and Talmud and there is nothing to justify any of this. If anything, if you read the ancient Jewist texts in context, there may not even be a "hell" in terms of how the Christian Church adopted that theology. This is simply a way to rationalize your own beliefs with a rigid belief system. Human compassion and empathy is not compatible with Biblical punishment. You have to go back to your explanation in the god who creates a beautiful girl but then condemns her to eternal torture simply because she wanted her own freedom.
There is scripture to support this in an indirect way, although this is more of a belief of mine than an absolute statement. Frankly only God knows for sure, but based on the kind of God he is (just) I have a hard time buying that he would condemn from birth those who will never hear the gospel.
Last edited by arloiginla; 07-09-2010 at 04:50 PM.
You are basing that on human equality. If you created everything in the world including the girl, that would be completely acceptable, especially if the girl was perfect when you created her but defied you purposely and rejected you.
What, just because I created something that means I can do things that would be completely immoral if I hadn't created it?
So I can lock my kids in the basement if they defy and reject me? This line of reasoning is probably where the whole idea of stoning disobedient children comes from.
When my son defies me, I don't damn him and all his children and grandchildren to a lifetime of hardship and an eternity of suffering if they don't happen to make the right choice thousands of years later.
Let me ask this, if you had been in the garden, would you have partaken of the apple?
Quote:
Originally Posted by arloiginla
Completely true. I have no doubt whatsoever that those who have never heard of Jesus or Christianity, or salvation, will be judged on what they do know and not what they don't. The God I believe in would do no such thing, because it would be contrary to His just nature.
Judged on what they know? What knowledge are they judged on? Like a game of trivial pursuit? I hope it's science or computers, cause then I'll get in for sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arloiginla
Wrong. It has nothing to do with a soft or hard sell. Those who are offered God's gift of salvation and do not accept it, will face eternal punishment apart from God, since they chose to be apart from Him during life.
This is presuming that a person has knowledge of what they are choosing, but they don't. Lots of gods offer salvation according to their followers.
You are offered salvation from Allah, you choose not to accept it and face eternal punishment.
In order to make an informed decision, you have to be informed. Someone telling someone else that they have to accept their god or face eternal punishment isn't being informed, that's just a assertion with nothing to substantiate it.
A just god would allow for informed decisions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arloiginla
I didn't judge one doctrine and say that those who believe in the "old" way of thinking (you're going to hell! stop being gay!) aren't really Christians. I think it is personal - each of us will be accountable to God Himself and it won't matter what doctrine we held, it will only matter whether or not we accepted His gift of salvation and strove to follow His will in our lives.
Well even the nature of salvation is in itself doctrine, the view of how to attain it according to the author of Matthew is very different than the author of John.
But I see what you mean. And this would more closely fit the early church I think. The problem is it didn't work out, it couldn't be sustained. The wide proliferation of doctrines and views in the early church combined with the lack of an "in your lifetime" return by Christ eventually resulted in 300 years of wrangling to establish correct doctrine, to separate orthodoxy from heresy.
If it shouldn't matter what doctrine is held, there can't be exceptions to that.. "It doesn't matter what doctrine you hold except you have to believe X" will just result in differences in what X should be. The writings that became the Bible have varying views on something as basic as the nature of Jesus.. Resulting in many different groups in early Christianity: Man but not god, god but not man, both man and god in varying percentages, man but infilled by the Christ spirit right before crucifixion, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arloiginla
I wasn't judging which doctrine turns people on and off being right or wrong. Rather, I simply said that one doctrine is more likely to win over unbelievers and therefore acting in love in todays society, than the other, which seems to be doing more harm than good.
Fair enough, I just wanted to point out that there are Christians that would disagree with that.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
God did not give us sin like a disease. He created us perfect, not fallen creatures. But He gave us a free will, so that we aren't forced to follow him.
But we are forced to follow him, because if we don't then we're given eternal punishment. That's not free will, that's coercion. Does the girl I'm going to lock in my basement because she doesn't choose to be my wife have free will?
And that's assuming that the decision to follow or not can be made, but there simply isn't enough information to make a well informed decision in that regard.
Adam and Eve lacked the knowledge of good and evil, so they weren't even equipped to understand the consequences of what they did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arloiginla
But Adam and Eve messed up and chose to reject that perfection and God. They separated themselves from God and therefore gave birth to a people that were born fallen from God. Hence the need for a Savior, someone who could make things right again.
Should you go to jail for the crimes of your grandfather? Is that just?
Quote:
Originally Posted by arloiginla
This is why so many people make the argument of "How can a loving God create so much evil in the world?" Simple. God didn't create evil, he allowed it to happen. It was us humans that created it.
"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."
"Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?"
"Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good?"
How does one go about creating evil? If it was created back then, can I still create it now?
If it was through an act of disobedience, then when my 6 year old disobeys me is that evil?
And allowing evil to happen when you have the ability to stop it is also evil.
If you are in a room with a mother and her child, and the mother puts the child in the microwave, is it not evil to stand aside? You would violate her free will by intervening. But she's violating the free will of the child already.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arloiginla
Once you become a Christian, the Holy Spirit lives in you. You are reconciled to God and are no longer a fallen creature. This Spirit guides you in order to live a perfect life worthy of the Lord and doing His work. That being said, we still have a free will and oftentimes this comes into play, when we choose to do what we know is displeasing in the Lord's sight. The Spirit will convict us if that is the case and we can always ask for forgiveness which is freely granted. The Holy Spirit is supernatural and the more time we spend with the Lord in devotions and whatnot, the closer we become to His spirit and the less likely we are to get sucked into the making wrong decisions.
That's the theory anyway, but if there was actually any validity to this I think you would see it, but rather than being exceptional in every measurable factor, Christians seem to have the same problems and make the same wrong decisions as everyone else. If the US is an example of a society where there are more Christians so should be less likely to get sucked into wrong decisions, then the should be the envy of the world with respect to social and physical health, but it's quite the opposite.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
We had this conversation in Christian bashing thread 145,938! When I said all these threads, like the Iraqi threads, just turn out the same. People should save time and keep the links to their previous posts! Especially Cheese.
I mean really...this new thread came about because of Iran threatening to stone a woman for adultery. (Now apparently pardoned) Any chance to take a swing right? Keep the links people, save CP the bandwidth!
The Following User Says Thank You to HOZ For This Useful Post:
We had this conversation in Christian bashing thread 145,938! When I said all these threads, like the Iraqi threads, just turn out the same. People should save time and keep the links to their previous posts! Especially Cheese.
I mean really...this new thread came about because of Iran threatening to stone a woman for adultery. (Now apparently pardoned) Any chance to take a swing right? Keep the links people, save CP the bandwidth!
Do you know what bugs me about these evangelical Athiests. Its that they won't let us crazy christians have our beliefs.
You know what we all know if you use only logic and reason and the scientific method that religion doesn't make sense. We don't care. We have developed a system of belief that gives us comfort and enjoyment in our lives. What is it that athiests find so threatening about this.
The answer always is that organized religion is a scourge and the organized religion is at fault for all of the worlds problems. While this may be true the individual religious person who gets lambasted by athiests has no control over what the top of the religion does. It is like holding a low level BP employee responsible for the oil spill just because they work there.
Beyond that organzied religion is used as a means of control. In the past we have had Nationalism, Racism, Communism and so on have all been used as a means to control people and deliver power to a small group of people. So if you got rid of religion and left the poverty in this world in place other means of control would develop that would give hope to the oppressed. The real solution to the moderation of religion is to lift people out of poverty. The attacking mentality of the evangelical athiests only serves to piss off moderates and galvanize the zealots. It may convert those on the fringe but they aren't the problem and the more you remove the moderates from the fold the more extreme the religion will become.
The Following User Says Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
when you tell me that a soul enters a zygote and therefore stem cell research had to be held back..
I always find this interesting. When does life began if not from conception. I sit on the religious side but eventually science will be able to grow life without a womb. So the question becomes at what point when the zygote divides to you call it life and protect it.
Heat beat? Brain activity? Conception to me really is the only cut and dry point. Any other point becomes an agrument akin to when is the soul installed during evolution.
Do you know what bugs me about these evangelical Athiests. Its that they won't let us crazy christians have our beliefs.
You got any examples of anyone not letting you have your beliefs?
Non-believers have been vilified, persecuted, and hell, even crucified for their beliefs for, well, forever.
We're maybe two decades into non-believers voicing their opinion and suddenly the believing majority is whining about the evil atheists ruining everything.
Have your beliefs all you want. Keep 'em to yourself and I guarantee the "evangelical atheists" will do the same.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to RougeUnderoos For This Useful Post:
You got any examples of anyone not letting you have your beliefs?
Non-believers have been vilified, persecuted, and hell, even crucified for their beliefs for, well, forever.
We're maybe two decades into non-believers voicing their opinion and suddenly the believing majority is whining about the evil atheists ruining everything.
Have your beliefs all you want. Keep 'em to yourself and I guarantee the "evangelical atheists" will do the same.
Dawkins is evangelical as any religious group. His mantra is not to get religion out of influencing politics his mantra is to discredit religion and eliminate belief. His focus is on pointing out the logical flaws in religion then essentially calling everyone who believes stupid is very similar to the believer or you are going to hell pitch of the southern evangelical christians.
I will also ask the question to you. When have you ever been persecuted for your non-belief. In canada this does not happen and when the discussion turns to Africa or even the Muslim world just blaming religion is a gross over simplification of the issue.
This board is a good example of the passive attack that occurs on idvidual christians. It really isn't socially acceptable to be religious outside of a religious group. Which is why most people just don't talk about it.
Dawkins is evangelical as any religious group. His mantra is not to get religion out of influencing politics his mantra is to discredit religion and eliminate belief. His focus is on pointing out the logical flaws in religion then essentially calling everyone who believes stupid is very similar to the believer or you are going to hell pitch of the southern evangelical christians.
I will also ask the question to you. When have you ever been persecuted for your non-belief. In canada this does not happen and when the discussion turns to Africa or even the Muslim world just blaming religion is a gross over simplification of the issue.
This board is a good example of the passive attack that occurs on idvidual christians. It really isn't socially acceptable to be religious outside of a religious group. Which is why most people just don't talk about it.
It doesnt have to be me thats persecuted. There are millions of cases of atrocities by the Christian faith, so many in fact that without these happening it would be highly likely you wouldn't even know about Christianity other than from your history class.
Why should we perpetuate a lie?
oh and...Dawkins speaks the facts, thats what pisses off the Christians, they have no answers for him, so the best thing that they can offer is "he is an atheist zealot" or evangelical atheist. We need thousands more just like him, and we are getting them.
Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence. Richard Dawkins
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. Richard Dawkins
Religion is about turning untested belief into unshakable truth through the power of institutions and the passage of time. Richard Dawkins
The theory of evolution by cumulative natural selection is the only theory we know of that is in principle capable of explaining the existence of organized complexity. Richard Dawkins
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference. Richard Dawkins
AND THE BEST..
We are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. Richard Dawkins
Last edited by Cheese; 07-09-2010 at 09:20 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Cheese For This Useful Post:
It doesnt have to be me thats persecuted. There are millions of cases of atrocities by the Christian faith, so many in fact that without these happening it would be highly likely you wouldn't even know about Christianity other than from your history class.
Why should we perpetuate a lie?
oh and...Dawkins speaks the facts, thats what pisses off the Christians, they have no answers for him, so the best thing that they can offer is "he is an atheist zealot" or evangelical atheist. We need thousands more just like him, and we are getting them.
With regards to these atrocities, is it your belief that they would of never of happened if religion was out of the equation?
What Im saying is that Christianity is responsible for these atrocities. What MAY have happened otherwise is pure speculation and we can never know where we would be now if left to grow naturally and with an open mind.
I hope it's science or computers, cause then I'll get in for sure.
