Many Christians DO Want You To Go To Hell

[David Sklansky]

It may not be because they hate you. But that doesn't change the fact that it would bother them greatly if they were to somehow find out that you or a loved one did not go to hell while remaining an unbeliever. Because if that were true it would mean that their religion was false.

Let's put it another way. Suppose God came to every Christian and said to them "I've been reading the 2+2 forums and some of this stuff that Sklansky has written is making a lot of sense to me. And I am considering changing my criteria for the afterlife. I think I am going to eliminate believing in me or Jesus or at least give it little weight, and I am going to put a lot of weight on the OVERALL behavior of a person. Instead of focusing merely on sins I will weigh them with good deeds. Extra weight will be given to good deeds late in life so as to make it a bit easier to make up for a sinful youth but only up to a point.(Of course babies, insane people and the like will recieve special consideration.)

Also after weighing things up, I won't decide between merely two alternatives. There will be gradations in rewards and punishments.

However before I make this change I decided it would only be fair if I put this idea to a vote to those who have been faithful to me. Furthermore I will make a concession to those elderly Christians who don't have time to adopt to this rule change suddenly sprung upon them. They get to use the old rules. Also I want you to vote your true preferance"

And if the referendum were to pass many of you and your loved ones will no longer be heading to hell. So regarding only those Christians who presently think that's where you are going, merely because of your unbelief, what percentage do you think would vote for the change?

[madnak]

Many Christians have said that to my face, David. C'mon now.

[chezlaw]

Nice post

The nasty fundementalists will tend to vote for traditional hell, the nice ones will tend to vote for your system. Essentially they have already voted.

chez

[r3vbr]

Why do insane people not go to hell?
What defines insane? Was Hitler insane?
"insane" is a cultural definition

like with drinking, until a few decades ago, drunks were lazy evil people.. now society views them as sick/an illness

same with crazy people

[surftheiop]

If God said "I think I am going to ..........."

I'd instantly agree .... he's God who am i to argue.

[madnak]

"I think I am going to send you to hell, surftheiop. How about that?"

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
"I think I am going to send you to hell, surftheiop. How about that?"

[/ QUOTE ]
/images/graemlins/smile.gif

I think we have to assume that god asks without influencing the result. He can do that you know.

chez

[surftheiop]

Two things
1) That would not be charectoristic of my God (given my belief and relationship with him) so we must be talking a "new" God.
2) If this new God (or changed God if you really want) in question was omniscient and the moral standard of the universe, then i would be forced to agree given that a God with these charectoristics cant be wrong.

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
Two things
1) That would not be charectoristic of my God (given my belief and relationship with him) so we must be talking a "new" God.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who are you to know the characteristics of God?

[ QUOTE ]
2) If this new God (or changed God if you really want) in question was omniscient and the moral standard of the universe, then i would be forced to agree given that a God with these charectoristics cant be wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, if a God with those characteristics says that he wants you to suffer for eternity in excruciating torment, but he'll let you off the hook if you disagree with him...

You'd go to hell over disputing God?

[FortunaMaximus]

[ QUOTE ]
You'd go to hell over disputing God?

[/ QUOTE ]

Dunno about him but I would to negate his positional advantage.

"You first."

An unholy war > oblivion.

[surftheiop]

Nice job changing the question,
In the case that God spelled out the way for me to be saved as "disagree with me and you will be saved"

I would of course disagree with him because he told me to.

[FortunaMaximus]

[ QUOTE ]
Nice job changing the question,
In the case that God spelled out the way for me to be saved as "disagree with me and you will be saved"

I would of course disagree with him because he told me to.

[/ QUOTE ]

And he's really not going to like you for that. /images/graemlins/frown.gif Set fire to his beard or something.

[David Sklansky]

"The nasty fundementalists will tend to vote for traditional hell, the nice ones will tend to vote for your system."

Again I'd change "nasty" to "lazy and weak willed"

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
"The nasty fundementalists will tend to vote for traditional hell, the nice ones will tend to vote for your system."

Again I'd change "nasty" to "lazy and weak willed"

[/ QUOTE ]
yes, I left out the word willful again, sorry.

chez

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
I would of course disagree with him because he told me to.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he wants you to go to hell. It's just that if you disagree he's willing to let you go to heaven. But he prefers that you go to hell.

[shemp]

[ QUOTE ]
So regarding only those Christians who presently think that's where you are going, merely because of your unbelief, what percentage do you think would vote for the change?

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps a better question is: how many would get confused by the ballot and vote to elect Pat Buchanan?

[A_C_Slater]

Let's also not forget that heaven is so much more rewarding and elitist when you know countless others are burning in hell. It's like getting into Studio 54 and then having the pleasure of mocking all your lame friends that weren't cool enough to get in, standing outside in the rain. What good is it if they let everyone in?

[A_C_Slater]

I would also like to add that it's quite predictable that a social species like the domesticated primates of Earth would find contentment in the idea of death as being something broken up into different social groups. I imagine an intelligent insectoid race on another world would find comfort in the idea of a collective afterlife. Or a reptilian race would find the concept of a solitary afterlife or no afterlife at all appealing.

[surftheiop]

Ok first off this is probaly even more ridiculous than the hypotheticals some posters (including me) come up with about AC.

I'll still attempt to field your question though. Im sure DS is gonna come kick my ass b/c ill probaly use some logical fallacies but hey its worth a try, maybe ill get lucky.

For me to feel obligation to the God i stated he would have to be omniscient and the moral standard.

So whatever he wants is right(moral standard) and because he is the moral standard he cant do wrong because everything he does is right.
So he is bound his own nature to either
1) Choose to want to send me to heaven
2) Send me to hell
He cant want to send me to hell but still send me to heaven or else he is doing wrong.

Basically the moral standard cant do something he doesnt want to.

[madnak]

If that's the case, then everything that happens must be God's will - including all human suffering. If God is omnibenevolent, then he doesn't want suffering to occur. If he doesn't want suffering to occur, and suffering does occur, then he is allowing a "wrong" to happen.

The typical answer to this is that when free will is involved, God keeps his hands off. So assume a similar condition applies to the hypothetical scenario - he wants you to go to hell, but the decision lies in your free will, and he won't interfere in that (even though he does want you to go to hell).

[thesnowman22]

Sins dont send people to hell. As Christians, you sin but are forgiven. While good works dont get u into Heaven, as a Christian you should be a role model and do good works. The people who "purposely" sin all the time I would argue may not truly be saved although we are human and have moments of weakness.

But I digress- sins dont send u to Hell.

[She]

[ QUOTE ]
If he doesn't want suffering to occur, and suffering does occur, then he is allowing a "wrong" to happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

*Sigh* I see this interpretation throughout most of DS's threads. Would someone please explain that there is no virtue w/o choice? It is in the same way that legislating morality does not make citizens moral (but merely obedient).

If we had no option to do evil, then there would be no value in the good that we do... If we had no choice but to love others (including God if you will), then there is no value in the love that we would show.

[Darryl_P]

[ QUOTE ]
And if the referendum were to pass many of you and your loved ones will no longer be heading to hell. So regarding only those Christians who presently think that's where you are going, merely because of your unbelief, what percentage do you think would vote for the change?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say a very small percentage. I guess that shows that they are sinners and that this would be yet another sin they are committing. And if some of these sinners educated themselves in probability and read your various posts on SMP very carefully, then they might even become fully aware of the sin themselves. That would then enable them to repent and serve God in a better way.

Is this what you're trying to get them to do, or am I missing the point of this OP?

[revots33]

[ QUOTE ]
And if the referendum were to pass many of you and your loved ones will no longer be heading to hell. So regarding only those Christians who presently think that's where you are going, merely because of your unbelief, what percentage do you think would vote for the change?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think most Christians would vote for the change, quite honestly. I'm not even sure how many run-of-the-mill Christians really believe that good people go to hell just for unbelief. Althought the official doctrine says differently, most people's innate sense of justice overrides this and assumes a good person will not burn in hell.

Taken another way, let's say Christian parents have an atheist son. They love their son, and he lives a life of good deeds, sacrifice, and service to others. How many of these parents REALLY think their son is going to burn in hell forever? Only the strictest fundies, I'd bet. And if god will make an exception for a relative who's lived a good life, he must make the same exception for all who've lived good lives.

[FortunaMaximus]

Why assume things when you can test 'em forever? Hmm.

[KUJustin]

This is one of the more ridiculous things I've seen since I started checking out this forum.

I think with a full understanding of sin and it's ramifications it would be possible to see that none of us will be going to anything like heaven under this "new system." As such I would vote for the current standard.

I feel like it's almost blasphemous to even answer this question.

[David Sklansky]

"I think most Christians would vote for the change, quite honestly. I'm not even sure how many run-of-the-mill Christians really believe that good people go to hell just for unbelief. Althought the official doctrine says differently, most people's innate sense of justice overrides this and assumes a good person will not burn in hell."

Shhh. You are right of course but your statement messes this forum.

[David Sklansky]

"Is this what you're trying to get them to do, or am I missing the point of this OP?"

I am trying to get stoke victims, who could help themselves a lot with physical therapy, admit that they are paralyzed.

[kleath]

Why is it okay to be ignorant on this forum if your name is in red?

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
"I think most Christians would vote for the change, quite honestly. I'm not even sure how many run-of-the-mill Christians really believe that good people go to hell just for unbelief. Althought the official doctrine says differently, most people's innate sense of justice overrides this and assumes a good person will not burn in hell."

Shhh. You are right of course but your statement messes this forum.

[/ QUOTE ]
Also you have to assume that god doesn't appear to ask them the question as if they actually started believing god existed that would change their view of the world completely.

chez

[JayTee]

[ QUOTE ]
Why is it okay to be ignorant on this forum if your name is in red?

[/ QUOTE ]

DS is in red because he is the standard of intelligence that everything in the 2+2 universe is measured against. Therefore, DS can not be ignorant. It is heresy to claim that DS's intelligence is governed by an anterior definition. If you don't believe me just have faith.

[brashbrother]

Sorry for the "lurker post", I've been reading a few of these religious debate forums with great fascination.

DS, you strike me as someone who might believe there is an afterlife, but nobody (or at least not a religious group) has the "correct secret recipe" on how to get there...am I close?

If not, please forgive, maybe I have not lurked long enough.

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
Would someone please explain that there is no virtue w/o choice?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you just did.

[jstnrgrs]

I have been around Christians who believe that non-believers are going to hell my whole life (i am 27). I am very confident that >95% would vote in favor of not sending people to hell.


FWIW, I would describe myself as a Christian who does not necessarily believe that all non-believers are going to hell.

[She]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not even sure how many run-of-the-mill Christians really believe that good people go to hell just for unbelief

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm... let's see. So, let me get this right. If you don't go to hell "just for unbelief" then you would be going to hell for... what, being "bad"? Come on, let's think about this now... Where exactly would you draw the line between who is good and who is "bad"? Well, obviously you would put child rapists, murders, probably regular rapists.. maybe even thieves in this category. What about liars? Are they bad? keep in mind this could encompass embezzlement and cross the border into theft and sometimes grand theft. So, is that bad? Well, what if you do it just a little bit less, is it still bad? What about a little bit less? What if you don't think it'll hurt anyone? Gets a little hazy doesn't it??

So where do you draw the line? Oh, wait a minute.... you don't. You're not God. Morality didn't originate w/ you. You aren't the deciding factor. (Sorry Dave)

So, now you have someone else who set the moral standard.. or even made the laws if you will (moral as well as physical). And you two options. Either you can choose to abide by the moral laws that he put in place, or you can choose not to. Totally up to you. That's where free will comes in.

Granted, God could choose to make everything acceptable.. to go completely w/o laws (which I personally think would be quite chaotic, especially in the physical realm)... but, as I brought up before, there is no virtue without the option to do wrong. If he forces your obedience... if he forces your love, then it has absolutely no value. So there must be an alternative. And laws without penalties are merely suggestions.

So... now what? Well obviously we have moral laws to separate good and evil.... and we have reasons and penalties for those laws, which are set in place by an absolute authority. Ok? That doesn't seem to be too hard.

Then, according to the christian faith we apparently have this God who is merciful as well as just and actually willing to pay the penalty himself. You know.. for these laws he put in place so that our virtue would actually have some meaning. Which I think is totally great. If I get a parking ticket, and someone else offers to pay the fine for me... but I refuse, should I still have to pay it?? Well no, of course not. That's completely unfair. Just because I refuse to obey the law, and I refuse to allow someone else to pay the penalty for me doesn't mean that I should have to pay it myself, does it??

Come on... "Just for unbelief"... What the hell do expect!? Disagree with me. I dare you.
She


*I hate using the word "bad" here, because it sounds like such an elementary term. Also, please feel free to ignore me if you don't believe in an absolute God.

As far as people that never get a chance to "hear about Jesus"... I personally think that God will not hold them accountable for what they do not, or are unable to know. I also think that he would find another way to reach them. How, I don't know... but those are my personally beliefs and not relevant to this particular topic.

[Prodigy54321]

[ QUOTE ]
Hmm... let's see. So, let me get this right. If you don't go to hell "just for unbelief" then you would be going to hell for... what, being "bad"? Come on, let's think about this now... Where exactly would you draw the line between who is good and who is "bad"? Well, obviously you would put child rapists, murders, probably regular rapists.. maybe even thieves in this category. What about liars? Are they bad? keep in mind this could encompass embezzlement and cross the border into theft and sometimes grand theft. So, is that bad? Well, what if you do it just a little bit less, is it still bad? What about a little bit less? What if you don't think it'll hurt anyone? Gets a little hazy doesn't it??

So where do you draw the line? Oh, wait a minute.... you don't. You're not God. Morality didn't originate w/ you. You aren't the deciding factor. (Sorry Dave)

[/ QUOTE ]

good suggestions..you should share them with this god..so why doesn't this god choose a meaningful place to draw the line instead of throwing it all away and deciding instead that it will be based on some arbitrary requirement of believing that he exists..

at least if he draws the line on subjects that you talked about, it would at least have a chance to benefit humanity...a benevolent god would do this, but instead he chooses some random requirement that doesn't help his creations, but rather feeds His ego.

[FortunaMaximus]

[ QUOTE ]
Come on... "Just for unbelief"... What the hell do expect!? Disagree with me. I dare you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would, but that's a very complete argument.

[ QUOTE ]
Then, according to the christian faith we apparently have this God who is merciful as well as just and actually willing to pay the penalty himself.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is fallacious though. Because to take that choice initally, he knows the results, even if he can censor himself for the lifetime. So what was his primary motivation here?

[She]

[ QUOTE ]
so why doesn't this god choose a meaningful place to draw the line instead of throwing it all away and deciding instead that it will be based on some arbitrary requirement of believing that he exists.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) Apparently what you consider meaningful, and what he considers meaningful are two different things. I wonder which has more authority?

2) According to the christian view he dosen't, and it isn't. Allow me to use a quote... "You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe--and tremble!" (James 2:19)

[She]

[ QUOTE ]
This is fallacious though. Because to take that choice initally, he knows the results, even if he can censor himself for the lifetime. So what was his primary motivation here?

[/ QUOTE ]
Perhaps his primary modivation was to give meaning to love and virtue? I am merely guessing here as I'm not sure I understand the question.

[FortunaMaximus]

It's a nice causality impact for a significant phase in a civilization's development.

Regardless, you answered the right interpretation of the right question. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Prodigy54321]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so why doesn't this god choose a meaningful place to draw the line instead of throwing it all away and deciding instead that it will be based on some arbitrary requirement of believing that he exists.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) Apparently what you consider meaningful, and what he considers meaningful are two different things. I wonder which has more authority?

2) According to the christian view he dosen't, and it isn't. Allow me to use a quote... "You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe--and tremble!" (James 2:19)

[/ QUOTE ]

I explained in the section below what you quoted that what I consider meaningful is the one which benefits humanity...I agree that god may be of the opinion that his (what I call arbitrary) requirement is actually the meaningful one..but if that is the case, he is not benevolent...

I call it "arbitrary" because.. it seems to do harm to humanity..so who does it benefit?..God?..not only does that seem to not be benevolent, but since god can in no way actually be affected by it, it cannot benefit him..

I can see no way of getting around having to convince me that god's requirement of belief over good deeds is beneficial to the world

[dknightx]

salvation does not come at the mere BELIEF of Christ ... it seems strange that people who do not even understand 1% of the bible/gospel claim to be experts on how they think God should act ...

not to say your argument has no merit ... in fact it is a really good argument, unfortunately it does not apply to the Christian God. I have to take off now, but hopefully I'll have time to elaborate tomorrow (if you truly want me to)

[revots33]

[ QUOTE ]
Hmm... let's see. So, let me get this right. If you don't go to hell "just for unbelief" then you would be going to hell for... what, being "bad"? Come on, let's think about this now... Where exactly would you draw the line between who is good and who is "bad"? Well, obviously you would put child rapists, murders, probably regular rapists.. maybe even thieves in this category. What about liars? Are they bad? keep in mind this could encompass embezzlement and cross the border into theft and sometimes grand theft. So, is that bad? Well, what if you do it just a little bit less, is it still bad? What about a little bit less? What if you don't think it'll hurt anyone? Gets a little hazy doesn't it??

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it does get a little hazy. I guess we should put all criminals in the electric chair, mass murderers and income tax cheats alike. Much too confusing to try and assign relative punishments to all the different bad stuff people might do!

Yes, there are degrees of "goodness" and "badness" in people. Or at least, some live their lives in a more "good" fashion than others. But if anyone can accurately judge all these gradations of good and evil, it's god! Why would he throw the minor offenders into eternal torment along with Hitler and Ted Bundy?

And what if a non-believer just happens to live his life in EXACTLY the moral way god wants him to? He's following all god's moral laws, he's a saint in fact - and he doesn't even realize it. God still sends this guy to hell? If that is true, then your arguments about god being the moral authority are meaningless. It's clear he cares more about being worshiped than whether his creations live according to his moral laws.

[Prodigy54321]

[ QUOTE ]
salvation does not come at the mere BELIEF of Christ ... it seems strange that people who do not even understand 1% of the bible/gospel claim to be experts on how they think God should act ...

not to say your argument has no merit ... in fact it is a really good argument, unfortunately it does not apply to the Christian God. I have to take off now, but hopefully I'll have time to elaborate tomorrow (if you truly want me to)

[/ QUOTE ]

true..

if I were to change the parts where I say "belief that he exists" or "belief in Him" or something to that effect to.."accept jesus as your savior" (basically not rejecting his sacrifice) instead I still think my argument is valid

you still must believe that he exists in order to "accept" Him..

and still, "accepting Him" seems arbitrary in the same sense that I said it before

and I still consider this requirement less meaningful for the same reasons..

I have a feeling that this will boil down to god's nature vs. sinful nature..which, to me, seems to create more problems that it helps

[ QUOTE ]
I have to take off now, but hopefully I'll have time to elaborate tomorrow (if you truly want me to)

[/ QUOTE ]

sure I do..contrary to what some may think, I enjoy being corrected on the views held by christians..the views I usually use are those of most christians that I do know, but obviouly not all christians hold the same views on every subject..so there are often many different things to cover even when talking only about the christian god.

[She]

[ QUOTE ]
...what I consider meaningful is the one which benefits humanity.

[/ QUOTE ]
Perhaps you might care to consider that if there is a God, then it is highly unlikely that humanity is the center of the universe?

[ QUOTE ]
I call it "arbitrary" because.. it seems to do harm to humanity..so who does it benefit?..God?..not only does that seem to not be benevolent, but since god can in no way actually be affected by it, it cannot benefit him..

[/ QUOTE ]
Is it harmful to humanity to give them options and a free will to choose which way they will go? Is it harmful to humanity to punish all people for a wrong choice that they some will make? Should God deprive all people of the freedom of choice, just because someone else is going to commit murder? I personally don't think so.

I don't like to argue on behalf of God's benevolence, because I think he is first just, then merciful... and that he can only be benevolent when it is not self contradictory. However, I personally believe that being benevolent may include what some people call "tough love." It would not be loving, or benevolent, to deprive choice from a person based on what another may or may not do. It would not even be loving to deprive a person of the ability to do good, because they may choose to do evil.

It is my personal opinion that freedom is more important that safety... A quote that is commonly attributed to Ben Franklin says that "He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither" ... Now, I don't particularly agree with the deserving part, but I think it is clear that he values freedom over mere safety. I would certainly prefer a god who would give me the freedom to make my own mistakes, rather than a dictatorship style god who gives me no alternative (literally) but to worship him. I would also prefer a god who would allow me to decide to do what I think "benefits" me... even if to do that there must be consequents when I am wrong. There can be no choice without options.

And that is where I believe it benefits God as well. If he gave us no choice but to do good and have a relationship w/ him then our good deeds and relationship w/ him would be meaningless. I see no logical reason to desire a forced, meaningless relationship. Do you?

[ QUOTE ]
I can see no way of getting around having to convince me that god's requirement of belief over good deeds is beneficial to the world

[/ QUOTE ]
That's fine, because I don't believe that he has any such requirement.

[Prodigy54321]

dknightx pointed out my stupid error which was made out of my haste

does that change anything..like this

[ QUOTE ]
That's fine, because I don't believe that he has any such requirement.

[/ QUOTE ]

surely he has the requirement I changed it to...unless we separate him from his actions again /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[She]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, there are degrees of "goodness" and "badness" in people.... Why would he throw the minor offenders into eternal torment along with Hitler and Ted Bundy?

[/ QUOTE ]
Apparently there are some christians who believe that there are different levels of heaven and hell, and that God's justice system is much more intricate than ours. I have never studied it. I would however like to point out, that you are still basing this on your moral standard and not Gods, who I tend to think might happen to be the authority here. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[ QUOTE ]
And what if a non-believer just happens to live his life in EXACTLY the moral way god wants him to? He's following all god's moral laws, he's a saint in fact - and he doesn't even realize it. God still sends this guy to hell?

[/ QUOTE ]
Don't know the answer to that one. I don't see why he would, but that's just me.

[Prodigy54321]

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps you might care to consider that if there is a God, then it is highly unlikely that humanity is the center of the universe?

[/ QUOTE ]

why is that?..I don't believe there is any evidence in scripture that suggests that god created other (more or equally important) creatures..

and if they do exist, I believe the same argument applies to their situation..they would suffer the same harm from god's chosed requirement over one that benefits them...unless they have developed some way to suck benefits from "accepting god and jesus"

[FortunaMaximus]

[ QUOTE ]
why is that?..I don't believe there is any evidence in scripture that suggests that god created other (more or equally important) creatures..

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to redirect the discussion, but to interject:

Can you allow for the possibility that Scripture is a human interpretation of the possibility of God, if not the probability?

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
Why would he throw the minor offenders into eternal torment along with Hitler and Ted Bundy?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is fairly common Christian belief that Heaven is not one-size fits all, but has different levels of reward based on works. I don't think it's a stretch to believe that hell would be any different.

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps you might care to consider that if there is a God, then it is highly unlikely that humanity is the center of the universe?

[/ QUOTE ]

why is that?..I don't believe there is any evidence in scripture that suggests that god created other (more or equally important) creatures..


[/ QUOTE ]

I think she was implying that God himself would be the center of the universe, not his creation.

[Prodigy54321]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps you might care to consider that if there is a God, then it is highly unlikely that humanity is the center of the universe?

[/ QUOTE ]

why is that?..I don't believe there is any evidence in scripture that suggests that god created other (more or equally important) creatures..


[/ QUOTE ]

I think she was implying that God himself would be the center of the universe, not his creation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I considered that..

but this god is then takes fulfillment of his own desires over our well-being..this doesn't sound like a benevolent god.

and since god cannot really be affected by this fulfillment of desires (can he even have desires since if he does, that means he is at some point imperfect?)..it is simply cruel to do anything other than do what is best for humanity

[Prodigy54321]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why is that?..I don't believe there is any evidence in scripture that suggests that god created other (more or equally important) creatures..

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to redirect the discussion, but to interject:

Can you allow for the possibility that Scripture is a human interpretation of the possibility of God, if not the probability?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what you mean..

[PairTheBoard]

The last person to get into heaven will be the last person who insists that someone must go to hell.

PairTheBoard

[FortunaMaximus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why is that?..I don't believe there is any evidence in scripture that suggests that god created other (more or equally important) creatures..

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to redirect the discussion, but to interject:

Can you allow for the possibility that Scripture is a human interpretation of the possibility of God, if not the probability?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what you mean..

[/ QUOTE ]

Where'd the concept of God come from? Was it always inherent in the structure of the Universe or was it an necessary invention for the evolution of humanity?

[kleath]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why would he throw the minor offenders into eternal torment along with Hitler and Ted Bundy?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is fairly common Christian belief that Heaven is not one-size fits all, but has different levels of reward based on works.

[/ QUOTE ]

No its not.

[txag007]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why would he throw the minor offenders into eternal torment along with Hitler and Ted Bundy?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is fairly common Christian belief that Heaven is not one-size fits all, but has different levels of reward based on works.

[/ QUOTE ]

No its not.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, it is.

Matthew 16:27
1 Corinthians 3:7-8
1 Corinthians 3:13-15

[Toddy]

When someone tells me they're a born again Christian I immediately don't trust them

[txag007]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And what if a non-believer just happens to live his life in EXACTLY the moral way god wants him to? He's following all god's moral laws, he's a saint in fact - and he doesn't even realize it. God still sends this guy to hell?

[/ QUOTE ]
Don't know the answer to that one. I don't see why he would, but that's just me.

[/ QUOTE ]
What you are describing, revots, is impossible. It is because of our sinful nature that "all have sin and fallen short of the glory of God". (Romans 3:23)

Look at the "heroes" of the Old Testament: Moses was murderer. David committed adultery. In fact, there are only one or two Old Testament characters about which the Bible does not describe some major sin. Why? Because they were born with the sinful nature that God gave Adam & Eve when he kicked them out of Eden.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
When someone tells me they're a born again Christian I immediately don't trust them

[/ QUOTE ]
We have good reason not to trust anyone who adamantly believes that non-believers will go to hell.

Either they worship a god they believe to be bad or they believe its good that non-believers should go to hell. Either way they definitely should not be trusted.

chez

[She]

[ QUOTE ]
What you are describing, revots, is impossible.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why is that? Even if it had never been done, would that make it impossible?

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, there are only one or two Old Testament characters about which the Bible does not describe some major sin.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm guessing you're talking about Enoch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enoch_%28ancestor_of_Noah%29) and Elijah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elijah) ?

[revots33]

[ QUOTE ]
And what if a non-believer just happens to live his life in EXACTLY the moral way god wants him to? He's following all god's moral laws, he's a saint in fact - and he doesn't even realize it. God still sends this guy to hell?


Don't know the answer to that one. I don't see why he would, but that's just me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does this not back up my argument, then, that most Christians do not think a good person would be denied heaven "just for unbelief"?

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And what if a non-believer just happens to live his life in EXACTLY the moral way god wants him to? He's following all god's moral laws, he's a saint in fact - and he doesn't even realize it. God still sends this guy to hell?


Don't know the answer to that one. I don't see why he would, but that's just me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does this not back up my argument, then, that most Christians do not think a good person would be denied heaven "just for unbelief"?

[/ QUOTE ]

revots,

My quick summation of the view of the Catholic Church, is that the surest way to achieve Heaven is the way as outlined by Scripture and the teachings of the Church. However, the Church doesn't say that there is no chance that people who dont follow these teachings will achieve heaven. Thats a very crude summation but suffices for the purpose of this discussion.

Frankly, I find the OP baffling. I cant imagine why someone would pick the choice that would send more people to Hell, but Im quite sure Im just missing the point that David was trying to make.

[txag007]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And what if a non-believer just happens to live his life in EXACTLY the moral way god wants him to? He's following all god's moral laws, he's a saint in fact - and he doesn't even realize it. God still sends this guy to hell?


Don't know the answer to that one. I don't see why he would, but that's just me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does this not back up my argument, then, that most Christians do not think a good person would be denied heaven "just for unbelief"?

[/ QUOTE ]
What defines a good person? By that argument, a good person would have to be completely sinless.

For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. James 2:10

For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Romans 3:23

18I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. Romans 7:18

[txag007]

[ QUOTE ]
Why is that? Even if it had never been done, would that make it impossible?


[/ QUOTE ]
I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. Romans 7:18

[ QUOTE ]
I'm guessing you're talking about Enoch and Elijah?

[/ QUOTE ]
I was actually thinking of Joseph and Joshua.

[TxRedMan]

David,

When I read the part about "i've been reading 2p2 and some of the stuff Sklansky has written and it makes a lot of sense"

First thought: maybe the most blasphemous thing i've ever read

Second thought: arrogance at it's highest form

Then I read the rest of it, and I would like to agree with certain principles. I am a Christian, although I am not highly educated in theology, yet. It's something that I want to learn, and have made steps to do so. I find a lot of flaws in things said by religous leaders. I cannot help but know that man wrote the bible, and that it is man who translates the stories. Man is not perfect, which leads me to the conclusion that it is up to each individual to seek the truth themselves, and not leave a matter that is of such paramount importance in the hands of another.

I have often wondered what God does to his people that have not heard his word, nor ever seen a bible or a church. Same goes for the insane, mentally retarded, and the children who die at birth.


In response to your question, I think that most christians would not accept this proposition unless it came directly from God. If Jesus were to come again and another testament to the bible were written, I believe that those who followed the older version would immediately adopt the new.


There are so many problems with religion. Human error and human nature has polluted it. I prefer to keep my religion to myself, because of the contentious nature that arises among even the smallest of disagreements and the unmatched superiority complexes that seemingly thrive in many sections of all faiths.

[bkholdem]

I thought they wanted poeple to go to heaven.

[FortunaMaximus]

If they don't, they're going to Hell.

Greed.

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
maybe the most blasphemous thing i've ever read

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't hang out around here much, do ya?