Your duty to kill those guaranteed to go to Heaven

[Brad1970]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The argument is obvious, but it relies on a definition of morality (ie on what the correct course of action is) based on maximising happiness or some such. Most christians (particularly those who believe in hell) dont think this is the right way to determine what is moral.

[/ QUOTE ]

Should there be a "Christian" who doesn't believe in hell?

[/ QUOTE ]
I call myself a christian but I dont believe in hell (eternal suffering doesnt fit in well with the loving god I believe in). I think everyone is saved.

Given the dominance of americans here, I am happy to accept that I may not be a christian from the point of view of this board - in Australia and more specifically in the church I attend I am regarded as a christian (although admittedly the various ministers I know think I have a strange and probably flawed way of looking at things).

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I tend to agree with them!!!!

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I tend to agree with them!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]
An all-loving God torturing some flawed beings for eternity on the grounds that they didnt believe in him makes sense to you?

[Brad1970]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I tend to agree with them!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]
An all-loving God torturing some flawed beings for eternity on the grounds that they didnt believe in him makes sense to you?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what the scripture says. And we're all flawed.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I tend to agree with them!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]
An all-loving God torturing some flawed beings for eternity on the grounds that they didnt believe in him makes sense to you?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what the scripture says. And we're all flawed.

[/ QUOTE ]
I understand we're all flawed - God understands it even better. That's why it seems impossible to me that an all-loving God would make a whole bunch of humans, know that some of them will not be able to believe in him and then choose to torture those incapable of belief for eternity. My personal view is that he loves us enough to make sure we wouldnt suffer and to forgive all of us for sinning.

Regarding scripture - I dont believe the bible is inerrant as it has been in the custody of flawed humans with political and selfish agendas for many centuries, nonetheless which verse(s) do you regard as giving the clearest message that there is a hell?

[Silent A]

[ QUOTE ]
My only point is that the believer would dispute this. There is no bigger picture, which provides a completely legitimate reason for them not acting counter to God's instructions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most would dispute it, but not all. And their reason for disputing it is pretty lame, in my opinion.

[ QUOTE ]
You would (I suspect) believe that morality is subjective or a question of opinion. For a believer there is no opinion involved other than God's. He says dont do it so (to them) it is immoral to do it - even if it results in reduced suffering.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I'm of the opinion that it's possible to derive simple, basic (even if incomplete) objective morals without reference to some powerful being. Something in the mold of "ideal observer theory".

In fact, I would argue that it's theistic morals that are subjective because they depend on the whim of an individual entity.

So, by objective moral standards, if the traditional Christian God exists and really sends innocents to heaven and sinners to Hell (very big IF), the person in question is profoundly moral.

[bunny]

*shrug* I cant say it any more ways.

Certainly if:
1. There is a God torturing sinners and not torturing innocents.
and
2. Morality is determined by something else other than God's wishes (like minimising suffering for instance).

then

The moral course of action is to ensure as many innocents die before they can become sinners.

This is an obvious argument. The trouble is, nobody believes the two premises.

[Brad1970]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I tend to agree with them!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]
An all-loving God torturing some flawed beings for eternity on the grounds that they didnt believe in him makes sense to you?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what the scripture says. And we're all flawed.

[/ QUOTE ]
I understand we're all flawed - God understands it even better. That's why it seems impossible to me that an all-loving God would make a whole bunch of humans, know that some of them will not be able to believe in him and then choose to torture those incapable of belief for eternity. My personal view is that he loves us enough to make sure we wouldnt suffer and to forgive all of us for sinning.

Regarding scripture - I dont believe the bible is inerrant as it has been in the custody of flawed humans with political and selfish agendas for many centuries, nonetheless which verse(s) do you regard as giving the clearest message that there is a hell?

[/ QUOTE ]

God didn't design us flawed. When Eve ate the forbidden fruit, sin entered the world. God gave us a choice of whether to believe in Jesus or not. He is not forcing himself on anyone but it's a free gift of salvation all for the asking. I made a post or two early today (maybe yesterday) to this same effect. Take a peek at those, maybe that'll help.

While your optimism is admirable, most people are perfectly capable from a intelligence standpoint to understand the Word of God & make their own choices. Don't you think that some folks around here are perfectly capable but choose not to??? Those that are not capable (i.e. children, mentally disabled) get a free pass. This too is well documented in the Bible.

I would encourage you to look at Revelation as a point of reference for hell. I don't have my Bible in front of me at the moment but I will be glad to look them up for you tomorrow (about to go to bed!!!).

Also, there are several indications prior to Revelation that Hell is a real place. Jesus referred to it as a place of weeping & gnashing of teeth. Once again, I will look some of those up later.

And I agree with your assesment that the Bible is the infallible Word of God but has been interpreted various ways by humans with political/selfish agendas. How do you think we wound up with so many variations of the same religion. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[Silent A]

[ QUOTE ]
This is an obvious argument. The trouble is, nobody believes the two premises.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, some do. Namely people who kill their children precisely for this reason.

It's rare but it happens.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
God didn't design us flawed. When Eve ate the forbidden fruit, sin entered the world.

[/ QUOTE ]
But he made her knowing she would choose to eat the fruit and thus sin. He also knew that a consequence of creating us was that there would be some people who would live their lives failing to acknowledge his existence.

[ QUOTE ]
While your optimism is admirable, most people are perfectly capable from a intelligence standpoint to understand the Word of God & make their own choices. Don't you think that some folks around here are perfectly capable but choose not to??? Those that are not capable (i.e. children, mentally disabled) get a free pass. This too is well documented in the Bible.

[/ QUOTE ]
What about people who attempt to form their opinions based on objective evidence alone? Who regard it as immoral to profess belief in something they dont actually agree with? (I think these would both apply to most of the atheists on this forum) In my experience, you cant force yourself to believe anything, regardless of the consequences or of how much you want to believe it.

[ QUOTE ]
I would encourage you to look at Revelation as a point of reference for hell. I don't have my Bible in front of me at the moment but I will be glad to look them up for you tomorrow (about to go to bed!!!).

Also, there are several indications prior to Revelation that Hell is a real place. Jesus referred to it as a place of weeping & gnashing of teeth. Once again, I will look some of those up later.

[/ QUOTE ]
My recollection is that it is actually a smattering of references all over the place, welded together as a unified doctrine through interpretation (a doctrine which coincidentally strengthened the church's power in earlier times) but not explicitly set out as such. Given my experience/belief in a loving god, I think alternative explanations are more likely than eternal torment for some (even most on some interpretations of the bible).

[ QUOTE ]
And I agree with your assesment that the Bible is the infallible Word of God but has been interpreted various ways by humans with political/selfish agendas. How do you think we wound up with so many variations of the same religion. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
This raises a problem for you, I think. How do you determine which interpretation is correct? It seems to me that catholics have the best answer to this (though I think they run into their own problems)

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is an obvious argument. The trouble is, nobody believes the two premises.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, some do. Namely people who kill their children precisely for this reason.

It's rare but it happens.

[/ QUOTE ]
Perhaps I misunderstood the OP. I have heard this argument a few times here and it usually follows the "All christians should murder newborns" line. My counterargument is that this is false, since most christians reject the second premise.

If the OP's point was merely that some people follow this logic and commit infanticide then I agree that it happens (and I also think they are doing the wrong thing). I dont see the point, but I am prone to that.