Can Not Ready Argue Against This?

[David Sklansky]

Not Ready has stated several times that those Christians who believe that non Christians are sometimes saved, are not jeapardizing their own chances with such beliefs.

I think that some Fundamentalists do not agree with Not Ready and thus believe that the above Christians can not be saved. (And the mathmetician in me wonders if there are even Christians who believe that Not Ready cant't be saved because of his generous attitude toward generous Chritians. But I'm getting off the subject.) But it is my impression that most Protestants agree with NR. Call them NRPs.

Anyway my point is that NRPs should be scouring the bible to make triply sure that Catholics and other generous Christians are wrong. If they don't, they have to look in the mirror and ask themselves why. For surely any nice person would, if it was up to them, PREFER that the Catholics are right and that some good, if misguided, non Christians, get into heaven. Don't forget that as NRPs they don't believe there is any danger in this belief. So they should prefer it as long as the bible allows it.

If they admit to themselves that they do not prefer it, they should do some soul searching about what really drives them.

[keith123]

why would a believer need to make triply sure that non-believers get to heaven? maybe they should make triply sure that belief alone is sufficient.

maybe everybody gets to heaven, and belief and works are totally irrelevant. does that mean that religious people should scour their texts looking for a viewpoint that supports that?

they've made an interpretation that they think is correct. if less is needed to get to heaven than they currently think, then they should be able to get there anyway.

[Paragon]

I think you might have missed something in the OP.

My interpretation was (or at least my opinion is) that any moral person would never wish eternal suffering upon anyone. Consequently, any moral person would hope that other people could avoid hell regardless of whether they subscribe to their flavor of fantasy or not.

Therefore, if holding such a belief will not jeopardize anyone's chance of acceptance into heaven, then everyone should hope that non-believers have a chance themselves. However, other people do exist that are against this position. The burden is on them to find strong evidence to support this contrary perspective. Otherwise, everyone else should be curious as to what their true motives are for advocating such a disgusting claim.

[David Sklansky]

Perfect stated summary. Remind me not to challenge you to the Verbal SAT.

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
My interpretation was (or at least my opinion is) that any moral person would never wish eternal suffering upon anyone. Consequently, any moral person would hope that other people could avoid hell regardless of whether they subscribe to their flavor of fantasy or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

well said. the essence of what you just expressed is also clearly stated several times in scripture as god's wish as well. god wants everyone to arrive at the centrifuge with as much value as possible and as little waste as possible.

[ QUOTE ]
Therefore, if holding such a belief will not jeopardize anyone's chance of acceptance into heaven, then everyone should hope that non-believers have a chance themselves. However, other people do exist that are against this position. The burden is on them to find strong evidence to support this contrary perspective. Otherwise, everyone else should be curious as to what their true motives are for advocating such a disgusting claim.

[/ QUOTE ]

terrorism. the experience of wielding the power of fear.

there have always been only 2 strategies for telling others about the centrifuge process:

a) terrorize them into self-interested fear of waste
b) attract them toward self-interested want of value

both strategies have their place.
notready misses the mark by persuing the terrorist strategy amongst people that are probably not major waste producers.

he should instead be visiting prisons and talking to the big waste producers. the "be-afraid-of-your-waste" message does have it's place in this world. notready is not incorrect for properly stating that both the old and new testament advocate a strategy of "avoiding-waste"

where he misses the mark is by not understanding that god does not use a pass/fail system upon the granularity of a whole life; he is flat out wrong when he claims that a neutral stance on jesus somehow transmutes ones entire life to "waste"; at most, he can claim that a neutral stance will not produce as much value for the centrifuge as a faith stance - he can correctly state that his faith stance produces value for the centrifuge and david's neutral stance does not.

notready is correct in stating that the new testament considers any anti-christ stance as guaranteed waste product. he is incorrect if he claims that temporal anti-christ granular emotive act transmutes the sum of that entire life to waste; it does not (the apostle paul was an anti-christ before his conversion).

by this same idea, any christian that claims that - a conversion to christ transmutes all previous waste to value - is just plain wrong. a convicted child molester that converts to faith in christ is guaranteed to have 100% of his waste memories obliterated by the centrifuge; it's not possible to discuss a rational heaven where this guy brings all of his memories and experiences in tact with him into a place where there is supposed to be exceptional quality of existence.

"peace on earth ... good will toward men"

ray

[Lestat]

Maybe I live in a cave or my reading comprehension is poor, but I don't recall any Christian saying that they look forward to others burning in hell. Not publicly anyway. On the contrary, prominent Christians preach the way to salvation, don't they?

The problem is, you can't change a belief, as hideous, rude, or insulting as it may be. Many of these people's beliefs are deeply-rooted as a result of very thorough brainwashing. Your efforts (I think), are better spent on logically showing why these beliefs are unlikely to be correct, than through attacks on their morality or intelligence.

If I truly believe you are going to hell, because of what you do or don't do, then that's what I believe regardless of what names you call me. I don't care if you think it's rude or that I'm unintelligent. It's what I believe. Show me how to reason so that I'm not bound by such an irrational belief and progress can be made.

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I live in a cave or my reading comprehension is poor, but I don't recall any Christian saying that they look forward to others burning in hell. Not publicly anyway. On the contrary, prominent Christians preach the way to salvation, don't they?

The problem is, you can't change a belief, as hideous, rude, or insulting as it may be. Many of these people's beliefs are deeply-rooted as a result of very thorough brainwashing. Your efforts (I think), are better spent on logically showing why these beliefs are unlikely to be correct, than through attacks on their morality or intelligence.

If I truly believe you are going to hell, because of what you do or don't do, then that's what I believe regardless of what names you call me. I don't care if you think it's rude or that I'm unintelligent. It's what I believe. Show me how to reason so that I'm not bound by such an irrational belief and progress can be made.

[/ QUOTE ]

i have personally encountered those that have expressed something very close to the following:

"i need hell to exist so that i can torture those i cannot forgive"

anybody that has ever felt the urge for vengeance is essentially aligned with the comment above even if for a brief moment.

the new testament teaching of grace is that the centrifuge equally erases (without differentiated malice) both an act of $5 theft and an act of rape. (btw this is good news to major waste producers)

the punitive hell/purgatory teaching is the strategy of adding waste memories to the subject as a means of dealing with their waste - some of these strategies hold that there are different degrees of hell so as to address the need to punish the $5 thief differently than the rapist. this is about as lo tech as you can get.

every human past present and future will encounter the centrifuge - it is the ultimate objective standard capable of sorting at the quantum level.

ray bornert

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

every human past present and future will encounter the centrifuge - it is the ultimate objective standard capable of sorting at the quantum level.


[/ QUOTE ]

Who's in charge of the centrifuge or who made it? What does the centrifuge do with acts that are outwardly good but done for evil motives?

[David Sklansky]

"Maybe I live in a cave or my reading comprehension is poor, but I don't recall any Christian saying that they look forward to others burning in hell. Not publicly anyway. On the contrary, prominent Christians preach the way to salvation, don't they?"

The question is whether they look forward to it once their "way" is rejected. Actually I don't accuse them of looking forward to it. But I do suspect that many of them would be disappointed and perhaps even fightened if they knew an exemplary unbeliever was in heaven right now. Because if God does allow such people into heaven contrary to what they think, who is to say that he might not make exceptions in the other direction as well?

"Your efforts (I think), are better spent on logically showing why these beliefs are unlikely to be correct, than through attacks on their morality or intelligence."

Only if I am trying to persuade them rather than others.

[Lestat]

You're losing me a little with your definitions of waste and centrifuge.

Nevertheless, I completely agree that people have core needs that predetermine their beliefs, or are at least pre-requisites for them. That said, I think that education in the proper use of logic and reasoning can a longer way towards eliminating beliefs which are silly, insulting, elitist, and downright pompous.

A better example and a much more important subject in my opinion, is the proliferation of the Islamic fascist movement which is spreading throughout the world. This radicalism is not only insulting, it is downright dangerous to mankind. It's premis is based on the same irrational philosophies fundamentist Christians use. The difference is that they are willing to cut your head off for non-belief. Slightly ruder than saying you'll go to hell.