NationStates Jolt Archive

I was having a discussion with my Christian flatmate earlier, and she asserted that you could only get into 'heaven' if you believed in God no matter how good a life you had lead. So you could spend your whole life helping people, being a good person and improving the world but if you don't believe in God, you'll go to hell. Conversely, an immoral and self absorbed Christian would have no problems getting to heaven.
This is the reason I am not religiuos, to be honest I think that way of thinking and acting is absolutely ridiculous and I'd like to think that if there is a God he's unimpressed with what his followers are saying.
Does anyone else agree/ disagree or can anyone shed any light on this strange belief (I'm sure it's not limited to Christians)

'And now a quick prayer...O Lord, protect us from thine followers'

Agree.

Hence it's called 'The Gospel' or Good news.. Exceedingly good news :)

EDIT: Correction.. Believe in Christ. Not God. Every other religion believes in God, but not Christ.

Romans 3:23 - For all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God.
24 - being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus
25 - whom God set forth as a propitiation by his blood, through faith, to demonstrate his righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously commited
26 - to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness , that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

I have watched a friend of mine convert to a Protestant form of Christianity, go through a crisis of faith or two, and we've discussed the matter once or twice. We can occasionally talk about such intricate subjects as the one you mention, but we always tread on eggshells. We both are strong in our beliefs, and don't wish to offend.

I've never managed to delicately steer the conversation to a satisfactory answer to your question. No matter how good and true and noble someone is, they apperantly become like Virgil in the Inferno. At best, trapped in Dis.

I don't know why Christ and God would deem such a fate acceptable, but its not really my place to question such things. Its not my religion. But like you, I'm intensely curious as to why that is acceptable, for I understand that there IS an answer to that question.

Agree.

Hence it's called 'The Gospel' or Good news.. Exceedingly good news :)

EDIT: Correction.. Believe in Christ. Not God. Every other religion believes in God, but not Christ.

Romans 3:23 - For all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God.
24 - being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus
25 - whom God set forth as a propitiation by his blood, through faith, to demonstrate his righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously commited
26 - to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness , that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

It's not that Christians don't believe in God, it is that we believe that God sent Christ down to earth to die on the cross for us and to forgive us of our sins, and then he rose again on the 3rd day.

<snip>
The theology works like this:
No matter how 'nice' a life you have lived by human standards you have sinned by God's standards.
All sin is offensive to God.
Through Christ's sacrifice you can be absolved of all sin if you accept him. If you don't all your sin is on you and you will be judged for it.
Saying you are a Christian doesn't make you one. You have to genuinely believe. If you don't believe all the words in the world won't do anything for you.

Here's a point to consider:

A good man, who helped others all his life, and was an Atheist is burning in Hell.
A Christian,who never bothered to give to charity, thinking people sholud help themselves, is in eternal bliss.

Does a God who allows that to happen deserve worship?

The theology works like this:
No matter how 'nice' a life you have lived by human standards you have sinned by God's standards.
All sin is offensive to God.
Through Christ's sacrifice you can be absolved of all sin if you accept him. If you don't all your sin is on you and you will be judged for it.
Saying you are a Christian doesn't make you one. You have to genuinely believe. If you don't believe all the words in the world won't do anything for you.

That's fair enough,I just don't understand why people can't see the paradox between a 'loving caring God' and the God who will condemn you to hell simply for not believing in him. They can't be one and the same, clearly, but if they both exist there most be two Gods right? And none of that's in the Bible.

Besides, you really think God would prefer to have religious nuts like Pat Buchanan alongside him then normal caring non Christians? If thats the case I'm quite glad I wont't go to heaven.

As far as I see it, believing that because you believe in God in a certain a way you will be saved is the most self obsessed form of self preservation possible....not exactly love thy neighbour is it? the message is, you can ignore all christian teachings and just believe and its OK- you're saved!

Here's a point to consider:

A good man, who helped others all his life, and was an Atheist is burning in Hell.
A Christian,who never bothered to give to charity, thinking people sholud help themselves, is in eternal bliss.

Does a God who allows that to happen deserve worship?

Thats kinda what I was trying to say just articulated a hell of a lot better.

I was having a discussion with my Christian flatmate earlier, and she asserted that you could only get into 'heaven' if you believed in God no matter how good a life you had lead. So you could spend your whole life helping people, being a good person and improving the world but if you don't believe in God, you'll go to hell. Conversely, an immoral and self absorbed Christian would have no problems getting to heaven.
This is the reason I am not religiuos, to be honest I think that way of thinking and acting is absolutely ridiculous and I'd like to think that if there is a God he's unimpressed with what his followers are saying.
Does anyone else agree/ disagree or can anyone shed any light on this strange belief (I'm sure it's not limited to Christians)

'And now a quick prayer...O Lord, protect us from thine followers'

One thing I've learned from my Catholic friend is the name for people like her: Heretic. Believing in Christ is no guarantee that you will get into heaven. By the same token, not believing isn't a one way ticket to hell.

I was having a discussion with my Christian flatmate earlier, and she asserted that you could only get into 'heaven' if you believed in God no matter how good a life you had lead. So you could spend your whole life helping people, being a good person and improving the world but if you don't believe in God, you'll go to hell. Conversely, an immoral and self absorbed Christian would have no problems getting to heaven.
This is the reason I am not religiuos, to be honest I think that way of thinking and acting is absolutely ridiculous and I'd like to think that if there is a God he's unimpressed with what his followers are saying.
Does anyone else agree/ disagree or can anyone shed any light on this strange belief (I'm sure it's not limited to Christians)

'And now a quick prayer...O Lord, protect us from thine followers'
That seems like a terribly unfair rule for the Christians who also happen to be good people; they are sentenced to an eternity in "Heaven" with all the lazy, cruel, immoral Christians!

Meanwhile, the rest of us don't have to spend our afterlives listening to the self-serving hypocricy of the immoral Godders. I'll take Hell, thank you very much.

The theology works like this:
No matter how 'nice' a life you have lived by human standards you have sinned by God's standards.
All sin is offensive to God.
Through Christ's sacrifice you can be absolved of all sin if you accept him. If you don't all your sin is on you and you will be judged for it.
Saying you are a Christian doesn't make you one. You have to genuinely believe. If you don't believe all the words in the world won't do anything for you.

Jesus died on the cross to absolve everybody of Original Sin, not all sin. To be saved it is then necessary to be baptised and to repent for any further sin committed.

If in Heaven we had to live by God's rules, wouldn't it get boring?

God:"So, what do you want to do?"
Me:"Dunno, let's see, erm, howsabout listen to some music"
*God checks your file*
God: "Nope, says here you like rock music."
Me: "Oh. Well, those vestial virgins over there..."
God: "No."
Me:"Oh, okay. Can I play some video games then?"
God: No no no! Video games convinced people to skip church, I couldn't have those!"
Me: "Then can I speak to some historically important people?"
God:"Sure. Who do you want to see?"
Me: "Leonardo da Vinci."
God: "Sorry, homosexuals burn in hell."
Me: "I don't think I'm cut out for this heaven thing, do you?"
God: "Hmm...no."
Me: "Bye then."
God: "Goodbye"

That's fair enough,I just don't understand why people can't see the paradox between a 'loving caring God' and the God who will condemn you to hell simply for not believing in him. They can't be one and the same, clearly, but if they both exist there most be two Gods right? And none of that's in the Bible.
The theology is:
If you are not saved you simply could not exist 'happily' in heaven.

Besides, you really think God would prefer to have religious nuts like Pat Buchanan alongside him then normal caring non Christians? If thats the case I'm quite glad I wont't go to heaven.
Like I said, he says he's a Christian, but that doesn't automatically make him one. I don't know him so I can't say.

As far as I see it, believing that because you believe in God in a certain a way you will be saved is the most self obsessed form of self preservation possible....not exactly love thy neighbour is it? the message is, you can ignore all christian teachings and just believe and its OK- you're saved!
If you ignore all Christian teachings how could you be saved? A lot of people have said this before. How old is this idea?
Matthew 7:20
"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them"

It's already been answered.



One thing I've learned from my Catholic friend is the name for people like her: Heretic. Believing in Christ is no guarantee that you will get into heaven. By the same token, not believing isn't a one way ticket to hell.
Yes, the Catholic Church does love to label everyone else Heretics. At least they've stopped burning us though.
John 3:16
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

So if you are a Christian then believing in Christ is a guarantee that you will get into heaven.
John 14:6
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."
So if you don't believe you cannot be saved. That simple.

Jesus died on the cross to absolve everybody of Original Sin, not all sin. To be saved it is then necessary to be baptised and to repent for any further sin committed.
Yes, all sin.
Hebrews 9:26
"Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself."
Original Sin is a Catholic dogma. All sin is forgiven if you accept the sacrifice.

Maniacal Me, you always say "the theology is...". Are you Christian?
A Christian most likely wouldn't say "the theology is..." when they can just argue the points as fact.

I was having a discussion with my Christian flatmate earlier, and she asserted that you could only get into 'heaven' if you believed in God no matter how good a life you had lead. So you could spend your whole life helping people, being a good person and improving the world but if you don't believe in God, you'll go to hell. Conversely, an immoral and self absorbed Christian would have no problems getting to heaven.
This is the reason I am not religiuos, to be honest I think that way of thinking and acting is absolutely ridiculous and I'd like to think that if there is a God he's unimpressed with what his followers are saying.
Does anyone else agree/ disagree or can anyone shed any light on this strange belief (I'm sure it's not limited to Christians)

'And now a quick prayer...O Lord, protect us from thine followers'
To be honest, if you were truely not religious, rather than be your reason, this would never be an issue. For the truely non-religious, there is no heaven.

To be honest, if you were truely not religious, rather than be your reason, this would never be an issue. For the truely non-religious, there is no heaven.
Not true at all. There are many people who reject all religions yet still believe in an after-life of some kind. I happen to be good friends with such a creature :).

Not true at all. There are many people who reject all religions yet still believe in an after-life of some kind. I happen to be good friends with such a creature :).
Ah, you are limiting "religious" to being "of an organized religion" then?

To be honest, if you were truely not religious, rather than be your reason, this would never be an issue. For the truely non-religious, there is no heaven.

No I am not religious at all, I have to admit I am a complete cynic when it comes to religion.

However I find the concept of belief very interesting, I like to know why people believe what they do. I refer to heaven in a metaphorical context (I think...this may be the wrong word!)

Being non religious doesn't mean the concept of religion shouldn't be an issue.

Ah, you are limiting "religious" to being "of an organized religion" then?
Doesn't have to even be limited to that. Some people don't have a defined sense of God/gods at all, they simply believe in some kind of afterlife. Hell, there are people who believe in no spiritual matters at all, yet believe that the energy of human consciousness continues after biological death. For some people there is spirituality without religion, and for other people there is no need for spirituality to believe in afterlife.

Maniacal Me, you always say "the theology is...". Are you Christian?
A Christian most likely wouldn't say "the theology is..." when they can just argue the points as fact.
I am a Christian. But screaming my opinions will more than likely provoke a hostile response, which would achieve nothing, so why do it?

I am a Christian. But screaming my opinions will more than likely provoke a hostile response, which would achieve nothing, so why do it?

Well to be honest anyone who gives you a hostile response because of what you believe probably isn't worth listening to anyway. I have no disrespect towards people who believe, I just like to debate the issues sensibly because I think it is a very interesting subject.

I am a Christian. But screaming my opinions will more than likely provoke a hostile response, which would achieve nothing, so why do it? Well said.

The Christian view (now I'm doing it!) is that all good comes from God. Now, this doesn't mean that all atheists are evil - it means that they have some of the goodness of God in them if they are good.

The Christian view (now I'm doing it!) is that all good comes from God. Now, this doesn't mean that all atheists are evil - it means that they have some of the goodness of God in them if they are good.

But even if they have the goodness of God in them, if they don't believe in God they are doomed to hell. Should this be right? Why is faith the most important aspect of Christianity, above helping thy fellow man and loving thy neighbour?

I was having a discussion with my Christian flatmate earlier, and she asserted that you could only get into 'heaven' if you believed in God no matter how good a life you had lead. So you could spend your whole life helping people, being a good person and improving the world but if you don't believe in God, you'll go to hell. Conversely, an immoral and self absorbed Christian would have no problems getting to heaven.
This is the reason I am not religiuos, to be honest I think that way of thinking and acting is absolutely ridiculous and I'd like to think that if there is a God he's unimpressed with what his followers are saying.
Does anyone else agree/ disagree or can anyone shed any light on this strange belief (I'm sure it's not limited to Christians)

'And now a quick prayer...O Lord, protect us from thine followers'

Just because I feel like playing Devil's Advocate, so to speak - maybe it's kind of like the fact that Columbus had to believe the world was round rather than flat as a prerequisite to him discovering new lands. Regardless of what he originally set out to do, he would never have made the trip in the first place if he really believed the world was flat and that he'd eventually just sail off the edge of the world. Perhaps you have to believe there is a god and a heaven to even realize that you need to make the trek once you leave this plane of existence. Maybe it doesn't even matter that the place where you are headed doesn't even remotely resemble the place that exists in your imagination - rather, it's only important that you set your ship on that course. Could it be that if you fail to do so, the energy that was you will simply dissipate into nothingness as so much wasted heat? Just a thought...

That's a really interesting concept Pterodonia, hadn't thought of that.

Doesn't have to even be limited to that. Some people don't have a defined sense of God/gods at all, they simply believe in some kind of afterlife. Hell, there are people who believe in no spiritual matters at all, yet believe that the energy of human consciousness continues after biological death. For some people there is spirituality without religion, and for other people there is no need for spirituality to believe in afterlife.
Each of those is something I would call religious. It doesn't have to include a belief in any god, because god is not "out there", it is within us. If the self survives beyond deaith, that would be a religious thing.

Here's a point to consider:

A good man, who helped others all his life, and was an Atheist is burning in Hell.
A Christian,who never bothered to give to charity, thinking people sholud help themselves, is in eternal bliss.

Does a God who allows that to happen deserve worship?

No
:p

No I am not religious at all, I have to admit I am a complete cynic when it comes to religion.

However I find the concept of belief very interesting, I like to know why people believe what they do. I refer to heaven in a metaphorical context (I think...this may be the wrong word!)

Being non religious doesn't mean the concept of religion shouldn't be an issue.
Not the concept of religion, but the concept of heaven being real.

Well to be honest anyone who gives you a hostile response because of what you believe probably isn't worth listening to anyway.
I was thinking more of the 'fire and brimstone' believers. You know, deport homosexuals, mixing colours is evil, blah blah blah. :headbang:
I tend to be more passive in how I speak to prevent associations with that sort.
I have no disrespect towards people who believe, I just like to debate the issues sensibly because I think it is a very interesting subject.
I enjoy the debates as well. I've always been of the opinion that if you don't think about your faith you have no business talking about it.

I was having a discussion with my Christian flatmate earlier, and she asserted that you could only get into 'heaven' if you believed in God no matter how good a life you had lead. So you could spend your whole life helping people, being a good person and improving the world but if you don't believe in God, you'll go to hell. Conversely, an immoral and self absorbed Christian would have no problems getting to heaven.
This is the reason I am not religiuos, to be honest I think that way of thinking and acting is absolutely ridiculous and I'd like to think that if there is a God he's unimpressed with what his followers are saying.
Does anyone else agree/ disagree or can anyone shed any light on this strange belief (I'm sure it's not limited to Christians)

'And now a quick prayer...O Lord, protect us from thine followers'

Actually, to throw a wrench into your flatmates thinking.

1. Yes, actually, regardless of how many "good works" you do, only faith in Christ gets you to heaven.

2. No... An immoral and self-absorbed "Christian" has no claim to being "Christian" in the first place. Good Works show the Spirit and inner faith of the person... A person lacking such expression of faith in their life, has no claim upon actually having faith in the first place...

"Faith without works is dead, being alone"... That is, "not faith" in the first place...

He's likely a "Hyper Calvinist" and "Antinomian" thinking; "Once saved, always saved; and it doesn't matter what you do..."

I think A.W. Tozer took care of that some time ago...; "Once saved, always saved; and it DOES matter what you do...."

Anyone who claims to be "Christian" and living the abject immorality; should be spending time questioning their own faith; as opposed to thinking God will spare them in the first place.... Your flatmate is on a very bad course...

But even if they have the goodness of God in them, if they don't believe in God they are doomed to hell. Should this be right? Why is faith the most important aspect of Christianity, above helping thy fellow man and loving thy neighbour?
They cannot be doomed to hell if hell doesn't exist for them. If you truely believe that hell is a made-up place for Christians, why is this an issue?

Not the concept of religion, but the concept of heaven being real.

But to understand the context of a religious heaven, real or not, requires thinking about the structure and ideologies of a religion. I am refering to organized religion, especially Christianity, I would be interested to hear the views of people who belong to another religion ie. Islam, Hinduism

Just because I feel like playing Devil's Advocate, so to speak - maybe it's kind of like the fact that Columbus had to believe the world was round rather than flat as a prerequisite to him discovering new lands. Regardless of what he originally set out to do, he would never have made the trip in the first place if he really believed the world was flat and that he'd eventually just sail off the edge of the world. Perhaps you have to believe there is a god and a heaven to even realize that you need to make the trek once you leave this plane of existence. Maybe it doesn't even matter that the place where you are headed doesn't even remotely resemble the place that exists in your imagination - rather, it's only important that you set your ship on that course. Could it be that if you fail to do so, the energy that was you will simply dissipate into nothingness as so much wasted heat? Just a thought...
A marvelous analogy.

Anyone who claims to be "Christian" and living the abject immorality; should be spending time questioning their own faith; as opposed to thinking God will spare them in the first place.... Your flatmate is on a very bad course...

My flatmate is a good person, not immoral I didn't mean to imply that. However she is no better or worse than anyone else in my flat when it comes to being a good person... I'm just interested as to why God will choose her above the 6 other people in the flat, just because she believes literally in a gigantic man who lives in the sky, and that the world will end with the four horsemen of the apocalytpse etc....

But to understand the context of a religious heaven, real or not, requires thinking about the structure and ideologies of a religion. I am refering to organized religion, especially Christianity, I would be interested to hear the views of people who belong to another religion ie. Islam, Hinduism
Alright, understanding it is a good thing, very good. I only started on this line of questioning because you had implied that if heaven were a certain other way from what Christians profess, you would become a Christian.

Ok make way for the satanist! God hates you, he wants you to worship you in all the time, he don't care who he let's in. I could be a mass murdering rapist but as long as I beleive in Christ I'll get in. Yet me, a average citizen, getting a education, doing ordinary things and living a ordinary life, will go to Hell... Also, if the bible is right, how come someone keeps changing the theory? Where would you want to go? A Underground cess pit with knowledge and truth? Or a metropolis of greed and vanity? You choose my children, you choose...

Alright, understanding it is a good thing, very good. I only started on this line of questioning because you had implied that if heaven were a certain other way from what Christians profess, you would become a Christian.

I would probably have more belief in the idea of a heaven if the conditions for entry were, simply, living a good life, treating people right and caring about the world around you.

The idea of an afterlife is not that ridiculous...think about it, we are simply a collection of atoms right? If you had the time and inclination you could take yourself apart atom by atom and you'd be left with a lifeless pile of atoms that have never been alive. Put them all together, and you get you. Why? What makes this happen? A soul?....

I would probably have more belief in the idea of a heaven if the conditions for entry were, simply, living a good life, treating people right and caring about the world around you.

The idea of an afterlife is not that ridiculous...think about it, we are simply a collection of atoms right? If you had the time and inclination you could take yourself apart atom by atom and you'd be left with a lifeless pile of atoms that have never been alive. Put them all together, and you get you. Why? What makes this happen? A soul?....
I too agree that the idea of an afterlife is not ridiculous. I myself tend towards a reincarnation belief when responding spontaneously to such things.

My flatmate is a good person, not immoral I didn't mean to imply that. However she is no better or worse than anyone else in my flat when it comes to being a good person... I'm just interested as to why God will choose her above the 6 other people in the flat, just because she believes literally in a gigantic man who lives in the sky, and that the world will end with the four horsemen of the apocalytpse etc....

According to my views of soterology (Salvation Theology), "will" can be omited (Reformed).

Salvation is based upon faith and love of Christ. Not works, themselves.

As a parent, do/would you reward disobedient children? Would you reward your child if they constantly said "I don't have to listen to you!"

Let's say you had to take care of your parents in their old age.... Let's say you told them that you only take care of them to get a tax relief.... As opposed to out of love... Would your parent reward you?

You put far too much value towards acts vice intents.... The concept of Christian faith is that intent means far more than actual acts. And to God, intent means far more than actual acts.... Loving God, is in fact, a commandment and part of faith.... If you hated your parents, how would you feel if your parents made you live at home? How would a sinner feel if God made them live in heaven? Would it be nothing short of hell in the first place to such?

Constructing a false theological framework, and then building an argument against a particular belief out of that artificial construct, is not a proper course of argument...

Ok make way for the satanist! God hates you, he wants you to worship you in all the time, he don't care who he let's in. I could be a mass murdering rapist but as long as I beleive in Christ I'll get in. Yet me, a average citizen, getting a education, doing ordinary things and living a ordinary life, will go to Hell... Also, if the bible is right, how come someone keeps changing the theory? Where would you want to go? A Underground cess pit with knowledge and truth? Or a metropolis of greed and vanity? You choose my children, you choose...

To you as well, constructing a false theological argument, to use as attack against a belief, is not the proper course for an argument.

To get into Heaven, you must be Christian, but I believe, that if you lead a good life you aren’t necessary sent to hell. The afterlife from what I know has many different levels, the Jews and the Muslims do not go to heaven but are not going to be spending time in the fires and pits. The righteous souls go to what I under stand to be the land of the dead or “Paradise”. Your soul is weighed and if you’ve done more good deeds then ill you go there and if your Jewish you get resurrected when the end of the world sort of speak is over and Jesus has come. :)

Tekania,
If you were a parent, would you prefer your child to blindly do and act as you say just because they are your child?
Or is it not better that the child is free to make their own values and judgements and find their own way and place in the world without permantly worrying of reprisals from the parent?

As for constructing a false theological argument to attack a certain faith, I asked people from other religions to share their thoughts. I'm not saying anyone's wrong or right. My flatmates argument was that despite us being good people, because we did not accept the word of the Bible as literal truth we were doomed.

My flatmates argument was that despite us being good people, because we did accept the word of the Bible as literal truth we were doomed.

You are not doomed, hell wasn't made for humans it was intended to be a punishment to the angels who rebelled. If you are a good person and try with your heart to help your fellow man and do what is right, then hell isn’t for you. Almost all old religions belief in a afterlife and many of them talk of a place for souls, only those who do want to go to hell, those worshiping demons, and the devil and those who have done more bad then good go to hell.

But like I said it isn't Heaven, and you don't get the rewards God has given to the christian people.

So you are saying that there are theoretically more than two places to go in the afterlife Falgarus? I thought it was just heaven, or hell. One or the other.

Somebody made an analogy earlier about Columbus belief that the world was round. I just think its funny that, if I recall correctly, does not the bible say somewhere the the World IS flat, no two ways about it? I duno, on too what I really wanted to say.

I grew up catholic, being tought all about how God loved everybody, no matter what, even the bad people. He WANTED them to find Christ etc. etc.

When I grew up I became disillusioned by the church. I still do belive in God (or at least A god of some sort), but NOT in THE CHURCH, or most of THE BIBLE, which was written by average humans, telling tales. The bibe is consistantly disproven in fact and translation. Then one day talking to a priest, I asked basically the same question:

If somebody who has killed, molested a child, and beat his wife gets baptised, repents, says whatever sayings he has to say, and confesses, would he go to heaven? And would somebody who sacrificed their whole lives towards helping sick children, feeding the poor, loving their neighbors, and living a competely moral life go to hell?

His answer? Yes. So I stopped being a Church-beliver. The God I belive in has more of a sence of right and wrong and less of a human failability of bigotry. And Christ? The church, and their followers, have basically in this day and age thrown all of his teachings out the window except or "listen to me or burn", which I personally doubt somebody like Christ would say, maybe that was just added later by Paul. I think what Christ was really trying to say was "Listen to my teachings to live a better life." To me, Christ no longer seems like the son of God, but as a brilliant man such as his holiness the Dali Lama (reincarnatioin of The Buddah), whose teachings are very valuable. I follow them every day.

And every once in a while I meet a Christian who truly follows Chirsts words, not the corporation of the church. A Christian who dosn't use christ/god as a reason to hate certain people, which seems to the popular thing today, and I feel better. But I'm sorry, the church has to much blood and lies on their hands or me to listen to them any longer. They screwed up everything Christ stood for. Thou Shalt Not Kill, anybody?

Tekania,
If you were a parent, would you prefer your child to blindly do and act as you say just because they are your child?
Or is it not better that the child is free to make their own values and judgements and find their own way and place in the world without permantly worrying of reprisals from the parent?

Since when did God take away your freewill?

When you are a child you have to obey the rules of the house, but when you have grown up you are free to do whatever you want.

If you choose to move far away from your fathers kingdom once you are an adult, and you never talk to him or keep in contact, you are still in the inheretence of the kingdom but you never went home to claim it. How is it God's fault that you chose to stay away from him and what he wants to give to you. I fail to see your objection.

Tekania,
If you were a parent, would you prefer your child to blindly do and act as you say just because they are your child?
Or is it not better that the child is free to make their own values and judgements and find their own way and place in the world without permantly worrying of reprisals from the parent?

As for constructing a false theological argument to attack a certain faith, I asked people from other religions to share their thoughts. I'm not saying anyone's wrong or right. My flatmates argument was that despite us being good people, because we did not accept the word of the Bible as literal truth we were doomed.

It's not a matter of "following" but of intent (the child parent relationship between Creator and Creature is an allusion, and not absolutly equal).

Follwing your parents wishes, and such, should be an intent from love. Following God's commands should also be such.

Laying claim to following these (but not loving); is not directly forgiveable. As it would be unjust to present one to the benefit of heaven (which is God's direct presence), to those which don't love (hate God).

Laying claim to loving your creator/God; but not serving him, is contradictional. You would seek out God if you indeed loved Him; and act accordingly... Lacking the actual acts, contradicts your supposed intents. So, could you truly lay claim to loving them in the first place?

One of the prime views of Judeochristian theology-proper (Doctrines of God), is that He is an infinate being, thus crimes against Him is infinite... He is also ascribed as "just"... And justice for an "infinite crime" is an "infinite punishment".... At the same tone, inverted, giving someone who hates God, and placing them in his presence, eternally, would be far worse than hell for such a person... Forever in the presence of all that you hate and dispise.

Well, theoretically for the afterlife there are only two places, Heaven and every thing else is hell. Hell means the absence of God, GOD’s ultimate reign is in Heaven, though he has a strong presence on Earth, HE more or less allows us to do what we want.

But GOD has two covenants, one to the gentiles and one to the Jews. Once a covenant is made it cannot be broken and GOD would not allow the Jews to be burned alive for all of their time down there, up to the point that HE returns to Earth. In the book of Enoch it talks about the after life and what it is like, though to the Christian standards this is “hell”, but it really isn’t the hell that is mostly talked about. The hell which must people think of is more or less the deepest pits of the after life and that is where satan controls.

I think when lazarus was resurrected it talk about the land of the dead and it went on to saying that below he saw a person he knew in hell and begged for water but couldn't give it to him.

<snip>
If somebody who has killed, molested a child, and beat his wife gets baptised, repents, says whatever sayings he has to say, and confesses, would he go to heaven? And would somebody who sacrificed their whole lives towards helping sick children, feeding the poor, loving their neighbors, and living a competely moral life go to hell?

His answer? Yes. So I stopped being a Church-beliver. The God I belive in has more of a sence of right and wrong and less of a human failability of bigotry.
So you believe in a vengeful God that cannot forgive and that only uses your personal standards of morality? Somehow I don't think God is the bigot.
<snip>Thou Shalt Not Kill, anybody?
It's, "Thou shalt not murder."
Just for the sake of accuracy.

Since when did God take away your freewill?

When you are a child you have to obey the rules of the house, but when you have grown up you are free to do whatever you want.

If you choose to move far away from your fathers kingdom once you are an adult, and you never talk to him or keep in contact, you are still in the inheretence of the kingdom but you never went home to claim it. How is it God's fault that you chose to stay away from him and what he wants to give to you. I fail to see your objection.

My point would be that since the inheritance is not something you receive in this life, but rather after death, would God really punish you that severely if you lived by his vaues and led a good life but failed to 'keep in contact'? Would he really punish you over someone who has been waiting to collect the inheritance as a 'reward' for doing as God said?

Would he really punish you over someone who has been waiting to collect the inheritance as a 'reward' for doing as God said?

He wouldn't punish you for it, but you just wouldn't get it. You have to claim your reward, and the only way to get that is by Christ. You can live the life mass murder, a big criminal and at the end claim the prize and still get it.. it just won't be as big as it would be if you lead a good life.

For all we know hitler, or stalin has a house in heaven. stalin was being trained to be a priest before he went into communism. :P

It's not a matter of "following" but of intent (the child parent relationship between Creator and Creature is an allusion, and not absolutly equal).

Follwing your parents wishes, and such, should be an intent from love. Following God's commands should also be such.

Good point. But I know out of love that my parents would want me to question the world around me, and forgive me for having a different opinion or worldview than they.

Laying claim to following these (but not loving); is not directly forgiveable. As it would be unjust to present one to the benefit of heaven (which is God's direct presence), to those which don't love (hate God).

Are you saying there is no middle ground between love and hate?

Laying claim to loving your creator/God; but not serving him, is contradictional. You would seek out God if you indeed loved Him; and act accordingly... Lacking the actual acts, contradicts your supposed intents. So, could you truly lay claim to loving them in the first place?

So the inverse of this would be that because I do not seek out God I indeed hate him? And since when did loving someone involve serving them? Listening to them, yes. Trying to please them, yes. Making time for them, yes. But serving them?

One of the prime views of Judeochristian theology-proper (Doctrines of God), is that He is an infinate being, thus crimes against Him is infinite... He is also ascribed as "just"... And justice for an "infinite crime" is an "infinite punishment".... At the same tone, inverted, giving someone who hates God, and placing them in his presence, eternally, would be far worse than hell for such a person... Forever in the presence of all that you hate and dispise.

At the end of this I'm confused...it logically stands to reason that if I 'hate' God, then God 'hates' me. But how can you reconcile this with an all loving, all forgiving God?

He wouldn't punish you for it, but you just wouldn't get it. You have to claim your reward, and the only way to get that is by Christ. You can live the life mass murder, a big criminal and at the end claim the prize and still get it.. it just won't be as big as it would be if you lead a good life.

For all we know hitler, or stalin has a house in heaven. stalin was being trained to be a priest before he went into communism. :P

Frankly, and I mean no offence, that's ridiculous! How is that right? How does confessing to Christ wash the blood from an evil man's hands, while a good man who does not believe or indeed believes differently is condemned to drown in that blood?
I believe someone earlier refered to Infinite Justice. How can this be?

If you steal money from your parents... And then turn around and tell them, and say you're sorry... that is confession... but not repentance. Repentence is more than acknowledgment, it is an act in and of itself (seperate from mere confession).

The principle, is that God can change the course of a persons heart. The person becomes "new" in Christ, through confession and repentance (as an extention of love and faith)... Under general christian soterology and christology; Christ death is substitutionary.... That is, his act on the cross is designed so as to pay the penalty upon sinners... Enjoining in Christ enjoins in the death of Christ as well (Christ bearing the penalty deserving that of the sinner)... It is a substitutionary way to atone for the judgment necessitate by acts and intents of sin, by sinners (which we all are). The act is taken through faith and love (operated in outward signs of confession and repentance, and a change in course of the person)... From the point of view of the infinite, all sins are the same; it does not matter if its theft, adultry, lying or murder... They all bear the same equal punishment before a just God.

All are sinners, and no one has followed the complete letter of the law (in both acts and intents)... Thus all are applicable to the judgment... So it is a matter of whether the judgement is fulfilled by the sinner themselves, or through the substitutionary payment of the penalty by Christ (through faith and love). As such, sone one who has commited murder, assuming actual confession, repentance, faith in Christ, and love; can go to heaven (the penalty payed through faith, by Christ, enjoined in His sacrifice); or if not, by the sinner themselves.

It extends the same illuding to a judge presiding over a case. A just judge would not excuse a single crime, merely because you have kept a multitude of other laws. When you break a law, regardless of the number of other laws you have kept... You're still a "law-breaker" and applicable to just punishment.

The substitutionary death is a merciful operation, whereby God has providing a way whereby justice can be satisfied.

To ilude to a parent again. Let's say your own parents take the penalty of your crime, for you.... Would you then keep comiting crimes, piling more judgement upon your own parents, and be able to claim you love them? Would someone who claims Christ's substitutionary death upon themselves, continue to transgress; yet have valid claim to love Christ?

Somebody made an analogy earlier about Columbus belief that the world was round. I just think its funny that, if I recall correctly, does not the bible say somewhere the the World IS flat, no two ways about it? I duno, on too what I really wanted to say.

I believe that the references the bible makes are the “four corners of the world” and the “Pillars of the world”. Four corners doesn’t necessary mean flat. Four corners could be the four main directions or something else which basically is saying , “to the ends of the world.”.

Frankly, and I mean no offence, that's ridiculous! How is that right? How does confessing to Christ wash the blood from an evil man's hands, while a good man who does not believe or indeed believes differently is condemned to drown in that blood?
I believe someone earlier refered to Infinite Justice. How can this be?
The concept (yes, I'm doing it again :p ) is that to God all sin is sin while we humans grade it. So whereas I would say a serial child molester should have some incredibly unpleasant things happen to him but a liar is just someone I (probably) don't want to know, to God there is no real difference between them.
So repentence earns you forgiveness if the repentence is earnest. Thus Infinite Mercy which is something I am far more concerned with.

I think you do have to believe in Christ on some level. God doesn't blame you if you are too busy working to go to church (although not many people are in this day and age) but He will blame you if you do not take the opportunity.

Personally I find that the opportunity is well worth it because He provides people with gifts and insights to help them.

Laying claim to following these (but not loving); is not directly forgiveable. As it would be unjust to present one to the benefit of heaven (which is God's direct presence), to those which don't love (hate God).

So your saying it's only possible to either love or hate God? Wrong answer.
Atheists, contrary to popular belief, DO NOT HATE GOD! We belive that there is no God. How, pray tell, can I hate something which I belive doesn't even exist?!

I was having a discussion with my Christian flatmate earlier, and she asserted that you could only get into 'heaven' if you believed in God no matter how good a life you had lead. So you could spend your whole life helping people, being a good person and improving the world but if you don't believe in God, you'll go to hell. Conversely, an immoral and self absorbed Christian would have no problems getting to heaven.
This is the reason I am not religiuos, to be honest I think that way of thinking and acting is absolutely ridiculous and I'd like to think that if there is a God he's unimpressed with what his followers are saying.
Does anyone else agree/ disagree or can anyone shed any light on this strange belief (I'm sure it's not limited to Christians)

'And now a quick prayer...O Lord, protect us from thine followers'
Got to love the fact that the Christian god seems fine to condemn people based on acts but will not save them by the same token

One of the prime views of Judeochristian theology-proper (Doctrines of God), is that He is an infinate being, thus crimes against Him is infinite...
What is the logic behind this leap?

At the end of this I'm confused...it logically stands to reason that if I 'hate' God, then God 'hates' me.
Um, that's not logical.

So your saying it's only possible to either love or hate God? Wrong answer.
Atheists, contrary to popular belief, DO NOT HATE GOD! We belive that there is no God. How, pray tell, can I hate something which I belive doesn't even exist?!

Well, if your a true atheists, you don't have to have a base, hate or love same with pagans and other reliegions, you can not believe in GOD but still have a respect for Christ\GOD. But some (claiming) Atheists do in fact hate GOD, hate Christian people, Hate Jewish people, or hate the churches. If you hate these groups those options reflect back to GOD. The same can be said about hating all the things GOD loves, Childern, Animals and People in general.

Got to love the fact that the Christian god seems fine to condemn people based on acts but will not save them by the same token
They are not condemned by their acts, but by their being.

They are not condemned by their acts, but by their being.
That’s true, original sin is a bitch. (I assumed that’s what you are talking about)

(That and the general view is it IS the acts that condemn them but with the proviso that no human can be perfect so they WILL commit one of these “acts” and therefore just by being human will be inevitably condemned unless they repent)

ok i havent read the whole topic but it strikes me as a christian, that the first post really isnt a question at all i mean if your an athiest why should you care if a christain believes you'll burn in hell in your view it doesnt exist! on the other hand any1 who is an athiest i believe to be kinda silly coz if there isnt a god both religious people and athiests alike will simply be eaten by worms, however if its the other way round and the athiest is wrong hes in a bit of a sticky situation (random bible verse-the fool says in his heart 'there is no god')and seeing as god is perfect and we, no matter how good we think we are are not,in fact most of us when we really think about it are pretty pathetic, twisted individuals i figure if he doesnt want us around him(heaven) thats his perogative and sayin well i dont believe in you wont cut it, feel free to spout abuse as that seems like what these boards are bein used for

Got to love the fact that the Christian god seems fine to condemn people based on acts but will not save them by the same token

Some people are saying that he is far to forgiving.. and others are saying he isn't mean enough. I love how forgiving Christ is and do not want him to change.

ok i havent read the whole topic but it strikes me as a christian, that the first post really isnt a question at all i mean if your an athiest why should you care if a christain believes you'll burn in hell in your view it doesnt exist! on the other hand any1 who is an athiest i believe to be kinda silly coz if there isnt a god both religious people and athiests alike will simply be eaten by worms, however if its the other way round and the athiest is wrong hes in a bit of a sticky situation (random bible verse-the fool says in his heart 'there is no god')and seeing as god is perfect and we, no matter how good we think we are are not,in fact most of us when we really think about it are pretty pathetic, twisted individuals i figure if he doesnt want us around him(heaven) thats his perogative and sayin well i dont believe in you wont cut it, feel free to spout abuse as that seems like what these boards are bein used for
Badly stated Pascal’s wager … but still wrong

Some people are saying that he is far to forgiving.. and others are saying he isn't mean enough. I love how forgiving Christ is and do not want him to change.
In my opinion an all loving god would divorce freedom of choice from that of consequence … if he truly loves us all.

I was having a discussion with my Christian flatmate earlier, and she asserted that you could only get into 'heaven' if you believed in God no matter how good a life you had lead. So you could spend your whole life helping people, being a good person and improving the world but if you don't believe in God, you'll go to hell. Conversely, an immoral and self absorbed Christian would have no problems getting to heaven.

This is kind of weird...I was actually going to start a thread asking Christians about this very question. A lady from work has terminal cancer, and she has sent us messages that indicate she is looking forward to being with her Lord. It got me thinking that she must be mightily comforted by the thought of a sort of life after death, and once again, I regretted my inability to really believe in such things.

So I thought....I'm a good person. I help others, I live as morally as I'm able, and yet I don't believe in a God, or any sort of afterlife. Now, if it turned out that I was wrong, would a God truly deny me 'heaven'? Is belief REALLY the most important thing? It's this very concept, I think, that makes it completely impossible for me to give credence to any sort of belief in a deity that DEMANDS membership in order for there to be 'goodies' at the end. I don't believe that any omnipotent being would be that shallow. I just can't.
Maybe semi-omnipotent. Or vaguely more powerful than us.

So, would I really go to hell (even though I don't believe one exists) simply because I don't BELIEVE in a God??

Originally Posted by Falgarus
He wouldn't punish you for it, but you just wouldn't get it. You have to claim your reward, and the only way to get that is by Christ. You can live the life mass murder, a big criminal and at the end claim the prize and still get it.. it just won't be as big as it would be if you lead a good life.

For all we know hitler, or stalin has a house in heaven. stalin was being trained to be a priest before he went into communism. :P
Frankly, and I mean no offence, that's ridiculous! How is that right? How does confessing to Christ wash the blood from an evil man's hands, while a good man who does not believe or indeed believes differently is condemned to drown in that blood?
I believe someone earlier refered to Infinite Justice. How can this be?
While I disagree that the only way to claim a reward in the afterlife is "through Christ", I do understand the claiming bit. It's not about God, it's about you. God doesn't give the reward, you claim it, and you do that through belief.

The reward not about good and bad, nor about our deeds in this life. A good Christian's good deeds are merely a reflection of what goes on inside; the real measure of him is what motivates those good deeds.

This is kind of weird...I was actually going to start a thread asking Christians about this very question. A lady from work has terminal cancer, and she has sent us messages that indicate she is looking forward to being with her Lord. It got me thinking that she must be mightily comforted by the thought of a sort of life after death, and once again, I regretted my inability to really believe in such things.

So I thought....I'm a good person. I help others, I live as morally as I'm able, and yet I don't believe in a God, or any sort of afterlife. Now, if it turned out that I was wrong, would a God truly deny me 'heaven'? Is belief REALLY the most important thing? It's this very concept, I think, that makes it completely impossible for me to give credence to any sort of belief in a deity that DEMANDS membership in order for there to be 'goodies' at the end. I don't believe that any omnipotent being would be that shallow. I just can't.
Maybe semi-omnipotent. Or vaguely more powerful than us.

So, would I really go to hell (even though I don't believe one exists) simply because I don't BELIEVE in a God??

I have the same problem with the Christian god … I am NOT able to believe in him. If he is not forgiving enough to accept that then he really is not someone that deserves my worship

Badly stated Pascal’s wager … but still wrong
im sorry whats pascals wager? and what precisely is wrong with the arguement?

So your saying it's only possible to either love or hate God? Wrong answer.
Atheists, contrary to popular belief, DO NOT HATE GOD! We belive that there is no God. How, pray tell, can I hate something which I belive doesn't even exist?!

You need to go to a different dicussion, this is a tangent to the question presented.

However, to answer it. "Hate" is opposed to "Love".... There is no neutrality in this situation. Saying there is no "God" is hating Him, from the simple fact that denying Him is a form of hate, in the context of judgement.

We're dealing with the operational confines of a particular philosophy/theology, not general relativism (which is where you're arguing from).

This is kind of weird...I was actually going to start a thread asking Christians about this very question. A lady from work has terminal cancer, and she has sent us messages that indicate she is looking forward to being with her Lord. It got me thinking that she must be mightily comforted by the thought of a sort of life after death, and once again, I regretted my inability to really believe in such things.

So I thought....I'm a good person. I help others, I live as morally as I'm able, and yet I don't believe in a God, or any sort of afterlife. Now, if it turned out that I was wrong, would a God truly deny me 'heaven'? Is belief REALLY the most important thing? It's this very concept, I think, that makes it completely impossible for me to give credence to any sort of belief in a deity that DEMANDS membership in order for there to be 'goodies' at the end. I don't believe that any omnipotent being would be that shallow. I just can't.
Maybe semi-omnipotent. Or vaguely more powerful than us.

So, would I really go to hell (even though I don't believe one exists) simply because I don't BELIEVE in a God??
Ahh... not "a God". There is only the one (in the belief system we're discussing).

I have the same problem with the Christian god … I am NOT able to believe in him. If he is not forgiving enough to accept that then he really is not someone that deserves my worship
Darn good thing Christianity doesn't need you (or those like you), eh? ;)

I have the same problem with the Christian god … I am NOT able to believe in him. If he is not forgiving enough to accept that then he really is not someone that deserves my worship

its such a relief that someone feels the same way i do, and has the same problem. something in my mind wont click and give me that absolution theres a god......but i figure if he exists, he wouldve already made me believe.....now dont missunderstand, ive gone to church, tryed to pray, and all that good stuff..but it just doesnt happen for me.

You need to go to a different dicussion, this is a tangent to the question presented.

However, to answer it. "Hate" is opposed to "Love".... There is no neutrality in this situation. Saying there is no "God" is hating Him, from the simple fact that denying Him is a form of hate, in the context of judgement.

We're dealing with the operational confines of a particular philosophy/theology, not general relativism (which is where you're arguing from).
Hate is not the opposite of love. One can love and hate at the same time, and one can love, hate or do neither. To say there is no neutrality is to deny a part of yourself.

im sorry whats pascals wager? and what precisely is wrong with the arguement?
http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/nogod/pascal.htm

http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/wager.html

Here is a snip of just some of the problems with that wager


The most obvious problems with Pascal's Wager are:
• How do you know which God to believe in? There are plenty to choose from, and if you pick the wrong one, you could be in big trouble (e.g. what if you choose Jesus, but get to heaven only to come face-to-trunk with Ganesh?). This is known as the "Avoiding the wrong Hell problem". If a dozen people of different religions came to you with Pascal's Wager, how could you possibly choose between them? After all, many religions are quite specific that they are the One True Religion, and not any others. Jesus Christ said "I am the way, the truth and the light. None shall come to the Father except through me." [emphasis added] and no doubt most other religions make similar claims. If a Christian considers the Wager as strong support for his faith, surely he must accept that it is equally valid for all other religions when presented to himself?
• God is not stupid. Won't He know that you're just trying to get a free ride into Heaven? How can you sincerely believe in a God simply out of convenience?
• If there is no God, you have still lost something. You have wasted a good portion of your life performing the various devotional rituals, attending Churches, praying, reading scripture and discussing your deity with His other followers. Not to mention giving your hard-earned money to the church, wasting your intelligence on theological endeavours and boring the hell out of people who really don't want to hear your Good News.
• Can you get away with just sort of generally believing in a Supreme Being, without specifically believing in one particular Deity? Probably not - God will still know what you're up to. Also, many Gods are quite particular about how they should be worshipped. Many born-again Christians will tell you that the only way to Heaven is through accepting Jesus Christ as your personal saviour - nothing more and nothing less. General-Deity-Belief and being nice simply won't do. Many people believe that all the different religions are merely alternative routes to the same destination. Nice and tolerant (if a little warm'n'fuzzy) though this may be, there is no valid reason to accept this stance over the fire-and-brimstone fundamentalist position : if the fundies are right, then the un-Saved liberal theists are in just as much trouble as the nonbelievers.
• Few, if any, atheists disbelieve in deities out of choice. It's not as if we know the god is really there, but somehow refuse to believe in it (for example, see if you can choose to truly believe that Australia does not exist). Most atheists disbelieve simply because they know of no compelling evidence to suggest that any sort of god exists. If you want an atheist to believe, show her some good evidence, don't just say it's in her best interests to believe even if there is no god. A person cannot choose to sincerely believe in something, just because it is pragmatic to do so. Sure, you could say all the right prayers and attend church regularly, but that is not the same thing as actually believing, and any God worth his salt would obviously see straight through that.
• It is quite insulting. It amounts to a thinly veiled threat, little better than saying "Believe in my God or He'll send you to Hell" (in fact, this is often the form it is presented in). Also, the theist making this threat assumes that the atheist believes there is a Hell or a God to send her there in the first place. If you don't believe in Hell anyway, it's not a scary thing to be threatened with - a bit like saying "If you don't start believing in unicorns, one will trample you to death while you're sleeping." Who would be worried by that?
• It is often self-refuting, depending on the person's description of God. If you believe that God will forgive anyone for anything, or judge people purely on how they lived their life and not what they believed, or that everyone gets to Heaven regardless (unless maybe they were genocidal cannibal serial killers), then the Wager is meaningless. You might as well say "Believe in God, or you'll... erm... go to Heaven anyway." In such a case, it doesn't make a scrap of difference whether the person believes or not.


Followed by a modified Athiests Wager

This seems to be much more reasonable, both for atheists and theists :
"It is better to live your life as if there are no Gods, and try to make the world a better place for your being in it. If there is no God, you have lost nothing and will be remembered fondly by those you left behind. If there is a benevolent God, He will judge you on your merits and not just on whether or not you believed in Him."
(And if God is not benevolent, he's gonna git ya whatever you do!)

This can be shown as:
God exists God does not exist
I believe Go To Heaven because
you believed Wasted life praying etc.
I do not believe Go To Heaven because
you're a good person Made the world a better place

Darn good thing Christianity doesn't need you (or those like you), eh? ;)

obviously, christianity didnt need him, because "god", if hes there, didnt care enough to make him believe, or help him to

*snip*

Here is a snip of just some of the problems with that wager

Followed by a modified Athiests Wager
None of those are convincing refutes. The best refute I heard was in a thread right here on these boards. I'll search for it.

obviously, christianity didnt need him, because "god", if hes there, didnt care enough to make him believe, or help him to
I'm just curious why you want a god who would warp your mind?

its such a relief that someone feels the same way i do, and has the same problem. something in my mind wont click and give me that absolution theres a god......but i figure if he exists, he wouldve already made me believe.....now dont missunderstand, ive gone to church, tryed to pray, and all that good stuff..but it just doesnt happen for me.
Anyone worth worshiping (for me) would understand this and understand it was not a choice

I could “Fake” believing … but if he is really up there I don’t think he would be fooled in the slightest (that is another problem with Pascal’s wager)

What is the logic behind this leap?

Restatement, we're dealing with POV of theological/philosophic chain of thought here.

Take relativism elsewhere. Having been an Atheist in the past, I know the general sophist tools used by Atheists in debate on theological topics.

Relativistically, it is just as logical for me to purport an infinite being/Creator, as it is for you not to....

The general logic used, is espoused in what is known as both textual testimony and revelation (that is, how this "God" is described in the bible)... And "Natural" revelation (that is the character and form of the universe). Both provide description (theologically) of what the creator would be like (by attributes, through elluded character).

None of those are convincing refutes. The best refute I heard was in a thread right here on these boards. I'll search for it.
Please do ... I have some pages that I have not ferrited out yet myself ... and my notes on it are at home not work with m e

Restatement, we're dealing with POV of theological/philosophic chain of thought here.

Take relativism elsewhere. Having been an Atheist in the past, I know the general sophist tools used by Atheists in debate on theological topics.

Relativistically, it is just as logical for me to purport an infinite being/Creator, as it is for you not to....

The general logic used, is espoused in what is known as both textual testimony and revelation (that is, how this "God" is described in the bible)... And "Natural" revelation (that is the character and form of the universe). Both provide description (theologically) of what the creator would be like (by attributes, through elluded character).
Okay; in other words, "because they say so." For the record, though, I'm not an atheist.

in my opinion your all kinda missin the point, its very convenient that the one and only thing that god/jesus(same thing)ask for for forgiveness is belief oh and thats the one thing people are suddenly incapable of! and all we can do is look at judgement through human eyes, of course its not guna make complete sense!!!!!i mean the guy sends his son to die and all every1 says is well i dont believe in it anyway, and to say oh well im a good person if there is a god he'll forgive my unbelief is a bit rich, as no one is good in comparison to perfection only one way to get to heaven and thats through jesus, and thats always the problem


oh and to say someone doesnt exist is really quite hateful id be hurt if someone said i didnt exist

its such a relief that someone feels the same way i do, and has the same problem. something in my mind wont click and give me that absolution theres a god......but i figure if he exists, he wouldve already made me believe.....now dont missunderstand, ive gone to church, tryed to pray, and all that good stuff..but it just doesnt happen for me.

Same here. I used to be a Christian, but then my true self broke through the indoctrination I had suffered.

[QUOTE=Willamena]I'm just curious why you want a god who would warp your mind?[/QUOTE

apperently the god you worship, doesnt care enough about my mind and body to lead me on his path of righteousness, ect., he just lets me sit here and debate whether hes there or not...some god

Okay; in other words, "because they say so." For the record, though, I'm not an atheist.
I was going to mention that but got busy at work :) (the not an atheist part)

I'm just curious why you want a god who would warp your mind?

apperently the god you worship, doesnt care enough about my mind and body to lead me on his path of righteousness, ect., he just lets me sit here and debate whether hes there or not...some god
Again, why would you want a god who would warp your mind to make you believe? What sort of religion are you seeking?

I'm just curious why you want a god who would warp your mind?
I think he was more eluding to why a god that required belief in him would (at least for now) deny him the ABILITY to believe why would he not make sure it is at least possible for me to have this blind faith

I think he was more eluding to why a god that required belief in him would (at least for now) deny him the ABILITY to believe why would he not make sure it is at least possible for me to have this blind faith
I don't think he has been denied the capacity to believe in a god. Nor you, for that matter.

Again, why would you want a god who would warp your mind to make you believe? What sort of religion are you seeking?

again......what does he want me to do...ive tryed church, even went for a while constantly...but the thought of god always refused to stick, and whats the use in joining the millions of heards of bible thumpers when i cant even believe, im not asking him to warp my mind, im asking for guidance, which obviously i havent recieved

free will its a buggar, if only god had programmed us as zombies then everything would be ok or even better sent someone to proove he existed oh wait he did!

again......what does he want me to do...ive tryed church, even went for a while constantly...but the thought of god always refused to stick, and whats the use in joining the millions of heards of bible thumpers when i cant even believe, im not asking him to warp my mind, im asking for guidance, which obviously i havent recieved

I've heard Ouija boards are pretty effective.

I don't think he has been denied the capacity to believe in a god. Nor you, for that matter.
The Christian god …yes, possibly not a deity in general but on general feeling from myself I would need more proof then so far has been provided.
The Judeo Christian god has a tendency to clash with my sensibilities and logic.

[QUOTE=The Noble Men]I've heard Ouija boards are pretty effective.[/QUOTE

very cute

what exactly does he have to do!?!?!

free will its a buggar, if only god had programmed us as zombies then everything would be ok or even better sent someone to proove he existed oh wait he did!

First off, your lack of punctuation and grammar is really starting to piss me off. So here's a lesson:
You start a sentence with a CAPITAL LETTER and end with a full stop.
(By the way it's spelt "bugger".)

How do we know he sent someone to guide us? The only thing that comes close to evidence is the Bible. And don't use that as evidence, as that leads to the circular argument "the Bible is the word of God. It is the word of God because it says so in the Bible". If that's your only defense then don't even bother.

-the babylonian talmud
-jewish records
-roman records
Jesus existed no self respecting historian would question that, and personal insults are not very good arguement

-the babylonian talmud
-jewish records
-roman records
Jesus existed no self respecting historian would question that, and personal insults are not very good arguement
No proof other then someone of that name did live in the area … why should I believe he walked on water again?

Jesus existed no self respecting historian would question that, and personal insults are not very good arguement

Oh, I'm not debating the existence of Jesus, I'm debating the "Son of God" thing.

And...erm, you missed out a full stop.

again......what does he want me to do...ive tryed church, even went for a while constantly...but the thought of god always refused to stick, and whats the use in joining the millions of heards of bible thumpers when i cant even believe, im not asking him to warp my mind, im asking for guidance, which obviously i havent recieved
Well, look at this way: it's not about him, it's about you.

Let's play an imagination game. Put aside for a moment the thought that god is some big guy up on a cloud in the sky, or some nondescript eternal thing existing outside our space/time continuum (a term I use loosely and with a smile). Put side all your knowledge of organized religions and imagine, if you will, that all you know of god is a glowing feeling inside of you. That's it, nothing more --no heaven and hell, no good and bad, no sacraments and rituals, just a glowie feeling, a knowledge, that's all you know of god. That is your relationship with him, how you feel about him. Otherwise, you are a complete person in mind and body, an individual apart from and a part of universe. An independent consciousness.

Now imagine that that glowie feeling is all you get. You don't get to know anything more about god. You don't get to know what the glow is about, why you have it, or what to do with it... but it is there. It's always there. Even when you forget about it for a time, as soon as you think of it there's a knowing that it was there all along. Our minds and bodies tend to filter things out that are constant, like the hum of city noises on our ears.

Then imagine one day you fall in love, and you find that the love you feel for your mate is very similar to that glowie feeling. You conclude that the glow is love for something, a love that is ever-present, a love that was around since you were born and remains until you die. It stems from a relationship, as real as the relationship with the other human, even though there is no apparent "other" for this relationship. There is just you and how you feel.

This is what I picture when people talk about god. We can only know god through our end of the relationship. Everything else (religion) is built up from there. There is no revealing himself, there is no making you believe. That's all up to you. You are a free, independent entity, a consciousness with a mind and heart of your own, and any belief you come to comes from you and is for your benefit, and yours alone.

First off, your lack of punctuation and grammar is really starting to piss me off. So here's a lesson:
You start a sentence with a CAPITAL LETTER and end with a full stop.
(By the way it's spelt "bugger".)

How do we know he sent someone to guide us? The only thing that comes close to evidence is the Bible. And don't use that as evidence, as that leads to the circular argument "the Bible is the word of God. It is the word of God because it says so in the Bible". If that's your only defense then don't even bother.
Ah, the fine noble art of pedantry. ;)

Well, look at this way: it's not about him, it's about you.

Let's play an imagination game. Put aside for a moment the thought that god is some big guy up on a cloud in the sky, or some nondescript eternal thing existing outside our space/time continuum (a term I use loosely and with a smile). Put side all your knowledge of organized religions and imagine, if you will, that all you know of god is a glowing feeling inside of you. That's it, nothing more --no heaven and hell, no good and bad, no sacraments and rituals, just a glowie feeling, a knowledge, that's all you know of god. That is your relationship with him, how you feel about him. Otherwise, you are a complete person in mind and body, an individual apart from and a part of universe. An independent consciousness.

Now imagine that that glowie feeling is all you get. You don't get to know anything more about god. You don't get to know what the glow is about, why you have it, or what to do with it... but it is there. It's always there. Even when you forget about it for a time, as soon as you think of it there's a knowing that it was there all along. Our minds and bodies tend to filter things out that are constant, like the hum of city noises on our ears.

Then imagine one day you fall in love, and you find that the love you feel for your mate is very similar to that glowie feeling. You conclude that the glow is love for something, a love that is ever-present, a love that was around since you were born and remains until you die. It stems from a relationship, as real as the relationship with the other human, even though there is no apparent "other" for this relationship. There is just you and you feel.

This is what I picture when people talk about god. We can only know god through our end of the relationship. Everything else (religion) is built up from there. There is no revealing himself, there is no making you believe. That's all up to you. You are a free, independent entity, a consciousness with a mind and heart of your own, and any belief you come to comes from you and is for your benefit, and yours alone.


And you my friend have one of the few beliefs that are at least a possibility on my end … my contention mostly is the religious explanation … I don’t “feel” that glow thing but I understand that that may change later
Though doubtful I will believe anything other then general deism

Okay; in other words, "because they say so." For the record, though, I'm not an atheist.

IOW, because natural and textual revelation support it.... It has nothing to do with what "they" (whoever they are....) say... I don't come to my claims because "they" say anything.... I come to my views, because I personally studied various views, and made my own informed ideas.... While I know others that also hold similar are the same; the fact they do plays no bearing on my personal beliefs and positions on the issue.

Well, look at this way: it's not about him, it's about you.

Let's play an imagination game. Put aside for a moment the thought that god is some big guy up on a cloud in the sky, or some nondescript eternal thing existing outside our space/time continuum (a term I use loosely and with a smile). Put side all your knowledge of organized religions and imagine, if you will, that all you know of god is a glowing feeling inside of you. That's it, nothing more --no heaven and hell, no good and bad, no sacraments and rituals, just a glowie feeling, a knowledge, that's all you know of god. That is your relationship with him, how you feel about him. Otherwise, you are a complete person in mind and body, an individual apart from and a part of universe. An independent consciousness.

Now imagine that that glowie feeling is all you get. You don't get to know anything more about god. You don't get to know what the glow is about, why you have it, or what to do with it... but it is there. It's always there. Even when you forget about it for a time, as soon as you think of it there's a knowing that it was there all along. Our minds and bodies tend to filter things out that are constant, like the hum of city noises on our ears.

Then imagine one day you fall in love, and you find that the love you feel for your mate is very similar to that glowie feeling. You conclude that the glow is love for something, a love that is ever-present, a love that was around since you were born and remains until you die. It stems from a relationship, as real as the relationship with the other human, even though there is no apparent "other" for this relationship. There is just you and you feel.

This is what I picture when people talk about god. We can only know god through our end of the relationship. Everything else (religion) is built up from there. There is no revealing himself, there is no making you believe. That's all up to you. You are a free, independent entity, a consciousness with a mind and heart of your own, and any belief you come to comes from you and is for your benefit, and yours alone.

you know i was beginning to think that you were some hokey woman just so secure in her faith all she can say is god is there thats it, get over it...but i guess i was wrong with the glowie deal..you make a realistic and deep thought as to what the faith is about..ill take it into thought, but following the walk on water, son of god, stop-the-storm-trick, and the parting of the sea stories in the bible, i still have a hard time with because they just sound silly and impossible..providing the only proof that the bible is the word of god is in the bible....but thats beside the point, me being an atheist, your reply was thoughtful, ill give it a try some time

And you my friend have one of the few beliefs that are at least a possibility on my end … my contention mostly is the religious explanation … I don’t “feel” that glow thing but I understand that that may change later
Though doubtful I will believe anything other then general deism
Power to you.

I was having a discussion with my Christian flatmate earlier, and she asserted that you could only get into 'heaven' if you believed in God no matter how good a life you had lead. So you could spend your whole life helping people, being a good person and improving the world but if you don't believe in God, you'll go to hell. Conversely, an immoral and self absorbed Christian would have no problems getting to heaven.
This is the reason I am not religiuos, to be honest I think that way of thinking and acting is absolutely ridiculous and I'd like to think that if there is a God he's unimpressed with what his followers are saying.
Does anyone else agree/ disagree or can anyone shed any light on this strange belief (I'm sure it's not limited to Christians)

'And now a quick prayer...O Lord, protect us from thine followers'
This is one method used by a number of religions to keep their followers in line, and is based on fear. "If you don't believe exactly how we say you should believe, you're going to spend eternity in hell." It's kind of the ultimate threat.

In my own opinion, fear can only motivate people to be doctrinaire, not motivate them to be truly faithful and dedicated. A faith motivated by love and compassion is much, much more likely to result in long-term, positive change, both in people's lives and in society as a whole.

Power to you.
:) the trick as you know is to realize your feelings at any given point in time are fallible and subject to change. I just don’t see that possibility right now (that does not mean that it is not a possibility)

Though you know my past with Catholicism (I believe) so you under stand some of my problems with the organization much less the religion itself

This is one method used by a number of religions to keep their followers in line, and is based on fear. "If you don't believe exactly how we say you should believe, you're going to spend eternity in hell." It's kind of the ultimate threat.

Good point. Also, the threat is meaningless to Atheists, since we don't belive in Hell. Maybe they should have thought of that.

Good point. Also, the threat is meaningless to Atheists, since we don't belive in Hell. Maybe they should have thought of that.
Repent, you Heathern! :D

Good point. Also, the threat is meaningless to Atheists, since we don't belive in Hell. Maybe they should have thought of that.

good point, and i also wanted to say, this is to my fellow atheists(not saying its like a club, but lack of belief in a god), is that the hell threat is stupid to us, i know im repeating noble men, because i think that when you die...i think everything stops, it like the state your in when having surgery, no nothing, besides i want closure at the end of my life

you know i was beginning to think that you were some hokey woman just so secure in her faith all she can say is god is there thats it, get over it...but i guess i was wrong with the glowie deal..you make a realistic and deep thought as to what the faith is about..ill take it into thought, but following the walk on water, son of god, stop-the-storm-trick, and the parting of the sea stories in the bible, i still have a hard time with because they just sound silly and impossible..providing the only proof that the bible is the word of god is in the bible....but thats beside the point, me being an atheist, your reply was thoughtful, ill give it a try some time
So maybe you are suited for some other religious mythology.

Good point. Also, the threat is meaningless to Atheists, since we don't belive in Hell. Maybe they should have thought of that.
Im INVINCABLE

:) the trick as you know is to realize your feelings at any given point in time are fallible and subject to change.
They are, nevertheless, yours. They are a part of you, of what makes you you. "Fallible" doesn't really apply --unless your health suffers, they are doing just what they are supposed to do.

They are, nevertheless, yours. They are a part of you, of what makes you you. "Fallible" doesn't really apply --unless your health suffers, they are doing just what they are supposed to do.
Well yeah … another strong deist atheist argument Is why would god build in a motivation (feeling) for something he does not intend you to do … there is a difference between leaving the option open and Motivating

But I digress

Well yeah … another strong deist atheist argument Is why would god build in a motivation (feeling) for something he does not intend you to do … there is a difference between leaving the option open and Motivating

But I digress
In truth, I don't have a strong handle on the whole "God as creator" metaphor --it doesn't make sense, except for the goddess religions. It *is* non-literal, a part of the whole mythology.

Well yeah … another strong deist atheist argument Is why would god build in a motivation (feeling) for something he does not intend you to do … there is a difference between leaving the option open and Motivating

But I digress
Continue digressing, that sounds interesting.

In truth, I don't have a strong handle on the whole "God as creator" metaphor --it doesn't make sense, except for the goddess religions. It *is* non-literal, a part of the whole mythology.
But we are discussing the whole “mythology” thing … And I suppose I was not talking about the literal me rather humanity as a whole (meaning may not be an individual creator while still being the creator of life)

But we get confused to argue this “mythology” I stepped into the framework and the assumptions it makes to argue its validity … my belief and your argument come from without that framework (more akin to my real feelings)

But I am getting a big vague tell me if I have not covered something ( no sleep for me last night lol)

But we are discussing the whole “mythology” thing … And I suppose I was not talking about the literal me rather humanity as a whole (meaning may not be an individual creator while still being the creator of life)

But we get confused to argue this “mythology” I stepped into the framework and the assumptions it makes to argue its validity … my belief and your argument come from without that framework (more akin to my real feelings)

But I am getting a big vague tell me if I have not covered something ( no sleep for me last night lol)
Nah, you're right. I shouldn't take the thread off topic.

Continue digressing, that sounds interesting.
Well the general idea (and stepping in the Christian framework here) that god created humanity in his image … we fell from grace by the eating of an apple (another argument I generally get into … could adam and eve have possibly made an INFORMED decision to eat that apple … but that is further digression)

For some reason not only are there external temptations to draw us to this supposedly dark side but somehow there are built in motivations for it (things like homosexuality)

He essentially not only allows temptation to eternal hellfire but also MOTOVATION built into us to also get us condemned …

Think of it this way … if we were cats

Not only would god Allow the devil to put a can of tuna out (that was poisoned) but he also built internal motivation to eat that tuna … but punishes the cat for doing what is in his nature (and before you theists get you panties in a bundle yes I realize that we have self determination … that does not make it any less of an asshole move)

Differing people have differing beliefs (to handle this purely philosophically).

What is generally seen in religions, is composed of various levels.

You have beliefs... These are particular views regarding particular aspects of things. These are very specific.... "I believe Christ died for my sins"....

When you combine the beliefs of a particular view, those are "doctrines" or "Teachings" (same thing) pertainig to the belief of a topic.

Higher on the scale, when you combine the thoughts of an entire facet of doctrines; under a theme, they become a "theology", that is a study of various doctrines in accordance to belief. Which are divided into seperate disciplines.

Soterology (Salvation Theology) [Calvinism, Arminianism, Pelagianism, Antinomianism (Hyper-Calvinism)]
Eschatology (End-Times Theology) [Preterism, Postmillenialism (and Dominionism), Premillenialism(Dispensational, and Covenential - Pretribulational, Midtribulational, Post-tribulational), Amillenialism]
Ecclesiology (Church Theology) [Episcopalianism, Congregationalism, Presbyterianism]
Theology-Proper (Theology of God) [Atheism, Monotheism, Polytheism]
Christology (Theology of Christ) [Arianism, Mancheanism, Trinitarianism]

And the list could go on for ages....

People generally adopt their particular theological views, based on their own determinations... I am neither in the same religion now, that I was raised in, nor did I go directly from that, to the present one. I'd find it pretty hard to believe that anyone in here is merely adhering to their belief, regardless whether they are deistic, Christian, or Atheist, merely because "Someone told them to".

Nah, you're right. I shouldn't take the thread off topic.
What else are we supposed to do this really is more of a general question on the validity of one of the beliefs of Christianity it lends itself to discussion of ALL the beliefs … analyzing a belief externally can be a very useful tool in that discussion

What else are we supposed to do this really is more of a general question on the validity of one of the beliefs of Christianity it lends itself to discussion of ALL the beliefs … analyzing a belief externally can be a very useful tool in that discussion

Best way to understand your own belief, is actual study of what everyone else believes as well.... Good call.

Being reformed, could I make a real reliable defense against, let's say "Arminianism" if I didn't know what those who adhere to particular Arminian doctrines actually believe in the first place?

If I don't even know what is taught be Dominionists; could I reliably refute their claims?...

I encourage, everyone, regardless of your personal beliefs, to persue some course of study in theology, before trying to develop counter arguments to any one persons particular beliefs.

Differing people have differing beliefs (to handle this purely philosophically).

What is generally seen in religions, is composed of various levels.

You have beliefs... These are particular views regarding particular aspects of things. These are very specific.... "I believe Christ died for my sins"....

When you combine the beliefs of a particular view, those are "doctrines" or "Teachings" (same thing) pertainig to the belief of a topic.

Higher on the scale, when you combine the thoughts of an entire facet of doctrines; under a theme, they become a "theology", that is a study of various doctrines in accordance to belief. Which are divided into seperate disciplines.

Soterology (Salvation Theology) [Calvinism, Arminianism, Pelagianism, Antinomianism (Hyper-Calvinism)]
Eschatology (End-Times Theology) [Preterism, Postmillenialism (and Dominionism), Premillenialism(Dispensational, and Covenential - Pretribulational, Midtribulational, Post-tribulational), Amillenialism]
Ecclesiology (Church Theology) [Episcopalianism, Congregationalism, Presbyterianism]
Theology-Proper (Theology of God) [Atheism, Monotheism, Polytheism]
Christology (Theology of Christ) [Arianism, Mancheanism, Trinitarianism]

And the list could go on for ages....

People generally adopt their particular theological views, based on their own determinations... I am neither in the same religion now, that I was raised in, nor did I go directly from that, to the present one. I'd find it pretty hard to believe that anyone in here is merely adhering to their belief, regardless whether they are deistic, Christian, or Atheist, merely because "Someone told them to".
I'm sorry that my "because they say so" was dismissive. I asked for the logic behind the idea that "crimes" against god are "infinite crimes" because he is an "infinite being", and instead of replying you essentially told me "it is written" that that is how God is described. I still don't have an answer to my question.

Best way to understand your own belief, is actual study of what everyone else believes as well.... Good call.

Being reformed, could I make a real reliable defense against, let's say "Arminianism" if I didn't know what those who adhere to particular Arminian doctrines actually believe in the first place?

If I don't even know what is taught be Dominionists; could I reliably refute their claims?...

I encourage, everyone, regardless of your personal beliefs, to persue some course of study in theology, before trying to develop counter arguments to any one persons particular beliefs.
Absolutely … I think a general theology class would be a great option (or requirement but that’s another argument) in high schools.
I personally don’t think you can completely understand your beliefs without looking at the bigger world around you, you start to realized the things (beliefs and feelings) that you take for granted and a study of the broader world may help you see those that you glossed over the first time

<snip>
That was interesting.
A question:
Imagine your entire life is controlled, quietly, anonymously and unobservably.
(Something like The Truman Show, but even more so)
Would you have free will?

That was interesting.
A question:
Imagine your entire life is controlled, quietly, anonymously and unobservably.
(Something like The Truman Show, but even more so)
Would you have free will?
Not if it was as you say controlled no

Not if it was as you say controlled no
This is why I find discussions like this fascinating (assuming we continue to duck the Their Name Shall Not Be Spoken, Lest It Summon Them). To me, if there was no way I could do anything wrong I would not have freedom of choice. I would have no say over my life.
Therefore there must exist the potential for me to do wrong so that I can choose to do right. (Not saying that I always get it right, but you don't need to know about that! ;) )

This is why I find discussions like this fascinating (assuming we continue to duck the Their Name Shall Not Be Spoken, Lest It Summon Them). To me, if there was no way I could do anything wrong I would not have freedom of choice. I would have no say over my life.
Therefore there must exist the potential for me to do wrong so that I can choose to do right. (Not saying that I always get it right, but you don't need to know about that! ;) )
You are assuming choosing “right” is a necessity … why so … why is “choosing right” a requirement for entry into heaven?

That was interesting.
A question:
Imagine your entire life is controlled, quietly, anonymously and unobservably.
(Something like The Truman Show, but even more so)
Would you have free will?
Truman did.

Not if it was as you say controlled no
Yes; even in that circumstance, you would have free will. Even if you were not exercising it, you would have it --unless the hypothetical situation specified that you had never made your own decisions, never determined anything within the confines of the scenario. For a living, breathing human being, such a scenario is impossible.

I'm sorry that my "because they say so" was dismissive. I asked for the logic behind the idea that "crimes" against god are "infinite crimes" because he is an "infinite being", and instead of replying you essentially told me "it is written" that that is how God is described. I still don't have an answer to my question.

I assumed you were talking about "infinite God" to being with....

The logic operates under elluded frames..... That is, the scope of creation, and God's operations, and God's attributes are infinite and multifaceted... There are discriptory aspects, which are appearant contradictions, but merely facets of operation of this "God".

God of wrath vs. God of Love
God of Justice vs. God of Mercy... etc.

In understanding of an infinite perfect being, his "creation" will bear that out. AS would his commands.... That is, they are "perfect" themselves. Transgression, against infinite "purity" of His commands, is infinite transgression.... That is, anything, however small, against absolute purity; becomes the virtual opposite of it.... Therefore the transgression against the "perrfection" of the law, is "imperfection", and infinitely "bad" opposed to the expressiong of "infinite good" as defined in context of the Creator.

This leads to other aspects... Such as the view of Christ, as a person ofthe Godhead... making the substitutional sacrifice, and act of infinite value, and capable of covering infinite transgression upon those engrafted in the act, through subsequent faith.... "Paying" for this act... (An Atonement, of infinite value, for a transgression of infinite proportion)... Thus the payment has value to cover the act... And judgement is satisfied towards the believer (in such theological model).

-the babylonian talmud
-jewish records
-roman records
Jesus existed no self respecting historian would question that, and personal insults are not very good arguement

I know this is an old argument, but....
1. You argue that the Bible is the word of God and therefore infallible, yes? So surely the Bible should correlate itself? Why then is each gospel (Mark, Luke, Matthew, John) different? Check them, they all have different stories or contradict at some point.
2. To prove Jesus existed you need physical evidence yes? If I want to prove that a man named Abraham Lincoln lived in America during the 1800s I would check birth records and death records and contempary reports. To establish the existance of Jesus, we have to trust the biased opinion of his disciples (hardly a sound objective source) or look in Roman records...and what is found? Mention of a man, maybe called Jesus, who lived in roughly the same area at around the same time. No miracles, no nothing. If Jesus was really so influential why aren't there hard historical records? You may say it was a long time ago...we can still prove who was Roman Emperor at the time though.
3. As a final aside, why is Jesus's birthday the same day as the pagan festival of Saturnalia? Isn't it suspicious that he was born of a virgin, exactly like the old Persian God Ahura- Mazda? In fact if you study it hard enough, Jesus Christ the Son simply replaces the Sun in all the old pagan belief systems. So there is evidence to suggest that Christianity is merely based on older, more ancient belief systems. I'm not saying this invalidates them- maybe it's the same God with a different name- but it certainly gives pause to thought.

I know this is digressing from the original topic but the whole conversation seems to have moved on in general.

You are assuming choosing “right” is a necessity … why so … why is “choosing right” a requirement for entry into heaven?
I don't think it is. I believe it is about accepting Christ's sacrifice on my behalf. However, I also believe that I should attempt to emulate him (in as much as I am able) and as such choose to do right.

Truman did.

Not really. His job, his wife, his neighbours, his home, what he ate everything was decided for him. He appeared to have free will to himself, but that was simply because he was unaware of the level of control being exerted on his life. You have a choice: salt or pepper. But what if what you really want is Tabasco sauce? Now what if you have never even heard of Tabasco sauce because someone else decided that you should choose salt or pepper?
You will not have what you desire because you are unaware that you desire it, because someone else has decided that you should never know. The illusion of free will is there but it is only an illusion.
How much worse could this be with a god? How much more thoroughly could your life be controlled and your choices limited? You would be less than a slave, you would be an automaton.

I don't think it is. I believe it is about accepting Christ's sacrifice on my behalf. However, I also believe that I should attempt to emulate him (in as much as I am able) and as such choose to do right.
And I believe that if there is a god belief is not necessary for entry into heaven

I don't think it is. I believe it is about accepting Christ's sacrifice on my behalf. However, I also believe that I should attempt to emulate him (in as much as I am able) and as such choose to do right.

There is a large philosophical discourse on the idea and coorelation between predestination, and "free-will" (or as its called Free-Agency) amongst some Calvinistic Theologians.... Earnest and John G. Reisinger, are two of the largest writers on the topic (though it has been covered early on by Horarius Bonar, and Arthur W. Pink as well).... Regardless of your views, it's an interesting philosophical discourse, amongst those authors.

So you believe in a vengeful God that cannot forgive and that only uses your personal standards of morality? Somehow I don't think God is the bigot.

Actually, no. I belive God should be forgiving. But if he forgives the rapist/murderer, why does he not forigive the man who, oh I dunno, saved some lives, but just happens to be of a different religion? Seems a more than a bit off.

And your right, I should stop forcing my own belifes that murder and rape are wrong on other people. Who says killing the innocent isn't moral? :rolleyes:

There is a large philosophical discourse on the idea and coorelation between predestination, and "free-will" (or as its called Free-Agency) amongst some Calvinistic Theologians.... Earnest and John G. Reisinger, are two of the largest writers on the topic (though it has been covered early on by Horarius Bonar, and Arthur W. Pink as well).... Regardless of your views, it's an interesting philosophical discourse, amongst those authors.
I imagine there is, however from my own personal views if I were to accept predestination I would then have to conclude that God is evil. As such, I am not really that interested in it.
As opposed to things like your post on Paul telling women to stay quiet. Where did you find out about that?

I don't think it is. I believe it is about accepting Christ's sacrifice on my behalf. However, I also believe that I should attempt to emulate him (in as much as I am able) and as such choose to do right.

Not really. His job, his wife, his neighbours, his home, what he ate everything was decided for him. He appeared to have free will to himself, but that was simply because he was unaware of the level of control being exerted on his life. You have a choice: salt or pepper. But what if what you really want is Tabasco sauce? Now what if you have never even heard of Tabasco sauce because someone else decided that you should choose salt or pepper?
You will not have what you desire because you are unaware that you desire it, because someone else has decided that you should never know. The illusion of free will is there but it is only an illusion.
How much worse could this be with a god? How much more thoroughly could your life be controlled and your choices limited? You would be less than a slave, you would be an automaton.
If he had no free will, he could not have escaped, and the movie would have been much more boring than it was. ;)

And I believe that if there is a god belief is not necessary for entry into heaven
Why do you entertain the belief in a heaven, then? If you're just going to ignore a stated requirement in an imaginary place because it doesn't suit you, why bother?

I don't think it is. I believe it is about accepting Christ's sacrifice on my behalf. However, I also believe that I should attempt to emulate him (in as much as I am able) and as such choose to do right.

Not really. His job, his wife, his neighbours, his home, what he ate everything was decided for him. He appeared to have free will to himself, but that was simply because he was unaware of the level of control being exerted on his life. You have a choice: salt or pepper. But what if what you really want is Tabasco sauce? Now what if you have never even heard of Tabasco sauce because someone else decided that you should choose salt or pepper?
You will not have what you desire because you are unaware that you desire it, because someone else has decided that you should never know. The illusion of free will is there but it is only an illusion.
How much worse could this be with a god? How much more thoroughly could your life be controlled and your choices limited? You would be less than a slave, you would be an automaton.

But that leads to the idea that to have true free will you have to essentially be omni potent … the ability to make ANY choice

I could argue that I do not have free choice because god determined that I could not fly un assisted

Therefore I do not have free choice

Actually, no. I belive God should be forgiving. But if he forgives the rapist/murderer, why does he not forigive the man who, oh I dunno, saved some lives, but just happens to be of a different religion? Seems a more than a bit off.

And your right, I should stop forcing my own belifes that murder and rape are wrong on other people. Who says killing the innocent isn't moral? :rolleyes:
What you said was that if God could forgive a repentant murderer/rapist he should forgive an unrepentant sinner because they occasionally helped some other people. That is you judged God by your morals. If all sin is sin to God, and he does not differentiate between it, why should he change that to fit you?
More importantly, there is no such thing as a wholly evil human. All people have good and bad points, and you are judging which bad points are worse than others, and which good points are better than others.
Your tone also suggested that said M/R should be unforgivable, which is why I suggested you were the bigot. If that was not your meaning then I retract that suggestion.

What you said was that if God could forgive a repentant murderer/rapist he should forgive an unrepentant sinner because they occasionally helped some other people. That is you judged God by your morals. If all sin is sin to God, and he does not differentiate between it, why should he change that to fit you?
More importantly, there is no such thing as a wholly evil human. All people have good and bad points, and you are judging which bad points are worse than others, and which good points are better than others.
Your tone also suggested that said M/R should be unforgivable, which is why I suggested you were the bigot. If that was not your meaning then I retract that suggestion.
I think he was pointing out the injustice in this supposedly just god

Again he can exist that way … there is no logic that says he cant do that … I just don’t believe someone with the attribute of “just” nor “all loving” would act that way therefore really does not deserve my worship

That's fair enough,I just don't understand why people can't see the paradox between a 'loving caring God' and the God who will condemn you to hell simply for not believing in him. They can't be one and the same, clearly, but if they both exist there most be two Gods right? And none of that's in the Bible.

Besides, you really think God would prefer to have religious nuts like Pat Buchanan alongside him then normal caring non Christians? If thats the case I'm quite glad I wont't go to heaven.

As far as I see it, believing that because you believe in God in a certain a way you will be saved is the most self obsessed form of self preservation possible....not exactly love thy neighbour is it? the message is, you can ignore all christian teachings and just believe and its OK- you're saved!
People always concentrate on the loving side of God but God is also pefectly just and holy. All sin must have a punnishemnt and as all people have sinned, all people must be punnished. However if u trust in Jesus, then u are save from this punnishment as he takes it from u. As God has given us free will unless we ask for it, God will not give it 2 us as He wants us 2 make our own choices

People always concentrate on the loving side of God but God is also pefectly just and holy. All sin must have a punnishemnt and as all people have sinned, all people must be punnished. However if u trust in Jesus, then u are save from this punnishment as he takes it from u. As God has given us free will unless we ask for it, God will not give it 2 us as He wants us 2 make our own choices
Oh and why must sin be punished? A just and loving god would forgive us whatever we did … even if all we did was not believe in him

If he had no free will, he could not have escaped, and the movie would have been much more boring than it was. ;)
He did have free will within the confines of his extremely controlled environment, which was not truly free will, however with an understanding of his world his choices were expanded and true freedom became more possible for him.
And it would have been duller than...some...horribly dull movie. (I have repressed any memories of the truly bad ones ;) )
But that leads to the idea that to have true free will you have to essentially be omni potent … the ability to make ANY choice

I could argue that I do not have free choice because god determined that I could not fly un assisted

Therefore I do not have free choice
Without complete information any choice is skewed, but that is the price of being human. For example, you are in a room with two doors. One is open and through it you can see (the wonderful situation of your choice, but it may be an illusion). The other door is shut and you do not know what is on the other side. If you choose the second door the first becomes unavailable to you. What do you choose?
We can choose to educate ourselves and thereby make more informed choices but that is the best that we can do.
The original point was why didn't God make you incapable of sinning, to which my response was that you would then have no free will.
So returning to the room analogy, imagine that both doors were invisible and impossible to open from your side. Would you be happier choosing or not choosing?
Also, within the confines of your humanity you can make any choice. You could choose to murder a stranger, or steal a book, or go for a drive, or sit there reading me spout off. :p Your choice.

Oh and why must sin be punished? A just and loving god would forgive us whatever we did … even if all we did was not believe in him
What if he can't? What if the nature of our sin alters us in such a fashion that we cannot stay in his presence?
What if a sinner in the presence of God for an extended period of time would be destroyed by his holiness?
By seperating them from himself is he being kind or cruel?

I think the sticking point for Christians, and non Christians is a misconception of hell. Hell is not punishment for wrong doing. It is not based upon what you do it is a choice you freely make. You can choose God or not choose God you pick, it is only available because of Jesus death on the cross. We make it complecated because we think we need to pay.

You either decide to choose the giver of all life or not. Simple choice.

You have the freedom to believe or not believe.

Hell is simply absence of the presence of God...

So the question should be, instead, where am I going and why am I in this handbasket?

What if he can't? What if the nature of our sin alters us in such a fashion that we cannot stay in his presence?
What if a sinner in the presence of God for an extended period of time would be destroyed by his holiness?
By seperating them from himself is he being kind or cruel?
Then he is no longer omni potent

Without the qualification of being all powerful eh really is just a “really” strong being rather then a god

Then he is no longer omni potent

Without the qualification of being all powerful eh really is just a “really” strong being rather then a god
So he should remould you to fit, thereby making as nothing all the choices you have made. So why let you choose?

I must go, will talk more tomorrow.

So he should remould you to fit, thereby making as nothing all the choices you have made. So why let you choose?

I must go, will talk more tomorrow.
I don’t know maybe he finds it important to let you choose

And I am not saying he has to change you to do it … I am sure an omni potent being could find a way to make you able to be in his presence
He is all powerful supposedly

There is a reason God doesn't just appear to everyone, and again it is to do with Free Will. If God proved his presence, then people would follow him out of fear and obedience, not out of love and righteousness.

There is a reason God doesn't just appear to everyone, and again it is to do with Free Will. If God proved his presence, then people would follow him out of fear and obedience, not out of love and righteousness.
Yet he seems perfectly fine threatening people with eternal damnation (not fear inspiring at all)

Not to mention he seemed to have no problem sending a piece of himself (Jesus) a few thousand years ago and “appearing” to all those in the area (not to mention supposedly performing acts that would cinch the deal of him being the son of god)

People always concentrate on the loving side of God but God is also pefectly just and holy. All sin must have a punnishemnt and as all people have sinned, all people must be punnished. However if u trust in Jesus, then u are save from this punnishment as he takes it from u. As God has given us free will unless we ask for it, God will not give it 2 us as He wants us 2 make our own choices
The justness comes from love, and that is what makes it holy.

Your philosophy, though, is the very reason why I would not become a Christian. Life is not a sin.

He did have free will within the confines of his extremely controlled environment, which was not truly free will, however with an understanding of his world his choices were expanded and true freedom became more possible for him.
All actions of a conscious mind are an exercise of free will, unless a person is coerced into doing something. At no time in the movie (that I can recall) was Truman coerced into doing something against his will. When his circumstances changed, it was free will he exercised to escape to freedom. He had free will all along, never lost it. It was truely free will. (Note, his circumstance of freedom has no effect on his capacity for free will.)

The justness comes from love, and that is what makes it holy.

Your philosophy, though, is the very reason why I would not become a Christian. Life is not a sin.
That and some of my past are some of my main issues with Christianity as well

There is a reason God doesn't just appear to everyone, and again it is to do with Free Will. If God proved his presence, then people would follow him out of fear and obedience, not out of love and righteousness.
So you are saying people don't currently follow God out of fear and obedience? What about all the people in the Bible, who God directly interacted with? All the thousands who He appeared to, commanded, struck with plagues, ordered into wars, etc etc etc? Why would He do all that, and why would He have His holy book written about all those things, if He didn't want us to fear and obey him?

Also, why would God appearing to us destroy free will? I know that George Bush exists, that he is extremely powerful, and that he wants me to obey him, but that doesn't mean I worship, obey, or even respect the fellow. Just because God shows up on Earth wouldn't do away with our free will at all. Plenty of people choose not to believe in many things that manefest themselves to us every day, so why would God's presence be any different?

Or put it another way: if the Christian God appeared before me right this instant, proved his Godliness, and demanded worship, I wouldn't do it. He would have a whole lot of explaining to do before I would even slightly consider the idea of possibly worshipping Him, and even if He answered every one of my questions perfectly I still might not decide to follow him. So there goes your theory :).

I think there may be a bit of a misconception here, have a look at this:

"Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery." (GS 22) Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.

-Catechism of the Catholic Chuch, no. 1260

The Catholic Church does not believe that only Christians can be saved. In fact, this has been defined as a dogmatic belief, making all Catholics who directly contradict this statement heretics.

I don’t know maybe he finds it important to let you choose

And I am not saying he has to change you to do it … I am sure an omni potent being could find a way to make you able to be in his presence
He is all powerful supposedly
He has made a way for you to be able to be in his presence: Christ's sacrifice.
If you did not accept it in life then you would have to have your opinions and beliefs reconstructed in death. Thus, your free will is as nothing, so why bother with it?

All actions of a conscious mind are an exercise of free will, unless a person is coerced into doing something. At no time in the movie (that I can recall) was Truman coerced into doing something against his will. When his circumstances changed, it was free will he exercised to escape to freedom. He had free will all along, never lost it. It was truely free will. (Note, his circumstance of freedom has no effect on his capacity for free will.)
Yes it was free will. I agree. However I was using it as an illustration of a point, namely that the more controlled you and your environment are the less free will you have even if you are unaware of it! Was it Truman's choice to never see his father again? To live on that island? No! All of that was decided for him by Christof. So my point is that a controlled environment controls your ability to make decisions.
If a god were to redesign your mind, beliefs, etc. you would have an even more controlled "free" will than a custom environment.
If someone else makes decisions for me I do not have free will, that is my perspective. If you believe that is not the case, fine.

Yes it was free will. I agree. However I was using it as an illustration of a point, namely that the more controlled you and your environment are the less free will you have even if you are unaware of it!
But that's incorrect. The less freedom you have; but you still have free will. Losing it is only a hypothetical exercise when speculating about god interfering in our existence, and god will never interfere. We never lose free will.

Was it Truman's choice to never see his father again? To live on that island? No! All of that was decided for him by Christof. So my point is that a controlled environment controls your ability to make decisions.
Is it a young nerd's choice not to have a girlfriend? Is it my choice to be born in Canada? Yes, a controlled environment limits your ability to make choices. So does living. But free will is your capacity for choice. Whether or not it was others who decided these things for Truman, he still had free will. He could change things if he knew about them, or attempt to. Truman lacked the awareness needed to make changes until the end of the movie. He did not lack free will.

If a god were to redesign your mind, beliefs, etc. you would have an even more controlled "free" will than a custom environment.
If someone else makes decisions for me I do not have free will, that is my perspective. If you believe that is not the case, fine.
Alrightee.

The way I see it, if God were to alter us in any way, we would not be what we are, we would no longer be human beings. Humans have free will.

But that's incorrect. The less freedom you have; but you still have free will. Losing it is only a hypothetical exercise when speculating about god interfering in our existence, and god will never interfere. We never lose free will.


Is it a young nerd's choice not to have a girlfriend? Is it my choice to be born in Canada? Yes, a controlled environment limits your ability to make choices. So does living. But free will is your capacity for choice. Whether or not it was others who decided these things for Truman, he still had free will. He could change things if he knew about them, or attempt to. Truman lacked the awareness needed to make changes until the end of the movie. He did not lack free will.


Alrightee.

The way I see it, if God were to alter us in any way, we would not be what we are, we would no longer be human beings. Humans have free will.


Or are at least convinced we have free will :p :fluffle:

Does free-will actually exist... or do we just think it does?

And what exactly is "free-will".

Does free-will actually exist... or do we just think it does?

And what exactly is "free-will".
I think it exists, but if we just think it exists then clearly my thinking is a product of my thoughts. :p

Or are at least convinced we have free will :p :fluffle:
There is no difference. Look...

What is will? It is a conscious act, the act of a consciousness asserting itself. We will our body to move, we will our thoughts, we will control over our emotions. Things done "against our will" are not done by us, but through us by others. So will is ours to command. And we can "impose our will" by commanding others. We all have a consciousness (well, the conscious ones), one that orders and organizes the world around it into recognizable symbols in a place (a concept) we call the "mind"; and we all have a mind. Everything in the mind is conceptual. There, we cause acts, we are the cause of the things we do; therefore we have a will. To say otherwise is to give away command of yourself, your conscious mind, to someone or something else, and I doubt anyone would willingly do that. It makes as little sense as denying consciousness itself. There is no difference between having free will and being convinced we have free will, because will is a property of the mind. Everything there is something we are convinced of, it's all conceptual.

All will is "free". Speculation about "free will" as opposed to God controlling everything (predestination) is just that: speculation. The term has come to be equated with "the capability to choose" because choice is a significant and frequent act of the conscious mind, and a good demonstration of an act of will. If we do not freely choose, then someone else is in command.

I think it exists, but if we just think it exists then clearly my thinking is a product of my thoughts. :p

Yeah.... but then, maybe you just think you think it exists.... But do you know it exists? Or then, maybe if you do, you may just think you know... Then maybe not, you may think you know, but then, even if you think that, you don't know necessarily.

Cogito Ergo Est.... I think therefore you is....

There is no difference. Look...

What is will? It is a conscious act, the act of a consciousness asserting itself. We will our body to move, we will our thoughts, we will control over our emotions. Things done "against our will" are not done by us, but through us by others. So will is ours to command. And we can "impose our will" by commanding others. We all have a consciousness (well, the conscious ones), one that orders and organizes the world around it into recognizable symbols in a place (a concept) we call the "mind"; and we all have a mind. Everything in the mind is conceptual. There, we cause acts, we are the cause of the things we do; therefore we have a will. To say otherwise is to give away command of yourself, your conscious mind, to someone or something else, and I doubt anyone would willingly do that. It makes as little sense as denying consciousness itself. There is no difference between having free will and being convinced we have free will, because will is a property of the mind. Everything there is something we are convinced of, it's all conceptual.

All will is "free". Speculation about "free will" as opposed to God controlling everything (predestination) is just that: speculation. The term has come to be equated with "the capability to choose" because choice is a significant and frequent act of the conscious mind, and a good demonstration of an act of will. If we do not freely choose, then someone else is in command.

Consciousness = will... ok. So, what is will? How does this "will" choose? How are its choices effected, does it choose outside of criteria external to this "consciousness" or does the will only choose by itself.... Is it independent of all other facets of human psyche? Or is it bound to the other operations in its choices?

Consciousness = will... ok. So, what is will? How does this "will" choose? How are its choices effected, does it choose outside of criteria external to this "consciousness" or does the will only choose by itself.... Is it independent of all other facets of human psyche? Or is it bound to the other operations in its choices?
I didn't say consciousness is equal to will, but that will is a property of a conscious mind. If a mind is conscious, it will excert itself; it will will. "This will" doesn't choose; "I" choose as an exercise of my will. Certainly my choices are based on internal and external factors and circumstances, input that my mind processes. I'm not sure what the psyche is, so I can't address that question yet. As to the last, I'm quite sure it is integrally bound to all other facets and faculties of the mind.

Oh and why must sin be punished? A just and loving god would forgive us whatever we did … even if all we did was not believe in him
because there has 2 be consequence. U say that if people were truly just they wldnt punish wrong doing. Isn't Justice the punnishment of wrong, there whatu r saying is flawed because you say that justice is the igonoring of wrong. Not believing in Jesus isn't a sin, however unless u believe in Jesus you will not ask for for forgiveness and there his death does not count as ur punnishment as you did not ask it 2 do be so. God forgives anything however you must ask to be forgiven.

because there has 2 be consequence. U say that if people were truly just they wldnt punish wrong doing. Isn't Justice the punnishment of wrong, there whatu r saying is flawed because you say that justice is the igonoring of wrong. Not believing in Jesus isn't a sin, however unless u believe in Jesus you will not ask for for forgiveness and there his death does not count as ur punnishment as you did not ask it 2 do be so. God forgives anything however you must ask to be forgiven.
And your talk about justice … some of the reason I have issues with the Christian god … in the end you can be an absolutely completely loving person to all of humanity

And go to hell because of your lack of belief

To me that is not justice and smacks way to much of a blatant attempt to indoctrinate those that want to believe deeper into the religion

Why must I ask to be forgiven? An all powerful all loving god would be able to save me if he wished without that

And your talk about justice … some of the reason I have issues with the Christian god … in the end you can be an absolutely completely loving person to all of humanity

And go to hell because of your lack of belief

To me that is not justice and smacks way to much of a blatant attempt to indoctrinate those that want to believe deeper into the religion

Why must I ask to be forgiven? An all powerful all loving god would be able to save me if he wished without that
The idea is that if you are truely loving you would come to Christ. Now, in some circles that means a Christ-like state, in which case it's not "belief in Christ" that wins you a place in heaven, but being Christ; and in being Christ, you have belief. However, to most lay-people it means just what you're implying --nothing more than believing that a person-Christ once existed.

I didn't say consciousness is equal to will, but that will is a property of a conscious mind. If a mind is conscious, it will excert itself; it will will. "This will" doesn't choose; "I" choose as an exercise of my will. Certainly my choices are based on internal and external factors and circumstances, input that my mind processes. I'm not sure what the psyche is, so I can't address that question yet. As to the last, I'm quite sure it is integrally bound to all other facets and faculties of the mind.

Free, yet bound.... So the "will" itself isn't free, but the agency of the person is.... (sic. free will vs. free agency)... The "will" bound to other factors.... But the agency of the person (their acts) are free.

And your talk about justice … some of the reason I have issues with the Christian god … in the end you can be an absolutely completely loving person to all of humanity

And go to hell because of your lack of belief

To me that is not justice and smacks way to much of a blatant attempt to indoctrinate those that want to believe deeper into the religion

Why must I ask to be forgiven? An all powerful all loving god would be able to save me if he wished without that

Save you against your will? And yet you complain about the idea of "coercing"?

Free, yet bound.... So the "will" itself isn't free, but the agency of the person is.... (sic. free will vs. free agency)... The "will" bound to other factors.... But the agency of the person (their acts) are free.
? You are using bound in another context, then, one of confinement rather than interdependence? There is no contradiction between executing will freely in conjunction with other faculties of the mind that it is bound to. Everything that goes on in the mind/heart/soul is bound to everything else: concepts, ideas, feelings. Are you imagining will as some *thing* separate from the mind, rather than the concept of a property of the mind?

? You are using bound in another context, then, one of confinement rather than interdependence? There is no contradiction between executing will freely in conjunction with other faculties of the mind that it is bound to. Everything that goes on in the mind/heart/soul is bound to everything else: concepts, ideas, feelings. Are you imagining will as some *thing* separate from the mind, rather than the concept of a property of the mind?

One of being confined to the operations of the other facets. Not seperate from them. The "will" as a facet of the internal operations of the person, "soul" and "heart" also confined/bound (in operation) to one another.... However, individually (as an operation) the will is not free (independent of the person as a whole).... However, the actions of the unit as a whole (mind, soul, heart), are [free agency].

I was having a discussion with my Christian flatmate earlier, and she asserted that you could only get into 'heaven' if you believed in God no matter how good a life you had lead. So you could spend your whole life helping people, being a good person and improving the world but if you don't believe in God, you'll go to hell. Conversely, an immoral and self absorbed Christian would have no problems getting to heaven.
This is the reason I am not religiuos, to be honest I think that way of thinking and acting is absolutely ridiculous and I'd like to think that if there is a God he's unimpressed with what his followers are saying.
Does anyone else agree/ disagree or can anyone shed any light on this strange belief (I'm sure it's not limited to Christians)

'And now a quick prayer...O Lord, protect us from thine followers'

Jesus says that whoever does not believe in Him is lost.

That said, we are not to "believe" in Him and act like a**holes, continuing in a life of sin. While Jesus' blood is sufficient payment for any sin we might commit, we are to try to be like Him.


John 3:16 (New International Version)
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

Romans 10:9-13
That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame." For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

Save you against your will? And yet you complain about the idea of "coercing"?
The difference is I am just "being me" the one that does not take anything at face value … including god
Its not necessarily my will … I did not make an active choice to not believe in god I just don’t.
If the Christian god will punishing me for being me I don’t believe he is a deity deserving of worship (by my moral standards)

According to my views of soterology (Salvation Theology), "will" can be omited (Reformed).

Salvation is based upon faith and love of Christ. Not works, themselves.

As a parent, do/would you reward disobedient children? Would you reward your child if they constantly said "I don't have to listen to you!"

Let's say you had to take care of your parents in their old age.... Let's say you told them that you only take care of them to get a tax relief.... As opposed to out of love... Would your parent reward you?

You put far too much value towards acts vice intents.... The concept of Christian faith is that intent means far more than actual acts. And to God, intent means far more than actual acts.... Loving God, is in fact, a commandment and part of faith.... If you hated your parents, how would you feel if your parents made you live at home? How would a sinner feel if God made them live in heaven? Would it be nothing short of hell in the first place to such?

Constructing a false theological framework, and then building an argument against a particular belief out of that artificial construct, is not a proper course of argument...

Unlike a parent there arnt thousands of people claiming to be your parent and all telling you different directions on how to do something and threatening to punish you eternally if you don’t follow their directions to a T
If my kid was in that kind of environment I would be much more forgiving then to punish him for getting confused

And who said not believing in this confusing environment is hate?
Again if my kid has never seen me … has conflicting reports to who his parent is … how to reach them … and the directions to get home I would not think he hated me if he got confused or was unsure if I was his parent or got confused on those direction
I would hope I would be a bit more understanding then that

One of being confined to the operations of the other facets. Not seperate from them. The "will" as a facet of the internal operations of the person, "soul" and "heart" also confined/bound (in operation) to one another.... However, individually (as an operation) the will is not free (independent of the person as a whole).... However, the actions of the unit as a whole (mind, soul, heart), are [free agency].
Will is not "free" of the person; it is a conceptual part of the person. I'm not sure what you're driving at by saying it is "confined to the operations of other facets"; are your thoughts confined to those as well? Or are you "free" to think whatever you want?

Reading about free agency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_agency_%28Latter-day_Saint%29) on Wikipedia, it is referring to ability to choose, rather than the capacity for choice. That is a much better term for the ideas Maniacal Me was addressing.

And your talk about justice … some of the reason I have issues with the Christian god … in the end you can be an absolutely completely loving person to all of humanity

And go to hell because of your lack of belief

To me that is not justice and smacks way to much of a blatant attempt to indoctrinate those that want to believe deeper into the religion

Why must I ask to be forgiven? An all powerful all loving god would be able to save me if he wished without that
I understand that, it is hard to believe, o.k but the problem is you are focusing on the easier bits of God that he is all loving and that he forgives all sins. That is true however we can not ignore the fact that he is also absolutely just and one of the things about justice is that if u do wrong then u get punnished.Any sin is enough for you to go to hell. However Jesus died and rose again so any who trust in him can be saved. Like i've said it is not a sin to not believe in Jesus however unless you do then you have to take the punishment of your wrongs. You say that if God was all loving then he wouldn't let you go to hell, his love for you has nothing to do with weather you go to hell or not. And God is loving, part of him died on the cross for you and as God is omnipresent, across all of time and space, part of him will be hanging on that cross for all eternity.
Lastly, you say that if God loved you he wouldnt need you to ask for his forgiveness God has given you freewill,that is true acroos everything, there are no exceptions if you read the gospels there are few if any examples where Jesus heals osme-one with out them asking him to. That free will applies to your decision of your belifs and as all choices have consequences, if you pick to go alone without God then you face hell, i'm sorry. Hope i havent gone on too long but it isnt a quick answer topic

I understand that, it is hard to believe, o.k but the problem is you are focusing on the easier bits of God that he is all loving and that he forgives all sins. That is true however we can not ignore the fact that he is also absolutely just and one of the things about justice is that if u do wrong then u get punnished.Any sin is enough for you to go to hell. However Jesus died and rose again so any who trust in him can be saved. Like i've said it is not a sin to not believe in Jesus however unless you do then you have to take the punishment of your wrongs. You say that if God was all loving then he wouldn't let you go to hell, his love for you has nothing to do with weather you go to hell or not. And God is loving, part of him died on the cross for you and as God is omnipresent, across all of time and space, part of him will be hanging on that cross for all eternity.
Lastly, you say that if God loved you he wouldnt need you to ask for his forgiveness God has given you freewill,that is true acroos everything, there are no exceptions if you read the gospels there are few if any examples where Jesus heals osme-one with out them asking him to. That free will applies to your decision of your belifs and as all choices have consequences, if you pick to go alone without God then you face hell, i'm sorry. Hope i havent gone on too long but it isnt a quick answer topic

And why is this belief in Jesus (which an all knowing god has to know sounds far fetched to some of us) required to ask for this salvation? Why can god just not ask me when I pass away if I want the salvation he has promised and ask me if I want my sins forgiven

Clear language
No mumbo jumbo
You would figure an all powerful god would be able to put this choice to me in a way that I can believe in and comprehend

The difference is I am just "being me" the one that does not take anything at face value … including god
Its not necessarily my will … I did not make an active choice to not believe in god I just don’t.
If the Christian god will punishing me for being me I don’t believe he is a deity deserving of worship (by my moral standards)

According to Scripture, we are unacceptable apart from Christ (born with sin) and must change to become acceptable. The most important step of the change is to follow Jesus, again according to Scripture. It's up to each person to choose his path... to accept or reject God's ultimatum.

According to Scripture, we are unacceptable apart from Christ (born with sin) and must change to become acceptable. The most important step of the change is to follow Jesus, again according to Scripture. It's up to each person to choose his path... to accept or reject God's ultimatum.
(sorry for just quoting buy my last post covers this)
"
And why is this belief in Jesus (which an all knowing god has to know sounds far fetched to some of us) required to ask for this salvation? Why can god just not ask me when I pass away if I want the salvation he has promised and ask me if I want my sins forgiven

Clear language
No mumbo jumbo
You would figure an all powerful god would be able to put this choice to me in a way that I can believe in and comprehend
"

Personally if I was god I would be a bit more understanding of the real life situation humans were in (thousands of religions , all telling you different things, most telling you that if you don’t follow their directions you are going to hell) not to mention my supposed word coming from a book with all kinds of errors with no present day “proof” or any real corroborating evidence

I would be a bit more understanding and maybe ask them when they die to make what choice they will