heaven and hell?

[luke07930]

My first question is why would god burn peacefull, kind, loving non believers and forgive a cruel, selfish believer as long as he repents and asks for forgiveness on his deathbed??

I will point out that many Christians (as you may know) believe we are predestined to either heaven or hell. We can't do anything about it. So with this kind of doctrine, the Christian God creates people with every intention of torturing them for all eternity.

[quote}

Also if God is all knowing he knows the future before it happens, then he really does create beings so he can torture them, nice chap this god bloke.

[luke07930]

Hello Luke. Welcome.

I am atheist, and like all human beings I have a spritual nature. I am moved by music, by beauty, by humanity.

I had always rejected Buddhism because I see it as a religion. It also feels too New Age for westerners to say "I'm a buddhist". I always feel that they are into it because its cool and alternative. I guess I also tend to lump all Eastern religion/phlosophy together ie Buddhists, Hare Krishnas and TMers all being part of the same thing.

But, it seems I'd better have a quick look into it to get a better understanding.

Regards

Stew

Heh. If a westerner is a Zen, then chances are they are being trendy.

But Gautama was certainly inspirational in his abandoning of his worldly riches. WAY before Jesus, this formerly rich young man understood that one's possessions could easily "own" the person.

Jesus came along later to try to make the point that enlightenment is personal and the most valuable commodity.

I like to watch Christian Evangelists who tell people that God wants them to be rich, because they, themselves are. They like to say that God will grant them x10 whatever they give them in cash.

Talk about missing the point!!

k

(Edit) I feel so trendy

Edited per TOS:

The use of profanity will not be tolerated. This includes sexually explicit, vulgar, or other profane language or usernames as well as any any signs or symbols that suggests such. Do not post sexually explicit, vulgar or offensive website addresses (URL's) to the forum. (Eph. 4: 29)

Edited October 22, 2006 by IslandRose

[khalou]

Hello Luke. Welcome.

I am atheist, and like all human beings I have a spritual nature. I am moved by music, by beauty, by humanity.

I had always rejected Buddhism because I see it as a religion. It also feels too New Age for westerners to say "I'm a buddhist". I always feel that they are into it because its cool and alternative. I guess I also tend to lump all Eastern religion/phlosophy together ie Buddhists, Hare Krishnas and TMers all being part of the same thing.

But, it seems I'd better have a quick look into it to get a better understanding.

Regards

Stew

Heh. If a westerner is a Zen, then chances are they are being trendy.

But Gautama was certainly inspirational in his abandoning of his worldly riches. WAY before Jesus, this formerly rich young man understood that one's possessions could easily "own" the person.

Jesus came along later to try to make the point that enlightenment is personal and the most valuable commodity.

I like to watch Christian Evangelists who tell people that God wants them to be rich, because they, themselves are. They like to say that God will grant them x10 whatever they give them in cash.

Talk about missing the point!!

k

(edit) I feel so trendy

ZEN? REALLY?

Sorry about that.

k

[khalou]

Hello Luke. Welcome.

I am atheist, and like all human beings I have a spritual nature. I am moved by music, by beauty, by humanity.

I had always rejected Buddhism because I see it as a religion. It also feels too New Age for westerners to say "I'm a buddhist". I always feel that they are into it because its cool and alternative. I guess I also tend to lump all Eastern religion/phlosophy together ie Buddhists, Hare Krishnas and TMers all being part of the same thing.

But, it seems I'd better have a quick look into it to get a better understanding.

Regards

Stew

Heh. If a westerner is a Zen, then chances are they are being trendy.

But Gautama was certainly inspirational in his abandoning of his worldly riches. WAY before Jesus, this formerly rich young man understood that one's possessions could easily "own" the person.

Jesus came along later to try to make the point that enlightenment is personal and the most valuable commodity.

I like to watch Christian Evangelists who tell people that God wants them to be rich, because they, themselves are. They like to say that God will grant them x10 whatever they give them in cash.

Talk about missing the point!!

k

(Edit) I feel so trendy

Edited per TOS:

The use of profanity will not be tolerated. This includes sexually explicit, vulgar, or other profane language or usernames as well as any any signs or symbols that suggests such. Do not post sexually explicit, vulgar or offensive website addresses (URL's) to the forum. (Eph. 4: 29)

Luke! You didn't use profanity, did you?

k

[Prodigalson123]

Luke, I'm not sure why you think that not only can you ask for a debate, but also frame the parameters of the debate. Are you so naive that you don't think that scriptures, that the religion is based on, will be the core of the response when issues are brought up? If you want to discuss the validity of Christiantiy, my suggestion would be to look at other posts in this category to see some of the arguments. If you want to have a discussion, then maybe not telling people how to answer would be a first step. Debating is the presentation of ideas, then the logical examination of those ideas. Thus far all you've spoken about is why would God send good people to Hell? The answer was given to you, there are none righteous, no not one. Religions that believe that they can get to heaven by actions are, by definition, self-righteous. No matter the persuasion of the individual, everyone I've met is flawed and imperfect. Why does the concept that God would allow those who conform to His requirement (which is belief in His provididng a way to Him, his son Jesus Christ) then seem so out of the realm of possible? Do you at least admit it is possible? I also find it humorous how people like to state that this or that predated Christianity as if that in and of itself disqualifies the ethic. It doesn't predate God no matter the philosophy. Now the real matter is how do we prove God was before everything? How do you prove He wasn't? So, since the whole topic is grandiose, lets start with something small. I'm happy to have the discussion with you as long as it stays civil, and not insulting. Ask me a specific question and I will endeavor to answer you honestly, but....scripture will be part of it but we can dissect the verse to see if there is validity, ok?

Edited October 23, 2006 by Prodigalson123

[Prodigalson123]

well this probably won't be a long discussion if the first round has degenerated to profanity already.

[TheProcess]

Thus far all you've spoken about is why would God send good people to Hell? The answer was given to you, there are none righteous, no not one.... No matter the persuasion of the individual, everyone I've met is flawed and imperfect.

I agree that people aren't perfect. But I disagree that there are "none righteous", at least as I understand the term. And even considering the most evil of people, I don't think any of them would deserve eternal hell.

The situation we are in with regard to our fallen nature -- well why did God create Adam in such a way that if Adam makes a mistake then original sin gets passed on to lots of succeeding generations? We aren't really responsible for what Adam and Eve did in the Garden of Eden are we? So if we sin because of our fallen nature, are we responsible for it? or entirely responsible for it?

Why does the concept that God would allow those who conform to His requirement (which is belief in His provididng a way to Him, his son Jesus Christ) then seem so out of the realm of possible?

If faith in such and such is criteria for salvation, is it not arbitrary? Why should we have faith in religion X rather than religion Y or Z etc. Is that really the way that God would do it?

[Prodigalson123]

Thus far all you've spoken about is why would God send good people to Hell? The answer was given to you, there are none righteous, no not one.... No matter the persuasion of the individual, everyone I've met is flawed and imperfect.

I agree that people aren't perfect. But I disagree that there are "none righteous", at least as I understand the term. And even considering the most evil of people, I don't think any of them would deserve eternal hell. So do I err then that you think that justice isn't important? Using Hitler as an example, why would he deserve to go to heaven? If I can live my life as good as can be, but Hitler is allowed in then what purpose was my behaving in a reasonable manner? Jesus states that there is only 1 who is good, and that's God. So we are back to the same question then that is presented to all non-believers, what do you think about Jesus? Was he a liar, madman or what he claimed to be? If he is either of the 1st 2 then it doesn't matter what he says, but if he is messiah, then what he says is the most important thing.

The situation we are in with regard to our fallen nature -- well why did God create Adam in such a way that if Adam makes a mistake Not a mistake, but directly disobeying God. And the theory that our forefathers don't pass along mistakes or benefits to us isn't logical is a fallacy. Do you benefit from the people who went before you in the history of this country? Of course you do. The mistakes and successes by the originators of this republic have affected your ability to be free from the moment you were born. If you were born in the former soviet socialist republic, then your rights and dare I say your perspective would be very different then they would be if born in the US. Your environment and the actions of those who preceded you make an impact on your life. Not really that large a stretch in my opinion then original sin gets passed on to lots of succeeding generations? We aren't really responsible for what Adam and Eve did in the Garden of Eden are we? So if we sin because of our fallen nature, are we responsible for it? or entirely responsible for it?No we aren't "responsible" for it, but that doesn't change the fact that we can't enter God's presence with this imperfection. God gave Adam and Eve free will, and I've heard others say they think that God should've just made everyone the way He wanted so that no one goes to hell. Well in the age of mankind insisting that he have choice, that no one will make an individual do something they don't want to do, doesn't it strike you as hypocritical that the same camp of people will now say that God shouldn't allow us to choose where our destiny will be? Now maybe you don't like the choices, but to say that we should be self-determining, but then say that God should guarantee our admittance to heaven is seemingly talking out of both sides of the proverbial mouth. It's almost like you would say to your parent that you want to do things the way you want, but you expect them to support all your choices unconditionally, and to foot the bill also. Seems funny how that situation only breeds spoiled ungrateful children on earth, yet you think it should be the recipe for the afterlife?

Why does the concept that God would allow those who conform to His requirement (which is belief in His provididng a way to Him, his son Jesus Christ) then seem so out of the realm of possible?

If faith in such and such is criteria for salvation, is it not arbitrary? Why should we have faith in religion X rather than religion Y or Z etc. Is that really the way that God would do it?

God has a right to satisfy his justice as he sees fit. Do you think you have the status to question God as to how he provides redemption? It is the legacy f man to say that he will place himself as judge and ruler over himself, when in reality we wouldn't be able to survive 1 moment without God. Think about the silliest thing you've ever done, bouncing a check, losing your car keys, leaving the stove on and leaving the house etc. Now, can you really tell me that you have a resume to say you have the wisdom to discern how eternal salvation should be determined? I certainly don't. Every theology other then Christianity is a self-righteous religion. They believe that if you do good, you'll be rewarded. Some believe that you won;t make it to paradise until you have wiped the slate clean of your offenses here. Some believe that we are divine in our nature, and that this life is nothing more then a series of lessons to perfect that divine nature. Some believe that rote obedience is the way, that acts of charity and good works will earn you entrance. Christianity says, it is a free gift of God, that you accept that one person has paid for your errors, one who had no error himself, and that price was paid by God himself so you can come home, free of guilt and welcomed in perfection. But it is an imputed righteousness that is put on you like a new set of clothes. But....you must trust that Jesus is who he says he is, that his sacrifice was enough, and then show that you are a follower of him by conforming your life to him and living your life out of gratitude to him. Sounds like a reasonable deal to me. If a rich benefactor came to you, when you were hopelessly in debt, and offered to pay your credit card bills, house payments and car payments, but all you would have to do is tell others how you got out of debt, and dedicate the rest of your life to not piling up more debt, would you accept that offer? I think we all know the answer. But that's because you could see it and touch it and witness the benefit of such an offer. But, if you won't see any results until you die, would you be as willing? That's why it takes faith, not impirical evidence. And those who insist on impirical evidence will be left searching.

Edited October 23, 2006 by Prodigalson123

[TheProcess]

And even considering the most evil of people, I don't think any of them would deserve eternal hell.

So do I err then that you think that justice isn't important? Using Hitler as an example, why would he deserve to go to heaven? If I can live my life as good as can be, but Hitler is allowed in then what purpose was my behaving in a reasonable manner?

I didn't say that Hitler would deserve to go to heaven. All I said, is that he wouldn't deserve eternal hell.

Christianity would allow that Hitler would go to heaven if he had converted. To me this looks contrary to justice.

[Prodigalson123]

And even considering the most evil of people, I don't think any of them would deserve eternal hell.

So do I err then that you think that justice isn't important? Using Hitler as an example, why would he deserve to go to heaven? If I can live my life as good as can be, but Hitler is allowed in then what purpose was my behaving in a reasonable manner?

I didn't say that Hitler would deserve to go to heaven. All I said, is that he wouldn't deserve eternal hell.

Christianity would allow that Hitler would go to heaven if he had converted. To me this looks contrary to justice.

ok process, if he doesn't deserve to go to heaven.....but not to hell....then where????

Edited October 23, 2006 by Prodigalson123