The Christian Hell

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Atheist

I know this isn't a question to me, but I'll answer it - and I'm very glad you ask it, because it does show a complete lack of understanding of what was said.

What he means is that the ToE cannot be cherry-picked to take the bits we like and ignore the rest.

Which is what religions do.



It's the reality, in your view, and it's insulting.



I don't make assumptions.



What do they believe instead?

What is your point?

---

Religion is cherry picked? Would you mind to elaborate?

I dont understand why non Christians bother to discuss Christian Hell when it involves something that will make them disagree and somewhat angry. If an aspect of Christian Hell will seem insulting to them it is common sense that they should dismiss themselves from being part of the discussion.
Its called a instinctive behaviour, if encountered by something they dont like, they should avoid it, like touching a hot pan, instinctively, the finger jerks away from the hot pan.

Let me clarify. Atheists and non believers I know do not completely accept or believe in ToE. What they believe in, the answer varies from each individual, unfortunately I do not have the time to interrogate each and every one of them.
My point, is this. That what you thought is wrong,
"Since when don't atheists accepts the ToE? "
There are some atheists that do not accpet ToE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weltanschauung

skasian, that is exactly the problem: you DONT question anything. you are like a broken record. and see, that which you repeat is only the song some sly producer stick into you, for you are just the record, not the song.

http://www.etc.cmu.edu/projects/ratm...marionette.jpg

---

How would you know whether if I dont question anything, sorry but you are very wrong. I question alot of things and most of these just cant be answered by humans. I question about why some periods of my life is so hard, I question God sometimes why I am not what He is expecting me to be, I question myself why somethings just seem so meaningless in life. I question myself what is worth the time and effort and what is not.
And yet you remark that I do not question? You have no authority to judge me in this way just because I am religious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

Religion is cherry picked? Would you mind to elaborate?

---

sure. eye for an eye or the golden rule. your choice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by billyjack

sure. eye for an eye or the golden rule. your choice

---

Eye for an eye? Jesus was against the idea, you should read the whole extract. Thats not cherry picking.

Golden rule being around nature? See your fingers creases, it has the golden rule, A4 follows the golden rule, shells and ferns are constructed by golden rule and so are many other things in nature. Thats mathematical measurement in nature. Thats no cherry picking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

Eye for an eye? Jesus was against the idea, you should read the whole extract. Thats not cherry picking.

Golden rule being around nature? See your fingers creases, it has the golden rule, A4 follows the golden rule, shells and ferns are constructed by golden rule and so are many other things in nature. Thats mathematical measurement in nature. Thats no cherry picking.

---

The Golden Rule in this case is not the geometric proportion - the golden ratio - but the moral principle that is often stated positively as

Quote:

---

Do to others as you would have them do to you

---

or negatively as

Quote:

---

Do not do to otherw what is hateful to you

---

It seems to have arisen in various places and times independantly and maybe even turns out to be the equivalent of more "sophisticated" moral calculi (Kant's for example).

The principle of an eye for an eye (the Lex Talonis, iirc) was repudiated by Jesus, but that's hardly to the point, since it stood presumably for a thousand years before him, as dictated by god in the Jewish scripture.

Peace and loving kindness

Z

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

Eye for an eye? Jesus was against the idea, you should read the whole extract. Thats not cherry picking.

Golden rule being around nature? See your fingers creases, it has the golden rule, A4 follows the golden rule, shells and ferns are constructed by golden rule and so are many other things in nature. Thats mathematical measurement in nature. Thats no cherry picking.

---

The Golden Rule in this case is not the geometric proportion - the golden ratio - but the moral principle that is often stated positively as

Quote:

---

Do to others as you would have them do to you

---

or negatively as

Quote:

---

Do not do to otherw what is hateful to you

---

It seems to have arisen in various places and times independantly and maybe even turns out to be the equivalent of more "sophisticated" moral calculi (Kant's for example).

The principle of an eye for an eye (the Lex Talonis, iirc) was repudiated by Jesus, but that's hardly to the point, since it stood presumably for a thousand years before him, as dictated by god in the Jewish scripture.

Peace and loving kindness

Z

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zado_k

The Golden Rule in this case is not the geometric proportion - the golden ratio - but the moral principle that is often stated positively as

or negatively as

It seems to have arisen in various places and times independantly and maybe even turns out to be the equivalent of more "sophisticated" moral calculi (Kant's for example).

The principle of an eye for an eye (the Lex Talonis, iirc) was repudiated by Jesus, but that's hardly to the point, since it stood presumably for a thousand years before him, as dictated by god in the Jewish scripture.

Peace and loving kindness

Z

---

Thanks for clarifying the other definition of the golden ratio.
Jesus was sent to earth for many reasons and one of them was to correct the laws of moses, therefore the eye for an eye seems to be one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

Thanks for clarifying the other definition of the golden ratio.
Jesus was sent to earth for many reasons and one of them was to correct the laws of moses, therefore the eye for an eye seems to be one of them.

---

May I ask then why the law of Moses needed correction? If the Bible is correct it was given to Moses directly from god. What was wrong with it and why did god hand down a flawed moral code?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zado_k

May I ask then why the law of Moses needed correction? If the Bible is correct it was given to Moses directly from god. What was wrong with it and why did god hand down a flawed moral code?

---

I asked this question when I was very young and I remember the pastor saying that nothing was wrong in the law of Moses however the reason for the correction was for the love of God for us. The law of Moses, some what the modern Jews strictly follow is very hard, and requires alot of attention and effort. Because God wanted less of these strict rules for us to follow, He sent Jesus to correct rules for us, rules that requires less attention and effort.

Oh yes, may I correct my thinking about the eye for an eye? I believe it is not from the law of Moses, but an idea that was arose before the time of Jesus, which according to Jesus, is wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

Oh yes, may I correct my thinking about the eye for an eye? I believe it is not from the law of Moses, but an idea that was arose before the time of Jesus, which according to Jesus, is wrong.

---

Deuteronomy 19

Quote:

---

21 Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

---

I think it's Moses!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

Oh yes, may I correct my thinking about the eye for an eye? I believe it is not from the law of Moses, but an idea that was arose before the time of Jesus, which according to Jesus, is wrong.

---

Huh? It`s not from the law of Moses? Of course it`s from there. It`s a part of the halakha and it`s in the Torah (as bazarov quoted it)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zado_k

May I ask then why the law of Moses needed correction? If the Bible is correct it was given to Moses directly from god. What was wrong with it and why did god hand down a flawed moral code?

---

The mosaic laws is "outdated" according to the NT (Matt 5:17). That means christians are free from following the laws and the punishments which are prescribed for some of those crimes (adultery, murder, rape and etc). The reason is because according christianity a person will "always" do good deeds as long he have the faith that Jesus Christ is his saviour. So a person with that faith will act good, ergo the punishments which are prescribed in the mosaic laws are not necessarily "flawed moral codes", but "updated" in a way by abrogation (which is something normal in religious scriptures , in the Quran it`s called the naskh-principle, the same is in hindu scriptures).

From a christian perspective you can say God is a "software developer". First God tried to enter in a pact with a nation (Israelites) and prescribed a whole lot of laws that they had to follow. When this didnt work (i want to clarify this is from christian perspective, for jews this is rubbish). God came with a new plan. The new plan is that he sends down his own "son" so humans can recieve salvation - with other words not a salvation meant for a specific nation, but universal. That`s why you can say that both christianity and islam have a universal doctrine for salvation.

According NT, Jesus Christ (John 3:16) freed humans from the law when he died for humanities sins. That is my understanding (as a non-christian) on why you can`t use the "tooth for tooth" argument on christians. Because that law is not prescribed for them anymore, so it will basically be irrelevant.

wrong post

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

Religion is cherry picked? Would you mind to elaborate?

---

I gave a list of hundreds of contradictions earlier.

Or, a subject which is irrefutable, since it concerns the bible - are the apocrypha. Men decided which bits went into the bible, men decide which bits get read in churches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

I dont understand why non Christians bother to discuss Christian Hell when it involves something that will make them disagree and somewhat angry.

---

I've been discussing aspects of religion for 40 years - I see no reason to stop now.

Why do I do it?

It's entertaining, and very occasionally, enlightening.

It enables me to see where the issues I wish to take on are, how deeply they're entrenched and trying to find possible ways to counter them. Also, to make sure that sufficient record is kept of the non-arguments for creationism to ensure that it never, ever gets close to being taught in public schools.

Not a word of it, however, makes me angry. My writing can look like that because I'm a forceful kinda bloke - personally and in prose, but angry, I ain't. I can get angry at wilful ignorance, but that's about the only thing, so you have no more chance of angering me than converting me.

;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

If an aspect of Christian Hell will seem insulting to them it is common sense that they should dismiss themselves from being part of the discussion.

---

Don't you think that's a pretty arrogant attitude?

I know you just can't quite grasp that it is insulting, and to some degree, nor do I, but the plain facts are that some people find it insulting to be repeatedly told that they're going to hell.

Things are insulting because someone feels they are, not because the writer intends an insult.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

Its called a instinctive behaviour, if encountered by something they dont like, they should avoid it, like touching a hot pan, instinctively, the finger jerks away from the hot pan.

---

So, you believe that the rule of "respect the belief of others" should only apply to non-christians? It's this simple - if someone else's beliefs make your assertion about hell insulting, then repeating it many times can only be disrespectful. Do we build fences around swimming pools? With that hot pan on your stove, do you put it right at the front, with the handle facing outwards? Even your own analogy shows the point - we think about other people as well as ourselves.

I always thought christianity taught that.

Mea culpa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

Let me clarify. Atheists and non believers I know do not completely accept or believe in ToE. What they believe in, the answer varies from each individual, unfortunately I do not have the time to interrogate each and every one of them.

---

That was my point exactly - you don't know, because you won't have asked the right questions. It's not a case of interrogation, but simply sorting the group of atheists into materialist/rationalists and other sections, which tells you about what they do believe, unlike atheism, which only tells you about what they don't.

I've explained many times that atheists comprise a wide range of people who self-assume the tag, which is how it's meant to be.

On the other hand, materialist atheists are a group of people who do share similar beliefs and I would challenge anyone, anytime, to find a material atheist who seriously challenges the ToE.

Anyone else's opinion is irrelevant to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bazarov

Deuteronomy 19

I think it's Moses!

---

Ah, thanks for the correction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Atheist

I gave a list of hundreds of contradictions earlier.

Or, a subject which is irrefutable, since it concerns the bible - are the apocrypha. Men decided which bits went into the bible, men decide which bits get read in churches.



I've been discussing aspects of religion for 40 years - I see no reason to stop now.

Why do I do it?

It's entertaining, and very occasionally, enlightening.

It enables me to see where the issues I wish to take on are, how deeply they're entrenched and trying to find possible ways to counter them. Also, to make sure that sufficient record is kept of the non-arguments for creationism to ensure that it never, ever gets close to being taught in public schools.

Not a word of it, however, makes me angry. My writing can look like that because I'm a forceful kinda bloke - personally and in prose, but angry, I ain't. I can get angry at wilful ignorance, but that's about the only thing, so you have no more chance of angering me than converting me.

;)



Don't you think that's a pretty arrogant attitude?

I know you just can't quite grasp that it is insulting, and to some degree, nor do I, but the plain facts are that some people find it insulting to be repeatedly told that they're going to hell.

Things are insulting because someone feels they are, not because the writer intends an insult.



So, you believe that the rule of "respect the belief of others" should only apply to non-christians? It's this simple - if someone else's beliefs make your assertion about hell insulting, then repeating it many times can only be disrespectful. Do we build fences around swimming pools? With that hot pan on your stove, do you put it right at the front, with the handle facing outwards? Even your own analogy shows the point - we think about other people as well as ourselves.

I always thought christianity taught that.

Mea culpa.



That was my point exactly - you don't know, because you won't have asked the right questions. It's not a case of interrogation, but simply sorting the group of atheists into materialist/rationalists and other sections, which tells you about what they do believe, unlike atheism, which only tells you about what they don't.

I've explained many times that atheists comprise a wide range of people who self-assume the tag, which is how it's meant to be.

On the other hand, materialist atheists are a group of people who do share similar beliefs and I would challenge anyone, anytime, to find a material atheist who seriously challenges the ToE.

Anyone else's opinion is irrelevant to me.

---

No, I dont mind non religious people like you that doesnt shout of offensive language about Christianity and its belief in hell since you are open to discuss without lack of respect. It is that some atheists and non Christians that gets themselves in angst about hearing somethings that they dont want to hear when it was their responsibility to put themselves in that position.

I am sorry for all the people that have felt the pain of me speaking out the belief in some Christians, but what do people expect out of this thread named as "The Christian Hell"? Wouldnt the rules that follow about Christian hell be inevitably brought up? In real life, the word hell represents the most insulting and abhorrent atmosphere. The thread that is called "The Christian Hell" obviously is going to contain some abhorrent components and it should be clear for people to realise this before allowing themselves to be into the discussion. I really have to ask you, is it my fault to bring up the most horrific truth about Hell? If it I have emphasised it too much, then I apologise, but I just want people to know that it is not in my responsibility to induce people to feel insulted, they should be the ones to expect that some component are going to be somewhat insultive.

It seems the rule that who ends up in hell is causing great harm for everyone. I vow that I never speak out this rule again. Now this rule is out of the way, what else is there to discuss about Christian Hell? There is not much about it, just souls in inexplicable pain, fear and all those detrimental emotions and feelings. Let see, if Christian Hell exists or not? Let us experience that ourselves in the end of time.

A thing I want to thank you about is your ability to control yourself when perceiving contrasting perspectives and views about Christianity that you may not necessarily agree with. You dont dispute without manners and respect out of your anger like some people here and in the world. And finally please, dont get any idea that I am trying to convert you, I have no intention to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Atheist

It's the reality, in your view, and it's insulting.

---

Just one quick question, my friend, for I do consider you a friend. Why be insulted by another's reality, as this is something you cannot believe and cannot see.

A quote from Thomas Jefferson:

"It makes no difference to me if my neighbor believes in no God or more Gods. It doesn't pick my pocket." This is paraphrased, as the exact quote is on my home computer and I am at work, but you get the idea. What someone deems worthy of belief and thinks you should know is no more insulting than for you to tell them you think they are being irrational. It should insult no one to hear someone out, and then agree or disagree and just move on.

That said, this thread should probably close, because this is getting us no further than when it first began. Some feel mankind is doomed to hell and others don't think so. That sums it up pretty good.

Do I think you are going to hell? I don't know you, and that would be judging, which the Bible expressly forbids. As I said before, I think Judgement Day will be filled with surprises for a lot of people, many of them who believe themselves to be solid Christians.

Sorry to post again after I folded, but I am certain you will forgive me.

God Bless

Pen

And to another friend, Skasian. You have openly made your point and have warned people about the reality of hell. Having done so, you are free from their blood should they wind in in that awful place. Further argument is unnecessary.

I think you are very sincere, and that you are concerned and caring. But what people cannot believe, they cannot believe. Go in peace, my sister.

God bless

Pen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

It seems the rule that who ends up in hell is causing great harm for everyone. I vow that I never speak out this rule again. Now this rule is out of the way, what else is there to discuss about Christian Hell?

---

Other people have different ideas, and the point of the thread was to find a wide spread of opinion.

I think we have had that, but maybe it's been a bit overshadowed.

No matter - we're all in tune now.

:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pendragon

Just one quick question, my friend, for I do consider you a friend.

---

Just as well - I'd be insulted if you didn't!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pendragon

Why be insulted by another's reality, as this is something you cannot believe and cannot see.

---

My sentiments entirely - it's the same to me as David Icke's supporters telling me I'm insane because I don't see the evidence of alien lizards. You may as well threaten me with the Cottingley Fairies.

I would bet that everyone in this thread knew before they entered it that some christians feel the way skasian does. The problem seems to be the repetition of it, which does come across as arrogant, "You're going to hell!" repeated endlessly gets under the skin.

In NZ, at least, we can laugh at it because Hell is an extremely successful pizza chain company which makes the best pizzas outside of specialist Italian restaurants. Many churches have felt insulted by both the name Hell and its highly amusing and Satanic advertising, and have made an immense number of official complaints to the regulatory bodies. The RCC has even asked its members to boycott the company.

To me, this is the identical situation in reverse and I ask myself why on earth those churches would care about it at all. According to their own theology, the people involved cannot be christian and cannot harm the church or its members, so why the fuss?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pendragon

As I said before, I think Judgement Day will be filled with surprises for a lot of people, many of them who believe themselves to be solid Christians.

---

Yep, we agree here, because if such a thing as a god exists, I bet humans have got him completely wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pendragon

Sorry to post again after I folded, but I am certain you will forgive me.

---

I'll give it serious consideration.

;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Atheist

In NZ, at least, we can laugh at it because Hell is an extremely successful pizza chain company which makes the best pizzas outside of specialist Italian restaurants. Many churches have felt insulted by both the name Hell and its highly amusing and Satanic advertising, and have made an immense number of official complaints to the regulatory bodies. The RCC has even asked its members to boycott the company.

To me, this is the identical situation in reverse and I ask myself why on earth those churches would care about it at all. According to their own theology, the people involved cannot be christian and cannot harm the church or its members, so why the fuss?

---

Mountains and molehills, or Jesus' motes and beams. Camels and the eye of a needle, etc. Much ado about nothing. My motto is: If things are as they are, deal with it. :)

When it comes to churches, I have, as a Minister, had a lot of doors closed for speaking my mind. But I am sure there are others who would be glad to hear someone like me speak. Que sera, sera.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skasian

How would you know whether if I dont question anything, sorry but you are very wrong. I question alot of things and most of these just cant be answered by humans. I question about why some periods of my life is so hard, I question God sometimes why I am not what He is expecting me to be, I question myself why somethings just seem so meaningless in life. I question myself what is worth the time and effort and what is not.
And yet you remark that I do not question? You have no authority to judge me in this way just because I am religious.

---

how do you know what "god" is expecting you to be? and why do you think he '"expects" anything at all?
what i dont understand is why do you see god as a person, but a huge one?
what i gather from what you say is that you see god as a gigantic superego, judging and pointing the finger down to his worthless children, an out of reach tyrant father, ordering around and expecting submission, or else punishment. i look at this kind of thought as infantile and under-elaborated, and that weltanschauung is the general rule in the world.
i dont believe in this god, because that is simply humankind's superego projection, and if there is something in this reality that is the demiurg, it is nature and the universe, and there isnt an outside force interfering and expecting anything, because the universe's laws are unavoidable and unchangeable. polarity and atraction and repulsion, that is "god". it is an eternal mechanism, but it doesnt think, cause we're the ones who do. a cloud and a rock and planet saturn dont think yet they're all alive, because the universe is alive, otherwise we wouldnt be here to question it.
therefore, god isnt "outside" of the world, watching and analising. god IS the world, we exist in "him", and he's not interfering and sending worthless parts of himself into an enternal ring of fire, because there is nothing outside of him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weltanschauung

how do you know what "god" is expecting you to be? and why do you think he '"expects" anything at all?
what i dont understand is why do you see god as a person, but a huge one?
what i gather from what you say is that you see god as a gigantic superego, judging and pointing the finger down to his worthless children, an out of reach tyrant father, ordering around and expecting submission, or else punishment. i look at this kind of thought as infantile and under-elaborated, and that weltanschauung is the general rule in the world.
i dont believe in this god, because that is simply humankind's superego projection, and if there is something in this reality that is the demiurg, it is nature and the universe, and there isnt an outside force interfering and expecting anything, because the universe's laws are unavoidable and unchangeable. polarity and atraction and repulsion, that is "god". it is an eternal mechanism, but it doesnt think, cause we're the ones who do. a cloud and a rock and planet saturn dont think yet they're all alive, because the universe is alive, otherwise we wouldnt be here to question it.
therefore, god isnt "outside" of the world, watching and analising. god IS the world, we exist in "him", and he's not interfering and sending worthless parts of himself into an enternal ring of fire, because there is nothing outside of him.

---

the philosophers god. a new word is needed other than god though--too many anthropomorphic and religious implications. i've always been keen on allan watts name for it, "IT"

agreed.

i watched this video once on youtube and i couldnt help laughing at it, because even though most christians arent this hysterically psychotic, i see all of the main characteristics of this lady in them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOpva_iit-8

now this is also something that makes no sense at all to me...
why is it that nature is so evil under their eyes? nature is everything that is pure, arent we the filthy ones?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weltanschauung

agreed.

i watched this video once on youtube and i couldnt help laughing at it, because even though most christians arent this hysterically psychotic, i see all of the main characteristics of this lady in them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOpva_iit-8

now this is also something that makes no sense at all to me...
why is it that nature is so evil under their eyes? nature is everything that is pure, arent we the filthy ones?

---

watched it: terrifying, vile, and cringefully funny. she's from the country i call home too...albeit the south

the beef with nature is some deep seeded self loathing that's beyond me...or self righteousness for that matter: too supreme to be part of the natural universe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by billyjack

i've always been keen on allan watts name for it, "IT"

---

Bit Steven King.

What's wrong with Lucas' Force?

i hear "down under" there's a rather large proportion of people who claim jedi as their religion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedi_census_phenomenon

i can live with force, it, the, spaghetti monster, whatever. just so the implications of the word don't involve a heaven or a hell

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weltanschauung

agreed.

i watched this video once on youtube and i couldnt help laughing at it, because even though most christians arent this hysterically psychotic, i see all of the main characteristics of this lady in them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOpva_iit-8

now this is also something that makes no sense at all to me...
why is it that nature is so evil under their eyes? nature is everything that is pure, arent we the filthy ones?

---

Those poor kids. They need to be taken away from that woman for their own protection. I actually couldn't watch it all, but it gives us a good, new way of understanding the subject of this thread, doesn't it? The Christian Hell. quod erat demonstrandum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Atheist

What's wrong with Lucas' Force?

---

Seriously? I know it might sound a bit humourless, but I do really dislike the earnestness with which that creed's put forward in the films, the notion that what seem to be the limits of natural law are really just the limits of our own preconceptions. It's very anti-Kantian. ;) And there are just too many people bumbling around with these kinds of ideas in real life for me to be able to see it as harmless in those movies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by billyjack

i hear "down under" there's a rather large proportion of people who claim jedi as their religion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedi_census_phenomenon

i can live with force, it, the, spaghetti monster, whatever. just so the implications of the word don't involve a heaven or a hell

---

hey, since you mentioned...

http://www.ooze.com/toolofsatan/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blp

Those poor kids. They need to be taken away from that woman for their own protection. I actually couldn't watch it all, but it gives us a good, new way of understanding the subject of this thread, doesn't it? The Christian Hell. quod erat demonstrandum.

---

quod erat demonstrandum indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blp

Seriously?

---

The name, not the philosophy.

This woman needs help herself. She cannot help others with that attitude. Christian is as Christian does and acts. I trust this isn't only way people view Christianity, through a warped lens given by a warped person.

God help us all if Christianity is degraded in this manner by those who profess it. May I never give the people on this site who know me as a Christian that type of horrible image.

God bless you all.

Pen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pendragon

This woman needs help herself. She cannot help others with that attitude. Christian is as Christian does and acts. I trust this isn't only way people view Christianity, through a warped lens given by a warped person.

---

Not worth bothering with - every side has its lunatics.

I know atheists at least as mad as she is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Atheist

I know atheists at least as mad as she is.

---

Me too! We agree on something! Woooooweeeeee!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pendragon

And to another friend, Skasian. You have openly made your point and have warned people about the reality of hell. Having done so, you are free from their blood should they wind in in that awful place. Further argument is unnecessary.

I think you are very sincere, and that you are concerned and caring. But what people cannot believe, they cannot believe. Go in peace, my sister.

God bless

Pen

---

Thank you for your words and your complements. Yes I agree that further argument is not required. God bless you too:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weltanschauung

how do you know what "god" is expecting you to be? and why do you think he '"expects" anything at all?
what i dont understand is why do you see god as a person, but a huge one?
what i gather from what you say is that you see god as a gigantic superego, judging and pointing the finger down to his worthless children, an out of reach tyrant father, ordering around and expecting submission, or else punishment. i look at this kind of thought as infantile and under-elaborated, and that weltanschauung is the general rule in the world.
i dont believe in this god, because that is simply humankind's superego projection, and if there is something in this reality that is the demiurg, it is nature and the universe, and there isnt an outside force interfering and expecting anything, because the universe's laws are unavoidable and unchangeable. polarity and atraction and repulsion, that is "god". it is an eternal mechanism, but it doesnt think, cause we're the ones who do. a cloud and a rock and planet saturn dont think yet they're all alive, because the universe is alive, otherwise we wouldnt be here to question it.
therefore, god isnt "outside" of the world, watching and analising. god IS the world, we exist in "him", and he's not interfering and sending worthless parts of himself into an enternal ring of fire, because there is nothing outside of him.

---

Let me just clarify what I believe in, and response to your enquires.

I do not believe that God is a mortal person but a high being that is far from comprehension. Because we are created in the image of God, I believe our personalities and emotions came from God as well, such as expressing love, hope, happiness, anger etc. I believe the relationship between a human father and his offspring is similar to what we have with God, therefore a Father for us all.

I do not believe He points down his finger at "his worthless children", what ever He may not approve is our decisions that lack morality and virtue. He created us for the hope of us being His children, able to love him back and praise Him with all our might. He WANTS us to respect and follow His Words just like any other father in our world.

Now let me share my view of God being "outside" of our world. I believe when He first created the earth, He created three skies, the blue sky we see from earth, the infinite stretch of sky existing in the universe, and the final sky called heaven. I believe that God resides in the heaven, looking down on us in earth with His Holy Spirit moving around Earth. Now let me ask you a question, how is a cloud, rock, planet saturn in a universe "living"? How confident are you to believe that universe is living? How do you define "living"?Cloud is formed by water vapour, a lifeless gas, rock is a small lifeless component of the earth crust being separated from the ground and planet saturn is a lifeless gaseous sphere held by forces of the solar system's belt. How is the universe "alive" when such motion and interference have absolutely nothing to do with being "alive".

If following your logic, every religious person must worship everything in universe because it contains God. There is a reason why people dont worship rocks, clouds and planet saturn. Because God resides in Heavens, religious people look up to Him and worship Him upwards, in a realm where we cannot comprehend.

God created the universe, and once again, the universe is not Him, and nothing inside the universe can be God, unless His spirit resides in one, (ie God takes form of a burning bush when encountering Moses).
I believe that God is a true being that exists in the Heaven, and it is His Holy Spirit that revolves around us everyday in earth, watching our every move.

And may I ask what is weltanschauung?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Atheist

In NZ, at least, we can laugh at it because Hell is an extremely successful pizza chain company which makes the best pizzas outside of specialist Italian restaurants. Many churches have felt insulted by both the name Hell and its highly amusing and Satanic advertising, and have made an immense number of official complaints to the regulatory bodies. The RCC has even asked its members to boycott the company.

---

I have a question about Hell pizza chain company, because I heard this often as a rumour, but just asking you if you know anything about this.
Hell pizza belongs to a large chain group, including Burger King, Demon Drink, Starbucks, Mudfight Bikini festival that includes unappropriate nudity in women.
There have been on going rumour that these large chain companies dedicate a sum of their incomes to a cult that worships satan and devils. It seemed odious to realise that Hell pizza and Demon drink dedicates its image in these devilish theme, BK playing around "Whooper" which means hitting and slapping on people, Starbucks with its central logo, which represents goddess of all evil and Bikini festival containing very immoral behaviours.

I dont want to believe in these rumours, however I just want to ask if you know anything about this large chain group all directing to such abhorrence to be true.

I love how atheism is slowly becoming a new religion, mostly being spread by insecure people that want to seem intellectual by underlining how religion cannot be proved through empiricism etc. It's not the point people. The point is that a shoemaker or an engineer doesn't need existential angst. That's religion's purpose in society. A doctor's job is to fix the gears, a teacher's job is to raise gears, and a priest's job is to convince the gear of the fact that there is a point in ticking the clock that is society. And now atheism is taking over that part in society, because we know enough now to be able to relax even when in the face of empiricism, but the truth? People, the truth is that we know nothing at all.

The conclusion? Richard Dawkins is a dork, and this «discussion» is absurd.

Thank you.

(Oh, and I do hope skasian was joking with that last post about pizza and hellish demon cults, because there's a grave difference between being a model citizen and just plain... stupid. Ick.)

(And just for the record, I'm an agnostic. Not because I'm too lazy to make up my mind, but because I'm sincere, though I do not expect that of you unless your ambitions are as high as mine.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leksandar

(Oh, and I do hope skasian was joking with that last post about pizza and hellish demon cults, because there's a grave difference between being a model citizen and just plain... stupid. Ick.)

---

If it was to be true, which I hope is not, all model citizens are paying their hardearned money towards evil.

skasian, i apreciate your effort to explain your point of views, you are extremely patient and kind in your words. but i disagree with every single word you say :)
i also think your view is filled with contradictions you clearly dont suspect, but...

"He created us for the hope of us being His children"
thats it? thats why we exist? thats the reason for all of this? that is way too naive and underelaborated for me..

"Now let me ask you a question, how is a cloud, rock, planet saturn in a universe "living"? How confident are you to believe that universe is living? How do you define "living"?"
the universe is alive and expanding, in motion, that isnt just an empirical assumption, everything is alive, the atoms are pulsing, in that rock, in my finger, in planet saturn, that is a scientific fact... the seed of life lies latent everywhere in the universe, given the right conditions for life to blossom, it does, because life is latent in our universe, because the universe itself is alive.
http://bugs.bio.usyd.edu.au/Mycology...llowLichen.jpg

i dont think you realise, but you have an anthropomorphicized vision of god, you give him human characteristics. you give him thoughts, and feelings and behaviours

"If following your logic, every religious person must worship everything in universe because it contains God. There is a reason why people dont worship rocks, clouds and planet saturn. Because God resides in Heavens, religious people look up to Him and worship Him upwards, in a realm where we cannot comprehend."
"How is the universe "alive" when such motion and interference have absolutely nothing to do with being "alive"."

movement and motion are EXACTLY everything that define life. im not talking about arms and legs here, skasian, get out of your box.
you know.. maybe if people "worshiped" nature instead of jhwh frankenstein, the world would not have turned into a huge pile of s%#t and trash. there is nothing holier than nature.
yeah, god resides in heaven, sitting somewhere drinking ambrosia and thinking "hmm, im gonna start some s**t today http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/39.gif"

"God created the universe, and once again, the universe is not Him, and nothing inside the universe can be God, unless His spirit resides in one, (ie God takes form of a burning bush when encountering Moses)."

"aham eva param brahman", skasian.

what is weltanschauung?
http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c2...sh/catcube.jpg

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c2...addonsmall.jpg


6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c2...lus-and-ic.jpg

"Battle not with monsters lest ye become a monster and if you gaze into the abyss the abyss gazes into you.."
spread your wings, ikarus.