Delta40 sighs wistfully and would like to comment further but fails to find anything effective to say at this point
She hopes effective communication will occur in this thread at some point and will drop in to see how well it is actually doing.
closes door softly and respectfully
That's a fairly sad admission really - that you put a doctrine above yourself. If you have a look at history, it's an attitude which has led to some pretty awful problems.Originally Posted by skasian
Seriously, I've spent over thirty years debating christians - my uncle was a Canon in the Anglican church - and the enormous majority of people I've spoken to haven't been hurt at all by attacks on their religion. If faith is strong, it should be water off a duck's back.
If your god is omnipotent and taking notes according to the bible, then why would it bother you if someone attacks the god? Obviously, the god itself can't be hurt by it, and the only result can be an everlasting death and torture for whoever does that.
I can understand your defence of the religion, but demanding respect for religion always seems a bit of a cop out to me.
Yes, you've been replying to other posts, but as I noted, the replies seem to be more of something taken from a Jack Chick tract rather than discussion. We want to know what you, skasian, think, not what you've learned from pastors and fellow christians.
I certainly didn't want it to become insulting, because that will just get the thread closed.
And your opinion is appreciated, that's exactly what I did want - an explanation of how christians view hell and reconcile their belief with life in 2009.
Which is two ways of saying exactly the same thing. From your perspective, you told us several times that the only way to the god is through Jesus Christ and those who fail will go to hell for eternal torture. What you're doing is playing Pascal's Wager, but instead of blind chance, you're offering 100% certainty that hell is the only possible result for irredeemable heathens like myself. It doesn't concern me a whit, personally, and I don't fear for the souls of my children, despite the god itself promising damnation for them for at least the next three generations for my disinclination to believe.
See, while I think Pascal's Wager is silly, I can see the attraction.
Where I - and many others, as evinced so far - struggle is seeing the attraction in a doctrine of eternal punishment. This is why most christian sects don't believe it any more.
Sure, the bible and Jesus say that one must love and worship the god or be sent to hell/wherever, and parroting the words of the bible is fine, but meaningless.
The doctrine of equivalent eternal punishment for all sinners just doesn't gel with the standards most christians accept for their god, and I certainly agree with the earlier suggestion that Jesus himself would have trouble with your version of hell and how it works.
I'd love you to tell me how that doctrine makes you feel as a human being who is personally living in a land of milk & honey in 2009, but repetition of "god says so, so it must be good" doesn't fire. I'm not asking you to justify it - which is what you've tried to do in a roundabout way - but I'd like you to consider an analogy:
Three people are about to be executed by flaying alive. (flaying = peeling off the skin, a slow, agonising death.)
One is a murderer, one a rapist and the other is an accountant who wrote a letter accusing the government of fraud.
Now, there is no point arguing that it's wrong for #3 to die, because the rules were clear and he knew that his letter would attract the death penalty.
During their time in prison, before execution, the rapist and murderer both confessed their sins, begged Jesus for forgiveness and were baptised into the christian faith. #3 is a fervent atheist who refused to recant his crime and in fact was virtually held in solitary confinement as he continued to try to verbally attack the government.
How would that make you feel?
Directly/indirectly makes no difference - as above.
Go to work, get married, have some kids, pay your taxes, pay your bills, watch your tv, follow fashion, act normal, obey the law and repeat after me: "I am free."
Anon
Ha, what a joker. Someone with bizarre, hateful, and selfish beliefs like yours has no call talking about common sense. If you want common sense: Any Creator who thinks it's okay to torment his children for eternity is an insane sadistic monster. I know you think if I understood I would realize that God has zero responsibility for torturing his kids. So I guess you think somebody's making Him do that. God the omnipotent has no choice. He created the entire universe for goodness sake. Hell was optional. Sheesh, very kooky, way beyond not common sense.
Thanks for not quoting the Bible though, that was nice of you, and a considerable relief. The reason I thought this was your thread was because you were complaining so much about people not saying what you wanted.
You say who anybody who disagrees with you just doesn't understand. Please explain to me and help me understand why the creator of this magnificent universe is insane and sadistic, not to mention dumb as a stump.
You have no intellectual or emotional access to how horrible your hateful religion makes other people feel. Your religion disrespects others, but they are not free to disrespect it. I know you are really proud of yourself for believing the torture-tale. Enjoy.
And don't worry about Hell. That's just baloney.
We work in the dark. We do what we can. We give what we have. Our doubt is our passion, and our passion is our task. The rest is the madness of art.
~ Henry James
Mal, your post really makes me shudder...
I am serious.
I would also point out to all that the subject matter of this thread is Christian Hell (which was created by The Atheist, by the way), therefore please do not partake if the only way it is possible for you to do so is in the way you have done.
Maybe it would be helpful for me to quote the Original Post. So I will do that and reply to the origianl post of the thread.
First of all thank you for making this post, it is a fine post and idea for a thread. I see no reason why this had to turn so ugly.
Yes as you say many mainline Christians do not believe in Hell. Or they might think it is a state of separation from God. It's necessary to point this out, as you have done.
The last thing you say is similar to the idea of the problem of evil argument against the existence of God. Would it be wrong for me to argue against this? God exists - so why is there suffering on Earth? As your avatar shows, some people on earth are suffering very greatly. But then would it be sane to say that because of this suffering, we should not live our lives? Someone named Wayne Dyer said something intelligent about this.
from here: http://www.4evayoung.com/wayne-dyer-...ention-part-1/
So maybe hell doesn't exist, maybe it does. I don't believe it does... if someone called my view hateful or bizzarre it would upset me, as I am not a superman. I sincerely please people like Mal to stop saying such awful things.
Last edited by NikolaiI; 01-02-2009 at 01:42 PM.
Here's what I've found.
Origen, Contra Celsum
Celsus lived in during the 2nd century, CE. Origen is refuting him in the 3rd century. Celsus' writings no longer survive in tact, but we have access to some of his work when Origen quotes passages for the purpose of refutation. The following is one such passage.
"Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her own hands. His mother had been turned out of doors by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a soldier named Panthéra (i.32)]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god."
Tertullian, De Spetaculis
Tertullian wrote this passage late in the 2nd century, CE. Here, he is imagining himself, after Jesus' return, mocking the Jews for their perversions of of the truth about Jesus.
"This is your carpenter's son, your harlot's son; your Sabbath-breaker, your Samaritan, your demon-possessed! This is he whom you bought from Judas. This is he who was struck with reeds and fists, dishonored with spittle, and given a draught of gall and vinegar! This is he whom his disciples have stolen secretly, that it may be said, 'He has risen', or the gardener abstracted that his lettuces might not be damaged by the crowds of visitors!"
The quote is from Morris Goldstein in Jesus in the Jewish Tradition, talking about Baraitha Bab. Sanhedrin.
(a Baraitha is a Jewish collection of teachings and commentary of the oral law)
"There is a tradition (in a Baraitha): They hanged Yeshu on the Sabbath of the Passover. But for forty days before that a herald went in front of him (crying), "Yeshu is to be stoned because he practiced sorcery and seduced Israel and lead them away from God. Anyone who can provide evidence on his behalf should come forward to defend him." When, however, nothing favorable about him was found, he was hanged on the Sabbath of the Passover."
Josephus mentions Jesus in Antiquities, Book 18, chapter 3, paragraph 3
“Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”
On top of these, there are the Gospels and Epistles in the Bible (I don't see why so many people are so quick to doubt their authenticity), and the Gospels that were not put in the Bible (Gospels of Judas, Mary, Peter, etc.)
Last edited by dzebra; 01-02-2009 at 02:20 PM.
I dont understand how someone can proclaim that they respect and understand other peoples beliefs ...yet, tell them they're going to hell because they don't follow Jesus.
Are you sick of yourself to contradict so easily?
I think you need a break
I said that whole religion was flawed. I didn't say I hated it, i barely insulted it. I pointed out a fact.
It's exremists like you who give it a bad name. You want respect for your religion? you're not going to get it by telling us we're all going to hell.
Your whole faith that you have built up is dependant on a book.
Just a polite suggestion - this is going nowhere, so maybe it's best to just let it drop.
I understand your frustration, but it only detracts from any discussion.
That's not what I'm doing, because I recognise the theology which covers evil and have no problem with it. I think it's rubbish, but that's just a personal view.
The bit I'm interested in, as explained to skasian, is how adherents reconcile the Dante-type hell with life.
As usual, none of which is contemporary with Jesus.
I don't expect that to have any relevance to believers, but it's factual.
Go to work, get married, have some kids, pay your taxes, pay your bills, watch your tv, follow fashion, act normal, obey the law and repeat after me: "I am free."
Anon
You really are looking at things with totally opposing viewpoints. You said:
"It's like believing that someone who has murdered, raped, and done terrible things deserves a place in heaven if they "just believe" whereas a good person, someone who has yeah, made mistakes - probably made some huge ones, but all in all has been a decent HUMAN being will burn in hell if they don't accept Jesus."
So you DO believe that people who have murdered and raped and done terrible things DESERVE to go to hell, but you don't understand how the "good" people could. You have really just told me that you believe hell exists, but only for the horrible, bad people.
Now see, this is where the logic does not follow. If there is no God ruling over us, then there is no morals. There is nothing that is able to tell us what is right or wrong, good or bad. The only thing we could rely on is human emotions, and if we relied on that, our entire world would be chaotic. So if there is no God, there is no morals.
It does logically follow that once there are no morals, there is no right or wrong. There is no crime, and there is no punishment or justice.....you wouldn't need justice, because there is no right or wrong!!!
You said:
"That is not only so morally backwards but, simply stupid. And i highly doubt a God that could create such beauty and mystery in our world, could be so stupid and cruel."
you have nothing whatsoever to measure up against. Who are you to say what is cruel and beautiful, mysterious and stupid? you are relying on your own thoughts and emotions when you decide that, and your definition will not be consistent, it will always change depending on what events have happened to you and emotional struggles that you have had. and also, morals come from a higher power, so if there is no God, there is no morals to go back on. If there is a God, he told you what morals are and how you should live by them. A person or being such as God, who does NOT rely on emotions, and is NOT constantly having mood swings would not be able to go backwards! He is not shaken by emotions!! he said it in the first place, and if he is not swung by anybody, there is no backwards.
My first question for you would be:
1) What do you define good and bad as?
and second
2) you said at the beginning of your post that:
"it seems to me that if all we need to do is accept what's written in a bible to score a ticket in to heaven, it's a little a bit of a cop out.."
a cop out of what? If it is too easy to follow, then why have you not accepted it? by saying this, you are showing to me that you want the hard way, and not the easy way. why is that?
"The reason I will not exhibit this picture is that I am afraid that I have shown in it the secret of my own soul."-The Picture of Dorian Gray
I wish I knew more about philosophy. I have been following this thread with interest. Rush of Blood - Good Show old chap! You wrote that just wonderfully .
It's like waiting for the next exciting instalment of a mini-series.
there is a vast difference between respect and truth. I do respect your beliefs. I had your standpoint once. I understand where you are coming from. But saying someone is going to go to hell is not a matter of respect or disrespect. it is a matter of fact or fiction.
If someone does not believe gravity exists and someone else says it does, is that a sign of disrespect? no. it is just opposing view points. I don't think respect is exactly the right word to use.
Are you respecting my beliefs? You are using your own logic against yourself. You have called Christians dumb, stupid, and when someone tried to explain their beliefs, you called it "the dumbest piece of bull**** ever." The point of this is not to insult people, but to get their minds working, thinking, and maybe re looking the issue over. Insults and disrespect will get you nowhere; it will only get you enemies.
"The reason I will not exhibit this picture is that I am afraid that I have shown in it the secret of my own soul."-The Picture of Dorian Gray
You said:
It's exremists like you who give it a bad name. You want respect for your religion? you're not going to get it by telling us we're all going to hell.
So give us an alternative. how do we gain your respect? what exactly are you looking for?
"The reason I will not exhibit this picture is that I am afraid that I have shown in it the secret of my own soul."-The Picture of Dorian Gray
I know nobody is taking note of what I say but I must say this. It is fair to say religion is flawed. I do wish to point out that all systems created by humankind are flawed. Democracy, communism, education, health, infrastructure etc. Religion is not an exception. Do flaws in a system make them useless and obselete?
I must make note that you have used the term 'religion' as reference to all religions in the world. What exactly is it that makes religions, in general, flawed? Is there one flaw tying them together?
"The reason I will not exhibit this picture is that I am afraid that I have shown in it the secret of my own soul."-The Picture of Dorian Gray
RoB I am referring to religions in general. I mean that nothing can be perfect. Our creator is. We are not. Our interpretations and consequent formations of religions are not. They are flawed. Imperfect. They are as flawed as any other system we have created in our societies. We can strive to perfect what we have created perhaps. I'm not a philosopher. You seem like a deep thinking person. This is my understanding. It is arrogant to me to suggest that religion above any other system is perfect while nothing else is. It is not a judgment, simply an observation. call it a sociological one. I don't have the knowledge to discuss at a micro level how those systems are flawed but that isn't the point. It is fair to say such systems are not without flaws but it does not make them obsolete. They are still a necessary function despite their imperfections.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
