Total posts: 2,082
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
The Old Testament is never what true Christians devout themselves too
Then why is it in every bible? Shouldn't it be discarded entirely to clear up some of this confusion?
There have many LGBTQ+ people who have been relieved of sin if they step into the church and are forgiven.
Yeah, many of them are in the clergy. Badumpump.
Seriously, many also suffer severe emotional damage because they're gay and Christian and told that the urges god gave them are a curse to be ignored, otherwise they'll be ostracized, their families will shun them, and they'll burn in hell in a lake of fire forever. God wired them wrong but it's their responsibility.
Created:
Posted in:
Sorry if I'm late here, but am I correct that one argument is "Well, they don't hate gays per se, they hate that they have non-reproductive sexual activity?" It's akin to they don't hate gays, they hate what they do. I hope that's incorrect and I'm just in TLDR mode, but there's an awful lot of talk about that. Wouldn't that make getting a blowie from your wife the same as being gay, and punishable by stoning in the streets according to Levitican law?
It seems to me like such an argument is just some weird permission structure for discrimination. Anyone ever heard of a group of people harassing a gay person on the street of (insert Christian-heavy town here, say Birmingham AL) by saying "YOUR SEXUAL ACTIVITY ISN'T REPRODUCTIVE!" Any gay bashers admit to dragging a gay kid behind their truck because he didn't have a desire to have reproductive sex? Would it be right for a grown woman's family to disown her because it came to light that her husband went down on her? I don't know man, I think the ones that DO hate them would look for any reason to do so, and having one in the bible that says it's an abomination unto the lord and sanctioning harassment is good enough. For the record, I don't think the majority of Christians DO hate homosexuals. I think they don't know many, and I think even the ones that do largely compartmentalize that their faith demands they hate them for any reason.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
You mean the evidence overwhelmingly supports that evolution via natural selection is responsible for the DIVERSITY of life. Not life itself. Where the first self-replicating cells came from, the ones that developed into the first form of what we'd say is life, is still a matter of debate.The irrefutable evidence that overwhelmingly supports the fact that life is a result of evolution by natural selection very much puts the kibosh on any notion that life was in any way created.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
I think you're forgetting that one of the rules is not to ask questions. BUt then maybe you're remembering, there are other rules that say it's fine to ask questions, just don't expect to understand the answer. So...that should clear it up.
Though this question always seems sticky. When we change our minds, it's because we've thought better of a previous decision or position. Oftentimes we feel we've been mistaken, and now need to correct ourselves. Is it possible for god to have been mistaken, that's really the question. Or, did god just do it to fk with people? Like for his own amusement. Did he always know he was going to change his mind?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
I'm asking you if you think t would have stopped slavery. Can you answer?
So you're asking me if a verse that isn't in the bible would have prevented something that happened, a lot, and was perpetuated BY BELIEVERS USING THE BIBLE AS SUPPORT? I'm not sure it would have stopped it everywhere for all time as the bible doesn't apply to everyone at every time according to some of your arguments, but for the sake of brevity, I'll say "probably not." But again, the verse "Don't own slaves" isn't in any of the 60+ books of the bible, so there's little to dispute here.
Where does this verse, which I've responded to in the quote, say "anyone"? It says "Israelite."
Deut 24:7 - If someone is caught kidnapping a fellow Israelite and treating or selling them as a slave, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you.
And selling who you kidnapped. Lol. The verse doesn't say what he wants. Was it not you asking for a verse prohibiting owning a human being?
It doesn't prohibit slavery, I'm sorry. This would be a very easy argument for you if, among the hundreds of prohibitions in the bible, slavery was actually called out as wrong by name and never contradicted within the bible, you know. "Don't kidnap and sell people" =/= "Don't own anyone." It simply isn't, that's not how words work, partner.
That's new! It's in the bible, written by an Apostle, saying slavery is wrong, but it's only the writer's opinion. Hee! Hee!
THe passage isn't attributed to Jesus or God, so what else would it be? A letter, written by a regular old person, unless you want to demonstrate otherwise, is just one man's opinion. Timothy doesn't make commandments, right?
The thread is about whether Christian doctrine allows slavery, not whether the Bible is written the way you like. In dodging my question, you've asked me 5 frivolous ones.
Cool, because it clearly does!
What part of, "treating or selling them as a slave, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you." do you not understand?
THe part that says "don't own slaves," because it isn't in there. The slave owner isn't mentioned, for example...but the kidnapper is. That is how English words. If that said slave owner, you'd have no argument, and slavery, at least the brand propped up in America by Christian values which have already been quoted, wouldn't have had god on its side for so long.
You keep making the same mistake. Look here what you quoted, but didn't cite:
If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and sell themselves to you, do not make them work as slaves.
To whom does this verse apply? I'll give you a hint. I bolded it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
This is exceptionally curious. Are you saying that god was in fact powerless to stop slavery, or that he decided not to bother adding this verse because "Eh, people are going to do it anyway"? I don't get it, it's almost like you're saying the bible overblows god's actual practical powers ("it wouldn't have stopped anything") or you're saying the bible is somehow incomplete or unclear (another word for this would be "errant", the opposite of INERRANT) and we have to fall back on man's interpretation as being the issue that causes all the trouble. But....since god made people according to you, and god either wrote or inspired the bible according to you, and people are flawed and interpretations vary so widely, aren't you then saying god designed people poorly, wrote a book that does't make sense without the interpretation by his error prone other creation, and is therefore at fault for the atrocities that arise from his flawed creation trying to figure out his inscrutable book?Did god have the power to add a verse saying "Slavery is not permitted under any circumstances"?Do you think that would have stopped slavery? Really?
If only there were a reliable way to figure out whose interpretation of the book, whose native language is such a small percentage of the world (Why not write it in Spanish if you're playing the percentages) and barely spoken across most of it, is correct! How can we tell?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
<br>When I post one, they say it is only for Israelis, not gentiles.When I show it prohibits slavery for anyone, they complain that it isn't worded how they like!
Feel free to make this case. "IT isn't worded how they'd like" isn't the same as "That's not what it says."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Exodus 21:16 - Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession.
Where does this verse say "slave" or "slavery"? It says kidnap. It doesn't have anything to do with slaves purchased legally from non-Israelite tribes. This can't be the verse that according to you 'unequivocally prohibits" slavery. What it unequivocally prohibits is kidnapping.
It is impossible for a human being to own another human being, so the bible makes no law against impossibilities.
Sure looks really possible according to American history. Plantation slaves were bought and sold, owned like cattle, willed like furniture down generations, and their owners used the bible to prop up that ownership right. Let's look at the other four:
Deut 23:15 - If a slave has taken refuge with you, do not hand them over to their master.
This doesn't prohibit slavery. It says don't return escaped slaves. That's not the same thing by a long shot. It could say "Don't own slaves at all." It doesn't.
1 Timothy 1:10 - for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine
Odd that homosexuals = slave traders = those that kill their parents. It looks like "law breakers" is the real concern here if you look at the wider context of the passage. Great! So all we need is the verse showing that any form of chattel slavery is against the law. Which...you haven't been able to produce. That makes this Timothy's opinion. Maybe reality resides between HIS ears?
Deut 24:7 - If someone is caught kidnapping a fellow Israelite and treating or selling them as a slave, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you.
Only a problem to sell a fellow Israelite, not a prohibition on anyone else being sold. Not to mention the bible has passages allowing the Hebrews to take slaves as the spoils of war. Including sex slaves. Which I bet you call "wives" and say "but it was for their own good! Getting repeatedly raped was far easier than trying to survive on your own as a woman!"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Did god have the power to add a verse saying "Slavery is not permitted under any circumstances"?
This is the real difficulty. The bible's plenty happy to tell you not to wear mixed cloth. It's plenty happy to condemn you for thought crimes like envy. Stone non-virgin women in front of their dads. But it seems to have skipped the verse that very clearly and simply states "Don't own another human being as property." There's simply no way around it. Yes, it prohibits an israelite from owning an israelite, but as you point out, it also lays out how to treat your foreign born slaves, how to purchase them, from whom, etc. THe fact that both sides have used the bible to support their arguments means it's really poorly laid out in the book what the actual edict is. All of it could have been solved with a commandment or a saying from Jesus someplace, but nope!
Must have been lost in the same draft as the commandment "Thou shalt not rape."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Thanks! Who'd have guessed the best way to get you to zip it was simply to tell you to make your case, irony isn't quite dead yet! Happy wednesday.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Dude, it's the internet. If you want to say something, say it. If I feel like it warrants response, I'll respond to it. I don't think you really are interested in any good faith discussion, as you didn't address the difference between morals and laws. The bottom line is very likely we agree on what is or isn't moral (NOT LEGAL) for the most part.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
So, will you work with me on figuring out when actions are moral?
I already said feel free.
No I'm not.
So you didn;t SAY this in post 48?
A citizen in France is subject to different laws than you. A husband is subject to different laws than you. An adult is subject to different laws than a child.
Laws =/= morality. These are referring to laws. You and your daughter's differences are not morals, either. Those are called RULES. Not morals. The former may be undergirded by the latter, but the latter is not dependent on the former. A two year old toruting an animal is indeed still immoral. Torture is done on purpose. Accidentally stepping on a dog's paw is something you wouldn't admonish a child for. Intentionally stomping on the same dog's paw is immoral and you'd admonish the child as such. I'd love to see the people who've told you the Germans were victims of genocide, when there were no orders to kill them to the last living being and all their livestock too.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
There isn't any real difference between the two, that might be the stumbling block. I would definitely suggest reading about it, it's fascinating.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
The answer is probably not, because evolution is just the culmination of adaptations over an immense amount of generations and time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
<br>A citizen in France is subject to different laws than you. A husband is subject to different laws than you. An adult is subject to different laws than a child. Please tell me you understand the simple concept that the morality of an action is affected by who a person is.
You're conflating a legal argument with a moral argument, they're not the same. It's never moral at any age to torture an animal, for example. Is it ever moral to drown a newborn? It's never moral to commit a genocide, can we agree on that? It might have been legal for the lord of a feudal land to claim the right to sexual conquest of any woman who was getting married on his land before her husband could, against her will. It was LEGAL. Was it MORAL?
. I will present my argument in stages, you can ask questions or rebut, and we will not progress to the next stage till we both agree.
Feel free.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
<br>oh I dunno, is adaptation random or planned?
Mutation is random. This happens at sub-cellular level (most people think "Missing link" or "x men", this is entirely wrong) over thousands and thousands of years. Adaptation is not random at all, but it's not planned, it's similar to when the edges get worn off a rock in a stream. It's a response. I'm not an evolutionary biologist, but there's a lot of really interesting books on the subject. We can shape species artificially through artificial selection (See: almost every breed of dog), but true evolution happens with no apparent hand at the wheel.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
We'll be egregiously off topic if I continue. Thanks for answering all the same!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Adaptation is the process of adjusting something to better match it's environment or situation.evolution is the change of one species into two or two becoming like one, changing from one thing into something different.
What makes them mutually exclusive? Natural selection via adaptation is basically how evolution works.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I don't think I understand then your determination of "purpose." I guess a lot of people around here use the word with an invisible capital P, like PGA does this a lot, that life has no purpose without a set of beliefs. I don't see replication as a purpose as much as I do a necessary drive, not in this way. But in the end, you're ascribing the purpose to the virus the same as I have done with the rock: after the fact. Would you say once reproduction is accounted for, that all other 'purposes' are difficult to figure out? Like why the F are there so many disgusting versions of wasps? Wouldn't one of these nightmares have been more than enough?!?
Also what's the difference in your view between adaptation and evolution, exactly?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
a rock has no purpose of its own, it just is
Couldn't a rock have a purpose like "redirecting the flow of this water / air"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
You're going to fall into the trap of assigning human emotions and motivations to something that is not, purportedly, human in any way, even though he's described in various human terms as jealous, loving, kind, angry, etc. Of course you'd get bored, you have the experience of being a mere mortal! But god isn't like that except for when he is. Like that time he played that HILARIOUS trick on Abraham!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
This means there are genocides, in your opinion, with good reasons behind them. Can you tell me one that isn't in the bible? Alternatively, what was the good reasons the Amalekites had to be brutally murdered, women and hcildren and livestock included, by Hebrews and not just deleted or modified by god to please him?
Please give it a go.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Self declaration is not proof of identity.
Nothing if not predictable, partner.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Christians don't sacrifice children, spread disease through sexual immorality, and oppress the poor. To do so is certainly unchristian. There is no good reason to persecute Christianity.
I'm pretty sure there's plenty of data that contradicts the first sentence (for example, one of my best friends got the clap from a born again Christian girl in college), but it sounds like you're probably just going to "No True Scotsman" that away.
I agree, there's no good reason to persecute Christianity. This means there are genocides, in your opinion, with good reasons behind them. Can you tell me one that isn't in the bible? Alternatively, what was the good reasons the Amalekites had to be brutally murdered, women and hcildren and livestock included, by Hebrews and not just deleted or modified by god to please him?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Morality to us has everything to do with our relationship with God. It has nothing to do with a "universal code".
Morality as I understand it is about judging actions or decisions on what's 'right or wrong.' Not about Jesus. This is what I call Ultimate Morality. It applies to all possible things at all possible times forever. To say that Ultimate Morality doesn't somehow apply to god is delusional on its face. This is what we Ludofl3xes call morality, and anyone not calling morality the same is wrong. The only thing expented from the Ultimate Morality is Ultimate Morality. You simply don't understand it.
Thank you for at least answering the question, no matter what god does that's the new definition of morality. What I don't get is how you think the soviets slaughtering people of your church was immoral, and the hebrews slaughtering the amalekites was moral.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Isn't this basically what happened to Dr. Manhattan?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
That is the source of evil in the world.
Actually according to what you just said, god built this feature in knowing it would create evil. So, that's actually moral, which makes me wonder why it's evil at all. How's something evil AND moral at the same time?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Is it accusatory if it's a direct story from the book though?
And you're basically advocating that the universal moral code is not universal. It'd be like if the law applied to everyone except the president who signed the laws.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
So you're saying that any action taken by god is moral?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
I would say the character is immoral for having a moral code for itself, one that claims to be universal and never wrong and timeless and unwaivering, but something totally different, and punishable by eternal torture, for its creations. Let's say, I decide I don't like my neighbors, and I find out they're not Christians, and I pray on it, and in the night, a voice comes into my head and says "I am god, I tell you to go burn their house down in my name if you want them to leave." So I do! He told me to do it, I can't disobey god! Uh-oh...two people in there died, and I'm arrested. Tried for first degree murder, and executed, the whole time saying "I'm not apologizing for it, god ordered me to do it, you don't understand." I'm completely remorseless, and as it's a divine order, it can't be a sin, right? So I get to heaven, and I'm facing my final judgement, and whattaya know, he's like "You killed two people, which violates the moral code I sent down." Wait a minute, what? You told me to do it, number one, and number two, you do it all over the bible, I figured this was one of those times like the genocides you order people to commit there! I only killed two people, you could argue by accident, how many Amalakites did you want dead on purpose? Wait, didn't you basically wipe out the entire planet including babies?Why is God immoral for not observing your personal moral code?
The question is why is something that we all objectively agree is an immoral act, like a genocide, okay if the character who's supposed to be all goodness and morality's source does it? Why are we so confused? Shouldn't the universal moral law giver be subject to his own universal moral law? Why not? Or do humans have the whole "don't do genocides" question wrong?
Created:
Posted in:
This story is a fine test subject for the question "If god does it, is it moral?" that so few theists really have an appetite for. If this story, Job, were described in non-Biblical terms, wherein two observers, Greg and Sam, plot to torture in unthinkable ways some third party, Jim, to see if they could get him to crack, everyone I know would say BOTH observers were jerks, and the third party an innocent victim. If you detailed the description by adding that one of the observers, Greg, had the power to ensure Jim was fired from their job in such a way that it's impossible for Jim to make a living, you'd get responses that Greg was certainly crossing the line from jerk to malevolence.
If you change the names to Satan, God and Job, suddenly you have a number of people, like Ethan, who seem to say no, this is totally fine, God's doing it, and he's got an even BETTER moral code than you. This means that no matter what god does, it's then the new moral standard. Is that how the divine moral code works, or is something moral because it's moral, not because god does it? This would make the biblical god, like all other mythological gods, subject to something: morality. If he's not subject to morality, then everything he does is moral...so then why is it immoral for you to do the same? Christians profess that this is the source of the uniform moral code that is for all time, without considering, forget explaining, this issue. I don't expect any to do so here based on what I've read. I expect Ethan will get all up in arms and claim I want god to be subject to MY moral code (as he's already done in this thread), which while I'm certain my moral code wouldn't let me burn a man's child on a bet, for example, is like saying I think Darth Vader is bad because he doesn't behave how I want him to. To me they're characters worthy of analysis, and I think they're exactly as real as one another.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Wow, that sounds horrible man. I'd gladly speak up for you. Can you show me definitively where this has happened, like a thread you've made or participated in, where you tried convincing a fellow Christian that your way of thinking is correct, and theirs is the road to perdition, where an atheist just jumps on it and says "Guys stop having this conversation, you're not allowed"? Post a link, they must be easy to find.Like why doesn't PGA2.0 try to convert Mopac, or Dr Franklin try to make Ethang5 come around to his way of thinking?Many reasons, but a main one is that the militant atheists would never let us.
Created:
Posted in:
Couldn't the same thing be said about the truly disturbing tale of Abraham and Isaac? Why doesn't the all knowing god just know without the test is never clear. If he just wanted Abraham to know how faithful he was, couldn't he simply put that info in the brain without the sickest "Pscyhe!!!!" ever?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
We have been around since the beginning. No protestant church can claim this.
How does that make you right?
And why don't you engage your fellow Christians?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I feel another impression of what he thinks sounds deep and smart and is actually in no way any answer to the very simple question, why don't the Christians here try and debate one another into their specific denominations, because it should be easy. Like why doesn't PGA2.0 try to convert Mopac, or Dr Franklin try to make Ethang5 come around to his way of thinking?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
You realize every single denomination of CHristianity, and religion in general, is making the exact same pitch, right? "Only we have the answers!" said all the scientologists you don't think are correct. The other thing you all have in common is your organizations want money, which is strange because if it's a very real incarnation of Jesus (who turned into buildings??), he shouldn't need any money from anyone. Why would any church ever close, if not because it was forsaken by god for some reason?
THe simplest answer is they're just buildings, buildings with a shrinking financial base due to a bad revenue model that's out of touch with their local market needs or wants.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
You bring a legitimate point about Christians not really debating eachother around here.We have one thing in common. We preach Christ.
So is that the most important bit? In other words, who cares what denomination you are, you all go to heaven, is that what you believe? If so, then what's the point of your church and your hyping it? If not, then why aren't you more vociferously pursuing the low hanging fruit, the ones who already believe largely what you do (Jesus), in order to save them from your loving lord roasting them in a lava bath for all eternity?
Seriously, it's a good thing atheists are here, who would you be talking to? EtrnlView and his planetary take on all things interdimensional, I suppose.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
EtrnlVw and I already know we don't agree on everything, and that doesn't bother me personally.
Which one of you is the true Christian, though?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Every time you say that I'm going to ask for a citation from now on.
Why don't you google prohibtion of masturbation in christianity and then give me the link that says "God doesn't care." BEcause I just googled it and it's literally pages and pages of "DO NOT TOUCH THAT WIENER."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Again, this is what is taught by Christianity, not me. I don't know why anything that could create a universe would give a healthy sh1t about what one guy's doing with his junk, but the bible's all about it, quit jacking off, don't sleep with men, be a virgin till your married. You're the only 'christian' saying it doesn't matter. This seems rather tasteless for someone who's called another poster a troll for not being a real christian. As far as the gospels and epistles and their take on behavior, I promise you it's contradicted in the bible and by the teachings of the various churches, and it goes well against common sense. But true christians are supposed to believe it, at peril of their eternal soul.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
@Mopac
A ton of beautiful souls, but no Christians or Jews or Muslims because I choose to chill with the regular good people atheists. Sounds pretty great, but definitely would not include Jesus, because that's not Christian heaven. Christian heaven is basically you forget who you are, you forget your family, and you sing praises of Jesus all the time for all eternity, you don't want anything at all. THAT planet sounds terrible, I think we can agree.
I'm wondering where all the Christians who like to attack those who don't believe in anything are, because they ought to be here disagreeing with you. LIke Mopac. Mopac, you think this guy's right or wrong about the planets heaven, existing in another universe that also has planets, and hindus go to their own heaven there?
Some balls commenting on who's a true Christian or not, as it turns out.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
You ought to take your act on the road. I feel like you're doing a Andy Kaufnman performance art routine, with how consistently you're able to pull off the "Here's something that I think sounds deep but is literally zero information at all" schtick. Is everyone in your church like this? Blathering faux-wise bromides and using capital letters? Are you currently wearing a cassock?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
And I don't know that God makes anyone think a certain way, there's a lot of nonsense in spiritual texts, in other words they can have errors.
Yay! Common ground! Couldn't agree more!!!
Coming back to earth is always an option. In other words why would you go to a heaven you believe is all nonsense?
I am relieved. I don't want to go to a Christian heaven, it sounds stupid.
f it's not good people go here and bad people go there what should it be? you mock here...."This is not a Christian classification of hell. Criminals and those who commit atrocities are as welcome in Heaven as your pastor would be, provided they meet the criteria that they accept Jesus before they die. See, if you start your morning by masturbating, don't repent immediately, walk out of your apartment and get hit in the head by a falling AC unit, you go to hell. If on the other hand you are a concentration camp guard who learns he's got cancer and is dying in the hospital, you repent moments before death, you get to go to that party in the sky!"
I'm sorry bud, but that's not mockery. That's what they teach: the most important thing is accepting Jesus. Anything you did before that, clean slate once you accept him. If you time it right, you can jack off all you want (this is a sin in every version of Christianity, it's like the one thing they agree on) so long as you get it out of your system before you (a) accept Jesus and (b) do it before you die, even like seconds before. It's not good people and bad people, that's what humans like PGA WANT it to be, that'd make the argument a lot easier. It's literally accepts Jesus ONLY. It's the whole point of the story. Good or bad, if you're on Jesus's list, you get in to the club. Good or bad, if you're not, sorry, enjoy roasting for eternity. I'm not mocking it. I'm laying it out.
If you want to go to advanced place in creation you have to work on your spiritual progression
L Ron Hubbard felt similarly. Was he correct?
Do you have a real problem that societies extend beyond the physical plane? if so why?
Because they haven't been demonstrated even remotely. Are you talking about a multiverse?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Good to know that whatever the creator god is, not only did it create a system that resulted in sectarian violence and discrimination on earth, but that the system extends into the afterlife! Great job Jesus. If I had a spaceship that could traverse the meaningless emptiness of space, and I had the right coordinates, theoretically, could I travel to this actual planet while still alive? What would I see there? What a fascinating fiction.Also, as we have already discussed before, there isn't just one planet when you leave this earth. There are many, many more planets. Therefore there is no need to clump every single soul into one planet. The Christian heaven is an actual planet, but there are countless areas of creation where the soul can inhabit. For example, a good Muslim wouldn't want to collectively exist with a bunch of Christians lol, no, it goes where its preferred choice of society is. Likewise a Christian might not want to spend an eon with a bunch of Hindus...ect ect..
Can we agree you're not Christian? There are literally no Christian doctrines that say heaven is a planet (it's a DIMENSION! duh!) nor are there any non-Christians in it, according to the doctrine.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
See what I mean by you never listen, and you always mock instead? At what point are you willing to learn something?
I'm not mocking, I'm just pointing out traditional Christian orthodoxy. Suddenly you're no true Christian either, it seems, but I think you said you don't claim to be a CHristian (which means, I'm afraid, according to Christianity you and I are headed the same direction). And you mean at what point am I willing to just accept what you claim, then answer is simple: when a single shred of verification that it's true is presented, as with all other propositions in life.
Why the need for varying societies, cultures, traditions and ways of expressing God? Answer...The Creator is a God of variety and flavors, that should be obvious.
So that explains why he made Christians think they're the only ones going to heaven? I don't understand. Or does he segregate based on faith? Can atheists, avowed atheists who live a good life, get in even as we go to our grave? wtf is the point of religion exactly if it's really just a 'good people go here, bad people go there' system, and not one where you have to have the right paperwork, or have to follow strange rules that don't really make sense? Like, I'm not out stoning non-virgin girls who get married in front of their dads, that is disobeying the word of god according to the book. So is me not doing that a plus or a minus?
You only see mockery because you can recognize the ridiculousness of Christian doctrine, to your credit, :)
ETA, I think you might believe in what sounds basically like the system on The Good Place.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
However not many people including Christians know how creation is put together so they are forced to accept things that aren't really true.
Special knowledge! Your favorite. :)
Hell is reserved for those who commit crimes, atrocities and who refuse to learn from their mistakes (even then there are levels of hell, and not all eternal).
This is not a Christian classification of hell. Criminals and those who commit atrocities are as welcome in Heaven as your pastor would be, provided they meet the criteria that they accept Jesus before they die. See, if you start your morning by masturbating, don't repent immediately, walk out of your apartment and get hit in the head by a falling AC unit, you go to hell. If on the other hand you are a concentration camp guard who learns he's got cancer and is dying in the hospital, you repent moments before death, you get to go to that party in the sky!
But creation has many heavens, and those are reserved for the righteous, not just those who believed a certain way. That is a great misconception among religious groups.
Why the need for more than one heaven? And special knowledge again, bolded.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
I think it's less people and more dogmatic an issue. The people, individuals, largely pick and choose what they want to believe or follow within their own denominations anyway, but I feel like there's at least a little anxiety in that if you're not in the right denomination, Christians want to believe their god will still let them into heaven because while they ate meat on Fridays, for example, they SURELY wouldn't burn in hell over the fact that their parents didn't know it was a problem. It allows for a more liberal interpretation of who can get in, but it also calls into serious question what the point of all the denominations is in the first place...which is a thread that when pulled inevitably leads to "why would this be important at all," and besides, there's plenty of non-CHristians who can burn in hell instead, right? Like Muslims, no matter what, they're not Christians, they don't revere Jesus, so clearly, if god's real and the whole Jesus thing is real, then they're definitely burning in hell. Man, woman and infant. At least that's what the book and the dogma say. In the end I don't think Christians really believe that belief in any one myth is a deal breaker for Jesus, but they'd rather have the bad people held accountable somehow regardless of faith.This is a serious problem within Christianity though I agree, but it's not everybody. Most the Christians I know aren't really like that, at least it is not there main priority or issue. I think these are more isolated cases than general reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Got, it. No True Scotsman indeed. :-)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
If I had to guess I would say he's probably an ex-Christian that had overbearing religious parents and now he is probably an angry Atheist trying to mock and make Christians look bad, using scripture as the tool to accomplish that. So a troll in other words.
He's not my style, but he's posting about the topics at hand, and he's not more or less abrasive than a handful of other 'agitators.' You seem to be calling him a troll based entirely on disagreeing with him. That's less than generous.
This topic, by the way, is stupid because the Christians in here all think their specific denomination is the only 'true' Christianity anyway, and none ever bother debating each other on the matter.
Created: