TheFlyingGerbil Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 I read it more as god doesn't send you to hell, rather you chose hell through your own actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 If that's what it means (which I thought was the more probable interpretation, I was just asking for clarification to be sure) that doesn't make it any less horrible on God's part to set it up that way for two main reasons: 1) it's not exactly an informed choice, when there are many different religions which often have conflicting views on what is necessary to get to the good afterlife (whatever they call it) and it's not as if there's any obvious way to determine which is the right one, and 2) there is no crime that could possibly be committed in one's transient time on Earth that could in any way justify an eternity of torture. Caveat: this is all assuming one subscribes to the idea that Hell is torture for eternity. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope V2 Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 On the topic of whether people have a choice or not. Romans:1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of people39 who suppress the truth by their40 unrighteousness,41 1:19 because what can be known about God is plain to them,42 because God has made it plain to them. 1:20 For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, because they are understood through what has been made. So people43 are without excuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgi Duke of Frisbee Posted February 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 (edited) On the topic of whether people have a choice or not. Romans:1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of people39 who suppress the truth by their40 unrighteousness,41 1:19 because what can be known about God is plain to them,42 because God has made it plain to them. 1:20 For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, because they are understood through what has been made. So people43 are without excuse. Except those "clearly seen" elements can be defined in different ways. I could claim that based on all that, a giant howler monkey is orbiting the Earth causing all this nonsense, and the only way to appease him would be to moon the heavens and scream "Vincent Price was murdered by the FBI because he knew about the fake moon landing! It's all a conspiracy!" Now, it most certainly is "the wrong answer", but who's to say yours is the right one? Edited February 19, 2012 by DukeOfPwn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 On the topic of whether people have a choice or not. Romans:1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of people39 who suppress the truth by their40 unrighteousness,41 1:19 because what can be known about God is plain to them,42 because God has made it plain to them. 1:20 For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, because they are understood through what has been made. So people43 are without excuse. It sure as hell (no pun intended) isn't clear to me. Saying it is doesn't make it so. If it were clear why on Earth would anyone willfully hide from that? It's not like the idea of going to Hell sounds like fun, and I don't know if even House is stubborn enough to do it just to be difficult. If I could choose what to believe I would certainly choose to believe in God, because as is often pointed out that's the safer bet. But my beliefs are the product of the information I've been exposed to and my brain's conclusions based on that. I can't choose to believe it any more than I can choose to believe in the Force. I may want to believe it, but that's not the same thing. Belief is an involuntary act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope V2 Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 (edited) So, we're kind of into a point where a lot of believing Christians will argue with each other and the great lengthy debates over the coexistance of free will and predestination begin and whether or not it's right for God to send people to hell or not. Romans is pretty clear about it and it's an answer that angers and distresses a lot of people, believer or not. " 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice with God? Absolutely not! 9:15 For he says to Moses: “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”29 9:16 So then,30 it does not depend on human desire or exertion,31 but on God who shows mercy. 9:17 For the scripture says to Pharaoh:32 “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may demonstrate my power in you, and that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth.”33 9:18 So then,34 God35 has mercy on whom he chooses to have mercy, and he hardens whom he chooses to harden.36 9:19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who has ever resisted his will?” 9:20 But who indeed are you – a mere human being37 – to talk back to God?38Does what is molded say to the molder, “Why have you made me like this?”39 9:21 Has the potter no right to make from the same lump of clay40 one vessel for special use and another for ordinary use?41 9:22 But what if God, willing to demonstrate his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience the objects42 of wrath43 prepared for destruction?44 9:23 And what if he is willing to make known the wealth of his glory on the objects45 of mercy that he has prepared beforehand for glory – 9:24 even us, whom he has called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? 9:25 As he also says in Hosea: “I will call those who were not my people, ‘My people,’ and I will call her who was unloved,46 ‘My beloved.’”47" Anyway, this kind of discusses two different angles of discussion of did God predestine people for hell and if he did is that wrong. I'd be lying if I said it doesn't bother me that God created people as "objects of wrath". Edited February 19, 2012 by Yantelope V2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SixTwoSixFour Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 (edited) Except those "clearly seen" elements can be defined in different ways. I could claim that based on all that, a giant howler monkey is orbiting the Earth causing all this nonsense, and the only way to appease him would be to moon the heavens and scream "Vincent Price was murdered by the FBI because he knew about the fake moon landing! It's all a conspiracy!" Now, it most certainly is "the wrong answer", but who's to say yours is the right one? Duke, you're arguing logic against that which is not logical. The whole Christian faith is a giant mind trap, and you really can't win against it. It's pretty cleverly designed, that's why it's stood the test of time. Don't believe? You're going to hell. Do any of a million things that people do? You DESERVE to go to hell, be grateful that God thinks that your belief is good enough that he won't send you to hell. Reject the holy spirit? You're going to hell. Think about the IDEA of rejecting the holy spirit? Yep, hell (Matthew 12:31-32). You have to convert your friends and family, because if you don't, they're going to hell. Basically, hell is dangled over your head like a Sword of Damocles as a response to any behavior that might cause the religion to stop growing. The whole thing is built to motivate people to spread the word, and do what their preachers tell them, but without being so hardcore and strict that people decide they can't keep with it. Finely crafted. And if I'm being frank, it seems pretty evil to me. Not Christians themselves, they're victims in all of this. The men who started it all, so many years ago... they were evil. To do this to so many people, to so thoroughly fuck up their minds with threats of neverending pain. EDIT: Small note, Yant, you should Copy Plain Test or something, your formatting on these copy and pastes is driving me crazy =P Edited February 19, 2012 by SixTwoSixFour 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope V2 Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 EDIT: Small note, Yant, you should Copy Plain Test or something, your formatting on these copy and pastes is driving me crazy =P but that would take effort... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 EDIT: Small note, Yant, you should Copy Plain Test or something, your formatting on these copy and pastes is driving me crazy =P but that would take effort... Ctrl+Shift+V It's amazing what might seem hard at first glance until you ask other people. I'm with six. Christianity doesn't seem a very appealing religion. It's an awful lot of telling you what you can't do, on the slim possibility that when you die you go to heaven. I hear the argument time to time that atheists have no morals because they have nothing to believe in. Now this is presented as a "why atheists are bad", but the issue is it pretty much implies Christians only do morally good things under threat of eternal suffering in the pits of hell, whereas an atheist, not bound by a belief system, does morally good things because it's the right thing to do. Personally I'm fine that when I die I'll be gone, finished. I think 80years is a nice time to have to do what you want to do and then move on. I'll "live on" in folks memories, photographs, and now through the interwebs a bit I guess. And my body will be made into fertilizer or whatever and eventually part of a star or new planet, which I think is nice. It's kinda reincarnation, but on a cosmological scale than a spiritual one. Personally I like the greek model of the afterlife(though I like a lot about the greek religion). You've got the regular underworld, ruled by Hades, which is basically "where you go when you die". Then you've got Tartarus, where you go when you eat seafood commit heinous crimes like rape n murder, and Elysium Fields, where the heroes go. Finer graded scale, none of this "you're either good or bad" stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post MasterDex Posted February 20, 2012 Popular Post Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 And if I'm being frank, it seems pretty evil to me. Not Christians themselves, they're victims in all of this. The men who started it all, so many years ago... they were evil. To do this to so many people, to so thoroughly fuck up their minds with threats of neverending pain. Christianity is one of those religions for leaders. It's designed to control a populace unlike many other religions which try to help individual growth or explain the unexplainable. There are christian/mosaic laws that can be found in the code of hammurabi. The story of Moses in the reed basket echoes that of Sargon, which would have been a story still well known in Moses' time. That story, thanks to the similarities with the story of Sargon's abandonment on the Euphrates sets him up as a king of kings as the common folk would have heard the stoy of Moses and compared it to the story of Sargon, with many likely coming to the conclusion that just like Sargon, Moses would have a kingdom. In that way, it was a self-fufilling prophecy intended to gather followers around Moses who would then rule over them. The burning bush and the time on Mt. Sinai strengthen his claim and set him up as a vessel for God's will. And that's the setup for much of the rest of the bible - the idea that only men chosen by God have the right to rule - an idea all to familiar to Constantine who, in the face of thousands of oppressed Christians, heard the voice of God and converted. Since then, there's been a bunch of leaders that have converted or used Christianity to control their people. It's a power religion, it spreads and takes over, forcing non-believers to question their fate faith or risk being struck down by Almighty God or one of his followers. It's why the head of the religion is a king upon himself and actually controls a kingdom. What I find most funny about Christianity however is how unlike the teachings of Christ it is. The original teachings of Christ would be closer to new age "hippy" and "liberal" beliefs than the conservatism it's associated with. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 This doesn't really have a point but I was reminded of something today that I always found amusing. There's a little shopping center near where I live. It's mostly family owned stores or local businesses, but for some reason I cannot fathom there is a Christian bookstore right next to a planned parenthood center. I don't remember which one was there first, but it must be real awkward when their employees pass each other by. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Pirate Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 (edited) I'm all for religion when it's a personal relationship between someone and their faith--it can enrich their lives and make them a better person at heart. But when it boils down to me being a horrible person for not believing in a deity, that's where I start getting irritated. I found a video that I think explains pretty well why so many religious people (not all of them of course) are so horribly offended by an athiest. Edited February 20, 2012 by LittlePirate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 (edited) In all my days I've never heard even an attempt at a halfway decent explanation for the human appendix or coccyx. Any Christians here fancy a shot at it? Why do we have a stub of a tail and a useless, broken cellulose digester? Oh and you are not allowed to talk about the ineffability of God's plan. Edited February 20, 2012 by Thursday Next Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 That guy had a really annoying manner of speaking, especially at the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Pirate Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 Yeah, I know, Ethan. The animation isn't so great, either. But the point he makes I think helps explain why non-religious people get a lot of hate tossed at them. I know religious people aren't the only ones, I'm pretty sure some Athiests do the same thing and spend all day bashing someone for being religious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 To add to Dex's point, most religions weren't in the form they are today from inception. It's always to do with politics. Most religions bend to that. Catholicism arose primarily to appeal to the gaudy Roman Empire. I don't believe there's anything in the inception of the original religion that required one to go about such a prescribed manner. They were clever to establish their religion as the religion of the king and also made concessions so it would be accepted by him. When one of the more stronger rulers in the region approves of your religion you have power. It's always power there. In Hinduism it's about social classes; or rather it evolved to be about that. In Islam well the religion was always political to be fair since the purpose was to unite the warring tribes but they split pretty much right after the death of their prophet into two groups. Even so, it's amazing how much freedom was given to women in their early society and all that was taken away later not entirely due to the nature of the religion. It's similar for most religions, though I don't know if I should get into it. Technically most religions did initially assume that science and knowing about the world was the way to a God (Except the ancient Hellenistic Civilisation and the early Roman one - for them the gods were just soap opera). Unfortunately curiousity leads to questions that go against the people who are in the head of any religion. So this takes away control from them and thus in order to maintain control they go on ultraconservative mode and thus a religion which was once a hippy liberal sort of thing for the most part and something that was meant to encourage freedom becomes something that's used to curb freedom. If you think modern atheism won't evolve into a religion then you're sadly mistaken. Any system of beliefs can evolve into a religion. The attitude of some who call themselves atheists is that science says so so it must be true. They didn't question the science, they didn't read the discussion, they didn't try to get the information - they accept it blindly. The basic issue is that we are too lazy individually to find out information for ourselves and choose to stick with the beliefs we were raised with. If there is a religion that needs to exist it should be the religion of inquisitiveness or maybe you should call it the CCC (Commune of Curious Cats). This is different from skepticism in the sense that you are questioning because you are curious and not because you're trying to win an argument. Most modern skeptics fall into the latter category. On a personal note the closest thing I can define myself as is a freethinker but in the post post-modernist sense. I do believe in finding universal truths and I doubt that for me journey will end till I'm dead. As long as we're within the system, i.e. the universe, it is impossible to claim anything as an absolute truth [that is to say, even if we know something to be true, it is true within the universe and within the constraints]. Simple reason being that from our observations we have noticed that it is harder to find an objective truth when you're within the system as your observations are skewed by being inside the system and you're unable to see the bigger picture. The simplest truth is that we still have so much to learn and we still do not know about a lot of things. But we're getting somewhere. Hope we go a lot further before shit happens and any number of things can happen that can destroy our fledgeling species. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldorf and Statler Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 I don't have the time to go through 14 pages of walls-of-texts but could somebody tell me if it's already been discussed how christianity was not the first religion around and that in a couple of hundred years it might be mythology alongside the rest of religions out there? I am agnostic, I don't give absolutes and to be honest, that's the way it should be. It takes a smart man to explain, a smarter man to admit he doesn't know everything. I base my entire outlook of life with science. When people back in ancient greece [TALKIN' ABOUT CAESAR] couldn't explain thunder and lightning, they came up with stories about it. As science evolves, we have explained more and more unanswered questions but never everything. I don't dismiss a high deity that started everything. Not even Stephen Hawking can fully explain the beginning of the world without questionable logic and doubts. And atheists getting hate is not unheard of, but I see just as many christians getting bullied BY atheists and hipsters thanks to the ignorant few christians [god hates africa-like people] who post their thoughts online. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope V2 Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 Christianity is one of those religions for leaders. It's designed to control a populace unlike many other religions which try to help individual growth or explain the unexplainable. There are christian/mosaic laws that can be found in the code of hammurabi. The story of Moses in the reed basket echoes that of Sargon, which would have been a story still well known in Moses' time. That story, thanks to the similarities with the story of Sargon's abandonment on the Euphrates sets him up as a king of kings as the common folk would have heard the stoy of Moses and compared it to the story of Sargon, with many likely coming to the conclusion that just like Sargon, Moses would have a kingdom. In that way, it was a self-fufilling prophecy intended to gather followers around Moses who would then rule over them. The burning bush and the time on Mt. Sinai strengthen his claim and set him up as a vessel for God's will. And that's the setup for much of the rest of the bible - the idea that only men chosen by God have the right to rule - an idea all to familiar to Constantine who, in the face of thousands of oppressed Christians, heard the voice of God and converted. Since then, there's been a bunch of leaders that have converted or used Christianity to control their people. It's a power religion, it spreads and takes over, forcing non-believers to question their fate faith or risk being struck down by Almighty God or one of his followers. It's why the head of the religion is a king upon himself and actually controls a kingdom. What I find most funny about Christianity however is how unlike the teachings of Christ it is. The original teachings of Christ would be closer to new age "hippy" and "liberal" beliefs than the conservatism it's associated with. You bring up two interesting points. First off, about Christianity being designed to control people: Clearly any religion can be used to control people if it is distorted and back in the dark ages when the common man was not allowed access to the Bible the catholic church did manipulate its teachings for their purposes. That aside, actual biblical teaching is impossible to control people with. The message is unique from other religions as well. The message of Christianity is that you are saved by God through no work of your own. It is the grace of God that saves you and not your own works. In fact, it's such a sharp message of Grace that Paul even says you can do anything you want and still be saved. Which of course begs the question "why not do whatever I feel like?". Romans 6:1 What shall we say then? Are we to remain in sin so that grace may increase? 6:2 Absolutely not! How can we who died to sin still live in it? 6:3 Or do you not know that as many as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 6:4 Therefore we have been buried with him through baptism into death, in order that just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too may live a new life. Basically the message is that you don't find joy in sin, you find joy in freedom from sin, joy in serving God. You can't really control anyone in that because their faith isn't contingent upon anything but their belief in God. It seems as though Islam and other works based religions are far better suited for controlling people. Also, yeah, separation from your personal life and your political beliefs is a very hard thing. Early Christians mostly lived like socialists. They shared everything so that no one had need. Of course they were mostly hiding in fear for their lives too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 https://www.npr.org/2012/01/29/146046428/on-the-record-a-quest-for-de-baptism-in-france As an aside to the "controlling people" stuff. Divine Right of Kings, Head of the Church of England, etc etc. Even in America I'm to understand you'd be bat-shit insane to run for POTUS and not be Christian (As seen with the "Obama is a Muslin" shit) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SixTwoSixFour Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Basically the message is that you don't find joy in sin, you find joy in freedom from sin, joy in serving God. You can't really control anyone in that because their faith isn't contingent upon anything but their belief in God. It seems as though Islam and other works based religions are far better suited for controlling people. Personally, I kind of agree. I don't think that of all religions, Christianity is best suited for controlling people... but that's partially because people don't like being controlled, and tend to rebel against it. Christianity is a religion designed around self-propagation. Spreading itself around, converting as many people as it can. All religions that I know of have it as a goal, but I don't know of any that are so effectively designed to ease the spread of the faith. If Christianity was very controlling, that would slow its spread. Certainly, back when it was all Judaism, it was a pretty strict religion. But it didn't really take off. It did okay. It stayed alive within the community of Israelites and their descendants, but it didn't spread too much further. Christianity was a far more aggressive religion, an evolution of the Jewish faith into something easier to get into, easier to spread. https://www.npr.org/...ptism-in-france As an aside to the "controlling people" stuff. Divine Right of Kings, Head of the Church of England, etc etc. Even in America I'm to understand you'd be bat-shit insane to run for POTUS and not be Christian (As seen with the "Obama is a Muslin" shit) Currently, the leading Republican candidate for POTUS is a Mormon. It remains to be seen if he'll be elected, I personally think he'll lose, but he's certainly doing pretty well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorgiShinobi Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Mormonism is a sect of Christianity, but Romney was (and is) getting the same flack as Obama has from Evangelical ministers for being a "false Christian" and so forth. Given that he's the last hope for a Republican president, anti-Mormons have been letting it slide. Essentially a "lesser of the two evils" scenario. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 So not only do you have to be a Christian, you have to be the right kind of Christian? Also query here: Was Six implying that Mormon isn't Christian. Maybe not on purpose, but unknowingly. Going back to an earlier question I guess on how Catholicism is sort of regarded as separate from Christianity within America. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope V2 Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Well, the word Christian has come to mean Catholic, Protestant (Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian), Lutheran, Church of Christ, Mormonism and I think even some Jehova's Witnesses might use the term, not sure. Anyway, it's a broad term for a lot of people who don't belive what others belive (although there is a fair bit of overlap). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 So ...US doesn't have the concept of Christian denominations? "Christian" hasn't come to mean Catholic, Protestant, etc. They are Christian and always were and always will be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorgiShinobi Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 It's suppose to be that way Dean, but there are members of various sects that treat Christianity as a sort of dick-measuring game. If you don't meet some arbitrary criteria, you're classified as a "cult" or simply a "non-Christian." I could fill a novel on the antics some of the Baptist kids in my high school would commit themselves too. Didn't help that all (but one) of the teachers were spineless and wouldn't control the ongoing harassment. As far as politics, you're partially right with the "right kind of Christian" as there are individuals who have this idealized version of a President. John F. Kennedy, one of the greatest Presidents, had to overcome being Catholic during his election, and to this day there are still people who get upset about Catholics and other non-Protestants in political offices. As if they're corrupting the country from the inside, or some other rubbish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.