Dreamer, I’d say that for me to admit that I’m wrong would require direct and undeniable evidence of God’s existance. The point rsa was trying to make is that evidence doesn’t get much more direct than standing in front of the throne of the diety in question. At that point, it’s fairly obvious one was wrong.
As it is, I see nothing in the universe around me that cannot be explained. A voice from heaven telling me I’d better get my keister to church, on the other hand, would probably convince me.
I really dislike smug bastards who use bumper stickers like that. And I’m an agnostic/athiest (the difference is discussed on another thread somewhere) myself. That’s exactly on a par with a believer telling a non-believer to go to hell. I think everybody is entitled to his/her belief or lack if it.
Frankly, I don’t see any threat in “you’ll see”. I’m just amazed and pissed off at a person who says it.
I pity him/her to believe a dead thing can go *anywhere *
Must be one good soul to say a thing like that.
It’s not too hard to understand, right?
When you’re dead-you’re dead.
You’re a stiff! Bereft of life, You’re metabolic processes are now history! you’re off the twig!
You kicked the bucket, you shuffled off your mortal coil, run
down the curtain
You’re DEAD.
Yes I’ve read the Bible. (I did say I respected the teachings of Jesus).
I have to be careful here not to hijack the thread, but (joke) I won’t go to Hell for that.
My counter suggestion for you would be to read Leviticus.
Cursing your parents - punishable by death.
Adultery - punishable by death.
Two chapters on how to treat leprosy, which conflict with modern medical knowledge.
Blind, lame and flatnosed people cannot be priests, because they profane the altar.
This is evidence of a petty, inaccurate God, not the one you’re describing.
Oh dear. :rolleyes:
I think you’re confused about science and religion.
Because there is a massive amount of evidence (see www.talkorigins.com ), scientists came up with a theory of evolution. The theory was formed from the evidence.
Religion starts with a theory (God exists and this is what His Word is), and then continues to believe it passionately, despite the fact there is no supporting evidence.
Dictionary definition:
Faith … firm belief, especially without logical proof…
John 6:36 (Jesus speaking) But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe.
He was standing right in front of these people, performed miracles right in front of these people, rose from the dead right in front of these people (and rose others from the dead) and yet they still did not believe.
If you don’t want to believe, your not going to believe, and there’s no convincing anyone who’s ears are not willing to hear, whos’s eyes are not willing to be opened, and who’s heart is not willing to know a God who loves them and longs for them to love him back.
You know, I started this thread awhile back in IMHO asking if there were any people on the boards that needed prayer. There were a few responses, but not many. I now realize there’s no need to start a thread like that anymore, there’e plenty of prayer needed right here in GD
All these materials “in the universe” that can apparently be explained, how were they created?
If you decide that there was some matter involved in the creation of said materials, please explain how that matter was created.
If your explanation of how that matter came in to existence involves using other, previously unused matter, again, could you please explain where that matter came from.
I am awaiting your explanation.
Before you leap back with “Yeah? Well where did YOUR God come from?” I will quickly inform you that I have no belief in God.
If I were to stand in front of you, and appeared to perform miracles, and appeared to be raising not only myself from the dead, but also others (please note, it is only appearing that I am doing so), you’re telling me you wouldn’t be skeptical of what I was doing?
The folks around here are generally divided into those who have some relationship with the god(s) of their preference – and to what extent that constitutes relationship with God is quite another thread, which I don’t want to hijack this one into – and those who do not accept the proposition that He either exists or wants to have a relationship with them as being founded on insufficient evidence to convince them. This to me seems to be a far cry from the “blasphemy against the Holy Spirit” which is the only sin that cannot be forgiven.
I’ve seen much more of what my mother would have called “Christian charity” from the Neopagans and Atheists who post here regularly than from the majority of the “official Christians” who show up. (Regulars who are active Christians trying to live out Jesus’s instructions are obviously not included in that latter category.) And I’m convinced that God honors their intellectual scruples as much as He honors any human fallibility – because not a one of us has the totality of the right answer to “What’s God going to do with ___?” where you can fill in the blank with every possible category of human behavior, like the devout woman blaspheming while insane as the result of a severe stroke, or the guy who thinks God exists but has it in for him personally. The classic thing of Hitler’s hypothetical deathbed repentance needs to be taken in the context that it would have to have been a real repentance, not sudden fear of hellfire or something. (For a real-life parallel, think about the change in George Wallace’s attitudes, and decide whether if you were black you would have forgiven him for what he did in the 60’s by the time he died.)
As for the Matthew quote above, it’s instructive to see it laid out in full:
Unlike some of the other posters, I do believe in God and in Jesus, and in the humanity of my fellow men (and women). Since people were proof-texting from Scripture in support of their own favorite views as regards this question, I thought it might be a good idea to take a good look at what the guy alleged by many to be the final authority on this stuff had to say on the subject. And it appears that whatcha do, not whatcha say, is His criterion.
The only version of Hell which I have ever been able to find morally justifiable lacks any element of damnation, heelfire, or intentional suffering. IIRC, I ran into first in process theology, but I do not know from whence it originates. The idea is that the “blessed” are united with the Godhead for eternity; they experience a bliss and fulfillment which defies human deconstruction. Those who do not or cannot unite with God continue their existence (in whatever manner spirits do so) without such perfect fulfillment. Hell, in these terms, is simply the absence of Heaven.
All other Hells I have seen proposed fall prey to Russell’s analysis of inequity. Eternity simply cannot be balanced by any property of a mortal life. Of course, I’m an atheist, so to me it remains an ethical/intellectual exercise. When I die the only thing I expect to survive me are the genes I have propogated and the memories I have inspired in others.
Honestly, this is the fundamental gap between how “afterlife believers” of all sorts and “non-afterlife believers” think. Both sides find the other’s belief in what constitutes a person’s individuality and what it can do… simply unbelievable.
I can’t seriously worry about Hell after death when there’s absolutely no evidence for an afterlife in the first place. Might as well worry that the giant squid people of Mars are going snatch us up, whereupon we will time travel to the lost continent of Mu and spend several eternities spontaneously generating philosopher’s stones to play mumblety pegs with.
This is an example of what Spiritus Mundi meant when he said
From the above quote it is obvious that Jocke is open minded enough to admit that he could become a believer. I’m afraid that there are others that would cling to their denial and that will keep them from being in the presence of God (Heaven). I once saw this portrayed on TV as two men floating around in row boats in a small pond. On the horizon you could see a light eminating from the other side. The two men sat in their boats telling each other it was not fair that they hadn’t been accepted. They couldn’t get it thru their heads that in order to be accepted they had to stop putting the blame on God.
Leslie Weatherhead wrote about the end coming when we are all at-one with God. He said that obviously no one, with the exception of Jesus is completely ready for that when we die. There will be a process that we will all have to go thru and some will have a longer process than others. Of course, as long as someone is sitting in a row boat, they will not be making any progress. Eventually, everyone will complete the course and we all will be at-one with God. In backing up this theory, he quotes the parable of the shepard that returned to get the lost sheep, even though he had the other 99. This parable goes against the common belief that only “real Christians” will be given shelter, since it says the shepard will not be happy until every sheep is safe.
I can’t argue with those that say when life is over that’s it, it is over forever. They have a lot going to support this idea. However, to me the OP is asking if there is an after-life, will the atheists go to hell, will they get into heaven or will they float around in a row boat for eternity?
I have never seen Jesus do anything with my own eyes, yet I believe. I can’t explain why and I can’t explain why you don’t. I only wish that I could tell you or have something that would help you to understand and see God’s love for what it really is - Unconditional love for you - for me - and for everyone. There’s really nothing more I can say.
If God is truly all-merciful and filled with unconditional love for me, then how can he have a requirement that I either believe in or worship him? Frankly, any deity who would bar the door to his Paradise to Einstein, Gandhi and Plato but would let in Hitler and Torquemada is a child and undeserving of my belief, much less my worship.
There’s a little anecdote that delves even deeper into this issue. It involves a missionary priest who visits an Inuit community. He tells a man about God, the Bible, sin, and Hell. The man asks him “If you had never come and I’d never learned of Jesus or sin, would I be sent to Hell?” The priest lkaughs and replies “Of course not. God is love, he would never do that.” The Inuit man continued “Then…why?”
In response to the posters who believe that hell isn’t a place where you’re tortured forever, but rather the lack of “total fulfillment” or such things…
It doesn’t change anything.
Either being in Heaven is better than being in Hell, and in this case it’s still a punishment (you weren’t a nice boy, you won’t be allowed to watch TV/be with god like your mates) and an eternal punishment is still contradictory with the concept of an all-loving and forgiving god.
Either Heaven isn’t better than hell (at least from the point of view of the person sent to hell) and the whole concept of heaven/hell is pointless.
