Christianity and Love, Part 2

[pinqy]

Ok, I dislike doing this, but since Friend of God did reply to my last post in the previous thread, I’m reposting it here in hope of an answer. I realize that FoG is swamped as it is replying to others, but I honestly think this will help break things down. So, Friend, here’s a chance for you to explain your logic again.

Faeries are going to kill you. I know this for sure. I have had experiences in my life that faeries are the only explanation for. I don’t understand why you don’t believe in faeries; you’ve seen hills, right? That’s where faeries live. Have you ever seen a circle of mushrooms? The faeries put them there to sit around and meet. You don’t really think mushrooms would grow in a perfect circle by accident, do you? The evidence is all around you if you’d just open your eyes. No, I can’t show you actual faeries; they’re invisible. I have several books on faeries you can read. Many different authors all agreeing remarkably on faeries. Well, there were some books that claimed to be about faeries, but they weren’t about real faeries, and we can’t include them in the canon on faeries. Nixies, pixies, sprites, elves? No, they’re not real. Sure, there are books on them, but those books aren’t as good, and I know it was the work of faeries I saw. The faeries want to be your friend. They used to be friends with some people, but the people started and argument and didn’t want to be friends anymore. So the faeries said they’d kill anyone who wasn’t their friend. Oh, you can’t just “say” you’re their friend. You have to really be their friend. You can’t be sure unless they kill you, then you know you’re not. So…don’t you want to be their friend? It costs you nothing, and you’ll die if you won’t be their friend.

Now, this is the stripped down version…I haven’t included the variations on how you become a friend of the faeries, but how clearly and obviously the one I tell you is correct.

Here’s the question: What exactly is the difference? Can you believe in faeries? There really have been many, many reports of them. I actually can point to historical evidence (documents showing the existence of Thomas of Ercledoune, aka True Tom, aka Thomas the Rhymer, who was kidnapped by the Faerie Queen and spent 7 years in Faerieland. He was a well-known prophet and all his predictions came true).

Now, (assuming you don’t believe in faeries) I assume my above analogy seems ridiculous to you. Why? Honestly sit down, and tell me logically where the arguments differ. I warn you that this was off-the-cuff and I can definitely improve on it (belief in faeries are found in every culture, for example). Why are your arguments “logical” and mine aren’t?

And this relates to your “madman in the basement” analogy. “Suppose a cold blooded ax murderer is hiding out in your basement, and there’s not a shred of evidence from law enforcement that he’s there.” Then on what basis are you assuming there’s on there, if there’s no evidence that he is?

[John_Corrado]

pinqy told Friend of God:

Faeries are going to kill you.

Actually, I thought Esprix was remarkably restrained in his responses.

Friend of God: Okay, let me see if I can maybe restructure DavidB’s point in a way you can understand (pure arrogance upon my part, and I apologize to all in advance).

DavidB does not believe in God. DavidB does not believe in an evil God. DavidB does not believe in an angry God. DavidB simply does not believe in any God at all.

When DavidB states “God is…” what he really means to say is “By your definition, God is…”. And he’s right. By your definition, God sends people to Hell for their mere existence (as we apparently are born into sin). Now, God could remove that sin from us- He’s omnipotent, right? Or God could chose not to punish us- He’s only following rules He Himself made, so why can’t He just change them?

But instead, God will cast us all into the everlasting lake of fire. The only chance we have is to believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ.

Except that there are probably a good two dozen other religions stating that their leader or prophet or way is divine, and that Christ’s way isn’t. And there is no evidence, no standing, nothing that makes any of these other religions any more or less valid than Christianity.
So what your version of God is saying is, “Believe in Me, even though I give you no evidence, and even though there are twenty other religions presenting just as valid a view of how the metaphysics of this world works. If you do not believe in this specific version of Me, you go to Hell. And should you believe in Me, then when you die, you can come up to Heaven with Hitler and Mengele and Vlad the Impaler, all of whom also accepted Christ as their savior, for that is all that I ask.”

[jmullaney]

**
Didn’t say “it doesn’t matter”. And also, there are ALWAYS earthly consequences for sin no matter what. If I kill babies before I come to Christ, and then come to Christ, I’m spared eternal punishment even though I deserve it. But (hopefully) I’ll still be prosecuted by the courts for my crimes, hopefully be proven guilty, and maybe even get the electric chair.
**

Well, that does it. FoG – I think you are the devil himself. I’ve never seen anyone do such a bad job of proselytizng before. You should take some time to examine your completely warped believe system before just going around doing everything you can to alienate people. I don’t think j.c. would be happy with your attitude.

[Gaudere]

Didn’t say “it doesn’t matter”. And also, there are ALWAYS earthly consequences for sin no matter what. If I kill babies before I come to Christ, and then come to Christ, I’m spared eternal punishment even though I deserve it. But (hopefully) I’ll still be prosecuted by the courts for my crimes, hopefully be proven guilty, and maybe even get the electric chair.

You claim there are always earthly consequences for sin no matter what. Then you say that you’ll “hopefully” be prosecuted, which means you concede that you may escape without earthly consequences–say you’re a serial killer and repent 2 seconds before your death of old age. You consider a quick death, possibly painless (although undoubtably scary), and an eternity in heaven to be adequate punishment for the murder of a child, when if I fib I deserve an eternity of torture?

God sees Jesus as guilty, just as He sees us as innocent.

If Jesus is guilty, and God cannot abide sin, why isn’t Jesus suffering eternally in Hell? How can God Himself be guilty? If Jesus is not really guilty, then you’re not really innocent, and God is just pretending you are. Therefore God really can allow sin into heaven.

EVERYONE, regardless of what they’ve done, has the same fair shot as anyone else. You don’t have to be good looking, successful, rich, poor – anything. You simply have to humble yourself, recognize your own wretched sinfulness, and come to Christ.

Unless you don’t see any particular reason why Jesus would be real, and not any of the other Gods. Then, simply because you don’t believe, you get to suffer eternally. Again, it seems rather silly for a Perfectly Loving God to torture Himself for the express purpose of letting everyone into heaven, then refuse to let them in if they don’t believe He did it.

You seem certain that God doesn’t exist, and if He DOES exist, He’s this illogical being you wouldn’t want to serve anyway. I think you’ve convinced yourself of this.

I am not certain that God doesn’t exist, but I lack belief that He does. The fact that your God is illogical means I think you must resolve the logicical contradiction somehow if you wish to have a coherent faith. The fact that despite your protestations, your God apparently does hideously unjust things makes me disinclined to worship Him even if He was logically possible and didn’t have a contradiction in attributes.

[jmullaney]

**
Why does god allow people to be born, knowing ahead of time that most of them are going to be damned for eternity?
**

What, you want someone to explain the birds and the bees to you? Are you just trying to argue that, if there is a god, you should be immortal? If there is a god, he doesn’t have any obligation to fix all of the worlds problems. Xtianity merely offers you the chance at immortality by uniting your soul to j.c.'s. Becoming part of the One if you will. Other religions offer this too but as best I can tell they are crock. I’m sorry if you’ve read too many chick tracks and really believe there is a hell outside of death itself and I know this is what a lot of later days jews-who-call-themselves xtians and fundies like FoG believe, but this simply is not the truth.

(i should mention i’m an atheist, but i hate to see others not give xtianity a chance just because i’m a lost cause)

Joel

[Gaudere]

Um, jmullaney, I believe Hell is a fairly well established Christian precept, although the nastiness of the Hell varies. Jews do not believe in Hell, though, IIRC. And I am curious about an atheist that dismisses the offer of salvation-though-becoming-part-of-God made by any other religion besides Christianity as a “crock”. Why isn’t Christianity’s offer a “crock”, too? You certainly don’t believe it either. Who do you say are the “jews-who-call-themselves xtians”?

BTW, I realize you’re simply flinging a bit of hyperbole about, but saying that FoG must be the Devil himself seems a bit rough on the poor guy. And I assure you, I’ve seen much worse attempts at witnessing; the guy who got all pouty when we actually argued with him, for one. FoG, while apparently untutored in basic logical reasoning, at least did not tell us all we’re going to Hell and he’s not, nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah.

[Holly]

jmullaney:

What, you want someone to explain the birds and the bees to you? Are you just trying to argue that, if there is a god, you should be immortal?

Huh? My point is: if you had a genetic disease and knew any child you bore would have a 90% chance of living with chronic, intractable pain and unimaginable suffering, wouldn’t you choose not to have kids?

My son does have a painful and debilitating disease. If I had realized before I had kids that it was really possible for me to have a child who would suffer so (and most people don’t really realize it could happen to them), I would have chosen to have no children at all. Do the health and happiness of my other two children outweigh the suffering of the one? Not to him. It doesn’t ease my heartache for him; I can’t say to myself, “Oh, well! Two of my kids aren’t suffering, anyways!”

If you are never born, you wouldn’t be conscious of missing anything. Better to never know anything, good or bad, than to burn for eternity.

Lib:

…the salvation of even one is worth the effort.

I disagree. How could anyone be happy in heaven knowing just one person is burning in hell? If heaven and hell did exist and at my death I was given a choice between going to heaven (unlikely, I know, but bear with me) or trading my place in heaven so a stranger could avoid hell, I would choose the latter.

jpmullaney:

I’m sorry if you’ve read too many chick tracks and really believe there is a hell outside of death itself…

Reading just one Chick tract is too many Chick tracts to read. (How much wood would a wood chuck… sorry.) No, I don’t believe there is a hell, or anything else, after death.

[jmullaney]

**
Um, jmullaney, I believe Hell is a fairly well established Christian precept
**

I disagree. Catholics, for example, believe hell is merely the separation from God. I mean, not that there hasn’t been a strong hell equals the Grecian hades or Dante’s inferno strain even in unofficial Catholicism. Protestants seem to be much more gungo ho about it of course.

**
Why isn’t Christianity’s offer a “crock”, too? You certainly don’t believe it either.
**

I didn’t say xtianity isn’t crock, but I have yet to see anything else more convincing. Taoism isn’t too bad, though. But I think Xtianity is the least crockiness. IMHO.

**
Who do you say are the “jews-who-call-themselves xtians”?
**

Most xtians who live their lives no different from any other person, atheist, jew, or whatever. Not that I haven’t met a few pious jews and if you adhere to your believe system anyway I think you are an alright person. But that kind of sums it up. I mean, if you believe in j.c., you might recall he came to change things. Most people who call themselves xtians today are no different than the people he called to change in the first place. And they give other xtians a bad name. They should just convert to judaism and let true believers have the name to themselves.

And I don’t know, FoG is pretty bad. But I haven’t been on a board in a while.

[jmullaney]

**
If you are never born, you wouldn’t be conscious of missing anything. Better to never know anything, good or bad, than to burn for eternity.
**

Boy, really. And to think burning for eternity in Hades sounded like a good alternative to the ancient Greeks to the eternal slumber of death. We’ve come a long way in 2000 years. I don’t know – for some reason the women I meet want to have children and I do sometimes too, even though I know they’ll probably die someday. It is screwed up, but well, if no one had children, I guess no one would suffer. Gee, who wants Kool-Aid?

**
No, I don’t believe there is a hell, or anything else, after death.
**

And you are right. I’ve never thought otherwise myself. But there still might be an eternal soul or holy spirit in the universe. You can’t argue one from the other. Oh well, someone will try…

[John_Corrado]

jmullaney said:

And I don’t know, FoG is pretty bad.

Were you here last New Year’s Eve? That was pretty bad. FoG, for all of his problems with understanding tenets of logic and inability to seperate “documentable fact” from “personal belief”, is at least willing to talk and discuss matters with us.

NY’sE we got a bunch of people who decided their job was to disrupt the board by witnessing everywhere, and starting up tons of threads. And then never discussing matters, just shouting Bible verses with every post.

Maybe I’m jaded by all of the troll activity we’ve been going through recently; but FoG is nothing compared to some of the aggravated fruit loops we’ve had running through here.

[Scylla]

"Catholics, for example, believe hell is merely the separation from God. "
Sez who?

[Gaudere]

Catholics, for example, believe hell is merely the separation from God. I mean, not that there hasn’t been a strong hell equals the Grecian hades or Dante’s inferno strain even in unofficial Catholicism. Protestants seem to be much more gungo ho about it of course.

So, yes there is a Hell, it’s just the official statement is that it might not be as scary as some say (IIRC, the pope said Hell might just be separation from God, but I do not think he was talking ex cathedral and made an absolute statement). And some Catholics do indeed have a scary Hell, and many/most protestsant do, and all of them have some sort of Hell. I must say your statement that Christians do not believe in Hell is unsupported by your own statements.

Most xtians who live their lives no different from any other person, atheist, jew, or whatever. Not that I haven’t met a few pious jews and if you adhere to your believe system anyway I think you are an alright person. But that kind of sums it up. I mean, if you believe in j.c., you might recall he came to change things. Most people who call themselves xtians today are no different than the people he called to change in the first place. And they give other xtians a bad name. They should just convert to judaism and let true believers have the name to themselves.

Pardon me, but what the bloody hell? Judaism is not “Christianity without a serious moral obligation to ge a good person” as you seem to be implying. Jews do not believe Jesus was God; Christians do. Jews are required by their religion to obey the mitvot, which is more stringent than the 10c; Christians are required by the religion, primarily, to have faith, although it is assumed that if you believe in J.C. you’ll want to do the stuff He says. Hell, the Jews came up with the Golden Rule before J.C. I simply don’t know where you get that Judaism or other religions are somehow inherently less concerned with morality than Christians are, to the point that you suggest that if a Christian does not behave in the manner that you think s/he should, that they should convert to Judaism. ::boggling::

[Esprix]

FriendofGod wrote:

The more detailed reason I didn’t want to continue this discussion:

1. It distracts totally from the main point I’m trying to make. I never intended it to be a point in this debate at all.

Funny, it has an awful lot to do with the original topic, which had to do with homosexuality and Christianity (regardless of the fact that this conversation really isn’t on-topic any longer). Plus, you’re the one that said it, and now you’re absolving yourself of responsibility for saying it by refusing to own up to your own statement - a cowardly act, my friend. How very “un-Christian” of you.

2. You don’t appear to be interested in a pleasant, healthy debate. You appear only interested in venting your steam off at me.

You insulted my friends by attacking their beliefs. Your “apology” was hollow and meaningless. I’m not venting steam, I’m demanding reparations, which seem to not be forthcoming.

That’s apparent by the fact that you linked to my very special hate-post with such glee.

Obviously you didn’t even read it. It’s not a “hate post,” it was a humorous observation. You might learn something from it.

I almost think you WANT me to say something that might offend you so you can get mad again.

There are scads of things in these two threads I could be offended at, but I just see you as a windbag, “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” This doesn’t particularly bother me. And it’s not a matter of getting mad again - my anger from your rude, insensitive, irresponsible remark remains as fresh as they day you first posted it.

And as for “evading” the issue … I’m telling you outright I’m not commenting on it!

Your lack of a direct answer only reinforces in my mind that your original statement is your true opinion.

I’d love to clarify some of the misconceptions you’re spreading about what I believe, believe me. It’s taking a LOT of “biting my tongue” to keep quiet. But I won’t get involved in a rude shouting match…

You have no problem going point-by-point and in-depth with every other philisophical and religious issue put to you, but you won’t even answer a simple question from me, which is only confirming something you already said.

I can honestly say that because of you and your statements here I will never, ever be a Christian by your or anyone else’s standards. Your conceited, self-righteous faith sickens me.

I will keep the rest of this little back-and-forth out of the thread and allow the rest of you to get on with your debate. If I have anything further to say, I’ll send it in e-mail. Thanks for listening.

Now, on to more pleasant posters I’d much rather spend my time talking with…

John Corrado wrote:

Faeries are going to kill you.

Actually, I thought Esprix was remarkably restrained in his responses.
[/quote]

Hey, I ain’t one of those Radical Faeries, although I do have some friends involved with 'em. Quite a wild little bunch, and fun at parties.

Esprix

[Liberal]

Holly

I disagree [that the salvation of even one is worth the effort]. How could anyone be happy in heaven knowing just one person is burning in hell? If heaven and hell did exist and at my death I was given a choice between going to heaven (unlikely, I know, but bear with me) or trading my place in heaven so a stranger could avoid hell, I would choose the latter.

Same thing Paul said, basically.

But the thing is, whoever is “burning in hell” is doing so by his own choice. And trust me, Holly, you stand a better chance of “going to heaven” than you might think. In fact, you might already be “there”. Do you love mercy and kindness and goodness? If so, you have already made your judgement.

[John_Corrado]

Esprix said:

Now, on to more pleasant posters I’d much rather spend my time talking with… John Corrado

I immediately took this as a compliment, but then I realized that, given who the comparison was with, Charlie Manson might be a more pleasant poster he’d rather spend his time talking with.

All in all, though, I’ll still take it as a compliment. As a Republican, compliments from gay men are few and far between, so I take them where I can get them.

Compliments, that is. I’m straight. Honest.

[jmullaney]

**
I must say your statement that Christians do not believe in Hell is unsupported by your own statements.
**

Is that what I said? I thought I specifically excluded some groups. I just mean this concept of Hell as a real physical (or meta-physical, spirit plane, whatever) that you go to when your physical body dies where you suffer for all eternity is not well established.

Judaism is not “Christianity without a serious moral obligation to ge a good person” as you seem to be implying.

Please don’t put words in my mouth! I don’t think xtianity has anything to do with “being a good person.” That’s Sesame Street you are thinking of.

DON’T WORRY
. . . .|
----- :)----
. . . .|
. . . .|
. . . .|
BE HAPPY

That isn’t the brand I’m talking about!

**
I simply don’t know where you get that Judaism or other religions are somehow inherently less concerned with morality than Christians are, to the point that you suggest that if a Christian does not behave in the manner that you think s/he should, that they should convert to Judaism. ::boggling::
**

I believe xtianity has a much more transendant morality than judaism. I don’t think the golden rule cuts it. Should I whip my brother if I like to be whipped my self? I don’t want to get into the faith/works arguement either, because if you don’t understand the transendential nature of this faith, it would be like arguing on the phone about what is on the tv while watching two different programs.

[andros]

FriendofGod sed, about the Columbine HS killings,

My point is, in this day and age, there’s a mindset that ‘whatever you believe is true is true’, regardless.

Was I the only one who laughed at this?

[Liberal]

Xeno

Um, I have been asked to clarify my statement that our Spirit is ablative in its relation to God rather than genitive beyond merely stating that I use the terms in their ordinary sense.

Perhaps if I paraphrase myself.

Our Spirit does not belong to God, though it comes from Him. It is His will that we believe in Him, but He allows us free moral agency to make our own decisions. That is, we are removed (ablatively) from His will, not tied (genitively) to it.

(Is that okay now?)

[gobear]

[/quote]

I believe xtianity has a much more transendant morality than judaism. I don’t think the golden rule cuts it. Should I whip my brother if I like to be whipped my self?
[/quote]

Um, how do you define ‘transcendent’? Second, the Golden Rule is from the New Testament, so the post doesn’t make sense to me. Christian morality descends directly from Judaism and the Law.

[Gaudere]

Is that what I said? I thought I specifically excluded some groups. I just mean this concept of Hell as a real physical (or meta-physical, spirit plane, whatever) that you go to when your physical body dies where you suffer for all eternity is not well established.

You excluded fundies and “jews-who-call-themselves xtians” (which, apparently, can include people who believe that Jesus is God, by your defintion; forgive me if I was puzzled by this, seeing as no Jew in good religious standing would ever believe such a thing). Nevertheless, most Christians believe in a place called Hell, although the degree to which they believe you suffer there may vary, and even many non-fundamentalists believe it is a thoroughly nasty place.

I don’t think xtianity has anything to do with “being a good person.”

Well, that’s kind of a shame, although it is perhaps borne out by the actions of some Christians. So Christianity is about becoming one with God, and this is expected to effect a profound change in the followers (although not necessarily make them better people). What sort of a change? And anyone who does not change is not a “true believer”, and should just stop believing Jesus is God and become a Jew.

I believe xtianity has a much more transendant morality than judaism. I don’t think the golden rule cuts it. Should I whip my brother if I like to be whipped my self? I don’t want to get into the faith/works arguement either, because if you don’t understand the transendential nature of this faith, it would be like arguing on the phone about what is on the tv while watching two different programs.

What is this transcendental morality? I thought it was basically “love God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself.” It’s certainly something that many other religions think is a good thing.