“Therefore”?
That really is not a logically valid conclusion from the premises you’ve stated.
Since no one can say where Heaven is(years ago they believed it was up in the sky and hell was down below because they thought the world was flat). Now when one says up, do they mean the same up as from Australia? Is Australia down from us? 
What if after one dies they just become part of the universe, their atoms become what they were before? Just like a plant or any other thing in our existance!! The meek will inherit the earth, but if the earth is destroyed with a comet or etc. What will the meek have then? If the stars fall and the moon is turned to blood and the Sun no longer gives it’s light, how many humans, plants or animals will be left?
Some of this answers are the reason why I’ve come to the conclusion that Christianity, or any similar religion really, is not on only not good, but downright evil.
Create living beings, give them free will, then throw them into a world in which it’s very much possible they will not accept you as a god (or accept the wrong one, as there is no clear evidence) - and then condemn those who use the free will (how unexpected!) to eternal punishment. Muaha! That’s right from an Episode of the Twilight Zone! And that’s the good and perfect god people are supposed to believe in? Who argue you can’t have any morale without god? Does not make any sense to me.
None are righteous, no not one.
Whose sin is beyond the redemption of the Lord?
Hypothetical sinners perhaps. Actual sinners are the ones for whom He was born into the world, and for whom He suffered.
Our petty lives are of great importance to us, as are our imagined greatness, and our self indulgent evils. God is greater than these things. We do not merit salvation, nor may we bring our hatreds with us into eternity. How shall the Lord redeem the most evil among us, and justly bring us to Himself? If we knew the answers to that, we should be God ourselves.
My opinion is, of course biased by the sure knowledge that my sins can be described with scriptural authority to be grievous, and my repentance self serving. But, I have faith that even I shall be welcomed in joy by my Lord. If he has forgiven me, how can I judge Nero, Hitler, and all those souls who did as I did?
Faith, hope, and love, abide these three things. And the greatest of them, is love.
I have no authority to present to the forum.
Tris
What are you talking about? The concept of “original sin” is the very foundation of Christianity. If you don’t accept Christ, you can’t enter heaven, period.
However, it’s equally common for any Christian sect to believe that they are the only “true” Christians, and any other type of faith is incorrect or doesn’t even exist…just sayin’.
True, that. Therefore, if this petty and immoral Christian God really does exist, the best defense is to seek out and attune your energy to a power higher than God, such as God’s Creator, or the Universe itself. After all, any presumed deity who delights in human suffering is probably lying about being omnipotent.
This seems like an odd point. I mean, presumably the various churches and priesthoods, while being variably accorded with different levels of respect, are often supposed to have a purpose beyond simply administration. They often give guidance, and as their role in the church is their job, it can often be expected that they ponder theological questions as part of that role. Given that we can’t actually ask Jesus such questions, it seems like churches and the priesthood are pretty much the best second-best. They may not be the ones that pass judgement, but they’re supposed to know about who does. Your argument is sort of like saying we shouldn’t ask a lawyer about the law because he doesn’t create it. No, but it’s his job to understand it.
Odd that “original sin” didn’t make it into any of the Creeds. And the concept of original sin does not necessarily mandate or depend on “no heaven w/o accepting Christ.”
The very foundations of Christianity are- The Creator is Just & Loving. Humans are valuable to Him yet fallen (NOT exactly the same as ‘original sin’). The Creator either sent or came as Jesus to redeem us & give us opportunity to Eternal Life.
I can’t think of any sect of Christianity that wouldn’t sign on to that, except perhaps some extreme Calvinism. Whether or not personal acceptance is mandatory with no exceptions is highly debatable, even/especially in the Bible.
If humans (or any part of creation) are flawed, it is the fault of the creator not the created. If God is an all loving being and knew all things before they happened then He knew man would sin, and because he made them suseptible to sin it was His will that they sin or He could have prevented it, at the very least not punish but teach each one and give them understanding, not depend on some other child to instruct them. If He gave them free will as some believe then He also knew that, so it seems to me that judgement is unnecessary.
John says in the NT that God is Love, but if one uses Paul’s description of what love is, He doesn’t fit that description. Starting with self seeking. God is said to create for Man to worship Him. A good Father(which If God is) would have so much love to give He would want to have creatures to love, not caring if he was loved in return. Such a great being would have no needs as he would have more than He needed. I doubt he would have murderers and Adulterers lead his children,but contact them Himself. Being able to do all things at once He could not be too busy!
Really now? How can the foundation be formulated AFTER the founding?
And where is Fred Phelps headed?
The is a parable on this issue, about the man who said he would do what his patriarch said … but didn’t. The brother who said he wouldn’t … but did. The question was … who followed his patriarch’s wishes? Richard, of course.
People are going to be surprised.
What I’m saying is that the main consideration on entrance to heaven is faith. Therefore, any religion that doesn’t have faith in the Christian god is doomed to hell.
I think the parable of the sheep & the goats is a pretty strong case. But it can be argued that the set of the righteous in the story is meant to be within the set of observant Jews. I suppose a Christian could claim it’s within the set of practicing Christians (although Jesus was not a Christian nor was he speaking to Christians at the time).
What about the “thief on the cross,” & the appearance of easy forgiveness? Well, we don’t know much about the thief. He was being executed by Rome, maybe he was just a patriot. Maybe he was a good man driven to one crime against his country’s oppressors. Likely, we’re told this because Jesus is meant to be shown as having great divine power in this story–but not to tell us that we may “sin that grace may increase.” So a near-death repentance in the presence of the Divine might be enough, but not all apparently glib repentances are the same.
Christianity talks about repentance, & makes Jesus out to be very powerful in this regard; but it’s not a free excuse for everything one does. Pelagius made the point that no one starts perfect, but a godly man may become perfected, though he used to be wicked.
And then it’s possible that the Gospels aren’t really all that consistent.