I think if I wanted to deceive people about God, I would make God as unattractive as possible. I might tell people that He demands worship and belief from His followers in illogical concepts and if they don’t believe He will torture them and burn them eternally in fire and brimstone. I think that would run them away rather quickly.
Love
Leroy
Don’t forget Alice Turner’s History of Hell.
So you’re saying that Jews want an eternity without God? Do aborted fetuses want an eternity without God?
And what about people who have never heard of Christianity? In what sense are they “rejecting” someone they have never heard of?
How about Jews who died a split second after the crucifixion?
His4Ever, (and, for that matter, anyone here who believes in torture for unbelievers,) do you think it’s just that unbelievers are tortured for eternity?
If I might ask a question, just out of curiosity…
why does Jehovah create people whom he knows will “choose” (in the rather offensive phraseology of the FC’s here) to go to hell? If it’s really just a matter of free choice, and Jehovah knows what people would choose before he creates them, why not restrict himself to only creating those people whom he knows will make the right choice of their own free will?
Thought plays a very large role in the freedom of choice that God grants His children. It is we that choose to come to the physical in the first place, in order to learn who we are. Heaven and hell are our inventions, not God’s. Some believe and some don’t. What matters is, that you choose love, which is God.
Nothing is eternal save God and His children, all other things are our toys.
Love
Leroy
And round and round we go. I know this doesn’t make sense to you, but if a person happens to believe that God provided us with His word, that word being the Holy Bible, then supposedy that person might believe whatever contradicts that word is false or not of God.
Now, if what Lekatt says about the after life isn’t the same as what the Bible says, then who is the person who believes the Bible to believe? What he (Lekatt) states definitely doesn’t appear to agree with what I believe God says about it, so I have a choice. Do I believe Lekatt and what near death experiencers say about it or do I examine it and compare with Scripture and see if it lines up?
I guess it all depends on what you decide to trust in as the authority on reality and the afterlife, doesn’t it? You can choose near death experiences and trust whatever they tell you or can examine them in the light of God’s word. Your choice.
For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders: insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Matthew 24:24
1 John 4:1 - Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons.
Yes, there is a way to tell if something is a deception or not. Take it and compare it with what God’s word has to say about it. If it doesn’t match up, then you have a choice to make.
We should do as the Bereans did and examine the scriptures to see if what we’re being told is true:
And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These (the Bereans) were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Acts 17:10-11
They searched the scriptures to see if the things they were being told were true. Isn’t that what we should be doing? Should we just accept everything we’re told from beings from the spirit world when we’re clearly told to test the spirits to see whether they’re from God?
Just because the experience feels loving and wonderful doesn’t mean the beings behind the experience are. Things aren’t always what they appear to be, that’s what deception is. What better way to deceive people than to use love? I didn’t intend for this to get so long and I’m probably wasting my breath here so I’ll just leave you with this:
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. 1 John 4:1-3
Do I even need to say the words “Junior Mints”?
I guess you haven’t been reading my posts very well. Most of what I quote is directly from the Bible, namely the teachings of Jesus. Jesus says to, not judge, forgive, love your neighbor (everyone), God is within you, seek ye first the Kingdom of God, etc., and etc.
You are contradicting this with other scriptures, making God out to be an Ogre, killer of children and torturer of mankind. No, I will never teach such nonsense. God is unconditional love, He created perfect children, you do not speak for God. The Bible was written by men, if that is your only knowledge of God, look within yourself and find Him. His love is within you. Men have felt the love of God in all ages and parts of the world, without the Bible. The Bible is not God. The Bible is not God, He is within you.
Love
Leroy
Yes, but the same isue arise : that you must believe in the first place that the content of the bible has been inspired by god, and not by the deceiver. And as it has been pointed out many times in threads on this boards, many of us don’t believe a loving god could have inspired the bible (see the many arguments about this god supposedly ordering the Hebrews to slaughter everybody, adults and children alike).
Also, like many other posters, I think that you too, despite your litteralist approach, pick and choose in the bible/gospels to fit your own personnal beliefs (or the beliefs of your favorite preacher, or commnunity, or the genarally held christian beliefs).
There has beenlenghty discussion about this topic, the most common being about homosexuality. it goes somewhat like that :
-God tells in the bible that homosexuality is an abomination
-yes, but he also tells that eating shellfish is an abomination. So why don’t you condemn also oyster-eaters?
-Because the ritual parts of the law have been abolished, while the moral ones haven’t been
-And who are you to tell what parts of god’s laws have been abolished, or even to tell which part are “ritual” and which part are “moral” laws? I can like oysters and sleeping with other men. What the difference? What makes sleeping with men more morally-related than eating oysters? Forbidding any of them or both seems arbitrary to me, so I’ve no obvious reason to assume than god eventually okeyed one and not the other. Or when the bible condone slavery, isn’t this a moral issue?
-Other counter argument : Jesus told, according to the gospels, that not even a letter of the Law will be dropped until the end of times (I don’t know the exact quote, especially according to your KJV, but surely you do). If you think it’s ok not to eat kosher, you have to ignore or “interpret away” these words told by Jesus.
-Answer : it’s confirmed by paul’s interpretations
-Counter-answer : since when is Paul more authoritative than the Christ?
-Other counter-argument : since you’re considering paul as authoritative, why don’t you follow his prescriptions for other issues, in particular about the (inferior) status of women?
-Answers : various new attempt to “interpret away” Paul’s teaching, the most nonsentical i read being that the fact that women should cover their heads actually means that they should have hair, or something like that.
So, to sum up, your argument is flawed in my opinion because :
-You’ve no way to know whether or not the bible was inspired by god and not by the deceiver, or at least that the deceiver didn’t mess up with its content.
-Actually, you’re as guilty of “picking and choosing” than other non-litteralist christians (or actually with people who would have very untraditionnal understanding of the bible…say for instance someone who would believe in Jesus but would follow all the prescriptions of the Jewish law…and there has been such christian sects).
You’re just not in agreement with the parts which should be ignored, or shouldn’t be taken at face value, or should be “interpreted away”. Like them, you pick in the bible and gospels only the parts which fits your system or belief, your morals, etc…
And of course, you don’t follow all of christ prescriptions (for instance, you don’t sleep with other women, I assume, but the fact that you own a computer proves you didn’t give away all of your belongings to follow Jesus (remember this guy who wanted to join Jesus but was sent packing because he was unwilling to give away all he owned?). Of course, nobody’s perfect (we’re all sinners and all…). But though I read you saying that homosexuals should change their way of life, I don’t remember you having encouraged posters on this board to give away all their belongings. Obviously some parts of the bible/gospels seem more important to you than others…Based on what? Most probably on your own opinions, way of life, morals, etc…
Like all other christians on this board, you want what you call “god’s words” to fit your beliefs and morals. Not the other way around. If you were to give the same weight, objectively, to each and every word of the bible, without any “picking and choosing”, without any “I don’t like that/ I’ve never been taught it that way, so I’m going to interpret it away”, your beliefs would be widely different (and probably quite distasteful from the wide majority’s point of view). And you’d have to face the many contradictions contained in these books, of course…
Assume thazt I pick three SD posters (you, lekatt, and a random non-litteralist christian).
All three of you are telling me that you have a personnal relationship with a loving supernatural being. So, I’ve no reason to believe one of you rather than the other on this basis alone. now, what else are you saying :
-Random non-litteralist : I’m inspired to think that I can’t be certain that my personnal interpretation is the absolutely correct one (various personnal interpretations follow)
-lekatt : I’m inspired to think that my interpretation is the only correct one, and this being is unconditionally loving
-His4ever : i’m inspired to think that my interpretation is the only correct one, and this being will torture forever everybody who disagrees.
Who, do you think, I will assume is the one inspired by a loving god, rather than by an evill deceiver? I’m not sure about the two first ones, but you can bet it won’t be the third.
So when Part A of the Bible contradicts Part B, how do you decide which part is of God and which part is false?
And the reason your bit above doesn’t make sense is because it violates a basic rule of Logic:
p.s. What claiobscur posted kind of hints at one of the reasons why I like my denomination (LDS) so much:
What clairobscur just mentioned is that he (she?) is seeking after (at least for the purpose of the experiment just described in that posting) something “virtuous, lovely…[etc.].” H4E, your depiction of deity is contrary to every one of those qualities and your method itself is also contrary to them.
Ben,
as for eternal torture, i guess that means what you call torture.
To me, IMHO< hell will be the person realized eternity with God would’ve been the best, and they missed it.
They will long to be with God but can’t.
Also: please explain the junior mints.
Goodness, if Hell was written to be a Good place, everyone would try to go there!
Clairobscur- I just want to say bravo to the post this qoute came from. It sums up many of the feelings I’ve been having about “higher than thou” Christians.
Not only that, but I think it’s right on the money in regards to some of the Christians posters on this board cough His4Ever cough
**
Let me ask again:
So you’re saying that Jews want an eternity without God? Do aborted fetuses want an eternity without God?
And what about people who have never heard of Christianity? In what sense are they “rejecting” someone they have never heard of?
How about Jews who died a split second after the crucifixion?
His4Ever, (and, for that matter, anyone here who believes in torture for unbelievers,) do you think it is just for unbelievers to be tortured for eternity?
It’s an old test for the ability to put yourself in other people’s shoes. You show a child a box of Junior mints and ask them what’s in it. Naturally, they say “Junior mints.” You show them that there’s really a pencil inside, and you close the box.
Then you ask, “What if I showed this box to your friend Bobby? What would he say was inside?”
If the kid replies, “a pencil,” then you’ve got a problem.
That’s the kind of behavior H4E is showing. She seems to expect everyone to measure truth by the yardstick of the Bible, even if they aren’t Christians.
I posted this point in a earlier thread. If I am going to heaven and its a place as described in the bible of eternal happiness and my family goes to hell (as a totally different place) and the people i love most go to hell than that would make my heaven without them a hell too wouldnt it?
As far as I can figure it, God fixes your brain so that you actually don’t mind, and even enjoy, the fact that your loved ones are in eternal agony. Some Christians have a word for this: Love.
Ben,
IMHO, as I cannot be certain, I think all babies and fetus’ will go to Heaven.
Why shouldn’t they?
They haven’t had any chance to repent!
Not that they even had anything to repent of.
As for Jews, somewhere in the Bible it says “All Israel will be saved”. because God made a convenant with them, and He is faithful, evne if we aren’t.
Just MHO, though, I am no expert.
Not according to this particular work. There was a treatise known as De Fide that describes what is going to happen to unborn babies who are not baptized. Joseph Wheless in his “Forgery in Christianity” says for a long time this work had long been considered Augustine’s, but many think nowadays it is the work of Bishop St. Fulgentius. It states: ** Be assured, and doubt not, that not only men who have attained the use of their reason, but also little children who have begun to live in their mothers’ womb and have there died, or who, having been just born, have passed away from the world without the sacrament of holy baptism, administered in the name of the Father, Son, and Hoy Ghost, must be punished by the eternal torture of undying fire; for although they committed no sin by their own will, they have nevertheless drawn with them the condemnation of original sin, by their carnal conception and nativity.** The church today keeps growing up though, and I doubt most would subscribe to De Fide. Give them another millennium or two, and they will eventually out grow the whole Hell concept altogether.
JZ