How good is good enough to get to Heaven?

[Koldo]

I'm just curious what everyone believes on the subject and by what rationale they defend their view. I realize this is a diverse board but I think we can all agree that we are all sinners to varying degrees. If Heaven is real then God must have some standard of imperfection that one must meet if they are to reach the pearly gates or else we are all destined to burn. What is that standard?

If God is good enough to get to Heaven, then by consequence every human meets the required standard, whatever it is.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

And that includes any deity that think it's right to torture somebody because they fall in love with someone of the same gender or because they don't believe in him/her. That deity seriously needs a Big Squishy Hug. :rainbow1:

Oddly enough it's not love that Yahewh convicts people of, it's lust. And how often is genuine love really a factor in relationships built on lust? I would say one of the defining characteristics of such relationships is a lack of real commitment.

 

[InChrist]

I believe the standard required is that one must be perfectly sinless.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Dang it, I started reading this thread.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

You're making an awful lot of assumptions here, based upon a fairly narrow view of eternity.

The standard is Divine perfect love and perfect forgiveness. We all have it at our disposal. All are invited; all are welcome, because all are one as the Divine is One.

Your idea of God is of one who accepts even those who reject him and blatantly tell him to his face that they despise his commandments and have no desire to live under his reign. Are you telling me such a God forces people to go live with him in Heaven? Or does he simply allow them to live there and do as they please? If it's the latter then wouldn't "Heaven" actually be a place of lawlessness? If that's the case, wouldn't it cease to be Heaven?

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Oddly enough it's not love that Yahewh convicts people of, it's lust. And how often is genuine love really a factor in relationships built on lust? I would say one of the defining characteristics of such relationships is a lack of real commitment.

I'm really hoping you aren't still implying that same sex relationships are based on lust. Because if you are, it's so untrue.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

I'm really hoping you aren't still implying that same sex relationships are based on lust. Because if you are, it's so untrue.

Here's a question that doesn't single any one group out. If all other factors were equal which marriage would you bet would last longer: the one in which monogamy is practiced or the one in which partners "sleep around?"

 

[Sir Doom]

I'm just curious what everyone believes on the subject and by what rationale they defend their view. I realize this is a diverse board but I think we can all agree that we are all sinners to varying degrees.

No, there are quite a few of us who think the idea of 'sin' is pretty ridiculous.

If Heaven is real then God must have some standard of imperfection that one must meet if they are to reach the pearly gates or else we are all destined to burn.

Nothing about the idea of Heaven makes Hell necessary. Additionally, there is no intrinsic connection between the afterlife and God. They may very well be completely separate.

What is that standard?

Be a human that believes they will go to Heaven. Nothing else matters. Yes, that includes rapists and murders and Hitler.

 

[sojourner]

Obviously I believe the Christian standard (grace), which Walkntune laid out pretty nicely, is what God uses to judge mankind.

Grace mitigates judgment.

 

[sojourner]

You have a problem with rapists and murderers being punished?

Christianity isn't a penal system, it's a forebearance system.

 

[InChrist]

Christianity isn't a penal system, it's a forebearance system.

Or an accounting system.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

No, there are quite a few of us who think the idea of 'sin' is pretty ridiculous.

.

That's easy to say until you're on the wrong end of it

 

[Gjallarhorn]

That's easy to say until you're on the wrong end of it

Sin and "things I don't like" are not synonyms, no matter how similar you believe God is to your limited, petty, human mind.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

Sin and "things I don't like" are not synonyms, no matter how similar you believe God is to your limited, petty, human mind.

Let's say somebody takes the life of someone you love. Let's pretend it was a armed robbery that went bad and your loved one was the victim. Does that only classify as "something you don't like"? Or are you willing to go so far as to call it evil?

 

[InformedIgnorance]

It is something I hate - it is also something that is destructive to society and was codified into law that people should not do so, laws that we follow because of social contract.

It is not 'sin'; It is not 'evil'

That does not change the validity of my emotional response of grief and hatred, the desire for revenge or retribution. However, while not in such a state (while my cognitive functions are uncolored by the swirl of emotions) I am willing to admit that my emotions do not determine 'right' and 'wrong' - I can determine what I like and dislike, I can try to envisage what others might like and dislike and I can try to envisage the outcomes of my own (in)actions (and that of others). None of this determines 'good' and 'evil' and all of it is based in my own emotional and intellectual capacity - not on the assertion of some external unidentifiable determinant of 'morality'

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Here's a question that doesn't single any one group out. If all other factors were equal which marriage would you bet would last longer: the one in which monogamy is practiced or the one in which partners "sleep around?"

We could look at the numbers and see. The statistics vary in how many married people or formerly married people report they slept with somebody else while they were married. If we could compare the various reports with the rates of divorce, say, in the U.S. over the last 25 years, we might get the beginning of a picture.

The only possibility I can think of how this would relate to the question of same sex marriage is that some would consider both adultery and homosexuality to be in the same category of "sin". Again, speaking from personal experience as both a polyamorous woman in an open marriage with her husband AND as a bisexual woman, I can tell you that orientation and relationship fidelity arrangements are absolutely 100% unlike each other.

One is a natural attraction sexually and romantically toward another person. The other is a couple working together to define its own boundaries. Some polyamorous couples are fine with physical sex, but no romance with outside partners. Some limit their outside partners to just swapping with another couple. Some limit outside partners to just "courting" and emotional attachment but no sex. Some limit to kissing, heavy petting, or oral sex and no penetration. Every polyamorous couple takes the time to really explore their boundaries for what they will allow into their relationship and what they will NOT allow.

Even monogamous couples need to communicate with each other about what is allowable and what isn't. Some couples don't allow having lunch alone with somebody else that might be attractive. Some don't allow porn. Some don't allow personal emails or facebook accounts and have all forms of communication funneled through the same account to prevent any wandering around.

Just goes to show that polyamorous couples really aren't THAT different from monogamous couples overall. But, yeah, it still would be interesting to see statistics and look through a number of studies to see the dynamics of what really constitutes "fidelity."

 

[-Peacemaker-]

It is something I hate - it is also something that is destructive to society and was codified into law that people should not do so, laws that we follow because of social contract.

It is not 'sin'; It is not 'evil'

At this point this is just a game of semantics

 

[InformedIgnorance]

It is only 'a game of semantics' if you concede that 'evil' and 'sins' are merely terms given to things we find intellectually undesirable and emotionally unpleasant. Because that is what I was talking about then saying it wasn't evil or sinful; for you to say it is merely a difference in semantics is to suggest that your understanding of evil and sins is merely that they are terms given to that which we dislike.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Obviously I believe the Christian standard (grace), which Walkntune laid out pretty nicely, is what God uses to judge mankind.

And you think this standard is just? Why?

I'm interested in hearing about what people here believe that standard to be and how they rationalize it. To reject the idea that only by grace can we get to Heaven is to accept the idea that a certain level of imperfection exists which is the line between that and going to Hell. Where do people believe that line is drawn?

Why does it have to be a matter of "deserve" as opposed to, say, "need"?

The Bible says that God, as our Heavenly Father, knows our needs and will provide for them. Do you think that we need salvation?

Would a human father be a good father if he based his decision of whether to provide for his children on whether the children have done things to "justify" getting the things they need?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

We could look at the numbers and see. The statistics vary in how many married people or formerly married people report they slept with somebody else while they were married. If we could compare the various reports with the rates of divorce, say, in the U.S. over the last 25 years, we might get the beginning of a picture.

The only possibility I can think of how this would relate to the question of same sex marriage is that some would consider both adultery and homosexuality to be in the same category of "sin". Again, speaking from personal experience as both a polyamorous woman in an open marriage with her husband AND as a bisexual woman, I can tell you that orientation and relationship fidelity arrangements are absolutely 100% unlike each other.

I know that anecdotes aren't data, but just as an illustrative example...

My monogamous, heterosexual marriage lasted 7 years. How long has your open marriage lasted so far?