I am a non-believer and have some questions

[Neo Deist]

3. There either is, will be, or has been a Hell of some type because the bible says God prepared it for Satan and the demons (fallen angels).

If God's will is done in heaven (thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven) then how exactly did Satan and his band of fallen angels rebel in the first place, unless God willed it?

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

What I meant was, simply, someone who has studied as much as you claim you have cannot be undecided. The evidence- historical, Geographically, Geologically and scientifically would demand a judgment. You are the only person I have ever met that has done research but can decide if it is true or not or acceptable or not. It is almost like saying it's raining when it isn't and the sun is shining. You can't have it both ways. No one can. If one does the research, as I have- to some degree, then one has an answer. It can't be otherwise. The Bible predicted Alexander, the Great (in a truly awesome and precise/detailed way!) and science agrees but you are undecided? Matt, that doesn't make sense. No offense, but do you take any medications?

There is also science that disagrees which would be the skeptics. Even if skeptics cannot explain these things, that does not mean that this is evidence of God. To think so would be the famous God of the Gaps argument fallacy.

 

[Sonny]

If that is the case then what makes Christianity so special?

Christianity is special bc it has the only true (real) God. Have you seen some of the stuff Hindu/Bhuddists believe? Whoa! No offense to any but.. What? Also, Bhuddism is more of a way of life than a religion. I once read that Buddha had said he was not God. It's been too long and so far away- plus I've moved and lost papers and dealt with some personal setbacks to remember where my info is, from whom I heard/read it and in what context he said it.

But not Buddhism or Hinduism?

What evidence have you found?

Most religions disprove themselves. All one need do is read what they wrote, how they said it happened, when, where and what took place. Most have prophecies, revelation, etc. When those don't happen as or when said then they come up with a different reason or date or an excuse that only the 'true believers' would accept. This is one way to sort out the frauds from the real. I could mention a number of people and their religions but I might get in trouble. I think I can say 'what' they said w/o fear but not now.

 

[Sonny]

If God's will is done in heaven (thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven) then how exactly did Satan and his band of fallen angels rebel in the first place, unless God willed it?

God allowed it. There is a big difference between what God wants, condones and wills from what He allows. he allowed David to commit adultery and 1st degree murder but he didn't want it or condone it. God gave each of us 'free will' to act, think and speak as we choose. he doesn't like what we have done but since He gave all of us those rights He can't stop someone from, say, molesting a child or murdering people with a strapped on device or good or innocent people from being hurt by corrupt cops, for examples. But that doesn't mean He doesn't love us. Giving us those rights/freedoms proves He loves us. We are not robots or slaves. We are loved beyond our wildest imagination. However, bad things happen to good and innocent people all of the time.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Christianity is special bc it has the only true (real) God. Have you seen some of the stuff Hindu/Bhuddists believe? Whoa! No offense to any but.. What? Also, Bhuddism is more of a way of life than a religion. I once read that Buddha had said he was not God. It's been too long and so far away- plus I've moved and lost papers and dealt with some personal setbacks to remember where my info is, from whom I heard/read it and in what context he said it.




Most religions disprove themselves. All one need do is read what they wrote, how they said it happened, when, where and what took place. Most have prophecies, revelation, etc. When those don't happen as or when said then they come up with a different reason or date or an excuse that only the 'true believers' would accept. This is one way to sort out the frauds from the real. I could mention a number of people and their religions but I might get in trouble. I think I can say 'what' they said w/o fear but not now.

I find it strange because the argumetns you use against the other religions are the same ones I see inhernet to Christianity as well. Do you have specific evidence that christianity is somehow different or distinct form these religions?

 

[Sonny]

There is also science that disagrees which would be the skeptics. Even if skeptics cannot explain these things, that does not mean that this is evidence of God. To think so would be the famous God of the Gaps argument fallacy.

Don't put your trust/faith in science. Not all science, anyway. Science is always changing. They say things are facts but always add 'maybe' or 'possibly' or 'might have'. Like with dinosaurs and our Universe. Science has nearly completely changed its collective minds on these things, radically so, from what they used to say and think just 30 years ago. The Bible has never been changed on any major doctrine. The cults do that all of the time, tho. These are some of the facts to be considered.
But, do men live on the moon or the sun, as one church taught. Is the earth held up by pillars with an elephant holding them up? Did humans come from some other place in the Universe, seeds, if you will? Does God want his followers to kill other humans for his sake? Once one has examined the teachings of other religions, especially in light of today's 'knowledge increase' (as the Bible predicted- maybe computers, too), then one must start cutting some of them out as never the right religion. After that it is a process of elimination based on possibility or evidence.

 

[Sonny]

I find it strange because the argumetns you use against the other religions are the same ones I see inhernet to Christianity as well. Do you have specific evidence that christianity is somehow different or distinct form these religions?

I mentioned a few fulfilled prophecies earlier. These are they which define truthfulness in a religion. But other evidences need to be taken into account as well. But if a church/religion has had lies in its teachings, failed revelations and/or false prophecies then eliminate it and move on. I prefer facts to feelings. Most don't. Truth is the biggest factor. If the church lies or deceives anyone stay away. I say what I do based on research. There aren't many who do that. Most will accept what others told them even when it sounds nuts. Others wouldn't fact-check if their lives depended on it (their soul does). It's easy to identify fraudulent and false religions if one looks into them. But, that's just me.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Don't put your trust/faith in science. Not all science, anyway. Science is always changing. They say things are facts but always add 'maybe' or 'possibly' or 'might have'. Like with dinosaurs and our Universe. Science has nearly completely changed its collective minds on these things, radically so, from what they used to say and think just 30 years ago. The Bible has never been changed on any major doctrine. The cults do that all of the time, tho. These are some of the facts to be considered.
But, do men live on the moon or the sun, as one church taught. Is the earth held up by pillars with an elephant holding them up? Did humans come from some other place in the Universe, seeds, if you will? Does God want his followers to kill other humans for his sake? Once one has examined the teachings of other religions, especially in light of today's 'knowledge increase' (as the Bible predicted- maybe computers, too), then one must start cutting some of them out as never the right religion. After that it is a process of elimination based on possibility or evidence.

Now I have a personal question. Based on your own personal belief, is there much evidence to support the idea that I would go to hell and remain there forever in my situation even though my lack of belief in God was genuine and honest?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I mentioned a few fulfilled prophecies earlier. These are they which define truthfulness in a religion. But other evidences need to be taken into account as well. But if a church/religion has had lies in its teachings, failed revelations and/or false prophecies then eliminate it and move on. I prefer facts to feelings. Most don't. Truth is the biggest factor. If the church lies or deceives anyone stay away. I say what I do based on research. There aren't many who do that. Most will accept what others told them even when it sounds nuts. Others wouldn't fact-check if their lives depended on it (their soul does). It's easy to identify fraudulent and false religions if one looks into them. But, that's just me.

I must have missed them or they were not directed at me. Which prophecies? I've heard of many but seen zero so far pan out.

Do you see christianity and catholosism as different?

 

[1robin]

I have stated before that I am a non-believer in Christianity and other religions that pose the risk of going to hell if you do not believe and serve their God. I am here to debate the moral nature of Christianity and those other religions as well as the validity of such religions.

I am in an undecided mindset leaning a bit towards the idea that such religions are fear mongering nonsense, but am not entirely sure which is why I wish to have a debate of my own here. I have read into all the claimed evidence and debates by skeptics and believers and my mindset is an honest, open, undecided mindset. I have truly and honestly tried my best here, but my mindset has to remain undecided and this is an honest mindset I am having here.

Christians, for example, would tell me that is bull because they would claim that I am in denial and only being the fool lying to myself. Now this is an issue that cannot be debated because this is a matter of personal subjective experience. I am in my own mind and only I would know if I were lying to myself or not.

I know that I am not lying to myself. My lack of conviction in Christianity and those other religions is genuine. If, let's pretend, the Christian God were real, then he should understand this and should get me out of hell if I were to go there.

He should of understood that I would of lived my life for him and dedicated my life to him if I believed he were real. Furthermore, if he loves and cares about me so much, then that love and compassion should compel him to try and convince me time and time again through signs and such to try and save me since nothing else has worked to convince me.

What kind of loving person or parent wouldn't take such action and instead just leave their son/daughter to be tormented in hell forever and not get them out? Especially since belief is not a matter of choice and is instead a matter of what your honest open mindset leads you to.

It is as though the Christian God, for example, is saying:

"I am an all loving and all just God. I have had my son sacrificed. So in order for people to be convinced of my existence and of my son's sacrifice, I will just throw some things out there. Namely, the bible that I know many honest open minded people will not be convinced of. But if they still don't believe, then that is just too bad.

Especially for little children who die early and other people in other areas of the world who never got the chance to believe in me. I will not try to convince them any more than this even though I am an all powerful God who is more than capable of trying to do so. So that is all I am going to offer as a means of conviction. So take it or leave it. If you are not convinced and end up in hell, then that is just too bad and I am just going to have to leave you there to suffer for eternity."

So don't you see how such an attitude is not all loving, not all caring/just, and not morally righteous?

Hello Matt, per your request I am reading your posts and will soon have a good idea what your positions are. However if we begin the journey in the exact wrong direction no matter how far we go we are no nearer the goal. So let me first give you a very brief summary of Christianity.

1. Love can only exist if freewill exists. A kiss from a pair of digital lips on an iphone means nothing, a kiss from a mate who can choose not to kiss you does mean something. So, no free will, no love.
2. God created man with freewill. Freewill is only free if it can be used for both evil and good.
3. God is perfect and either has or is creating a perfect heaven which allow evil to enter.
4. Every single one of us has done evil (with the exception of Christ), by doing evil we disqualify our selves from meriting Heaven. None of us have the slightest thing to offer to God that will earn us heaven.
5. God along with being perfectly just is perfectly loving. So he rightly condemns us for our evil deeds but also paid the entire price for each of us to enter heaven.
6. Christ was perfect and does merit heaven but through his substitutionary atoning death all of us who have done evil are made right with God if we but accept Christ's sacrifice.
7. My sin was placed on Christ and punished on the cross, his righteousness is applied to my account when I first believe.
8. Keep in mind I am made righteous (right standing before God) not perfect. I only am made perfect upon resurrection.

As to Hell.

It is not logical to deny something's existence if it contains something inconvenient. We try and detect cancer early as possible, we do not deny cancer exists. I believe a literal Hell may or may not exist currently, but if it does it is eventually done away with in the finite future. Those who did not believe on Christ are annihilated along with Satan and the fallen angels. So in the end we use our freewill to accept God or reject him and we get exactly what we chose. All we have to do is admit the obvious fact that we are morally imperfect and accept the Gift of salvation paid entirely by God on our behalf.

If you wish to debate Christianity we need to be on the same page concerning what it is.

 

[1robin]

If God's will is done in heaven (thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven) then how exactly did Satan and his band of fallen angels rebel in the first place, unless God willed it?

Hold the phone a minute, you can't ignore my claims and questions that I posted to you and instead post one of your own in an entirely new context (or at least you shouldn't). If you will first answer the questions in my post I will then answer yours. You have a good question but first things first.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Hello Matt, per your request I am reading your posts and will soon have a good idea what your positions are. However if we begin the journey in the exact wrong direction no matter how far we go we are no nearer the goal. So let me first give you a very brief summary of Christianity.

1. Love can only exist if freewill exists. A kiss from a pair of digital lips on an iphone means nothing, a kiss from a mate who can choose not to kiss you does mean something. So, no free will, no love.
2. God created man with freewill. Freewill is only free if it can be used for both evil and good.
3. God is perfect and either has or is creating a perfect heaven which allow evil to enter.
4. Every single one of us has done evil (with the exception of Christ), by doing evil we disqualify our selves from meriting Heaven. None of us have the slightest thing to offer to God that will earn us heaven.
5. God along with being perfectly just is perfectly loving. So he rightly condemns us for our evil deeds but also paid the entire price for each of us to enter heaven.
6. Christ was perfect and does merit heaven but through his substitutionary atoning death all of us who have done evil are made right with God if we but accept Christ's sacrifice.
7. My sin was placed on Christ and punished on the cross, his righteousness is applied to my account when I first believe.
8. Keep in mind I am made righteous (right standing before God) not perfect. I only am made perfect upon resurrection.

As to Hell.

It is not logical to deny something's existence if it contains something inconvenient. We try and detect cancer early as possible, we do not deny cancer exists. I believe a literal Hell may or may not exist currently, but if it does it is eventually done away with in the finite future. Those who did not believe on Christ are annihilated along with Satan and the fallen angels. So in the end we use our freewill to accept God or reject him and we get exactly what we chose. All we have to do is admit the obvious fact that we are morally imperfect and accept the Gift of salvation paid entirely by God on our behalf.

If you wish to debate Christianity we need to be on the same page concerning what it is.

I agree that this is what Christianity is. But to have me go to hell and for God to never get me out over a lack of belief in him which was a genuine and honest disbelief, then I would obviously think he would be a morally absurd, asinine, cruel, and daft God. I personally do not agree at all that this would be an all loving, all just, and morally righteous God.

 

[sayak83]

Or, that He planned the British Empire to bring back His chosen people's homeland, Israel. There is nothing that God has not had a hand in, one way or another, in history. Without England's vast power and massive colonization programs (to say nothing of the new and massive American military might) Israel would not- could not- have become a State again. Yet, God said He would bring them back as a nation. (Think about that, Matt) Also, what other nation, even superpower, has made a comeback? Not one. To say or think there isn't a God or that the Judeo-Christian God isn't God is to deny so many undeniable facts of history and the Bible. I can't do that bc I can't get past all of the evidence. Matt, did your research lead you to this issue? How did it impact you? Why are you sitting on the fence still, if you studied it, I mean?

Yes. Clearly He put Hitler on earth in order that he does the holocaust and hence garner enough sympathies from the nations so that they carve out a nation for Israel. In other great "signs" of non-Christian variety :-
1) China regained their mandate from heaven to become the great empire among nations under a new glorious unified autocracy.
2) Hindus reclaimed Bharatvarsha after centuries of domination by foreign religions.
3) The first secular humanist nations were established and began to prosper (EU, Japan, Canada etc.)

 

[1robin]

I agree some. The Bible/Jesus said Hell/Lake of Fire is real, was made for Devil and his demons (fallen angels), and those who hate God (if we don't serve Him then we do hate Him, He says- I agree) will suffer for all eternity. I hate that thought. But where else can an eternal soul go? Can't go to heaven- didn't want to. And Hell is the only other known place that God created. So, it becomes a default location for lost eternal souls. There is no reason for anyone, certainly in the Western world, to go to hell. It isn't hard to stay out. But it is a choice to go there. That comes back to research. If we go to college and Trade school to learn/earn a good living on earth why won't we take time to study/research for our eternal life? That is what gets me.

1. God is omnipresent. The second death is separation from God. The only place God isn't is non-existence.

2. You cannot merit heaven, it isn't a reward. It is a gift, that comes by faith but through grace.

Weymouth New Testament
For it is by grace that you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves. It is God's gift, and is not on the ground of merit--

3. If the souls of the damned are tormented for an eternity then how is God just?

4. If the souls of the damned are indestructible why did Mathew warn us that God can destroy the body and soul?

 

[1robin]

I agree that this is what Christianity is. But to have me go to hell and for God to never get me out over a lack of belief in him which was a genuine and honest disbelief, then I would obviously think he would be a morally absurd, asinine, cruel, and daft God. I personally do not agree at all that this would be an all loving, all just, and morally righteous God.

He got you out of Hell 2,000 years ago in the most recognized event in human history. He paid the entire price, all you must do is accept it. He is not going to force you to accept it, he does not desire automatons. Do you refuse to believe in your house because you wanted the front door someplace else?

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

He got you out of Hell 2,000 years ago in the most recognized event in human history. He paid the entire price, all you must do is accept it. He is not going to force you to accept it, he does not desire automatons. Do you refuse to believe in your house because you wanted the front door someplace else?

My lack of belief is not due to some foolish denial and rejection. It is a genuine and honest lack of belief. So your analogy with me not believing in my house does not work here at all.

 

[Katzpur]

Having lived in Utah for over 33 years (St. George for 26) I'm pretty sure my 'personal' research is spot on. And, I have the old LDS books to prove it. But, I'm willing to listen and discuss the fact of Mormonism with you (anyone). One thing, though- don't get mad at my knowledge of the Mormon Church and your lack of it or the extent of it to which 'others' have told you it was true and run off when you don't like your church's truth, OK? I will show you things from accepted, taught, printed and published LDS books that will astound you (the vast majority of LDS, anyway). I have mottos I live by. One of them is- I follow the facts- whatever they say, wherever they lead. I don't accept a person's feelings as facts. And, neither should anyone else, including LDS. So, let's talk, Katzpur.

I've been on this forum for nearly 12 years now and have over 27,000 posts to my credit, Sonny, and the vast, vast majority of non-Mormon posters here will tell you that they trust me for accurate information on Mormonism, even when it doesn't reflect well on my Church. They know that I know my religion backwards and forwards and outside in and inside out, and I am 100% honest in addressing even the most touchy, difficult, problematic issues. I'm not even hesitant to speak out against LDS Church policy when I disagree with it, which I frequently do. You seriously couldn't show me anything that would astound me. Trust me, in 68 years of being a Mormon, I've seen it all more times than I can count. So when some newbie comes on here and starts spouting off what he has learned about Mormons over "33 years of living in Utah," and tells me he has the "old LDS books" to prove his point, I know what kind of person I'm dealing with. As my favorite Pagan poster, Draka, once observed, "Debating some people is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good at playing chess you are, the pigeon is just going to knock down all the pieces, poop on the board, and walk around all triumphant." So I'll tell you what... You just pat yourself on the back and accuse me of "running off" if it makes you feel better, but everybody here who knows me knows which one of us has got his facts straight and which one doesn't. The bottom line, Sonny Boy, is that you're not worth my time.

 

[Altfish]

What about the undeniable (and irrefutable) facts? Let me give you a couple (try imagining the time they lived in as you consider what they said),
Israel- a nothing nation in decline- would become a nation again 'in the End Times'. 1948
A 200 million man Army when about 50 million lived on earth. Saying that, to be descriptive, is like me/someone saying a time will come when there will be an Army of 28 Billion (just an army). Yeah, they heard God right and wrote it that way. Today, we have 3 groups that can muster a 200 million-man Army.
A massive Meteor (Asteroid/Comet) will hit earth and knock it off its Axis (Equator may become a Pole, etc). We know, today, they are out there and coming. But not so much in 1st Century AD. In 2004, Indonesia the earth was 'knocked off Axis by 2 1/2 centimeters. It can/will happen large scale.
Nukes are mentioned/described in Bible (twice) roughly 2400 years before the first was made.
Men and Dinos lived together. We've found footprints with both in the same rock beside each other.
The Bible predicted Debit/Credit cards (sorta) and, bc of scams, a mark on hand/forehead. We can see the technology coming- implantable devices that have our info on but cannot be stolen or duplicated.
Only a real God that can see the future while standing in the past could say/describe/predict these things and be spot on. And, only the Bible's God said it. Since then lots of 'others' have said as much but Bible was first. And there is many more of these predictions, fulfilled and coming, from the Bible.
If ur not a Christian or believer then explain how the Bible could have predicted, so accurately- precisely, these events. I want to see how you reply to these known facts from 2,000-4,000 years ago.

I notice you give no chapter/verse reference for these "undeniable (and irrefutable) facts", perhaps you could do that so I can check these assertions.
"Men and dinos lived together" - oh dear, those footprints have been debunked many times.

I do not believe any of these predictions will prove anything but at best an ambiguous, open to multi-interpretations quotations.

 

[1robin]

My lack of belief is not due to some foolish denial and rejection. It is a genuine and honest lack of belief. So your analogy with me not believing in my house does not work here at all.

Your response had nothing to do with an insufficiency of evidence. I have reviewed most of your posts, the common theme seems to be statements about preference. You keep saying you do not want to believe in a God that does x, y, or z or that you disagree with something God has done. I have not seen a single post about evidence yet. So I will make one myself.

Among the many historical claims about Christ the consensus among NT historians (those best trained to know) claim are reliable are the following.

1. Christ appeared on the historical stage with an unprecedented sense of divine authority.
2. That he had a ministry of miracle working and exorcisms.
3. That he died by crucifixion.
4. That his tomb was found empty.
5. That even his enemies claimed to have spoken to him post mortem.

I used to post the two mistakes most people will make in response but when I saw it did not make any difference I stopped trying.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Your response had nothing to do with an insufficiency of evidence. I have reviewed most of your posts, the common theme seems to be statements about preference. You keep saying you do not want to believe in a God that does x, y, or z or that you disagree with something God has done. I have not seen a single post about evidence yet. So I will make one myself.

Among the many historical claims about Christ the consensus among NT historians (those best trained to know) claim are reliable are the following.

1. Christ appeared on the historical stage with an unprecedented sense of divine authority.
2. That he had a ministry of miracle working and exorcisms.
3. That he died by crucifixion.
4. That his tomb was found empty.
5. That even his enemies claimed to have spoken to him post mortem.

I used to post the two mistakes most people will make in response but when I saw it did not make any difference I stopped trying.

It seems you did not read the entirety of this thread yet because if you did, then you would realize that my undecided mindset regarding the claimed evidence has nothing to do with my disagreement with God's moral standards. I am undecided simply because I am undecided and I have searched, but have found no definite answer.

However, my disagreement with God's moral standards and my justifications in the arguments I have presented here for this disagreement has me leaning a bit towards Christianity being nonsense. So I am in an undecided mindset leaning a bit towards Christianity being nonsense. Since there is just no way for me to make a decision based on all the claimed evidence out there, then I wasn't here to debate the validity of the evidence. Rather, I was here to simply debate the moral nature of God.

I cannot debate the validity of the evidence since I am not a scientist or a highly intelligent person who is any good at that. I would have to have a lot of knowledge of science to, for example, attempt to refute the claimed evidence regarding the Shroud of Turin. Not to mention, it would take a lot of scientific knowledge on my part (which I do not have) to even comprehend the types of arguments people are making for and against the Shroud of Turin in scientific terms.

But I am not a trained scientist or philosopher. However, when it comes to debating something that is an intrinsic and valuable part of my life which would be the concept of morality, then I am all for debating that and am good at debating that.

I have my own moral standard that I would gladly put up a debate against the Christian God's moral standard. So I will continue to do that right now here in this very post. Therefore, I would like to continue by saying that it doesn't matter who you are. I don't care if you are famous, have high status/wealth, are a genius, have made a loving sacrifice for me and for others, or if you are the all powerful creator of the universe. That gives you no authority over my life or over the lives of others.

To just barge and intrude into my life or into the lives of others, judge our ways of living as sinful, and tell us that we must obey or go to hell and never get out, then that is serious disrespect and is cruel. It doesn't matter who you are--I will treat you as being any other normal human being out there in the world who is expected to show respect towards the values and personal lives of others.

Each person has his/her life to live and God should be no exception. He should keep to his own life, not intrude into the lives of others, show respect, and not judge us as sinful. I mean, I could understand it if I was someone cruel harming and torturing others. I would agree then that there should be some intervention for something like that. But as long as I am not doing that, then there is no reason to intrude into my personal life, tell me that I am going to hell if I don't do this and that, and that I am a sinner.

There is no justified reason why someone like me should go to hell in the first place. A truly all loving, all just, and morally righteous God would welcome someone like me into his heavenly kingdom after looking upon my life here on Earth and respecting my way of life since it imposed no harm/torture upon others. But if there was harm and torture imposed, then they would be trivial matters such as yelling at my mother. But nothing serious deserving of an eternal hell of torment. Not that I agree such a place should exist in the first place for anybody regardless of how wicked they are.

Lastly, even if someone was somehow deserving of an eternal torment in hell, then the moment they go there, my love would compel me to get them out. My love would simply not allow them to remain there. It would be asinine, absurd, and daft of me to just sit there and weep over them and not get them out of hell when I am an all powerful God who can. But if I were to laugh, rejoice, become apathetic, etc. towards this person's eternal torment in hell, then I would just be plain vile and cruel.