Why would God send good people to Hell just because they dont believe he exists?

[DandyAndy]

Without enough evidence to even know if he existed

If there isn't enough evidence to know if God existed, why am I so sure?

There's evidence - the real question is whether or not there is enough evidence for YOU specifically - and the answer to that question is determined by only YOU and your opinion.

I think God gave us plenty of evidence.

It's more a 'you made the wrong choices and saw no reason to believe in me, so go to hell for eternity'. How is his the 'best way' in comparison to other beliefs?

I will freely admit that going to Hell is a terrible thing, it isn't cool, it really sucks. Which is why everyone should study up on this stuff, go spend some time outdoors in the quiet, do some inner reflection and come to the realization that we all need Christ. Then no one would have to go to Hell.

How is eternal life and joy and living the best life possible now and forever lacking when compared to other beliefs?

when Christians themselves disagree on whether works are necessary it leads me to think that the bible is ambiguous

Huh? Atheists disagree on stuff all the time - does that make disbelief in God ambiguous? Agnostics can't agree on anything - that's why they're undecided - so you probably shouldn't be agnostic either.

No one can seem to agree on anything, so you really shouldn't think, say or believe anything at all...

That doesn't make much sense. Anyways, if you take the time to read the Bible, it's pretty clear that the two go hand in hand - both are required, as I said and James says, both are necessary.

Or you want to read a large range of books to try and find the right one.

I agree you should read a large range of books. But there can only be one right answer. And once you find the right answer, you don't need to double check every other answer to make sure they are all wrong

 

[PolyHedral]

I know that it follows that free will was given us by God. But, again, God giving us free will does not make Him responsible for what we decide to do with it. Toyota is nor responsible for my drunk driving accident and neither is Wild Turkey, the guys that paved the roads or the guy that invented the car.

Neither of those are omniscient. God is. He therefore should bear full responsibility.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Neither of those are omniscient. God is. He therefore should bear full responsibility.

Where does it say God is omniscient ?

If God saw 'all' there would have been no need to intervene at the Flood.
The Adam and Eve scenario would not have taken place.
Why wait til dead to pass judgment if judgment is already known?
Rev. [7v9] mentions an un-numbered population.
If known in advance then it would be a known set number of people.

Adam chose Satan as his god [2nd Cor 4v4] when Adam broke away from God rule and by choosing independence from God.

God allowed Adam to choose who Adam would want as ruler.
By disobeying God, then Adam chose Satan as his god.

According to Rev. [12vs9,12] it is Satan who brings 'woe' to earth.
God sent Jesus to bring Peace on Earth.
Jesus will involve himself into mankind's affairs by getting rid of the wicked then ushering in global peace on earth toward men of goodwill.

-Proverbs 2vs20-22; 10v30 21v18; Psalm 37 vs11,29; 72v8.

 

[waitasec]

I hope you saw my note regarding the fact that I looked up the full definition of a sociopath.

i'm using sociopath as a means to describe indifference.
is the birth of a sociopath intended or was it an act of life's indifference?

Because belief is the only way we can be forgiven of our sins. That's how things work. Eating food is the only natural way to receive nutrients. Inhaling is the only way to naturally breathe. There's nothing insecure about that...

i call that wishful thinking.

You seem to leave out the guilty of sin part a lot...

you seem to ignore remorse

What about all the people that saw Jesus and heard him speak and didn't believe? I clearly understand your point - you never saw Alexander the Great so do you have a hard time believing he existed or did the things attributed to him? What about Columbus or any other ancient figure in history? Have you ever seen them?

none of those people claimed to be god

I disagree with the first part. I know nothing of the second part.

then why are you saying you do...

Huh???

Oh boy. Why do you assume I am a creationist? I guess you think I believe the Earth is the center of the universe and that it's only 6,000 years old and that I am an idiot too?
People love to attribute things to someone based upon a snap judgement of a one word label (Christian) so they can paint them as an idiot.

hold your horses captain
you are making a judgement call here.
i mentioned creationist because you asked me who thought the universe was created for us...
i told you who. i never said you were, did i

How is a son choosing to commit an action indifference?

the act itself...
if a person just kills people because of lack of empathy was there a reason?

If we were good friends having a face-to-face conversation I would make a multi-personality joke...but we're not.

As I said, the only opinion that matters between you and God is your own.

the jury in my head matters...
call me crazy but i weigh out the pros and cons when i consider something to be anything

I'm starting to think you're not reading what I write and i'm getting sad.

A sociopath probably has a mental handicap, based upon the definition I read, one that renders the clear difference between moral right and wrong murky or non-existent. The Bible doesn't say much about how God will judge mentally handicapped people. It's very clear how He will judge normal, sinful, unbelievers with the full capacity to determine between right and wrong.

again you seem to undermine remorse for those that learn from their life experience. oddly enough the holy spirit isn't needed to be able to discern it.

Oh boy...have you spoken with every single person and figured out if they are a confessing follower of Christ? Or do you just trust one question that asks someone to pick a label, which they could define as anything from believing in God to just going to church on easter and Christmas?

And about that laundry list - don't you think the people making the laws or the president or the people doing those things are to blame?

That line of argument doesn't amount to anything as far as I'm concerned.

it is what it is.

You keep forgetting the 'guilty of sin' part. If you take anything away from all this PLEASE remember that 'guilty of sin' goes hand in hand with unbelief. We are all guilty of sin...

as you diminish the power of remorse.

The afterlife is.

this is interesting.
the here and now isn't so why place a double standard?

I have a difficult time understanding the odd ways in which you use the word to describe the birth of a sociopath baby...

I understand indifference as having no opinion one way or the other, being on the fence, not caring, being indifferent.

:yes: exactly. that is life.
tell me what, is the purpose for a child born without the capacity to empathize?

Where does the Bible say you can live your life however you want and then at the last moment expect to make a meaningful conversion? You assume it works that way and you assume that a few words can save a mans eternal soul after he spends 60 years living a life of rebellion, debauchery and purposeful sin - I'm not saying it's impossible, but salvation isn't a switch you can flick or a box you can check...

my mom thinks that. it is her way of dealing with the fact that i am a non theist...
which brings me to ask you this, how are you to reconcile the understanding that there will be loved ones burning in hell while you are in heaven? how is that a comforting thought? or is heaven just a place of sheer ego as one is completely encompassed in self?
seems rather lonely after an eternity.

They understood consequences - you don't have to understand good and evil to understand that touching the fire will burn you, that drinking the poison will make you sick or that eating the fruit from that specific tree will make you die.
Especially when someone clearly TELLS YOU UP FRONT.

touching fire has nothing to do with evil.
the word "no" was a concept they couldn't understand. remember they were in state of innocence meaning everything is yes...

and death was a foreign concept...

:thud: You are wrong but you are set in your ways, so I will make sure that it's know that I disagree.

hell is the limitation

You are really loosing me... what do a wave in a pond and talents have to do with God being perfect?

perfection is impossible to achieve. it's a carrot.
god is a carrot.

I could explain my personal opinion on the matter without bring God into the issue AT ALL.

Then I could explain another personal opinion on the matter and bring God into it.

Neither has anything to do with politics.

it is what it is.
read luke 6

Nope, I'm just basing it on what the Bible says - since I believe the Bible, it shapes my outlooks, opinions and thoughts. I don't understand how that is a judgement to call something that is wrong, wrong.

but it's ok to eat bacon and shell fish right?
i don't see anyone advocating the ban of eating such things, do you? and i wonder why that would be...

You can hand pick a scripture, single it out and make any point you want...Christians get chastised for doing this (and rightfully so) all the time, yet it sounds like you don't even believe in the Bible and you are doing the same thing! At least the Christians believe that what they are taking out of context and using to prove their own personal point is true!!

huh?
isn't that called manipulation or insecurity?

Jesus makes the point that anyone that truly follows him will do those things - following Christ is not a requirement for doing good like this, but doing good like this is a requirement for following Christ.

but those who do those things without believing in him will go to hell regardless...that is a double standard.
correct me if i'm wrong, but jesus seemed to have taught that it was the way in which people treated each other was what mattered and would set them apart...
read luke 6

You've really got this wrong, a big time misunderstanding. My faith in Christ, which is the only faith that provides eternal life, does not make me better than anyone else. In fact, I am commanded to think of myself as LOWER than everyone else because of my faith (Romans 12:3, Phillipians 2:3). So it actually makes me a servant of all.

well this is one of the reasons i believe christians think they are morally superior to unbelievers...
1 cor 6:1-6
If any of you has a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord’s people? 2 Or do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life!

Of course I think that God's word is the best one to follow - that's why I live my life according to it and I try to convince others that they should live their lives under it's authority as well - doing so will give them a happy and fulfilled life with meaning, purpose and hope for eternal life, which is something no other worldview or religion can give them.

do you try to convince others in deed or by your words?

Out of the love God showed me, I try to show that love to others.

do you show them or tell them?

 

[9Westy9]

If there isn't enough evidence to know if God existed, why am I so sure?

There's evidence - the real question is whether or not there is enough evidence for YOU specifically - and the answer to that question is determined by only YOU and your opinion.

I think God gave us plenty of evidence.

Then what about people who come to different conclusions? Are they wrong?

I will freely admit that going to Hell is a terrible thing, it isn't cool, it really sucks. Which is why everyone should study up on this stuff, go spend some time outdoors in the quiet, do some inner reflection and come to the realization that we all need Christ. Then no one would have to go to Hell.

In your opinion. And Muslims would say teh exact same about their beliefs

How is eternal life and joy and living the best life possible now and forever lacking when compared to other beliefs?

define 'best life possible' Pretty sure you'll find someone who disagrees with you.

Huh? Atheists disagree on stuff all the time - does that make disbelief in God ambiguous? Agnostics can't agree on anything - that's why they're undecided - so you probably shouldn't be agnostic either.

No one can seem to agree on anything, so you really shouldn't think, say or believe anything at all...

That doesn't make much sense. Anyways, if you take the time to read the Bible, it's pretty clear that the two go hand in hand - both are required, as I said and James says, both are necessary.

We were talking about salvation in the bible. and you're clearly missing my point. My point was that when Christians can't agree on salvation how are outsiders meant to know? Especially when both sides provide bible passages to back up their claims. Is the bible infallible truth? Or is it what we want to believe?

Atheism doesn't have that problem as it has no 'holy book' to tell it what to do. They are perfectly fine to disagree as atheism isn't a religion

I'm agnostic because I don't claim to know the truth. Also agnostic isn't merely 'undecided'. And I have read the bible. Have been for 18 years.

I agree you should read a large range of books. But there can only be one right answer. And once you find the right answer, you don't need to double check every other answer to make sure they are all wrong

In which case why do people come to different decisions? Are they deluding themselves? and if so how can you tell?

 

[unitedunderone]

Dawny - I couldn't agree with you more. I respect that you have 'faith' and believe you came from God and that you'll be returned to 'Him' ---- but the more important thing is to understand that faith is merely an element of comfort. Even if you don't follow every rule of the church, simply believing that 'God decides' what you achieve in your life is a way to take the responsibility off of yourself and onto God. It provides comfort that even if bad things happen, God has a plan for you. Understand? So although I agree that everyone needs to learn to get along, I don't believe in telling people things that are either just not true or lack proof.

 

[waitasec]

Where does it say God is omniscient ?

.

psalm 139
4 Before a word is on my tongue
you, LORD, know it completely....
16 Your eyes saw my unformed body;
all the days ordained for me were written in your book
before one of them came to be.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

You may not choose Hell like you choose a candidate in a voting booth, but you choose it the way you choose lung cancer when you decide to smoke 2 packs of cigarettes a day for 25 years.

No, it is not the same thing at all. The possible consequences of smoking are known and have been proven and everyone is aware of them. But like I said before, I do not know that there is a hell and I have absolutely no evidence to suggest that the consequences of choosing non-belief will be my ending up there.

Only you and God can know how you have arrived at your decision and only God can judge based upon your decision. The only danger is whether or not God thinks He has presented enough evidence for everyone. But again, that's an issue between you and God. I may have more than enough evidence and you may not have enough - who's right? Just going by what the Bible says, I don't think it matters if you academically looked everything over and don't believe or if you just hate God and don't believe - you still don't believe. Clearly God will make the decision, not me, I'm just pointing out that from what I see in the Bible, it doesn't matter why you don't believe - all that counts is that you don't believe.

On top of seeing no evidence, this is precisely why I don’t buy it. Out of one side of their mouths Christians say that God loves us unconditionally and out of the other side they say that on the condition of faith, we’ll receive salvation and a place in heaven. You can’t have it both ways.

If the serpent in the Garden is indeed Satan, I think that Jewish understanding and teaching would require that what Christ said happened at some time in the past.

That’s just it, it is never said in Genesis that the serpent was actually Satan, only that it was a serpent. The text reads: “Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made.” Again, going by the text, the serpent was not Satan, it was just a serpent, albeit a talking one. The text also makes it clear that the serpent was one of the wild animals. Another important thing to consider, Satan appears as a member of God’s angelic retinue in the book of Job which is seventeen books later in the Bible. So how could Satan have been cast out of heaven before the creation of man to tempt Eve and then show up later as God’s appointed accuser to harass Job?

I am very willing to admit that I could be wrong too. I'm also very willing to admit that I am just a laymen and that it is good (very good) to test anything I say against the scriptures. This last paragraph is a little hard for me to follow - but I think it's important. I don't understand the entire body-soul relationship very well or all the details of it or reasons of it. I *think* you are saying that God shouldn't send an unbeliever/sinner to Hell because He knew He would get unbelieving sinners when He made humanity, yes? If so, I think that's an excellent question. I see it as a double-edged sword - if God didn't allow for unbelievers to disbelieve, then unbelievers wouldn't have the ability to believe either. He couldn't present a choice and then only allow people to choose one of the two choices - that's not a choice. Hopefully I understood you right - it's a very good point.

I’m not necessarily making a should/shouldn’t proposition, only that he knew full well what was going to happen and he got what he chose. To expand on this a little, if you choose to create a vast diversity of people to be individuals with their own minds (who did not ask to be born with a sinful nature btw) and you choose to create the universe in such a way that the question of your existence could be concluded either way, it is inevitable that some of them are going to use the faculties you gave them and conclude that you do not exist. So if I make an honest and sincere analysis of the evidence based on the personality and character traits he created me with, whose fault is it if I conclude that he doesn’t exist?

I can't put myself in that position. But I'll try. First, you are assuming that the snapshot of the world as far as beliefs go would be the same throughout all of history as it is right now. Perhaps the numbers would be reversed 1,000 years ago or 2,000 years ago.

You’re forgetting that God is supposedly omniscient and that he has a plan and that everything happens according to that plan. That being the case and given that the Final Judgment has not yet occurred, he would have known when he planned to initiate the Final Judgment and that when he did, the world population will have been at least seven billion strong and that two thirds of that seven billion or more will have to be consigned to hell, right?

And then we have to think of all the people that never knew of Christ but confessed and knew of God and of all the children that died too young to make a decision and on and on and it very quickly becomes something only God can decide. We'd need perfect foreknowledge to get it right. But either way I agree it's a very tough decision - a decision I would want ONLY a perfect, holy, loving, fair and just God to make.

That doesn’t answer the question. You may not have perfect foreknowledge but you do have the benefit of hindsight and of existing at this moment in history. Given this, you don’t need perfect foreknowledge to know that Judgment Day hasn’t happened yet. If it hasn’t happened yet, it could happen tomorrow and if it does, billions will be going to hell. So, could you do it?

These are excellent questions! I agree 100% with this paragraph. The sinful nature is not the reason we sin, but it is a direct influence. The sinful nature is the reason that we cannot live an entire life without sinning because that nature is such a strong influence - it's a part of the flesh. In order to live our lives without sinning once, we would have to live an unnatural life.

Apparently Adam and Eve couldn’t live their entire lives without sinning once either. What this all boils down to is that the only thing relevant about the Adam and Eve story is the becoming aware of good and evil. The rest is irrelevant because not being aware of good and evil obviously doesn’t stop us from sinning and neither do we need a sinful nature to sin.

We sin today because of the choices we make - this sinful nature makes it easier to choose in a certain direction. A&E ate the fruit because the made a choice - they weren't influenced by an internal sinful nature that says 'oh yeah, do that bad thing, it will feel good' they were influenced by an external sinful nature that said 'surely God didn't mean that you would die - you will become like God/gods and know good & evil.' A&E had no sinful nature - it was actually (I think) unnatural for them to sin. They were influenced and made a choice based on the influence of that influence. The sinful nature we all have is an influence and we make choices that are influenced by that influence. Does that make sense? I said influence a lot.

Eve chose to eat the fruit because it was, and I quote from the text: “good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom…”. It doesn’t get any easier than that. If all it took was for the fruit to be pleasing to the eye for her to go against her nature then with or without a sinful nature, Adam and Eve had the same propensity to sin as we do. Beyond that, I would say that Adam and Eve were only influenced insofar as they already had a desire to gain the knowledge of good and evil. I’ll use myself as an example. I’ve never been much of a drinker and I don’t like to get drunk or even buzzed as I don’t like not having full control of my faculties. I also hate the feeling I have in the morning after too many. For that reason I haven’t been drunk in like twenty five years. Having said that, early in my career when I was still a first mate (I’m a captain), the captain and the rest of the crew were drinking beer on the vessel but I abstained. The captain tried to cajole me into giving in and having a beer but I refused. I was just not tempted to drink. The point of this is that, because the desire to drink was not there, I was neither tempted nor influenced by the captain’s cajoling even though I knew the chances were slim that the office would find out. However, If we could say that they were influenced in any way, we’d have to lay some of the blame on God for 1.) Putting the tree in the garden in the first place and 2.) making them aware of it and telling them not to eat of it thereby arousing their curiosity. I mean, what was the purpose of putting the tree there in the garden where they could get to it when he could have put it anywhere out of their reach for cryin’ out loud?

Interesting. I don't think they could have sinned any other way because they didn't know what sin was. Not in the sense that Adam could have murdered Eve and not known it was bad, but rather in the sense that Adam actually didn't know what murder was, so he couldn't commit it at all. How could we do a sinful thing if we didn't know what a sinful act is? This knowledge of good and evil opened up a plethora of new acts that I don't think A&E ever knew existed. If we never knew they existed, I don't think we'd ever do them, by accident or by choice. If we never knew what good and evil were, we would never know what rape was, so we would never commit rape either by accident or by choice, since we didn't know what it was. I think.

We can’t pick and choose what particular sins they may or may not have understood because the text makes clear that they didn’t understand the concept of sin at all. That’s the whole point of the story. So if they didn’t understand what murder was then they didn’t understand what disobedience was either. Yet they disobeyed.

 

[Muffled]

Im going to get straight to the point.

I am no Athiest. I believe there IS a higher power but I do not believe he is as wrathful as most Church's make him/her out to be.

What gets me angry about alot of Church's is that unless you follow their particular way of worship you will go to hell. What kind of rubbish is this? I thought Jesus taught people to love thy neighbor not judgeing them on Race or Religion? Or am I wrong here?

Nearly all people who participate in Church are very Judgemental, I have been told numerous times by Christians I will go to Hell if I dont change my ways..

I Don't Smoke
I Don't Gamble
I Do Partake in Alcohol but I Don't get drunk or drink to get drunk
I am a Virgin so no Sex either
I do not commit crimes

I guess they judge me wicked because I don't go to Church?
But why should I go to Church? How does going to Church make me more good?

(If that place even exists) simply for "I think God doe's Exist but I dont believe he will send people to Hell not believing in him " or not following a specific Church's practice.

Heres a Scenario.
(None of this is real it is made up as an example)

Jeff is a 43 year old man with 3 Kids aged 3,9 and 16 and a 39 year old Wife named Brenda.

Jeff is driveing home from work on a rainy night and a Truck who is driveing too fast lose's control and Smashes into Jeff's car. Killing him Instantly.

The Driver of the Truck is Arrested, Trialed and Sent to Prison for Manslaughter.

Jeff was a loveing Husband and Father and a great Friend to many.

Jeff was involved in many Charitys and raised lots of money to help Kids with disabilitys.

Jeff was an Athiest and did not believe in any god.

Uh Oh! Jeff did not believe God existed! Any Church Zealot would condemn him to Hell for this ungodly Sin...

My point is I cannot imagine God saying this.

Jeff. " But im not a Bad Person! ive made mistakes in life like a normal Human being but ive given most of my life to help people! "

God. " To bad you didn't believe in me so now you will burn in Hell for all Eternity "
---
God would not Punish anyone for being a Good Person. Never.
Shame on you for believing he would.
---
And for anyone who is too lazy to read this the Question is pretty much.

Why would God send people to Hell for being Good Careing Decent people?

The short answer is that He doesn't. However a person who doesn't believe in God has already broken the first commandment and is not good.

What is the basis for your belief? Certainly not the Bible because God is pictured in the Bible as having wrath at times.

Yes, Jesus taught people to love their neighbors. He also taught people that they need to repent their sins or be in danger of Hellfire. Jesus did not teach people that they had to be good church goers to be good but lack of church attendance may very well be an indication of which direction people are going.
Where do you think a person goes to be in the presence of God? A tavern, golf course, watching TV, reading a book, taking a walk? The latter places are not where Jesus said He would be.

God said in Genesis that it isn't good for man to be alone so he created woman to be with man.

I agree with the latter but not the former. What is the basis for your belief?

Or as Jesus said "for what evil act do you condemn me and they said for making yourself equal to God." (paraphrase)

Jesus said 'those who are in the world who don't know God are already condemned, and this is the condemnation that they preferred not to know Him because their acts were evil.' (paraphrase)

 

[waitasec]

The short answer is that He doesn't. However a person who doesn't believe in God has already broken the first commandment and is not good.

so does this stance give a believer the advantage, the upper hand, or a vantage point, for favoritism?
it's no wonder people who have this POV think themselves morally superior when there is nothing moral they can do that an unbeliever cannot.

 

[idav]

so does this stance give a believer the advantage, the upper hand, or a vantage point, for favoritism?
it's no wonder people who have this POV think themselves morally superior when there is nothing moral they can do that an unbeliever cannot.

Actually I think he is wrong. The first commandment is to not have FALSE gods before God. I think that gives atheists the vantage point.

 

[waitasec]

Actually I think he is wrong. The first commandment is to not have FALSE gods before God. I think that gives atheists the vantage point.

yes indeed it does... :drool:

 

[DandyAndy]

i'm using sociopath as a means to describe indifference.
is the birth of a sociopath intended or was it an act of life's indifference?

I don't think a person without the mental capacity to understand right and wrong has anything to do with indifference. I think I have a very hazy view of what you are saying but I don't really know.

I can't say, because I don't know everything, I don't know what purpose(s) a 'sociopath' being born may serve, I don't know everything. So I can't say one way or the other and I don't anyone else can with any certainty.

i call that wishful thinking.

I disagree.

you seem to ignore remorse

Disagree.

Remorse leads to repent, repent is essential to salvation. Therefore remorse is essential - if I don't feel bad for doing wrong, why would I apologize and do my best to not do wrong anymore?

none of those people claimed to be god

Touche.

then why are you saying you do...

Huh? I don't understand parent/child relationship from the parent side - I never claimed I did. I understand it from the child side. I've been one of those.

hold your horses captain
you are making a judgement call here.
i mentioned creationist because you asked me who thought the universe was created for us...
i told you who. i never said you were, did i

I apologize. I thought you were inferring that I believed everything in the universe had to be for a direct purpose that supports us. I'm sensitive to that because it gets lobbed at me a lot in situations where the entire subject is never brought up.

I'm sorry.

the act itself...
if a person just kills people because of lack of empathy was there a reason?

I don't see how ant act can be indifferent. The only action that would be indifferent would be no action. I don't think we're on the same page, I don't think I'm understanding the point of this whole 'indifference' thing and what the purpose of bringing it up is. Sorry.

the jury in my head matters...
call me crazy but i weigh out the pros and cons when i consider something to be anything

That's a good thing, like I said, only opinion that matters in the situation of the individual is yours and Gods.

again you seem to undermine remorse for those that learn from their life experience. oddly enough the holy spirit isn't needed to be able to discern it.

See note above. Remorse is essential to repentance, I have remorse nearly everyday. Why would I repent if I didn't think I did a bad thing and I didn't feel guilty for doing something?

I don't get the remorse/life experience connection.

it is what it is.

And for me it is nothing - just pointing that out.

as you diminish the power of remorse.

See multiple notes above...

this is interesting.
the here and now isn't so why place a double standard?

The here and now IS black and white (there is right and wrong) but we blur those lines all the time.

:yes: exactly. that is life.
tell me what, is the purpose for a child born without the capacity to empathize?

I have no idea, just because we don't know doesn't mean there is no purpose. We don't know everything and we can't.

my mom thinks that. it is her way of dealing with the fact that i am a non theist...
which brings me to ask you this, how are you to reconcile the understanding that there will be loved ones burning in hell while you are in heaven? how is that a comforting thought? or is heaven just a place of sheer ego as one is completely encompassed in self?
seems rather lonely after an eternity.

Well, it's harsh, but there are going to be a LOT of better things in heaven than family members we have on Earth.

This is really tough issue because I have an atheist Grandfather in the hospital, colon cancer, probably close to death. It affects everyone. nearly everyone has a friend or relative that doesn't believe and there is nothing worse than going to a funeral, knowing that your friend/grandfather/whomever is in Hell.

But, that's the way it works. It was their personal decision. I tried my best (hopefully) to tell/show them the truth. If they didn't accept it, well, it's on them. We are all responsible for our own personal chocies - we can't make other peoples choices for them.

So, comfort wise, I can't explain how every tear will be wiped away or how there will be no more pain or hurt or fear - but I believe that if anyone can take all taht stuff away, it's Christ. And he's going to be there. Plus, I'll have a TON of new family.

So yes it sucks to loose a family member to Hell, but it isn't my place to decide who goes and who doesn't - that is between the individual and God. I trust God to make the right choice.

touching fire has nothing to do with evil.
the word "no" was a concept they couldn't understand. remember they were in state of innocence meaning everything is yes...

I don't believe that for one second. Innocence is not ignorance.

and death was a foreign concept...

How do you know? You have never died...yet you understand it. We see things around us die. How do we know they didn't understand it? We don't. There's nothing I know of that says the trees and animals and plants and insects around them lived forever. Maybe they saw death in the natural world around them? I can't say - I doubt it if sin hadn't entered into it, but maybe flowers still withered before sin came - I don't know, i wasn't there.

hell is the limitation

Hell is justice.

perfection is impossible to achieve. it's a carrot.
god is a carrot.

I disagree. Carrots are yucky (unless you boil them).

it is what it is.
read luke 6

Luke 6 is a great example of how a Christian changed by the redemption and forgiveness of sins brought about by Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit should act in the world.

but it's ok to eat bacon and shell fish right?
i don't see anyone advocating the ban of eating such things, do you? and i wonder why that would be...

Go read up on the old covenant and the new covenant, I'm not good at explaining it and need to do more reading of it myself. I am not Jewish. The NT is littered with passages about legalism and food.

Check out Mark 7 also.

huh?
isn't that called manipulation or insecurity?

Yeah and it's totally not cool, it's just funny to see someone that doesn't believe in the Bible do the same thing.

but those who do those things without believing in him will go to hell regardless...that is a double standard.

IF (and that's a big if) they were sinless (blameless, perfect) and they still went to Hell, I would agree with out 100%.

Sad thing is no matter how awesome and loving you are to people, you are still guilty of sin. No one is perfect.

correct me if i'm wrong, but jesus seemed to have taught that it was the way in which people treated each other was what mattered and would set them apart...
read luke 6

You are right - it would set them apart in the eyes of the people, because people would see the Spirit of God working in their lives to transform them. It is impossible to please God without faith - nice things without faith are meaningless as pointed out in James.

I think Christ even said it is impossible to please God without faith. Could be wrong. Too lazy to google it, I have to go soon...

well this is one of the reasons i believe christians think they are morally superior to unbelievers...
1 cor 6:1-6
If any of you has a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord’s people? 2 Or do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life!

I think we talked about this in another thread maybe...we won't judge the world until we have been made perfect and recreated, because later in the same book he commands Christians to not judge those outside the church.

This is more about presenting an image to pagans, an image that says 'yeah we are loving and forgiving but we can't love or forgive each other, so we need your help once you are done having your orgy' that looks bad.

do you try to convince others in deed or by your words?

[/QUOTE]

Both. I often fail at both, but I try.

do you show them or tell them?

I try to do both. It's hard to show on the internet

 

[DandyAndy]

Then what about people who come to different conclusions? Are they wrong?

I will give that a tentative yes because I think you are talking about religion. So do I think Hindu's are wrong? I'm sure they might have a few things right, but overall, yes, I think they are wrong. Same thing with Muslims, atheists or any other group/belief system that isn't Christian.

In your opinion. And Muslims would say teh exact same about their beliefs

Give it a try. Be honest and really try to understand. Pray about it. I guarantee God will speak and reveal Himself (somehow - not like appear before you, but hopefully you know what I mean) if you truly seek Him.

I'm not fully familiar with their beliefs on Hell but I know they don't involve Christ so therefore the are vastly different than the Christian beliefs of Hell and how to get there and how to avoid it.

define 'best life possible' Pretty sure you'll find someone who disagrees with you.

What's better than no pain, no fear, no suffering, no sadness and only good stuff?

We were talking about salvation in the bible. and you're clearly missing my point. My point was that when Christians can't agree on salvation how are outsiders meant to know? Especially when both sides provide bible passages to back up their claims. Is the bible infallible truth? Or is it what we want to believe?

I get your point totally - I'm saying that when you read the whole thing, you only get one clear picture on that issue.

Look, I could quote a few verses out of Song of Solomon and then proclaim the entire Bible is about having sex - that doesn't mean it is.

Just because someone pulls a few verses out and says 'oh you can only be saved if you do X amount of works and donate AT LEAST 10% of all your $$$' or 'no one will go to Hell, see, it says so right here...just ignore those other passages!'

If you read, rather than pick and choose, it becomes a lot clearer - I promise - I used to be a cherry picker, picking out what I liked and ignoring the rest. That ain't right.

Atheism doesn't have that problem as it has no 'holy book' to tell it what to do. They are perfectly fine to disagree as atheism isn't a religion

I'm agnostic because I don't claim to know the truth. Also agnostic isn't merely 'undecided'. And I have read the bible. Have been for 18 years.

I only use those examples to point out how I understood your logic you were using. I didn't mean to offend anyone.

I also didn't mean to imply that you have never read the BIble or anything like that either.

I thought agnostic was undecided? Undecided as in 'yeah, there's something up there, but I don't know who or what.' Am I wrong or is that too simplistic?

In which case why do people come to different decisions? Are they deluding themselves? and if so how can you tell?

I don't know why people come to different conclusions. People are wrong all the time. I will freely admit that I could be wrong. I don't think I am, which is why I've made my decision the way I have.

I look at the whole situation as I would a math problem - everyone could be wrong, but not everyone can be right - someone has to be right and thus the rest are wrong. It is only logical that there be one right answer the way I see it and understand it.

 

[DandyAndy]

Neither of those are omniscient. God is. He therefore should bear full responsibility.

I don't buy into that but that's ok.

 

[DandyAndy]

No, it is not the same thing at all. The possible consequences of smoking are known and have been proven and everyone is aware of them. But like I said before, I do not know that there is a hell and I have absolutely no evidence to suggest that the consequences of choosing non-belief will be my ending up there.

Knowing and believing are two different things. If you are familiar with the Christian story, the whole over-arching thing, then you are aware of Hell and the consequences of sin and not accepting Christ. You may not believe any of that stuff is true, but if you are aware of it, you know it. So you are responsible for what you do with what you know.

There is evidence - according to you it may not be good evidence, but it is there.

On top of seeing no evidence, this is precisely why I don’t buy it. Out of one side of their mouths Christians say that God loves us unconditionally and out of the other side they say that on the condition of faith, we’ll receive salvation and a place in heaven. You can’t have it both ways.

God does not love evil. God hates evil. God hates sin.

God loves people. God created people. God wants people to love Him.

God made the choice of sin available to people so people could have a choice, have free will. They made the wrong choice. Now people are evil and sinful.

God cannot simultaneously love and hate evil. We are all evil. I don't understand the difference between how God sees unbelievers now (alive) as opposed to when they stand before Him in judgement (dead) - I don't know if there is a difference.

All I know is that in this life, as the Bible teaches, Jesus and forgiveness are available freely to all. After death, judgement comes, and that forgiveness is no longer available.

After this life the body passes away. The flesh is evil and infected with sin. The soul, through Christ, can be purified. But the soul without Christ is still dirty with sin and evil.

I don't see any inconsistency with God separating evil and sin from Himself and His presence - in this life, without Christ, we are guilty of choosing our own sin and evilness over God. I see a consistency, but then again I am looking at it from a different side of the fence.

That’s just it, it is never said in Genesis that the serpent was actually Satan, only that it was a serpent. The text reads: “Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made.” Again, going by the text, the serpent was not Satan, it was just a serpent, albeit a talking one. The text also makes it clear that the serpent was one of the wild animals. Another important thing to consider, Satan appears as a member of God’s angelic retinue in the book of Job which is seventeen books later in the Bible. So how could Satan have been cast out of heaven before the creation of man to tempt Eve and then show up later as God’s appointed accuser to harass Job?

I only brought up that point to present a possibility. I think it's plausible and probable that the serpent either was Satan or was directly under Satan's control/possession.

The devil is identified as the old serpent in Revelation 12. Also Satan, the subject of most of Ezekiel 28, is mentioned as being in the Garden of God, which is Eden.

Well, in Job, Satan tells us where he came from. He came from the Earth, after roaming back and forth on it. I don't see the word 'retinue' used at all. It states clearly that the angels came before God and that Satan came with them, as if he tagged along, as if he wasn't supposed to be there. Which is clear when God asks him 'Where have you come from?'

I’m not necessarily making a should/shouldn’t proposition, only that he knew full well what was going to happen and he got what he chose. whose fault is it if I conclude that he doesn’t exist?

I see your point, I really do (I think), but the way I see it, we are all responsible for our own choices. You are making the choice to either believe or not believe. Even if the situation you are in sets you up to choose A and points towards A and really pushes for A, you are still free to choose B or C or anything else.

If you could ONLY choose A, I would agree. But we are free to choose A, B or any other number of options.

 

[IsmailaGodHasHeard]

Because Jesus is the only way to be saved.

 

[DandyAndy]

*I had to break this into two posts. I deleted some of your quotes to try and fit it into one, didn't work, and I'm too lazy to figure out and restore all your quotes. Sorry. Please refer to past post to see full quotes. I tried to cut out filler and not good stuff. I apologize if I did, it was not my intention.

You’re forgetting that God is supposedly omniscient and that he has a plan and that everything happens according to that plan. That being the case and given that the Final Judgment has not yet occurred, he would have known when he planned to initiate the Final Judgment and that when he did, the world population will have been at least seven billion strong and that two thirds of that seven billion or more will have to be consigned to hell, right?

More or less, yeah.

God knows exactly how many people are going to Hell and I'm sure He knows their names, how many hairs are on their heads and what He could have blessed them with if they had only submitted to His will.

I have no idea what God sees or knows, my thoughts are not His thoughts. I trust that He's got this thing figured out and that He's got it right. I wouldn't want anyone else to sort it all out.

That doesn’t answer the question. You may not have perfect foreknowledge but you do have the benefit of hindsight and of existing at this moment in history. Given this, you don’t need perfect foreknowledge to know that Judgment Day hasn’t happened yet. If it hasn’t happened yet, it could happen tomorrow and if it does, billions will be going to hell. So, could you do it?

Could I send people to Hell? Well, I'm not perfect, so I'm not in the position to decide. There are a lot of things that I couldn't do - so it's a good thing I'm not God.

Apparently Adam and Eve couldn’t live their entire lives without sinning once either. What this all boils down to is that the only thing relevant about the Adam and Eve story is the becoming aware of good and evil. The rest is irrelevant because not being aware of good and evil obviously doesn’t stop us from sinning and neither do we need a sinful nature to sin.

Ok.

Eve chose to eat the fruit because it was, and I quote from the text: “good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom…”. It doesn’t get any easier than that. If all it took was for the fruit to be pleasing to the eye for her to go against her nature then with or without a sinful nature, Adam and Eve had the same propensity to sin as we do.

I disagree with what I underlined in your quote. The serpent's tempting clearly initiated something or played a role.

Beyond that, I would say that Adam and Eve were only influenced insofar as they already had a desire to gain the knowledge of good and evil. I’ll use myself as an example. I’ve never been much of a drinker and I don’t like to get drunk or even buzzed as I don’t like not having full control of my faculties. I also hate the feeling I have in the morning after too many. I was just not tempted to drink. The point of this is that, because the desire to drink was not there, I was neither tempted nor influenced.

But it seems, from the reasons you gave, that you don't like drinking because you have tried it and it didn't suit you. You said you don't like not having control (I'm assuming you've felt out of control at least once from the result of alcohol) and you don't like the way it makes you feel in the morning (so I assume you've had a few too many at least once before).

Now I concur that you could come to both of these conclusions without ever touching alcohol, but you would have observed others being out of control or hungover.

So either way, you have prior knowledge/prior observation/prior experience to base your decision upon. A&E had zero experience or observation - all they knew was that God told them not to - it's arguable that that is prior knowledge.

Extending your example, it would be like you have zero experience with alcohol or with anyone else that has had alcohol. You don't know what it tastes like, what it does or anything. Then your father (a nice man that you have a good relationship with) tells you 'son, don't drink alcohol, if you do, you will get very sick.' And he shows you what it looks like so you know to stay away from it.

Then a strange man comes up to you and says 'hey, you should come have a whiskey and coke with me' and you say 'no, Dad said if I drink alcohol, I'll get sick.' The man says, 'oh, he didn't really say that, did he? You won't get sick - you'll feel good and you'll know stuff, stuff only we know about - it feels good.' So you look at the whiskey and coke (just go with it) and it looks yummy and you do realize that you could have fun and learn stuff. So despite what your Dad told you, you go drink anyways because you want to have fun and know stuff. So you get drunk and you know stuff and your Dad catches you and you feel bad and the rest is history.

However, If we could say that they were influenced in any way, we’d have to lay some of the blame on God for 1.) Putting the tree in the garden in the first place and 2.) making them aware of it and telling them not to eat of it thereby arousing their curiosity. I mean, what was the purpose of putting the tree there in the garden where they could get to it when he could have put it anywhere out of their reach for cryin’ out loud?

They had to have a legitimate choice - it's the key to perfect love. Perfect love means being vulnerable and allowing the other to leave/reject the love. If they didn't have the choice, I would see them as just robots doing what they were programed to do - there's no relationship and no love in that - and relationship and love are what God wants, what God is.

We can’t pick and choose what particular sins they may or may not have understood because the text makes clear that they didn’t understand the concept of sin at all. That’s the whole point of the story. So if they didn’t understand what murder was then they didn’t understand what disobedience was either. Yet they disobeyed.

I only pulled out specific sins to make a point. Clearly they understood 0 sin.

But you don't have to know what murder is to know that if you stab someone in the heart with a long knife, they will die. So even though you don't know that it's bad, you know not to do it, because someone will die.

 

[IsmailaGodHasHeard]

There are quite a few. The one where God mauls 42 children to death, without warning, for making fun of Elisha.

He treats humans as plunder (Deuteronomy 20:10-14)

Kidnapping and possibly rape as well (Judges 21:10-24 NLT)

(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT) This means a man can rape a woman and then must take her as his wife

You are wrong. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 does not mean that a rape victim has to marry her rapist in the original languages.

 

[waitasec]

pt 1

I don't think a person without the mental capacity to understand right and wrong has anything to do with indifference.

sure it does unless you think there is a purpose for that.

indifference doesn't contradict with the reality we live in.
it does however contradict the notion that god planned for such a thing.
this is the predicament you need to solve in order for this reality to make sense...

I think I have a very hazy view of what you are saying but I don't really know.

I can't say, because I don't know everything, I don't know what purpose(s) a 'sociopath' being born may serve, I don't know everything. So I can't say one way or the other and I don't anyone else can with any certainty.

for me this reality puts a red flag on the notion that god is the source of only goodness...it's a double standard. the good must come with the bad otherwise it's a double standard.

Disagree.

Remorse leads to repent, repent is essential to salvation. Therefore remorse is essential - if I don't feel bad for doing wrong, why would I apologize and do my best to not do wrong anymore?

if i have made a mistake i am fully capable of understanding the hurt i caused because i am not a sociopath. are you assuming my unbelief is because i am not capable of feeling remorse?
i can't imagine any other implication of such a statement.
don't worry, i'm not taking what you say personally...

Huh? I don't understand parent/child relationship from the parent side - I never claimed I did. I understand it from the child side. I've been one of those.

so why compare gods love to his creation as a father loves his children..?

I apologize. I thought you were inferring that I believed everything in the universe had to be for a direct purpose that supports us. I'm sensitive to that because it gets lobbed at me a lot in situations where the entire subject is never brought up.

I'm sorry.

no worries mate...i'm not taking anything you say personally
i just want to reiterate...i am arguing the ideal NOT you

I don't see how ant act can be indifferent. The only action that would be indifferent would be no action. I don't think we're on the same page, I don't think I'm understanding the point of this whole 'indifference' thing and what the purpose of bringing it up is. Sorry.

isn't that what god does? he doesn't get involved, especially when bad things happen...but for some reason he only gets the credit when good things happen...

that is what i mean by saying life is indifferent.

That's a good thing, like I said, only opinion that matters in the situation of the individual is yours and Gods.

fair enough...

I don't get the remorse/life experience connection.

in my 45 yrs of life experiences (well more like the last 20 ) remorse is something i can smell a mile away and i do what i can to avert it as much as i can...meaning i've learned from my past mistakes because regret is something i do not enjoy.

The here and now IS black and white (there is right and wrong) but we blur those lines all the time.

is it a wrong for a person to steal/kill in order to survive in any other time period of the past and culture? i think it is a right to do what you can in order to survive. it is a basic instinct, otherwise our species wouldn't be able to survive...consider for a second that our adrenal glands are too big for our bodies...and today, stress is the #1 killer...stress was however needed in order to survive in a dog eat dog world... think of the time when humans were hunters and gatherers...
so no, wrong hasn't always been a wrong.

I have no idea, just because we don't know doesn't mean there is no purpose. We don't know everything and we can't.

i have an idea...life is indifferent. it a cold hard truth, and truth never concerns itself with anyones feelings...

Well, it's harsh, but there are going to be a LOT of better things in heaven than family members we have on Earth.

This is really tough issue because I have an atheist Grandfather in the hospital, colon cancer, probably close to death. It affects everyone. nearly everyone has a friend or relative that doesn't believe and there is nothing worse than going to a funeral, knowing that your friend/grandfather/whomever is in Hell.

But, that's the way it works. It was their personal decision. I tried my best (hopefully) to tell/show them the truth. If they didn't accept it, well, it's on them. We are all responsible for our own personal chocies - we can't make other peoples choices for them.

So, comfort wise, I can't explain how every tear will be wiped away or how there will be no more pain or hurt or fear - but I believe that if anyone can take all taht stuff away, it's Christ. And he's going to be there. Plus, I'll have a TON of new family.

So yes it sucks to loose a family member to Hell, but it isn't my place to decide who goes and who doesn't - that is between the individual and God. I trust God to make the right choice.

sure it isn't your place to decide...so you are willing to live with it though and i find that really interesting.

my way of looking at death is that i had the privilege of having that person in my life...my father in law died a few yrs back and it was one of the hardest things i had ever gone through...he was sick for a few yrs and we knew his time with us was very short...we have no regrets, we did what we could...we knew he knew how much he meant to us because he said so. it is so very sad but death is a part of life. knowing the here and now is our one shot at getting to know another person and having them be a part of our lifes, how can anyone take this time for granted...the here and now is all we have.

I don't believe that for one second. Innocence is not ignorance.

ignorance isn't stupidity
and here is the definition of innocence

a : freedom from guilt or sin through being unacquainted with evil : blamelessness
b : chastity
c : freedom from legal guilt of a particular crime or offense
d (1) : freedom from guile or cunning : simplicity (2) : lack of worldly experience or sophistication
e : lack of knowledge : ignorance <written in entire innocence of the Italian language &#8212; E. R. Bentley>

Innocence - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

How do you know? You have never died...yet you understand it. We see things around us die. How do we know they didn't understand it? We don't. There's nothing I know of that says the trees and animals and plants and insects around them lived forever. Maybe they saw death in the natural world around them? I can't say - I doubt it if sin hadn't entered into it, but maybe flowers still withered before sin came - I don't know, i wasn't there.

exactly...
it doesn't add up does it. how can someone who is innocent understand what death meant...they are ignorant of it.

Hell is justice.

for an insecure god.

I disagree. Carrots are yucky (unless you boil them).

naw...raw carrots are better...

Luke 6 is a great example of how a Christian changed by the redemption and forgiveness of sins brought about by Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit should act in the world.

it's interesting to note that one doesn't need to be a christian in order to be capable of doing these things.

Go read up on the old covenant and the new covenant, I'm not good at explaining it and need to do more reading of it myself. I am not Jewish. The NT is littered with passages about legalism and food.

so why hold homosexuality in a harsher light....because of the icky factor?

Check out Mark 7 also.

20 He went on: &#8220;What comes out of a person is what defiles them. 21 For it is from within, out of a person&#8217;s heart, that evil thoughts come&#8212;sexual immorality, theft, murder, 22 adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. 23 All these evils come from inside and defile a person.&#8221;
homosexuality isn't mentioned.
he also forgot to mention that empathy comes from the heart of unbelievers