Non-believer go to hell, who's fault?

[JoStories]

Well emotions are concepts aren't they? When a person acts in a particular way, with a particular look on their face as they do it, we say they are angry. It is just a name we give when a person decides to act in a certain way. So even if no one can really know what God feels we are just as justified in ascribing or naming his actions under certain circumstances as we are to name our own actions under certain circumstances.

But as for me I believe God does have emotions. I belief the Bible to be the word of God so when someone in the Bible say God said "ABC" I believe God did say that. And God did say to Moses that He is a jealous God. And he told other prophets that he is angry. And Jesus said, "If ye have seen me, ye have seen the father". And Jesus was compassionate (he even cried) - which tells me God is compassionate too. I have also felt God's compassion and love for me. My God is not passionless.

I understand that you believe that Thanda and mean no disrespect to you. We simply differ on the concept of God and how that concept is defined and what attributes, is any, are ascribed to God. Since we cannot, in truth, know for certain, we extrapolate and infer human characteristics. Nothing wrong with that really, save that there are those who hold entirely different views of God including having no face, no gender and no emotions. So who is correct? I would say both really as none of us can really know.

 

[JoStories]

i know, that's because i think is in their own interest that so called "moderate believers" join us atheists or agnostics in asking for true secularism and i would gladly stand side by side with a believere for this common goal because this would make both our lives better. He can live according to his laws, i can live according to mine and both we would be protected by rights given by secularism. Unfortunately many believers ( i can't personally quantify the percentage ) think its part of their duty to proselitize and to shape society according to their values forcing them on anyone. those are the ones i will always stand against.

You would have those 'moderate believers' join your camp and side with you? Do you not see what a slippery slope this is? You are asking people to adopt your beliefs and abandon their own. Its 1984 in a nutshell. How can you say with 100% certainty that life would be better under a secular rule? Can you tell the future? No. You cannot write or build laws in the absence of ethics or morals and like it not or morals are very often based on religious tenet. Can you tell me how you would rewrite all those laws devoid of moral and ethical constraints?

 

[Thanda]

Thing is Thanda, I do believe in God. I just cannot accept a middle man as being necessary to my understanding of God. And IMO, that is how I see Christ. If this man did truly exist and, further, if this man was truly God incarnate, there would still have been more proof of this. We (theologians) cannot find enough historical data to concur the Jesus even lived, let alone was the Son of God. I believe this man was a lot like The Buddha; a very good teacher who was further along on their path to enlightenment. A lot like the two monks who taught Helena Blavatsky who founded Theosophy. IOW, prophets. You state above that if one rejects Jesus, The Christ, you dont know if they go to heaven. I find that exclusivity to the Christian faith rather off putting, no offense intended. If a Hindu follows their faith to the letter, as Gandhi did, why would God condemn such a person to hell for believing in Kali or Krishna instead of Jesus Christ? It makes no sense to me.

I will explain for what I'm sure is the tenth time now. If someone was ignorant, or did not have enough information from which to make a decision, they cannot be condemned for not believing in Christ. If their time to properly know Christ did not come in this life it will come in the life hereafter. But if a person knew of Christ and had sufficient (God will know what is sufficient) knowledge to make a decision and rejected him, preferring Krishna instead, then he will not get the salvation that Christ offers. When he reaches the others side he will have to go and find this Krishna whom he chose over Christ and ask him to give him salvation.

This is why Elijah did the test with the pagan people in his time. He asked them to pray to their God and ask their God to bring fire from heaven to consume the offerings. They, the pagan priests, tried for the whole day. Eventually Elijah told them to pour water over everything and he asked His God to bring down fire from Heaven. The fire came down and consumed everything. Elijah was trying to show the pagans that their gods did not exist and that their gods could do nothing for them - while the God he believed in was the living God.

Likewise if you knowingly (with understanding) reject Christ for some other God then you will be like those pagans: when you get to the other side, you will realise that those Gods can do nothing for you.

I have some questions for you if you don't mind. What is your relationship to your God. Is he someone you pray to? Do you ask him for things? Do you ask him to comfort you perhaps when you are distressed? When you are in a difficulty is he someone you can ask to do something in order for things to work out? I'm just curious.

 

[Thanda]

Ridiculous. How do you know God doesn't drag people there unwillingly? Who is willing to be tortured for eternity? I mean nobody is that much of a masochist. I'm sure Hitler was willing enough to avoid eternal hellfire. Does hitler still go to hell even if he is unwilling?

And you know where else you could go? Some kind of neutral ground, or perhaps reincarnation, or perhaps no existence. I mean you're creating a false dilemma--it has to be heaven or hell. No it doesn't. Everything in your post is so wrong.

As darkness is the absence of light so hell is the absence of heaven. You will go to hell if you don't make it into heaven.

 

[psychoslice]

Non believers have the right to not believe, if there is a god that doesn't like people having their own beliefs, then he shouldn't be god, its that simple.

 

[JoStories]

what's the difference for example in being racists against blacks and discriminate homosexuals? fact is, we can't tolerate no more racism in every shape or form. If a public figure says something against blacks he is dead. You say the n-word on tv you're out. While for hate against homosexuals many people feel that "because is god related it can be tolerated". wich is foolish at best. They're also cowards and hypocrite because they hide their personal hate behind the shield of god.

Nice sentiments but here's the thing. Right now, in my country, we have a candidate who wants to 'label' all Muslims. Think the disgusting yellow star that the Jews had to wear per Hitler's dogma. Is that not racism in all its unmitigated sick twisted glory? And the sad thing is that this candidate has a very good chance of becoming our president. Course, he won't be allowed to go to England if Parliment passes that law but what the hey...he has more money so he can buy his way into the white house. From that label, as in the star, it is a very short step to internment camps. This same candidate wants to do away with the internet to stop terrorism. Can you imagine the collective apoplexy that would ensue if all teens had their tablets and smart phones taken away? Trump is espousing that kind of hatred. And it is all directed at ONE faith. Or rather, one group of misguided fanatics within one faith. Until the day that we have comingled to the point that skin color is moot, we will forever have racism and bigots.

 

[JoStories]

I will explain for what I'm sure is the tenth time now. If someone was ignorant, or did not have enough information from which to make a decision, they cannot be condemned for not believing in Christ. If their time to properly know Christ did not come in this life it will come in the life hereafter. But if a person knew of Christ and had sufficient (God will know what is sufficient) knowledge to make a decision and rejected him, preferring Krishna instead, then he will not get the salvation that Christ offers. When he reaches the others side he will have to go and find this Krishna whom he chose over Christ and ask him to give him salvation.

This is why Elijah did the test with the pagan people in his time. He asked them to pray to their God and ask their God to bring fire from heaven to consume the offerings. They, the pagan priests, tried for the whole day. Eventually Elijah told them to pour water over everything and he asked His God to bring down fire from Heaven. The fire came down and consumed everything. Elijah was trying to show the pagans that their gods did not exist and that their gods could do nothing for them - while the God he believed in was the living God.

Likewise if you knowingly (with understanding) reject Christ for some other God then you will be like those pagans: when you get to the other side, you will realise that those Gods can do nothing for you.

I have some questions for you if you don't mind. What is your relationship to your God. Is he someone you pray to? Do you ask him for things? Do you ask him to comfort you perhaps when you are distressed? When you are in a difficulty is he someone you can ask to do something in order for things to work out? I'm just curious.

I love questions..ask away. My relationship with God is much like yours I suspect. I don't use the word pray but I do meditate on God for guidance so in essence, its sort of the same as praying. At least, that is what the priest Thomas Merton believed. I don't ask God for anything. To me, that is hubris. Instead, I ask God for guidance on how I can achieve what I need. I do find comfort in my meditations, and I do meditate when I am distressed so I guess I do get comfort, albeit not specifically asked for. If I am in a difficult situation, I feel that God has my back and I rely on myself and the teachings I have gleaned from The Bible, The Teachings of the Buddha, the Vedas, etc. IMO, asking God for things I can do seems to not be the way to communicate with God. God gives us the tools we need and we must be the ones to learn to use them. That is part of the journey to enlightenment. My strength is bolstered through my meditations wiht God but ultimately, I have to do these things on my own. Hope this helps?

 

[Thanda]

I love questions..ask away. My relationship with God is much like yours I suspect. I don't use the word pray but I do meditate on God for guidance so in essence, its sort of the same as praying. At least, that is what the priest Thomas Merton believed. I don't ask God for anything. To me, that is hubris. Instead, I ask God for guidance on how I can achieve what I need. I do find comfort in my meditations, and I do meditate when I am distressed so I guess I do get comfort, albeit not specifically asked for. If I am in a difficult situation, I feel that God has my back and I rely on myself and the teachings I have gleaned from The Bible, The Teachings of the Buddha, the Vedas, etc. IMO, asking God for things I can do seems to not be the way to communicate with God. God gives us the tools we need and we must be the ones to learn to use them. That is part of the journey to enlightenment. My strength is bolstered through my meditations wiht God but ultimately, I have to do these things on my own. Hope this helps?

Thanks, yes it does. I must say I do ask for things. I ask similar things to you. In addition I do ask God for things which I cannot do myself - e.g. to heal someone.

 

[psychoslice]

In my opinion there is no such place as a hell, its only a scare tactic, and nothing more.

 

[cambridge79]

You would have those 'moderate believers' join your camp and side with you? Do you not see what a slippery slope this is? You are asking people to adopt your beliefs and abandon their own. Its 1984 in a nutshell. How can you say with 100% certainty that life would be better under a secular rule? Can you tell the future? No. You cannot write or build laws in the absence of ethics or morals and like it not or morals are very often based on religious tenet. Can you tell me how you would rewrite all those laws devoid of moral and ethical constraints?

i'm not asking anything as such. I'm not asking them to obey my rules, i ask the right for myself to not obey theirs. Let's talk for example "end of life care" to name something different than gay marriage or abortion, since gay marriage actually interests only gay, abortion would involve a potential other person, while on the other hand we're all gonna die one day and our life is our own.
you have two options here:
my option: legalize euthanasia in case you're diagnosed with a terminal disease, because the life is mine and i can do what i want with it.
hardcore believers option: not legalize euthanasia, because life is a gift from god and if he wants you to suffer you have to suffer.
according to my option, euthanasia is legal, not forced on people. It's there. You want it you can have it, you don't want it you say "no thanks". Since for them life is sacred and only god can decide when you're gonna die, they can reject such treatment and suffer till their last breath.
everyone is a winner.
according to their option on the other hand i'm diagnosed a lung cancer, i have to suffer like a dog with no hope whatsoever, just waiting to die cause there's no chance i'm gonna live trough that, for the only reason that a god i don't believe in would be upset at me ( consider that if he actually exists he would be already upset just for the fact that i don't believe him so it doesn't even make sense at all ).
how can it possibly be their option better and more desirable than mine?
What interest and profit would have a moderate christian to side with hardcore believers and not with me on the subject?

 

[serp777]

As darkness is the absence of light so hell is the absence of heaven. You will go to hell if you don't make it into heaven.

That doesn't answer anything. You've asserted that and ignored my other points. I already know you assert this false dichotomy. I mean if God was sensible he'd have an afterlife for people who weren't that bad or believed the wrong religion, or were atheists, or whatever.

I mean its like saying--NOPE THERE'S ONLY LIGHT AND DARKNESS. YOU CAN'T HAVE DIFFERENT LUMINOSITY. Ever heard of the color gray maybe?

 

[serp777]

I think that is a bit harsh. For you, Thanda's post is wrong. But it is about belief and faith and faith is defined as that which one believes in the absence of proof. For you, this is ridiculous, to use your terms but for Thanda, it fits her belief. Its not wrong, its just her belief. Are you really willing to say that anyone who has the temerity to disagree with your mindset is wrong? That borders on 1984 and the Thought Police.

Its about whats logical and sensible. Just because someone has belief and faith doesn't mean their beliefs or faith is legitimate. I mean if something defies logic or mathematics then you're free to believe it, but i'm also free to tell you you're wrong and that your beliefs are entirely illogical if you post them publicly. Beliefs aren't valid just because they're beliefs in conclusion.

I increased the font so this would be easier to read since i read your sig.

 

[atpollard]

Really!

Ezekiel 25:16 & 17
thus says the Lord God, Behold, I will stretch out my hand against the Philistines, and I will cut off the Cherethites and destroy the rest of the seacoast. 17 I will execute great vengeance on them with wrathful rebukes. Then they will know that I am the Lord, when I lay my vengeance upon them.”
​

This is petty, and so is sending people to hell because they are cowards. Think people choose to be cowards? "I think I will be a coward." FYI, they don't

Ezekiel 25:15
“This is what the Sovereign LORD says: ‘Because the Philistines acted in vengeance and took revenge with malice in their hearts, and with ancient hostility sought to destroy Judah,

You missed a verse.

 

[JoStories]

Thanks, yes it does. I must say I do ask for things. I ask similar things to you. In addition I do ask God for things which I cannot do myself - e.g. to heal someone.

I can understand that Thanda but in my faith, if someone is about to die, that is their journey. Sometimes being healed is not what God might want for that person, or what that person wants for themselves. My POV is jaded because of 40 years working in ICU's and ER's where people who had a loved one who was suffering beyond anyone's imagination would not let them die. We would code them over and over, breaking ribs and puncturing lungs each time, only to have them scream and cry that they wanted to die. Some docs would order 'slow codes' where in we would walk to the person VERY slowly, in an effort to allow them to die, which is generally what they wanted. Healing is great for those who are just a bit sick but for those such as an elder dying of cancer, death is the better choice sometimes.

 

[JoStories]

Its about whats logical and sensible. Just because someone has belief and faith doesn't mean their beliefs or faith is legitimate. I mean if something defies logic or mathematics then you're free to believe it, but i'm also free to tell you you're wrong and that your beliefs are entirely illogical if you post them publicly. Beliefs aren't valid just because they're beliefs in conclusion.

I increased the font so this would be easier to read since i read your sig.

1. You are so very kind Serp for increasing the font size. Thank you!
2. You're right. You have ever right to say that my beliefs are illogical. I agree they are. Faith is belief in the absence of proof. I have long stated that I cannot prove my beliefs, nor will I try. I get your POV as my dad was a lifelong atheist. For him, it just didn't make sense. I have no issue with you and your POV its just that sometimes, posts to those of us who do have beliefs can be rather harsh, IMO. Its one thing to counter an argument of belief and quite another to be rude and snarky to a person just because they have those beliefs. Not speaking of you, btw. Just some posters who can be rude at times. I hope this clears things up.

 

[Thanda]

I can understand that Thanda but in my faith, if someone is about to die, that is their journey. Sometimes being healed is not what God might want for that person, or what that person wants for themselves. My POV is jaded because of 40 years working in ICU's and ER's where people who had a loved one who was suffering beyond anyone's imagination would not let them die. We would code them over and over, breaking ribs and puncturing lungs each time, only to have them scream and cry that they wanted to die. Some docs would order 'slow codes' where in we would walk to the person VERY slowly, in an effort to allow them to die, which is generally what they wanted. Healing is great for those who are just a bit sick but for those such as an elder dying of cancer, death is the better choice sometimes.

True, that is why Jesus commanded to say "Thy will be done" when we pray. But I believe there are many things in this world that God can do for us. Many of them he does them without us asking and often without us knowing (having someone or something delay us so we miss an accident). But I do believe there are other things God is willing to do for us but only on condition that we ask.

 

[Thanda]

1. You are so very kind Serp for increasing the font size. Thank you!
2. You're right. You have ever right to say that my beliefs are illogical. I agree they are. Faith is belief in the absence of proof. I have long stated that I cannot prove my beliefs, nor will I try. I get your POV as my dad was a lifelong atheist. For him, it just didn't make sense. I have no issue with you and your POV its just that sometimes, posts to those of us who do have beliefs can be rather harsh, IMO. Its one thing to counter an argument of belief and quite another to be rude and snarky to a person just because they have those beliefs. Not speaking of you, btw. Just some posters who can be rude at times. I hope this clears things up.

Jo, are you a woman?

 

[JoStories]

i'm not asking anything as such. I'm not asking them to obey my rules, i ask the right for myself to not obey theirs. Let's talk for example "end of life care" to name something different than gay marriage or abortion, since gay marriage actually interests only gay, abortion would involve a potential other person, while on the other hand we're all gonna die one day and our life is our own.
you have two options here:
my option: legalize euthanasia in case you're diagnosed with a terminal disease, because the life is mine and i can do what i want with it.
hardcore believers option: not legalize euthanasia, because life is a gift from god and if he wants you to suffer you have to suffer.
according to my option, euthanasia is legal, not forced on people. It's there. You want it you can have it, you don't want it you say "no thanks". Since for them life is sacred and only god can decide when you're gonna die, they can reject such treatment and suffer till their last breath.
everyone is a winner.
according to their option on the other hand i'm diagnosed a lung cancer, i have to suffer like a dog with no hope whatsoever, just waiting to die cause there's no chance i'm gonna live trough that, for the only reason that a god i don't believe in would be upset at me ( consider that if he actually exists he would be already upset just for the fact that i don't believe him so it doesn't even make sense at all ).
how can it possibly be their option better and more desirable than mine?
What interest and profit would have a moderate christian to side with hardcore believers and not with me on the subject?

Cambridge, in all of your situations, whether it be abortion, SSM, or the right to die, I am firmly on your side. It is your right to want to die if you have a terminal disease. I firmly believe that and find that those who wish to stop you or me to be incredibly selfish. Who the hell are they to have the right to have an effect on my life? So I get your POV and support you completely but keep in mind, that is more because I am Buddhist and not of the monotheistic faiths. I have seen Christians deny their family members the right to die over and over again, subjecting them to horrid pain and it kill me. Who are they to do this? What is the point of keeping this person alive only to have more pain? I don;t get it. But for now, in most places, the right to die is denied. I hope someday that will change.

 

[JoStories]

Jo, are you a woman?

Yes. Why do you ask? Not that I mind, just curious Thanda.

 

[Thanda]

Yes. Why do you ask? Not that I mind, just curious Thanda.

Jeez! I never knew - I only checked now. For some reason I always thought you were a guy.