Dying in sin?

[Kenny]

t's not even that; this is just how we look at religions.

When you're thinking about, say, Shinto, do you look at it in terms of how it's actually practiced or in terms of some nebulous notion of how it "ought" to be practiced? Christianity is no different.

I'm just sharing my understanding. You would have to ask the Shinto follower what their viewpoint is.

What Christians do doesn't reflect on the character of any purported gods.

The Bible certainly does cast God in a bad light, though.

Seems to contradict your first statement.

In this analogy, the person who threw the grenade that Jesus jumped on was God.

Jesus's sacrifice is only noble to the extent that God demanding the sacrifice is heinous.

This comes across more like "any excuse is a good enough excuse for you". But you are welcome to your viewpoint

The many posts in the Jan. 6 thread where you sympathized with the putsch and its participants left me with a different impression.

Again... like with your take of Jesus, a wrong perception.

 

[YoursTrue]

Dying in sin means either time as a ghost or in hell. Rituals or good deeds by descendants of the person can relive the person from his torment. But eternal hell is for a select few with most heinous crimes, murder, rape, traitorous conduct, etc. Most, however, will do time in hell and return.

Is this what you believe?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Is this what you believe?

Of course, no. I do not believe in existence of God or soul. I am a hard-baked atheist. For me, it is curtains on my individuality and chemical recycling of what my body is composed of.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I'm just sharing my understanding. You would have to ask the Shinto follower what their viewpoint is.



Seems to contradict your first statement.

This comes across more like "any excuse is a good enough excuse for you". But you are welcome to your viewpoint

Again... like with your take of Jesus, a wrong perception.

The problem is that you are in effect claiming objective evidence, yet you claim you don't do that:
Of course, I speak through the eyes of one who holds a worldview of the Christian faith; I'm sure that other religions have different viewpoints.

You are in effect saying that you know that it is wrong, but you claim that you only treat other viewpoints as different.
So do you know that it is a wrong perception and how do you know that?

 

[viole]

If a good christian one day is doing something illegal online and police are about to arrest them because they needed to arrest them but both parties decide to shoot it out and it leaves countless of dead police officers and the "good christian" perpetrator dead too, where will the good christian go to according to the catholic church??? Heaven, hell, or limbo??? What about purgatory??

His sin has been payed. So, no problem.

Ciao

- viole

 

[YoursTrue]

Of course, no. I do not believe in existence of God or soul. I am a hard-baked atheist. For me, it is curtains on my individuality and chemical recycling of what my body is composed of.

You elicited a little laugh out of me about the hard baked stuff and chemical recycling. Here is what I will say but which many do not believe or understand --
Genesis 1:20 speaks of living "souls" in the creation account.
"And God said--Let the waters swarm [with] an abundance of living soul, and birds shall fly over the earth, over the face of the expanse of the heavens." So here animals are said to be living souls. Yes, when such die they go back to the elements.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You elicited a little laugh out of me about the hard baked stuff and chemical recycling. Here is what I will say but which many do not believe or understand --
Genesis 1:20 speaks of living "souls" in the creation account.
"And God said--Let the waters swarm [with] an abundance of living soul, and birds shall fly over the earth, over the face of the expanse of the heavens." So here animals are said to be living souls. Yes, when such die they go back to the elements.

Well, that is one belief in souls. My wife believes differently.

 

[wellwisher]

There is a solid scientific argument, for a possible free energy matrix, that can be used for an afterlife.

Proof for a possible realm connected to the afterlife.
The second law of Thermodynamics states that the entropy of the universe has to increase. This is one of the few laws in science, with any law higher than any theory. The 2nd law of science implies change is inevitable. Climate change is partially based on entropy and entropy having to increase. Entropy increasing in the universe; 2nd law, means reality, in all its many forms, become more and more complex. Entropy increase assures change over time. Even when making widgets on an assembly line, small defects can appear, to increase entropy. This makes life more complicated for engineers.

When entropy increases, free energy is absorb; lowers local free energy. Since the entropy of the universe has to always net increase, and energy will be absorbed, the logical result is the universe is bleeding energy into the 2nd law entropy increase; universe is losing useable free energy. The energy is conserved, but made net unusable to the universe, since net entropy has to always net increase; 2nd law. This pool of lost energy keeps getting larger and larger, even if some is recycled. We can reverse entropy, but this adds to the entropy increase or it would be called perpetual motion. This ever growing pool of entropic energy, separated from the material universe, is the most logical place for an afterlife.

The reason this pool should logically be connected to human and even animal after life, is our brain and consciousness function via changes in ionic entropy. The brain expends 90% of its metabolic energy pumping and exchanging ions in a way that lowers ionic entropic. Lot of energy is used by the brain to go against the 2nd law, at the cost of 90% its metabolic energy. Consciousness is connected to the 2nd law acting on this added entropic potential as well as on its own.

Our memory, naturally gets more and more complex with added data and increasing data organization as we learn and age; wisdom of old age. Theoretically, our memory, due the entropic connection, should be adding to the pool of lost energy, due to the 2nd law. Our lifetime contribution to the pool is called our soul; our catalog of entropic parallel; memory, goes into the energy/entropy states within the pool.

There is conservation of energy. Even though energy is removed from the universe; universe ages as entropy increases and withdraw energy, the energy in the pool is still conserved. It is separate from the material universe; within another realm associated with entropic potential. The endothermic affect of an entropic increase; cooling, may be why parapsychology often feels cold zones, when it assumes that spirits/ghosts of the dead are present.

Religions, from all time, use(d) the brain to generate memory of an afterlife. These specific images of the after life, via entropy change due neuron firing, still represent an entropy increase. This sort of becomes a self fulfilling prophesy, since even imaginary, still involves neuron entropy increase, with specific afterlife imagery saved in the pool. The Christians, for example, have a very well defined place to enter into the other realm, based 20 centuries of collective neural entropic energy generation; specific pool zone of collective entropic addition that looks their paradise.

Based on entropy, even Atheists will have an entropic based afterlife since their neurons also increase entropy. The difference is many may end up alone, since Atheists expect there to being nothing, for an after life. They may sleep and dream since this is what they collectively expect. Other religions will have their own collective capacitance of neuron and entropic memories. The East may their version of paradise connected to a number of afterlife scenarios to forward integrate saved memory. It may take billions of human inputting to generate a collective safe zone.

 

[Aupmanyav]

"And God said--Let the waters swarm [with] an abundance of living soul, and birds shall fly over the earth, over the face of the expanse of the heavens." So here animals are said to be living souls. Yes, when such die they go back to the elements.

This is like theistic Advaita Hinduism. Soul is in singular. Not many souls, but just one, a small part of Brahman, the Supreme Soul.
When your God says just one soul, why do you believe in different souls in animals and humans?

 

[viole]

If a good christian one day is doing something illegal online and police are about to arrest them because they needed to arrest them but both parties decide to shoot it out and it leaves countless of dead police officers and the "good christian" perpetrator dead too, where will the good christian go to according to the catholic church??? Heaven, hell, or limbo??? What about purgatory??

The sin of that good Christian have been washed by the blood of Christ. Actually, all sins have been washed by the blood of Christ.
So, no problem for him. Or her. Or anyone else.

Ciao

- viole

 

[metis]

If a good christian one day is doing something illegal online and police are about to arrest them because they needed to arrest them but both parties decide to shoot it out and it leaves countless of dead police officers and the "good christian" perpetrator dead too, where will the good christian go to according to the catholic church??? Heaven, hell, or limbo??? What about purgatory??

The Catholic Church has no teaching on this because we are told not to judge others, even ourselves, as that's God's domain.

 

[YoursTrue]

Well, that is one belief in souls. My wife believes differently.

Since it makes sense to me as to what the Bible says, not that everybody agrees as to what it says or teaches, anyway I go with what I consider a reasonable fact that we ARE souls -- that a soul does not transmigrate from one person to another and that when we die, the soul, not a separate part of the body, dies.
"The Bible does not say we have a soul. ‘Nefesh,’ is the person himself, his need for food, the very blood in his veins, his being.”—The New York Times, October 12, 1962.

 

[YoursTrue]

This is like theistic Advaita Hinduism. Soul is in singular. Not many souls, but just one, a small part of Brahman, the Supreme Soul.
When your God says just one soul, why do you believe in different souls in animals and humans?

Each animal, fish, or human, IS a soul. That is an interesting point you bring out because I was using a translation I don't often use, that is, The Emphasized Bible which uses the word soul in the singular. But the King James translates it differently.
King James Version
20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
So here it speaks of moving creature (not creatures) that hath life, but I'll go into more detail about this later. Thanks for bringing that out, we can talk about that later.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Here God is talking about life and not about souls. So why do you believe in existence of souls?

 

[YoursTrue]

Here God is talking about life and not about souls. So why do you believe in existence of souls?

OK, good question but it can get complicated. For me it wasn't complicated when I first learned it, but we all have different backgrounds and you're asking the right questions. I'm going to give you a brief explanation and we can possibly go on from there. First is the fact that English Bibles as well as other languages are translations. So in the Bible, the word soul is translated from a Hebrew word, nephesh and a Greek word psyche. The way the Bible uses these words shows the soul to be a person or an animal or the life that a person or an animal has. But to many, the word “soul” means the immaterial or spirit part of a being that survives the death of the physical body. Others understand it to be the principle of life. But these particular views are not in harmony with Bible teaching.
OK, this is a start for understanding. Hopefully.

 

[YoursTrue]

Here God is talking about life and not about souls. So why do you believe in existence of souls?

OK, one more thing. I looked up three different English translations using the word soul, showing it can die. Notice the following: (Ezekiel 18:4)
English Standard Version
Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die.

Berean Standard Bible
Behold, every soul belongs to Me; both father and son are Mine. The soul who sins is the one who will die.

King James Bible
Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

 

[YoursTrue]

Well, that is one belief in souls. My wife believes differently.

ok...

 

[Kenny]

The problem is that you are in effect claiming objective evidence, yet you claim you don't do that:
Of course, I speak through the eyes of one who holds a worldview of the Christian faith; I'm sure that other religions have different viewpoints.

I don't think my statements are wrong. One could have an objective claim and yet other people could have a different viewpoint.

You are in effect saying that you know that it is wrong, but you claim that you only treat other viewpoints as different.
So do you know that it is a wrong perception and how do you know that?

There are three positions:

1. I am right and the other person is wrong
2. I am wrong and the other person is right
3. Both are wrong.

Different viewpoints can't both be right.

So what specific point do want me to deal with?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I don't think my statements are wrong. One could have an objective claim and yet other people could have a different viewpoint.



There are three positions:

1. I am right and the other person is wrong
2. I am wrong and the other person is right
3. Both are wrong.

Different viewpoints can't both be right.

So what specific point do want me to deal with?

Or that is not objective as such.

 

[Kenny]

Or that is not objective as such.

You could be right...
Or you could be wrong.