belief

[gcomeau]

After re-reading all of John 3 and Corinthians 15 I see nothing there that supports your particular claim about the specific fate of the unsaved. Could you elaborate what part of either one specifies that all those not saved are placed in some kind of neutral holding pattern forever living out perfectly happy lives?

Sure. Scripture makes it clear that those who are not baptized are damned (try Mark 16:16 for another reference to this). What does that mean? Certainly not misery and woe forever (which would imply some awful harsh, nasty things about a God most Christians claim is our "Heavenly Father"). Nor is there scriptural support for that idea. Rather, it seems that people are the ones who insist someone has to be miserable. Consider instead a river dam, which stops forward progress. This seems more likely of the merciful God whose stated objectives for us include resurrection and eternal life.

If this is true, then it is no longer as black and white as heaven and hell (poor guys just south of that borderline). There must be more. Indeed, Paul assures us in Corinthians that there are at least three degrees of glorious resurrection: celestial like the sun, terrestrial like the moon and a degree for the stars. Why would we need three types of resurrection for only one heaven? And are there resurrections without glory?

There must be some wiggle room between simply passing or failing here. What about the excellent person who was never baptized? Would you cast him to hell? Or does it make sense that a just but loving God would prepare a place for him where he can be happy, even though he has not met the qualifications for eternal life?

It makes sense to me that there must be different levels of heaven; that it's not a system of acquiring so many good deeds or saying so many prayers to pass some arbitrary, unknown benchmark. A person who was resurrected terrestrially is damned in the sense that the moon cannot be as bright as the sun, but receives some glory (and is therefore happy to some degree) all the same.

Let me just summarize what you just said.

The only thing you can find in scripture about the fate of the unsaved is basically that they're damned. But since you refuse to think anything could ever be unpleasant about god, "damned" just can't be a bad nasty thing so it must be a happy pleasant thing and you just took it from there by filling in all the blanks about what things must really be like for them using your own imagination.

And that despite the bible being absolutely packed with god doing nasty unpleasant things to people who tick him off.

Any part of that summary you care to find fault with?

 

[trueblue]

After re-reading all of John 3 and Corinthians 15 I see nothing there that supports your particular claim about the specific fate of the unsaved. Could you elaborate what part of either one specifies that all those not saved are placed in some kind of neutral holding pattern forever living out perfectly happy lives?

Sure. Scripture makes it clear that those who are not baptized are damned (try Mark 16:16 for another reference to this). What does that mean? Certainly not misery and woe forever (which would imply some awful harsh, nasty things about a God most Christians claim is our "Heavenly Father"). Nor is there scriptural support for that idea. Rather, it seems that people are the ones who insist someone has to be miserable. Consider instead a river dam, which stops forward progress. This seems more likely of the merciful God whose stated objectives for us include resurrection and eternal life.

If this is true, then it is no longer as black and white as heaven and hell (poor guys just south of that borderline). There must be more. Indeed, Paul assures us in Corinthians that there are at least three degrees of glorious resurrection: celestial like the sun, terrestrial like the moon and a degree for the stars. Why would we need three types of resurrection for only one heaven? And are there resurrections without glory?

There must be some wiggle room between simply passing or failing here. What about the excellent person who was never baptized? Would you cast him to hell? Or does it make sense that a just but loving God would prepare a place for him where he can be happy, even though he has not met the qualifications for eternal life?

It makes sense to me that there must be different levels of heaven; that it's not a system of acquiring so many good deeds or saying so many prayers to pass some arbitrary, unknown benchmark. A person who was resurrected terrestrially is damned in the sense that the moon cannot be as bright as the sun, but receives some glory (and is therefore happy to some degree) all the same.

Let me just summarize what you just said.

The only thing you can find in scripture about the fate of the unsaved is basically that they're damned. But since you refuse to think anything could ever be unpleasant about god, "damned" just can't be a bad nasty thing so it must be a happy pleasant thing and you just took it from there by filling in all the blanks about what things must really be like for them using your own imagination.

And that despite the bible being absolutely packed with god doing nasty unpleasant things to people who tick him off.

Any part of that summary you care to find fault with?

It does appear in the Bible that God can be harsh at times, but why do you insist on making him a cruel sadist? There are also many evidences of God being merciful and kind-- of him desiring to give us the best he can, not the worst. So is your solution to choose to believe that he is mean and nasty and hates people or do you have some other answer that provides greater hope and satisfaction?

 

[gcomeau]

Sure. Scripture makes it clear that those who are not baptized are damned (try Mark 16:16 for another reference to this). What does that mean? Certainly not misery and woe forever (which would imply some awful harsh, nasty things about a God most Christians claim is our "Heavenly Father"). Nor is there scriptural support for that idea. Rather, it seems that people are the ones who insist someone has to be miserable. Consider instead a river dam, which stops forward progress. This seems more likely of the merciful God whose stated objectives for us include resurrection and eternal life.

If this is true, then it is no longer as black and white as heaven and hell (poor guys just south of that borderline). There must be more. Indeed, Paul assures us in Corinthians that there are at least three degrees of glorious resurrection: celestial like the sun, terrestrial like the moon and a degree for the stars. Why would we need three types of resurrection for only one heaven? And are there resurrections without glory?

There must be some wiggle room between simply passing or failing here. What about the excellent person who was never baptized? Would you cast him to hell? Or does it make sense that a just but loving God would prepare a place for him where he can be happy, even though he has not met the qualifications for eternal life?

It makes sense to me that there must be different levels of heaven; that it's not a system of acquiring so many good deeds or saying so many prayers to pass some arbitrary, unknown benchmark. A person who was resurrected terrestrially is damned in the sense that the moon cannot be as bright as the sun, but receives some glory (and is therefore happy to some degree) all the same.

Let me just summarize what you just said.

The only thing you can find in scripture about the fate of the unsaved is basically that they're damned. But since you refuse to think anything could ever be unpleasant about god, "damned" just can't be a bad nasty thing so it must be a happy pleasant thing and you just took it from there by filling in all the blanks about what things must really be like for them using your own imagination.

And that despite the bible being absolutely packed with god doing nasty unpleasant things to people who tick him off.

Any part of that summary you care to find fault with?

It does appear in the Bible that God can be harsh at times, but why do you insist on making him a cruel sadist? There are also many evidences of God being merciful and kind-- of him desiring to give us the best he can, not the worst. So is your solution to choose to believe that he is mean and nasty and hates people or do you have some other answer that provides greater hope and satisfaction?

I said the bible is packed with him doing nasty unpleasant things to people who tick him off. That is a simple statement of fact, do I really need to run through a list of incidents from the old testament or can we both just acknowledge the obvious and move on?

The only person who said "cruel sadist" however, was you. I might or might not disagree with the evaluation if you cared to argue it in more depth but you just went there all by yourself.

 

[JBeukema]

It does appear in the Bible that God can be harsh at times, but why do you insist on making him a cruel sadist? There are also many evidences of God being merciful and kind

DSM-IV Criteria for Bipolar Disorder

 

[amrchaos]

do muslims believe in gods son jesus christ? and if not how do they expect to get to heaven.

Jews do not believe in Christ. Muslims consider Christ just another prophet.

 

[trueblue]

The Bible is equally packed with him doing wonderful splendid things for the downtrodden, the weak, the simple and even the sinner. I believe that part of the bible is called the New Testament. As in, the world after the Law of Moses.

So again, why would the harsh Old Testament God trump the gentle, kind New Testament God?

 

[SmarterThanHick]

do muslims believe in gods son jesus christ? and if not how do they expect to get to heaven.

do you read the Qu'ran, believe in its prophet, or practice Islam? How about Judaism? How about any other of the organized religions in this world? Heck, do you even follow all of the teachings of Jesus yourself? Probably not to all of these questions.

Wanna know why we got bombed on 9/11? Cuz ignorant hicks like you with ignorant religious beliefs impinge on ignorant hicks like them with ignorant religious beliefs.

 

[trueblue]

do muslims believe in gods son jesus christ? and if not how do they expect to get to heaven.

do you read the Qu'ran, believe in its prophet, or practice Islam? How about Judaism? How about any other of the organized religions in this world? Heck, do you even follow all of the teachings of Jesus yourself? Probably not to all of these questions.

Wanna know why we got bombed on 9/11? Cuz ignorant hicks like you with ignorant religious beliefs impinge on ignorant hicks like them with ignorant religious beliefs.

Wow. That was a bit harsh. I know you're trying to insult him, but you confused me. To clarify: you believe that unless a person follows and practices all of the organized religions in the world they are ignorant and bring terror attacks upon themselves?

That requirement would make every person in the world ignorant and deserving of terrorist attacks. Please clarify....

 

[SmarterThanHick]

haha. sorry bout that.

my point was a response to his. he claimed that everyone else is doomed because they don't follow his religion. thus I asked if he followed their's. The point isn't that I think everyone is doomed, but that every (ok most) religions claim they are the one true way and followers of any other religion are doomed. In other words, Christians think Muslim beliefs are wrong, and Muslims think Christian beliefs are wrong.

The ignorance is failing to identify that, failing to realize that everyone has their own beliefs, and claiming any one religion is any more right than any other despite none of them having any real proof.

 

[gcomeau]

The Bible is equally packed with him doing wonderful splendid things for the downtrodden, the weak, the simple and even the sinner. I believe that part of the bible is called the New Testament. As in, the world after the Law of Moses.

So again, why would the harsh Old Testament God trump the gentle, kind New Testament God?

Who said it did?

It does however rather firmly establish that God doesn't have any particular problems with getting mean and nasty, and has done so on multiple occasions if the bible is to be believed. So where exactly is your belief that God wouldn't be mean and nasty to the unsaved coming from, considering the 'facts' at hand?

 

[trueblue]

The Bible is equally packed with him doing wonderful splendid things for the downtrodden, the weak, the simple and even the sinner. I believe that part of the bible is called the New Testament. As in, the world after the Law of Moses.

So again, why would the harsh Old Testament God trump the gentle, kind New Testament God?

Who said it did?

It does however rather firmly establish that God doesn't have any particular problems with getting mean and nasty, and has done so on multiple occasions if the bible is to be believed. So where exactly is your belief that God wouldn't be mean and nasty to the unsaved coming from, considering the 'facts' at hand?

As I said, the New Testament. Doesn't Christ spend most of his time among sinners? Aren't they the 'unsaved'? Do you suppose he despised them every minute he was there? His actions suggest otherwise. He was kind. He healed them. He forgave their sins, no matter what they were or how many. He blessed their children. He spoke of the generosity of God (Matthew 7:7 comes off the top of my head). He traveled great distances to lift a burden or calm a troubled heart. He spoke of hope, of peace, of love.

Aren't these accounts also facts? Or must God be mean and harsh for you to believe He is real? If He is truly our father, as I believe him to be, then it makes sense that he would give us the benefit of the doubt, not look to condemn us at every chance.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

I really like this:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urlTBBKTO68]YouTube - An Atheist Meets God[/ame]
"What do you think heaven would be like if I let in EVERY good person!?"

 

[gcomeau]

The Bible is equally packed with him doing wonderful splendid things for the downtrodden, the weak, the simple and even the sinner. I believe that part of the bible is called the New Testament. As in, the world after the Law of Moses.

So again, why would the harsh Old Testament God trump the gentle, kind New Testament God?

Who said it did?

It does however rather firmly establish that God doesn't have any particular problems with getting mean and nasty, and has done so on multiple occasions if the bible is to be believed. So where exactly is your belief that God wouldn't be mean and nasty to the unsaved coming from, considering the 'facts' at hand?

As I said, the New Testament.

The New testment says God had a sudden personality shift?

Where exactly?

Doesn't Christ spend most of his time among sinners? Aren't they the 'unsaved'?

Umm... no, they're not. You are Christian right? I would think you would be aware of the whole "EVERYONE has sinned" component of your own religion. If sinners were the unsaved, then everyone is unsaved. Always. Not quite what Christianity teaches, now is it?

You know perfectly well we are speaking of the unsaved deceased. Not living potential converts.

 

[trueblue]

Who said it did?

It does however rather firmly establish that God doesn't have any particular problems with getting mean and nasty, and has done so on multiple occasions if the bible is to be believed. So where exactly is your belief that God wouldn't be mean and nasty to the unsaved coming from, considering the 'facts' at hand?

As I said, the New Testament.

The New testment says God had a sudden personality shift?

Where exactly?

Doesn't Christ spend most of his time among sinners? Aren't they the 'unsaved'?

Umm... no, they're not. You are Christian right? I would think you would be aware of the whole "EVERYONE has sinned" component of your own religion. If sinners were the unsaved, then everyone is unsaved. Always. Not quite what Christianity teaches, now is it?

You know perfectly well we are speaking of the unsaved deceased. Not living potential converts.

Oh. So God's love is conditional on our being alive? Once we're dead-- sorry, no more nice guy? You're so confusing...

 

[gcomeau]

Oh. So God's love is conditional on our being alive? Once we're dead-- sorry, no more nice guy? You're so confusing...

What the hell is wrong with you?

We're talking about the deceased because THAT'S THE SUBJECT OF DISCUSSION HERE. What happens to the freaking deceased. Specifically, what happens to them according to Christian theology and how exactly you reached the conclusions you reached on that particular topic. And we're not talking about the saved deceased because as far as I know there's nothing to talk about there. I'm pretty sure we're both agreed that according to Christian theology THOSE people go to heaven.

Now would you try getting it together and focusing? Just a bit?

 

[Mr. H.]

I've baptised quite a few babies, including my own (4). I'm not an ordained minister so I'm wondering if I've gone and damned them to hell?

 

[froggy]

I've baptised quite a few babies, including my own (4). I'm not an ordained minister so I'm wondering if I've gone and damned them to hell?

why are you baptising

 

[rdean]

It amazes me that people have, what they consider, a serious conversation about the "occult".

 

[JBeukema]

I really like this:
YouTube - An Atheist Meets God
"What do you think heaven would be like if I let in EVERY good person!?"

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=2DBAAE6305A463D0&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&v=36uAoe8e2dY

 

[trueblue]

Oh. So God's love is conditional on our being alive? Once we're dead-- sorry, no more nice guy? You're so confusing...

What the hell is wrong with you?

We're talking about the deceased because THAT'S THE SUBJECT OF DISCUSSION HERE. What happens to the freaking deceased. Specifically, what happens to them according to Christian theology and how exactly you reached the conclusions you reached on that particular topic. And we're not talking about the saved deceased because as far as I know there's nothing to talk about there. I'm pretty sure we're both agreed that according to Christian theology THOSE people go to heaven.

Now would you try getting it together and focusing? Just a bit?

Sorry. Perhaps I've been a bit weak minded. The unsaved deceased have an opportunity to accept or reject Christ and baptism (which would obviously have to be performed vicariously as it was in New Testament times). Then they are judged like the rest of us.