(November 18, 2017 at 7:17 am)alpha male Wrote:

(November 18, 2017 at 6:40 am)Aroura Wrote: So, you don't believe that our choices are what define our destination, but instead that we are basically predestined for one location or another?

No, I believe that one needs to choose God to be saved. The point is that that choice is a matter of the heart, not of precise ritual.

And it doesn't matter if one chooses the apocalyptic Judaism God that Jesus worshiped and advocated for or instead picks the revised, repackaged, rethought, sanitized, neutered and modified God of the Apostle Paul ??

Just want to be clear on this.

And if the Apostle Paul God is in fact the preferred one, I'll follow on with an as revised by Joe Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, Martin Luther, Jim Bakker, Billy Graham, Ripoll or William Tyndale ??

(November 18, 2017 at 8:55 am)Aroura Wrote: Also, I want to be clear about your answer to CL.  You do not think most people who are not exposed to the word of Jesus still get into heaven.  Is that correct?

(I know this was meant for AM but I will answer as well lol)

I don't know if it's "most" or "few" or "some..." Can't really put a number on it. But I do think that people of other faiths or no faith at all can go to Heaven. My beliefs of Heaven and Hell are that they are not physical places, but a state of being constructed by our acceptance or rejection of God. So if a person goes through life genuinely not believing in God/Jesus for whatever reason, but they see Him when they die and choose to accept Him, I would say that acceptance puts them in a state of Heaven. Perhaps it'll take some transitioning to finally get to the point of full grace after a lifetime of not knowing God, which is where Purgatory comes in. (But I assume everyone goes through that state of transition before reaching the perfect grace of Heaven.)

Now, how often that happens, whether it's most of the time or rarely or almost always, I don't know.

Quote:Lastly, is it your belief that only belief matters, and not other actions/choices in this life? What about harmful acts to others, or even the 10 commandments? 

For instance, if there is a man in Nepal who is a Buddhist for life, and he spends his life taking care of the poor street children, finding them food and medicine, even going without himself sometimes so they are taken care of, he does not accept Jesus (or God), he's destined for hell.  But a person who truly accepts Jesus, but gets drunk and kills a whole family driving, or beats his wife because he has temper issues he can't seem to deal with, he's destined for heaven?

No, definitely not. While I believe that Heaven is the state of ultimate acceptance of God, that acceptance of God actually means something. It isn't just saying "I believe in Jesus as my savior." Since I believe God is goodness and love, "accepting Him" means accepting goodness and love. It means having a desire to do good, to love, to feel remorse for wrongdoings. A person who doesn't believe God exists but who acts out the corporal works of mercy, does good for others, and desires goodness and love, is much closer to God than the person who says they believe in Jesus but then goes home and beats his wife and treats people with hate. I believe the first person, even though they don't believe God exists, will be drawn to Him and want to be with Him when they die and see Him. Because that person has a good heart, and God is goodness. The second person, while it is possible for them to feel true remorse and completely change their heart, I think it is less likely.

Quote:It doesn't bother you that other people who call themselves Christian, for instance, would entirely reverse that...and would you still consider those people true Christians?

(Reminds me of a boy I dated in my late teens.  His gran was evangelical, and she did not like him dating me because I was Catholic, which she viewed as basically pagan as we have Mary and all those Saints put just a step below Jesus.  I was not a true Christian in her eyes.)

Well, I am one of those people lol. So no.

Quote:One of the things I'm most fascinated by is how different groups of believers rarely agree on anything.
Is life a test?  Some adamantly yes, some adamantly no.  Some not sure.
Is there a literal heaven and hell?  Same, some yes, some no, some not sure.
How to get into heaven?  Depends on who you ask.
Can non-believers get into heaven?  Yes, no, maybe.
Are parts of the bible allegorical or factual?  Some parts, maybe all parts, dependson who you ask.  
And all of this can vary even within sects, because people feel more free nowadays to reject some parts of their own faith, insert what makes the most sense to them personally, then claim it with any confidence at all.  "Well, I think...." That's nice, but that is't what your faith teaches, what's in the bible, etc.
And on and on and on.

And these are all people who band together and claim to believe in the same God.  They have no more in common with each other, belief wise, than we do with them. /Ironic

Yeah, Christianity is very diverse in certain details. But at the end of the day, the fundamental principles of Christianity are mostly still the same throughout most denominations worldwide (unless we're talking about a fringe group like the Westboros, etc).

So long as Christians live out the corporal works of mercy and try to follow the teachings of Christ, the smaller details like whether the OT is allegory vs historical fact, who goes to Heaven, etc, doesn't bother me.

---

(November 18, 2017 at 9:23 am)alpha male Wrote:

(November 18, 2017 at 8:55 am)Aroura Wrote: Are you only OK with the different possible paths all because you believe you have chosen the correct path, though?  

Not sure what you mean by "OK with."

Quote:Also, I want to be clear about your answer to CL.  You do not think most people who are not exposed to the word of Jesus still get into heaven.  Is that correct?

Since I believe that life begins at conception and I subscribe to an age of accountability doctrine, most people go to heaven. You're only considering adults.

Quote:My question then is, why are they going to be punished when they didn't get the same choice, just for "inventing a false religion?"

First, they're not punished for just inventing a false religion. As the Romans 2 passage shows, they're punished for all their sins.

Second, you're using a general sense of fairness. When you consider it as matters of justice and grace, there's no need for God to offer the same grace to everyone, as grace is by definition unmerited.

Third, it can be argued that everyone gets a final shot at accepting salvation after death. I haven't studied it enough to have a firm opinion. Check 1 Peter 3: 18-20 if you're interested.

Quote:Lastly, is it your belief that only belief matters, and not other actions/choices in this life? What about harmful acts to others, or even the 10 commandments? 

Nope.
We're condemned for our sins, which include both actions and thoughts.
We're saved by confession and belief.
We earn eternal rewards through our actions here in this life.

Quote:For instance, if there is a man in Nepal who is a Buddhist for life, and he spends his life taking care of the poor street children, finding them food and medicine, even going without himself sometimes so they are taken care of, he does not accept Jesus (or God), he's destined for hell.  But a person who truly accepts Jesus, but gets drunk and kills a whole family driving, or beats his wife because he has temper issues he can't seem to deal with, he's destined for heaven?

If the man in Nepal has heard of Jesus and rejected him, then yes, that's correct.

Quote:It doesn't bother you that other people who call themselves Christian, for instance, would entirely reverse that...and would you still consider those people true Christians?

Bad theology bothers me, but no one's theology is perfect. Mine is different than it was 30 years ago. I basically go by the Apostle's Creed as the minimum shared beliefs necessary for me to consider someone a Christian. I also distinguish between leaders (more responsibility for truth) and lay people (less responsibility).

Quote:(Reminds me of a boy I dated in my late teens.  His gran was evangelical, and she did not like him dating me because I was Catholic, which she viewed as basically pagan as we have Mary and all those Saints put just a step below Jesus.  I was not a true Christian in her eyes.)

---

One of the things I'm most fascinated by is how different groups of believers rarely agree on anything.
Is life a test?  Some adamantly yes, some adamantly no.  Some not sure.
Is there a literal heaven and hell?  Same, some yes, some no, some not sure.
How to get into heaven?  Depends on who you ask.
Can non-believers get into heaven?  Yes, no, maybe.
Are parts of the bible allegorical or factual?  Some parts, maybe all parts, dependson who you ask.  
And all of this can vary even within sects, because people feel more free nowadays to reject some parts of their own faith, insert what makes the most sense to them personally, then claim it with any confidence at all.  "Well, I think...." That's nice, but that is't what your faith teaches, what's in the bible, etc.
And on and on and on.

And these are all people who band together and claim to believe in the same God.  They have no more in common with each other, belief wise, than we do with them. /Ironic

See above on Apostle's Creed.

I thought the Apostle's Creed was Catholic??

(November 18, 2017 at 1:39 pm)vorlon13 Wrote:

(November 18, 2017 at 7:17 am)alpha male Wrote: No, I believe that one needs to choose God to be saved. The point is that that choice is a matter of the heart, not of precise ritual.

And it doesn't matter if one chooses the apocalyptic Judaism God that Jesus worshiped and advocated for or instead picks the revised, repackaged, rethought, sanitized, neutered and modified God of the Apostle Paul ??

Just want to be clear on this.

And if the Apostle Paul God is in fact the preferred one, I'll follow on with an as revised by Joe Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, Martin Luther, Jim Bakker, Billy Graham, Ripoll or William Tyndale ??

This is important because I'm sure that most of us have been in a conversation a christian who claims how many millions of other christians there are in the world as if that is evidence that their religion is the correct one. But the same person will later then claim in a debate that those christians are not True Christians because they do something different.

You wouldn't want to become a christian thinking that you were going to be saved and then found that you chose the wrong sect.

(November 18, 2017 at 7:17 am)alpha male Wrote:

(November 18, 2017 at 6:40 am)Aroura Wrote: So, you don't believe that our choices are what define our destination, but instead that we are basically predestined for one location or another?

No, I believe that one needs to choose God to be saved. The point is that that choice is a matter of the heart, not of precise ritual.

Yea and? Others think you need Allah/ Yahweh. So?

Humans wont be saved long term, we will go extinct just like dinosaurs. If you want our species finite ride to be extended, chalking it up to sky wizards isn't the way to do it. I'd say investing in human reality in that we are all we have, is the only thing that will extend our finite ride.

Yea, you have a hero you wish to be real. I get that, I used to believe too. So?

"A matter of the heart"

No, a matter of YOU and your own dreamy eyed wishful thinking.

I have the same objection to Mystic when he pontificates about Allah. 

I'd have the same objection if anyone claimed Yoda was real. 

YES the idea of having a cosmic security guard has appealed to humans forever. But science isn't propping up anyone's claims.

(November 18, 2017 at 2:06 pm)Mathilda Wrote:

(November 18, 2017 at 1:39 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: And it doesn't matter if one chooses the apocalyptic Judaism God that Jesus worshiped and advocated for or instead picks the revised, repackaged, rethought, sanitized, neutered and modified God of the Apostle Paul ??

Just want to be clear on this.

And if the Apostle Paul God is in fact the preferred one, I'll follow on with an as revised by Joe Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, Martin Luther, Jim Bakker, Billy Graham, Ripoll or William Tyndale ??

This is important because I'm sure that most of us have been in a conversation a christian who claims how many millions of other christians there are in the world as if that is evidence that their religion is the correct one. But the same person will later then claim in a debate that those christians are not True Christians  because they do something different.

You wouldn't want to become a christian thinking that you were going to be saved and then found that you chose the wrong sect.

ESPECIALLY knowing that the religion Jesus practiced is ABSOLUTELY not the religion being promoted in virtually every single 'Christian' church in the US.

How can a believer in Jesus KNOWINGLY practice a religion Jesus Himself would not recognize ??


As I am fond of saying, there is NO WAY they are 'Doing it Right'. Proven by their own Bibles, it is an absolute fact the religion OF Jesus has been willingly abandoned by even His most ardent of followers.

(November 18, 2017 at 1:39 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: And it doesn't matter if one chooses the apocalyptic Judaism God that Jesus worshiped and advocated for or instead picks the revised, repackaged, rethought, sanitized, neutered and modified God of the Apostle Paul ??

LOL - if you don't see anything apocalyptic in Paul, that means that you haven't read Paul.

(November 18, 2017 at 3:03 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(November 18, 2017 at 1:39 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: And it doesn't matter if one chooses the apocalyptic Judaism God that Jesus worshiped and advocated for or instead picks the revised, repackaged, rethought, sanitized, neutered and modified God of the Apostle Paul ??

LOL - if you don't see anything apocalyptic in Paul, that means that you haven't read Paul.

Why would you assume we have not read the bible?

We have, including the part where Paul advocating lying to gain converts. 

YES we do see sick self serving language, not just in Paul, but from beginning to end. It is all about one entity, his narcissism, his need for attention, and bent on revenge for anyone who doesn't kiss his ass.

God, "Obey me or else".

That is the intent of the entire book.

NOW AGAIN, not because a real God exists, but because in antiquity in all religions WORLDWIDE, the mortality rate was far higher so it was far more important BACK THEN, to follow your local ruling family. 

Theism, even Hinduism, and Buddhism, BACK THEN, was written in an age of a species WORLDWIDE, who confused success with some sort of magical entitlement. 

So yea, it does not surprise anyone here that you make the claim you got it right. Muslims think they got it right, Jews think they got it right, Hindus think they got it right. Even the Mayans had their "end times" superstitions. 

Paul? I don't care. Just another manufactured character used to glorify the man heros of the book.

(November 17, 2017 at 12:34 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: In Catholicism we don't have anything about a loyalty/reward scheme.

With that being said, some protestant denominations believe that all you need to do to "go to Heaven" is to believe in Jesus as your Lord and Savior, and if you are not a Christian you go to Hell. They believe faith alone will get them to Heaven.

We believe it is much more involved/less simplistic than that, and we do acknowledge that a person who is Christian *may* go to Hell, and one who isn't *may not*.

Basically, it depends entirely on the state of your soul. If you are in a state of mortal sin, you go to Hell. That sounds simple enough, but the tricky part is that we have no way of knowing whether or not a person's soul is in a state of mortal sin. We can't even officially say that about Hitler, Stallin, or Mao, for example. Because in determining the state of someone's soul, every single thing about that person is taken into account. And since we can't read minds and see a person's entire life experiences, we can't make any judgements on their soul.

 Then what was the purpose of Jesus, His life, His death and His resurrection. What you just described is Judaism. Something that Christ came to put away because it didn't work, Judaism was set up to show we needed a savior and not ourselves. I'm not trying to bring some kind of argument, I'm curious.

GC

Cod takes note of the above.

---

(November 17, 2017 at 7:54 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(November 17, 2017 at 7:09 pm)Cod Wrote: Like I said, I think you are a reasonable person, the more you talk to cod the less catholic you will become, give me a couple of weeks and you will be backing me up.

Challenge accepted. 

PS - being theist doesn't make someone unreasonable, contrary to some claims around here that we're all mentally ill.

Okay, lets begin.. think about this CL, think back to your childhood, did you ever eat an soil in your garden like I did?

(November 18, 2017 at 1:40 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Yeah, Christianity is very diverse in certain details. But at the end of the day, the fundamental principles of Christianity are mostly still the same throughout most denominations worldwide (unless we're talking about a fringe group like the Westboros, etc).

So long as Christians live out the corporal works of mercy and try to follow the teachings of Christ, the smaller details like whether the OT is allegory vs historical fact, who goes to Heaven, etc, doesn't bother me.

---

I do appreciate your open mind and tolerant worldview of others, very much.  Yet, you say this (my bold) after literally disagreeing with nearly everything AM said about his beliefs.  You differ on who may get into heaven, what heaven is, how people attain states of grace and/or reach heaven.  You essentially differ on what is important both in this life and in the next.  Yet you still maintain that "the fundamental principles of Christianity are mostly still the same throughout most denominations worldwide". 

I'm not angry or anything, just utterly puzzled how you can disagree on such extremely important, and not even nitpicky points of faith.  But broad, and again, important points, and yet still say you are fundamentally the same. 

To me, it seems very clear that your religion is as different from his as it is from Shinto or Wicca.  You have nothing in common except you both claim your faith dates back to a man with the same name.  Everything else seems pretty different.  Just sharing this from my outsider POV.

---

(November 18, 2017 at 12:01 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(November 18, 2017 at 3:16 am)Hammy Wrote: Nor would I. But I would say things to make a point.

Seriously though, it would be dishonest if I pretended to take Christianity any more seriously than Zeus.

I also notice that you would take Buddhists seriously and genuinely be interested but if someone believed in Zeus which is considered mythology you would consider that different merely because it's less popular. But it's no less absurd. The religions of today are exactly like the mythology of tomorrow.

---

I am about there not being one.  Doesn't that ever worry you?

1. Yeah, it's pretty fundamental to Christian teaching, if that's what you mean.

2. No, it really doesnt....

...One because I do feel confident in my belief that everyone who goes to Hell will be there from their own deliberate choosing, and it won't be like "Whoops! You were Hindu and not Christian, too bad!" Or "Looks like you never got baptised/had a confession, tough luck!" I cant imagine a God so infinitely huge and all knowing being so petty.

...And two, if I am wrong, there's really no point in being worried about. It will be what it will be regardless of what i do or don't believe to be true, so besides making my best inference, there's nothing much else I can do.

---

Also, thank you for this answer.  This is possibly my favorite thing you've ever said.  It lets me know you are truly very understanding of how others not in your own in-group think, including those who lack belief.  I bet most people here on AF would say basically this exact same thing in response to any version of pascals wager.