Biblical Inerrancy - mandatory to be Christian?

[Darkstar]

The people in hell aren't being tortured by God, they're torturing themselves and refuse to stop. These people lock themselves into hell, and God allows them to go. Otherwise, he's basically kidnapping.

Why would anyone do that? Are they masochistic?

---

Skip to 2:00

---

God isn't there. He has nothing to do with what goes on in hell. Yet, there is evil. The only place it can come from are the people there.

Evil? What about the fire and brimstone?

[The Grand Nudger]

God isn't there. He has nothing to do with what goes on in hell.

I guess we can add hell to the list of places where god isn;t, that god has nothing to do with.

Yet, there is evil. The only place it can come from are the people there.

...and we can add this to the list of things that didn't come from god, anything else you'd like to submit for entry to this list?

[fr0d0]

The people in hell aren't being tortured by God, they're torturing themselves and refuse to stop. These people lock themselves into hell, and God allows them to go. Otherwise, he's basically kidnapping.

That's the most absurd thing I've ever heard.

That's exactly how I understand it too.

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm sure we can find other people who are also suffering from the affliction that the two of you share. Maybe we could start a support group where you can all commiserate? What's that? Already on top of it? Of course, of course.

[Tex]

Why would anyone do that? Are they masochistic?

That video would have been hilarious if the lady was just a voice actress, but sadly she is just that infantile in her understanding. I watched the whole thing rather than just starting at 2:00 and ending later, but the two guys on the show are great at finding the fundamental point, making the caller isolate it, and focusing on that premise. The lady... well, I can't say such kind words for her other than a great stubbornness of faith (she calls it the book of RevelationS...).

Are they masochistic? Kinda... I gave an analogy earlier when Rhythm wasn't on the ignore list (and pardon the language): Lets say I own a farm and you're a hired hand. You're also a douche. You continue being a douche for a long time, both to me and the other hired hands. Finally, I kick you off the property. I say you're allowed to come back when you quit being a douche for good. You never do. Am I unjust for not allowing you onto the property? You never met the menial goal of "stop being a douche". However, I'm not the only farm owner, and all the other farm owners kicked off their douches too. Now there's only one place you can go, and its called "Mt. FuckItSucks", and on Mt. FuckItSucks you have to live with a whole bunch of other douchers just like you. Now we have to rename the place "Mt. FuckItReallySucks". Has there been any crime of any farm owner or hired hand? Nope.

It's not that God is punishing them, but its that they refuse God as "God". God allows this. However, he does not allow those same people to reap all the benefits as the ones who are behaving. Just isn't right. The analogy doesn't fit this, but actually all directions away from God, regardless of choice, is hell. It's compared to a lake of fire because it sucks without God, not because God is actively creating the punishment. It is just for God to allow their pain eternally because they refuse to accept God eternally. If they were to hypothetically change their minds, they could. However, they won't. They think their way is better.

And for the record, I do not adhere to any divine command theory. The good is not simply good because God says so. The good is also not greater than God. The good is God. To have moral qualities is to resemble God.

[Darkstar]

---

Are they masochistic? Kinda... I gave an analogy earlier when Rhythm wasn't on the ignore list (and pardon the language): Lets say I own a farm and you're a hired hand. You're also a douche. You continue being a douche for a long time, both to me and the other hired hands. Finally, I kick you off the property. I say you're allowed to come back when you quit being a douche for good. You never do. Am I unjust for not allowing you onto the property? You never met the menial goal of "stop being a douche". However, I'm not the only farm owner, and all the other farm owners kicked off their douches too. Now there's only one place you can go, and its called "Mt. FuckItSucks", and on Mt. FuckItSucks you have to live with a whole bunch of other douchers just like you. Now we have to rename the place "Mt. FuckItReallySucks". Has there been any crime of any farm owner or hired hand? Nope.

It's not that God is punishing them, but its that they refuse God as "God". God allows this. However, he does not allow those same people to reap all the benefits as the ones who are behaving. Just isn't right. The analogy doesn't fit this, but actually all directions away from God, regardless of choice, is hell. It's compared to a lake of fire because it sucks without God, not because God is actively creating the punishment. It is just for God to allow their pain eternally because they refuse to accept God eternally. If they were to hypothetically change their minds, they could. However, they won't. They think their way is better.

And for the record, I do not adhere to any divine command theory. The good is not simply good because God says so. The good is also not greater than God. The good is God. To have moral qualities is to resemble God.

---

Does this mean that if you are a morally upright atheist you will not go to hell, or is accepting god still the main thing? (or is accepting god synonymous with being morally upright, from your interpretation)

Also, I am curious as to the scriptural validity of purgatory. When I was a theist, I was told that it was a kind of in-between pace where the people who didn't have totally pure souls (or something like that) were cleansed of their sins and eventually sent to heaven. Some failed and went to hell, but only the worst went straight there. Is any such place mentioned in the bible?

[Tex]

I'm using a lot of philosophy here, so there probably isn't a scripture verse for some of my conclusions.

Does this mean that if you are a morally upright atheist you will not go to hell, or is accepting god still the main thing? (or is accepting god synonymous with being morally upright, from your interpretation).

Assuming Christian morality, if one does "the Good", they actually are building a relationship with God. In Psalm 136, David assures us that "...he is good...", so by being moral/good, there is a very real bond that forms between that person and God. This bond I call "faith", and is the agent of salvation (even though most people use faith to mean "knowledge of the existence of God"). The more the giving of one's self to the Good, the stronger the bond. Here, we have imperfect faith. My bond to God can always be strengthened, as can anyone else's. This imperfect faith is because we're not giving our whole selves to God; We only give part. Everyone only gives part. But part is all that is necessary for salvation.

Agnostic has a possibility (knowledge does not grant salvation), but if one firmly believes that there is no sort of god, the entire demeanor of the person is different. Really, this is a case of how much pride is there. I don't see it being possible with how that knowledge would then affect how one acts (we're not to love "mankind", but individuals). If "atheist" defines their person, I strongly doubt it. If they simply do not see the need for any god yet, if the proof was there and they simply did not notice it, they might be able to be lumped in the same category as the agnostics. Really, this totally varies. There are plenty of Christians who had all the right knowledge and all the right actions, but they do it for recognition or money, or they think they earned their way into heaven, or something, and these people are far worse than any atheist in my eyes. They don't deny his existence out loud, they exploit the trust of the faithful. The same pride problem applies for other religions as well. If their religion defines them and they will not separate from it, what can we do? If it does not, then that bond to God is completely possible.

After resurrection, the faith of those believers will instantly be perfected because they will be in the presence of God. The issue here is that I don't think many have the ability to let go of pride, and pride refuses the giving of one's whole self. This causes big problems with one's salvation. Including Christians and non-Christians, the "better-than-thou" syndrome could thwart any sort of measurement. This, I think, is our greatest sin. Christians will go to hell because they have pride that "they were right" that they won't let go. Atheists will have pride in saying that God was unjust. Other religions will attach themselves to their own gods. Selfishness will be the fall of many. We all have selfishness and pride now in some way or another, but as long as it can be shed, there is hope.

So, in short, doing the Good is accepting God with action, even if the concept of "God" is foreign. However, many actions can resemble the Good, and are not, and those don't count. Also, pride can and will destroy the bond, effectively having the person damn themselves.

Also, I am curious as to the scriptural validity of purgatory. When I was a theist, I was told that it was a kind of in-between pace where the people who didn't have totally pure souls (or something like that) were cleansed of their sins and eventually sent to heaven. Some failed and went to hell, but only the worst went straight there. Is any such place mentioned in the bible?

Purgatory is with the Catholics and Greek Orthodox. They both have 2 Maccabees (along with 1 Maccabees, of course), a book not included in Protestant bibles. This is the only real passage they get it from that is clearly speaking of a purgatorial realm. I go to a private catholic college, and they gave me some other bible passages, but I think they're reading into the text like a rorschach test. Anyway, although I don't think the place exists personally, I'll assume it exists for the time being.

Purgatory is basically hell, but the main difference being that in Purgatory there is hope to get out. Purgatory is temporary, while hell is eternal. There is a difference in how the suffering works too: in hell, the suffering is caused by the individual. In purgatory, the reason for suffering is the individual, but it's actually the presence of God burning the impurity out. Apparently, after a while, it works, and perfect virtue will soon be had. Once it does, the suffering ceases and the person now is numbered among the saints in heaven. The reason for Purgatory in the first place is to cause just suffering for the evils done during life that were not experienced. So, to a Catholic, if Hitler magically made the cut and didn't immediately plunge into hell, Hitler would spend a really, really, really long time in purgatory. The nun who feeds the poor and raises orphans, however, may not even go.

/Catholic Tex

I believe a crazy thing called soul sleep. Basically, the soul needs the body for all perceptions, including the perception of time. Death is most similar to anesthesia and you wake up at Resurrection when given a new body. You never stop existing, you just don't do... anything. I get bible verses from Ecclesiastes 9, but there's not enough to make it sound. I have a lot of philosophy to surround it.

[The Grand Nudger]

Assuming Christian morality, if one does "the Good", they actually are building a relationship with God. In Psalm 136, David assures us that "...he is good...", so by being moral/good, there is a very real bond that forms between that person and God. This bond I call "faith", and is the agent of salvation (even though most people use faith to mean "knowledge of the existence of God"). The more the giving of one's self to the Good, the stronger the bond. Here, we have imperfect faith. My bond to God can always be strengthened, as can anyone else's. This imperfect faith is because we're not giving our whole selves to God; We only give part. Everyone only gives part. But part is all that is necessary for salvation.

Agnostic has a possibility (knowledge does not grant salvation), but if one firmly believes that there is no sort of god, the entire demeanor of the person is different. Really, this is a case of how much pride is there. I don't see it being possible with how that knowledge would then affect how one acts (we're not to love "mankind", but individuals). If "atheist" defines their person, I strongly doubt it. If they simply do not see the need for any god yet, if the proof was there and they simply did not notice it, they might be able to be lumped in the same category as the agnostics. Really, this totally varies. There are plenty of Christians who had all the right knowledge and all the right actions, but they do it for recognition or money, or they think they earned their way into heaven, or something, and these people are far worse than any atheist in my eyes. They don't deny his existence out loud, they exploit the trust of the faithful. The same pride problem applies for other religions as well. If their religion defines them and they will not separate from it, what can we do? If it does not, then that bond to God is completely possible.

I think you'll find a great many christians who disagree with you on this count. In what way do you imagine that the entire demeanor of a person who firmly believes here is no sort of god would be different from anyone else - or that this difference would be due to their firm belief that no sort of god existed?

After resurrection, the faith of those believers will instantly be perfected because they will be in the presence of God. The issue here is that I don't think many have the ability to let go of pride, and pride refuses the giving of one's whole self. This causes big problems with one's salvation. Including Christians and non-Christians, the "better-than-thou" syndrome could thwart any sort of measurement. This, I think, is our greatest sin. Christians will go to hell because they have pride that "they were right" that they won't let go. Atheists will have pride in saying that God was unjust. Other religions will attach themselves to their own gods. Selfishness will be the fall of many. We all have selfishness and pride now in some way or another, but as long as it can be shed, there is hope.

This is starting to sound less like an exploration on who might find themselves in heaven or hell...and more like an attempt to create novel definitions for things like faith in order to launch a polemic against pride (wondering why you perceive pride as such a dirty thing anyway).

So, in short, doing the Good is accepting God with action, even if the concept of "God" is foreign. However, many actions can resemble the Good, and are not, and those don't count. Also, pride can and will destroy the bond, effectively having the person damn themselves.

If doing "the good" means accepting god, I'm going to have to start seriously considering doing "the bad" - aren't I? Nevertheless, what I see here is a situation in which a belief in god, the "revealed words of god" or even any concept of god is far less than necessary to achieve the cosmic carrot. Seeing as how doing "the good" is entirely more beneficial to both myself and my fellow man than any belief personally held would ever be (consider, you've set up a situation in which doing the good might grant entry in and of itself - but belief is no such key) - I see no reason to waste any time I could spend doing "the good" expressing or contemplating any belief. Seems to me that my time would be better spent enhancing the lives of the poor fuckers down here on the prison planet that you're so keen to escape. On the other hand - if your assessment were true, I don't know that I'd want to continue doing "the good" because I don't want to spend eternity (or even a moment) with your god. Tough position to be in, I'm sure you'll appreciate that?

[Neo-Scholastic]

The people in hell aren't being tortured by God, they're torturing themselves and refuse to stop.

Actually, this idea is less absurd than you believe. The people who deny God and love only the things of this world close themselves off to spiritual light. While on earth, we still have the ability to choose between good and evil because our existence is between these two. Following death, our choices have been confirmed. We continue in the direction we have chosen. Because they refuse to see spiritual light, the wicked live in darkness. Since they reject the warmth of God's love, they 'burn' in their own selfish desires. Even still all spirits in the afterlife retain free-will, the difference is that the wicked chose between varieties of evil that follow from the lies they tell themselves. Meanwhile, the righteous allow themselves to be guided by God's love and truth in their pursuit of useful activities of mutual love in heaven.

I believe a crazy thing called soul sleep.

Almost as crazy as my property dualism.

[The Grand Nudger]

That idea is exactly as absurd as I think it is...lol, in my case anyway. I'm not a masochist. If yall's hell require that I torture myself, or lock myself in - it's not someplace I'm going to be. Here's the kicker, when I stroll out of your hell, that apparently can't contain me - where am I going to go? I've already mentioned that I don't feel like spending any time in heaven.