On Non-belief

[fr0d0]

But you do know and you do avoid it FTR. Forget the dogma... if you do bad stuff do you expect justice not to apply to you?

[FallentoReason]

But you do know

I'd be the most famous person on the surface of this earth and the history of man if I had the knowledge that Christianity was true and I could prove that I did.

and you do avoid it FTR.

You're using the word "avoid" in a context that I did not use. I said people can't avoid going to hell if they are unaware that apparently Christianity is true.

Forget the dogma... if you do bad stuff do you expect justice not to apply to you?

The only kingdom I'll be seeing is two feet wide and six feet deep. Oh wait, you mean there's a judgement after this? Well, that's the problem isn't it? This fact about the cosmos is not obvious. I'd rather to go hell than sit for all eternity in awe of God's epic fail of a divine plan.

[Godscreated]

What exactly did you not do and what exactly could you not avoid and why?

Someone unaware that Christianity's claims are true are unable to put trust in these claims. Consequently, they can't avoid hellfire since nothing in their environment lead them to the knowledge that the claims of Christianity are true.

The problem of non-belief.

It's your responsibility to search once you have been made aware of Christianities claims, God will give you that chance, I believe I referred you to Matthew 13:1-23. You should have read it days ago and maybe you would not be so confused about the matter. Faith is the seed, you recognize that and you're on your way, now I'm not trying to push this on you, was just asking you to read and see what I was saying is from scripture, since you think I make stuff up.

The consequences of rejection.

[fr0d0]

I see you avoided the question FTR.

[Neo-Scholastic]

The Tibetan monk won't ever come across Delusion 11, nor will an Eskimo, or exotic tribes hidden in rain forests. All these will burn to a crisp for something they were completely unaware of.

FtR, I really do believe you are objecting to something very very few people actually believe, i.e. that people are condemned because they do not intellectually know Jesus Christ by name. It is well understood that OT people had saving faith (goodwill from a belief in God) long before the first advent. People unaware of the gospel because of their remoteness in space will be treated no differently than those who were remote in time.

"By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended as a righteous man, when God spoke well of his offerings. ...By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death...before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God...without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him...By faith Noah, ...in holy fear built an ark to save his family...and became heir of the righteousness that comes by faith...by faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going...All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance." Hebrews 11:4-19

[FallentoReason]

I see you avoided the question FTR.

I presume you were talking about your god's justice. If so, then no, I didn't avoid the question.

---

The Tibetan monk won't ever come across Delusion 11, nor will an Eskimo, or exotic tribes hidden in rain forests. All these will burn to a crisp for something they were completely unaware of.

FtR, I really do believe you are objecting to something very very few people actually believe, i.e. that people are condemned because they do not intellectually know Jesus Christ by name. It is well understood that OT people had saving faith (goodwill from a belief in God) long before the first advent. People unaware of the gospel because of their remoteness in space will be treated no differently than those who were remote in time.

"By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended as a righteous man, when God spoke well of his offerings. ...By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death...before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God...without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him...By faith Noah, ...in holy fear built an ark to save his family...and became heir of the righteousness that comes by faith...by faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going...All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance." Hebrews 11:4-19

Firstly, I don't see how these verses say anything other than "these people knew of God. They had faith in God. They were saved"... the problem hasn't been solved here. Monks -> hell. Eskimos -> hell. Australian Aboriginals -> hell. None of them are aware of your god's existence, and if they are, then it isn't clear to them like it isn't clear to me that the claims of the Bible are true.

Secondly, while it might be true that Christians disagree on the nature of salvation (surprise surprise...) I guess I'm approaching it from what I know, and what I know is that in my every day life, the Christians I know act and talk like it's about knowing and believing in Jesus. I unfortunately had to live through the hardship of losing a friend to suicide, and when I told a leader at youth group that he was a Buddhist, he started sobbing. Pretty evident that even my entire church believes that there's a bunch of propositions that need to be confessed with one's mouth in order to get to the pearly gates.

[Drich]

So we have our first candidate for the set x; we need to believe that Jesus was the Son of God. See, this isn't too hard Drich!

Ah, no. We are told in the bible that no one can believe unless God open their mind heart and eyes. Christ said all that is needed for God to do this is for one to have a mustard seeds worth of faith.

Which is where A/S/K comes in. it is the pratical application of that faith.

Belief can not happen unless God opens you to it. God has stated that He has closed your heart and mind to Him unless your first humble yourself before Him.

Which he hasn't. A Tibetan monk raised that way as a kid will be engulfed in flames for all eternity for something he didn't do nor something he could have avoided thanks to your god's faulty divine plan.

How do you know this? No one can know who enters Heaven and who does not. Christ said, "No man comes to the Father but by Him." Meaning only Christ is suitable to judge. Not 'No man come to the Father but through christianity.' (In fact many who claim Christianity will not enter Heaven according to Christ per mat 7)

We've had this discussion before. Christianity is not the only way to Christ. it is the easiest, but not the only one. Lest you think there are only Christians in Heaven.. Which would mean everyone before Christ (David Abraham, solomon, Isaac, etc... are all in Hell because they were born at the wrong time. Christ is the ultimate judge not christianity.

Delusion 11 is the last thing you should be bringing up. Clearly you haven't understood the problem of non-belief. The Tibetan monk won't ever come across Delusion 11, nor will an Eskimo, or exotic tribes hidden in rain forests. All these will burn to a crisp for something they were completely unaware of.

Misconception 1: You believe that only formula/"x" will be found suitable before Christ. Again only Christ is suitiable to judge, but I believe there are many tibetian monks who know Christ better than some of our 'christian' TV ministers.

Your 'visit' to hell should be able to answer this about if x is known.

It does for me completely. and I am sure your visit (Or whatever God has in store for you) would do for you, if you only sought it out earnestly.

Luke warm believers are on the fence for a reason;

Not fence sitters. Look at the list Christ compiled. These men did/will do a great number of things in his name. They will do so because they know who and what Christ is otherwise they would not have access to the gifts of the Spirit needed to accomplish these feats. Luke warm believers are those who simple go through the motions. I've called them Check list Christians. They see worship as a check list and strive to check as many things off of that list as possiable, all the while ignoring the primary reason for worship, thereby ignoring our greatest command.

the evidence/reasoning for the Bible to be true is inconclusive. Divine Plan Epic Fail.

Misconception 2. That all people have the same limited exposure to God that you and your peers have elected to have.

Again if you do not have it is because you have not Asked, Sought, or knocked as outlined in Luke 11.

Get your head out of your butt. You point to someone who was lucky enough to bump into the "truth" of the cosmos because they were born in the Western world and then they ruined it for themselves? Umm... Tibetan monk? Eskimos? Exotic tribes unexposed to the outside world? Australian Aboriginals isolated from us for around 40 000 years?

I refer back to misconception number 1. (That people need a specific exposure to Christ.) When in fact God only holds us accountable to what we have been given. To the one who does not know of Christianity then God does not expect them to be Christian (The whole of the OT interactions with God and His prophets are a very good biblical examples of this.)

Seriously, get your head out of your butt. You never seize to sicken me in one way or another..

Do you not understand what that passage means or who it refers to?
Jesus is speaking to 'Christians' Or rather those who call themselves Christians, not to those who know nothing of Christ.

[Tex]

The greater the doubt, the more souls that roast in hell not by their own doing, but by God's shyness to reveal himself.

Nah, the doubt would be due to ourselves. It's not that there isn't proof out there, but we have to work for it.

Finally, I don't even know if the knowledge beyond a doubt would help so many people. I can't reasonably say all, but most people would still want to do what they want, make their own way, and basically dismiss the knowledge they have as unimportant.

Then so be it. At least everyone had an equal chance at eternity.

Everyone does have an equal chance at eternity. Not every has the same chance to know intricate details. Not everyone gets every opportunity ever, and to have the opportunity is completely unnecessary.

To note again, to for you but mainly to other readers, no knowledge saves. Even Native Americans have a chance for salvation.

You keep bringing up this strawman. I've never said that the knowledge itself saves. It simply gives everyone an equal chance at eternity.

The equal knowledge doesn't mean equal chance at eternity. Some people could (hypothetically) turn away if they knew more. Some could (hypothetically) turn toward if they knew more. Some people still wouldn't care. Equal disposition would make equal chance at eternity, and in fact, the large majority of Christians teach this. Original Sin means we were all born with an innate disposition against God. We can never fully undo this ourselves, but we can, with faith, "turn" (more commonly, "repent") during our life, and this is all that is needed.

---

The Mormons will tell you that Jesus flew over here after he rose and died, but that is not my reasoning (nor any sane person). I believe God is partially known in an indirect manner naturally. The "transcendentals" are Good, True, Beauty, Order, and Being. These are metaphysically complex, but a person, without even having the concept of "god" might not be able to develop a complex metaphysics from these transcendentals but use them all the same.

Little At'eed and Ashkii were running around one day and come across a wounded man from another tribe, barely conscious. Both of them hide bushes as not to be seen. A few minutes pass and Ethete, a girl from a third other tribe which both At'eed and Ashkii hate, comes along the same path. Ethete doesn't run at the sight of the unknown wounded man, but instead she runs over and begins tending to his needs. The injuries are doctored and the woman helps the man back to the nearest village. Ashkii thinks that Ethete was stupid in helping. She has wasted time and energy on someone she doesn't even know, not to mention the potential danger she put herself in. At'eed thinks the opposite; Ethete was right to help and her actions may have saved a man's life.

Ethete helping the man is part of the Good. She is participating in something Godly, even though she does not know it. Indirectly, she is worshiping God. Ashkii doesn't think that what she was doing is smart, and although he saw the scenario, he puts himself in front of the needs of other. He has witness Good and finds it repulsive. At'eed has witnessed the good and, although she did not participate, she agrees with it. This is not worship, but this is a disposition toward God.

Of those that adhere to this strange metaphysics, there are 2 opinions. The first is that only Ethete can be saved since she is the only one who acts upon her dispositions. This is not my opinion. My opinion is that Both Ethete and At'eed can be saved because both have the inward disposition toward God. However, I will say that At'eed needs to begin acting on this disposition and not quell it, because quelling it may lead her away from her current path.

You can actually use that same scenario I gave for all 5 of those transcendentals: Truth is that the person had dire needs met. Beauty is the act of helping someone who has done nothing to deserve it and most likely will not get anything for it. Order is the happenstance that this girl ran along when the guy needed her. Being is simply that things "are".

---

No idea where you're getting this pseudo-theology or why it should even be considered. For all you know, these people were doing these deeds for Mountain God or whatever they might believe.

If the only reason they do them is because they have been told to, they aren't exercising their will and aren't participating in the Good (my little phrase). If they're doing the Good because it will bring them praise, they also get no credit. The only way to actually participate in the Good properly is to do it simply because it is Good. It's the same reason why you save a stranger drowning over saving a dog drowning. Both are terrible, but the reason you save the person isn't because they can give you stuff for saving them or they are pretty or something like that, but you save them because they are a person.

And this should be considered because I place it within the salvation theory, the subject of our conversation.

[Ryantology]

It's not that there isn't proof out there, but we have to work for it.

If there was proof of the specific Christian creator of the universe, faith in that creator should not be necessary to find it (where is it said that God would completely conceal himself from every possible method of observation in order to test everyone's faith, I must have completely missed that part of the Bible). The only reason Christians assert that faith is necessary for proof is because there is no proof to be found, other than the worthless variety which results from confirmation bias.

The 'faith is necessary' idea was invented because it is the only way to possibly justify believing in a being which is in every way indistinguishable from any other character in fiction.

[Tex]

It's not that there isn't proof out there, but we have to work for it.

If there was proof of the specific Christian creator of the universe, faith in that creator should not be necessary to find it (where is it said that God would completely conceal himself from every possible method of observation in order to test everyone's faith, I must have completely missed that part of the Bible). The only reason Christians assert that faith is necessary for proof is because there is no proof to be found, other than the worthless variety which results from confirmation bias.

The 'faith is necessary' idea was invented because it is the only way to possibly justify believing in a being which is in every way indistinguishable from any other character in fiction.

Strawman. You don't know Christianity. You're attacking an imaginary other-thing and calling it by the same name. If Christianity was a person, you'd be sued for slander.

"Faith" is a relationship, the main component being trust. When a child chooses not to touch the stove, the kid has demonstrated faith in his parents. When I am handed an English translation of Aristotle, I can have faith it is a good translation or not. Usually, I begin with trust. If the book seems iffy, then I'll go check the Greek and see if I am wrong or the translator is wrong.

Again, faith does not mean "I trust completely with no backing". We are not called to blind faith, but informed faith is encouraged because it strengthens.