I saw somebody say this on a thread a while back, and just remembered it, "It would be better to reign in hell that serve in heaven."
That's not word for word, and I don't remember who said it, but that is the just of it.
This seems ridiculous to me for several reasons. First, no one will reign in hell, not even Satan himself after God casts him back to hell permanently in the second coming. In hell, you will not have any other human contact, and be forever tortured with the worst pain imaginable, and every second will feel like an hour, and every day like a year. In heaven, you will be a servant of God, but you will want to serve Him. It will not be like being a slave, heaven will be perfect, everything you've ever wanted times ten, with no pain, sadness, or boredom.
In my opinion, that statement is horribly false, but what do you guys think?
But anyone, homosexual, murderer, or rapist can go to heaven as long as they confess that they have sinned and accept Jesus.
It sure doesn't group well with the rest of your examples of sin since they involve the unwilling harm of another individual while homosexuality does not.
He is against homosexuality because he created man and women to go together. He says very clearly multiple times in scripture that it is a sin.
God said so? Pretty week reason to regard it as bad. I wonder if we can call this a divine argument from authority fallacy?
Personally Kasic, I strongly detest such self-righteous people who think that their life goal is to ''save'' your soul from the flames. It's such a poor trick to play on a waiter who has to run around the whole day serving your fat a** with hundred dollar lobsters.
If Heaven is filled with such Holier Than Thou people, I'd rather stew in a magma-Jacuzzi next to Satan.
Personally Kasic, I strongly detest such self-righteous people who think that their life goal is to ''save'' your soul from the flames.
I do as well. I understand why they do it, but there's no way they have not been told by just about everyone they've preached to to just bug off. You have to be pretty thick to not get the idea after a few times...
If Heaven is filled with such Holier Than Thou people, I'd rather stew in a magma-Jacuzzi next to Satan.
Yeah, you have to think of all the types of people that will be there. Also, I don't even want to imagine how inflated it would be since they supposedly earned eternal happiness by doing that sort of crap.
You have to be pretty thick to not get the idea after a few times...
Or possessing the thick hide of a concrete elephant.
Yeah, you have to think of all the types of people that will be there. Also, I don't even want to imagine how inflated it would be since they supposedly earned eternal happiness by doing that sort of crap.
Which again brings up the question that the people in Heaven or Hell are equally important in this discussion, not just the Angels or Devils.
That is not what I said. I believe that you have to believe in Jesus Christ, and accept his forgiveness of your sins to go to Heaven. But anyone, homosexual, murderer, or rapist can go to heaven as long as they confess that they have sinned and accept Jesus.
again, so being born is a sin altogether. and god expects us to feel horibble for being born. not only, that since some are born this way and some are born that way we all start from "different levels of sin". anyway, this makes people feel horibble about themselves.
in my opinion troubles started when he created eve. "hello im eve, ohhh forbiden apple :3" lol. i could say that eve is a mistake of god and be extremely sexist. saying that being homosexual is better because we dont want anything to do with the ignorance of women. anyone can see it in whatever way they want to. god felt sorry for us for not seeing this and that is why we only reproduce with different genders. :P
anyway god did some mistake, since creating homosexuals and whatever is creating sinners without giving them the chance to be "good". or maybe he is doing it on purpose? being all good is kind of subjective. this is the only way i can see this UNLESS being non-christian/homosexual/whatever isnt a sin.
If Heaven is filled with such Holier Than Thou people, I'd rather stew in a magma-Jacuzzi next to Satan.
"Holier Than Thou people"... The whole point of Jesus coming to Earth in the Christian faith was to make it so that those who were not "Holier Than Thou" people could have eternal life, their sins forgiven. In the Christian faith, the reason a person goes to hell is because they have not been made pure through a replacement of their sin (old testament was the killing of a perfect lamb, new testament was the death of Jesus) by a perfect sacrifice. The moral reasoning that God (in the Christian faith) holds is that a perfect sacrifice can take the place for a sin. An eye for an eye. That's why Christians have a connection to the Holy Spirit. They have been made pure inside and thus are able to be host to the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit can not be amongst sin therefore a Christian needs the holiness that Jesus blood brings to receive it. That's what I believe.
The whole point of Jesus coming to Earth in the Christian faith was to make it so that those who were not "Holier Than Thou" people could have eternal life, their sins forgiven.
Which would be a totally pointless gesture for an all powerful being. Not to mention a very barbaric one.
In the Christian faith, the reason a person goes to hell is because they have not been made pure through a replacement of their sin (old testament was the killing of a perfect lamb, new testament was the death of Jesus) by a perfect sacrifice.
Basically we stop being us by being fundamentally altered if we are fundamentally sinners. Though not clear how accepting a brutal murder is needed since for an all powerful, all knowing being could preform any of the things that are claimed to be necessary without the death involved. For that matter what is up with this obsession with death?
The moral reasoning that God (in the Christian faith) holds is that a perfect sacrifice can take the place for a sin. An eye for an eye.
I prefer Gandhi's take on that concept. It seems more moral than God's.
"An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind." -Mohandas Gandhi
That's why Christians have a connection to the Holy Spirit. They have been made pure inside and thus are able to be host to the Holy Spirit.
So if I point out all the wrong doing by Christians past and present I guess I will just get a "no true Scotsman" argument?
The Holy Spirit can not be amongst sin therefore a Christian needs the holiness that Jesus blood brings to receive it.
And there goes God's omnipresence. There are points in the Bible where he hangs out with the Devil This would seem to be in direction contradiction to this concept.
Basically we stop being us by being fundamentally altered if we are fundamentally sinners.
we have free will. we can choose to burn or to be brainwashed :3
That's why Christians have a connection to the Holy Spirit. They have been made pure inside and thus are able to be host to the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit can not be amongst sin therefore a Christian needs the holiness that Jesus blood brings to receive it.
thats weird, because according to chrsitianity everyone are sinners. lol pure christians? since when?
in the christian belief there is no way you can exist and not be a sinner. you dont even get an explanation to why you are a sinner. all you do is to regret the fact that you are a sinner. but since we are all sinners because we exist you pretty much have to regret the fact that you exist...:/
in the christian belief there is no way you can exist and not be a sinner. you dont even get an explanation to why you are a sinner. all you do is to regret the fact that you are a sinner. but since we are all sinners because we exist you pretty much have to regret the fact that you exist...:/
its a really sad belief i think
Aside from the fact that if you're a good boy/girl, your retirement plan will be awesome. Aside from phony tippers.
That said, there are Christians who put aside such thoughts and just trod on with their lives.
Aside from that, I used the word aside four times. Lulz.
Which would be a totally pointless gesture for an all powerful being.
It seems to me to be a completely reasonable and powerful gesture to me.
Though not clear how accepting a brutal murder is needed since for an all powerful, all knowing being could preform any of the things that are claimed to be necessary without the death involved. For that matter what is up with this obsession with death?
Because of sin, things will always die. Ever met someone who hasn't died? Didn't think so. If you are not to die, then who or what will die? Something has to take the place for what you have done.
I prefer Gandhi's take on that concept. It seems more moral than God's.
And it is that way now that Jesus has died and risen from the grave. One no longer must die for the sins they have committed, but may live forever. Also, almost all governments see this form of punishment for sin as a proper judicial basis. You kill someone; you get a life sentence in prison or are executed. I don't know why you're attacking God's moral standards; they're highly reasonable.
So if I point out all the wrong doing by Christians past and present I guess I will just get a "no true Scotsman" argument?
Yup. Religion is often used as a means to gain power, blah... blah... blah...
And there goes God's omnipresence. There are points in the Bible where he hangs out with the Devil This would seem to be in direction contradiction to this concept.
I don't ever remember God attempting to enter into the Devil. I was saying he can't be directly in the presence of impurity... such as a bird enters a room. God exists everywhere but can only focus his presence and show it to people who are completely pure. That's why only the high priest could enter into the Holy of holies in the Tabernacle and Christians feel the direct presence of the Holy Spirit during worship. That's my explanation, if it makes sense.
Aside from the fact that if you're a good boy/girl, your retirement plan will be awesome. Aside from phony tippers.
Yes, I agree. A life lived by high moral standards will generally reap a better outcome than one who has low ones.
It seems to me to be a completely reasonable and powerful gesture to me.
What he means is that God, as an all powerful being, could just declare that all sin is taken upon himself and accomplish the exact same thing without the bloodshed and torturous death of his own son who is himself.
Something has to take the place for what you have done.
No it doesn't.
I don't know why you're attacking God's moral standards; they're highly reasonable.
The difference is God's equivilant of the death sentence is eternal torture. That and God's numerous hypocritical actions.
That's my explanation, if it makes sense.
As much sense as every other explanation ever on the subject as it is just as unfounded and impossible to prove as all of those previous.
Because of sin, things will always die. Ever met someone who hasn't died? Didn't think so. If you are not to die, then who or what will die? Something has to take the place for what you have done.
So, in a way, you're saying that death is god's best idea to handle sins and their consequences. Right?
Yup. Religion is often used as a means to gain power, blah... blah... blah...
Mh, sure. But did the fact that religion can be misused so easily, never make you think about the rightfulness of the institution?
Since Jesus? O.o
Exactly. And not before. Because the all-powerful godly god needed all that time to realize his miscalculation.
