"no, I'm actually an athiest"

prinz

Sam Vimes wrote: »

So it's ok to tell your child that they're going to be tortured after death if they don't believe in christianity....because it won't happen until they die

I have never, ever, ever heard anyone telling a child they are going to be tortured... so perhaps we could drop the hysterics?

Sam Vimes wrote: »

What exactly do they base this on? As far as I can see the bible is absolutely unequivocal on this matter. I have never seen anything in it to suggest that non-christians will gain salvation and an awful lot to suggest the contrary. The first commandment is "I am the lord your god. You will have to other gods before me". In fact a non-christian cannot keep the first four commandments or at least has no reason to

You'd have to understand the origins of the Ten Commandments. it's quite clear you don't, so going on is rather pointless until you do get a grasp of Biblical history.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

That is unless you can show me the part of the bible that suggests that non-christians will be saved?

Would it do any good? Where do you think in the Bible people went when they died prior to Jesus, i.e. non-Christians? When Jesus died did He immediately go to heaven or are we told He went somewhere else? Are we told what He did there? Are we told that when we die we immediately go to heaven or hell? See.... no distinction made between Jew and non-Jew..

There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism. 12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares

prinz

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

I asked you an honest question. How the **** do you know what you're
talking about prinz? In case you hadn't realized nobody in the history of
humanity has offered proof for what you've written so if me pointing out
the logical fallacy in your ridiculous statement....

You see, when you ignore one 'ridiculous statement' with an equal supposed logical fallacy.. then yes I can assume you were interested in nothing but a crude attempt at humour. Otherwise treat both positions as equally ridiculous, which would be the logical thing to do.

Edit: and as I said, history would support the conclusion.

goingpostal

If I were to use my political beliefs to justify homophobia, misogyny, and a hatred of fig trees, I would be rightly castigated. But if I was to don the protective cloak of religious belief and expound these views, people would be frightened to challenge me, in case they "offended" me, "oh he's allowed to say that, its his sacred religious beliefs".

zuroph

so it doesnt matter if you have the wrong religion, you're still going to heaven?

MingulayJohnny

What I mean is if you started to have psychic premonitions and communicate with deceased relatives and you suspected you had a brain tumor ( god forbid ) but were found to be completely physically well. Would you continue to deny your own subjective experience?. None of us can fully verify life after death , it's something that every individual has to experience themselves imo. The traditional role of the mystic or the shaman was to explore non ordinary realities and gain insight for the tribe and heal sickness. In my opinion and my own experience they were explorers and pioneers as oppossed to religious people who just blindly believe. I don't want to argue about the validity of my own experiences btw , I can't prove them to anybody here so it's pointless.

Ush1

So....can someone please direct me on how to get to Hell please?

Sam Vimes

prinz wrote: »

I have never, ever, ever heard anyone telling a child they are going to be tortured... so perhaps we could drop the hysterics?

Well then they're teaching their children a-la-carte christianity. And you obviously weren't around when the church had a strangle hold on this country. If you read the Ryan report you'll see many example of children who were told they would go to hell if they told anyone. you might even remember the people who were forced to sign oaths of secrecy under such threats.

prinz wrote: »

You'd have to understand the origins of the Ten Commandments. it's quite clear you don't, so going on is rather pointless until you do get a grasp of Biblical history.

you just lost the right to call atheists condescending.

prinz wrote: »

Would it do any good? Where do you think in the Bible people went when they died prior to Jesus, i.e. non-Christians? When Jesus died did He immediately go to heaven or are we told He went somewhere else? Are we told what He did there? Are we told that when we die we immediately go to heaven or hell? See.... no distinction made between Jew and non-Jew..

There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism. 12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares

That passage refers to those who have not heard the law and yet obey it. I have heard the law and I obey almost part of it except the parts about believing in god. It appears that god makes allowances for those who have never heard the law but not for those who have heard it but do not believe it. Two of the parts of the law that I don't obey are the rules about sexual "morality" and, although I'm not gay myself, I see nothing wrong with gayness. Looks like I'm gonna burn I'm afraid


Also, even if that passage did mean what you claim it means, it wouldn't erase all the other passages that state unequivocally that believing in Jesus (as long as you have heard of him) is a requirement for salvation. It would simply mean that the bible is contradicting itself.

prinz

Ush1 wrote: »

So....can someone please direct me on how to get to Hell please?

Number 4 bus towards Harristown will get you close enough.:D



I kid, I live out there

sponsoredwalk

Sam Vimes wrote: »

What? How? Why?

How the fook does "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son" not mean that non-christians are excluded from heaven?

I'm glad you've seen this take place. What you've witnessed is his standard
debating technique - to refute the obvious evidence right in his face.

Since he's fond of the 10 commandments, lets find out how many
non-christians break.

3 Do not have any other gods before me.


4 You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.


5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me,


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments

So, even at the fundamental level we're hitting the wall,

John 3:4 (King James Version)
4Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

I bet we'll hear this actually isn't meant to mean the 10 commandments
yada yada...

Basically he's arguing, against all doctrinal teachings, that in fact
non-believers do go to heaven and he has absolutely no evidence to
support this and is resorting to telling me I'm being snide as opposed to
questioning him.

games...

Shenshen

MingulayJohnny wrote: »

What I mean is if you started to have psychic premonitions and communicate with deceased relatives and you suspected you had a brain tumor ( god forbid ) but were found to be completely physically well. Would you continue to deny your own subjective experience?. None of us can fully verify life after death , it's something that every individual has to experience themselves imo. The traditional role of the mystic or the shaman was to explore non ordinary realities and gain insight for the tribe and heal sickness. In my opinion and my own experience they were explorers and pioneers as oppossed to religious people who just blindly believe. I don't want to argue about the validity of my own experiences btw , I can't prove them to anybody here so it's pointless.

I would offer myself for any and all kinds of scientific tests, as I would be curious how this works, especially if it turned out to be the real thing and not an illusion or trick.

After all, none of those shamans and spiritual healers has ever done as much, so I'm sure I would be welcome as a subject.

Pookah

Galvasean wrote: »

Personally, I believe my side is winning

sacramento wrote: »

I didn't read the entire thing, nor am I informed about what has been said for both sides.

But I have a belief that my side is winning, because basing beliefs on absolutely nothing except for a "feeling" makes perfect sense.

Agreed.

Reminds me of the Law of Fives.

Naikon

I am an atheist. I don't give a toss what people think. Everyone has the right to their own beliefs imo. It's not like I bring the issue up intentionally to start a fight:pac: WHO CARES!

MingulayJohnny

Shenshen - "If I was able to experience something supernatural, it couldn't be supernatural, since my natural senses did pick it up. It would have to be natural."

If you had a psychic premonition that came true what natural sense would this have utilised?.

optogirl

Ush1 wrote: »

So....can someone please direct me on how to get to Hell please?

I've bought my ticket. www.countmeout.ie

Shenshen

MingulayJohnny wrote: »

Shenshen - "If I was able to experience something supernatural, it couldn't be supernatural, since my natural senses did pick it up. It would have to be natural."

If you had a psychic premonition that came true what natural sense would this have utilised?.

One that hasn't been discovered, named and researched yet, obviously.
That's why I said I would participate in all possible manners of experiment if I discovered such an ability, to find out what it is, where it came from, and how it worked.

MrStuffins

I know i said "I'm out", but i just wanna add something.

I love how there is so much hate for Dawkins. I love how some are saying "Oh, he tells you to do this, listen to that, don't listen to this"

And other things like:

"Oh, he wants you to buy his books" etc.

whereas, again, taking this country and the Catholic Church for example, every Sunday (and every other day actually), up and down the country, in ever town and city and everything in between, there is a building called a Church.

And inside this Church is a man who represents God. He tells you what to do, he tells you what not to do, what to think, how to act, how to treat others, how you will be punished if you don't do as he says.

Then he hands around a collection plate and charges you for the privilage!

Marvelous :pac:

(and before someone says it, i CAN differntiate between God and RCC, but you can put a lot of religions in the place of RCC in my example)

Helix

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

No, what upsets believers is the way in which some athiests like Dawkins look down their noses at us and insist on patronising and condescending towars us.

that wouldnt happen if religion didnt have such an unnecessary amount of power within politics and peoples' day to day lives


it NEEDS to be fought until it is only something that people do in private

it NEEDS to be fought until it doesnt matter what religion youn are, or if you even are one, because people realise its an entirely personal thing

it NEEDS to be fought until religion has no say in politics

it NEEDS to be fought until religious factions cop on and relise that killing each other over it is ridiculous

dawkins may be an irritating pr1ck, but he's helping with the above, like it or not

prinz

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Well then they're teaching their children a-la-carte christianity.

Could you point out the part that says non-believers are destined for torture?

Sam Vimes wrote: »

And you obviously weren't around when the church had a strangle hold on this country. If you read the Ryan report you'll see many example of children who were told they would go to hell if they told anyone. you might even remember the people who were forced to sign oaths of secrecy under such threats..

...now, now you are smarter than that.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

...you just lost the right to call atheists condescending..

I did? How'd I manage that? Btw I never called all atheists condescending. Perhaps I should have just used a wikilink......;)

Sam Vimes wrote: »

That passage refers to those who do not hear the law and yet obey it. I have heard the law and I obey almost part of it except the parts about believing in god. It appears that god makes allowances for those who have never heard the law but not for those who have heard it but do not believe it.

Personally we all die and go to the same place. I'll make sure we're not at the same table on the seating plan Then you get a choice..

Sam Vimes wrote: »

...although I'm not gay myself, I see nothing wrong with gayness. Looks like I'm gonna burn I'm afraid.

Scraping the barrel again Sam. When in doubt revert to the homophobic slant..

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Also, even if that passage did mean what you claim it means, it wouldn't erase all the other passages that state unequivocally that believing in Jesus (as long as you have heard of him) is a requirement for salvation. It would simply mean that the bible is contradicting itself.

No, it wouldn't. What it does point to is accepting Jesus after death when we are offered a choice. All of the dead go to the same place, Christian, Jew, Gentile...

marco_polo

MingulayJohnny wrote: »

What I mean is if you started to have psychic premonitions and communicate with deceased relatives and you suspected you had a brain tumor ( god forbid ) but were found to be completely physically well. Would you continue to deny your own subjective experience?. None of us can fully verify life after death , it's something that every individual has to experience themselves imo. The traditional role of the mystic or the shaman was to explore non ordinary realities and gain insight for the tribe and heal sickness. In my opinion and my own experience they were explorers and pioneers as oppossed to religious people who just blindly believe. I don't want to argue about the validity of my own experiences btw , I can't prove them to anybody here so it's pointless.

As a first test of my new powers I would do the the lotto. :cool:

prinz

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Basically he's arguing, against all doctrinal teachings, that in fact
non-believers do go to heaven and he has absolutely no evidence to
support this and is resorting to telling me I'm being snide as opposed to
questioning him....games...

Yes, I am going against "all doctrinal teachings"...... including the words of the current and previous Popes of the RCC.

optogirl

prinz wrote: »

Could you point out the part that says non-believers are destined for torture?

He already did - several times

...now, now you are smarter than that.

What exactly are you waffling about?

Scraping the barrel again Sam. When in doubt revert to the homophobic slant..

Scraping the barrel?? This is a hugely hot topic in the area of christianity and in particular catholicism - it is a doctrine of the church that homosexuality is a sin. I, and I'm guessing many, find that disgusting and offensive in the extreme.

All of the dead go to the same place, Christian, Jew, Gentile...

How the hell (boom boom) do you know that?

Sam Vimes

prinz wrote: »

I did? How'd I manage that? Btw I never called all atheists condescending. Perhaps I should have just used a wikilink......;)

You accused me of insulting your intelligence for providing a link to back up my statement. Now you say that I "clearly don't understand the ten commandments". If the former is insulting of intelligence the latter can only be moreso.

prinz wrote: »

Could you point out the part that says non-believers are destined for torture?

Personally we all die and go to the same place. I'll make sure we're not at the same table on the seating plan Then you get a choice..

Scraping the barrel again Sam. When in doubt revert to the homophobic slant..

No, it wouldn't. What it does point to is accepting Jesus after death when we are offered a choice. All of the dead go to the same place, Christian, Jew, Gentile...

You're making this up as you go along. I don't give a monkey's what you "personally believe", I care what you can back up. You have been provided with multiple examples of passages from the bible that explicitly state that people who do not believe in Jesus will be condemned and various statements around that and to counter this you have given a passage that applies to people who have never heard of Jesus. You have acknowledged that this passage does not erase the other ones that equivocally condemn non-believers so how do you counter it other by stating that it's what you "personally believe"?

edit: if we're going to get the chance to accept Jesus after we die and after he appears in front of us, ie when all reasonable doubt is removed, then what's the point of the whole rigmarole on earth? Why not just appear now? And why did Jesus say "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed"?

virmilitaris

prinz wrote: »

No, it wouldn't. What it does point to is accepting Jesus after death when we are offered a choice. All of the dead go to the same place, Christian, Jew, Gentile...

So what your saying is I can do what I like now. When I kick the bucket, if your right, I meet the big JC and then I can 'accept' him and I'm off to heaven ?

Seems like Christianity is rather pointless then doesn't it ?

Apologies if I'm misunderstanding you.

sponsoredwalk

prinz wrote: »

No, it wouldn't. What it does point to is accepting Jesus after death when we are offered a choice. All of the dead go to the same place, Christian, Jew, Gentile...

So, in other words even though the main commandments tell everyone
not to worship false idols, "for I the Lord your God am a jealous God,
punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth
generation of those who reject me" & "...shall not make wrongful use of the
name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses
his name", in fact the unaquitted will be admitted after all and in fact
everything in the bible is irrelevant, including all the explicit passages I
quoted telling us "that every soul that shall not hearken to that prophet,
shall be utterly destroyed from among the people" and that "Salvation is
found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to
men by which we must be saved".

Who knew prinz was the one that was able to decipher that in fact most
of the bible is incorrect and meaningless while the one passage he's
quoted actually explains it all.

prinz wrote: »

Picky choosy....

prinz

Sam Vimes wrote: »

You accused me of insulting your intelligence for providing a link to back up my statement. Now you say that I "clearly don't understand the ten commandments". If the former is insulting of intelligence the latter can only be moreso.

Tasting your own medicine? I never gave cause for you to doubt my understanding of what you were attempting. You have demonstrated a weak grasp on Biblical history.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

You're making this up as you go along..

Condescending?

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I don't give a monkey's what you "personally believe".....

That's great. However I don't speak for Christians everywhere, of every denomination. This should be noted from time to time.

sponsoredwalk

prinz wrote: »

Tasting your own medicine? I never gave cause for you to doubt my understanding of what you were attempting. You have demonstrated a weak grasp on Biblical history.

Where did he do that exactly?

MrStuffins

virmilitaris wrote: »

So what your saying is I can do what I like now. When I kick the bucket, if your right, I meet the big JC and then I can 'accept' him and I'm off to heaven ?

Seems like Christianity is rather pointless then doesn't it ?

Apologies if I'm misunderstanding you.

I wondered the same thing yesterday and asked Jakkass.

According to him, you must repent here on earth. When you get to Heaven you are given a new body. Thise who don't repent don't get one.

Although, maybe i'm getting it wrong, but it was something like that if i remember correctlyp

prinz

virmilitaris wrote: »

So what your saying is I can do what I like now. When I kick the bucket, if your right, I meet the big JC and then I can 'accept' him and I'm off to heaven ? Seems like Christianity is rather pointless then doesn't it ? Apologies if I'm misunderstanding you.

You'd still be judged on what you did in life. Christians are going to be judged, and non-Christians.

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Who knew prinz was the one that was able to decipher that in fact most
of the bible is incorrect and meaningless while the one passage he's
quoted actually explains it all.

Go back and see who the 10 Commandments were to. You may also want to check the distinction between Mosaic Law and the New Covenant.

Sam Vimes

prinz wrote: »

Tasting your own medicine? I never gave cause for you to doubt my understanding of what you were attempting. You have demonstrated a weak grasp on Biblical history.

I don't think that either is particularly condescending but if my statement is then your statement certainly is. Also, you have simply declared that my understanding is weak without backing this up in the slightest. Declaring that someone's understanding is weak is not the same as explaining why it is. Please explain what I'm missing and how a non-believer can obey the first commandment.

prinz wrote: »

Condescending?

Nope, I went on to justify my use of the term.

prinz wrote: »

That's great. However I don't speak for Christians everywhere, of every denomination. This should be noted from time to time.

Then you should probably stop phrasing things like so "Quite wrong. You can have lived your life from birth to death without being a Christian and still avoid 'hell'", since not all christians believe that

Sam Vimes

prinz wrote: »

Go back and see who the 10 Commandments were to. You may also want to check the distinction between Mosaic Law and the New Covenant.

Indeed. didn't Jesus shorten the ten commandments to something along the lines of "Love god and love your neighbour", i.e. love god is still pretty important.

edit: yes he did, in Matthew 22:36-40: 36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'[a] 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."