Question about the Christian God

[BK-201]

God basically scammed us into this knowledge tree eating from what you say. He created us and if he's omnipowerful he wouldn't have had us eat it. Obviously he made us do this if he were real.

Edited February 14, 2010 by BK201

[uguu]

So quick question. What would you define heaven as? "Paradise"?

[Kintenbo]

I have a question. Is every Jew that endured endless torture at the holocaust, every person in uncivilized lands who had never heard of god or Jesus, and person before Christianity was widely excepted burning in Hell?

As far as before Christianity goes, I think all who trusted in God went to what was called "Abraham's Bosom". I really don't know much about how our eternal fate worked before Jesus came, that's a question for a Bible scholar, I think, but I do remember mention about Abraham's Bosom.

As for the uncivilized folk, this is why Jesus told us to go spread the Word of God. That's why we Christians tend to have rather vocal tendencies when it comes to our beliefs. It isn't (or shouldn't, though history shows some fools make it so) a matter of imperialism and "you're different, you must be like us", but a matter of wanting them to know Christ so they can be saved. As for those Jews that were in the Holocaust, I can't speak for them, so I wouldn't know if they came to know Christ or not. It's definitely not impossible. Out of over 6 million people, I'd like to say that there were those who came to know him and accept him.

[Mousefire]

As far as before Christianity goes, I think all who trusted in God went to what was called "Abraham's Bosom". I really don't know much about how our eternal fate worked before Jesus came, that's a question for a Bible scholar, I think, but I do remember mention about Abraham's Bosom.

As for the uncivilized folk, this is why Jesus told us to go spread the Word of God. That's why we Christians tend to have rather vocal tendencies when it comes to our beliefs. It isn't (or shouldn't, though history shows some fools make it so) a matter of imperialism and "you're different, you must be like us", but a matter of wanting them to know Christ so they can be saved. As for those Jews that were in the Holocaust, I can't speak for them, so I wouldn't know if they came to know Christ or not. It's definitely not impossible. Out of over 6 million people, I'd like to say that there were those who came to know him and accept him.

Why would Jews accept Jesus if the ones who believed in him were torturing them? Only through Stockholm Syndrome. You didn't answer the uncivilized one. There are people who have never heard of god or Jesus. They would go through life, and not a word would be spoken of him. Would they be sent to hell?

Edited February 14, 2010 by mousefire

[Kintenbo]

Why would Jews accept Jesus if the ones who believed in him were torturing them? Only through Stockholm Syndrome. You didn't answer the uncivilized one. There are people who have never heard of god or Jesus. They would go through life, and not a word would be spoken of him. Would they be sent to hell?

I did answer that, as in that's why we tend to be vocal. We have missionaries for that very reason.

As for Jews, the first Christians were Jews, so its not impossible for more to accept him. As for the Nazis, if I'm not mistaken, Hitler had a VERY twisted view on Jesus, so him being an accurate representative of Christianity would be crazy! The mass killing of Jews and Jewish discrimination was all a foolish affair, no ands, ifs, or buts.

[Mousefire]

I did answer that, as in that's why we tend to be vocal. We have missionaries for that very reason.

As for Jews, the first Christians were Jews, so its not impossible for more to accept him. As for the Nazis, if I'm not mistaken, Hitler had a VERY twisted view on Jesus, so him being an accurate representative of Christianity would be crazy! The mass killing of Jews and Jewish discrimination was all a foolish affair, no ands, ifs, or buts.

correct, Hitler is a bad one; however, I doubt it would make them more readily to accept it. Especially considering they are about as faithful to their beliefs as any other Christian. As for the Uncivilized people, I mean before a missionary gets to them

[Balcerzak]

Sin and evil in the world is a consequence of Man failing to follow God's orders. We ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil when we weren't supposed to, and because of that, sin entered the world. God let's it happen because there is a little something called FREE WILL that we have. It's not like we're forced to eat a cookie, or forced to watch T.V., we do it, and consequences come from it, whether it be good or bad for us. And He is not the "Christian God", He is the ONLY God.

I think I got the message right, I may have to check again to make sure I said the right thing.

BTW, I'm a member of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod. That's why I believe this. We also believe that even though we are sinful, and sin constantly, God forgives us for our sin, and Jesus took away our sin from his innocent death on the cross. He was a perfect sacrificial lamb, and it was because of Him that we are saved. Also, we believe God is Triune, being 3 people in 1 person, as in the Father, Son(Jesus Christ), and Holy Spirit. Our faith is built from the Holy Spirit, entering us from baptism.

BUT! I am not saying freedom of religion is wrong, I just don't approve of what other people believe. I am tolerant, but I don't trust in it.

Yet another thing, Atheism seems to be in and of itself a cult or religion. Am I right, or am I right?

Wow, I am NOT sorry for this huge wall of text.

I'd copy/paste my earlier post on the matter of Free Will (in which I point out famous theologian Martin Luther going on the record argueing vehemently against it), but something tells me you either wouldn't read it or understand it.

Atheism is most certainly not a religion. A religion involves a organized and shared set of beliefs, usually fairly in depth and often accompanied by a call to model your actions in a certain manner molded off of these beliefs. All atheism is is the lack of belief in one or more dieties. (Many) Buddhists are atheists, LaVeyan Satanists are atheists, but you certainly would be remiss to classify these to groups as theologically similar in any way at all (protip, they're beliefs are almost entirely diametrically opposed).

[Defeatist Elitist]

Yeah, we basically have already addressed the "free will" thing a bunch of times in this thread, and nothing new has been brought up.

[Crystal Shards]

Sin and evil in the world is a consequence of Man failing to follow God's orders. We ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil when we weren't supposed to, and because of that, sin entered the world. God let's it happen because there is a little something called FREE WILL that we have. It's not like we're forced to eat a cookie, or forced to watch T.V., we do it, and consequences come from it, whether it be good or bad for us. And He is not the "Christian God", He is the ONLY God.

Okay, and I've never understood this so this is a serious set of questions: why would you create something you're not planning on using? If we're going to claim that God is omniscient, as many do, why would He create something that He knew Adam and Eve would succumb to, thus throwing them out of paradise (in other words, why would he ruin their lives)? Sin entered the world, looking at it this way, because God allowed it to, which isn't very benevolent of Him. So he either can't be omnibenevolent or he can't be omniscient, OR he can't be omnipotent if He didn't have the power to stop them (I'm not saying He didn't but that's a common argument too).

In other words, just one story about the CHRISTIAN God (yes, it is the "Christian" God, as you have absolutely no proof He's the ONLY God, let alone that He even exists) has so many flaws and contradictions in it compared to our knowledge of Him that it makes for a very poor argument. Even the two books of the Bible can't agree on what kind of God the Christians have, yet one thing many Christians hold about God is that He's unchanging.

[BK-201]

He doesn't "speak" to us anymore, that's a change.

[Kirbyiscool19]

Eh, but then again, all of this is based solely on trust.

After all: Hebrews 11:1 “Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.” NIV Bible.

But this is my own opinion, and meh I should actually go to the Fire Emblem forums...

So yeah, I quit this argument. Bye!

[Crystal Shards]

Eh, but then again, all of this is based solely on trust.

After all: Hebrews 11:1 "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." NIV Bible.

But this is my own opinion, and meh I should actually go to the Fire Emblem forums...

So yeah, I quit this argument. Bye!

Of course it's your opinion. You're the one stating it. That's not a reasonable defense.

[Kintenbo]

In other words, just one story about the CHRISTIAN God (yes, it is the "Christian" God, as you have absolutely no proof He's the ONLY God, let alone that He even exists) has so many flaws and contradictions in it compared to our knowledge of Him that it makes for a very poor argument. Even the two books of the Bible can't agree on what kind of God the Christians have, yet one thing many Christians hold about God is that He's unchanging.

Contradictions? He rewards righteousness, punishes sin, and forgives sin after repentance. This definitely appears to be his nature in both Old and New Testament. He said that he was going to send a Messiah in Isiah, so trying to say that the New Testament some how contradicts him is pointless.

[Crystal Shards]

Contradictions? He rewards righteousness, punishes sin, and forgives sin after repentance. This definitely appears to be his nature in both Old and New Testament. He said that he was going to send a Messiah in Isiah, so trying to say that the New Testament some how contradicts him is pointless.

Yeah, but the manner in which He does so is contradictory. The Old Testament God is all fire and brimstone, yet the New Testament God is all Love Thy Neighbor shit.

[BK-201]

Show me a modern day prophet.

[Kintenbo]

Yeah, but the manner in which He does so is contradictory. The Old Testament God is all fire and brimstone, yet the New Testament God is all Love Thy Neighbor shit.

Revelation isn't so fluffy. Granted, God's more scary side shows up more often in the Old Testament, but that in no way contradicts a thing. When you read Old Testament books like Ruth, Daniel, and Jonah, God's humane side shows up a lot, as well. Don't forget about how he brought Ruth to prosperity by turning to him away from her original countries idols, how he saved Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego from the furnace, and instructed Jonah to save the non-Jewish Nineveh by having them turn towards God. Heck, if you think Old Testament God is just a crazy hothead, why was he against Jonah's being angry at Nineveh repenting? Of course, there's more books in the Old Testament, and most of the New Testament, once you get past the four main records of Christ's actions on Earth, are mainly letters by Paul and various other apostles, instructing new believers how to handle themselves. Don't forget in Acts, God kills Herod for blasphemy, if you want a "fire and brimstone" example in the New Testament. Instances of God's blessings and God's wrath does indeed show up in both Testaments.

Also, the love thy neighbor business is encouraged in the Old Testament. You may try to get yourself caught up in the "what about where they tell us to stone folks for this and that", but that was Hebraic law for criminal acts. You might also try to point out how during wars, the Israelites would kill everyone from an enemy country. That, I believe, had more to do with the fact that if they didn't do that, the enemy country would only continue to try to kill all of them. If I'm not mistaken, total wars were very common back in ancient times, regardless on which god a country followed. However, that can't hide what is taught in the 10 Commandments. Those commandments made it clear that God expected his people to treat their neighbors with respect. (by the way, before you try to bring this up, "Thou Shall Not Murder" refers to killing outside of war, so killing while in war is not necessarily a sin)

[BK-201]

How about God having the "Chosen People" whom he preaches to and tells them "Kill all your neighbors with an 100% chance of success for now as I am non partisan towards your group".

[catastrophe_2]

As far as before Christianity goes, I think all who trusted in God went to what was called "Abraham's Bosom". I really don't know much about how our eternal fate worked before Jesus came, that's a question for a Bible scholar, I think, but I do remember mention about Abraham's Bosom.

As for the uncivilized folk, this is why Jesus told us to go spread the Word of God. That's why we Christians tend to have rather vocal tendencies when it comes to our beliefs. It isn't (or shouldn't, though history shows some fools make it so) a matter of imperialism and "you're different, you must be like us", but a matter of wanting them to know Christ so they can be saved. As for those Jews that were in the Holocaust, I can't speak for them, so I wouldn't know if they came to know Christ or not. It's definitely not impossible. Out of over 6 million people, I'd like to say that there were those who came to know him and accept him.

So everyone from Asia before the years 1600 are currently burning/chilling/whatever they are supposed to do in Hell? Oh dear.

Also, I find that the term "uncivilized" shouldn't be used. Sure, when the Europeans came around on their big wooden fancy boats (even then, the Chinese had even bigger fancy boats), the indigenous populations weren't Christian. But I doubt that what makes a nation "civilized" is the amount of Christians in it. The Native American nations in North America were doing pretty well before the Europeans came, and so was most of Asia (I can't speak for the rest though). The only thing Europeans had that most other nations didn't was efficient gunpowder-based weaponry (and horses for North America IIRC).

So yeah, the notion that "non-christian" is "uncivilized" really irks me.

Edited February 17, 2010 by catastrophe_2

[catastrophe_2]

As far as before Christianity goes, I think all who trusted in God went to what was called "Abraham's Bosom". I really don't know much about how our eternal fate worked before Jesus came, that's a question for a Bible scholar, I think, but I do remember mention about Abraham's Bosom.

As for the uncivilized folk, this is why Jesus told us to go spread the Word of God. That's why we Christians tend to have rather vocal tendencies when it comes to our beliefs. It isn't (or shouldn't, though history shows some fools make it so) a matter of imperialism and "you're different, you must be like us", but a matter of wanting them to know Christ so they can be saved. As for those Jews that were in the Holocaust, I can't speak for them, so I wouldn't know if they came to know Christ or not. It's definitely not impossible. Out of over 6 million people, I'd like to say that there were those who came to know him and accept him.

So everyone from Asia before the years 1600 are currently burning/chilling/whatever they are supposed to do in Hell? Oh dear.

Also, I find that the term "uncivilized" shouldn't be used. Sure, when the Europeans came around on their big wooden fancy boats (even then, the Chinese had even bigger fancy boats), they weren't Christian. But I doubt that what makes a nation "civilized" is the amount of Christians in it. The Native American nations in North America were doing pretty well before the Europeans came, and so was most of Asia (I can't speak for the rest though). The only things unique to the Europeans that allowed them to dominate the world was efficient gunpowder-based weaponry.

So yeah, the notion that "non-christian" is "uncivilized" really irks me.

[Inactive Account]

So everyone from Asia before the years 1600 are currently burning/chilling/whatever they are supposed to do in Hell? Oh dear.

I'm no expert, but I remember my catechism classes taught that there was another state of afterlife, Limbo, where unbaptized people who had lived good lives but were raised outside of/never introduced to Christianity ended up; it wasn't with God, but it was a pretty good place. Since then the Catholic Church has changed their thoughts on the subject into I-don't-know-what (I think they might be saying now that those people go to Heaven instead). There was a similar sort of thing before Jesus was crucified; good people went to Limbo and unrepentant evildoers went to Hell, and when Jesus died he opened up Heaven for everyone in Limbo. No idea what other denominations have to say on the subject.

I've never actually heard the term "uncivilized" used in the context of "people who haven't been exposed to Christianity." It bothers me a fair bit too. Actually there are a lot of things about "Christians" that bother me in general, mainly that for the most part, those of us who call ourselves Christian really, really suck at actually being that way. As Gandhi said, "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

(edited: clarification, I knew what he meant by it, and it bothered me.)

Edited February 18, 2010 by _____

[Mousefire]

By "uncivilized, he meant people in some parts of Africa, 3rd word countries, etc. that never heard about Christianity.

[DeSu]

I've skipped the past 17 pages because I don't want to spend an hour reading right this moment. I'm just gonna state my opinion.

I believe there may or may not be a God, but if there is, it is a very cruel God. First he makes us a flawed species, then blames us for our flaws, and condemns us to eternal punishment for it. If he was actually benevolent, he would have fixed our flaws, or at least not condemn us. In addition, he apparently sacrificed his own son(lolJesus) to atone for our sins, which males no sense whatsoever. What good will come from killing your own son? Is god trying to teach us that by sacrificing others, you can be forgiven?

[Crystal Shards]

I'm no expert, but I remember my catechism classes taught that there was another state of afterlife, Limbo, where unbaptized people who had lived good lives but were raised outside of/never introduced to Christianity ended up; it wasn't with God, but it was a pretty good place.

I'm not an expert either, but aren't you referring to Dante's Inferno and not actual Christian doctrine? I've never heard of a Christian that legitimately believed in limbo. I always learned it was a speculation/theory/compromise/what-have-you from the medieval ages.

[quanta]

I'm not an expert either, but aren't you referring to Dante's Inferno and not actual Christian doctrine? I've never heard of a Christian that legitimately believed in limbo. I always learned it was a speculation/theory/compromise/what-have-you from the medieval ages.

Eh, the only real difference between that and more core canon is the time period during which the speculation/theory occurred.

Bottom line: if people are willing to believe some scrolls compiled into a book in the 600s (or somewhere around there when the Bible was compiled and formed) that claim a virgin can give birth and Jesus can make 5 fish into enough fish to feed an entire crowd along with the existence of heaven and hell, there isn't any particularly good reason for the same people to rule out the existence of limbo. Quite the opposite, considering it makes some of their doctrine about their god more consistent. Or you could just remember that the whole heaven or hell thing is really a very small portion of the new testament anyways (seriously, I'm not sure hell gets much mention outside of Revelation- which is highly suspected to have been written in code anyways; making literal interpretation of it kind of moot).

[Crystal Shards]

Eh, the only real difference between that and more core canon is the time period during which the speculation/theory occurred.

Bottom line: if people are willing to believe some scrolls compiled into a book in the 600s (or somewhere around there when the Bible was compiled and formed) that claim a virgin can give birth and Jesus can make 5 fish into enough fish to feed an entire crowd along with the existence of heaven and hell, there isn't any particularly good reason for the same people to rule out the existence of limbo. Quite the opposite, considering it makes some of their doctrine about their god more consistent. Or you could just remember that the whole heaven or hell thing is really a very small portion of the new testament anyways (seriously, I'm not sure hell gets much mention outside of Revelation- which is highly suspected to have been written in code anyways; making literal interpretation of it kind of moot).

Well that's for the people who believe the Bible should be taken literally, although actually if they're the ones saying that the Bible is the final word, then Limbo doesn't exist because the Bible doesn't talk about Limbo. Those, like Bultmann, who believe that the Bible should be taken as fables and the main point is the moral of the story (not, for example, that a fox actually tried to eat grapes), might be more willing to accept the idea of Limbo, at least as a theoretical construct.

Edited February 21, 2010 by Crystal Shards