Sri Lumpa said:
I speak of a Catholic miracle because you mentioned it in response to player1x3 asserting hell as a state of mind and not a physical place. If your aim was t to argue that then you would have been better off doing so quoting the new testament as he seems to put credence in it rather than something more specific. What you are doing is the equivalent of arguing with a jew that Jesus is the messiah by quoting the new testament: it might be a correct quote but it wouldn't advance your point and would be irrelevant unless you knew that jew put credence in the new testament.
You don't teach little kids about right and wrong (morality) by allowing them to do wrong things unpunished. You punish them whe nthey do wrong even if they don't understand why it is wrong at the time and as they grow up and their intellectual ability develops then you can start teaching them not just what is wrong but why it is wrong. I maintain that god should not have given laws lacking in moral to the Hebrews, especially if their heart was hard (as they would need such laws more than somebody with a good heart). He should have given them good laws to live by and if they did not understand them immediately it would not matter, only that they start obeying them, the understanding could come latter.
You don't understand. Belief? Love? Both belief and love? If heaven was about morality then neither should matter, only whether somebody is moral (or at least trying their best to be as nobody is perfect). I am not saying that either belief or love or both should disqualify but I am saying that them being requirements means that the christian view of heaven is not based on morality but on being "part of the gang".
Are you claiming that belief in and love of god is the only path to goodness? If that is the case then you are arguing that all those billions of people that do not believe in your specific god* cannot do good for goodness' sake. If that was the case you would expect countries with a majority of the populations believing in those religions to be completely immoral. Yet, by and large, people in those countries adhere to many similar moral codes as those in Christian countries. And if you don't claim that god is the only path to goodness then rejecting those other paths that do not include belief in and/or love of god makes the act of saving not a moral act but a "part of the gang" act. * atheists, buddhists, hindus, shintoists,... possibly muslims and jews depending on how narrowly you want to go.
Which is my point. If heaven and hell was a moral thing then that would be all of it. That morality is just a part of it means that it is not moral.
No, I said that I had more respect for those branches of christianity that believe in the destructions of unsaved souls as opposed to eternal torture. It still doesn't make the proposition of heaven moral as it still is a private club whose membership is not based on morality alone but at least they don't torture people forevermore for not being part of the club even if they are otherwise moral people.
It is a common mistake of believers to assume that unbelievers do not know what it means to have faith and live it. My parents are believers and so they raised me in their religion. As most children I accepted my parent's teachings as true until I was able to determine for myself that : 1. They are only human and don't always tell the truth. 2. Even when they tell what they believe to be true they still might be wrong about it being true. This means that until that time I too was a believer who had faith and believed that faith and know what it feels like. You are basically arguing that an adult cannot understand what it means to believe in Santa Claus because he doesn't believe in it. He might not believe in him now but a lot of adults did believe in him as a kid and thus understand what it feels like and what it means.
I ams still saying that putting requirements beyond a person's morality for saving (morality in their heart, not just in their acts) makes the act of saving an act not predicated on morality and thus amoral. The extra bit about punishing people for eternity for something not based on moral makes it, in those faiths believing in hell, an immoral thing.
And that is the problem. It should be "Aim your eyes and heart at being a good person and that 's all that matters" if it was about morality. What about you? You seem like a decent enough fellow that tries to lead a moral life. One day you will die (hopefully after a very long, happy and fulfilling life). What if you then find that the god you set your eyes and heart on was the wrong god. Would you think it would be moral to have you be tortured for eternity merely because your parents believed in the wrong god and taught you the wrong belief? Even though you do your best to be good? Would you simply accept such a judgement or be outraged at the injustice of it? |
Although i didn`t quote the New Testament, Mary was part of it. So, in a way, it`s related to the new testament.
My original intention was no to show a religious point of view, even though i realise how it`s not easy to separate that apparition from the religion that embraces mary.
Honestly, only Jesus knew exactly why God didn`t impose something that their hearts wouldn`t understand/comprehend/accept - whatever the term is. The important things is that... well, by now i don`t really remember why i brought this up in the first place! :D oh, i remember, it was about the stoning situation.
The "understand" part was my view on why God did what He did.
The view on heaven and hell are moral. God is also about morality. The difference is that it`s much more than that. Faith alone won`t save you as being good alone won`t save you either. It`s the whole thing that allows you to find salvation.
That`s the important part as having faith implies a series of things: belief, love, morality. That`s why i used that example of the person in love. Loving back implies everything like respect, fidelity, etc. As with God, loving Him back, implies having belief, trusting and being good. And this love as a whole is what will make you worthy of going to heaven. That`s why salvation might seem amoral and immoral. About the last part, in the end, those who rejected God or just kept Him away from one`s heart are punished as much as acting immorally would have someone punished - if there was only morality as basis for the decision of heaven or hell. That`s the price to pay, as heaven is a reward on the other side of the coin. I know that some won`t like it, but that`s how it is. So, i do hope that everyone can find faith, as part for giving them heaven.
I do believe that everyone is capable of being good, btw.
Yes i made a mistake.
If i may be a bit personnal, you gave me the impression that there`s more to it than you showed as i believe you have taken your time with it. I sincerely hope that one day you can regain your faith back.
Thank you for your wishes of a good life! Same here for you! :)
That`s a difficult question. Although i do believe that God is the one i know that others will not agree with me. The difficulty in the question is trying to understand how God will make His decision. There are a lot of important things to question: did that person know of God and Jesus? Was he taught about Them? What did he know? Was he a good person?
You could ask, for example, what about those who were born before Jesus?
I don`t know if i have the best answer for that but i`ll start by saying that God is fair. If God didn`t impose Himself with His wishes - like we talked before about the stoning and the reference to Jesus' comments on marriage - He will be fair with everyone. I believe, like there`s an example on the Bible of a rich and poor man and how one goes to heaven and the other not, that in situations like these God will look at the goodness of their hearts. Supposing that said person never KNEW about Jesus' and His teachings.
In the situation that someone has a different religion, because he was taught differently, the biggest question should be: did he reject God from his heart? Only him and God can answer this question. I can only guess.
Actually these reflects the importance of spreading the word of God - like the apostles did and priests do.
