If There Is A Hell, We're All Going To It.

[Iryssa]

*grin* no problem...I've always liked that verse "Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do"...it's sort of a more eloquent way of saying "you gotta walk the walk not just talk the talk"

[Avatar]

..."you gotta walk the walk not just talk the talk"

Indeed. Now if only more people did!

--A

[Iryssa]

No kidding...There's something at the beginning of the DC Talk* song "What if I Stumble?"...it's a guy talking on a radio, and he says "The greatest single cause of atheism in the world today is Christians, who acknowledge Jesus with their lips, and then walk out the door, and deny Him with their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelieveable."
Whether or not he's right about it being "the greatest single cause of atheism," it's definitely a large reason for it...It's quite frustrating, actually. I think I mentioned in another post how the Crusades still affect people's view of Christians. That may stick with us forever...not to mention all the more individual examples that the "unbelieving world" sees daily...I'm quite ashamed to say that I've done things that probably made the people who saw them go "yup, just another hypocrite..." *shakes head* well...live and learn, I suppose...I just wish I hadn't been too hard-headed to learn the easy way...



* A Christian band, perhaps THE Christian band that made Christian music as popular with Christian teens as it is today...they wrote the song "Jesus Freak" and helped put together the books "Jesus Freaks" and whatever the second one is called...I think I mentioned the books in another post.

[Avatar]

...I just wish I hadn't been too hard-headed to learn the easy way...

The difference between the hard way and the easy way is simple. The easy way is like being told something, the hard way is being told to find out for yourself. With the easy way, you may be aware of whatever it is. With the hard way, you'll actually KNOW it.

I know which one I think is best for people, intellectually, spiritually, and emotionally.

--A

[Iryssa]

*nods* good point...and when I think about it, it wasn't as though I wasn't ready for those lessons when I learned them, the hard way though it was...it's kinda like finding the Wards in the right order, actually...I learned one lesson, which prepared me for the next, and so on and so forth...
Anyway...totally off-topic...*grin*

So...how 'bout that devil guy?

[Avatar]

*nods* good point...and when I think about it, it wasn't as though I wasn't ready for those lessons when I learned them, the hard way though it was...it's kinda like finding the Wards in the right order, actually...I learned one lesson, which prepared me for the next, and so on and so forth...

Yeah, that may well be a part of it too.

So...how 'bout that devil guy?

Aah, a tough one. Even the christians themselves have had great difficulty with this concept over the centuries. As I've mentioned somewhere, it was only fairly late in the progression of christianity that Lucifer became the great "Adversary".

And even so, it could be argued, (and I have) that christianity needs the devil. Otherwise what point is there? There has to be a stick for the carrot to be effective. Someone, (I think it was Satre) once said that if the devil was ever to defeat god, he would have to assume the attributes of divinity. Along the same lines, if there was no devil, christianity would have to invent him.

Of course, it's raised a number of problems, such as how a just and loving god could permit such a thing, and why there is evil at all if god is really in charge, but personally, I see Satan as the ultimate fall-guy. If you take the biblical standpoint, he doesn't have a chance. He's trying to beat a stacked deck from the outset, becuase according to christians, it's inevitable that god will win.

I prefer the Judaic approach to evil, which basically states that "evil" isn't a "thing" or a person, or an external force or entity, but that instead it arises from the actions of people. That makes a great deal more sense to me than imagining someone sitting behind the scenes and manipulating events. I mean, why would he bother, if there was no chance of eventual victory?

I think it was Heinlein who said: "God has millions of salaried staff. The opposition has none."

--Avatar

[onewyteduck]

Not only am I sure I'm going there, but I already have a plan in place to take over the joint.

[Baradakas]

iryssa said:

On the use of the Bible for this topic...Careful about that, Darth...If you read the New Testament, you find that it's not exactly as you describe. I know I've said it before, but I'll say it again:
Salvation, according to Biblical teachings, comes from accepting Christ as Savior. Works come from salvation; salvation does not come from works.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding about the New Testament, the "Nailed to the Cross" belief. Belief in Jesus is not enough, for Jesus Himself said, "Why do you say unto me, Lord, Lord, but do not do the things I say?" And later, (this is not an exact quote, sorry), He says, For many will come before me, saying they have preached in my name, cast out demons in my name, and I will turn them away saying, Begone, you who practice lawlessness!

Jesus did not nail the Ten Commandments to the cross! When asked by a young man how best to gain eternal life, Jesus said, "Follow the Ten Commandments."

His own disciples stated, "How can you have salvation without works?"

Sorry, I will post more later on this, I don't have enough time right now.

-B

[Edge]

iryssa said:

On the use of the Bible for this topic...Careful about that, Darth...If you read the New Testament, you find that it's not exactly as you describe. I know I've said it before, but I'll say it again:
Salvation, according to Biblical teachings, comes from accepting Christ as Savior. Works come from salvation; salvation does not come from works.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding about the New Testament, the "Nailed to the Cross" belief. Belief in Jesus is not enough, for Jesus Himself said, "Why do you say unto me, Lord, Lord, but do not do the things I say?" And later, (this is not an exact quote, sorry), He says, For many will come before me, saying they have preached in my name, cast out demons in my name, and I will turn them away saying, Begone, you who practice lawlessness!

Jesus did not nail the Ten Commandments to the cross! When asked by a young man how best to gain eternal life, Jesus said, "Follow the Ten Commandments."

His own disciples stated, "How can you have salvation without works?"

Sorry, I will post more later on this, I don't have enough time right now.

-B

Not to be picky or pedantic, but I think the part you misquoted is quite important. It's not "Begone, you who who practise lawlessness", but "Depart from Me, I never knew you".

I think it's an important distinction, because in the actual quote He seems in fact to be saying that all those good works are meaningless if they don't arise from a personal knowledge of Him.

I'm not saying (and I don't believe) that you can have salvation without works - to quote a wise man, "It's not that easy" - but rather, that good works without salvation are just not enough.

[Baradakas]

Thanks Edge, I knew I was making a mess of that quote, and I couldn't agree with you more!!!

[Iryssa]

Amen, Baradakas and Edge.

*grin* I think that's one of the reasons I've always loved TC...his "it's not that easy" thing...I can relate.

[Avatar]

I think it's an important distinction, because in the actual quote He seems in fact to be saying that all those good works are meaningless if they don't arise from a personal knowledge of Him.

I assume that you mean "meaningless in terms of getting into heaven" though, rather than meaningless in and of themselves.

Afterall, I'm sure even christ would rather people did "good works" outside of (or without) a relationship with god, than not do any good works at all, whether they claimed that relationship or not.

--A

[Edge]

I think it's an important distinction, because in the actual quote He seems in fact to be saying that all those good works are meaningless if they don't arise from a personal knowledge of Him.

I assume that you mean "meaningless in terms of getting into heaven" though, rather than meaningless in and of themselves.

Afterall, I'm sure even christ would rather people did "good works" outside of (or without) a relationship with god, than not do any good works at all, whether they claimed that relationship or not.

--A

I think I could have used a better word than 'meaningless'... possibly 'insufficient' would be more accurate. Also, in the context of that passage: it's speaking very specifically of people who do things in Jesus' name, i.e. claiming His authority, but actually have no relationship with Him.

I certainly don't mean to give the impression that 'doing good' is irrelevant, or something that Christ pays no attention to. For one thing, the Bible states pretty clearly that those who've never heard of Him will in fact be judged worthy of admittance to God's presence (or not), at least partly on the basis of their actions.

[Avatar]

I certainly don't mean to give the impression that 'doing good' is irrelevant, or something that Christ pays no attention to.

No worries, that's what I assumed you meant, just wanted to be sure.

For one thing, the Bible states pretty clearly that those who've never heard of Him will in fact be judged worthy of admittance to God's presence (or not), at least partly on the basis of their actions.

Thats something that I've always thought "good" about the whole thing. The only part of it that I dislike is that, IIRC, it refers specifically to people who have no knowledge of god/christ etc. In other words, ignorance is the "mitigating factor".

It assumes that those people, had they been exposed to gods message, would have become followers. I'd be a lot happier if it included those who disagree with that message (or at least parts of it, (perhaps the parts altered or interpreted by man for their own agenda's) ) and yet still live a life in accordance with the basic ideal.



--Avatar

[Edge]

My personal interpretation is that it's not a simple question of people who have 'heard of' Christ, the gospel, etc., but also includes those who for whatever reason haven't been given an accurate understanding of who God actually is. Or perhaps more to the point, those who have been taught, either literally or by bad examples of 'Christians', a completely wrong idea about God.

And I certainly don't believe God's going to be throwing anyone out of His presence just because of disagreements about doctrine, or questioning certain points. If that were the case, Heaven would be a lonely place indeed.

[Avatar]

Now that's an interpretation that I'm pretty comfortable with, and god would certainly rise in my estimation if that proves to be the case

And I certainly don't believe God's going to be throwing anyone out of His presence just because of disagreements about doctrine, or questioning certain points. If that were the case, Heaven would be a lonely place indeed.

I agree. I once read a fantastic quote, which said:

The technicalities of Religion have no place in the minds of God

That's sort of the way I like to think that a "supreme being" would look at things.

In essence, I don't have a problem hypothesising the existence of some "force" that effects the universe, many such forces are known to exist, and doubtless there are many more that we are not yet aware of.

It's the "spin" that humanity has tried to put on it which offends me. And if god exists, and is truly as he's explained to be, and there's any justice, I hope that a lot of it is offensive to him as well. Surely he'd be sickened by the atrocities so often perpetrated in his name?

--A

[Baradakas]

My personal interpretation is that it's not a simple question of people who have 'heard of' Christ, the gospel, etc., but also includes those who for whatever reason haven't been given an accurate understanding of who God actually is. Or perhaps more to the point, those who have been taught, either literally or by bad examples of 'Christians', a completely wrong idea about God.

Another common misinterpretation. Not that Edge is wrong, but it goes even deeper than that. What we are speaking of is less a personal knowledge of God, more like 'living in the Holy Spirit'. Of the untold millions of christians living today, perhaps 1% (or less) live in said Spirit. That is where the White Throne Judgement comes in. It gives all those who never had the chance to live in the Holy Spirit a second chance.

[Avatar]

It gives all those who never had the chance to live in the Holy Spirit a second chance.

But there's the rub. I don't want to live in the "Holy Spirit". I want to live my life as I always have. Happy in the belief that I live it to the best of my ability, without having to resort to some sort of external validation.

I certainly agree with your estimate that very few of the people who call themselves "christians" actually live lives commensurate with the teachings of god/Jesus.

However, what I'm interested in here, is those who live such lives without having to say that it's because of those teachings. I can't accept that god is petty enough to say that the only way those lives count is if they are lived in the context of what Baradakas refers to as "The Holy Spirit".

All spirits are holy in essence. Mine, yours, everybodies. It's how we use them that determines the "level" of our soul.

--Avatar

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

Ignorance being the mitigating factor...
Well, I've got to say, if the message of God, and Jesus et al. is the perfect message, and the one true message and the way of all joy and love and truth etc, wouldn't anyone who didn't follow it, whether or not they chose not to follow it or never learned of it in the first place... couldn't you put everyone in that category?

[The Dreaming]

Have any of you read Shaw? He said that "hell is a city much like Seville" His version of Hell was a place that the wicked would want to be. He figured that heaven would be full of all the self righteous jerks of the world. Makes you think eh?

Personally, I like Gaiman's view of Hell in the Sandman. He said that there is no objective being of pure evil who enjoys to torture the wicked, we punish ourselves. The people who go to Hell are the people with too much pride to forgive themselves.