A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
marketandchurch
Scholar
Posts: 358
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2013 12:51 am
Location: The People's Republic Of Portland

A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Post #1

Post by marketandchurch »

This was the post that got me banned on Christian Chat:
Then God doesn't care about the goodness and decency of an atheist, a buddhist, etc. And if that is the message you are telling me, then there is no point to being a good person. There is no point of fighting on behalf of the oppressed, as America did, in WWII. The only purpose of fighting the Japanese, and beating back the Nazi's should have been so that we could bring more people to christ...is that what your saying? Should America be sending food and aid to heathens in Haiti? Should America be helping out muslims in disaster relief fallowing a natural disaster, unless it is to bring them to Christ? Is a person's only value to you, there potential to become a convert? They have no humanity beyond that?

You have an old testament my_adonai, and you are to be as obsessed with its obsessions, as you are with the new testament's. And the Old Testament's preoccupation is fighting evil, championing the good, and making a more ethical existence, during this lifetime.

And unless you think Christians alone can make this lifetime a little better, a little less genocidal, with a little less starvation, a little less torture, etc, it is an unethical message to peddle, that a good God would demand goodness, unless one doesn't believe in his son. Then one's goodness is pointless. One might as well not care about not gossiping behind other people's back, destroying someone's dignity in public, sleeping with a coworker's wife, extorting an elderly couple that one was hired to help, raping a pre-pubcescent child, killing another human being because of their skin color, etc, etc, etc.

Apparently, I was challenging people's faith, and was just there to be anti-christian, in saying that a Good God would not send to hell decent people, simply because they do not believe in his Son. I got all sorts of less then appetizing replies, saying I'm screwed for eternity, if I don't accept Jesus. I feel that I am not alone, even within the Christian community, in thinking this as I've heard many catholic priests, and mainstream protestant pastors, while I was growing up, distancing themselves from such a belief. I don't know where people on this forum stand, but I'll put it up for debate:

  • Topic of Debate: A Good God would not send to hell a decent person, simply for not believing in his son.


If you agree with me, and are a Christian, please square your response with the rest of the New Testament. What I'm looking for is scriptural consistency to back up your position, and more importantly, how one will then re-read the entire message of the New Testament, if one wants to hold that position. I say this because I don't want you to drop scripture, simply because it doesn't conform to your own personal beliefs, but I am looking for how one can reinterpret the New testament, if one drops that central tenant, & for the rest of us, impediment, to everlasting life. Is there room for this? Or is the New Testament rigidly in the affirmative about Christ being the only way to heaven? Which is fine. That's their theology, but let's see where this goes.

Dantalion
Guru
Posts: 1588
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 3:37 pm

Post #21

Post by Dantalion »

aglassdarkly wrote:
Justin108 wrote:
bluethread wrote: The problem is the premise. Paul refers to the principle espoused by Yesha'yahu when He says, (Rom. 3:10) "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:". It is a matter of proximate cause. If a man is headed for a brick wall, does he hit the brick wall because he was headed for it, or because he did not call onstar and have them turn off the engine? In that case would one fault onstar for only saving those who call?
So not one of us is without sin. It is impossible to live without sin (or at least so improbable that it has never happened). It is in our very nature to sin. Yet god, who gave us our nature, is punishing us for having the very nature he gave us. Where is the sense in that?
We got our sinful nature by freely choosing disobedience over obedience. A sinful nature is God's punishment. And a sinful nature doesn't mean we must sin, or are forced to sin, but that we tend to sin. Each sin is a choice and is still punishable.
So you are saying that neither Adam nor Eve had a sinful nature ? If that was true, they could not have being 'tempted' in the first place, because there was nothing in them that would 'draw' them to disobedience.

Iam
Banned
Banned
Posts: 649
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 9:23 am

Re: A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Post #22

Post by Iam »

[Replying to post 10 by marketandchurch]
I am more comfortable with simply perishing, over this hell narrative I keep hearing about
And that is precisely why many "christian" sects promote that belief, because it makes them more comfortable. The alternative is far to horrific for them to contemplate and therefore they just have wave it away with the "there is no eternal torture" (oh heaven forbid, hands on ears, stop saying that)

Iam
Banned
Banned
Posts: 649
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 9:23 am

Post #23

Post by Iam »

aglassdarkly wrote:
Justin108 wrote:
bluethread wrote: The problem is the premise. Paul refers to the principle espoused by Yesha'yahu when He says, (Rom. 3:10) "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:". It is a matter of proximate cause. If a man is headed for a brick wall, does he hit the brick wall because he was headed for it, or because he did not call onstar and have them turn off the engine? In that case would one fault onstar for only saving those who call?
So not one of us is without sin. It is impossible to live without sin (or at least so improbable that it has never happened). It is in our very nature to sin. Yet god, who gave us our nature, is punishing us for having the very nature he gave us. Where is the sense in that?
We got our sinful nature by freely choosing disobedience over obedience. A sinful nature is God's punishment. And a sinful nature doesn't mean we must sin, or are forced to sin, but that we tend to sin. Each sin is a choice and is still punishable.
1. How can one be disobedient without knowledge of the difference between obedience and disobedience? This claim made by some "christians" is completely assinine. Why don't you at least attempt to apply some critical thinking to these unbelievable story. Adam and Eve had no knowledge of good and evil until they ate the fruit from the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Obedience is a choice between good and evil and it's possible to disobey and still choose good. Without that knowledge how could Adam and Eve have possibly disobeyed and would disobeying the serpent constitute doing evil if you don't know the difference?
2. The rest of humanity is punished by this allegedly most just god, the omnibenevolent god for the sole purpose of sacrificing his son on the altar of his hubris, for an error that could only be laid at this gods feet and no other.
3. This sin that is so abhorrent to this god was created by this god and he lives with it eternally and yet the believers claim that he cannot exist in it's presence. Is that just another of this gods lies. Or is it more likely the attempts of ancient "MEN" to improve and exert the authority they possessed as leaders of the ignorant tribes they lead?

aglassdarkly
Scholar
Posts: 499
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 4:16 pm

Post #24

Post by aglassdarkly »

Dantalion wrote: So you are saying that neither Adam nor Eve had a sinful nature ? If that was true, they could not have being 'tempted' in the first place, because there was nothing in them that would 'draw' them to disobedience.
Adam and Eve didn't begin with a sinful nature. They were completely free to choose to obey or disobey. There was no inclination favoring either option. They chose to disobey, and they were punished by being given a natural inclination toward sin.
Iam wrote: 1. How can one be disobedient without knowledge of the difference between obedience and disobedience? This claim made by some "christians" is completely assinine.
I don't have to know about electricity to get zapped. God told them "don't", they turned around and did because they could. They didn't necessarily understand that they were being disobedient, but they were.

Dantalion
Guru
Posts: 1588
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 3:37 pm

Post #25

Post by Dantalion »

aglassdarkly wrote:
Dantalion wrote: So you are saying that neither Adam nor Eve had a sinful nature ? If that was true, they could not have being 'tempted' in the first place, because there was nothing in them that would 'draw' them to disobedience.
Adam and Eve didn't begin with a sinful nature. They were completely free to choose to obey or disobey. There was no inclination favoring either option. They chose to disobey, and they were punished by being given a natural inclination toward sin.
Iam wrote: 1. How can one be disobedient without knowledge of the difference between obedience and disobedience? This claim made by some "christians" is completely assinine.
I don't have to know about electricity to get zapped. God told them "don't", they turned around and did because they could. They didn't necessarily understand that they were being disobedient, but they were.
But that's just the thing, if they didn't understand what they were doing, why punish them ?

Iam
Banned
Banned
Posts: 649
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 9:23 am

Post #26

Post by Iam »

aglassdarkly wrote:
Dantalion wrote: So you are saying that neither Adam nor Eve had a sinful nature ? If that was true, they could not have being 'tempted' in the first place, because there was nothing in them that would 'draw' them to disobedience.
Adam and Eve didn't begin with a sinful nature. They were completely free to choose to obey or disobey. There was no inclination favoring either option. They chose to disobey, and they were punished by being given a natural inclination toward sin.
Iam wrote: 1. How can one be disobedient without knowledge of the difference between obedience and disobedience? This claim made by some "christians" is completely assinine.
I don't have to know about electricity to get zapped. God told them "don't", they turned around and did because they could. They didn't necessarily understand that they were being disobedient, but they were.
Gotta love it. Have you ever dealt with a 2yr old child? Because according to the bible any 2yr old child has more knowledge of obedience and disobedience than Adam and Eve had, in fact they have been taught it for their entire lives, Adam and Eve (according to the bible) had no instruction at all. But as a result of their less than a human 2yr old's knowledge the entire human race is sentenced to death, sin and suffering. This god of your's would last five minutes in my neighnourhood if that is how he treated 2yr olds. How stupid does he need to be. Here's a tip you might like to pass on to this thing next time you're talking to it......................you gotta TELL what do and don't MEAN before you can hold anyone responsible for ignoring such instruction. And you most certainly can't visit the sins of the father upon the son..........................Oh wait who allegedly said that. Your god of the bible is truly a pathetic hypocrite.

aglassdarkly
Scholar
Posts: 499
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 4:16 pm

Post #27

Post by aglassdarkly »

Dantalion wrote:
aglassdarkly wrote:
Dantalion wrote: So you are saying that neither Adam nor Eve had a sinful nature ? If that was true, they could not have being 'tempted' in the first place, because there was nothing in them that would 'draw' them to disobedience.
Adam and Eve didn't begin with a sinful nature. They were completely free to choose to obey or disobey. There was no inclination favoring either option. They chose to disobey, and they were punished by being given a natural inclination toward sin.
Iam wrote: 1. How can one be disobedient without knowledge of the difference between obedience and disobedience? This claim made by some "christians" is completely assinine.
I don't have to know about electricity to get zapped. God told them "don't", they turned around and did because they could. They didn't necessarily understand that they were being disobedient, but they were.
But that's just the thing, if they didn't understand what they were doing, why punish them ?
They knew they were doing what God told them not to do. They probably didn't understand the implications or how it would allow sin to enter the world or what sin is, but they still chose to do what God told them not to do.

Dantalion
Guru
Posts: 1588
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 3:37 pm

Post #28

Post by Dantalion »

aglassdarkly wrote:
Dantalion wrote:
aglassdarkly wrote:
Dantalion wrote: So you are saying that neither Adam nor Eve had a sinful nature ? If that was true, they could not have being 'tempted' in the first place, because there was nothing in them that would 'draw' them to disobedience.
Adam and Eve didn't begin with a sinful nature. They were completely free to choose to obey or disobey. There was no inclination favoring either option. They chose to disobey, and they were punished by being given a natural inclination toward sin.
Iam wrote: 1. How can one be disobedient without knowledge of the difference between obedience and disobedience? This claim made by some "christians" is completely assinine.
I don't have to know about electricity to get zapped. God told them "don't", they turned around and did because they could. They didn't necessarily understand that they were being disobedient, but they were.
But that's just the thing, if they didn't understand what they were doing, why punish them ?
They knew they were doing what God told them not to do. They probably didn't understand the implications or how it would allow sin to enter the world or what sin is, but they still chose to do what God told them not to do.
Sure, but how would they know that doing what God told them not to do is wrong ?
How would they have any understanding of obedience ?

aglassdarkly
Scholar
Posts: 499
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 4:16 pm

Post #29

Post by aglassdarkly »

Dantalion wrote:
aglassdarkly wrote: They knew they were doing what God told them not to do. They probably didn't understand the implications or how it would allow sin to enter the world or what sin is, but they still chose to do what God told them not to do.
Sure, but how would they know that doing what God told them not to do is wrong ?
How would they have any understanding of obedience ?
They didn't understand "good and evil". But they did something evil. God's standard doesn't allow for a mulligan. Evil gets punished.

As a parent, I can say that the very first time you punish your child, they didn't understand that what they did was bad before they did it. But you still need to punish them so they know it's bad. We don't give kids a "pass" for their first 18 months because they don't know what's right and wrong. People learn by being punished.

Dantalion
Guru
Posts: 1588
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 3:37 pm

Post #30

Post by Dantalion »

aglassdarkly wrote:
Dantalion wrote:
aglassdarkly wrote: They knew they were doing what God told them not to do. They probably didn't understand the implications or how it would allow sin to enter the world or what sin is, but they still chose to do what God told them not to do.
Sure, but how would they know that doing what God told them not to do is wrong ?
How would they have any understanding of obedience ?
They didn't understand "good and evil". But they did something evil. God's standard doesn't allow for a mulligan. Evil gets punished.

As a parent, I can say that the very first time you punish your child, they didn't understand that what they did was bad before they did it. But you still need to punish them so they know it's bad. We don't give kids a "pass" for their first 18 months because they don't know what's right and wrong. People learn by being punished.
Again with the parent analogy :-D
Tell me, as a parent, do you punish your newborn child that doesn't understand he did something wrong in such a way that you cast him out, curse him and his offspring for all eternity ?.

Post Reply