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.

shnarkle
Guru
Posts: 2054
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 10:56 am

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

Post #761

Post by shnarkle »

Danmark wrote:
shnarkle wrote:
Danmark wrote:
shnarkle wrote:
shnarkle: One could argue, but so far no one has. One could argue that atheists just don't get caught, one could argue that they have better lawyers, one could argue that atheists are better at framing others for their own crimes.
Then one would be forced to conclude that atheists must be much, much smarter.
:D
That would be the logical conclusion of the argument you suggest.

Snarkle wrote:
Yes, it most certainly would! Glad you agree. So perhaps you might also see that the great contributions to our society from atheists aren't because they are atheists anymore than Stalin or Mao's contribution to destroying humanity on such a massive scale is because of their atheism. The great advances in civilization from those affiliated with Christianity aren't because they decided to become Christians, anymore than their violations of the teachings of Christ could be blamed on those same teachings.
Glad to see you have now come full circle and agree and that you have now refuted your own silly argument about Most murders being committed by atheists. You were not only wrong on your facts, but you now have agreed that you were wrong to imply that atheists are more likely to murder because they are atheists.
O:)
shnarkle: Huh? How did you get that from what I posted??? Look again. My point was that the massive destruction of life by atheists wasn't necessarily because they were atheists, although there is a strong argument to be made that those who believe that life is just a product of time +space + chance aren't going to think there is much value in the lives of others; this in no way denies the fact that the numbers of people they murdered are exponentially higher than any murdering done in the name of Christianity. Once again it seems that you see what you want to see rather than what is actually in front of your face.

User avatar
dianaiad
Site Supporter
Posts: 10220
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 12:30 pm
Location: Southern California

Post #762

Post by dianaiad »

shnarkle wrote: [Replying to Danmark]

Well since you would rather just go trolling rather than offer an argument. I'm going to look for someone who actually wants to engage in a discussion.
:warning: Moderator Warning


Accusing someone of 'trolling' is insulting, uncivil and unproductive. It neither helps the conversation nor produces good will. It's also against the rules.


Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

User avatar
dianaiad
Site Supporter
Posts: 10220
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 12:30 pm
Location: Southern California

Post #763

Post by dianaiad »

DanieltheDragon wrote: [Replying to post 750 by Danmark]


I see what you did thar, that's some serious debating kung-foo :lol:
Moderator Comment

Please use the token donation system, or PM the writer of a post you agree with, instead of one-line comments like the above in the public forum.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

User avatar
Jack Stoddart
Apprentice
Posts: 179
Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:34 am

Post #764

Post by Jack Stoddart »

shnarkle wrote:
Danmark wrote:When entire cities are destroyed by your god, the destruction includes infants and children who are not yet an an age where they can make moral judgments. For example, as a matter of law children of a certain age may not be held responsible for criminal acts.
Perhaps you could give an example from the bible to support your claim.

There are plenty of examples. Children are slaughtered by God directly, by supposedly direct commands to tribal leaders of various descriptions and by armies under the influence of the LORD implementing his will and declared to be implementing his will.



[center]Direct killing by God[/center]A single child
In the case of a single child we have David’s son. The child had done no wrong yet was blasted by God as some sort of exercise in morality. The lesson is that hanky-panky with a willing participant foaming herself in a bathtub outside your window in the sun—surely not an accidental activity—does not justify murder, the murder of her husband by nefarious means. And yet it justifies the murder of a child.

The mind to devise killing one’s mistress’s husband is a warped mind. Yet how more warped the mind to think infanticide a just dessert? It is presented in the source material as direct killing by God:
  • 2 Samuel 12:1-18a Yahweh sent Nathan the prophet to David. He came to him and said: 'In the same town were two men, one rich, the other poor. The rich man had flocks and herds in great abundance; the poor man had nothing but a ewe lamb, one only, a small one he had bought. This he fed, and it grew up with him and his children, eating his bread, drinking from his cup, sleeping on his breast; it was like a daughter to him When there came a traveller to stay, the rich man refused to take one of his own flock or herd to provide for the wayfarer who had come to him. Instead he took the poor man's lamb and prepared it for his guest.' David's anger flared up against the man. 'As Yahweh lives,' he said to Nathan 'the man who did this deserves to die! He must make fourfold restitution for the lamb, for doing such a thing and showing no compassion.' Then Nathan said to David, 'You are the man. Yahweh the God of Israel says this, "I anointed you king over Israel; I delivered you from the hands of Saul; I gave your master's house to you, his wives into your arms; I gave you the House of Israel and of Judah; and if this were not enough, I would add as much again for you. Why have you shown contempt for Yahweh, doing what displeases him? You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword, taken his wife for your own, and killed him with the sword of the Ammonites So now the sword will never be far from your House, since you have shown contempt for me and taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife." Thus Yahweh speaks, "I will stir up evil for you out of your own House. Before your very eyes I will take your wives and give them to your neighbour, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun You worked in secret, I will work this in the face of all Israel and in the face of the sun."' David said to Nathan, 'I have sinned against Yahweh'. Then Nathan said to David, 'Yahweh, for his part, forgives your sin; you are not to die Yet because you have outraged Yahweh by doing this, the child that is born to you is to die.' Then Nathan went home.
    Yahweh struck the child that Uriah's wife had borne to David and it fell gravely ill. David pleaded with Yahweh for the child; he kept a strict fast and went home and spent the night on the bare ground, covered with sacking.The officials of his household came and stood round him to get him to rise from the ground, but he refused, nor would he take food with them. On the seventh day the child died


[center]Direct command to tribal leaders[/center]The command
God issues his instructions for a routine genocide. Basically the same as the last population to be wiped out, the elderly, their adult children who had honoured their parents by following their cultural traditions, their grandchildren, the infants, the little babies and all the pregnant women. A subterfuge is included for this particular episode:
  • Joshua 8:1-2 Then Yahweh said to Joshua, 'Be fearless now, and be confident. Take all your fighting men with you, and march out against Ai. I will put into your power the king of Ai, his people, his town and his territory. You are to do with Ai and its king as you did with Jericho and its king. As regards booty, you may take the goods and the cattle no more. Take up a concealed position against the city, to the rear of it.
The rout
Essentialy the fighting men were lured away from the city. According to the source material, verse 17, there were no men left behind. Therefore only women and children remained, together with infants and newborn babies. I will probably post the whole passage—since that’s what was requested—so to cut the story down a bit the details are that once all the men were some distance away the Israelites pounced on the city setting fire to it. The women and children came out to defend themselves and God’s people, acting in accordance with his command, murdered the lot of them as is spelled out in verse 24. Including all the babies.
  • Joshua 8:14-25 When the king of Ai saw how things lay, he and all his people hurried out to engage Israel on the slope facing the Arabah; he did not know that an ambush had been laid against him to the rear of the town. Joshua and all Israel with him let themselves be driven back, taking flight towards the wilderness. All the people who were in the town followed them in loud pursuit, and in pursuing Joshua they left the town itself unguarded.
    • 17 Not a man was left behind in Ai, all had gone out in pursuit of Israel; and in pursuing Israel they left the town undefended.
    Then Yahweh said to Joshua, 'Point the javelin in your hand at Ai; for I am about to put the town in your power'. Then Joshua pointed the javelin in his hand towards the town. No sooner had he stretched out his hand than the men in ambush rose quickly from their position, ran forward and entered the town; they captured it and quickly set it on fire. When the men of Ai looked back, they saw smoke rising from the town into the sky. None of them had the chance to run one way rather than another, for the people fleeing towards the wilderness turned back on their pursuers. For when Joshua and all Israel saw that the town had been seized by the men in ambush, and saw the smoke rising from the town into the sky, they turned round and attacked the men of Ai. The others came out from the town to engage them, so that the men of Ai found themselves surrounded by Israelites, some on this side and some on that. These set about them till not one was alive and none left to flee; but the king of Ai was captured alive, and brought to Joshua.
    • 24When Israel had finished killing all the inhabitants of Ai in the open ground and where they followed them into the wilderness, and when all to a man had fallen by the edge of the sword, all Israel returned to Ai and slaughtered all its people.
    The number of those who fell that day, men and women together, was twelve thousand, all people of Ai.

[center]Implementing God’s will and declared to be implementing God’s will[/center]
Who is acting
This atrocity is not ascribed to any normal cause. People try to invade one another with varying degrees of success, from time to time, but verse 15 spells this out very clearly indeed: it is the LORD acting here. I will point out that in Amos 1:13 these same crimes unendorsed by the LORD are criticised strongly. From the source material:
  • Hosea 12:10-11, 13:12-(14:1) I have been Yahweh, your God, since the days in the land of Egypt I will make you live in tents again as on the day of Meeting. I will speak to the prophets, I will increase the visions and through the prophets I will deal out death.. The iniquity of Ephraim is carefully hoarded, his sin is safely stored away. Pangs as of childbirth overtake him, and a stupid child it is, its time is up but it does not leave the womb. And am I to save them from the power of Sheol? Am I to rescue them from Death? Where is your plague, Death? Where are your scourges, Sheol? I have no eyes for pity.
    • 15 Ephraim may flourish among the reeds, but the wind from the East will come, the breath of Yahweh will rise from the desert to dry his water-sources, to parch his springs, to strip his land of all its treasures.
    Samaria must atone for rebelling against her God. They shall fall by the sword, their little children be dashed to pieces, their pregnant women disembowelled.
If you require additional examples they can be provided.

This, not Mrs Doasyouwouldbedoneby, is the standard of righteousness for admission to heaven. Clearly atheists would not comply with those standards since any murders done would not be attributed to God or to divine command or divine manipulation of the Id. The Bible is unambiguous, in my opinion. Indeed it goes to some length to spell out its position. Not all language is so direct. For example I noticed in post post 739 the sentence
Those atheists who have murdered do so as a direct result of their beliefs, while those professing christians do so as a direct violation of the life and teachings of Christ.
which seemed rather imprecise. I tried switching the subjects around:
  • Those professing christians who have murdered do so as a direct result of their beliefs, while those atheists do so as a direct violation of the life and teachings of Christ.
and found that the meaning was essentially unchanged, in the absence of any information about what either group may believe. A professing christian can have beliefs at variance with those attributed to Christ, after all.

The Bible, on the other hand, is most lucid. Its God is equally unambiguous. I hope that addresses your questions and helps others to answer the question posed in the Original Post.[right][font=Times New Roman]Passages quoted: JB ©1966[/font]
compare AV here
[/right]

User avatar
Benoni
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2301
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 8:31 am
Location: Wilson NY (Niagara County)

Post #765

Post by Benoni »

God does not see death as we humans who will all die death is temporary to God where it is the end to our limited earthy existence. If a child dies he returned to God

myth-one.com
Savant
Posts: 7468
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:16 pm
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 98 times
Contact:

Post #766

Post by myth-one.com »

Benoni wrote:If a child dies he returned to God
Is that good?

User avatar
Danmark
Site Supporter
Posts: 12697
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
Location: Seattle
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #767

Post by Danmark »

Benoni wrote: God does not see death as we humans who will all die death is temporary to God where it is the end to our limited earthy existence. If a child dies he returned to God
Wouldn't the result of such a belief as you describe be more murders? Sounds like a VERY dangerous belief system and one that encourages violation of its own rule:
'Thou shalt not murder.'

Not only is this a dangerous belief system, but from the point of view of those who don't except such nonsense, it is utterly vile, ghastly and disgusting because of what it encourages and because of how it excuses murder.

olavisjo
Site Supporter
Posts: 2749
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 8:20 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Post #768

Post by olavisjo »

.
Danmark wrote: Not only is this a dangerous belief system, but from the point of view of those who don't except such nonsense, it is utterly vile, ghastly and disgusting because of what it encourages and because of how it excuses murder.
The other side is even worse, for those who 'except' the idea that death is just sleep without dreams, killing becomes a way of putting people out of their misery, a place where they will all go sooner or later anyway. And no God to punish, eternally, the murderers.
"I believe in no religion. There is absolutely no proof for any of them, and from a philosophical standpoint Christianity is not even the best. All religions, that is, all mythologies to give them their proper name, are merely man’s own invention..."

C.S. Lewis

myth-one.com
Savant
Posts: 7468
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:16 pm
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 98 times
Contact:

Post #769

Post by myth-one.com »

olavisjo wrote:
Danmark wrote:Not only is this a dangerous belief system, but from the point of view of those who don't except such nonsense, it is utterly vile, ghastly and disgusting because of what it encourages and because of how it excuses murder.
The other side is even worse, for those who 'except' the idea that death is just sleep without dreams, killing becomes a way of putting people out of their misery, a place where they will all go sooner or later anyway. And no God to punish, eternally, the murderers.
How is euthanasia worse than murdering a child in no misery with his full life ahead of him?

An adult may have some input into his death (living will, for example), a child cannot.

olavisjo
Site Supporter
Posts: 2749
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 8:20 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Post #770

Post by olavisjo »

.
myth-one.com wrote: How is euthanasia worse than murdering a child in no misery with his full life ahead of him?
It is no worse, the child will never pine for his full life that was ahead of him. There is no regret in non-existence.
"I believe in no religion. There is absolutely no proof for any of them, and from a philosophical standpoint Christianity is not even the best. All religions, that is, all mythologies to give them their proper name, are merely man’s own invention..."

C.S. Lewis

Post Reply