What's better? This world or the "world to come"?

[Jagella]

Christian apologists, being evangelists, want to convert people to Christianity. And since the inception of Christianity, Christians have tried to entice people to convert to their religion by offering what Christians think people will want, a better world. Obviously, what constitutes a better world is a matter of opinion.

Question for Debate: Is the Christian heaven your idea of a better world, a world you would want to live in, or would you rather live in this world?

I prefer this world. Yes, it can be terrible at times, but I've managed to survive for fifty seven years in it. I've even had a lot of fun at times. I enjoy all the different kinds of people from all the different cultures including Christians. We've built an amazing world-wide civilization that supports billions of people. Surely no other species in all of the history of the earth has accomplished anything nearly as awesome as we have.

As for the world promised by Christianity, at the least it looks boring, and at most it looks horrible to me. Yes, streets of gold might be novel for a day or two, but it would get old after that time. In other ways it would be terrible. I would hate eternally praising a cosmic devil that I know murdered billions of people and engaged in world-wide destruction.

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 30 by Aetixintro]

Folklore and fantasies do not constitute verifiable evidence.

[Jagella]

Mark 16:9-20 is not original.

Yes, I know that Mark 16:9-20 was tacked on later, but I'd rather not spend a lot of time discussing Biblical integrity. You can always start a thread to debate that issue. For this discussion, I'm assuming the New-Testament Jesus and the theology that most Christians base their beliefs on.

To believe in the name of Jesus is to think what he stands for is true. What is it that Jesus stands for?

What Jesus "stands for" will vary from person to person (assuming they care). We have many different models of Jesus that people have derived from the New Testament. So the passage you quoted from John 3 will be interpreted differently by different people. There simply is no "definitive" Jesus.

Again, for the purposes of this debate, please assume the Jesus of Christian faith who came down from the sky to save people from their sins and who was crucified for the forgiveness of those sins.

I do not see what that has to do with having faith. It is in fact about doing things...

Well, placing faith in Jesus is an act, but we're talking here about works that have nothing to do with Jesus. Are those works apart from Jesus enough to get a person into heaven? The message of the gospel is no, we need Jesus to be forgiven of our sins no matter how good we try to be.

But notice that Jesus did not mention this until the man said he wanted to do more. The implication is that doing what Jesus had already said is sufficient and anything else is if you want to do more.

That's not how I would interpret Matthew 19:20-21. If all the man had to do is keep the commandments to attain eternal life, then he wouldn't need Jesus. And Jesus was not known to tell people they don't need him! The writer of this story was making the point that keeping the commandments is insufficient to attain eternal life, and that's why the man asked what he was still lacking. Jesus, of course, was only too happy to fill the man in telling the man to follow him and put faith in him.

Do you really have to hate your family and your own life to be a Christian?

That's a good apologetic: explain away Jesus telling people to hate their families as "mere hyperbole." If it was meant as an exaggeration not to be taken literally, then I think it's a poor choice of words.

In any case, Jesus was clearly trying to create dependent followers who would believe and obey anything he said including his injunction to forsake one's family.

Romans is mostly about convincing the Jewish segment of the Christian community in Rome that Gentiles need not convert to Judaism in order to be Christians

.

Yes, the immediate purpose of Paul's letter to the Romans may have been resolving issues of conversion at the church in Rome, but the church included this epistle in the canon because Paul wrote much in it that was generally applicable to Christians everywhere for all time. Paul was definitely explaining the importance of faith in Christ granting righteousness to the person placing their trust in Christ, and this doctrine goes well beyond the Gentiles Paul was writing to.

Where does Jesus insert himself? Book, chapter and verse please.

You honestly don't know where Jesus insists he is important in saving people from hell? For starters, we have John 14:6 (NRSV):

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Obviously, then, all the good works in the world won't get you to heaven without Jesus. This Christian doctrine is made even clearer in Galatians 2:16 (NRSV):

And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by doing the works of the law, because no one will be justified by the works of the law.

So at least here Paul agrees with Jesus: being a good person is insufficient--add Jesus to be saved.

I am presenting what the NT really says and not what some people want it to say. Not being a believer allows me to read for actual content and not according to what I am supposed to believe.

I take the same approach, yet we come to different conclusions regarding what the New Testament really says.

In conclusion, I find your approach to Christianity to be obviously unorthodox. It appears that Jesus and his death on the cross plays no role in the forgiveness of sins. We are on the internet, of course, and right or wrong, we can all say what we wish.

[Zzyzx]

.

See? Not so much wishful thinking as a definite target, also The 5 Factors in hand, in near future and the next 20 to 100 years or more.

Is this an attempt to use the Bible to prove something true? If so, it would be prudent to read carefully C&A Sub-forum Guidelines

If you choose to debate in this sub-forum you are REQUIRED to honor the Guidelines. Notice specifically that the Bible can be used ONLY to show what the bible says and what Christianity says. It cannot be used to prove that a statement or story is true.

This sub-forum is intended as a meeting ground for any and all theistic positions – none of which are given preferential treatment. It is a very “level playing field�. Any story, statement or claim of knowledge which is challenged is required to be substantiated with evidence to show that it is true and accurate. “The Bible (or Quran or Bhagavad Gita) says so� is NOT acceptable as proof of truth.

If you disagree with the Guidelines and/or cannot debate without attempting to use the Bible to prove a point or position true, kindly do not debate in this sub-forum. Instead, use Theology, Doctrine and Dogma OR Holy Huddle sub-forums in which the Bible IS regarded as authoritative and can be used as proof of truth.

Also, kindly review Forum Rules regarding preaching and proselytizing.
viewtopic.php?t=9741

Some people are more comfortable in TD&D or HH sub-forums where they can cite the Bible as authoritative and/or proof of truth.

[Aetixintro]

[Replying to post 33 by Zzyzx]

Dear Zzyzx, I can't see this as anything else than rules-riding... against me.

Because I suggest that Christians are looking toward 2 goals, one to improve society toward Utopia, The Promised Land, and 2, to go to Heaven After Life.

Is that really making me dishonest? "Think again? Reconsider? Please...?"

[Zzyzx]

.

I can't see this as anything else than rules-riding... against me.

Rules-riding? Against you?

Forum Rules and Guidelines apply to everyone. Is there some reason you should be immune?

Because I suggest that Christians are looking toward 2 goals, one to improve society toward Utopia, The Promised Land, and 2, to go to Heaven After Life.

Notice that my post was, “Kindly cite verifiable evidence that the ‘promised’ is more than imagination and/or wishful thinking� and your response was to quote an article citing Bible verses – as though that was verifiable evidence to support the ‘promised’.

I challenge the claim “to improve society toward Utopia, The Promised Land�. The land in question is anything BUT utopia. Claims that ‘My god gave me this land’ (that was long settled by others) has provoked thousands of years of warfare.

According to Genesis 15:18 and Joshua 1:4, the land God gave to Israel included everything from the Nile River in Egypt to Lebanon (south to north) and everything from the Mediterranean Sea to the Euphrates River (west to east). So, what land has God stated belongs to Israel? All of the land modern Israel currently possesses, plus all of the land of the Palestinians (the West Bank and Gaza), plus some of Egypt and Syria, plus all of Jordan, plus some of Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Israel currently possesses only a fraction of the land God has promised.
https://www.gotquestions.org/Israel-land.html

Is that really making me dishonest?

Has someone accused you of dishonesty?

"Think again? Reconsider?

What would you suggest that I consider?

[Jagella]

Biblical Heaven, or eternal life is for righteous. Righteous people do good things and love others. To me, the righteous company and love makes it heaven.

So for you some people, the "unrighteous," have no good in them at all and should be done away with. To allow them to go on will harm the good, worthwhile people. This view has been common throughout history, and it does not have a good track record.

Without love no place would be good and with love the streets don't matter much.

If love is so important, then it seems reasonable to me to love everybody, righteous or not, and let everybody live the best life they can live.

I think it is not even the point to try to entice you.

Sorry, but I'm afraid you're wrong there. Jesus constantly tried to entice people with rewards.

I think there is no reason to try to make heaven look enticing to anyone.

So you don't find heaven to be enticing. Or to put it another way, you don't want heaven. Is that correct?

I think disciples of Jesus should live by the example of Jesus.

If you did live like Jesus, then you'd probably get banned from this forum.

I know God is good, righteous and loving and doesn’t do anything evil.

How do you know God is righteous and loving and doesn’t do anything evil?

I understand also that if I am unrighteous and evil, God doesn’t allow me to live eternally and I think it is good.

If God deemed a good friend of yours to be unrighteous and evil, would it be OK for you if God killed that friend?

I think it is really disturbing if people really think they give life. Parents don’t give life.

Sorry, but we all came from our parents. It's a demonstrable fact. No gods are required.

If you would decide to give a gift to someone, has the someone right to decide how much you must give?

I don't know if they have the right to demand how much I give to them, but I'd give them as much as they want if I could. And since God can give people eternal life, he should give it to everyone.

Or have you some good reason why God should give eternal life for all?

Sure. Why not grant everybody eternal life? It would be a really nice thing to do for people.

If people are righteous, as Bible defines it, they don’t do anything evil.

What Bible are you reading??? Romans 3:23 (NRSV):

...since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God...

So we all do evil according to your own Bible.

If I am righteous, then I think it would be ok to live in Biblical heaven. If I am not righteous, then I hope I don’t go to there to ruin it.

If the Christian heaven is full of people who want to get rid of people they think are evil, then I'd take this world any time. At least here I get to recognize the good that's in everybody and know that other people can see that good too.

[1213]

…Where does a new human life come from if not from parents?

People give birth, not life, but apparently you see it differently. But, if human life is always from parents, where did the first parents get their life?

…
Does the female body produce ovum and male body produce sperm?

Yes, but in what phase the life is given? How do you give life for your cells? Can you help people who can’t give life to cells?

…Yes, over a half million Christian women have abortions per year in the US – 70% of 878.713 (in 2017) = 615.099 Christian abortions….
…Hypocrisy much?

That is sad. But nice if atheists are against abortions and not hypocrites.

[1213]

… This view has been common throughout history, and it does not have a good track record….

Please show one example?

If you did live like Jesus, then you'd probably get banned from this forum.

Please explain why?

How do you know God is righteous and loving and doesn’t do anything evil?

By what He has done and what He says in the Bible.

If God deemed a good friend of yours to be unrighteous and evil, would it be OK for you if God killed that friend?

Yes. Actually, because God has given life, it would be ok, even if He would not allow righteous to live forever. I think there is no reason why God must give eternal life.

Sure. Why not grant everybody eternal life? It would be a really nice thing to do for people.

If unrighteous would live eternally, they would turn life eternal suffering for all. That is why I don’t like that idea. One solution would be to let unrighteous live eternally in their own place and righteous in their own place. Reason why I don’t think that happens is that unrighteous people would make it eternal suffering for them.

What Bible are you reading??? Romans 3:23 (NRSV):

...since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God...

So we all do evil according to your own Bible.

That doesn’t say all are evil, it says “all have sinned�. Why do you need to change what it actually says?

Even if all have sinned, it is possible that they have later become righteous and can have eternal life.

… At least here I get to recognize the good that's in everybody and know that other people can see that good too.

Please explain, what do you mean with “good that’s in everybody�?

[Tcg]

What Bible are you reading??? Romans 3:23 (NRSV):

...since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God...

So we all do evil according to your own Bible.

That doesn’t say all are evil, it says “all have sinned�. Why do you need to change what it actually says?

Jagella didn't say all are evil, Jagella said all do evil. Why do you need to change what it actually says?



Tcg

[Jagella]

Please show one example?

I can cite three examples of how your outlook on people has resulted in untold misery and suffering starting with the Christian Inquisition. The Inquisition persecuted, imprisoned, tortured and executed all those they believed were the unrighteous spoken of in the New Testament. Inspired by what Jesus preached in the gospel, the Inquisition burned people at the stake believing those people were in league with the Devil, and since they would burn in hell, the Inquisition started their burning here on earth.

The second example of seeing many people as unrighteous is that of Hitler and the Nazis. The Nazis got their inspiration to hate Jews from the New Testament. Since the Jews in most cases refused to convert to Christianity, they could not be righteous. Since they were seen as unrighteous, they were punished for that alleged unrighteousness. The result was Hitler's "final solution" and six million Jews murdered.

Finally, Joseph Stalin murdered perhaps even more people than Hitler seeing those he murdered as dangerous and needing to be done away with. Although Stalin was an avowed atheist as an adult, as a boy he did a stint in a Christian seminary. It was there that some people say he learned of genocide as a way to rid the world of undesirables no doubt from reading about the genocides in the Old Testament.

Please explain why?

Try calling people here names like Jesus did, and see where it gets you.

If God deemed a good friend of yours to be unrighteous and evil, would it be OK for you if God killed that friend?

Yes.

If God killed your own mother, then you would approve.

If unrighteous would live eternally, they would turn life eternal suffering for all. That is why I don’t like that idea. One solution would be to let unrighteous live eternally in their own place and righteous in their own place. Reason why I don’t think that happens is that unrighteous people would make it eternal suffering for them.

If God needs to kill people he doesn't approve of, then if he had any brains he wouldn't have created them to begin with.

That doesn’t say all are evil, it says “all have sinned�. Why do you need to change what it actually says?

So sin isn't evil? I never heard that one before! LOL

Please explain, what do you mean with “good that’s in everybody�?

I think even the "worst" people can to some extent show some goodness like kindness. As an atheist I need not be blind to that fact.