Question for Religious Folk - A BIG Gap in Mainstream Religious Ideology.

I'm going to try and keep this short and sweet without attacking or mentioning any religion in particular.

Ok so for arguments sake... Lets say that there is an omnipresent god up 'there' who is waiting to forgive and accept anyone who accepts his/hers word as truth. This god will also banish people to hell for not accepting his/hers word as truth.

So what about all the people in the world who have never heard of Christ or Allah or whatever? All the people who have never had a chance to accept any of these religions? Real human beings who live off nature and don't rape it. People who don't have a ****ed up political/economical hierarchy. REAL HUMAN BEINGS.

Question - Are these fellow humans going to go to hell just because some jumped up, western tainted religious poison hasn't reached their habitat/country/tribe yet?

ERM.. I DON'T-THINK-SO

-TU

P.S - For the record I know quite a few religious people, a couple of them being my mum and her husband. I have nothing against religious people at all, Just what religion has done to the western world over many years.

reply to post by TechUnique

Question - Are these fellow humans going to go to hell just because some jumped up, western tainted religious poison hasn't reached their habitat/country/tribe yet?

Answer - Nope, we are all going to be Judged according our deeds.

Peace

reply to post by TechUnique

Are these fellow humans going to go to hell just because some jumped up, western tainted religious poison hasn't reached their habitat/country/tribe yet?

No, they wouldn't. If they go to hell, it would be because of their sin and what they did or didn't do with the revelation that was given to them.

Just to throw it out there, from my point of view, God is completely capable of reaching a group of people himself without needing us. Yes, normally we're the ones that need to go into the world and spread the good news, but ultimately it's God that saves people and thus, he could reach these people himself that won't hear God's gospel from a westerner.

Just what religion has done to the western world over many years.

Don't forget that not everyone that has claimed to be a participant of religion (Christianity I'm assuming is the religion you have in mind) really was. Throughout history there have been many people that have gone under the banner of "religion" or "Christianity" that were just using the name for their own gain.

From what I've read in the Bible, NO... people who are truly iggnorant of a Biblical or Christian God will not go to hell... the Apostle Paul addressed this with the greeks. they had a statue dedicated to the unknown god...he identified that deity as the God...Yahweh..or the Lord.

Hell is meant for those that willingly reject God, His words, and His teachings.

That being said, Hell is not meant for those that reject man's distortion and contamination of the word...aka Organized Religion... it is those folks that have soured the road to salvation for so many.

Man inherently knows there is something greater...or bigger than himself. What we call it and how we choose to live it is up to the individual...do I call Him Lord?...God?...Yahweh?.... the Great Spirit?... Allah?... Spirit in the Sky?...

I'll leave that to you.

i am pretty sure that the Mormons have to identify the deceased and convert all who were not civilized enough to recognize JC as their savior to a posthumous mormonism, and then they can be saved......it is borderline insane to believe this, of course, but they do...funny how a bit of critical thinking always brings out the humorous fallacies in modern religious dogmatic thought...

Here's something that I have always tried to keep in mind over the years. Matt 7:21,22. "Not everyone who says to me Lord,Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven;but he who does the will of my Father in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, did we not prophesy in your name, and did we not cast out demons, and in your name perform many miracles? And then I will declare to them,' I never knew you; depart from me you who practice lawlessness." Just as there people who profess to be christians(and we've all met them), that are not, there are also those who have kept the words of God by nature and are children of God. Keep this in mind, there won't be anyone in heaven that shouldn't be there and no one will be left behind that should be there. I just try to get up each day and treat people the way you want to be treated and yes that includes even those who you don't think deserve it. IMO there's a big difference between religion and spirituality. Keep asking question and you'll get your answers. Have a good one.

Don't forget that not everyone that has claimed to be a participant of religion (Christianity I'm assuming is the religion you have in mind) really was. Throughout history there have been many people that have gone under the banner of "religion" or "Christianity" that were just using the name for their own gain.

Those people constitute a rather large portion of current "Christians," IMO. People who believe in war, people who are racists, priests who abuse children, ministers who are in it for the check, etc.

Originally posted by TechUnique
Ok so for arguments sake... Lets say that there is an omnipresent god up 'there' who is waiting to forgive and accept anyone who accepts his/hers word as truth. This god will also banish people to hell for not accepting his/hers word as truth.

So what about all the people in the world who have never heard of Christ or Allah or whatever? All the people who have never had a chance to accept any of these religions? Real human beings who live off nature and don't rape it. People who don't have a ****ed up political/economical hierarchy. REAL HUMAN BEINGS.

Consider:

"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well." Mark 16

Bear in mind that according to the above text, non believers will be "condemned" and that true believers will have certain signs by which they can be recognised, including being able to drink deadly poison and be unharmed, and being able to miraculously cure the sick. Since no Christian can do such things, it seems that "all" Christians are anyway condemned.

Thus "Unless you believe and are able to drink deadly poison and be unharmed, you are not "saved." should be a Christian mantra, but since this is too difficult they substitute other more vague mantras. I should point out that the Jim Jones Christian suicide cult tried to do this and they all died.

Disclaimer: Please don't try to drink deadly poison at home without telling your parents first, or without the supervision of a qualified religious charlatan (a priest); I would however suggest "testing" out all adult Christians, with regards to whether they can drink deadly poison and whether they can miraculously cure leprosy, blindesss etc.

Lux

reply to post by Lucifer777


Mark 16:9ff probably aren't original to Mark's gospel so far as we presently know. Those that do accept them as original extend these miraculous acts only to the early disciples; some of what is mentioned in these verses indeed did take place in church history (cf Acts). Early church history supports this view somewhat as it records the progressive dying out of the miraculous gifts in the majority of the church.

this is addressed in early part of book of Romans; all humans are given a basic moral/ethic program (spiritiual equivalent of windows 1.0). those who have never heard the gospel will be judged case-by-case based on what they did and how much did they understand.
the only certain doomed are those who heard and understood the gospel message and knowingly rejected same.

Originally posted by octotom
reply to post by Lucifer777

 

Mark 16:9ff probably aren't original to Mark's gospel so far as we presently know.

Yes, however the conclusions of textual and historical Biblical criticism are that the Gospels are a fabrication which have been edited and re-edited, and which contain numerous contradictions, additions and also verbatim similarlites between the 3 synoptic Gospels (i.e., they have just copied another document). If there is a passage which Biblical fanatics object to they often refer to a conclusion of textual criticism, but they tend to reject the overall conclusions which would negate their entire faith. How convenient.

See: "Is the New Testament Fabricated & Fraudulent? The New Testament: A Fabrication, created for Social Control and Mass Hypnosis. The Conclusions of Historical and Textual Studies of the New Testament." on: www.davidicke.com...


Christian Hypocrisy.

One of the hypocritical and dishonest arguments often raised by Christians who are uncomfortable with certain ridiculous quotations by the Jesus of the Gospels is to ignore "Biblical Textual Criticism" and historical studies which substantiate that the New Testament is a fraud, at least when they are quotng statements which they are comfortable with, and then and to refer to the conclusions of "Biblical Textual Criticism" and historical studies when they wish to claim that certain teachings of the Gospels, which they may wish to reject, may not be genuine, or that it is a "later addition" to the text, such as the ridiculous statement of the Jesus of the Gospels, that the true believers would have the power to safely drink deadly poison and miraculously heal the sick and cure leprosy, blindness etc., and that those who did not have such powers were to be "condemned."

'Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.' Mark 16:15-18

While it is certainly the case that there has been editing and additions to the texts of the Gospels, the conclusions of "Biblical Textual Criticism" and historical studies are simply that the "entirety" of the Gospels have been fabricated, edited and are a fictional "construction" which occurred centuries after the alleged life of Jesus.

Bear in mind also that this conclusion that the New Testament has been fabricated, is not merely the conclusion of a few fringe conspiracy theorists, it is a widely held view among academics, historians and scholars; such critical studies in the 21st century forms part of the modern graduate syllabus of "Religious Studies."
................

Not only do modern Christians "cherry pick" the Biblical texts, discarding whatever is inconvenient for them (such as Jesus' alleged commands not to wear shoes, carry money, or have more than one robe), they also "cherry pick" the conclusions of "Biblical Textual Criticism (which is a scholarly endevour, not a religious one)" when the are uncomfortable with particular texts, and yet they disregard the overall historical and textual evidence of the fabrication, editing and re-editing of the texts......Ibid

The New Testament is essentially derived from a fabricated compliation of "in all, two thousand two hundred and thirty-one scrolls and legendary tales of gods and saviors, together with a record of the doctrines orated by them" (Life of Constantine, cited Ibid (see above hyperlink))


Lux

reply to post by TechUnique


If there is this "god" that you are describing...why are you asking us?


Am I supposed to answer for god?

Originally posted by MindSpin
reply to post by TechUnique

 

If there is this "god" that you are describing...why are you asking us?


Am I supposed to answer for god?

No but It would be appreciated if someone could shed some light on their beloved faith and its flaws which condemn perfectly innocent people to hell.

It doesn't make sense to me whatsoever.

I am a very spiritual person (Not just saying that, I am VERY spiritual) but I find that religion suppresses the human spirit and condemns anyone who doesn't believe in some omnipresent god (Take your pick)

I am asking anyone who wants to answer because as far as I am aware there is no "God hotline"

Originally posted by TechUnique

Originally posted by MindSpin
reply to post by TechUnique

 

If there is this "god" that you are describing...why are you asking us?


Am I supposed to answer for god?

No but It would be appreciated if someone could shed some light on their beloved faith and its flaws which condemn perfectly innocent people to hell.

all have sinned; no one is 'innocent'.
as I mentioned in previous post, those with imperfect knowledge will be judged case-by-case.
what does God say?
"Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?"

reply to post by Lucifer777

Yes, however the conclusions of textual and historical Biblical criticism are that the Gospels are a fabrication which have been edited and re-edited,

Some involved in textual criticism believe that, but by no means is it as clear as you make it sound. Those that think that the Gospels have been fabricated actually tend to be on the fringe.

and which contain numerous contradictions,

Oh really?

additions and also verbatim similarlites between the 3 synoptic Gospels (i.e., they have just copied another document).

Umm. No one denies that the synoptics used sources. In fact, Luke makes it fairly clear that sources were used in the writing of his Gospel.

David Icke isn't exactly a textual critic either.

This is why these religious groups travel the world and try to convert them. They take food and water and medicine and say "This is what our god provides for you". Don't worship your silly idols worship the invisible guy up in the heavens.

I don't think so due to Deuteronomy 10:15, which says:

Thou shalt surely give him, and thine heart shall not be grieved when thou givest unto him: because that for this thing the LORD thy God shall bless thee in all thy works, and in all that thou puttest thine hand unto.

Originally posted by TechUnique
Ok so for arguments sake... Lets say that there is an omnipresent god up 'there' who is waiting to forgive and accept anyone who accepts his/hers word as truth. This god will also banish people to hell for not accepting his/hers word as truth.

I dont really reply to such threads anymore, but sometimes the bug bites

I always thought it was strange that an omnipresent being could be "up there" and not "in here." Being, you know, omnipresent and all Interestingly, the bible says something similar in.. Luke 17:20-21

"Once, on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, 21 nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst.”

I could never make head nor tails of the mainstream belief, when using such terms as omnipresent, and similar verses as above, that says 'this' or 'that' can not be God. I also see this represented within your statement, so perhaps you could shed light on how you view it?

So what about all the people in the world who have never heard of Christ or Allah or whatever? All the people who have never had a chance to accept any of these religions? Real human beings who live off nature and don't rape it. People who don't have a ****ed up political/economical hierarchy. REAL HUMAN BEINGS.

Question - Are these fellow humans going to go to hell just because some jumped up, western tainted religious poison hasn't reached their habitat/country/tribe yet?

This one never felt that an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent being (even if only viewed as the "physical" universe) was relegated to just one religion or any human conceptualization or representation. Organized religion was created to profit, persuade, and control the populace through fear and/or "acceptance, as long as you conform." With great success as well. Organized religion has NOT been the only thing to do this and similar social structures can be seen everywhere from high school social dynamics, to riots. However, the base teachings are, in many cases, direct similes of other human group's conceptualization of the same thing (the universe). Which is quite interesting.

ERM.. I DON'T-THINK-SO

-TU

It is not up to you, or me, or religions. Regardless of the existence of anything.

P.S - For the record I know quite a few religious people, a couple of them being my mum and her husband. I have nothing against religious people at all, Just what religion has done to the western world over many years.

Lets not let religion absolve individuals of their own choices, and their consequences. It seems both sides of the coin continually do this. Those "against" religion says it is religions fault, and rarely speaks of the individuals involved. Placing all the blame on some nebulous and vague organization. Those "involved" in such religions believe their individual responsibilities are absolved as well, from the very same organization. In both cases, religion is allowed to absolve the "sins" and consequences of the individual choices, decisions, and responsibilities of those involved. That is probably the thing im responding to more than anything. Not only can it lead to dehumanization of a group (from one side), but also greatly facilitates the victim mentality (from the other).

reply to post by TechUnique


i think human beings get a choice after they die to choose jesus or not. i think in that case those who have not heard of him before would have an easier time saying yes than those who have and have steeled their heart against it.

reply to post by Lucifer777

Your objections, criticisms and choice of monicur, says more about you, than the love of God expressed through the person of Jesus Christ, however mythologized he may have been, and however mixed up or inaccurate the oral tradition. Just so you know..

The staw man God you wish to tear apart, based on Biblical literalism, isn't even the God many modern Christians hold dear anyway.

You're on a fools errand.