The Morality Of Saving People From Hell

Originally posted by zerimar65
How do I know? I'm not sure if I can answer that to anybody's satisfaction. I would say faith AND trust. Same thing I would have with people. If a person promises me something, I can only go on their word and have faith in them and trust that they will do what they say.

Then you're placed in a position of believing any promise. You'll be in a grave still waiting for politicians to honor their words

I don't know about non-believers. Do they have faith and trust in anything? The only reason I would say a non-believer should believe in such a thing is if they are concerned about their eternal salvation. If they can comprehend an existence beyond this one, although it is unknown, it is promised to be totally awesome. I really cannot convince anybody of anything. Especially a non-believer. All I would be able to do is share what I've been taught and what I have learned and my own experiences. I have no physical proof. Even though it might sound far fetched and fairy tale like, they've heard it. They have to make their own decisions.

Yes, non-believers have faith and trust in probably everything you do except god. I'm prepared to accept that one exists if one can be demonstrated to exist. Same with "eternal salvation". As it stands now, there's really no good reason to believe in any of those things.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Same with "eternal salvation". As it stands now, there's really no good reason to believe in any of those things.

There's better reason not to.

I have a serious problem with living for a reward at the end - - and/or - - being good to appease a mythical promise.

I think you lose sight of now/today - - - are handicapped/limited by dogma - - - AND man-made fears/rules/restrictions - - - in the name of god.

There is much more integrity in being human purely for the sake of humanity. Contributing all that you can each day and for future generations.

Originally posted by DarkKnight76
Well, once I tell you I am not interested in your voodoo mumbojumbo, then it is time to shut up and let me burn.

I agree. Yet, others then complain how a merciful God could let people go to hell. Well if you had a choice and rejected it, then don't complain. Same with all things in life including those who didn't invest in Gold at $400 years ago etc etc.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Same with "eternal salvation". As it stands now, there's really no good reason to believe in any of those things.

There's better reason not to.

I have a serious problem with living for a reward at the end - - and/or - - being good to appease a mythical promise.

I think you lose sight of now/today - - - are handicapped/limited by dogma - - - AND man-made fears/rules/restrictions - - - in the name of god.

There is much more integrity in being human purely for the sake of humanity. Contributing all that you can each day and for future generations.

I agree completely. It also has otherwise rational, intelligent people going through life expecting someone to wave a magic wand over them, to expect a post-mortem paradise oasis, feeling supernaturally "protected" from tragedy and imagine their dead relatives are helping them through life from beyond the ether.

With no evidence for any of it.

Originally posted by daggyz
Well if you had a choice and rejected it, then don't complain.

There is no choice. Firstly, I cannot choose to believe in things not proven to exist.

And let's say the "choice" as laid out in the bible is correct. You can choose to worship god or go to Hell.

That's not a choice.

Originally posted by daggyz

Originally posted by DarkKnight76
Well, once I tell you I am not interested in your voodoo mumbojumbo, then it is time to shut up and let me burn.

I agree. Yet, others then complain how a merciful God could let people go to hell. Well if you had a choice and rejected it, then don't complain. Same with all things in life including those who didn't invest in Gold at $400 years ago etc etc.

As I mentioned before, there is no hell. It is a creation of the mind. Fictional place. God is not some entity who smiles and frowns upon things.
Its beyond your understanding. Any christian who claims to know is being ignorant as well.

reply to post by Shadow Herder

As I mentioned before, there is no hell. It is a creation of the mind. Fictional place. God is not some entity who smiles and frowns upon things. Its beyond your understanding. Any christian who claims to know is being ignorant as well.

So ..umm.. who made you the expert of what is total truth and undeniable?

.. while there may not be a hell.. tell me why we have such darkness.. and things of evil nature in this world?

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Originally posted by autowrench

I always ask the religious person trying to save me, which God are you talking about?

God exists. You cannot doubt His existence, and that is one essential point.

I'm sorry, but I can and do doubt the existence of any god, and for good reason. Your assertions that a god exists doesn't relieve my doubt.

Since you seem certain could you tell me how you know a god exists?

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

How do you know? As a believer, certain you have faith and you may believe such things because of it. But, what of non-believers? Why should they believe such a thing? How could you convince them that they should?

Perhaps you did not see my reasonings.....
post#1
post#2
...note: these are on p.15. You might have to scroll down to view the posts. The links are not linking fully, it seems.

Oh.... I get it... TOE- Theory of Evolution..... Debunked. Try the following on for size:

Many will make the argument of no-fossils found for the gaps of evolution of many species. While this is true, and many (all?) are still not accounted for, there are even more reasonings to consider. If evolution is true, then consider these:

-If we evolved from apes, why then are primates: chimpanzees, gorillas, etc. not the pets of choice? i.e. why are dogs considered "man's best friend?" Why do people relate better to dogs? Did we actually evolve from dogs? sic

-Supposedly, the sea is where everything began. If this is true, then it's logical to conclude that after billions of years, the most evolved creatures would be in the sea. Following this logic, then why are there so many evolutionary conflicts- as follows:
a. Why do fresh-water fish not swim out to salt water. Conversely, why are salt-water fish not in fresh water rivers and lakes?
b. Why are tropical-sea fish not all over the world? Why are certain fish not found in the tropics?
c. Why are some deep-sea creatures only found in the deep sea? Why are not all species found in the ocean able to be in all parts of the ocean? Did these fish not have enough time to 'evolve' yet? Yes... they are comfortable where they already are, and thrive there. That's not the point I'm making. What I am saying is that after all this time, fish, etc. should be much more adaptable.

-Evolution states that different species if faced with the possibility of extinction- animals can adapt to new surroundings and environments. If so, then why are so many species right now currently threatened with extinction, and why are so many people all up-in-arms about this potentially happening? If evolution is true, then these people should just relax. You can't have it both ways.

-Why do certain birds migrate each and every year? They fly south for the winter, and back north in the spring. Surely after all this time, billions of years, they should have found a nice middle spot somewhere and just stayed there. Like as they are flying over, say the south... they might think: "This is crazy!!! We can just stay here year-round. We don't need to do this trip anymore." Humpback whales migrate to the Hawaiian islands every year to mate.... Monarch butterflies migrate from all over the country to Mexico every year.... What is the evolutionary explanation for this? Don't butterflies have better things to do, or are they guided by an unseen God to migrate? Why is it that only Monarch butterflies migrate? Surely after all this time, they should have figured out a better plan.... No?

-Speaking of birds, why is it that not one type of bird developed arms, paws or four legs? You would have thought that they noticed that these things are common, and useful, to most other animals... for a reason... No? Not one bird species? None? Taking it the other way, why is it that hardly any animals other than birds and rats (bats, lol) fly? Flying is a great feat... There should be flying dogs, horses, elephants, etc... if evolution was working the way that they say it should.

Following this line of reasoning… there are probably infinite different ‘deficiencies’ that animals 'should be' possessing but do not- not because they did not evolve as such... but because the Creator wished it to be so. Possibly others can help expand this out… to clarify things for our doubting friends a little bit more.

The sum is: don't buy it... evolution is a farce. Jesus Is, and will always be the True one. "Call upon Him in the day of trouble, and He will deliver you."

In the end... nobody was ever argued into the Kingdom.... The above are just some points to ponder and to pray about.... Thanks for reading these posts....

Originally posted by MarkJS
-Supposedly, the sea is where everything began. If this is true, then it's logical to conclude that after billions of years, the most evolved creatures would be in the sea. Following this logic, then why are there so many evolutionary conflicts- as follows:

That is not logic, it's inductive reasoning and unfortunately it's all predicated on your misunderstanding on evolution.

That aside, the attempt to disprove a scientific theory does not make a competing hypothesis correct. I asked you how you knew that the claims in the bible were true and you seem to have provided me an argument against evolution. I don't get it: this is a non sequitur.

Originally posted by gabby2011
reply to post by Shadow Herder

 

So ..umm.. who made you the expert of what is total truth and undeniable?

.. while there may not be a hell.. tell me why we have such darkness.. and things of evil nature in this world?

The localization of rewards and punishments in fixed places exists only in man's imagination; it proceeds from his' tendency to materialize and to circumscribe the things of which he cannot comprehend the essential infinitude.

God leaves man free to choose his road; so much the worse for him if he takes the wrong one; his pilgrimage will be all the longer. If there were no mountains, man could not comprehend the possibility of ascending and descending; if there were no rocks, he could not understand that there are such things as hard bodies. It is necessary for the spirit to acquire experience; and, to that end, he must know both good and evil. It is for this purpose that souls are united to bodies

more

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by zerimar65
How do I know? I'm not sure if I can answer that to anybody's satisfaction. I would say faith AND trust. Same thing I would have with people. If a person promises me something, I can only go on their word and have faith in them and trust that they will do what they say.

Then you're placed in a position of believing any promise. You'll be in a grave still waiting for politicians to honor their words

I don't know about non-believers. Do they have faith and trust in anything? The only reason I would say a non-believer should believe in such a thing is if they are concerned about their eternal salvation. If they can comprehend an existence beyond this one, although it is unknown, it is promised to be totally awesome. I really cannot convince anybody of anything. Especially a non-believer. All I would be able to do is share what I've been taught and what I have learned and my own experiences. I have no physical proof. Even though it might sound far fetched and fairy tale like, they've heard it. They have to make their own decisions.

Yes, non-believers have faith and trust in probably everything you do except god. I'm prepared to accept that one exists if one can be demonstrated to exist. Same with "eternal salvation". As it stands now, there's really no good reason to believe in any of those things.

Okay. But getting back to your original question, I don't think it's supposed to be a moral action, but it's not an unethical one.


re: Then you're placed in a position of believing any promise. You'll be in a grave still waiting for politicians to honor their words

when I say "people", I'm talking about people I know personally who are in my life. Not politicians. I know about politicians and I have no faith or trust in any of them. I won't be in a grave waiting for anything other than Christ's return. That is, if I happen to go before he comes back, but it doesn't seem like it.

reply to post by Shadow Herder


Got my shat straight in very next post. Before you jumped in. I even said sorry. Get your sheet straight. And there is nothing you could save me from except your incessant ridiculous over zealous arrogant annoyingly wordy babble

Whatcha talking about? Sorry for not seeing your correction. "your incessant ridiculous over zealous arrogant annoyingly wordy babble "..... lol Why do you say such negative things to me when all I offered was a perspective? Thats not nice. Maybe you should take up a faith. May it guide you to bettering yourself. You mean arrogant like that? lol.... ease up brother.

edit on 3-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by zerimar65
Okay. But getting back to your original question, I don't think it's supposed to be a moral action, but it's not an unethical one.

I think it's done with ethical intentions though often isn't perceived as such.

when I say "people", I'm talking about people I know personally who are in my life. Not politicians. I know about politicians and I have no faith or trust in any of them. I won't be in a grave waiting for anything other than Christ's return. That is, if I happen to go before he comes back, but it doesn't seem like it.

You know Jesus personally?

reply to post by Shadow Herder


You say any Christian who claims to understand god is ignorant....I seem to recall you giving a bit of a diatribe as to why bodies are united with souls....that seems to me like you claiming to have an understanding of something that nothing other than god would be privy to. You claim there is no hell...sounds like you certainly think you have an understanding of god that you would call anyone else ignorant for claiming to understand

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
If there were no mountains, man could not comprehend the possibility of ascending and descending; if there were no rocks, he could not understand that there are such things as hard bodies. It is necessary for the spirit to acquire experience; and, to that end, he must know both good and evil.

My parents taught me all that.

God was not necessary

reply to post by Annee


Yea fifty cent said it to...sunny days wouldn't be special if it wasn't for rain. Joy wouldn't feel so good if it wasn't for pain. Doesn't take god or a million words to understand or say that.

reply to post by FloatingGhost


I said any Christian that claims to"Know"...... not "understand" as you misquoted me. I can begin to understand something but that is far from knowing.