Does Hell seem over the top ?

Originally posted by Coletti
I tend to agree with full disclosure. Don't mislead people - we're not selling cars - we're not selling anything - just spreading the truth.

edit: I see that this has grown quite long. I appreciate any of you who take the time to read it though it is addressed to orfeo.

No, I don't believe you must be masochists at all. Not any more than having already chosen to live a life without God, which brings certain kinds of pain even in this life.

I'm glad to find that you do not believe that I want to go to Hell. That's both silly and illogical. Having lived a life with God (You may, as some fundies here do, doubt the veracity of this claim.) and now I live one without God, and I can testify that I am much happier now. I am not familiar with the "certain kinds of pain" you are referring to here.

I hasten to add that I am NOT subscribing to the idea that "be a Christian and your life will be rosy". That's a load of rubbish and completely unbiblical to boot. I'm just saying the Christian experience of life is different to the non-Christian one.

Sure. I don't think many xtians subscribe to that idea. In fact, many might say that being an xtian makes your life harder because you have to die to yourself and "be in the world, but not of the world." Certainly, the xtian experience of life is different from the non-xtian one. Just as the Muslim experience of life is a little different from the non-Muslim, the redneck's from the dignitary's, and Bill Gate's from the typical Conganese child.

I am actually aware of a few examples of people who believe(d) they were going to hell and embraced the fact, but in general I agree that people would not choose to go there.

I would argue that those people either:

1) fully understand the description of Hell, but attach zero probability to its existence. You and I do this with all sorts of divine punishments described by other religions.

or

2) do not really understand what Hell is supposed to be. We also do this with some other religious judgements.

It's not an easy question and I certainly don't want to be glib about it.

I won't be glib, if you won't. With people like BF, Darfius, and Arby Hill, glibness is generally more efficient than sincere thoughtfulness.

I happen to think there is plenty of 'evidence' for God's existence in the universe.

That's fine. I would be interested in hearing the evidence, but if you do choose to present some please verify that it passes these criteria first:

1) It must be something that natural explainations do not account for more parsimoniously. For example, don't point to how the light bulb works and say that it is a miracle that only God can account for (peopel 300 years ago would likely have done this very thing). The same goes with other natural processes (e.g. the diversity of life).

2) Given it passes (1), it must further be evidence of your particular god, God (i.e. Yahweh). Too often, theist equivocate between Yahweh and a deistic first cause. You must show that this evidence points only to or much more strongly towards your particular god and away from all others.

The Bible isn't really interested in proving God's existence - it assumes it and works from there to discussing what he is like.

I agree. That's why I find it so disappointing when believers try to show me that God exists by quoting the Bible.

You have to wonder what it is that people all over the world saw to believe in a spiritual dimension, because total atheism is a relatively new and trendy thing. They must have had some 'evidence' they found persuasive... or do you think that all ancient peoples were basically complete idiots, and that science can answer everything?

I have wondered that, as have anthropologists and psychologists. I have my suspicions, but nothing I would want to publish without a lot more research. I would point out though that even if most people have believed in a spiritual existence, this is not an indication that such a thing exists. We must consider their evidence for the claim. If they do not provide any rational reason to believe it, then we can dismiss it until solid evidence comes along.

This goes for things like animals that walk and speak like humans and elaborate 'pseudo-medical' ceremonies. Both seem to have been with man since his earliest stages of civilization, but neither one should be believed based solely upon its longevity or popularity.

Now this does not mean that they were 'idiots' as you suggest. They just had very little knowledge of the natural world. Anthropomorphisms provided explainations for how our world worked. I'm sure that they had their 'evidence,' but in light of broader and more accurate knowledge we know these 'evidences' are not really evidences at all.

I do not think science can answer everything. I think that when it comes to acquiring knowledge of the physical universe, the scientific method has proven itself hands down to be vastly superior to other methods with respect to accuracy and predictive power.

One final thing, atheism is not a 'new and trendy' thing. I would first argue that atheism has existed as long as man has since everyone is born atheistic. Most are then indoctrinated as they grow up. Some, if not for indoctrination, would remain atheistic, while others would likely develop there own theism since the fallacy of anthropomorphism is very tempting.

Moreover we have references to accusations of atheism even as early as Plato, who writes of Socrates being accused of atheism. Now you might object that often atheism was employed then to mean "not believing the gods worshipped by the hegemony." This is true (In fact, the Romans called the early xtians "atheists" when they executed them.). Nevertheless the concept of a godlessness certainly existed by this time. Consider Democritus' philosophy of the materialistic universe. While I have not found anything that claims that Democritus or his fellow atomists openly denyed or affirmed the existence of any god or gods, his philosophy of the nature of the universe is completely silent about them. In the East, Jainism and early Buddhism were/are also atheistic.

In the West however, atheism may have become more 'trendy' if you mean that it won't get you executed any longer. That isn't true in all parts of the world of course. Moreover, I would say that it's certainly not 'trendy' in America.

Originally posted by eagles54
I can't speak for him but I think he meant that people tend to compartmentalize their perceptions of God.

Originally posted by sasquatch672
It's an ostentatious way for born-agains to advertise their uber-holiness to the great unwashed, in an attempt to make the great unwashed feel left out of the Heaven Club. "MY piety is greater than YOUR piety. MY reverence is greater than YOUR reverence. I am saved and YOU are not. NYAH NYAH NYAH!!!"

You don't show God respect by capitalizing ...[text shortened]... I worship all day, every day. By giving my best in life. You guys? You're all dilletantes.

Originally posted by telerion
In the East, Jainism and early Buddhism were/are also atheistic.

Originally posted by eagles54
Actually, Buddhism is a tradition that does not claim there is no God, only that God's existence or non-existence is irrelevant to the understanding and elimination of suffering.

The Buddha never denied the existence of God when questioned, but maintained so-called Noble Silence.

Originally posted by blindfaith101
I have always stated the Saving Power of JESUS CHRIST. I have always written what the WORD OF GOD has to say. All of what I have said states the belief in JESUS CHRIST and the Saving Power HE offers. What I have stated is what going to happen to those that reject JESUS CHRIST Saving Power.
There is nothing to understand but the thruth, you either acce ...[text shortened]... asting punishment.
You made an interresting quote from St Paul from where did you misquote it.

Originally posted by blindfaith101
You have chosen your road. If you ever have had a chance to accept the Salvation that freely given by JESUS CHRIST. And you reject HIM than you are headed for everlasting punishment. If you have ever read HIS words and teachings the punishment will be worst. Repent, Repent and accept the teachings and Saving Power of JESUS CHRIST.

ckOriginally posted by FelixMc
In reply, and extending what I said on Page 7:

No Offence, but to me - what you said sounds like you are towing the party line. Why Jesus Christ and not Allah, or Buddha?

Come on - I'm asking for a reasoned debate here, not JC #1' just because', that is a poor argument.

Why should I live my life by someone else's standards - your saying these ...[text shortened]... We're the cockroach.

Again, I do not not wish to offend...even the cockroaches out there.

Originally posted by menace71
Well I think you hit that on the nail but Christians believe that God became flesh & dwelt amoung us in the person of Christ. Kinda like coming to talk to us the cockroaches LOL 🙂 Manny

Originally posted by sasquatch672
What I don't get is why people like BF101, RBHILL, Darfius, and their lot try to convert anybody at all. "Because it's my Christian duty to save souls"? Please. Isn't it supreme arrogance for you - for anyone - to say that God favors you? How do you know? What if he doesn't, and you're really pissing him off?