29 Jan 11
Originally posted by whodeyInterestingly, the explanation often given by theists for the suffering in this life - is that it is only temporary, and the next life makes it insignificant.
I think that hell is torment and suffering, is it not? Conversly, heaven is used to describe happiness and bliss. We experience both to various degrees here on earth, so if there is a next life, why should either be exempt?
29 Jan 11
Originally posted by jaywillSo a book written by men, and only men, well, a couple of women got there accidentally but mainly by men and for sure no god involved, religious people have supreme arrogance to assume they know the heart of a non-revealing god. All you have is a book. That's all you have is a book.
[b]=================================
Also, why does a GOD NEED GLORY?
It already knows everything about everytime and place and person and alien, what need is there for this god for glory from the pathetic beings called humans?
=======================================
Your question foolishly misunderstands God's heart COMPLETELY. The Bib ...[text shortened]... d's heart and His full salvation.
www.recoveryversions.org[/b]
Why didn't your god come down to us lowly humans 100,000 years ago when modern brains first appeared? Why doesn't it come down now, surely the last 100 years have been devastatingly evil on many levels. What was so evil 2000 years ago that isn't now? It seems to me we need a god more than ever but where is your non-appearing god? Not here for sure, all we have is your word, and the word of a billion or so other christians who hope against hope for such a god.
You nor any of the 7 billion people on Earth know anything about any god. Men made gods not the other way round.
29 Jan 11
Originally posted by big bernWell many here would argue that Hell, will be seen, touched and heard.
As far as Spirituality, it is in my opinion something that cannot be seen ,touched,heard etc.
There are threads here about Richard Dawkings, the big bang, lying, and more, all of which do not fit your definition of 'spiritual'.
29 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadI can't speak for all theists, but from my vantage point sin in responsible for suffering. Therefore, where sin ends suffering ends and where it resides suffering continues.
Interestingly, the explanation often given by theists for the suffering in this life - is that it is only temporary, and the next life makes it insignificant.
29 Jan 11
Originally posted by twhiteheadWell, knowing full well what they were doing they not only rebelled against God in
So can we ask the same questions on behalf of the devil and his angels?
God's Kingdom they also tempted into sin the human race, helping to bring about
all the pain and suffering that came as a reult. A being and a race bent upon evil
the flames of Hell a just recompense in my opinion. With the human race we are
acting not only with knowledge, but also faith, and there has been a way made
for us to repent while Satan and his devils don’t want to repent and will not.
Kelly
30 Jan 11
Originally posted by whodeyTrue......the sinner suffers and the sinless suffers, but the suffering of the sinner is one hundred fold.
Christ suffered. Does that mean he sinned? Nope. The fact remains that we all live in a world of sin, therefore, we all suffer.
Three types of suffering....
1. Adhyatmika.....suffering from ones own body and mind.
2. Adhibhautika......suffering from other living entities.
3. Adhidaivika........suffering from natural calamities.
30 Jan 11
Originally posted by FabianFnasIs this like saying "I don't believe in the police, therefore I cannot go to jail"?
As me as being a non-christian (and non-jew and non-muslem), I am safe from any religious hell.
To go to hell you must believe in it first. I don't. Christians can go to hell. I cannot.
Think again.
30 Jan 11
Originally posted by vishvahetuYou forgot
True......the sinner suffers and the sinless suffers, but the suffering of the sinner is one hundred fold.
Three types of suffering....
1. Adhyatmika.....suffering from ones own body and mind.
2. Adhibhautika......suffering from other living entities.
3. Adhidaivika........suffering from natural calamities.
4. Adhivishvahetika.......suffering from reading your posts.
30 Jan 11
Originally posted by twhitehead1. I used a colloquialism. I could have as easily said "The punishment is not for having no faith." Do I really have to dumb down everything I say here to be understood? True, when you have no faith, you cannot be redeemed, but your punishment is not for having no faith, your punishment is for your sins.
So what is the test that you referred to all about and what happens when you fail it?
[b]Sin is abhorrent to God, and it requires a price.
Is that something you can explain, or something that you do not have an explanation for? Does it make sense to you, or is it just something you take on faith?[/b]
2. Yes, no, yes and yes.
30 Jan 11
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonThis would go against the concept of free will. We have free will so we can never claim that we had no choice. God does not want puppets.
Why would a 'god' take the chance that you will not repent if that 'god' doesn't want you to fail to repent and is all-powerful so can avoid the risk of you not repenting?