"You're going to hell!"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-09-2011, 09:05 PM (This post was last modified: 03-09-2011 09:37 PM by S.T. Ranger.)
RE: "You're going to hell!"
(03-09-2011 07:19 PM)nontheocrat Wrote:  Quick point, if my child offends me, betrays me, denies me, breaks my rules or refuses to love me. I can forgive her without a sacrifice or anyone dying. That makes me more holy and more moral than the god of the Bible.

If I had gods morals I would lock her in the basement and torture her forever for not doing exactly what I want.

Don't give me meaningless arguments about god being limited by his "holy rightous" nature. I call BS!
Now that I think about it a better analogy for the Christian god's morality is to kill my son who didn't offend me in order to forgive my daughter who did. I can't think of a more immoral monster.

Hello Nontheocrat, thanks for the input.

I have to reiterate, though, a point that is not being considered honestly, I feel, and that is this:

In comparing yourself as a parent to God the analogy breaks down on several points.

1-as a parent you have no authority to put your child to death;

2-if you did have that authority, their death would be on a physical level, not a spiritual level, as Matthew 10:28 teaches.

3-If your child did disobey law that warranted death, it would not be you that would sentence the child, as you are on the same level as the child when it comes to justice in the legal sense, much less be the one that executes the child.

In order for your argument to be equitable you would have to have an authority beyond that of a parent, it would also have to be as a judge.

God's description as a Father is given that we might have an understanding of HIm in human terms.

We could make the analogy closer by presenting this scenario:

You are a judge. A child grows up to become a murderer and you have the duty as a judge to weigh the evidence, and to either declare innocence based on that evidence, or guilt. If you render a verdict of guilty, then you are to sentence that murderer according to the law by which he is tried under.

It is similar with the verdict rendered upon the unjust: they are not God's children.

And for God to render the murderer innocent without fulfilling justice would be like you as a judge overlooking the crime of the murderer despite the evidence.

Hope that makes sense.

S.T.
(03-09-2011 08:02 PM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  1) I'm saying that the power struggle is never one sided by the mosquito reference.
I would determine the need general by the level of need to be saved. I'm not going to rate a human above any other life. I might place someone close to me (of any species) above a stranger, but that is a completely different context.

2) You fail to understand what scapegoating is. Self sacrifice is wholly different than ritual sacrifice. Placing your sins in a living organism and killing it for instance the jewish ritual with chickens. To sacrifice things in atonement is in no way taking any blame upon yourself.

3) Looking back over the quotes (which is laborious due to your difficulty with posting) I see that after your contradictory statement there was an explanation so sorry for not catching it previously. (I had saved it to wordpad to read easier too....)

4) And I am not baiting you by asking your opinion. I'm talking with you and continuing to personalize you in my mind. The issue of things like intersex and even homosexuality play a huge role in my life. I also am a public speaker on these topics. i am not looking for a certain answer or planning a already decided response. I am asking, I ask everyone.

5) I think if you want to talk here you might need to take a step back. You are (probably) a bit overwhelmed with the feedback and it seems your posts are deteriorating in clarity.



6) That's pretty common when you're in the spotlight. I'm sorry if you think I was not trying to answer your questions. I answered most of them right off the bat and some of these later ones I haven't answered yet but both of us still have loose ends currently. When you address so many points at once (which I am doing in order to keep up with you) the discussion becomes really difficult. We might talk better if we tone it down a bit, and I brought up my topics because there were many things being discussed and it's a central point to one of my oppositions of christianity which you asked.

As much as I would like to respond more completely, I am a little tired, and need to get some rest soon. I will number the responses, if that is okay.

1) Are you then saying that you would place the value of an animal as equal to that of a human being?


2) the "scapegoat" is the person who is saved. I need clarification as to your position about value of life. I am one that loves most animals (though I detest with every fiber of my body the ostrich), but I would not hesitate to sacrifice an animal to save a human.

In the context of animal sacrifice for the "covering" of sin, I can't say that it is something I relish, but at the same time, again, we are talking about man vs. animal. From a biblical standpoint, who's fault was it that animals had to be sacrificed? Before the fall, animals were vegetarian...they did not eat each other. In the millennial reign, I believe scripture teaches that animals will revert to that pattern, and I cannot wait. I would love to walk with lions.

Any way, I can understand the abhorrence of animal savrifice, I do as well. I am glad that I am not under the law. I guess God is seen as horrible because He made this as a covering for sins, that man not die, but have a way of atonement. But I cannot place the value of one of the animals that were sacrificed over even one of the humans they died in the place of.

Lastly, it is not "taking the blame upon yourself (the offerer)," it was a "transference of guilt in picture (which is what Judaism was, a picture that was fulfilled in the Person of Christ) from the sinner to the animal. Search laying on of hands on Strong's concordance for examples.

3) I appreciate that.


4) I appreciate this aspect and try to be sensitive to it as best as I can. As I said, I am not here to try to convert someone from something, but simply understand better the basis for certain beliefs. I love talking with atheists, but unfortunately, and usually due to attitude, they are mostly banned before I get a chance to do so.

I will say I take a fundamental view of scriptural teaching, and you will more likely than not not be happy with my answers to your questions or comments. I try to base my beliefs and attitudes upon the instruction found in God's word, and we both know what God's word has to say, right? At the very least, you will probably hear what you have heard before, though I hope I do not come across as if I feel I am superior because my sin is different than yours.

And that is one thing that most Christians will not admit. I am not a sinless person. I have faults like everybody else.

I do not categorize sin that I might glorify myself by saying "My sin is more acceptable before God than yours!"

My sin is actually less acceptable to Him.

5) Come on! I thought I did okay, though I did have to rush a bit. As I am doing so now.


6) I detected irritation. And, no worries, I am not overwhelmed. Short on time, and I sometimes make the mistake of trying to hurry, because I do not like to leave a single point unaddressed. Because if I do, I am accused of dodging, and my pride gets in the way sometime.

Look, as far as this issue that is important to you, I realize that. But before discussing that, I need to know what type of discussion I can look forward to. I have already been assailed by some who have no interest in either discussion or debate, but seem only capable of oneliners and insults. I will not waste too much time for unsubstantiated and uncalled for nonsense.

Since this issue is probably the most important issue, I think both of us should "step back." If we do get into this discussion, I would prefer that it is actually genuine discussion not hindered by emotion, and I know that this is a topic that will certainly get emotional.

Okay, all I have time for today. I will be back when I can.

S.T.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2011, 02:51 AM
 
RE: "You're going to hell!"
(31-08-2011 08:33 AM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  since there is no real reason for anyone to have certainty in discussion of a figure known as Jesus who was the son of god/messiah/prophet depending on which gospel we're discussing.
It's a beautiful thing to see the different perspectives of Christ Jesus in the four gospels. The Son of God, King of Kings...etc. It might escape your notice but what you just stated actually reinforces the idea that God inspired men to write the gospels.

If you so desire we can discuss this further...
Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2011, 02:57 AM
RE: "You're going to hell!"
(04-09-2011 02:51 AM)Hunted By A Freak Wrote:  
(31-08-2011 08:33 AM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  since there is no real reason for anyone to have certainty in discussion of a figure known as Jesus who was the son of god/messiah/prophet depending on which gospel we're discussing.
It's a beautiful thing to see the different perspectives of Christ Jesus in the four gospels. The Son of God, King of Kings...etc. It might escape your notice but what you just stated actually reinforces the idea that God inspired men to write the gospels.

If you so desire we can discuss this further...

It's a beautiful thing only if you're wearing Christian goggles. To everyone else it demonstrates how fabricated the gospels are. HBAF, you need to do some reading about the origins of the gospels.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
04-09-2011, 07:22 AM
RE: "You're going to hell!"
This was much easier to read thank you.
1) I place all life at equal value what makes a cat more important than a blade of grass? Life is life and while valuing it all is difficult in a world where we are forced to destroy life in order to live I still see it as very important to value everything.

2) How many people who sacrificed at an alter escaped death? I happen to believe that absolutely everyone who lived at that time is dead. Death is an inevitability and there has yet to be an understood deterrent to it. Killing something simply to act like it takes away your guilt is simply hiding from yourself. Luckily some offerings weren't burnt and the people actually ate the meat, but often there would be no real purpose in the sacrifice. Those people still died and during their life killed a whole bunch of doves, turtles, lambs, and goats in the process. Scapegoating is not a term to defend. Do you like how politicians act nowadays? Scapegoating is when you remove yourself of guilt by blaming a third party.

4) I understand that you are concerned with how to respond, but there is really no need. You have answered most but do you understand one part I asked? I was born incomplete, at 3 days old I had a surgery to fix a penis that didn't work. As a child I had severe hormonal issues as my body fought between estrogen and testosterone production. I was not born male, I was declared male. I cannot procreate, and I've never fit into either category. I said I was an instant outsider because I am.

What would you think are the important points, both to those who are born without a biblically doctrined body and those who are unable to procreate. Both by the bible would be blemishes in the sight of god, but being born is of no personal vindictiveness.

6) I would never accuse you of dodging just continue mentioning something if I felt you needed to address it. I am not here to catch you. I'm here to talk, and the only time i will mention something like a catch is when something gets a bit too obvious. Everyone falls into patterns that can be written off with a single word, that doesn't really help the discussion which needs to be an earnest interest by both parties. I leave conversations if I see no point to them so don't worry.
How is the story corroborated by two men who disagree on the birthing place and the current ruler? Those are excessively big errors to just overlook.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2011, 01:00 PM
RE: "You're going to hell!"
(04-09-2011 07:22 AM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  This was much easier to read thank you.
1) I place all life at equal value what makes a cat more important than a blade of grass? Life is life and while valuing it all is difficult in a world where we are forced to destroy life in order to live I still see it as very important to value everything.

2) How many people who sacrificed at an alter escaped death? I happen to believe that absolutely everyone who lived at that time is dead. Death is an inevitability and there has yet to be an understood deterrent to it. Killing something simply to act like it takes away your guilt is simply hiding from yourself. Luckily some offerings weren't burnt and the people actually ate the meat, but often there would be no real purpose in the sacrifice. Those people still died and during their life killed a whole bunch of doves, turtles, lambs, and goats in the process. Scapegoating is not a term to defend. Do you like how politicians act nowadays? Scapegoating is when you remove yourself of guilt by blaming a third party.

4) I understand that you are concerned with how to respond, but there is really no need. You have answered most but do you understand one part I asked? I was born incomplete, at 3 days old I had a surgery to fix a penis that didn't work. As a child I had severe hormonal issues as my body fought between estrogen and testosterone production. I was not born male, I was declared male. I cannot procreate, and I've never fit into either category. I said I was an instant outsider because I am.

What would you think are the important points, both to those who are born without a biblically doctrined body and those who are unable to procreate. Both by the bible would be blemishes in the sight of god, but being born is of no personal vindictiveness.

6) I would never accuse you of dodging just continue mentioning something if I felt you needed to address it. I am not here to catch you. I'm here to talk, and the only time i will mention something like a catch is when something gets a bit too obvious. Everyone falls into patterns that can be written off with a single word, that doesn't really help the discussion which needs to be an earnest interest by both parties. I leave conversations if I see no point to them so don't worry.
How is the story corroborated by two men who disagree on the birthing place and the current ruler? Those are excessively big errors to just overlook.

Hello Lilith, thanks for the reply and the honesty. I will have to come back to this, as I do not wish to rush the response to this, and would like to seek the Lord's leading in responding.

I just wanted to let you know I have read the response, and it is not being ignored, I just want to give this more consideration before responding.

Thanks,

S.T.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2011, 05:41 PM
RE: "You're going to hell!"
(06-09-2011 01:00 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(04-09-2011 07:22 AM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  This was much easier to read thank you.
1) I place all life at equal value what makes a cat more important than a blade of grass? Life is life and while valuing it all is difficult in a world where we are forced to destroy life in order to live I still see it as very important to value everything.

2) How many people who sacrificed at an alter escaped death? I happen to believe that absolutely everyone who lived at that time is dead. Death is an inevitability and there has yet to be an understood deterrent to it. Killing something simply to act like it takes away your guilt is simply hiding from yourself. Luckily some offerings weren't burnt and the people actually ate the meat, but often there would be no real purpose in the sacrifice. Those people still died and during their life killed a whole bunch of doves, turtles, lambs, and goats in the process. Scapegoating is not a term to defend. Do you like how politicians act nowadays? Scapegoating is when you remove yourself of guilt by blaming a third party.

4) I understand that you are concerned with how to respond, but there is really no need. You have answered most but do you understand one part I asked? I was born incomplete, at 3 days old I had a surgery to fix a penis that didn't work. As a child I had severe hormonal issues as my body fought between estrogen and testosterone production. I was not born male, I was declared male. I cannot procreate, and I've never fit into either category. I said I was an instant outsider because I am.

What would you think are the important points, both to those who are born without a biblically doctrined body and those who are unable to procreate. Both by the bible would be blemishes in the sight of god, but being born is of no personal vindictiveness.

6) I would never accuse you of dodging just continue mentioning something if I felt you needed to address it. I am not here to catch you. I'm here to talk, and the only time i will mention something like a catch is when something gets a bit too obvious. Everyone falls into patterns that can be written off with a single word, that doesn't really help the discussion which needs to be an earnest interest by both parties. I leave conversations if I see no point to them so don't worry.
How is the story corroborated by two men who disagree on the birthing place and the current ruler? Those are excessively big errors to just overlook.

Hello Lilith, thanks for the reply and the honesty. I will have to come back to this, as I do not wish to rush the response to this, and would like to seek the Lord's leading in responding.

I just wanted to let you know I have read the response, and it is not being ignored, I just want to give this more consideration before responding.

Thanks,

S.T.
S.T.RANGER
Your whole belief system appears locked exclusively to Judeo/ Christian writings and rhetoric so it is probably a waste of time trying to divert from these dogmas; alow me to raise a few issues.
(1) The alleged fall, a fall from what....the coercion of some dictator superbeing?
(2) How are the Christian bona fides of god ever established?
(3) Some early Christian sects including the Marcionites saw Yahweh as a very limited god and Jesus representing the real god---(hierarchy of gods)
(4)Your loving god created a wasp that lays its eggs in beatles for the babies to eat their way out, a similar situation occurs with the miastor midge.
(5) In a one life scenario why should skeptics face an eternal bonfire.
(6) A god who displays extreme cruelty to non humans is unworthy of worship.
(7) All ad fidem arguments require devotion to an authority figure, whereby virtually anything deemed holy goes.
(8) How do you explain pre Judaism events, or do you see the Adam's family as our ancestors? Dodgy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2011, 05:42 PM
RE: "You're going to hell!"
After about 2 mins of listen to then lecture me and I would have told them I was a satanist, and to leave me alone.

If you tell them you are an atheists, you will likely just compel them to try harder to convert you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-09-2011, 07:45 PM
RE: "You're going to hell!"
(04-09-2011 02:51 AM)Hunted By A Freak Wrote:  It's a beautiful thing to see the different perspectives of Christ Jesus in the four gospels. The Son of God, King of Kings...etc. It might escape your notice but what you just stated actually reinforces the idea that God inspired men to write the gospels.

If you so desire we can discuss this further...

The idea of the Gospels being four different takes on Jesus would be interesting. Emphasizing some elements. Telling a story four times through different perspectives so that we can form different opinions about the subject each time. But that's not what the gospels are. The Gospels... are like Rashomon. The same story, recounted four different times, with wild contradictions. Maybe not as much dignity-saving lying as happened in Rashomon, but just as many problems in how to reconcile the contradicatory accounts.

Most notably (I believe this is in two gospels, but it might be in two different parts of the NT), is what happened to Judas. In one book, it says that Judas, remorseless, had his guts spill out on the field he bought with his blood-money, due to some good ol' fashioned god-wrath. Another book, says that Judas, filled with grief, hung himself. The exact means of death might be forgiven (Maybe he hung himself, and the decay of his rotting body causing his stomach to open), but whether Judas was remorseless enough to buy land with his blood-money, or so remorseful as to commit suicide, is not a minor detail.

This isn't the difference between one author seeing Jesus as the Humble Savior of Mankind ™, playing up his sacrifice, and his healing work, or another author seeing him as the King of Kings, playing up his wisdom and teachings for how to live. This is the difference between Judas being a cold-hearted bastard, and a man wracked with guilt to the point of suicide.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Sines's post
07-09-2011, 08:44 PM
RE: "You're going to hell!"
(03-09-2011 09:05 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(03-09-2011 07:19 PM)nontheocrat Wrote:  Quick point, if my child offends me, betrays me, denies me, breaks my rules or refuses to love me. I can forgive her without a sacrifice or anyone dying. That makes me more holy and more moral than the god of the Bible.

If I had god's morals I would lock her in the basement and torture her forever for not doing exactly what I want.

Don't give me meaningless arguments about god being limited by his "holy righteous" nature. I call BS!
Now that I think about it a better analogy for the Christian god's morality is to kill my son who didn't offend me in order to forgive my daughter who did. I can't think of a more immoral monster.

Hello Nontheocrat, thanks for the input.

I have to reiterate, though, a point that is not being considered honestly, I feel, and that is this:

In comparing yourself as a parent to God the analogy breaks down on several points.

1-as a parent you have no authority to put your child to death;

Someone should have told Abraham as he raised his dagger to kill Isaac... Wink

God would not have the authority either if he existed. The idea you seem to be promoting here is that just because you think god created man he is justified in making up any rule he wants and then kill this creations at his whim. This is not moral in my book.

I think the parent child analogy is perfect. I caused my child to exist and we both agree that I don't have that authority, where we disagree is that I don't think a creator would either. Your idea of god reminds me of a sadistic child holding a magnifying glass scorching ants with sun beams. What makes Christians think might makes right??? I don't understand it.

(03-09-2011 09:05 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  2-if you did have that authority, their death would be on a physical level, not a spiritual level, as Matthew 10:28 teaches.

That's why I said, tortured forever.

(03-09-2011 09:05 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  3-If your child did disobey law that warranted death, it would not be you that would sentence the child, as you are on the same level as the child when it comes to justice in the legal sense, much less be the one that executes the child.

In order for your argument to be equitable you would have to have an authority beyond that of a parent, it would also have to be as a judge.

According to the biblical gods morals everyone of the offenses I attributed to my child are punishable by death and I like god am a self-appointed judge. By your reasoning the being who causes another to exist gets the authority to dole out judgement. The only reason I hear from you that god gets to be the judge is because he says so, well I claim the same authority. Sounds just as valid to me.

(03-09-2011 09:05 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  God's description as a Father is given that we might have an understanding of HIm in human terms.

We could make the analogy closer by presenting this scenario:

You are a judge. A child grows up to become a murderer and you have the duty as a judge to weigh the evidence, and to either declare innocence based on that evidence, or guilt. If you render a verdict of guilty, then you are to sentence that murderer according to the law by which he is tried under.

Well, actually it is not better, it is all wrong. You forgot the part that unlike a real judge, your god says take the innocent one, punish him and turn the guilty one free.

There are far more offenses in the Bible meriting eternal punishment other than murder. In fact, if you take serious the statement that only those who believe in Jesus will be saved, then I will be damned for my inability to believe, in essence for being the way you believe HE made me.

Don't forget, you think your god also made the laws he is using to condemn me, they seem to change at his whim. At one time I can be given a death sentence for eating shellfish, the next I am allowed to eat anything not previously offered to idols. Seems he likes playing games with these pesky mortals...

(03-09-2011 09:05 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  It is similar with the verdict rendered upon the unjust: they are not God's children.

And for God to render the murderer innocent without fulfilling justice would be like you as a judge overlooking the crime of the murderer despite the evidence.

Hope that makes sense.

S.T.

Actually, it makes no sense to me at all. I see you swallowing an awful lot of crap in order to hang onto love for an immoral imaginary monster.

“There is no sin except stupidity.” Oscar Wilde
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like nontheocrat's post
08-09-2011, 10:27 AM
RE: "You're going to hell!"
(07-09-2011 08:44 PM)nontheocrat Wrote:  At one time I can be given a death sentence for eating shellfish, the next I am allowed to eat anything not previously offered to idols.
Where in the Bible is there a death penalty for eating shellfish? I know it was forbidden under the Mosaic law but I don't recall ever reading anything about a person being sentenced to death for it.

The information in ancient libraries came from real minds of real people. The far more complex information in cells came from the far more intelligent mind of God.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: