Jesus or Burn?

[Nasor]

Most people who arent' spinless and scared, would be like, 'who wants to follow a god that tries to motivate his subjects with fear?'

To be fair, I think that any sane person who seriously believed that a god existed and would send them to hell for not worshiping him would cave in and do pretty much anything the god wanted. Balance your brief moment of pride and satisfying righteousness when you tell an unjust god "Screw you, you're a jerk and I'm not going to be bullied!" against an infinitely long period of torture.

The real issue with the monstrous unfairness of the god that most christians believe in is that it dramatically shows how capable they are of simultaneously believing nonsensical, contradictory things. "God love us and is just" does not seem to be in any way compatible with "God will condemn us to eternal torture if we don't do what he wants." It reminds me of abused women who believe that their husbands love them, and that they deserve it when their spouse hits them. "He loves me. But if I don't do what he wants, he'll hurt me. But it's my own fault when he hurts me - I made him do it, and I deserve it" is something you hear from both christians and battered women.

 

[mikenostic]

To be fair, I think that any sane person who seriously believed that a god existed and would send them to hell for not worshiping him would cave in and do pretty much anything the god wanted. Balance your brief moment of pride and satisfying righteousness when you tell an unjust god "Screw you, you're a jerk and I'm not going to be bullied!" against an infinitely long period of torture.

Is that why the Russians had to build a fuckin wall around Berlin after WWII? ...because the people were just going to 'cave in' and do pretty much whatever the Communist Warsaw Pact told them to?
Hell no. It was to keep the people IN, because if they didn't, people wouldn't put up with that crap and would defect.
In fact, you should know as well as I do that a lot of people risked (and lost) their lives in the attempt of escaping from that crap fest.
If god does exist, I'll take my chances in hell.

The real issue with the monstrous unfairness of the god that most christians believe in is that it dramatically shows how capable they are of simultaneously believing nonsensical, contradictory things. "God love us and is just" does not seem to be in any way compatible with "God will condemn us to eternal torture if we don't do what he wants." It reminds me of abused women who believe that their husbands love them, and that they deserve it when their spouse hits them. "He loves me. But if I don't do what he wants, he'll hurt me. But it's my own fault when he hurts me - I made him do it, and I deserve it" is something you hear from both christians and battered women.

Now this, is something that we can agree on. I've noticed that as well. I see quotes like 'I am an angry god. I am a jealous god.' Yet you see Christians swearing up and down that 'god is a righteous god. God is a merciful god.'
God is perfect. <--O RLY? Last time I checked, anger and jealousy aren't traits of a perfect anything.

 

[Nasor]

Is that why the Russians had to build a fuckin wall around Berlin after WWII? ...because the people were just going to 'cave in' and do pretty much whatever the Communist Warsaw Pact told them to?
Hell no. It was to keep the people IN, because if they didn't, people wouldn't put up with that crap and would defect.
In fact, you should know as well as I do that a lot of people risked (and lost) their lives in the attempt of escaping from that crap fest.
If god does exist, I'll take my chances in hell.

The difference, of course, is that people who resisted the communists etc. had a chance of success. You might die, or you might escape to a better life. If you really believed that an omnipotent, omniscient god existed and would send you to hell for failure to obey him, there's no way out of it. I'm guessing that close to zero people would have tried to defect if they thought that their chances of success were zero. Also, the worst they were facing was being shot. An eternity of torture is considerably worse. Even people who might tell the communists "I'll never cooperate, just go ahead and kill me" would probably do whatever they thought was necessary to avoid hell. You say "If god does exist, I'll take my chances in hell," but you only say that because you think the odds of such a god and hell actually existing are very low. If you really believed that the christian god existed, you would have to be crazy not to obey him.

 

[Cybernetics]

My bigest question is why dose god need you to belive in him in the first place, if he is all loving as suposed he shouldent care. There is no compitent reason i see why prayer or belife is needed

 

[mikenostic]

The difference, of course, is that people who resisted the communists etc. had a chance of success. You might die, or you might escape to a better life. If you really believed that an omnipotent, omniscient god existed and would send you to hell for failure to obey him, there's no way out of it. I'm guessing that close to zero people would have tried to defect if they thought that their chances of success were zero. Also, the worst they were facing was being shot. An eternity of torture is considerably worse. Even people who might tell the communists "I'll never cooperate, just go ahead and kill me" would probably do whatever they thought was necessary to avoid hell. You say "If god does exist, I'll take my chances in hell," but you only say that because you think the odds of such a god and hell actually existing are very low. If you really believed that the christian god existed, you would have to be crazy not to obey him.

There would still be people who try it, regardless of the anticipated outcome. Some people would rather die (like me) than to feign allegiance to an authority that they don't respect.
While there was higher than a zero chance of success trying to get out of Cold War Berlin, the chances were still pretty slim. People knowingly risked their lives anyway, even with the knowledge that quite a few have been killed trying to escape.
You do know that there are books written for the bible that were banned, don't you? Some of those books contained information along the lines of if you did get sent to hell, and someone in heaven asked god to forgive you, he would and would bring you into heaven. There are other books that say you don't go to hell for an eternity, just as long as your sentence requires. Why were these kinds of books banned? Seems to me that they would indeed give followers that 'chance of success' you mention above.
And given that the discussion of hell itself is so subjective and varied, what makes you think that hell, if it does indeed exist, is all 'gnashing of teeth and fire and brimstone'?
Look, I'm just doing a direct comparison.
According to the bible, man was made in god's image. We are god's children, yet he doesn't treat us like his children. If there was a Galactic or Universal Division of Child Services, they would come and take us away from him for being a shitty parent.
What parent would sit back and let their children get into lethal skirmishes?
Do you have children, Nasor?
If you do, what would you do if they just started beating the shit out of one another (due to difference of opinion on something)? Would you stand back and let one of them kill the other (like God often does) or would you put a stop to it?


EDIT:
Found some relative info on the banned books:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banned_from_the_Bible

The Gospel of Nicodemus
Main article: Gospel of Nicodemus
Believed to have been written in the 3rd or 4th century due to the testimonies of the early church fathers, this is a story of Jesus’s trial, execution and brief descent into Hell. Hell in this book is a place where everyone is destined to go and Jesus ventures there to free many of the early church patriarchs and martyrs.

Many scholars, as well as early church leaders[who?], feel it’s a forgery to gain converts by impressing upon an individual the Savior’s power over Satan. Others see it as a redundant compilation of all other stories previously written. Finally, many of the early church fathers deemed its description of the underworld as too speculative because they viewed Hell as a state of mind and not a physical place.

The Apocalypse of Peter
Main article: Apocalypse of Peter
A contender with the Revelation of John, this work fell out of favor with the early leaders as they doubted its authorship and the fact that Revelation was better written.

During the time of the Christian persecutions, many apocalyptic literature was in circulation to console the faithful that the evil empire (Rome) was going to have justice served on it.

This book gives a gruesome detailed account of what Hell is like. It also suggests a way out of Hell for evildoers. If a consensus of heavenly angels decide to beseech the Lord to forgive their sins, they can escape. Church leaders were opposed to such a concept because that would mean that anyone can sin all they wanted because ultimately all will be saved

At best, it sounds like some of the early bible writers just wanted a way to control the population by fear.

 

[Nasor]

There would still be people who try it, regardless of the anticipated outcome. Some people would rather die (like me) than to feign allegiance to an authority that they don't respect.
While there was higher than a zero chance of success trying to get out of Cold War Berlin, the chances were still pretty slim. People knowingly risked their lives anyway, even with the knowledge that quite a few have been killed trying to escape.

Actually your chances of escaping into West Germany were pretty damn good. According to wikipedia there were about 200 people killed attempting to escape and over 5000 successful escapes. Not that it really matters. As I already pointed out, at worst those people risked death. An eternity in hell would presumably be considerably worse.

You do know that there are books written for the bible that were banned, don't you? Some of those books contained information along the lines of if you did get sent to hell, and someone in heaven asked god to forgive you, he would and would bring you into heaven. There are other books that say you don't go to hell for an eternity, just as long as your sentence requires.

I was talking about people who have mainstream christian beliefs. Obviously if your beliefs are different, the risk/benefit analysis changes.

I just always think it's silly when atheists try to claim that they wouldn't be christians even if christianity were ture, because the christian god is so unjust. That's akin to claiming that if you were confronted by an armed robber who demanded your wallet and who you were sure would kill you if you didn't cooperate, you would laugh in his face and tell him to go ahead and shoot because you would rather die than hand your wallet over. Perhaps some tiny number of people would actually behave that way, but it would be an insane thing to do.

According to the bible, man was made in god's image. We are god's children, yet he doesn't treat us like his children. If there was a Galactic or Universal Division of Child Services, they would come and take us away from him for being a shitty parent.
What parent would sit back and let their children get into lethal skirmishes?
Do you have children, Nasor?
If you do, what would you do if they just started beating the shit out of one another (due to difference of opinion on something)? Would you stand back and let one of them kill the other (like God often does) or would you put a stop to it?

I have no idea what kind of point you might be trying to make here. You do realize that I'm an atheist, don't you?

 

[mikenostic]

Actually your chances of escaping into West Germany were pretty damn good. According to wikipedia there were about 200 people killed attempting to escape and over 5000 successful escapes. Not that it really matters. As I already pointed out, at worst those people risked death. An eternity in hell would presumably be considerably worse.

True, but just like the opposite of your rhetoric below(where some christians will worship god out of fear of going to hell), there are some people who will not back down, regardless of the situation; those are the ones who stand up for themselves and refuse to become someone's bitch. It's the same principle as how you cannot keep some animals in captivity. They will die. And try to keep a tiger or a lion as a pet and see how well and easy that goes.

I just always think it's silly when atheists try to claim that they wouldn't be christians even if christianity were ture, because the christian god is so unjust. That's akin to claiming that if you were confronted by an armed robber who demanded your wallet and who you were sure would kill you if you didn't cooperate, you would laugh in his face and tell him to go ahead and shoot because you would rather die than hand your wallet over. Perhaps some tiny number of people would actually behave that way, but it would be an insane thing to do.

Oh I agree. There will always be people who believe outlandish shit, regardless of what it is; look at Scientology for example. It makes Christianity look like it is deeply rooted in logic.
Depending on the situation, I would not let an armed robber rob me. I'm usually armed myself and my head is always on a swivel when I'm out in any urban area. If you're paying attention, you can usually tell if someone is coming up to rob you.

I have no idea what kind of point you might be trying to make here. You do realize that I'm an atheist, don't you?

I did not, as it is fairly difficult to tell with some members.
And the point I was trying to make is that how do you respect an authority figure when he lets his business go to shit?
If parents down here did what he does, to their own children, they would be in jail and their children would go live with foster parents.

 

[(Q)]

So yeah i am dead against preaching fire and brimstone to the converted. Its wrong.

But those who do not believe Jesus should rightly be in great fear of the Lake of Fire. So a bit of fire and brimstone is ok as a last ditched attempt to motivate them to consider Jesus with a serious investigation.

And, you don't see this as contradictory and the promotion of fear? Personally, I don't like being threatened with fear from those who promote it, regardless of their agenda.

But, if we're talking about lakes of fire and who to believe, I suspect that you yourself would very much burn in a lake of fire for not accepting Allah, don't you think?

 

[mikenostic]

And, you don't see this as contradictory and the promotion of fear? Personally, I don't like being threatened with fear from those who promote it, regardless of their agenda.

Me neither.

But, if we're talking about lakes of fire and who to believe, I suspect that you yourself would very much burn in a lake of fire for not accepting Allah, don't you think?

Haha. That makes me think of the statement I've made before, that no theist seems to be able to answer: What makes one religion anymore beleivable than the next? NOTHING

 

[Adstar]

And, you don't see this as contradictory and the promotion of fear? Personally, I don't like being threatened with fear from those who promote it, regardless of their agenda.

The motivation of a believer is to say all they can, to leave no stone unturned when doing their best to have others saved. We reveal why one needs salvation and who brings that salvation and when that is resisted, in a last attempt, we reveal what one is being saved from. There is no contradiction in approaching believers in a different manner because they are already saved and do not need to hear about something that has all ready been dealt with.

But, if we're talking about lakes of fire and who to believe, I suspect that you yourself would very much burn in a lake of fire for not accepting Allah, don't you think?

Are you serious, asking me this question? What muhammad brought forward was in rebellion against the teachings of Jesus. So it was, and is not, the true will of God.

For me to accept the message of muhammed i would need to reject the Message of Jesus. That would ensure i would burn in the Lake of Fire.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[Adstar]

Ad,
No offense meant, but Christians like you are the reason Christianity is losing popularity.

I don't think so. A lot of supposed christians who where indoctrinated into religions of man, religions that have relied on mans traditions and views of what they want God to be like are losing popularity because the straw man churches satan built where designed to burn and fall in the end times. Read the book of revelation, the harlot rides the beast till in the end the beast turns against the harlot and tears her apart.

All you did was reiterate the point that Cybernetics is making above.
Christians are desparately trying to make god out to be benevolent and merciful when it's obvious that he's not.

There you confirm it yourself. They are busy creating a god that no one can believe exists, the very state of the world shows that God must be more complex than this straw man they put forward.

Oh one correction to your quote. They are christians not Christians.

And if he's not, then he really doesn't seem much different than the devil.
You even said it yourself, in the bold above, 'Choose Jesus as your savior or burn in hell'.

well in my first post in this thread the 4th post i made a simple statement. And i quote myself.

Reject Jesus and you will burn.

This is the position that i have consistently put forward for years in this place and the section in my post that you bolded before is not inconsistent with that stance.

It is different from the stance that you have just declared it to means

'Choose Jesus as your savior or burn in hell'

Most people who arent' spinless and scared, would be like, 'who wants to follow a god that tries to motivate his subjects with fear?'

Is it spineless to fear being thrown into a lake of fire to suffer never ending agony. Does not science say that fear is a good thing, natures warning a protective emotion.

The bible says fear of God is the beginning of all wisdom. Therefore it has its place.

And if God exists as revealed in the Bible then an attitude of 'who wants to follow a god that tries to motivate his subjects with fear?' would be the hight of vanity. If God Is, then you can have whatever attitude you like it would make no difference to the eternal outcome of Gods will.

How pointless to rebel against God, what an absolute waste of time.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[Tiassa]

If it wasn't called religion, it would be called crazy

To be fair, I think that any sane person who seriously believed that a god existed and would send them to hell for not worshiping him would cave in and do pretty much anything the god wanted.

There are some who would suggest that there is no such thing as a sane person who seriously believes that God exists and would send them to Hell for not worshipping Him.

Untestable, non-demonstrable conditions believed by an individual to such a degree as to affect or even dominate his behavior, when not called "religion" is called "delusion".

 

[nova900]

Are you serious, asking me this question? What muhammad brought forward was in rebellion against the teachings of Jesus. So it was, and is not, the true will of God.

For me to accept the message of muhammed i would need to reject the Message of Jesus. That would ensure i would burn in the Lake of Fire.

Many Muslims believe some biblical authors,mainly Paul;distorted the true message and revalations given to Mohammed.They reject your message for the same reason you rejects theirs.
The fact Pauls' writings predate theirs is no issue to them.

 

[mikenostic]

I don't think so. A lot of supposed christians who where indoctrinated into religions of man, religions that have relied on mans traditions and views of what they want God to be like are losing popularity because the straw man churches satan built where designed to burn and fall in the end times. Read the book of revelation, the harlot rides the beast till in the end the beast turns against the harlot and tears her apart.

I do think so. Your stupid ass opinion is no more valid than mine. Prove god exists (by means other than saying 'the bible says so') or shut the fuck up already. You're convincing no one on here with your crap.
Oh, and Revelations was written by a man who suffered from delusions.

There you confirm it yourself. They are busy creating a god that no one can believe exists, the very state of the world shows that God must be more complex than this straw man they put forward.

No, they made up a god that doesn't exist. The most impressive job that they accomplished is brainwashing weak-minded gullible people like you for over 2.000 years.

Oh one correction to your quote. They are christians not Christians.

Who gives a shit how it's spelled?

Is it spineless to fear being thrown into a lake of fire to suffer never ending agony. Does not science say that fear is a good thing, natures warning a protective emotion.

No, but it is spineless to not stand up to any deity that would implement such a 'choice' for his greatest creations.
It's also spineless to just up and believe in something when there is no proof, and when there are so many contradictions about it.

The bible says fear of God is the beginning of all wisdom. Therefore it has its place.

I will not fear him, mainly because he doesn't exist. And even if he did, any deity that orders his subjects to fear him, gets no respect from me.

And if God exists as revealed in the Bible then an attitude of 'who wants to follow a god that tries to motivate his subjects with fear?' would be the hight of vanity. If God Is, then you can have whatever attitude you like it would make no difference to the eternal outcome of Gods will.

How pointless to rebel against God, what an absolute waste of time.

You sound like one of those Necromongers from The Chronicles of Riddick.

Yeah, how pointless to rebel against some deity whose existence has yet to be proven, and whose origin came from Paganism.

 

[Dr Lou Natic]

I would choose to burn jesus by calling him a kike.

 

[(Q)]

The motivation of a believer is to say all they can, to leave no stone unturned when doing their best to have others saved. We reveal why one needs salvation and who brings that salvation and when that is resisted, in a last attempt, we reveal what one is being saved from.

If your religion is unable to "save" someone with good, honest and reasonable criteria, and must resort to threatening and scaring the bejezus out of them, then it is rather worthless as it clearly does not foster that which it intends.

There is no contradiction in approaching believers in a different manner because they are already saved and do not need to hear about something that has all ready been dealt with.

We've all heard it, Adstar. And, it still reeks of striking fear into people as opposed to reasonable intentions.

Are you serious, asking me this question? What muhammad brought forward was in rebellion against the teachings of Jesus. So it was, and is not, the true will of God.

That's clearly another debate. The point is that you might be saved from your perspective but will burn in a lake of fire from an Islamic perspective. Of course, either way is NOT your decision as to whether or not you will burn, is it?

For me to accept the message of muhammed i would need to reject the Message of Jesus. That would ensure i would burn in the Lake of Fire.

Muhammad did exactly what Jesus did, reject that which was taught before him. Why wouldn't you do the same?

 

[BlueMoose]

So all the Jews will burn in hell ? Or Am I missing something ?

 

[BlueMoose]

Its so quiet you can hear the pixels humming...

 

[swarm]

Only the lamest of gods would ever lose a single soul to hell.

 

[Cybernetics]

yes all jews go to a christian and musalim hell, all christians go to the musalim and jewish hell and all musalims go to the jewich and christian hells. huray there is a 2/3 chance you are gooing to hell whichever one you chose

I would also like to ask why god is potrayed to battle the devel meaning he is in no way omnipotent