Hell Is Real And Souls Go There

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
341

[quote]H factor wrote:
That they aren’t like me just because they say they did it in the name of the Bible…but you won’t allow that for a different faith? Interesting.

[/quote]

This is the exact point. The Bible only talks about the Jews destroying the people in the Holy Land when they were taking possession of it. Then Jesus comes and wants to show Grace to everyone. Now lets look at the Quoran. Starts off with love the Jew and Love the Christian, but then all of a sudden turns to kill the Infidel if they do not convert.

The Quoran was written by one person, and just on a side note there are different Quorans. This is the reason the two faiths still hate each other and turn back to killing each other when there is no infidels around. I will say this could have been the Protestants and Catholics 300-400 years ago, but those two stopped doing it while the Muslims have been doing it since Muhammad died. Now the Bible was written over 1500 years and with 39 authors.

There is a big difference between the two holy texts. I guess you do not see it because you really do not care.

343

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

That is what you claim, but not me. You have any proof it is man made?
[/quote]

It isn’t about proof, it’s about which assumptions are more or less reasonable.

It is unreasonable to believe in resurrection from the dead after three days based solely upon the unremarkable fact that it is written down somewhere that a guy came back from the dead.

Either that, or, as I said, you believe that Agni runs white-rayed through the sky, shining with treasures. Do you believe this?[/quote]

I have never heard that story. Please tell me about it, also share with me the current people that believe it.[/quote]
Well its a belief of the words 3rd largest religion. At least as a parable or a myth if not literally. Which is much the same for many Christians…please true believers grant me a pass I understand that you believe every word to be literal but thats not the case for most of those who call themselves Christian…

By the way its also the name of India’s first long range nuclear missile…I am not religious but how fucking cool would it be if our missiles were named shit like “The Hand of God” or “The Holy Spirit”.[/quote]

I was thinking Hindu, but was not 100% sure. I have been to India and it is the most beautiful and the most putrid of countries.

I agree having a missle called “The Hand of God”, but that would go against what Jesus came to do.

If Revelation is correct, and yes I believe it, then all Hell is braking loose.

344

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I find one thing in this conversation particularly interesting.

Generally speaking, with a few exceptions the God haters/disbelievers/agnostics tend to line up on the left side of the political spectrum.

The theists in the other direction.

Not necessarily trying to make a point at this juncture, just an observation.[/quote]

I’m one of the non-religious conservatives you mention here, and it generally holds in non-internet observation that non-believers are almost always lefties in my experience, and that most of the political nuts I know are pretty mum about religion in general. We just don’t discuss it, so I don’t know.

Those that hate religion tend to be the ones bringing it up all the time, in real life that is. On the net it is different, lol.

346

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I find one thing in this conversation particularly interesting.

Generally speaking, with a few exceptions the God haters/disbelievers/agnostics tend to line up on the left side of the political spectrum.

The theists in the other direction.

Not necessarily trying to make a point at this juncture, just an observation.[/quote]

I’m one of the non-religious conservatives you mention here, and it generally holds in non-internet observation that non-believers are almost always lefties in my experience, and that most of the political nuts I know are pretty mum about religion in general. We just don’t discuss it, so I don’t know.

Those that hate religion tend to be the ones bringing it up all the time, in real life that is. On the net it is different, lol. [/quote]

I personally do not think it is an absolute. Catholics will split 50/50 on politics. Jews usually lean left though, but that might be changing. I know some atheists in real life and they are conservative. Maybe more Libertarian.

347

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Groo, what are you doing here if all of this (thread) is a complete waste of time?

Are you a time waster by nature? Or do you practice the wasting of time for some particular purpose?[/quote]

I waste a lot of time so there is that. I think I could change someone’s mind on the value of being vitriolic in a thread like this. While I don’t think that anyone is going to particularly change their worldview some people certainly could and should learn to dial it down a notch.

I think we all waste a lot of time at least by someone’s measure that’s likely another thread though.

This topic interests me some though because years ago I briefly dated a very very Southern Baptist woman and we had some conversations about different punishments that God was going to mete out to the deserving when the time came…me being one of those of course. Somewhat because I don’t think I entirely understand the position of someone who literally believes in Hell being say something other than separation from God ala Dante or something similar with specific punishments and be so seemingly trite about it in interactions with other people as in my personal experience and that this thread title leads me to think…It kinda gives me the message of something like “There’s a hell bitches if you don’t like me telling you ignore me otherwise fuck you I’m off.”

I try to stay to posts say defining the debate a bit anymore sense it comes across as more antagonistic than I intend if I say that its equally like x is as y particularly in an issue I think I truly can’t change the mind of someone thats committed to believing y. Also I personally don’t think this issue has any relevance at all while the other side thinks it has tremendous relevance so focus the antagonistic piece to areas I think are important maybe.

There’s only so many reality shows one can watch after all. Had to find some new time wasting.

348

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Those that hate religion tend to be the ones bringing it up all the time…

[/quote]

My opinion as to why this is the case is one I’ve stated repeatedly over the years here on PWI: the God-haters/disbelievers/atheists/belligerent agnostics have a BELIEF system that they are intent on propagating. They are proselytizing. Fervently in many cases. This thread is perfect proof of this. Maybe it’s done indirectly in some cases but it is done nonetheless with religious zeal.

They say they despise religious folks for wanting to convert others to their faith (which if these folks did abstain from “witnessing” to others they would be violating their very own faith) but they practice what they preach against.
[/quote]

I think this may have more to do with age. I wouldn’t necessarily atheism a world view per se but there is certainly a secular belief system so why quibble I guess.

I think you see relatively few atheists that despise the religious but the ones that do are certainly vocal thats certain.

I think there was a paradigm leap in America from being sectarian to being religious versus being secular that began in the 70s. I think holding these world views to being in greater conflict than the various sects was began more on the religious side than the secular but thats certainly debatable.

Besides largely we are becoming more secular in the West so atheism true believers for lack of a better word don’t really need to be as vocal or nasty as some come off. The world view is becoming the default organically.

349

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I find one thing in this conversation particularly interesting.

Generally speaking, with a few exceptions the God haters/disbelievers/agnostics tend to line up on the left side of the political spectrum.

The theists in the other direction.

Not necessarily trying to make a point at this juncture, just an observation.[/quote]

I’m one of the non-religious conservatives you mention here, and it generally holds in non-internet observation that non-believers are almost always lefties in my experience, and that most of the political nuts I know are pretty mum about religion in general. We just don’t discuss it, so I don’t know.

Those that hate religion tend to be the ones bringing it up all the time, in real life that is. On the net it is different, lol. [/quote]

I personally do not think it is an absolute. Catholics will split 50/50 on politics. Jews usually lean left though, but that might be changing. I know some atheists in real life and they are conservative. Maybe more Libertarian.
[/quote]
There are many homosexuals that are fiscally conservative for example but if you push them out of the big tent of the GOP by embracing morality issues where are they going to go but to the other party? On one hand someone is going to take more money from you on the other someone wants to deny you what you consider basic rights and shows active abhorrence for your lifestyle…seems an easy pick.

350

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Those that hate religion tend to be the ones bringing it up all the time…

[/quote]

My opinion as to why this is the case is one I’ve stated repeatedly over the years here on PWI: the God-haters/disbelievers/atheists/belligerent agnostics have a BELIEF system that they are intent on propagating. They are proselytizing. Fervently in many cases. This thread is perfect proof of this. Maybe it’s done indirectly in some cases but it is done nonetheless with religious zeal.

They say they despise religious folks for wanting to convert others to their faith (which if these folks did abstain from “witnessing” to others they would be violating their very own faith) but they practice what they preach against.
[/quote]

Lack of belief cannot be a belief system push.

Every time someone challenges you on the reasoning behind your religious beliefs and the arguments/debates that result in you taking a particular stance based on your religious beliefs, you come up with poor arguments and/or dodge questions, e.g. God manipulating the speed of light to explain how we’re getting light from stars that are millions/billions of light years, arguing with Dr. Matt over the validity of carbon(and the other forms of) dating of fossils.

For me, “I don’t know” is an adequate answer for some questions that haven’t been solved/worked on enough yet. For you, “God did it” is the answer and you keep going about your business.

Just because someone is agnostic/atheist doesn’t mean they’re a leftie, but I suppose the further right one is, the more people that will be to the left of you, relatively speaking.

351

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I find one thing in this conversation particularly interesting.

Generally speaking, with a few exceptions the God haters/disbelievers/agnostics tend to line up on the left side of the political spectrum.

The theists in the other direction.

Not necessarily trying to make a point at this juncture, just an observation.[/quote]

I’m one of the non-religious conservatives you mention here, and it generally holds in non-internet observation that non-believers are almost always lefties in my experience, and that most of the political nuts I know are pretty mum about religion in general. We just don’t discuss it, so I don’t know.

Those that hate religion tend to be the ones bringing it up all the time, in real life that is. On the net it is different, lol. [/quote]

I personally do not think it is an absolute. Catholics will split 50/50 on politics. Jews usually lean left though, but that might be changing. I know some atheists in real life and they are conservative. Maybe more Libertarian.
[/quote]
There are many homosexuals that are fiscally conservative for example but if you push them out of the big tent of the GOP by embracing morality issues where are they going to go but to the other party? On one hand someone is going to take more money from you on the other someone wants to deny you what you consider basic rights and shows active abhorrence for your lifestyle…seems an easy pick.[/quote]

This is where I part with the GOP, but I will vote GOP because I believe is smaller government, and fewer taxes. I am very conservative politically, and faithful to Christ. Do I think Homosexuality is a sin? Yes. Do I think it is any worse of a sin than anything I have done? No. The Government should not legislate morals that do not impact another person. This is where I side with the Libertarians.

352

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

God would only be ‘mean’ if we didn’t have freewill[/quote]

What about lightning striking and killing a baby? Or a sinkhole swallowing a small girl on Long Island?

I’m not saying that God did these things. I’m saying that, according to you, He knew that they were going to happen, and watched them happen without intervening.[/quote]

Why should he intervene?
And if God exists as does the afterlife, then death is not the end. Wouldn’t it be better to move on to eternal life than to live in this temporary perilous life?[/quote]

This argument applies to abortion as well. Why do you care about stopping it, if God shouldn’t care about stopping lightning strikes that have the same end result?

Is it, or is it not, “good” to live? To protect life? For life to flourish? Is murder, is premature death “bad”? Is it not a tragedy when an infant dies of SIDS, or is killed by a doctor at the request of its mother?

The position you took here leads to the same nihilism as does physicalism.

[quote]
Do you really want God to intervene, if he exists? You want him to save a baby?[/quote]

Of course I do. You don’t? It’s not an inconvenience to Him, being omnipotent as He is. So, yeah, why would I not?

Just like, if I were walking through the wilderness with a pistol, and came upon a slavering coyote that was circling a human infant, about to eat the poor little thing, I’d put a bullet between the coyote’s eyes. I have the power to stop a baby from dying. Why wouldn’t I?

(In fact, I’d consider myself complicit in its death if I could have acted, directly and at no inconvenience to me, and chose not to.)

But that isn’t the point. The point is this:

How can can an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God and natural evil coexist.

Either it isn’t “bad” for an infant to be struck by lightning, or it is “bad” for an infant to be struck by lightning and yet God can’t stop it from happening, or it is bad for an infant to be struck by lightning, and God can stop it from happening, and yet He chooses not to. Take your pick.

edited[/quote]

Well this thread exploded in the few hours I was doing work. Damn!

I am inclined to believe that a God that created the universe, and the quadrillions of stars, could probably stop a person from being struck by lightning. That’s peanuts compared to creation of the universe. What if he can stop it, but doesn’t stop it from happening?

353

[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:

Haha gladly. I think it is more likely that extraterrestrial beings came to our planet and seeded or guided our evolution than an ancient text written by ancient people (that thought the world was flat and Earth was the center of the universe) got everything about our creation exactly right to the point where if you don’t believe in that text you burn for eternity. That being said, I do not believe this religiously or even believe that it is very likely. Just more likely. [/quote]

Let’s revisit your earlier comment about the similarities across religions over time. There are a lot of them correct? In fact a lot of the same tales are very similar.

Now atheists tend to us this as an attacking point because they tend to only pick on religions that, in 2013, won’t harm them, or Christianity and the Jews once in awhile too, but not so much. They spend so much time with their feathers in the air peacocking their “AH HA!” moment they don’t ever sit back and think about the big picture.

So let’s just reframe this:

Option a: Omnipotent being has been trying to communicate with humans since the birth of thought, and because human’s are fallible they keep mixing up things, but some general themes hold true for thousands of years. Yes human translation is revised, changed and re-labled over and over, but the general themes are the same.

Option b: Space aliens who would likely have to be thousands of years more advanced than us, which would mean thousands of times less self destructive and stupid, landed on Earth, a handful of times at best, a few thousand years ago, and birthed the species.

You honestly think “b” is more likely? Best case I would say they both sound equally likely. [/quote]

haha. A very good post beans. I was wondering something else though Maiden, and if you wouldn’t mind indulging me I was wondering why you view the ancient aliens as more palatable? I’ll refrain from using the term “more likely” because I’m not asking about likelihood.[/quote]

It’s a fact we are not the only species on this planet. There are many other species of various intelligences right here on Earth. It is also a fact that there are many other galaxies with many other starts that are orbited by other planets. So it is so much of a stretch to believe that it is possible there is another life form on one of those planets with an intelligence greater than our own? We have been a species of technology for thousands of years and we have the technology to clone organisms. Imagine what a species of technology for millions of years could accomplish?
[/quote]

Interesting take. I am inclined towards believing that while it is possible there are other species in the galaxy, if they exist–and I am not convinced they do–they more than likely are about at the same point in the evolutionary chain as we are, in other words they are not super techy alien founders but within a stone’s throw of our approximate technology. I don’t remember the author of the paper expounding on this, but it made sense to me.

Anyway, lets say you get to choose which theory is true–not believed, but actually true-- between ancient aliens or christianity. Or I suppose you could pick islam, but whatever. What do you pick and why?

354

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
They were very real to the Greeks, the Egyptians and the Norse.

You’d be in big trouble had you implied that they were not to the devout believers in Sparta, Alexandria and Oslo. [/quote]
And that’s the problem with the religious. It is real to them and that’s enough for it to be real. Belief is not truth. [/quote]

And one day it will be Real Truth to you also. Just wait.
[/quote]
Who said it wasn’t already? The problem with most who claim to be religious is that they are fundamentalists. Faith without doubt. [/quote]

Is it doubt or their unwillingness to question? You can not doubt God exists and be a believer. You can question God of why? King David in the Bible did it all the time. I also question God about why things happen the way they do. It is hard to see through my eyes, but when you look back at history you can see parts to the question why.
[/quote]

It’s their unwillingness to search for the truth. They don’t have faith, they have simply been convinced. It’s not about the existence of God but the arrogance to believe they know God, speak for God…speak with God. Fundamentalists believe everything we need to know about existence is known. It has been shown to us by God via whomever claimed he speaks for Him. The things we don’t know, don’t need to be known. Any question that cannot be answered with scripture is not worth pondering, let alone answering. [/quote]

How do you come to have any opinion at all in life without being convinced of it? I think you should rephrase what you’re saying here because to me it doesn’t make any sense. I am convinced of all my currently held opinions or believes on science, on the Patriots, on the Chiefs being 9-0 and lucky, all of that. You don’t reach a single belief in your life that you aren’t “simply been convinced of”.

I’d also take issue with your comment that Fundamentalists believe everything we need to know about existence is already known…blah blah blah scripture and not pondering. I’ve never met one that thought we should stop researching drugs, or medical procedures, or physics, or math, or biology, or chemistry, or cryptography, or anything. You made a silly statement with that, it is indefensible and I believe that you know it. Your feelings on religion aside–or for that matter certain hot button issues currently being quarreled over–that is a manifestly false statement and you cannot defend it. The most you can say is that you haven’t really bothered talking to them very much.

355

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

The point is about religion. You say that I will know “the Real Truth” in the end. But you can’t prove it–not even in the way that a physicist can prove quantum mechanics.
[/quote]

Well, technically, quantum mechanics is still “unproven” because it conflicts with relativity and they have yet to marry the two approaches successfully (that’s what the search for a quantum description of gravity is all about)…

356

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Yes, I have no problem with Muslims. I have a problem with extremist assholes. [/quote]

You are aware we have Christian extremist assholes ?
[/quote]

Please link to a story about a Christian “extremist” strapping a bomb to his daughter chest and detonating her in the middle of a market? Or sending a down syndrome sufferer to the same fate.[/quote]

What about those extremist assholes that murdered the “witches” in Salem?[/quote]

You have any proof that even happened?
[/quote]

Seriously dude?

357

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Yes, I have no problem with Muslims. I have a problem with extremist assholes. [/quote]

You are aware we have Christian extremist assholes ?
[/quote]

Please link to a story about a Christian “extremist” strapping a bomb to his daughter chest and detonating her in the middle of a market? Or sending a down syndrome sufferer to the same fate.[/quote]

Very good, now lets move on to the Jewish, and after that we’ll get to all the “pagans” and their “silly” religions as well. Once we get to the God Kings of the Mediterranean cultures maybe, just MAYBE people will stop acting like Christianity is the only religion who has serious problems within it’s ranks. [/quote]

Lol. Beans, you are making me laugh with all your posts here. I think it is because we think very much alike. You’re hitting the nose on a lot of things and I find it extraordinarily amusing…every post I think “huh, I should probably say this…” but wait to read a few more posts and you’ve already said what I was thinking about replying with.

358

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

The point is about religion. You say that I will know “the Real Truth” in the end. But you can’t prove it–not even in the way that a physicist can prove quantum mechanics.
[/quote]

Well, technically, quantum mechanics is still “unproven” because it conflicts with relativity and they have yet to marry the two approaches successfully (that’s what the search for a quantum description of gravity is all about)…

[/quote]

This is true. I tried to account for this by saying, “not in the way that a physicist can prove quantum mechanics.” What I meant by this was that the random nature of quantum events, for example, while not “gospel,” has held up in each of the hundreds or thousands of experiments designed to test it.

As an aside, I just finished writing something pretty extensive on the subject, and that included some interviews with a good number of experts. It is the most mind-bending, crazy stuff I’ve ever tried to understand–and believe me, I don’t understand it. And, to the layman at least, it sounds about as implausible as Genesis.

359

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Those that hate religion tend to be the ones bringing it up all the time…

[/quote]

My opinion as to why this is the case is one I’ve stated repeatedly over the years here on PWI: the God-haters/disbelievers/atheists/belligerent agnostics have a BELIEF system that they are intent on propagating. They are proselytizing. Fervently in many cases. This thread is perfect proof of this. Maybe it’s done indirectly in some cases but it is done nonetheless with religious zeal.

They say they despise religious folks for wanting to convert others to their faith (which if these folks did abstain from “witnessing” to others they would be violating their very own faith) but they practice what they preach against.
[/quote]

Lack of belief cannot be a belief system push.

[/quote]
Unfortunately this is not true. Everything is a belief system. Lack of belief in a God essentially equates to you saying “I know enough to know there is no God”, which–for it to be true–essentially requires a) hubris the size of Jupiter or b) omniscience. Or both.

Being that human beings are not omniscient, the above statement is the foundational proclamation of an atheistic belief system. This is definitional. It would be more proper to say that agnosticism is not a belief system for this reason, although unfortunately that is not particularly accurate either. Like the Rush song “if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”. A belief system is formed by the opinions you have and thus definitionally ANY opinion you have either is a result of or a formative factor in your belief system.

360

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

I am inclined to believe that a God that created the universe, and the quadrillions of stars, could probably stop a person from being struck by lightning. That’s peanuts compared to creation of the universe. What if he can stop it, but doesn’t stop it from happening?[/quote]

Exactly. I am interested to know what the community’s response to this is.