If I'm an Atheist and I am not a bad person, will I go to hell?

[GillDouglas]

I understand of what you believe what not you believe as well But my answer is JESUS SAID I AM THE WAY, TRUTH AND LIFE NONE CAN GO TO THE FATHER WITHOUT ME EITHER GOOD PERSON OR BAD PERSON BUT HE LOVES ALL REGARDLESS THAT IS WHY HE DO NOT WANT TO SEE ANY ONE PERISH TO CHOICE WRONG WAY AND HE CAME TO SAVE ALL IN ORDER TO TAKE TO HEAVEN WHERE HE DWELLS AND WAITING FOR HIS CHILDREN WHO ARE OBEDIENT AND WILLING TO ACCEPT HIM AS SAVIOR AND THE LORD IN THEIR LIFE.

Easy on the CAPS lock my brother.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Yes that's horrible. My ex told my kid about hell when he was 6. He was crying under the shower.
Luckily I could help him, but with 8 he told him again because he just doesn't get it. He started hearing voices, the devil say this and that and he wanted to take him to a psychologist and give him drugs. Really, just shut up about it. The only way I was able to convince my son that he would not fall away later on in life and go to hell (he was Tortured with those thoughts) was that before his conception I told God I would only get children if they would follow Him. God set him free from it but what if parents are so stupid and they don't have someone who helps them.

It is stories like this that make me think that Richard Dawkins has a point when he called teaching the doctrine of hell to children child abuse.

Fortunately, I did not have such an extreme reaction when I was taught about hell as a child.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Thistle]

I deny Jesus as a savior of mankind, but I do think historically speaking, he was a real person. I find it extremely unlikely there is a God of any kind, even more unlikely a god that actually "loves" his creation and for some reason cares so much if people love him back. And to make it clear too, I don't believe in the devil either. I'm an honest and caring person, I've never done an "evil" thing my entire life. With that all said, would I go to hell?

CS Lewis argued that goodness has an upper limit at perfection. Evil however, is goodness corrupted. Since corruption is theoretically without end, there is no lower threshold to evil. Thus he argued that hell, is God's grace by way of an absolute bottom to evil, beneath which no one can descend further, for those who refuse a better form of grace.

 

[Thistle]

CS Lewis argued that goodness has an upper limit at perfection. Evil however, is goodness corrupted. Since corruption is theoretically without end, there is no lower threshold to evil. Thus he argued that hell, is God's grace by way of an absolute bottom to evil, beneath which no one can descend further, for those who refuse a better form of grace.

 

[GillDouglas]

But atheism is not a system of thought. It's quite simply a lack of belief in gods.

A system of disbelief is a system of thought.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Denying Jesus as savior is evil in itself.

Why would that be evil if one is honest?


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Which testifies to the fact that atheism is a religion. It's just a religion that doesn't posit the existence of a supreme being, but it's still a religion. It has its sacred texts, its saints, and its dogmas.

Name one sacred text, one saint, one dogma, of atheism. Predictably, you will name The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and so on. If you burn a copy of Letter to a Christian Nation, my "sacred text," I won't be offended. If you say nasty things about my "prophet," I won't care. If you my question my nonbelief, my so-called "dogma," I won't threaten you with a place called "Hell for Christians." You really have to stretch the definitions of those words in order to claim that atheism is a religion.

It defines ultimate reality for the devotees.

No, it doesn't. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. It is not a description of "ultimate reality;" it doesn't even pretend to be that.

 

[GillDouglas]

CS Lewis argued that goodness has an upper limit at perfection. Evil however, is goodness corrupted. Since corruption is theoretically without end, there is no lower threshold to evil. Thus he argued that hell, is God's grace by way of an absolute bottom to evil, beneath which no one can descend further, for those who refuse a better form of grace.

Which book of his did that come from? I love his work and I can relate to him spending so many years as an unbeliever!

 

[ckuhrasch]

If you don't believe in God, why would you believe in hell?

 

[Albion]

It is stories like this that make me think that Richard Dawkins has a point when he called teaching the doctrine of hell to children child abuse.

Fortunately, I did not have such an extreme reaction when I was taught about hell as a child.


eudaimonia,

Mark

1. FWIW, I wouldn't consider that to be child abuse, but people--believers included--ought to have enough sense to not lay visions of Dante's kind of hell upon young children, just as they usually know not to be unnecessarily graphic when answering the "Where do babies come from" questions.

But I do not know why that paragraph is numbered. Another of the mysteries of the new system, I guess.

 

[GillDouglas]

Why would that be evil if one is honest?


eudaimonia,

Mark

So there is never an example that being honest is cruel? Does this dress make me look fat? Yup!

 

[Archaeopteryx]

That people in both groups on both sides are exactly the same.

One side claims to have the ultimate answers to all the "big questions" - life, the universe, and everything - and the other asks how they know what they claim to know.

 

[Eudaimonist]

A system of disbelief is a system of thought.

Whatever is a system of disbelief? I've never heard of such a thing.

Atheists may very well have systems of thought, but they are not systems of disbelief.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Albion]

Name one sacred text, one saint, one dogma, of atheism.

Goodness! It's perfectly obvious. Atheists laud as heroes of their movement various atheist writers and lecturers. They refer certain books to you when the subject comes up in discussion as standard texts that are known among atheists to perfectly "prove" their POV.

And the de facto dogmas I already referred to. For example, is atheism a rejection of God or does merely not having a commitment one way or the other constitute genuine atheism? Or is it something else. One "atheist" is wrong, wrong, wrong, according to the next one. That's hardly any different from Christians identifying some of their number as heretics.

 

[AStander]

In a word, YES.

If you don't believe on Jesus, you're on the way to hell, it doesn't matter how good you've been.

To go to heaven: Admit that you're a sinner (we ALL have sinned and you are no exception) and realize that without Christ you are on the way to hell.

Believe that Jesus died, shed His blood on the cross as the once-for-all sacrifice for your sins, that He was buried, and that He rose from the dead after three days.

Accept his sacrifice on your behalf.

 

[pcseekr]

See you in hell, my friend.

 

[Eudaimonist]

So there is never an example that being honest is cruel? Does this dress make me look fat? Yup!

I never said that, and that is a very poor analogy.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[GillDouglas]

One side claims to have the ultimate answers to all the "big questions" - life, the universe, and everything - and the other asks how they know what they claim to know.

So your side does not claim to have the ultimate answers and we don't ask how you claim to know?

 

[GBRK]

I deny Jesus as a savior of mankind, but I do think historically speaking, he was a real person. I find it extremely unlikely there is a God of any kind, even more unlikely a god that actually "loves" his creation and for some reason cares so much if people love him back. And to make it clear too, I don't believe in the devil either. I'm an honest and caring person, I've never done an "evil" thing my entire life. With that all said, would I go to hell?

The Scriptures, using Christ own words, answers the question: John 12:47-50
"47 As for the person who hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge him. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save it.* 48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; that very word which I spoke will condemn him* at the last day. 49 For I did not speak of my own accord, but the Father who sent me commanded me * what to say and how to say it. 50 I know that his command leads to eternal life.* So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say."*

The apostle Paul, in his letter to the Romans also addressed attempting to please/satisfy God's requirements without Christ. Many of the Jews sought to be justified by living right and obeying "The Law" being a moral person but Paul told them that salvation is only found in and through Christ.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Goodness! It's perfectly obvious. Atheists laud as heroes of their movement various atheist writers and lecturer.

And? I'm not religiously devoted to any of those individuals, regardless of how much we may happen to agree (and we don't agree perfectly about everything anyway!)

They refer certain books to you when the subject comes up in discussion.

And? Is referring a book to someone a sign that the book must be viewed as a "sacred text"? I encourage people to read The Lord of the Rings. My "sacred text"?

The de facto dogmas I already referred to. For example, is atheism a rejection of God or not having a commitment to one? Or something else. One "atheist" is wrong, wrong, wrong, according to the next one. That's hardly any different from Christians identifying some of their number as heretics.

And? Last I checked, atheist "heretics" seem to fare better than the heretics of Christendom, who often faced alienation at best, violence at worst.