Atheists go to hell even if they are good!?

[Skavau]

And as I have said so many times, right here is the crux of the issue with most atheists or people who speak against God's word.

I'm not speaking against 'God's word'. I am speaking against people who interpret scripture to suggest that 'God's word' supports the eternal torture of all atheists and non-christians in general on the charge of thought-crime. Just as you claim to be speaking against opinions, I will say the same thing also.

They simply cannot stand that they be told what to do or what is right by anyone. They want to be their own little gods.

Nonsense. There is a fine line between being told rightfully what to do and being expected to always accept what an authority figure tells you what to do. That is to say that some requests and requirements are grounded in reason and righteousness and other requests and requirements are not. To reiterate further, some punishments for some actions are justified and acceptable and some punishments for some actions are not. We don't make excuses for North Korea's civil law but we do defend the civil law of Sweden.

 

[razeontherock]

Do you believe that God is involved or complicit in the torture of any group of people in the afterlife?

There's nothing elusive about have the integrity to admit this is not presently knowable. Before you continue trying to badger me, please realize I hail from the Badger State.

Yes you did and your rejection on this point is deceitful. I will quote you:


If that is not a comparison to the hypothetical evil that could exist in the spiritual realm with the natural evil that does exist in the real world, then I don't know what is.


So don't say it then.

Oy You're really aggravating. Nothing that you're saying here is responsive. You can't even tell when you twist and distort. Again I excuse you as being too emotional on this subject to be rational, but that doesn't strengthen the logic of your points in the least. Also, could you learn how to use the quote function? I had to scroll through 6 pages of posts to find the context, before I could discover how you butchered it.

I didn't move the goalposts. I just chose to focus on natural disasters. Concerning scorpions and other 'malicious' creatures: There's not a great deal we can do about them either (short of attempted genocide). They aren't moral agents and we cannot moderate their behaviour, so the best we can do is avoid them and treat any bites or stings they may give us.

They were created by G-d, whom you're accusing of being a poor moral agent. To say He's not capable of creating nastiness we have to deal with ignores reality. To say He would do that in this life but not the next is not consistent.

 

[razeontherock]

I've also heard belatedly Jewish lectures

Belatedly Jewish? What does that mean?

Excuse me, if you believe that I reject God and reject the sacrifice despite knowing that God exists then what other intent [other than malicious] do you think that I could have?

Here's a point I've never considered! Ok, so now you have everyone openly rejecting the gospel in this fashion as being malicious against G-d, as satan is. And you have G-d forbearing with them for their entire lives. Why is retribution immoral in the next life?

 

[Skavau]

http://www.christianforums.com/t7556526-65/#post57476910

There's nothing elusive about have the integrity to admit this is not presently knowable. Before you continue trying to badger me, please realize I hail from the Badger State.

I know you said earlier that you weren't sure whether or not torture was eternal or not.

Oy You're really aggravating. Nothing that you're saying here is responsive. You can't even tell when you twist and distort. Again I excuse you as being too emotional on this subject to be rational, but that doesn't strengthen the logic of your points in the least. Also, could you learn how to use the quote function? I had to scroll through 6 pages of posts to find the context, before I could discover how you butchered it.

I know how to use the quote function and I know precisely what you're referring to here. I edit my posts on wordpad due to a larger editing space and a less chance of a browser crash deleting all of my text. I don't even use the 'Go Advanced' reply option and simply cut and paste my response from Wordpad. I will on request provide a link to the post I am quoting for the benefit of who I am responding to.

That said: How did I butcher anything? I did not quote-mine anything from you. I posted the entire paragraph.

They were created by G-d, whom you're accusing of being a poor moral agent. To say He's not capable of creating nastiness we have to deal with ignores reality.

Well, what can I said to that? You just admitted that God is willing to create nastiness. I think my conduct towards him on that point can be vindicated.

To say He would do that in this life but not the next is not consistent.

Misotheism is the "hatred of God" or "hatred of the gods" (from the Greek adjective μισόθεος "hating the gods", a compound of μῖσος "hatred" and θεός "god"). In some varieties of polytheism, it was considered possible to inflict punishment on gods by ceasing to worship them. Thus, Hrafnkell, protagonist of the eponymous Icelandic saga set in the 10th century, as his temple to Freyr is burnt and he is enslaved states that "I think it is folly to have faith in gods", never performing another sacrifice, a position described in the sagas as goðlauss "godless". Jacob Grimm in his Teutonic Mythology observes that:

You're welcome, and thanks for conceding the point.

 

[Skavau]

Belatedly Jewish? What does that mean?

It was a typing error by me. I've been held hostage by a bunch of Jews on several occasions blithering on ad nauseum about Judaism.

Here's a point I've never considered! Ok, so now you have everyone openly rejecting the gospel in this fashion as being malicious against G-d, as satan is. And you have G-d forbearing with them for their entire lives. Why is retribution immoral in the next life?

The first thing that should be said is that I am not actually being malicious in the slightest here. It was taking Zaac's argument to its natural conclusion. If he believes that all atheists are lying about their non-belief then it could only be that they do so because of some sort of malice. In any case, even if it was true that all atheists were compulsive liars about it for said malice then eternal torment would still not be justified.

 

[b&wpac7]

It was a typing error by me. I've been held hostage by a bunch of Jews on several occasions blithering on ad nauseum about Judaism.

That doesn't make any sense. What would possess them to do such a thing?

 

[razeontherock]

I would think I was doing something wrong if I wasn't putting myself above the Biblical God when I deride those who say that said Biblical God is involved in the eternal torture of people for thought-crime.

This is the first thing I've seen you post in quite some time that I find agreeable. I do think you should know that while God knows our thoughts, if someone were to live their whole life and have no sin other than their thoughts that would mean they chose not to act on bad thoughts, and would be rewarded by God for that, not punished. So another huge amount of your pet peeve just evaporated. Oh and, your welcome. Arguing a point like this would be infinitely more effective than what you've been doing, and given you quite a few of them already.

 

[Skavau]

That doesn't make any sense. What would possess them to do such a thing?

They weren't preaching, just talking about Judaism and talked about it often. They despised Christianity and actually really liked atheists.

 

[b&wpac7]

They weren't preaching, just talking about Judaism and talked about it often. They despised Christianity and actually really liked atheists.

Ah, I see. Not surprised about the despised Christianity part, to be honest.

 

[Skavau]

This is the first thing I've seen you post in quite some time that I find agreeable. I do think you should know that while God knows our thoughts, if someone were to live their whole life and have no sin other than their thoughts that would mean they chose not to act on bad thoughts, and would be rewarded by God for that, not punished. So another huge amount of your pet peeve just evaporated.

So we receive a reprieve so long as we do absolutely nothing, ever. How loving of God.

Yeah, all of my pet peeves have just 'evaporated'.

 

[Skavau]

Ah, I see. Not surprised about the despised Christianity part, to be honest.

Yeah, I co-ran a chatroom that allowed all sorts of discussion and gained the attention of a large(ish) group of Jews that took interest in the amount of voice they were granted in there. They had hours long cordial discussions with some Muslims comparing and contrasting.

 

[Zaac]

You are implicitly calling all atheists liars. I won't hold any respect for that tone of voice. I won't be told that I must be rejecting hell when I am not.

Let me clear up any confusion . In accordance with God's word and the Scripture given above, all atheists are liars. Nothing implied. All atheists are liars.

You have missed the point entirely. You don't consider yourself to be rejecting Jannah yet Muslims would argue that you are. Do you on that point contend with all seriousness that Muslims are rejecting heaven in favour of hell?

You've missed the point entirely. I don't do "what ifs". I'm a proclaimer of God's truth, not a proclaimer of what ifs. As such, worldly hypotheticals are nothing for me to even discuss with you or anyone who WILLFULLY rejects what God says HE has shown those who supress the truth in their unrighteousness.

It is entirely relevant. To make the asinine points that somehow all Non-Christians are choosing hell you have to believe the absurd. The absurd including the nonsense claim that Muslims are also rejecting hell.

It's totally irrelevant. You have been given the truth. But because of your own pride and absolute incredulousness that someone would dare tell you that it's this way or the lake of fire, you choose to reject the truth and tus CHOOSE to go to hell.

You've been told that's where God says you will go. Yet because of what was said above, you refuse to accept it.

So you are CHOOSING to go to the lake of fire. There's no need to bow up and get mad about it. It's the decision that you are CHOOSING to make, and you wil eternally have to deal with it.

That is not answering the question: Why should I hold Christianity to a lesser standard than I hold the other religions?

You shouldn't do anything but what you want to do. If you want to reject the truth and spend an eternity in a lake of fire after God has revealed His truth to you, then you do so. But you have been given the truth.

The only reason you attempt to argue it is because as God's word says, He has already made it known to you. You just don't want to fathom that things could be that way.

Does that include Muslims? If so, how is that moral?

That includes anyone who rejects the word of God. It's moral because God says so.

So why are you here? If you believe every word I say is always going to be deception (at least concerning theology) then why bother? You have me down as necessarily malevolent in my statements regarding Christianity.

I'm a proclaimer of God's truth. That's what He placed us here to be. I don't have you down as necessarily anything except someone in desperate need of God's salvation.

But I'm glad I got you to admit it at long last.

If you wanted to know if I thought all atheists were liars, all you had to do was ask, and I would have told you the same thing that i did. In accordane with God's word, all atheists are liars.

In that case then, when I rave against eternal torture for thought-crime I am debating against an opinion as well.

In this case, you'd be wrong because God deals in absoulte truth and not opinion.

It took you long enough to finally admit what you felt about atheists.

you need to catch up. If you wanted to know what I thought about atheists, you should have just asked and I would have told you exactly what I said in accordance with God's word. I pray for atheists that God's forbearance continues to hold out and that He continues to give them a chance for redemption.

But a lot of them don't want it.

If I all atheists can be nothing more than constant liars (which you finally admitted to believing) then how can my intent not be malicious?

Why are you caught up on the intent as opposed to the fact that they are liars? Every atheists will spend eternity in the lake of fire. Does it matter what their intent is?

 

[Zaac]

I'm not speaking against 'God's word'. I am speaking against people who interpret scripture to suggest that 'God's word' supports the eternal torture of all atheists and non-christians in general on the charge of thought-crime. Just as you claim to be speaking against opinions, I will say the same thing also.

And we can play ring around the rosie all day. At the end of the day, if you reject Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, you will spend eternity in the lake of fire no matter how unconscionable you find the FACT.

Nonsense. There is a fine line between being told rightfully what to do and being expected to always accept what an authority figure tells you what to do.

So CHOOSE to skirt the line. Skirting the line will be you making the CHOICE to spend eternity in the lake of fire.

YOU are responsible. You don't have to like it or agree with God's word. But the end result will be you in the lake of fire because you CHOSE to reject Jesus Christ and His way in lieu of your own.

That is to say that some requests and requirements are grounded in reason and righteousness and other requests and requirements are not.

To reiterate further, some punishments for some actions are justified and acceptable and some punishments for some actions are not. We don't make excuses for North Korea's civil law but we do defend the civil law of Sweden.

To reiterate further, who cares what you, me or anyone on the face of this earth thinks to be just punishment for our sin?

God is God ALONE. We don't get a say so in what is just. You couldn't even think about what justice is if HE had not given you the ability to. The nerve of sinful men to try to tell HOLY God what is just. (smh).

But as was said, a lot of us want to be our own god.

 

[b&wpac7]

Perhaps I'll be one of the few who actually say it to you Zaac:

Yes, I reject Jesus. I do this with confidence through my study of the Hebrew Bible and my understanding that the work of Jesus was not necessary to be forgiven of sin nor did he complete the work that the messiah is said to complete. I follow the path I have been given. I believe I have been led this way by God, and I try to walk in his statues and laws as He commands.

 

[Skavau]

Let me clear up any confusion . In accordance with God's word and the Scripture given above, all atheists are liars. Nothing implied. All atheists are liars.

Glad to see just how open you are about it at last. In any case, I will always respond against such vitriol by re-asserting the reality: I am not a liar. I sincerely do not believe in God. I sincerely do not believe in Christianity. I am not 'rejecting' Christianity or vicarious redemption anymore than I am 'rejecting' that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.

You've missed the point entirely. I don't do "what ifs". I'm a proclaimer of God's truth, not a proclaimer of what ifs. As such, worldly hypotheticals are nothing for me to even discuss with you or anyone who WILLFULLY rejects what God says HE has shown those who supress the truth in their unrighteousness.

I will re-assert the reality: I do not 'willfully' reject what God says. I don't believe that 'God' has ever said anything. I am an atheist. I don't believe in God.

I will also remind you that my question is not in this case, a hypothetical. It is asking you what you think of Muslims. More specifically: Do you think that Muslims are rejecting heaven in favour of hell? You are keen enough to say it of atheists. Do you also say it of Muslims?

It's totally irrelevant. You have been given the truth.

So you say. I have been given and been told what you believe. What you believe happens to be incompatible with morality and reality and so I cannot literally consider it to be true.

But because of your own pride and absolute incredulousness that someone would dare tell you that it's this way or the lake of fire, you choose to reject the truth and tus CHOOSE to go to hell.

Incorrect. Because of my indignation concerning the notion of a 'lake of fire' for all non-conformists I cannot be told that this said 'truth' is worthy of following and the orator behind it worthy of worship. I would hold to this regardless of whether I actually believed it to be true or not. That is to say, at the risk of prompting Godwin's Law that Hitler was a bad man whether or not he existed in reality or fiction.

You've been told that's where God says you will go. Yet because of what was said above, you refuse to accept it.

I have been told by you where you think that God says I will go. I find the viewpoint contemptible and morally unjustifiable.

So you are CHOOSING to go to the lake of fire. There's no need to bow up and get mad about it. It's the decision that you are CHOOSING to make, and you wil eternally have to deal with it.

I don't believe that a 'lake of fire' exists. I am no more 'choosing' to go to the lake of fire as understood in Christianity than I am choosing to enter hellfire as decreed under Islam.

You also misrepresent the very nature of belief by insinuating that conviction can be chosen.

You shouldn't do anything but what you want to do. If you want to reject the truth and spend an eternity in a lake of fire after God has revealed His truth to you, then you do so. But you have been given the truth.

My point was that I have no reason to believe Christianity over Islam. I have no reason to accept Christianity over Sikhism. I have no reason to think Christianity true over Hinduism. If you can't provide me with any positive reasons to isolate Christianity as true over all the other possibilities then not only does the wager fail, then I have no reason to accept vicarious redemption.

The only reason you attempt to argue it is because as God's word says, He has already made it known to you. You just don't want to fathom that things could be that way.

This is again another smear. Another attack on my character by insisting that my sincerity is a front. I repeat again that I don't believe that God's word is true. I do not believe that there is even such a thing as 'God's word'.

That includes anyone who rejects the word of God. It's moral because God says so.

It is difficult to constrain one's own anger when confronted with such unashamed amorality. By insisting that anything is moral on the basis of God's word then you necessarily reduce to nothing more than obedience. It is indicative of some of the most profound justification for evil that can or has ever existed in this planet. You necessarily, by your explanation can only derive morality from authority. You can only derive your behavioural constraints by the declaration of might. Humanity can mean nothing but tools to an end of God's grand scheme.

There is a deeper problem to your explanation, and it confirms exactly what I suspected. You propose a morality of systematic obedience and capitulation to authority in the face of demands. Your morality is nothing more than this. You claim that so long as God decrees X then it is right. The self-destructive consequences of this mentality can be seen immediately. You do not say that things such as murder, theft, rape, slavery, torture etc are wrong because of their impact on the lives of other people. You say that these things are wrong just because God says so. You distort the term 'moral' to mean 'obedience' and the term 'immoral' to mean 'disobedience'. If you really, truly believe that this is true then you could have no objection to anything God could ever say. If hypothetically, God was to decree murder as valid - you could have no mechanism to disapprove. If God was to state that rape was wholly acceptable - you would have no reasoning in your library to dispute that. The terms 'justice' and 'compassion', just like morality can have no meaning in your dichtonomy. And this is objective? This is a morality of understanding, of objective parameters? It creates an applicable converse to the opposite of Dostoevsky's famous quote in the Brother's Karamazov. I'll say: with God, all things are possible.

A man chooses, a slave obeys. Thank you for reminding me of the importance of that.

If you wanted to know if I thought all atheists were liars, all you had to do was ask, and I would have told you the same thing that i did. In accordane with God's word, all atheists are liars.

I did, and you answered only belatedly.

In this case, you'd be wrong because God deals in absoulte truth and not opinion.

But I don't believe in God - and therefore the claim that eternal torture and thought-crime are mandated by God are completely meaningless to me.

Why are you caught up on the intent as opposed to the fact that they are liars? Every atheists will spend eternity in the lake of fire. Does it matter what their intent is?

Concerning what you derive your morality from, I suppose that motivation means precious little to you. Just how 'justice' and 'compassion' mean absolutely nothing to you.

 

[Skavau]

And we can play ring around the rosie all day. At the end of the day, if you reject Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, you will spend eternity in the lake of fire no matter how unconscionable you find the FACT.

So you keep saying. Your repetition of this 'fact' does not make it any less of an immoral thing to say.

So CHOOSE to skirt the line. Skirting the line will be you making the CHOICE to spend eternity in the lake of fire.

This does not make any sense. If someone makes an unreasonable demand or imposes a disproportionate punishment then they are not right to do it.

To reiterate further, who cares what you, me or anyone on the face of this earth thinks to be just punishment for our sin?

Yes, I know that you are anti-humanity. I know that life is effectively a meaningless queue line for you to eternal life. I know that humanity is merely a tool for God for you and that any form of murder, rape, torture is acceptable so long as God calls for it.

Those are your beliefs though, and I was explaining that to civilised people there are valid constraints in legislation and valid concepts that underpin liberty.

 

[razeontherock]

http://www.christianforums.com/t7556526-65/#post57476910
I will on request provide a link to the post I am quoting for the benefit of who I am responding to.

That said: How did I butcher anything? I did not quote-mine anything from you. I posted the entire paragraph.

I do understand about using external software, and it is one small part of why I (usually) don't go into great length in a single post. Anymore You can still use the quote function here that provides the little blue arrow that takes us right to context; just hit quote and then copy the text. Voila!

I will also concede that the above link is actually the post you are responding to - here. But it does not preserve the context of what you're asking about. That's back on page 50 some-odd.

I don't recall the exact specifics of what you did nor is that my main concern, but in general if you can find justification for a certain point you're making, you should know that what I'm objecting to must be something else. Isn't that reasonable? And also to look for that, to see what it might be in your initial response? In this case it was something like twisting my straightforward comparison btw evil here and hereafter, into something I never said. That comparison I actually did make, for a specific purpose, so obviously I couldn't have objected to that that. Right?

Well, what can I said to that? You just admitted that God is willing to create nastiness. I think my conduct towards him on that point can be vindicated.

I furnished you with Scripture on this point long ago:

"I will search Jerusalem with candles, and punish the men that are settled on their lees: that say in their heart, The LORD will not do good, neither will he do evil." (Zephaniah 1:12)

Last time, you butchered the clear intent of this horribly, so I really don't take it personally when you also do that to my words. Do you not see my point?

I mean for someone that accuses others of "taking a long time to admit a point," it would be helpful if you could recognize these are things people point out to you right from the onset.

So what you have is a scenario where G-d absolutely WILL do evil, (why I furnished this Scripture both times) and you shake your fist at Him for it. Just like Revelation Prophesies.

Ok.

If you're ever going to do that, the time is now.

The purpose of the grieving process, (and there is real grief involved here) is ACCEPTANCE. That is the last step of the process, and you are young. So how long do you think is reasonable before you stop shaking your fist, accept this Truth, and take the next step? And do you think reconciliation is a logical next step, assuming it is still offered at that time? I ask because there are at least a couple unbelievers who maintain it is morally superior to side with satan, even knowing it means certain defeat, and potential eternal torture.

I also ask because a literal reading could have me being responsible for your slaughter, in a most uneven battle which I could not lose. While I would not object to such harsh treatment of satan and his minions, I'd really prefer not to have human flesh involved in that way, as I do consider it all as my own.

So if you want to take on moral quandaries - there ya go!!

 

[Zaac]

Perhaps I'll be one of the few who actually say it to you Zaac:

Yes, I reject Jesus. I do this with confidence through my study of the Hebrew Bible and my understanding that the work of Jesus was not necessary to be forgiven of sin nor did he complete the work that the messiah is said to complete. I follow the path I have been given. I believe I have been led this way by God, and I try to walk in his statues and laws as He commands.

And I'm not surprised that you say this. You've said as much before. People confidently reject Jesus everyday and go to hell.

Your rejection is no different.

When he says there is but one way, there is but one way. Doesn't matter what the Jew or the Gentile thinks. Things are as God says they are.

 

[b&wpac7]

When he says there is but one way, there is but one way. Doesn't matter what the Jew or the Gentile thinks. Things are as God says they are.

I just don't agree with you that it is what God said. I believe what I believe just as much as you do.

 

[razeontherock]

It was a typing error by me. I've been held hostage by a bunch of Jews on several occasions blithering on ad nauseum about Judaism.

This I can understand But what was the typing error? I mean what you were intending to type? Belatedly Jewish = bleating?!? Or what