Don't all roads led to heaven?

[2ndRateMind]

(This is not to offend, but I am currently waxing poetic.)

Ah, the great arrogance of the Western world. Let us throw off the burdensome past that gave us birth! We know better than our forefathers! The old way is silly and outdated. We are not so silly as they were.

I don't understand why you persist in trying to use the scientific method to solve questions of a philosophical and religious nature. It's like trying to prepare dinner using a sledge-hammer and machete.

The next serious monologue on my plate is MacIntyre's Whose Justice? Which Rationality? Have you heard of it? It would be really cool if you could pick up a copy. Then we could read together and, you know, discuss.

As you know, we share a lot of the same questions and methodologies. I read MacIntyre's original pot-stirrer, After Virtue, over Christmas holidays, and was very impressed. I think he would be really good food for thought for you.

Thanks for the recommends. I'll see if I can find them. It may take some time though - I'm a bit low on funds, after Christmas!

Best, 2RM.

PS. I am not using scientific method, in the sense of observation - hypothesis - experiment - analysis - conclusion - peer review. But I do think that basic rationality, in the sense of a logical progression of concepts, is a useful contribution to this forum. The degree to which it is resisted confirms me in that view. And peer review is my entire reason for posting here.

 

[theFijian]

I know where i stand but i want other peoples veiw, do you think that all people, no matter there faith, can go to heaven? Understanding of course the people lived a moral and just life.

Why do people make the statement "All roads lead to heaven"? Is it to be inclusive towards all people of all faiths or none who regard themselves as good? (who in reality actually regards themselves as a bad person anyway?)

One may look at the statement a "Jesus is the only way" and disliking it's exclusivity state that it must be incorrect and that "all roads lead to heaven".

In reality "all roads lead to heaven" is an exclusive truth claim just as much as "Jesus is the only way". You are saying that you're take on spiritual reality is incorrect by my take on spiritual reality is correct. In seeking to be inclusive, in actuality you end up being exclusive.

The sad thing is that this spiritual relativism has pervaded the Christian church to such an extent that it looks no different to the prevailing secular culture.

 

[theFijian]

Conclusion 2. Salvation must therefore be a just process.

Except salvation as biblically described is not a just process. Is it just to pardon the guilty? That's not called justice, that's called mercy.

Observation 1. People tend to follow the religion of their parents, and their surrounding culture.

A sweeping generalisation which nullifies your conclusion.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To 2ndRateMind,

Isn't that precisely what you would say, if you wanted to nip any possible criticism in the bud?

What do you think debate is, everyone afreeing with you?
It’s a pretty core belief of Christianity my friend, scripture addressing this is too numerous to post except an example or two.
Proverbs 3:5 “Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding;”

I would have thought that technology proves that human reasoning is not foolish.

Technology isn’t about God though, it doesn’t say anything about heaven or hell so have you made this remark again to avoid the issue?
1 Corinthians 3:19 “For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness" ;”

I can recommend an excellent book to you, it is called the Bible. You will see that the statement of faith of CF is taken from it. As far as you are concerned many people in the world still believe what the ancients thought, as far as we are concerned we believe in the same God they knew, that we know.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To theFijian,
Excellent post.

The sad thing is that this spiritual relativism has pervaded the Christian church to such an extent that it looks no different to the prevailing secular culture.

It looks no different because thats what it is, the prevailing secular culture.
And we know that Bible not only warns of turing away to another gospel, but also truth masquerading as light. (Galatians 1, 2 Corinthians 11)

 

[2ndRateMind]

Except salvation as biblically described is not a just process. Is it just to pardon the guilty? That's not called justice, that's called mercy.

I agree. Nowhere do I state that the morally culpable escape justice - whatever their religion. It is conventional Christianity that preaches belief is a 'get into Heaven for free' ticket, not me. Here is a quote from earlier in the thread, which you must have overlooked:

Of course, if we love our fellow man, we will want heaven for them. The thing is though, that Justice demands some atonement, from all of us, to greater or lesser degrees, according to the degree to which we are (in your words) 'short'.* And belonging to no religion, not even Christianity, can provide escape from that necessity. But even as God is just, He is merciful, and I think the price of being short will be limited to the repentance required to render us whole, the way God first intended us to be when He arranged the world to teach us.

*(short being synonymous with sinful, in this context)

A sweeping generalisation which nullifies your conclusion.

Well, yes. It is a sweeping generalisation. But I think you would find it holds, statistically. I have lived in a Moslem state, for a time. The entire culture, including the legal system, militates against a person born a Moslem doing anything but dieing a Moslem. In the more rural areas, the penalty for 'apostasy' was (and still is) death. But this is an extreme example. You will find, I am sure, most Buddhists born into Buddhist societies die Buddhist, and the same goes for Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, of course, and so on. Religious freedom, much prized in Western cultures, generally boils down to just doing what everyone around you does. But you are welcome to provide a statistical refutation of this observation, if you care to.

Best wishes, 2RM.

 

[2ndRateMind]

Proverbs 3:5 “Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding;”

Well, this is the very attitude I object to. Whose understanding am I supposed to lean on? Yours? The Pope's? The writer of Proverbs? I won't do it. At the end of days, I stand to be judged. I will not pass the responsibility for my sins onto anyone else. I insist on leaning on my own understanding, as the only attitude consistant with any meaning of the word 'integrity'.

Best, 2RM.

 

[2ndRateMind]

I can recommend an excellent book to you, it is called the Bible.

Best, 2RM

 

[brightmorningstar]

To 2ndRateMind,

Well, this is the very attitude I object to.

Ok so you object to it, I didn’t really ask you for your feelings about it but rather that’s what we call the word of God says as opposed to your view.

Whose understanding am I supposed to lean on? Yours? The Pope's? The writer of Proverbs?

Its referring to God, it would be God’s wisdom the writers of the Bible are referring to.

At the end of days, I stand to be judged.

Who do you expect will judge you?

I will not pass the responsibility for my sins onto anyone else. I insist on leaning on my own understanding, as the only attitude consistant with any meaning of the word 'integrity'

ok well according to the Biblical testimony which is what I believe I also see that the one who will judge us says that we are not to lean on our own understanding which is why I cited and quoted the scriptures.

Now the OP ask whether all roads lead to heaven, you have made reference to your own understanding, reason and technology. Can you first explain what your concept of heaven in from these points of view. How can you reason heaven?

 

[theFijian]

I agree. Nowhere do I state that the morally culpable escape justice - whatever their religion. It is conventional Christianity that preaches belief is a 'get into Heaven for free' ticket, not me. Here is a quote from earlier in the thread, which you must have overlooked:

Of course, if we love our fellow man, we will want heaven for them. The thing is though, that Justice demands some atonement, from all of us, to greater or lesser degrees, according to the degree to which we are (in your words) 'short'.* And belonging to no religion, not even Christianity, can provide escape from that necessity. But even as God is just, He is merciful, and I think the price of being short will be limited to the repentance required to render us whole, the way God first intended us to be when He arranged the world to teach us.

*(short being synonymous with sinful, in this context)

Is that your quote or someone else's?

Well, yes. It is a sweeping generalisation. But I think you would find it holds, statistically.

Can you demonstrate for us that God cares about or is governed by statistics?

I have lived in a Moslem state, for a time. The entire culture, including the legal system, militates against a person born a Moslem doing anything but dieing a Moslem. In the more rural areas, the penalty for 'apostasy' was (and still is) death. But this is an extreme example. You will find, I am sure, most Buddhists born into Buddhist societies die Buddhist, and the same goes for Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, of course, and so on.

Romans 2, especially 12-16, provides an insight into this situation. Note that the 'Law' Paul talks about it God's Law, assuming it is held in any athority.

 

[2ndRateMind]

To 2ndRateMind,

Now the OP ask whether all roads lead to heaven, you have made reference to your own understanding, reason and technology. Can you first explain what your concept of heaven in from these points of view. How can you reason heaven?

Well, the reason I mentioned technology was to put across the idea that reason is far from futile, and has considerable purchase on this God-built world.

As for Heaven.

We can, of course, only speculate. But, since you have asked me to speculate, speculate I will.

Many people would agree that Heaven is being in the presence of God. Some people think that Hell is the absence of God. But I tend to the view that Heaven and Hell are the same (metaphorical) place. I think we all end up in the presence of God. For the righteous, it will be vindication. For the evil, it will be judgement. So, when people say 'all roads lead to Heaven', they aren't entirely wrong. In this scenario, everyone gets to go to a place that is Heaven for some people. But, it will be Hell for others. The difference, though, is not what is done to us, but our spiritual state. Good people value goodness, and value the virtues that are the riches of Heaven. They know their cost. Evil people tend to hate goodness, and despise virtue as weakness. They won't pay that cost. There is nothing in Heaven for them, but the hatred of themselves that arises out of a final confrontation with the objective truth about themselves.

Three points arise;

1. I have spoken in terms of absolutes, but the reality is that we are all part good, and part bad. There is therefore something of Hell and something of Heaven for all of us to look forward to.

2. This scenario is independent of religion. It works for anyone, from any religion, regardless of the (irrelevant) system of religious belief they espouse. It therefore avoids the 'accident of birth' problem I began by drawing attention to.

3. I have presented as a steady state a system I suspect to be dynamic. As we do confront the truth we hate about ourselves, and by repenting atone, then I think we shall be healed. There is no eternal suffering, in this scenario, except the suffering we choose for ourselves by refusing to face the truth, refusing to repent, refusing to atone.

That's the theory, anyway. I prefer it to the Biblical picture, which is rather less than subtle in it's conception.

Best wishes, 2RM.

 

[2ndRateMind]

Is that your quote or someone else's?

Read the thread, if you want to comment on it. I'm not your bloody secretary.

Can you demonstrate for us that God cares about or is governed by statistics?

Maybe the fact that He built a world in which statistics are an integral part, vital to the understanding of 'sweeping generalisations', provides that demonstration. Though in this context we are asking about something that can be checked and verified empirically, without the need to involve God, at all.

Romans 2, especially 12-16, provides an insight into this situation. Note that the 'Law' Paul talks about it God's Law, assuming it is held in any athority.

Well, I read the passage. I don't see any direct relevance. Perhaps you would care to interpret, for me?

Best wishes, 2RM.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To 2ndRateMind,
Thanks for your response, its very much humanism, and indeed…

This scenario is independent of religion. It works for anyone, from any religion,

Well no it doesn’t for Christianity as has been shown, unless you are proposing Christianity doesn’t have the Bible as a benchmark to test against, which I think you have. This means we are back to the nature of Christianity again.
I cant see how the accident of birth makes any difference, Jesus was a Jew, God made a covenant with the Jews, most Christians were not born Jews, but come from all countries and cultures. All that needs to happen is to hear the message, according to the Biblical testimony.

That's the theory, anyway. I prefer it to the Biblical picture, which is rather less than subtle in it's conception.

Yes that’s what the Biblical picture calls foolishness.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To 2ndRateMind,

Maybe the fact that He built a world in which statistics are an integral part,

Who said He built it? Who do you mean by He? I ask especially because..

without the need to involve God, at all.

Its a different god at least.

 

[brightmorningstar]

I think the Biblical testimony is clear, Jesus Christ is the truth, the way and the life, no-one comes to the Father except through Him, that means every person can, it just excludes other religions and worldviews.

 

[2ndRateMind]

To 2ndRateMind,
Thanks for your response, its very much humanism, and indeed…
Well no it doesn’t for Christianity as has been shown, unless you are proposing Christianity doesn’t have the Bible as a benchmark to test against, which I think you have. This means we are back to the nature of Christianity again.
I cant see how the accident of birth makes any difference, Jesus was a Jew, God made a covenant with the Jews, most Christians were not born Jews, but come from all countries and cultures. All that needs to happen is to hear the message, according to the Biblical testimony.

Well, if I commend the scenario to you, it is on the basis that it is consistent with a number of things conventional Christians believe about God; that He is Just, and Merciful, for example, and adaquately reconciles these attributes, which their own beliefs about the afterlife do not. As for humanism; I don't think so. There are humanists who believe in God, but the thrust of the movement is agnostic at best, and sometimes outright atheist. I have sympathy with their emphasis on human dignity and worth, but I am still Christian enough to think there are Ideals, divine in nature, which humanity can only ever approach, and never reach.

Yes that’s what the Biblical picture calls foolishness.

I have foreborn, 'til now, to call you to task on this. You may think I am foolish, you may think the Biblical writers would consider me foolish, you may think God considers me foolish. But it is extremely poor manners to say so. Have you not considered that what you consider to be foolish may simply be evidence of your own lack of understanding? That is the first, and last, time, I shall allude to any possible intellectual weakness on your part; I would be grateful, if we are to continue this conversation, if it was the last time you alluded any possible intellectual weakness on mine. We can argue the points raised on their own merits; there is no reason to invoke personal failings, at all.

Best wishes, 2RM.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To 2ndRateMind,

Well, if I commend the scenario to you, it is on the basis that it is consistent with a number of things conventional Christians believe about God; that He is Just, and Merciful, for example, and adaquately reconciles these attributes, which their own beliefs about the afterlife do not.

I don’t think so as the scenario you put is not consistent with what the Bible says and what Christians believe about the nature of God, and what is just and merciful as far as God is concerned.

As for humanism; I don't think so. There are humanists who believe in God, but the thrust of the movement is agnostic at best, and sometimes outright atheist.

No I don’t think so and not according to dictionary definitions such as http://www.thefreedictionary.com/humanism which asserts that humanism is apart from a diety, and the Biblical testimony refers to what you are describing in terms such as leaning on ones own understanding, turning away from God, rebellion etc.

I have foreborn, till now, to call you to task on this. You may think I am foolish, you may think the Biblical writers would consider me foolish, you may think God considers me foolish. But it is extremely poor manners to say so.

Let me stop you there. I have not said that as such, you have. I have reasoned using what the Biblical testimony says, that leaning on ones own understanding as opposed to what God's word in the Biblical testimony says is foolishness; and I believe this is the word of God. If you feel that includes your view then I would agree I think it does, but I can’t change what the Bible says.

 

[Zaac]

So far, the main criticism you have put to me, Zaac, and brightmorningstar, is that the theory I have presented is not 'biblical', not 'God's Word'. Well, you seem to think these two things are identical, and I suspect they are rather different. But you have a point, and I am not going to insult your intelligence by twisting scriptures to suit my purposes.

2RM, I couldn't even read anything else after this for here is the problem. Yall sure know how to make the Saints head hurt.

May I ask how you came to know of Jesus and all the things that led to His going to Calvary and being raised on the third day?

 

[theFijian]

Read the thread, if you want to comment on it. I'm not your bloody secretary.

It would have been simple enough to say either way wouldn't it? But If that's the level of cordiality you prefer then i'm off seeing how I've answer the OP who hasn't been seen for a while anyhow.

Well, I read the passage. I don't see any direct relevance. Perhaps you would care to interpret, for me?

You don't want to be my secretary but you expect me to be your bloody teacher?

 

[2ndRateMind]

2RM, I couldn't even read anything else after this for here is the problem. Yall sure know how to make the Saints head hurt.

May I ask how you came to know of Jesus and all the things that led to His going to Calvary and being raised on the third day?

Well, to be honest, it wasn't by reading the Bible. To this day, I tend to check it for the accuracy of my quotations, (and other people's), rather than sitting down in the approved reverential attitude to 'absorb God's Word'. Frankly, I've seen too many otherwise perfectly pleasant people ruined by doing just that. No, my knowledge of Jesus, and His crucifixion, arrives out of cultural osmosis and the school syllabus.

And, one other source. The doctors seem to think I was psychotic (read, insane) at the time, but the fact is, I really know what it is like to have your life demanded of you in exchange for 'saving the world'. I survived, but only because Jesus didn't, had gone before, and already paid the price so I wouldn't have to. I am not quite sure what mysticism is, or the difference between that and madness, but I do know that experience changed my outlook profoundly.

But that doesn't mean I am bound to accept everything He (allegedly) said without question.

Best wishes, 2RM.