Possible Conundrum?

[cvanwey]

Assuming belief is a prerequisite to enter Heaven, one must ask, would this individual go to Heaven or Hell? Now, I know such possible 'knee-jerk' answers might follow:

'I'm not God, only God knows,' 'You are simplifying salvation too much so.' 'Belief alone is not what saves.' etc..........

However, please watch this short video and assess accordingly.

Also, if the brain is damaged, the part which controls belief(s), and the belief changes or is maybe altered in some pronounced way post injury, does God care? Seems more-so logical that such tenets and qualifiers, as written in the Bible, were predicated upon the limited knowledge obtained at the time in which such texts were derived really...?

Now to the video:

And as always, thank you for the view; and especially the ones whom respond!

 

[jacks]

I'm sure God is still wringing His hands over Sybil.

 

[Monk Brendan]

The Bible says, "The Lord knows those who are his."

Pray for those who might have physical or mental issues that seem to impede their spiritual life.

And look to your own soul, not theirs.

 

[cvanwey]

The Bible says, "The Lord knows those who are his."

Pray for those who might have physical or mental issues that seem to impede their spiritual life.

And look to your own soul, not theirs.

If the Lord knows already whom are His, then what is praying for the ones not chosen going to accomplish?

Furthermore, if the damage does impede their spiritual life, do they get a free pass? Or, would it only have mattered what their beliefs were prior to such damage? Or, are they screwed?

Thank you for your possible continued insight.

 

[cvanwey]

.

 

[Tolworth John]

Assuming belief is a prerequisite to enter Heaven,

Why assume when the bible clearly say belief/faith is what is required.
Starting from a false position renders your question untenable.

 

[Eloy Craft]

We can't box God in. God saves whom He will. We know for us we must believe.

 

[cvanwey]

Why assume when the bible clearly say belief/faith is what is required.
Starting from a false position renders your question untenable.

Because any time I assert practically anything here, as read from the Bible, I receive an onslaught of various 'corrections.'

 

[Silmarien]

This sort of situation is a pretty key question in philosophy of mind, driving straight at the heart of the problem of what the self actually is. We don't really have an answer as to what's going on here--do we have one unique self being manifested in different ways, do we have two new individuals, does one of the other of them not truly exist as a unique self, etc.? Nobody but the subject here can really say what's going on, and even their insight is going to be limited.

If we've got two individuals, then I would expect them to be judged individually. We might even end up with three unique people here--the original one, and the new identities that were formed later. If this is the case, then I would expect all three to be judged individually. Maybe neither of the two new ones is a genuine individual, and perhaps only one of the two is. In all cases, I would expect all resulting individuals to be judged as individuals.

 

[Par5]

The video certainly posed an interesting question for the religious as to what would happen to someone like that. Would they go to heaven or would they go to hell?
I don't believe it matters whether or not if someone has a split personality or is mentally impaired, or indeed has full mental capacity. If you believe in the biblical god then surely you must believe your fate is already sealed. I say that because the prerequisites you need to follow in life in order to determine your final destination would only make sense if the one who set those prerequisites was not omniscient.
If the biblical god is all knowing as claimed, then it would know when someone would be born even before that person's parents were born. It would know every deed you would do, every word you would speak, every thought you would have before you did. Perhaps Christians don't believe their god is omniscient?
I have never understood why a supposedly omniscient being would create something and being omniscient therefore know that the project would barely get off the ground before turning pear-shaped, or in the biblical case, apple shaped, causing this being to destroy most of its human and animal creation and the environment in which they lived. That doesn't make sense.
On a human level, that would be like a contractor building houses knowing full well that they would not pass building regulations and would have to be demolished, but went ahead and built them anyway. That doesn't make sense either.

 

[Tolworth John]

Because any time I assert practically anything here, as read from the Bible, I receive an onslaught of various 'corrections.'

Oh dear looka like every thing you say is subject to a barrage of correction

 

[cvanwey]

Oh dear looka like every thing you say is subject to a barrage of correction

Well, you agree with me about the Bible's stance on belief. But somehow, since you have a Christian label upon your avatar, the 'corrections' will most likely not apply to you

 

[cvanwey]

We can't box God in. God saves whom He will. We know for us we must believe.

Who's trying to 'box anyone in'? Just asking the question, (heaven or hell), based upon the provided and given tenets, as dictated from the Holy Bible? Seems like a rather perplexing predicament, if you ask me.

 

[Eloy Craft]

if this guy were whole he would either be a Christian who suffers occasional doubt or an agnostic or a hard line atheist who smetimes doubts. You are asking that his heart be judged thinking it is exposed. it isn't. Any time you decide what God will do you are trying to box Him in.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Why assume when the bible clearly say belief/faith is what is required.
Starting from a false position renders your question untenable.

Why assume the Bible is authoritative to begin with?

 

[Tolworth John]

Why assume the Bible is authoritative to begin with?

You don have to. The problem for those who assume it ia a collection of stories, if they seriously investigate the bible, is that they find it is historically accurate, that it presents a consistent morality. Yes one we don't always agree with.
That Jesus presenrs a real problem as he is not a liar, neither is he a lunatic and you and other investigators will not acknowledge him as Lord.,

 

[Steve Petersen]

You don have to. The problem for those who assume it ia a collection of stories, if they seriously investigate the bible, is that they find it is historically accurate, that it presents a consistent morality. Yes one we don't always agree with.
That Jesus presenrs a real problem as he is not a liar, neither is he a lunatic and you and other investigators will not acknowledge him as Lord.,

Historical accuracy has been debated for decades. How accurate does it have to be to be considered divinely inspired anyway? It would have to be without historical error wouldn't it?

 

[Tolworth John]

Historical accuracy has been debated for decades. How accurate does it have to be to be considered divinely inspired anyway? It would have to be without historical error wouldn't it?

How do you know it is with out error.
Do remember untill the hitties were found in Turkey the bible was derided for inventing people.

The normal way of treating any book/information is to assume it is trustworthy untill shown not to be.

 

[Steve Petersen]

How do you know it is with out error.
Do remember untill the hitties were found in Turkey the bible was derided for inventing people.

The normal way of treating any book/information is to assume it is trustworthy untill shown not to be.

Getting some things right is not the same as getting all things right.

When a book says that a snake and donkey can talk, I think we have reason to be skeptical of it.

 

[Lulav]

Getting some things right is not the same as getting all things right.

When a book says that a snake and donkey can talk, I think we have reason to be skeptical of it.

Do you believe in a Creator G-d?