100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Christians... | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
. Eljay said . . . . Since God is not constrained by time, an action does not have to occur before He is aware of what it "was". Right so he made you to go to hell, then sent himself down to die but then the best he could come up with to spread the word was word of mouth . . . pretty pathetic, he creates the vast majority of us to go to hell . . . . Yep pretty sloppy. Actually, that's not quite accurate. He did not create people to go to hell, else everyone would. It isn't God's choice that people go to hell - it's their choice. He doesn't make the decision for anyone. So I guess you could say that if one finds themself in hell - it's because they were a fool while they were on earth. That's what's sloppy. That doesn't seem quite accurate. Isn't the default option for all human beings hell? Don't you have to choose heaven in order to not go to hell? Didn't Jesus say if you are not with me you are against me? So isn't it fair to say that we were created with the hell switch toggled to the on position? No. We are created with the heaven switch on. At the point that the individual "sins" (does wrong, whatever your term for falling short of doing what is right is) THEY flip the switch. Once the individual flips that switch, separating them from God (thus not losing their ticket to paradise, if you will) there is only one way to flip the switch back on, and it has nothing to do with how many "good works" one does - but in recognizing that faith in Jesus is the switch. It's not about quantity, but quality. So - going to hell is not a decision by God, it's only a fullfillment of the choice that an individual makes. It's all about the heart. Either one recognizes the place God has in existance, and how they're in relation to that, or they decide for themselves that it's all about them, and how they percieve God in relation to thier reality - as to where they'll end up. The choice is entirely in the hands of man. That would be a contradiction to the original sin idea wouldn't it? How can you call sin a choice if no one can avoid it? The concept of "original sin" is from Catholicism. You'd be hard pressed to find it in the bible. It isn't the fact that people can't avoid it - it's that they don't. There's a difference. Not_being_able to avoid sin takes the responsibility away from the individual, and that is not how man was created. It is certainly within man's capability to avoid sinning, however - no one does. No one ever has, no one ever will - apart from the incarnate Jesus. But I'm not telling you anything you're not aware of here. It is the central gospel message. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. Eljay said . . . . Since God is not constrained by time, an action does not have to occur before He is aware of what it "was". Right so he made you to go to hell, then sent himself down to die but then the best he could come up with to spread the word was word of mouth . . . pretty pathetic, he creates the vast majority of us to go to hell . . . . Yep pretty sloppy. Actually, that's not quite accurate. He did not create people to go to hell, else everyone would. It isn't God's choice that people go to hell - it's their choice. He doesn't make the decision for anyone. So I guess you could say that if one finds themself in hell - it's because they were a fool while they were on earth. That's what's sloppy. That doesn't seem quite accurate. Isn't the default option for all human beings hell? Don't you have to choose heaven in order to not go to hell? Didn't Jesus say if you are not with me you are against me? So isn't it fair to say that we were created with the hell switch toggled to the on position? No. We are created with the heaven switch on. At the point that the individual "sins" (does wrong, whatever your term for falling short of doing what is right is) THEY flip the switch. Once the individual flips that switch, separating them from God (thus not losing their ticket to paradise, if you will) there is only one way to flip the switch back on, and it has nothing to do with how many "good works" one does - but in recognizing that faith in Jesus is the switch. It's not about quantity, but quality. So - going to hell is not a decision by God, it's only a fullfillment of the choice that an individual makes. It's all about the heart. Either one recognizes the place God has in existance, and how they're in relation to that, or they decide for themselves that it's all about them, and how they percieve God in relation to thier reality - as to where they'll end up. The choice is entirely in the hands of man. That would be a contradiction to the original sin idea wouldn't it? How can you call sin a choice if no one can avoid it? The concept of "original sin" is from Catholicism. You'd be hard pressed to find it in the bible. It isn't the fact that people can't avoid it - it's that they don't. There's a difference. Not_being_able to avoid sin takes the responsibility away from the individual, and that is not how man was created. It is certainly within man's capability to avoid sinning, however - no one does. No one ever has, no one ever will - apart from the incarnate Jesus. But I'm not telling you anything you're not aware of here. It is the central gospel message.  Catholics = Christians
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's not an assumption on my part, I'm merely stating a biblical concept - and that is where the idea of "all knowing" comes from. If you're going to state a biblical concept as an a priori than it helps to understand that concept. Else, you are not talking about God, in which case - who are you talking about? Who indeed. You have not yet defined "god" to our mutual satisfaction. So I guess this argument is a moot point. Assuming God is an entity (apart from other entities and apart from us) and assuming God is all knowing and not 'constrained by time' then in order to make such statements as you do, you would also have to understand time. Which you don't. I'm not sure I understand time either on the human consciousness level. I do know that I don't exist in the past, I only think about the past and I don't exist in the future, I only think about the future. I do have an idea of what does exist, exists in the present moment. All decisions are made in the present moment. One might predict the outcome of an event, or decision but one cannot know what choices are made in the moment until they are made. Not even an entity you define as God. That is my conclusion. I don't think you can present any evidence to the contrary, so I guess this discussion fails on premise that I don't accept your interpretation of Biblical scripture. Well - in the post that originated this discussion between us - you spoke of a God who is claimed to be omniscient. What God other than the biblical one were you refering to? So what is your interpretetation of the biblical God - which by the way states that God is omniscient and exists outside of time. How are you interpreting that to mean anything other than what it says? You may conclude that this God does not exist - but you are not basing your conclusion on anything factual, so you are merely presenting a strawman who's attributes fullfill your contradictions. Isn't that cozy. I agree with you. The God that you are speaking of does not exist. However - this god is not the one represented in scripture. You said: Actually, since I strongly believe you and I fall woefully short of the mind of God, your stating with certainty that God does not know the future is delusional at best. That's funny since you have not even defined 'God' and cannot prove such an entity exists, if it is indeed an entity. Again - you are the one who established the definition of God in your original post - stating it was the one believed to be omniscient. We're working with your definition of an entity already described in print. I don't need to define it - merely reference the description that exists. Perhaps you consider the thousands of prophecies of scripture that were fullfilled centuries after the prophets died - coincidence. No, I consider them to be fiction. What are you basing your conclusion on? That still does not demonstrate that God is unaware of what has happened in the future. For despite the unsurity of decisiveness of man in the present, whatever happens in the future is going to happen, and for an entity that is aware of all of the circumstances surrounding every decision that is to be made, knowing what the eventual outcome will be is not hard to reason that an omnicient being already knew what the choices are (were). For all of the logic that you are attempting to assert - time is an asssumed premise as a constraint. If we remove time from your argument - you have no foundation to support your conclusions. I have already removed time from the argument, because it does not exist in reality. If each thinking center (person) has free will to decide or act, no all knowing entity identified as "God" will know that decision or choice until it is made in the present. (NOW) Which is all that exists. The future cannot be known because it does not exist, is all I am saying. But time is not defined by the future. Time is described by 3 separate entities - past present and future. Your conclusion that time does not exist merely demonstrates your not understanding what time is. We have indefinite evidence to attest to the past, and unless you are in a comma - you are fully aware of the present as it occurs. Though you may not recognize the future, as it has not occured - it will come, and you can do nothing to stop it. But you have nothing to base your assertion on than mere desire on your part. And if life has demonstrated anything - it is that just desiring something be true, does not make it so. That I 'desire' a thing is something that is beyond your ability to know. I don't 'desire' anything to be true or not true. Truth is truth. To resist "What Is" only causes pain and discomfort and misery. So, what ever is.... IS. I am just telling you what I think IS. We agree - truth is truth. It is an absolute. However, perception of it can be evasive, and delusional. And truth is not perception. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. Eljay said . . . . Since God is not constrained by time, an action does not have to occur before He is aware of what it "was". Right so he made you to go to hell, then sent himself down to die but then the best he could come up with to spread the word was word of mouth . . . pretty pathetic, he creates the vast majority of us to go to hell . . . . Yep pretty sloppy. Actually, that's not quite accurate. He did not create people to go to hell, else everyone would. It isn't God's choice that people go to hell - it's their choice. He doesn't make the decision for anyone. So I guess you could say that if one finds themself in hell - it's because they were a fool while they were on earth. That's what's sloppy. That doesn't seem quite accurate. Isn't the default option for all human beings hell? Don't you have to choose heaven in order to not go to hell? Didn't Jesus say if you are not with me you are against me? So isn't it fair to say that we were created with the hell switch toggled to the on position? No. We are created with the heaven switch on. At the point that the individual "sins" (does wrong, whatever your term for falling short of doing what is right is) THEY flip the switch. Once the individual flips that switch, separating them from God (thus not losing their ticket to paradise, if you will) there is only one way to flip the switch back on, and it has nothing to do with how many "good works" one does - but in recognizing that faith in Jesus is the switch. It's not about quantity, but quality. So - going to hell is not a decision by God, it's only a fullfillment of the choice that an individual makes. It's all about the heart. Either one recognizes the place God has in existance, and how they're in relation to that, or they decide for themselves that it's all about them, and how they percieve God in relation to thier reality - as to where they'll end up. The choice is entirely in the hands of man. That would be a contradiction to the original sin idea wouldn't it? How can you call sin a choice if no one can avoid it? The concept of "original sin" is from Catholicism. You'd be hard pressed to find it in the bible. It isn't the fact that people can't avoid it - it's that they don't. There's a difference. Not_being_able to avoid sin takes the responsibility away from the individual, and that is not how man was created. It is certainly within man's capability to avoid sinning, however - no one does. No one ever has, no one ever will - apart from the incarnate Jesus. But I'm not telling you anything you're not aware of here. It is the central gospel message. Catholics = Christians I think it more accurate to say that some Catholics are Christians, but not all Christians are Catholics, so your equasion is a false one, for your implication that merely stating one is a Catholic - makes them a Christian. This is a premise unsupported by fact. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. Eljay said . . . . Since God is not constrained by time, an action does not have to occur before He is aware of what it "was". Right so he made you to go to hell, then sent himself down to die but then the best he could come up with to spread the word was word of mouth . . . pretty pathetic, he creates the vast majority of us to go to hell . . . . Yep pretty sloppy. Actually, that's not quite accurate. He did not create people to go to hell, else everyone would. It isn't God's choice that people go to hell - it's their choice. He doesn't make the decision for anyone. So I guess you could say that if one finds themself in hell - it's because they were a fool while they were on earth. That's what's sloppy. That doesn't seem quite accurate. Isn't the default option for all human beings hell? Don't you have to choose heaven in order to not go to hell? Didn't Jesus say if you are not with me you are against me? So isn't it fair to say that we were created with the hell switch toggled to the on position? No. We are created with the heaven switch on. At the point that the individual "sins" (does wrong, whatever your term for falling short of doing what is right is) THEY flip the switch. Once the individual flips that switch, separating them from God (thus not losing their ticket to paradise, if you will) there is only one way to flip the switch back on, and it has nothing to do with how many "good works" one does - but in recognizing that faith in Jesus is the switch. It's not about quantity, but quality. So - going to hell is not a decision by God, it's only a fullfillment of the choice that an individual makes. It's all about the heart. Either one recognizes the place God has in existance, and how they're in relation to that, or they decide for themselves that it's all about them, and how they percieve God in relation to thier reality - as to where they'll end up. The choice is entirely in the hands of man. That would be a contradiction to the original sin idea wouldn't it? How can you call sin a choice if no one can avoid it? The concept of "original sin" is from Catholicism. You'd be hard pressed to find it in the bible. It isn't the fact that people can't avoid it - it's that they don't. There's a difference. Not_being_able to avoid sin takes the responsibility away from the individual, and that is not how man was created. It is certainly within man's capability to avoid sinning, however - no one does. No one ever has, no one ever will - apart from the incarnate Jesus. But I'm not telling you anything you're not aware of here. It is the central gospel message. Catholics = Christians I think it more accurate to say that some Catholics are Christians, but not all Christians are Catholics, so your equasion is a false one, for your implication that merely stating one is a Catholic - makes them a Christian. This is a premise unsupported by fact.  What Catholics are christians and what Catholics are not? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. Eljay said . . . . Since God is not constrained by time, an action does not have to occur before He is aware of what it "was". Right so he made you to go to hell, then sent himself down to die but then the best he could come up with to spread the word was word of mouth . . . pretty pathetic, he creates the vast majority of us to go to hell . . . . Yep pretty sloppy. Actually, that's not quite accurate. He did not create people to go to hell, else everyone would. It isn't God's choice that people go to hell - it's their choice. He doesn't make the decision for anyone. So I guess you could say that if one finds themself in hell - it's because they were a fool while they were on earth. That's what's sloppy. That doesn't seem quite accurate. Isn't the default option for all human beings hell? Don't you have to choose heaven in order to not go to hell? Didn't Jesus say if you are not with me you are against me? So isn't it fair to say that we were created with the hell switch toggled to the on position? No. We are created with the heaven switch on. At the point that the individual "sins" (does wrong, whatever your term for falling short of doing what is right is) THEY flip the switch. Once the individual flips that switch, separating them from God (thus not losing their ticket to paradise, if you will) there is only one way to flip the switch back on, and it has nothing to do with how many "good works" one does - but in recognizing that faith in Jesus is the switch. It's not about quantity, but quality. So - going to hell is not a decision by God, it's only a fullfillment of the choice that an individual makes. It's all about the heart. Either one recognizes the place God has in existance, and how they're in relation to that, or they decide for themselves that it's all about them, and how they percieve God in relation to thier reality - as to where they'll end up. The choice is entirely in the hands of man. That would be a contradiction to the original sin idea wouldn't it? How can you call sin a choice if no one can avoid it? The concept of "original sin" is from Catholicism. You'd be hard pressed to find it in the bible. It isn't the fact that people can't avoid it - it's that they don't. There's a difference. Not_being_able to avoid sin takes the responsibility away from the individual, and that is not how man was created. It is certainly within man's capability to avoid sinning, however - no one does. No one ever has, no one ever will - apart from the incarnate Jesus. But I'm not telling you anything you're not aware of here. It is the central gospel message. Catholics = Christians I think it more accurate to say that some Catholics are Christians, but not all Christians are Catholics, so your equasion is a false one, for your implication that merely stating one is a Catholic - makes them a Christian. This is a premise unsupported by fact. What Catholics are christians and what Catholics are not? Chris·tian (krschn) KEY ADJECTIVE: Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike. Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents. Showing a loving concern for others; humane. NOUN: One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ETYMOLOGY: Middle English Cristen, from Old English cristen, from Latin Chrstinus, from Chrstus, Christ ; see Christ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. Eljay said . . . . Since God is not constrained by time, an action does not have to occur before He is aware of what it "was". Right so he made you to go to hell, then sent himself down to die but then the best he could come up with to spread the word was word of mouth . . . pretty pathetic, he creates the vast majority of us to go to hell . . . . Yep pretty sloppy. Actually, that's not quite accurate. He did not create people to go to hell, else everyone would. It isn't God's choice that people go to hell - it's their choice. He doesn't make the decision for anyone. So I guess you could say that if one finds themself in hell - it's because they were a fool while they were on earth. That's what's sloppy. That doesn't seem quite accurate. Isn't the default option for all human beings hell? Don't you have to choose heaven in order to not go to hell? Didn't Jesus say if you are not with me you are against me? So isn't it fair to say that we were created with the hell switch toggled to the on position? No. We are created with the heaven switch on. At the point that the individual "sins" (does wrong, whatever your term for falling short of doing what is right is) THEY flip the switch. Once the individual flips that switch, separating them from God (thus not losing their ticket to paradise, if you will) there is only one way to flip the switch back on, and it has nothing to do with how many "good works" one does - but in recognizing that faith in Jesus is the switch. It's not about quantity, but quality. So - going to hell is not a decision by God, it's only a fullfillment of the choice that an individual makes. It's all about the heart. Either one recognizes the place God has in existance, and how they're in relation to that, or they decide for themselves that it's all about them, and how they percieve God in relation to thier reality - as to where they'll end up. The choice is entirely in the hands of man. That would be a contradiction to the original sin idea wouldn't it? How can you call sin a choice if no one can avoid it? The concept of "original sin" is from Catholicism. You'd be hard pressed to find it in the bible. It isn't the fact that people can't avoid it - it's that they don't. There's a difference. Not_being_able to avoid sin takes the responsibility away from the individual, and that is not how man was created. It is certainly within man's capability to avoid sinning, however - no one does. No one ever has, no one ever will - apart from the incarnate Jesus. But I'm not telling you anything you're not aware of here. It is the central gospel message. Catholics = Christians I think it more accurate to say that some Catholics are Christians, but not all Christians are Catholics, so your equasion is a false one, for your implication that merely stating one is a Catholic - makes them a Christian. This is a premise unsupported by fact. What Catholics are christians and what Catholics are not? Chris·tian (krschn) KEY ADJECTIVE: Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike. Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents. Showing a loving concern for others; humane. NOUN: One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ETYMOLOGY: Middle English Cristen, from Old English cristen, from Latin Chrstinus, from Chrstus, Christ ; see Christ  What do Catholics believe in?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Protestant=Christian?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Wed 06/03/09 07:07 PM
|
|
Eljay
Well - in the post that originated this discussion between us - you spoke of a God who is claimed to be omniscient. What God other than the biblical one were you refering to? Any groups (religions) perception of "God" can be referred to as omniscient. To assume that being omniscient has to mean the God of the Bible is assuming a lot. From Wikipedia: ******************************** The God of the Bible is referred to often as "The Great I Am," among other similar names, which also incorporates His omnipresence and omnipotence. This concept is included in the Qur'an, where God is called "Al-'aleem" on multiple occasions. This is the infinite form of the verb "alema" which means to know. In Hinduism, God is referred to as sarv-gyaata (omniscient), sarv-samarth (omnipotent) and sarv-vyapt (omnipresent) gyaata (knowing). There are basically three main gods of Hinduism. Vishnu, Shiva and Brahma. Each god has his own special purpose. ************************************ So what is your interpretetation of the biblical God - which by the way states that God is omniscient and exists outside of time. How are you interpreting that to mean anything other than what it says? The descriptions of "God" in the Bible are all different and from different writers. On the one hand some describe him as "all knowing" or omniscient, and on the other hand, they tell stories of a God who is not all knowing. So the Bible actually contradicts itself in many ways in its description of God by the stories about that God that demonstrate that he is neither all powerful or all knowing, and yet on other places they describe him as all powerful and all knowing. This is understandable as the Bible was written by different men at different times, not by God. You may conclude that this God does not exist - but you are not basing your conclusion on anything factual, so you are merely presenting a strawman who's attributes fullfill your contradictions. Isn't that cozy. I agree with you. The God that you are speaking of does not exist. However - this god is not the one represented in scripture. I don't need to have any 'facts' to prove whether a certain entity described as "God" exists or not because there are no 'facts' that prove this entity exists in the first place. More responses your post in next post. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Again - you are the one who established the definition of God in your original post - stating it was the one believed to be omniscient. We're working with your definition of an entity already described in print. I don't need to define it - merely reference the description that exists. Sorry, I don't remember the context of that post, but perhaps I was just accepting your understanding of that attribute. Perhaps "God" is all knowing, but being "all knowing" is only an attribute of "God" it is not a description of the entity known as "God." Perhaps you consider the thousands of prophecies of scripture that were fullfilled centuries after the prophets died - coincidence. No, I consider them to be fiction. What are you basing your conclusion on? Politics and the agenda of the men who wrote scripture, and of the ones who decided which scripture would be included in the Bible. I don't believe any of them were "inspired by God." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Wed 06/03/09 07:27 PM
|
|
Eljay said:
But time is not defined by the future. Time is described by 3 separate entities - past present and future. Your conclusion that time does not exist merely demonstrates your not understanding what time is. We have indefinite evidence to attest to the past, and unless you are in a comma - you are fully aware of the present as it occurs. Though you may not recognize the future, as it has not occured - it will come, and you can do nothing to stop it. Past, present and future are NOT entities and they cannot 'describe' anything. You saying that time 'exsits' demonstrates YOUR lack of understanding of what time is. Time is not an entity and it does not exist. I am not saying that memory does not exist. The past is memory. Is it not? The only "evidence" you have of the past is evidence of change and movement. It is evidence of the progression of events through a spacetime matrix in a given direction. (called time by us.) Even if you could get into a time machine and go into the past, when you got there, it would be YOUR PRESENT MOMENT. If I planned to make a trip in a time machine to the past tomorrow, that trip would be IN MY FUTURE. When I made the trip and arrived in the past (of this reality) it would be MY PRESENT MOMENT. The future, (of that reality) would actually be where I remembered MY PAST.. IN THE FUTURE when in relation to non time travelers. Therefore, past present and future are from the perspective of the observer. For the observer, the only thing that actually exists is NOW.. the present. You cannot take action in the past or the future, you can only take action NOW. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i thought you were going to ask what they worshipped...a dragon, a barber, or a man.
The OT describes in one book as smoke coming from the sky assuming it's from God and fire...which to me sounds like a dragon. Another--telling the servants if you prayed, He'll come down and shave your head and body hair and then of course the prophet Jesus |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is interesting to me, is if you take away original sin, and take away the need to reference Jesus.
Then Buddhism will get you into a Christian heaven. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is interesting to me, is if you take away original sin, and take away the need to reference Jesus. Then Buddhism will get you into a Christian heaven. I don't get it. Don't the Buddhists have their own heaven? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
....scare me
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boo!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
smiless
on
Thu 06/04/09 09:08 PM
|
|
What is interesting to me, is if you take away original sin, and take away the need to reference Jesus. Then Buddhism will get you into a Christian heaven. I don't get it. Don't the Buddhists have their own heaven? The Buddhist concept of heaven and hell is entirely different from that in other religions. Buddhists do not accept that these places are eternal. It is unreasonable to condemn a man to eternal hell for his human weakness but quite reasonable to give him every chance to develop himself. From the Buddhist point of view, those who go to hell can work themselves upward by making use of the merit that they had acquired previously. There are no locks on the gates of hell. Hell is a temporary place and there is no reason for those beings to suffer there forever. The Buddha's Teaching shows us that there are heavens and hells not only beyond this world, but in this very world itself. Thus the Buddhist conception of heaven and hell is very reasonable. For instance, the Buddha once said, 'When the average ignorant person makes an assertion to the effect that there is a Hell (patala) under the ocean he is making a statement which is false and without basis. The word 'Hell' is a term for painful sensations. 'The idea of one particular ready-made place or a place created by god as heaven and hell is not acceptable to the Buddhist concept. The fire of hell in this world is hotter than that of the hell in the world-beyond. There is no fire equal to anger, lust or greed and ignorance. According to the Buddha, we are burning from eleven kinds of physical pain and mental agony: lust, hatred, illusion sickness, decay, death, worry, lamentation, pain(physical and mental), melancholy and grief. People can burn the entire world with some of these fires of mental discord. From a Buddhist point of view, the easiest way to define hell and heaven is that where ever there is more suffering, either in this world or any other plane, that place is a hell to those who suffer. And where there is more pleasure or happiness, either in this world or any other worldly existence, that place is a heaven to those who enjoy their worldly life in that particular place. However, as the human realm is a mixture of both pain and happiness, human beings experience both pain and happiness and will be able to realize the real nature of life. But in many other planes of existence inhabitants have less chance for this realization. In certain places there is more suffering than pleasure while in some other places there is more pleasure than suffering. Therefore heaven and hell is more of a emotional status then an actual physical plane of existence like other religions want to believe. It is also temporary as it can be changed if you want to change it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know i haven't been to church since i was 19 im 25 now. Its funny i was gonna become the youth leader of the the church i went away for a week. The church accused me of having sex with the woman i went with nothing happened. Well they said they didn't want me to become youth leader so i siad to them if im not gonna become the youth leader because you belive something happened im not coming back here nomore and no teens will ever come to this church again. To this day no teen has went to that church. I made no threats i simply stop going and the teens wouldn't go cause they stood by me. I still don't know which religion to follow if any at all. You all have a good day. :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is interesting to me, is if you take away original sin, and take away the need to reference Jesus. Then Buddhism will get you into a Christian heaven. I don't get it. Don't the Buddhists have their own heaven? The Buddhist concept of heaven and hell is entirely different from that in other religions. Buddhists do not accept that these places are eternal. It is unreasonable to condemn a man to eternal hell for his human weakness but quite reasonable to give him every chance to develop himself. From the Buddhist point of view, those who go to hell can work themselves upward by making use of the merit that they had acquired previously. There are no locks on the gates of hell. Hell is a temporary place and there is no reason for those beings to suffer there forever. The Buddha's Teaching shows us that there are heavens and hells not only beyond this world, but in this very world itself. Thus the Buddhist conception of heaven and hell is very reasonable. For instance, the Buddha once said, 'When the average ignorant person makes an assertion to the effect that there is a Hell (patala) under the ocean he is making a statement which is false and without basis. The word 'Hell' is a term for painful sensations. 'The idea of one particular ready-made place or a place created by god as heaven and hell is not acceptable to the Buddhist concept. The fire of hell in this world is hotter than that of the hell in the world-beyond. There is no fire equal to anger, lust or greed and ignorance. According to the Buddha, we are burning from eleven kinds of physical pain and mental agony: lust, hatred, illusion sickness, decay, death, worry, lamentation, pain(physical and mental), melancholy and grief. People can burn the entire world with some of these fires of mental discord. From a Buddhist point of view, the easiest way to define hell and heaven is that where ever there is more suffering, either in this world or any other plane, that place is a hell to those who suffer. And where there is more pleasure or happiness, either in this world or any other worldly existence, that place is a heaven to those who enjoy their worldly life in that particular place. However, as the human realm is a mixture of both pain and happiness, human beings experience both pain and happiness and will be able to realize the real nature of life. But in many other planes of existence inhabitants have less chance for this realization. In certain places there is more suffering than pleasure while in some other places there is more pleasure than suffering. Therefore heaven and hell is more of a emotional status then an actual physical plane of existence like other religions want to believe. It is also temporary as it can be changed if you want to change it. That's very interesting Smiles. I agree with the Buddhists. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...two questions. 1: Dinosaurs. ? 2: God is omnipotent. He created free will. But by definition he is everywhere all the time, and therefore exists in the future right now...what's the point in His guidance in our choices if he knows what we're going to do already? In fact, doesn't this make free will...a lie? In which case, doesn't this make all our lives on earth before we go off into the nicely black and white heaven and hell a sort of sick side show that must get pretty boring knowing exactly what we're going to do all the time? 1.) The dinosaurs, I understand are all dead unless some of them escaped into the inner earth and evolved into reptilian humanoids. 2.) a. God does not exist "in the future" because time does not actually exist. The only thing that exists is HERE AND NOW. b. "Free will" was not created. The "will" is the power to direct the self and is always and innately "free." It is neither given or taken away or created. c. The "free will" of conscious individuals is the randomness that disrupts any kind of predicable actions or events. "God" does not know what anyone will decide to do, therefore this reality is anything but boring. http://mingle2.com/topic/show/227814 |
|
|
|
|
