Freewill. Not an excuse.

[Hatter23]

So you're a moronmuslim?

Sorry, I don't feel bad because someone can't type. And I'm not Muslim, I believe in Jesus, Son of God.

He was making a refence as to a Muslim could have used the exact same statement to support his religion.

[Dante]

And clearly, you don't believe in the Bible. So why are so concerned about her? She's dead, and so will we be dead at some point or another.

I'm not concerned about her. She would be dead, and in eternal oblivion. I'm concerned about you. Mostly for the reasons that Hatter stated above, but also on a personal level. I'm concerned about you, v. It pains me to see you not using your evolved brain for some of the simplest of human tasks.

[vozilo]

So what about the Wars over various non-Christian deities over the millenia...by your own mindset, they were wars over a pink elephant. You are still relying on appeals to ignorance, false dichotomies, and ignoring the counter-evidence.

No, i do not. You're taking words out of my mouth and creating your own meaning. Other religions exist because people try to perverse the truth. Or they try to make sense of why are they here, on Earth.

Only one truth exists. There is hell and heaven. You choose where to spend your eternity.

[Persephone]

Only one truth exists. There is hell and heaven. You choose where to spend your eternity.

You're going to sleep so much better tonight because you warned us, aren't you? Congratulate yourself on telling us that it's our choice and we're choosing hell if we remain atheists, right?

I don't even know where to start with you. You're not worth my time so I'll let them rest of them here deal with you.

[vozilo]

He was making a refence as to a Muslim could have used the exact same statement to support his religion.

Don't try to cover up the fact. He typed the word before "Muslim"  deliberately to insult me. Muslims believe in their own God, Allah. Shall we discuss Islam also? I see that you're very interested in many religions.

[Hatter23]

So what about the Wars over various non-Christian deities over the millenia...by your own mindset, they were wars over a pink elephant. You are still relying on appeals to ignorance, false dichotomies, and ignoring the counter-evidence.

No, i do not. You're taking words out of my mouth and creating your own meaning. Other religions exist because people try to perverse the truth. Or they try to make sense of why are they here, on Earth.

Only one truth exists. There is hell and heaven. You choose where to spend your eternity.

Ahh, and now we get down to it. The essence of your argument. You think your realigion is real because you are afraid.

I didn't put words in you mouth, I just used the very words you stated and put them in something other than your false dichotomy. Since you state people couldn't be fighting over a non-thing(a pink elephant) therefore said thing they are fighting over must be real. I used your own reasoning and applied it to something other than the limited paradigm you are thinking in.

[Dante]

So what about the Wars over various non-Christian deities over the millenia...by your own mindset, they were wars over a pink elephant. You are still relying on appeals to ignorance, false dichotomies, and ignoring the counter-evidence.

No, i do not. You're taking words out of my mouth and creating your own meaning. Other religions exist because people try to perverse the truth. Or they try to make sense of why are they here, on Earth.

Only one truth exists. There is hell and heaven. You choose where to spend your eternity.

Bzzzt. Wrong. Since you believe your god is all knowing, and created me, he MUST have created me KNOWING I wouldn't believe in his fairly tale.

Loving god my ass.

[vozilo]

I'm not concerned about her. She would be dead, and in eternal oblivion. I'm concerned about you. Mostly for the reasons that Hatter stated above, but also on a personal level. I'm concerned about you, v. It pains me to see you not using your evolved brain for some of the simplest of human tasks.

Thank you for being concerned about me. I value that you're being honest and admit that it bothers you on a personal level. At some time I was also wondering what happens to those people. Not anymore, Let God be God, He knows what happens to them.

Your only concern is where are you going to spend eternity.

[Dante]

He was making a refence as to a Muslim could have used the exact same statement to support his religion.

Don't try to cover up the fact. He typed the word before "Muslim"  deliberately to insult me. Muslims believe in their own God, Allah. Shall we discuss Islam also? I see that you're very interested in many religions.

No, I typed "moron" to insult you. Damn, you're dense.

Edit: Oops, my bad. Still, the 2nd sentence stands.

[Hatter23]

He was making a refence as to a Muslim could have used the exact same statement to support his religion.

Don't try to cover up the fact. He typed the word before "Muslim"  deliberately to insult me. Muslims believe in their own God, Allah. Shall we discuss Islam also? I see that you're very interested in many religions.

Yes, and despite the insult, the reasoning still stands. If I said "Hey you fucking moron, 2 +2 equals 4"  The insult would in no way render that statement incorrect.

[IAmFirst]

Only one truth exists. There is hell and heaven. You choose where to spend your eternity.

Vozilo, do you really think an all loving, all knowing god is a nice god who is willing to reward murderers and rapists who BELIEVE in him with eternal happiness, while charitable people like me and others on this board who DO NOT believe in him should burn for all eternity?

To make a point, I have never even heard of a human that deserves to be judged by Yahweh-- the most morally inferior being ever created. No one even CAN burn forever, unless your loving god makes it so.

To make another point, I hope you don't burn in any aspect of life or afterlife. Do you hope that I burn forever just because I think Yahweh is an asshole and his illiterate son was anything but holy?

[vozilo]

Yes, and despite the insult, the reasoning still stands. If I said "Hey you fucking moron, 2 +2 equals 4"  The insult would in no way render that statement incorrect.

Instead of having a logical conversation you guys start using foul language. How not nice. All I got to say is that I'm not offended by any of that.

Stay cool, we'll talk later. I'll let u cool off a bit.

[Hatter23]

Your only concern is where are you going to spend eternity.

Appeals to negative consequences do nothing to support the validity of your argument. It is called a fallacy for a reason. When those negative consequences are from a measurable and real derivitive from the question at hand, that does apply.

To give you an example:

Should we build this dam? If one argues that the negative consequence is that it will anger the God...that is an invalid appeal to negative consequences. If it is, It will kill off the nesting area for the bee that pollinate our crops, that is a valid appeal to negative consequences

[Asmoday]

Muslims believe in their own God, Allah.

You don't know much about Islam, do you?

According to them, you are believing in Allah, too. Albeit in a twisted version of the true belief. According to the quran Jesus did actually exist. But he was not the son of God. Instead he was the last prophet before Mohammed came.

I see that you're very interested in many religions.

Atheists are interested in many religions because the adherents of said religions are very busy to transform this planet into a living hell.

Atheists would be very interested in the myth of the Easter Bunny, if there were people running around that work on making the rules of the Easter Bunny cult become the rules of all other people by law and who are ready and willing to harm, hurt and even kill others for not sharing their belief in the Easter Bunny.

[Hatter23]

Yes, and despite the insult, the reasoning still stands. If I said "Hey you fucking moron, 2 +2 equals 4"  The insult would in no way render that statement incorrect.

Instead of having a logical conversation you guys start using foul language. How not nice. All I got to say is that I'm not offended by any of that.

Stay cool, we'll talk later. I'll let u cool off a bit.

So you don't comprehend why the insult does not render the statement 2 + 2 equals 4, invalid? In order to be logical, you need to divorce the emotional impact of the statement from the fact.

[IAmFirst]

Yes, and despite the insult, the reasoning still stands. If I said "Hey you fucking moron, 2 +2 equals 4"  The insult would in no way render that statement incorrect.

Instead of having a logical conversation you guys start using foul language. How not nice. All I got to say is that I'm not offended by any of that.

Stay cool, we'll talk later. I'll let u cool off a bit.

The insults come and go, Voz (just like in life), but we ARE having a logical conversation, you OTOH, are just sticking to words others have told you without ever questioning them or researching them. That's what "logic" is.

Tell me how Muslims are wrong and you are right.

[Historicity]

Wow, I'm the one who is ignorant? You people see what u want to see and I'm trying to tell you the Truth.
How about I'll give u a link to another discussion and then you'll let me know what you think:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7509431/

I did, thank you.  The title of the thread was "HISTORIANS AT THE TIME OF JESUS".

Way down on the page someone cited Flavius Josephus, Tacitus and Julius Africanus.

In the quote from the work of Flavius Josephus the writer says he believed Jesus was the Messiah but Josephus remained a Pharisee -- in modern terms an Orthodox Jew.  Josephus' writing was about 95 AD.  He was born about 37 AD in Israel. Early Christian writers looking for authorities to cite in support of their belief never cite him.  Eusebius is the first, around 324 AD.  Eusebius praised lying to indoctrinate the lower classes as a virtue taught by Plato who learned it from Moses.


Tacitus' writing was about 115 AD.  He was writing about Nero's persecution of the group called the Christians.  He does not say he researched anything about Jesus himself and has apparently taken the claim on face value.  He also says the Christians deserved what they were getting because of their "odium humani" which would mean "hatred of the human race" or "hatred of everything human and decent".  If you want to take him as someone with authentic knowledge of the Christians from sound research then take that, too. He was born about 60 AD.

Suetonius was writing about 120 AD.  He says there was trouble in the Jewish community instigated by Crestus. (Greek was dialectic at a level hard to believe compared to modern languages.  Some cities rejected the kh sound.  Crestos is a possible dialectic variant of Khristos or just a mishearing.)   From that he seems to think that this Crestus was alive.  Clearly he is relating hearsay.  He was born about 70 AD.

None of these were literally "HISTORIANS AT THE TIME OF JESUS".

Julius Africanus wrote around 220 AD.  Why did the poster even mention him?

[Ambassador Pony]

 

[Graybeard]

First of all, be respectful to my beliefs and don't call Christianity a mythology. Jesus is a proven historical figure. Titus Flavius Josephus, Justus of Tiberius, and few more of historians write about Jesus. (all lived within 100 yrs from Jesus's death).

As you say, none saw him alive and the Josephus passage you are thinking of is a forgery added much later by an over-excitable Christian.

Consider the following list. These are the historians and writers who DID live within Christ's alleged lifetime or within a hundred years of it, after the time:
 Apollonius             Persius
 Appian                 Petronius
 Arrian                 Phaedrus
 Aulus Gellius          Philo-Judaeus
 Columella              Phlegon
 Damis                  Pliny the Elder
 Dio Chrysostom         Pliny the Younger
 Dion Pruseus           Plutarch
 Epictetus              Pompon Mela
 Favorinus              Ptolemy
 Florus Lucius          Quintilian
 Hermogones             Quintius Curtius
 Josephus               Seneca
 Justus of Tiberius     Silius Italicus
 Juvenal                Statius
 Lucanus                Suetonius
 Lucian                 Tacitus
 Lysias                 Theon of Smyran
 Martial                Valerius Flaccus
 Paterculus             Valerius Maximus
 Pausanias
Yet, aside from two FORGED passages in the works of a Jewish writer mentioned above, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there isn't ANY mention of Jesus Christ. At all.

http://www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/jesus5.htm

Who said she was doomed to hell? You're the one who assumes this. You don't know what were her thoughts before she died, maybe she repented and accepted Christ before her death.

Hmmm… just like Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot…

[Historicity]

First of all, be respectful to my beliefs and don't call Christianity a mythology.

That is the Argumentum Ad Misericordium.  Also known as The Appeal to Pity.

We're supposed to pity your hurt little feelings and concede your case at the beginning.  Sorry, Christianity fits the definition of a mythology.

[vozilo]

  when what you posted, just John 3:16 doesn't even mention hell at all.  The verses I posted did that.     Nice try though.  Rather amusing to see even more lies.

You are some what wrong. In John 3:16 it says, "...so that no one would perish.." which I think refers to hell buddy.

[IAmFirst]

  when what you posted, just John 3:16 doesn't even mention hell at all.  The verses I posted did that.     Nice try though.  Rather amusing to see even more lies.

You are some what wrong. In John 3:16 it says, "...so that no one would perish.." which I think refers to hell buddy.

Whoa, whoa, whoa, Vol! You're getting confused again. "Hell" was not mentioned in early translations of the bible. The concept you are attributing to Hell, an actual place in the bible, comes from Dante's Inferno, which (most christians don't know) was a comedy.

Dante was obviously inspired by Norse mythology: In Norse mythology, Hel is a being who presides over a realm of the same name, where she receives a portion of the dead. In this mythology, no one is burning, but they are underground, where they are buried, and Hel watches over them, not torment them.

You can find out much, much more about the fictional hell just by starting in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell

Click on that and see how many other religions have their own version of "hell" and you can read about the goddess Hel in the same link.

[vozilo]

Whoa, whoa, whoa, Vol! You're getting confused again. "Hell" was not mentioned in early translations of the bible. The concept you are attributing to Hell, an actual place in the bible, comes from Dante's Inferno, which (most christians don't know) was a comedy.

Dante was obviously inspired by Norse mythology: In Norse mythology, Hel is a being who presides over a realm of the same name, where she receives a portion of the dead. In this mythology, no one is burning, but they are underground, where they are buried, and Hel watches over them, not torment them.

You can find out much, much more about the fictional hell just by starting in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell

Click on that and see how many other religions have their own version of "hell" and you can read about the goddess Hel in the same link.

Norse mythology comes much later (11 to 18th century) than Bible, which was written 2000 years ago. So this verse has nothing to do with Norse mythology.  In the Old Testament, Hell is more closely translated as Sheol in Hebrew or Hades, which means "place of darkness to which all dead go regardless of the moral choices made in life and where they are "removed from the light of God"".

In New Testament, in which Gospels were originally written in Greek, the word hell is exactly translated as 'Gehenna'. It represents a place of fire and torture for the wicked.

You can research this more online if you want. Use Wiki if you wish.

[Bagheera]

Yeah, because a 4 year old raised in a Jewish household would think that way....are you really that incredibly stupid??????

Stop attacking my intelligence and debate on the topic. All I am saying is that you don't know her state of mind when she died, she could've changed her beliefs and seen God in all of this, while you only see negative.

I bolded part of your reply for emphasis: she still would have gone to Hell by your beliefs[1], because the only way to heaven is through jesus, right?

I think you should consider your approach here carefully. Your are implying here that it is quite possible that the young girl came to jesus in her last moments, and was saved. The other side is that the 4 year olds who have NOT come to Jesus in their final moments, were not saved, and are in Hell. 

Keep in mind that there are plenty of children across the globe who have not heard of Jesus Christ or have been taught that He is NOT the one. Are you claiming that everyone who you feel sorry for magically accepts Christ in their final moments, even if they have never heard of him or have no basis to believe in him as their savior? The kid raised in the  Buddhist tradition has a blinding, magical epiphany immediately before they step on a land mine? If that's the case, why do we need ignorant, argumentative, evangelical Christians for?

1.	I say your beliefs because there are other Christians who believe that Christ's teaching did not apply to Jews; that being good and believing in God is enough; that just doing good is enough; that no one is judged until after the Apocalypse; and so on.

[Bagheera]

Don't u think that if there was nothing there, this wouldn't exist? After all, no one is going to argue over pink elephant for over 2000 years? Right?

Don't you think that if pink elephants existed, someone would have found one by now?

[IAmFirst]

Whoa, whoa, whoa, Vol! You're getting confused again. "Hell" was not mentioned in early translations of the bible. The concept you are attributing to Hell, an actual place in the bible, comes from Dante's Inferno, which (most christians don't know) was a comedy.

Dante was obviously inspired by Norse mythology: In Norse mythology, Hel is a being who presides over a realm of the same name, where she receives a portion of the dead. In this mythology, no one is burning, but they are underground, where they are buried, and Hel watches over them, not torment them.

You can find out much, much more about the fictional hell just by starting in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell

Click on that and see how many other religions have their own version of "hell" and you can read about the goddess Hel in the same link.

Norse mythology comes much later (11 to 18th century) than Bible, which was written 2000 years ago. So this verse has nothing to do with Norse mythology.  In the Old Testament, Hell is more closely translated as Sheol in Hebrew or Hades, which means "place of darkness to which all dead go regardless of the moral choices made in life and where they are "removed from the light of God"".

In New Testament, in which Gospels were originally written in Greek, the word hell is exactly translated as 'Gehenna'. It represents a place of fire and torture for the wicked.

You can research this more online if you want. Use Wiki if you wish.

I gave you the wiki site to look at which shows you still have it backwards. (It's not a sin to click on a site that clears things up for ya. ) What I'm saying is "Hell" was not mentioned in the Holy Bible UNTIL after Dante's Inferno and the discovery of Nordic Mythology in the late 700s. What the bible DID mention is an "eternal fire" not a hell.

As you point out, the Greek translation (nor did any Hebrew translation) become translated to "Hell" until very recently. KJV is the most recent to mistranslate.

[vozilo]

I gave you the wiki site to look at which shows you still have it backwards. (It's not a sin to click on a site that clears things up for ya. ) What I'm saying is "Hell" was not mentioned in the Holy Bible UNTIL after Dante's Inferno and the discovery of Nordic Mythology in the late 700s. What the bible DID mention is an "eternal fire" not a hell.

As you point out, the Greek translation (nor did any Hebrew translation) become translated to "Hell" until very recently. KJV is the most recent to mistranslate.

Well it doesn't matter what the Bible calls it, what is important that is that we call it hell to sum it up.  (I didn't read all of the wiki page as it's very long but I did look at the parts which were relevant to our discussion.) You're saying that Norses invented "hell" but it was already in the Bible.

I can call it Sheol or burning lake. The fact remains a fact: it is real (heaven & hell), based on the bible, other books of different  origins, and testimonies of people being there. (you can search for them on youtube if you'd like).

[Add Homonym]

There is no hell in John. It simply states that people either walk in light or darkness. The word perish means disappear.

Around the time the bible was written, some people believed that sheol was compartmentalised into nice bits and bad bits, probably due to the apocryphal book of Enoch.

Luke 16 states that Lazarus went immediately to sheol into the bosom of Abraham, and the rich man started burning in Hades, from where he could see Lazarus having fun with Abraham, over a chasm.

What the bible DID mention is an "eternal fire" not a hell.

"Eonian chastening". Matthew 25:46 is the only place which mentions any duration to the suffering during the 4th eon.
http://scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/mat25.pdf

The rest of the NT refers to fire, but does not specify how long the fire will take to burn people. The fire of the sun is long lasting, but you wouldn't burn in it for long.

Matt 10 says that your soul is destroyed in hell, but does not specify how long it will take

[28] And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

[velkyn]

  when what you posted, just John 3:16 doesn't even mention hell at all.  The verses I posted did that.     Nice try though.  Rather amusing to see even more lies.

You are some what wrong. In John 3:16 it says, "...so that no one would perish.." which I think refers to hell buddy.

Always nice to see the usual attempts by a Chrisitan to redefine words.  Perish means die, yes?  Christians die all of the time.  And according to your bible, hell is not a place where anyone perishes. God goes out of his way to make sure people suffer. You indeed have to die to get to hell or sheol or wherever, but as my fellow forum members have pointed out, the hell of Christians is not the sheol of the Jews. 

However, getting back to your delusion that 4 year olds can convert magically.  Again, Voz, show how that can happen.  You make the claim to excuse your vile beliefs and now you are expected to support it.  I don't have to know about the entire universe to know that you are wrong.  I know human psychology, early childhood development, religion, and I know what your bible actually says, not what you and so many others desperately want it to.  It never says that children get a free pass or that anyone is allowed into heaven except by the conscious acceptance of JC.