According to Christianity, people who don't accept Jesus as their savior go to Hell?

[Jeff7]

Not a single sinner can make it to heaven, since heaven is pure and must remain pure from sin. Humans sin all the time, so by definition, we're all going to hell.

BUT, God sent his son, to take our place (death) on the cross, and all our sins are forgiven. The ONLY thing we have to do is accept this, and we are forgiven, thus, can enter heaven.

So how exactly does that work anyway? Or rather, why?
Recipe for cleansing sins. (From the kitchen of god) :
- Create a son to be born like any other mammal is born, out the ol' vagina
- Allow son to be raised by humans
- Allow son to be tortured by humans
- Allow son to be killed by humans
- Raise him from the dead after he's had a few days to think about what he's done
- Sins be gone!

Makes perfect sense. :i am confus;

Religion does not really matter here. If you have faith and accept that you're a sinner and that God forgave you, then you go to heaven. It's the beauty of it really... by nature, we sin, we can't help it.

"Religion doesn't matter."
Ok.....

"...you're a sinner [in the eyes of the Christian deity] and that [the Christian] God forgave you, then you go to [Christian] heaven."
Wait, religion doesn't matter? The sentence immediately following "religion doesn't matter" dealt entirely with a specific religion.
BSOD. DOES NOT COMPUTE. DEVELOPERS.

Now let's just say, all this is not true and was all made up somehow, what harm did it do to you if you believed in it anyway? See, there is really nothing to lose here.

I can't "believe in it anyway," as it's something I see as being a fabrication of humans thousands of years ago as a way of explaining weird crap in the hostile environment that is Earth, as well as a way of explaining the stupid crap that our primate brains can come up with.
Things to lose:
- Taking credit away from your own abilities to do good. "Oh, I couldn't do that on my own, it was all god doing it." Yeah, bullshit. You're perfectly capable of doing good things without the threat of a superparent judging you.

- And at the same time, not holding said deity responsible for things that are very much under his control. "Acts of god" - yeah, good name for them. Tsunamis and earthquakes, anyone? Don't give me the crap about us being cast out of the Garden either. "The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son." Yeah, thanks for leading by example and punishing all of humanity for someone else's alleged screwup. Nice. (This is something I see as a detriment to rational thinking. When good is done under an individual's control, it's God. When bad things happen entirely outside of any person's control, God had absolutely nothing to do with it. That is, until one or two survivors are plucked out of wreckage - by people.)

- Perhaps not doing everything you want to in life because, hey, who cares? You're just going to get a much longer, better life afterward.

- "Jesus, save me from your followers" syndrome. People who claim to be Jesus followers, but don't do the things he'd probably do. I think most Christians would qualify here. I doubt Jesus would work at a comfortable job for $100k/yr and live in a lavishly large house, while the large majority of the world lives far below the poverty line.
But god already taught us the "Do as I say, not as I do" lesson.

- "Nothing to lose" - one of the lousiest reasons to commit yourself to an ideology.

- On the subject of logic failures...so god sent Jesus to Earth to absolve sins. With a powerful anti-sin coating applied to the entire planet, why is sin still such a big issue? I mean sure, we all sin by nature yeah yeah mhmm, but after chanting "Jesus" 3x to bring out the protectiveness of the SinAway coating, does sinning even matter? And if all sins are equal in the eyes of god, and if we all sin anyway...???

 

[Kadarin]

Any way that you slice it, everything we believe, be it religious or science, is, at its true core, based on faith.

You completely miss the point of science. It's not some big monolithic thing you believe in, it's something you do.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

You completely miss the point of faith. It's not just some big monolithic thing you believe in, it's something you do.

Fixed that for ya.

 

[RESmonkey]

Guys, not only is this troll thread, but trying to change someone's beliefs is not practical because they base in on faith. Might as well go talk to a brick wall or something.

 

[destrekor]

Could some of the scientific peps tell me if there is no God why do we have a conscience? Or a inner voice that tells you something is wrong with what you're doing? Wouldn't that just get in the way of Darwinism? I mean if you just shit on someone to get what you want isn't that just what Darwinism is about? Why would you care? The animals don't care.

If the animals don't care, why don't you see other animals shitting on each other to get what they want?

There are many other relatively intelligent species out there that are incredibly social. A conscience is a social-construct, and we cannot at all argue other creatures don't have a conscience. It is more readily observed with language, language being a result of learning/teaching.

Also of importance, ancient primates and even current primates, have all demonstrated immense mental capacity. Not rivaling ours, but still impressive. Also of importance, brain size. Primates already have some of the larger brains in the animal kingdom. Our lineage shows an increase in brain size over time, but what we got out of the deal was weak jaws. Our ancestors had crazy strong jaws, which require muscle. This muscle took room in the skull, leaving less room for the brain. Over the course of a very long time, new species developed that had less jaw muscle mass, and other differences, that led to an increase in brain mass.

I dare say it, but ancient man, the male of the species, and this dates back far beyond man but in the primate family, is likely responsible for the first concepts of education. Tool use, and learning tool use, and more importantly, the purpose of tool use, and in general the whole concept of problem solving. This is a notoriously male trait, still evidenced in our species today, though our genetic lines have mixed up quite a bit and some females display more of a "male brain" than do some males. And far more of both sexes have a brain that is right in the middle, a blend of both brain types but strongest in neither. Right now I cannot remember the name of the female brain type. But I digress.

Problem solving got us basic education. Do, learn, teach. The survival of the tribes often depended on a tribe remaining competent at certain tricks they learned. This continued to progress, someone learned fire, someone learned flinging things with a string on a curved stick, etc etc. Written language is basically one of the most recent insanely important solutions to managing life, and helped pave way to complex civilizations, though even large South American empires existed without written language.

And you can see how important written language truly was. It helps make it easier for a generation to learn everything about all previous generations and what they achieved. Helping pave the way for a greater evolution of civilizations.

"We" have been in the making for thousands of years, all due to education. We haven't changed physically one bit. Our biological signature has been the same for tens of thousands of years, at least. The evolution of our social conscience, thusly, has been equally tied to our education.
Early man had little conscience. Early man would have been equally as barbaric as primates. The capabilities of our more advanced brain took tens of thousands of years to come to the point where we were still barbaric, but in large groups. And then it took another 4 thousand years to where massive religious groups were killing mass numbers of people just to help spread and convert so as to expand empires.


Why did I just reply to this thread?

 

[Jeff7]

Guys, not only is this troll thread, but trying to change someone's beliefs is not practical because they base in on faith. Might as well go talk to a brick wall or something.

But I like talking to brick walls!

Why did I just reply to this thread?

I had started replying to that post, but I realized 1) I'd replied to such posts a few times before, and I didn't feel like doing a search+copy+paste, 2) A sufficient reply would take a lot of typing, and 3) I suspected that you might be in the neighborhood.

 

[FoBoT]

So, who's right then?

we won't know for sure, until later
like when we are dead

that is why religion is about faith and not knowledge ^_^

 

[Nik]

Guys, not only is this troll thread, but trying to change someone's beliefs is not practical because they base in on faith. Might as well go talk to a brick wall or something.

I have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow morning based on evidence. Having faith that an invisible magic man in the sky made everything without any evidence is called blind faith and not only is it irrational, believing in something with no reason to do so is just fucking stupid.

 

[FoBoT]

If what you're saying is true, what was the point of christian crusades?

that was mainly political, not really religious. at the time, the government/church were very intertwined

The specific crusades to restore Christian control of the Holy Land were fought over a period of nearly 200 years, between 1095 and 1291. Other campaigns in Spain and Eastern Europe continued into the 15th century. The Crusades were fought mainly against Muslims, although campaigns were also waged against pagan Slavs, Jews, Russian and Greek Orthodox Christians, Mongols, Cathars, Hussites, Waldensians, Old Prussians, and political enemies of the popes.

The Crusades originally had the goal of recapturing Jerusalem and the Holy Land from Muslim rule and were launched in response to a call from the Christian Byzantine Empire for help against the expansion of the Muslim Seljuk Turks into Anatolia. The term is also used to describe contemporaneous and subsequent campaigns conducted through to the 16th century in territories outside the Levant[3] usually against pagans, heretics, and peoples under the ban of excommunication[4] for a mixture of religious, economic, and political reasons.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

I have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow morning based on evidence. Having faith that an invisible magic man in the sky made everything without any evidence is called blind faith and not only is it irrational, believing in something with no reason to do so is just fucking stupid.

Some would say that the promise of everlasting life is a pretty good reason.

 

[Nik]

Some would say that the promise of everlasting life is a pretty good reason.

Faith in something with no evidence, no reason to believe that what is offered is something more than horse shit, is fucking stupid.

 

[uhohs]

Not a single sinner can make it to heaven, since heaven is pure and must remain pure from sin. Humans sin all the time, so by definition, we're all going to hell.

BUT, God sent his son, to take our place (death) on the cross, and all our sins are forgiven. The ONLY thing we have to do is accept this, and we are forgiven, thus, can enter heaven.

Religion does not really matter here. If you have faith and accept that you're a sinner and that God forgave you, then you go to heaven. It's the beauty of it really... by nature, we sin, we can't help it.

Now let's just say, all this is not true and was all made up somehow, what harm did it do to you if you believed in it anyway? See, there is really nothing to lose here.

here's the fixed or clarified version:

Not a single sinner can make it to heaven(Be in God's presence), since God is holy, pure, and righteous He cannot tolerate any sin. Humans are fallen and sin all the time, so by definition, we all have sinned against a infinitely holy and righteous God and deserve the judgement/sentence of hell.

BUT, because He is loving and merciful, He provided a way to escape from what we ought to receive. God sent his son, to live a sinless life and be the perfect sacrifice(substitute) to take our place (death) on the cross, and all our sins are forgiven (covered by His sacrifice). The ONLY thing we have to do is accept this, and we are forgiven, thus, can enter heaven. Acceptance means you believe(have faith) in who Christ said he was and to obey His words. And if you obey, this involves repenting and turning away from your old life(self).

Now let's just say, all this is not true and was all made up somehow, what harm did it do to you if you believed in it anyway? See, there is really nothing to lose here.

That type of attitude and view demonstrates a lack of any faith and belief. D:

 

[FoBoT]

Might as well go talk to a brick wall or something.

all i have available is this brick floor, not quite finished though

 

[Fritzo]

YOU MUST WORSHIP HIM OR HE WILL SEND YOU TO HELL WHERE YOU WILL BURN FOR ALL ETERNITY!!!!

...but he loves you!

Hell was invented as an incentive to stay in the religon. If you have no incentive, there's no point.

 

[Fritzo]

all i have available is this brick floor, not quite finished though

I did that last year----it's it a bitch getting all those bricks level :|

 

[SooperDave]

Guys, not only is this troll thread, but trying to change someone's beliefs is not practical because they base in on faith. Might as well go talk to a brick wall or something.

Yep. The mods stomped out his tire pressure thread pretty quick yesterday. Not sure why they are letting this one go.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

YOU MUST WORSHIP HIM OR HE WILL SEND YOU TO HELL WHERE YOU WILL BURN FOR ALL ETERNITY!!!!

...but he loves you!

Hell was invented as an incentive to stay in the religon. If you have no incentive, there's no point.

Negative reinforcement doesn't really work that well. You know, the beatings will continue til morale improves.

 

[El Guaraguao]

Yep. The mods stomped out his tire pressure thread pretty quick yesterday. Not sure why they are letting this one go.

Yea im sure the mods will just end up throwing this thread in the recycle bin (aka P&N)
:awe::awe)()

 

[Jeff7]

Negative reinforcement doesn't really work that well. You know, the beatings will continue til morale improves.

Really? I think history's shown it to be exceedingly effective, at least for awhile. Sure, eventually the beatees begin to try to escape from their predicament. That only means that you haven't instilled a sufficient sense of hopelessness in them, and it's your own damn fault as a malevolent leader for letting them figure out that they can think for themselves.

 

[mjrpes3]

Could some of the scientific peps tell me if there is no God why do we have a conscience? Or a inner voice that tells you something is wrong with what you're doing? Wouldn't that just get in the way of Darwinism?

It is wrong to say that Darwinism is just competition between organisms for survival. Darwinism is about survival of organisms in a competitive environment. Survival is often at the expense of a competing organisms, but survival also comes about through cooperation.

You, a multicellular organism, are a wonderful symbiosis of similar and vastly different smaller organisms that evolved the way they did because it was more profitable to work together than compete. In the same way, the human species has flourished as it has because survivability is much higher when we work together (starting with small groups, then tribes, then nations) than fight amongst ourselves -- albeit we as a collective often fight against other human collectives, it still stands that our survivability as a collective, in itself, is still high.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Really? I think history's shown it to be exceedingly effective, at least for awhile. Sure, eventually the beatees begin to try to escape from their predicament. That only means that you haven't instilled a sufficient sense of hopelessness in them, and it's your own damn fault as a malevolent leader for letting them figure out that they can think for themselves.

I think maybe you've confused the intent of religion with the intent of those who would use it to control others.

 

[Nik]

I think maybe you've confused the intent of religion with the intent of those who would use it to control others.

That's like confusing apples with apples.

 

[Jeff7]

I think maybe you've confused the intent of religion with the intent of those who would use it to control others.

Actually, what I said was mainly geared to disagree with the notion that negative reinforcement is ineffective. It is effective, but only when applied properly.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Actually, what I said was mainly geared to disagree with the notion that negative reinforcement is ineffective. It is effective, but only when applied properly.

Any method for controlling others is effective in the short run. It comes down to what your objectives are.

 

[Wheezer]

Actually, what I said was mainly geared to disagree with the notion that negative reinforcement is ineffective. It is effective, but only when applied properly.

shock collars on kids starting at age 8 is a step in the right direction.