Freethought & Rationalism Archive

notMichaelJackson · 07-07-2003, 10:28 PM

Is it moral for God to send a person to hell ONLY because he or she had never heard the Gospels?

A spin-off of this thread.

winstonjen · 07-07-2003, 10:33 PM

If it's not just for us, it's not just for god. Any other morality is meaningless.

And now we bring you to your regularly scheduled show, "Apologetics with Magus55!"

Odemus · 07-08-2003, 01:41 AM

Absolutely, If god created everything that is, then the rules of morality are his entirely, not ours. God could create a whole world of people with the intention of sending them all to eternal torment and still be moral. After all, the moral code is his creation just as much as the rest of creation is his.

winstonjen · 07-08-2003, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Odemus
Absolutely, If god created everything that is, then the rules of morality are his entirely, not ours. God could create a whole world of people with the intention of sending them all to eternal torment and still be moral. After all, the moral code is his creation just as much as the rest of creation is his.

Charming. And do you have any evidence as to why his moral code is greater than ours? Or does might make right?

SpaceMonkey · 07-08-2003, 02:08 AM

The idea that some almighty being is so unfeeling is truly repugnant to me.

What a silly God.

Just think of all of those people, existing in places in which Christianity had never existed. They all went to hell.

Pfft.. What a joke.

meritocrat · 07-08-2003, 05:28 AM

I think Christian teaching states that a person would still go to heaven if they had never heard of the Gospels, provided they had led a 'righteos' life.

Odemus · 07-08-2003, 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by winstonjen
Charming. And do you have any evidence as to why his moral code is greater than ours? Or does might make right?

What does evidence have to do with anything? If I am a created being in a created universe, my evidence is irrelevant, as are my feelings of what is morally right or wrong. So yes, might does equal right.

Carol Massey · 07-08-2003, 05:39 AM

I am thus far the single vote for 'other'. So I am a strange clam, I live with that. The poll is restrictive in that it 'assumes' god is....

My nickel says: LIFE is self-reflective and self-reflexive, and a nested heirarchy, meaning that if we transcend our limited thinking, we find that we are one with source, then we tend to assume another higher source, and on and on.

Always there is this gap between our being and the energy that moves us....so we find that we exist in a quantum world with all potentialities, heavens and hells of our own making.

I love the christian mystics who were truly the salt of the earth:

Meister Eckhart: "When I die and return to the Source, no one will ask where have I been, what have I been doing, for no one will have missed me." (Pardon my paraphrasing, as I am relying on my aging memory).

Kevbo · 07-08-2003, 03:02 PM

If a god created me to think that its own actions were immoral, that god may be one of the following:

-Crazy
-Loony
-Batty
-Evil
-Hypocritical
-A really strong jerk

Somehow, making people who think that your own actions are immoral doesn't strike me as "good" or "just." Maybe God is good at physics but really bad at sociology, and that we've evolved to be smarter than him in this area, or maybe he was made up by a bunch of wooly camel herders a couple of thousand years ago.

Nowhere357 · 07-08-2003, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Odemus
If I am a created being in a created universe, my evidence is irrelevant, as are my feelings of what is morally right or wrong. So yes, might does equal right.

Then the baboon, which is mightier that man, is our moral superior. Then the mugger and the rapist are morally superior to their victims. Then Hitler exhibited superior morals when he managed to butcher millions of innocent people.

And of course, God is morally superior because he kills and tortures billions of people.

What a strange view.

View Poll Results: Is it moral for God to send a person to hell ONLY bec. he/she never heard the Gospels
Yes. There is nothing wrong with God condemning a person for something he/she had no control over.	1	1.33%
No. This would be completly immoral and unjust.	70	93.33%
Other (please explain).	4	5.33%
Voters: 75. You may not vote on this poll

07-07-2003, 10:28 PM	#1
notMichaelJackson Banned Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: IL Posts: 552	Poll about God Is it moral for God to send a person to hell ONLY because he or she had never heard the Gospels? A spin-off of this thread.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-07-2003, 10:33 PM	#2
winstonjen Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 3,425	If it's not just for us, it's not just for god. Any other morality is meaningless. And now we bring you to your regularly scheduled show, "Apologetics with Magus55!"

07-08-2003, 01:41 AM	#3
Odemus Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Easy Street Posts: 736	Absolutely, If god created everything that is, then the rules of morality are his entirely, not ours. God could create a whole world of people with the intention of sending them all to eternal torment and still be moral. After all, the moral code is his creation just as much as the rest of creation is his.

07-08-2003, 02:08 AM	#5
SpaceMonkey Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 37	The idea that some almighty being is so unfeeling is truly repugnant to me. What a silly God. Just think of all of those people, existing in places in which Christianity had never existed. They all went to hell. Pfft.. What a joke.

07-08-2003, 05:28 AM	#6
meritocrat Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: England Posts: 2,608	I think Christian teaching states that a person would still go to heaven if they had never heard of the Gospels, provided they had led a 'righteos' life.

07-08-2003, 05:39 AM	#8
Carol Massey Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Springfield Missouri Posts: 86	I am thus far the single vote for 'other'. So I am a strange clam, I live with that. The poll is restrictive in that it 'assumes' god is.... My nickel says: LIFE is self-reflective and self-reflexive, and a nested heirarchy, meaning that if we transcend our limited thinking, we find that we are one with source, then we tend to assume another higher source, and on and on. Always there is this gap between our being and the energy that moves us....so we find that we exist in a quantum world with all potentialities, heavens and hells of our own making. I love the christian mystics who were truly the salt of the earth: Meister Eckhart: "When I die and return to the Source, no one will ask where have I been, what have I been doing, for no one will have missed me." (Pardon my paraphrasing, as I am relying on my aging memory).

07-08-2003, 03:02 PM	#9
Kevbo Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: NY Posts: 212	If a god created me to think that its own actions were immoral, that god may be one of the following: -Crazy -Loony -Batty -Evil -Hypocritical -A really strong jerk Somehow, making people who think that your own actions are immoral doesn't strike me as "good" or "just." Maybe God is good at physics but really bad at sociology, and that we've evolved to be smarter than him in this area, or maybe he was made up by a bunch of wooly camel herders a couple of thousand years ago.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.