Pandora

Originally posted by Puttz:
Just to let you know most Christians who hold to a view of Hell, admit that it only applies to people of the age to understand and recieve the gospel. 4 year olds will not be in hell, or the mentally ill, and as for the person who has never heard the gospel well God is the judge there. (I am sure most of this seems silly to point out, but I just hate it when people unfairly portray the Christian position for emotional appeal.) You can do better.

Okay, so if God is the judge of those who never hear the gospel, why do Christians feel this overwhelming need to go out and convert native populations around the world. Surely you are doing them a disservice? If they have never heard the gospel they will be judged according to how they have lived their lives, if they hear the gospel and reckon it’s not up to much- well they get to burn in hell. Which seems fairer to you? Think how many people you could be sentencing to an eternity in hell every time you start preaching.

Queen of Swords

Originally posted by Puttz:
<strong> 4 year olds will not be in hell, or the mentally ill</strong>

How mentally ill do you have to be to get out of hell free? Paranoid schizophrenic, manic-depressive, mildly autistic? In the afterlife, can I redefine skepticism as a mental illness? After all, one could argue that because of our "illness" we couldn't really understand the gospel, so we didn't believe in it. Okay, god, let us all in!

Edited for formatting.

[ December 03, 2001: Message edited by: QueenofSwords ]</p>

kctan

What about pyschopaths, socialpaths, serial killers, serial rapists et al, some of them are termed as mentally ill as well. Does that mean they will go to heaven also ?

Wow what a lively bunch we will have together in heaven !

BTW If a serial killer decided to kill me in heaven do I,
1) go to hell
2) get reincarnated
3) get repeatedly killed & resurrect, killed & resurrect by the killer again & again in heaven at the "crime scene"
4) I can't die, so that asshole just keep stabbing at me ?

DRFseven

This is a great problem with Christian theology; the problem of the nature of punishment - to castigate the culpable. By the way, I don't know if it's really true that most Christians believe that infants aren't culpable. Don't Catholics and some others hold Christenings and other types of infant head-sprinklings and baptisms specifically for protection for them against eternal damnation?

But even those religions that mercifully wait until the age of reason is attained before damning the child to everlasting torment, there is the problem of increment. As you ask, is the child blameless one month and responsible the next? This is similar to the Christian problem of souls, which are thought to exist in humans, but not in other animals. There is no one point when our ancestors became human; it occured over a long period of time; did some hominids have partial souls? I know that a few think things like dogs and plants and even coffee beans have souls, but most think souls are for humans only.

Another Christian problem of increment concerns the corporeal body going to heaven (which is included in many creeds, even though the supposed adherents don't even know it and think only the "soul" goes there). Yet when limbs are amputated, everyone can see they don't go anywhere, and dead bodies completely decompose before anybody comes down in a chariot to get them. And what about weight loss? If a Christian loses twenty pounds, are the twenty pounds hanging out in heaven, waiting for the rest of the body to join them? Is that why we don't see the pounds fall off?

I think some Christians have some splainin to do.

Jacey

It is tomorrow afternoon here in New Orleans.....patiently awaiting your answer.......

Jacey

DRFseven

No need to worry, kctan; I think God said He would be hiring Argenbright Security to check for knives at the gates.

Bree

Pandora - I hate to be the bearer of bad news but there is a supposed logical reason Christians feel the need to spread the Good News of the Lord Jesus (and it has nothing to do with that wonderful feeling that comes from having saved a soul from the fires of Hell).

Revelations states that Christ will not return to earth to claim His followers until the word of God has been spread to all four corners of the earth (I don't know if God meant the earth as was known at the time Revelations was written, or the earth as we know it today - someone had better ask Him about that). Therefore, Christians want to spread the word as fast as possible in order to speed up their Heavenly Reward.

I don't understand why you would have to consult an outside source regarding Lone Wolf's postings. You are a Believer, Lone Wolf is not - it is YOUR job to convince Lone Wolf that the Bible is the inerrant word of God. Whatever the Bible says, goes. The Bible dropped out of Heaven fully written - therefore you have no right questioning what is written in in. If you start questioning the Bible, then you have sinned and must ask Jesus' forgiveness.

Boy, I'm so glad that I'm an Ex-Christian - at least I have the 'insiders' knowledge!

Ojuice5001

That's me. I have Asperger Syndrome, a mild form of autism. While the rest of you chumps have to choose between heaven and hell, I'll be hanging out in a place I like to call Fool's Paradise.

Mageth

Interesting. So it's possible that the mother of one of Dahmer's victims might meet him in heaven, knowing that her own son who was his victim is in hell. God thinks it's some non-believers' time to die, even though this leaves hundreds of children fatherless, motherless or parentless.

If this is a "just" god, send me to hell. Dahmer and Bin Laden are more just.

Mageth

Ah, the old "age of understanding" problem. If you are a hard-line original sin believer, then you're faced with the question of god sending infants to hell. So someone comes up with the "more palatable" explanation of an age of understanding. Besides the pointed-out fact that there's no scriptural defense of this position, to me, this has an equally unjust ramification as infants-deserve-hell.

Supposedly at some age or level of spiritual awareness, children become responsible for their sins. Note that this demarcation line would nt be one month to the next, but an instantaneous point in the child's life. One second no worries, the next second responsible for their sins. This leaves the unpleasant theoretical situation where some child, an instant after "crossing the line," disobeys their parents by going out in the street. Or perhaps the child isn't even disobeying, but is just careless and the child has heard the gospel but hasn't yet been "saved" (whatever your particular definition of that is). The child is hit by a car and dies instantly. For this single act of childhood rebellion or carelessness, the child is sent to hell by a "just" god. If the child had wandered out in the street one minute or one thought process earlier, it would have been heaven. And if it was just carelessness on the child's part, how would god interfering to save the child's life be violating the child's "free will?"

No one will ever convince me that the xian god is in any way, shape or fashion "just" or "benevolent."