Do you believe that 2007 will have the second coming of Jesus Christ?

[John Dibble]

Dude, you're contradicting yourself - first you say that non-belief isn't the reason you go to hell, then you say non-believers are condemned (a.k.a. going to hell) because they don't believe. It's right there in plain English, the second half of the last sentence in your post.

Hello and welcome to Jesus 101!

In the beginning, God created man. He was all like, "Dude, don't do that sh**t over there." But man was all "Whatever, man," and did it anyway (man was probably high). God was pissed and was like, "You idiot, now I have to send you to hell. I LOVE YOU!" Man was like "That's lame." So God felt a little bad and was like "Well just wait 2000 years I'll fix everything."

So 2000 years later this Jesus guy pops out and doesn't do any of that sh**t over there. God was like, "Jesus is so awesome, let's kill him so that man doesn't have to go to hell." So they killed Jesus and that was a serious bummer. But then Jesus popped out of the ground a few days later all like, "Pshh death is for pussies. Believe me and you can come hang out with God."

To summarize: God condemned man to hell for sin. The belief, faith, and acceptance that Jesus died in stead of you is what forgives you your sin. Now, one could indeed argue that not believing results in going to hell, but not believing would not be a problem if you didn't already have sin on your plate. Besides, the Bible states that even the demons know and believe in God and Jesus.

LOL, amusing. Anywho, in response to the last part - in terms of "belief" I think "worshiping and submitting" were also implied, so keep that in mind for the rest of the conversation, but I digress...

Biblically, all humans are sinful in nature, right? Suppose a Christian and, oh I dunno, how about a Buddhist both live near identical lives, the primary difference being their religion. If the Christian commits a sin, the Buddhist also commits the same sin. Basically, if the Christian steals $10 from his grandmother, the Buddhist steals $10 from his grandmother. That's not to say they generally go around doing bad things, but even the most devout slip up now and then. So let's also say if one feels bad and tells his grandmother the truth and pays her back $20, so does the other.

When they both die, they have committed an equal amount of sins. The Christian is "saved" and goes to heaven, and the Buddhist is "condemned" and goes to hell - this is what the quote before says will happen. They have committed equal amounts of sin, and yet they receive different fates. Logically, given that they both have sinned equally, the consequences can't be because of sin. The only difference was their beliefs, and the one who believed in Christ gets saved and the one who doesn't burns eternally. The end result is the direct consequence of believing or not believing. Logically you can't get around it. You can still say that sin is the reason you go to hell, but you first have to also say that not believing is the only sin God won't forgive.

[tik 🪀✨]

Dude, you're contradicting yourself - first you say that non-belief isn't the reason you go to hell, then you say non-believers are condemned (a.k.a. going to hell) because they don't believe. It's right there in plain English, the second half of the last sentence in your post.

Hello and welcome to Jesus 101!

In the beginning, God created man. He was all like, "Dude, don't do that sh**t over there." But man was all "Whatever, man," and did it anyway (man was probably high). God was pissed and was like, "You idiot, now I have to send you to hell. I LOVE YOU!" Man was like "That's lame." So God felt a little bad and was like "Well just wait 2000 years I'll fix everything."

So 2000 years later this Jesus guy pops out and doesn't do any of that sh**t over there. God was like, "Jesus is so awesome, let's kill him so that man doesn't have to go to hell." So they killed Jesus and that was a serious bummer. But then Jesus popped out of the ground a few days later all like, "Pshh death is for pussies. Believe me and you can come hang out with God."

To summarize: God condemned man to hell for sin. The belief, faith, and acceptance that Jesus died in stead of you is what forgives you your sin. Now, one could indeed argue that not believing results in going to hell, but not believing would not be a problem if you didn't already have sin on your plate. Besides, the Bible states that even the demons know and believe in God and Jesus.

LOL, amusing. Anywho, in response to the last part - in terms of "belief" I think "worshiping and submitting" were also implied, so keep that in mind for the rest of the conversation, but I digress...

Biblically, all humans are sinful in nature, right? Suppose a Christian and, oh I dunno, how about a Buddhist both live near identical lives, the primary difference being their religion. If the Christian commits a sin, the Buddhist also commits the same sin. Basically, if the Christian steals $10 from his grandmother, the Buddhist steals $10 from his grandmother. That's not to say they generally go around doing bad things, but even the most devout slip up now and then. So let's also say if one feels bad and tells his grandmother the truth and pays her back $20, so does the other.

When they both die, they have committed an equal amount of sins. The Christian is "saved" and goes to heaven, and the Buddhist is "condemned" and goes to hell - this is what the quote before says will happen. They have committed equal amounts of sin, and yet they receive different fates. Logically, given that they both have sinned equally, the consequences can't be because of sin. The only difference was their beliefs, and the one who believed in Christ gets saved and the one who doesn't burns eternally. The end result is the direct consequence of believing or not believing. Logically you can't get around it. You can still say that sin is the reason you go to hell, but you first have to also say that not believing is the only sin God won't forgive.

Before I continue I might state that I don't believe in Christian dogma really because I have the same sort of problems with it and its followers that I imagine you do. In fact your story exemplifies one of them, but under Christian dogma it is perfectly explainable - not fair, I think, but explainable.

Jesus acted as the ultimate offering for the sacrificial rituals laid out in the Old Testament that the Jews were meant to do on a regular basis for God to forgive them of their sins. It was in this way that he superseded the doctrines of the Torah by providing a more, shall we say, flexible, salvation. Basically Jesus's sacrifice acts to pay the debt owed by sinners, but that debt is only paid if one chooses to accept it by believing in it.

And after one has done so, things get more metaphysical and confusing. Because the Christian accepted the offering of Jesus, his sins in fact are said to be erased. He has never done them. I'm sure there is debate about how this is even possible with an omniscient God.. my understanding amounts to that if God forgets something, it must have never occurred. That makes all kinds of sense, right? Ultimately how you live your life is meaningless. The Buddhist could have lived an even purer life than the Christian by human standards and still be sent to hell.

And that is one big problem I have with Christianity. I understand how it works (at least I think I have a decent grasp on it), but it doesn't seem fair. No, it isn't fair at all. It's a travesty.

[Left-Wing Blogger]

So, who voted yes?

I just did.

[Middle-aged Europe]

The second coming of Jesus did occur in 2007... we just haven't noticed yet.

[Left-Wing Blogger]

The second coming of Jesus did occur in 2007... we just haven't noticed yet.

I see.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Probably one of the most distasteful parts of Christianity for me is the part that you hear over and over from people trying to convert others, which is that you get eternally tortured in hell if you don't believe that Jesus was the Son of God, etc.

No, Hell is the consequence of sin; it is NOT the consequence of disbelief:

John 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him."

But Salvation is the consequence of living by faith:

John 3:16-18 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."

Dude, you're contradicting yourself - first you say that non-belief isn't the reason you go to hell, then you say non-believers are condemned (a.k.a. going to hell) because they don't believe. It's right there in plain English, the second half of the last sentence in your post.

No, you're just taking the verse out of its greater context, which is further explained a little later in the chapter:

John 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him.

So, you are NOT condemned because of unbelief, rather you are condemned if you don't believe because only faith in Jesus removes God's wrath from you.  And the wrath was on you in first place because you sinned.

So, sin came before condemnation, and faith removes the condemnation, and it's your choice to use faith to remove the condemnation that resulted from your sin. 

[John Dibble]

Dude, it's real simple.

Belief/Worship -> Heaven
Non-belief/Non-worship -> Hell

You can try to bulls**t your way out of it all you like, but the link is quite clear. The consequence of not believing and not worshiping is hell. That's how things stand according to the quotes you've put here. You can try to gussy it up as much as you like, doesn't change the simple facts.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

this is real simple:

if you get caught stealing and have a "get out of jail free" card that you refuse to use, are you convicted and sent to jail on the charge of stupidity or on the charge of stealing?

[John Dibble]

this is real simple:

if you get caught stealing and have a "get out of jail free" card that you refuse to use, are you convicted and sent to jail on the charge of stupidity or on the charge of stealing?

Except under the concept of "original sin" I'm guilty of a crime I didn't commit. Since the condemnation comes from something I didn't do in the first place, your example is flawed.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Perhaps because, until recently, the western interest in the Islamic world was an esoteric intellectual taste?

Also note unlike Jesus actual known political history has been attributed to Mohammed; the rise of Islamic imperalism in the 100 years after his supposed death. Trying to explain that without reference to 'Mohammed' is rather difficult, no?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, not in the same way I 'know' I am typing on the computer right now.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Also note unlike Jesus actual known political history has been attributed to Mohammed;

Though on the other hand (no... probably just a different finger) expecting to find known political history that was the direct result of the activities of the preacher son of a carpenter living in a largely illiterate society two thousand years ago is a little silly.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Also note unlike Jesus actual known political history has been attributed to Mohammed;

Though on the other hand (no... probably just a different finger) expecting to find known political history that was the direct result of the activities of the preacher son of a carpenter living in a largely illiterate society two thousand years ago is a little silly.

Err Yes, that is my point.

Bono compared the evidence for Jesus to the evidence to Mohammed, implying that the story of Mohammed is believed by Westerners (Whoever they are) not due to evidence but because of OMG POLITICAL CORRECTNESS OMG!!1111. I was merely refuting that. Anyway I tend to strongly believe that Jesus actually existed - even if the events of his life as told in the gospels are probably fabricated - since the alternative is to imply that someone made him up.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

this is real simple:

if you get caught stealing and have a "get out of jail free" card that you refuse to use, are you convicted and sent to jail on the charge of stupidity or on the charge of stealing?

Except under the concept of "original sin" I'm guilty of a crime I didn't commit. Since the condemnation comes from something I didn't do in the first place, your example is flawed.

need I remind you that you're not debating with a Catholic 

[John Dibble]

this is real simple:

if you get caught stealing and have a "get out of jail free" card that you refuse to use, are you convicted and sent to jail on the charge of stupidity or on the charge of stealing?

Except under the concept of "original sin" I'm guilty of a crime I didn't commit. Since the condemnation comes from something I didn't do in the first place, your example is flawed.

need I remind you that you're not debating with a Catholic 

No, we could probably have a somewhat rational discussion if you were Catholic.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

this is real simple:

if you get caught stealing and have a "get out of jail free" card that you refuse to use, are you convicted and sent to jail on the charge of stupidity or on the charge of stealing?

Except under the concept of "original sin" I'm guilty of a crime I didn't commit. Since the condemnation comes from something I didn't do in the first place, your example is flawed.

need I remind you that you're not debating with a Catholic 

No, we could probably have a somewhat rational discussion if you were Catholic.

all excuses aside, the differences are irrelevant for the outcome in my case and in your case is the same - we need faith in Jesus for the forgiveness of our sins

[John Dibble]

this is real simple:

if you get caught stealing and have a "get out of jail free" card that you refuse to use, are you convicted and sent to jail on the charge of stupidity or on the charge of stealing?

Except under the concept of "original sin" I'm guilty of a crime I didn't commit. Since the condemnation comes from something I didn't do in the first place, your example is flawed.

need I remind you that you're not debating with a Catholic 

No, we could probably have a somewhat rational discussion if you were Catholic.

all excuses aside, the differences are irrelevant for the outcome in my case and in your case is the same - we need faith in Jesus for the forgiveness of our sins

Yes yes, I understand. I need to give the schoolyard bully my lunch money to avoid him beating me up.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Yes yes, I understand. I need to give the schoolyard bully my lunch money to avoid him beating me up.

Eze 18:25 "Yet you say, 'The way of the Lord is not just.' Hear, O house of Israel: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26 If a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits sin, he will die for it; because of the sin he has committed he will die. 27 But if a wicked man turns away from the wickedness he has committed and does what is just and right, he will save his life. 28 Because he considers all the offenses he has committed and turns away from them, he will surely live; he will not die. 29 Yet the house of Israel says, 'The way of the Lord is not just.' Are my ways unjust, O house of Israel? Is it not your ways that are unjust?

 30 "Therefore, O house of Israel, I will judge you, each one according to his ways, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall. 31 Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, O house of Israel? 32 For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!"

[John Dibble]

God is just because the book that is supposedly the word of God says God is just? I remind you that circular logic isn't very affective in real debates.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

God is just because the book that is supposedly the word of God says God is just? I remind you that circular logic isn't very affective in real debates.

for someone who doesn't belief faith is logical, you sure spend a lot of time discussing religion

[John Dibble]

God is just because the book that is supposedly the word of God says God is just? I remind you that circular logic isn't very affective in real debates.

for someone who doesn't belief faith is logical, you sure spend a lot of time discussing religion

Just because I don't find faith particularly logical doesn't mean it's not worthy of discussion. If you haven't noticed a good deal of people in the world are religious, and religion affects a range of things such as culture, politics, and law. Should I ignore something that has a significant impact on the world simply because I find that something to be illogical?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Just because I don't find faith particularly logical doesn't mean it's not worthy of discussion. If you haven't noticed a good deal of people in the world are religious, and religion affects a range of things such as culture, politics, and law. Should I ignore something that has a significant impact on the world simply because I find that something to be illogical?

actually, unless you live in a dry county, I don't see how the religion of Christians is affecting you at all.  The last time I was affected by someone else's religion was when the Mormons knocked on my door.

But, even if you believe you're directly affected by Muslim terrorists, I don't see how discussing Islam and/or Christianity is going to help the situation.  This government is racking up huge amounts of debt in my name fighting Muslim terrorists, but I don't believe discussing Islam is going to change Muslim terrorists.

[Bono]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Perhaps because, until recently, the western interest in the Islamic world was an esoteric intellectual taste?

We have is not just "western" biographies, is any kind of biography.

Also note unlike Jesus actual known political history has been attributed to Mohammed; the rise of Islamic imperalism in the 100 years after his supposed death. Trying to explain that without reference to 'Mohammed' is rather difficult, no?

Just as difficult as trying to explain the expansion of  Christianity without reference to Jesus.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, not in the same way I 'know' I am typing on the computer right now.

Yes, so your worldview collapses into skepticism. I don't see how this especially commends it.

[Bono]

this is real simple:

if you get caught stealing and have a "get out of jail free" card that you refuse to use, are you convicted and sent to jail on the charge of stupidity or on the charge of stealing?

Except under the concept of "original sin" I'm guilty of a crime I didn't commit. Since the condemnation comes from something I didn't do in the first place, your example is flawed.

Dibble, original sin entails, more than an actual sin, a corruption of nature that renders man incapable of doing any good in and out of themselves. Besides, Adam was the federal head of mankind. So since he was representing man when he sinned in a state of sinlessness, mankind as a whole faces the consequences.

What is so amazing is not that God doesn't save everyone, but that He saves anyone at all.

[Ebowed]

God is just because the book that is supposedly the word of God says God is just? I remind you that circular logic isn't very affective in real debates.

for someone who doesn't belief faith is logical, you sure spend a lot of time discussing religion

Should we consider that an ad hominem attack, or just yet another dodge of a valid point?

[Ebowed]

What is so amazing is not that God doesn't save everyone, but that He saves anyone at all.

Where do you get that from?

I know I'd be inclined to look the other way when it comes to all sorts of minor "sins", yet they are grounds for God to damn you to hell.