is the whole idea of salvation through faith alone evil?

[Ban my account ffs!]

The idea is that you will be held accountable for your sins, but if you have faith then you will not perish. 

I think it makes more sense to say something like... upon death you are released from the limitations of this physical world and you instantly come to understand the consequences of your actions and the weight of that falls on you.  Without Christ, it would cause you to fall forever in anguish... but he will lift you and unburden those sins from you. 

But this requires some things that are not popular in most Christian doctrines:

1.  Everyone has every chance to go to "heaven"

2.  Only the truly evil or bitter will choose to fall/perish even after knowing the truth

3.  It's not like God is standing at the gate looking over your record on some computer and deciding whehter you get in or not.  Everybody can get in.  That's 100% up to you and you will never have to worry about "not having had the chance to believe".

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Yes, and the maniacs who promote this way of thinking are trying to manipulate people for their own profit, and not because they actually believe it.

[RFayette]

Yes, and the maniacs who promote this way of thinking are trying to manipulate people for their own profit, and not because they actually believe it.

As I asked HillGoose already, how do you know this? 

Usually when you make incredible claims like this concerning vast swaths of people, it's best to make at least some effort to justify your statements.

[HillGoose]

Yes, and the maniacs who promote this way of thinking are trying to manipulate people for their own profit, and not because they actually believe it.

As I asked HillGoose already, how do you know this?  

Usually when you make incredible claims like this concerning vast swaths of people, it's best to make at least some effort to justify your statements.

Because why the hell do Christians think that a Christian adult could rape a child and when the child grows up, develops mental illness as a result of the adult's behavior, and stop believing in God, if they commit suicide they'll go to hell FOREVER but the Christian will go to heaven FOREVER just for believing?

I've posed this scenario to Christians before, and yes this is what many of them said they believe would happen, while some say "Only God knows" but it's pretty clear what they think.

I don't believe that's justice and if God is actually like that, humanity's spiritual goal should be to overthrow God, not try to enter his Celestial North Korea.

[RFayette]

Yes, and the maniacs who promote this way of thinking are trying to manipulate people for their own profit, and not because they actually believe it.

As I asked HillGoose already, how do you know this?  

Usually when you make incredible claims like this concerning vast swaths of people, it's best to make at least some effort to justify your statements.

Because why the hell do Christians think that a Christian adult could rape a child and when the child grows up, develops mental illness as a result of the adult's behavior, and stop believing in God, if they commit suicide they'll go to hell FOREVER but the Christian will go to heaven FOREVER just for believing?

I've posed this scenario to Christians before, and yes this is what many of them said they believe would happen, while some say "Only God knows" but it's pretty clear what they think.

I don't believe that's justice and if God is actually like that, humanity's spiritual goal should be to overthrow God, not try to enter his Celestial North Korea.

The second part of my response was more to Solid who claimed that all Protestants don't actually believe what we profess, which is a ridiculous statement on its face.  To claim that a very heterogeneous group of nearly 1 billion people are all insincere is just crazy.

As far as what you are saying, all I can say is that according to the Bible, we all deserve God's judgment.  Again, grace means unmerited favor - the tough part is that this means that God can and does save people who have committed very vile crimes like murder and child molestation, and there are people who haven't physically committed these crimes and yet stand condemned. 

Part of the answer stems in the holiness of God.  Again, Jesus equates looking at a woman with lust as adultery and hatred with murder.  God's ways are so much higher than our ways, and so many things which seem unfair to us are perfectly fair to God both because he has more knowledge/information than we do and also because he has higher standards for justice than we could possibly fathom.

The difficult question is why God chooses to save some and not others.  Obviously, different denominations will have different explanations regarding the role of God's sovereignty and human free will, but as a Calvinist I do very much believe in election and predestination (as well as a sort of free will, a full reconciliation which I believe is impossible in our finite state/mind), so it does demand an answer. The Bible's response can be seen in verses like Psalm 115:3, Romans 9:22 (make his glory known and show his power), and others.  This is an exceedingly tough topic, but the bottom line is that we are so much more sinful than we can ever imagine, and God as creator has full rights over us and can do with us as he pleases.   

It's your choice how to respond to God's revelation.  What I will say is that the book of Revelation makes it clear that God has power over the devil and his adversaries, so any attempt to fight him will be unsuccessful.  The Bible does say that the judge of all the Earth will do what is right (Genesis 18:25).  However, you have to take it by faith, as Luther put it:  "This is the highest degree of faith , to believe him merciful when he saves so few and damns so many, and to believe him righteous when by his own will he makes us necessarily damnable, so that he seems, according to Erasmus [E., p. 41], to delight in the torments of the wretched and to be worthy of hatred rather than love."

[catographer]

judgment based on whether they believe in God/Jesus is morally wrong.

the punishment of "hell" and eternal suffering in it will always be insanely disproportionate to human sinfulness (imperfection/immorality). the eternal joy of heaven will always be disproportionately positive to any faith humans have. God's judgments, according to Christianity, are extreme binaries that ignore the nuance of human nature.

look at what RFayette quoted from Luther, "This is the highest degree of faith, to believe him merciful when he saves so few and damns so many, and to believe him righteous when by his own will he makes us necessarily damnable, so that he seems, according to Erasmus [E., p. 41], to delight in the torments of the wretched and to be worthy of hatred rather than love."
^that captures the fundamental irrationality, injustice, and inhumanity of the Judeo-Christian God.

[catographer]

The idea is that you will be held accountable for your sins, but if you have faith then you will not perish. 

I think it makes more sense to say something like... upon death you are released from the limitations of this physical world and you instantly come to understand the consequences of your actions and the weight of that falls on you.  Without Christ, it would cause you to fall forever in anguish... but he will lift you and unburden those sins from you. 

But this requires some things that are not popular in most Christian doctrines:

1.  Everyone has every chance to go to "heaven"

2.  Only the truly evil or bitter will choose to fall/perish even after knowing the truth

3.  It's not like God is standing at the gate looking over your record on some computer and deciding whehter you get in or not.  Everybody can get in.  That's 100% up to you and you will never have to worry about "not having had the chance to believe".

if someone is confronted with the story of Jesus but finds it unconvincing, then I'd argue that they never "knew" or "rejected" the "truth" because the "truth" was never true to begin with, according to the well-intentioned individual who found it unconvincing. christianity explicitly seeks to punish people for not believing in supernatural powers, instead of actually being fair to humans and taking into account that human reason ("God" given human reason, after all) prevents us from believing that.

[HillGoose]

Yes, and the maniacs who promote this way of thinking are trying to manipulate people for their own profit, and not because they actually believe it.

As I asked HillGoose already, how do you know this?  

Usually when you make incredible claims like this concerning vast swaths of people, it's best to make at least some effort to justify your statements.

Because why the hell do Christians think that a Christian adult could rape a child and when the child grows up, develops mental illness as a result of the adult's behavior, and stop believing in God, if they commit suicide they'll go to hell FOREVER but the Christian will go to heaven FOREVER just for believing?

I've posed this scenario to Christians before, and yes this is what many of them said they believe would happen, while some say "Only God knows" but it's pretty clear what they think.

I don't believe that's justice and if God is actually like that, humanity's spiritual goal should be to overthrow God, not try to enter his Celestial North Korea.

The second part of my response was more to Solid who claimed that all Protestants don't actually believe what we profess, which is a ridiculous statement on its face.  To claim that a very heterogeneous group of nearly 1 billion people are all insincere is just crazy.

As far as what you are saying, all I can say is that according to the Bible, we all deserve God's judgment.  Again, grace means unmerited favor - the tough part is that this means that God can and does save people who have committed very vile crimes like murder and child molestation, and there are people who haven't physically committed these crimes and yet stand condemned.  

Part of the answer stems in the holiness of God.  Again, Jesus equates looking at a woman with lust as adultery and hatred with murder.  God's ways are so much higher than our ways, and so many things which seem unfair to us are perfectly fair to God both because he has more knowledge/information than we do and also because he has higher standards for justice than we could possibly fathom.

The difficult question is why God chooses to save some and not others.  Obviously, different denominations will have different explanations regarding the role of God's sovereignty and human free will, but as a Calvinist I do very much believe in election and predestination (as well as a sort of free will, a full reconciliation which I believe is impossible in our finite state/mind), so it does demand an answer. The Bible's response can be seen in verses like Psalm 115:3, Romans 9:22 (make his glory known and show his power), and others.  This is an exceedingly tough topic, but the bottom line is that we are so much more sinful than we can ever imagine, and God as creator has full rights over us and can do with us as he pleases.  

It's your choice how to respond to God's revelation.  What I will say is that the book of Revelation makes it clear that God has power over the devil and his adversaries, so any attempt to fight him will be unsuccessful.  The Bible does say that the judge of all the Earth will do what is right (Genesis 18:25).  However, you have to take it by faith, as Luther put it:  "This is the highest degree of faith , to believe him merciful when he saves so few and damns so many, and to believe him righteous when by his own will he makes us necessarily damnable, so that he seems, according to Erasmus [E., p. 41], to delight in the torments of the wretched and to be worthy of hatred rather than love."

so it's okay that teenagers who leave the church and commit suicide because they were molested as children burn in hell forever, while adults who happened to be Christian and who made the decision to molest them are in heaven?

I think that's extremely immoral. I'm probably one of the people predestined for hell though?

I've known since I was a child that the way I was treated by my parents and my peers was a reflection of how God felt about me, meaning God is evil.

[SingingAnalyst]

A deathbed conversion is one thing (I am reminded of the saying "hard cases make bad law"); living one's life for years as a person of "faith" is another.

What is faith? Faith in what? Most Christians would say faith in the power of Jesus to save their soul. But a lot of baggage can come with that. Churches and the people in them, for one thing. People of "faith" are admonished to "not forsake the assembly" (Hebrews 10:25) and to accept that "all Scripture is God-breathed" (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Victims of molestation, as mentioned above, even someone dealing with a difficult personal crisis as portrayed by Jennifer Garner in the 2016 movie "Miracles from Heaven" may have reason to stay away. In addition, in many fundamentalist circles, disbelief in a literal, six-day creation is considered a warning sign of apostasy. As I have said elsewhere in this forum, I do not believe that the same God who "wants all... to be saved" (1 Timothy 2:4) would deliberately deceive the seeker (of whom Charles Darwin definitely was one) by making the universe appear ancient, when it was not.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

More unfathomable. I don't understand why a deity sufficiently powerful to create the universe and all its laws would be so human and petty to demand worship. If God does exist, the idea of them having a personality comprehensible to a human being, let alone feeling insecure due to a lack of worship, seems unrealistic.

[DC Al Fine]

More unfathomable. I don't understand why a deity sufficiently powerful to create the universe and all its laws would be so human and petty to demand worship. If God does exist, the idea of them having a personality comprehensible to a human being, let alone feeling insecure due to a lack of worship, seems unrealistic.

Why are you, a finite human so certain that an infinite being would or wouldn't act a certain way?

Children sometimes have trouble understanding why their parents do what they do simply because they lack the knowledge and their parents are operating at a different level. The gap between an omnipotent, omniscient being and finite humanity dwarfs the gap between parent and child.

Due to that gap in knowledge, I don't think you can posit an omnipotent, omniscient being and deduce much about their character, at least not without additional information. Christians, Muslims etc have the benefit of God revealing his character through religious texts, but you presumably don't have that luxury.

[RFayette]

More unfathomable. I don't understand why a deity sufficiently powerful to create the universe and all its laws would be so human and petty to demand worship. If God does exist, the idea of them having a personality comprehensible to a human being, let alone feeling insecure due to a lack of worship, seems unrealistic.

Why are you, a finite human so certain that an infinite being would or wouldn't act a certain way?

Children sometimes have trouble understanding why their parents do what they do simply because they lack the knowledge and their parents are operating at a different level. The gap between an omnipotent, omniscient being and finite humanity dwarfs the gap between parent and child.

Due to that gap in knowledge, I don't think you can posit an omnipotent, omniscient being and deduce much about their character, at least not without additional information. Christians, Muslims etc have the benefit of God revealing his character through religious texts, but you presumably don't have that luxury.

William Lane Craig had a good point about this in one of his podcasts.  He was discussing the problem of evil, but it also applies to this; atheists have a heavy burden of proof to say that any action of God is morally wrong or unjustifiable because they would have to exhaustively rule out every conceivable objection and rule out the existence of unknown factors (which would obviously be applicable when we're talking about an omnipotent God) in order to make their case. 

Nonetheless, this isn't to say that it's a difficult question on an emotional level.  Scripture gives some pretty clear guideposts as to what a lot of the reason is for hell and for salvation being the way it is, but it is perfectly understandable why we as humans find these sayings hard.  Luther understood the scriptures better than just about any major Christian figure and he knew that this was a challenge - but as with many Biblical issues, faith is required on our end.

[Ban my account ffs!]

The idea is that you will be held accountable for your sins, but if you have faith then you will not perish.  

I think it makes more sense to say something like... upon death you are released from the limitations of this physical world and you instantly come to understand the consequences of your actions and the weight of that falls on you.  Without Christ, it would cause you to fall forever in anguish... but he will lift you and unburden those sins from you.  

But this requires some things that are not popular in most Christian doctrines:

1.  Everyone has every chance to go to "heaven"

2.  Only the truly evil or bitter will choose to fall/perish even after knowing the truth

3.  It's not like God is standing at the gate looking over your record on some computer and deciding whehter you get in or not.  Everybody can get in.  That's 100% up to you and you will never have to worry about "not having had the chance to believe".

if someone is confronted with the story of Jesus but finds it unconvincing, then I'd argue that they never "knew" or "rejected" the "truth" because the "truth" was never true to begin with, according to the well-intentioned individual who found it unconvincing. christianity explicitly seeks to punish people for not believing in supernatural powers, instead of actually being fair to humans and taking into account that human reason ("God" given human reason, after all) prevents us from believing that.

The point is that in the end Jesus Christ would make the story so convincing that only the truly evil would still reject it.

I know this sounds rather convenient.  We want to believe salvation is something the "truly worthy" deserve... but it's not about deserve.  I believe Jesus died for the scum.  How our Father sorts it all out will be miraculous in and of itself... but he will and has it figured out.

I'm a believer in unconditional love and grace.  In so many ways, that's harder to believe in than law and order.

[HillGoose]

More unfathomable. I don't understand why a deity sufficiently powerful to create the universe and all its laws would be so human and petty to demand worship. If God does exist, the idea of them having a personality comprehensible to a human being, let alone feeling insecure due to a lack of worship, seems unrealistic.

Why are you, a finite human so certain that an infinite being would or wouldn't act a certain way?

Children sometimes have trouble understanding why their parents do what they do simply because they lack the knowledge and their parents are operating at a different level. The gap between an omnipotent, omniscient being and finite humanity dwarfs the gap between parent and child.

Due to that gap in knowledge, I don't think you can posit an omnipotent, omniscient being and deduce much about their character, at least not without additional information. Christians, Muslims etc have the benefit of God revealing his character through religious texts, but you presumably don't have that luxury.

William Lane Craig had a good point about this in one of his podcasts.  He was discussing the problem of evil, but it also applies to this; atheists have a heavy burden of proof to say that any action of God is morally wrong or unjustifiable because they would have to exhaustively rule out every conceivable objection and rule out the existence of unknown factors (which would obviously be applicable when we're talking about an omnipotent God) in order to make their case. 

Nonetheless, this isn't to say that it's a difficult question on an emotional level.  Scripture gives some pretty clear guideposts as to what a lot of the reason is for hell and for salvation being the way it is, but it is perfectly understandable why we as humans find these sayings hard.  Luther understood the scriptures better than just about any major Christian figure and he knew that this was a challenge - but as with many Biblical issues, faith is required on our end.

Why should I trust a figure who apparently, like living under Adolf Hitler of Joseph Stalin, watch me every minute of my life, just waiting for me to commit thoughtcrime?

[RFayette]

More unfathomable. I don't understand why a deity sufficiently powerful to create the universe and all its laws would be so human and petty to demand worship. If God does exist, the idea of them having a personality comprehensible to a human being, let alone feeling insecure due to a lack of worship, seems unrealistic.

Why are you, a finite human so certain that an infinite being would or wouldn't act a certain way?

Children sometimes have trouble understanding why their parents do what they do simply because they lack the knowledge and their parents are operating at a different level. The gap between an omnipotent, omniscient being and finite humanity dwarfs the gap between parent and child.

Due to that gap in knowledge, I don't think you can posit an omnipotent, omniscient being and deduce much about their character, at least not without additional information. Christians, Muslims etc have the benefit of God revealing his character through religious texts, but you presumably don't have that luxury.

William Lane Craig had a good point about this in one of his podcasts.  He was discussing the problem of evil, but it also applies to this; atheists have a heavy burden of proof to say that any action of God is morally wrong or unjustifiable because they would have to exhaustively rule out every conceivable objection and rule out the existence of unknown factors (which would obviously be applicable when we're talking about an omnipotent God) in order to make their case.  

Nonetheless, this isn't to say that it's a difficult question on an emotional level.  Scripture gives some pretty clear guideposts as to what a lot of the reason is for hell and for salvation being the way it is, but it is perfectly understandable why we as humans find these sayings hard.  Luther understood the scriptures better than just about any major Christian figure and he knew that this was a challenge - but as with many Biblical issues, faith is required on our end.

Why should I trust a figure who apparently, like living under Adolf Hitler of Joseph Stalin, watch me every minute of my life, just waiting for me to commit thoughtcrime?

Pascal's Wager is a good place to start.  If you believe Christianity is factually true (and there are many reasons for doing so - just read a book by Frank Turek or J Warner Wallace to see the evidence), then it has implications.  You're better off trusting God then guaranteeing yourself a spot in hell. 

[afleitch]

More unfathomable. I don't understand why a deity sufficiently powerful to create the universe and all its laws would be so human and petty to demand worship. If God does exist, the idea of them having a personality comprehensible to a human being, let alone feeling insecure due to a lack of worship, seems unrealistic.

Why are you, a finite human so certain that an infinite being would or wouldn't act a certain way?

Children sometimes have trouble understanding why their parents do what they do simply because they lack the knowledge and their parents are operating at a different level. The gap between an omnipotent, omniscient being and finite humanity dwarfs the gap between parent and child.

Due to that gap in knowledge, I don't think you can posit an omnipotent, omniscient being and deduce much about their character, at least not without additional information. Christians, Muslims etc have the benefit of God revealing his character through religious texts, but you presumably don't have that luxury.

William Lane Craig had a good point about this in one of his podcasts.  He was discussing the problem of evil, but it also applies to this; atheists have a heavy burden of proof to say that any action of God is morally wrong or unjustifiable because they would have to exhaustively rule out every conceivable objection and rule out the existence of unknown factors (which would obviously be applicable when we're talking about an omnipotent God) in order to make their case.  

Nonetheless, this isn't to say that it's a difficult question on an emotional level.  Scripture gives some pretty clear guideposts as to what a lot of the reason is for hell and for salvation being the way it is, but it is perfectly understandable why we as humans find these sayings hard.  Luther understood the scriptures better than just about any major Christian figure and he knew that this was a challenge - but as with many Biblical issues, faith is required on our end.

Why should I trust a figure who apparently, like living under Adolf Hitler of Joseph Stalin, watch me every minute of my life, just waiting for me to commit thoughtcrime?

Pascal's Wager is a good place to start.  If you believe Christianity is factually true (and there are many reasons for doing so - just read a book by Frank Turek or J Warner Wallace to see the evidence), then it has implications.  You're better off trusting God then guaranteeing yourself a spot in hell. 

You do realise that regurgitating Turek, Lane Craig etc is...never mind.

[Karpatsky]

It is incompatible with the concept of a just god.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It is incompatible with the concept of a just god.

But the core of the Christian message is that God care more about mercy than justice.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

More unfathomable. I don't understand why a deity sufficiently powerful to create the universe and all its laws would be so human and petty to demand worship. If God does exist, the idea of them having a personality comprehensible to a human being, let alone feeling insecure due to a lack of worship, seems unrealistic.

Why are you, a finite human so certain that an infinite being would or wouldn't act a certain way?

Children sometimes have trouble understanding why their parents do what they do simply because they lack the knowledge and their parents are operating at a different level. The gap between an omnipotent, omniscient being and finite humanity dwarfs the gap between parent and child.

Due to that gap in knowledge, I don't think you can posit an omnipotent, omniscient being and deduce much about their character, at least not without additional information. Christians, Muslims etc have the benefit of God revealing his character through religious texts, but you presumably don't have that luxury.

William Lane Craig had a good point about this in one of his podcasts.  He was discussing the problem of evil, but it also applies to this; atheists have a heavy burden of proof to say that any action of God is morally wrong or unjustifiable because they would have to exhaustively rule out every conceivable objection and rule out the existence of unknown factors (which would obviously be applicable when we're talking about an omnipotent God) in order to make their case.  

Nonetheless, this isn't to say that it's a difficult question on an emotional level.  Scripture gives some pretty clear guideposts as to what a lot of the reason is for hell and for salvation being the way it is, but it is perfectly understandable why we as humans find these sayings hard.  Luther understood the scriptures better than just about any major Christian figure and he knew that this was a challenge - but as with many Biblical issues, faith is required on our end.

Why should I trust a figure who apparently, like living under Adolf Hitler of Joseph Stalin, watch me every minute of my life, just waiting for me to commit thoughtcrime?

Pascal's Wager is a good place to start.  If you believe Christianity is factually true (and there are many reasons for doing so - just read a book by Frank Turek or J Warner Wallace to see the evidence), then it has implications.  You're better off trusting God then guaranteeing yourself a spot in hell. 

Pascal's Wager is a horrible place to start.  It only pay off if God is shallow enough to only want people to go thru the motions of religion without giving a damn about whether they really have faith.

[RFayette]

More unfathomable. I don't understand why a deity sufficiently powerful to create the universe and all its laws would be so human and petty to demand worship. If God does exist, the idea of them having a personality comprehensible to a human being, let alone feeling insecure due to a lack of worship, seems unrealistic.

Why are you, a finite human so certain that an infinite being would or wouldn't act a certain way?

Children sometimes have trouble understanding why their parents do what they do simply because they lack the knowledge and their parents are operating at a different level. The gap between an omnipotent, omniscient being and finite humanity dwarfs the gap between parent and child.

Due to that gap in knowledge, I don't think you can posit an omnipotent, omniscient being and deduce much about their character, at least not without additional information. Christians, Muslims etc have the benefit of God revealing his character through religious texts, but you presumably don't have that luxury.

William Lane Craig had a good point about this in one of his podcasts.  He was discussing the problem of evil, but it also applies to this; atheists have a heavy burden of proof to say that any action of God is morally wrong or unjustifiable because they would have to exhaustively rule out every conceivable objection and rule out the existence of unknown factors (which would obviously be applicable when we're talking about an omnipotent God) in order to make their case.  

Nonetheless, this isn't to say that it's a difficult question on an emotional level.  Scripture gives some pretty clear guideposts as to what a lot of the reason is for hell and for salvation being the way it is, but it is perfectly understandable why we as humans find these sayings hard.  Luther understood the scriptures better than just about any major Christian figure and he knew that this was a challenge - but as with many Biblical issues, faith is required on our end.

Why should I trust a figure who apparently, like living under Adolf Hitler of Joseph Stalin, watch me every minute of my life, just waiting for me to commit thoughtcrime?

Pascal's Wager is a good place to start.  If you believe Christianity is factually true (and there are many reasons for doing so - just read a book by Frank Turek or J Warner Wallace to see the evidence), then it has implications.  You're better off trusting God then guaranteeing yourself a spot in hell. 

Pascal's Wager is a horrible place to start.  It only pay off if God is shallow enough to only want people to go thru the motions of religion without giving a damn about whether they really have faith.

Pascal's Wager is a starting point, not an ending one.  The idea is that you would enter a relationship with God because of fear of punishment, but the relationship would grow from there.  It seems the New Testament often invokes fear of punishment and the enticement of reward as motivation to repent, so it seems appropriate as a way to engage with doubt - if the stakes are this high, you're better off trusting in God so you don't go to hell.

[TJ in Oregon]

Christianity at its core requires faith that God loves you. Without that, no apologetic argument will ever suffice.

[SingingAnalyst]

It is incompatible with the concept of a just god.

But the core of the Christian message is that God care more about mercy than justice.

Horrible dichotomy, IHMO. The assumption (that in my understanding is not part of the Jewish understanding of human nature) is total depravity.

Jesus showed both mercy and justice to the woman caught in the act of adultery. While the text (John 7:53 - 8:11) leaves this out, I'm sure the woman was weeping, and sorry.

Even today we use the phrase "contrary to equity and good conscience" to describe an unjustifiable denial of service, benefits, etc.  Justice and mercy are not incompatible.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Yes, and the maniacs who promote this way of thinking are trying to manipulate people for their own profit, and not because they actually believe it.

As I asked HillGoose already, how do you know this?  

Usually when you make incredible claims like this concerning vast swaths of people, it's best to make at least some effort to justify your statements.

Because why the hell do Christians think that a Christian adult could rape a child and when the child grows up, develops mental illness as a result of the adult's behavior, and stop believing in God, if they commit suicide they'll go to hell FOREVER but the Christian will go to heaven FOREVER just for believing?

I've posed this scenario to Christians before, and yes this is what many of them said they believe would happen, while some say "Only God knows" but it's pretty clear what they think.

I don't believe that's justice and if God is actually like that, humanity's spiritual goal should be to overthrow God, not try to enter his Celestial North Korea.

The second part of my response was more to Solid who claimed that all Protestants don't actually believe what we profess, which is a ridiculous statement on its face.  To claim that a very heterogeneous group of nearly 1 billion people are all insincere is just crazy.

As far as what you are saying, all I can say is that according to the Bible, we all deserve God's judgment.  Again, grace means unmerited favor - the tough part is that this means that God can and does save people who have committed very vile crimes like murder and child molestation, and there are people who haven't physically committed these crimes and yet stand condemned. 

Part of the answer stems in the holiness of God.  Again, Jesus equates looking at a woman with lust as adultery and hatred with murder.  God's ways are so much higher than our ways, and so many things which seem unfair to us are perfectly fair to God both because he has more knowledge/information than we do and also because he has higher standards for justice than we could possibly fathom.

The difficult question is why God chooses to save some and not others.  Obviously, different denominations will have different explanations regarding the role of God's sovereignty and human free will, but as a Calvinist I do very much believe in election and predestination (as well as a sort of free will, a full reconciliation which I believe is impossible in our finite state/mind), so it does demand an answer. The Bible's response can be seen in verses like Psalm 115:3, Romans 9:22 (make his glory known and show his power), and others.  This is an exceedingly tough topic, but the bottom line is that we are so much more sinful than we can ever imagine, and God as creator has full rights over us and can do with us as he pleases.   

It's your choice how to respond to God's revelation.  What I will say is that the book of Revelation makes it clear that God has power over the devil and his adversaries, so any attempt to fight him will be unsuccessful.  The Bible does say that the judge of all the Earth will do what is right (Genesis 18:25).  However, you have to take it by faith, as Luther put it:  "This is the highest degree of faith , to believe him merciful when he saves so few and damns so many, and to believe him righteous when by his own will he makes us necessarily damnable, so that he seems, according to Erasmus [E., p. 41], to delight in the torments of the wretched and to be worthy of hatred rather than love."

Oh. I am not talking about the massive numbers of fools who were duped by the church in that post. I am talking about the people who run the church.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It is incompatible with the concept of a just god.

But the core of the Christian message is that God care more about mercy than justice.

Horrible dichotomy, IHMO. The assumption (that in my understanding is not part of the Jewish understanding of human nature) is total depravity.

Jesus showed both mercy and justice to the woman caught in the act of adultery. While the text (John 7:53 - 8:11) leaves this out, I'm sure the woman was weeping, and sorry.

Even today we use the phrase "contrary to equity and good conscience" to describe an unjustifiable denial of service, benefits, etc.  Justice and mercy are not incompatible.

But neither are they synonymous and when the two are in conflict, mercy prevails.

[SingingAnalyst]

It is incompatible with the concept of a just god.

But the core of the Christian message is that God care more about mercy than justice.

Horrible dichotomy, IHMO. The assumption (that in my understanding is not part of the Jewish understanding of human nature) is total depravity.

Jesus showed both mercy and justice to the woman caught in the act of adultery. While the text (John 7:53 - 8:11) leaves this out, I'm sure the woman was weeping, and sorry.

Even today we use the phrase "contrary to equity and good conscience" to describe an unjustifiable denial of service, benefits, etc.  Justice and mercy are not incompatible.

But neither are they synonymous and when the two are in conflict, mercy prevails.

Point well taken.