Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Flipside on February 15, 2005, 08:34:36 pm
-
I was just wondering on this, and, since I've only a general education in religion, so I was wondering this..
Say, for example, a Sikh devotes his entire life to orphaned children, takes in waifs and strays and helps them build a life for themselves. Say this man was good and kind to those around him, never offered violence to another man, was an honourable and devoted husband etc..
Now, one day, this man dies. If he was wrong about his religion, and, say, another religion is right, he stands before the wrong God, but is a good and honest man.
It seems to me that there are two options, Man can only really be judged by his actions, not his thoughts, since strength is the ability to resist temptation.
1 : The man gets allowed into Heaven for being a 'Good Man', but it is neither the Heaven nor the God he believed in.
2 : The man goes to whatever form of heaven he thinks he goes to, and it's different for all of us.
3 : The man goes to Hell for being a Heathen, which seems a bit unfair from any 'Wise and Powerful' God.
Thoughts anyone?
-
4. His consciousness ceases to exist. :D
-
LOL Thank you Capt. Optimistic :p
-
I'm an aetheist these days.
I put all religeons under the catagory of 'cults'.
I have more faith in humanity and good will than imaginary beings.
-
Hmmmmmm.. I'm more spiritual, I suppose.. I'd like to believe option 2, but the artist in me is always at War with the scientist ;)
-
That's a good question, really, one I've pondered several times myself.
I don't know the official answers, yet I personally believe that some exceptional people will make it to Heaven/Paradise/what-have-you regardless of their denomination or lack thereof.
Drifting into heresy now, it is also possible that in the end we were all worshipping the same God/dess and didn't know it, so we'd end up in a single non-denominational version anyways. Or that we are all worshipping different Gods/desses who all exist and so we all will go to our own version of The Happy Place.
But really, it's hard to know without actually having been there...
-
I think the question is moot.Or at best, unknowable.
However, from a Christian point of view, its probably C. Dante's Inferno is filled with so called "enlightened non-Christians" (or something like that), which are virtuous people born before Christ, so that they could not have been Christians, but are not the same as regular sinners since they were expectional men, like Plato. So, no Heaven for them, but not the very deepest pits of Hells either.
-
Christianity would say:
No one gets into Heaven by virtue of being a good man, because the standard they are measured against is God's own perfection. Even those who we would say are 'good' by human standards are just that - measured only according to a (thoroughly depraved, if we are honest about ourselves) human standard.
So if anyone gets into Heaven, it is by God's grace. Thus, the Sikh would not get into Heaven, because he has not asked God for the grace that is needed for him to enter Heaven.
Totally fair from the 'wise and powerful' God - because in the end, no one deserves to get into Heaven by their own merit. :)
-
But why would god create people without clarifying for them how to reach heaven? Allowing people to stumble blindly through uncertainty when they have so much at stake in their afterlife seems... sadistic.
-
There is so many alternatives its just not applicable to have a singular religeon.
There is also suggestions that Jesus wasn't the real Christ. The whole John the baptist story.
2000 years ago, you could say something, send it halfway across the known world, and people would believe almost anything.
Communication these days significantly changes that, allowing people to see for themselves and draw their own conclusions.
In third world countries its quite evident, where they have minimum technology. So misionaries are sent to brainwash yes brainwash them to believe a religeon.
-
I see your point, but that suggests that what religion you are is actually more important than how good you are to your fellow man?
-
i dont like religion as a whole.
just be good and good things will happen.
my version of the afterlive is awesome, its a cross between the Norse afterlife and the Muslim afterlife. Eat drink beat the snot out of someone, then chill with my 70 brown haired virgins, lol
but yeah, i think the Sikh would go to paradise, whatever it is for him
-
I don't really believe in an afterlife.
I believe in the possibility of something remaining after the physical being is decayed or incinerated etc.
-
Great opinions there, Grug. I'd appreciate, though, even just as a favour to me, if you held back on your conclusions until perhaps you'd met a real missionary and talked to them about their work. :)
Originally posted by Flipside
I see your point, but that suggests that what religion you are is actually more important than how good you are to your fellow man?
Oh, to be certain, how good you are to your fellow man is vital. In fact, it is chiefly important because how good you act demonstrates with clarity how good you are. The difference from the Christian viewpoint is that our conclusion about how good we are is: we are not good at all.
Therefore, according to Christianity, how good we are to our fellow man is important; but we have already failed by that standard. So, the only basis that remains for us 'getting into Heaven' (which, as a Christian, I would replace with the phrase 'being in relationship with God') is God's grace rather than our goodness.
-
I see, so from the Christian point of view, simply to exist is to sin, therefore joining God is a question of God forgiving those Sins.
It makes me wonder, actually, whether it is even 'possible' for there to be different Heavens, if Heaven is a state of unreachable Euphoria, surely all religions must be speaking of the same Heaven?
Nyaaarg! The next time this happens, I start posting Rocky Horror picture show images :mad:
-
i think confucious once said something about it being unwise to concern yourself with the workings of the spiritual realm. afterall we are in the physical realm, we should do our best here, we can councern ourselves with what happens after death when we get there.
as for inferno, i dont think hell even existed untill that little work came out. i think its more to do with the catholic church trying to increase conversions. the church used all kinds of dirty tricks to convert people back in the middle ages. like modeling satan after pagan gods, or telling jews to either convert or leave the country. if you worshiped any other god in the middle ages you wera a 'satan worshiper'.
as for what i believe happens, i dont care. its all a fabrication anyway.
-
Officially I could be counted as Christian, Catholic and aetheist.
And I have spoken to missionaries in the past.
I'm all for the helping of people and communities, I just find it dis-heartening that it takes a religeon to motivate people to do so. And why some have to press their views on others...
Religeon has changed so much over the decades, which adds further disbelief to me. It just comes across as keeping up with the times, rather than the old days where religeon had a highly significant part in saying what goes.
Edit: That's three posts that have appeared before mine now! 3!
Damn gamespy!
-
Originally posted by Setekh
So if anyone gets into Heaven, it is by God's grace. Thus, the Sikh would not get into Heaven, because he has not asked God for the grace that is needed for him to enter Heaven.
OK, so what about Jews? They worship the same God, but not the complete, christian God, since they reject Christ. Firey pits of damnation for them too? Or Muslims? Again, same god, but they follow a different prophet. Long time burnies?
-
I'm pretty sure that the idea of hell predates Dante by quite a bit.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
I see, so from the Christian point of view, simply to exist is to sin, therefore joining God is a question of God forgiving those Sins.
It makes me wonder, actually, whether it is even 'possible' for there to be different Heavens, if Heaven is a state of unreachable Euphoria, surely all religions must be speaking of the same Heaven?
That's a pretty good summary, though I would add to that slightly. Since the Fall, it has indeed been true that to exist is to sin; but coupled with this is the fact that we genuinely choose to sin simultaneously. So the image is slightly more complex than 'we sin and have no choice in the matter'. But you're right in identifying that to the Christian, the issue is God forgiving us for what we've done.
Good question. To be sure, Christianity would describe Heaven first (as I mentioned before) as being perfectly in relationship with God. Whether or not that exactly translates to a state of unreachable euphoria is difficult to say or not, though if anything did, this would. :) However, whilst Heaven as described by different religions often bears many similarities, I would be so bold as to say that if we look very closely, they are in fact describing quite different things. That's my impression on the matter.
-
Most people see and think of hell as fire and brimstone..
This is a misinterpatation, as a matter of fact its a vas void and complete darkness, and all you can hear are the cries of the damned.
-
That sounds more like life, to me. :)
-
Originally posted by Black Wolf
OK, so what about Jews? They worship the same God, but not the complete, christian God, since they reject Christ. Firey pits of damnation for them too? Or Muslims? Again, same god, but they follow a different prophet. Long time burnies?
Jews are actually a special case in a couple of ways, but I'll address your question first. I'm going to assume that you mean Jews in terms of religion (Judaism) - not Jews in terms of nationality (who are free to follow Judaism, Christianity, or whatever they like).
Again, the Christian question would be: have they sought God's grace as the basis for their relationship with him? If indeed they reject Christ, then this translates to a rejection of the ultimate offer of forgiveness that God has extended. Despite identifying with the same God, they do not seek the grace that is the only means by which they can be forgiven and enter into relationship with God.
With regard to Islam, the question is the same. Have they sought Allah's grace as the basis for their relationship with him? In my study of Islam, I've found they have a well-articulated theology of Allah's mercy in forgiving those he chooses. However, it is a very different concept of mercy, for it is earned - which is the reason for the strict adherence of Muslims to the laws set out for prayer and conduct in the Qu'ran. Christians also adhere to the instructions of the Bible, but not as a basis for their salvation; in Islam, there is no true grace. On this understanding, they too reject God's grace, which is the only way for them to be in relationship with him.
-
Originally posted by Ford Prefect
That sounds more like life, to me. :)
Ah yes, if only I could count the times i`ve heard this. :D
Life is what you make of it, nothing more, nothing less.
(edit) thats strange, your reply is above my post .. :wtf:
-
Ah yes, if only I could count the times i`ve heard this.
Life is what you make of it, nothing more, nothing less.
Oh, I don't really think my life is bad at all. You'll have to excuse me. I believe in very little and laugh at most things.
-
Quick question: if accepting God and asking forgiveness are the sole criteria for entering Heaven and being saved, what prevents people from living a horrible life, and simply repenting on their death bed? Likewise, what reason is there for living a good life, if it has no bearing on your ultimate fate? I mean good life in relation to others, like helping the weak, giving to charity etc, not in relation to your inner spiritual life.
-
Anyone ever read a piece called "Non Serviam" by Stanisem Lem? I seem to remember it being an excellent summation of my thoughts on the matter.
-
The song "always look on the bright side of life" jumps into my mind...
:)
-
Originally posted by Rictor
Quick question: if accepting God and asking forgiveness are the sole criteria for entering Heaven and being saved, what prevents people from living a horrible life, and simply repenting on their death bed? Likewise, what reason is there for living a good life, if it has no bearing on your ultimate fate? I mean good life in relation to others, like helping the weak, giving to charity etc, not in relation to your inner spiritual life.
Its not that easy, the good must outweight the bad, meaning it would take a life time to correct. I don`t think that would get them into heaven.
-
According to catholic religeon you can.
-
It seems to me though that, in Genesis, God didn't intend for mankind to Multiply at first, we were supposed to simply be Adam and Eve, God's Avatara, as it were, it was the Apple of Knowledge that bought them the idea of their own sexuality?
-
Quick question: if accepting God and asking forgiveness are the sole criteria for entering Heaven and being saved, what prevents people from living a horrible life, and simply repenting on their death bed? Likewise, what reason is there for living a good life, if it has no bearing on your ultimate fate? I mean good life in relation to others, like helping the weak, giving to charity etc, not in relation to your inner spiritual life.
I think that taking advantage of god's grace in that manner (repenting just before your death so you would get saved) is sort of dishonest to god. So logically, you'll probably go to hell either way.
But I'm an atheist so it's just my opinion.
-
Originally posted by Whitelight
Most people see and think of hell as fire and brimstone..
This is a misinterpatation, as a matter of fact its a vas void and complete darkness, and all you can hear are the cries of the damned.
Man, that would be a step up.
I actually have to do things for the damned when they start to cry in this world. At least I can sit and laze out in hell.
-
Originally posted by Rictor
Quick question: if accepting God and asking forgiveness are the sole criteria for entering Heaven and being saved, what prevents people from living a horrible life, and simply repenting on their death bed? Likewise, what reason is there for living a good life, if it has no bearing on your ultimate fate? I mean good life in relation to others, like helping the weak, giving to charity etc, not in relation to your inner spiritual life.
Okay, I'm going to continue to answer from the Christian viewpoint. So far, we've been dealing with a fairly simple perspective: the image is of being right/wrong in relation to God, and thus being forgiven/not forgiven.
However, in Christianity, being forgiven is not all that happens to you. When you come to God and ask him for forgiveness, God forgives you but also changes who you are. In fact, you begin to become like Christ himself - so we are forgiven, but also on the inside we are different. We begin to take on the character and behaviour of God himself.
So to answer your question at face value: there is nothing stopping you. One of the only people who we knew was right with God was a terrible criminal, hanging on a cross alongside Jesus - he didn't even the luxury of a death bed. But he asked God for forgiveness and trusted in God's grace rather than in his own goodness (the lack of which was pretty obvious at that point), and so he was right with God.
What reason is there for living a 'good life'? Well, I'll give you a more concrete example than that hypothetical situation. Take me. I asked exactly the same question you did - why bother, if I'm already 'going to Heaven'? But the point in what I was saying earlier was that, if I was indeed forgiven by God and in relationship with him, then on the inside I'm a different person.
So you see, it's not so much a question of "I have to do this to go to Heaven", but more like "Hey, I'm different now - how can I live the way I used to?". To give a crude illustration, if I was a fish who had just evolved into a land creature, why would I go back to swim in the ocean? I'm new now, so I ought to live in a new way that's appropriate for me.
Therefore, the reason that I help the weak and give to charity is not because I need to do that to be saved, but because this is my new identity now - the Bible says that when God forgives people, his aim is to "purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good". :)
-
i've always thought that when we try to discuss stuff, we should define stuff first, so we're discussing the same stuff. so firstly, when Christians say 'sin', generally they mean rejection of God rather than the actual murder, adultery, etc. sure, the _acts_ are sin, but only because they are the result of rejecting God.
so when you reject your ruler and creator (of course if you don't believe God created the world and you, you have a bit of a problem seeing the relevance of this point) your ruler and creater has every right to destroy you, or to cast you aside. kinda like if i made a pot, and the pot decides to leak all the soup i try to put in it, i have the right to go smash that pot good.
that's the basic premise behind Christian hell (hah, what an oxymoron). in which case, since the premise is that all humans reject God, and all humans deserve hell, the fact that God chooses some humans to be saved to go to heaven/paradise/whatever you want to call it is not unfair. it's like me making millions of pots, all of which _choose_ to leak soup, but i decide to keep some of them and patch up the leaks and make them into entirely better pots to hold really really good soup.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
It seems to me though that, in Genesis, God didn't intend for mankind to Multiply at first, we were supposed to simply be Adam and Eve, God's Avatara, as it were, it was the Apple of Knowledge that bought them the idea of their own sexuality?
Mind if I correct that with a quote from the end of the first chapter in Genesis? :)
[q]So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
[/q]
God created mankind, with the full intention for them to multiply and to be the rulers over the world. Sexuality was God's good invention from the very start. :)
-
What flavoured soup?
@Setekh - I agree with you on the 'eager to do good part', but I believe we shouldn't need the bible to do so. It contains alot of red tape etc.
But being a good person is fundamentally what life should be about...
-
You see Grug, this is where we differ. Christianity says that without God (and without his word to us, the Bible), we simply cannot be 'good'. The default position of mankind is steeped in failure - being a good person is simply no longer an option.
-
Indeed it is where we differ.
I like to have more hope in humanity than in a supposed God, though at times I am dreadfully sorrowed by it.
I think in the long run, disputes between Religous groups have caused more trouble for humanity than good.
-
ummm... grug, you prefer to hope in humanity... well, consider that for most of human history, God has left us alone, and we haven't exactly distinguished ourselves as citizens of peace, love and goodwill. in fact, it's often been saints of various religions, rather than atheists, agnostics, and so on, who've been the 'good' people. religion's usually an excuse for disputes rather than the sole cause. humans like to argue, whatever the subject.
the flavour of the soup depends on the pot. but rest assured that its _good_ soup.
-
Ah, but I believe there was never God in the first place. The so called saints etc, were just ordinary people but with good morals.
Near anyone in my mind has the potential to become a great person.
But nobody's perfect.
Saying that God works through people, is in my mind stealing the glory from humanity itself.
edit- oh and I thought the flavour of the soup was determined by the ingredients?
-
oh, well then, that makes things a whole lot more difficult. so i guess you're a big bang person, an evolutionist, a morality-derived-from-societal-survival-necessities guy, in short, an atheist? well, that's your choice.
-
Aye it is.
I have no problem with people believing in a God either, if it makes them think their a better person - that's their choice. But in my mind, its just the good already within themselves shining through.
Where religeon is applied for evil means however is where I fall strongly back on atheism. And will go so far to say that I would believe those people to be brain washed.
It's happened all throughout the ages, most notibly of recent, being in the form of suicide bombers etc.
Killing yourself and others for the name of a God / Prophet just disgusts me to the pit of my stomach.
-
I take a different approach in this respect. I entirely deny the actual existence of any abstracts at all. Good, evil, right, wrong, justice-- they're all imaginary, but they are also the inevitable result of the way our minds work. The question, in my mind, is of the degree to which we want to pretend that these things are absolute, for the sake of our happiness.
Now, god, I think, is a seperate emotion from the ones that govern morality. Ethics are about the people around us, while stark spirituality is profoundly personal. Spirituality is the same thing as our sense of beauty. A figment of our perceptions, perhaps, but it nevertheless has a very strong effect on us, and thus cannot be written off as simply a "lie" or a "fairy tale." I do not believe in god, an afterlife, a soul, or in any metaphysical world whatsoever, but the thoughts and feelings I experience when I listen to a Gregorian chant or to Handel's "Messiah" are real, and they say something about the nature of humanity.
-
Hmm I think I understand. So you live 'in the moment' and that's it?
I like some aspects of Religeon, such as the community it encourages, and I sometimes adapt some of the ways into my own life.
I've toyed with the idea of learning more about Budhism for a long time now, but it seems a little difficult to find information about.
-
Originally posted by Setekh
Christianity would say:
No one gets into Heaven by virtue of being a good man, because the standard they are measured against is God's own perfection. Even those who we would say are 'good' by human standards are just that - measured only according to a (thoroughly depraved, if we are honest about ourselves) human standard.
So if anyone gets into Heaven, it is by God's grace. Thus, the Sikh would not get into Heaven, because he has not asked God for the grace that is needed for him to enter Heaven.
Totally fair from the 'wise and powerful' God - because in the end, no one deserves to get into Heaven by their own merit.
So basicly, all humans are guilty of the crime of being human, so unless they beg before some all powerful entity, their last place of residence changes from something akin to a nice flat to something which looks like a burnt match?
-
Originally posted by Ghostavo
So basicly, all humans are guilty of the crime of being human, so unless they beg before some all powerful entity, their last place of residence changes from something akin to a nice flat to something which looks like a burnt match?
i wish people would read _all_ the posts instead of quoting the one that sounds the most controversial and ignoring the others. both steak and i have made it clear that humans are guilty of _rejecting_ the God who created us, which is a rather different and far more serious crime than being guilty of humanity.
the other thing i thought we made fairly clear, but apparently not, is that the Christian concept of hell is an absence of God rather than the usual fire and brimstone. the images of fire and burning used in the bible are intended as imagery. they may or may not be reality, but their primary interpretation is metaphorical in any case.
-
That sounds a bit bleak.
So your saying that as soon as we are born, we have rejected God and have to make peace with the almighty?
I think I've missed something here, because I fail to understand how an intellectual person could believe in that...
-
I don't believe a word of organized religion, because it's men* who write the holy books. Plus I wouldn't want to worship a God who valued worship of himself (what is he, insecure?) above treating other people well.
If Mother Theresa was an aetheist, would it mean she wouldn't get into heaven?
(Incidentally, on the whole religion causes trouble thing; human differences cause trouble. People will and do subvert any 'cause' to suit their own biases, religion is just a particularly suitable thing for that because it demands belief rather than rational consideration+)
*specifically males, due to the time period they were written. Which were somewhat sexist AFAIK when it come to that sort of thing.
+ don't take that as criticism BTW. I'm aetheist (in the sense I reject organized religion, I'm agnostic on the existence of God and believe all I need to be is a decent person and i'll be ok regardless), but at the same point I understand the whole point of religion is belief rather than proof - to 'prove' Christianity, or Islam, or Sikhism, etc would surely destroy the whole point of it?
-
This whole god-heaven argument is the reason I'm an athiest virtue-ethicist.
The only problem I have now is working out what 'the good life' is...
-
This looks good to me: http://www.witchway.net/
-
Originally posted by icespeed
i wish people would read _all_ the posts instead of quoting the one that sounds the most controversial and ignoring the others. both steak and i have made it clear that humans are guilty of _rejecting_ the God who created us, which is a rather different and far more serious crime than being guilty of humanity.
the other thing i thought we made fairly clear, but apparently not, is that the Christian concept of hell is an absence of God rather than the usual fire and brimstone. the images of fire and burning used in the bible are intended as imagery. they may or may not be reality, but their primary interpretation is metaphorical in any case.
I've read all the posts, but that still isn't explained (properly at least). Also, I remember reading something about Christ's death leading him to hell. If hell is the absence of God, how can Christ have gone there when he was crucified?
Coming back to the post in question, the problem with that is how can you reject something at birth (or before birth even), if you don't know what the hell everyone is talking about? Furthermore, it's like going to a baby and telling that if he/she doesn't do X she won't get the candy.
It's bullying.
-
Uhm Ghostavo. You really expect logic from.....any religion? :wtf:
-
Seriously speaking, I would... sad isn't it? :blah: :(
EDIT:
In response to the post below by BD.
DAMN TIME WARPS!! :mad:
-
Well, being a Sikh, I would automatically say A.
But being...well, being Singh, I'd say more of option D - we'll never know........
-
Originally posted by Grug
I have more faith in humanity and good will than imaginary beings.
That sums it up for my part. :yes:
I am an atheist, I don't have any reason of whatsoever to believe into some obscure entity such as god. Though I must agree that church is a powerful institution, perhaps I could subvert it to serve my goals...:drevil: ;)
-
Option 2 Flip - I even wrote an essay on the concept for my RE project back in high school.
-
Sooooo, I have one question, too:
Before JC, christianism didn't exist, so to speak. And it took hundreds, thousands of years to spread worldwide.
So, what about those before JC, what about those, dunno, native americans who were not "blessed" by some sign before the colons poped up and evangelized by gallons?
What about 2 year old kids that die for X reason and can't even grasp the concept of god?
All damned, just coz they didn't ( couldn't ) know?
I believe hell ( to reply to someone who asked before, hell exists in all religions, before christianism, be shintoist, norse, pagan, egyptian, whatever ) must be an awfully crowded place if the christians are right :p
As for me, I think we turn into some etheral creature that wanders around the world and jumps into the next baby just born that it meets. Yeah, that's why they cry, coz an etheral creature forces its way inside the soulless body!
Nah, really :D
-
I've toyed with the idea of learning more about Budhism for a long time now, but it seems a little difficult to find information about.
http://www.buddhanet.net/
All there is to know about Buddhism.
I think I've missed something here, because I fail to understand how an intellectual person could believe in that...
How I understand it, intellectuality and religion are completley unrelated. You "Know" knowledge, but you "believe" religion.
Considering how most religions don't usually base their beliefs on logic or reason, it seems that when discussing religion, intellectuality, reason and logic don't play a piviotal role.
-
I don't know. That's the short answer.
I reject the idea of a "human" god, anyway. If there is a god, then there's no way it'd be interested in the likes of us. That's just humans inflating their ego. I'm agnostic, and I know I'm right. ;)
I'm pretty much a buddhist, though Buddhism isn't a religion as such , more of a lifestyle :). I'm not sure about the reincarnation aspect, but I believe we are all one and the same, and that in death we return to the cosmos, and are one with the universe again. Basically, be good to yourself and others, and everything will turn out fine.
-
I actually brought that exact example to a die-hard Christian. She said that he would go to Hell, no matter what, because he didn't believe in the Christian God.
Anyway, I'm a witch (it's masculine as well, people), and belong to the Wiccan faith, which believes that you are judged by your actions, and as long as you are a good person, you will go to Heaven. (Not that we believe in Hell anyway - if you do bad, you come back again until your karma works out. It borrows from the Eastern traditions in that respect).
Just thought I should point out that not all religions say that if you don't believe in their God(s) you'll go to hell :)
-
I'm glad some other people put their points forward for other religions, for a while I thought I'd led poor Setekh into the centre of a stoning circle, and that wasn't my intention.
I like the idea of the 'Wheel', similar to the Wicca belief, that we are on a constant search for our own form of 'Godhood' and we keep turning the wheel till we achieve it :)
-
I would offer a slightly modified version of Setekh's view. From a Christian POV, everyone is headed for hell from birth and it is only through the grace of God that they get into heaven. I think that's pretty much common belief among Christians.
However it says repeatedly in the Bible that God judges us based on what we do with what we have (the Parable of the Talents (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2025:14-30;&version=31;), for example). So in a sense the Sikh is accepting God's grace, because he's responding in the only way he knows how - by living an honorable and virtuous life. Since God is the source of goodness, he's seeking after that goodness. He is "a law for himself" (Romans 2:14-15 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202:14-15;&version=31;)). He's certainly loving his neighbor as himself. So God would welcome into heaven (option 1, but for a different reason) because he responded wholeheartedly to what he was given.
-
How I understand it, intellectuality and religion are completley unrelated. You "Know" knowledge, but you "believe" religion.
Considering how most religions don't usually base their beliefs on logic or reason, it seems that when discussing religion, intellectuality, reason and logic don't play a piviotal role.
Well, this is debatable, I think. I equate religion with art, ("art" meaning all forms-- literature, music, visual, etc.), and the most insightful art certainly stems from those with exceptional intellectual prowess. The problem with religion is that it is often built by people with great artistic insight, but it is then interpreted by the average person, who is not capable of understanding the overwhelming complexities of which the intellectual is aware.
-
Also, theres the natural human 'agenda' to deal with. Everyone tries to twist the world so that they have the advantage, it's normal and has been going on for centuries.
The problem is, when you start doing that with religion, you are doing it on a global scale. So one person will deliberately misinterpret something simply for personal gain, and that comment/interpretation could lead to the death of hundreds of thousands of people. That is the danger of adding the human equation to religion.
-
and actually from a christian POV, let me just say this...and i don't know the address so don't ask me for it.....
"it is better to have not known me than to have known me and turned your back"
notice that is says "to have known me" not "to have known who i am". we all know who the christian God is, but, i daresay that until your heart has been filled you don't know the christian God. Once you know God in that manner, and turn your back, you blew it according to christianity. For those who have never known or heard the Gospel of Jesus, I have been taught that God allows for them. Same with small children who are not of an age of understanding. Same for adults who can never truly comprehend.
I know it's vague, but i don't pretend to fully understand my God, or his ways.
-
So, nobody can answer my question?
:p
-
No. And the fact that no one can speaks volumes.
-
Originally posted by ShadowWolf_IH
For those who have never known or heard the Gospel of Jesus, I have been taught that God allows for them. Same with small children who are not of an age of understanding. Same for adults who can never truly comprehend.
that would mean that God makes exceptions for those who haven't heard, or who were not of an age of understanding, or were not of intellect enough to understand
how's that Nico?
and we posted at the same time Ford
-
He makes exceptions?
Why can't I be satisfied with that, when he will make no exception for any other people, no matter how good they are? :doubt:
-
Originally posted by ShadowWolf_IH
and actually from a christian POV, let me just say this...and i don't know the address so don't ask me for it.....
"it is better to have not known me than to have known me and turned your back"
notice that is says "to have known me" not "to have known who i am". we all know who the christian God is, but, i daresay that until your heart has been filled you don't know the christian God. Once you know God in that manner, and turn your back, you blew it according to christianity. For those who have never known or heard the Gospel of Jesus, I have been taught that God allows for them. Same with small children who are not of an age of understanding. Same for adults who can never truly comprehend.
I know it's vague, but i don't pretend to fully understand my God, or his ways.
Speaking from a Roman Catholic viewpoint, I can say that the Catholic church has no "unforgivable" sins. No matter what you do, the "road back to the church" is always open.
All this stuff about "having to know Jesus, and we're all sinners from the start" stuff that is attributed to Christianity just...well, isn't really thrown at me as a Catholic (I go to a Catholic Highschool and have to take a course every year on Theology). In fact I get into arguements with my Protestant Christian (not sure how else to say it...Catholics are Christians too, so I can't just say Christians) friends every once in a while on subjects of that kind (well...most recent was a discussion on whether listening to death metal was a sin. I uphold that it isn't, :p ).
I also know quite a few missionaries that travel to poorer countries and help out there. I find it extremely offensive that certain people, having not met these individuals, can lump them all together and say they brainwash people...the ones I know work their tails off in Haiti giving out medicine and food, as well as preaching a bit of course.
I call myself a Roman Catholic, but I believe that any religion can be "right". Worshipping the Christian God should be no different than worshipping even a set of polytheistic gods. The "one true God" just presents himself in a way that the culture can understand Him/It/She/Herm. The parts of human history where men have destroyed each other "for their God", are completely to blame on humanity's stupidity. I am undecided as to whether newborns, etc, are sent to heaven or possibly their souls are transferred to another being for "another chance".
-
i was also taught that people who have never known him can go to heaven. Would you deny a person the right to live simply because they live in a tribe in south america that has as yet been undiscovered? Neither would I. come to think of it, neither would God, so how would you decide that one? If you know his heart, then it is easy to decide.
I am a firm believer that for people who have never been a christian, they are judged on their works, or more to the point, the heart. I also believe that with all of these religeons out there, we all worship the same being. Religeon is simply a man-made tradition on how to worship a diety. The religeon i don't think is as important to God as our hearts are. Know what i mean?
-
I think me and ShadowWolf posted at the same time, and both of our last paragraphs mean basically the same thing if I understand him right.
-
As Solatar posted above, there is no one "Christian" viewpoint on most religious issues. There are many sects of Christianity; for example, fundamentalist Christians would disagree with many of the doctrines that form the cornerstone of my Catholic life. What unites all Christians is the belief in Christ as the Son of God and Savior.
As for the question at hand, I'm much more in agreement with Solatar/ShadowWolf than Setekh. For example, as a Catholic, I do not believe that salvation is a matter of faith alone. What we do is as important as what we believe. In fact, someone who professes to be a Christian and lives their life in a manner contrary to the teachings of Christ really isn't much of a Christian, is he? If we claim to believe in Christ, we are obligated to follow Christ's teachings. As I mentioned, this is not a universal belief among Christians; indeed, Luther's belief in "sola scriptura," the principle that faith in God was the sole requirement for salvation, helped lead to the Reformation.
As for what I believe, and for what my faith teaches, I think it answers your original question Nico, at least in part. I believe that my own faith is the fullest revelation of God's truth to humanity. (Note that I don't expect a single one of you to agree, and I'm not offended if you don't. That's just my belief.) At the same time, however, the Church teaches that every faith has at least some aspect of truth in it. In other words, although people are of various religious beliefs, they are really worshipping the same omnipotent being of God. This may have been the position of the Church in the past, but it has not been for a long time. I personally believe that any person, no matter what their particular religious faith, can achieve Heaven. As some of you have said, dooming someone who has never heard of Christ to Hell for that sole reason isn't exactly the sign of a benevolent and forgiving God, is it? I believe that anyone, be they Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, or anything else, can achieve salvation. In my mind, at least, if someone lives a good and virtuous life according to their particular faith, then they will go to Heaven.
If any of you have ever read C.S. Lewis's The Chronicles of Narnia, a particularly wonderful children's story that is also a Christian allegory, this can be easier to understand. In this story, the character meant to represent Christ, the lion Aslan, talks to someone who worships a different entity, a god of warfare and terror known as Tash. This person has loyally worshipped Tash for his entire life and has lived virtuously. After the end of Narnia, in Paradise, the man asks Aslan, "For my whole life I have feared you and worshipped Tash. How, then, can I be here?" Aslan answers, "Any good deed you performed in the name of Tash was rendered unto me. Likewise, any evil deeds performed in my name were rendered unto Tash." (This is a truly excellent series of seven books; even though I first read them in second grade, they remain perhaps my second-favorite series of all time. The ending is particularly beautiful. I'd highly recommend them.) The point of this allegory is that, as far as I'm concerned, anyone who does right by their own faith is doing right in the eyes of God. This same concept even holds true for atheists. Yes, that's right, I believe that someone who does not believe in any concept of a higher power can get into Heaven, so long as they live a good life to the best of their ability. This belief might shock a few of you. :p This is not the same as the concept in Dante's Inferno; I'm speaking of the full actuality of Heaven, not a particularly nice level of Hell or anything.
The issue of unbaptized babies is one that has changed over the history of the Church. Even as recently as into the twentienth century, the Church spoke of the concept of "limbo," a state of being where babies who died in the womb or unbaptized would reside. However, this teaching has been somewhat downplayed over the past few decades. Personally, I believe that an all-loving God would bring all children, including the unborn and baptized, into His care.
As for those who died before Christ's crucifixion and resurrection, I'm not entirely positive of the specific Church teaching on this point. I personally believe, however, that, whether before or after Christ's death, the good who died before Christ was born did make it to Heaven. I'm sorry that I can't go into more detail; I will try to look it up, though. I'm also not entirely sure of Jewish beliefs regarding heaven and hell; I do know that certain people in the Old Testament are referred to as being in heaven, and Christ's parable of the beggar Lazarus details him being taken to Heaven. At the same time, though, Christ's death and resurrection destroyed death and enabled all of humanity to attain everlasting life through redemption. I'll have to get back to you on this specific point.
As for my own specific images of heaven and hell, I see heaven as a place of indescribable beauty and light, a state of perfect union with God. I see those in heaven as being like God, all-knowing and completely good. As for hell, I see it as a place of utter darkness, torment, and sorrow, a state of complete separation from God. I also believe in Purgatory, a state of purging one's earthly sins before one enters into Heaven.
I hope this post has done some good, and I hope even more that it doesn't start the oh-too-easy path to a flamewar. :p
-
I'm going to start off by saying I love this forum. A religion thread, over 60 posts long, and no flames. That's better then most dinner-table debates I've had over this kind of stuff.
I'll explain my own POV first: I'm quite against most organised religion, but I respect anyone who wishes to worship. I'm not a very firm believer in a great creator, but also not a very firm disbeliever. If, however, there was a great creator, I do believe he started off with the big bang, and not with Adam and Eve.
I personally refuse to believe in a God who finds it nessecary to believe in Him just to be allowed into the 'good' part of the afterlife. I try to live in a 'good' way, as in helping anyone who asks for aid, respecting anyone who wishes to worship, and preventing hurt (to anyone) if it is avoidable. If some God almighty however desides that that simply isn't enough, because I didn't pray to him often enough, I'll flip him (or her, now that I think of it) the bird the moment he informs me of that.
I'd rather be in Hell and suffer, but with a clean conscience, then live in some kind of Heaven, while knowing I'd be lying my ass of just to get in.
One thing about being in heaven, like God, all knowing and all good. If I was all knowing about the things on earth, but powerless to help, that would be a torment in its own right. I have a friend I can only reasonably speak with over MSN due to distance, and it is quite a problem if you cannot be near someone when you know that person is hurting.
-
Originally posted by Mongoose
As for what I believe, and for what my faith teaches, I think it answers your original question Nico, at least in part. I believe that my own faith is the fullest revelation of God's truth to humanity. (Note that I don't expect a single one of you to agree, and I'm not offended if you don't. That's just my belief.) At the same time, however, the Church teaches that every faith has at least some aspect of truth in it. In other words, although people are of various religious beliefs, they are really worshipping the same omnipotent being of God. This may have been the position of the Church in the past, but it has not been for a long time. I personally believe that any person, no matter what their particular religious faith, can achieve Heaven. As some of you have said, dooming someone who has never heard of Christ to Hell for that sole reason isn't exactly the sign of a benevolent and forgiving God, is it? I believe that anyone, be they Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, or anything else, can achieve salvation. In my mind, at least, if someone lives a good and virtuous life according to their particular faith, then they will go to Heaven.
What if they live a good and virtuous life according to their own personal moral code rather than that of a specific faith?
-
My view on that Aldo, is that if you adhere to your own personal moral, you are living according to a particular faith, namely, the faith in the goodness of man*.
*As in humanity, not male.
-
Pheeeeew i'm gone for a day and this happens.
1. Christ in hell: in the first letter of Peter it says that "Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built..." (chapter 3, verse 18 to 20). This appears to say that Jesus went to a place in which people who died before he did were being held, in order to tell them the good news about himself. it does not say that he went to hell. i assume this is the passage being talked about.
2. People rejecting God at birth: by thinking that we know how to run things our own way, we are rejecting God as our creator and ruler who knows what's best for us (since he's omniscient). haven't you ever thought, what's that idiot doing, i could do it so much better! basically, saying that to God is rejecting him... and we all do it, even from babyhood. we've all said, or thought, that we know better than our parents. Christians believe God is the ultimate parent.
3. To answer Nico's question- people who lived before JC: refer to point 1, partially, and also, a place in the book of Hebrews, "...These (prophets and believers of God in the old testament) were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect." (chapter 11 verse 39-40) So apparently those who place their trust in God will go to heaven, although they may not be there yet.
4. About people who don't confess the name of Jesus Christ specifically: there's a passage in the letter of Paul to the Romans which reads: "All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and the thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)" Chapter 2, verse 12-15. Presumably, people will be judged by what they do, and should they do good, then they won't be punished, whether or not the know the actual name of God. of course the premise here is that no one can be perfectly good.
-
Now I'm confused, I remember reading this specifically (it's a bit old, I'm afraid)
Originally posted in here (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,21052.0.html)
This is a crucial misunderstanding. First, let's define a few things.
Death - this can be on many levels. I identify three main ones:
1. Death of a part of ourselves, mentally or emotionally. People don't usually use the word death to refer to this, but it is quite sensible to sometimes say that a part of us has died (eg. my sister's love for dogs, after she was bitten really badly by one).
2. Physical death. This is the most common definition of death. The physical body, which we can prod with sticks, stops functioning.
3. Spiritual death. This is a little wierder. You cannot prod the spirit with sticks. Also, it seems that most people define spiritual death as an actual continuation of the spirit in a state of pain (a la hell), as opposed to spiritual annihiliation, whereby the spirit ceases to exist.
Hell - (as per Christian definition, of course) the complete absence of God and all his benefits, and the 'place' you are when you experience spiritual death (#3 above).
Now, when you talk about Jesus dying, you seem to be referring to physical death (#2), and it would have been far more convincing had he actually been sentenced to Hell (#3). Well, I put it to you plainly that this is exactly what Jesus did - you're right, it would have made absolutely no sense had he merely physically died and went 'back' to been with his Father in heaven. However, when he died on the cross, what he was doing was taking on all the sins of the world and paying for them - receiving the punishment they required (death, both #2 and #3). He didn't return to his Father's presence, he was separated from it - that's what made it a horror. Jesus, the Son of God, was actually treated as if he himself were a sinner.
So if christ is god, how could he have truly died? If I were god, and I knew that by "dying" I would not "truly die" (which is where the omniciesnce (sp?) kicks in) how can that be a true sacrifice?
Someone please explain this to me.
-
Originally posted by Ghostavo
So if christ is god, how could he have truly died? If I were god, and I knew that by "dying" I would not "truly die" (which is where the omniciesnce (sp?) kicks in) how can that be a true sacrifice?
Someone please explain this to me.
I will try...
Christ was not only fully God, but also fully human. He felt and experienced everything any human would. And yes, he did truly "die" both in the physical and spiritual sense. He suffered the pain as any human...and died physically as any human would have under those circumstances....and was separated from God....as any sinner would be. We see art depicting Christ on the cross....a small dribble of blood on his brow and a small cut on his side. We've made his death a nice little clean thing that our consciences can live with. What we've failed to think about is that he died a horrible death...with much suffering. I never stopped to think about it until I heard a medical doctor describe what would be happening to the human body during scourging and crucifixtion.
And yes, he rose again.... and we say "ya, but he was God" Well, the whole point of it is: This is no longer something attainable just by God. He paid the price...and led by example...and now any human being can expect that same promise of living beyond physical death.
Btw...Let me say how nice it was to read posts on this sort of topic without someone resorting to name calling, slurs, and blatent disrespect to each other. :yes:
-
Well, this is debatable, I think. I equate religion with art, ("art" meaning all forms-- literature, music, visual, etc.), and the most insightful art certainly stems from those with exceptional intellectual prowess. The problem with religion is that it is often built by people with great artistic insight, but it is then interpreted by the average person, who is not capable of understanding the overwhelming complexities of which the intellectual is aware.
You're probably right. For example, I don't think Muammed and his followers anticipated their religion being so incredibly misinterpreted to the point of people literally blowing themselves up to attain eternal salvation.
-
vyper thought KappaWing was called KappaWang
-
hmmm (http://members.aol.com/plweiss1/aquinas.htm)
-
vyper thought KappaWing was called KappaWang
lol!
:lol:
-
Originally posted by Nico
Sooooo, I have one question, too:
Before JC, christianism didn't exist, so to speak. And it took hundreds, thousands of years to spread worldwide.
So, what about those before JC, what about those, dunno, native americans who were not "blessed" by some sign before the colons poped up and evangelized by gallons?
What about 2 year old kids that die for X reason and can't even grasp the concept of god?
All damned, just coz they didn't ( couldn't ) know?
I believe hell ( to reply to someone who asked before, hell exists in all religions, before christianism, be shintoist, norse, pagan, egyptian, whatever ) must be an awfully crowded place if the christians are right :p
As for me, I think we turn into some etheral creature that wanders around the world and jumps into the next baby just born that it meets. Yeah, that's why they cry, coz an etheral creature forces its way inside the soulless body!
Nah, really :D
I remember, awhile ago, some thread being posted here about a girl who was allergic to something in the water they use to baptize babies or whatever, so she couldn't be baptized, and the priests of her church said she was damned to hell because of it.
-
Indeed I recall that. Now that was a fun topic. :wtF:
-
Originally posted by Sapphire
I will try...
Christ was not only fully God, but also fully human. He felt and experienced everything any human would. And yes, he did truly "die" both in the physical and spiritual sense. He suffered the pain as any human...and died physically as any human would have under those circumstances....and was separated from God....as any sinner would be. We see art depicting Christ on the cross....a small dribble of blood on his brow and a small cut on his side. We've made his death a nice little clean thing that our consciences can live with. What we've failed to think about is that he died a horrible death...with much suffering. I never stopped to think about it until I heard a medical doctor describe what would be happening to the human body during scourging and crucifixtion.
And yes, he rose again.... and we say "ya, but he was God" Well, the whole point of it is: This is no longer something attainable just by God. He paid the price...and led by example...and now any human being can expect that same promise of living beyond physical death.
Btw...Let me say how nice it was to read posts on this sort of topic without someone resorting to name calling, slurs, and blatent disrespect to each other. :yes:
That (the bold) is what I don't get. How can he seperate from himself?
It looks much more like torture than sacrifice or death...
-
Originally posted by Clave
This looks good to me: http://www.witchway.net/
And on a secondary note, this is actually a better resource, imho:
www.wicca.com
-
I don't understand what part of water someone could be alergic to?
Whatever, I believe those priests are thinking a little too legalistic in terms of God's plan for salvation. In special circumstances like that, who are they to claim they know how God will judge? I believe that God will see her willingness to be baptised, and not hold it against her that she could not be because of a medical problem.
The Bible tells Christians to believe and be baptised, the baptism being the outward sign that they had accepted Christ as Savior and public testimony thereof--an act of obedience. However, I personally believe that if someone gets saved in church....and walks out the door to cross the street to be baptised in a lake, but gets hit by a car and dies before they get baptised, I can't see how that would be held against him. God looks at the heart, and the willingness to obey his word.
Personally, I don't even believe in infant baptism. Believers were being baptised only after they had made a conscious decision to follow Christ. Somewhere along the line, someone interpreted this as babies having to go to hell because they could not make a decision for themselves. So some well-doer instituted infant baptism to save the dying babies from damnation. As a result, many denominations seem to place a emphasis on baptism as being the thing that "saves" you.
-
Actually, it was the wheat in the communal wafers, but this isn't a thread called 'Let's get Christians!', I don't want this to turn into another gang bang. ;)
-
Most all of Christians are "well-doers" :doubt:
Anyway, priests are able to do that because, apparantly, they are spoken to "by God" and as such carry his will to the people.
That's why the rape cases weren't reported, or one of the reasons: a priest did it, and a priest is supposadly talked to by God, and as such is doing his will.
-
Originally posted by Ghostavo
That (the bold) is what I don't get. How can he seperate from himself?
It looks much more like torture than sacrifice or death...
Ahhh....the infinite confusion about the concept of the Trinity. Remember... "God" is made up of 3 parts: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Sorta like an egg is made up of: white, yolk, and shell.
Each part is definite and can be separated from the others, yet together they make up the whole.
Its a slippery slope and like a fool I will probably run headlong down it in attempt to explain, and crash and burn when I fail. Good thing that God is compassionate on fools too.
I believe that the separation here was the separation of Son from the Father and Holy Spirit. At that moment...Godhood was far from him, simply because God cannot co-exist with sin--and the Bible tells us that he became sin on the cross...our sins, so that we didn't have to suffer the ultimate wages of those sins.
Does that help a little bit?
-
Originally posted by Flipside
Actually, it was the wheat in the communal wafers, but this isn't a thread called 'Let's get Christians!', I don't want this to turn into another gang bang. ;)
Someone told you that communion (or the wheat in wafers) saves you?
-
Wicca = cool. Unfortunately, I've never truly understood or accepted half of it could be real.
-
Originally posted by Unknown Target
Most all of Christians are "well-doers" :doubt:
Anyway, priests are able to do that because, apparantly, they are spoken to "by God" and as such carry his will to the people.
That's why the rape cases weren't reported, or one of the reasons: a priest did it, and a priest is supposadly talked to by God, and as such is doing his will.
Oh boy. I'm not touching this one... I'd have all the catholics on my case. :lol:
Lets just say that the Bible tells us that when Christ died...the curtain to the Holy of Holies--which only the priests could enter into--was torn. It was a signal that we are all free to go to God on our own behalf.
-
Find the article and read it for yourself :) It was too long ago for me to remember the specifics.
Anywho, I'd just like to add that all the non-Christians should respect Christianity just like any normal religion. People have the right to believe what they choose.
-
Originally posted by vyper
Wicca = cool. Unfortunately, I've never truly understood or accepted half of it could be real.
What don't you understand?
And for the record, Wicca is very diverse: you are basically free to choose what you do and do not believe. In some cases, some Christian converts even turn it to be a lot like Christianity.
Here's a basic run down of that statement:
In Wicca, there is The One. It is the energy of all living and non-living things, that flows through the universe. Everybody is connected to it, even people who do not believe in it. However, for those who do believe in it, you can use it to magick and that sort of stuff. NOTE: Magick is not like "Charmed," but if I had to describe it in the simplest terms, it's sort of like changing the probability of something happening in your favor. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
Anyway, back to The One (I'm fuzzy on the exact name). The One is not a physical or conscious entity. It is the binding energy that keeps us all together, etc. Lower down on the list are the two Gods, the God and the Goddess. The former symbolizes life, and is usually a creature with a man's upper body and a goat's lower body. Similar to the Christian satan? Sort of, yes. Why? Because of the Crusades, but that's another topic. The Goddess is a human.
The creationist myth is that the two of them created the universe from their union (aka sex). This created the stars, planets, people, etc. Thus, sex is actually considered a very good thing in Wicca, as it gives us the same power as the God and Goddess.
Now, the thing about Wicca is that you can use several different idealogies. I personally believe in just the God and Goddess (for now), however, many others use a pantheon of Gods, taken from around the world. These can include the Greek, Egyptian, Asian, etc.
I think that's most every basic thing. :) I probably forgot something, but oh well.
-
Originally posted by Unknown Target
Find the article and read it for yourself :) It was too long ago for me to remember the specifics.
Anywho, I'd just like to add that all the non-Christians should respect Christianity just like any normal religion. People have the right to believe what they choose.
Exactly. Thats why we weren't made to be robots. We were given free will to choose to believe or not to believe.
-
Actually, I seem to recall that George Lucas used Wicca references a lot when creating 'The Force'. He found the fact that both 'Light' and 'Dark' practioners existed quite fascinating.
-
:) I only have problems with people who try to force their beliefs on others. No offense, but a lot of Christians try to do that (because they believe that they are "saving" others, and because the Bible says so). I don't mean to start an argument, though, I'm just using an example. I've met many Christians who just don't care what religion you are :)
-
I agree in principle with you, UT
I'm afraid that many christians seem to be forcing their religion on you, when they are simply trying to share what they experience and believe to be true in hopes that someone else will experience what God has to give freely.
I can't remember who said it or the exact wording, but there was one man that said in essence "Preach the Gospel, and sometimes use words".
Another words.... live like Christ, and people will notice. You don't have to hit them over the head with it.
-
[q]"Charmed,"[/q]
I'd prefer a Buffy analogy, Willow was hot once she became a lesbian witch.....
Erm. Let's move on now.
Makes a bit more sense put like that, bar my natural avoidance of "Gods" per se.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
Actually, I seem to recall that George Lucas used Wicca references a lot when creating 'The Force'. He found the fact that both 'Light' and 'Dark' practioners existed quite fascinating.
Yes, parts of Wicca is startlingly like "The Force" actually :)
However, there is no "light" or "dark" magick. There is magick, and what you choose to do with it is what makes it light or dark. It's up to the person to decide how they use the tool :)
And Sapphire, if people lived like Christ, then I would be thrilled. Ghandi once said "I do not have anything against your Christ. I like your Christ, but you are not your Christ" (or something similar to that :)), and I am pressed to agree with those sentiments :)
-
One very, very, very important point regarding Flipside's original question, as seen from a Chrsitian perspective:
The decision about whether you end up with eternal life or eternal destruction does not happen when you die. That decision will be made only after Jesus returns.
At that time, everyone will stand before God, and the truth about people's real character will be made clear. Everyone who, in their heart of hearts, wants to live in a world where God is God and things happen the way God intended, will get that. Everyone who, in their heart of hearts, would rather die than submit, will get that. The judgment of Judgment Day consists in determining what the real inclination of your heart is, and letting that inclination be carried to is logical conclusion.
So whether self-proclaimed and practicing Sikh, Jew, Christian, Buddhist, atheist, agnostic, Wiccan, or whatever, none of us are set in our eternal destiny yet.
Thus, the answer to the question is 4: It depends on whether he really wants to live with God when he meets him.
-
All that is, of course, if you believe in the Christian God. ;)
-
Originally posted by Sapphire
Ahhh....the infinite confusion about the concept of the Trinity. Remember... "God" is made up of 3 parts: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Sorta like an egg is made up of: white, yolk, and shell.
Each part is definite and can be separated from the others, yet together they make up the whole.
Its a slippery slope and like a fool I will probably run headlong down it in attempt to explain, and crash and burn when I fail. Good thing that God is compassionate on fools too.
I believe that the separation here was the separation of Son from the Father and Holy Spirit. At that moment...Godhood was far from him, simply because God cannot co-exist with sin--and the Bible tells us that he became sin on the cross...our sins, so that we didn't have to suffer the ultimate wages of those sins.
Does that help a little bit?
A bit :blah:
*will never understand the complexity of a trinity godhood in a monotheistic religion*
Originally posted by Unknown Target
Thus, sex is actually considered a very good thing in Wicca, as it gives us the same power as the God and Goddess.
;7
*starts a religion with shivans as gods, in which only people who have played FS will go to heaven, those who don't have hallfight to figure out for eternity*
:nervous:
-
Thank you UT for clearing up the Dark and Light garbage. Obviously I am not Wiccan. That does not mean that i haven't studied it extensively. I believe in spirits. Not the hokey crap that we see in movies, but spirits themselves....a sentient energy if you will. I am having a great deal of trouble finding the right words...anyway....what you refer to as Magick is simply having these spirits do work for you. How you use them, now that is the dark and light of it. I don't believe in ouija boards or Psychic tarrot over the phone, however when seen in the proper light of things, divination is something to be reckoned with.
I think that the problem lies in the fact that when we deal in divination, we are loosing things, and what is loosed in the heavens is loosed on earth. Which is to say that what we do in spiritual realm does have ramifications on us, here. Too many people look to wicca as a source of power, when in reality it is quite beautiful. One of the best statements i have ever heard concerning Wiccan faith verses Christian Faith, is "all gods are one god and all goddesses are one goddess, there is but one initiator." I have always liked that statemnent as a good way of saying that we all worship the same being.
The problem is, when dealing with these spirits, some call them angels and demons, we loose something that is an imitator, something that is not here for good. Something that will have us "buy the lie" until we suddenly find ourselves drinking the blood of animals and calling forth satan.
The simple fact that we as people who believe in a spiritual existence have a hard time distinguishing between the two, is why God doesn't practicing that. It's not that Magick is an evil thing, it's just that we are 2 years old and playing with a blowtorch. If you get my meaning.
Do you know how many die hard baptists would slaughter me for this? I think that when i think of wicca, i correlate it to the manifestation gifts of the holy spirit found in Romans. I think that alot of the things that wiccans use spirits for, christians use the holy spirit for. I think that while we may not be using the same spirit, we are in fact pure of heart in our intent.
i hope that this has made sense.
-
Originally posted by Unknown Target
Yes, parts of Wicca is startlingly like "The Force" actually :)
However, there is no "light" or "dark" magick. There is magick, and what you choose to do with it is what makes it light or dark. It's up to the person to decide how they use the tool :)
Precisely, which, I think is how Lucas envisioned the Force, one Force, but several different ways of using it ;)
Take, for example, the trick of sealing up an item of the persons belongings in a bottle. Depending on how it's done, that is believed to either inhibit or protect them, the Magick is the same, but the use of it changes.
-
I can't comment on your example, Flipside, as I have only heard of, never seen, a physical manifestation of magick :)
In response to Shadowolf. Yes, I have heard of, and do believe in, evil spirits, and I actually think quite a few people do. That website (www.wicca.com) actually explains a lot of it, and I'm inclined to agree with what he says :)
But yes, I do think that Christians and Wiccans may use the same spirits, however, I haven't put much thought into it, so I can't make an informed statement. :) Besides, you seem to have a quite good grasp of Wicca, so I don't think you need any further clarification :)
-
Yeah, I've been good friends with a White witch for quite a while now. even jumped the Broomstick at her wedding. We've had some interesting discussions on the matter. The technique is known as 'Bottling', which suggests why Wicca had some trouble catching on in Scotland, since if you tell someone in Glasgow you plan to Bottle them, you better be running away at the time ;)
Basically it's up to the person doing the 'Bottling' what sort of influence it would have.
That said, I personally have found the World tends to do what it will, regardless of how hard we try to tell it otherwise ;)
-
I just got visions of a White Witch glassing someone...
It shouldn't be funny but it is.
-
I get visions of Gandalf, broken bottle in one hand, half a pool cue in the other, standing before the gates of Mordor shouting, 'Come on ya Bastards! I'll take on the lot o' ye!'
:lol:
-
Bloody doormen, eh?
-
wow....5 pages of religeous tpoic without a fight and suddenly gandolf is trying to stop people from using the bathroom. :p
-
Ya know...? I was just thinking this was the most civil religious thread HLP has ever had.
whoops, jinxed it :D
-
(http://www.aqsx85.dsl.pipex.com/Gandalf.jpg)
'D'Yez have a problem wi' me using the Bathroom laddie?'
LOL
Edit : Agreed UT, it's been quite refreshing, but a little light humour makes sure things don't get too intense ;)
-
(http://www.3dactionplanet.com/hlp/hosted/casofwar/lostsouls/balrog.jpg)
Oh ****, I knew I shouldn't have had that curry........
-
Image hosted by Angelfire...
-
you guys know what the _best_ thing about this thread is? no one's slandered the Christians as mindless idiots, and the Christians haven't slandered anyone else as mindless idiots, and there's an equally interesting discussion of wicca going on at the same time which hasn't been pushed aside by people clamouring to flame the Christians.
i'm curious about what wicca has to say about actually living your life. is that cobbled together as well out of whichever religious tenets you choose to have, or is there a kind of overarching directive like 'be good' or something? what actual effect does wicca have on someone's life?
oh, and good on ya, sapphire, for trying to answer questions about trinity. God knows it's hard stuff.
-
Originally posted by Ghostavo
Image hosted by Angelfire...
balls. 1 sec.
Fixed.
Originally posted by icespeed
you guys know what the _best_ thing about this thread is? no one's slandered the Christians as mindless idiots, and the Christians haven't slandered anyone else as mindless idiots, and there's an equally interesting discussion of wicca going on at the same time which hasn't been pushed aside by people clamouring to flame the Christians.
I think 90% are genuinely interested in what other people think, so long as noones pushing stuff onto them (be it religious or anti-religious). At the least it lets you quantify your own belief structure.
-
Aldo's got it right, I think.
I always like to learn more about other peoples believes, to understand the actions of those people, and perhaps do change my own believes.
-
Originally posted by kasperl
I always like to learn more about other peoples believes, to understand the actions of those people, and perhaps do change my own believes.
-
As I like to say, no matter what decision it is, it will never be the right one unless you see both sides of the issue :)
-
I'd like to say that this thread should be stickyed and put in the highlights.:nod: I've read thru all the pages and not one flame, not one. And I'm sitting here in awe.:shaking: This is so calm, it's allmost scary.:D I'm so proud of everybody at HLP.:yes:
-
Originally posted by WeatherOp
I've read thru all the pages and not one flame, not one.
You know... he's right...
ahem...
Let's try to keep this thread free of flames, even in jest, okay? [/b]
Better?
-
Kaz? Is that you? :p
-
Now now :D
Anyway, I agree, this has been, I believe, the first non-explosive religious/politics thread we've had.