Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,809 Year: 3,066/9,624 Month: 911/1,588 Week: 94/223 Day: 5/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Christianity is Morally Bankrupt
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 106 of 652 (694845)
03-29-2013 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Jazzns
03-29-2013 10:42 AM


Re: Still missing the point
quote:
Why would you assume that? What part of the discussion was not talking about the morality of the ideas involved in Christianity?
Because the originator didn't even know there was a definition to moral bankruptcy (Message 78) and moral bankruptcy is about action, not ideas.
Moral Bankruptcy Message 77
It is a negatively connoted term referring to the deterioration or devaluation of morality in a person or entity, usually with the implication that the person or entity is aware of and responsible themselves for this deterioration. Moral bankruptcy, therefore, suggests that an individual has a sense of what is both morally good and bad (i.e. right and wrong), but consciously and deliberately chooses to make decisions in accord with the morally bad.
quote:
Nothing in your reply addressed the issue of agency. You quibbled about whether Jesus really counts as vicarious redemption and whether the whole heaven/hell selection was any different from a normal justice system. Those are examples I am using to support a larger point.
I'm not really sure how you're using the word agency. I'm assuming you're using it as a person or thing through which power is exerted or an end is achieved. If not, clarification would help.
quote:
My point was originally, and remains, that our ability to judge the morality of these beliefs versus random acts of nature rests in the agency and intent embedded in the belief.
Which is another reason I assumed we weren't talking about moral bankruptcy anymore. Your position doesn't really have anything to do with moral bankruptcy.
Moral bankruptcy is about actions of the living, not beliefs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Jazzns, posted 03-29-2013 10:42 AM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Jazzns, posted 03-29-2013 11:28 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 107 of 652 (694854)
03-29-2013 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by Jazzns
03-25-2013 11:47 PM


Re: Missing the point
Jazzns writes:
The idea of heaven and hell is another good one. Which one you go to is solely determined by the agency of God! You can draw a similarity between hell and the Earth engulfed by the sun but the sun is not making a choice between burning the Earth or between burning some people on the earth for eternity.
I don't want to butt in on your conversation but I thought that maybe CS Lewis might be able to add something to this. Here is a CS Lewis quote from the book the great divorce.
quote:
There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened.
The gospel is very clear that it is all about our hearts. We keep the laws, (all encapsulated in love of God's creation and its inhabitants), because we find ourselves wanting to keep them for their own sake, not about how perfectly we keep them.
I know this sound's pretentious but I'll quote what I wrote in the thread "morality without god". "(If I'm going to repeat myself I might as well do it precisely. )
GDR writes:
Speaking as a Christian I would say that there is no objective standard as such and frankly I think that if we think about it that is a reasonable position to take.
I was raised in a home where I was loved and valued. I was raised in a home where the hallmarks were honesty and generosity. If God exists and if there is some form of ultimate judgement I suggest that it would be unreasonable to judge some one who grew up in a home like mine to the same standard as some one who grew up in a cold unloving home.
It is obvious that every person ever born has been subjected to their own unique combination of genes and circumstances. My contention is that even though we might behave badly as humans we can never tell what kind of person we are with all that has influenced our lives, (or maybe even mental illnesses), stripped away. Maybe at the very core of a mass murderer is a heart that hates what he is doing and desperately wants to live out a life characterized by unselfish love. As a Christian, I'm not prepared to say how God will ultimately judge anyone, (which Paul says as well by the way).
As others have pointed out there is a wide divergence of belief amongst those that call themselves Christian. There is a wide divergence between Faith's belief and my own. The idea that we try to understand the Bible as essentially being dictated by God is at odds with the Bible itself.
Just read my signature. If this is what God wants of us the it becomes ludicrous to think that He would sanction genocide or public stoning. I think that being a follower of Jesus is very different thing than being a follower of a God dictated Bible.
Jazzns writes:
It is an immoral concept because immorality can only come from things with an agency to decide to be immoral. When a person throws a stone, it is not possible for the stone itself to be immoral.
Absolutely. Again, it is about where our hearts are. Are we motivated by selfishness or do we genuinely care for others as we do for ourselves.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Jazzns, posted 03-25-2013 11:47 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Rahvin, posted 03-29-2013 7:05 PM GDR has replied
 Message 115 by Jazzns, posted 03-30-2013 12:08 AM GDR has replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


(1)
Message 108 of 652 (694855)
03-29-2013 7:05 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by GDR
03-29-2013 6:44 PM


Re: Missing the point
I don't want to butt in on your conversation but I thought that maybe CS Lewis might be able to add something to this. Here is a CS Lewis quote from the book the great divorce.
quote:
There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened.
CS Lewis was very good at communicating his apologetics...but his logic was still terrible.
The situation remains a false dichotomy. God is the one who created hell, and he's the one who makes heaven/hell the only two choices. Even Lewis' quote simply screams "do what god says or he''' burn you forever."
It's nothing more than blaming the victim with some absurd rationalization to make the speaker feel good about what is, at its very nature, a reprehensible moral act.
If I am an interrogator, and I tell my victim to answer my questions or else I'll cause him immense pain, it is not my victim's fault when I commit atrocities against him. He may have chosen not to speak, but the moral culpability still rests with me...because I have the option to let him go, or to try an interrogation technique that actually works.
Your deity is no better. He could choose for there to be no hell. Instead, he creates a place of eternal torment when, as an all-powerful being, he could choose literally anything else.
The choices of the damned are meaningless; the moral culpability remains tied to the one who set up such a system. Because there are no choices that any mortal person could ever make int heir lives, even if they spent every breath murdering and raping and hurting others, that would justify an eternity of torture as punishment.

The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus
"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by GDR, posted 03-29-2013 6:44 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by GDR, posted 03-29-2013 9:07 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 109 of 652 (694856)
03-29-2013 8:03 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Jazzns
03-29-2013 11:14 AM


ay that therefore it is impossible to speak about Christianity in a general sense where many if not most of actual instances of Christianity in our modern world DO IN FACT hold those beliefs.
So if many, but not most do hold those beliefs, according to your statement it would still be okay to make general statements and apply them to all Christians or to Christianity in general. That implication at least seems wrong to me.
You can generalize as much as you want. But a perfectly good response to a generalization is to simply point out the generalization is false.
Edited by NoNukes, : replace two with to. My grammar stinks.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Jazzns, posted 03-29-2013 11:14 AM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Jazzns, posted 03-29-2013 11:41 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 110 of 652 (694857)
03-29-2013 8:06 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Jazzns
03-29-2013 11:27 AM


Re: Still missing the point
Presumably yes. In that case it is actually possible to apply the moral question once you insert the agency of the creator God. If it is actually in God's purvue to destory the earth, it doesn't matter the means by which that is accomplished, we can still judge it to be immoral.
Forget heaven, hell, salvation or all of the other stuff that have actually been brought up. You can find God evil for only giving sol 9-10 billion years worth of hydrogen. I find that idea laughable.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Jazzns, posted 03-29-2013 11:27 AM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Jazzns, posted 03-29-2013 11:48 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 111 of 652 (694858)
03-29-2013 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by Rahvin
03-29-2013 7:05 PM


Re: Missing the point
Rahvin writes:
The situation remains a false dichotomy. God is the one who created hell, and he's the one who makes heaven/hell the only two choices. Even Lewis' quote simply screams "do what god says or he''' burn you forever."
It's nothing more than blaming the victim with some absurd rationalization to make the speaker feel good about what is, at its very nature, a reprehensible moral act.
I think if you read the whole of my previous post you would see that this does not portray my views. It isn’t about doing what God wants or he’ll burn us, but about what are truly the desires of our hearts and the idea that God will grant those desires.
As for the idea of burning in hell I don’t buy into that either. I’d suggest that understanding comes from ancient Jewish apocalyptic language. If you read the whole book The Great Divorce it is pretty clear that Lewis’ view is that hell means separation from God.
If I had to guess, I think that hell is likely pretty similar to our current existence which is largely driven by selfish desires, whereas life with God is a life in a truly altruistic society.
The other thing I’d suggest that deep down we pretty much all want to see justice done. (Except maybe for ourselves.)
22 years ago there was a child abduction in the city that I live on the outskirts of. The little boy’s name was Michael Dunahee. Someone took that little boy and nobody seems to have any idea who it was. From our point of view there was never any justice for either Michael, his family or for the abductor. We might think that the abductor should burn in hell for eternity but maybe if we knew that he had been brutalized as a child himself we might feel a little differently. It is my belief that ultimately there will be perfect justice done for all.
I don’t pretend to have all the answers but I’m prepared to worship a loving God whose desire is that all of us should humbly love kindness and do justice. I see that God in the life of Jesus Christ.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Rahvin, posted 03-29-2013 7:05 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 112 of 652 (694863)
03-29-2013 11:28 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by purpledawn
03-29-2013 2:01 PM


Re: Still missing the point
Because the originator didn't even know there was a definition to moral bankruptcy (Message 78) and moral bankruptcy is about action, not ideas.
The originator picked a phrase. He perhaps should have picked a different phrase but how he described what he meant made it reasonably clear to a reader that was he was talking about is the quality of the ideas. In particular, the negative quality of the ideas.
Ideas can in fact be judged and ideas can in be moral or immoral.
I'm not really sure how you're using the word agency.
Agency Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
quote:
3: a person or thing through which power is exerted or an end is achieved
Moral bankruptcy is about actions of the living, not beliefs.
And you are being overly pedantic.

If we long for our planet to be important, there is something we can do about it. We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers. --Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by purpledawn, posted 03-29-2013 2:01 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 113 of 652 (694864)
03-29-2013 11:41 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by NoNukes
03-29-2013 8:03 PM


So if many, but not most do hold those beliefs, according to your statement it would still be okay to make general statements and apply them to all Christians or to Christianity in general. That implication at least seems wrong to me.
Well, I mean is it not possible to talk about the category of people who do hold those beliefs? How specific must we be before we can talk about a genuine set of beliefs that our neighbors do actually hold to in part or whole by their very own admission?
Some of us think that these beliefs are destructive. How do you propose we talk about them in a rational manner?
You can generalize as much as you want. But a perfectly good response to a generalization is to simply point out the generalization is false.
Nobody is trying to use a generalization to hide anything. If there was a simple word that meant, a large body of people that hold to many of these beliefs in varying degrees, we would use that word. But there is a somewhat common understanding that many people who call themselves Christian do in fact profess some of these ideas. You don't have to go very far at all to find examples of people warning about the dangers of hell or extolling the wonders of Jesus's sacrifice for humanity.
And these people call their religion something, they call it Christianity.
Edited by Jazzns, : changed the ending a bit

If we long for our planet to be important, there is something we can do about it. We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers. --Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by NoNukes, posted 03-29-2013 8:03 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by NoNukes, posted 03-30-2013 4:10 AM Jazzns has replied
 Message 121 by purpledawn, posted 03-30-2013 6:03 AM Jazzns has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 114 of 652 (694865)
03-29-2013 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by NoNukes
03-29-2013 8:06 PM


Re: Still missing the point
Forget heaven, hell, salvation or all of the other stuff that have actually been brought up. You can find God evil for only giving sol 9-10 billion years worth of hydrogen. I find that idea laughable.
If he is doing it because a girl and a guy ate an apple from the wrong tree a long time ago, yea it is still evil.
My kids are eventually going to die. It was not immoral of us to bring them into the world because we don't have any control over how the leave it.
God presumably does have control and the reasons why he exerts that control matters. Thats the point.

If we long for our planet to be important, there is something we can do about it. We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers. --Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by NoNukes, posted 03-29-2013 8:06 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 115 of 652 (694870)
03-30-2013 12:08 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by GDR
03-29-2013 6:44 PM


I never mind you butting in, but I think the issues you are raising are somewhat tangential to the point I was trying to make.
Lewis writes:
All that are in Hell, choose it.
It really is hard to think of an idea, that is MORE pathetically evil than this idea.
Absolutely. Again, it is about where our hearts are. Are we motivated by selfishness or do we genuinely care for others as we do for ourselves.
I wasn't talking about the morality of people. I am talking about the morality of ideas held by Christians and why we should be allowed to judge those ideas.

If we long for our planet to be important, there is something we can do about it. We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers. --Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by GDR, posted 03-29-2013 6:44 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by GDR, posted 03-30-2013 1:42 AM Jazzns has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 116 of 652 (694872)
03-30-2013 1:42 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by Jazzns
03-30-2013 12:08 AM


Jazzns writes:
It really is hard to think of an idea, that is MORE pathetically evil than this idea.
Why? In this life we make choices as to where and how we live. Is that evil? Out of curiosity did you ever read "The Great Divorce"?
Jazzns writes:
I wasn't talking about the morality of people. I am talking about the morality of ideas held by Christians and why we should be allowed to judge those ideas.
I think that we should always question. The fact that we believe that morality exists does indicate that morality actually does matter and have meaning. There does seem to be a moral standard which would indicate that there is a foundation for that standard that is external to our present existence.
The various concepts we have a God reflect our understanding of the nature of God. Of course we should judge the morality of ideas held by Christians just as we should the morality of ideas of other faiths and even atheists for that matter.
Personally I accept the morality espoused by Jesus in the Gospel accounts and believe them to be accurate, as I believe that God affirmed Christ's message by resurrecting him. That message is that we are to love God and neighbour as he first loved us. Our actions are a by-product of where are hearts are, and if we have hearts that truly care about others as much as or more than we care for ourselves then our actions will reflect that.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Jazzns, posted 03-30-2013 12:08 AM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Tangle, posted 03-30-2013 4:33 AM GDR has replied
 Message 188 by Jazzns, posted 04-01-2013 11:26 AM GDR has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 117 of 652 (694873)
03-30-2013 4:10 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by Jazzns
03-29-2013 11:41 PM


Well, I mean is it not possible to talk about the category of people who do hold those beliefs? How specific must we be before we can talk about a genuine set of beliefs that our neighbors do actually hold to in part or whole by their very own admission?
If you want to toss around accusations that people are evil, perhaps you should be accurate about who you mean to address. Pretty much all of the stuff you describe is simply not central to Christianity.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Jazzns, posted 03-29-2013 11:41 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by Jazzns, posted 04-01-2013 10:54 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 118 of 652 (694874)
03-30-2013 4:33 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by GDR
03-30-2013 1:42 AM


GDR writes:
Why? In this life we make choices as to where and how we live. Is that evil?
I lead a decent and moral life - take that as fact.
But I'm an atheist, so according to most Christians this means I'm going to hell. (Even in your moderate view, I'll be denied perfect happiness for all eternity).
My atheism isn't a result of a some kind of hatred for Christianity or Christ, it's purely an act of reason. I've thought it through and considered it using the very tools you believe that your God gave me.
Now explain to me why I deserve, at best, everlasting denial of happiness and why an entity that is supposed to be perfect love, would do this to me. And then explain why it would be a moral act.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by GDR, posted 03-30-2013 1:42 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Faith, posted 03-30-2013 4:58 AM Tangle has replied
 Message 126 by GDR, posted 03-30-2013 12:01 PM Tangle has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 119 of 652 (694875)
03-30-2013 4:58 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by Tangle
03-30-2013 4:33 AM


My atheism isn't a result of a some kind of hatred for Christianity or Christ, it's purely an act of reason. I've thought it through and considered it using the very tools you believe that your God gave me.
Except that according to Christian theology your tools are fallen and unreliable for that reason. Particularly what we lack in our human reason is any way to rightly assess God and His demands on us.
But if you've truly come to this conclusion why does the question concern you at all? When I was an atheist I don't think I gave a second thought to hell, I simply didn't believe in it.
Now explain to me why I deserve, at best, everlasting denial of happiness and why an entity that is supposed to be perfect love, would do this to me. And then explain why it would be a moral act.
Sin, or disobedience of God, is something like a rent in the nature of things, because God is perfectly pure. No matter how moral a person's life is by human standards it can never be perfect, but God is perfect so even a very small sin puts a chasm between us and Him. One lie, one act of unfairness to someone, one act of disobedience such as the trivial-seeming eating of a fruit that was forbidden to Adam and Eve, cuts us off from God.
The only way to right the wrong is atonement but we can't atone for ourselves because we are not pure. Only God Himself is pure enough to atone for us, but in order to atone for us He also has to be a human being, an absolutely sinless human being, who lives as a perfect human being and then dies in our place to pay for our sins. That's what Jesus did for us. I personally think it is a wonderful story of perfect love.
But again if you've truly concluded the story is false it shouldn't concern you at all.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.
2Cr 10:4-5 (For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Tangle, posted 03-30-2013 4:33 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Tangle, posted 03-30-2013 5:23 AM Faith has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 120 of 652 (694876)
03-30-2013 5:23 AM
Reply to: Message 119 by Faith
03-30-2013 4:58 AM


Faith writes:
Except that according to Christian theology your tools are fallen and unreliable for that reason. Particularly what we lack in our human reason is any way to rightly assess God and His demands on us.
If the tools that your God gave me are faulty, then I can't be blamed for using them and getting the wrong answer can I?
But if you've truly come to this conclusion why does the question concern you at all? When I was an atheist I don't think I gave a second thought to hell, I simply didn't believe in it.
It doesn't concern me for a moment.
But I am interested in why those that do believe it think that way. And I'm concerned about the effect those that believe in the bunkum has on our society.
But again if you've truly concluded the story is false it shouldn't concern you at all.
Well of course it's false - you just invented all that nonsense. But that's not the point, you haven't answered the question at all. The questions was:
"explain to me why I deserve, at best, everlasting denial of happiness and why an entity that is supposed to be perfect love, would do this to me. And then explain why it would be a moral act"
Why is it moral to condemn a perfectly decent bloke to everlasting hell?

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Faith, posted 03-30-2013 4:58 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by purpledawn, posted 03-30-2013 8:16 AM Tangle has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024