Ask Your Question today
Christians often state that believing in Jesus or not is a free choice. I don't see how it is, though, since the consequence of not believing in Jesus supposedly is eternal torture in Hell. I think it's pure blackmail.
Moreover, I'm not even sure if you can choose to believe something or not in the FIRST place.
What do you think? Is it blackmail?
You have a free choice as to what religion you want to practice but deep down, you either believe something or you don’t
You're free to choose like you're free to murder someone; there's the threat of harsh punishment for making the wrong choice.
If there's a harsh punishment for making the wrong choice, the choice isn't truly free. A truly free choice has no negative consequences, no matter what you choose.
I'm going to take a detour here. In the grand scheme of things (existence) there's no wrong choice, there's no 'harsh punishment'. Without disregarding the fact that we are all dealt unique life circumstances, unique puzzles to solve, there's no one right, and there's no one wrong. But there are repercussions for everything you do, or don't do.. everything! Even if you decided to lock yourself up in a basement for the rest of your days as a deterrent for wronging anyone.. guess what, there will still be repercussions (consequences) for doing so.
You said that believing in Jesus or not was a FREE choice. I have just shown that because of the supposed consequences of not believing in Jesus, it is not a free choice at all.
Under your definition, there is no such thing as a free choice, because there will always be an option that has a better outcome than the other in any choice anyone can ever make, so it is a term that should never be mentioned to describe a single choice at all. However, people do use the term "free choice" to describe choices, so your definition must be false.
🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖
OH MY FUCKING GOD
The Brain Parasite is active again.
Consider this: We flip a coin. If I predict the outcome correctly,
I get the coin, if I don't, you get it.
I FREELY CHOOSE HEADS. Why? because outcome is exactly
equal to choosing TAILS. IT DOESNT FUCKING MATTER.
BOTH OUTCOMES ARE EQUAL.
This Brain Parasite has you talking out of your ass. Your understanding of logic has been damaged. YOU ARE A SICK PUP. Get it thru your head. You must relearn logic. Your pathetic blitherings make people hate you. AND, you are not conscious of it. In fact you have very little consciousness at all. You are a bot. You talk out of your ass for Jesus. You are unaware of your unawareness. Your proselytizing makes people vomit. The Brain Parasite is doing this to you. Somehow, you must reclaim your mind.
🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖
Nobody's forcing you to believe in hell, either 🤔. In fact, I personally know a number of Christians who don't believe in hell. There is a whole movement that doesn't accept it - it's called Universalism.
Universalism isnt just christianity it's a hodgepodge of religions going down the least common denominator. It's an ok "chruch" but they dont have any actual issues they discuss.
Thank you for this info. I was thinking about the motivational speaker Rob Bell and the writer Francis Spufford, in his book 'Unapologetic'.
I do not agree with them at all on their soteriology, to the point that I find it actually dangerous (since all misinformation is more or less dangerous, depending on how consequential it is for the reader - and the eternal destiny of the soul is not a light matter).
I did appreciate immensely the emotional honesty and intellectual rigour about Spufford, though, and Bell's early Nooma videos were thought-provoking.
You are free to believe in whatever you want to believe.
Christianity is not forced.
That's exactly why I like christianity more than islam.
In christianity you can convert any time during your life and it would be the same as if you were life long in gods eyes. You don't get special premiums in heaven for being a lifer. I dont like the assertions the pope is any more holy than the average person.
The Bible actually states that there are hierarchies in Heaven and that people will be rewarded differently.
I dont take those bits as literal because let's be honest the Lutheran formation was because of those premium benefits being kinda fucky for a religious organization.
And how exactly do you choose what to take literally or not, based on whether or not the bit is fucky to you? Do you take the other bits as symbolic or do you see them as mistakes in the Bible?
Well as an agnostic I read the bible within the historical context of what was going on at the time. Roman's being the big bad during jesus crucifixion. Ironically creating the best iconography for the upcoming religion that was going to take over the world by storm.
I take most of it as metaphors. Tellings of hallucinations with a somewhat good moral compass. Got to understand when christianity started up there were literally dozens of religions with the same weight within the area. Survival of the fittest when it came to religion. Nothing short of a miracle that Judaism survived.
I believe based on a preponderance of evidence in my own life, and in the eternally complex beauty of our universe. And while I truly believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and that He was sent to die on the cross for my sins (which were many), it was a conscious decision to believe after exploring many religions. After all, I would prefer to believe and be disappointed than NOT believe and be unpleasantly surprised.
Good for you... and I agree with your opinion on modern day "Christians."
I consider myself Christian (I believe in Jesus); but not like most so called Christians believe and I believe that much of what the mainstream "Christian Churches" are teaching have no biblical backing (and the Bible may actually say the exact opposite).
I think one must be a staunch believer, or a staunch non-believer to be able to understand the nature of belief. Faith is a huge part of belief! Some people have faith, and some people don't. Some people who don't have faith, but want to can choose to pray to God for the willingness to be willing, or for the the faith they lack, but want.
This stuff is complicated, and I'm probably not doing the topic justice, but there are a lot of people who feel in their gut that God exists, or feel strongly in their gut God doesn't exist. I think a lot of belief, or having faith is fairly simple. I think it's when people aren't entirely sure that they can choose to utilize their freewill to pray for more faith, and willingness.
I don't know why I just imagined some shady figure in a trench coat selling some blackmarket faith in Jesus pass to heaven. "Yo you followed? No? I got just what you need, my man! A friend in Jesus, right off the truck!"
And yes, I know I just pitched the next best Netflix series.
You've got it a bit backwards. Not being a Christian does not send you to hell in and of itself. Sin is what sends you to hell. Accepting Christ saves you from hell.
If a person actually accepts Christ and changes their lives to live according to his example and the biblical rules he followed... they don't go to hell.
If they just say that accept Christ and don't significantly change their behavior.. that does not save them; as they really did not accept Christ.
Sin is something we allegedly have been cursed with.. so every newborn baby, by no fault of its own, is damned to hell unless it accepts Christ.
Gross and pathetic. What kind of narcissist psycho would make those rules? "God"... Yeah right.
Yeah. Even if you discount all the scientific evidence against God existing, logic alone dictates that such a narcissistic being couldn't have obtained such a powerful position.
Three of the ten commandments are just about not forgetting how great he is. I'd say that I guess not enslaving, raping, and committing genocide couldn't quite make the top ten but then I remember he actually condones all three of these things from time to time.
I would only disagree with the part about narcissists. I think they are most likely to get into positions of power. Or maybe that's sociopaths.
Well there's some overlap quite often anyway. But sociopaths are able to obtain high positions because they're okay stepping on people and go undetected doing so. Narcissists can too but they're often a bit too obviously all about themselves and can be seen as placing their priority there instead of a company, etc.
But that's all business oriented really. When we're talking about a creator that requires a lot of science and narcissism doesn't mix there at all. Scientists have to pick each other apart and also want their own ideas picked apart. They don't care who is right. They just want the truth. The ego has to go or they get caught up in the wrong ideas. I just feel a creator would have to come from that sort of background. I feel that without the narcissism, the reasons for even doing such an experiment would also disappear if not for a lot of empathy. One would think the god would be a pretty solid being. That's just my opinion though and we have nothing to really base it on because this clearly didn't happen either way.
"Sin is something we allegedly have been cursed with.. so every newborn baby, by no fault of its own, is damned to hell unless it accepts Christ." Who told you those lies? That's not true at all.
It's got a pretty strong basis, actually.
"Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." - John 3:5
"Augustine says in his book on the Baptism of infants (De Pecc. Merit. et Remiss. i, 39) that on account of original sin little children have the aptitude of concupiscence though they have not the act. Now aptitude denotes some kind of habit. Therefore original sin is a habit." - Summa Theologiae FS Q [82] A [1] d
I'm not entirely sure how to interpret that verse, but I don't think it's an indication of "original sin".
Why should I care what Augustine said? I care about the word of God, not the word of a guy who was appointed by religious bureaucrats.
"I care about the word of God"
Who says the Bible is the word of God? The Bible?
If it was the word of God, it's strange it has so many mistakes and shortcomings.
https://www.evilbible.com/
https://skepticsannotatedbible.com/
The chapter pretty much says that those who are not baptized do not go to Heaven. What baptism does is wash people of all their sins, and allows them to go to Heaven, as long as they are sincere. However, though you claim not to care:
"Augustine says (Super Levit. lxxxiv) that "some have received the invisible sanctification without visible sacraments, and to their profit; but though it is possible to have the visible sanctification, consisting in a visible sacrament, without the invisible sanctification, it will be to no profit." Since, therefore, the sacrament of Baptism pertains to the visible sanctification, it seems that a man can obtain salvation without the sacrament of Baptism, by means of the invisible sanctification." - Summa Theologiae TP Q [68] A [2] d
To not listen to the Church Fathers is a very quick and easy way to lead oneself to heresy, apostasy, or blasphemy by creating one's own false truths on topics upon which the truths are already known.
"Christianity reinforced folklore in its insistence on rapid baptism, for the church feared that the child would die in a state of original sin. Thus on the day of birth or the next day the child underwent the baptismal and naming ceremony. If a newborn baby appeared on the verge of death, the Church empowered lay people to baptize it so that it would not die in original sin."
From 'The Ties That Bound - Peasant Families in Medieval England' p. 172
The reference that came to mind. But it is from the Fall of Man in the Bible that we get the concept of original sin. Just googling it shows this:
"Traditionally, the origin has been ascribed to the sin of the first man, Adam, who disobeyed God in eating the forbidden fruit (of knowledge of good and evil) and, in consequence, transmitted his sin and guilt by heredity to his descendants."
If you just read Genesis 3, all the things God curses Adam and Eve with, and all their descendents. Painful childbirth and obedience to Man for Eve, and for Adam:
“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”
"From 'The Ties That Bound - Peasant Families in Medieval England' p. 172" I don't care what some medieval fogey thought. They're the ones that came up with paying money to absolve people of sin, along with several other corrupt ideas. People are not guilty of a crime by default just because their ancestor committed a crime. What we inherited from Adam was a sinful nature, that is the tendency to sin, not the guilt for his crime. The curses given to Adam and Eve are not evidence for the idea of "original sin". We are not being punished for their crime, rather we are just living with the natural negative consequences of their punishment.
"My atheism was disproven"
How?
"I very much support the Bible"
So you're cool with slavery, misogyny, homophobia and Jesus saying all kinds of nasty shit, huh?
Everyone is trying different methods to keep their crowd in their religion these days because people are leaving religious believings.
Last strike of any religion that use to keep people within them is fear. If you do this you'll burn in eternity at a place no living being can prove.
"Not worth arguing with you."
Yet you are...
"I actually did not believe in this stuff until it happened."
Well, it's never happened to me, so how am I supposed to believe it?
"I did obtain proof for myself which was exposure to real life intelligent demonic activity that responded to verbal prayer."
If you don't share it, it's just a baseless assertion.
"Humans are dumb and I question why I am still replying to you."
Yeah, I question it too. Especially if you won't (can't) offer any evidence whatsoever. Hardly convincing...
"The Bible wasn't originally written in English either."
You don't say...
"Who knows what God allows and does not."
Well, it seems very strange an almighty God would actually allow his message to mankind to be corrupted.
"God isn't a dictator"
The Christian God basically says: "Obey me or be punished forever. Sounds pretty dictatorial to me...
As for prayer, check this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7PivoK2fA8
Fine. But no proof means there's no reason to believe, as the lack of proof just makes it a baseless assertion. Prayer doesn't work, which IS proven. It may help to make things a bit clearer for you, nothing more. The fact that there are several versions of the Bible implies its human origin. Surely, an almighty God wouldn't have allowed his messsage to be corrupted. I think you merely WANT to believe.
You're dead wrong, sweetheart.
https://www.openbible.info/topics/afterlife
"It's not my job to prove anything or go into detail about it."
Okay, but you can't reasonably expect people to believe you on that basis. I hope you don't.
"what happened to me isn't special."
It sure sounds that way to me.
"No, I do not condone slavery, homophobia or misogyny."
Glad to hear it!
"That's just how humans were back then unfortunately."
True, but the God of the Bible most definitely condones it. That just cannot be denied.
"I don't see in the Bible where "Jesus says nasty shit." He did not support hateful behaviors either."
Really? http://churchandstate.org.uk/2016/03/50-reasons-to-be-ashamed-and-not-a-fan-of-jesus/
"I read those verses and you seem to misinterpret that."
Very strange the Biblical God apparently couldn't be clearer.
"Why does God allow messages to be corrupted? Humans have free will."
Free will is actually disputed by a lot of prominent scientists.
"everyone can ask Jesus for the holy spirit to guide them."
I did that on several occasions, while being 100% sincire. And guess what? Nothing happend. Absolutey nothing. Is that my fault? I'd very much like to follow the truth, be forgiven for all my wrongdoings and I certainly don't wanna go to Hell. WTF should I do?
I've asked two little yes/no questions. The fact that you haven't really answered them is quite telling. That being said, here is my response:
"You haven't read the bible I'm guessing."
I've read quite a lot of it, but not all of it, no.
"Humans are stupid."
Some more so than others.
"I've had encounters with celestial beings which disproved atheism"
WTF? You may think you did, but that's just hearsay to rest of us. Any evidence perhaps?
"There is a lot of evidence to back up a lot of Biblical stories."
I fully admit that some Biblical events are indeed confirmed by archeology. However, that doesn't confirm them all, certainly not when it pertains to outlandish stories like, say, Noah's Ark. Also, it wouldn't mean the morality of the Bible is valid.
"The stuff you mentioned is based off a few old testament quotes people often use to manipulate their own agenda and they are based off things people were doing at the time, not Jesus's teachings."
No, there is also material from the New Testament, including the teachings of Jesus, present. For example, according to Mark 4:11 and Matthew 13:10-15, Jesus said that he spoke in parables to confuse people so he could send them to Hell. This quote can be easilty located.
"It shows people base their idea of Christianity off ignorant modern day religious nuts without actually studying it for themselves."
Some people probably indeed do that, yes, but I assure you that I HAVE studied it.
"I'm not going to argue religion as it is pointless."
Because there's no evidence, and so no good reason to believe, you mean?
"You can believe what you want"
I'm not sure that you even can.
"I've had enough experiences to believe a lot of the Biblical stories happened."
Good for you, but what is that to the rest of us?
"I do not believe the Earth is 6000 years old or any of that nonsense either."
Good to hear. Me neither, as the current science indicates the Earth is 4,54 billion years old.
"I've had enough experiences to believe a lot of the Biblical stories happened."
"Some people aren't very intelligent and take poorly translated historical documents and assume the English translations are literally what they originally meant. If people weren't stupid it would make more sense."
It's really weird that God would apparently allow his extremely important message to humanity to be corrupted/mistranslated. But okay, let's assume that that's indeed the case. It would then STILL be material that I have to evaluate. Moreover, I'm not stupid. English isn't even my first language, for example.
I agree with most of your comments here. A good number of modern christians don't question their so called pastors' teachings and are at the same time uninterested in reading the bible on their own, to discern with God's guidance.