Dont Tell Me What To Believe....

[AJ]

Because Jesus took all the punishment for all our sins upon Himself. Jesus sacrificed His own blood to pay our sin debt.

so then we dont have to worry about hell.

so why is there a hell?

 

[Reba]

so then we dont have to worry about hell.

so why is there a hell?

Jesus made the sacrifice but each person has to individually accept Jesus as Savior. Jesus doesn't force anyone to accept Him. He puts out His open nail-printed hand to the sinner, to save him. It is the decision of the sinner whether or not to grab hold of His hand, or to ignore it. If the sinner doesn't grab hold, then he will not be snatched from Hell's fire.

How does a sinner "grab hold"? A sinner must confess his sin. That means, to agree with God that he is a sinner. Second, the sinner must repent. That means to feel sorry about those sins, and to agree with God to turn away from the direction of sin. Then, the sinner must believe, in mind and heart, that the blood that Jesus sacrificed can forgive all sins because Jesus is 100 percent perfect God. Then, just pray to Jesus, "save me." He will.

It is really not complicated.

Hell was originally made for Satan and his fallen angels. God doesn't want people to go to Hell. That is why God provided His Son to save us from Hell.

But God cannot allow sin into His heavenly presence. God is holy. Heaven is a holy place. If sin entered and contaminated Heaven, it wouldn't be Heaven. That is why God had to create a place for unholiness to stay.

God doesn't "send" people to Hell. Each person decides his own destination.

 

[AJ]

well im not a sinner, so im never going to repent for anything ive done. i guess im going to hell. ill be sure to get satans autograph for u

 

[Reba]

well im not a sinner, so im never going to repent for anything ive done. i guess im going to hell.

I'm curious. Why do you think that you are not a sinner?

 

[VamPyroX]

AJ,

Well, if Hell and Satan don't exist, then how come there's always a war ? Why hate is still around ? How about killin' ? It wasn't God's way of makin' people to do it. It wasn't God's Idea to create somethin' like this for other people to learn. He never taught them to do that. God is always good ! I don't think it is a good idea to start arguin' or fightin' over this silly issue since you still have your own choices. No body could take that choices from you. You have your own life you can chose what ever you want and that is your decision to make for yourself. Why makin' things soo hard on yourself, hmm ?

Who says that it's Satan's fault that we have war?

For all we know, it's probably God's fault. He was the one who told us to kill another for stealing.

 

[AJ]

I'm curious. Why do you think that you are not a sinner?

because my beliefs there are no sins. yes there are things that are morally wrong, and should not be done. like murders and theft. u shouldn't do those things. but they arent sins. there are no such things as sins. its just something that was made up so people behave.

so there are no sins. im not a sinner and believe it or not, neither are u

this is what my religion believes....

Jesus was sent to earth to teach the word of god. not to die for our sins. yes he KNEW he was going to die for teaching the word of god.

 

[Rose Immortal]

logically....you would not throw ur child into a fire place and let them burn if they've done something wrong and didn't say sorry.

so why would god?

That is why (as best as I can understand it) God's love drove Him to provide a sacrifice in our place--because He loved us too much to want that to happen. It is my personal belief that if one does wish to be saved, a way will be provided. I think however many people we see in Heaven, it will be the maximum number that could've possibly been saved. I can't say anything as to what kind of proportion that would be, but my PERSONAL inclination is--bigger than some might suspect.

RedFox--a friend of mine once explained the term "meme" to me, and my understanding is that by using it you're comparing Christianity to a virus. Correct me if I'm wrong, of course.

Anyway, I'd like to propose a question to you. You seem to speak of guilt as though it had no useful purpose to the individual whatsoever (I restrict this to the individual to prevent digressions into "usefulness for religious leaders"), as well as the idea of having a moral code, or having leaders. Tell me, then, what would the end-state of a society be in which there was essentially no moral code whatsoever, and people basically did whatever they pleased to further their own self-interest with no regard for others? In a nutshell, I'm speaking of total and complete anarchy--absence of any social order or rules. My guess at this answer is, if you think our world as it is is a chaotic, falling-apart place, it would be WAY worse under the scenario I just outlined.

So, while guilt in its proper proportion is uncomfortable, I suggest caution in defining it as a negative or suggesting it has no use.

Related to that...about the "silly little things", as you call them, I do not think Christians are expected to torture themselves--in fact, that is considered an unhealthy, twisted interpretation as far as I understand it. Rather, at the same time as one seeks forgiveness from God, one ought to also seek His help in forgiving oneself. That does not mean absolving oneself from making a genuine effort to do better. But it does mean avoiding the trap of becoming so caught up in self-flagellation (historical reference intended) that one does further harm.

 

[Rose Immortal]

Who says that it's Satan's fault that we have war?

For all we know, it's probably God's fault. He was the one who told us to kill another for stealing.

I'm going to propose something that might sound a little strange to you, but bear with me here.

Especially in an ancient, nomadic society where there were no prisons (you'd have had limited ability to do so), I'm not sure what other reasonable alternative God could have proposed besides the death penalty. Someone who steals, who murders, and so on, is a threat, and even more so under those sorts of circumstances where resources are very scarce and the environment is very harsh.

So we have the execution of a thief or a murderer. That is the death of the physical body--but who's to say that God doesn't know something about that person's eternal soul that we do not, something that causes Him to forgive that person and grant him or her eternal life? That can be an uncomfortable thought for some Christians (and not always comfortable to me, I'll admit it, I'm not perfect!), but I think it makes sense.

Now, we've gotten away from execution for some crimes as society has changed. But, as far as I can tell, that's some possible reasoning behind that kind of commandment.

 

[RedFox]

RedFox--a friend of mine once explained the term "meme" to me, and my understanding is that by using it you're comparing Christianity to a virus. Correct me if I'm wrong, of course.

Yeah, an analogy could be made between memes and genes. Some memes could be said to spread like viruses. The Christian meme complex, or memeplex, is around now because it includes memes that promotes its spread to new hosts and retention of them. It's as if the collection of ideas had a life of its own.

Anyway, I'd like to propose a question to you. You seem to speak of guilt as though it had no useful purpose to the individual whatsoever (I restrict this to the individual to prevent digressions into "usefulness for religious leaders"), as well as the idea of having a moral code, or having leaders. Tell me, then, what would the end-state of a society be in which there was essentially no moral code whatsoever, and people basically did whatever they pleased to further their own self-interest with no regard for others? In a nutshell, I'm speaking of total and complete anarchy--absence of any social order or rules. My guess at this answer is, if you think our world as it is is a chaotic, falling-apart place, it would be WAY worse under the scenario I just outlined.

So, while guilt in its proper proportion is uncomfortable, I suggest caution in defining it as a negative or suggesting it has no use.

Guilt can be good when it prevents people from doing bad things or repeat them. What I was trying to say was that the Christian memes lay out a moral code in such a way that it makes everybody guilty of something and establishs a threatening future for all of those people unless they became hosts of the Jesus acceptence meme. It could cause excessive guilt for things that do not warrent such amounts of guilt and push people over the edge through catharsis and into becoming hosts of the Christian meme complex.

Related to that...about the "silly little things", as you call them, I do not think Christians are expected to torture themselves--in fact, that is considered an unhealthy, twisted interpretation as far as I understand it. Rather, at the same time as one seeks forgiveness from God, one ought to also seek His help in forgiving oneself. That does not mean absolving oneself from making a genuine effort to do better. But it does mean avoiding the trap of becoming so caught up in self-flagellation (historical reference intended) that one does further harm.

I was thinking of people on the edge of becoming believers with the guilt trip being an one time thing that pushes them into becoming believers. It's good that Christians are not expected to continue the guilt trips as far as health is concerned. The meme complex is already in them and had already provided its solution to the guilt trips provoked by how its moral code labels everybody except Jesus as hellbound sinners. They have undergone catharsis, so if they mess up, the memes about forgiveness are already available to prevent such guilt trips, something that is not available to people on the edge of becoming believers, unless they go through with becoming believers.

 

[Rose Immortal]

Yeah, an analogy could be made between memes and genes. Some memes could be said to spread like viruses. The Christian meme complex, or memeplex, is around now because it includes memes that promotes its spread to new hosts and retention of them. It's as if the collection of ideas had a life of its own.

Phrased as "a life of its own", you probably wouldn't get much argument from believers. But the virus comparison can be a bit touchy.

Guilt can be good when it prevents people from doing bad things or repeat them. What I was trying to say was that the Christian memes lay out a moral code in such a way that it makes everybody guilty of something and establishs a threatening future for all of those people unless they became hosts of the Jesus acceptence meme. It could cause excessive guilt for things that do not warrent such amounts of guilt and push people over the edge through catharsis and into becoming hosts of the Christian meme complex.

Um...how do you know everybody isn't guilty of something? Even looking at my own life, I know better than to say I'm not. As for a threatening future, it makes sense once one has established that there is indeed absolute moral law to determine right and wrong, written into the nature of the universe. Like the physical laws, every action engenders a reaction. As to what in particular causes a person to become a Christian, it almost seems like you're trying to set up a threshold of what's "bad enough" to make it OK for one to feel pushed into Christianity--I mean, let's say only murder was bad enough. Would you say that only those who have murdered should feel sufficiently guilty? As for guilt over other things that are smaller, I'd just repeat my point that it's not supposed to be a permanent, soul-drowning state.

I was thinking of people on the edge of becoming believers with the guilt trip being an one time thing that pushes them into becoming believers. It's good that Christians are not expected to continue the guilt trips as far as health is concerned. The meme complex is already in them and had already provided its solution to the guilt trips provoked by how its moral code labels everybody except Jesus as hellbound sinners. They have undergone catharsis, so if they mess up, the memes about forgiveness are already available to prevent such guilt trips, something that is not available to people on the edge of becoming believers, unless they go through with becoming believers.

I wanted to clarify one thing--those who have become believers are still supposed to remain vigilant in their actions. I mean, being Christian does not give one a free ticket to treat others poorly, to be hateful, and so on. There are two differences, though, that I tend to see: greater awareness of how these things are against God's will, and the wish to seek forgiveness. Obviously there'd be a temporary spur of guilt after the thing is done, but one thing we're encouraged to do once we seek forgiveness (as I said before) is to also learn to forgive ourselves. I don't think a life without guilt at all would be good or healthy. What I'm talking about is moderation--to have it around when it's necessary (just like fear--I don't think a life without any fear AT ALL would be good), but not to become paralyzed by it.

 

[Yiffzer]

ok looking around, a lot of people are just putting Religous posts in everything, and trying to get people to believe what they believe. and also saying that we dont believe in god, or that we lost faith.

dont talk to me about god. dont try to push on me what u believe. at the end of the day, my relationship with god is between me and him. i dont care what u want to believe, if ur an atheist, a buddhist, a jew, a monk...i dont care what ur religion is. i accept all religions, i welcome them. i myself, im a Gnostic Christian. i believe in God and jesus, i just dont believe in Hell or Satan. and thats what i believe. if u dont want to believe in God, thats cool. you do what u feel comfortable with. cuz u know what? god doesn't care. he's not stupid, he understands what is going on.

just do you, and ill do me.

There's two infactual errors in this post, AJ. Let me say that I would like to call myself an "Islamic Scholar" but unfortunately I only teach myself without the proper education. However, with close teachings from my own scholars and Imams, I have been able to gain understanding over a lot of topics. Just to be clear, the main concept of religion is very similar between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, although with a lot of slight differences in terms of rules.

I respect your stance and you are absolutely right.

However, you should not say you don't believe in a Hell or a Satan. This is very similar to what many people in New Orleans said in a poll: 27% of the Christian people there said there was a Hell and a Satan. Where is the rest? If you are religious, you must believe in a Hell and a Satan. Not follow them but you must acknowledge that they exist. For faithful people around the world, it's a life of struggle to fight evil desires and to please God. Saying Hell and Satan doesn't exist just makes you prone to ignorance. If this is anything of an attempt to justify for your own mistaken behavior previously, I would suggest you to start accepting the fact that you have only yourself to blame. There is a God and there is a Satan - you must know that.

Also, you should not ever speak for God. You should not say that God does not care. In a small verse in the Bible, you will see that God has actual feelings - beyond a normal human being. He defines the feelings after all. God actually cares about whether people follow Him or not. This is why He believes there is vengeful punishment for those that ignore Him. So if anything, God does get hurt. He cares. This is why we call God, the loving, the merciful, the caring...

Take care.

-J.

 

[Yiffzer]

so yeah Cheri we do all go back home when we die.

I'm not very sure of what religion you follow and/or if you picked out your "favorite parts" of one of the Holy Books. But to say this is simply wrong. Of course, depending which religion you see this topic from, it may go one way or another. However, the bottom line is that you do not go back "home" just because. While some (admittedly, I would say very few) people will enter heaven, there will be many ignorant people who have been full of sin throughout their lives. God knows when the religious faith have been presented to them throughout their life. Speaking of scripts (which I think is a very fantastic idea), God has everything they did on the scripts. God tries with intention to inform the "infidels" of God with some random events and/or situations. But everytime they know but ignore it, it is placed on the script. By the time they die - God judges them by how they lived their entire life based on the script. With reviewing, God can either do one of the three things - accept you into heaven, provide you another chance, or simply send you to hell. God is sweet, but there are times when he has to "toughen up".

It sounds to me by saying, "We all go home", is an obvious expectation from you because you said you did not believe in an Adam and Eve. This is where your interpretations [might] become flawed and become mistakened about a lot of things. In other words, you're being a little too easy on yourself. Don't be led into believing that your own belief is nice and charming...

-J.

 

[Yiffzer]

yeah there are lots of books there's actually a Gnostic Bible i found at the library. that thing is real thick. thicker than a Christian bible. but not any easier to read. and also if u know Sylvia Browne...u know that physcic lady who predicts the future. she is a Gnostic and she writes about all this stuff in her books. she even has a Gnostic church in california that i would like to go to one day maybe.

but yeah to go the library and look up Sylvia Browne. she has like i think 30 or more books she has written. and almost all of them have been on New Yorks Best Sellers List.

The only problem with this is that how is this God's Word? I don't know of any Gnostic Bibles but it sounds interesting. Regardless, how is it God's Word? Anything that does not follow what Jesus/God claims is simply not God's Word. If the Gnostic Bible tries to do anything otherwise, it's easily dismissed. A lot of things in the Bible are moderate as well. The Gnostic Bible sounds completely lopsided to the point where everything is positive rather than moderate. How is this good teaching if it maintains to be positive the whole time? After all, many people are drawn to things that are easiest and/or unpainful.

Of course, that depends if you want to be easy on yourself.

Best Sellers List doesn't mean anything - it can be factual or not.

Take care.

-J.

 

[RedFox]

Phrased as "a life of its own", you probably wouldn't get much argument from believers. But the virus comparison can be a bit touchy.

Um...how do you know everybody isn't guilty of something? Even looking at my own life, I know better than to say I'm not. As for a threatening future, it makes sense once one has established that there is indeed absolute moral law to determine right and wrong, written into the nature of the universe. Like the physical laws, every action engenders a reaction. As to what in particular causes a person to become a Christian, it almost seems like you're trying to set up a threshold of what's "bad enough" to make it OK for one to feel pushed into Christianity--I mean, let's say only murder was bad enough. Would you say that only those who have murdered should feel sufficiently guilty? As for guilt over other things that are smaller, I'd just repeat my point that it's not supposed to be a permanent, soul-drowning state.

I wasn't trying to set up a threshold. I was saying that since the Christian moral code is set up so that everybody had violated some part of it, no matter how unimportant those supposed violations are to the world at large, those would be blown out of proporation because the Christian moral code assigns torture to hell to all such violations. It would be like giving the death penalty for parking violations.

If somebody came to believe in such a moral code and that they would go to hell for such things, they'd be pressed to accept Jesus and become hosts of the Christian memeplex to avoid excessive amounts of guilt. The soul drowning state is avoided by accepting Jesus. In this way, the Christian memeplex's moral code aids in drawing in new hosts.

I wanted to clarify one thing--those who have become believers are still supposed to remain vigilant in their actions. I mean, being Christian does not give one a free ticket to treat others poorly, to be hateful, and so on. There are two differences, though, that I tend to see: greater awareness of how these things are against God's will, and the wish to seek forgiveness. Obviously there'd be a temporary spur of guilt after the thing is done, but one thing we're encouraged to do once we seek forgiveness (as I said before) is to also learn to forgive ourselves. I don't think a life without guilt at all would be good or healthy. What I'm talking about is moderation--to have it around when it's necessary (just like fear--I don't think a life without any fear AT ALL would be good), but not to become paralyzed by it.

Those memes about forgiveness serve to keep Christians from feeling excessive guilt and keep them feeling happy about being Christians. They'd see that it works at making things better with forgiveness, so they'd think that being Christians is a good thing.

 

[AJ]

see, Yiffzer u can only tell me about ur religion. u need to read up about my religion. you can tell me there is a satan until u die but im not going to believe you. why do u have to believe in satan? why do i have to believe in hell? why do i have to believe in demons and all things hateful? why cant i focus all my attention on god, instead of worrying about going to hell? im not living my life in fear everyday that i might go to hell. im here to learn life lessons, im too busy to worry about some dude in red pajamas. Demons only exist for the people who believe in them and give them power. and i dont give demons power, so they dont bother me, and i dont have to worry about them. but u believe in them, so u give them power over u.

 

[RedFox]

see, Yiffzer u can only tell me about ur religion. u need to read up about my religion. you can tell me there is a satan until u die but im not going to believe you. why do u have to believe in satan? why do i have to believe in hell? why do i have to believe in demons and all things hateful? why cant i focus all my attention on god, instead of worrying about going to hell? im not living my life in fear everyday that i might go to hell. im here to learn life lessons, im too busy to worry about some dude in red pajamas. Demons only exist for the people who believe in them and give them power. and i dont give demons power, so they dont bother me, and i dont have to worry about them. but u believe in them, so u give them power over u.

I used to believe in demons and they'd bother me when I was in bed. When I did not believe in them anymore, they went byebye.

 

[AJ]

I used to believe in demons and they'd bother me when I was in bed. When I did not believe in them anymore, they went byebye.

thats what my religon calls a Tulpa. something that people believe in so much, that it becomes real. people believe in demons so much that they become real, but they only haunt the people that believe in them. Satan is a tulpa also. and so is big foot. people believe in big foot so much that he became real in their minds. i highly suggest Sylva Brownes book Secrets and Mysteries. i dont care if u hate Sylvia or if u think she's the devil, she does not talk about religion at all in this book. she talks about Werewolfs and vampires, and banshees and big foot and the loch ness monster. its interesting, its just a mystery book.

 

[Yiffzer]

see, Yiffzer u can only tell me about ur religion. u need to read up about my religion. you can tell me there is a satan until u die but im not going to believe you. why do u have to believe in satan? why do i have to believe in hell? why do i have to believe in demons and all things hateful? why cant i focus all my attention on god, instead of worrying about going to hell? im not living my life in fear everyday that i might go to hell. im here to learn life lessons, im too busy to worry about some dude in red pajamas. Demons only exist for the people who believe in them and give them power. and i dont give demons power, so they dont bother me, and i dont have to worry about them. but u believe in them, so u give them power over u.

Thank you for the answer. I should note that I have no religion. I may sound like I support or follow a particular religion but I don't. I am quite very philosophical and I take all perspectives to account (example of that: http://www.alldeaf.com/showpost.php?p=451817&postcount=10). I have to say that I enjoy your post because it provides me a new perspective of thinking of all things positive.

However, you jump to conclusions on what my position is. Please do not ever assume anything from a single post; the same goes for everybody else. I did not speak from one religion, I spoke from all of the modern day religion's perspective. This includes Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Mormonic, etc. They all share very similar established stories and points that what I post is simply a reflection of all those.

The truth is, I've never heard of the Gnostic Bible. I did ask you of it was whether of God's words or the Human's words. To see that God did not acknowledge the existence of Satan is simply unrealistic and is rather a fabrication - the work of human beings. I say this because you and I know that God dislikes those that follow the wrong source. However, your perspective rings in true because you can ignore the belief of Satan but you have to acknowledge that there is one. Based on many things you see (such as corruption) have all been influenced by Satan (due to contrary belief) and you need to acknowledge that.

I never spoke of believing in one, fearing of one, worrying of one, or even anything related to Satan. That's your own problem to deal with. Do not assume that I believe in Satan either because as I told you, I do not have a religion. I am only a near-scholar in which I study religions in its entirety. Do not put words in people's mouth. I am neutral and I am neither supporting you or protesting against you; I am simply informing you.

-J.

 

[AJ]

Thank you for the answer. I should note that I have no religion. I may sound like I support or follow a particular religion but I don't. I am quite very philosophical and I take all perspectives to account (example of that: http://www.alldeaf.com/showpost.php?p=451817&postcount=10). I have to say that I enjoy your post because it provides me a new perspective of thinking of all things positive.

However, you jump to conclusions on what my position is. Please do not ever assume anything from a single post; the same goes for everybody else. I did not speak from one religion, I spoke from all of the modern day religion's perspective. This includes Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Mormonic, etc. They all share very similar established stories and points that what I post is simply a reflection of all those.

The truth is, I've never heard of the Gnostic Bible. I did ask you of it was whether of God's words or the Human's words. To see that God did not acknowledge the existence of Satan is simply unrealistic and is rather a fabrication - the work of human beings. I say this because you and I know that God dislikes those that follow the wrong source. However, your perspective rings in true because you can ignore the belief of Satan but you have to acknowledge that there is one. Based on many things you see (such as corruption) have all been influenced by Satan (due to contrary belief) and you need to acknowledge that.

I never spoke of believing in one, fearing of one, worrying of one, or even anything related to Satan. That's your own problem to deal with. Do not assume that I believe in Satan either because as I told you, I do not have a religion. I am only a near-scholar in which I study religions in its entirety. Do not put words in people's mouth. I am neutral and I am neither supporting you or protesting against you; I am simply informing you.

-J.

i cant argue this back and forth anymore. ive said all i can say, and im just going in circles.

i dont believe in satan
i dont believe in demons
i dont believe in hell
i believe in god
i follow and love jesus

and thats that. thats the end. no one can convince me other wise. as strong as u guys are in ur beliefs, is exactly how strong i am in my beliefs. there's no swaying me.

 

[Rose Immortal]

I wasn't trying to set up a threshold. I was saying that since the Christian moral code is set up so that everybody had violated some part of it, no matter how unimportant those supposed violations are to the world at large, those would be blown out of proporation because the Christian moral code assigns torture to hell to all such violations. It would be like giving the death penalty for parking violations.

If somebody came to believe in such a moral code and that they would go to hell for such things, they'd be pressed to accept Jesus and become hosts of the Christian memeplex to avoid excessive amounts of guilt. The soul drowning state is avoided by accepting Jesus. In this way, the Christian memeplex's moral code aids in drawing in new hosts.

Stating it differently, you could say that there is essentially only one sin--treason against God. The form it takes then becomes irrelevant, which I suspect is one reason for such a mundane action (biting into a fruit) being the illustration for the original sin. It might not seem like much on the surface, but it was the defiance of God's will that was the big issue, not the physical action of biting into the fruit.

Of course, the way you're phrasing all of this seems to presuppose that accepting Christianity is ultimately a negative thing, a malicious entrapment of sorts. But if one can successfully establish the premises (and I would argue the scientific standard is not appropriate), and only one conclusion logically follows from the premises once established, then isn't that just the mark of a good, solid argument?

Those memes about forgiveness serve to keep Christians from feeling excessive guilt and keep them feeling happy about being Christians. They'd see that it works at making things better with forgiveness, so they'd think that being Christians is a good thing.

If it works, why not follow it? Again I see the presupposition that something negative is going on...and I think some distort the premises to where something negative can happen, but then the faulty interpretations are at fault, not the original premises as they were supposed to be.