Religion and Hell

[candle]

Then why is there sin...

According to your logic thar, God does not exist, particularly if you throw in the fact that "God is everywhere"

for god hates sin, and sinner. He destroyed the sinner actully more times than once. He allowed sin to enter because he wanted people to choose to worship him, though the crime for not is eternal pain and torment

 

[cardgame]

god is omnipresent he sees all outcomes

So he knew he would make imperfect humans and still kicked them out?
I have a quote that fits this perfectly:

Strange...a God who could make good children as easily as bad, yet preferred to make bad ones; who made them prize their bitter life, yet stingily cut it short; mouths Golden Rules and forgiveness multiplied seventy times seven and invented Hell; who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, then tries to shuffle the responsibility for man's acts upon man, instead of honorably placing it where it belongs, upon himself; and finally with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him! ~Mark Twain

the crime for not [worshipping God] is eternal pain and torment

Some choice.

 

[Loki130]

god is omnipresent he sees all outcomes

so you agree with me? god wanted to throw adam and eve out the garden and wants to send all (according to you) none-penta-whatever you are to hell for eternal suffering?
edit-crosspost, but with hell added

 

[Flying Pig]

for god hates sin, and sinner. He destroyed the sinner actully more times than once. He allowed sin to enter because he wanted people to choose to worship him, though the crime for not is eternal pain and torment

I thought the whole thing was to love the sinner? Remember that woman in the NT called Mary Magdelene?

Anyway, I was once told that God allows sin for this reason:

We define justice as the fair dealing of good people with evil. Now, without evil there could therefore be no justice, and it is better to have a world with some evil than it is to have a world with no justice

 

[Erik Mesoy]

I think the solution to this application of the Trilemma is that John is the best source for saying that "Jesus IS God", and John is not a reputable text. The fourth option, then, is that the author believed fanciful tales.

I finally got around to leafing through Mark on this.

Chapter 2:

5 When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven you.”
6 And some of the scribes were sitting there and reasoning in their hearts, 7 “Why does this Man speak blasphemies like this? Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

3:

11 And the unclean spirits, whenever they saw Him, fell down before Him and cried out, saying, “You are the Son of God.”

5:

6 When he saw Jesus from afar, he ran and worshiped Him. 7 And he cried out with a loud voice and said, “What have I to do with You, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I implore You by God that You do not torment me.”

8:

34 When He had called the people to Himself, with His disciples also, He said to them, “Whoever desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me. 35 For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel’s will save it. 36 For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? 37 Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul? 38 For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.”

9:

2 Now after six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John, and led them up on a high mountain apart by themselves; and He was transfigured before them. 3 His clothes became shining, exceedingly white, like snow, such as no launderer on earth can whiten them. 4 And Elijah appeared to them with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus. 5 Then Peter answered and said to Jesus, “Rabbi, it is good for us to be here; and let us make three tabernacles: one for You, one for Moses, and one for Elijah”— 6 because he did not know what to say, for they were greatly afraid.
7 And a cloud came and overshadowed them; and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is My beloved Son. Hear Him!”

10:

17 Now as He was going out on the road, one came running, knelt before Him, and asked Him, “Good Teacher, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?”
18 So Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. 19 You know the commandments: ‘Do not commit adultery,’ ‘Do not murder,’ ‘Do not steal,’ ‘Do not bear false witness,’ ‘Do not defraud,’ ‘Honor your father and your mother.’”[c]
20 And he answered and said to Him, “Teacher, all these things I have kept from my youth.”
21 Then Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, “One thing you lack: Go your way, sell whatever you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, take up the cross, and follow Me.”

14:

60 And the high priest stood up in the midst and asked Jesus, saying, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” 61 But He kept silent and answered nothing.
Again the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?”
62 Jesus said, “I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”

There are some more minor references, mostly to "the Son of Man" in various forms. (8:38 and 14:62 above if you want to argue that this is a common epithet.)

 

[classical_hero]

I think the solution to this application of the Trilemma is that John is the best source for saying that "Jesus IS God", and John is not a reputable text. The fourth option, then, is that the author believed fanciful tales.

Actually it shows that it is quite genuine since it is so different from the other four Gospels, since each are witness accounts and the fact that we have one account that is so different, showing that they did not collude to tell lies. Also John is the witness account that gives more detail on time and places than all the other Gospels combined, so he went into the detail to show that he knew what he was talking about.

 

[Flying Pig]

Err... From my time in the police force, I can reliably tell you that when there are four witnesses, three of which agree and one of which is spouting an incredibly complex web of randomness, you generally go with the three

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Three of them are researched accounts, probably relying on the same sources. The fourth is a memoir written by an elderly man describing events that happened when he was a teenager. It isn't so much like having 3 out of 4 witnesses agree and the fourth differ, but it is having 3 police reports written by different officers after interrogating the same witnesses disagree with testimony of another witness who came forth with his account many rears later. The memory of the last witness may not be perfect, but it can still shed some important light on things the initial reports left out.

 

[Flying Pig]

Matthew, Mark and Luke were all apostles, so they are writing from their own experience too

 

[Fr8monkey]

That is the problem with multiple witmesses. Lets assume you come across an empty tomb and there are 4 witnesses. You interview them and get the following:

1. A young man (Mark 16:5)
2. It was no man, it was an angel (Matthew 28:2-5)
3. It was two men (Luke 24:4)
4. There was nobody there (John 20:1-2)

Who is right? Acording to the Bible... they all are.

 

[Flying Pig]

Short-sighted doctrine strikes again!