If you add 'slave owner' to that I may agree, but now you're just insulting the numerous people of other religions who did not keep humans as livestock (although he probably didn't treat it EDIT: them (now I'm thinking like a slave owner too already ) like that, that doesn't make it an any less humiliating experience).
Thomas Jefferson was illumined mind. That guy was living in Heaven while he was on Earth. I have no worry about him.
And about Jeffersons slaves, I strongly doubt it was a humiliating experience. They probably were better off at his estate then free in racist society all around.
Gorakshanat has a significant point, but my statement had a "Wink" emoticon so it was kinda a joke. Not a total joke, I like Jefferson a lot, but that there were better people than him would not surprise me.
Now, he was the best non-Christian PRESIDENT ever, we can't argue that
I don't but eh, Jefferson took a lot of the stuff he didn't like out of his Bible. I admire him because of his political genius and small-government principles, not so much his faith.
Sadly, those in the early US who DID have a strong faith also had ideas regarding government that I did not agree with.
I don't but eh, Jefferson took a lot of the stuff he didn't like out of his Bible. I admire him because of his political genius and small-government principles, not so much his faith.
Sadly, those in the early US who DID have a strong faith also had ideas regarding government that I did not agree with.
It seems that by strong faith you actualy mean blind one. Jefferson had strong faith and sound reason which both in concert allowed him to see actual truth.
Which didn't prevent Jefferson from employing them as free men, which he could perfectly have done.
It's hard for me to imagine a life without any freedom at all, but perhaps it's indeed not bad if you're born into it. Noone of us has any experience of it probably.
Not really, actually. Admittedly, they do perscribe some fairly hefty enforcement of morality that would definitely scream "Theocracy" but ignoring the special religious laws for Israel as the Holy Land, the original intention was actually a theocratic anarchy, in fact, no nation has EVER practiced anarchy while surrounded by enemies successfully except ancient Israel.
They were warned against having a King, for reasons greatly resembling modern taxation. Not 100% equivalent of course, after all a "King" was an autocratic ruler, but not really unlike it either.
And in many ways their laws were more libertarian than we'd even dream today.
Of course, ancient Israel isn't exactly the shining beacon of libertarianism, but for the Holy Land, well, you'd be surprised
Well my very liberal and broad version of Christianity that I follow may make you happy.
I believe that you don't have to be a Christian to go to heaven, or even believe in God. I personally believe in God, but whether someone does or not does not necessarily have a lot to do with whether they go to heaven or not.
It depends on what you do with your life. How nice you are to others, sacrifices you make for others, not hurting others intentionally, things of that sort.
Not really, actually. Admittedly, they do perscribe some fairly hefty enforcement of morality that would definitely scream "Theocracy" but ignoring the special religious laws for Israel as the Holy Land, the original intention was actually a theocratic anarchy, in fact, no nation has EVER practiced anarchy while surrounded by enemies successfully except ancient Israel.
They were warned against having a King, for reasons greatly resembling modern taxation. Not 100% equivalent of course, after all a "King" was an autocratic ruler, but not really unlike it either.
And in many ways their laws were more libertarian than we'd even dream today.
Of course, ancient Israel isn't exactly the shining beacon of libertarianism, but for the Holy Land, well, you'd be surprised
You really need to read your Bible more carefully. They had a very complex tax system that was even progressive. Plus mandated theft of property by the oor and illegal aliens. Theocracy combined with a bunch of liberal policies.
No, not at all. Not a pre-defined 'point', anyway. Once someone's alive, then there's an instinct to remain alive that stands on its own - I suspect we then rationalize our continued existence in order to justify it. I see no intrinsic need to reproduce, despite the fact that we all are evolved to want (at least a bit) to breed, and this evolved urge will be even more selected for, now that rutting has been decoupled from breeding.
As you know, I'm an immortalist, and so I am often exposed to immortalist philosophies. And, on the 'point of life', I've only ever seen shallow statements. "I want to live, because I want to see what's next!" is basically the most common statement. Humans like puzzles, intellectual challenges, struggles followed by success, etc. This is why videogames are so popular, they trigger basic "struggle then success" pathways in our brains.
Now, this also seems to be an evolved response. There's no reason why a mind would have to be designed to enjoy short-term struggles, we like it because we bred it into ourselves. It's hard to imagine an eternity without some type of constant struggle, and I think this is where you're worried about boredom (despite the bliss).
Keep in mind, there're theoretically an infinite number of mathematical puzzles to solve (if you're less than perfectly intelligent), and math is basically a complex form of sudoku. As well, I'm currently re-reading a book I bought over a decade ago, because I remember enjoying it but don't really remember the story. In another 20 years, I might read it again.
No, not at all. Not a pre-defined 'point', anyway. Once someone's alive, then there's an instinct to remain alive that stands on its own - I suspect we then rationalize our continued existence in order to justify it. I see no intrinsic need to reproduce, despite the fact that we all are evolved to want (at least a bit) to breed, and this evolved urge will be even more selected for, now that rutting has been decoupled from breeding.
As you know, I'm an immortalist, and so I am often exposed to immortalist philosophies. And, on the 'point of life', I've only ever seen shallow statements. "I want to live, because I want to see what's next!" is basically the most common statement. Humans like puzzles, intellectual challenges, struggles followed by success, etc. This is why videogames are so popular, they trigger basic "struggle then success" pathways in our brains.
Oh, I like the principle of "one more turn" applied to real life. Sounds true to me.
Now, this also seems to be an evolved response. There's no reason why a mind would have to be designed to enjoy short-term struggles, we like it because we bred it into ourselves. It's hard to imagine an eternity without some type of constant struggle, and I think this is where you're worried about boredom (despite the bliss).
While I never specifically defined it as such in my mind, I think you're right there as well.
Plus, if there are no reference points on what non-bliss is, would we, given enough time, perceive bliss in an all-blissful environment as bliss? I don't think so.
Now the weird situation may develop that it needs periods of less than bliss, or more sadistically referencing to others who experience less than bliss, in order to be able to accurately appoint the term bliss to yourself at a given time.
This does not get any easier does it? ( Which is fine. Scratching your head about ignorance is bliss! )
Keep in mind, there're theoretically an infinite number of mathematical puzzles to solve (if you're less than perfectly intelligent), and math is basically a complex form of sudoku. As well, I'm currently re-reading a book I bought over a decade ago, because I remember enjoying it but don't really remember the story. In another 20 years, I might read it again.
When the bible says "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" it does not merely mean "assent to the claims made about Jesus." The meaning in the original Greek is more like "entrust yourself to the the Lord Jesus Christ." Entrusting himself to him would involve actually following his teachings.
First and foremost among his teachings are the commandments to love God and to Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind and Love your neighbor as yourself.
Note that the term for love does not refer to some empty emotion. It is an act of the will, which impels a man to a act for the good of the beloved. Also note that the bible is clear that it is impossible for anyone to love God if he does not love his brother.
Christ also seems to say rather clearly that you must forgive others in order for God to give you. Forgiveness of course can be considered an important part of love.
Yes, that's why I cited Theologians instead of sheer numbers.
Theodicy is usually considered a seperate matter from Salvation. But since you're concerned with it, how do you square it with God's Omnibenevolence?
Yes, but as I pointed out, this contradicts theodicy, which you can't do without ignoring many key passages in the bible.
I'm not asking you to softball anything. I'm asking you to step up to the plate here. You seem to think Calvinism is the one true understanding of the bible, and I say it's the work of a Scottish nutjob, followed by an obscure Church, that represented no Christian thought for over a millenia, is totally incompatible with theology, the bible, or reason.
In fact, I'm asking you to defend your entire idea of hell, because I don't see any evidence for it in the bible.
There are 13 references to Hell in the bible.
Spoiler:
Matthew 5:22
Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
22 but I say unto you, that every one who is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council; and whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of the hell of fire.
23 If therefore thou art offering thy gift at the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee,
So a vague reference to a "hell of fire" that we're in danger of. I've seen similar warnings on propane tanks.
Spoiler:
Matthew 5:29
And if thy right eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body be cast into hell.
And if thy right hand causeth thee to stumble, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body go into hell.
This ones problematic for the traditional view, because here we have two reference that the whole body goes to hell. No reference to a soul or intellect there, but to literally your body going to hell. Remember, if this hell is supposed to reference the afterlife, this basically means "if you sin, your body will be cremated".
Spoiler:
Matthew 10:28
And be not afraid of them that kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
If this is a reference to God, it says he is able, but nothing about willing. Note here how now we're discussing the body and soul, so the last passages weren't unconscious omissions.
Spoiler:
And if thine eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is good for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into the hell of fire.
Again, a reference to body parts ending up in a fire.
Spoiler:
Matthew 23:15
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he is become so, ye make him twofold more a son of hell than yourselves.
Okay, so you can be a Son of Hell, and that means something, but still nothing about going to hell when you die.
Spoiler:
Matthew 23:33
Ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers, how shall ye escape the judgment of hell?
Hell apparently judges you, still nothing about what that entails, who enforces it, and if it's enforced.
Spoiler:
Mark 9:43
And if thy hand cause thee to stumble, cut it off: it is good for thee to enter into life maimed, rather than having thy two hands to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire.
And if thy foot cause thee to stumble, cut it off: it is good for thee to enter into life halt, rather than having thy two feet to be cast into hell.
And if thine eye cause thee to stumble, cast it out: it is good for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell;
Again, body parts go to hell. Soul? Not so much.
Spoiler:
Luke 12:5
But I will warn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, who after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.
Again, able, but not willing. First reference to hell being something after death, though no references to this actually happening, happening for an eternity, or anything like that.
Spoiler:
James 3:6
And the tongue is a fire: the world of iniquity among our members is the tongue, which defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the wheel of nature, and is set on fire by hell.
So your tongue is alright alight with the fire of Hell. I gotta say, my tongue doesn't feel too bad. Gotta brush it, it's kind a gunky, but I wouldn't classify this as torture.
Spoiler:
2 Peter 2:3-5
American Standard Version (ASV)
3 And in covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose sentence now from of old lingereth not, and their destruction slumbereth not.
4 For if God spared not angels when they sinned, but cast them down to hell, and committed them to pits of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
5 and spared not the ancient world, but preserved Noah with seven others, a preacher of righteousness, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;
6 and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, having made them an example unto those that should live ungodly;
7 and delivered righteous Lot, sore distressed by the lascivious life of the wicked
8 (for that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their lawless deeds):
9 the Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment unto the day of judgment;
So we know Angels are in Hell, or at least a hell because this doesn't seem to be the "Hell of Fire" because it's dark. Now, it doesn't say anything about torture, or anything like that for the angels, just that they're in hell, and it's dark. There's no references to humans going there after the die anymore then there's references to them being underwater after they die, or that you'll turn to ash.
Note also that the Angels do not seem to be there forever, as they're there to "Reserve unto judgement." If Hell is a punishment, then why are they held there until they're being judged, until their punished?
And that is it. That is literally every reference to Hell in the bible. So I want to see how you reconstruct the usual psuedo-pornographic view of hell out of these disjointed references to something, with absolutely no mention of an afterlife.
The Revelation references do make much more clear the eternal nature of Hell, although I know some people reject those, or at least, its clear that suffering is for 1,000+ years.
When the bible says "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" it does not merely mean "assent to the claims made about Jesus." The meaning in the original Greek is more like "entrust yourself to the the Lord Jesus Christ." Entrusting himself to him would involve actually following his teachings.
Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. He came to Jesus at night and said, Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.
Jesus replied, Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.
(John 3:1-3)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
) like that, that doesn't make it an any less humiliating experience).
.
) 
