Who gets into the afterlife?

Who makes it into the afterlife/heaven/vahala/etc.?

  • Only saints (believers without sin) make it.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Only those without sin make it.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    79
[...]none that doeth good, no, not one.[...]

I'll just take this underlined bit and say that Paul must've been having a very cynical day when he wrote that. I'm quite sure that there are people who do good in the world.

I do have to ask you this question. Why did Jesus die on the cross for then, if it is your good works are enough to get into heaven? Personally I see no need for him to even come to earth if we can get there by the power of our own good deeds.

I would cite this as one of the most fundamental things wrong with Christianity as it is practiced mostly today. The focus is way too much on his death, and not nearly enough on his life. He did not come to earth to die. Such a truth would only prove that God is moronic (what is the point in creating life for the purpose of taking it away? It's a paradox). Jesus came to show us what is good, so that we may lead similar lives of...goodness.

The stark reality is that Jesus will reject those who "do" things om his name, but are not belonging to him.
Matthew 7:21-23 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

If anything, I would interpret this passage as proving my point. It says quite plainly that you don't get into heaven simply for believing, but you get into heaven for doing God's work on Earth, i.e. doing good without the precondition of believing in the Christian God and Jesus.

But I won't even try to over-Bible you, because there is no way I could; I do not base my faith off the Bible, for the reason that I think a lot of it makes no sense considering Jesus' message and God's benevolence.
 
I'll just take this underlined bit and say that Paul must've been having a very cynical day when he wrote that. I'm quite sure that there are people who do good in the world.



I would cite this as one of the most fundamental things wrong with Christianity as it is practiced mostly today. The focus is way too much on his death, and not nearly enough on his life. He did not come to earth to die. Such a truth would only prove that God is moronic (what is the point in creating life for the purpose of taking it away? It's a paradox). Jesus came to show us what is good, so that we may lead similar lives of...goodness.



If anything, I would interpret this passage as proving my point. It says quite plainly that you don't get into heaven simply for believing, but you get into heaven for doing God's work on Earth, i.e. doing good without the precondition of believing in the Christian God and Jesus.

But I won't even try to over-Bible you, because there is no way I could; I do not base my faith off the Bible, for the reason that I think a lot of it makes no sense considering Jesus' message and God's benevolence.

Paul was quoting from the Old Testament through out that passage from Romans. His basic point was that we cannot be good, since by definition we are sinners. Sin is the exact opposite of good. Paul was not being cynical. Boy that is just a hopeless attempt by you to brush that away.

Jesus purpose was to come to earth to provide a way for sin to be defeated, since it is the ultimate. His life proved tht he was sinless and when he rose again, it was proof that he lived the life that was acceptable. The bible is explicit in saying that there is not forgiveness of sins without the shedding of blood. That was the whole point of the Day of Atonement sacrifice, since the blood of the lamb was symbolising that they were cleansed for year from their sins. Also the Passover is a testament to what blood does does. The original Passover happened when the blood of the lamb was used to cover the family from the coming plague. It was by the sign of the blood that the angel of the Lord went by the house and not touched it. These are symbolising what Jesus would do for us. John the Baptist calls him the Lamb of God in John 1:29. Jesus in his discourse with Nicodemus said that he would have to "lifted up", signifying the manner of his death. He was specifically referring to the situation in the dessert when God sent some snakes to chastise the Israelites for their sins. All they had to was to look at the bronze snake once they were bitten and they would not suffer from the poison. A clear picture of what Christ would do, that he would take away the sins of those who trust on him. The people had to have faith that what God said would happen, and that is what happened if they had faith to look at the bronze snake.

Obviously you did not read it properly, since he called those who he did not know as workers of iniquity, another word for sin. He was condemning them even though they were doing things in his name and doing marvellous works, i.e. doing good, but according to Jesus they are workers of sin, i.e. they are evil, not doing God's will. The exat opoisite of what you said.

Since you seem to only trust in what Christ sasys, then I will leave the final word to him.
John 3:16-21 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Luke 18:18-27 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.
21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.
22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.
24 And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
26 And they that heard it said, Who then can be saved?
27 And he said, The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.
 
Paul was quoting from the Old Testament through out that passage from Romans. His basic point was that we cannot be good, since by definition we are sinners. Sin is the exact opposite of good. Paul was not being cynical. Boy that is just a hopeless attempt by you to brush that away.

It quite clearly stated that no-one does good, not that everyone sins. Boy that is just a hopeless attempt to justify a clearly incorrect passage. Sinning does not make someone not good, unless you are using a horribly distorted definition of the word.

As for the rest, I'm not gonna bother with it. As I said, I know I'm not gonna out-quote you. Suffice to say that I don't subscribe to biblical literalism, and I think you're grievously incorrect. Actually, I would go so far as to say that I don't subscribe to the Bible as a whole.

BTW, out of curiosity, what denomination do you belong to?
 
Sin is basically breaking of God's law. The actual word means "to miss the mark". Originally it was an archery term and it was the best term to describe the Greek term that was used for that. Jesus came to save sinners. In fact the Pharisees often accused Jesus of being to close to sinners, i.e. the lowest parts of society, since that what his goal. He told the woman caught in adultery to "go and sin no more." Paul called himself the "chief of sinners". Paul understood what sin was, since he murder many Christians just because of their faith, before he became the greatest expounder and defender of the faith. We sing this song about the situation.
I was once a sinner, but I came
Pardon to receive from my Lord:
This was freely given, and I found
That He always kept His word.

Refrain

There’s a new name written down in glory,
And it’s mine, O yes, it’s mine!
And the white robed angels sing the story,
“A sinner has come home.”
For there’s a new name written down in glory,
And it’s mine, O yes, it’s mine!
With my sins forgiven I am bound for Heaven,
Never more to roam.

I was humbly kneeling at the cross,
Fearing naught but God’s angry frown;
When the heavens opened and I saw
That my name was written down.

Refrain

In the Book ’tis written, “Saved by Grace,”
O the joy that came to my soul!
Now I am forgiven, and I know
By the blood I am made whole.

Refrain

BTW, I am a Baptist.
 
Well since you are all atheists, I can say this. The official position of the both the oldest and most direct Christian Church, the Catholic and Orthodox. Say this.
Salvation is granted to ALL humans, regardless of religion.

That's not what Jesus said.

John 3:3
In reply Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again. "

I voted "other".
 
He did not come to earth to die. Such a truth would only prove that God is moronic (what is the point in creating life for the purpose of taking it away? It's a paradox).
Oh, but Jesus DID come to Earth to die.

John 10:17-18
"The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."

The reason it's not moronic, is that Jesus rose from the dead- just as He predicted He would do.
 
wrong thread
 
Oh, but Jesus DID come to Earth to die.

John 10:17-18
"The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."

The reason it's not moronic, is that Jesus rose from the dead- just as He predicted He would do.

Dude. I'm arguing against biblical literalism. You're not going to convince me by quoting from the Bible.
 
classical_hero said:
The bible is explicit in saying that there is not forgiveness of sins without the shedding of blood. That was the whole point of the Day of Atonement sacrifice, since the blood of the lamb was symbolising that they were cleansed for year from their sins.
This is false. There are three methods of atonement clearly defined in the Jewish scriptures: sacrifice (Leviticus 4:1-35), repentance (Deuteronomy 4:26-31; I Kings 8:46-50; Isaiah 55:6-9; Jeremiah 7:3-23; Ezekiel 18:1-23; Hosea 6:6; 14:2-3; Micah 6:6; Psalm 40:7-9 (6-8); 51:16-19; ) and charity (Proverbs 10:2; 11:4; 16:6; Daniel 4:24; II Chronicles 6:36-39).

Moreover, the sin sacrifice did not atone for all types of sin, but rather, only for unintentional sins. The sin sacrifice was inadequate to atone for a transgression committed intentionally. The brazen sinner was barred from the Sanctuary, and had to bear his own iniquity because of his rebellious intent to sin against God.

Numbers 15:27-31 said:
"If a person sins unintentionally, then he shall offer a one year old female goat for a sin offering. And the priest shall make atonement before the LORD for the person who goes astray when he sins unintentionally, making atonement for him that he may be forgiven.... But the person who does anything defiantly, whether he is native or an alien, that one is blaspheming the LORD; and that person shall be cut off from among his people. Because he has despised the word of the LORD and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; his guilt shall be on him."
 
Obviously, by that point most people would have figured out that God does, indeed, exist. But do you seriously think that you could eternally bare the guilt of knowing that in all your time on Earth you had rejected God, and he continues to love you?

No. I would have just been like: "Hey God, that's cool that you exist and love me and stuff.. I love you too! But why didn't you come chill with me before?"

Then we'd go in for hugs and it'd be allll goood.
 
Unless if you attain nirvana (nibbana) in this life, there will be an afterlife.
In which you deserve it if your next life is bad. Reincarnation/nirvana/karma etc is one of the worst ideologies ever on that point, because it's such a discouragement against helping the oppressed, because hey, they must have done something really bad last life to get born like that.
 
I know of no reason why an afterlife should exist other than to satisfy the human conceit that we deserve one.
 
I know of no reason why an afterlife should exist other than to satisfy the human conceit that we deserve one.

Because humanity always sucks, amirite? I don't know what this post is supposed to accomplish or say.
 
In which you deserve it if your next life is bad. Reincarnation/nirvana/karma etc is one of the worst ideologies ever on that point, because it's such a discouragement against helping the oppressed, because hey, they must have done something really bad last life to get born like that.

But don't most of those religions have an onus towards charity, despite the fact that everyone else is likely scum?
 
Because humanity always sucks, amirite? I don't know what this post is supposed to accomplish or say.

We fear death, and so create ideas of an afterlife to comfort ourselves -- and to justify our actions at times. My meaning was that reality does not exist to serve our comfort.
 
I find this relevant
I think it's very important to distinguish between saying "Everyone who's never heard of Jesus immediately gets into heaven." and "It's possible for somebody to come to a knowledge of Christ without knowing his name in particular." This more or less sums it up:
C.S. Lewis said:
There are people in other religions who are being led by God's secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it ... For example a Buddhist of good will may be led to concentrate more and more on the Buddhist teaching about mercy and to leave in the background (though he might still say he believed) the Buddhist teaching on certain points. Many of the good Pagans long before Christ's birth may have been in this position.
 
In which you deserve it if your next life is bad. Reincarnation/nirvana/karma etc is one of the worst ideologies ever on that point, because it's such a discouragement against helping the oppressed, because hey, they must have done something really bad last life to get born like that.

Uh, giving to charity increases your karma.

Also, reincarnation isn't really the point of Buddhism. It exists, yes, but it's not ideal and it's considered part of suffering; the goal is to break the cycle.
 
Back
Top Bottom