Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Jodie.Lynne

I don't believe you

5,213 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

DieChecker
8 minutes ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

So, would I be correct in assuming that you reject the premise that "only by accepting Jesus as your personal savior" can one gain heaven?

If you, as a believer, and I as a non-believer in Jesus, live similar lives, would you gain Paradise, whilst I suffer torment, simply because you bent your knees for Jesus?

No. I fully believe one has to believe in Jesus. And as mankind's savior. And repent of whatever sins you carry with you.

I simply believe that God's not going to just drain hole everyone else. They'll go up in front of Jesus at the Final Judgement, and he'll say, "Well, it appears you've been rather Good.". Then he'll ask if they think he is real, and if he died for them. Saying "Yes" at this point means salvation. And time not being an issue at that point, I feel Jesus will have days... weeks... years... of time to speak with each person to convince them of his reality. 

I simply can't imagine anyone speaking to Jesus for days on end and still refusing to believe the situation is just fading thoughts as the brain dies.

So, yeah. I believe 99.99%, or more, of every one that has ever lived will be saved. Only the truly heinous will go into the Fire with the Enemy and his disciples. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
2 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

No. I fully believe one has to believe in Jesus. And as mankind's savior. And repent of whatever sins you carry with you.

I simply believe that God's not going to just drain hole everyone else. They'll go up in front of Jesus at the Final Judgement, and he'll say, "Well, it appears you've been rather Good.". Then he'll ask if they think he is real, and if he died for them. Saying "Yes" at this point means salvation. And time not being an issue at that point, I feel Jesus will have days... weeks... years... of time to speak with each person to convince them of his reality. 

I simply can't imagine anyone speaking to Jesus for days on end and still refusing to believe the situation is just fading thoughts as the brain dies.

So, yeah. I believe 99.99%, or more, of every one that has ever lived will be saved. Only the truly heinous will go into the Fire with the Enemy and his disciples. 

I'm not a gambler so I can't make the same spiritual bet you can. Plus if god/jesus/whatever exist I figure that no matter what I'm going to hell regardless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
8 minutes ago, Harte said:
Quote

Matthew 28:19-20 King James Version (KJV)

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Harte

.

To teach does not necessarily imply forcing people to convert, or forcing yourself on them. 

It is a modern idea to force people to go be educated. Jesus walked by many whom did not listen. He taught those who followed him around, or specifically seemed him out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
Just now, XenoFish said:

I'm not a gambler so I can't make the same spiritual bet you can. Plus if god/jesus/whatever exist I figure that no matter what I'm going to hell regardless.

You're not going to Hell. Unless I am also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
18 hours ago, third_eye said:

Nut is a girl... 

1558506872304.png.cbc01ca7a73f459760608bf0411a88fb.png

~

Looks like a divine OBGYN appointment. Husband has passed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte
1 minute ago, DieChecker said:

To teach does not necessarily imply forcing people to convert, or forcing yourself on them. 

It is a modern idea to force people to go be educated. Jesus walked by many whom did not listen. He taught those who followed him around, or specifically seemed him out.

True.

But teaching is not keeping your religion to yourself, as the poster I replied to suggested.

I gave that quote to illustrate why people try to convert other people. It's just part of the religion. Part of a lot of religions, I'm sure.

Harte

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte
Just now, DieChecker said:

Looks like a divine OBGYN appointment. Husband has passed out.

Fainted when he looked at it in the light.

Harte

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
Just now, DieChecker said:

You're not going to Hell. Unless I am also.

You don't quite get it. In my head. I was basically taught that god hates me for existing, that a guy had to be murdered because I was born "screwed up" and no matter what good I might do in this life I am doomed to suffer for all eternity because I'll never be good enough. Basically in god's eye I am a failure and will always be such a thing. God hates me. That is what I know of god. I do not see a loving god, I do not see forgiveness, I do not see compassion for a supposed lord and savior. There is only an angry god. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jodie.Lynne
2 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Then he'll ask if they think he is real, and if he died for them.

You see, you and others believe in this, and that is fine. It helps you live day to day.

But, I fail to see how a Jewish Rabbi, could have possibly died "for me" 2,000 years ago.

The lesson being that 'he died for your sins', is not logical. Nor is the explanation that 'while he died for your sins, you are still responsible for your sins".

EXAMPLE: If you committed a crime, and I know you committed that crime, but I confess to the crime and suffer the punishment for it, absolving you of your guilt, then how is it that you are still 'guilty'?

 

EXAMPLE: A more accurate, less ambiguous one... If you have a college debt, and I pay that debt for you, no strings attached, do you still have a debt?

NO where, does it say that Jesus said "Hey guys, I'm taking the hit for you all! Just worship me forever, OK?

If Jesus 'died for the sins of mankind', then there is no sin on your slate. If you accept him as your scapegoat. So how is it that we are all still 'sinful sinners'?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jodie.Lynne
10 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

To teach does not necessarily imply forcing people to convert, or forcing yourself on them. 

With respect, Christianity implies the exact opposite of your position. By deed, thought, and teachings.

There is great theological debate about whether those who have never heard the Jesus narratives get a 'free pass'.

The idea being that if you have no knowledge about Jesus, you are exempt for hellish torment for not believing. Yet, missionaries take it as a sacred duty to 'spread the word' to all. This is setting a trap, IMO. 

I could be a happy native, living my life in accordance with my society's moral codes, confident that I am going to a happy place when I die. Until... da da da dun.... some cross wearing missionary comes along and tells me that my people need to be saved by Jesus.

Now, once having been told about this foreign god, I am placed in an untenable position: believe what my people have believed for hundreds (thousands) of years, and suffer the torments of hellfire...

OR,,,

throw away everything that I and my people have lived with, all our lives, in order to appease a very vengeful, FOREIGN god who threatens you with punishment if you don't love & obey him.

 

How does that fit into 'not forcing' one's beliefs on others?

 

Again, I am not saying you shouldn't believe what you believe, but how is this justified with what is referred to as a 'loving god'?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
18 minutes ago, Harte said:

I gave that quote to illustrate why people try to convert other people.

Read everything, question everything, figure it out for yourself and join the Society of Friends in out efforts never to agree. :yes:

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte
17 minutes ago, Piney said:

Read everything, question everything, figure it out for yourself and join the Society of Friends in out efforts never to agree. :yes:

They'd probably have me. After all, Nixon was a member.

Plus, you can't go wrong with those oats.

Harte

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oslove
6 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

I'm not a gambler so I can't make the same spiritual bet you can. Plus if god/jesus/whatever exist I figure that no matter what I'm going to hell regardless.

Dear Xeno, you are not talking with logic, and that is because you don't think about what you have said.

You see, when you write something, first you think on what you are going to write about, then as you write you also keep thinking on each word you write, to make sure that each word together with other words already written, and the words that will still come from you to complete your thought, they make a consistent, coherent, and sensible communication; finally when you have completed your text, read again the whole thought for a final examination: on whether you have produced a thought that is endowed with consistency, coherency, and logic.

Here is what you wrote (enumeration by yours truly):

"<1>I'm not a gambler so I can't make the same spiritual bet you can. <2>Plus if god/jesus/whatever exist <3>I figure that no matter what I'm going to hell regardless."

No. <3> is illogical; to be logicall you should say:  " . . . I'm going to strive to escape hell regardless."

 

 

 

 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte
4 minutes ago, oslove said:

Dear Xeno, you are not talking with logic, and that is because you don't think about what you have said.

You see, when you write something, first you think on what you are going to write about, then as you write you also keep thinking on each word you write, to make sure that each word together with other words already written, and the words that will still come from you to complete your thought, they make a consistent, coherent, and sensible communication; finally when you have completed your text, read again the whole thought for a final examination: on whether you have produced a thought that is endowed with consistency, coherency, and logic.

Here is what you wrote (enumeration by yours truly):

"<1>I'm not a gambler so I can't make the same spiritual bet you can. <2>Plus if god/jesus/whatever exist <3>I figure that no matter what I'm going to hell regardless."

No. <3> is illogical; to be logicall you should say:  " . . . I'm going to strive to escape hell regardless."

That actually happened in "Preacher."

Harte

  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
9 minutes ago, oslove said:

Dear Xeno, you are not talking with logic, and that is because you don't think about what you have said.

Do you wish to further insult me? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
25 minutes ago, Harte said:

They'd probably have me. After all, Nixon was a member.

No he wasn't. He was born one but never practiced or paid his tithe. The Nixons were one of the "First Families" who settled West Jersey and there is a road named for his ancestors near the Moorestown Meetinghouse though. I also have his genealogy in my files. 

Philadelphia Yearly Meeting would have you, no doubt. My sister would be driving you nuts to join the Union of Concerned Scientists too.

I don't think the Evangelicals on the West Coast would appreciate you though. Of course we "Traditionalists" don't consider them real Quakers. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
3 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Went back and read your post again. Not as confrontational as I seemed to think it was. :wacko:

Didn't mean offence. Mostly tired misreading.... 

I'd tend to agree with your previous post in that the old will continue to fall away for the new. Hopefully whatever comes on new in religion will be an improvement.

My apologies if I came off confrontational, too.

Not my intentions. 

No worries Die, all good here. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
6 hours ago, DieChecker said:

The Romans also could not even fathom Christianity. All they wanted was to have the Emperor recognized as a fellow god. Why would the Christians allow themselves to be killed, and hide (literally) underground, rather than make token offerings to the Emperor?

You can't understand because you have bought into this world. You believe your worldview is the true one, and have firmly planted your flag in it's soil. Not that there anything wrong with that. But your assertions that it is beyond comprehension, or in error, is just your opinion based on your adopted worldview.

Not accusing you, but many say Christians are intolerant. And there is some truth there. But another truth is that many atheists are as intolerant, or more so.

When the disciples went out into the Empire to spread the word, the communities that welcomed them were Roman; some proselyte Jews. Judaism being evangelical in that era in that they accepted converts. Others were Romans, jaded with the old gods and enamored of what was called Eastern Mystery Cults. These Romans were instrumental in the spread of Christianity and it's almost as if the teachings of Jesus had preceded them before his crucifixion. The persecution of Christians is historically exaggerated as most of the time, they were accepted as just another fringe religion. They were regarded as "atheist" as they eschewed worship and propitiatory offerings to the traditional pantheon and, of course, the Emperor. That was usually the excuse for the infrequent and localized persecutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
3 hours ago, oslove said:

Dear Xeno, you are not talking with logic, and that is because you don't think about what you have said.

You see, when you write something, first you think on what you are going to write about, then as you write you also keep thinking on each word you write, to make sure that each word together with other words already written, and the words that will still come from you to complete your thought, they make a consistent, coherent, and sensible communication; finally when you have completed your text, read again the whole thought for a final examination: on whether you have produced a thought that is endowed with consistency, coherency, and logic.

Here is what you wrote (enumeration by yours truly):

"<1>I'm not a gambler so I can't make the same spiritual bet you can. <2>Plus if god/jesus/whatever exist <3>I figure that no matter what I'm going to hell regardless."

No. <3> is illogical; to be logicall you should say:  " . . . I'm going to strive to escape hell regardless."

 

 

 

 

What are you waffling about?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
3 hours ago, oslove said:

Dear Xeno, you are not talking with logic, and that is because you don't think about what you have said.

You see, when you write something, first you think on what you are going to write about, then as you write you also keep thinking on each word you write, to make sure that each word together with other words already written, and the words that will still come from you to complete your thought, they make a consistent, coherent, and sensible communication; finally when you have completed your text, read again the whole thought for a final examination: on whether you have produced a thought that is endowed with consistency, coherency, and logic.

Here is what you wrote (enumeration by yours truly):

"<1>I'm not a gambler so I can't make the same spiritual bet you can. <2>Plus if god/jesus/whatever exist <3>I figure that no matter what I'm going to hell regardless."

No. <3> is illogical; to be logicall you should say:  " . . . I'm going to strive to escape hell regardless."

 

 

 

 

He is entitled to his own perspective.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
27 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

He is entitled to his own perspective.

 

Xeno has an admirer. It seems! 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
14 minutes ago, danydandan said:

Xeno has an admirer. It seems! 

Make that two. He's a good poster and a good friend. He keeps me on my toes and makes me think twice. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
5 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Make that two. He's a good poster and a good friend. He keeps me on my toes and makes me think twice. 

We all admire Xeno.

I was trying to make a joke, the poor guy seems to attract these trolling type posters. I've never seen a post from oslove before and the first one I see is a post attempting to belittle Xeno. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
29 minutes ago, danydandan said:

Xeno has an admirer. It seems! 

more than one, team xeno

 

apologies to oslove for being unable to understand his point, it is 0137 am here, but was it a logic or argument fallacy?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
3 minutes ago, danydandan said:

We all admire Xeno.

I was trying to make a joke, the poor guy seems to attract these trolling type posters. I've never seen a post from oslove before and the first one I see is a post attempting to belittle Xeno. 

Apparent anonymity makes people forget their manners and too free to give Fortnitesque bludgeonings.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.