SerenelyBlue Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Correct me if I am wrong, but I have just made a simple and true discovery. The person that is a good person without religion is a better person than the one that would not have been a good person had it not been for the threat of punishment and the promise of reward. My logic tells me that an infinitely intelligent entity would prefer goodness for goodness sake. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disillusioned Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 "There is none good but one, that is, God". This is the flaw in your reasoning. The notion of heaven and hell is derived from the belief that humanity is fundamentally flawed and deserving of hell. It is not possible for us to deserve heaven. We can only attain it by grace. Of course, the heaven and hell doctrine is not actually true, and so you're right: it's better to be good for it's own sake than to do it because we are afraid. But this only makes sense on the view that the Christian heaven and hell do not exist. If they do--if Christianity is true--then it is not possible for us to be good. We are fallen, and in need of salvation by grace, through faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SerenelyBlue Posted February 7, 2016 Author Share Posted February 7, 2016 "There is none good but one, that is, God". This is the flaw in your reasoning. The notion of heaven and hell is derived from the belief that humanity is fundamentally flawed and deserving of hell. It is not possible for us to deserve heaven. We can only attain it by grace. Of course, the heaven and hell doctrine is not actually true, and so you're right: it's better to be good for it's own sake than to do it because we are afraid. But this only makes sense on the view that the Christian heaven and hell do not exist. If they do--if Christianity is true--then it is not possible for us to be good. We are fallen, and in need of salvation by grace, through faith. Hmm... I think this is one good example of a serious defect in the Bible. Any intelligent entity would know that it is outrageous to have the good boiling in the depths of Hell, while the ones that came in with a free, do as you please and say these words, pass get to sit up there with God on the throne.Not able to be good? My dog is able to be good. My physiology and origins are similar to my dog. I can be good. I think this is another flaw of Christianity: They don't allow you to think unhampered about whether or not teaching makes sense. If we say today that women may preach and it is ok to be gay, what stops us from making alterations in our understanding of other verses in the Bible? If one can change, all can change. That is the beauty and the flaw of liberal Christianity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disillusioned Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Hmm... I think this is one good example of a serious defect in the Bible. Any intelligent entity would know that it is outrageous to have the good boiling in the depths of Hell, while the ones that came in with a free, do as you please and say these words, pass get to sit up there with God on the throne. Not able to be good? My dog is able to be good. My physiology and origins are similar to my dog. I can be good. I think this is another flaw of Christianity: They don't allow you to think unhampered about whether or not teaching makes sense. If we say today that women may preach and it is ok to be gay, what stops us from making alterations in our understanding of other verses in the Bible? If one can change, all can change. That is the beauty and the flaw of liberal Christianity. The bolded is a flat contradiction of Christian teaching. God alone is good. We have not met his standard. We are fallen. We are sinful. We are not good, and we cannot be good. When you say that your dog is good, and that you can be good you are using a secular definition of the word good. But if Christianity is true, then your understanding of good is not what counts: only God's opinion matters. Now, this leaves us with the insurmountable problem of determining how we can possibly know God's opinions, but that is another matter. As you say, if some the Bible requires interpretation and a "modern" understanding, then where do we draw the line? This type of reasoning, in my opinion, can be used to form some of the most powerful arguments against Christianity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SerenelyBlue Posted February 7, 2016 Author Share Posted February 7, 2016 Why does God use words that can be misunderstood? Anyhow, the Bible has many errors and contradictions. What's to say this one isn't an error. And Jesus is God isn't he. And he said this... I know Paul also said that not one is good. The Bible is wrong and unfair according to my humble standards. I dare to disagree and to use my "God given" brain. Surely if God made my brain, he should not be angry if I come up with different conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjn Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I don't buy that "Well, God's definitions are different from ours"-crap. We can only relate to things on a human level, anything beyond it is useless. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qadeshet Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 The Christian Heaven is actually horrifying to me. There is no marriage or sex, no Free Will, no hunger or thirst, so no food or drink. Just an eternity of singing hymns, telling "god" how great he is. No thanks. No one deserves such a fate. Matthew 22: 22:28 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. Skeptic'snnotated Bible 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disillusioned Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I don't buy that "Well, God's definitions are different from ours"-crap. We can only relate to things on a human level, anything beyond it is useless. That's because you're not a Christian. I agree with you, by the way. But I think that questions like the one in the OP largely miss the point. They are based on the premise that the Christian heaven and hell exist. If that is true, then Christianity is true, and God's definitions are different than ours. It boots nothing to discuss these questions from a secular perspective: from the outside, there is no reason to believe in heaven or hell, and from the inside, the secular perspective is incorrect. Better simply to say that no one has ever had any reason to think that heaven and hell exist and leave it at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Nobody deserves complete infinite anything. Such ideals cannot exist in the real world and certainly can't be earned in our realistic life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jedah Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 infinite reward for finite good deeds is nonsense for the same reason infinite punishment for finite sins is nonsense. If there is an afterlife, I would find it more interesting if it wasn't heaven. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amateur Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 "God" didn't say anything about heaven because god doesn't exist. The people who wrote the bible made up the concept of heaven. The various people and groups who wrote the bible also put in what they wanted for varying reasons, so there is not one consistent, logical, non-contradictory theme throughout the bible. I also agree with qadeshet, that the concept of heaven we seem to get from the bible sounds horrible. Eternity is unimaginable to us, as people who live surrounded by births and deaths, beginnings and ends. But, yes, what exactly are we to DO in heaven if not live in a way we know with relationships, marriages, doing SOMETHING (working, hobbies, relaxing)? If we are only to spend eternity praising god, it does sound like an endless punishment. The people and groups who wrote the bible did not think that through very well. I think they were just going for the maximum in reward/punishment in order to control people. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedStar Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Between being a personality devoid worship robot and not existing in any form of consciousness at all I'd definitely choose the latter. I think it would be tedious existing for eternity eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted February 14, 2016 Super Moderator Share Posted February 14, 2016 god's ways are not our ways; and his thoughts are higher than our thoughts. Stop trying to understand and just... believe!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhim Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 infinite reward for finite good deeds is nonsense for the same reason infinite punishment for finite sins is nonsense. If there is an afterlife, I would find it more interesting if it wasn't heaven. Agreed, and this is one of the serious moral failings of Christianity. If all sin is equally meritorious of infinite punishment, then stealing a paperclip is on equal moral ground as genocide. Jesus effectively trivializes sin and makes it impossible to justly punish anyone for anything. I would add that Jesus is the only individual I know of who ever devised a punishment that even Adolf Hitler doesn't deserve. No one deserves eternal punishment for finite wrongdoing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedStar Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 I always think about how a god that's supposed to be completely good could even think up a concept as evil as hell in the first place. Not just that, but he is supposed to have created evil, all evil. How is sin supposed to be infinite and how could anyone or anything be evil enough to think anybody deserves eternal torture? You don't find xianity convincing? Well too bad for you, eternal torture is what you'll get and what you'll deserve. It's beyond disgusting that anyone thinks that premise is ok or justifiable in any way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dangitbobby83 Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 If there is an afterlife, I would find it more interesting if it wasn't heaven. Valhalla would be badass. Even Islam's heaven would be far more interesting, considering the all the sex you would be having. (Sexist and misogynic, yes, but still more interesting than just singing god's praises forever) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dichotomy Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 For me this all hinges on the premise that there is such a thing as "goodness". I'm not really convinced there is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SerenelyBlue Posted February 28, 2016 Author Share Posted February 28, 2016 For me this all hinges on the premise that there is such a thing as "goodness". I'm not really convinced there is.What do call it when someone displays altruism, when he thinks himself into other person's shoes, when he respects people and animals and lives a decent life adopting a personal code of decency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts