Hitler

Originally posted by KellyJay
No, everyone is qualified because we are all sinners, but not everyone wants it. Look at your own heart, you spend more time worrying about a list of questions about Jesus than Jesus Himself.

That's not true based on what you said. According to you, all other religions which exclude Jesus go to hell. All atheists go to hell, because of no Jesus. Some or many Christians go to hell, even though they 'think' they have Jesus.

The list, according to you, of people going to heaven seems very very short.

Originally posted by chaney3
That's not true based on what you said. According to you, all other religions which exclude Jesus go to hell. All atheists go to hell, because of no Jesus. Some or many Christians go to hell, even though they 'think' they have Jesus.

The list, according to you, of people going to heaven seems very very short.

The human race is one people you can look at them divided up by any number of things from nationality, to the beliefs we hold. The fact that God reaches out to us all by His Son goes out to us all regardless of what we call ourselves or our nationalities. This isn't a gospel directed at just a few, but everyone.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Listen, I think newborns like all of us have the same sinful nature we are born with it.
I believe (MY PERSONAL BELIEF) is that God is just and fair and will not condemn
anyone who doesn't have it in them to be responsible for themselves due to their age
maturity. ...

We are born guilty of sin? This is what you say. You believe though that babies don't get tossed into hell; only grown-ups that don't believe in Jesus. Works don't matter here you say. This view has at least two horrible consequences.

This god you advocate is not fair and just; instead it is downright evil. You see this, and that is why your PERSONAL BELIEF gives babies a free pass.

Since babies get a free pass, and since heaven is supposedly desirable, we should kill our babies.

Originally posted by apathist
We are born guilty of sin? This is what you say. You believe though that babies don't get tossed into hell; only grown-ups that don't believe in Jesus. Works don't matter here you say. This view has at least two horrible consequences.

This god you advocate is not fair and just; instead it is downright evil. You see this, and that is why your PERSONAL BE ...[text shortened]... nce babies get a free pass, and since heaven is supposedly desirable, we should kill our babies.

When you say something is evil, you assume there's good. When you assume there's good, you assume there's such a thing as a moral law on the basis of which to differentiate between good and evil. But if you assume a moral law, you must posit a moral Law Giver, but that's Who you're trying to disprove and not prove. Because if there's no moral Law Giver, there's no moral law. If there's no moral law, there's no good. If there's no good, there's no evil. So your claim that something is evil only makes sense if God does in fact exist.

Originally posted by apathist
We are born guilty of sin? This is what you say. You believe though that babies don't get tossed into hell; only grown-ups that don't believe in Jesus. Works don't matter here you say. This view has at least two horrible consequences.

This god you advocate is not fair and just; instead it is downright evil. You see this, and that is why your PERSONAL BE ...[text shortened]... nce babies get a free pass, and since heaven is supposedly desirable, we should kill our babies.

Only sinners get tossed into Hell, because of their sins. Those that receive the life line that
God gave us Jesus Christ will be saved, the rest are lost.

Originally posted by apathist
We are born guilty of sin? This is what you say. You believe though that babies don't get tossed into hell; only grown-ups that don't believe in Jesus. Works don't matter here you say. This view has at least two horrible consequences.

This god you advocate is not fair and just; instead it is downright evil. You see this, and that is why your PERSONAL BE ...[text shortened]... nce babies get a free pass, and since heaven is supposedly desirable, we should kill our babies.

What horrible thing to suggest.

Originally posted by apathist
We are born guilty of sin? This is what you say. You believe though that babies don't get tossed into hell; only grown-ups that don't believe in Jesus. Works don't matter here you say. This view has at least two horrible consequences.

This god you advocate is not fair and just; instead it is downright evil. You see this, and that is why your PERSONAL BE ...[text shortened]... nce babies get a free pass, and since heaven is supposedly desirable, we should kill our babies.

We are humans, born with human nature as we mature we act like humans act now. Which
is that we all will sin in any manner. The fact that we are given time to mature and not all
get tossed into Hell is due to God's grace, the fact that He saved as many as wanted to be
saved is also due to God's grace. You solution of kill all of the babies, just shows where
your heart is at. End the human race in one generation.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Dude, we're saved already. Didn't you get the memo?

Ghost - Righteous Atheist

I guess that memo must have gone into my spam folder!

Originally posted by josephw
I guess that memo must have gone into my spam folder!

Sorry to hear that sir. Are you able to redirect it into your favourites folder?

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Sorry to hear that sir. Are you able to redirect it into your favourites folder?

I would, but I don't have a "righteous atheist" folder. 😉

Originally posted by josephw
I would, but I don't have a "righteous atheist" folder. 😉

'If I were not an atheist, I would believe in a God who would choose to save people on the basis of the totality of their lives and not the pattern of their words. I think he would prefer an honest and righteous atheist to a TV preacher whose every word is God, God, God, and whose every deed is foul, foul, foul.'

Isaac Asimov

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
'If I were not an atheist, I would believe in a God who would choose to save people on the basis of the totality of their lives and not the pattern of their words. I think he would prefer an honest and righteous atheist to a TV preacher whose every word is God, God, God, and whose every deed is foul, foul, foul.'

Isaac Asimov

Loved his books, I think he had a great mind, but he missed the boat here. He set up a bar to reach to be good enough, God set it up so the best and worst could be saved.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk

It bears repeating.

When you say something is evil, you assume there's good. When you assume there's good, you assume there's such a thing as a moral law on the basis of which to differentiate between good and evil. But if you assume a moral law, you must posit a moral Law Giver, but that's Who you're trying to disprove and not prove. Because if there's no moral Law Giver, there's no moral law. If there's no moral law, there's no good. If there's no good, there's no evil. So your claim that something is evil only makes sense if God does in fact exist.

This is the anti-theist's problem. Like the little child who wants to slap her father on the face, but cannot do so unless she sits on his lap.

The anti-theist and the atheist has to steal from God in order to create a worldview within which he can criticize God.

Okay, make it the little boy who wants to slap his mother on the face. Same principle applies. The child has to sit on the parent's lap to reach the parent's face to slap it.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
When you say something is evil, you assume there's good. When you assume there's good, you assume there's such a thing as a moral law on the basis of which to differentiate between good and evil. But if you assume a moral law, you must posit a moral Law Giver, but that's Who you're trying to disprove and not prove. Because if there's no moral Law Giver, ...[text shortened]... here's no evil. So your claim that something is evil only makes sense if God does in fact exist.

This is nonsense.

Actually all one need is a concept upon which to hang decisions of morality.

For example, the Golden Rule has been recognized as one such concept through the ages, across many cultures and within both theistic and secular schools of thought. This fact also belies the idea that morality is "completely subjective".

http://www.bahai.us/welcome/spiritual-concepts/oneness-of-god/
Baha'i Faith
“Blessed is he who preferreth his brother before himself.”
…Baha'u'llah, Tablets of Baha'u'llah, 71…


Buddhism
“Hurt not others in ways that you
yourself would find hurtful.”
…Udana-Varga,5:18…


Christianity
“All things whatsoever ye would that men
should do to you, do ye even so to them.”
…Matthew 7:12…


Hinduism
“This is the sum of duty: do naught unto others
which would cause you pain if done to you.”
…Mahabharata 5:1517…


Islam
“No one of you is a believer until he desires for
his brother that which he desires for himself”.
…Sunnah…


Judaism
“What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man.
That is the law: all the rest is commentary”
…Talmud, Shabbat 31a


Zoroastrianism
“That nature only is good when it shall not do unto
another whatever is not good for its own self.”
…Dadistan-i-Dinik, 94:5…

http://www.uhj.net/the-golden-rule.html

CONFUCIANISM:

"Do not unto others what you would not have them do unto you."
(Analects, 15:23)

"If one strives to treat others as he would be treated by them, he will come near the perfect life."
(Book of Meng Tzu)

WESTERN SCHOOLS:

"What you wish your neighbors to be to you, such be also to them."
(Pythagorean)

"We should conduct ourselves toward others as we would have them act toward us."
(Aristotle, from Plato and Socrates)

"Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing."
(Thales)

"Do not to your neighbor what you would take ill from him."
(Pittacus)

"Cherish reciprocal benevolence, which will make you as anxious for another's welfare as your own"
(Aristippus of Cyrene).

"Act toward others as you desire them to act toward you"
(Isocrates)

TAO:

"Pity the misfortunes of others; rejoice in the well-being of others; help those who are in want; save men in danger; rejoice at the success of others; and sympathise with their reverses, even as though YOU WERE in their place."

"The sage has no interests of his own, but regards the interests of the people as his own. He is kind to the kind, he is also kind to the unkind: for virtue is kind."
(T'ai Shang Kan Ying P'ien)

NATIVE AMERICAN:

"Love your friend and never desert him. If you see him surrounded by the enemy do not run away; go to him, and if you cannot save him, be killed together and let your bones lie side by side."
(Sur-AR-Ale-Shar, The Lessons of the Lone Chief)

"Do not kill or injure your neighbor, for it is not him that you injure, you injure yourself. But do good to him, therefore add to his days of happiness as you add to your own. Do not wrong or hate your neighbor, for it is not him that you wrong, you wrong yourself. But love him, for The Great Spirit (Moneto) loves him also as he loves you."
(Shawnee)

"Respect for all life is the foundation."
(The Great Law of Peace)

AFRICAN TRADITIONAL RELIGION:

"A SAGE is ingenuous and leads his life after comprehending the parity of the killed and the killer. THEREFORE, neither does he cause violence to others nor does he make others do so."
(Yoruba Proverb, Nigeria)

"One going to take a pointed stick to pinch a baby bird should first try it on himself to feel how it hurts."
(Yoruba Proverb, Nigeria)

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
This is nonsense.

Actually all one need is a concept upon which to hang decisions of morality.

For example, the Golden Rule has been recognized as one such concept through the ages, across many cultures and within both theistic and secular schools of thought. This fact also belies the idea that morality is "completely subjective".

http:/ ...[text shortened]... ird should first try it on himself to feel how it hurts."
(Yoruba Proverb, Nigeria)

What is your 'objective' standard that you use to differentiate between right and wrong? Is it the golden rule?