|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Would you give up your place in heaven... | |||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
cavediver writes: ...if it meant that ten others destined for everlasting torment could be granted a place in heaven? No. My reason for not doing so involves my respecting their hearts desire - just as God will have done in consigning them to Hell. There will be no one in Hell who didn’t choose (in effect) to go there.
Let's say that these ten are some of the most selfless, moral, charitable people on earth - they just happened not to choose Jesus as their saviour. Perhaps they are atheists, hindus, devout muslims, whatever - they have all heard the Christian message and rejected it for one reason or another. According to God’s standard, all people are steeped to the neck in the filth of sin - from the most “moral” to the least. If it were possible to set aside the insurmountable issue of their will (above) then I would gladly* stand in the place of any 10 people you care to pick. I’d be as happy with 10 murderers / paedophiles / rapists / evolutionists () as I would with 10 of the most selfless, moral, charitable people you could find. I’m with God on this one. Spiritually speaking, I see no moral distinction. *gladly... but on two conditions a) that I didn’t first get to see what Hell is like close up b) my decision, taken before I got to see it close up, is final. It’s one thing to read about it and imagine it through a glass darkly. I suspect I wouldn't be quite so willing were my nose pressed between the bars of the entrance gate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
creationista writes: That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly Clearly that passage doesn't apply here. The persons "alms" will result in them being in Hell. Some reward.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Indeed it is not in question. The verses you offer tell us precisly what will happen. Charity in secret attracts reward. Charity given in public attracts none.
The OP offers simple exchange (were it possible). We're not dealing with all kinds of hypotheticals. Your bible verses do not apply in this case
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
The verses always apply. The answer is, anyone who would say yes wouldn't say yes in this thread. If the verses apply they tell us that there is certain to be no reward for this "public charity" of mine. Clearly I wasn't expecting any. What's the problem? I've said yes in this thread so that point is refuted.
Any question of seeking reward is off point. Reward should never be the reason you do anything. See above. Reward was not the expectation nor motivation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Actually, you said no, and then dithered, and then changed your mind. Then you said 'Only if I won't really understand how bad Hell will be until it's too late.' That's like giving away someone else's money. Oop's. If that's how you read what I wrote then I'll forego attempting to clarify things for you..
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
The prime commandment is "love God with all your heart, soul and mind". Thereafter "love your neighbour as yourself".
The motivation for giving up ones own place in heaven for 10 otherwise damned members of my family would be love for them. "Greater love hath no man for another than that he lay down his life..." for example But what about my love for God? Is my love for God greater than my love for family? If faced with a choice and given the greatest commandment would I not have to focus on my love for God and turn away from my love for family? Is not obeying God's commands always the best thing to do?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
quote: Or Cavedivers estimation of what constitutes selflessness amd morality differs somewhat from Gods idea of same. If these people are in fact, lovers of evil and insist in their refusal to love the truth - then the message they shall not get. For the message itself is truth. The message says (amongst other things) that you have evil in your heart and no matter how selflessly you act that evil cannot be got rid of. That no matter how morally you try to act you know the immorality that resides within you. Sticking your head in the sand isn't the messages fault. And the message won't face the consequences of persisting in doing so to the bitter end
quote: Those silly rules happen to be the very things that will assist in saving you (in the event that you are finally saved). Or they will be the thing that will condemn you - in that case. Your conscience is your rule giver in anycase. Gods law delivered to your door. I'm sure it's not silly you consider it after breaking it's law. Guilt and shame are more likely companions. If not, you have reason to fear.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
quote: Suppose for a moment that conscience is actually Gods voice (or influence) in-our-head. These "moral and selfless people", when they are acting morally and selflessly, are actually empowered by the urge placed there by God. He itches, they scratch - and the credit for their goodness goes to God. When they are not acting morally and selflessly (for no one is perfect) they are only willfully suppressing and rejecting the voice of conscience that tells them that they ought to be doing otherwise. Sometimes their conscience might be screeching at them - yet they suppress it and ignore it in order to have their wicked will done. The credit for their evil goes to them. If Hell is an existance without the presence of God it is safe to suppose that the person in Hell will have no conscience anymore. God will have totally left: lock, stock and barrel. All that will be left is a person whose heart is evil without the restraint of conscience. There will be no redeeming features that impart even the merest iota of that which makes humanity attractive. They will be totally ugly - like one of those despicable creatures featuring in Lord of the Rings or Narnia. They would be impossible to even pity them, so ugly will they be. So much for pining away for loved ones who end up in Hell. If Hell is a place where Gods love isn't and if Hell is a place a person only ends up in due to their hearts desire - then your objection must struggle. God granting a persons hearts desire cannot be described as a petty act. Respectful of the humanity he gave them (and whose final act of respect is, ironically, to take that humanity away again) - but not at all petty. It's a very serious business this life. But then, we all know that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
quote: The issue is whether the righteous acts of a person are attributable them - making them the most selfless people in the world. Or whether the credit for their righteous acts goes to God. Believers in the Biblical God attribute their righteous acts to Gods influence and give glory to him. Unbelievers attribute their own righteous acts to themselves.
quote: The selfless person carrying out righteous acts does so because of Gods call upon them urging them to do so. Their conscience pricks them into action. The conscience is Gods voice and empowerment and the credit is thus Gods. The persons reward is a salved conscience at the very least. And the satisfaction that comes from loving others perhaps. The believer can do good acts motivated by the reward he will get (which the Bible tells him that he will not get, in that case) or out of a convicted heart similar to the heart of the selfless unbeliever.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
quote: Which is why, perhaps, Jesus said that only God is good. I'm not sure from which source you suppose godless-good-acts to otherwise come from though: upbringing, influence of society, genetics? Are you not still co-reliant on something/someone else for the good act. As I am? -
quote: That I conclude there to be no improving on his values and that I chose to adhere to his values doesn't render me different than yourself. You arrive at and adhere to whatever values you arrive at and chose to adhere to - just like I do. At the end of the day, we lie in the bed we make for ourselves. -
quote: The need where? The need that arises in them that those acts be done, I suggest. Seeing as there is no one beyond themselves (they suppose) the need can be only sourced within themselves. And so the righteous acts that follow are attributable only to that need arising in themselves. Attributable to themselves thus, making the act a self-righteous one. -
quote: Not so. The gospel is the power of God unto salvation - not just words on a page or the call of a street evangelist. Abraham was saved by the gospel of God - and he lived long before Christ and the good news concerning him. You might be confusing me with people who say that you must hear and believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ (as commonly communicated) in order to be saved. Their rule isn't my rule. Edited by iano, : No reason given. Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
quote: They are responding to a need that arises in themselves. If it didn't (and it doesn't in the person next to them who passes the situation unconcernedly by) then the good act wouldn't follow. It't their conscience that is pricked by the external-to-them situation. Their compassion that cannot turn away. Something in them lies at the root. And if no God beyond them then the buck stops with them: at the trigger within themselves that fires off the "good" act. That's what I mean by self-righteous. The righteousness derives from the need to satisfy something within the self. I can't see much to applaud to be honest (if looking at things through unbelieving lens). What formed them: society, upbringing, genetics? What credit does a person take for such things?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
quote: If actually inhabited by the Holy Spirit of God then I am a product of something other than you assert. And the mechanics of that scenario would be quite different from the mechanics which the unbeliever cannot avoid. But this isn't about me in the first instance, it's about these good deeds - which are actually deeds arising out of that which is a product of it's environment (according to the unbeliever). The self being a product of it's environment, a complicated machine, the righteousness is self-righteousness. Or product-of-it's-environment-righteousness if you prefer. Little cause to applaud it in any case.
quote: I wouldn't argue against that. So much for applauding the selfless person over the selfish person then.. Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
quote: I am drawing the conclusions I think the unbeliever must come to. His "good" acts or "evil" acts are acts that arise out of a "need" within himself. He scratches whichever itch happens to arise. Seeing as those itches arise only naturalistically (in the eyes of an unbeliever) one wonders as to why the applause. Applaud a persons good acts because they were brought up with a moral framework that would ensure those acts occurred? Or happen to have a genetic makeup that makes such acts more likely? Paradoxically, you yourself seem to consider absolute good and evil to exist. Certainly your indignation as to Gods potential treatment of what you consider a good person indicates as much. The definer of absolute good in this case being, of course, you. -
quote: I don't have to follow Gods rules. I want to and attempt to and very often fail to - but then again, I'm a child of his and my relationship to the law of God is other than an unbelievers relationship to it. You (as an unbeliever, I presume) don't have to follow Gods laws either, if you don't want to. The fact you break them every day is proof positive that you don't have to. Your point isn't clear to me otherwise. Could you reword it? -
quote: We all have to follow some path or other. We both chose which one. In my case the path I attempt to follow is defined by God. In your case it's an assembly of bits drawn from various sources and influences. How each path is made up is not the main point, that we chose the one we follow, is. -
quote: Determine good or bad against which measure? If it's your own measure, and your own measure can alter to suit your book then all you're saying is that; what you reason to be right is right and vice versa. The good samaritan and the paedophile can operate in precisely the same way. -
quote: Seeing as it is down to the (unbelieving) individual to decide whether they have done right or wrong and the meausure is the measure they themselves choose to apply, forgive me if I'm not all that impressed. The person who considers themselves to have done wrong makes a choice to consider so. The person who considers themselves to have done no wrong makes the choice to consider so. The same act can be viewed by the one as evil and the other as not evil - simply by applying their respective choices. But was it evil? -
quote: One thing that Gods standard says to me is that I, unlike you, don't need to fumble around in the dark wondering what is right and wrong anymore. I, unlike you, haven't the luxury of a) considering something I've done then b) deciding to reconfigure my moral framework so that what I previously considered wrong is now not wrong. I'm not saying you do this, but I'm saying you can do this if you like. Indeed, there is nothing stopping you doing this given that right and wrong can be whatever you chose them to be, whenever you chose them to be. Knowing the correct answer doesn't mean I always do the right thing. I'm a sinner and it is the tendency of believing sinners to know what is right yet do the wrong thing. How much harder to know for sure you've done the wrong thing, than know you can always reconfigure your morals so that you are always right - whatever any other moral relativist might say? Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
quote: I was talking about myself. I know what stealing is and I know it's wrong. And I wouldn't be able to reinterpret Gods word on the matter to suit my own book - even when I steal. He won't let me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1969 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
rueh writes: But you could use it for the purpose of killing? Many have used their religion to justify any action they want. These are just examples from the OT Your conflating Religion and Scripture - in my view. Of course you might say that there is no difference - in which case our disagreement would revolve around difference in definitions. Take this:
quote: Moses is reporting what God said - in which case it is not Religion who is instructing the killing but God. Or at least Gods mouthpiece: Moses. Ditto the other biblical examples. -
quote: If instructed to do so by God then they are, of course, justified. Justified by him, the highest court in the land ... and beyond. -
Sorry but I just don't believe that your individual belief justifies your actions or makes you any more moral than anyone else. Clearly God instructing the killing of others (even if the his instruction is delivered to the people through Moses) would not be an unrighteous thing - seeing as God can only act righteously by definition. Moses obviously wouldn't be acting unrighteously in carrying out Gods instructions - it's in the disobeying of Gods instructions that a man acts unrighteously afterall Similarily, any act of mine which is seen by God as righteous is righteous irrespective of what you believe about it. As it happens my many unrighteous acts are forgiven and forgotten. And the many 'righteous' acts of yours don't amount to a hill of beans if you come to stand before a holy God in your sin. It might not sound fair. But it is fair - it's the way God has it. This is what I believe. Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024