I'm not a religious person, but I'm still curious about this.
If lack of knowledge of christianity and Jesus means that you'll go to heaven, then did the missionaries really help anything by going to foreign countries? Weren't they better off in the first place?
For reference: John 15:22 "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin. "
Quotes
You shoulda gone to China. You know, 'cause I hear they give away babies like free iPods. You know they pretty much just put them in those t-shirt guns and shoot them out at sporting events.
... And then the Prince Knelt Down and tried to put the Glass Slipper on Cinderella's Foot by Judith Viorst
I really didn't notice that he had a funny nose.
And he certainly looked better dressed up in fancy clothes.
He's not nearly as attractive as he seemed the other night.
So I think I'll just pretend that this glass slipper feels too tight.
The beauty of life is, while we cannot undo what is done,
we can see it, understand it, learn from it and change.
So that every new moment is spent not in regret, guilt, fear or anger,
but in wisdom, understanding and love.
Jennifer Edwards
"The Christian system of Religion is an outrage on common sense" -- Thomas Paine
"The Hocus Pocus phantasy of a God, like another Cerberus, with one body and three heads, had its birth and growth in the blood of thousands and thousands of martyrs." -- Thomas Jefferson
"Reality sucks Thats why I play Hungry Hungry Hippo"
"So... what if i had a siamese penis?"
"My doctor says that I have a malformed public-duty gland and a natural deficiency in moral fiber, and that I am therefore excused from saving Universes."
A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward. - Franklin D. Roosevelt
You know, if a mere human was mentally split into three personas like your god he'd be in an insane assylm right?
Women who seek to be equal with men lack ambition.
Practice safe lunch: Use a condiment.
The attack on women's reproductive rights has nothing to do with life and everything to do with trying to put women back in their "place"
"you can always tell what kind a person a man thinks you are by the earrings he gives you" --- Audrey Hepburn
The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism. (Albert Einstein)
What I gather from that line is not about missionaries.... Basically what I get is that sin only exists WITHIN the Christian religion.
If you have no knowledge of the faith and religion so therefore have no basis for sin... yet can still get to heaven DESPITE committing sins... wouldn't that meant that only Christians and members of other religions would be going to hell?
Of course this includes Atheist and Agnostics, since they have knowledge of the religion and chose to ignore it for whatever reason.
I'm not religious either, but the idea is that withoug god in one's life one's life is not complete/full. That and the after life hierarchy. One does not get into heaven without accepting Jesus Christ as your lord and savor, etc, etc, but that does not mean everyone else goes to hell. There's loads of vague references and popular opinion shifts a lot, from a limbo to a purgatory like plane or place, what have you, where - sure, you're not in hell, but something wonderful and amazing is missing.
The idea isn't that shhh- and all will be well, as it is give the choice to better themselves.
When the Eskimo asked why the missionary told him, everyone cuts the famous quote off. But it finishes in one rendition with the missionary actually answering if it teaching his son to fish is wise, knowing that one day the whale might eat him. It's along the same lines, as corny as that is.
I am religious; I belong to Christianity, and am devot in the ways. I haven't been so all my life and had before converting, study religions for a while (Islam, Bahá'í faith, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Greek religion [Mythology to others] and a lot of Native American religions), but I am very much Christian. I can answer questions if you want.
Well, it is better off if they didn't convert, yes. But the purpose of them doing so was to spread the word of God and Jesus Christ, and therefore the love and the compassion Jesus Christ showed to all before him. Believing in God and Jesus Christ as your Savior and the Only Son of God is your way to His Kingdom and His love. It is really hard to explain, I'm not that good at wording what's in my head.
Quote:Of course this includes Atheist and Agnostics, since they have knowledge of the religion and chose to ignore it for whatever reason.
Christians, Children under 12 and people who have no knowledge of God, the Bible and Jesus Christ are safe, they will be taken to His Kingdom. I'm not sure about Agnostics, but I suppose that is true. There are other verses that narrate and explain these kind of situations as well.
(Question: People who are Atheist don't believe in God, Hell or Heaven anyway so why does it really matter? [I am not trying to be rude or anything, I'm generally interested in it...])
Quote:yet can still get to heaven DESPITE committing sins
Where did you get this from? In Christianity, this is not so. Though it is so in Islam (Even in Sin, you got to a level of Jeddah), Bahá'í faith (Follows every religion's prophet, but is of Islamic faith mostly) and I think Judaism (I think they can forgive themselves, or so a Rabbi told me), but that is not how it is in Christianity.
If you honestly repent for your Sins and never do it again after asking the Lord for forgiveness, you are well, forgiven. If you Sin, then yes, you won't be going to Heaven. And of course people of other religions (One that isn't Christianity, for example and going by OP) who don't believe in God, the Bible and Jesus Christ as their savior, won't be joining Him in His Kingdom.
(I hope I have not offended anyone with my post, that was the furthest intention I had. I was just trying to answer the OP and some of the posts here. If I had, I am terribly sorry, I had not meant it. :( )
Set by me, MagitekElite! Planet Development Artist, Author, Gamer, Music Maker (learning!) and Christian :)
Im a hard core atheist.
For one reason and one reason only.
People are almost always wrong.
In physics people who go and discover new things constanly have to deal with finding something that shatters what they thought they knew.But this doesnt deter them cause for them thats awesome.
Learning that your wrong helps them find the truth ad widdle down to what they were trying to find.
and if those people are wrong, Of course Anyone else guessing at our existence is also wrong.
I was agnostic for aloong time. Always thinking that maybe there is what but even if it was real it was a pointless quest to find it.If it was so vital to us to know god,Itd be easier to attain it.
Like air food and water,god would have to be in reach.Not without its troubles but not a massive problem either.
No religion tells us of this god with any accuracy.
But when I started to delve into physics and the history of physics.
All delusions of god being a maybe were shattered. The more I learn the less realistic the gods of religion become.
How can A god who can create the things like atoms also not be able to control humans with any accuracy?Emotion is not nearly as complex as Atoms or gravity.or anything alse for that matter.
Emotions do one thing and one thing only.They help you decide and grow an opinion.
However gravity is a law of the universe that binds us like the force.
The gods of religion are far too human.
And there in lines the problem.
God is a human. He has limits, and emotional complexities.Hes morally ambiguous but god as a title has always been explained as an all powerful all knowing being.That one little cliam is wrong.God is most defiantly not if the bible or other religious texts were accurate.
Another thing is that God seems to have different triats as the religion itself grows. Jehovah{Yahweh}
Is first described as a vengeful god Who chooses the jews as his people.The god slowly turns into a more fogiving character and his physical form seems to disappear over time.
in the universe we can see that Stars creates elements.They are as close to the god we're looking for that we have found.Now the questions behind the laws of physica themselves are being asked.And a great many possible answers can be true. But Im sorry for those with Faith.But you are most Wrong.
The problems with god are not only the limitations of the writters telling the tales but also the thing itself is highly improbable.
A being that has a conscious but no body? We have never found a single thing with the capacity of a brain without a physical being.And even if it was invisable without hard materials it would still need to be made of some form of energy.Or else it could not bend the powers or create them.
I think it simply boils down to a simple case of refrence. We are creators. So our first answer will be of course that the universe was created.
But thats silly, thats like an artist looking up and saying its merely a pianting,or a kids thinking it was mommy.Your refrence may seem deep.But its just cause our limited form of reference .We only have earth.and even with just earth those gods are defeated.Evolution by itself defeats every creation myth.
I also try to stay away from the more confronting argument that religion is dangerous.
but it is.Religion is the only reason why we have the silly debate of gay rights.the many different terrorists that kill in the name of their gods.
And some psuedo-intellegent people who are simply annoying.Religion can also be blamed of why we take seriously the republicans, Bnp, or any conservitive governing party who turn their back on their voters.
Religion creates over conflict.
And we take these sides seriously.
And yet theres a good reason why I avoid this very legitimate argument.
Cause without that conflict our world wouldnt have progressed as fast as it did.
if the conflicting engine that challenges our morals had been something like sports it would of took alot longer.
Cause we can use anything as a moral engine.
But the speed is important.
If religion wasnt so radically horrible we might have never realized what we accept and what is too far.
So I dont like religion and they are most definably wrong, however I know its an important moral engine.Its up to everyone else to decide for themselves to get a new faster moral engine.
Just to answer your li'l tiny fonted question, Magitek of why it doesn't matter if atheists don't believe in god, heaven or hell, etc.
Atheists are like Christians, there's loads of schools of thoughts, and some are actually very different. Atheists don't believe in god, that's not to say they don't believe in an afterlife. Those who follow Jainism are atheists, as are some schools of Buddhists. Both have an afterlife. But the real issue is a feeling of judgment and what is seen as a loophole, or hole in logic. It's effectively a challenge of logic for many, and also a philosophical quandary. One that exists in most, if not all cultures. It's a Pandora's Box.
If you open the box, and share the knowledge, you effectively doomed someone to exist in evil. Is it better to have kept the box shut? The classical versions use temptation as the catalyst. In this version, there's a reward instead. Open the box, share the knowledge and effectively doom someone to exist in evil - but, if they exist right, they get the better reward for it all. The silver star becomes the gold star.
These kinds of philosophical debates rarely actually deal outside of what would be considered a neutral hypothetical. The hypothetical being that heaven and hell exist for the purposes of the scenario, and that one will not go to heaven having being told, but otherwise not have been punished. Why did you doom that person?
But the argument is fairly moot in general Christianity, since like I said there's uncountable schools of thoughts, schisms and sub faiths, each one having varying believes and customs. So, for one, you don't accept Jesus, and you are told, you burn, another, you might simply exist in a place of missing.
Atheists believe in an afterlife? I never knew this...The Atheists I have met claimed nothing that religion gives off exists -- heaven, hell, sin...things like that. But then again, I was hanging out on a forum where they are known to publicly attack religious people...what are the thoughts of Atheism? Searches won't ever bring up actually good facts and whatnot...
I think I understand what you are saying (please bare with me, I am Dyslexic...). You mean to say that the box is the religion? You start the religion and therein doom someone who doesn't believe in it, to hell/ect? Right...?
God created these places to differ the people, to bring the people who were faithful to their Father and His Kingdom, who had faith in Him and His love (especially Sinners: Murderers, Rapists etc etc). It is really hard to explain and if I said it, either way would look a bit silly. Hmm...perhaps you could look at it like parents? If you were naughty, you were sent to your room (or so that's how children were punished) and when you were good, you remained ungrounded (free to walk around, for example). Think of it like that, but for God....sorta?
I was told before I turned to Christianity (though I never really found anything to support it and if I had, never thought anything of it) that if you don't believe in religion at all, you are brought before God's Kingdom when you die and will be asked to whom you believe, whom you will serve and love. But that seems a little too convenient? Or that might not be the correct word to use....
To be fair, those sub-branches of Christianity that say such things like "you shall burn" aren't the main Sub, if that makes sense. There are the Mystic Christians, for example. They believe that they can become what Paul said they couldn't and the Bible (and God) said they couldn't -- becoming Jesus Christ themselves. There are branches that differ so far from the true Christianity, it seems hardly fair to branch it together, but I suppose it must since that's where it started...
Set by me, MagitekElite! Planet Development Artist, Author, Gamer, Music Maker (learning!) and Christian :)
(04-12-2011, 06:41 AM)MagitekElite Wrote: Atheists believe in an afterlife? I never knew this...The Atheists I have met claimed nothing that religion gives off exists -- heaven, hell, sin...things like that. But then again, I was hanging out on a forum where they are known to publicly attack religious people...what are the thoughts of Atheism? Searches won't ever bring up actually good facts and whatnot...
I think I understand what you are saying (please bare with me, I am Dyslexic...). You mean to say that the box is the religion? You start the religion and therein doom someone who doesn't believe in it, to hell/ect? Right...?
God created these places to differ the people, to bring the people who were faithful to their Father and His Kingdom, who had faith in Him and His love. It is really hard to explain and if I said it, either way would look a bit silly. Hmm...perhaps you could look at it like parents? If you were naughty, you were sent to your room (or so that's how children were punished) and when you were good, you remained ungrounded (free to walk around, for example). Think of it like that, but for God....sorta?
I was told before I turned to Christianity (though I never really found anything to support it and if I had, never thought anything of it) that if you don't believe in religion at all, you are brought before God's Kingdom when you die and will be asked to whom you believe, whom you will serve and love. But that seems a little too convenient? Or that might not be the correct word to use....
To be fair, those sub-branches of Christianity that say such things like "you shall burn" aren't the main Sub, if that makes sense. There are the Mystic Christians, for example. They believe that they can become what Paul said they couldn't and the Bible (and God) said they couldn't -- becoming Jesus Christ themselves. There are branches that differ so far from the true Christianity, it seems hardly fair to branch it together, but I suppose it must since that's where it started...
An atheist only requires the opinion that god doesnt exist to earn the title.
There is no form of organised atheists,sense atheist dont set morals nor have a code.Its only the belief that god doesnt exist that we share.So any specifics like an after life that the creation myth created is naturally wrong to us too.We dont buy the god, why would we buy the devil or the afterlife?
Actualy disproving those can be as easy as pie with the right words.
For instance my stance is that morals are not objective,they dont exist for a higher purpose.
They are something we created to govern ourselves,based mostly off our emotions.
Using that logic I defeat the devil and god theory, cause morals arent objective no one is in control of them.
so the after life is an even simpler answer.
Without a brain there is no conscious.Thus the after life is irrelevant even if it were real, cause you wouldnt be able to experience something with out your brain.
In less then a paragraph, I have defeated those theories with words only.The basis of all which is science.
The previous limitations were destroyed when science discovered these truths.
It goes back to the whole Gandi and hell argument. so If hell isnt real niether can heaven be.Cause then even stalin would be there, and sence heaven aint true there is no purpose of the morals god sets, so the morals become non-objective.
Thus following god becomes pointless.It ripples down and destroyed itself.
Infact god has been disproven so many times most atheist tire of repeating themselves,because christians and other religions will simply expand the limitations of god by claiming something new,in a weird self debunking way.
I mean we went from having a god very angry and apparent to having something that doesnt necessarily need a body or that exists withen a made up box distinguishing Reality from non reality.
This is inherently flawed because it says basicaly yeah god doesnt exist, but he lives in non existence.
How inane.
All in a futile attempt to keep their god.which is so flawed they needed to bribe other religions by keeping in holidays or celebrations from pre-established Paganism.
The reality of this world is that humans dont know how it was created.We dont know.
That is our reality.Even as we learn more the fact that we're still learning 2000 years later means that of course gods fake.
If the Jews found god way back then none of science would be necessary we'd simply ask him.
Moses talked to him, jesus was born of him, and several others believed they talked to god.
But in reality Jesus was little more then a cult leader, Moses was a war tactician capable of fighting several successful ambushes.And such a good tactician he used his intellect against Freagen Egypt.
Noah was probably just a fisher man during a really bad storm.
You should never read the bible as if its a book of spiritual awarness.You should read it as fiction.
See if it stands up as fiction.I find that it doesnt.
also pearing into the bible and reading it will challenge your faith More then talking to an atheist.
Its what changed me.And so far the same story is with all religions the books and scriptures are just to fake.And only reading them yourself will you be able to know this.
I was tempted to put the bible down and burn it on 7 occassion because of the absalute bull they were spouting. Levitcus testes you even further by listing off things you cannot do and repeating the phrase I am Jehovah your lord. also included in that book is a nice little story about a son being burned in front og his own father and moses for not sacrificing an offering for personal sin and community.You can imagine that I read this in disgust.
Also the fact that a more public story of moses incounter with egypt shows that god is simply evily.
None of the desasters that he causes would hurt the egyptian more then the jews.and I think they were written in a bias manner from the opinion of the jews that wrote it down.
Cause god put Famine, pestilence on egypt.Both occassions would hit the jews hardest.
As an egyptian youd feed your family in the sight of crop shortage, the slaves would of been given scraps if anythig at all.
IN the pestilence the bugs could have spread their diseases to the jews as well.
And in the last and final sin of god in this one tale.Is killing the first borns.
In reality this would make The pharoh surround and sluaghter the jews, not free them.
I think this part was written as a tale of irony,to show karmatic events happening, but sence karma doesnt exist, the reality is less appealing.
What I think truely happened is that moses snuck em out or fought back, he was capable of military action by that time.He was soo keen he even knew the tides were low.
The propaganda later told is that god did it.
But like god himself this is just a theory and doesnt have to be the truth,
All I know is that the god of this bible is one of two things.
None existent, or not as described.
I'm breaking this into spoilers so as not to dive in and steal this thread...
On atheists not believing in an afterlife
Not all atheists, as I said there's multiple schools of thought. "Atheist" is effectively not believing in a deity. If one doesn't believe in a single deity, or group of deities, one can still believe in other spiritual aspects. So any religion that doesn't believe in a god, or gods, is effectively an atheist. It's a blanket term, NOT a specific religious view.
For three cheap examples:
I am a post-theist. I don't believe in, well, anything. I won't go into why or reasons, but basically heaven? Nope. Hell? Nope. God? Nope. Other spiritual aspects not based in our own existence (meditation for the sake of meditation can be considered "spiritual" so that's why I worded that - a bit clunky I know)? Nope.
A friend of mine is a - well, I don't know the name actually, but he's more of a nature lover. He believes in an after life, and he believes in ghosts. He also believes in nature itself being a sort of cosmic power. He tried to explain it but couldn't, he's bad with words, but he defined it as "believing in life". Does not believe in a god, or a deity of any sort, and therefore he is an atheist.
Lisa Simpson is a Buddhist, and she obviously follows a more introspective Buddhism. The spirits and demons and gods of some Buddhist faiths, they aren't in hers. She's also an atheist. Reincarnation, and effectively because she's a Buddhist, Nirvana are her forms of after life.
Now, despite being all atheists we all believe in different things. We all identify ourselves, not as an atheist, but as something else. I call myself, as stated, a post-theist. Even that term has more than one group, so if someone does know those terms, I might have to further explain that I'm a non-theist post-theist. BTW, being the type of post-theist I am, it means that I don't agree with the typical western Atheist attitude, though I may agree with the views, and often do not get along in philosophical debate or conjecture. Just to show the diversity of what an "atheist" is.
When I say "western atheist" I'm referring to the antitheism movement. Antitheists are against theism, and often against religion or religious bodies (such as a church). A good chunk of people who call themselves atheists in the western world are really Antitheists. The popular view from religious people on atheists, the idea that they purposely go out of their way to insult religion, or the sort, that comes from the antitheists. Chances are if you went into a highschool and saw someone dressed in black, and they said they were an atheist, and if asked why they respond with not with an argument of logic, but an argument of insults, they're probably an antitheist.
As for your smaller text, that's not really true.
There is no "main" branch of Christianity. There technically is no "Christianity" as far as a unified religion goes. Christianity is a unified belief, all Christians believe in Jesus Christ & his teachings. But like atheism, Christianity is a blanket term.
It really splits into two groups, Trinitarians and Nontrinitarians. Though the latter is a small minority. Each of those groups then splinter into smaller groups. For instance you have the early Christians who were gnostics. They split into groups. Eventually more splitting occurred. Protestants, Catholics, and the many Orthadox Christians. Each of these groups split even further. Lutherans, Baptists, Evangelists, Mormons, I can literally name dozens of groups all calling themselves, and referring to themselves as Christians, all carrying the banner of Christians, and none - absolutely none - being the same religion that the first Christians practiced. Granted, the same schools of thoughts are in all of these, but there are massive differences in scripture belief, even sacraments and value on existence.
However certain groups don't label themselves first as Christians. Like my examples above with atheists, not all call themselves atheists, but they consider themselves atheists. Catholics, for example, have been split from many other Christian faiths for their "saint worship" as it were. They are Christians, but because of the schisms and social movements, have, as a group, been labeled and labeled themselves as Catholics first.
Also, I'm an ordained minister in the Universal Life Church, and all I had to do was fill out an online form and answer to no skills are requirements at all, so I know what I'm talking about! MWA HA HA!
lulz. Minister Jacket.
As for the box, no it's not making the religion, it simply is the religion. By having someone open and look inside, you have doomed them to a life of evil. Beforehand they were ignorant of the evil. The evil could not harm them, nor could they harm it. Now that they are aware - like the concept of "original sin" - evil is real and released into their world.
The philosophical argument that I believe is being made (and the most common with this type of example) is basically that if that person would not accept Jesus, as in "never ever" would they have been better off in ignorance? If the Buddhist would have lived in his limbo world, or after life, not going to hell, were you better off condemning him to hell, knowing he will not convert? If the "Christian thing to do" is keep others safe and protected, is not the "Christian thing" to keep them ignorant and out of evil's harmful ways? What they don't know, won't hurt them, after all.
(04-12-2011, 07:51 AM)Jacket Wrote: I'm breaking this into spoilers so as not to dive in and steal this thread...
On atheists not believing in an afterlife
Not all atheists, as I said there's multiple schools of thought. "Atheist" is effectively not believing in a deity. If one doesn't believe in a single deity, or group of deities, one can still believe in other spiritual aspects. So any religion that doesn't believe in a god, or gods, is effectively an atheist. It's a blanket term, NOT a specific religious view.
For three cheap examples:
I am a post-theist. I don't believe in, well, anything. I won't go into why or reasons, but basically heaven? Nope. Hell? Nope. God? Nope. Other spiritual aspects not based in our own existence (meditation for the sake of meditation can be considered "spiritual" so that's why I worded that - a bit clunky I know)? Nope.
A friend of mine is a - well, I don't know the name actually, but he's more of a nature lover. He believes in an after life, and he believes in ghosts. He also believes in nature itself being a sort of cosmic power. He tried to explain it but couldn't, he's bad with words, but he defined it as "believing in life". Does not believe in a god, or a deity of any sort, and therefore he is an atheist.
Lisa Simpson is a Buddhist, and she obviously follows a more introspective Buddhism. The spirits and demons and gods of some Buddhist faiths, they aren't in hers. She's also an atheist. Reincarnation, and effectively because she's a Buddhist, Nirvana are her forms of after life.
Now, despite being all atheists we all believe in different things. We all identify ourselves, not as an atheist, but as something else. I call myself, as stated, a post-theist. Even that term has more than one group, so if someone does know those terms, I might have to further explain that I'm a non-theist post-theist. BTW, being the type of post-theist I am, it means that I don't agree with the typical western Atheist attitude, though I may agree with the views, and often do not get along in philosophical debate or conjecture. Just to show the diversity of what an "atheist" is.
When I say "western atheist" I'm referring to the antitheism movement. Antitheists are against theism, and often against religion or religious bodies (such as a church). A good chunk of people who call themselves atheists in the western world are really Antitheists. The popular view from religious people on atheists, the idea that they purposely go out of their way to insult religion, or the sort, that comes from the antitheists. Chances are if you went into a highschool and saw someone dressed in black, and they said they were an atheist, and if asked why they respond with not with an argument of logic, but an argument of insults, they're probably an antitheist.
As for your smaller text, that's not really true.
There is no "main" branch of Christianity. There technically is no "Christianity" as far as a unified religion goes. Christianity is a unified belief, all Christians believe in Jesus Christ & his teachings. But like atheism, Christianity is a blanket term.
It really splits into two groups, Trinitarians and Nontrinitarians. Though the latter is a small minority. Each of those groups then splinter into smaller groups. For instance you have the early Christians who were gnostics. They split into groups. Eventually more splitting occurred. Protestants, Catholics, and the many Orthadox Christians. Each of these groups split even further. Lutherans, Baptists, Evangelists, Mormons, I can literally name dozens of groups all calling themselves, and referring to themselves as Christians, all carrying the banner of Christians, and none - absolutely none - being the same religion that the first Christians practiced. Granted, the same schools of thoughts are in all of these, but there are massive differences in scripture belief, even sacraments and value on existence.
However certain groups don't label themselves first as Christians. Like my examples above with atheists, not all call themselves atheists, but they consider themselves atheists. Catholics, for example, have been split from many other Christian faiths for their "saint worship" as it were. They are Christians, but because of the schisms and social movements, have, as a group, been labeled and labeled themselves as Catholics first.
Also, I'm an ordained minister in the Universal Life Church, and all I had to do was fill out an online form and answer to no skills are requirements at all, so I know what I'm talking about! MWA HA HA!
lulz. Minister Jacket.
As for the box, no it's not making the religion, it simply is the religion. By having someone open and look inside, you have doomed them to a life of evil. Beforehand they were ignorant of the evil. The evil could not harm them, nor could they harm it. Now that they are aware - like the concept of "original sin" - evil is real and released into their world.
The philosophical argument that I believe is being made (and the most common with this type of example) is basically that if that person would not accept Jesus, as in "never ever" would they have been better off in ignorance? If the Buddhist would have lived in his limbo world, or after life, not going to hell, were you better off condemning him to hell, knowing he will not convert? If the "Christian thing to do" is keep others safe and protected, is not the "Christian thing" to keep them ignorant and out of evil's harmful ways? What they don't know, won't hurt them, after all.
Of course then jacket all of that seperation furthur proves how flawed their belief is, they cant even agree on the true meaning of the same god.
Further disestablishing any credibility that they know the truth at all.
Its probably best to treat Religion as the child it is and let science answer these things.
After all they're the only ones looking.
Being spiritual doesnt have to include religion or gods.So I wont except that as a good reason to leave religion be.
They are simply wrong.
Their stories dont hold up, they should stop being taken seriously as a result.
The universe is far bigger and greater then their god tales. A blackhole dwarfs every god Ive heard of and read about.
How amazing the life and death of a star.
Religious Question
In Christianity, this is not so. Though it is so in Islam (Even in Sin, you got to a level of Jeddah), Bahá'í faith (Follows every religion's prophet, but is of Islamic faith mostly) and I think Judaism (I think they can forgive themselves, or so a Rabbi told me), but that is not how it is in Christianity. ![[Image: 10shroo.jpg]](http://i52.tinypic.com/10shroo.jpg)
