Heaven/Hell/Purgatory

PDN

Wicknight wrote: »

Why?

I really can't understand this attitude that because God created us he can basically do what ever he likes with us.

Do you guys really believe that?

Leaving aside the question of if he would or not, if God tortured me for no reason would that be ok because he humans? That is a serious question, because I'm trying to establish if you guys consider any action by God to humans to be moral no matter what that action is.

No, I don't believe that God has the right to torture us. I don't see hell as God torturing us at all. I see hell as giving to us exactly what the Indians asked of the settlers - to be left alone.

I envisage hell as a place where people get to live for ever and are able to do whatever they want with each other. Given that I believe hell will be populated by immortal versions of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Genghis Khan, Pope Urban II, Pol Pot, and (if she fails to repent) Paris Hilton then it should be clear that any activity of God could not make such a scenario any more torturous.

Do I see it as moral that God allows those who reject him to live forever in such company - yes, absolutely.

djpbarry

PDN wrote: »

Homosexuals in Pakistan would probably find it pretty hellish that they face the death penalty if they act upon their sexual orientation.

This gentleman would appear to disagree:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4583911.stm

And besides, it was the British who criminalised homosexuality in Pakistan - it had little to do with Islam.

PDN wrote: »

the Islamic Republic of Pakistan denies that any of its citizens are gay. Coincidentally, the Islamic Republic of Iran makes a similar claim.

Pakistan is not an Islamic Republic, it is a federal democratic republic.

PDN wrote: »

Or maybe Amnesty are just making it all up?

I am well aware of human rights abuses that take place in Pakistan, but most have little to do with religion.

Anyway, this is all way OT.

PDN

Wicknight wrote: »

Who is accountable for you having a "sinful nature" in the first place? Who's fault is that? God's? Adam's? Mans? Yours?

I believe it is Adam's fault that I inherited a sinful nature. I am not accountable for my sinful nature. I am accountable for the sins I have chosen to commit. Having a sinful nature, or a propensity towards sin, does not alter the fact that I have free will and could choose to resist any individual temptation. Therefore I am accountable for my choices. It's simply taking responsibility for our own actions, hardly a shocking concept, I would have thought.

PDN

djpbarry wrote: »

This gentleman would appear to disagree:

And besides, it was the British who criminalised homosexuality in Pakistan - it had little to do with Islam.

So, one guy's experience (who freely admits he is 'an exception') makes Pakistan's homophobia OK? The British did indeed pass Section 377 of the Penal Code which prohibited homosexuality and stipulated a maximum prison sentence of 10 years. However, it was not the Brits who added the death penalty or that of public flogging - that was due to sharia law. Do you want to argue that sharia has little to do with Islam?

Pakistan is not an Islamic Republic, it is a federal democratic republic.

The country's official name is 'The Islamic Republic of Pakistan'. The fact that it is democratic or federal is irrelevant as to whether it is Islamic or not.

I am well aware of human rights abuses that take place in Pakistan, but most have little to do with religion.

The human rights abuses against the Ahmadis, according to Amnesty International, are entirely due to their religion. And those human rights abuses make the Islamic Republic of Pakistan a hellish place for those who are being abused.

Anyway, this is all way OT.

You were the one that wanted to make an issue of it.

Zombrex

PDN wrote: »

I believe it is Adam's fault that I inherited a sinful nature.

So to clarify, you believe that you being effected by the punishment by God for Adam's failing was Adam's fault

Did Adam understand that this would be the inevitable consequence of his action of eating the fruit?

Was it the inevitable consequence of his actions in the first place? Could God have chosen to punish Adam in a different fashion that didn't effect the rest of humanity?

Do you think this punishment was fair?

And finally do you understand why someone would think that it isn't fair?

PDN wrote: »

I am not accountable for my sinful nature. I am accountable for the sins I have chosen to commit. Having a sinful nature, or a propensity towards sin, does not alter the fact that I have free will and could choose to resist any individual temptation.

Yes but is it fair that God placed those temptations in you to begin with, as a punishment for Adam's actions? From the point of view of free will this clearly wasn't necessary, since Adam existed without this sinful nature and had free will, even the free will to sin.

So the ultimate question is what purpose does God putting the temptation to sin inside you serve? It was a punishment given to Adam, but why extend it to the rest of humanity?

You might say you don't know nor care, God did it so it must have been a good reason. But can you at least understand why this idea would trouble others like myself?

PDN wrote: »

It's simply taking responsibility for our own actions, hardly a shocking concept, I would have thought.

No, the bit that is shocking is that God would place this temptation to sin into all of humanity to punish one person.

If I was addicted to heroin that is not an excuse to rob someone for heroin money. That is bad, and it is still bad even if I am having a really hard time resisting the temptation of the heroin.

But that does not mean that if you got me addicted to heroin in the first place against my will, you wouldn't share some of the responsibility.

God placed the temptation to sin inside humanity as punishment for Adam. And you are quite right that that does not absolve us from taking responsibility for our own actions, in the same way a heroin addict must still be responsible for what he does. But the act of placing temptation inside is is still something that God can and should be held responsible for, in the same way that someone secretly injecting the heroin addict so they become addicted should be held responsible for.

No doubt you will say that we are God's creatures to do so as he wishes. If he wants to inject temptation into us he can, he can do what he likes with us.

But do you at least understand why people would have a problem with this?

Zombrex

PDN wrote: »

No, I don't believe that God has the right to torture us. I don't see hell as God torturing us at all. I see hell as giving to us exactly what the Indians asked of the settlers - to be left alone. I envisage hell as a place where people get to live for ever and are able to do whatever they want with each other. Given that I believe hell will be populated by immortal versions of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Genghis Khan, Pope Urban II, Pol Pot, and (if she fails to repent) Paris Hilton then it should be clear that any activity of God could not make such a scenario any more torturous.

Well hell is describe many times in the Bible as being a place of suffering

So I'm not sure how Biblically supported your concept of hell is. If that is actually what hell is I would much prefer that than heaven.

But that wasn't actually the point of my question. The point was to decide do you think there exists some things that it is immoral even for a god, to do to his creations?

djpbarry

PDN wrote: »

However, it was not the Brits who added the death penalty or that of public flogging - that was due to sharia law.

Pakistan was founded as a secular nation. Shariah law was introduced by one man, Zia-ul-Haq, and has since been gradually rescinded.

PDN wrote: »

The country's official name is 'The Islamic Republic of Pakistan'. The fact that it is democratic or federal is irrelevant as to whether it is Islamic or not.

No it is not irrelevant - it is not an Islamic state that practices Shariah law. Would Benazir Bhutto have been Prime minister if that were the case?

Pakistan only uses the "Islamic" name on its passports and visas. All government documents are prepared under the name of the Government of Pakistan.

Zombrex

Actually your comment on hell got me thinking PDN.

Hypothetically, if hell is a place created by God of eternal suffering and punishment, do you agree with atheists/skeptics like myself that the set up is ultimately unfair?

I ask because if you do then we both basically agree, and arguing this point is well pointless, because the difference is what we understand "hell" to supposed to mean, not our conclusion on the morality of God.

kelly1

Hello Wicknight, you've asked some important questions and I understand where you're coming from.

I don't know or understand why we inherited tendency to sin from Adam but I trust that it's somehow for our own good. It's part of God's plan. I believe God's love for us is beyond words. He did after all send His only Son in the flesh to die for our sins. We just don't have the wisdom to understand God's ways.

When God created Adam, he was just in the sight of God and worthy of Heaven and union with God. Adam was created with sanctifying grace in His soul making His soul like God (created in God image and likeness etc).

Adam's first sin destroyed the grace in his soul leaving him unfit for Heaven and union with God. So the question is why have we inherited the faults which Adam created in himself. It's a very good question which I'm going to research.

What I do know is that original sin is a privation rather than a burden we are given. We are born deprived of sanctifying grace and the grace which prevents us from sinning. Baptism restores sanctifying grace but we are still left with a moral weakness and a tendency to sin. I also know that God doesn't tempt us beyond our limit to resist. Any time we sin, we will find if we look honestly at ourselves, there was consent given to the sin. We chose the sin over God.

God can and does use temptation to make us realize that we need His grace in order to be holy. When we sin, we realize that our own efforts alone aren't sufficent. We depend on God entirely in order to be good (according to God's standards).

God bless,
Noel.

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

What I do know is that original sin is a privation rather than a burden we are given. We are born deprived of sanctifying grace and the grace which prevents us from sinning.

To me the ultimate question though is why did God design the universe like that in the first place?

For example, why do we need sanctifying grace to prevent us from sinning?

Understand I'm not asking how sanctifying grace prevents us from sinning, but rather why is the whole system created this way in the first place where we will be tempted to sin without grace.

It seems to me what you are saying is that God created humans with a sinful nature and then gave Adam grace so he wouldn't be tempted down that path.

He then removed that grace as punishment, and as such his offspring did not inherit this grace because it didn't exist any more. God doesn't insert the temptation to sin, he removes his grace and we revert to our true original nature. That is interesting because I've not encountered that explanation before.

To me though the question remains why set things up like this. Why give humans a sinful nature at all that requires grace to be nullified? The question becomes even more interesting when one factors in that God knew Adam would disobey and that God would remove his grace when designing the first humans.

kelly1 wrote: »

God can and does use temptation to make us realize that we need His grace in order to be holy.

Again the question to me would be why did he design us so that we need His grace to be holy?

I'm thinking of this from the point of view of a computer programmer. As a programmer nothing is in the program without me deciding that it will go into the program. Not only do I have complete control over the program, but more importantly the program won't write itself. I have to decide to design something some way or it doesn't get designed at all.

I'm saying this because there seems to be an assumption among a lot of theists (and I'm not apply this to you, just explaining my issue with the whole "answer" as given by Christianity in general), that these things are just givens. Of course we need God's grace to be holy! How else could we be holy?

The actual fact is that any infinite number of other ways.

God, just like an good programmer, must have picked this specific way for a reason, it didn't just happen on its own.

To me the reasons given so far don't make sense given what God is supposed to be.

I actually respect your stance "I don't know" more than theists who attempt to explain to me that this is the best way it could be or that God meant to do this or that.

kelly1

Wicknight wrote: »

To me the ultimate question though is why did God design the universe like that in the first place?

For example, why do we need sanctifying grace to prevent us from sinning?

Understand I'm not asking how sanctifying grace prevents us from sinning, but rather why is the whole system created this way in the first place where we will be tempted to sin without grace.

I suppose the answer to this is that we are created ultimately to live in union with God and not independent of Him. If we were good of our own accord, we would be inclined to forget about our Creator and become selfish. We would think we don't need God.
Didn't a similar thing happen in Ireland with the arrival of the Celtic Tiger? Money became our God and made us comfortable in ourselves and independent of God?

Wicknight wrote: »

It seems to me what you are saying is that God created humans with a sinful nature and then gave Adam grace so he wouldn't be tempted down that path.

Basically, as I see it, we of ourselves are nothing and God is everything. We need God's grace in order to be something, to be like God. Ultimately, because we are God's children by virtue of our baptism, we will inherit all that God our Father has and we will then have everything. Even in this life our goal should be to increase constantly in grace. God freely gives of His grace when we do His will.

Does this make sense?

Noel.

bill_ashmount

It genuinely saddens me that people can believe in this stuff and also that they feel the punishments are justified. I'm glad I won't be in heaven to share eternity with these people.

Latchy

Sombody in another post (cant find it ) mentioned somthing about 'why did god make the universe the way he did and all this talk of heaven /hell / purgatory ,it's only when we look to the skys that we can see with our own eyes any tangible evidence of a higher power that we call ' god ' a view so amazing that it is impossible to explain in human terms although we try understand it ,it is really byond us ( scientists and theologians will have done so better ) .We can only understand that whoever is responsible for this wonderous thing also included us in his /her /it's plan and we only have guess work as to what it is ....

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

I suppose the answer to this is that we are created ultimately to live in union with God and not independent of Him. If we were good of our own accord, we would be inclined to forget about our Creator and become selfish. We would think we don't need God.

Why were we created to need God/live in union with God in the first place?

Have you actually considered that question, or do you simply take it as a given that we would just be designed to need this just because we are designed to need this.

Again it goes back to the programmer example. Say I'm making a web application. I need a programming language that connects well with my database. They need to work together well. But they only need to work together well because I'm designing a web application. If I wasn't they wouldn't. Therefore I wouldn't take the assertion "my PL needs to interface well with my database" as just a given universally.

So the question for me is why were we created this way to begin with. Why does my programming language need to connect to my database well (why do we need God's grace?)

kelly1 wrote: »

Basically, as I see it, we of ourselves are nothing and God is everything.

Speak for yourself

kelly1 wrote: »

We need God's grace in order to be something, to be like God.

Yes but only because God has designed us like that.

The question is why?

Why did God design us to need his Grace in the first place? He could have designed us to not need his Grace, and to be honest that would make more sense if God is supposed to love us.

Again you seem to just be accepting these things that you are told without thinking does that actually make sense?

So you say we need God's grace to be something. And I ask, why did God design the universe so we need his grace to be something?

kelly1 wrote: »

Does this make sense?

Well to be honest I'm not quite sure you understand my questions.

Zombrex

latchyco wrote: »

it's only when we look to the skys that we can see with our own eyes any tangible evidence of a higher power that we call ' god ' a view so amazing that it is impossible to explain in human terms

Actually it is quite easy to explain in human terms. Trillions of stars converting hydrogen into helium producing high amounts of light energy through this process.

Latchy

Wicknight wrote: »

Actually it is quite easy to explain in human terms. Trillions of stars converting hydrogen into helium producing high amounts of light energy through this process.

Yea, but who made the bleeding things, the sun ,earth , moon ,mars, venus and why are we/ they there LOL ......perhaps i need to brush up on my science and leave the innocent wonder aside ? ...no never

kelly1

bill_ashmount wrote: »

It genuinely saddens me that people can believe in this stuff and also that they feel the punishments are justified. I'm glad I won't be in heaven to share eternity with these people.

Hello Bill, what saddens me is people's lack of trust in God. I wish people could only see how wonderfully loving God is. God is essentially love itself. God sent His only Son to die for us. How could God love us any more than this?

And people respond to God's love by throwing it back in His face and living as if He didn't exist. That is what's really sad.

God bless,
Noel.

coffee_cake

kelly1 wrote: »

God is essentially love itself. God sent His only Son to die for us. How could God love us any more than this?

His only son who knew he'd be headed back to heaven for an eternity anyway... doesn't seem like much of a sacrifice. For a fully human person, of course it would say a lot more. But this is a god you're talking about.
And if god is love itself, god wouldn't punish everyone for something Adam did, I'm reading Wicknights questions and looking forward to more thorough responses than "god is love and that's just how it is"...

Latchy

PDN wrote: »

Actually, there is. Anything under 100 means you're out. That means just one sin in an entire lifetime means you miss the pass mark.

It's a pretty stiff task, I know that I've already failed by a long way. In fact there's only ever been one guy in the history of the human race who made the pass mark.

The good news is that the one guy who did make the pass mark also worked out a way for the rest of us to get in on his guest pass. The bad news is that a lot of people would rather reject his kind offer and instead spend their time whining about how unfair the whole process is.

It takes all sorts.

So basicaly the whole lot of us ie, human race (bar a few) are all off to hell ? must be very over crowded there.

Zombrex

latchyco wrote: »

Yea, but who made the bleeding things, the sun ,earth , moon ,mars, venus and why are we/ they there LOL ......perhaps i need to brush up on my science and leave the innocent wonder aside ? ...no never

Well I suppose it depends on if you look at something and automatically think "Who made that?"

kelly1

bluewolf wrote: »

His only son who knew he'd be headed back to heaven for an eternity anyway... doesn't seem like much of a sacrifice.

It was attitudes like this that caused Jesus' agony in the garden of Gethsemane. Not much of a sacrifice??? How would you like to whipped till you were covered with blood and wear a crown of thorns and have to carry the instrument of your own torture up and hill and have nails hammered throught your hands and feet and hang on a cross till you died???? And after all that be mocked for it??

bluewolf wrote: »

For a fully human person, of course it would say a lot more. But this is a god you're talking about.

***NewsFlash*** Jesus is fully human (and fully divine) but I suppose you think this is ridiculous too.

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

I wish people could only see how wonderfully loving God is.

Well considering they have recently figured out how to trick the brain into triggering these "religious experience" sensations in the human brain, that might be easier than you think.

kelly1 wrote: »

God sent His only Son to die for us. How could God love us any more than this?

Well in my view if God loved us he would not have created a universe where suffering is possible.

djpbarry

kelly1 wrote: »

God sent His only Son to die for us. How could God love us any more than this?

That doesn't sound terribly loving at all. How could a loving father send their Son to their death? Surely it would have been easier, as Wicknight has pointed out, to just do a better job designing us in the first place? Then Jesus would not have had to endure any suffering.

Latchy

Wicknight wrote: »

Well I suppose it depends on if you look at something and automatically think "Who made that?"

And the answer is always the same , sombody or in the case of the universe ' somthing ' but like the priest or religious instrctor asking you at school ' who made the world' ? and we replied 'God ' because we were told he did, and we belived it as we are taught ,but niether he nor anybody else could prove that god does exist and we are taught as catholics that even to comtemplate such a thought is a sin , which can way heavy on an innocent childs mind .Then we are back into the relem of fear ' heaven and hell ' .

djpbarry

latchyco wrote: »

Yea, but who made the bleeding things, the sun ,earth , moon ,mars, venus and why are we/ they there LOL ......perhaps i need to brush up on my science and leave the innocent wonder aside ? ...no never

The universe is an extremely complex system - why the need to make it even more so by introducing the idea of a creator? The next logical question is, who created the creator?

Zombrex

latchyco wrote: »

And the answer is always the same

Your missing the point. The question doesn't apply, so the answer is irrelevant.

Its like asking "Does toast enjoy being toast?"

BrianCalgary

bill_ashmount wrote: »

It genuinely saddens me that people can believe in this stuff and also that they feel the punishments are justified. I'm glad I won't be in heaven to share eternity with these people.

And I'm sorry that you won't be in Heaven to share in all the joys that life has to offer.

coffee_cake

BrianCalgary wrote: »

And I'm sorry that you won't be in Heaven to share in all the joys that life has to offer.

Life? Isn't it afterlife?

kelly1 wrote:

Not much of a sacrifice??? How would you like to whipped till you were covered with blood and wear a crown of thorns and have to carry the instrument of your own torture up and hill and have nails hammered throught your hands and feet and hang on a cross till you died???? And after all that be mocked for it??

Not much, but then I don't have the ability to snap my fingers and end it.
And what about all the other people to whom this cross punishment happened, why don't you talk about their sacrifice

***NewsFlash*** Jesus is fully human (and fully divine) but I suppose you think this is ridiculous too.

Since the divinity gave him the knowledge of what was going to happen (I assume? from recalling random quotes...) and so on, then it isn't the same as any of us being fully human and uncertain.

BrianCalgary

djpbarry wrote: »

That doesn't sound terribly loving at all. How could a loving father send their Son to their death? Surely it would have been easier, as Wicknight has pointed out, to just do a better job designing us in the first place? Then Jesus would not have had to endure any suffering.

It shows how intense God's love is for us, that He would do such a thing.

bill_ashmount

BrianCalgary wrote: »

And I'm sorry that you won't be in Heaven to share in all the joys that life has to offer.

Thank you.

I hope everyone you know and love makes it, because i know that I couldn't enjoy it if even one person i loved/respected didn't make it. The thought of their pain would diminish the experience for me.