Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Please Read OP)

Masteroid

lmaopml wrote: »

So, very simply lets leave God behind folks in this enlightened era. We can do it all on our own - we can agree that we are animals, albeit exceptionally gifted ones with the ability to view the cosmos, explore it and understand it, see beauty, but what is that only a fiction, it's our chemicals doing what they do best - let's get out the calculator..

- at the end of the day let's just be reasonable, and as such we can permit anything form abortion to euthanasia - because we're worth it. Life is a pain after all, and choices are painful.

That's what we can do best. We kill pain, we kill everything that involves pain, even the patient because it's kind of ugly dealing with that stuff, and we're not equipped to do anything more than make it go away - there is absolutely no character building in any kind of pain, and provide inoculation to the general public in the form of our rationality, our reasoning and knowing the price of everything, and simultaneously knowing the value of nothing.


..and amazingly enough you wonder why you don't make sense to some people with this brand new world.

No thanks.

We are already doing 'it' on our own. It's just that some people behave as if they are in the care of a cosmic babysitter.

You simply cannot have freedom if you have to have faith.

Masteroid

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Or the logic behind an omnipotent being giving up his omnipotence in order to give lesser beings free will, and thus futzing up his own creation.

Lesser? You see, that is precisely my problem - I AM NOT LESSER.

Than anything!

God wanted robots and I said,

"NO! I will eat of the fruit of any tree I desire.

Unless, of course, I am a slave - to do and never question why. But then, what need for robots?"

I am not lesser. I am the height of evolution.

God did not create me to be like Him, they created Him to be like me.

And that is where He derives His strength.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to say so and I am quite sure that you agree.

Masteroid

philologos wrote: »

Lantus: wishful thinking. Unless you fundamentally change the human condition these problems will just manifest themselves in other forms. Humans are inherently selfish and are inherently inclined towards wrong doing.

Indeed there's only one person who will and can restore us as human beings and this creation.

Mother Theresa?

Masteroid

Sacksian wrote: »

That hasn't been my experience at all and I'm sorry that your experience has led you to that conclusion.

Hopefully, in time, perhaps with broader experiences or reading, you'll develop a more positive opinion of humanity.

Good luck with your journey!

Indeed. And it is a pity that the word is run by people who 'believe' this and abandon themselves to evil as prescribed.

If you tell people they are evil then have a good reason for acting evil.

Tell someone he is actually a good person and he feels guilty.

From guilt comes repentance.

From repentance comes restoration.

Evil people only have to live as God created them and good people have to fight against the way that God created evil people.

That is the wrong message to send to our children.

How about - 'We were created good and must fight those who are evil'.

Wouldn't that be a better message?

I mean, if we were created sinful and we didn't create ourselves then everyone has an excuse for being evil - God made us that way.

Do you see? He created us to choose evil and the world we live in proves it.

God gave us an excuse to be evil and we took it like a child would take sweets from a priest.

Greedily and 'punishably'. Religion is about earning punishment. Flagellation. Beat yourself mercilessly until God forgives you.

(I reckon that the 'Opus Dei' don't reckon that there are a billion Catholics in the world. They probably think that most 'Catholics' need saving.)

Point is, and I'm sure you agree, Sacksian, if you tell your children they are sinful and they tell their children that they are sinful then what you end up with, after a few generations, is sinful children.

Whereas, if you tell your children that they are good and they tell their children that they are good then what you get is less sinful.

Isn't it time to change the program?

Masteroid

philologos wrote: »

How condescending!

Tell me if you look around you, if you pick up the newspaper, if you have any form of interaction with other people, are you telling me that wrongdoing isn't commonplace?

I'm sure even on the basis of today's news I could show you a litany of cases of human wrongdoing.

Am I wrong? Or are you going to say that a bit more reading will make me wish reality away?

Man was created in the Lord's image. Yet we fell and as a result there are clear consequences of this around us. The great news is that there us a Saviour, Jesus who will one day restore all things.

Secular humanism is absolutely absurd wishful thinking that doesn't grapple with truth.

Exactly.

Teach a dog that it is a 'biter' and it will bite.

Teach a child he is sinful and he will be sinful.

Teach a child he is good and ...

It's not rocket science.

Masteroid

Sacksian wrote: »

If I look around me, "wrongdoing" is the exception.

That is an incontrovertible fact.

If I tried to explicitly look for "wrongdoing", I'm sure I could find some but I'd find a hell of a lot more mundane behaviour.

Well said dude.

It is as if most people are fighting against the way they were created.

It is the ultimate in 'divide and conquer' - the religionists have got us fighting against ourselves.

To be good, I have to overcome.

To be evil, I have to be as God made me.

If God had just made us 'not sinful' then we could have behaved as we were meant to be without ever having a concept of God.

In other words, 'Evil is what nourishes the Hebrew God of war'.

And earth is a big old plantation of evil that is ripe the whole year round.

Doesn't that make more sense than a Jehovah's Witness choosing 'evolution' over modern medicine?

Masteroid

Morbert wrote: »

Secular humanism does not hinge on the assumption that man is ultimately "good" or just, or that kindness will ultimately win over selfishness. Instead, it is merely the practise of doing our best to be compassionate individuals, and to nurture those facets of our humanity that permit respect and peace, in spite of the angry, selfish, ruthless facets.

To be fair, we actually think Christianity is the position that does not grapple with the truth. The one thing you cannot accuse atheists of is wishful thinking. Most of us would subscribe to the part of Marxism that posits materialism and resource as the primary motivation behind atrocities. Thus, we see men who claim to do God's work cause great destruction and misery, just as we see men who curse God's name cause great destruction and misery.

Absolutely and I hope you'll forgive me but we may as well talk amongst ourselves.

Would you agree that the idea of all humanity behaving in a Godly way is the path to 'unGodliness'?

And further that it is in fact 'evil' that gives relevance to God? i.e., God must 'purport the threat of terrorism' in order for us to perceive that we are protected from terrorism.

Why can't an ego-less, omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient being protect us invisibly? Why does God always want to be in the 'lime-light'?

Personally, I am always suspicious of that which seems to be self-serving.

And I wonder why no-one ever asks - Why does the creator of existence need my soul?'

You see, I am of the opinion that it is 'I' who needs my soul.

Am 'I' the creator of existence?

Masteroid

Lantus wrote: »

There is no such thing as a bad person or an evil person or a stupid or selfish person. People are products of society and their environment. When we learn to socially engineer better living environments then most of the problems we have today and the drachonian laws we uphold to try to 'force' behaviour would simply not exist.

How can something that doesn't exist be a 'product' of anything?

Don't let your morality distract you from the truth.

There are evil and selfish people and there are even more stupid people.

Come on dude, there are actually people who ring those 0898 Tarot Tarot Tarot phone-lines.

There are even people who vote on X-Factor and politicians.

This kind of mis-guidedness is the food of the exploiters. They can turn a man's stupidity into their wealth. It's like magic. They have an epiphany and they become endebted.

Crazy. They should be asking me, not I them.

Point is, don't clutter your own mind with your own ideals. Your ideals don't exist in the real world but the rest of the real world thinks its ideals ought to be manifest in you.

Don't be fooled by ideals as ideals only ever work in theory and never in practice.

This is important. God is everywhere, outside and in. If that is true then no-one can claim to know themselves more than you know yourself.

Be what you are but realise that you will 'tend' to be a bit like 'them'.

Fight it.

And evolve.

nagirrac

I think one of the problems with Christianity is that many (most?) Christians do not understand what Christ's message was. I think it's clear enough if you read the gospels. The biggest mistake many Christians make imho is the thinking that Christ's teaching refers to a next life (the kingdom of God), while it is actually all about this life. Jesus Christ had no time for the rich, for kings, priests, or merchants, he did not think you could follow the path of money and do God's will.

There are many people who take false ideas from his teachings, and think he was just a bit of a hippy philosopher and what he said was not that relevant to day to day life. Sure its easy to balance being a good Christian and supporting George Bush. My reading of the gospels is that he was very specific in who he was talking to and not talking to, and he wasn't talking to Dick Chaney.

Masteroid

lmaopml wrote: »

So, very simply lets leave God behind folks in this enlightened era. We can do it all on our own - we can agree that we are animals, albeit exceptionally gifted ones with the ability to view the cosmos, explore it and understand it, see beauty, but what is that only a fiction, it's our chemicals doing what they do best - let's get out the calculator..

- at the end of the day let's just be reasonable, and as such we can permit anything form abortion to euthanasia - because we're worth it. Life is a pain after all, and choices are painful.

That's what we can do best. We kill pain, we kill everything that involves pain, even the patient because it's kind of ugly dealing with that stuff, and we're not equipped to do anything more than make it go away - there is absolutely no character building in any kind of pain, and provide inoculation to the general public in the form of our rationality, our reasoning and knowing the price of everything, and simultaneously knowing the value of nothing.


..and amazingly enough you wonder why you don't make sense to some people with this brand new world.

No thanks.

Well, I was with you for the first couple of paragraphs but then you started to unravel.

However, your conclusion, although it was based on the empiricism of the first two paragraphs, is rife with unnecessary assumptions.

You go from saying that, and I'm paraphrasing here, 'we want to cure our headache' to 'we want to kill anyone who has a headache'.

It seems unreasonable to me that wanting to be pain-free should be considered as a road to euthanasia and I wonder what your reasoning is.

It's a bit like saying, 'God created sinners to destroy evil'.

Well, although that is what appears to be happening, then by that logic, we are built to destroy ourselves.

Everybody is an enemy of someone by virtue of the fact that they are born into a world of conflicting ideologies.

I reckon that the last man standing is God and once again, He'll be alone forever. He will end up with the only Utopia that can be maintained, His.

We can't help who we are but we can change. We can't help how others are but we can change.

If we can help them then perhaps they will help us?

Oops.Sounds like idealism and we know that that doesn't work.

What then must we do?

How about- We all prepare for war?

Ah, but that's just it - 'they' already have.

And how quickly we renounce our faith with a sword at the throats of our loved ones.

God can wait. My problems are more immediate and the future of 'God's plan' depends on what we do next.

So, don't you see, it's up to us? The ball is in our court. Pick up a sword, don't pick up a sword, it's up to you.

But you will be in a sword fight so it would be better for you if you were prepared.

Religion, creed. These are 'people separators'.

But everyone understands 'swords'.

Masteroid

philologos wrote: »

If it is the exception, why has every single person done wrong in their lives? That's not just an exception, if it affects every single person it is an epidemic. It affects all of us, and has affected all of us.

If anything to quote you



See above. Unless you're saying that you've never done anything wrong (in which case you'd be a liar, but let's roll with it) sin has affected every single mortal human being irrespective of how "good" or how "moral" they might feel. Every single person has fallen short.

Indeed, that's why the Bible says that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23), and as a result we are all guilty before Him. Thankfully, God in His loving mercy sent Jesus to stand in our place, take the full punishment so that we could be forgiven.

Refusing to acknowledge that there is something wrong with the human condition is a fundamental denial of reality and is wishful thinking.



People know inherently what is good and what is evil even if they attempt to cop out with this "relative morality" stuff.

If I wrong you, I wrong you.

If I was fieldshooting humans on a Sunday, you'd rebuke me, and presumably have me arrested, because it is manifestly obvious that that is wrong.

You don't spend ages contemplating and humming about saying "well what if in his moral code that fieldshooting humans is OK, why are we imposing our values on him".

No sane person does that. When they are wronged they appeal inherently for justice to be done.

The problem is that if God did justice to us all, we'd all stand guilty because we've all done wrong, but instead in His kindness God visits His justice upon Jesus so that we can be forgiven.

What a wonderful truth.

So how did that go? Did the 'Son' draw the short straw? Did the 'Father' and the 'Holy Spirit' just get lucky?

Your view seems to be that God sacrificed Himself in order to absolve all of mankind of mortal sin. (If you hold to the Trinity.)


It doesn't even make sense. What is the point of worshipping a God who has apparently committed suicide?

Masteroid

tommy2bad wrote: »

I agree with this and so do most Christians, fear and desire cause most of the troubles in the world.
Basic message of Christ was love one another.

If bad, selfish and evil people don't exist then what are you people preaching for?

Masteroid

tommy2bad wrote: »

Hey when it comes to finding reasons for what seems unexplainable christians hold no monoplly.
Your right God dosn't provide a set of instructions on how to achive world peace and the end to hunger...no wait! He dose!
Blame Charlton Heston for any misunderstandings since then :P

Wouldn't it have been easier just to say that you agree with Lantus and Zombrex?

Why do you have to try and be 'engmatic'?

Masteroid

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Christianity offers a different order of explanation and a different avenue of investigation. Very broadly speaking, it might be reduced to exploring the origin and nature of evil.

Oh! Why didn't you say so? I can help you out here.

Okay, everything was cool at the end of day six and we know this because God saw that all was 'very good'.

But on day eight, God planted the 'Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil'.

If I were you, I'd focus the investigation on the events of the Sabbath.

Evil got in somehow but only one 'entity' had a key.

In the words of Homer Simpson,

"It was like that when I got here."

Masteroid

nagirrac wrote: »

I think one of the problems with Christianity is that many (most?) Christians do not understand what Christ's message was. I think it's clear enough if you read the gospels. The biggest mistake many Christians make imho is the thinking that Christ's teaching refers to a next life (the kingdom of God), while it is actually all about this life. Jesus Christ had no time for the rich, for kings, priests, or merchants, he did not think you could follow the path of money and do God's will.

There are many people who take false ideas from his teachings, and think he was just a bit of a hippy philosopher and what he said was not that relevant to day to day life. Sure its easy to balance being a good Christian and supporting George Bush. My reading of the gospels is that he was very specific in who he was talking to and not talking to, and he wasn't talking to Dick Chaney.

Well, you might think so but the New Tesstament is largely St. Paul's understanding of the words he was told that Jesus said.

Brian Shanahan

lmaopml wrote: »

How does that destroy my arguement?

Because you are using Hitler as an example of your "hypothesis" that godlessness leads to evil, when in fact it shows that, all too often, a god-full society is the one which leads to evil.

philologos

Masteroid wrote: »

Exactly.

Teach a dog that it is a 'biter' and it will bite.

Teach a child he is sinful and he will be sinful.

Teach a child he is good and ...

It's not rocket science.

It's not rocket science because it is nonsense. Telling someone they don't have cancer doesn't mean that they don't have it. Telling someone that they have done good when they haven't or telling someone the human condition is inherently good when its obvious that that isn't true from looking around us is an absurdity.

Engaging with truth is far better. I'll be going through the other posts later.

Delirium

philologos wrote: »

It's not rocket science because it is nonsense. Telling someone they don't have cancer doesn't mean that they don't have it. Telling someone that they have done good when they haven't or telling someone the human condition is inherently good when its obvious that that isn't true from looking around us is an absurdity.

Engaging with truth is far better. I'll be going through the other posts later.

You'd do well not to not to claim that people are inherently bad/wicked then.

And telling someone from a young age they are wicked/evil will undoubtedly have a negative impact on their mind as they grow. They may not become a serial killer but it's certainly not conducive to a healthy mind.

nagirrac

Masteroid wrote: »

Well, you might think so but the New Tesstament is largely St. Paul's understanding of the words he was told that Jesus said.

I am by no means a biblical scholar but my understanding is that St. Paul's writings are largely based on his own visions or revelations while the gospels are believed to be based on eye witness accounts. Is there any evidence for example that Paul ever spoke to any of the disciples, some of whom would surely have still being alive while he was writing?

I understand that St. Paul was essentially the founder of the early Christian church and the New Testament is largely his writings, which apparently predate the gospels. However, there are many discrepencies between the gospels (which admittedly have discepencies themselves, mainly between John and the other three) and the writings of St. Paul in terms of what Jesus is supposed to have said. To try and understand Christianity I think you have to delve into the reasons for these discrepencies from an unbiased perspective. This is very difficult to do given how much theologians and skeptics alike try and bend the evidence in their favor.

Skeptics would argue there is no credible evidence that Jesus existed at all while theologians argue that the New Testament from a historical perspective is entirely consistent and validated by non Christian theologians of the time (Josephus for example)). I suspect the truth must lie somewhere in between. My original point still stands which is what Jesus was supposed to have said according to the gospels bears little resemblance to what Christianity has been in practice since his death.

philologos

nagirrac wrote: »

I think one of the problems with Christianity is that many (most?) Christians do not understand what Christ's message was. I think it's clear enough if you read the gospels. The biggest mistake many Christians make imho is the thinking that Christ's teaching refers to a next life (the kingdom of God), while it is actually all about this life. Jesus Christ had no time for the rich, for kings, priests, or merchants, he did not think you could follow the path of money and do God's will.

There are many people who take false ideas from his teachings, and think he was just a bit of a hippy philosopher and what he said was not that relevant to day to day life. Sure its easy to balance being a good Christian and supporting George Bush. My reading of the gospels is that he was very specific in who he was talking to and not talking to, and he wasn't talking to Dick Chaney.

Show me how it is a mistake

John 5:19-29 wrote:

So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise. For the Father loves the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing. And greater works than these will he show him, so that you may marvel. For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.
“Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.

tommy2bad

philologos wrote: »

Show me how it is a mistake

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A34-40&version=NIV

Like a lot of things is not an either/or.

philologos

koth wrote: »

You'd do well not to not to claim that people are inherently bad/wicked then.

And telling someone from a young age they are wicked/evil will undoubtedly have a negative impact on their mind as they grow. They may not become a serial killer but it's certainly not conducive to a healthy mind.

Misinterpretation of the week?

What I am saying is that humans are inclined towards doing wrongdoing. To say that this is true, or that this is a common expectation is just to observe what's true around us. At some point or another we're going to fail, we're going to muck up, and more than likely hurt others.

I think it is more healthy to give people a realistic idea of the world and that there is indeed something wrong here than to claim that this are all great and that we can in and of ourselves construct some kind of utopia.

I'm also not saying that all things are pointless. That would be the last thing that I would say as a Christian. But what I am saying is that things are broken here, and we can't ultimately fix it unless we radically change the human heart which isn't something that you and I can do. Yes we can go for the symptoms or the consequences of the evil intentions that we often have, but these will become manifest again and again in a multitude of ways.

There is only one way that the fundamental nature of man can begin to be restored, thankfully as a result of the saving death of Jesus we have the opportunity to look back to the only one who can transform us, the one who made us, and the one whom we rebelled against. It is by looking back to God repenting and putting our full trust in Him.

Any thesis that undermines the real cause of hatred, suffering, bitterness, exploitation, greed and anything else will fail. The real cause is our sinful nature:

Mark 7:14-23 wrote:

And he called the people to him again and said to them, “Hear me, all of you, and understand: There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him.” And when he had entered the house and left the people, his disciples asked him about the parable. And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?” (Thus he declared all foods clean.) And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”

This is a far more pertinent to reality than the atheistic "relative morality" perspective.

philologos

tommy2bad wrote: »

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A34-40&version=NIV

Like a lot of things is not an either/or.

??

What are you responding to? -

The New Testament is explicitly clear that there is eternal life. It is clear that his teaching is applicable in real life, but that there is very clearly a hereafter also. Therefore it is wrong to conclude that there is no idea of eternity in Jesus' outlook.

tommy2bad

philologos wrote: »

??

What are you responding to? -

The New Testament is explicitly clear that there is eternal life. It is clear that his teaching is applicable in real life, but that there is very clearly a hereafter also. Therefore it is wrong to conclude that there is no idea of eternity in Jesus' outlook.

Well yeah but then again no one did, apart from you who insisted that Jesus spoke about the kingdom meaning the afterlife when nagirrac stated that Jesus talked about the world here and now. Or have I gotten it wrong somewhere?
I'm just saying that it not one or the other but both. Life isn't what happens after we die, eternal life starts at birth, or conception or even before that in some mystic traditions.

philologos

tommy2bad wrote: »

Well yeah but then again no one did, apart from you who insisted that Jesus spoke about the kingdom meaning the afterlife when nagirrac stated that Jesus talked about the world here and now. Or have I gotten it wrong somewhere?
I'm just saying that it not one or the other but both. Life isn't what happens after we die, eternal life starts at birth, or conception or even before that in some mystic traditions.

??

I'm confused as to what relevance that has to my post.

nagirrac said that Jesus' teaching didn't concern the hereafter, and Jesus clearly said it did. That's my point. The Gospels very clearly do point to eternal life.

If you think that eternal life really means finite, then you should consider what the word eternal means.

Delirium

philologos wrote: »

Misinterpretation of the week?

What I am saying is that humans are inclined towards doing wrongdoing. To say that this is true, or that this is a common expectation is just to observe what's true around us. At some point or another we're going to fail, we're going to muck up, and more than likely hurt others.

I think it is more healthy to give people a realistic idea of the world and that there is indeed something wrong here than to claim that this are all great and that we can in and of ourselves construct some kind of utopia.

I'm also not saying that all things are pointless. That would be the last thing that I would say as a Christian. But what I am saying is that things are broken here, and we can't ultimately fix it unless we radically change the human heart which isn't something that you and I can do. Yes we can go for the symptoms or the consequences of the evil intentions that we often have, but these will become manifest again and again in a multitude of ways.

There is only one way that the fundamental nature of man can begin to be restored, thankfully as a result of the saving death of Jesus we have the opportunity to look back to the only one who can transform us, the one who made us, and the one whom we rebelled against. It is by looking back to God repenting and putting our full trust in Him.

Any thesis that undermines the real cause of hatred, suffering, bitterness, exploitation, greed and anything else will fail. The real cause is our sinful nature:


This is a far more pertinent to reality than the atheistic "relative morality" perspective.

I don't know what the atheistic "relative morality" is about, as I'm just talking about basic interaction on a human level.

You're not talking about a realistic idea of people, i.e. saying that everyone makes a mistake from time to time. You're saying that people will actively choose the wrong/bad choice more often than not.

It's not realistic to teach people that they're broken/cast down (or whatever term you want to use). You're putting down the foundations of a negative self-image to those you teach that to.

You're painting people as "evil with moments of goodness" whereas I'm suggesting the opposite. It's sad that your faith makes you cynical of your fellow humans.

Sacksian

philologos wrote: »

Misinterpretation of the week?

What I am saying is that humans are inclined towards doing wrongdoing.

Any thesis that undermines the real cause of hatred, suffering, bitterness, exploitation, greed and anything else will fail. The real cause is our sinful nature:

This is a far more pertinent to reality than the atheistic "relative morality" perspective.

I know many people (religious and non-religious alike) who are very much inclined towards good, whose good deeds far, far outweigh any amount of times they have messed up or done "wrong".

Your quotation from above: “What comes out of a person is what defiles him...theft, murder, adultery, coveting... All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”

I really think it would be worthwhile for you to consider why this view is attractive to you.

Have you ever wondered why your view of humanity is so bleak and what experiences have contributed to that view?

tommy2bad

philologos wrote: »

??

I'm confused as to what relevance that has to my post.

nagirrac said that Jesus' teaching didn't concern the hereafter, and Jesus clearly said it did. That's my point. The Gospels very clearly do point to eternal life.

If you think that eternal life really means finite, then you should consider what the word eternal means.

nagirrc didn't say that Jesus never mentioned the afterlife What he/she said was

The biggest mistake many Christians make imho is the thinking that Christ's teaching refers to a next life (the kingdom of God), while it is actually all about this life.

I kinda agree with him here. The problem with projecting Jesus words onto our concept of the afterlife is it postpones living as redeemed people until we get their.

philologos

tommy2bad wrote: »

nagirrc didn't say that Jesus never mentioned the afterlife What he/she said was
I kinda agree with him here. The problem with projecting Jesus words onto our concept of the afterlife is it postpones living as redeemed people until we get their.

Jesus does refer to a next life. That's the thing.

Even a cursory look at the four gospels suggest this. It's nothing about projection, it's all about reading. Even your passage has to do with the final judgement.

I can't help but think that you are misinterpreting what I have said.

philologos

Sacksian wrote: »

I know many people (religious and non-religious alike) who are very much inclined towards good, whose good deeds far, far outweigh any amount of times they have messed up or done "wrong".

Your quotation from above: “What comes out of a person is what defiles him...theft, murder, adultery, coveting... All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”

I really think it would be worthwhile for you to consider why this view is attractive to you.

Have you ever wondered why your view of humanity is so bleak and what experiences have contributed to that view?

1. It's not because of what is "attractive". It's about what is a true perspective of the world. I think Jesus hits the nail on the head when he talks about the origins of evil. From deep within the human heart. That is the ultimate problem.

2. I don't believe it is bleak. Why? Jesus came to rescue us if we would only put our trust in Him. He will and indeed is the only one who can restore humanity back to the point prior to their rebellion if only they believe and trust in Him.

It's very humbling and very reassuring to think that this doesn't depend on anything else other than the sheer kindness and mercy of God towards us that He sent His Son Jesus into the world to stand in our place and take the punishment we deserved so that we could walk free. There isn't enough time in the week to praise God enough for what He has done for us.

I am not sure that man's good deeds outweigh the evil. Even if they did it doesn't make a jot of difference. If a man murders someone 30 years ago and never did a single thing wrong again (let's say that's possible), that man is still guilty of murder. The same is true of sin as a whole. We are still guilty of our sin even if we never do wrong again. The problem isn't resolved until restitution is made, and the only one who is sufficient to make that restitution is Jesus.