What's your religion?

[Zackirus]

The was very well done Cyso.

However, I think it is unfair to say that without God, all people will sin and they will go to hell. I have three examples:

Think about (M.K.) Gandhi. He did a lot of good for the India, trying to separate from India without restoring to violence. So with that, are you saying that someone who doesn't believe in your god, will automatically go to hell, even if they were a extremely good person in their life.

Another example is a lone Hunter in a Forest. He lives all his life learning how to catch and trap animals. His father doesn't teach him about any God. Once he (The Father) dies, he is all alone in the forest. Each day he makes new traps, checks his old ones, and repairs his small shack that he lives in. He  never meets another person and dies from an infection when he is 50 years old. Will this man go to Hell just because he never believed in God?

My last example is small embryo growing in a mother's whom. Once the embryo becomes 4 months old, it suddenly dies. Does this baby, having never done anything sinful in life, or knowing about any God simply go to Hell because it did not believe?

[cyso]

Think about (M.K.) Gandhi. He did a lot of good for the India, trying to separate from India without restoring to violence. So with that, are you saying that someone who doesn't believe in your god, will automatically go to hell, even if they were a extremely good person in their life.

Yes, because even though Gandhi did many good things, they never erased any of the bad. No matter how many good things you do, you can't erase the bad.

Another example is a lone Hunter in a Forest. He lives all his life learning how to catch and trap animals. His father doesn't teach him about any God. Once he (The Father) dies, he is all alone in the forest. Each day he makes new traps, checks his old ones, and repairs his small shack that he lives in. He  never meets another person and dies from an infection when he is 50 years old. Will this man go to Hell just because he never believed in God?

Yes. Being isolated in with his father in the forest doesn't remove the possibility of sin. For example, there is the way he treats and interacts with his father. He could be an absolute jerk to the only person he knows. Even if he wasn't, he probably wouldn't always treat or interact with his father like he should. Plus, much of the sin we do is inside. Not things like anger or sadness. Those are feelings and aren't bad by themselves. But, in this scenario, if the son had spent an hour thinking about how he should do something to his dad or hurt him in some way, he would have sinned. If he had been mad at him for a moment, he wouldn't have done anything wrong. By harboring evil thoughts, he would have sinned. I probably didn't do a good job explaining that, so I'm going to show a bible verse.
Matthew 5:27-28
"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery'. But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."
I hope that clears things up. The hunter would have had to live an absolutely perfect life, which is beyond any of us. Living a simple life isn't the same as living a perfect life.

My last example is small embryo growing in a mother's whom. Once the embryo becomes 4 months old, it suddenly dies. Does this baby, having never done anything sinful in life, or knowing about any God simply go to Hell because it did not believe?

No, because it hasn't done anything. The reason we need to be reconciled with God is that we sin. As an embryo, I don't think you are capable of sinning. Here is a verse from the bible.
2 Samuel 12:23 "But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me."
Just to clarify, David commits adultery with one of his soldiers wife. She becomes pregnant. He recalls the soldier to Jerusalem to be with his wife so it will look like the son is actually the soldiers. He refuses to sleep with his wife because all of his fellow soldiers are out fighting. So, David sends him into battle and orders his commander to put him in the fiercest part of the battle. The soldier dies. David marries the soldier's wife. A prophet comes and brings the issue to light. David repents, and his sins are forgiven, but there is a consequence. As stated in 2 Samuel 12:10 Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own.' So, a lot of David's family will die. David's newborn son is one of them. He dies after seven days. David then makes the above statement. The child was 7 days old, and yet David still says he will go to him (in heaven). So, I do not think embryos go to hell.
Before anyone says that it was unfair for God to cause problems in David's family: All of the problems in David's family were caused by conflicts between family members. The conflicts were probably a consequence of his sin. For example, when Solomon (son of the soldier's former wife) was made king, there was conflict between him and his older brother. If David hadn't sinned, this conflict wouldn't have existed.

Wow, cyso, that was ... pretty much the most convincing post on this topic. I can't help feeling I should turn to Christ, as I'm currently athiest.

If you want to, please PM me about this.

[bugfartboy]

A fairly large quote from Cyso. I couldn't pick it apart.

We don't follow God. We follow our own path. It may be intentional defiance or it may be lack of faith in God. The thing is, God is the creator and ruler of everything. He has the right to everything. He isn't a terrible ruler trying to harm his subjects or torture them. When we turn from him, it's about the equivalent of the servants of a good king or ruler refusing to do what he says and what the law demands and completely refusing to serve him, regardless of intent. This type of crime is treason. Even if you forget about all of the other bad things a person does, this crime alone is enough to earn death. God's punishment is not only the death of our bodies (separating our souls and spirits from our body) but the death of our spirits (separating our souls and spirits from him). This is basically what we ask for when we follow our own path apart from him, but it really sucks. I posted a little bit about hell a few posts back. Eternally separated from God, without hope.
So, that's why we need to be reconciled. We take off on our own path. We run away from God. We are apart from him, and need to come back to him, but our sins, our treason, separates us. We owe him a debt, a debt that must be paid. This is why works don't get you into heaven. You can't work your way to heaven. The good things you do don't erase the bad. I described us as running away from God. This is like the parable of the son that demanded his inheritance from his father, left with it, and spent it all. Living a good life and being careful with your money doesn't do you any good if you don't have any money and you took all the money from your father anyways, just like living good won't help you. You may do less bad things, you may sin less, but you never really stop sinning and you still haven't done a thing about your previous sins. All you might do is slow your present rate of sin. Those sins will get you into hell.
That is why I think good works don't cut it with God. You don't even really stop sinning, so it really doesn't matter. You can work and work and work, but you can't undo what you've done. You can try to lessen the effects, but you can't erase what you did from history. Not spending money when you owe debt is a good idea, but unless you can pay back the debt, it doesn't do you much good. You've got to pay back the debt, but you can't. Works don't pay back anything. So, any idea of getting to heaven by works is out.

That, I would think, applies to the first.
For the second, I have an example. Say a man grows up in the USA. He's raised in a world where killing is common. Thus he remains ignorant that it's illegal and wrong to kill. So then this man goes to a larger city where law enforcement is strict. So, say someone ticks this man off and the man strikes back and kills the man. What happens to this man? He left a pretty bloody trail leading right to him. Would the government simply extemp him from punishment because he was ignorant? Nope. The same is with God. An excuse, ignorance be not.
Now on to the third.

But Jesus called the children to him and said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.

There is an age of accountability. As the above quote states, Jesus clearly says that children "such as these" get to heaven. Therefore, an unborn would as well.

[ArtDrake]

Reply Part One:

[spoiler=Intellectual Property]

Yes. I'm a Christian, so I believe there is only one answer. You're not a Christian though. So, I'm going to explain the problem, or

why we have to be reconciled with God.

We don't follow God. We follow our own path. It may be intentional defiance or it may be lack of faith in God. The thing is, God is

the creator and ruler of everything. He has the right to everything.

Okay, I'm going to have to interject right here, and say how I think about the matter. I'm going to be doing this a lot during the

whole reply, so if you won't be swayed either way, you can tune out now. Anywho, while God may have been the ultimate creator of

everything, I must say that even if you came up with the idea, it might be your intellectual property, but it's certainly not yours.

Y'see, the way intellectual property works is that you come up with an idea, and when you get the rights to the idea, you have the

rights to say yea or nay to anyone that wants to make an implementation of the idea. However, once they recieve the rights to use the

instance of the idea's form, you, as the intellectual property owner, cannot actually take the property from the new owner. It's still

your intellectual property, but the physical property is theirs, and you have no claim whatsoever to it. I know that according to you,

His Holiness created everything in the universe, but he didn't touch it until a couple of thousand years later, when Biblical times

came along, and anything that happened in between was without His hand in it. Animals reproduced, ate, slept, and when they were born,

they were not just created. The whole process of conception and birth went smoothly without Him, and any creation that appeared to

happen was the result of subroutines He came up with so He wouldn't have to deal with all this.

The reason I digress into the topic of this supposed period of nonintervention is that in modern day, conception appears to work in

much the same way it did back then. Evolution can't exist (that would imply that the Earth is older than 6000 yrs. old -- GASP), so

nothing changed. Therefore, God doesn't have a hand in birth. He doesn't, and can't possibly be responsible for everyone's

characteristics any more than he is responsible for creating the universe.

The other thing about intellectual property is that it runs out after 14 years; so God can't possibly own, or have any rights to us,

at all whatsoever. QED.[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Treason and Servitude]

He isn't a terrible ruler trying to harm his subjects or torture them. When we turn from him, it's about the equivalent of the

servants of a good king or ruler[,] refusing to do what he says¹ and what the law demands² and completely

refusing to serve him³, regardless of intent. This type of crime is treason.

Statement 1: Oh, he isn't a terrible ruler, eh? That's definitely up for debate, seeing as he meets not a single criterion for being a

good ruler. He lets His people die by the thousands, by the millions because of rampant disease and famine. Instead of acting upon

this like He can, he is completely aloof, cold, and not remotely interested in what his people are doing.

Clause 2, Dependent: Neither I nor any other atheist agnostics have turned from God, but rather simply wait for God to show any signs

of life. For all I know, God might have died 2000 years ago -- wait a sec. He did. Point is, I don't want to emptily worship a dead

God, so I think God ought to check in on us every once in a while to see how we're doing, and to show He hasn't kicked the ultimate

bucket. That is, if He really wanted people with sense to worship Him. I have not turned, but rather am truly cautious to face.

Clause 3, Independent: Servants of a good king, eh? I'm nobody's servant, and I refuse to serve anyone I can't see. Case Closed.

• 
  Footnote 1: He hasn't said anything to me, so I'm not about to make any huge "leaps of faith" about what he may or may not have
  
  intended.
  
• 
  Footnote 2: I don't sin... much. And all absolute rulers that proclaim themselves to be also divine monarchs have been deposed by now,
  
  so it's not looking good for His Holiness. In this day and age, we can't afford to bow down to some guy we can't see.
  
• 
  Footnote 3: I'm not refusing. He hasn't asked. And the other thing. "Regardless of intent"? On whose part. You really oughtn't say
  
  these things without making yourself understandable. Some people actually read this.
  

Clause 4, Independent: Treason? More like insubordination, and possibly insolence, but ignoring a God that never talks to you is not

"a crime against your sovereign of the greatest extent. Nonworship is nothing compared to Satan's/Lucifer's crime of ultimate

betrayal. Overall, I think God, if he exists, is an overreaching, unreasonable (in that one cannot reason with Him), tyrannical drama

queen.
[/spoiler]


[spoiler=Helldeath]

Even if you forget about all of the other bad things a person does, this crime alone is enough to earn death. God's punishment is not

only the death of our bodies (separating our souls and spirits from our body) but the death of our spirits (separating our souls and

spirits from him). This is basically what we ask for when we follow our own path apart from him, but it really sucks. I posted a

little bit about hell a few posts back. Eternally separated from God, without hope.

So, the way I see it, it would appear that just living is enough to earn death. That's the logical conclusion, right? Everything

living dies, and dying sucks, and things that suck are God punishing us, therefore God punishes us for living. That's not nice. That's

spiteful.

The first death isn't punishment, as there is no noticeable difference in the manner of death of those who "sin" and those who get

their sins absorbed by the Jesus sponge. And if you're saying that the two happen at the same time... (which I can only assume that

you are) I would have to say that I don't want my soul and spirit (is there a difference?) attached to God in the first place? Can I

make that choice? What would spiritual death during biological life be like? Would it be living Hell? Seeing as there have been no

reported cases of living Hell, I can only presume not.

FYI, I'm not asking to live apart. I'm just living in a way that is not parasitically depended on the being who used to own the

intellectual property rights to my kind and is now trying to (poorly) control us in subtle ways. No thanks.

And about that bit: "eternally separated from God, and without hope". I should hope I'm separated from God, and without hope of what?

Hope of being stuck back on, like one of so many pieces of chewed gum that have been deemed Not Tasty and thrown into the Great Trash

Bin? Please.
[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Debt?]

So, that's why we need to be reconciled. We take off on our own path. We run away from God. We are apart from him, and need to come

back to him, but our sins, our treason, separates us. We owe him a debt, a debt that must be paid.

Hold on a moment. When did ignoring someone that has provided you with no evidence that they haven't died yet consitute a debt? Is

that a common sense thing? Or is that one of those wonderful insights one only gets if one is a Christian?
[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Inheritance]

This is why works don't get you into heaven. You can't work your way to heaven. The good things you do don't erase the bad. I

described us as running away from God. This is like the parable of the son that demanded his inheritance from his father, left with

it, and spent it all. Living a good life and being careful with your money doesn't do you any good if you don't have any money and you

took all the money from your father anyways, just like living good won't help you. You may do less bad things, you may sin less, but

you never really stop sinning and you still haven't done a thing about your previous sins. All you might do is slow your present rate

of sin. Those sins will get you into hell.

Thing is, the father was obviously an idiot for letting the son go away with the inheritance.
First off, the father could have made clear to the son the value of spending money wisely.
Second, the father had no obligation to give the inheritance to the son.
Third, the son was not in the wrong by demanding his inheritance, apart from the fact that his father wasn't dead yet (a minor

matter).
Fourth, why didn't the son get a job?
Fifth, he must have spent it on something nice, eh? His whole inheritance?
Sixth, the son was even less in the wrong if the father was missing for 2000 years, presumed dead.
[/spoiler]


[spoiler=Good works and Lifedebt]

That is why I think good works don't cut it with God. You don't even really stop sinning, so it really doesn't matter. You can work

and work and work, but you can't undo what you've done. You can try to lessen the effects, but you can't erase what you did from

history. Not spending money when you owe debt is a good idea, but unless you can pay back the debt, it doesn't do you much good.

You've got to pay back the debt, but you can't. Works don't pay back anything. So, any idea of getting to heaven by works is out.
You may be wondering why God doesn't just say oh well, they all screwed up, I'll let them slide. After all, he's supposed to be all

loving. The thing is, he's also just. So, even though he loves you and he really doesn't like to do it, he will send people to hell. A

truly just judge demands the penalty be paid and that the law be upheld. Someone has to pay the penalty. Not that God is out for

blood, but the debt must be paid. You must pay for something like a speeding ticket in human courts; in God's court, you must pay for

treason, and the price is your life.

Honestly, how often do people ususally sin? I don't sin... much (except for blasphemy ;)), as I said, so I'm already accumulating sin slowly, not to mention the fact that in our legal system, minor infractions can be paid off with community service, and thus yet smaller sins must be paid off with good deeds? Or are you saying that the law of God is completely different, and you can't truly compare the two? Renders Article I, Section II, Clause 3 of your monologue null.

You keep saying that everybody sins, almost constantly. I don't believe that, and I also think that if the religion says that if you think a mean thought in your head, you boil forever if you don't spend the rest of your life in awe of some being in the sky you can't even see and have recieved no confirmation of the existence of.

"Just"??!! Since when is a being that sends Gandhi to hell and Hitler to heaven "just"???

And finally, God can't possibly love us if he just sends us to Hell on a regular basis.
"If you love something set it free. If it comes back to you, it's yours. If it doesn't, it never was."
-- Richard Bach

If there is a true God, he would let people make up their mind about whether to believe or not, and if He wanted supporters, he wouldn't threaten them, but rather provide prophets every once in a while, not just a lot all at once. And then, when they died, everyone would go to Heaven, because God would have a decent sense of humour, and have a little I-told-you-so moment every three seconds. That would be an all-loving God.

Oh! One more thing: I don't understand the whole thing with the first and second death. The first is biological, and God has no influence, but then the second is spiritual, and is when you separate yourself from God. I already did that, so God really seems to have no more aces up his sleeve.
[/spoiler]

[Ertxiem]

Very well written, cyso.
Nevertheless, I have a couple of comments to do.
All the arguments you gave can be given by most common religions (with some small adjustments). So, how can one choose the right religion?

As I said before, I chose to believe that Science is the way to get to the Truth. So, I tend to rationalize everything. That's what I did in this post.

In my view, there are (at least) 3 hypothesis regarding the existence of God(s):
0: There are no God(s);
1: There is a God (or a set of Gods) and those who doesn't follow his (their) laws are sinners;
2: There is a God (or a set of Gods) and most common religions are correct in their views.

If Hypothesis 0 is true, then there is not much to say.

If Hypothesis 1 is true, then most people on Earth are sinners and will go to hell. Furthermore, all people that ever lived were sinners as well and went to hell.
Let's assume that the Christian God is the one that exists (a similar argument can be given to most of other religions). Now, think about the native Americans that lived before the XV century. They never had the chance to know that Christ ever existed, so they don't believe in the Christian God. Hence, either
a) They were sinners or;
b) They weren't sinners because they had no chance.
In your reply to Zackirus, you say, option a) is the correct one in a similar case.
In my view, option b) and Hypothesis 2 are more or less the same thing.
Option a), however, has a problem: it's not really fair. And if God is good and fair, He should give a chance to everybody to follow him. Otherwise, we would have a contradiction. It's harsh to call someone a traitor when he didn't had a chance to know the rules.

If Hypothesis 2 is true, we have the problem that most common religions contradict each other in one or other aspect.
The most common one is: if you don't follow us, you will go to hell. Now, if we take this literally, everybody will go to hell.
The way I see out of it (not that I need it) is to claim that God's laws are interpreted by humans. Humans have flaws and misunderstood that part (and others too, probably). And a reasonable alternative was to say that if you follow a religion like most common religions, then you may avoid going to hell if you don't sin a lot.
Even this interpretation starts to get tricky because most religions speak about good deeds to go to heaven. The point about non believing being considered treason is a very strong one. I only find one weakness in it: if we humans are flawed, some of us might have an harder time to see God. Should those flawed humans go to hell? In my view, this is not in agreement with a kind and fair God.

Anyway, I'm not trying to say that I'm right and others are wrong. I'm just putting here my view of the Universe.

One more thing: how can we distinguish between the good God and the bad Devil? Why should we be based on a text written by a flawed human?

[Duskling]

Think about (M.K.) Gandhi. He did a lot of good for the India, trying to separate from India without restoring to violence. So with that, are you saying that someone who doesn't believe in your god, will automatically go to hell, even if they were a extremely good person in their life.

Yes, because even though Gandhi did many good things, they never erased any of the bad. No matter how many good things you do, you can't erase the bad.

But that wasn't the question, the question was: "Would he go to hell for not believing in God?" not, "Would he go to hell for his deeds?"

Yes. Being isolated in with his father in the forest doesn't remove the possibility of sin. For example, there is the way he treats and interacts with his father. He could be an absolute jerk to the only person he knows. Even if he wasn't, he probably wouldn't always treat or interact with his father like he should. Plus, much of the sin we do is inside. Not things like anger or sadness. Those are feelings and aren't bad by themselves. But, in this scenario, if the son had spent an hour thinking about how he should do something to his dad or hurt him in some way, he would have sinned. If he had been mad at him for a moment, he wouldn't have done anything wrong. By harboring evil thoughts, he would have sinned. I probably didn't do a good job explaining that, so I'm going to show a bible verse.
Matthew 5:27-28
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery'. But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."
I hope that clears things up. The hunter would have had to live an absolutely perfect life, which is beyond any of us. Living a simple life isn't the same as living a perfect life.

Once again, not the question, the question is, "Would he go to hell if he never knew God existed, and, therefore, could not believe?" not, "Could he still sin if he didn't know about god?"

[Idozen Cair]

Hm. Duckling makes a lot of sense. To simplify:

Why would and should we go to hell for not believing in a god that doesn't even show he exists?

Why would and should we serve anyone that we can't see?

Why would ignoring someone that doesn't even show he exists be a debt to non-believers?

[The Holy namelesskitty]

I'm atheistic but I'm an aetheistic existentialist.

[ArtDrake]

Psst. Holy Nameless. Please correct your spelling; you're making us atheists look bad it looks silly.

[The Holy namelesskitty]

I don't do "seplilng"