Topic: Aetheism = Hell?

[Dark Exodus]

Alright, I see the problem here...

People are saying there's no definite truth, and that what's right for one person may not be right for another person.

Fact is, that is THE point of view, based on the Bible.

Not meaning to sound cocky...

No, that is your interpretation of the bibles point of view...

...Not that it matters since the bible is probably one of the most edited books of all time.

[Lomendil]

The most interesting thing for me if I go to Hell (as I assuredly would, as a godless heathen atheist) would be to see who else is in Hell. I'd be fascinated to find out if all those humans from prehistory (you know, the ones that came millenia before the Israelites decided that Jawe was teh r0XX0r) are condemned to eternal agony for their ignorance. Also, if there are people from isolated tribes in modern times who never ever heard about Chistianity. People from the deep Amazon rainforest or the far flung Polynesian isles.

[Lanfeix]

ohh yer i get to see evey one i know if do not steal is realy strict (ever y one steals at some time in there life

[Rasmus]

The most interesting thing for me if I go to Hell (as I assuredly would, as a godless heathen atheist) would be to see who else is in Hell. I'd be fascinated to find out if all those humans from prehistory (you know, the ones that came millenia before the Israelites decided that Jawe was teh r0XX0r) are condemned to eternal agony for their ignorance. Also, if there are people from isolated tribes in modern times who never ever heard about Chistianity. People from the deep Amazon rainforest or the far flung Polynesian isles.

   There is a clause for those. Anyone who never hears of the glory of god are automatically pardoned (Dante puts them in Limbo, but the church doctrine puts them in heaven). Only those who hear and reject the word of God our Lord and Savior are damned. Or something like that.

[Chuckles, The Space Marine Clown]

I'd love to go to Hell, just to get the chance to beat seventeen shades of bukkake out of Hitler again. Damn that would be fun. I'd give Reagan a good going over too, and since hopefully my death shouldn't be for a long while, Nixon (hell, maybe even GW Bush). No way those guys go to heaven while Gandhi goes to hell.

[Lanfeix]

Gandhi will be down there unless god dosn't care if your a wife beaters

[mrspungebob]

Alright, I see the problem here...

People are saying there's no definite truth, and that what's right for one person may not be right for another person.

Fact is, that is THE point of view, based on the Bible.

Not meaning to sound cocky...

So you're saying that the Tora, Koran (word?), and every other religious book is wrong then? Since its a fact that bible-based view is THE view? Plus, there are many other interpretations of heaven and hell based on the bible.

[Farseer OOBAD]

Can you please disclose your source of all knowing knowledge?

The use of facts goes for protecting your religion from hole poking, as well as for the people that want to show you holes that are already there.

The emperor Constantine did not decide what went into the bible, but he did convoke (order) the first Council of Nicea.
The first council did not however debate the New Testament, but the trinity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

Basically Constantine started the process of organising Christianity into a organised religion it is now.
All under his and his descendants control (The second Council of Nicea for example was convoked by Empress Irene more than 400 years later) for the strengthening of imperial control.

One of the earliest attempt at solidifying a canon was made by Marcion, who rejected the entire Old Testament, all but one gospel (Luke), and three of the Pauline letters. His unorthodox canon was rejected by a majority of Christians, as was he and his theology, Marcionism. Around 200 the Muratorian fragment was written, listing the accepted works. This list was very similar to the modern canon, but also included the Wisdom of Solomon (now part of the Deuterocanonical books) and the Apocalypse of Peter. The New Testament canon as it is now was first listed by St. Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, in 367, in a letter written to his churches in Egypt. That canon gained wider and wider recognition until it was accepted by all at the Third Council of Carthage in 397. Even this council did not settle the matter, however. Certain books continued to be questioned, especially James and Revelation. Even as late as the 16th century, theologian and reformer Martin Luther questioned (but in the end did not reject) the Epistle of James, the Epistle of Jude, the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Book of Revelation. Even today, German-language Luther Bibles are printed with these four books at the end of the canon, rather than their traditional order for other Christians. Due to the fact that some of the recognized Books of the Holy Scripture were having their canonicity questioned in the 16th century by Protestants, the Council of Trent reaffirmed the traditional canon of the Scripture as a dogma of the Catholic Church.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament

As you can see the bible wasn't actually decided in one council, but it was still decided on by men, with worldly needs and seats of power.

Check out the thread "Why is there a dislike of Christians."  I post my arguments and sources there.  As for your wikipedia sources, they're right, of course.  The contents of the Bible were not decided by any men in seats of power, whether Constantine or the Council of Nicaea.  It was decided by what the majority of Christians believed.  As I say in the other thread, what was accepted as scripture was already used by the vast majority of Christians.  The Bible has definitely not been editted and controlled by Emperors and Councils for political purposes.  Christianity was already an organized religion with churches and elders; what Constantine did was make sure all Christians everywhere were worshipping the same thing.  At the time, his efforts were not needed; the vast majority of Christians agreed on what they were worshipping.  Ironically, now that there is a need in the world today, there are no gatherings of elders or Councils.  Interesting what that means for the past.  Today, if there was a council and there were so many versions of faith, the people who didn't agree with the council would ignore it.  In order to get the results that history says they got (one religion with minimal opposition), people ignoring the council would have had to be forced.  As we have no evidence of this happening, the canon put together by the council was probably accepted by the overwhelming majority of Christians.  Therefore, it couldn't have been editted for population control.

The point of my post was to say that faithlessmonkeigh was wrong in his implication that Constantine "left out" parts of the Gospel.  Both you and your sources seem to back this up.  I am using the facts available to me in writing what I say.  When I said to use facts to poke holes in Christianity, what I thought was an obvious assumption was that I was using facts to prevent the hole poking.

Dark Exodus- Yes the Bible has been editted for word choice like "Thee"s and "Thy"s and "Thou"s etc, but the message and the events have not been changed.  24,000 scraps of ancient document back this up.



As for Teege, you know what I meant   I thought it was fairly good.  The plot stayed together and I never saw the twists coming.  The ending was admittedly weak (as was the historical research ) but I thought it was a good story.

[Mr Bate]

Christians think that pretty much anybody who does not follow thier faith is going to hell, how they know still confuses me. but i suppose it will be one big eternal party down there. Enjoy ill be there to.

[LoGrei]

irrespective of faith or religion that speaks of hell well this world we live in IS hell. look around, watch the news we hear of moral decay in some countries, people starving and dying, genocide, wars, pollution,  murders,suicide,  rape, incest, rioting, robberies, the list negative elements go on and on and on, take your pick, the 'buffet' table is ready and serving.

while at the same time this is also heaven for there is love, kindness, compassion, creation of life in newborns, joy and happiness.

the problem is when some humans feel content with their own state of living that little is thought of on the other side of the world where impoverish countries are in need of aid.

Whether God exist or not is not important. There are other issues that are more important like the negative elements I've mentioned and they need to be resolved as quickly as humanly possible. God helps those that help themselves and those with the initiative to help others.

Now if God exist what would He/She rather prefer...you vigilantly praying/recruiting more devotees or going all out to help your poorer brothers and sisters who are in dire need of aide?

God those not dictate our fate. the choices you and i make are ours alone. we have a choice to do good or evil. if God decided our fate/destiny than what is the point of living? why bother to make decisions at all if our lives have already been carved out?

If you are met with a situation where you could either choose do good / evil is purely of your own making? if our actions are a result of God's influence or the devil then seriously there is no point in leading a life.

instead of raising questions like 'why is there a dislike for christians' or aetheism why not raise questions like how better to curb whatever social decay that maybe occuring in our own backyard? sure we can;t deal with all the worlds problems but mind you this IS a forum where many people meet and discuss ideas.

with that many people the potential for brainstorming solutions become and endless wealth of possibilities that could be used to form an idea list that could be sent to governing bodies or entities with the power to take action

how about it people?

[Charon]

Check out the thread "Why is there a dislike of Christians."  I post my arguments and sources there.  As for your wikipedia sources, they're right, of course.  The contents of the Bible were not decided by any men in seats of power, whether Constantine or the Council of Nicaea.  It was decided by what the majority of Christians believed.  As I say in the other thread, what was accepted as scripture was already used by the vast majority of Christians.  The Bible has definitely not been editted and controlled by Emperors and Councils for political purposes.  Christianity was already an organized religion with churches and elders; what Constantine did was make sure all Christians everywhere were worshipping the same thing.  At the time, his efforts were not needed; the vast majority of Christians agreed on what they were worshipping.  Ironically, now that there is a need in the world today, there are no gatherings of elders or Councils.  Interesting what that means for the past.  Today, if there was a council and there were so many versions of faith, the people who didn't agree with the council would ignore it.  In order to get the results that history says they got (one religion with minimal opposition), people ignoring the council would have had to be forced.  As we have no evidence of this happening, the canon put together by the council was probably accepted by the overwhelming majority of Christians.  Therefore, it couldn't have been editted for population control.

The point of my post was to say that faithlessmonkeigh was wrong in his implication that Constantine "left out" parts of the Gospel.  Both you and your sources seem to back this up.  I am using the facts available to me in writing what I say.  When I said to use facts to poke holes in Christianity, what I thought was an obvious assumption was that I was using facts to prevent the hole poking.

Then at least put a link to the topic in your post if you don't want to repeat yourself, otherwise your facts are based on nothing.

My sources neither prove nor disprove the fact that Constantine as convoker of the Council had the power to influence the direction of Christianty, just by that act alone.
Yet it his more than likely he did influence which books were or weren't read throughout the empire.
As emperor of the Roman Empire he was all powerfull and would not stand for any other influence to threaten his position, be it political, religious or both.

[Guildmage Aech]

And so yet another thread desends into arguing over whether the bible is right or not. Almost as pointless as trying to advocate gun control in america (and curiously has very common defense arguments but enough of my social commentary).

LoGrei has got a better point that most of the bible thumpers/haters put together. I try and lead a good life because its the right thing to do, not because I think its something to do for a bribe of getting into some suspicious unprovable place. Maybe Heaven and Hell do exist, more likely they don't but either way its more important to make the best of whats here now - a position that isn't helped by terrorisitng people over what they belive in be it the medium of words in the playground or fully loaded 747s. Same scale, different ends.

24,000 scraps of ancient document back this up.

Like the dead sea scrolls that are competly different. Well, couldn't resist could I   Can I blame the devil for that?

[Camo]

If you are a murderer, thief and adulterer, no matter if you believe in god or not, you are going to burn though, if you follow the teachings of the current christian faith.

Hmm, Rasmus you seem to be mistaken here. According to Christian Dogma faith, not actions. Thus the Christian murderer goes to Heaven and the Athiest philanthropist goes to hell.

This is the reason even if I did believe in Christian teachings, i'd not follow the religion, if their God really did exist - i'd fight against him.

Dante's Inferno is not part of the Bible..and it's a work of the Divine Comedy - get the comedy part, it's supposed to be symbolic not literal.

[War Chief Haiden]

The most interesting thing for me if I go to Hell (as I assuredly would, as a godless heathen atheist) would be to see who else is in Hell. I'd be fascinated to find out if all those humans from prehistory (you know, the ones that came millenia before the Israelites decided that Jawe was teh r0XX0r) are condemned to eternal agony for their ignorance. Also, if there are people from isolated tribes in modern times who never ever heard about Chistianity. People from the deep Amazon rainforest or the far flung Polynesian isles.

Ok if you are a aethist then you do not believe in hell but if you do think there is a hell then you have the idea from the bible, in there it says that hell is a horible place full of torture and pain so where did you get the idea of it being a party? And the devil and demon will not be controlling it like a jail house they are burning and endureing the torture right along side of you.

Also, before any of you say anything bad about the bible please read it than we can have things to talk about that are not rumors and are from the bible. And one thing i do not get is about aethists is that you think we are just going to cease to exist?
I dont really get that idea if we cease to exist there will be no blackness or anything it just doesnt make sense to me...

[Lomendil]

Ok if you are a aethist then you do not believe in hell but if you do think there is a hell then you have the idea from the bible, in there it says that hell is a horible place full of torture and pain so where did you get the idea of it being a party? And the devil and demon will not be controlling it like a jail house they are burning and endureing the torture right along side of you.

I have a dark sense of humour, that's all.

Perhaps you'd like to answer the real point in the part you quoted from me.

And one thing i do not get is about aethists is that you think we are just going to cease to exist?
I dont really get that idea if we cease to exist there will be no blackness or anything it just doesnt make sense to me...

No. Life's tough, eh? Well you're right, it certainly is easier to picture oneself continuing indefinately in some kind of cloudy paradise/flame-filled underworld. But 'easer to picture' doesn't kead to 'is therefore correct'.

[Dark Exodus]

Dark Exodus- Yes the Bible has been editted for word choice like "Thee"s and "Thy"s and "Thou"s etc, but the message and the events have not been changed.  24,000 scraps of ancient document back this up.

Evidence please.

[DanBZ]

Dark Exodus- Yes the Bible has been edited for word choice like "Thee"s and "Thy"s and "Thou"s etc, but the message and the events have not been changed.  24,000 scraps of ancient document back this up.

Actually, according to this article, some translations play around with the wording of the Bible to suit their goals.  I'll admit that many of the articles on this site are horribly biased, but this is a good one.

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/versions.html

[Battle Armour]

AAAARRRRGGGGGHHHHHH H !!! *FRUSTRATION ((VEINS POPPING)) FRUSTRATION *

This topic is spinning out of control. You know I never read ALL the posts but for some of you it helps to read the one above yours. (any way people probably have their reasons.)

To clarify for the second time (especailly for Mr Bate) The majority of Christian religions and therefore a large amount (and hopefully the majority) of there followers beleive that you can be saved with only a few exceptions.

Basically for the Roman Catholic or about 7/16th (I think) of the christians beleive that unless you commit suicide, or don't feel remorse for your sins (not beleiving in God is not that kind of sin), and most importantly if you forgive those who sinned against you.

It varies for other churches but generally the more protestant you go the more loosy goosy you get with the rules.


All the other mumbo jumbo I'll leave to the living tomhs(sp?) of knoweledge on the site (In no way is that an insult) to argue about the bible and blahblahbhalbha ...... zzzzzzzzzzzzz


More important than all the things being argued here though, is to just live a good life and contribute in a positive way to the world.

[Guildmage Aech]

Something that bugs me is that according to Christian fogiveness, someone who lives a life of theft, rape, murder and gereral pilliaging still goes to heaven as long as he confesses and says sorry. Meanwhile someone who doesn't beleive in god but lives a fair life being kind and helping old ladies across the road and so on goes and burns in hell for being a non-believer.

Excuse me if I don't subscribe to that morality, which smells more like a excuse to fill churches to a guide on how to live.

*reads DanBZ's link*

Ah, Farseer OOBAD is pwned.

[War Chief Haiden]

well... Hymirl Its kindve like that, but not. The guy who went helping little old ladys and stuff might go to heaven if he never heard about christ or god in his WHOLE life. But if he did and accepted atheism or other religions(yes i know atheism isnt really a religion ) then he will go to hell unless he converts. I being a christian myself truly dont believe what others say, about how if someone like hitler lived a horrible life and then asks for forgiveness on his deathbed and go to heaven. I think that they get their just desserts if ya know what i mean

-Haiden