Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

In Christianity, we believe that the very core of a person's heart is sinful and wicked. Thusly any good people are able to do ( this means any kind of good, from saving a person from death, to petting a kitten ) comes from the grace of the Lord.

If God left people, even people who knew of their sins and knew what they did was wrong, to "find strength in themselves" they would only stumble in thier sins and only steadily get worse. To the point where any form of love or cherishment would dissapear forever. The inner strength we have is thanks to the help of the Lord.

I think that should answer your question quite well.

That's a reason I don't believe in God right up there onscreen. That argument is BS, man, total BS.

_________________
So, so you think you can tell Heaven from Hell, blue skies from pain. Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail? A smile from a veil? Do you think you can tell?

Begging your pardon, but could you please be a little more discriptive of why you don't accept that? Thank you.

Let me use a little personification then: Let's say you are God and you watch over a pocket watch that is a person. In order to keep your watch working you need to keep winding it every day and clean it every two years, if you stop, the watch eventually stops working.

i'm using the Stone Edition Artscroll Tanach; it's a modern, direct translation from the original Hebrew. i'm not wont to trust any translation that includes the New Testament. i'll go straight to the Hebrew for you, if you like:

it says, "im-teytiv" -- if you improve yourself. that's exactly what it says. "if you do good" would be "im t'aseh tov."



"v'ata timshal-bo" -- and yet you will conquer it. when i look at it in the Hebrew, it's actually not even a matter of capability but of certainty. not even "you can conquer it" but "you will conquer it."

I'm not familiar with the original Hebrew, mainly since I don't know the language, so I'll defer that.

Wow, that's the most vile outlook on human nature I've seen in my life. And reeks of being brainwashed. I know very few Christians who actually believe that.

Plus you're calling me sinful and wicked because I don't have "the grace of the Lord" in me. Ugh.

_________________
CLOCK

You mentioned you loathe moral relativism. (I'm not putting words in your mouth; those were your almost-exact words in the other thread. I'm pretty sure you'd agree "loathe" is a synonym for "detest".) So I'm assuming (here is the part that assumes) that you have postulated what is right, and what is wrong.

Think: What do you think is "wrong"? You don't have to post it, just think of it.

Now then. Have you ever, in your life, done anything wrong? Last year? Last week? Yesterday? Today?

Odd, I only know two Christains who belive in the idea that some good is in them without the help of the Lord. But that's not the purpose.

Rose, even the most faithful Christian on Earth is still subjected to the malevolence of sin. Myself, unfortunetly, included. This is because sin, like emotion, is natural. But at the same time somthing unnatural. It's something you can't fully stop it from comming.

This also has nothing to do with "brainwashing" the Bible, God, and Jesus make it very appearnt about this. And here's just a small challenge: If humans have good from the core of their hearts, then why did Jesus Christ go to such a bit of trouble for us, so that we could make atonement for what sins we did?

P.S. Rose, I'm not saying anything about you, I'm only stating what Christianity states and what I believe in. I was also trained to respect people no matter who they where. You don't have to accept this, so you can go your way and I will go mine. Thank you very much.

You sure showed a lot of respect for homosexuals in the regards to you saying they shouldn't get married... lots of respect there.

_________________

I meant tolerance, human respect, this is a serious disscussion board after all .

Just because I dissagre with someone doesn't give me the right to hate them. Nor the right to judge. I prefer to leave God in that role.

Oh, thank goodness... I'm sorry, I had a heated debate with a fundamentalist about gay rights, and had to verbally tear their arguement apart limb from limb. And I grow weary of repeating myself... thus my frustration.

_________________

Right and wrong are concepts that lie somewhere between philosphy and logic, and quite simply conciously taking the course of action that overall causes harm over a course of action that does not is wrong.
Just sit down and think about it for a second.

For instance, homosexuality is not wrong because it is not "done" with the intent of hurting other people. Expressing homophobia is as it makes homosexuals feel uncomfortable and affects the way impressionables may treat them.

And yes, I have "Postulated" this before.



Well, that's pretty odd. But it's still a terrible world view that takes any amount of self worth and human achievement away.



If someone tells you it's not brainwashing that um, doesn't mean it's not. Quite the opposite, generally. Perhaps brainwashing is the wrong word. "Method of control".



Wait... how does that even make sense? Huh? Jesus was, from what we know, a martyr, and not the only one by any stretch.



Religion is open to interpretation, really. The fact that you find so many Christians who have a different take on the bible means that you too could take a different take if you wish. So it's purely what you believe in or think you believe in, when it comes down it.



The problem is that your very religious views demand you see people in a lesser light to yourself... which is always a problem.

_________________
CLOCK

Whee. Rosalie can be stubborn and annoying at times, but when she's right, she's totally friggin' right.

_________________
So, so you think you can tell Heaven from Hell, blue skies from pain. Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail? A smile from a veil? Do you think you can tell?

Impressive. An atheist agreeing with a pagan. Not something you see every day.

And I disagree that she's "totally friggin' right". But since she refuses to acknowledge my existence, I won't get into it.

I do have a few short things to say.

One--this is for Einoo. How can a Christian view on hell and the afterlife drive someone to not believe in a divine at all, finding no accord in ANY sort of religion? Is it merely reactionary, trying to distance yourself from a religious majority and not honestly contemplating things?

I am not trying to personally attack you, but I really want to know why what a Christian thinks drives you to be atheist.

Two, if a majority of Christian views on being saved and being able to enter heaven did indeed make self worth and human achievement meaningless, then what of technogical, cultural, and scientific achievements by Christians? If it was meaningless to be productive and advance human society, why do it? Yet Christian scientists, artists, engineers have all done much to help enrich human life, to advance it, not retard it.

Here's how I'd answer it--there's a difference between views on the afterlife and a human's significance here on Earth. Christians might believe that only through accepting Jesus can one enter heaven, but humanity is still God's greatest creation--or on a broader scale, intelligent life is. We are still significant to ourselves and to God.

I don't think being a Christian and holding such views makes life worthless at all, nor does it squelch human ambition. We are, after all, talking about two realms here, the afterlife and the human world.

Another thing I'd thought I throw in--some people I know in high school ( and this is a view I agree with by the way) thought this: The abilities and skills you develop, and the knowledge you gain on your own voilition, are things you yourself can be proud of, because it was what you worked for to attain.

_________________

The only good human beings are capable of is through God.

Therefore, any technical and scientific achievements are all virtues of God; and the people who "achieved" them were naught but vessels.

Not to mention that the real irony is that most scientists would be atheist and not Christian.

And life and afterlife shouldn't be so seperate. How much worth would someone look back on their life as having if they spent everything after in a burning pit of darkness?

_________________
CLOCK

But the majority aren't atheists. They likely aren't mostly Christian, but they're still not atheists.



As far as I've seen on this thread, not everyone quantifies hell in the same commonly thought of way.

Yet that question is a sort which asks "what meaning did your life really have, now that you're dead?" I dunno--that question just never feels potent to me, when you consider those who believe we simply cease to exist in all forms once dead (such as secular humanists). Their beliefs certainly don't stop them or make them feel defeatist for doing so.[/url]

_________________

"Improve yourself" is not quite what the text is communicating there. The term communicates something more along the lines of, "Do what it pleasing." Keep in mind that in this passage, God is confronting Cain for what God knows is wrongdoing. In other words, Cain has already failed; there is no more "improving himself." Instead, God must give him a mark in order to prevent him from being killed by the other children of Adam.

Furthermore, was it not God who provided Adam and Even the lamb skin clothing to cover over their shame? Was it not God who cleansed Isaiah's lips with the burning coal? Was it not God who took away Joshua's filthy rags and replaced them with garments of divine authority (Zech 3)? This theme of God providing for his people a holiness and purity that they could not attain themselves is constant throughout the Tanak.

Nevertheless, let me offer this to you as to why we do, in fact, need divine grace:


And


In addition,

_________________

yeah, but the problem here is that you're already assuming a position where sin is utterly unredeemable. clearly God is here giving Cain an opportunity to admit what he did wrong and ask forgiveness for it. if Cain had taken that opportunity, he would have been forgiven. instead he denies that he even knows where his brother is, let alone that he'd murdered him. instead of just smiting Cain right off the bat, God first asks him why he's so depressed, and assures him that, if he did something wrong, he can be forgiven for it.

the quotes that you gave (from Psalms and Isaiah; i'm not including the quote from Romans because i don't consider the so-called New Testament to have any sort of theological validity whatsoever) do point to the inevitability of sin -- nobody is disputing that sin is everywhere and committed by everyone -- but doesn't say anything about it being permanent. we need God to forgive the sins that we commit against Him -- and if we're sincerely regretful and ask His forgiveness then it will be given -- but even God can't forgive us for sins we commit against other people. if i hurt someone, i have to get forgiveness from them, not from God.

the same King David who wrote about being born in sin also wrote:



sin is inevitable, but it's not unforgiveable -- and even the stain of unrepented sins do not inherently prevent a person from achieving a place in heaven. good deeds are also inevitable, after all. nobody is 100% evil and devoid of all good. God does not expect perfection.

We're living there, man.

_________________
"You get the Most Annoying Transsexual I've Ever Spoken To award." -The Zephyr Song

Not unredeemable, but rather in need of redemption. But again, where does that redemption come from if not God himself?


But then, wouldn't that be a matter of grace anyway? I mean, Cain did in fact deserve death for killing his brother, yet God offered him a chance to be forgiven. Did he deserve that? Of course not. Yet God offered forgiveness, and even though he didn't confess and repent, God still refrained from striking him down. That's undeserved mercy. That's grace.


It was written by a Jewish man who had a direct experience of God. And prior to that, he was trained in rabbinical tradition under Rabbi Gamaliel. He strikes me as a man knowledgeable on the subject both from a Jewish and a Christian perspective.

And that still does not answer the question: what happens to those who do not believe they need God's forgiveness?

_________________

it's not undeserved, though. Cain would have deserved forgiveness if he had asked for it. regret and repentence for sins is the definition of what merits forgiveness for them. that's the way God built the universe. you're assuming that no one who sins can ever actually deserve forgiveness, and i just don't accept that, and God specifically refutes it all throughout the Torah.



what do you mean by "had a direct experience of God"? i don't accept that Paul had any such experience. he's simply not someone whose words i take as authoritative.

those people aren't forgiven for the individual sins they committed in their lives, i suppose. but it doesn't then follow that they burn in hell for all eternity, either.

Seems an awfully cheap price to pay for killing your own brother. While I might agree that forgiveness can be received by confession and repentance, I cannot agree that they merit forgiveness.


What I see throughout the Torah is God promising to cleanse sin and forgive them, not that that forgiveness is deserved. In other words, when God forgives, he does so because he is slow to anger and abounding in lovingkindness, not because those who sin and repent deserve that mercy.


But neither can they enter into God's holy presence. They miss out on what God created them for, and that in itself is tragic.

_________________

look, God is the one who gets to decide what merits forgiveness and what doesn't. if regret and repentence are the necessary and sufficient conditions for God's forgiveness, how is that any different from what it takes to deserve it?

just death itself -- the sheer process of dying -- is a major component of the soul's purification from sin. sure, nobody dies without sins on them, but the whole reason that death became necessary when sin entered the world was so that humanity would have a way to be redeemed, at least in part, for the sins that go unrepented-for throughout their lives.



again, what's the difference? are you assuming that repentence is easy? that abstaining from doing the sins that you're inclined to do is easy? they're not. they require hard work and dedication, and that's what God is willing -- and happy -- to reward, with forgiveness.



but not forever. eventually most people are going to make it into God's presence. because just like nobody is without sin, neither is anyone utterly devoid of goodness. and that goodness needs to be rewarded. sins are things that we have and so can be removed, but goodness is something that we become; the good things we do are inseparable from our souls themselves, they are infused into us. how can a soul that has even a little bit of goodness simply be cut off permanently? it doesn't sound very merciful to me.

Once again, I direct your attention to Purgatory.

It's a compromise. People who are mostly good have their souls purified of whatever sin is left before being allowed into Heaven. That is, again, if you believe in it.

The rest of your post I leave to Didymus, as he is the expert here, and not me.

_________________
beep beep I'm a Jeep

well, yes. that's kind of what i was talking about. the closest concept that Judaism (on behalf of which i am arguing) has to hell is Gehenna, which is really closer to purgatory -- it's a temporary, though certainly unpleasant, process of purification before the soul can go on to heaven. what i'm really trying to get across is that even unrepented-for sins, while having consequences, still don't deserve eternal torment or permanent removal from God's presence, or what have you.

About Purgatory: there really is no basis in Scripture for such a place. And traditionally, when the Church believed in Purgatory, it was only for those who were already repentant. Those who continued to act against God were not privileged to enter Purgatory.

But I digress. As stated above, there really is no justification for believing in such a place in the afterlife. The Scriptures speak of being purified by fires (i.e., suffering), but this is best understood as those things we suffer in this life, those things which force us to recognize our place before our Creator, and drive us to rely more and more upon him. They are those circumstances in this life which show us just how helpless we are in this uncertain world, and place us where all we can do is cry out to God, "Lord, have mercy upon me!"

And Cobalt, I can appreciate your point that there seems little difference in practice between deserving God's mercy and receiving it as a gift. But I continue to stress the importance of understanding that mercy is in fact a gift, not something that can be deserved.

Earlier in this thread, I quoted from Psalm 51. Keeping in mind the circumstances under which David wrote that (having seduced Bathsheba and arranging to have her husband murdered), can you honestly say that David deserved God's mercy? Pay attention to the nuances of that psalm: on the contrary, David fully realizes that he does not deverve mercy from God, and yet he cries out nevertheless. Pay attention to his asking for cleansing from that guilt as well. That God does offer an avenue of mercy is in fact mercy in itself, such that rejecting that means of grace is itself is deserving of death. I am thinking of the incident of the Nahash Nehosheth (the Brass Snake). The people spurned God's provision for them in the wilderness, so God sent poisonous snakes to plague them. When the people realized their mistake, they turned to Moses and asked him to remove the snakes. He didn't. Instead, God instructed him to make a Brass Snake (which, I note, is something of a play on words in the Hebrew). If anyone was bitten, they could look to the Brass Snake and receive healing. But while looking to the Brass Snake did in fact convey healing, the Brass Snake itself was a gift from God. And that is my point: while the act of confession and repentance can indeed convey forgiveness, cleansing, and healing from sin, the means for that, God's mercy, is in fact a gift from him, without which, there can be no forgiveness. This is why I say that the act of repentance can bring about forgiveness, but it cannot merit forgiveness, because the means (God's mercy) is still his gift.

_________________

you guys...ive discovered the way for all to follow....... it requires nothing but this one thing.....this one thing that doesnt require you to switch to a different religion or anything...just this one thing.. no Hail Mary's, no Penance rope... heaven is nondenominational, which means that you can be of any religion..... there is only one thing that you have to do....Just Accept Jesus As Savior.

also, check this site out, its Creepy
http://www.amightywind.com/hell/citizenhell.htm

_________________

No thanks, I'll pass. Besides, wouldn't that be switching religions, technically? By accepting Jesus as savior, you are technically a Christian... so as I said, as I have said to at least 200 people in the past, no thanks... I'll pass.

This has a killer beat to it, by the way! Even though it was mostly sampled screams and noises from stock sound effect groupings. But still... I'm probably going to put this on a mix CD. Very entertaining.

Now, the "Sounds of Hell" thing... funny they found it in Siberia, one of the harshest climates on Earth. The sounds are too unclear to discern truth from them.

Also, do you know how many men, women and children got banished to Siberia during the reign of Stalin? If you believe in the supernatural, those probably weren't sounds from Hell, but screams of spirits trapped in this realm.

This site is nonsense. All it is doing is trying to scare people into being Christians. If someone is going to choose a particular faith, it shouldn't be due to some half-assed scare tactic, which this is. Not even Catholics do that anymore. Not after the Pope John XXIII instilled the ideal of what has been known to become "Vatican II."

Furthermore, I live in Oregon, and Jefferson is one of the most backward redneck, bible-bumping towns I've been through with theological knowledge restricted to such nonsensical arguements, and nothing beyond it. So, I wouldn't take these people seriously anyways.

And, as I have said in the past, if people like this are going to be in heaven, I'd rather be in Hell.

_________________