No Hell and everyone gets saved

Heretic wrote:

JP Cusick wrote:

Bellatori wrote:The list of vengeful and spiteful slaying of opposition is legion.

You see malice because the malice is inside of your self, and you project your own malicious perception onto God who does not have it. - Humans are filled with violence, and we can not see clearly until we remove the evil from our self.

Malice in the heart of God. If God had malice in his heart then he would create a world in which every creature would compete with every other, where each destroys other living entities (or recently killed) in order to survive. He would set up edifices in order to knock them down. He would create all sort of desires within each individual and then condemn them for satisfying them. He would create a bottomless pit filled with fire to throw people into when they die (and give them eternal life to appreciate the pain).

Let's think about it. What kind of God  would do all of that?

Heretic

JP Cusick wrote:The Bible does not really teach of any burning HELL as the word in the Bible only means the grave or garbage dump where they use to throw dead bodies.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Christianity has taught this and still does, if you're disagreeing then again you're not a christian in the traditional sense, and are inventing a new version. You're hardly unique in that however, but if you're going to cite the errant nature of scripture then I fear there may be little to base your new religion on, and you ought perhaps to wander into the woods and get a new bible directly from the source, or pretend the source has approached you whilst sitting quietly outside your Bedouin tent, as that's the usual form here.

Many religions beside Christianity has taught people this wrong barbaric idea as their religious doctrine, but it is not real.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Whilst I agree the idea is barbaric, your claim is unevidenced, so how is it more valid than traditional christian claims? If all you can do is cite is the lack of evidence for hell then your logic is going to neatly dismantle the existence of any god.

1) Any God that burns people for any reason is not only a monster but a criminal and a sinner and an evil entity.

2) Burning people is not "forgiveness" as it is rather the opposite of forgiving.

3) Burning people is not "love" as it is rather the opposite of love.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Whilst all that may be true, the same accusation must be levied at any deity that would create a world with ubiquitous suffering.

4) Putting any person into a Hell, link, is not justice and such an evil idea can not be justice.

5) To "love" means no pain and no more hurting for anyone, as per: "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away." KJV. Revelation 21:4.

God is love, link here = 1 John 4:8, and God does not hurt people, and that means no one ever goes to any hell.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Then why has your deity created disease and predation?

Everyone is a sinner at various degrees and depth, and there is no one as righteous.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Exactly as your deity intended if it is as claimed both omniscient and omnipotent.

Nobody goes to some fire and torment of any hell, and the saying of "Hell on earth" in this lifetime now is far more accurate.

In the end everyone gets saved and not even one sinner nor one evil sheep gets lost or left out because salvation is for all of mankind.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:It's tiresome I know, but do you think you could provide your evidence for this?

Jesus said "Love thy enemies" just as God loves His enemies, Matthew 5:43-48, so love does not burn people and love does not hurt people, and that means not even those that are sinners and enemies.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Unfortunately we can't be sure what Jesus said or did not say, we can't even verify that he actually existed at all, and there is of course not one shred of contemporaneous testimony to validate his existence, which is very odd given the grandiose claims about his deeds during his life.

See 1 Corinthians 3:15 "If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire." So the person is being "SAVED" by the "FIRE" and not hurt by it.

The plan is to have a great salvation, and it would not be great if some people were excluded.

Just FYI.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Again, you have neglected to provide any evidence for your claims, biblical scripture is certainly not reliable evidence, as it's errant nature and contradictory message attests.

stu wrote:Hi Sheldon, well he will not get any evidence to back up his claims from the good book now will he? not often we bump into each other on this new site is it? so many topics to choose from is there not. hope all is ok at the homestead, i'm busy decorating when Ifeel like it at the moment. Glossed 5 Doors in the last 2 days just one left and that's them done in the hallway(phew)

stu wrote:I bet it isn't pal, worse things in the body bone wise are bloody backs. too many intricate parts joining each bloody other. Sorry to hear about it Sheldon, if it gets any worse get your gp out if he/she is any good. I am just going to undercoat the last door in the hallway, won't take long.

stu wrote:Naughty Sheldon, you know that if we were on the other place, old you know who would have jumped at you straight away. As libation use to mean a drink to god. 

stu wrote:Heretic, did you send me a private message? I cannot read it my friend,only know the topic.

Heretic wrote:No hell and everyone gets saved, sounds like a no brainer and I suspect it might be.

If everyone gets saved there is sort of no point to a lot of things. I'll try and put them in a list.

1. No need for sin or sinlessness.
2. No need for the Garden of Eden.
3. No need for hell Hell.
4. No need for a distinct Heaven.
5. No need for prophets.
6. No need for a messiah.
7. No need for holy wars.
8. No need for churches or temples.
9. No need for ministers.
10. No need for tithes.
11. No need for sacrifice.
12. No need for service.
13. No need for scriptures.
14. No need for services.
15. No need for hate.
16. No need for love.
17. No need for salvation.
18. No need for sermons.
19. No need for need.
20. No need for TV Evangelists.

The list could go on and on - I'm sure all of you have your own suggestions

Heretic

• Well the fact is there isn't a shred of empirical evidence for anything metaphysical, for me that's strike one.
  

• The idea of religious belief or faith cannot, as many theists have attested, be disproved, any hypothesis, idea, or claim that cannot be falsified has to be dismissed, otherwise any claim that's made about anything is vlaid if it can't be disproved. Strike two
  

• Many religions make claims that would have left evidence in the physical world, yet no evidence exists to back up these claims, strike three.
  

• The modern monotheistic religions claim certain attributes or characteristics for their god, omniscience, omnipotence, and limitless benevolence, all create innate logical paradox that no theologian has ever been able to correct.

• Humans have existed for approximately 100 to 150 thousand years, and have created myriads of deities, the claim that they finally stumbled upon the "one true" god just 2 to 3 thousand years ago without any evidence to validate the claim is absurd.

• The main contemporary monotheistic religions all have religious tomes supposedly containing a message from an omniscient and omnipotent being, yet the bulk of it is palpably errant, even puerile, in places, and therefore the idea it's origins are omniscient is axiomatically false, or else that being must want it's message corrupted exactly as it has been, which is again incompatible with a being that has limitless benevolence.

polyglide wrote:As usual Shirina misses the whole point.

No one is taking into consideration the part Satan is playing.

It is like not involving the other eleven in a football match.

There is a match going on between God and the Devil.

As a Christian, I am aware that at the present time God's hands are tied as to the extent he can be involved, having given the Devil a certain time to do his utmost to turn all against God.

The state of the world and the behaviour of many of it's people are proof that the Devil is making a very good attempt but he will not win in the end.  

polyglide wrote:As usual Shirina misses the whole point.

No one is taking into consideration the part Satan is playing.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:True enough, because Satan is a fiction, for which there obviously isn't one shred of empirical evidence.

It is like not involving the other eleven in a football match. There is a match going on between God and the Devil.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Leaving aside the fact you haven't a shred of evidence here, it's not much of a match is it? If your god is omnipotent I mean.

As a Christian, I am aware that at the present time God's hands are tied as to the extent he can be involved, having given the Devil a certain time to do his utmost to turn all against God.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:EVIDENCE please??  

The state of the world and the behaviour of many of it's people are proof that the Devil is making a very good attempt but he will not win in the end.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Proof? Well that's different, could you reference the scientific journal these proofs were published in please.

Dan Fante wrote:

polyglide wrote:As usual Shirina misses the whole point.

No one is taking into consideration the part Satan is playing.

It is like not involving the other eleven in a football match.

There is a match going on between God and the Devil.

As a Christian, I am aware that at the present time God's hands are tied as to the extent he can be involved, having given the Devil a certain time to do his utmost to turn all against God.

The state of the world and the behaviour of many of it's people are proof that the Devil is making a very good attempt but he will not win in the end.  

Who created the Devil?

polyglide wrote:It is obvious that both God and the Devil are of the same nature, where they originated is a problem we cannot at this time answer.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Well it may be obvious to you, but to me the claim has all the validity of making analogous claims between witches and leprechauns.

I can understand why you ask Dan, but if we had all the answers there would be no need for faith.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:If you use faith you can believe whatever you choose, and since many different and even contradictory claims are made by those claiming to have faith it's axiomatic that faith is a useless tool for determining the truth of a claim. Scientific empiricism on the other hand has amassed an impressive and innumerable amount of successes, that is an indisputable FACT.

polyglide wrote:It is obvious that both God and the Devil are of the same nature

polyglide wrote: where they originated is a problem we cannot at this time answer.

polyglide wrote:
I can understand why you ask Dan, but if we had all the answers there would be no need for faith.

polyglide wrote:You base an opinion on the evidence available.

The evidence that God and the Devil are of a like nature is evidenced by the fact that they communicate on the same level and there is no alternative reasonable explanation.

polyglide wrote:You base an opinion on the evidence available.

The evidence that God and the Devil are of a like nature is evidenced by the fact that they communicate on the same level and there is no alternative reasonable explanation.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:No I don't base an opinion on evidence, if compelling empirical evidence is vlidated then opinion is not necessary. The whole point and purpose of scientific empiricism is to negate the need of opinion. You have no evidence they exist, and you have no evidence they communicate, as for there being no other reasonable explanation your whole religion like all the hundreds of others are entirely man made, that's a reasonable explanation, and it matches exactly the lack of evidence.

Dan Fante wrote:

polyglide wrote:You base an opinion on the evidence available.

The evidence that God and the Devil are of a like nature is evidenced by the fact that they communicate on the same level and there is no alternative reasonable explanation.

I think you're on slightly rocky ground by trying to introduce evidential based claims in relation to those assertions.

polyglide wrote:You base an opinion on the evidence available.

The evidence that God and the Devil are of a like nature is evidenced by the fact that they communicate on the same level and there is no alternative reasonable explanation.

polyglide wrote:and there is no alternative reasonable explanation.

Sam Hunter wrote:

polyglide wrote:You base an opinion on the evidence available.

The evidence that God and the Devil are of a like nature is evidenced by the fact that they communicate on the same level and there is no alternative reasonable explanation.

Hello Polyglide.

You've made an evidence-based claim, so could you present the evidence that supports it, please? This would include the evidence that both God and the Devil exist, that they communicate, that this communication is "on the same level" (this must also include a description of what you mean by "on the same level"), and that there are no other reasonable interpretations of the evidence.

Thank you.

No I don't base an opinion on evidence, if compelling empirical evidence is vlidated then opinion is not necessary. The whole point and purpose of scientific empiricism is to negate the need of opinion. You have no evidence they exist, and you have no evidence they communicate, as for there being no other reasonable explanation your whole religion like all the hundreds of others are entirely man made, that's a reasonable explanation, and it matches exactly the lack of evidence. wrote:Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Shirina wrote:

polyglide wrote:and there is no alternative reasonable explanation.

Sure there is.

For instance, how do we know that it isn't Zeus and Hades instead of God and Satan?

Besides, you - like many others - make that leap which says that, if a god exists, it is the god of your religion. Yet when believers cannot even present objective evidence of any type of god, there is even less reason to run off half-cocked to the nearest church to start singing praises and throwing hard-earned money into the collection pit ... err, I mean plate.

After all, wow, aren't you relieved that, through a random series of events, you just happened to be born and raised in a culture that worships the One True God? After all, you had a much greater chance to have been born in India, where you would have been taught to worship, say, Ganesh. Then you would have been totally screwed because you'd spend your life worshiping a "false god."

Whew, guess you dodged that bullet, eh?

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Hi Sam, as you can see I've already asked him for that evidence

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:No I don't base an opinion on evidence, if compelling empirical evidence is vlidated then opinion is not necessary. The whole point and purpose of scientific empiricism is to negate the need of opinion. You have no evidence they exist, and you have no evidence they communicate, as for there being no other reasonable explanation your whole religion like all the hundreds of others are entirely man made, that's a reasonable explanation, and it matches exactly the lack of evidence.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Well actually the odds were even grater than you suggest, as if he'd been born any time over the last 150000+ years other than the last 2000 years his religion and god wouldn't even have been created, so he'd have been damned to hell by his logic.

polyglide wrote:As a Christian, I am aware that at the present time God's hands are tied as to the extent he can be involved, having given the Devil a certain time to do his utmost to turn all against God.

Shirina wrote:If you throw in the past 150,000 years, the odds of being born in a place and time where the God of the Bible is being worshiped are so remote that I would rather play casino games with the longest odds than bet on Mr. Cusick's Christianity.

Heretic wrote:No hell and everyone gets saved, sounds like a no brainer and I suspect it might be.

If everyone gets saved there is sort of no point to a lot of things. I'll try and put them in a list.

1. No need for sin or sinlessness.
2. No need for the Garden of Eden.
3. No need for hell Hell.
4. No need for a distinct Heaven.
5. No need for prophets.
6. No need for a messiah.
7. No need for holy wars.
8. No need for churches or temples.
9. No need for ministers.
10. No need for tithes.
11. No need for sacrifice.
12. No need for service.
13. No need for scriptures.
14. No need for services.
15. No need for hate.
16. No need for love.
17. No need for salvation.
18. No need for sermons.
19. No need for need.
20. No need for TV Evangelists.

The list could go on and on - I'm sure all of you have your own suggestions

Heretic