Doubts about Hell, suffering. Please Help!

[Mijoy2]

AnAtheist:

some

god may or even must have created the universe, to assume it is the Christian one is a non sequitur. For that, you need additional proof, and that does not come from reliable sources.

I honestly don’t know how you can say this. There is, of course, no video tape, no eye witnesses remaining, no lightening bolt from the sky engraving the truth of the Christian God on the pavement. But of course this (the pavement thing) wouldn’t make sense anyway because if God wanted to hand us evidence in this way He would not have had His only son die on the cross…or, Christ would have stepped down off the cross when the Roman Soldiers suggested He do so to prove his diety.

The entirety of scripture, old and new is proof. Not the kind of proof you insist on. In fact is amazing evidence. The way the book unfolds exhibits certainly more proof then if there were a 2000 year old eye witness, or a video tape. The book was either crafted by a genius, orders of magnitude more brilliant then Einstein and Isaac Newton combined and somehow got individuals who were not yet born , over the course of the next millenium, to follow through with a conspiracy to carry on the story of redeemtion…or it’s the Word of God.

Jesus, must have been part of this conspiracy. He read the scriptures, such as Isaiah 53 and thought, “boy could I pull off a huge hoax if only I preach with a brilliance like this world and has never witnessed, then, follow through by dying on a cross and making sure I pull off fulfiling scripture in the process”. What presence of mind huh? I sometimes forget to put the gas cap back on after getting gas. I’ll bet He and His 12 friends got a laugh out of that one.

You simply do not want to hear it.

 

[eptatorata]

Mijoy2:

The entirety of scripture, old and new is proof.

You mistake acceptance of a revealed religion with proof.

 

[Mijoy2]

eptatorata:

You mistake acceptance of a revealed religion with proof.

Is this some sort of a Yogi-ism?
I certainly do accept revealed religion, as proof. I’m just not quite sure where the word “mistake” fits in.

 

[eptatorata]

You accept a revealed religion as proof of the very same revealed religion. In other words, you mistake buying into a revelation that convinces you with an objective proof that would compel a skeptic.

I will leave the last word to you.

 

[AnAtheist]

Mijoy2:

The entirety of scripture, old and new is proof. Not the kind of proof you insist on. In fact is amazing evidence.

The Earth was not created in six days.
Species evolve and were not created in an instant the way they look now.
There has not been a global flood.
The Augustian census took not place during the reign of Herodes.
The infant slaughter by Herodes never took place.

These are all facts directly contradicting scripture. And digging deeper, I could find more mistakes. So why should I believe the rest of story?

 

[Mijoy2]

eptatorata:

You accept a revealed religion as proof of the very same revealed religion. In other words, you mistake buying into a revelation that convinces you with an objective proof that would compel a skeptic.

I will leave the last word to you.

Eptatorta,
I don’t “mistake” because I 'buy into" the truth of what has been revelaled by God. I simply buy into it. There will always be skeptics. There are skeptics regarding whether or not Man walked on the moon in 1969. Because I buy it, it does not mean I am making a mistake. I guess I am not sure what you are saying here, I think I may be missing your point. Sorry.

 

[misterX]

AnAtheist:

The Earth was not created in six days.
Species evolve and were not created in an instant the way they look now.
There has not been a global flood.

You seem so sure…you must be very old to have witnessed these things…1 how long is a day in the life of god? you don’t know…
2… yes new speices are made in a instant even useing evolution as a model…i.e when a finch hatches or is even concieved that has a different kind of beak from its parents. its a new species.
3… what global flood are you talking about… the one in genesis where it talks about the world being covered in water? which is almost if not spot on in its claim…because no where else does the bible say there was a global flood…unless you mean the story of noah? mmm probably not…because someone as smart as you, would know what the word earth meant to the anceint hebrews…

 

[oriel36]

Mijoy2:

I. The book was either crafted by a genius, orders of magnitude more brilliant then Einstein and Isaac Newton combined and somehow got individuals who were not yet born , over the course of the next millenium, to follow through with a conspiracy to carry on the story of redeemtion…or it’s the Word of God.

.

Why are you doing this Miljoy2 when most Christians cannot defend themselves against the conception that these men were brilliant when ,with a small bit of effort,it is seen that Newton was was cunning creep who distorted real achievements to get his ballistic agenda applied to planetary motion to work and the other guy just built on the distortion.

This is like killing dodo birds just because you can,without any objection.

 

[AnAtheist]

misterX:

unless you mean the story of noah? mmm probably not…because someone as smart as you, would know what the word earth meant to the anceint hebrews…

yeah, yeah, anytime the bible says something that doesn’t fit, it really says something else…

“Son of God” meant something else too to the ancient Hebrews than being an offspring.

 

[eptatorata]

AnAtheist:

yeah, yeah, anytime the bible says something that doesn’t fit, it really says something else.

Well, this is the apologetics forum.

I’m curious why John Doran doesn’t quiz the theists on their epistemology…

 

[oriel36]

misterX:

AnAtheist:

The Earth was not created in six days.
Species evolve and were not created in an instant the way they look now.
There has not been a global flood.
QUOTE]
You seem so sure…you must be very old to have witnessed these things…1 how long is a day in the life of god? you don’t know…
2… yes new speices are made in a instant even useing evolution as a model…i.e when a finch hatches or is even concieved that has a different kind of beak from its parents. its a new species.
3… what global flood are you talking about… the one in genesis where it talks about the world being covered in water? which is almost if not spot on in its claim…because no where else does the bible say there was a global flood…unless you mean the story of noah? mmm probably not…because someone as smart as you, would know what the word earth meant to the anceint hebrews…

You approach this guy like the creationists do and this is extremely unfair to the author(s) of Genesis and their work.

The symbolic nature of Genesis is precise and especially in the chronology of Adam to Noah.This mathematical facet is there for good and decent people in order to stop the narrative from swamping the Spiritual message as expressed by the figure of Adam as undisciplined will.

How precise is it ? - how is this for starters -

"1 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month: it was on that day that All the fountains of the great abyss burst forth, and the floodgates of the sky were opened. 12 For forty days and forty nights heavy rain poured down on the earth. 13 On the precise day named, "usccb.org/nab/bible/genesis/genesis7.htm

Maybe you wish to see how the Hebrew author made a day of creation overlap with a day of the genealogy of Genesis 5 by introducing the formula of evening came and morning followed.

Maybe you wish to see the Hebrew hints at Enoch of 365 years denoting calendrical days and the break in the formula which accents it.

23 The whole lifetime of Enoch was three hundred and sixty-five years. 24 2 Then Enoch walked with God,usccb.org/nab/bible/genesis/genesis5.htm

Unless the Hebrew authors came back and shook you by the throat to point out that there is something more to the narative I don’t know why you allow weak empirical arguments to conquer you.

Genesis 5 Genealogy.

Age of father at birth of son.

Adam 130 years
Seth 105
Enosh 90
Kenan 70
Mahalel 65
Jared 162
Enoch 65
Methusaleh 187
Lamech 182
Noah 600 (age at time of flood Gen 7)

Total years from creation to flood = 1656 years

1656 AT 52.17 per year = 86,393.52 weeks

Gen 7 " in the second month,on the 17th day of the month" where Noah is 600 yrs old at time of flood is anywhere within the 45th day 45.36/7 day week =6.48 weeks).

86,393.52 + 6.48 = 86,400 weeks from creation to destruction. Gen 7 “on the precise day named”

There are 86,400 seconds in a 24 hour cycle.

Perhaps I am trying too hard to up the standard of Christian thinking as these empirical cretins run amok through our sacred writings but I fear it is the reasonably intelligent people who are doing the damage insofar as the empirical freaks appear to have valid arguments and dictate the method of approach.

 

[misterX]

AnAtheist:

yeah, yeah, anytime the bible says something that doesn’t fit, it really says something else…

Well i’m sorry … i just thought someone with a mystical insight into how the earth was created… would understand that words change meaning through time and the translation process…and who says what the bible implies doesn’t fit? did the bible change the wording in the story of noah… ? No so i’m sorry the point you’re trying to make is basless.

 

[Tietjen]

SamCA:

Even the really bad ones – I could see Pol Pot deserving, I don’t know, a few millenia of torment, or something. But even history’s worst individuals didn’t inflict infinite harm.
So why do they deserve infinite harm inflicted on them?

By what measuring stick are you supposing that no infinite harm was done by those such as Pol Pot or Hitler or even someone who has only killed once? Can even one of their victims ever return and know the happiness of seeing their children, of pushing their grandchild on a swing, of embracing their spouse? No, the victims are deprived for all eternity of loving those they knew or might have known while on earth. Yes, hopefully they will encounter them in Heaven, assuming that all of them make it there, but there is certainly no guarantee. Had the victim been allowed the opportunity to maintain a life, he/she may have had an effect on his/her loved ones and quit possibly helped them to find the truth of Christ. Our sins, do not just affect a single individual or ourselves. The result of sin continues on to others, doors are opened, and shut that would not have been had the sin never taken place. Those opening and closing doors in turn can lead to further sin by others and the process is infinitely continued.
When considering Heaven and Hell as the final place, which everyone will end up, you have to see the larger picture. First, God created every one of us. Therefore, we belong to Him. If I created 100 paintings, and after having completed them I looked at each one and judge them, obviously I would find some that did not meet my expectations. Am I wrong to destroy the bad ones and preserve the good ones? Is it unfair of me to do so? Who is above God that can call Him unfair for condemning those who He created to do good, and they refused and rejected Him? God loves us enough that He sent Christ into the world on our behalf. Yet, there will still be those that reject Him. Life isn’t fair (by our comprehension) but that doesn’t mean that simply because we don’t see it as fair God must live up only to our standards for what is right and wrong. Perhaps it is we who need to change our opinions of what is good and evil, right and wrong, fair and unfair.
God bless.

 

[Tietjen]

AnAtheist:

Besides, if the choice of a certain option is severly punished, the choice can hardly be called free.

That argument would only apply if everyone knew the Truth and the consequences of using their free will to choose evil (sin). However, as I am sure that you are very aware, not everybody believes in the consequences for sin. Therefore, they convince themselves that there is “no consequences for my decisions and therefore I can choose option A or option B based solely on my wants.” We are finite beings. Many believe that if they do not know or understand something that it cannot affect them. My wife knew nothing about cars when we first got married. She drove ignorant of the fact that a car needs to have its oil changed regularly. Needless to say, we no longer have that car. The simple fact that she did not understand the importance of changing the oil did not negate the necessity of it. The truth of the matter remained the same, the engine ceased. If a person goes through life only believing what he/she wishes to believe, will the consequences in the end change just because they were ignorant of the final outcome or chose not to believe it. Truth is not relative. It simply is. A person wishing or wanting it to be something other than it is will not change it.
God bless.

 

[Tietjen]

SamCA:

Imagine that you’re at an ice cream shop. They have a dozen different flavors of ice cream. However, the guy who owns the place has a standing policy of shooting anyone who orders any flavor except vanilla in the head.

Would anyone seriously argue that he is offering his customers a free choice?

Yes, there is still a choice. For those customers who don’t believe that he will shoot them, they make their choice in ignorance and thus pay the price. For those that choose wisely, they walk away in peace. Just like there is a choice in today’s world of following Christ and not following Christ. For me the choice is obvious because I believe the “owners” policy. But for the person who doesn’t believe the policy of the “owner”… well, I hope he enjoyed the pecan fudge swirl.
God bless.

 

[Mijoy2]

oriel36:

misterX:

You approach this guy like the creationists do and this is extremely unfair to the author(s) of Genesis and their work.

The symbolic nature of Genesis is precise and especially in the chronology of Adam to Noah.This mathematical facet is there for good and decent people in order to stop the narrative from swamping the Spiritual message as expressed by the figure of Adam as undisciplined will.

How precise is it ? - how is this for starters -

"1

In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month: it was on that day that All the fountains of the great abyss burst forth, and the floodgates of the sky were opened. 12 For forty days and forty nights heavy rain poured down on the earth. 13 On the precise day named, "usccb.org/nab/bible/genesis/genesis7.htm

Maybe you wish to see how the Hebrew author made a day of creation overlap with a day of the genealogy of Genesis 5 by introducing the formula of evening came and morning followed.

Maybe you wish to see the Hebrew hints at Enoch of 365 years denoting calendrical days and the break in the formula which accents it.

23 The whole lifetime of Enoch was three hundred and sixty-five years. 24 2 Then Enoch walked with God,usccb.org/nab/bible/genesis/genesis5.htm

Unless the Hebrew authors came back and shook you by the throat to point out that there is something more to the narative I don’t know why you allow weak empirical arguments to conquer you.

Genesis 5 Genealogy.

Age of father at birth of son.

Adam 130 years
Seth 105
Enosh 90
Kenan 70
Mahalel 65
Jared 162
Enoch 65
Methusaleh 187
Lamech 182
Noah 600 (age at time of flood Gen 7)

Total years from creation to flood = 1656 years

1656 AT 52.17 per year = 86,393.52 weeks

Gen 7 " in the second month,on the 17th day of the month" where Noah is 600 yrs old at time of flood is anywhere within the 45th day 45.36/7 day week =6.48 weeks).

86,393.52 + 6.48 = 86,400 weeks from creation to destruction. Gen 7 “on the precise day named”

There are 86,400 seconds in a 24 hour cycle.

Perhaps I am trying too hard to up the standard of Christian thinking as these empirical cretins run amok through our sacred writings but I fear it is the reasonably intelligent people who are doing the damage insofar as the empirical freaks appear to have valid arguments and dictate the method of approach.

I get the impression you are have something quite valuable to say but it keeps flying over my head, for somehow I am missing it.

Could you dumb it down a tad for me please….
Are you saying that from the time of Adam (creation of man) to the flood, is one day? Where a day is something over 600 years? And that this is mathematically precise in the Bible? And, from this I can summize that the 7 day creation which was 7 days, can be ttraslated to 7* 600 or 4200 years?

Am I on track here?

 

[oriel36]

misterX:

Well i’m sorry … i just thought someone with a mystical insight into how the earth was created… would understand that words change meaning through time and the translation process…and who says what the bible implies doesn’t fit? did the bible change the wording in the story of noah… ? No so i’m sorry the point you’re trying to make is basless.

You just highlighted the point the guy was making even though he has a puny understanding of our sacred traditions up to and including our written heritage in the form of the library of books known as the Bible.The poor cretin does’nt even comprehend his own discipline of natural phenomena yet a Christian lacks the ability to send him back to the absurdities from whence he came.

The non-believer is and never was the problem ,it is this dim-witted and diluted version of Christianity which dilutes our rich and exquisite Catholic tradition to 20th century empirical sensibilities.

I refuse to believe that fellow Christians would be so dumb as to let these dumb cretins set the agenda on how to approach our written heritage much less the fundamental tenets of our Christian faith but this much I do know,whatever god you imagine you are defending,it certainly is’nt the God of Christ and Christianity.

These empirical fools know nothing and I mean nothing but fellow Christians have given these pale imitations of gnostics validity and a platform.They will run a mile if I bring up matters in their own discipline becasue pseudo-christians are indoctrinated into the same belief in the ‘genius’ of Newton and the other guy as the non -believers are.These people were crooks yet look how their disciples approach our Christian tradition with the support of fellow Christians and not ONE single Christian has spoken against Newton as a guy who denied the Trinity.This denial shows up in the devious way he shuffles technical matters from astronomy by using technical jargon to give a cartoon version of planetary motion.

What Christian accepts insincerity just because it convenient and live a life spouting slogans for God and Christ when it truly is the devil that is being worshiped .It must be the devil because the answer you give the unbeliever showed no wisdom,divine or otherwise.

 

[oriel36]

Mijoy2:

oriel36:

I get the impression you are have something quite valuable to say but it keeps flying over my head, for somehow I am missing it.

Could you dumb it down a tad for me please….
Are you saying that from the time of Adam (creation of man) to the flood, is one day? Where a day is something over 600 years? And that this is mathematically precise in the Bible? And, from this I can summize that the 7 day creation which was 7 days, can be ttraslated to 7* 600 or 4200 years?

Am I on track here?

Is it a fair deal that I have a severe difficulty in expressing matters while you may have a great way of expression but see these matters in hazy outlines that you know somehow make sense but have yet to become more familiar with the exquisite thinking of the authors of Genesis.

Wipe the board clean with just one assumption.The wisdom of Genesis author(s) exceeds anything comparable today both in the construction of the Genesis text with a prime Spiritual message,a narrative that was necessary but falls away as the Spiritual message becomes more obvious with experience,and a mechanisn to protect the Spiritual message from being swamped by the narrative.

I am basically asking you to accept that effort is needed to approach the standard of the Hebrew authors rather than manipulating their work to 20th century purposes or conceptions.The authors made NO mistakes and the mathematical facet is precise.

First question -

Can a day of creation be seperated from day of the genealogy of Genesis 5 ?.

This shuts off the ability to say that a ‘day’ of creation is one thing and a ‘day’ in the lifespans of the Patriarchs is something else.

This is not about proving something true, this is about precision with the end result of appreceation of those wonderful men and their exquisite work.

 

[eptatorata]

Tietjen:

Yes, there is still a choice. For those customers who don’t believe that he will shoot them, they make their choice in ignorance and thus pay the price. For those that choose wisely, they walk away in peace.

You just reinforced SamCA’s point…

 

[Philthy]

eptatorata:

That strikes me as one of the most insincere posts I have ever read on this forum.

Hi eptatorata!

Thank you for your contribution, but Hermoine and I have worked through this - you needn’t burden us with your opinions which are irrelevent to the post.

Truly,

Philthy