Active Users:1071 Time:22/11/2024 05:11:34 PM
I actually find that conversation quite interesting. nossy Send a noteboard - 29/02/2012 08:18:35 PM
And there are quite a few things for us to disagree on in that too. ;)

one of the biggest, rehash debates of this site (and especially its predecessor) and the perfect response to it.

The debate is regarding a loving God and "sending people to hell." I've always stated that its not God sending someone to hell, but instead it is the person who is sending themself to hell. Or seen from a different perspective, God chose everyone to be in heaven, but the only ones who will be in heaven are those who choose God.

I do agree that God doesn't "send people to hell." I don't really believe in hell as it was described during the dark ages. I don't believe that if a poor little man in India never heard of Christ/God, he is automatically doomed to burn in hell... unless a Mormon thinks of him and gets baptized in his honor, anyway.

I think we got a pretty raw deal if one woman once ate one apple and forever after we had to be careful to understand exactly what to believe, or our afterlives would be nothing but anguish. We do not believe in precisely the same God, imo.

So having that in mind, think about what you said. About how you would consider it, essentially, spiritual rape for someone to push aside your decision about what you believe, in order to supplant it with something else. It is offensive to you. It is casting aside your free will. Interestingly enough, God feels the same way in that you can make up your own mind, and He will respect that....even if it breaks His heart.

I suppose I'll find out, if I end up in hell. But I do believe that the choices I make for myself are mine to make, and to mess up (or not) as I will. And if I'm wrong, God and I can talk about that when I get there.

(edit: I don't think Narg is suggesting casting aside my free will (see his "play ticket" comment to LL), but it does seem that the Mormon faith takes liberties that I find offensive, personally, and it does touch on free will.)

Good post

Thank you?
This message last edited by nossy on 29/02/2012 at 08:23:12 PM
Reply to message
Do you know the best way to anger an atheist? - 28/02/2012 07:10:57 PM 1856 Views
Or, you could baptize one of them, posthumously. - 28/02/2012 07:32:48 PM 1187 Views
Ooo that is hilarious *NM* - 28/02/2012 08:22:19 PM 428 Views
I can't think of any reason for an atheist to be annoyed by that. - 28/02/2012 11:08:44 PM 945 Views
Well, for starters, it's really effing rude. - 28/02/2012 11:31:36 PM 983 Views
It is an act of love. - 29/02/2012 12:34:03 AM 1008 Views
Everyone does it for that reason? (edits for clarity) - 29/02/2012 10:27:02 AM 897 Views
I have some disturbing news for you... - 29/02/2012 06:42:41 PM 945 Views
For anyone reading this: the guy above is wrong, and I am admitting that to you on his behalf, so - 29/02/2012 07:15:38 PM 955 Views
Maybe without realizing it, you have articulated.... - 29/02/2012 07:24:13 PM 810 Views
I actually find that conversation quite interesting. - 29/02/2012 08:18:35 PM 933 Views
Re: I actually find that conversation quite interesting. - 29/02/2012 09:07:06 PM 956 Views
I cannot possibly agree more with these two paragraphs of yours... - 29/02/2012 09:28:09 PM 967 Views
I'm surprised to see some of this. - 01/03/2012 12:11:31 PM 823 Views
You said it was really effing rude. - 29/02/2012 08:18:40 PM 992 Views
I meant that the act of choosing for someone else - 29/02/2012 08:54:02 PM 882 Views
Question - 29/02/2012 07:58:32 PM 995 Views
No, I don't blame them or think they are fools. - 29/02/2012 08:41:13 PM 908 Views
It is not an act of love to defy the beliefs of a loved one. - 29/02/2012 02:32:45 PM 1053 Views
Rape? That is ridiculous. - 29/02/2012 05:26:13 PM 957 Views
It's a bit of hyperbole, but not too far from it, imo - 29/02/2012 05:45:39 PM 988 Views
You are trying your best to not understand. - 29/02/2012 07:12:57 PM 975 Views
I suspect that that is where a lot of the issue with it lies. - 02/03/2012 01:33:43 AM 1027 Views
one thing - 29/02/2012 06:25:45 PM 996 Views
Precisely *NM* - 29/02/2012 06:59:15 PM 473 Views
Bad example - 05/03/2012 05:06:21 AM 1044 Views
Why would they be angry about that? - 02/03/2012 01:23:56 AM 1113 Views
Denying people rights since it was written 3000 years ago? - 28/02/2012 07:44:02 PM 908 Views
Isn't religion different than faith, though? - 28/02/2012 07:44:07 PM 1012 Views
Yeah that's pretty much what I said - 28/02/2012 08:21:56 PM 802 Views
Only if I get to be Pope. - 28/02/2012 08:25:45 PM 916 Views
I love me my vices! Thanks Pope - 28/02/2012 10:14:27 PM 786 Views
Generally the same way you piss off anyone else - 28/02/2012 08:43:04 PM 929 Views
Great post. - 28/02/2012 09:18:38 PM 911 Views
I find that the best way is to smile. - 29/02/2012 06:23:50 AM 931 Views
Some answers - 28/02/2012 09:05:35 PM 878 Views
that won't work on Buddists - 28/02/2012 09:21:48 PM 951 Views
On the other hand ... - 28/02/2012 09:28:27 PM 790 Views
For some reason I always imagine Buddhists as the monk class on RPG games... *NM* - 28/02/2012 10:13:27 PM 472 Views
LOL same *NM* - 28/02/2012 10:31:38 PM 450 Views
Best way to anger an atheist, by declaring all atheists are the same. *NM* - 28/02/2012 10:38:51 PM 615 Views
Telling anyone what they actually believe will work. *NM* - 28/02/2012 10:51:56 PM 442 Views
This kind of works for many, doesn't it? - 29/02/2012 06:22:33 PM 812 Views
I'm an atheist, and I consider it to be my religion. *NM* - 28/02/2012 10:51:00 PM 425 Views
Common error number 1: "Atheism isn't a lack of belief, but rather a belief that God doesn't exist." - 28/02/2012 11:18:23 PM 1096 Views
I second that - 29/02/2012 03:46:15 AM 913 Views
Curiously, anger at statements of simple obvious facts is a hallmark of religious fundamentalism. - 29/02/2012 10:27:29 AM 1036 Views
What you're doing there is defining "atheist" and "agnostic" in a way that suits you, but... - 29/02/2012 11:50:27 AM 834 Views
What I am doing is using the terms as they were universally used until about the time I was born. - 05/03/2012 01:11:21 AM 971 Views
So what do you call this position?: - 05/03/2012 08:43:20 AM 927 Views
I call them both agnostic, but the former leans toward atheism while the latter has no lean. - 05/03/2012 10:53:02 AM 981 Views
See, there you go again, defining atheism in such a way as to make it sound ridiculous. - 05/03/2012 11:21:17 AM 805 Views
Well, is unswerving belief a good thing, or not? - 05/03/2012 11:57:05 AM 1032 Views
What's happening - 05/03/2012 02:24:41 PM 1014 Views
Conversationally, DKs use of "atheism" at the start of this convo is the only practical definition. - 07/03/2012 03:10:18 AM 1321 Views
Oh really? The guy who was doing it to annoy people? - 07/03/2012 09:53:38 PM 919 Views
The guy who was doing it to annoy atheists based on the terms technical and popular meaning, yes. - 11/03/2012 04:04:36 AM 794 Views
Whatever. - 12/03/2012 12:39:24 AM 1235 Views
*NM* - 12/03/2012 01:14:39 AM 447 Views
I understand that as "I completely agree." - 13/03/2012 12:11:18 AM 1073 Views
I saw it as.... - 13/03/2012 10:44:37 PM 829 Views
My browser does not like your gif. - 13/03/2012 11:32:06 PM 1084 Views
I have a few good quotes for this one. - 29/02/2012 03:29:22 PM 928 Views
I snerfled. *NM* - 29/02/2012 05:12:32 PM 462 Views
Re: That's it? *NM* - 01/03/2012 06:33:48 AM 519 Views
Re: Do you know the best way to anger an atheist? - 02/03/2012 01:47:03 AM 863 Views

Reply to Message