It depends on your view of God.
Do people still believe in Hell?
- Thread starter Jayson1
- Start date
This is not how purgatory works if you trust modern Catholic teaching, like that of Joseph Ratzinger (who then became pope). According to him purgatory is not a place God sends you to when he decides to make to make you suffer for your sins. Instead it's an internal process of purification people undergo to finally be with God.
You're not judged for past sins in a positivist way but mostly an process you go through automatically.
Well, I can't imagine why you'd get judgment for being a Christian from other Christian people, so it kind of goes without saying that the majority of the anti-Christian judgment you'd receive would come from non-Christians, would it not? Pretty basic logic there, really. Doesn't mean that percentage-wise non-Christians are more judgmental than Christians; not that anyone's competing.
I'm a straight white cisgender male in the United States, so in terms of privilege I pretty much hit the jackpot. I only say that to preface this by saying I'm not complaining about my status or treatment, just making a point to counter yours above. If I tried to run for higher political office in the US today I wouldn't stand a chance of winning. Do you know why that is? Because with very rare exceptions America does not elect openly atheist candidates to higher office. Atheists are considered the most distrusted minority in the country. Is it because they commit more crimes or terrorist attacks? No. Is it because atheists have historically tried to undermine American institutions? No. Is it because atheists are the most powerful or largest minority in America and represent a threat to Christian dominance? No. Is it because atheists have no moral or ethical framework? No. We have pretty much the same basic ethics and morals as most people do because most of us were raised in similar backgrounds. Most atheists were raised by Christian parents and have extended families and circles of friends and acquaintances that are largely made up of Christians. Many of us even attended church for much of our childhoods.
So, given all of that, why are atheists so distrusted and considered unworthy of political office in this country? To me, the answer is obviously that the Christian majority feels a profound sense of judgment, defensiveness, and prejudice toward atheists. So when I hear about how atheists are more judgmental than Christians or Christians are persecuted here, all I have to do is count the number of atheist Representatives and Senators (state and federal) and presidents and governors and Supreme Court justices and compare that number to how many Christians have held those offices in the past and present to put the lie to that argument. It doesn't paint a pretty picture.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/19/atheists-in-congress_n_3944108.html
After observing the very low bar you set for what qualifies as judgment and bullying to you on these forums, I don't place much stock in your interpretation of those things. Disagreeing with or questioning your positions and how your views affect others is not judging you or bullying you no matter how many times you want to say it is.
And where in the West have Christians en masse been persecuted for centuries through to today? Certainly not in the United States or where you are from. Was it Australia? Unless you're from parts of the Middle East or SE Asia or Africa you haven't experienced real Christian persecution. And in Africa Christian groups backed by bigoted Westerners have been responsible for some of the harshest persecution of LGBTQ people in the world, up to and including legalized murder.
I can't recall a single time in my life where a legitimate news outlet has made it a point of singling out the religion of a thief or a drunk driver, Muslim, Christian, or otherwise. It's almost always completely irrelevant to such crimes unless perhaps they had a religious icon as a tattoo or other identifier that can lead to their capture. Yet you cite it as something that happens "often" and refer to it as group degradation of Christians. Saying to look for a Christian suspect in a 3/4ths majority Christian nation would be a pretty monumental waste of time.
How would one go about identifying someone as an atheist thief or drunk driver, anyway? Are they drinking "There Is No God" brand tequila or something? Do they have a Christopher Hitchens tattoo above their asscrack? Did they steal someone's gold cross necklace and it burned a mark into their hand because crosses are like acid to the touch for us? You probably don't see it because a) you don't see it for anyone and it's a completely made up issue, and b) because even if it was a real issue, there'd be no easily identifiable way to determine that someone is atheist.
The only group that has "often" been degraded like that in Western nations are Muslims when people rush to judgment about the motivation for an alleged terror attack and assume it was based on radical Islamic beliefs (and many times it is). Christians don't have to deal with that though since when they conduct terror attacks they're usually just called mass shooters or "lone wolves" or mentally ill instead of being labelled radical Christian terrorists.
- There are several other winter holidays besides Christmas, so it makes sense to be inclusive.I think Happy Holidays sounds kind of forced. I always think it flows saying Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year
- You've already established that you know that the etymology of holiday is "holy day," so why would anyone consider that disrespectful of Christians? (Not you, just the usual War on Christmas BS)
- Sometimes people are required to say Happy Holidays for work or say it out of expediency, so getting mad at them doesn't make sense.
Anyone who has a problem with a private business owner putting up a nativity scene in their shop is an asshole, but I don't recall hearing many incidents of that nature, and even if there are, the complainant doesn't have a leg to stand on legally, so who cares? What I do recall is examples of local, state, and federal government buildings putting up decorations that favor one religion while not allowing equivalent displays from other religions. Now personally, I don't have a problem with a nativity scene in front of a government office, but some others might, and they are not wrong to think that and have the law on their side.
I don't recall any examples of people being upset by bells or candles, since neither of those are exclusively Christian or Christmas related. Back in my youth when I worked as a manager in retail, I did have plenty of uptight Christians pitch a fit because an employee said "Happy Holidays," as if it was a personal affront to them and not just the person trying to be pleasant. You can't really complain about sensitive snowflakes when every winter prior to being canned Bill O'Reilly would wage an imaginary war against the secular progressives trying to destroy Christmas.
I'm an atheist, and I love Christmas and all the trappings of the holiday like the music (even *gasp* Christian music) and decorations. It's my favorite holiday. And not just because it's my birthday.
Now, given your track record in this thread since you returned to it after doing your dramatic "You all suck and I'm leaving" departure the other day and bragged about ignoring me, I don't expect a reply. You seem completely incapable of answering or handling questions which challenge your set in stone worldview in any way. But if you don't plan to answer anyone who disagrees with you, I have to ask, why are you bothering to post here? This isn't a proselyzation forum, it's a discussion forum. If you're just going to drop drive-by comments without discussing things, Twitter is right over there.
Marxist-Leninists didn't act in the name of atheism. There was no ancient atheist texts that were the guiding principle behind their actions, because none exist. They adopted atheism as a policy because religion was the dominant competing ideology of the time that could weaken the Party's propaganda grip on the hearts and minds of the people, and lessen the power of the State to control the populace, not because they were interested in spreading atheism around the world. Atheism was a byproduct of Soviet-style Communism, it wasn't a central tenet of it, and other non-Soviet Marxists such as those in Latin America often chose to integrate their religious beliefs with their communism and could be every bit as brutal (relatively speaking). So equating Stalin and the genocidal purges of communist governments with conventional atheism is an unfair comparison, and one that has been used to justify mistreatment of atheist individuals who arrived at their stance based on reason and rational thought rather than through fear or suppression of competing ideologies (for instance, during the Red Scare).For some reason, I felt this was appropriate here:
Last edited:
Oh. I was referring to one of the Bibles descriptions. I think it's literally 'burns away earthly sin' or something like that.
To the Googles!
Edit: Damn, Ye olde Christians liked themselves some fire. Good, bad, an appropriate simile for every occasion!
Typically, it turns out I was thinking of Corinthians.
Last edited:
""[Purgatory] is the inwardly necessary process of transformation in which a person becomes capable of Christ, capable of God and thus capable of unity with the whole communion of saints."
Ratzinger in his book on Eschatology.
Note that it's an internal process. Not a punishment from an outside entity. The view on purgatory has evolved quite a bit in Catholic thinking.
Ratzinger in his book on Eschatology.
Note that it's an internal process. Not a punishment from an outside entity. The view on purgatory has evolved quite a bit in Catholic thinking.
Oh, I wasn't claiming it was a punishment.
Just a process described in highly unpleasant terms. And leaves me wondering how one can rationalise both it and eternal punishment co-existing.
Unless God purifies then punishes you. Which seems remarkably unforgiving and self defeating. I mean, you're literally meant to come out a new-ish...thing.
Just a process described in highly unpleasant terms. And leaves me wondering how one can rationalise both it and eternal punishment co-existing.
Unless God purifies then punishes you. Which seems remarkably unforgiving and self defeating. I mean, you're literally meant to come out a new-ish...thing.
Last edited:
You're a better person than I am. I don't think I could keep my cool replying to that much horse shit.
While that wasn't my point, it was more of a thought provoking interesting picture, given the nature of the thread, I appreciate the historical context. Thanks.
In Jewish and Christian theology fire is often used as a simple of the holiness and judgement of God, as the two are fairly intertwined in both.
No, I got what you were going for, it's just the false equivalency argument that "atheists are responsible for genocides and tyranny too!" has always bugged me, and the meme played into that, even though you weren't saying that yourself.
Ok, cool. No misunderstanding then.
Last edited:
"just making a point to counter yours above"
I appreciate you offering a reference point rather than a.. counter point. I also appreciate you offering context to your reactions and opinion.
I am of mixed race though very fair skinned and at the moment fair haired. I navigate the world under the radar. Often treated like one of the white guys (women) and getting the inside view of white prejudice and prejudice from other quarters. It is equally part of the human condition in my experience and no less tolerable based on whether one group is in the majority or minority. I can't be bothered with some of the opinion I've read here that seems to justify behavior if it is in retaliation or a way to make up for past sins. Bias is bias no matter who delivers it. However, I get what you are saying, in the majority the comfort zone lies and I have also benefited from that. I have had very little religious background from my parents. One of my parents, being an Atheist, was and is, very intolerant of religious people. Still sent me to an Anglican boarding school though. Again I see it as navigating the world. It's healthy to mix it up. With regards to politics, that is purely a reflection (within a given system) of the electorate. Wait long enough and things might change.
"The only group that has "often" been degraded like that in Western nations are Muslims when people rush to judgment about the motivation for an alleged terror attack and assume it was based on radical Islamic beliefs (and many times it is).."
Alleged terror attack? One just has to look at the proven attacks to see why this impression is drawn. It's a blessing they are radicals and not the mass majority of garden variety decent believers of Islam who are not nutters. When a nutter Christian goes on a shooting spree you better believe I distance myself from someone like that. There is nothing to be gained by dragging the innocent in with the evil. This may sound off base but as a Christian I believe there is sin. It doesn't excuse behavior but it exists.
I like Christmas too, just my luck I was born when it is usually Easter, lol.
As for the replying. I have tried (remember you said I was monopolizing things) and frankly whether you want to see it or not different posters depending on whether they are in a majority group.. have their comfort zone too, others might not. That is the nature of the beast. It is not however always conducive to pleasant and open exchange.
Just a last thought. What is the wish? Is it for equality or is it for a new status quo? I really would like to know that. If it is about raising others up that should be the goal, in my opinion.
All I meant by that is when people automatically assume something is a terrorist incident because the suspect is Middle Eastern when the same crime committed by a white suspect might just be labelled a mass shooting or an incident involving a runaway car. The same benefit of the doubt is not extended to Middle Easterners and Muslims as it is to others. Now obviously, given the prevalence of radical Islamic terror attacks around the world some of that is unavoidable, but it's best to not jump to conclusions before all the facts are in.
I appreciate you taking the time to reply here and hopefully it will be the beginning of a better exchange of dialogue in the future.
You mean, for atheists? Equal respect and treatment, of course. Atheists aren't organized or capable of establishing a new status quo. It's not a religion. It's just individuals with their lack of belief.
Can we make this a general religious thread and not just about hell?
There's just a lot that can be discussed here I suspect.
There's just a lot that can be discussed here I suspect.
What about heck, can we discuss that too?
That's up to Jayson if he wants me to change the title, but it's the nature of threads like this that the topic drifts, so if you have something else religion-related to discuss, go ahead. Just be mindful that it's a sensitive topic so try not to lob any grenades and then back away to watch the chaos ensue.
As soon as the title changes to something like "General Religion Thread" it will die.
That's my prophecy, those who have ears to hear let them do so. The Ferengi for instance.
That's my prophecy, those who have ears to hear let them do so. The Ferengi for instance.
I agree with teacake.....
But I'm hoping this isn't a hand grenade when I ask this..
How do modern Christians get around the issue of women pastors or priests?
I don't know if there is a specific verse in the Bible that says women can't be pastors or such but yeah how is that issue addressed?
Galatians 3:28 (KJV)
Religious patriarchalism stems from tradition not doctrine; the same goes for animal sacrifice -- we don't do that any more either.
What I want to know is whether Jesus died that only human souls could be saved. What about intelligent aliens -- would they have their own saviours and how would those children of God relate to the Holy Trinity of the Christian church?
Religious patriarchalism stems from tradition not doctrine; the same goes for animal sacrifice -- we don't do that any more either.
What I want to know is whether Jesus died that only human souls could be saved. What about intelligent aliens -- would they have their own saviours and how would those children of God relate to the Holy Trinity of the Christian church?
Last edited:
But isn't the Bible supposed to be unchanging?
Similar threads
