How To Get To Heaven When You Die

[xfrodobagginsx]

God is not the liar. Humans are the liars. It is humanity which makes up stories, fables and myths.

Satan is the Great Deliverer. He freed humanity from the captivity of Eden. Without him we would be walking around naked with no knowledge, no science and no free will. In Eden humans were like pets held in ignorance.

Man makes up fables and myths and God gave us the truth through His word.

satan is the great deciever, not deliverer. Jesus Christ is the Deliverer. Eden wasn't captivity, it was paradise. Without satan we would be doing great things right now, Adam and Eve would still be alive, there would be no pain or suffering in the world. The Scientific method and Schools and Universities were invented by Christians, so try again. In Eden, men were being tested by God. God wanted to see if Adam would choose to believe or choose Him or satan. Adam and Even were tricked into choosing satan because they believed the liar satan over God. It sounds like you are falling for the same evil lies.

 

[JohnnySavage]

Man makes up fables and myths and God gave us the truth through His word.

satan is the great deciever, not deliverer. Jesus Christ is the Deliverer. Eden wasn't captivity, it was paradise. Without satan we would be doing great things right now, Adam and Eve would still be alive, there would be no pain or suffering in the world. The Scientific method and Schools and Universities were invented by Christians, so try again. In Eden, men were being tested by God. God wanted to see if Adam would choose to believe or choose Him or satan. Adam and Even were tricked into choosing satan because they believed the liar satan over God. It sounds like you are falling for the same evil lies.

Oy vey!

That's only true if you consider the entire world to be Europe. The Chinese and Indians had universities when the Western World was still living in caves.

 

[Hard_Rom]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Satan

The church does not believe in or worship the Devil or a Christian notion of Satan. High priest Peter Gilmore describes its members as "skeptical atheists", embracing the Hebrew root of the word "Satan" as "adversary". The church views Satan as a positive archetype who represents pride, individualism, and enlightenment, and as a symbol of defiance against the Abrahamic faiths which LaVey criticized for what he saw as the suppression of humanity's natural instincts.

The Church does not espouse a belief in Satan as an entity who literally exists, and LaVey did not encourage the worship of Satan as a deity. In an interview with David Shankbone, High Priest Peter Gilmore stated "My real feeling is that anybody who believes in supernatural entities on some level is insane. Whether they believe in the Devil or God, they are abdicating reason". Gilmore defines the word "Satan" as "a model or a mode of behavior", noting that in Hebrew the word means "adversary" or "opposer", which can be regarded as "one who questions". Gilmore describes Satanism as beginning with atheism, and taking the view that the universe is indifferent: "There’s no God, there’s no Devil. No one cares!" LaVey sought to cement his belief system within the secularist world-view that derived from natural science, thus providing him with an atheistic basis with which to criticize Christianity and other supernaturalist beliefs. He legitimized his religion by highlighting what he claimed was its rational nature, contrasting this with what he saw as the supernaturalist irrationality of established religions.

 

[Tryharder62]

By what theological rationale was their resurrection justified? The Bible essentially teaches, and I suspect you believe in, a dual nature of justification -- an Old Testament teaching of justification by adherence to Hebrew law and a New Testament justification by faith in Jesus Christ.

So at the time of Christ's crucifixion, unless these resurrected souls had ALL previously met and professed a saving faith in Jesus Christ PRIOR TO HIS RESURRECTION, UPON WHAT BASIS WERE THEY RESURRECTED?

I am sure you know that there is much controversy today over whether Jews who do not accept Christ as their savior will live eternally in heaven. If you happen to believe that doctrine, I am simply asking you to apply it to those resurrected souls at the time of Christ's crucifixion.

Don't you think that these "holy" people had done what they were instructed by God before their resurrection? They were rewarded an opportunity to know and love Jesus. Just my thoughts.

 

[1sickbastard]

Man makes up fables and myths and God gave us the truth through His word.

satan is the great deciever, not deliverer. Jesus Christ is the Deliverer. Eden wasn't captivity, it was paradise. Without satan we would be doing great things right now, Adam and Eve would still be alive, there would be no pain or suffering in the world. The Scientific method and Schools and Universities were invented by Christians, so try again. In Eden, men were being tested by God. God wanted to see if Adam would choose to believe or choose Him or satan. Adam and Even were tricked into choosing satan because they believed the liar satan over God. It sounds like you are falling for the same evil lies.

Man makes up myths and fables.... and gods.
Your particular version of god, like any other, has no basis in demonstrable reality, which is why it has to be taken on "faith", which is an a priori position held in spite of any and all objectively demonstrable evidence against said position.
In other words, you assume the conclusion shoe-horn what evidence you can to support it and supress and/or ignore any and all evidence against.
In psychology, this is called delusional behavior.

Note, if you or anyone could provide objectively demonstrable, independently verifiable evidence for any conception of any god, there wouldn't be the endless sharding of religions into ever smaller denominations. There would be only ONE religion that wouldn't require "faith" to accept because it WOULD be objectively demonstrable.

That's why the scientific method produces useful knowledge that converges towards singular models of reality and why religion, among other varieties of woo, fracture and split based on whatever some ...individual happens to pull out of his or her mind's ass.

 

[1sickbastard]

Don't you think that these "holy" people had done what they were instructed by God before their resurrection? They were rewarded an opportunity to know and love Jesus. Just my thoughts.

You mean like the "holy martyrs" that flew airplanes into building on 9/11, or the Good folks that picket the funerals of US service personal with signs like "God Hates Fags", or all those good folk up in the Waco Branch Davidian compound?
They all thought they were doing "What God Instructed" too.

How about that woman who drowned her kids in the bathtub a few years back in Houston? She was getting her "instructions fro God". Funny how the jury didn't agree.

Oh, and how about the last time you worked from Friday after sundown to Saturday at sundown, which is the actual Sabbath? Did anyone demand you be taken to the edge of the city and had rocks hurled at you until you died?
What about having or soliciting sex outside of marriage?
Yep, that is also a stoning offense.

And no, you don't get to claim that was the Old Testament. According to the bible you and frodo-bullshit boy worship, Jesus said that "Not one iota or tittle of the law shall pass" (Matthew 5:18), so you don't get to cherry pick your morality, and every sin you consciously commit after your salvation is a cum-shot in your fluffy savior's face.
You know, like you hanging out on a porn site and masturbating.

 

[phrodeau]

We don't need to persecute people here. That makes them think they're right.

 

[Hard_Rom]

While there is no proof God exists, there is no proof God does not exist. In fact there are many logical arguments to suggest God does exist. First cause and fine tuning being a couple of them. There is a God Theory and until ultimately disproven has as much logical reality as the Theory of Relativity, Quantum Theory, and the Theory of Evolution. Even though all facts 'currently' point towards each of these as reality there is always the chance that something may arise to disprove any or all of them. Hence we still call them 'theories'.

If there is a God, I doubt it possess the anthromorphic characteristics of the Abrahamic religions. Although the existence of good does indicate this as a possibility. The Universe began as an unchanging singularity outside of spacetime. There was no time so it had no beginning. But something changed that and led to the Big Bang. This something also defined the parameters of the Universes existence. And these parameters and cosmological constants are very tiny and if changed even by as little as 1% life could not exist. This something is/was God. But again without the anthropomorphic characteristics of the biblical God.

The singularity that preceded the Universe as we observe it was true Order. The injection of Chaos was required to change that. Chaos is change. I would think that God therefore is a force of Chaos not Order. We like to think humans and their God bring order to the Universe. In fact it is the opposite.

 

[1sickbastard]

While there is no proof God exists, there is no proof God does not exist. In fact there are many logical arguments to suggest God does exist. First cause and fine tuning being a couple of them. There is a God Theory and until ultimately disproven has as much logical reality as the Theory of Relativity, Quantum Theory, and the Theory of Evolution. Even though all facts 'currently' point towards each of these as reality there is always the chance that something may arise to disprove any or all of them. Hence we still call them 'theories'.

If there is a God, I doubt it possess the anthromorphic characteristics of the Abrahamic religions. Although the existence of good does indicate this as a possibility. The Universe began as an unchanging singularity outside of spacetime. There was no time so it had no beginning. But something changed that and led to the Big Bang. This something also defined the parameters of the Universes existence. And these parameters and cosmological constants are very tiny and if changed even by as little as 1% life could not exist. This something is/was God. But again without the anthropomorphic characteristics of the biblical God.

The singularity that preceded the Universe as we observe it was true Order. The injection of Chaos was required to change that. Chaos is change. I would think that God therefore is a force of Chaos not Order. We like to think humans and their God bring order to the Universe. In fact it is the opposite.

1) One cannot "prove" a negative. this is why the Burden of Proof ALWAYS fall on the positive claimant.
2) Logical argument never, ever, not even once, becomes a viable substitute for objectively demonstrable, independently verifiable evidence. While a thing may be disproved logically (i.e. a married bachelor) it cannot be demonstrated to exist in reality via argument (i.e. nothing exists "necessarily")
3) You're making a "god of the gaps" argument, which is essentially an argument from ignorance, i.e., I don't know, therefore god. You might as well say, "I don't know, therefore Flying Spaghetti Monster." At least you'd be able to positively, objectively and independently verifiably demonstrate the existence of pasta.

 

[Hard_Rom]

1) One cannot "prove" a negative. this is why the Burden of Proof ALWAYS fall on the positive claimant.
2) Logical argument never, ever, not even once, becomes a viable substitute for objectively demonstrable, independently verifiable evidence. While a thing may be disproved logically (i.e. a married bachelor) it cannot be demonstrated to exist in reality via argument (i.e. nothing exists "necessarily")
3) You're making a "god of the gaps" argument, which is essentially an argument from ignorance, i.e., I don't know, therefore god. You might as well say, "I don't know, therefore Flying Spaghetti Monster." At least you'd be able to positively, objectively and independently verifiably demonstrate the existence of pasta.

But something did occur objectively and observably. The singularity did explode in the Big Bang and it has observable effects. This is fact. IMO you and the biblical types are attempting to anthromorphize this cause.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God#Definition_of_God

In classical theism, God is characterized as the metaphysically ultimate being (the first, timeless, absolutely simple, and sovereign being, who is devoid of any anthropomorphic qualities), in distinction to other conceptions such as theistic personalism, open theism, and process theism. Classical theists do not believe that God can be completely defined. They believe that this would contradict the transcendent nature of God for mere humans to define him. Robert Barron explains by analogy that it seems impossible for a two-dimensional object to conceive of three-dimensional humans.

By contrast, much of Eastern religious thought (chiefly pantheism) posits God as a force contained in every imaginable phenomenon. For example, Baruch Spinoza and his followers use the term God in a particular philosophical sense to mean the essential substance/principles of nature.


*you are falling into the same trap as the Christians by assuming human qualities to that which could very well be beyond human understanding*

All we can do is observe the effects of the Big Bang not it's cause. When we observe fundamental particles we typically hit them with a packet of energy to make them 'visible'. This changes the energy state of the particle and therefore we cannot actually observe the particle as it existed before we hit it with a packet (quanta) of energy. So ultimately many things are unknowable but we can theorize and postulate backwards as to the original state of the particle.

Quantum Theory tells us nothing is impossible and nothing is certain. Although the possibility approaches zero or one, they never equal zero or one.

 

[1sickbastard]

But something did occur objectively and observably. The singularity did explode in the Big Bang and it has observable effects. This is fact. IMO you and the biblical types are attempting to anthromorphize this cause.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God#Definition_of_God

In classical theism, God is characterized as the metaphysically ultimate being (the first, timeless, absolutely simple, and sovereign being, who is devoid of any anthropomorphic qualities), in distinction to other conceptions such as theistic personalism, open theism, and process theism. Classical theists do not believe that God can be completely defined. They believe that this would contradict the transcendent nature of God for mere humans to define him. Robert Barron explains by analogy that it seems impossible for a two-dimensional object to conceive of three-dimensional humans.

By contrast, much of Eastern religious thought (chiefly pantheism) posits God as a force contained in every imaginable phenomenon. For example, Baruch Spinoza and his followers use the term God in a particular philosophical sense to mean the essential substance/principles of nature.


*you are falling into the same trap as the Christians by assuming human qualities to that which could very well be beyond human understanding*

All we can do is observe the effects of the Big Bang not it's cause. When we observe fundamental particles we typically hit them with a packet of energy to make them 'visible'. This changes the energy state of the particle and therefore we cannot actually observe the particle as it existed before we hit it with a packet (quanta) of energy. So ultimately many things are unknowable but we can theorize and postulate backwards as to the original state of the particle.

Quantum Theory tells us nothing is impossible and nothing is certain. Although the possibility approaches zero or one, they never equal zero or one.

There was no "explosion" at the big bang. Explosion is a chemical reaction. The "Big Bang" was (and still is) the expansion of 'space-time'. And yes, there are some parts of it which are not yet testable, therefor potentially falsifiable, but there are parts that are or possibly could be if our technology advances sufficiently.

Spinoza is also using a god of the gaps position.

And "first cause" is a case of special pleading. Why does "god" get a a pass of not having a cause or "creator"?

That no one can define "god" in a way that is both meaningful, testable and potentially falsifiable is the root of the problem. How would one ever know if a phenomena meets a definition of a "god" if one cannot accurately define the concept and be able to determine what is and what is not a god?
This is why religions continually split and disagree. If there are definite definitions that can be tested, then there are groups that have to admit, when faced with demonstrable, objective, independently verifiable evidence, that they are wrong.

If one cannot admit when one is wrong, one can never determine when oone is right with any degree of real certainty.

 

[Hard_Rom]

An explosion is a rapid increase in volume and release of energy in an extreme manner, usually with the generation of high temperatures and the release of gases.

Not always chemical. Pressure releases and nuclear reactions are also causes of explosions.

 

[Tryharder62]

You mean like the "holy martyrs" that flew airplanes into building on 9/11, or the Good folks that picket the funerals of US service personal with signs like "God Hates Fags", or all those good folk up in the Waco Branch Davidian compound?
They all thought they were doing "What God Instructed" too.

How about that woman who drowned her kids in the bathtub a few years back in Houston? She was getting her "instructions fro God". Funny how the jury didn't agree.

Oh, and how about the last time you worked from Friday after sundown to Saturday at sundown, which is the actual Sabbath? Did anyone demand you be taken to the edge of the city and had rocks hurled at you until you died?
What about having or soliciting sex outside of marriage?
Yep, that is also a stoning offense.

And no, you don't get to claim that was the Old Testament. According to the bible you and frodo-bullshit boy worship, Jesus said that "Not one iota or tittle of the law shall pass" (Matthew 5:18), so you don't get to cherry pick your morality, and every sin you consciously commit after your salvation is a cum-shot in your fluffy savior's face.
You know, like you hanging out on a porn site and masturbating.

So let me get this straight. My response to a verse that was taken from the bible about the rising of "Zombies" gets you all hot and bothered while in the next paragraph you use the bible to supposedly prove your point. Talk about cherry picking, you take verses out of context to prove your point. Look a verse earlier than your Mathhew 5:18. Look at Mathew 5:17 -
Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. 18For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." Jesus came to fulfill the Law. That is why he said It is finished when he was crucified. It was complete. I was talking about the "holy" people directly taken from the verse I was responding too,

The woman who drowned her child. I had a case just like it when I worked on a mental health unit. Ever hear of mental illness.

You know what I have found on here. The people that need to be nasty and vulgar to people who express their opinions in a thread started for this purpose are those that have no foundation for their arguments, just anger and hopelessness. A great many that I have talked to in threads such as this gain my respect and admiration for their beliefs even though they don't agree with mine, because they can discuss things like an adult. So grow up, we are not in high school anymore.

I'm touched you are so worried about my sin. I tell you what though, you worry about your sin and I'll worry about mine.

Have I been perfect!!!! Absolutely not. Have I done things that are wrong!!!! Absolutely. Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven.

 

[RoryN]

Creationist gets served repeatedly. [youtube]

The caller is the thread starter, to a t.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

The caller is the thread starter, to a t.

Creationist Dr. Kent Hovind Destroys 3 Evolutionist Professors at the same time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meIg-TyDm-g

 

[RoryN]

Creationist gets served repeatedly. - YouTube link

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Creationist gets served repeatedly. - YouTube link

Kent Hovind Explains why evolution is so stupid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8DDIe_2cHM

 

[Mello_SixtyNine]

http://i.imgur.com/T0QkMDz.jpg

 

[Tryharder62]

Do you know that the bible does not say anything about masturbation. You are to keep your thoughts clean though, so I just fantasize about this guy!!!! JUST KIDDING!!!http://cdn.dynamixse.com/mrcleancarwashcom/small-mrclean.png OK it's a little funny

 

[1sickbastard]

So let me get this straight. My response to a verse that was taken from the bible about the rising of "Zombies" gets you all hot and bothered while in the next paragraph you use the bible to supposedly prove your point. Talk about cherry picking, you take verses out of context to prove your point. Look a verse earlier than your Mathhew 5:18. Look at Mathew 5:17 -
Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. 18For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." Jesus came to fulfill the Law. That is why he said It is finished when he was crucified. It was complete. I was talking about the "holy" people directly taken from the verse I was responding too,

Yeah, exactly. Heaven and Earth are still here, so that long, boring as shit book in the Pentateuch, the one called Leviticus, all that shit is still on the books, and yet here you are, not having been stoned or otherwise executed. According to your scripture, your pass on the LAW is only after your temporal existence is done.
And as far as your temporal existence goes, you'd still be under a death warrant if bible law was enforced as secular law.

So fail.

The woman who drowned her child. I had a case just like it when I worked on a mental health unit. Ever hear of mental illness.

Yeah, I have. The only reason the delusions of those who claim to "feel the touch of..whatever" get a pass is because religion has always gotten a pass. If it wasn't for the undeserved respect society accords religions, those involved would be correctly diagnosed as mentally ill and (hopefully) given appropriated therapy so they could start living in reality as opposed to their delusions.

You know what I have found on here. The people that need to be nasty and vulgar to people who express their opinions in a thread started for this purpose are those that have no foundation for their arguments, just anger and hopelessness. A great many that I have talked to in threads such as this gain my respect and admiration for their beliefs even though they don't agree with mine, because they can discuss things like an adult. So grow up, we are not in high school anymore.

Yeah, and we're a bit to old to be believing in Santa Clause, the Tooth Fairy, or any other fairy tales or myths that have talking animals, events that are demonstrably shown to have never happened (like a world-wide flood), or magic/miracles. Yet, here you are, on a PORN site, trying to defend exactly that.
So grow up, you're not a child any more.

BTW, I don't give a shit if I have your respect. You're an anonymous person on a porn site.

Oh, and the reason I get angry is because there are far to many "people of faith" (and no, it doesn't matter which religion or denomination) who gladly give money, time and energy to those who would happily turn their version of "God's Will" into secular law to be enforced by secular power.

We did that already in the western world. It was called the "Dark Ages" for a reason.

Religion is in direct opposition to individuality, reason, democracy, freedom of thought, freedom of expression, freedom of association, pretty much everything that has been fought and struggled for, and its people like yourself who support ideologies that run contrary to that same freedom and individual liberty.

And it's all in the name of a 'god' you cannot produce so you can avoid, in your abject fear, a "hell" that also cannot be demonstrated, but will gladly turn a blind eye to those who can and will make others miserable because they don't conform to what some fuckwad says is "god's will".

I've lived in a theocracy, and I'll oppose and fight anyone who thinks that "faith" is anything good or that any religion is worthy of any respect.
So fuck your faith and fuck your religion.

I'm touched you are so worried about my sin. I tell you what though, you worry about your sin and I'll worry about mine.

Couldn't give a fly's fart about your "sin". I'm trying to point out your outright hypocrisy.

Have I been perfect!!!! Absolutely not. Have I done things that are wrong!!!! Absolutely. Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven.

Right, Jesus forgives you so you can continue acting like a hypocrite, yet allow yourself to think you're a "good" person.

 

[1sickbastard]

Kent Hovind Explains why evolution is so stupid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8DDIe_2cHM

You mean the same Kent Hovind who thought Federal Tax Law was "stupid" (too bad the courts didn't agree), whose wife has now divorced him and his son has accomplished a hostile take-over of the family business, the same Kent Hovind who has a "doctorate" from an unaccredited diploma mill, yet hasn't ever produced even one peer reviewed work in any actual academic publication anywhere, ever?

Thanks, but I think I'll get my science from those who actually do credible science.
You know, the kind of science that produces tangible results that make life better for everyone.

 

[RoryN]

Kent Hovind Explains why evolution is so stupid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8DDIe_2cHM

Now I know why you're posting here: you've probably already been laughed off other forums.

You've come to the right place. We love laughing at the clowns.

 

[Mello_SixtyNine]

Top 15 Quotes from Kent Hovind’s Ph.D. Thesis.
(From an unaccredited institution, obviously).

 

[Mello_SixtyNine]

Ray Comfort explains to Kurt Cameron about the atheist's nightmare...the Banana.

Fun Fact: William Cavendish (the 6th Duke of Devenshire) is xfrodobagginsx's god.

 

[Hard_Rom]

Do you know that the bible does not say anything about masturbation. You are to keep your thoughts clean though, so I just fantasize about this guy!!!! JUST KIDDING!!!http://cdn.dynamixse.com/mrcleancarwashcom/small-mrclean.png OK it's a little funny

That may be open to interpretation. I assume this is more likely in reference to coming on her not in her. God may demand creampie. Swallowing may be acceptable for good Christian women. Masturbation may or may not be a sin for females. Might have to look that up. But as women are the main vessels of sin, I assume masturbation, unhealthy sexual appetites, and wantonness are assumed.

Genesis 38:8-10
Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother's wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother's wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.