Christianity

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Belinda
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Belinda »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 6:11 pm
Belinda wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 5:03 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 2:29 pm
Yes. But if he did get it wrong, Sagan knows the truth now.
Does that mean you believe in life after death?
It means that he also does...now.
Do you believe some people go to Hell after they die, sort of like Alexis describes, if God deems they deserve punishment?

But you are not dead, so even if dead people live on after they die, you would not be able to know there is life after death as you have not yet died.

What is the name of the religious sect you belong to?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 27604
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

popeye1945 wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 6:15 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 6:11 pm
Belinda wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 5:03 pm

Does that mean you believe in life after death?
It means that he also does...now.
There is always refuge in the God of the gaps
That's why "God of the gaps" is not a good theory. But it's actually not a theological idea at all...it's born of the naive belief that science "replaces" God, as if it performed His roles for Him. No sensible person believes it...Theist or Atheist.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 27604
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Belinda wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 6:25 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 6:11 pm
Belinda wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 5:03 pm

Does that mean you believe in life after death?
It means that he also does...now.
Do you believe some people go to Hell after they die, sort of like Alexis describes, if God deems they deserve punishment?
What do you "deem" you deserve," if I may ask?
But you are not dead, so even if dead people live on after they die, you would not be able to know there is life after death as you have not yet died.
If my belief rested on personal experience, you'd be right. But God Himself has told us what is to come, on what basis, and for whom...and He surely knows.

However, Sagan now has experience instead of salvation. That's the source of his present certainty. I'm not sure he's happy with his choice, though...
What is the name of the religious sect you belong to?
Religion is man's attempt to earn heaven. I don't do that. I wouldn't be successful, if I tried. The whole Christian message is to trust in what God has done, instead of what you can do. That's why we speak of "salvation," not "wage-earning."

I don't belong to a sect. I belong to the Lord. So do all Christians.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 8301
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

Jesus as eternal torturer. Oh Immanuel, you have a ways to go yet! But I’m rooting for you.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 8301
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

This is interesting, as a starting point for those who bother to think on these levels or who are preoccupied with such concerns:
Religion is man's attempt to earn heaven.
If we do suppose that the soul has eternal existence, we might suppose that in the term of one life one could (to use your phrase) “earn heaven”. However Christian concepts limit the field. Vedic concepts expand the field. Same principle, however: the growth and evolution of the aware and intelligent being. Let us suppose that that is God’s true aim. Really, everything changes.

I would say that “life offers to a man the possibility of becoming human”. I mean if I were to try to visualize what the person Jesus Christ would say to anyone.

“Earn heaven” is more a child’s concept.

There is a curious idea in the Vaishnava (Vishnu-Krishna worshipping) religion. They say that their object is not to seek those heaven-realms, which are also temporary, but to serve the Avatar-figure in whatever realm one has been placed.

Immanuel’s preaching has only ever dealt on the threat of eternal torture, never on becoming human or fulfilling a life of decency and service.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 27604
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 6:41 pm ...eternal torturer.
The eternal state of those who reject God is to be eternally without God. In other words, they get exactly what they have freely chosen. God honours their individuality, will and choice, treating them as volitional beings who have every right to set their own eternal disposition.

But God is the source of all goodness, health, happiness, light, truth, joy, relationship, and delight. There are no such things outside of relationship with Him, as Scripture says, for He is "the Giver of all good gifts," and "in Him is fullness of joy." Outside of association with God, what is there that is left? So His concern, as demonstrated in Jesus Christ, is to make available to every person the means of forgiveness and reconciliation, with promise of free relationship with Him for all of eternity, and the most winning appeal to everybody to make the best choice.

So what does somebody get when they freely choose not-God? They get exactly what they have chosen.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 27604
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 7:03 pm This is interesting, as a starting point for those who bother to think on these levels or who are preoccupied with such concerns:
Religion is man's attempt to earn heaven.
If we do suppose that the soul has eternal existence, we might suppose that in the term of one life one could (to use your phrase) “earn heaven”.
And hence, things like the Hindu and Buddhist element of "reincarnation." Even they have a realistic sense that such a task cannot possibly be achieved in one lifetime...or even in an indefinite number. What they don't realize, however, is that it's actually impossible, no matter how many cycles of the wheel of samsara one endures, because salvation has never been about us making ourselves good.
I would say that “life offers to a man the possibility of becoming human”.

I've always found the idea that we can "become human" rather ridiculous, especially for people who believe humans are just part of the natural world. After all, lions don't need to "become lion," and hyenas don't need to "become hyenas," anymore than apes, fish or paramecia need to "become" themselves. According to nature, we already are what we are; and to mistake anything we are for something not-human would be a category error in logic, and an absurdity in fact.

But there is this much truth behind it: that unlike lions and hyenas, human beings are not what they should be. Lions and hyenas know no "should." They just do whatever they do. But mankind knows they should be better, and should be other than the fallen state in which they find themselves, and so they cannot help but aspire to more. But how to become more than you are...that's the problem.

Hence, salvation. We need to be made, by God, to be far more than we now know ourselves to be. We experience our own insufficiency and fallenness every day; and it takes a shot of harsh realism and true self-knowledge for us to admit to ourselves that we're really never going to have the personal resources to make ourselves from what we are to what we should be. We need to reach the "should," but cannot ever reach it apart from God.
I mean if I were to try to visualize what the person Jesus Christ would say to anyone. “Earn heaven” is more a child’s concept.
He actually called it more a concept for Pharisees. As for children, they're often much more willing to trust than those who regard themselves as sophisticated. Hence the comments on camels and eyes-of-needles, so to speak: it's those who think they're too good to bow to God who never find their way at all.

But we all make our choices. They make theirs. Don't make it yours.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 8301
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

Yes, yes, Immanuel, I know all this. I know that you have it conceptually set up that wherever people end up who do not “choose God” end up in a godless realm, and I know that you believe it is eternal and deserved, and supported by scripture.

Check ✅

Everyone who reads you knows this. (Except Belinda who did not seem to understand but now does).
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 27604
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 7:49 pm Yes, yes, Immanuel, I know all this. I know that you have it conceptually set up that wherever people end up who do not “choose God” end up in a godless realm, and I know that you believe it is eternal and deserved, and supported by scripture.
Don't forget "freely chosen," too.

“There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened.”

--C.S. Lewis
seeds
Posts: 2880
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by seeds »

Belinda wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 6:25 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 6:11 pm
Belinda wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 5:03 pm
Does that mean you believe in life after death?
It means that he also does...now.
Do you believe some people go to Hell after they die, sort of like Alexis describes, if God deems they deserve punishment?
Good grief, Belinda, don't you pay attention to the conversations that take place in this forum regarding IC's ("Christian") view of the afterlife?

Not only does he believe in life after death, but as I pointed out to Gary Childress a few days ago in this very thread,...

...IC believes...

(and has argued this point with me, though the argument involved the death of a toddler)

...that it is perfectly justifiable for God to take the soul of an infant who died shortly after being born, and brutally torture that infant soul for an eternity in Hell simply because God "omnisciently knew" that that infant soul would, for whatever reason...

(how about being born into the arms of Buddhist or Hindu parents for two of many reasons)

...not accept Jesus as its personal savior had it made it into adulthood on Earth.

Immanuel Can...

(who was no doubt born into the arms of Christian parents and into the brainwashing indoctrination of a Christian society)

...seems to think that even if he was fully aware of the fact that his own wife, and children, and parents, and sisters, and brothers, and dearest friends and loved ones were all writhing in unimaginable agony in the fires of Hell,...

...again, IC seems to believe that he would nevertheless be able to blissfully ignore all of that while he exists in a state of perfect happiness in heaven, forever worshiping the very Being that is doing the torturing of those whom he loved dearly while on Earth.

So yes, Belinda, IC believes in life after death.

However, he believes in a "Bizarro World" life after death -- a life and world in which the "real demons" (the torturer and the worshipers of the torturer) reside in heaven.
_______
Alexiev
Posts: 1302
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2023 12:32 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexiev »

ThinkOfOne wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 3:00 pm
Alexiev wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 2:57 am
popeye1945 wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:50 am "IF WE ARE TO SURVIVE AS A SPECIES, WE MUST OVERCOME FAITH." CARL SAGAN
This is silly. Faith suggests having the courage of one's convictions. I believe India is the most populous nation in the world becauae I have faith in almanacs. I believe the evidence of my.own eyes becauae I have faith in the dependable accuracy of my senses. All knowledge depends on faith, which Sagan should know, but apparently doesn't.
Actually, what's silly is that you fail to make a distinction between two different denotations of the word "faith". Christians, especially the Evangelicals, deceitfully often do the same thing.

Hopefully the following will put this in perspective for you:
One of the most significant conflicts between religion and science is the issue of faith. Faith, as Sagan described it, is “belief in the absence of evidence,” and it often requires adherence to ideas without the necessity of proof.
Religious faith can provide comfort, purpose, and a sense of belonging to individuals, but it is also a system that, at times, has led to harmful consequences when applied to areas where evidence-based reasoning is essential.

Science, on the other hand, is founded on empirical evidence and the scientific method.
It is a system of inquiry that demands rigorous testing, skepticism, and openness to new evidence.

The importance of skepticism is particularly relevant in today’s world, where misinformation and pseudoscience can spread rapidly, undermining public trust in scientific advancements and critical thinking.

As Sagan noted, the essence of science lies not in “what makes us feel good,” but in “what’s true” (Sagan, 1996). This distinction is critical, particularly when considering pressing issues such as climate change, healthcare, and technology, where decisions must be grounded in facts, not belief systems.

From https://www.thesquaremagazine.com/mag/a ... -religion/

Sagan clearly had no idea what he was talking about. First of all, there's plenty of "evidence" for religious faith. There are eye witness accounts of miracles; there is the personal testimony of enlightened experience; there are written, historical accounts of people rising from the dead. To say there is no evidence is ludicrous. Two things, however, are lacking: "proof" (as opposed to evidence) and "scientific evidence" (as if science is the only path to knowledge). If these are our standards, we should not have faith in the assassination of Caesar, the battle of Gaugamela, or the signing of the Magna Carta. Scientific evidence is clearly not the only variety of evidence in which we should have "faith".

Second, science offers no "proof" of anything. If we want to believe only that which has been proven, we must stick to mathematics. The scientific method demands not only faith in our own observations, but also faith in those of the giants who have preceded us.

Personally, I have no "faith" in God or religious beliefs. But I have faith in my own observations. I have faith in accepted scientific facts (although I'm aware that many of them may some day be proven wrong), and I have faith in certain moral precepts which have been tested by time and many of which are religious in origin. Don't you?
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 8301
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

My view goes like this: for whatever reason, and by way of whatever circumstances, we find ourselves in this world. Cleary, simply because we are aware beings, or that we have the possibility of being and becoming aware, it is our imperative to increase awareness. Not a small thing.

It is true in numerous senses that we alone cannot “perfect ourselves”. But on the other hand there are “great souls” who do. We can emulate them to the degree we are able.

I think Immanuel would have to produce that man “perfected by God” through living Christianly. Most of those would never say they are at all special. And Immanuel has not succeeded in convincing me that he is such a man. Who is the most emulatable Protestant figure of our age? No one comes to mind. Though I can think of “saintly” Catholic figures.

But what does seem true to me is again that we can choose, if we want to, to attune ourselves with (sorry to use the same terms) “higher metaphysical principles”. This corresponds to “having a relationship with God” (in Immanuel’s rigid terms). It is expressed well in the 16th chapter of the Bhagavad-Gita. We can align ourselves with up-tending currents, or we can further descend into materialism. One definite question is about how seriously we take that imperative.

But the idea of “salvation” that Christians are committed to, I do not believe it works quite that way. However, the Vedic notion of Vishnu-like avatars that enter the fallen worlds — it cannot be dismissed. Because ultimately each of us is very much dependent on ‘vidya’ (knowledge) that was gained at great cost by great men — by those who establish the models that we emulate.

One problem is that unquestionably many people turn away from those currents of knowledge, and the stimulus to ascend to greater heights, personally and socially. It is hard to say exactly why this is. But both Spengler and Richard Weaver, and many others, outline the decadence and also nihilism — or is it simply brutality in the original sense of the word? — that encloses people.
promethean75
Posts: 7113
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by promethean75 »

"The eternal state of those who reject God is to be eternally without God. In other words, they get exactly what they have freely chosen..."

This is a bit dramatic, i think. One can't get "exactly what they've chosen" when one hardly knows what it is they have chosen, the nature of it, the terms and conditions of it, etc.

"Being in god's absence," "separated from God", "torment in hell", what's all this like before i make a decision?

Let's say you just say, "Consider hell to be the worst thing you can think of." Then I say, "Okay, a Taylor Swift concert," and then you say "okay then that's where you're going. "i would reply finally, "who in their right mind would praise and worship a god that sends someone to a Taylor Swift concert for eternity?! This is no benevolent God."

No, but seriously, the consequences and penalties for disbelief are incredibly ambiguous. I'm no student of ancient culture but folks have been describing all kinds of hells since ancient Mesopotamia
popeye1945
Posts: 3058
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am

Re: Christianity

Post by popeye1945 »

Religion is the striking of a deal that cannot be acquired through reality.
Gary Childress
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: It's my fault

Re: Christianity

Post by Gary Childress »

So here's a question regarding Christianity. How do Christians reconcile the teachings of Jesus with supporting Israel's continued strikes in Gaza? If Jesus is waiting for us in Heaven (someday to return), what would Jesus say of the war in Gaza? Is "love thy enemies" nonsense. Is to forgive those who "trespass against us nonsense? Or what are those statements doing in the Bible? Did Jesus really say them?
Post Reply