Do you think Good "Atheists" go to Hell?

The Bible does not address the age of the earth. Carbon dating has been proven to be subject to error and is based on unproven assumptions, as are other dating methods. The odds of life originating by random accident, for even the simplest cell have been calculated to be one in 10 to the 40,000 power. Anything with a probability of greater than 1 in 10 to the 50th power is considered impossible. Show me one single case of biogenesis. Show me one single case, not based on speculation, of a living transitional animal species. There are no scientific mistakes in the Bible. In fact, science has confirmed that the universe had a beginning where it used to be accepted that it was eternal. There is only one truth and science will conform to that truth.

blackregiment

Odds? Where are these odds from? Anything with a propability of greater than 1 in 10^50 is considered impossible? So, if something has the 1 in 1 odds of existing, it's impossible?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/03/4/l_034_05.html

Call it an unfinished story, but with a plot that's a grabber. It's the tale of an ancient land mammal making its way back to the sea, becoming the forerunner of today's whales. In doing so, it lost its legs, and all of its vital systems became adapted to a marine existence -- the reverse of what happened millions of years previously, when the first animals crawled out of the sea onto land.

Some details remain fuzzy and under investigation. But we know for certain that this back-to-the-water evolution did occur, thanks to a profusion of intermediate fossils that have been uncovered over the past two decades.

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

The odds of life originating by random accident, for even the simplest cell have been calculated to be one in 10 to the 40,000 power.

Funky_Llama

1. I detect God-of-the-gaps.

2. Source?

Sir Fredrick Hoyle.

Odds? Where are these odds from? Anything with a propability of greater than 1 in 10^50 is considered impossible? So, if something has the 1 in 1 odds of existing, it's impossible?

Call it an unfinished story, but with a plot that's a grabber. It's the tale of an ancient land mammal making its way back to the sea, becoming the forerunner of today's whales. In doing so, it lost its legs, and all of its vital systems became adapted to a marine existence -- the reverse of what happened millions of years previously, when the first animals crawled out of the sea onto land.

Some details remain fuzzy and under investigation. But we know for certain that this back-to-the-water evolution did occur, thanks to a profusion of intermediate fossils that have been uncovered over the past two decades.

Genetic_Code

I should have written smaller if you are thinking in terms of decimal numbers. By greater, I was referring to the exponent. The greater the exponent, the smaller the odds.

As far as speculation on the evolution of a whale. That is mere speculation and debatable.It is a whale of a tale.

I should have written smaller if you are thinking in terms of decimal numbers. By greater, I was referring to the exponent. The greater the exponent, the smaller the odds.blackregiment

Fair enough.

As far as speculation on the evolution of a whale. That is mere speculation and debatable.It is a whale of a tale.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/08/the_incorrigible_dr_berlinski.htmlblackregiment

Fossils are not debatable. Those are facts.

The video your provided draws a parallel between a cow and a whale with a car and a submarine. The differences between these are astronomical. The only possible way that life couldn't evolve is for animals to be objects devoid of any life.

Evolution makes predictions about what we would expect to see in the fossil record, comparative anatomy, genetic sequences, geographical distribution of species, etc.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]I should have written smaller if you are thinking in terms of decimal numbers. By greater, I was referring to the exponent. The greater the exponent, the smaller the odds.Genetic_Code

Fair enough.

As far as speculation on the evolution of a whale. That is mere speculation and debatable.It is a whale of a tale.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/08/the_incorrigible_dr_berlinski.html

blackregiment

Fossils are not debatable. Those are facts.

The video your provided draws a parallel between a cow and a whale with a car and a submarine. The differences between these are astronomical. The only possible way that life couldn't evolve is for animals to be objects devoid of any life.

Evolution makes predictions about what we would expect to see in the fossil record, comparative anatomy, genetic sequences, geographical distribution of species, etc.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html

You can't "prove" that it did. No one was there. There are simply speculations based on some fossils. There have been speculation on the evolution of man based on a few bone fragments and a couple of teeth.The fossil record is full of holes. What about the Cambrian explosion?

http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/problems-with-the-fossil-record.htm

Evolutionist David Raup, Curator of Geology at Chicago's Field Museum of Natural History said:- "The evidence we find in the geological record is not nearly as compatible with Darwinian natural selection as we would like it to be ....We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much. The record of evolution is surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than in Darwin's time ... so Darwin's problem has not been alleviated". (Raup, Field museum of Natural History Bulletin).

"The more we know about the cosmos and evolutionary biology, the more they seem inexplicable without some aspect of [intelligent] design," Townes asserts. "And for me that inspires faith." Charles Hard Townes(Nobel prize for Physics in 1964). Greg Easterbrook "Of lasers and prayer" w Science, Vol. 277, 15August 1997.

"I do not want to believe in God. Therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible, spontaneous generation leading to evolution." George Wald (Nobel prize for Medicine in 1967). George Wald, "Frontiers of Modern Biology on Theories of Origin of Life" (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1972), p.187.

blackregiment

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]I should have written smaller if you are thinking in terms of decimal numbers. By greater, I was referring to the exponent. The greater the exponent, the smaller the odds.Genetic_Code

Fair enough.

As far as speculation on the evolution of a whale. That is mere speculation and debatable.It is a whale of a tale.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/08/the_incorrigible_dr_berlinski.html

blackregiment

Fossils are not debatable. Those are facts.

The video your provided draws a parallel between a cow and a whale with a car and a submarine. The differences between these are astronomical. The only possible way that life couldn't evolve is for animals to be objects devoid of any life.

Evolution makes predictions about what we would expect to see in the fossil record, comparative anatomy, genetic sequences, geographical distribution of species, etc.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html

You can't "prove" that it did. No one was there. There are simply speculations based on some fossils. There have been speculation on the evolution of man based on a few bone fragments and a couple of teeth.The fossil record is full of holes. What about the Cambrian explosion?

http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/problems-with-the-fossil-record.htm

The Bible does not address the age of the earth.

blackregiment

Don't the 7 days of creation (assuming that they're 24 hour) plus the genealogies = age of the earth?

You can't "prove" that it did. No one was there.

If fossil evidence doesn't count, then that completely rules out god for no one was there when God created Earth.

There are simply speculations based on some fossils. There have been speculation on the evolution of man based on a few bone fragments and a couple of teeth.The fossil record is full of holes. What about the Cambrian explosion?

I don't see what point you're getting at. It seems as though that there was an expansion of animal evolution. This only questions some attributes of evolution, but it does not question evolution itself.

Evolutionist David Raup, Curator of Geology at Chicago's Field Museum of Natural History said:- "The evidence we find in the geological record is not nearly as compatible with Darwinian natural selection as we would like it to be ....We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much. The record of evolution is surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than in Darwin's time ... so Darwin's problem has not been alleviated". (Raup, Field museum of Natural History Bulletin).

I don't understand how this person came to this conclusion. It seems illogical that despite accumulating to 250,000 fossil species, that there's less fossil evidence of evolutionary transition.

"The more we know about the cosmos and evolutionary biology, the more they seem inexplicable without some aspect of [intelligent] design," Townes asserts. "And for me that inspires faith." Charles Hard Townes(Nobel prize for Physics in 1964). Greg Easterbrook "Of lasers and prayer" w Science, Vol. 277, 15August 1997.

This is not science. Not in the least. This is someone's personal journey. The two should never be confused.

"I do not want to believe in God. Therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible, spontaneous generation leading to evolution." George Wald (Nobel prize for Medicine in 1967). George Wald, "Frontiers of Modern Biology on Theories of Origin of Life" (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1972), p.187.

I can only give you credit to providing this quote. I cannot, however, speak on behalf of this man.

The only speculation that's occured is your assertion that species don't evolve because there are still sequences of evolution that have yet been uncovered by fossil evidence. You then rule out the entire theory.

Evolution is a theory built on facts. It is not an individual fact. If evidence on one species is missing, that one missing fact doesn't negate the entire theory of evolution. That's like saying because I threw a tennis ball over a house and I couldn't find it on the other side, gravity did not occur.

When I get to the white gates and the "guard" asks me if I strove to be a good person and do good will towards men then I'd have to say yes...and he'd probably be satisfied. God technically wrote the bible and it would make sense if he decided to amend it. Thank god the CWU doesn't guard the gates...satan would be PRETTY busy with all of his newfound guests.

no poll?Anti-Venom

There used to be.

Unless God is a corrupt son of a ****, no.deepdreamer256

Would it be unjust of God to send someone to hell for doing something which he had clearly instructed them not to? If you go and stab someone to death, is it not right for you to go to jail for your actions?

[QUOTE="deepdreamer256"]Unless God is a corrupt son of a ****, no.Lansdowne5

Would it be unjust of God to send someone to hell for doing something which he had clearly instructed them not to? If you go and stab someone to death, is it not right for you to go to jail for your actions?

:roll: Stabbing someone to death is deliberately malicious. It's immoral and the criminal knows it. Not believing in God is entirely different. Come on, surely even you realise that not believing in God is not like stabbing someone to death.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="blackregiment"]

The odds of life originating by random accident, for even the simplest cell have been calculated to be one in 10 to the 40,000 power.

blackregiment

1. I detect God-of-the-gaps.

2. Source?

Sir Fredrick Hoyle.

Hoyle was wrong. So wrong, there's a fallacy named after him.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

[QUOTE="deepdreamer256"]Unless God is a corrupt son of a ****, no.Funky_Llama

Would it be unjust of God to send someone to hell for doing something which he had clearly instructed them not to? If you go and stab someone to death, is it not right for you to go to jail for your actions?

:roll: Stabbing someone to death is deliberately malicious. It's immoral and the criminal knows it. Not believing in God is entirely different. Come on, surely even you realise that not believing in God is not like stabbing someone to death.

It's exactly the same Funky. A choice you have made even though you know the consequences will be dire.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

[QUOTE="deepdreamer256"]Unless God is a corrupt son of a ****, no.Lansdowne5

Would it be unjust of God to send someone to hell for doing something which he had clearly instructed them not to? If you go and stab someone to death, is it not right for you to go to jail for your actions?

:roll: Stabbing someone to death is deliberately malicious. It's immoral and the criminal knows it. Not believing in God is entirely different. Come on, surely even you realise that not believing in God is not like stabbing someone to death.

It's exactly the same Funky. A choice you have made even though you know the consequences will be dire.

:lol: What, you honestly think I expect dire consequences for not believing in God? Of course I bloody don't! What kind of an atheist believes they'll be going to hell?

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

[QUOTE="deepdreamer256"]Unless God is a corrupt son of a ****, no.Funky_Llama

Would it be unjust of God to send someone to hell for doing something which he had clearly instructed them not to? If you go and stab someone to death, is it not right for you to go to jail for your actions?

:roll: Stabbing someone to death is deliberately malicious. It's immoral and the criminal knows it. Not believing in God is entirely different. Come on, surely even you realise that not believing in God is not like stabbing someone to death.

It's exactly the same Funky. A choice you have made even though you know the consequences will be dire.

:lol: What, you honestly think I expect dire consequences for not believing in God? Of course I bloody don't! What kind of an atheist believes they'll be going to hell?

The sensible kind. You can deny God all you want, and it might help you if you think you would be living a lie otherwise, but being a Christian in the long term is going to pay off more * infinity, actually.

The sensible kind. You can deny God all you want, and it might help you if you think you would be living a lie otherwise, but being a Christian in the long term is going to pay off more * infinity, actually.

Lansdowne5

You should totally check out that thread I made on Pascal's wager.

The sensible kind. You can deny God all you want, and it might help you if you think you would be living a lie otherwise, but being a Christian in the long term is going to pay off more * infinity, actually.

Lansdowne5

Heh... we're not discussing whether it would be advantageous to believe in Christianity (which in domatron's thread he demonstrated it wasn't), we are discussing whether it's right that atheists go to hell.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

[QUOTE="deepdreamer256"]Unless God is a corrupt son of a ****, no.Lansdowne5

Would it be unjust of God to send someone to hell for doing something which he had clearly instructed them not to? If you go and stab someone to death, is it not right for you to go to jail for your actions?

:roll: Stabbing someone to death is deliberately malicious. It's immoral and the criminal knows it. Not believing in God is entirely different. Come on, surely even you realise that not believing in God is not like stabbing someone to death.

It's exactly the same Funky. A choice you have made even though you know the consequences will be dire.

You guys aren't winning any popularity contests here, and saying such bigoted things like that is just making it worse.

Hey when I'm sent to hell by a supposedly 'loving' god I'll say hi to you while you're like a catatonic up in heaven with your nice little fairytale God.

You guys aren't winning any popularity contests here, and saying such bigoted things like that is just making it worse.

Hey when I'm sent to hell by a supposedly 'loving' god I'll say hi to you while you're like a catatonic up in heaven with your nice little fairytale God.

felixlynch777

Got hypocrisy?

[QUOTE="felixlynch777"]

You guys aren't winning any popularity contests here, and saying such bigoted things like that is just making it worse.

Hey when I'm sent to hell by a supposedly 'loving' god I'll say hi to you while you're like a catatonic up in heaven with your nice little fairytale God.

domatron23

Got hypocrisy?

You beat me to it again... stop beating me to it! :cry:

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

The sensible kind. You can deny God all you want, and it might help you if you think you would be living a lie otherwise, but being a Christian in the long term is going to pay off more * infinity, actually.

Funky_Llama

Heh... we're not discussing whether it would be advantageous to believe in Christianity (which in domatron's thread he demonstrated it wasn't), we are discussing whether it's right that atheists go to hell.

God has far more reasoning behind his actions then we could possibly have. But you are trying to find error in what he chooses? To do that, as I've said before, you must have a mind equal to God's, an infinite mind, which you do not have.

They absolutely do go to hell.

I don't want to get into quoting scrip but there is plenty of evidence to back this up.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions sorry guys.

But if you are a athiest then you don't believe in hell so why are you worring.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

The sensible kind. You can deny God all you want, and it might help you if you think you would be living a lie otherwise, but being a Christian in the long term is going to pay off more * infinity, actually.

Lansdowne5

Heh... we're not discussing whether it would be advantageous to believe in Christianity (which in domatron's thread he demonstrated it wasn't), we are discussing whether it's right that atheists go to hell.

God has far more reasoning behind his actions then we could possibly have. But you are trying to find error in what he chooses? To do that, as I've said before, you must have a mind equal to God's, an infinite mind, which you do not have.

Given that you've said yourself that God's existence can't be proven, I have no reason to trust that objection because existence is not a predicate.

I don't want to get into quoting scrip but there is plenty of evidence to back this up.

thegrimpeeper

Heh... and is there any non-scripture evidence to back that up?

What're we talking about now?SpidersRMe

The unfairness of atheists going to hell.

Like, people with good morals, that either were brought up without the church or have a damn good reason not to be a part of it? BloodEmblem

Just because you don't go to church (are a christian) doesn't make you an atheist my friend. Nice topic you started though. Now its time to insult everyones religions. Dear Muslims the earth is not flat, dear Christians we are evolved from apes, the world is not 6000 years old and the sun does not revolve around the earth, dear Hindus reincarnation is a lie, dear Jews Moses was not magic, dear Atheists belief in god is not the biggest problem facing humanity. Now convert to Dickenism the only through path in life.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

[QUOTE="deepdreamer256"]Unless God is a corrupt son of a ****, no.Funky_Llama

Would it be unjust of God to send someone to hell for doing something which he had clearly instructed them not to? If you go and stab someone to death, is it not right for you to go to jail for your actions?

:roll: Stabbing someone to death is deliberately malicious. It's immoral and the criminal knows it. Not believing in God is entirely different. Come on, surely even you realise that not believing in God is not like stabbing someone to death.

It is not about not believing in God. It is about the fact that we all are sinners. The penalty for sin is eternal death. God is holy and cannot let sin into His presence or He would not be Holy. God is just and would not be just if He did not punish sin. This is a problem. The solution is that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life. He died as a substitute for us. He paid the price for our sins. He paid the price we all deserve to pay. When one believes this and put their trust in Jesus Christ, repents of their sin, the righteous of Christ is imputed to them.. In God's eyes we are counted righteous because of the blood of Jesus. We are still sinners but at judgement, God sees us as righteous.

They absolutely do go to hell.

I don't want to get into quoting scrip but there is plenty of evidence to back this up.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions sorry guys.

But if you are a athiest then you don't believe in hell so why are you worring.

thegrimpeeper

This is just a lazy way to say that you have no evidence apart from that ****** 'Holy" bible.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

[QUOTE="deepdreamer256"]Unless God is a corrupt son of a ****, no.blackregiment

Would it be unjust of God to send someone to hell for doing something which he had clearly instructed them not to? If you go and stab someone to death, is it not right for you to go to jail for your actions?

:roll: Stabbing someone to death is deliberately malicious. It's immoral and the criminal knows it. Not believing in God is entirely different. Come on, surely even you realise that not believing in God is not like stabbing someone to death.

It is not about not believing in God. It is about the fact that we all are sinners. The penalty for sin is eternal death. God is holy and cannot let sin into His presence or He would not be Holy. God is just and would not be just if He did not punish sin. This is a problem. The solution is that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life. He died as a substitute for us. He paid the price for our sins. He paid the price we all deserve to pay. When one believes this and put their trust in Jesus Christ, repents of their sin, the righteous of Christ is imputed to them.. In God's eyes we are counted righteous because of the blood of Jesus. We are still sinners but at judgement, God sees us as righteous.

Well said BR. :D

[QUOTE="BloodEmblem"]Like, people with good morals, that either were brought up without the church or have a damn good reason not to be a part of it? chadurwalla

Just because you don't go to church (are a christian) doesn't make you an atheist my friend. Nice topic you started though. Now its time to insult everyones religions. Dear Muslims the earth is not flat, dear Christians we are evolved from apes, the world is not 6000 years old and the sun does not revolve around the earth, dear Hindus reincarnation is a lie, dear Jews Moses was not magic, dear Atheists belief in god is not the biggest problem facing humanity. Now convert to Dickenism the only through path in life.

Dickenism?? or Darwinism???

[QUOTE="chadurwalla"]

[QUOTE="BloodEmblem"]Like, people with good morals, that either were brought up without the church or have a damn good reason not to be a part of it? Lansdowne5

Just because you don't go to church (are a christian) doesn't make you an atheist my friend. Nice topic you started though. Now its time to insult everyones religions. Dear Muslims the earth is not flat, dear Christians we are evolved from apes, the world is not 6000 years old and the sun does not revolve around the earth, dear Hindus reincarnation is a lie, dear Jews Moses was not magic, dear Atheists belief in god is not the biggest problem facing humanity. Now convert to Dickenism the only through path in life.

Dickenism?? or Darwinism???

Psst... I think he was joking.

I think every decent person should get into heaven on the basis that they don't deserve eternal suffering.SolidSnake35

I agree with this.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

[QUOTE="deepdreamer256"]Unless God is a corrupt son of a ****, no.blackregiment

Would it be unjust of God to send someone to hell for doing something which he had clearly instructed them not to? If you go and stab someone to death, is it not right for you to go to jail for your actions?

:roll: Stabbing someone to death is deliberately malicious. It's immoral and the criminal knows it. Not believing in God is entirely different. Come on, surely even you realise that not believing in God is not like stabbing someone to death.

It is not about not believing in God. It is about the fact that we all are sinners. The penalty for sin is eternal death. God is holy and cannot let sin into His presence or He would not be Holy. God is just and would not be just if He did not punish sin. This is a problem. The solution is that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life. He died as a substitute for us. He paid the price for our sins. He paid the price we all deserve to pay. When one believes this and put their trust in Jesus Christ, repents of their sin, the righteous of Christ is imputed to them.. In God's eyes we are counted righteous because of the blood of Jesus. We are still sinners but at judgement, God sees us as righteous.

1. I'm aware the penalty for sin is eternal death; that's exactly what I'm objecting to, and exactly what you've failed to demonstrate is just.

2. It doesn't actually make sense that someone could suffer for your sins to absolve them on your behalf. Morality doesn't work like that.

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]I think every decent person should get into heaven on the basis that they don't deserve eternal suffering.Tauruslink

I agree with this.

Me too.

2. It doesn't actually make sense that someone could suffer for your sins to absolve them on your behalf. Morality doesn't work like that.Funky_Llama

Apparently it makes sense in christianity ;)

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]2. It doesn't actually make sense that someone could suffer for your sins to absolve them on your behalf. Morality doesn't work like that.123625

Apparently it makes sense in christianity ;)

:roll: Whatever you say. How about if you ever get convicted of a crime, ask the court if your mom could serve the sentence for you, and see how that works out.

[QUOTE="123625"]

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]2. It doesn't actually make sense that someone could suffer for your sins to absolve them on your behalf. Morality doesn't work like that.Funky_Llama

Apparently it makes sense in christianity ;)

:roll: Whatever you say. How about if you ever get convicted of a crime, ask the court if your mom could serve the sentence for you, and see how that works out.

I don't think you get it, but regardless I don't think they would let me blame my mom, just doesn't seem fair.

Also i thought you would go for a comment likie, "well christianity doesn't make sense now, does it?"

[QUOTE="blackregiment"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

[QUOTE="deepdreamer256"]Unless God is a corrupt son of a ****, no.Funky_Llama

Would it be unjust of God to send someone to hell for doing something which he had clearly instructed them not to? If you go and stab someone to death, is it not right for you to go to jail for your actions?

:roll: Stabbing someone to death is deliberately malicious. It's immoral and the criminal knows it. Not believing in God is entirely different. Come on, surely even you realise that not believing in God is not like stabbing someone to death.

It is not about not believing in God. It is about the fact that we all are sinners. The penalty for sin is eternal death. God is holy and cannot let sin into His presence or He would not be Holy. God is just and would not be just if He did not punish sin. This is a problem. The solution is that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life. He died as a substitute for us. He paid the price for our sins. He paid the price we all deserve to pay. When one believes this and put their trust in Jesus Christ, repents of their sin, the righteous of Christ is imputed to them.. In God's eyes we are counted righteous because of the blood of Jesus. We are still sinners but at judgement, God sees us as righteous.

1. I'm aware the penalty for sin is eternal death; that's exactly what I'm objecting to, and exactly what you've failed to demonstrate is just.

2. It doesn't actually make sense that someone could suffer for your sins to absolve them on your behalf. Morality doesn't work like that.

1. Your soul is eternal, therefore a punishment apon it should also be.

2. It makes perfect sense to me, you sin against God, so God is the one who can remove it.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="123625"]

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]2. It doesn't actually make sense that someone could suffer for your sins to absolve them on your behalf. Morality doesn't work like that.123625

Apparently it makes sense in christianity ;)

:roll: Whatever you say. How about if you ever get convicted of a crime, ask the court if your mom could serve the sentence for you, and see how that works out.

I don't think you get it, but regardless I don't think they would let me blame my mom, just doesn't seem fair.

That is exactly the point. It doesn't make sense that someone could absolve you of your sins by suffering on your behalf.

[QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="123625"]

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]2. It doesn't actually make sense that someone could suffer for your sins to absolve them on your behalf. Morality doesn't work like that.Funky_Llama

Apparently it makes sense in christianity ;)

:roll: Whatever you say. How about if you ever get convicted of a crime, ask the court if your mom could serve the sentence for you, and see how that works out.

I don't think you get it, but regardless I don't think they would let me blame my mom, just doesn't seem fair.

That is exactly the point. It doesn't make sense that someone could absolve you of your sins by suffering on your behalf.

Don't know exactly how to word this, but i'll give it a shot. I don't see God's court, working like our court. Well i tried :P

1. Your soul is eternal, therefore a punishment apon it should also be.

2. It makes perfect sense to me, you sin against God, so God is the one who can remove it.

Lansdowne5

1. That's a non-seqitur.

2. The premise is wrong. If I go out and stab someone, it's a sin against them, not God. Besides which, if God wants to forgive us for our sins, why can't he just do so? Jesus' death was competely unnecessary.