Total Posts:35|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Shoplifter and genocider - same punishment?

Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/30/2016 11:34:47 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
So I had this topic in my other thread "Who goes to hell?", albeit only as a side topic, which barely was branched there.

However. Is there any kind of a punishment scale in Christianity? Let's compare these two made up characters:

Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Mr B: Was an evil dictator who brutally tortured 30 millions of innocent people to death, many of them were children. He was proud of his genocide and considered it his masterpiece. Then he died of lung cancer after having been a chain smoker. This man as well never repented for what he did.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/30/2016 11:50:49 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
"Mercy triumphs over judgement"

"Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, they say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 12:12:57 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/30/2016 11:50:49 PM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
"Mercy triumphs over judgement"

"Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, they say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."

What would happen to this woman if she never repented for the adultery? Same punishment as Hitler? Breaking a man's heart is equal to brutally torturing 30 millions to death?
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 12:15:23 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
What happens in real life?
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/30/2016 11:34:47 PM, Jovian wrote:
So I had this topic in my other thread "Who goes to hell?", albeit only as a side topic, which barely was branched there.

However. Is there any kind of a punishment scale in Christianity? Let's compare these two made up characters:

Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Mr B: Was an evil dictator who brutally tortured 30 millions of innocent people to death, many of them were children. He was proud of his genocide and considered it his masterpiece. Then he died of lung cancer after having been a chain smoker. This man as well never repented for what he did.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
AWSM0055
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 12:59:37 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 11:34:47 PM, Jovian wrote:
So I had this topic in my other thread "Who goes to hell?", albeit only as a side topic, which barely was branched there.

However. Is there any kind of a punishment scale in Christianity? Let's compare these two made up characters:

Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Mr B: Was an evil dictator who brutally tortured 30 millions of innocent people to death, many of them were children. He was proud of his genocide and considered it his masterpiece. Then he died of lung cancer after having been a chain smoker. This man as well never repented for what he did.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

How convenient
"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

"Calling my atheism a religion, is like calling my non-stamp-collecting a hobby" - MagicAintReal 2016

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Matt8800: "When warring men kidnap damsels of the enemy, what do they do?"

Jerry947: "They give them the option of marriage."

Matt8800: "Correct! You won idiot of the year award!"

http://explosm.net...
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 2:37:56 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 12:59:37 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 11:34:47 PM, Jovian wrote:
So I had this topic in my other thread "Who goes to hell?", albeit only as a side topic, which barely was branched there.

However. Is there any kind of a punishment scale in Christianity? Let's compare these two made up characters:

Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Mr B: Was an evil dictator who brutally tortured 30 millions of innocent people to death, many of them were children. He was proud of his genocide and considered it his masterpiece. Then he died of lung cancer after having been a chain smoker. This man as well never repented for what he did.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

How convenient

Whatever. We're not God, so we don't get to decide.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 9:20:45 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 12:15:23 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
What happens in real life?

Some little fine for the shoplifter unless he returns it and says sorry, and lifetime in prison or execution for the genocider. But is there any kind of a scale like that in Christianity? I haven't heard of any other punishment than burn in hell or no punishment at all.
Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 9:23:27 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 11:34:47 PM, Jovian wrote:
So I had this topic in my other thread "Who goes to hell?", albeit only as a side topic, which barely was branched there.

However. Is there any kind of a punishment scale in Christianity? Let's compare these two made up characters:

Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Mr B: Was an evil dictator who brutally tortured 30 millions of innocent people to death, many of them were children. He was proud of his genocide and considered it his masterpiece. Then he died of lung cancer after having been a chain smoker. This man as well never repented for what he did.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

Here I thought Christians could speak for God. There must be some part of the Bible or some kind of scholar who has done some sensible speech about this?
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 1:02:37 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 9:20:45 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 5/1/2016 12:15:23 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
What happens in real life?

Some little fine for the shoplifter unless he returns it and says sorry, and lifetime in prison or execution for the genocider. But is there any kind of a scale like that in Christianity? I haven't heard of any other punishment than burn in hell or no punishment at all.

God punishes the way that God punishes. Christians are not called to be judges, but we are also told that the law of the land, and authority was put their by the will of God.

In other words, let the world handle worldly stuff. Let God handle the rest. A Christian is told, "mercy triumphs over judgement", and that we are to "bless those who curse us". We are also told to forgive others.

That is the way that Christ taught. Respect the law, do what it says. Try not to involve the legal system in your disputes.
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
KingDavid8
Posts: 63
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 1:13:59 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Per the Bible, if this person was a Christian and accepted Jesus as his savior, then he's forgiven whether he repented of the sin or not. You don't lose your salvation in the time between committing a sin and repenting of it. If you're saved, you're saved from all of your sins, not just specific ones.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

It doesn't make any sense that whatever punishment you get in the afterlife exceeds the crime. So if Mr. A. wasn't saved but still lived a very good life and his worst sin was shoplifting, then whatever punishment he gets in the afterlife wouldn't be anything that exceeds the crime of shoplifting. He wouldn't get the same punishment as someone who brutally tortured 30 million people, and who is thus deserving of far more punishment.
tarantula
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 1:49:51 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/30/2016 11:34:47 PM, Jovian wrote:
So I had this topic in my other thread "Who goes to hell?", albeit only as a side topic, which barely was branched there.

However. Is there any kind of a punishment scale in Christianity? Let's compare these two made up characters:

Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Mr B: Was an evil dictator who brutally tortured 30 millions of innocent people to death, many of them were children. He was proud of his genocide and considered it his masterpiece. Then he died of lung cancer after having been a chain smoker. This man as well never repented for what he did.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

It goes to show what a crazy belief system that is!
Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 2:22:01 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 1:13:59 PM, KingDavid8 wrote:
Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Per the Bible, if this person was a Christian and accepted Jesus as his savior, then he's forgiven whether he repented of the sin or not. You don't lose your salvation in the time between committing a sin and repenting of it. If you're saved, you're saved from all of your sins, not just specific ones.

1 Corinthians 6:10 doesn't agree with you claiming Jesus would forgive an unrepenting Mr. A, since "thieves will not inherit the kingdom of God".

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

It doesn't make any sense that whatever punishment you get in the afterlife exceeds the crime. So if Mr. A. wasn't saved but still lived a very good life and his worst sin was shoplifting, then whatever punishment he gets in the afterlife wouldn't be anything that exceeds the crime of shoplifting. He wouldn't get the same punishment as someone who brutally tortured 30 million people, and who is thus deserving of far more punishment.

This sounds more like your opinions. Can you refer to any part of the Bible or any Christian scholar to strengthen this claim? I myself haven't heard of any kind of punishment scale in Christianity, but I reserve myself for being wrong.
Athomos
Posts: 401
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 7:46:34 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/30/2016 11:34:47 PM, Jovian wrote:
So I had this topic in my other thread "Who goes to hell?", albeit only as a side topic, which barely was branched there.

However. Is there any kind of a punishment scale in Christianity? Let's compare these two made up characters:

Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Mr B: Was an evil dictator who brutally tortured 30 millions of innocent people to death, many of them were children. He was proud of his genocide and considered it his masterpiece. Then he died of lung cancer after having been a chain smoker. This man as well never repented for what he did.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

That's just one of the many ways Christianity is abysmally immoral. Those who have no problem with eternal damnation in hell not only sit well with everlasting torment in retribution for finite sins, they're also fine with vastly different offences being punished with a one-size-fits all kind of sanction. Notice that this is true whether they believe hell simply stands for death or for a literal place of torture.

And some of these individuals have the supreme gal to put in question where atheists get their morality.

Most, from a vastly superior source, I say.
KingDavid8
Posts: 63
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 8:17:49 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 2:22:01 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 5/1/2016 1:13:59 PM, KingDavid8 wrote:

Per the Bible, if this person was a Christian and accepted Jesus as his savior, then he's forgiven whether he repented of the sin or not. You don't lose your salvation in the time between committing a sin and repenting of it. If you're saved, you're saved from all of your sins, not just specific ones.

1 Corinthians 6:10 doesn't agree with you claiming Jesus would forgive an unrepenting Mr. A, since "thieves will not inherit the kingdom of God".

If you take that passage as an absolute, then you're saying anyone who steals goes to hell whether they repent or not, which is clearly not what you're arguing. Taken in context (especially looking at Corinthians 6:11), it's saying that people who are habitually thieves are unlike those who accept Jesus as their savior.

This sounds more like your opinions. Can you refer to any part of the Bible or any Christian scholar to strengthen this claim? I myself haven't heard of any kind of punishment scale in Christianity, but I reserve myself for being wrong.

The Bible doesn't say whether everyone gets the same punishment regardless of what they've done. But it obviously doesn't make sense that a shoplifter and a genocidal maniac would get the same punishment. You're asking me if they would, and I say they wouldn't.
Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 9:02:13 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 8:17:49 PM, KingDavid8 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 2:22:01 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 5/1/2016 1:13:59 PM, KingDavid8 wrote:

Per the Bible, if this person was a Christian and accepted Jesus as his savior, then he's forgiven whether he repented of the sin or not. You don't lose your salvation in the time between committing a sin and repenting of it. If you're saved, you're saved from all of your sins, not just specific ones.

1 Corinthians 6:10 doesn't agree with you claiming Jesus would forgive an unrepenting Mr. A, since "thieves will not inherit the kingdom of God".

If you take that passage as an absolute, then you're saying anyone who steals goes to hell whether they repent or not, which is clearly not what you're arguing. Taken in context (especially looking at Corinthians 6:11), it's saying that people who are habitually thieves are unlike those who accept Jesus as their savior.

OK this sounds sensible.

This sounds more like your opinions. Can you refer to any part of the Bible or any Christian scholar to strengthen this claim? I myself haven't heard of any kind of punishment scale in Christianity, but I reserve myself for being wrong.

The Bible doesn't say whether everyone gets the same punishment regardless of what they've done. But it obviously doesn't make sense that a shoplifter and a genocidal maniac would get the same punishment. You're asking me if they would, and I say they wouldn't.

This is your opinion. At least until you show me some kind of canon supporting you.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 9:27:14 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 11:34:47 PM, Jovian wrote:
So I had this topic in my other thread "Who goes to hell?", albeit only as a side topic, which barely was branched there.

However. Is there any kind of a punishment scale in Christianity? Let's compare these two made up characters:

Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Mr B: Was an evil dictator who brutally tortured 30 millions of innocent people to death, many of them were children. He was proud of his genocide and considered it his masterpiece. Then he died of lung cancer after having been a chain smoker. This man as well never repented for what he did.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

In other words, "I'm not going to concern myself with how nonsensical this all is, I'm just going to do what I'm told which is to not think for myself and blindly trust that there must be some valid explanation".
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 10:11:59 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 9:27:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 11:34:47 PM, Jovian wrote:
So I had this topic in my other thread "Who goes to hell?", albeit only as a side topic, which barely was branched there.

However. Is there any kind of a punishment scale in Christianity? Let's compare these two made up characters:

Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Mr B: Was an evil dictator who brutally tortured 30 millions of innocent people to death, many of them were children. He was proud of his genocide and considered it his masterpiece. Then he died of lung cancer after having been a chain smoker. This man as well never repented for what he did.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

In other words, "I'm not going to concern myself with how nonsensical this all is, I'm just going to do what I'm told which is to not think for myself and blindly trust that there must be some valid explanation".

I agree, this thread is nonsensical, so no, I'm not going to concern myself with it. As I said, that decision is not ours to make, so as you so accurately determined... It's rather nonsensical.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
Athomos
Posts: 401
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 10:18:23 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 10:11:59 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 9:27:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 11:34:47 PM, Jovian wrote:
So I had this topic in my other thread "Who goes to hell?", albeit only as a side topic, which barely was branched there.

However. Is there any kind of a punishment scale in Christianity? Let's compare these two made up characters:

Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Mr B: Was an evil dictator who brutally tortured 30 millions of innocent people to death, many of them were children. He was proud of his genocide and considered it his masterpiece. Then he died of lung cancer after having been a chain smoker. This man as well never repented for what he did.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

In other words, "I'm not going to concern myself with how nonsensical this all is, I'm just going to do what I'm told which is to not think for myself and blindly trust that there must be some valid explanation".


I agree, this thread is nonsensical, so no, I'm not going to concern myself with it. As I said, that decision is not ours to make, so as you so accurately determined... It's rather nonsensical.

Not that I expected anything different from a Catholic.

Suppose God is evil. Suppose He's deceiving you, telling you He's the embodiment of Love, when in fact He's the opposite.

How would you be able to tell?

This sort of not so graceful exits inadvertedly lends more
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 10:24:40 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 10:18:23 PM, Athomos wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:11:59 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 9:27:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 11:34:47 PM, Jovian wrote:
So I had this topic in my other thread "Who goes to hell?", albeit only as a side topic, which barely was branched there.

However. Is there any kind of a punishment scale in Christianity? Let's compare these two made up characters:

Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Mr B: Was an evil dictator who brutally tortured 30 millions of innocent people to death, many of them were children. He was proud of his genocide and considered it his masterpiece. Then he died of lung cancer after having been a chain smoker. This man as well never repented for what he did.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

In other words, "I'm not going to concern myself with how nonsensical this all is, I'm just going to do what I'm told which is to not think for myself and blindly trust that there must be some valid explanation".


I agree, this thread is nonsensical, so no, I'm not going to concern myself with it. As I said, that decision is not ours to make, so as you so accurately determined... It's rather nonsensical.

Not that I expected anything different from a Catholic.

Suppose God is evil. Suppose He's deceiving you, telling you He's the embodiment of Love, when in fact He's the opposite.

How would you be able to tell?

This sort of not so graceful exits inadvertedly lends more

His actions coincide with His claims of holiness... That's how I know.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 10:24:41 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 10:11:59 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 9:27:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

In other words, "I'm not going to concern myself with how nonsensical this all is, I'm just going to do what I'm told which is to not think for myself and blindly trust that there must be some valid explanation".


I agree, this thread is nonsensical, so no, I'm not going to concern myself with it. As I said, that decision is not ours to make, so as you so accurately determined... It's rather nonsensical.

There is nothing nonsensical about challenging the idea of levying the same punishment on one for committing theft as would be levied on one for commuting mass murder. But when you are taught to not think about these things for yourself that's what happens, you can't even tell challenging that idea looks like.
Athomos
Posts: 401
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 10:29:25 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 10:24:40 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:18:23 PM, Athomos wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:11:59 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 9:27:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 11:34:47 PM, Jovian wrote:
So I had this topic in my other thread "Who goes to hell?", albeit only as a side topic, which barely was branched there.

However. Is there any kind of a punishment scale in Christianity? Let's compare these two made up characters:

Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Mr B: Was an evil dictator who brutally tortured 30 millions of innocent people to death, many of them were children. He was proud of his genocide and considered it his masterpiece. Then he died of lung cancer after having been a chain smoker. This man as well never repented for what he did.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

In other words, "I'm not going to concern myself with how nonsensical this all is, I'm just going to do what I'm told which is to not think for myself and blindly trust that there must be some valid explanation".


I agree, this thread is nonsensical, so no, I'm not going to concern myself with it. As I said, that decision is not ours to make, so as you so accurately determined... It's rather nonsensical.

Not that I expected anything different from a Catholic.

Suppose God is evil. Suppose He's deceiving you, telling you He's the embodiment of Love, when in fact He's the opposite.

How would you be able to tell?

This sort of not so graceful exits inadvertedly lends more

His actions coincide with His claims of holiness... That's how I know.

Yes, this is were we're going to disagree.
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 10:54:09 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 10:24:41 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:11:59 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 9:27:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

In other words, "I'm not going to concern myself with how nonsensical this all is, I'm just going to do what I'm told which is to not think for myself and blindly trust that there must be some valid explanation".


I agree, this thread is nonsensical, so no, I'm not going to concern myself with it. As I said, that decision is not ours to make, so as you so accurately determined... It's rather nonsensical.

There is nothing nonsensical about challenging the idea of levying the same punishment on one for committing theft as would be levied on one for commuting mass murder. But when you are taught to not think about these things for yourself that's what happens, you can't even tell challenging that idea looks like.

But we weren't asked to challenge the idea. We were asked to decide what punishment each specific person deserved. With this reality in mind, your argument fails.

And I don't know where you get the idea that I'm not supposed to think about things by myself. No one has ever told me that.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2016 10:55:11 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 10:29:25 PM, Athomos wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:24:40 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:18:23 PM, Athomos wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:11:59 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 9:27:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 4/30/2016 11:34:47 PM, Jovian wrote:
So I had this topic in my other thread "Who goes to hell?", albeit only as a side topic, which barely was branched there.

However. Is there any kind of a punishment scale in Christianity? Let's compare these two made up characters:

Mr A: Lived a proper Christian life. Although in his 60s, he shoplifted a chocolate bar from a store, without being ashamed of it at all (and he wasn't mentally disordered or senile at all). The next week, he dies of an unexpected heart attack. All in all, he never repented his shoplift.

Mr B: Was an evil dictator who brutally tortured 30 millions of innocent people to death, many of them were children. He was proud of his genocide and considered it his masterpiece. Then he died of lung cancer after having been a chain smoker. This man as well never repented for what he did.

Will the punishment somehow differ between these two guys? Or will they both burn in hell forever, and if so, why does God regard stealing a $1 candy bar as bad as having brutally tortured 30 million people to death?

It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

In other words, "I'm not going to concern myself with how nonsensical this all is, I'm just going to do what I'm told which is to not think for myself and blindly trust that there must be some valid explanation".


I agree, this thread is nonsensical, so no, I'm not going to concern myself with it. As I said, that decision is not ours to make, so as you so accurately determined... It's rather nonsensical.

Not that I expected anything different from a Catholic.

Suppose God is evil. Suppose He's deceiving you, telling you He's the embodiment of Love, when in fact He's the opposite.

How would you be able to tell?

This sort of not so graceful exits inadvertedly lends more

His actions coincide with His claims of holiness... That's how I know.

Yes, this is were we're going to disagree.

Ok.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2016 1:15:37 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/1/2016 10:54:09 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:24:41 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:11:59 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 9:27:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

In other words, "I'm not going to concern myself with how nonsensical this all is, I'm just going to do what I'm told which is to not think for myself and blindly trust that there must be some valid explanation".


I agree, this thread is nonsensical, so no, I'm not going to concern myself with it. As I said, that decision is not ours to make, so as you so accurately determined... It's rather nonsensical.

There is nothing nonsensical about challenging the idea of levying the same punishment on one for committing theft as would be levied on one for commuting mass murder. But when you are taught to not think about these things for yourself that's what happens, you can't even tell challenging that idea looks like.


But we weren't asked to challenge the idea. We were asked to decide what punishment each specific person deserved. With this reality in mind, your argument fails.

You were specifically asked if the two men described would get the same punishment, and why. That is, at least in my opinion, a clear implicit challenge to explain whether the idea of equal punishment for the aforementioned crimes is justified.

And I don't know where you get the idea that I'm not supposed to think about things by myself. No one has ever told me that.

You just demonstrated it. Even if you don't agree that the OP was a challenge of some sort, if we're talking about a God that you believe exists and presumably worship, then you should have no problem explaining why the premise (that both men would get the same punishment) is wrong, or explain why you feel the idea of equal punishment in this case is justified. Yet instead you tell us it's not your place to make that determination. How much more explicitly clear could you have made yourself?
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2016 1:22:24 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/2/2016 1:15:37 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:54:09 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:24:41 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:11:59 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 9:27:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

In other words, "I'm not going to concern myself with how nonsensical this all is, I'm just going to do what I'm told which is to not think for myself and blindly trust that there must be some valid explanation".


I agree, this thread is nonsensical, so no, I'm not going to concern myself with it. As I said, that decision is not ours to make, so as you so accurately determined... It's rather nonsensical.

There is nothing nonsensical about challenging the idea of levying the same punishment on one for committing theft as would be levied on one for commuting mass murder. But when you are taught to not think about these things for yourself that's what happens, you can't even tell challenging that idea looks like.


But we weren't asked to challenge the idea. We were asked to decide what punishment each specific person deserved. With this reality in mind, your argument fails.

You were specifically asked if the two men described would get the same punishment, and why. That is, at least in my opinion, a clear implicit challenge to explain whether the idea of equal punishment for the aforementioned crimes is justified.

And I don't know where you get the idea that I'm not supposed to think about things by myself. No one has ever told me that.

You just demonstrated it. Even if you don't agree that the OP was a challenge of some sort, if we're talking about a God that you believe exists and presumably worship, then you should have no problem explaining why the premise (that both men would get the same punishment) is wrong, or explain why you feel the idea of equal punishment in this case is justified. Yet instead you tell us it's not your place to make that determination. How much more explicitly clear could you have made yourself?

There was no implied question, only an actual question. And STILL no one has asked me to answer a policy question on the issue.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2016 12:15:24 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/2/2016 1:22:24 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/2/2016 1:15:37 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:54:09 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:24:41 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:11:59 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 9:27:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

In other words, "I'm not going to concern myself with how nonsensical this all is, I'm just going to do what I'm told which is to not think for myself and blindly trust that there must be some valid explanation".


I agree, this thread is nonsensical, so no, I'm not going to concern myself with it. As I said, that decision is not ours to make, so as you so accurately determined... It's rather nonsensical.

There is nothing nonsensical about challenging the idea of levying the same punishment on one for committing theft as would be levied on one for commuting mass murder. But when you are taught to not think about these things for yourself that's what happens, you can't even tell challenging that idea looks like.


But we weren't asked to challenge the idea. We were asked to decide what punishment each specific person deserved. With this reality in mind, your argument fails.

You were specifically asked if the two men described would get the same punishment, and why. That is, at least in my opinion, a clear implicit challenge to explain whether the idea of equal punishment for the aforementioned crimes is justified.

And I don't know where you get the idea that I'm not supposed to think about things by myself. No one has ever told me that.

You just demonstrated it. Even if you don't agree that the OP was a challenge of some sort, if we're talking about a God that you believe exists and presumably worship, then you should have no problem explaining why the premise (that both men would get the same punishment) is wrong, or explain why you feel the idea of equal punishment in this case is justified. Yet instead you tell us it's not your place to make that determination. How much more explicitly clear could you have made yourself?


There was no implied question, only an actual question. And STILL no one has asked me to answer a policy question on the issue.

An actual question which you still have yet to address...
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2016 1:06:54 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/3/2016 12:15:24 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/2/2016 1:22:24 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/2/2016 1:15:37 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:54:09 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:24:41 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 10:11:59 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/1/2016 9:27:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/1/2016 12:26:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
It's not for us to decide who goes to Hell or not. That's God's decision alone.

In other words, "I'm not going to concern myself with how nonsensical this all is, I'm just going to do what I'm told which is to not think for myself and blindly trust that there must be some valid explanation".


I agree, this thread is nonsensical, so no, I'm not going to concern myself with it. As I said, that decision is not ours to make, so as you so accurately determined... It's rather nonsensical.

There is nothing nonsensical about challenging the idea of levying the same punishment on one for committing theft as would be levied on one for commuting mass murder. But when you are taught to not think about these things for yourself that's what happens, you can't even tell challenging that idea looks like.


But we weren't asked to challenge the idea. We were asked to decide what punishment each specific person deserved. With this reality in mind, your argument fails.

You were specifically asked if the two men described would get the same punishment, and why. That is, at least in my opinion, a clear implicit challenge to explain whether the idea of equal punishment for the aforementioned crimes is justified.

And I don't know where you get the idea that I'm not supposed to think about things by myself. No one has ever told me that.

You just demonstrated it. Even if you don't agree that the OP was a challenge of some sort, if we're talking about a God that you believe exists and presumably worship, then you should have no problem explaining why the premise (that both men would get the same punishment) is wrong, or explain why you feel the idea of equal punishment in this case is justified. Yet instead you tell us it's not your place to make that determination. How much more explicitly clear could you have made yourself?


There was no implied question, only an actual question. And STILL no one has asked me to answer a policy question on the issue.

An actual question which you still have yet to address...

I guess I missed it. I answered the OP question.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2016 1:17:09 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/3/2016 1:06:54 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/3/2016 12:15:24 AM, Double_R wrote:
An actual question which you still have yet to address...

I guess I missed it. I answered the OP question.

Would you mind pointing me to the post where you answered the OP? I seem to have missed that.
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2016 1:23:54 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/3/2016 1:17:09 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/3/2016 1:06:54 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/3/2016 12:15:24 AM, Double_R wrote:
An actual question which you still have yet to address...

I guess I missed it. I answered the OP question.

Would you mind pointing me to the post where you answered the OP? I seem to have missed that.

My original response.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax