Babies going to hell...

[Acriku]

Atheism is the lack of belief in any god(s). Atheists may reject god, but atheism itself is just the lack of belief in any god(s). Rejection is not to be included in the definition of atheism, but atheists may do it.

Dictionaries have been wrong before, so it isn't surprising that a common misconception snuck its way into the dictionary.

[SurlyPIG]

Believing in God is not what gets you into heaven.

Is it not obeying the ten commandments? The first two seem pretty clear about what you must and must not believe in. Are you saying that an atheist who is a good, moral person (no TMA its not an oxymoron) can be taken into the Kingdom of Heaven?

[Gobalopper]

ACE everyone sins, even Christians.

Read John 14:5-6

Thomas said to him, "Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?"

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

or John 3:16-21

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.

Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.

But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God."

That is how.

[Sneakgab]

''For now, I'll take a step back and enjoy watching Acriku logically lay the smack-down on other arguements while Edric hits below the belt. I could point out some of the contradictions in this thread but I havn't the time...''

For now, I'll take a step back and enjoy watching Acriku and Edric debate on this and other arguments while Acelethal displays his bias (making atheism look bad) and dishes out a meaningless paragraph with no purpose to it other than bahsing religious people and Edrico. If I were to base an decision on atheists on what you just said, I would think that atheists assumed all religous people to be ignorant and cannot accept arguments from them which they dismiss without even considering. Fortunately for Acriku, I do not make this generalization (perhaps because I am not ignorant as you're attitude suggests). And so, I wish good luck to Acriku and Edric in their debate.

''Are you saying that an atheist who is a good, moral person (no TMA its not an oxymoron) can be taken into the Kingdom of Heaven?''

Oh look, another bash at religous people... and I haven't even finished my reply. This time you assume religous people to be ignorant

Im tired of people assuming the religous to be ignorant and close-minded. Iv'e seen it everywhere. Even on the Generals board where the retards (well, most of them are certainly retards) inhabiting that board have the audacity to call some one else ignorant without even properly going through what they have said. But it is most persistent here on the emp boards. Keep you bias,generalizations,assumptions,e.t.c at home about religous people,Edrico,his attitude,what he may have to say,e.t.c and reply as if you don't know the person...

I know Im going a little off the top but I don't usually see people generalizing,assuming or being biased on this board and it's irritating that religous people are the target of it as they are constantly called close-minded,ignorant,e.t.c. Perhaps I may have just seen religous people being called ignorant and the like on other forums but I have certainly seen them assumed to be, or called, close-minded on this forum

You know, come to think of it, the post I've just made is almost a joke and I'll probably take back what Iv'e said not soon after posting it... but now that I've typed out...:D

[Acriku]

I'm curious to wonder how asking whether or not an atheist that is good and moral can get into the Kingdom of Heaven is a bash to religious people?

[SurlyPIG]

Well I don't think that most atheists are about to accept and be grateful to Jesus, Gob.

Sneakgab, if you wish for me to be less interesting in my posts, very well.

I agree with Acriku's point.

Is that acceptable?

[Gobalopper]

Of course not thats why they are athiests. :)

[SurlyPIG]

My point exactly. That's why it's impossible for them to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Well you knew that, obviously, and you were just pointing out that belief in Jesus is the "clincher" so to speak.

[Caid Ivik]

You think atheism is a breakdown of morals. Well I say you are wrong. Keep your closed mind, but do not try to tell me about it.

Who has closed mind now, when you don't want to hear the truth? ;)

Atheism causes slow moral decay, that is true. People, who lived for prayer and work where more moral than todays, which even want to negate morale as it is, like you. Problem is that you know NOTHING about the principes of our religion, and even you don't want to know something about it. Have you ever tried to talk with some priest about it?

[Sneakgab]

''Sneakgab, if you wish for me to be less interesting in my posts, very well.''

What!? I do not understand how you could comprehend my post in such a manner that it suggested to you that you're posts be less interesting (unless of course you consider bias against a particular person or idea to be interesting)

I merely suggested that people should not be prejudiced against the religious by assuming them to be ignorant and close-minded

Also, I didn't find you're insult towards Edrico to be very ''interesting''...

[Edric O]

The only way for sin to affect your chance hugely is to not ask for forgiveness, and those who do not believe in Jesus can't ask for forgiveness, so in a way that is just screwing the non-believers.

Well, so who's stopping you from believing? ;)

And about whether "an atheist that is good and moral can get into the Kingdom of Heaven" or not - Honestly, I don't know. A lot depends on how you define "good and moral", though. There are many issues on which atheist and Christian morals disagree. Sex outside of marriage, for example.

[Caid Ivik]

What is "good and moral" is strictly defined. But God is merciful and looks more on that what we did good than bad, I think.

[DjCiD]

My point exactly. That's why it's impossible for them to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Well you knew that, obviously, and you were just pointing out that belief in Jesus is the "clincher" so to speak.

Well who is stopping them from entering the Kingdom? All the have to do is accept and their name will be writen in the book of life. It's not just the belief in God that gets you into Heaven but the acceptence of his son that was sent to die on a cross for all of mans sins. Even Satan believes in God. ;)

[Acriku]

Caid, I am willing to understand how you got to your conclusion, but other than that I will ignore it - unless you can explain.

An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An atheist believes that deed must be done instead of prayer said. An atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death. He wants disease conquered, poverty vanished, war eliminated. - Madalyn Murray O'Hair

Yep, we are morally decaying ;) Actually, atheists like myself are humanists, for the good of humankind, and I have morals similar to christians or any other people, and to say that atheists have a decaying morality is ludicrous because you do not need god to have morals. Morals come from other than god, that is certain.

[DjCiD]

So where do morals come from?

[Acriku]

They can come from society. There are stages in psychology that conscern morale development.

[DjCiD]

But where did society get them? All of a sudden on day a guy was sitting under a tree and a whore fell from top of the tree and *bang* his discovered the laws of morality?

...

Wait that was a different law wasn't it... ;)

[Acriku]

Society makes up laws. Laws in which to govern the cities. It is illegal to murder someone. Ok, there is one moral fiber right there. Where did those laws come from? From the conclusion of laws in which a society would be most effective and stable. Now where did some moral fibers that aren't in the law system come from? Possibly from offshoots of the law, or what their parents told them to do, which the first parent told their child probably due to the society's position. Also, customs fall into here. In our society, it is custom to hold the door for the lady. In the bible, it shows nowhere to hold the door for a lady. It even holds sexist views against the women in some places, so we didn't get it from the bible. Hmm, I think we got it from our society :)

[Edric O]

An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An atheist believes that deed must be done instead of prayer said. An atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death. He wants disease conquered, poverty vanished, war eliminated.

Good one, Acriku, but I'm afraid you can't have it both ways. You claim that we cannot hold the actions of evil atheists (such as Stalin or Pol Pot) against atheism, because atheism is not a set of beliefs. In that case, by the very same logic, we also cannot hold the actions of good atheists to be representative of atheism.

[Acriku]

When the majority of atheists are good, we can make a stereotype ;)

[TMA_1]

its funny how so many atheists attack the evil men of christiandom, but when we attack the evil men that were atheists, its somehow out of line. doesnt make much sense. too many double standards for the majority of atheists.

[Acriku]

TMA because they are different. Christianity has a code for christians to follow, if they do not follow it then we can point that out. Atheism doesn't. So when there are atheists who are 'evil,' that holds no merit because there is no code to follow, thus they aren't doing anything wrong as an atheist. But as a moral human being they are doing something wrong.

[Edric O]

As I have said, Acriku, I can agree to that - as long as you also agree that good atheists also do not bring you any merit. To say otherwise is pure hypocrisy. It's basically saying: "we're not responsible for anything evil done by an atheist, but we take all the credit for anything good done by one"

Now, on to the matter of morals... So you follow the moral laws of society, right? Because what's good for society must always be moral, right?

Let's go back in time 60 years. To Germany. Would you follow the morals of that society, Acriku? And if not, then on what basis could you possibly call them wrong?

[Acriku]

I know edric, I was joking on the post after yours (the last one on last page). But the majority of atheists are good, even though that has no hold on atheism itself.

Back in 60 years, they were products of their society. Just like I am, or you are. In some way or another, society has had an effect on us, and our morals. Just like the slaveholders back in early 1800's, they did not follow the morality given to them by the bible, they followed the morals given by their society - that it is ok to have slaves. Products of their society, not that that is an excuse.

[SurlyPIG]

What!? I do not understand how you could comprehend my post in such a manner that it suggested to you that you're posts be less interesting (unless of course you consider bias against a particular person or idea to be interesting)

I merely suggested that people should not be prejudiced against the religious by assuming them to be ignorant and close-minded

Also, I didn't find you're insult towards Edrico to be very ''interesting''...

I didn't say that at all! Not once. I essentially said I agreed with Acriku and enjoyed the way he logically debated the other posters, not ONCE did I cally anyone ignorant or closed-minded. And what I said about Edric's comment was accurate; he made a personal comment about Acriku against his logical arguments.