Where did the heathens go before Jesus?

[mmntech]

Ok, I'm not a bible scholar.
From my rudimentary understanding of Christianity, you can only get to heaven by believing in Jesus.

So did everyone go to hell before Jesus?

According to Dante's Divine Comedy, the unbaptized good went to the first circle of hell that contained Earthly joys. It was a lesser version of heaven that didn't contain things mortal souls couldn't understand.

 

[Crono]

Was just wondering where you were drawing the connection to demons, then. The only mention I see of unnatural procreation in the time of Noah is in Genesis 6:4-- "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown." This is, of course, assuming "sons of God" refers to angels/spirits and not priests/holy men.

Otherwise, the only verse I see the originally quoted 1 Peter 3:19 correlating to is, well, 1 Peter 4:6-- "For this reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead." Which, to me, speaks more of men than demons.

Edit: Again, I don't purport to be a biblical scholar, I just read parts of it for fun every now and then.

2 Peter 2:4-5:"For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, reserved for judgment; and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly"

and

Jude 6: "And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day"

Also, "sons of God" refers to beings created directly by God, and not a result of the reproduction process. Which is why Adam was is the son of God in the genealogy of Luke 3, and why angels are called the sons of God. New Testament believers are likewise called the sons of God because of the new spirit (regeneration) that God creates in those who believe.

Otherwise, men are called sons of men, and sons of God refers to angels. You can do a reference study to see how the phrase is used through the Bible.

The passages above and the text in Genesis 6 make it clear that fallen angels possessed men and lusted after women during that time of wickedness when humanity as a whole was more depraved than any time since and any time up until the tribulation yet future.

Some people take the passage too far, however, and say that a physical being, some kind of giant half-man/half demon creature resulted from fallen angels somehow "mating" with women. I don't believe that, I believe that men were simply so corrupt that they were willing to worship demons and believe in the doctrines or religions of demons, and thus were susceptible to suggestion and control. Demons are spirits and cannot reproduce by any means, nor can they interact with the physical world.

Even angels cannot appear to men unless they have authority from God, and demons are never shown as having appeared physically to anyone anywhere in scripture. If they could, they certainly would - it would make it easier to perform some kinds of deception and manipulation.

 

[totalnoob]

Why did God make evil demons crono? Why did he let Satan in the garden of Eden? If he is truly omniscient, the creation of evil and suffering must have been part of his plan from the get-go.

 

[Crono]

Why did God make evil demons crono? Why did he let Satan in the garden of Eden? If he is truly omniscient, the creation of evil and suffering must have been part of his plan from the get-go.

Choice.

Satan, not satisfied with being in the presence of God and at the side of God, desired the throne of God. His rebellion and fall were his own fault.

Man, not satisfied with what God had provided, desired to be like God and to follow his own will rather than the will of God.

In both instances, sin resulted from choosing the wrong path.

Why did God make it possible to choose to disobey? Ultimately it's because the end result - and the reason everything exists - is the glory of God. God is glorified in His saving and justifying human beings and his just punishment of those who remain in defiant sin. Why couldn't He make it so everyone is saved and He still receives glory that way?

I don't know. I'm not God, and I doubt I could understand the answer anyway. Only one who created everything has the ability to understand eternity, and only He could be truly righteous.

Romans 9 deals with this. It points out that God has chosen from the beginning, and that He has the right to chose. People want to put God in a box and make Him behave according to their standards, but that's now how it works. An omniscient and omnipotent has every right and holds the standard of righteousness, not you or I.

"You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?"

On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?

What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory"


http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans 9&version=NASB

 

[totalnoob]

Do you define "saved" as living in Eden like Adam before the fall? Is that your definition of paradise crono? ..being obedient little peons, sitting in a garden, eating fruit, and following God's orders? No knowledge of good and evil..no need to work..no goals or achievements to strive for..no passion for the opposite sex..? Sounds more like hell to me.

Ayn Rand said it best..

The name of this monstrous absurdity is Original Sin.

A sin without volition is a slap at morality and an insolent contradiction in terms: that which is outside the possibility of choice is outside the province of morality. If man is evil by birth, he has no will, no power to change it; if he has no will, he can be neither good nor evil; a robot is amoral. To hold, as man’s sin, a fact not open to his choice is a mockery of morality. To hold man’s nature as his sin is a mockery of nature. To punish him for a crime he committed before he was born is a mockery of justice. To hold him guilty in a matter where no innocence exists is a mockery of reason. To destroy morality, nature, justice and reason by means of a single concept is a feat of evil hardly to be matched. Yet that is the root of your code.

Do not hide behind the cowardly evasion that man is born with free will, but with a “tendency” to evil. A free will saddled with a tendency is like a game with loaded dice. It forces man to struggle through the effort of playing, to bear responsibility and pay for the game, but the decision is weighted in favor of a tendency that he had no power to escape. If the tendency is of his choice, he cannot possess it at birth; if it is not of his choice, his will is not free.

What is the nature of the guilt that your teachers call his Original Sin? What are the evils man acquired when he fell from a state they consider perfection? Their myth declares that he ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge—he acquired a mind and became a rational being. It was the knowledge of good and evil—he became a moral being. He was sentenced to earn his bread by his labor—he became a productive being. He was sentenced to experience desire—he acquired the capacity of sexual enjoyment. The evils for which they damn him are reason, morality, creativeness, joy—all the cardinal values of his existence. It is not his vices that their myth of man’s fall is designed to explain and condemn, it is not his errors that they hold as his guilt, but the essence of his nature as man. Whatever he was—that robot in the Garden of Eden, who existed without mind, without values, without labor, without love—he was not man.

 

[Crono]

Do you define "saved" as living in Eden like Adam before the fall? Is that your definition of paradise crono? ..being obedient little peons, sitting in a garden, eating fruit, and following God's orders? No knowledge of good and evil..no need to work..no goals or achievements to strive for..no passion for the opposite sex..? Sounds more like hell to me.

Ayn Rand said it best..

No, being saved is about God chosing you and then you chosing to obey God out of gratitude. It's being delivered from the grasp of sin and being granted eternal life in the kingdom of God.

If you see sin as "freedom", then you are missing the reality of life. People choose sin all the time, and it leads to pain, not joy. There is joy in this world, but only in the bounds of God's declared will according to His word.

I liken it to how societies operate. Laws are put in place to protect. Do they limit us if we obey them? Yes. But without any laws, there is only chaos and despair as people destroy and take and take without regard. True, there is injustice in some human laws, but that's the very result of human fallibility. There is no such corruption in the nature of God.

True freedom is living according to the standards of God.

 

[totalnoob]

Laws are put in place to protect. Do they limit us if we obey them? Yes. But without any laws, there is only chaos and despair as people destroy and take and take without regard. True, there is injustice in some human laws, but that's the very result of human fallibility. There is no such corruption in the nature of God.

too bad so many of the biblical laws are utter nonsense..

Tell me crono, are we still prohibited under pain of death to boil a goat in it's mother's milk?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_Mitzvot

What about witchcraft and wizardry..? Still out of bounds? lol Are men still permitted to sell their daughters as sex slaves? (Exodus 21:7-11) Are rape victims still required to marry their rapists? (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

And of the "supreme" law of the 10 commandments, 8 out of 10 are PERFECTLY LEGAL in America and always have been.. If worshiping other Gods and working on the Sabbath are capital crimes (God ordered people killed for doing this many times), why aren't Christians campaigning to have the law changed today? Nothing could be more important than following "God's word", right?

 

[Mani]

Choice.

Satan, not satisfied with being in the presence of God and at the side of God, desired the throne of God. His rebellion and fall were his own fault.

Man, not satisfied with what God had provided, desired to be like God and to follow his own will rather than the will of God.

In both instances, sin resulted from choosing the wrong path.

Why did God make it possible to choose to disobey? Ultimately it's because the end result - and the reason everything exists - is the glory of God. God is glorified in His saving and justifying human beings and his just punishment of those who remain in defiant sin. Why couldn't He make it so everyone is saved and He still receives glory that way?

I don't know. I'm not God, and I doubt I could understand the answer anyway. Only one who created everything has the ability to understand eternity, and only He could be truly righteous.

Romans 9 deals with this. It points out that God has chosen from the beginning, and that He has the right to chose. People want to put God in a box and make Him behave according to their standards, but that's now how it works. An omniscient and omnipotent has every right and holds the standard of righteousness, not you or I.

This is why I could never believe in organized religion. This stuff reads like a freaking children's book.

 

[Crono]

too bad so many of the biblical laws are utter nonsense..

Tell me crono, are we still prohibited under pain of death to boil a goat in it's mother's milk?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_Mitzvot

What about witchcraft and wizardry..? Still out of bounds? lol Are men still permitted to sell their daughters as sex slaves? (Exodus 21:7-11) Are rape victims still required to marry their rapists? (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

And of the "supreme" law of the 10 commandments, 8 out of 10 are PERFECTLY legal in America and always have been.. If worshiping other Gods and working on the Sabbath are capital crimes (God ordered people killed for doing this many times), why aren't Christians campaigning to have the law changed today? Nothing could be more important than following God's word, right?

The OT laws were either for practical purposes and governance, the "spirit" of the law, or as symbols for the future things.

1 ) Was about animal cruelty, and representative of all such other types of acts
2 ) Slavery was an unfortunate reality of the times, and was not much different from being in debt and working to pay off that debt. Since the Bible gives guidelines for the fair treatment of slaves (much like employee rights and labor laws today), it disallows the cruelty we associate with more modern slavery. The reality is that slavery was much more common in the time of early civilizations and the empires up to the Roman empire, and nowhere in scripture does it say it was a DESIRABLE thing for a man to sell his daughter or son in to slavery. I don't know where you see "sex" slave, that was never permitted.
3) Rape was not sanctioned, it's talking there not about rape but about consensual sex before marriage. What that law is doing is heavily penalizing that kind of act, such that it could not be done with out a heavy commitment (marriage, without possibility for divorce) and monetary payment resulting. Which in essence limits the desire for casual sex.
4) Witchcraft and wizardry is not talking about Harry Potter alohamora spells or witches brew. Witchcraft was seriously sadistic stuff, including human sacrifices and ritualistic sexual practices. Israel actually succumbed to that kind of practice in its darker days, and they did such things as putting their children through fire. If you think that is a good thing, something is wrong with you.

Christians aren't campaigning because the laws themselves aren't useful without the spirit of the law. In other words, if people don't have a heart for God, they will just disobey whatever laws are enacted and a willing heart is what God desires, not forced worship.

True Christians don't believe in a police state, they believe in people willingly obeying God's word. There needs to be some rule of course, but Christians are called to spread the gospel, not write laws or lobby Congress (though some do indeed choose to do so). This isn't the United States of Christendom, btw, this is America.

You can probably take more verses out of context, but that's all it will be - out of context. Anything out of context can be ridiculed, but until you do a thorough study of scripture, you aren't proving anything quoting randomly. Tell me what doctrines you hold dear and from what (book, manuscript, your own, etc), and I bet I could make it seem foolish.

 

[totalnoob]

Oh sure crono..I love how you fundies see all the barbarism and sadistic acts commanded by God as taken "out of context". You can't get around the simple truth buddy..he was a cruel SOB, explicitly commanding the genocide of thousands of men, women, and children...explicitly commanding the subjugation of women and enslavement of entire civilizations. It matters not that these things were "common at the time". If God wanted to write a moral guidebook for humanity, he had a perfect opportunity to disavow things like slavery in it, yet he did not..not even in the "kinder, gentler" New Testament. In fact when Jesus himself was asked a question concerning slaves, rather than imparting some of his "perfect morality" on his followers and condemning the practice, he simply told them how hard they are allowed to beat their slaves under certain circumstances. (Luke 12:47).

Accept it buddy.. Your book bears all the hallmarks of being written by first century primitives with first century morality. It is dripping with the racist/sexist biases, ignorant superstitions, and cruel practices of ancient desert nomads. It lacks any profound morality and certainly doesn't appear as something inspired by the creator of the universe.

 

[ahenkel]

They went to Burgerville

 

[shiner]

Fresno

 

[SlitheryDee]

Neverland Ranch? Who cares, it's bullshit anyway. This whole debate was carried out a thousand years ago and you know how they solved it?


They made shit up. They fabricated what they needed to get an answer they could live with. Now the times have changed. People are morally superior to those venerable oldsters, and are making shit up again to get a answer they can live with. It's all fantasy and fancy, and I see no point in arguing the specifics of it.

The important thing is that people see that they are making this shit up as they go along. These are not ultimate, universal, god-given truths. This is the result of a population that is moving in a positive moral direction willfully editing their religion to match their own superior views. They are LYING to themselves.

 

[Crono]

Oh sure crono..I love how you fundies see all the barbarism and sadistic acts commanded by God as taken "out of context". You can't get around the simple truth buddy..he was a cruel SOB, explicitly commanding the genocide of thousands of men, women, and children...explicitly commanding the subjugation of women and enslavement of entire civilizations. It matters not that these things were "common at the time". If God wanted to write a moral guidebook for humanity, he had a perfect opportunity to disavow things like slavery in it, yet he did not..not even in the "kinder, gentler" New Testament. In fact when Jesus himself was asked a question concerning slaves, rather than imparting some of his "perfect morality" on his followers and condemning the practice, he simply told them how hard they are allowed to beat their slaves under certain circumstances. (Luke 12:47).

Accept it buddy.. Your book bears all the hallmarks of being written by first century primitives with first century morality. It is dripping with the cruel practices and the racist/sexist biases of ancient desert nomads. It lacks any profound morality and certainly doesn't appear as something inspired by the creator of the universe.

Again, tell me where you primarily derive your beliefs from.

You are right that Jesus did not condemn slavery altogether, but the NT does set the guidelines for fair treatment of slaves. Slaves were to be under the authority of their masters, and not to be cruel.

Beatings - to an extent - were seen as fair for disobeying a master. Again, this was in a civilization (Rome) where slavery was already in place. Jesus did not say go out and make slaves of anyone. Nor did he say for all the slaves to go free or to disobey. Slavery was practically a pillar of civilization, and was Jesus advocated was the obedience of slaves and the fair treatment of slaves by their masters. Something in between that of an employee-employer relationship and that of a child-parent.

As for the "subjugation" and destruction of civilizations, you have to ask yourself which civilizations, under which circumstances, and then ask whether or not God has the right to bring down or lift up peoples and even to take life.

If He is the creator, then yes, of course He does. We cannot go around falsely claiming to have His authority to do so, but He did give Israel the authority in that time to act as a sword on His behalf. Not now, though.

What do you think would look like the the inspired word of the creator of the universe, since you are the authority?

 

[ichy]

Technically unbaptized babies went to limbo. IIRC they were there for eternity. It wasn't a bad or good place... just a place.

Except now the Catholic Church has decided that limbo doesn't exist after all. I guess the charlatans figured they needed to change their scam a bit...

 

[ichy]

totalnoob:

That Ayn Rand quote is great. I'm generally not a big fan of hers, but that bit was brilliant.

 

[preslove]

So, what about molesting priests after jesus who repented and believed in jesus.

Heaven or Hell?

 

[preslove]

Except now the Catholic Church has decided that limbo doesn't exist after all. I guess the charlatans figured they needed to change their scam a bit...

Is purgatory around, still?

 

[shiner]

Is purgatory around, still?

Depends...how man Indulgences can you afford to buy?

 

[ichy]

Is purgatory around, still?

Yep, although I'd have to doublecheck wiki (my infallible guide to all things spiritual!) to be certain.

 

[preslove]

Depends...how man Indulgences can you afford to buy?

How's a couple adolescent boys sound?

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

This thread definitely invites scorn from the Reason Brigade. I imagine fellow atheists find Crono's discourse pretty amusing, but props for at least attempting to answer the OP's troll question.

 

[shiner]

How's a couple adolescent boys sound?

I'd rather have a bottle of Woodford Reserve and a good cigar......then again I'm not Catholic so I really don't know what the going rate is.

 

[lxskllr]

You are right that Jesus did not condemn slavery altogether, but the NT does set the guidelines for fair treatment of slaves. Slaves were to be under the authority of their masters, and not to be cruel.

Beatings - to an extent - were seen as fair for disobeying a master. Again, this was in a civilization (Rome) where slavery was already in place. Jesus did not say go out and make slaves of anyone. Nor did he say for all the slaves to go free or to disobey. Slavery was practically a pillar of civilization, and was Jesus advocated was the obedience of slaves and the fair treatment of slaves by their masters. Something in between that of an employee-employer relationship and that of a child-parent.

I'm not sure why I'm getting in this, but those statements are utterly ridiculous. That's the same thing as saying since theft is common place, we'll make rules regarding theft. Stealing a bike's ok, but a car's off limits. Nevermind that you shouldn't be stealing ANYTHING. When you're making moral rules, they better be fucking moral. If you're representing a a higher authority, you're telling people the way it WILL be. It doesn't matter what the peons are doing. Slavery is either right, or it's wrong. If it was right 2000 years ago, it's right today. Which is it?

 

[totalnoob]

Again, tell me where you primarily derive your beliefs from.

I derive them from reason and common sense...from learning about the world and recognizing the nature of man and the requirements to sustain human life and happiness. I think the golden rule is a good place to start, and it predates Christianity by a LOOONG shot (at least 1500 years). Basic human solidarity and empathy will get you quite a long way towards a good moral base, and is certainly superior to getting it from something written down 3000 years ago by a schizophrenic who thought God was talking to him..

Any man alive could improve the 10 commandments in about a second crono. Instead of the first 4 or 5 commandments dealing with God's vanity and jealousy over other Gods, why don't we replace one with something like "Do not intentionally harm, rape, torture, oppress, or enslave another human being."? Or how bout "In all things, seek to minimize harm"?

You are right that Jesus did not condemn slavery altogether, but the NT does set the guidelines for fair treatment of slaves. Slaves were to be under the authority of their masters, and not to be cruel. Slavery was practically a pillar of civilization, and was Jesus advocated was the obedience of slaves and the fair treatment of slaves by their masters.

I think we could expect a bit better from the creator of all things. If God was truly compassionate towards his people, I don't see how he could be satisfied with prescribing rules and regulations for oppression, rather than abolishing it altogether.

As for the "subjugation" and destruction of civilizations, you have to ask yourself which civilizations, under which circumstances, and then ask whether or not God has the right to bring down or lift up peoples and even to take life.

Might makes right does it? Sure, you have the capacity to stomp on an ant colony. If ants had consciousness, it would be rather presumptuous of them to think they have authority over you..but after enduring pointless agony and devastation at your hand, I couldn't blame them for looking up and wondering why you are acting like a cruel and petty SOB.

He did give Israel the authority in that time to act as a sword on His behalf. Not now, though.

Think about this for a second crono.. Do you really think it likely that the creator of the universe would single out a single desert tribe as his favorite, then command them to wipe out his other tribes? Does an infinitely powerful being really need help from others? Why bother when he could simply erase his enemies from existence? Isn't it more likely that the victors of the various battles found it useful to tell their troops they had "God on their side"..and to record it this way in the history books? Apply Occam's razor buddy.

What do you think would look like the the inspired word of the creator of the universe, since you are the authority?

Despite our imperfections, humanity has slowly been improving it's moral sense over the centuries. The civilized world has abolished many ancient practices like slavery, human and animal sacrifices, the murder of homosexuals, etc Most of humanity would consider this progress and certainly "more perfect" than the morality of the past. If the bible were indeed written by a perfect and timeless being, it should be impossible to improve upon or surpass in any way..and it's teachings therefore should be more in line with our present sense of morality than that have bronze age savages.