Will you make it to Heaven?

[Vincitveritas]

Take the quiz and see!

jesusplusnothing.com/the-heaven-test

@Mustardseed86 as a secular person I can pretty much agree with everything you've just posted except that my respect for Christians who cannot accept committed gay relationships is rather more constrained than yours. For me it isn't just about not pushing conversion therapy, it's about people like the couple who ran the B&B and thought they could refuse to serve a gay couple - that's a hard no from me. If you have strong religious convictions but you want to run a business, you abide by the laws of the land you live in and that includes not discriminating against anyone who comes under a protected characteristic. I also feel very strongly that pharmacists for instance should not be allowed to refuse to prescribe the MAP or the contraceptive pill because of their faith. If you feel that way, be a sodding podiatrist instead.

I'm in agreement with you there. I'm thinking more of someone like my friend who is a very very Christian gay man who doesn't feel he can square his faith with being in a same sex relationship. Which makes me sad but at the same time he seems to be at peace with his decision and I respect that.

@Mustardseed86 I can absolutely respect that decision but yes, it makes me feel sad too.

I’m a big fan of Carl Jung. Famously when asked if he believed in God he said I know, I don’t need to believe

Here are some of his thoughts on God

I haven’t got a clue what your CS Lewis quote has to do with me not believing in your god. As I have said (on more than one post) - I don’t believe in god, heaven or hell.

@parker123 As OMG12 said, its an allegory and a rather wonderful one which illustrates the old addage 'there's none so blind as those who will not see' - in a spiritual sense here. The Dwarfs are like atheists.

You're very welcome of course, but I'm also rather confused why you're still here.
On some level, I think you must be searching for answers.

What does that mean exactly?

@poweredbysteam I was speaking generally about how Christians shouldn't give in to worldy pressure. We don't bow to the will of other people, we bow to the will of God. These topics have been touched on already. You can click on OP posts: See all at the bottom right corner of this post and they'll be grouped together without messages in between.

OP, do you have original thoughts or did you just start this thread to spam walls of text the bible, random Christian blogs and now Narnia? Because I don't think that's going to convince anyone to join your religion.

@Anthillveggie Take it or leave it my friend, its entirely up to you. Unfortunately given time constraints I'm not able to give this thread the attention I'd like and cut/paste is quicker! I make no apology for all the Bible verses. They might be gibberish to you but they get to the heart of the matter.

@OMG12 Okay, you're not a Gnostic - let's just say you're heavily influenced by Gnosticism, if you'd prefer. I know your belief system is very eclectic and wide ranging, so no offence meant.
I know allegory when I see it and there's lots of it in the Bible. When Jesus referred to Himself as a door and a vine being two examples. Then there's the idea of transubstantiation, which I don't agree with either. Saying someone takes the Bible literally is a bit of a misnomer and it doesn't mean every single word. I also realise Bible can be interpreted in various different ways (hence differences between denominations) but you can't just write off things like Hell, the resurrection or the virgin birth. I don't think I have to explain the meaning of heresy to you. 😉

And you worship a god who - according to you - sends anyone who doesn't worship him to hell. Does that mean you disagree with god?

@watmel While we might not like it, while it inevitably makes us sad, we believe it because it's the truth regardless. We must not let our sensibilities dictate our own version of the truth - that places us above God and claims we're more moral and loving, which is impossible. Sometimes the truth hurts. I don't believe God feels anyone deserves Hell either, it's more of a natural consequence of the active choice to reject His offer of salvation.

@Mustardseed86
I think the point of the quiz from a Christian point of view is that nobody gets 100% - because the 'spirit' is willing but the 'flesh' is weak. In other words we all have a conscience and basically we want to be good people, but we don't always get it right.

Absolutely.

We are always forgiven and God is not angry with us over our sins.

One must first reach out and ask for that forgiveness.

@speakout Who'd have thought it, we actually agree on something!

Here is Father Mike again, answering the question, if God loves everyone, why doesn't everyone go to Heaven?

Sticking with The Last Battle, this is C.S.Lewis' description of the Narnian version of Heaven:

'...And Tirian turned to see who had spoken. And what he saw then set his heart beating as it had never beaten in any fight. Seven Kings and Queens stood before him, all with crowns on their heads and all in glittering clothes, but the Kings wore fine mail as well and had their swords drawn in their hands. Tirian bowed courteously and was about to speak when the youngest of the Queens laughed. He stared hard at her face, and then gasped with amazement, for he knew her. It was Jill: but not Jill as he had last seen her, with her face all dirt and tears and an old drill dress half slipping off one shoulder. Now she looked cool and fresh, as fresh as if she had just come from bathing. And at first he thought she looked older, but then didn’t, and he could never make up his mind on that point. And then he saw that the youngest of the Kings was Eustace: but he also was changed as Jill was changed. Tirian suddenly felt awkward about coming among these people with the blood and dust and sweat of a battle still on him. Next moment he realized that he was not in that state at all. He was fresh and cool and clean, and dressed in such clothes as he would have worn for a great feast at Cair Paravel. (But in Narnia your good clothes were never your uncomfortable ones)...Not far away from them rose a grove of trees, thickly leaved, but under every leaf there peeped out the gold or faint yellow or purple or glowing red of fruits such as no one has seen in our world. The fruit made Tirian feel that it must be autumn but there was something in the feel of the air that told him it could not be later than June. They all moved toward the trees. Everyone raised his hand to pick the fruit he best liked the look of, and then everyone paused for a second. This fruit was so beautiful that each felt “It can’t be meant for me … surely we’re not allowed to pluck it.” “It’s all right,” said Peter. “I know what we’re all thinking. But I’m sure, quite sure, we needn’t. I’ve a feeling we’ve got to the country where everything is allowed.” “Here goes, then!” said Eustace. And they all began to eat. What was the fruit like? Unfortunately no one can describe a taste. All I can say is that, compared with those fruits, the freshest grapefruit you’ve ever eaten was dull, and the juiciest orange was dry, and the most melting pear was hard and woody, and the sweetest wild strawberry was sour. And there were no seeds or stones, and no wasps. If you had once eaten that fruit, all the nicest things in this world would taste like medicines after it. But I can’t describe it. You can’t find out what it is like unless you can get to that country and taste it for yourself...When they had eaten enough, Eustace said to King Peter, “You haven’t yet told us how you got here...There was a frightful roar and something hit me with a bang, but it didn’t hurt. And I felt not so much scared as—well, excited. Oh—and this is one queer thing. I’d had a rather sore knee, from a hack at rugger. I noticed it had suddenly gone. And I felt very light. And then—here we were.” “It was much the same for us in the railway carriage,” said the Lord Digory, wiping the last traces of the fruit from his golden beard. “Only I think you and I, Polly, chiefly felt that we’d been unstiffened. You youngsters won’t understand. But we stopped feeling old.” “Youngsters, indeed!” said Jill. “I don’t believe you two really are much older than we are here.” “Well if we aren’t, we have been,” said the Lady Polly.'

While we might not like it, while it inevitably makes us sad, we believe it because it's the truth regardless. We must not let our sensibilities dictate our own version of the truth - that places us above God and claims we're more moral and loving, which is impossible. Sometimes the truth hurts. I don't believe God feels anyone deserves Hell either, it's more of a natural consequence of the active choice to reject His offer of salvation.

• *If God doesn't believe anyone deserves hell he doesn't have to send them there. Or even make it in the first place.

Yes I do have bits of Gnosticism in my belief system, but then I’m a perennialist I’d argue I have bits of every belief system in mine because my belief system is in every religion😀.

Oh I don’t discount Hell, the Resurrection or the Virgin Birth. It’s just I attributed very different meanings to those than people who see these things as literal places or occurrences., but they’re my interpretations.

I would have undoubtedly been condemned and probably executed as a heretic at many points in history. But heresy is a construction of man not God

I was speaking generally about how Christians shouldn't give in to worldy pressure. We don't bow to the will of other people, we bow to the will of God. These topics have been touched on already. You can click on OP posts: See all at the bottom right corner of this post and they'll be grouped together without messages in between.

I know how the forum works thanks, no need to be passive aggressive. But I can't see what "worldy pressure" has to do with Christians historically and in some cases currently discriminating against women and gay people.

As OMG12 said, its an allegory and a rather wonderful one which illustrates the old addage 'there's none so blind as those who will not see' - in a spiritual sense here. The Dwarfs are like atheists.

If someone made an insulting generalisation about Christians like that you'd complain.

I think CS Lewis was the one using Dwarfs as an analogy to non-believers rather than the OP. But I’m not really a fan of some portrayals of certain groups by Lewis.

And I think this is where this idea of a good omnipotent god falls down. He can set any rules he wants and structure the universe in any way he wants do why even give humans free will if it might lead to failure and hell. Because in the end, that’s no freedom at all

@Vincitveritas - don’t think I need a justification to check in on the thread? I’m interested - I don’t need a religion in my life but intrigued as to why others do.
Still don’t understand what CS Lewis has to do with real life.

But I’m not really a fan of some portrayals of certain groups by Lewis.

Nor am I. I can't read the Narnia books at all now, they've been thoroughly spoiled for me. His portayal of Islam is horrific.

And I think this is where this idea of a good omnipotent god falls down. He can set any rules he wants and structure the universe in any way he wants do why even give humans free will if it might lead to failure and hell. Because in the end, that’s no freedom at all.

Well, exactly. Giving someone free will and then punishing them for using it is - well, a bit gaslight-y. I do not understand why anyone would want to believe in a god like that.

But I'm not sure how we could not have free will. I can see how an animal could be said not to, because presumably they just act on instinct and can't comprehend the idea of a choice or certainly weigh up and analyse different complex options. And they can't do anything 'wrong' either. But how could a human not have free will? We'd be more like sophisticated computers or something.

Actually I get your point, it's about the punishment. Like putting a marshmallow in front of a two year old and punishing them for eating it.

Pondering all this a bit more and I'd like to share some thoughts if that's ok.

VincitVeritas and I have a really significant disagreement in how God may remedy sin in his relationship with each person individually in the life to come, but both of us have a deep conviction that we are sinners, that sin is a reality, and that sin causes a fundamental separation from God which requires a solution.

The objection is that the Christian message is offering a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, and using the threat of punishment to frighten and coerce people into accepting it, a bit like if God were an abusive spouse.

If you don't believe in God or anything beyond the physical reality we experience, that's one aspect of this conversation which is obviously pretty crucial. But putting that aside temporarily, how do you relate to the injustice in the world? You may not use the word 'sin', but what would you say to someone who has been trafficked into the sex trade? What is the cause of their suffering? What about all the workers who are treated little better than slaves making cheap goods for us, or victims of violent crime? I almost wonder if we're too privileged to really feel what it means to be at the sharp end of what Christians would call the sinfulness of humanity.

You may not use the word 'sin', but what would you say to someone who has been trafficked into the sex trade? What is the cause of their suffering? What about all the workers who are treated little better than slaves making cheap goods for us, or victims of violent crime? I almost wonder if we're too privileged to really feel what it means to be at the sharp end of what Christians would call the sinfulness of humanity.

It isn't loving sex between two consenting adults of whatever sex that is at the root of the sex trade though, is it? So the problem I have is with saying that having sex with someone you are not married to, whether same sex or not, is just as bad as having sex with someone who has been trafficked into slavery. That is just nonsense - there has to be more nuance than that. I refuse to believe that the loving relationships my DC are in, are sinful.

Sex trafficking is about crime, it is about harm, it is about evil, it is about control. Applying the label of 'sin' to it doesn't resolve anything. And this is why laws need to have a secular base, not a religious one. Of course there is some overlap, but the concept of sin is too nebulous to be helpful in the real world.

The same thing applies to sweatshops - that isn't about sin, it's about making sure we have laws that prevent that sort of thing and a culture that makes purchasing them unacceptable.
As for violent crime - that's just a matter of crime, not sin. When my late husband threatened to kill me, that wasn't a sin - it was a crime. So I called the police and they dealt with it.

We all know what happens if you draft laws and/or guidelines too broadly - we saw it during the Coronation, innocent people wanting to protest arrested because they might commit a crime. And that was under a law which had been drafted that way. The concept of sin does this too - it operates on a presumption of guilt. I will never accept that.

It isn't loving sex between two consenting adults of whatever sex that is at the root of the sex trade though, is it?

Definitely not. But what actually is at the root of it? As you rightly say, sex trafficking is about crime, it is about harm, it is about evil, it is about control. As far as I can see we're using different vocabulary to say the same thing.

So the problem I have is with saying that having sex with someone you are not married to, whether same sex or not, is just as bad as having sex with someone who has been trafficked into slavery.

I don't say that. I think that's a terrible thing to say tbh.

That is just nonsense - there has to be more nuance than that. I refuse to believe that the loving relationships my DC are in, are sinful.

Couldn't agree more.

The same thing applies to sweatshops - that isn't about sin, it's about making sure we have laws that prevent that sort of thing and a culture that makes purchasing them unacceptable.

Yes. A culture that doesn't perpetuate exploitation and greed. I think we're all guilty of turning a blind eye to that to some extent.

As for violent crime - that's just a matter of crime, not sin. When my late husband threatened to kill me, that wasn't a sin - it was a crime. So I called the police and they dealt with it.

I'm so sorry that happened to you. Awful. And it was certainly a crime. But we call something a crime if it's morally wrong to such an extent that we can't tolerate it as a society and have to take protective measures against it. Thank goodness we do - but violence still happens. Why? Because some people actually enjoy it or see it as a means to an end, to control another person or to get what they want at the expense of someone else's sense of safety, dignity and their basic bodily rights.

Applying the label of 'sin' to it doesn't resolve anything. And this is why laws need to have a secular base, not a religious one. Of course there is some overlap, but the concept of sin is too nebulous to be helpful in the real world.

I agree with that - I dont want to live in a Christian theocracy. I'm certainly not calling for, say, adultery to be treated as a crime. But the principles of justice aren't at odds with broadly Christian principles.

The concept of sin does this too - it operates on a presumption of guilt. I will never accept that.

Sorry, I meant to say - I don't know if I quite understand what you mean by this. By presumption of guilt do you mean the idea that nobody is perfect? I do think that but I don't feel I operate on a presumption of guilt in any way, except at times where I know I've been at fault.

What I mean is that I object to the idea that we are all sinners and that we need some form of redemption from an outside source or higher being. We don't have to be perfect and we don't need redemption. If we commit crimes or do evil, it's down to the laws of the world we live in to deal with that. If we do hurtful things to others then it is up to us to acknowledge that and make amends - to the people we have hurt, not to a higher being.

The idea of sin isn't helpful in managing any of the above. It instils the idea that no matter how hard we try to be good people, we are not able to be good. I call hardcore bullshit on that. Just as there is such a thing as 'good enough parenting' there is such a thing as 'a good enough human being'. That doesn't mean perfect and it shouldn't mean perfect, because perfectionism is destructive.

But the principles of justice aren't at odds with broadly Christian principles.

I agree with this. But they are also not at odds with broadly Jewish, Islamic, Hindu principles. The principles of justice are part of what makes us human. They are required for humanity to survive and build functioning societies, and in that sense you could say they are an evolutionary necessity. We can dress them up in the garments of the deities we invent, but we don't have to.

Ah, I get you now. Fair points, perfectionism can be destructive. I'm not sure if I'm explaining my spiritual approach very well really. For me, God is a help, not a hindrance to all the things you mentioned, and I also think people are able to be good with or without religious belief. I don't hold to the 'total depravity' Calvinist idea, there's a lot of good in most people IMO.

And yes to other faiths having principles of justice - I didn't mean to imply otherwise. I do think Christianity has a particular emphasis on justice for the 'underdog', but sadly you wouldn't always know it.

I agree.
If we put aside the rantings of a genocidal narcissistic deity the bible doesn't have any novel or useful information.
At best it is an observational document.

The message from jesus and his holy gang is be good to each other. Don't steal stuff don't hurt others.

No shit sherlock.

In the million or so years hominids have roamed the earth you think we haven't come to those conclusion already?