So what you are saying is that because there is an interpretation on morality, morality is subjectional. Ill address the second part of your answer. What is considered fighting for good or evil? Let's take the wars in the Middle East. Both sides are fighting because they think they are fighting for good. But which side is right? Which is wrong? Heres another example: the crusades. The crusaders thought they were fighting in the name of god, and that they were fighting for god. The muslims believed the same thing. Who is right?
What about the draft? Anyone who is drafted into war has no choice. And how can you determine what are evil intentions or not? Some people may think all Germans in WWII were evil. However, it comes down to, they weren't all evil. Most Germans in the 1930's and 40's followed Hitler because he promised to stabilize their economy and make Germany strong again. While you may think what they ended up doing was wrong, they were really just trying to help their country. Is that evil? Someone who goes to war for the sake of killing others may seem evil, or they may be trying to help their country by doing so. I don't think anyone can judge what reasons and morals someone has for killing in a war. EDIT: Damn lol.. didn't see that P3P5I posted again lol... oh well...
Well, both sides believe they are fighting for good. So everyone wins... But let's take into account the Concentration Camps, the ****'s knew they were doing evil... They are burning for that. Once again the Crusade is nothing but good, both sides fight for religion and for Faith... The Bible states that you need to have Faith in god... Therefore both sides are right. yes, killing is wrong, but if you kill for faith, and to preserve faith then you are no sinning. The Middle East war... If you are suffering to the Desert Storm, then you will realize that Saddam Hussein was a madman just like his military, they were killing the innocent.
Did the ****'s really know they were committing acts of evil? The ****'s thought what they were doing was for a greater good, for the supremacy of the Aryans. In their eyes, what they are doing is good. President Truman saw bombing Japan as a good thing, because it saved millions of American lives and ended the war quicker than an invasion of Japan. The Japanese saw that as destroying them, and as a great evil. I guess President Truman is burning as well. And how were the crusades good? Yes if you count the rewards that inadvertently came out of them, like trade routes, new products, banking systems, etc... then yea they were good. But how was the fighting at all good? The pointless killing of thousands in the name of God? Why does God let us kill so many of his children in his name?
I never said the Holy Crusades were good, I know that even the Popes were corrupt back then, I am not thinking about the prophet, I am thinking about the Faith that these men must have to die for their religion, such faith must certainly have a reward for God must certainly see the extent of the faith of some men. The case with Truman was decision, he is probably burning, I do not know what God would think of that as. Was it evil since he killed innocent or Good since he saved American lives... We will all find out once we ourselves die. I do not condone killing, I said that those men would most likely go to heaven, I believe that God accepts almost everyone, it would not be just if a man kills another man for self defense or because he is defending his home, and then go to hell. No Mortal on earth can deal with losing their ground, no man can deal with their Faith being forcefully replaced by another.
Again, religion is not the source of murder and maiming in this world in the general sense. It's selfishness, which as I'm sure most would agree is anit-religious. So, why do we blame religion? Because of selfish people that are figureheads in a particular religion. For instance the Spanish Inquisition wasn't about religion at all. It was all about the Catholic Church's grip on the European world. The Catholic Church as a governmental system was one of the worst in history. But again, their reign of terror wasn't about what they believed it was to pay the mortgage so to speak. The Catholic Church was a greedy empire bent on getting money, gaining new lands, and controlling the face of politics to secure it's reign. That isn't religious at all. In fact it sounds a lot like a monopoly. So, why the Spanish Inquisition? More converts equals a newer source of income and power over others. Also, one like-minded people is a lot easier to rule. Almost every evil act where religion is blamed is probably do to a lack of religious morals. The best way to earn a living back during the Middle Ages was to become part of the priesthood or catholic clergy. People weren't becoming celebid for religious purposes, it was for the money. Why do you think Indulgences were implemented? Selfishness, not religion.
God forgives anyone, no matter what they have done. Only suicide is not welcome in Heaven because you never asked for God's forgiveness before death. As long as you ask, you will always be forgiven. And that is why Jesus was sent to earth, to preach that sin is not good. but when Jesus by his own free will accepted death on the Cross, He became sin and after that all sin is forgiven in God's eyes.
That isn't a Biblically defensible position. No where does it say Salvation is dependant on forgiveness. It's dependant on faith. That idea is simply a supersition that arose in fear of dying with a guilty conscience. Let's say I fornicate then die minutes later in a car-wreck. Do I burn? No, because salvation isn't dependant on our actions or deeds. Faith alone saves.
No it won't hurt, forgiveness restores the relationship. I'd like to leave this earth on a good note, but I know I'm saved and I expect the final Glorification through Christ.
Wait wha- ? The only sin that guarantees you not getting into Heaven is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.
Blasphemy?! Amoeba, take a step back and look at what you are saying. Look at the bizarre nature of the "Getting Into Heaven" system that has been set up. Hopefully, Christianity is to blame for the current rules, because if God made this up he's retarded. Blasphemy?! Blasphemy is the only sin that kills your chances of getting into heaven? Saying something like "God damn" or Jesus F@#$ing Christ" when you stub your toe or something is the ultimate sin that ensures a endless barbeque in hell. Even if you take blasphemy to the extreme, where you are swearing directly at god after someone you love is tragically killed: "F@$k you, God! I hate you. Why did you take them from me, you heartless bastard!" This just can't be the worst of the sins in a rational reality. In your version of "heaven" you will be side by side with murders, rapists, and thieves that have all repented and accepted Jesus, but anyone who ever committed Blasphemy(which I'm guessing is a majority of members of FH and most of the general population) will be slow roasting in the punishment pit.
No most likely people will eventualy grow out of religion and then believe in something new. People will always have some belief in something greater than themselves but to say it will always be some god is not possible look at all the religions that have died out over the years. Yes new ones are created every so often but there will be a time where none of our religions today will be around. Religion will probably evolve into something different as we learn more about the universe. Some type of common knowledge religion or belief.
I'm going to say that religion will last for a very long time, maybe even throughout the entirety of the human race. I recently read an article, which really is an eye-opener. It regards the part of the brain which makes us beleive in a higher authority - apparently, it's part of evolution and helps us to survive. Have a read, It's a good'n: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/belief-and-the-brains-god-spot-1641022.html
Ladies and gentlemen, this is a perfect example of not knowing what you're talking about. Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is praying for somebody, and when results come to pass, giving yourself the credit. Let's say for example's purposes you "heal" someone of cancer, with the Holy Spirit. Now you do this and joy joy but you give yourself the credit for healing.
Semantics Well, I did misunderstand what Blasphemy you were referring to, as it has more than one meaning, but my argument still stands. Praying for someone and then giving yourself credit when they are healed, while it seems like a pretty crazy thing to do, hardly seems like the worst possible act you could commit as a mortal on god's green earth. So my exact comparisons also stand. Do murderers, rapists and thieves, who have since reformed themselves and accepted Jesus find eternal heaven while liars with mild egomania get the trap door?
The problem with blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is the often misconception. The thing the Holy Spirit does are good works on earth. Now all you could blasphemy the Holy Spirit for are saying the good works it does are your's. Blasphemy of Jesus or God is different entirely - and doesn't warrant eternal damnation.
Heaviest Let's try and avoid the semantics of the word. By any definition of Blasphemy, how can this be worse than some of the more severe human behavior we've witnessed on earth? I've mentioned these in my two previous posts and will not bring them up again. Does it make sense to you that this would be the heaviest of all sins?
Let's say you killed the president and a hobo. Now the president has been good to you - lowered taxes, made the economy better, and living in America better. Then the hobo, who begs for cash, mugs people, etc. While they're both a dishonorable act, which is obviously worse? Killing the president. Or look at it this way. You're taking credit for a supernatural act. We live in the natural, so how could we ourselves do something supernatural anyways? Since all men are sinners, all men will commit crimes against each other. But why commit a crime against something that has never done wrong - only right?
If a surgeon prays before surgery that his patient survives, and then the patient does survive, should the surgeon not take credit because the Holy Spirit saved the patient? You have no proof the person survived from a supernatural act, just that you prayed they would. I guess taking credit for something that might not have actually happened, and you certainly didn't do is bad, but I don't see how that is even remotely in comparison to the evils others can commit like murder, rape, theft... etc...