LOL, Catholic and Christian aren't synonymous in the way we understand the faiths today, just saying.

Okay, ignore the sex slave, and just consider the cleaning and cooking slaves. Do you think it's right that people who hold such slaves for $1 a day get into heaven the same way, that a person who dedicates all their wealth to the poor does? After all, according to your requirements, they both equally meet the requirements for heaven...

Also, you say that beating other random people is assault and that is not "doing onto others as you would like done onto yourself" but God does not prohibit beating others, nor does he prohibit torture. People with sadistic personalities like to be beaten and abused and they often also like to beat and abuse others. So they are doing onto others what they would like done onto themselves. This is specifically why I mentioned - a person with sadistic personality traits.

To be more specific. Let's assume this person is in the Roman Army, at war with another country. They conquer that country and now own the citizens (as was common practice in Ancient Rome). The conquerors are able to do whatever they want with these citizens now. These were the societal laws of Ancient Rome.

This hypothetical Christian with sadistic personality traits, living in Ancient Rome, now decides to torture and beat the citizens, because he gets pleasure out of it, and hopes that they would beat him as well (he gets pleasure out of this too). According to the requirements you have outlined: he is able to get into heaven, because A. His actions are not outside of the laws of the land, B. His actions are not outside of God's laws, and C. He is a firm believer.

Do you think that this is right?

So why are you contradicting yourself?

In one post you say
"Of course it counts. So does sin." where "it" refers to morals.

Now you are saying morals dont count. In which case you agree that mass murderers will go to heaven if they repent and believe on their death bed. And someone who had worked all their life to help people in need, will go to hell because they dont believe.

I am not contradicting myself. Good morals/deeds and sins aren't on a x:y scale where x morals/deeds overcome y sins. That is not to say that morals/deeds do not count, just that they are not a means to salvation.

Lol.
me :- Do morals count towards salvation?
you:- Yes, morals count, but not towards salvation.

What do they count towards then, your length of time in hell?


I notice you avoided the sticky question I put to you, so I am going to put you on the spot now. Please answer simply yes or no for both of them.

Do you agree that a mass murderer will get into heaven if he repents on his death bed and believes in jesus?
And that someone who devotes all his life to helping people in need will go to hell because he doesnt believe?

So, the Nazi's were following God by obeying the commands of Hitler. The United States, per scripture, were usurping God by going to war with Germany, as God himself had put that authority in place.

Just one example of many.

Maybe he just doesn't know what a contradiction is

Yes they do count towards salvation, but they are not sufficient for salvation.

The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil.
(Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 ESV)

I have answered every one of your questions in this thread. If I have not answered clearly, or you'd like clarification you're welcome to ask. Also I'm going to answer with more than a yes/no if it's appropriate. I hope you don't mind.

Yes I do.
For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
(Romans 10:13 ESV)
If a person were to live a sinless life the person would go to Heaven. Unfortunately everyone sins.
Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins.
(Ecclesiastes 7:20 ESV)

And if the person is a sinner, then any amount of good deeds will not overcome the price of sin.
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
(Romans 6:23 ESV)

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
(Ephesians 2:8-9 ESV)

Then Isaiah is so bold as to say,
“I have been found by those who did not seek me;
I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.”
But of Israel he says, “All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.”
(Romans 10:20-21 ESV)

whatsa conterdickshin?

Maybe this wording is better: Deeds will be counted upon God's judgment, but they are not a means to salvation.

Is that better? Sorry if i was unclear.

This is why i think atheists should repent and switch to believing in god when they are old and likely to die soon. I mean you're basically freerolling, and when you're old it's not like you have anything better to do.

sorry, youre not making sense.

The only way to get into heaven is to believe in jesus . You have stated this multiple times.

You say deeds, will be counted, counted towards what?( I am looking for a direct answer to this)

You cannot say, the only way to salvation is to believe in jesus, and then say Deeds will be counted towards salvation. It cannot be both logically, it can only be one or the other.

A guy who does mass murders, and then repents and believes on his death bed, you say he gets into heaven. How were his deeds counted ? and counted towards what?
A guy who does good will never get into heaven if he doesnt believe in jesus, how were his deeds counted? and counted towards what?

If the only way to get into heaven is to believe in jesus ( these are your words) then deeds dont count. Otherwise it would be
The only way to get into heaven is to believe in jesus and do good.

It would have been a good freeroll had it not been for this question

- which god/gods does one switch to believing in?

Likely to pick the wrong one due to sheer number of options.

Maybe an analogy will help. Bill gates is brought before a judge for the most unspeakable crimes imaginable. It is 100% shown that Bill committed these crimes. During the defense, Bill gives a laundry list of his philanthropy and life morals. The judge takes it into consideration, and they are considered and counted toward him, but the punishment for his crimes is not waved.

Wizard 50,

After the judge takes his philanthropy into consideration, the judge might sentence Bill Gates to 20 years instead of 30 years.

But with God, there's no "degrees of punishment". Heaven or hell. Since only Jesus is perfect, no one else deserves heaven no matter how good they are unless they believe in Jesus.

So yea, that analogy doesn't really help.

“Is there a time when we should intentionally disobey the laws of the land?” The answer to that question may be found in Acts 5:27-29, “Having brought the apostles, they made them appear before the Sanhedrin to be questioned by the high priest. 'We gave you strict orders not to teach in this Name,' he said. 'Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man's blood.' Peter and the other apostles replied: ‘We must obey God rather than men!'“ From this, it is clear that as long as the law of the land does not contradict the law of God, we are bound to obey the law of the land. As soon as the law of the land contradicts God's command, we are to disobey the law of the land and obey God's law. However, even in that instance, we are to accept the government’s authority over us. This is demonstrated by the fact that Peter and John did not protest being flogged, but instead rejoiced that they suffered for obeying God (Acts 5:40-42).

The most unspeakable crimes imaginable was to emphasize multiple crimes that carry the death penalty. Of course no analogy will be perfect in regards to divine judgment and justice.

"According to the requirements you have outlined: he is able to get into heaven, because A. His actions are not outside of the laws of the land, B. His actions are not outside of God's laws, and C. He is a firm believer."
No he cannot get into heaven from A nor B, rather, only C. Your attempt to live within in the law is vain. By law I mean mans law as well as God's Law, taking into consideration that man's law may not contradict God's Law for if it does it is unrighteous. So no man can always live within the law that why the only requirement is "C" and "C" alone.

Lets also clear something up about sadism, sadism is the pleasure of inflicting pain on others, masochism however, is the pleasure of recieving pain. Just because someone is sadistic doesn't mean they are a masochist. Also you gave an interesting example..."hypothetical Christian with sadistic personality traits, living in Ancient Rome, now decides to torture and beat the citizens", this has contradictory ideas. A Christian will not do such a thing, and if you can provide such an example than this person isn't a Christian to begin with. It would be like this: there is this hypothetical atheist that goes around praying to a God he believes in to heal people. It just doesn't make sense.

Also with your POW example..."The conquerors are able to do whatever they want with these citizens now. These were the societal laws of Ancient Rome." Sure, they may do whatever they like as long as societal laws don't contradict any of God's Law. So if it is not frowned upon by God to beat your prisoners, than have at 'er. If it is against God's Law to beat your prisoners than you shouldn't do it. I'm not familiar with Biblical teachings regarding POWs and slaves captured during war times, I'm sorry.

Something I want to reiterate is this: only way to make it into heave is to be a Christian: to put your faith in Christ and what He did for you. This implies that this Christian will not go out abusing God's Law for self gratification. We are to be living sacrifices to the Lord. That means if it pains you not to do something because it is pleasing to the Lord than don't do it. We should always do what is pleasing to the Lord, not because it gains us anything in terms of salvation but because we love God and want to do what is right.

Any more questions you have or would like to understand better I would be happy to answer them. Also I would like to remind you what you asked in your original post. "My question is. If I was to die tomorrow - judging by the words written in the Bible or the Quran - would I be put in hell? or heaven? and why?" According to the Bible, hell. Your original questions is answered because what you asked, you told me to base my answer according to the Bible and that is what I did. But again, any other questions you want to hash out I'm down to discuss things further, however you must come to the understanding of my beliefs, only way into heaven is through faith and faith alone, no good work can ever merit heaven. As long as you understand that this is what I believe we can continue as long as you want but if you keep making comments such as: "According to the requirements you have outlined: he is able to get into heaven, because A. His actions are not outside of the laws of the land, B. His actions are not outside of God's laws" than it is pointless to continue. I love this topic but when you keep writing that is what I am saying when in fact I am not it gets me a little frustrated because I need to keep repeating: salvation is through faith and faith and faith rather than any good works at all. Keep the questions coming as long as you understand this point.

You're talking out of both sides of your mouth, but I run into this all the time with people trying to justify scripture.

So it's ok to violate the commands of authority, put in place by God, so long at that authority put in place by God is not actually doing God's work? Why not just skip a step and have God only put in leaders who will follow him?

"The Bible is very clear on the subject."
"But what about this apparent contradiction??"
"The Bible means something else in that instance."

Sigh.

Let's broaden out this analogy so that it addresses the issue. Two people commit the same crime. In one trial, Bill Gates is punished with the maximun penalty--death, even though he points to the fact that he has given billions of dollars to charity, created thousands of jobs, and devoted years of his life to philanthropy. In the other trial, Kim Jong-il is let go because he has a patron who agrees to pay a fine to make up for the crime, even though Kim Jong-il has led a life that greatly increased the suffering of the world.

There are two problems here:

1) If it really is just to punish Bill Gates here, then it seems unjust to let Kim Jong-il go.
2) If you are going to let some people go, it seems like a better basis on which to do so would be how moral their lives have been rather than on the fact that they have powerful friends.

In your analogy, why is Bill Gates' penalty different than KJ? (Death vs fine)

Why should someone go to Heaven just because they "do good works". Because that's hard. Think theists believe we were called to do more than that.

Billionaire gives up 99.50% of wealth. Call me not impressed.

Punishment is the same for both in my story (death), it is just that if you pay a fine then you can avoid this punishment. Unfortunately, this fine is too expensive for even Bill Gates to pay, only Kim Jong-il's patron is wealthy enough to pay it.

I think to make this analogy better is to have someone innocent be put to death in Kim Jong-il's place. This way death is the result of both crimes, BG's and KJ's cases.

That is what I was getting at. Also the person to take KJI's place would be the most righteous person to ever exist.