The Infant Damnation Discourse is insane. Imagine being so committed to defending your theology you're willing to say shit this unhinged. And the craziest part is that this isn't even an outdated position. There's still people defending it today.
>>16877866If the Christian God winds up being real and does actually eternally torment infants that die in their mother's womb who never even got a chance to learn anything about any religion whatsoever, I wouldn't want to stick around in Heaven with that monster. Definitely the most evil shit you could possibly imagine.
>>16877866Ingenious way to keep the masses in your cult.Next step, don’t let them read the Bible or else they might catch on to your bullshit.
I think the Dante's Inferno video game where you run around Hell fighting unbaptized babies should have settled the question. It's just too ridiculous of a concept to even entertain.
>>16877909If Jesus was right about no one getting to the Father (and by extension Heaven) without him, then it stands to reason that infants who die would be damned. Bible never says otherwise.
>>16877866Religion transformed from a form of faith to a political method for control starting around the 300's or so with the Roman adoption of Christianity. God exist, but you'd be hard pressed to say a majority of his message hasn't been perverted by the evil, sinful minds of humanity.
>>16877912He also says "The kingdom of Heaven belongs to ones such as these" (meaning kids go to Heaven) and "If I be lifted up I will draw all people to myself" (my crucifixion will save everyone). Neither of those verses are consistent with this teaching.
>>16877917>>16877866You can thank the retard St. Hippo (Born and raised in the Roman empire FYI) for this, he claimed in his 'Letter to Jerome', " Likewise, whosoever says that those children who depart out of this life without partaking of that sacrament shall be made alive in Christ, certainly contradicts the apostolic declaration, and condemns the universal Church, in which it is the practice to lose no time and run in haste to administer baptism to infant children, because it is believed, as an indubitable truth, that otherwise they cannot be made alive in Christ. ...Infants are born under the guilt of this offense is believed by the whole Church.",TLDR, 'If we cant baptize you b4 you're dead, you are damned nigga LMAO'.
>>16877937Matthew 25:41>Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.Kind of undercuts the idea of universal salvation, no?
>>16877912>Bible never says otherwise.No elaboration doesn't mean that unborn/unbaptized infants will be damned, this is simply a assumption by the church.
>>16877943Love reminding Catholics they made this cunt a saint every time they get up on their "One true church" high horses. Although he did have some pretty based takes on civil disobedience (sometimes it's moral to go against the established government).
>>16877949Never said the Bible didn't contradict itself.
>>16877937>Leave the little children alone, and don't try to keep them from coming to meThere's a reason Jesus was also caught with a boy youth that ran away naked>“A youth, wearing nothing but a linen garment, was following Jesus. When they seized him, he fled naked, leaving his garment behind” (Mark 14:51–52).Jesus was obviously a pedophile.
>>16877960This has nothing to do with the discussion you retard, lol.
>>16877943>>16877953He's my confirmation saint. He was one of the smartest men of the entire ancient world and you're spending your life jerking off to hentai.
>>16877980"No really. The unhinged psycho who thought burning babies alive was okay was really smart. That makes it okay."
>>16877983>burning babies aliveOne, if you're in hell you aren't alive.Two, his concept of "limbo" isn't the modern Amerimutt concept of "burning" hell.>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limbo#Latin_Fathers>In countering Pelagius, who denied original sin, Saint Augustine of Hippo was led to state that because of original sin, "such infants as quit the body without being baptized will be involved in the mildest condemnation of all. That person, therefore, greatly deceives both himself and others, who teaches that they will not be involved in condemnation; whereas the apostle says: 'Judgment from one offence to condemnation' (Romans 5:16), and again a little after: 'By the offence of one upon all persons to condemnation'."[14][15]Dumbass redditor.
>>16877989Limbo was Augustine backpedaling and is still a pretty shitty thing to do to grieving parents.
>>16878009>backpedalingHis point about limbo (412) was written three years before his letter to Jerome you misinterpreted (415).>a pretty shitty thing to do to grieving parents.I'm sorry philosophers aren't intellectually dishonest with themselves to appease the sensibilities of redditors sixteen centuries after the fact. The churches don't even teach limbo anymore, but that's not relevant to you being caught wrong about Augustine.
It's pretty fucking crazy manI prefer folk Christianity to this shit
>>16878039So making up a holding place for unbaptized babies to extort grieving parents isn't intellectually dishonest but just saying "Babies go to Heaven" is?
>>16877866>BABIES MUST BE BURNED UNTIL THEY ARE SCREAMING AND TORTURED ANALLY BY DEMONS IF THEY DONT GET TOUCHED BY A PREISTI don’t want Christian’s to ever pretend to care about child welfare ever again.,
>>16878056What's the "extortion"? He wasn't asking for money from these hypothetical parents you're imagining.>>16878139>PREIST>Christian’s>again.,good morning saar
>>16877989>>16878039>>16877980>unironically defending sending unborn babies to hellYou will never convince me that the Christian god isn't objectively a god of evil.
>>16878199Why would he? Forgiveness and mercy are His biggest ideals. If a child died at birth, unable to be baptised it wouldn't make sense why they would go to Hell just because they couldn't get the sacrement and being sinless (unless the denomination believes in original sin, which is more damaging and a flawed interpretation to the faith in my personal opinion.)
>>16877866More than insane, it's Satanic. It's an obvious example of Lucifer infiltrating the church and placing his servants inside it to seduce and mislead Christians.
>>16878234Catholicism is a counterfeit devised by satan, and it is thoroughly unbiblical from start to finish. It's only designed to have a veneer to which someone who wants to hide from the truth could cling to in order to claim it's Christianity. In every point of substance, it is devilish. See how they flagrantly worship idols, denying the grace that brings salvation in place of their own works (just like every other works-based religion) and contradict the teachings of the Lord as if they were nothing. Instead, they elevate, worship and pray to men from their own false cult instead. It has been like this since the moment Constantine brought it onto the stage. And often, Catholicism has been the very staging ground for persecution of the Bible-believing church throughout history as well. They would force people who didn't believe in their heretical teachings (such as worshipping literal crackers as if they were equal to God) to be tortured and burned alive.
>>16877884This statement has always been so fucking stupid.>Well, even if God IS real, the evil stuff he allows to happen…I mean, I wouldn’t even wanna be with the guy!Yeah, okay bro, get thrown into the hellfire and brimstone. For all eternity.>Inb4 You’re a coward and I have stronger moral fortitudeIf you were ACTUALLY presented with eternal paradise or eternal pain and suffering, you’re going with the paradise man. I don’t care how strong you think you are, maybe 10 minutes of the worst anguish you can’t even fathom would set you right in line. It’s why this shit worked on laymen and clergy alike for thousands of years.
>>16878274>correctly acknowledges that the Catholic Church is in part infiltrated by Satan>proceeds to promote the satanic lie of blind obedience to God over trying to be a good personNice try Lucifer, you're the best at playing both sides and recruiting from all camps. Now get thee behind me
>>16878274What denomination are you?
>>16878329The original church, which existed before heretics invented the unbiblical concept of infant baptism and tried to pass off the counterfeit they invented as the real thing.
>>16878329he's church of serpent
>>16877866infants are a corner case the inventors of the original fairy tale did not think of at first.
>>16877912the bible doesn't even describe Hell. not "Hell" as modern christians understand it, anyway
>>16878284So you’re saying you’re cool with worshipping a God that burns children forever?
>>16878417>where the worm dieth not and the fire is not quenchedImplies eternal conscious torment by burning
>>16877980Negros like you only convince me that dumb Christians are just as bad as Child raping mudslimes. Make up your fucking minds, is abortion evil because you are killing an unborn human, making it murder: or is it simply because 'libtard support it so it bad, ok?'. Stupid motherfucker.
>>16878218Eternally torturing anyone for eternity regardless of what they did is the mist evil shit possible. Torturing unborn babies isn’t that big of a stretch if you believe God tortures everyone who died before Christ was born anyway
>>16878172Why do you laugh at babies being tortured in hell?
>>16878622Because theobros are closet sociopaths. Just be glad he wasn't a Calvinist. I saw one on Twitter who kept posting realistic CGI burning babies and bragging about God torturing them.
>>16878705Calvinists ironically have the most accurate conception of salvation with regard to determinism. Ephesians 2:8-9> 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.
>>16877866>By their carnal conception and birthGee I wonder if teaching this to people will result in massive sexual and emotional dysfunction :^)
>>16878199It is. You see, Yahweh is actually Set the Egyptian chaos deity.
>>16878705Ngl that's kinda based.
>>16877866I believe this is evidence against infant damnation.1 John 2:12 ESV[12] I am writing to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven for his name’s sake.>>16877912That verse (below) is a point about striking out any other possible deities or religions. Jesus, through His own merits, can still save individuals who may not have been formally introduced to Christianity.John 14:6 ESV[6] Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
>>16878800>little childrenNot literal, it's taking about his followers you dishonest fuck.
Why is /his/ so reddit lately?Election tourists?I can smell the onions milk itt
>>16878877that's the smell of roasting babies
>>16877866>jesus can't save you without magic water being poured/dipped/sprinkled on you firstNice religion you got there
>>16878284>This statement has always been so fucking stupid>If you were ACTUALLY presented with eternal paradise or eternal pain and suffering, you’re going with the paradise manIt's a dramatic way to put it but there's something to it. Christians think we're already presented with that choice. Except pascal's wager doesn't really make sense here, you need to also really love God and believe in him in order to get the eternal paradise. Just thinking burning alive forever sounds really scary isn't enough. Is it possible for you to love a being that burns infants for eternity? That's like an infinitely worse version of Moloch lol. And do you honestly get the sense things are that unjust that the ultimate reality is going to be something as horrific as that? A God who burns children alive forever would be evil so I'm not worried about whether he exists.
God doesnt care about unborn babiesIn the bible its just punished with a fine, unlike killing a born man on purpose or not
>>16878783Imagine how much worse it was when infant mortality rates were much higher. I'm sure countless Christian women in days of yore were left with permanent guilt over the idea of their stillborn children burning forever. When people talk about how positive Christianity is for people, they conveniently forget that the message of "hope and love" is really only half of the equation.
>>16877912It can be also interpreted that Jesus can send those babies to heaven with whatever power he has if he wants
>>16877866>Infant Damnationis bullshit pushed by those who wish to see God's people extinguished from the earth
>>16879525Who are gods prople
>>16877866>mfw it's realnice religion lmao
>>16878284You’d get used to it
>>16878284>you'd break under torture, gotcha!Who could fathom.
>>16878705>I saw one on TwitterI bet you did, zoom zoom.>>16878783Christians aren't the ones cutting off their dicks for their woman transformation fetish.
>>16877866It's unfortunate that the catholic church and just people in general say this, it's because they are evil mostly, and they subscribe to these false doctrines.Anyone under the age of accountability, say from 13-15 will go to heaven if they die. Anyone over that, like a 16 year old (generally speaking) is at adult age and will go to hell. Because, mind you, God holds people accountable for their sins (even if they didn't know)For"It is not the will of your Father in heaven that any I'llof these little ones should perish." Matthew 18:14 (perish is the technical term in christianity for "go to hell")
>>16877943>st. Hippothat's like calling st. cyril of Alexandria "st. Alexandria".
>>16878958You misread. The fine is for if the child is unharmed. In the next verse, it says if the child is harmed, then the penalty is a life for a life."If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe."Exodus 21:22-25
>>16879925woman with child == pregnant.her fruit depart from her == miscarriage.
>>16879932>her fruit depart from her == miscarriage.I know. The men were striving with the intent of causing a miscarriage. If they failed and the child was unharmed, then they still have to pay a fine.But in the next verse it says, if the child was harmed in any way, the perpetrators must be harmed equally, up to and including a death penalty. The only reason people don't get this is because they misquote the passage and leave out verse 23-25.
>>16879938they're referring to the woman, else it wouldn't have to specify another man (there's no fine for a man who causes a miscarriage to his own wife)
>>16879942It does say they must pay a life for a life if one kills the child intentionally. People have based laws from this principle as well. In the US, you are charged with a separate homicide if you cause the death of an unborn child, for example.
>>16879950the text says nothing about intentionally, and I assume those laws don't make a difference depending on it's her husband or another man hitting the woman like the bible clearly does
>>16879958>the text says nothing about intentionallyIt says "so that her fruit depart from her." That's talking about the intent. There are also separate passages in the Old Testament dealing with what happens when someone commits manslaughter, and also ones dealing with adults who cause harm to each other. The focus here is when someone tries to cause a miscarriage. If the child is unharmed, then they settle for a fine. Otherwise, we are reminded that the same familiar penalty of "eye for an eye" still applies.People leave out verses 23-25 in order to create confusion about what the Bible actually teaches about this. The case of a husband who harms his own wife would fall under a different category to be dealt with as well (the usual concept of an eye for an eye), but if he actually causes her child to die in this way then the punishment applies to him as well. The fine mentioned here would be added to the other punishments for harming a person's wife, so a husband wouldn't get away with doing it because the fine is just added on top of the other penalties. Yet the punishment gets worse if the child is actually harmed too.
>>16879977it really just means that the birth is a result of the barrage, not that it's the result of it. For example the NIV and ISV use"and" in its place.And the text clearly talks about damage done to the women by the man, if it was a general ban on abortion it would include other means like potions or physical exercise it's the same book that allows you to kill slaves if they just take their time dying so it makes sense a fetish didn't have too much value
>>16880007>For example the NIV and ISV use"and" in its place.Those are poor translations.>if it was a general ban on abortion it would include other means like potions or physical exerciseIn Deuteronomy 19:5, it says:"As when a man goeth into the wood with his neighbour to hew wood, and his hand fetcheth a stroke with the axe to cut down the tree, and the head slippeth from the helve, and lighteth upon his neighbour, that he die; he shall flee unto one of those cities, and live:Lest the avenger of the blood pursue the slayer, while his heart is hot, and overtake him, because the way is long, and slay him; whereas he was not worthy of death, inasmuch as he hated him not in time past."(Deuteronomy 19:5-6)Is this only talking about the very specific situation where a loose axe head causes someone to accidentally die, or is that just an example of the general case of manslaughter?
>>16879632Yes that's why transgenderism occurs most commonly in previously culturally puritan areas. Wait a minute.... It's almost as if not letting people explore healthy sexuality results in bizarre fetishes and possibly even transgenderism.
>>16880015>Those are poor translations.according to who? and your understanding of english is strange if you think "so" has to mean intent>Is this only talking about the very specific situation where a loose axe head causes someone to accidentally die, or is that just an example of the general case of manslaughter?well the other text starts from the premise it's not her husband doing it and then it never bothers to clarify the second half is a general rule or who the mischief is for
>>16878284>presented with eternal paradise or eternal pain and suffering,except christian heaven is just a big palace where you sit around a throne and pray to god all day, isn't it?It's not like valhalla or something where it's just generally a cool place that conceivably anyone from any religious or cultural background would be fine with if they wound up there.And if that's the case, then going to heaven for someone who finds god objectionable would still be like its own version of hell.
>>16880075>then going to heaven for someone who finds god objectionable would still be like its own version of hell.Still, literal Hell is described as a place where the worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched which implies eternal conscious torment. Not exactly "its own version of Hell" if you're not burning forever.
>>16877866No one is damned. Learn your own theology. Everyone is eventually saved.
>>16880215Matthew 25:41>“Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.Sort of undercuts the idea of universal salvation, no?
>>16879537>Who are God's peopleThe fact that this is not readily known by all is the primary reason for all the world's problems.
>>16880224Is "The God of this world" supposed to be Satan because a fallen angel being able to thwart the plans of a tri omni God seems pretty far fetched.
2 Samuel 12;23> “But now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me.”King David here talking about the death of his newborn baby states that he will meet the baby again when he dies, indicating the baby will be in Heaven.All die because Adam sinned, and all are punished in Hell because of their own sin. Those that have no sin of their own are still punished with death because of Adam’s sin, but how can they go to Hell for punishment of their own sins if they have never sinned? There is a point at while all people are tempted, and choose to sin. After that they are damned without asking for Jesus’ forgiveness. Before that point they are guilty only of being Adam’s descendants, and they receive death, and then eternal life. Remember, Genesis 18, when God agrees to separate Lot and his family from the sinful people of Sodom and Gommoragh before judging them; He says to Abraham “Will not the judge of all the earth do right?”
>>16880454The spirit made holy by the son of God is of the Father.
>>16880541So God's actively sabotaging Himself? There's also no Free Will if God's blinding their minds.
>>16880539>he will meet the baby again when he dies, indicating the baby will be in Heaven.why would David be in heaven?
>>16880220God is the eternal fire that feels like deep hot pain to sinners and warm love to the good. Whether of not you're damned is an active continous choice you make. Once there is no more sin to burn off, it stops being torment.
>>16877917>God exist,And you yourself are thus a victim still. Your halfway there buddy.
>>16881039I like gods who dont claim to have created light before the sun
>>16880032>explore healthy sexualitylolhttps://www.psypost.org/atheists-are-perceived-as-more-prone-to-infidelity-according-to-new-research/
>>16878867>little children>Not literal, it's taking about his followers you dishonest fuck.Look at the context of the entire segment. He splits up his comments towards little children, children, young men, fathers. There are different categories of people.1 John 2:12-14 ESV[12] I am writing to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven for his name’s sake. [13] I am writing to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I am writing to you, young men, because you have overcome the evil one. I write to you, children, because you know the Father. [14] I write to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one.
>>16878284>evil stuff he allows to happenTHIS ISNT EVEN A CASE OF "HE ALLOWS IT TO HAPPEN" ITS A CASE OF THINGS HE ACTIVELY DOES
>“Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you that in Heaven their angels do always behold the face of My Father who is in Heaven."
>>16877866Seems fairly logical to me, assuming Christianity is true. You can't just commit a crime and then claim "I didn't know it was wrong!" to get out of jail.>>16877884You would change your mind after about 5 seconds in hell and then it would be too late
>>16877917>Religion transformed from a form of faith to a political method for control starting around the 300's or so with the Roman adoption of ChristianityImagine being THIS historically illiterate lmfao. The trend is precisely backwards. The first time religion got separated from the state and politics was in enlightenment Europe. As you go further back in history the state and religion were the same thing.
>>16882354>You can't just commit a crime and then claim "I didn't know it was wrong!" to get out of jail.you can if you are a baby
>>16881658>PERCEIVEDAll you shits are illiterate.
>>16882354>You would change your mind after about 5 seconds in hell and then it would be too lateYeah and if the one true God turned out to be Allah or some obscure deity you've never heard of and threatened you with a torture pit you'd probably eventually cave too. Although if this God is stupid enough to make its victims immortal it shouldn't be too hard to overthrow.
>>16882849You could lock the guy in a fucking treehouse until he agrees to establish an alternative governing system, because if heaven is a perfect place, nice things like treehouses just don't break. Bring him cookies, milk, and keep him company tho, it would be cruel to ditch the g-man in there.
>>16882411lmao is this really the power of teenage atheist intellect.
>>16877866>>16877884>it doesnt appeal to meso what? they dont follow it because its appealing they follow it because they literally believe it is as true as the sky is up.
>>16883246Their beliefs contradict itself
>>16883246You have no evidence or proof for the existence of God and therefore your belief rests on it being appealing to you.
>>16883240Dilate.
>>16877866Why don't you guys just copy the islamic tradition and say that any child who dies before puberty goes straight to heaven?
>>16883446>say that any child who dies before puberty goes straight to heaven?that was the original position in Christinaity until these idolater heretics changed it to promote ''baptism'' >come to our churches and pay for babtism of your children or they will burn in hell lol!!!
>>16883446Muslims kill their kids.
>>16883246"It's psychotically detached from any form of empathy and isn't logically coherent" isn't the same as "I just don't like it."
It is insane, especially when you consider that having original sin doesn't necessarily make you guilty.John 9:39-41>39 Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.”>40 Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, “What? Are we blind too?”>41 Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.So just because you have sin doesn't necessarily mean you are guilty of sin. You have to be capable of realizing your sin to be guilty, and clearly infants are incapable of realizing their sin.It's like people don't even understand what their own holy book says.
I was taught this growing up until we changed churches. My new preacher told me that was the most insane view he’s heard.I still think about the four years of existential dread as a child, worried about my stillborn uncle and cousin.
>>16882354Babies can’t intentionally commit crime or speak on their own behalf.Your analogies need work.
>>16877866>infant damnation is insane because I don't like itReally? You can make a billion arguments against christian theology and you choose to pick on a subject that's actually logically consistent?
>>16884585>Logically consistentYou can't be a merciful and loving God while yeeting babies into a lake of fire. Infant damnation makes a mockery of the entire Gospel.
>Put a loaded gun in a baby crib>The baby shoots himselfSorry but he did it of his own free will.
>>16883295They do not see proof or evidence as a necessary prerequisite for what is true.They believe it because they believe it is true, that is why it does not matter how unappealing it is.no one finds infants being punished appealing.Stop being a child.also>You>youryou are deranged.
>>16878414id like to buy this narrative but "the lake of fire" seems to pretty clearly conflict with it
That doesn't prove God doesn't exist, it just means he's a dick.
>>16883668Firstly, why did you put quotes around your entire post? Go back.Secondly, nothing you said is relevant. What I said stands.They do not believe it because they like it, they believe it because they think it is true.>its heckin psychoticso what? They dont judge their beliefs on if they are socially permissible in a prototypical sense.They judge their beliefs on if they find them to be true.>its logically inconsistentsee above.I am just telling you how they are, you are sperging out because you probably have autism and can not grasp the fact human behavior does not operate in a monolithic uniform fashion and certain subsets or groups can behave in ways which are inherently illogical or psychopathic.>that's le badYou live under ZOG, idiot. Get used to life being struggle.
>>16885078based God making redditors seethe
>>16877866Why would they go to heaven if they aren’t children of the elect?
>>16877912This. The prospect of babies being thrown into the lake of fire is embarrassing so many Christians wiggle exceptions for babies and people who haven't heard of Jesus but then you just run into more weird implications like infant death being the best thing that could happen to your child or the fact that spreading the gospel results in more people going to hell.
>>16886639There are no "exceptions" for people who haven't heard of Jesus (or the Savior in Old Testament times), because if they actually sought God they would have found Him. If a person never even tried to seek God, then they too will die in their sins.>infant death being the best thing that could happen to your childAccording to my understanding, being saved is better.>or the fact that spreading the gospel results in more people going to hell.Spreading the Gospel can only result in fewer people going to hell than would otherwise be the case.There really is no problem with any of the things you bring up. The fact that unborn and infants don't go to hell is also mentioned in the Bible.
>>16877866>>16877884Christian here, this is completely insane and I've never heard any other Christian say this shit before. Whoever said the OP is literally insane. So it must be a Catholic belief.
>>16886790You mean if a 12th-century Mayan had really sought God then God would have responded and sent Christopher Columbus on his journey across the Atlantic a few centuries earlier? Or maybe the guy would have been inspired to build a raft and sail East?Also, if infants don't go to hell then they dodge a bullet by dying before they're old enough to risk going to the lava pit.
>>16887157>You mean if a 12th-century Mayan had really sought God then God would have respondedI am certain of it. As it says in Psalm 145:18, "The LORD is nigh unto all them that call upon him, to all that call upon him in truth.">Also, if infants don't go to hell then they dodge a bullet by dying before they're old enough to risk going to the lava pit.The Lord wouldn't place anyone who would be a believer at risk. He will surely save them, though the way in which it all happens is beyond our knowledge.The only people who reject the Lord and go to hell are those who would never do so, even when given every possible chance to be saved. God is infinitely just after all. So even though it's a very real possibility that any of us could be justly sent to hell for our sins, God has provided salvation for all of those who would believe in Christ. And as the Creator, He has ways to reach those who are of the truth. As the Lord said in John 18:37, "Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice."
>>16886790The Bible says there's exceptions though.See "Judged by the light given them" and "In their ignorance God winked". This is a very common teaching in a lot of denominations.
>>16887415I'm aware of the fact that some people spread this teaching, but I think it's misguided to some extent.>See "Judged by the light given them"This seems to be an oblique reference to Romans chapter 2 or perhaps to some other passage, but what you wrote is not a direct quote of the Bible. In fact, Paul repeatedly makes the point that everyone who commits sin can tell this by their conscience, whether or not they have the Law (for instance, those who lived before Moses for example), so this passage doesn't seem to be saying what they might think. So, I have never seen that phrase that you quoted above actually occur in the Bible. What I am reminded of however is what it says in Psalm 19:1-3.>and "In their ignorance God winked".That's a reference to Acts 17:30."And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:"- Acts 17:30If you look at the context here, the verb "ὑπεροράω" means to overlook or to choose not to regard. That's because God doesn't blame people for real ignorance. It doesn't mean to approve of, however. Recall that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. But that doesn't mean He approves of sin either.In addition to these, you do also have Luke 12:48, but that passage is talking more about different degrees of punishment.Compare all of this with what it says in Romans 1, which makes the situation pretty clear."For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:"- Romans 1:18-20That's talking about everyone, obviously. It even includes those who haven't been given the Law. Knowledge of good and evil.
>>16886814Not even Catholics say this, they say the unbaptized children go to limbo instead. Anyone who takes OP (that is, the opinion of one, singular guy whom other saints don't seem to agree with) as something all Catholics or Christians agree with is a moron.>B-b-but he's a Catholic saint!!! Which means they see him and everything he says as infallible!!!What if I told you that saints don't know everything and that some of the things they say are based on their personal opinions and logic?
Reminder that whether unbaptized infants go to hell or heaven is at it's core unknown and any opinion on the subject is largely speculation. Obviously no one truly knows how God judges them
>>16877909>Guys this one game somewhat based off what effectively a fanfiction does this so all Christians HAVE to believe it!!!I like Dante's structuring and portrayals of Hell, Purgatory and Heaven and all but this is like thinking that God isn't omnipotent and Hell itself is sapient because the game Ultrakill portrays it.It's not an argument.
>>16887779See these quotations from the Old Testament:"Or as an hidden untimely birth I had not been; as infants which never saw light.There the wicked cease from troubling; and there the weary be at rest.There the prisoners rest together; they hear not the voice of the oppressor.The small and great are there; and the servant is free from his master."– Job 3:16-19"But when David saw that his servants whispered, David perceived that the child was dead: therefore David said unto his servants, Is the child dead? And they said, He is dead.Then David arose from the earth, and washed, and anointed himself, and changed his apparel, and came into the house of the LORD, and worshipped: then he came to his own house; and when he required, they set bread before him, and he did eat.Then said his servants unto him, What thing is this that thou hast done? thou didst fast and weep for the child, while it was alive; but when the child was dead, thou didst rise and eat bread.And he said, While the child was yet alive, I fasted and wept: for I said, Who can tell whether GOD will be gracious to me, that the child may live?But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.And David comforted Bath-sheba his wife, and went in unto her, and lay with her: and she bare a son, and he called his name Solomon: and the LORD loved him."– 2 Samuel 12:19-24
>>16878199And you won’t convince me that we live in an empty universe that came into existence randomly for no reasonCling to whatever gotcha and “god evil lol” zinger you have, your empty materialist worldview is too ugly and repulsive to ever find ground on a global scale
>>16887829"The universe couldn't have come from nothing, therefore it's okay to eternally torture babies."Imagine being brain damaged enough to think that makes any sense.
>>16887779What possible judgement could God pass on a fucking baby and why is people's first reaction to such a maltheistic concept "Let's defend God" instead of "Let's find a way to JRPG his ass"?
>>16887901Because as it turns out le heckin wholesome Japanese rpg game isn't real life and anyone who genuinely thinks he can best a literal transcendent omnipotent being watches too much anime/is an edgy 13 year old.
>>16888028Not really all that omnipotent if a fallen angel has been keeping him at bay for thousands of years.
>>16888047What if I told you that said fallen angel is an eternally seething rager that isn't even the ruler of hell(he's just another prisoner) and literally only still exists because God literally still loves him enough to not completely disintegrate him
>>16888061I'd say you're full of shit because a being that runs Baby Hell is incapable of love.
>>16888076He doesn't run it tho.No one does.
>>16888303So nobody sends the babies to Hell. They just crawl there on their own. That makes even less sense.
>>16888330No, they don't go to hell, at least not the hell you're thinking of. They go to the Bosom of Abraham, that is a "nice" part of hell that the prophets and faithful from the Old Testament went to before being carried to Heaven by Jesus. Plus, God doesn't exactly send them there.
>>16887174That makes no sense. If babies get a free ride to heaven then parents should rejoice when their child dies because he could have grown up to be an unsaved adult.
>>16888578>because he could have grown up to be an unsaved adult.You really have no way at all, zero, to know what could happen. This is your faulty assumption.
>>16888590So god looks into the future and only allows the death of children who were predestined to accept him later anyway?
>>16887901That's just your human standards of fairness resurfacing. Whenever someone points out something weird or disgusting in the bible christfags throw a hissy fit and scream "how dare you judge God? he is holy and you are not". Yet on the question of how babies can be saved without accepting Jesus they make up cope stories because otherwise that'd be too horrible. At least the quote in OP is internally consistent.
>>16888606Anon, I'm not going that far. But I'll make two points about this from the Biblical perspective: Firstly, the fact is that every death no matter what is unambiguously a bad thing, and we are commanded not to kill others. This is true even if it's unavoidable in the present world we live in. It's still true regardless of the fact that we have more to anticipate after this life is done. So anyone ending a person's life is robbing them of their life, and even now that fact is also accepted widely.Secondly, we should really question the narrative that all of this is just happenstance or chance. It's not. According to the Biblical view, we are all here for a reason. We were placed here with a purpose in mind. As much as people like to whine about it sometimes, I know there was a purpose behind it, it was deliberate and it isn't an accident that we are exactly the way we are. Even if a person chooses to do evil, even though death and horrible things are in the world, and even though God can always work to bring His purposes to pass regardless of how much evil people choose to do that is contrary to the Lord's will... nothing is an accident or simply by chance. It's not like one person is saved and another isn't just by a completely random coin flip, that isn't what the Bible implies at all. So, I would ultimately believe what the Bible says about the unborn fate, and I would still defer the final judgement over each person to Christ, and do so without getting ahead of ourselves. This is because, recall what Paul says about God in 2 Timothy 1:9,"Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,"- 2 Timothy 1:9
>>16888627>Firstly, the fact is that every death no matter what is unambiguously a bad thing, and we are commanded not to kill others.There's multiple passages in the Bible where God directly commands his servants to kill others. In some cases, he even orders genocide.
>>16888627All that stuff is just trust me bro it will all make sense in the end. Earlier you were arguing that living in fucking pre-contact America was no excuse for not accepting Jesus but that being an infant is. So for millenia all the people there went to heaven when they died in infancy but the adults didn't because they weren't trying hard enough?
>>16888639>There's multiple passages in the Bible where God directly commands his servants to kill others.I know, but it's not like there's no reason for why those people or people groups were commanded to be killed. The reason given for the Canaanites for instance was because they were burning their children in the fire to sacrifice to idols. God Himself destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha as well, and was also the one who judged that death would have to come into this world, but all of it had to happen because of sin.Just because God prescribed death to come into this world (because of sin, by the way) doesn't mean we are allowed to transgress the limitations placed on us, one of which being that murder is a crime. In fact, in Genesis 9 it states that whoever sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed. So, hopefully that answer helps explain this.
>>16888653>All that stuff is just trust me bro it will all make sense in the end. Earlier you were arguing that...No, I haven't taken back what I said before.
>>16888656>Firstly, the fact is that every death no matter what is unambiguously a bad thing>I know, but it's not like there's no reason for why those people or people groups were commanded to be killed.Choose one. Is it always unambiguously a bad thing or not?>The reason given for the Canaanites for instance was because they were burning their children in the fire to sacrifice to idols.What about all the other ones, what have they done?Deuteronomy 20:16-17 16 However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy them--the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites--as the LORD your God has commanded you. And if God cares to much about saving kids, why did he order them to be killed as well?
>>16877866I think religion makes alot more sense if you accept that God just has a sense of humor and he is trolling like 90% of the time>yeah im totally going to send infants to hell>im gonna fucking have them tortured forever>jk lolhes just fucking around and being silly.
>>16888671>Choose one. Is it always unambiguously a bad thing or not?It is. Be that as it may, the situation would apparently be even worse if no death penalty existed for some crimes. Such as for example the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrha, it was necessary that they were destroyed. It's unfortunate that they had to die, but they brought it on themselves.>What about all the other ones, what have they done?Usually I see a reason given. But in the cases where there is no reason, I just trust God that it is right, which is the same thing that I do when it comes to every other circumstance in the present day and history that isn't mentioned in the Bible.>Deuteronomy 20:16-17Yes, those are the various Canaanites, so the reasons are what I mentioned earlier.>And if God cares to much about saving kids, why did he order them to be killed as well?I'm assuming it's the same reason why that even today, death ravages people of all ages. I believe there are reasons for things being this way, and that death is here in general because of sin. Every death (whether young or old) is a bad thing, but God has seen fit to enact it on this fallen world, and I believe it's to prevent something worse. And as we were talking about earlier: After this life, the God who gave life to all things is also going to judge all things and render justice completely to every individual."Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil."- Ecclesiastes 12:13-14"Therefore hearken unto me, ye men of understanding: far be it from God, that he should do wickedness; and from the Almighty, that he should commit iniquity.For the work of a man shall he render unto him, and cause every man to find according to his ways.Yea, surely God will not do wickedly, neither will the Almighty pervert judgment."- Job 34:10-12
>>16879569When the argument you're making is that torture doesn't phase you, yeah.Nature apart from God is no different, by the way. Infants die and don't come back, through no fault of their own.Do you bitch and moan about how unfair it is and then kill yourself or do you take some responsibility and protect the innocent in accordance with nature's law?
>>16880075it's eternal paradise. that's literally all you need to know.>that doesn't sound fun to my 23-year old mind thou, i wanna chill and drink beers foreverWell when you're an ageless wise spirit you'll think different
>>16881887You gotta ask what free will is, with or without god.Nature gives you an option. You can choose to walk into the woods with no preparation and die, and you can choose to do research and empower yourself by learning its laws. I might be wrong - but you don't bitch about that, you just get to work.Somehow when you personify nature and give it a name it instantly becomes something to screech about. But what's wiser? You or the universe that built you?
>>16888739The universe can't be expected to conform to human ideas of fairness or wisdom because it's not a conscious thing that does stuff deliberately.
>>16877866lmao based st. fulgnetius?
>>16877912When Jesus went into hell to save the righteous who had no chance to know of him (past and future) even in that case he would be saving all unbaptised babies. and they would be eternally damned. The infant damnation discourse sounds like something a Jew would come up with.
>>16888748Why should that change your behavior? It is what it is.If it were conscious, and billions of years older than you, and the origin of morality itself, why would you expect its laws to align so conveniently with your own?By the way, doesn't this whole debate fly in the face of the "religion was made up to satisfy our own desires" stance?
>>16888773I don't but Christians apparently do given how many of them make special loopholes like infants getting a dispensation.
>>16888795you don't? good for you. when are you getting baptized?
>>16888807I don't see why a hypothetical creator and ruler of the universe would necessarily have views that align with those of 21st-century Westerners. I also don't see why this hypothetical being would necessarily be the one described in the Bible or why there's good reason to assume this entity actually exists in the first place.
>>16888061>God literally still loves him enough to not completely disintegrate himso god hates ananias and sapphira but not satan? how has satan *not* committed the blasphemy of the holy spirit?
>>16888824You don't have to. 21st century westerners have diverse views that don't always align with Abrahamic doctrine, let alone orthodox or catholic.You can look to the 20th, the 19th, the 18th, and so on, in the west and in the east, and scope out the consistent tradition, back to the greeks.You can notice that, just like evolution converges, and science converges, developing repeated, effective structures, so does theology. You can posit a universal theology from there.
>>16888846Then you end up tossing away the whole book at some point or at best keeping it as a vague source of general inspiration and ignoring the specifics that you think don't pass the test of evolution.
>>16888872Science doesn't work based off what you happen to think and neither does evolution. Wings for example are inevitable for creatures that move through air in the same way fins are for creatures that move through water; and the general shape of both is shared as a structure that is inherently necessary for moving through a fluid medium with intent.There's something objective, independent of bats and birds and fish, about movement. You throw away the wings and the fins, but you don't throw away the principle shape.God is the objective form of theology and the bible and it's accompanying traditions are the height of religious development.If you doubt it then get studying. To me it sounds like you're kind of throwing together an idea of relativism and universalism from whims alone. If that's what you believe, you should look for the support for that belief. Otherwise you're living a lie.
>>16878777This refers to Christ's sacrifice, not to a person's acquisition of eternal life. God alone brought about salvation as the opportunity to be saved, but we must accept the gift of salvation. Like all things it is conditional.
>>16888758Since when is baby torture based?
