Topic: Do you believe that sexuality is a choice?

[Andrew Crook]

People have had morality before the Christian Church ever came about. 

Very true, they were called Gods Chosen People.  Of course we know the Christian Church didn’t begin until Christ arrived, so the people of God absolutely had morals prior to Christianity.

There have been plenty of people who have never even heard of the Judeo-Christian god, and have led very decent lives. 

By whose standards?  Certainly not Gods.  The world perhaps, which is where the problem really rests.

The great majority of cultures and world religions teach a standard of morality, that doesn't necessarily include Christianity... 

See my above statement.  Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

God's chosen people? No, not just the Jews.  The Hindus, Buddhists, and Zoroastrians of the East have also always had in mind the concept of "good deeds, good thoughts, good words".  It is implanted in most people to realize when something is harmful, and causes suffering.  Hence the Buddhist preaching against cravings...  and therefore if it causes suffering, it's not moral.

LOL@missing out on the splenders of God in the afterlife.  Yes that's always been a pleasant discussion... "Believe in me, and follow my religion or end up in eternal suffering."  I have never believed if there is a god, that just because they're not Christians or more specifically Orthodox Christians -- that they're going to a place where they can suffer, and feel nothing but pain.  But that's for another thread.

[stavros_388]

See my above statement.  Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

And are you okay with this? Is it all about being on God's "team" (and the correct team, at that)? Or can someone be somewhere doing the work of a Christian (service, charity, self-sacrifice, love of neighbor) without really knowing it or labeling it as such? Will God judge your heart and your actions in life, or just your Certificate of Baptism?

[Kerdy]

Just out of curiosity, would a sexual attraction to children or animals constitute a legitimate "orientation"? I know it's a tired argument, but I have yet to hear a thoughtful response.

Is it natural or choice?

That is something that I take issue with regarding many people's arguments in favor of accepting homosexuality as moral behavior. Most such people, with few exceptions, would not likewise apply the same arguments to other "sexual orientations."

E.g.:

"Homosexuality is a natural phenomenon occurring in human beings, which they have no control over. After all, if it were a choice, why would they choose to be ostracized by society?"

"Paedophilia is a natural phenomenon occurring in human beings, which they have no control over. After all, if it were a choice, why would they choose to be ostracized by society?"

you can't really compare Homosexuality and paedophilia. Homesexuality if you are careful harms none. Paedophilia harms children. Not comparable.

Why can't they be comparable.  The same defense can be made for both.  You want to distinguish the difference in a legal sense, otherwise one can say homosexuality is harmful to other people. 

How can homosexuality be harmful to other people?  Explain more, please...

Anything sinful is always harmful.

Any sexual deviant behavior consistently brings with it all the medical problems associated with that behavior.

Anything not natural also brings problems.  Just because someone says it is natural does not mean it is natural.  It just means that person believes it should be natural.

I could go into a long, long, long list of harmful things associated with homosexuality, or more specifically, deviant sexual behavior in general.  The problem is, few people want to look at that directly and most attempt to side track and associate those problems with a laundry list of other activities, thinking it somehow nullifies the problems which come with homosexuality...so I don’t bother wasting my time anymore.  I also don’t engage is circular (i.e., ridiculous) arguments if I can help myself.

Ah by "sexual behavior" you are differentiating between homosexuality, and certain homosexual acts aren't you?   The same arguments could be made for heterosexual sex, could they not?  It is harmful and dangerous to have sex with just anyone regardless of gender...   Your version of "sinfulness" is solely based off of Christianity, BTW.  You are entitled to those beliefs, just do not expect everyone to agree with that.   Also many have a hard time telling the difference between who they are and what they're attracted to, so they might feel you were calling them "deviants" because of their inclinations. 

Yes, there is a difference between attraction and action.  I'm attracted to an embarrassing number of women; however, that's all I allow it to be, an attraction...nothing more.

 Yes, Christian belief in origin.  Does any other matter?  Either it's right or it's wrong and if it is right, all others are wrong, so this is an useless point, in truth.  It makes no difference what someone believes if its wrong.

If a deviant (sexual or otherwise) is a deviant, it's due to their actions, not what they would like to do.  Everyone has something they would like to do, but we control ourselves.  If a person can't control their self, they should not complain about the proper usage of a title when applies to them.  Speaking of which, "orientation" is improperly used when applied to a sexual desire.

[Punch]

We do not choose our temptations.  We can only choose our response to them.  A homosexual orientation is not a choice.  A homosexual lifestyle is.

[JamesR]

Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

I highly disagree with this. While maybe people who are consciously aware of the existence of the Orthodox Church and God might be missing out on the spledors of God in the afterlife and have to worry--since they are consciously rejecting the Truth--but even that is debatable because there are several factors that could be responsible for their rejection--ie, maybe they had a bad experience with Churches in the past (like they were molested by clergy or something as a child) and thus they don't like Churches--but either way, that judgment is up to God because He is the only one who knows the condition of these people and all of the events in their life that need to be taken into consideration. And I'm sure that He works with them in His own way to come into their lives given their condition--whether or not they accept it, that's a different matter and God will judge them by it appropriately.

But as for those who have never heard of the Church, I think that the same thing applies--even to a greater extent. I think instead of blaming them and worrying about their judgment, we should be more worried about our own judgment and guilt. We are the stewards of God's Truth and God entrusted us with the duty to spread it to people who don't know it. If many people in the world aren't aware of it, then that's our fault for not spreading it and we'll be the ones judged for it. As for them, God will judge them based on His own personal standard for them based upon the little bit of Truth that they did know--resulting from God working with them in His own unique way. I don't think that God just abandons people to be untreated just because we haven't spread the message to them properly. I would think that He is working with them to some extent, and their judgment will depend upon how they reacted to whatever way God worked with them. And that being said, I think that basic morality like respecting others and caring for one another might be one of the standards that God is going to judge them by, since morality is indeed at least some reflection of God's Truth--even if it is small.

[Kerdy]

Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

I highly disagree with this. While maybe people who are consciously aware of the existence of the Orthodox Church and God might be missing out on the spledors of God in the afterlife and have to worry--since they are consciously rejecting the Truth--but even that is debatable because there are several factors that could be responsible for their rejection--ie, maybe they had a bad experience with Churches in the past (like they were molested by clergy or something as a child) and thus they don't like Churches--but either way, that judgment is up to God because He is the only one who knows the condition of these people and all of the events in their life that need to be taken into consideration. And I'm sure that He works with them in His own way to come into their lives given their condition--whether or not they accept it, that's a different matter and God will judge them by it appropriately.

But as for those who have never heard of the Church, I think that the same thing applies--even to a greater extent. I think instead of blaming them and worrying about their judgment, we should be more worried about our own judgment and guilt. We are the stewards of God's Truth and God entrusted us with the duty to spread it to people who don't know it. If many people in the world aren't aware of it, then that's our fault for not spreading it and we'll be the ones judged for it. As for them, God will judge them based on His own personal standard for them based upon the little bit of Truth that they did know--resulting from God working with them in His own unique way. I don't think that God just abandons people to be untreated just because we haven't spread the message to them properly. I would think that He is working with them to some extent, and their judgment will depend upon how they reacted to whatever way God worked with them. And that being said, I think that basic morality like respecting others and caring for one another might be one of the standards that God is going to judge them by, since morality is indeed at least some reflection of God's Truth--even if it is small.

Very few people alive today have not heard of Jesus in some fashion.

[JamesR]

Very few people alive today have not heard of Jesus in some fashion.

Tell that to North Korea, large portions of India and South America, large sections of the Middle East where Christianity has been eradicated, certain tribes in Africa, the Pacific Islands...

[Nephi]

large sections of the Middle East where Christianity has been eradicated

Muslims have heard of Jesus...

[Alveus Lacuna]

Children and animals are not capable of consent, nor do they have the intellect or reason to understand those sorts of things.

So consent is the standard? Then what of consensual incest among adults or consensual homicide?

You can speak of currently existing laws, but since laws are changeable (as with the recently stricken sodomy laws), one obviously cannot appeal to current law as a means unto itself or as being sacrosanct.

[tweety234]

People have had morality before the Christian Church ever came about. 

Very true, they were called Gods Chosen People.  Of course we know the Christian Church didn’t begin until Christ arrived, so the people of God absolutely had morals prior to Christianity.

There have been plenty of people who have never even heard of the Judeo-Christian god, and have led very decent lives. 

By whose standards?  Certainly not Gods.  The world perhaps, which is where the problem really rests.

The great majority of cultures and world religions teach a standard of morality, that doesn't necessarily include Christianity... 

See my above statement.  Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

God's chosen people? No, not just the Jews.  The Hindus, Buddhists, and Zoroastrians of the East have also always had in mind the concept of "good deeds, good thoughts, good words".  It is implanted in most people to realize when something is harmful, and causes suffering.  Hence the Buddhist preaching against cravings...  and therefore if it causes suffering, it's not moral.

LOL@missing out on the splenders of God in the afterlife.  Yes that's always been a pleasant discussion... "Believe in me, and follow my religion or end up in eternal suffering."  I have never believed if there is a god, that just because they're not Christians or more specifically Orthodox Christians -- that they're going to a place where they can suffer, and feel nothing but pain.  But that's for another thread.

off topic:
yes it is for another thread. Please let me know when you  make that thread. via pm with the link. I would like to read your thoughts.

[tweety234]

See my above statement.  Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

And are you okay with this? Is it all about being on God's "team" (and the correct team, at that)? Or can someone be somewhere doing the work of a Christian (service, charity, self-sacrifice, love of neighbor) without really knowing it or labeling it as such? Will God judge your heart and your actions in life, or just your Certificate of Baptism?

[tweety234]

 
Either it's right or it's wrong and if it is right, all others are wrong,

black or white. I see. 

[William]

JamesR is the only poster who has come close to the correct answer.

[JamesR]

large sections of the Middle East where Christianity has been eradicated

Muslims have heard of Jesus...

Not in the Christian context though in certain radical regions of the Middle East

[Shanghaiski]

We do not choose our temptations.  We can only choose our response to them.  A homosexual orientation is not a choice.  A homosexual lifestyle is.

Behold the answer!

Yet I think the thread has strangely moved on to a completely different topci. Nothing like that has ever happened on this forum before.

[Kerdy]

We do not choose our temptations.  We can only choose our response to them.  A homosexual orientation is not a choice.  A homosexual lifestyle is.

Behold the answer!

Yet I think the thread has strangely moved on to a completely different topci. Nothing like that has ever happened on this forum before.

Yes, he pretty much hit the nail on the head.  So, like I said before, one can choose how they respond and act, so the first part really isn't a point at all, rather a distraction and attempt to justify poor choices.

[Shanghaiski]

We do not choose our temptations.  We can only choose our response to them.  A homosexual orientation is not a choice.  A homosexual lifestyle is.

Behold the answer!

Yet I think the thread has strangely moved on to a completely different topci. Nothing like that has ever happened on this forum before.

Yes, he pretty much hit the nail on the head.  So, like I said before, one can choose how they respond and act, so the first part really isn't a point at all, rather a distraction and attempt to justify poor choices.

First part of what?

[augustin717]

Children and animals are not capable of consent, nor do they have the intellect or reason to understand those sorts of things.

So consent is the standard? Then what of consensual incest among adults or consensual homicide?

You can speak of currently existing laws, but since laws are changeable (as with the recently stricken sodomy laws), one obviously cannot appeal to current law as a means unto itself or as being sacrosanct.

Well it's quite easy. Consensual incest should be legal and it's actually legal in many places; consensual homocide because of the irrevocable ultimate harm done to one of the parties shouldn't be totally outside of the scope of the law. Its rare anyway and iirc in more known cases the laws were applied with more leniency there when there was proof of consensus.

[88Devin12]

If yes, at what age did you consciously choose to be attracted to the opposite gender? I personally can't say i chose to be straight. I was born that way. And it has nothing to do with religion.

I believe that one can choose their sexuality, but I also believe one can be born with a tendency towards a certain sexuality.

However, being born homosexual, bisexual or asexual doesn't mean that it is a natural and God-given state, it is in fact, the very opposite. It's a result of our fallen state. One isn't sinful just by being attracted to the opposite sex, but the actions and thoughts that are entertained can be and are.

[Kerdy]

We do not choose our temptations.  We can only choose our response to them.  A homosexual orientation is not a choice.  A homosexual lifestyle is.

Behold the answer!

Yet I think the thread has strangely moved on to a completely different topci. Nothing like that has ever happened on this forum before.

Yes, he pretty much hit the nail on the head.  So, like I said before, one can choose how they respond and act, so the first part really isn't a point at all, rather a distraction and attempt to justify poor choices.

First part of what?

Our temptations being a choice.

Our response to them is what is important.  I feel people focus on the wrong half of the coin.  It really doesn’t matter if it is a choice; in this case its sexuality, rather what we do in response to that temptation.  Choice, result of social environment, natural occurrence, what we want it to be, it doesn’t make any difference.  What we do with that is what makes the difference.

Too many people use the temptation (choice or not) as a crutch, an excuse for what they do instead of taking responsibility for their own actions. 

[Kerdy]

Tell that to North Korea,

Missionaries

Tell that to … large portions of India and South America

Missionaries and Christians are there

Tell that to…large sections of the Middle East where Christianity has been eradicated,

Christians are there all over the place

Tell that to … certain tribes in Africa, the Pacific Islands...

Missionaries and Christians are there all over the place

James, this isn’t the 1700’s.  Has every ear on the planet heard the message?  No, most have, thus my saying very few people have not.  If the soul yearns for the truth, do you not believe God will provide a way?

[Kerdy]

I believe you made a mistake on your quotation.

[Kerdy]

See my above statement.  Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

And are you okay with this? Is it all about being on God's "team" (and the correct team, at that)? Or can someone be somewhere doing the work of a Christian (service, charity, self-sacrifice, love of neighbor) without really knowing it or labeling it as such? Will God judge your heart and your actions in life, or just your Certificate of Baptism?

It makes little difference what I am ok with.  I don't make the rules.

[stavros_388]

See my above statement.  Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

And are you okay with this? Is it all about being on God's "team" (and the correct team, at that)? Or can someone be somewhere doing the work of a Christian (service, charity, self-sacrifice, love of neighbor) without really knowing it or labeling it as such? Will God judge your heart and your actions in life, or just your Certificate of Baptism?

It makes little difference what I am ok with.  I don't make the rules.

And that would be a 'yes'.
Good people going to hell is okay with you because you believe those are "the rules".
Sorry, it's just that this kind of attitude has never made any sense to me. 

[Punch]

See my above statement.  Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

And are you okay with this? Is it all about being on God's "team" (and the correct team, at that)? Or can someone be somewhere doing the work of a Christian (service, charity, self-sacrifice, love of neighbor) without really knowing it or labeling it as such? Will God judge your heart and your actions in life, or just your Certificate of Baptism?

It makes little difference what I am ok with.  I don't make the rules.

And that would be a 'yes'.
Good people going to hell is okay with you because you believe those are "the rules".
Sorry, it's just that this kind of attitude has never made any sense to me. 

It is a meaningless argument because there is no such thing as "good people".  Christ tells us this Himself. 

[stavros_388]

See my above statement.  Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

And are you okay with this? Is it all about being on God's "team" (and the correct team, at that)? Or can someone be somewhere doing the work of a Christian (service, charity, self-sacrifice, love of neighbor) without really knowing it or labeling it as such? Will God judge your heart and your actions in life, or just your Certificate of Baptism?

It makes little difference what I am ok with.  I don't make the rules.

And that would be a 'yes'.
Good people going to hell is okay with you because you believe those are "the rules".
Sorry, it's just that this kind of attitude has never made any sense to me.  

It is a meaningless argument because there is no such thing as "good people".  Christ tells us this Himself.  

Okay. People who do good to others, then.

[primuspilus]

Not in the Christian context though in certain radical regions of the Middle East

Islam knows exactly how Christianity views Jesus. Muslims have always known how Christians view Jesus. So much so that the issue of "the Son of God" was addressed in the Koran directly (somewhere in 18 I believe). Also, read some of the early texts on the subject from either point of view. It becomes very obvious that Mohammed and his direct followers knew precisely and rejected it for one reason or another.

Wasn't Mohammed's uncle a monk at one point?

PP

[Punch]

See my above statement.  Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

And are you okay with this? Is it all about being on God's "team" (and the correct team, at that)? Or can someone be somewhere doing the work of a Christian (service, charity, self-sacrifice, love of neighbor) without really knowing it or labeling it as such? Will God judge your heart and your actions in life, or just your Certificate of Baptism?

It makes little difference what I am ok with.  I don't make the rules.

And that would be a 'yes'.
Good people going to hell is okay with you because you believe those are "the rules".
Sorry, it's just that this kind of attitude has never made any sense to me.  

It is a meaningless argument because there is no such thing as "good people".  Christ tells us this Himself.  

Okay. People who do good to others, then.

I believe (and I may be wrong) that there is "doing good" and "doing good unto Salvation".  Faith is the primary requirement for Salvation.  Faith will spawn good works, and these works will help us toward Salvation.  However, without Faith, Salvation is not possible, so good works done without Faith are to no avail.  It is not that God does not see them, but He cannot act on those that do not accept Him.  However, that does NOT mean that He will not bless them in this life.

[Andrew Crook]

This thread has made me realize, I sincerely disagree with a lot of you.  

I cannot believe that morality is derived from Christianity, and that if the Church is true -- then all others are false.  I cannot believe sexuality is a choice, and there were a few other points that I highly disagree with.  All of this black and white reasoning is beyond me, and goes against a lot of what I have believed to be true in my core..

Oh well it's been a fun chat, at least I know what I don't believe.  Trying to argue it is meaningless

[orthonorm]

This thread has made me realize, I sincerely disagree with a lot of you. 

I cannot believe that morality is derived from Christianity, and that if the Church is true -- then all others are false.  I cannot believe sexuality is a choice, and there were a few other points that I highly disagree with.  All of this black and white reasoning is beyond me, and goes against a lot of what I have known in my core..

Oh well it's been a fun chat, at least I know what I don't believe.  Trying to argue it is meaningless

Too bad Ionnis can't write that book. No irony.

Don't worry Andrew you're right in knowing most of the people above are wrong (I only read Ionnis' post I think and this one, I stalk the guy.)

Knowing others are almost always wrong is the beginning of wisdom.

[Andrew Crook]

This thread has made me realize, I sincerely disagree with a lot of you. 

I cannot believe that morality is derived from Christianity, and that if the Church is true -- then all others are false.  I cannot believe sexuality is a choice, and there were a few other points that I highly disagree with.  All of this black and white reasoning is beyond me, and goes against a lot of what I have known in my core..

Oh well it's been a fun chat, at least I know what I don't believe.  Trying to argue it is meaningless

Too bad Ionnis can't write that book. No irony.

Don't worry Andrew you're right in knowing most of the people above are wrong (I only read Ionnis' post I think and this one, I stalk the guy.)

Knowing others are almost always wrong is the beginning of wisdom.

^^LOL 

[Punch]

This thread has made me realize, I sincerely disagree with a lot of you. 

I cannot believe that morality is derived from Christianity, and that if the Church is true -- then all others are false.  I cannot believe sexuality is a choice, and there were a few other points that I highly disagree with.  All of this black and white reasoning is beyond me, and goes against a lot of what I have known in my core..

Oh well it's been a fun chat, at least I know what I don't believe.  Trying to argue it is meaningless

Arguing on the Internet is like running a race in the Special Olympics.  The rest is politically incorrect.  In any case, most of us "believe".  Those that say they "know" anything are fools.

[Andrew Crook]

Good point, fixed that..

[orthonorm]

Good point, fixed that..

Believing is a mode of being more obsessive and blind and violent than knowing.

And unfortunately, most people know a lot and believe little.

[Punch]

Good point, fixed that..

Believing is a mode of being more obsessive and blind and violent than knowing.

And unfortunately, most people know a lot and believe little.

Unfortunately, you are wrong.  Belief is simply passing inputs through a filter and drawing conclusions.  Knowledge involves certainty, and there is little that is certain.  Death is probably one of the few things that is certain, and even then not everyone is dead that appears that way.  If someone believes something, they can change that belief based on new inputs.  Someone who thinks they know is usually locked in that belief, regardless of inputs to the contrary.

[orthonorm]

Good point, fixed that..

Believing is a mode of being more obsessive and blind and violent than knowing.

And unfortunately, most people know a lot and believe little.

Unfortunately, you are wrong.

Wanna bet? And do you believe, think, or know the above?

[Kerdy]

See my above statement.  Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

And are you okay with this? Is it all about being on God's "team" (and the correct team, at that)? Or can someone be somewhere doing the work of a Christian (service, charity, self-sacrifice, love of neighbor) without really knowing it or labeling it as such? Will God judge your heart and your actions in life, or just your Certificate of Baptism?

It makes little difference what I am ok with.  I don't make the rules.

And that would be a 'yes'.
Good people going to hell is okay with you because you believe those are "the rules".
Sorry, it's just that this kind of attitude has never made any sense to me. 

It is not a yes.  It is an acceptance of what we know to be true.  There is but one path to God and that is not through some great effort on our behalf.  What does being a nice person really mean?  How is this going to help any more than not being a nice person or randomly being a nice person, or even being a mean person?  This is all subjective to what you or I think a nice person is or what a nice person should be doing.  These are our earthly standards, which have little or nothing to do with God.  Nice is good, but it is not enough.

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

[Punch]

Wanna bet? And do you believe, think, or know the above?

Well, I try not to think because the heat put off by my enormous brain power tends to overheat those around me (surely you understand, based on most of what you write).  Now, as to the other two, I believe that you are wrong.  I do not KNOW that you are wrong because I always leave open the possibility that I could be wrong.  It does happen on occasion.  As to the present matter, I believe the way I do because you have not provided me with enough contrary data to change that belief.  But I am sure that if you really put your mind to it (and did not burn up all those around you), you could make a more convincing attempt at it.  You see, I do not mind being proven wrong since that is one of the many ways to learn.  And to top it off, the other guy does all the work.

[tweety234]

  Nice is good, but it is not enough.

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

you are very right. But "Nice" is a whole lot better than pure wickedness and cruelty. Wicked and cruel people aren't nice at all. Therefore, who is closer to God?

[orthonorm]

But I am sure that if you really put your mind to it (and did not burn up all those around you), you could make a more convincing attempt at it.  You see, I do not mind being proven wrong since that is one of the many ways to learn.  And to top it off, the other guy does all the work.

I already have alluded to this problem previously in more than a few posts around here. A German speaker would certainly understand the meaning of belief and think outside the cheap manner in which we use it today. And a student of the German language would understand know in the same manner, as it was part and parcel of Germanic languages before disappearing I think in all of them except English. Or if you have Greek of some sort (and I don't think you are allowed to be Orthodox otherwise) then you should have know all wrapped up.

In short, you already understand what I have to say.

How could it ever be otherwise? How can anyone ever learn anything that they didn't already understand?

No one learns anything new. This means no one has to work, especially "teachers".

I doubt you care based on your post, but when I return to real life (use the internet 20 hours a day), I might do more to help you remember.

[augustin717]

See my above statement.  Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

And are you okay with this? Is it all about being on God's "team" (and the correct team, at that)? Or can someone be somewhere doing the work of a Christian (service, charity, self-sacrifice, love of neighbor) without really knowing it or labeling it as such? Will God judge your heart and your actions in life, or just your Certificate of Baptism?

It makes little difference what I am ok with.  I don't make the rules.

And that would be a 'yes'.
Good people going to hell is okay with you because you believe those are "the rules".
Sorry, it's just that this kind of attitude has never made any sense to me.  

It is not a yes.  It is an acceptance of what we know to be true.  There is but one path to God and that is not through some great effort on our behalf.  What does being a nice person really mean?  How is this going to help any more than not being a nice person or randomly being a nice person, or even being a mean person?  This is all subjective to what you or I think a nice person is or what a nice person should be doing.  These are our earthly standards, which have little or nothing to do with God.  Nice is good, but it is not enough.

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

Spoken like a true Southern Baptist.
Lest you think I persecute you without cause, in my experience I only heard this sort of phrases from the  more theologically aware baptist-types; the orthodox just don't talk like that and do not frame the thing like that. There is no Orthodox aversion and scorn to the concept of "being good/nice"  whatever that is, at least never came across with something like that.

[Nephi]

Spoken like a true Southern Baptist.
Lest you think I persecute you without cause, in my experience I only heard this sort of phrases from the  more theologically aware baptist-types; the orthodox just don't talk like that and do not frame the thing like that. There is no Orthodox aversion and scorn to the concept of "being good/nice"  whatever that is, at least never came across with something like that.

It seems like the Orthodox position to me.

[Punch]

Having spoken German through my childhood, I am well aware of how glauben, denken, and wissen were used in conversation.  Pretty much exactly the way I use believe, think and know today in English.  Of course my mother and her relatives (from whom I learned the language) were rather simple people who said what they meant and did not tend to play useless word games.  As to Greek, I don't trust those innovators and tend to avoid them.  So, I never learned to speak their language. 

I already have alluded to this problem previously in more than a few posts around here. A German speaker would certainly understand the meaning of belief and think outside the cheap manner in which we use it today. And a student of the German language would understand know in the same manner, as it was part and parcel of Germanic languages before disappearing I think in all of them except English. Or if you have Greek of some sort (and I don't think you are allowed to be Orthodox otherwise) then you should have know all wrapped up.

In short, you already understand what I have to say.

How could it ever be otherwise? How can anyone ever learn anything that they didn't already understand?

No one learns anything new. This means no one has to work, especially "teachers".

I doubt you care based on your post, but when I return to real life (use the internet 20 hours a day), I might do more to help you remember.

[stavros_388]

See my above statement.  Being a nice person means nothing.  I hope you realize this.  There are going to be a lot of nice people missing out on the splendors of God in the afterlife.

And are you okay with this? Is it all about being on God's "team" (and the correct team, at that)? Or can someone be somewhere doing the work of a Christian (service, charity, self-sacrifice, love of neighbor) without really knowing it or labeling it as such? Will God judge your heart and your actions in life, or just your Certificate of Baptism?

It makes little difference what I am ok with.  I don't make the rules.

And that would be a 'yes'.
Good people going to hell is okay with you because you believe those are "the rules".
Sorry, it's just that this kind of attitude has never made any sense to me.  

It is not a yes.  It is an acceptance of what we know to be true.  There is but one path to God and that is not through some great effort on our behalf.  What does being a nice person really mean?  How is this going to help any more than not being a nice person or randomly being a nice person, or even being a mean person?  This is all subjective to what you or I think a nice person is or what a nice person should be doing.  These are our earthly standards, which have little or nothing to do with God.  Nice is good, but it is not enough.

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

I guess by "nice" I am thinking of genuine kindness. The Golden Rule is not unique to Christ's teachings, and frankly, many non-Christians exhibit true kindness better and more regularly than many Christians.

This makes me think of the Parable of the Good Samaritan in St. Luke's Gospel.

"Who is my neighbour?", the expert in the Law asked Jesus...


30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”


I was thinking of those "nice" people that help and love their neighbours, whether subscribing to any particular religion or not.
I guess what really bothers me is when people casually and matter-of-factly claim that good people cannot be saved because, for one reason or another, they do not call themselves Christians. This would of course include many good people that I know and love.

But perhaps I've misconstrued what you wrote. I do that sometimes.

[stavros_388]

BTW, sorry about the thread detour. What were we talking about, again?