Would YOU let the 50 Orlando gays into heaven?

Question: if it was up to you, would you let the 50 Orlando dead gay club patrons (assume they were all gay) into "heaven", or do you side with Jesus (in 1 Corinthians) and steadfastly refuse to allow them in because they don't think like you do?

Me, well I first have to decide how much I love people. Ok, I've decided I love people alot....a whole lot, as people have helped me through tough times are I consider them incredible (not "sinners", or "evil" like Jesus did.) If that's the case, then of course I'd let them into heaven, as it would be the opposite of love to be, well, almost "racist" against them by not letting them in.

Would you have let them in, if it was up to you? This is a good test of your compassion. Choose wisely.

 

Congratulations, you have JUST fleshed out the GOOD SAMARITAN, almost verbatim. Are you SURE you are an Atheist/secular humanist?

 

I guess it would depend on how good their marks on their purgatory exams were.

 

After extensive background checks, a 3 day waiting period, and passing through a metal detector.

 

Congratulations! You are more moral, more compassionate, and more loving than even Jesus. I applaud you.

PS you obviously work for Homeland Security, so keep up the good work.

 

Yes, I would let them in, just like every other person, regardless of their human imperfections. I would do this, because after reading the Bible more than 20 times, cover to cover, I'm convinced that this is EXACTLY what Jesus would want me to do, regardless of your self serving and perverted view of the message that Scripture ACTUALLY conveys.

You think you're this smart guy/girl (?), with some morally superior world view, because you've made a hobby out of cherry picking lone verses, out of context, to try to make an argument that Jesus was in to hating on people. Well, Jesus is the one who said to those about to stone the prostitute (also guilty of a sexual sin, according to the standard of THAT day), "you who have never sinned, cast the first stone". He said this to point out to them, their own faults, and to teach them not to be hypocrites about "your sin vs. my sin". Even the Pope (who I like, though I'm not Catholic) said of Gays, "When people come together with love in their heart, who am I to judge?"

Jesus is about Love, Healing, and Forgiveness. You on the other hand are about Hate, Anger, Resentment. And to top it all off, by omission, you make outright lies with your "quotes", when you attribute your own hatred and anger to Jesus. It's OK though, Jesus loves even the mean spirited Shatheels like you, who flame bate about Christians for sport.

You know, if you posted so much hatred about Blacks as you do about Christians, people would rightfully call you Racist. But you're not, your just a Bigot, with attitude! Got many friends, do you?

 

Please read it once more and don't forget to read these verses that say that good, decent, moral, hard-working people who simply don't suck up to Jesus (are, say, buddhists, lovers of science, agnostics, etc.) get brutal savage torture: John 14:6, Acts 4:12, 2 Thessalonians 1:1-10, John 3:18, John 10:27-28, Matthew 10:32, Luke 12:8, John 5:2, John 3:36, John 6:47, Acts 16:31, Romans 10:9, Revelation 19:20, 20:10,14-15, 21:8

- - - Updated - - -

You can't condemn the bigotry in the Bible where god tells those people to not marry outside of their tribe, can you?

 

You seem to be under the false belief that Jesus is more moral than I am....Jesus accepted slavery, I don't.....so who is more moral? Do you condemn Jesus for accepting slavery? If you can't even condemn someone who accepts slavery - who claims to be the best moral teacher ever - then you have no moral standing yourself, I'm afraid.
http://www.evilbible.com/evil-bible-home-page/slavery/

 

No, you are again misquoting, in another vain attempt to support your own moral superiority. Jesus did not "accept slavery", he merely accepted that there was slavery, as a fact of life, just like murder, rape, war, etc. etc. These are facts of the human condition, and Jesus only offered us ways to deal with these conditions while on this earth.

I think it was in the New Testament book of Philomon , but I may be mistaken as to the correct title, This "book" was actually a letter to a Roman citizen, a slave owner and new convert to Christianity, regarding a runaway slave who came to Paul for help. In this letter, Paul urged the slave owner to "take back" his "property", but not as a "slave" but as a "brother in Christ, who after all, died on the cross for both of you".

The ownership of people, ugly as it is/was, was just a fact of life that was not going to be undone by the waiving of some magic wand, which is what you seem to insist Christ must do to earn your respect. BTW, Christ is not Harry Potter, you might want to figure that part out, OK?

Paul, who once persecuted Christians, converted to Christianity by direct revelation from Christ himself (so the story goes), and then urged a slave owner to take back his property and NOT PUNISH HIM for running away. THIS is what you call "hate", and "accepting" of slavery? Dude, you are so forking ignorant of what the Bible truly says. But, don't let that ignorance get in the way of your Bigoted Ranting, gotta be a good little Liberal, don'tcha?

 

Would YOU, if you were in Jesus' shoes, taken a mere 15 seconds out of your life to say "write this down, teach to end slavery w/in the next 30 years"? I would, of course, because I care about humanity more than Jesus did. How about you? It would have prevented some (not all) slavery, arguably. Would you have, my friend?

 

Can't you wait a bit before you make this into a religious political issue? Allow the victims to get buried before starting this crap. Patience my liberal pajama boy.

 

Shouldn't the question be: "would you let the shooter in if he repented?"

 

No point. If he was a muslim, according to their beliefs, he's already in for killing 'gay' infidels.

 

I am imagining that there's a gay bar or club somewhere named Heaven; what better place should they go?

 

Just a question: why should hell be some abstract plane of existence, while we actually have a world full of evil and suffering? To me, hell is where we are now. Let those who die find peace regardless of what they did and who they are.

 

Heaven isn't heaven if it has restrictions...

 

The shooter is in. Per Islam, martyrs are in and get 72 virgins.
So they all are hanging out in heaven together, if one believes each religion. Even tho each religion hates each other.

- - - Updated - - -

Entrance to heaven has huge restrictions on it. Per the bible and koran.
Hell, on the other hand, pretty wide open and easy to get to.

 

Religious morality..

"California pastor praises Orlando massacre"

Yes, that's pastor, not imam. Baptist, to be precise. I'm reminded of Westboro..

http://www.usatoday.com/videos/news/nation/2016/06/15/85917730/

 

If heaven keeps out gays then Jesus/god/Christians are bigots.
(Look, I guess maybe I myself am "bigoted" against, say, hard-core Nazis who approve of the Holocaust, but I think my reasons would be at least more legitimate than Jesus/god/Christians' reasons for their bigotry against gay - as gays don't hurt anybody....in fact, since gays tend to reproduce less, it can be argued that gays are good for the planet, as such.)

 

It's almost as if his BIBLE says to kill gays and that gays are such "scum" that they can't get into heaven....almost.

 

I was really just hoping that at least a dozen of this guy's virgins were victims from the night club.

 

I wonder if he follows all of the other Old Testament rules? Has he stoned disobedient kids to death? Would he advocate that also?

- - - Updated - - -

He's had all the virgins he's ever going to get. Bottles of olive oil, that is.

 

Jumbo shrimp.
Airline schedules.
Military intelligence.
Microsoft Works.

 

Even if he hasn't lifted finger, he still follows an immoral book. When one follows/approves of an immoral book, then that person is immoral themselves. As a Christian, I of course couldn't consider myself moral - so I left Jesus/God, for a far more moral belief system. Best. Decision. Ever.

"Has he stoned disobedient kids to death?".....too bad people in the 21st century still believe in a book that obviously, OBVIOUSLY, doesn't understand right from wrong. Most Christians/Muslims I know seem to have a pretty decent IQ, so it astonishes me that they proudly give their children a book that doesn't understand right from wrong. I'm also glad that they don't all FOLLOW their barbaric "god's" teachings - they let common sense override god's teachings.

- - - Updated - - -

Besides, who the hell would want of bunch of ladies that have no clue how to have sex (they are all virgins, all 72 of them)?....why not want one really experienced broad who really knows what the hell she's doing!?

 

Well, you know, modern Christian churches have generally found ways to gloss over the bad parts of the Bible, usually by focusing on the Christian writings and insisting that the nasty old stuff has been more or less abolished because, somehow, Christ "fulfilled" all that "law" on behalf of the believer. Isn't Christ grand! That's why he's such a beloved religious figure - he made the Hebrew god more palatable, at least as long as you don't think about the goofiness of it all, about how Christianity is based on human sacrifice, in turn based on primitive animal sacrifice, all without any reasonable explanation offered as to why such sacrifice was ever actually necessary, how this could serve as justice in the eyes of the alleged Creator of the Universe. If Christians do ever allow themselves to think about this stuff, I think they either end up non-Christians or effectively put these thoughts away and again concentrate instead on the good bits, and maybe remind themselves that, by golly, the price of unbelief just isn't worth risking! (Pascal's wager). See, Christianity has a big bag of tricks to keep people in the cult.

Heh. Yeah, really. 72 popping cherries? 72 painful, bloody experiences? It sounds like a fantasy cooked up by a male virgin for other male virgins.