what happens to non-christians after death
-
your anology on righteousness (ie. doing the right things, the right way, the right intention, the right standing... every maner that is right everytime) being subjective, as in from whose point of view that its right, is reasonable.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Fairness is important before one can mete out justice. If u claim tat fairness is subjective, then righteous is also subjective since righteous does not exist if there is no fairness. I can also give an example tat righteous is subjective too when the christians crusaders claimed they r righteous when they slaughter people from other religion. So fairness and justice does not exist and so god still cannot be fair or just ?
Furthermore, fairness is giving punishment based on deeds and not on race/religion. If they cannot practise tis fairness, the judge is not just. U just keep avoiding tis point.
To the christians crusaders, its the right thing to do, to their victims, they are monstors, murderer deserved nothing less than eternal torture in hell.
I do disagree that Fairness is important before one can mete out Justice. However, I will say, Decernment and Wisdom are important before one can mete out Justice. -
cause I a stubborn bigot...Originally posted by stupidissmart:If there is such a thing and if I can save 1 million, I will convert to believe anything. I am not as stupid as reject help if it is true. However the system is so absupt tat I find it unbelievable.
I don't believe I can save 1 million, I can point the way to them, but I cannot decide for them, the path they chose to go. -
I do disagree that Fairness is important before one can mete out Justice. However, I will say, Decernment and Wisdom are important before one can mete out Justice.
To mete out justice, fairness is critical. With wisdom and discernment, then it will realise fairness is critical. Without fairness, it is not justice. It is double standard and biased and nothing more than torture -
got example?Originally posted by stupidissmart:To mete out justice, fairness is critical. With wisdom and discernment, then it will realise fairness is critical. Without fairness, it is not justice. It is double standard and biased and nothing more than torture
*edit: illustration is a better word.
got illustration? -
Hmm, I have doubts on many concepts taught and explained by the established religions out there. I will probably not say that the concept of salvation as taught by Christianity is absurd but it does not let me make an informed decision by just asking me to believe when good or bad things happen to me.Originally posted by stupidissmart:If there is such a thing and if I can save 1 million, I will convert to believe anything. I am not as stupid as reject help if it is true. However the system is so absupt tat I find it unbelievable.
Good, will say it's God's work. Bad, will say God's testing me, training or toughening me up. It's like anything goes.
Then like that how to differentiate between a good or a bad teaching?
For example, in some scriptures, God kills a lot of ppl but it is explained that it is for the benefit of all. But in human history, how often have we heard military dictators use that logic to wage war against a particular country, a particular race?
That's why global terrorism is so much feared by governments around the world. -
To everyone, please remember to take things in the right context. Thank you.
-
How about those people in the Old Testiment?
TO HELL WITH THEM ? =|
-
To mete out justice, fairness is critical. With wisdom and discernment, then it will realise fairness is critical. Without fairness, it is not justice. It is double standard and biased and nothing more than torture
If there is no fairness when meting out justice, then it will punish the good people and favour the bad one. Then it will encourage more people to commit offences as well as disregard the whole system and segregate the people.
Then tat form of justice is nothing more than actring like a bigger bully or bandit.
With wisdom and discernment one can surely realise tis outcome.
Why don't u give an illustration why total unfairness to a group of people who commit the same deed with same intention get different judgement, can be a wise and just act ? -
I ask you for illustration first...Originally posted by stupidissmart:If there is no fairness when meting out justice, then it will punish the good people and favour the bad one. Then it will encourage more people to commit offences as well as disregard the whole system and segregate the people.
Then tat form of justice is nothing more than actring like a bigger bully or bandit.
With wisdom and discernment one can surely realise tis outcome.
Why don't u give an illustration why total unfairness to a group of people who commit the same deed with same intention get different judgement, can be a wise and just act ?
you have not give me any,... 
want realistic one hor... don't everything just by ideal assumptions only hor... -
I thought my points r obvious. If u want illustration I can give u as many as u like
Person A from religion A kill a man. He get death penalty and die
Person B from religion B kill a man under completely same circumstances. He get away with $100 fine
Then tis person B just keep on going and kill people, because he doesn't get any major problem. Not only tat all the people from religion B will commit offences easily because they do not face any backlash. People from religion A will feel they r discriminated, they will isolate from society and group among themselves and desire a change of system or governance. Wat happen then ? Chaos in the country and there will be a civil war.
Now u tell me an illustration while unfairness can lead to justice and wisdom ? -
Can fairness be relative to the person's viewpoint and his desired outcome?
-
Can fairness be relative to the person's viewpoint and his desired outcome?
Fairness refers to same treatment to all classes of people. -
Can I say that is from a third person's point of view?Originally posted by stupidissmart:Fairness refers to same treatment to all classes of people.
Fairness from the person involved may not be the same. -
Can I say that is from a third person's point of view?
Is it so hard to understand "fairness" used here means rewarding/punishment according to deed and not because of person ? I hope u r not trying to play with the word or come out with completely different scenario or something.
Fairness from the person involved may not be the same -
I am not trying to play with words.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Is it so hard to understand "fairness" used here means rewarding/punishment according to deed and not because of person ? I hope u r not trying to play with the word or come out with completely different scenario or something.
I think the understanding of the word is that cause of the debate between the two of you.
Just trying to help. -
wrong... thats EqualityOriginally posted by stupidissmart:Fairness refers to same treatment to all classes of people.
ask you, is it fair to punish someone with low IQ for doing something stupid with the same punishment as the one with a high IQ doing this same stupid thing?
there is this thing called, expectation.
Even if the exact same treatment is given to everybody, there will still be someone shouting NOT FAIR! why? cause everyone wants better treatment. :-) -
does it mean that because i have two sons of varying age, what i give to one is also what i give to the other??? obviously not. so am i being unfair?Originally posted by stupidissmart:Fairness refers to same treatment to all classes of people.
one got a brand new phone, the other got a hand-me-down phone.
at the end of the day, even if there is an almighty deity and this deity is unfair, so how..... he bigger than you, complain go where????
but if there is no god, all these argument for what??? -
wrong... thats Equality
U need to see the dictionary definition of "fair" then
ask you, is it fair to punish someone with low IQ for doing something stupid with the same punishment as the one with a high IQ doing this same stupid thing?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fair
Fair:
free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice: a fair decision; a fair judge
Fairness
Fair, impartial, disinterested, unprejudiced refer to lack of bias in opinions, judgments, etc. Fair implies the treating of all sides alike, justly and equitably: a fair compromise. Impartial, like fair, implies showing no more favor to one side than another, but suggests particularly a judicial consideration of a case: an impartial judge. Disinterested implies a fairness arising particularly from lack of desire to obtain a selfish advantage: The motives of her guardian were entirely disinterested. Unprejudiced means not influenced or swayed by bias, or by prejudice caused by irrelevant considerations: an unprejudiced decision. 4. passable, tolerable, average, middling. 8. open, clear, unencumbered. 10. clean, spotless, pure, untarnished, unsullied, unstained. 11. legible, distinct. 12. blond, pale. 13. pretty, comely, lovely. 15. polite, gracious.
If u look at the definition of equality, u find tat it is far from the one tat I am mentioning. U r just playing with word.
And your example of a stupid person and clever person, u r giving the wrong example. If u talk about comparing a clever person with a stupid person, obviously u have to account their intelligence to make a fair judgement. Tat is fairness. Tis is because stupidity is a matter of grave important to the case and must be taken into account to be fair.
If u punish a stupid person A of religion A harshly while punishing a stupid person B of religion B lightly, u r not being fair. Religion in tis case does not play any role and it is discrimination
U r giving the wrong example man
Now where is your illustration of being unfair and making it become a just and wise wisdom ? Com'on show me your illustration. -
Who told you that?Originally posted by popmynutsy:sad to say yes.
even if u are a best person in the world, down u go too.
hell is very scary. bible said that.
if u really want to know what is like,
go google 23 minutes in hell. -
does it mean that because i have two sons of varying age, what i give to one is also what i give to the other??? obviously not. so am i being unfair?
Obviously he can say u r unfair to him and he is not wrong. But u probably have a valid reason why one get the phone over the other and tat makes it fair.
one got a brand new phone, the other got a hand-me-down phone.at the end of the day, even if there is an almighty deity and this deity is unfair, so how..... he bigger than you, complain go where????
The question is not to complain or watsoever but to say tat the logic of some being which is just but not fair is contradicting -
Equality isn't possible and should never be possible though we can give it our best shot at being fair.Originally posted by vince69:wrong... thats Equality
ask you, is it fair to punish someone with low IQ for doing something stupid with the same punishment as the one with a high IQ doing this same stupid thing?
there is this thing called, expectation.
Even if the exact same treatment is given to everybody, there will still be someone shouting NOT FAIR! why? cause everyone wants better treatment. :-) -
Yup, so a god can say that he is fair regardless of how much you and i complain about it right?Originally posted by stupidissmart:Obviously he can say u r unfair to him and he is not wrong. But u probably have a valid reason why one get the phone over the other and tat makes it fair.
as in the above case, i think it's similar. one son, on the basis that he is older, is also more responsible, therefore he can handle a brand new phone. the other son, a few years younger and rather careless about his belongings gets a hand-me-done phone..... am i being contradictory and not being fair to my younger son???Originally posted by stupidissmart:The question is not to complain or watsoever but to say tat the logic of some being which is just but not fair is contradicting -
if u have to account their intelligence to make a fair judgementOriginally posted by stupidissmart:And your example of a stupid person and clever person, u r giving the wrong example. If u talk about comparing a clever person with a stupid person, obviously u have to account their intelligence to make a fair judgement. Tat is fairness. Tis is because stupidity is a matter of grave important to the case and must be taken into account to be fair.
If u punish a stupid person A of religion A harshly while punishing a stupid person B of religion B lightly, u r not being fair. Religion in tis case does not play any role and it is discrimination
U r giving the wrong example man
by your definition.... that would be unfair, does it? ie. not teating all the same irregardless of classes and intelligence...Originally posted by stupidissmart:Fairness refers to same treatment to all classes of people. -
morning unker vince.... so early this morning? or haben sleep yet?
-
There are many interesting discussions (lately) on fairness, justice, etc. Shouldn't a new thread be started to focus on this?
So, what happens to non-christians after death? anyone got the last word on this?