According to christian beliefs, where's Gandhi now?

[HoreTore]

As to Gandhi's right to heaven I believe that God takes into account culture and other religion but judges you as more a whole individual not on a single thing. Basically (this is my life now) if you were applying to university he would look at your grades but also your extracurricular and sports. So personally following God by the christian faith is just one of many paths to reaching him. He believes that all paths are paths to Him as he is simply different manifestations of Himself. Sorta stolen from the Hindu's belief but I am not arguing.

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

So.... Jesus was lying?

You're assuming that god would always agree with public opinion and support democracy in general, maybe the catholic church bows to the will of the people over the years but that is not how the bible describes god. What the indian people wanted might have just been plain wrong in god's eyes.

So.... God hates freedom?

[Husar]

So.... God hates freedom?

If he would, would he have created us able to think for ourselves? That however, does not mean that he will let everyone into heaven. You're not really saying democratic societies hate freedom just because they have laws one must obey to stay out of prison?

[Beskar]

If he would, would he have created us able to think for ourselves?

You haven't been going to bible classes. He never gave us that, technically, satan embodied through a snake actually gave us freedom, by making Adam and Eve eat the apple through their choice, thus, create sin by disobeying god. By eating the apple, Adam and Eve came to know what good and evil are, that evil is going against god and being good is obeying him.

The other consequences from this is that man realised what it was to think for ourselves, opposed to having others think for us (ie: god).

Quite interesting, don't you think?

[Strike For The South]

Hell

[The Wizard]

It's not about me, dude. This thread is about whether Christians would say Gandhi's in heaven. Since I don't really give a crap about heaven, I took offense to the suggestion that not following Christ was a bad thing and implied a lack of moral righteousness in Gandhi. As said here:

Ok, well this is a fair gripe, but you need to take a nuanced view about this. Why didn't he follow Christ? Pride? Racism? Cultural prejudice? These are all attributes attached to Ghandi at one time or another, racism against non-Hindu's and Blacks in particular is the most infamous, I believe.

To simply assume that Ghandi should get into heaven is therefore unjustified, whatever he may have done he was also deeply flawed as an individual.

Who cares if he didn't follow Christ, dude? Look at his works, he can be nothing other than good.

In addition, if I recall correctly, almost every single Christian in this thread has indeed confirmed that Gandhi would indeed not go to heaven. For something as banal as not accepting Jesus.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

It's not about me, dude. This thread is about whether Christians would say Gandhi's in heaven. Since I don't really give a crap about heaven, I took offense to the suggestion that not following Christ was a bad thing and implied a lack of moral righteousness in Gandhi. As said here:

You are mis-representing what I said, that post was in response to HoreTore's complaint that rejection of Christ lands you in hell, to quote the passage completely:

Ok, well this is a fair gripe, but you need to take a nuanced view about this. Why didn't he follow Christ? Pride? Racism? Cultural prejudice? These are all attributes attached to Ghandi at one time or another, racism against non-Hindu's and Blacks in particular is the most infamous, I believe.

To simply assume that Ghandi should get into heaven is therefore unjustified, whatever he may have done he was also deeply flawed as an individual.

On the other hand, rejection of Christ assumes not only exposure, but also effective preaching. If Ghandi was not actually exposed to both then he might be judged as not having actually "rejected" Christ. In which case, he would be judged as a Christian would, I believe, this means his penitence and his wish to know God would be the deciding factors.

Funny how you just ignored that bit? Are you being malicious, or just obstinate?

Who cares if he didn't follow Christ, dude? Look at his works, he can be nothing other than good.

In addition, if I recall correctly, almost every single Christian in this thread has indeed confirmed that Gandhi would indeed not go to heaven. For something as banal as not accepting Jesus.

Works are not relevent in a Christian context, and virtue rests in intention carried through in action; not in action alone.

Ghandi's works in no way qualify him for a place in Christian Heaven, neither do those of Saint Francis of Assesi.

A definitive rejection of Christ is a rejection of Christ's teaching; that man is not by his actions moral, but by his intent; that God judges all men equally and finds all wanting.

God will have judged Ghandi just as he judges anyone else, he will have been found wanting, and the key question will be whether Ghandi himself considers himself to be wanting; and why.

[The Wizard]

I'm not misrepresenting anything. I didn't include that paragraph 'cause it merely underwrites what is said above: that if Gandhi heard about Christ, yet didn't accept the supposed messiah, then hey, no heaven for him, too bad you were a good man, have fun burning!

I might also add I find the idea disgusting that rejection of Christ is necessarily a bad thing. Or that being a good person apparently isn't enough, to Christians, for a person to be, well, good. Or that you presume to know what God thinks. Or that you apply your own (Protestant, apparently) view of Christianity to the entire religion. Or that every single Christian in this thread has said Gandhi has no place in the good afterlife 'cause he didn't believe in cosmic Jewish zombies. I can keep going on like this for a while.

[HoreTore]

You are mis-representing what I said, that post was in response to HoreTore's complaint that rejection of Christ lands you in hell, to quote the passage completely:



Funny how you just ignored that bit? Are you being malicious, or just obstinate?



Works are not relevent in a Christian context, and virtue rests in intention carried through in action; not in action alone.

Ghandi's works in no way qualify him for a place in Christian Heaven, neither do those of Saint Francis of Assesi.

A definitive rejection of Christ is a rejection of Christ's teaching; that man is not by his actions moral, but by his intent; that God judges all men equally and finds all wanting.

God will have judged Ghandi just as he judges anyone else, he will have been found wanting, and the key question will be whether Ghandi himself considers himself to be wanting; and why.

I would consider everyone who "has found Gandhi wanting" to be a complete idiot. Gandhi has done more for humanity than Jesus or almost anyone else has done, if that's not enough to your god, then your god is an evil one to me.

[Myrddraal]

That quote, "No one shall come to the Father except through me" and people's reactions to it have always confused me a little. Is Jesus actually saying "you have to accept and believe in me to come to the Father"? No, not really. Perhaps he meant (which seems more likely to me) that no one shall go to heaven without my forgiveness? Whatever the case, I fear we are putting words in his mouth when we use that phrase to justify the point of view that non-Christians don't go to heaven.

Who said we think for ourselves? It may seem so, but appearances are deceptive. Who is to say we are not but automatons... He does not even need to control us. We are our own slaves.

That way madness lies... or at least, that way the twisting of logic and nihilism lies. I'll fall back on a misused and abused quote: "I think therefore I am"

[Aemilius Paulus]

That way madness lies... or at least, that way the twisting of logic and nihilism lies.

Yeah, been there, done that, still there.

EDIT: Nihilism-absurdism, that is me... Nothing surprising for my age and standing.

[Myrddraal]

Yeah, been there, done that, still there.

That's deep, coming from a nihilist

[Aemilius Paulus]

If he would, would he have created us able to think for ourselves?

Who said we think for ourselves? It may seem so, but appearances are deceptive. Who is to say we are not but automatons, believing we have free will, yet always choosing predictable choices based on personality, upbringing, other people, general environment, etc... Does God not know every step we will make in our lives before we are even born? He does not even need to control us. We are our own slaves.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Who said we think for ourselves? It may seem so, but appearances are deceptive. Who is to say we are not but automatons, believing we have free will, yet always choosing predictable choices based on personality, upbringing, other people, general environment, etc... Does God not know every step we will make in our lives before we are even born? He does not even need to control us. We are our own slaves.

That way madness lies... or at least, that way the twisting of logic and nihilism lies. I'll fall back on a misused and abused quote: "I think therefore I am"

If I go to get some ice cream, what flavor I choose is entirely predictable based on past experiences with taste and genetic programming. I'm a slave to my own taste. I may think I have a choice, but the process is automatic.

But I still get to eat my favorite ice cream...which I bought because it's my favorite...and it's delicious. Deny that, nihilists.

[Viking]

In heaven or hell?

This is one of the main reason why I'll never be a christian was a Hindu. He did not follow christ, and as such shouldn't be in heaven right? Only through me and all that... If he isn't in heaven, then he must be in Hell, or I guess somewhere less pleasing than heaven for those who do not believe in hell. Can't claim the ignorance and limbo thing on him either, as he certainly knew about christianity and jesus, but decided not to convert.

But what god would punish Gandhi? Seriously? The man who organized a succesful independence movement not through war, but through total nonviolence, and also inspired a bunch of other nonviolence movements all over the world. To punish such a man would be rather.... evil, wouldn't it? On the other hand, if he isn't punished in any way, if he got into heaven ass a Hindu, then what's the point of accepting christ then? I could just go about being a good boy, and no harm will come to me in the afterlife...

It depends entirely upon what truly matters on this Earth. If it was to belong to a certain religion, you could say that the rest doesn't matter. It would be like a child molester risking his own life in order to rescue someone from certain death - there is going to be something ambiguous about his reputation no matter what he does.

If a deity defines the meaning of life to be something different than what you do, there's little do be done about that.

[Beskar]

If I go to get some ice cream, what flavor I choose is entirely predictable based on past experiences with taste and genetic programming. I'm a slave to my own taste. I may think I have a choice, but the process is automatic.

But I still get to eat my favorite ice cream...which I bought because it's my favorite...and it's delicious. Deny that, nihilists.

That argument gets very interesting when it comes to homosexuality. But that is a different subject.

[Mooks]

According to what I learned when I was a christrian for many years(Baptist), he's burning in hell right now and will be for all eternity. Probaly by a demon with a british accent.

[Husar]

You haven't been going to bible classes.

I haven't? Now that's interesting, how do you know?

He never gave us that, technically, satan embodied through a snake actually gave us freedom, by making Adam and Eve eat the apple through their choice, thus, create sin by disobeying god. By eating the apple, Adam and Eve came to know what good and evil are, that evil is going against god and being good is obeying him.

The other consequences from this is that man realised what it was to think for ourselves, opposed to having others think for us (ie: god).

Quite interesting, don't you think?

Indeed, it is, I find it very interesting that god's puppets were apparently ordered by god (since they had no free will as you say) to listen to the snake and eat the apple despite god's orders not to. Yeah, sure, no sign of free will or decision-making there...

Who said we think for ourselves? It may seem so, but appearances are deceptive. Who is to say we are not but automatons, believing we have free will, yet always choosing predictable choices based on personality, upbringing, other people, general environment, etc... Does God not know every step we will make in our lives before we are even born? He does not even need to control us. We are our own slaves.

So you're talking about a deterministic world where every atom and every photon will more or less spark a chain reaction or change that of another and these things chainreactions are basically hat makes the universe "move", that's a view I thought about before, kinda destroys the american dream, doesn't it? In fact i think it would make everything completely meaningless and that's exactly where i stop thinking about it because from there it's only going in circles and this automaton does not like circles.

Oh, and what Myrddraal said.

[Beskar]

Indeed, it is, I find it very interesting that god's puppets were apparently ordered by god (since they had no free will as you say) to listen to the snake and eat the apple despite god's orders not to. Yeah, sure, no sign of free will or decision-making there...

What decision making?

[Ironside]

Indeed, it is, I find it very interesting that god's puppets were apparently ordered by god (since they had no free will as you say) to listen to the snake and eat the apple despite god's orders not to. Yeah, sure, no sign of free will or decision-making there...

What decision making?

God's decision to let the snake in, that caused the original sin. That, or God is seriously lacking in his omipotence.

[Husar]

What decision making?

How about the decision to eat the apple despite god's order not to eat them?
There was temptation involved, why would the snake need to temptate them if they would either
a) only do what god told them, in this case any temptation would bear no fruit, or
b) do whatever anyone told them to, in this case temptation would be superfluous, an order would get there faster

The snake made a tempting offer and convinced Eve to the point where she decided to break the rules and eat the apple, then Eve convinced Adam to decide to break the rules, too and that's why they were thrown out of paradise, because they gave in to temptation and decided to break the rules (aka sinning).

[Xiahou]

It's worth pointing out that "limbo" is not official Catholic doctrine.

Just sayin....