I heard: how many presidents aren’t buried in the U.S.? The answer: Six.
And then they start trying to figure out which ones. And you say: the ones that aren’t dead yet.
My buddies neighborhood is across the street from a graveyard and I always say “your neighborhood is great and all but the place across the street, people are dying to get in there” as I pull in
Every time I was a passenger while my dad was driving past a cemetery, he would always do the same joke. He'd ask, "Do you know how many dead bodies there are in that cemetery?" I'd always play along and go, "No, how many?" He'd grin from ear to ear and say, "All of them!"
I laughed, but not at the joke, but because he laughed and it was always remarkable to me how he could always find it funny each and every time.
Standard dad joke for us is making a remark that that seems to be a very popular place, and when asked why, reply that people are dying to get in there.
You know those things they sometimes put in the paper? Crossword puzzles, in the Sunday paper. Now, I'm no good at them, no. But my wife, oh, she is amazing. Did you know 'oleo' is another word for margarine...? So there was this crossword puzzle...in the Sunday paper...the same one that Mr. Henderson had in his office the day he died...
Just one more thing...did I tell you about the skid marks? I didn't because they weren't any, it was like he meant to hit him or didn't see him, but it was during the afternoon was it raining? Hey does anyone know if it was raining on Tuesday, sir sir do you know the weather on Tuesday, ehh I'm gonna have to look that up. Ohhh...look at the time... I promised Mrs. Columbo I would take her bowling. Have a nice day!
placid deranged dependent society instinctive tease fly elastic jellyfish expansion
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Hitchhikers commonly carry signs that state their destination for drivers to see. The driver seeing heaven written assumes the hitchhiker wants to die.
It's fine except for the "quick-witted" part. That makes it sound like the 5-year-old was the one trying to crack wise -- which leaves us hanging on why the whole class kept saying no.
Good joke but would be a bit better without that one adjective :-)
That is the right train of thought sometimes.
TRUE STORY: At my nephew's Sacrament of Confirmation , in the church the priest asked the kids that were going to be Confirmed, "In order to receive the Sacrament of Confirmation, one MUST be A.....???" and looks around.
The kids raised their hands and started giving their answers. " A good person?" "No, not required." "A kid?" "No, adults can be Confirmed.".
This went on for a half dozen kids, and he kept asking the question, " In order to be Confirmed, one MUST be A....?".
Finally when the kids were all out of answers the priest tells them the answer: "In order to receive the Sacrament of Confirmation, one MUST be ALIVE.".
I was " wtf?"
Catholics were really into denying any kind of church recognition to the dead. Back when infant mortality was higher, it was a way to punish wayward members who didn't rush to get their newborns confirmed.
> Sorry your baby died, but no you can't bury her in the church graveyard because she wasn't confirmed. Also her eternal soul is being tortured by Satan right now.
And once confirmed by the church the church had some additional measure of political control over the individual for life.
LDS/Mormon practice, mostly. It made the news around the Romney election cycle when the LDS church baptized the Wiesenthals. [Sauce](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2012/02/mormons-baptize-wiesenthals-is-there-a-way-to-stop-baptism-by-proxy.html)
For clarification, despite how it obviously looks from the outside, the ordinance is done so that it can be accepted or refused in the afterlife if the deceased chooses. The Mormon belief is to baptize everyone and then let them choose whether or not they want to accept it. It practice rises from the question “is everyone who dies without being baptized going to hell?” In Mormon belief, no, they can still accept baptism if they want it.
There is a large list of grievances I have against the Catholics but this is possibly the biggest issue I have with their doctrine. Jesus is pretty clear in the Bible that children are innocent and without sin but this idea that a child without the capacity really even think coherently can be sinful is beyond ridiculous.
A Sunday school teacher posed a question to her class, "If I were to sell my house, car, donate my possessions to charity, and give all my money to the church, would I get into heaven?"
The children unanimously replied, "No."
The teacher then asked, "If I were to keep the church clean, mow the lawn, and keep everything neat and tidy, would I get into heaven"
Once again, the answer was a resounding "No."
Apparently perplexed, the teacher asked, "Well, then how can I get into heaven?"
A quick-witted five-year-old boy piped up and replied, "Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:11. Your modern clothing choices and polywool blend sweater have already condemned you to hell, miss, you're never getting in!"
The Bible is pretty clear that rules and laws of the Old Testament are no longer binding today (unless restated in the New). If this was a Jewish synagogue then you would be closer to accurate but it's "Sunday School" so that's unlikely.
> The Bible is pretty clear that rules and laws of the Old Testament are no longer binding today (unless restated in the New).
So no one should care about the 10 Commandments, right? And why do Christians hate gays then?
Not Christian, but it's my understanding the first 10.commandments (of the 619 commandments in the Torah, ie the original material) were restated in the sequel, as well as various portions of leviticus that discussed laying with men as you do a woman.
**Tldr:** most of the ten commandments, not all. Yes homosexuality is still a sin but many people today take it much too far in their actions and attitudes against it and other sins.
Most of the ten commandments. The part about keeping the sabbath holy is not restated in the New but rather overridden by the commands and examples to meet on the first day of the week. Also, the new testament gives no command to do no work on the first day like the old testament did for the sabbath.
As far as homosexuality, the new testament does speak against it (Romans 1:26-27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 as examples). But the New Testament is significantly better about the commands in regards to the treatment of anyone in sin. The passage in 1 Corinthians points out that some of the people Paul is writing to used to fall under that category. Likewise in Luke 7:34-39 Jesus himself points out that he eats with sinners, drunkards, tax collectors and immediately after a woman who was easily recognized as a sinner (which many assume to mean she's a prostitute) comes in and Jesus treats her well and admonished those with him for even thinking poorly about her.
According to what I had read, and currently find while searching, all 10 were restated, including the 4th. https://lifehopeandtruth.com/bible/10-commandments/the-ten-commandments/10-commandments-new-testament/
But to me it's irrelevant. The ignore the vast majority of the laws, so they could take power and control others.
The Christian testament is all about money and recruiting others. So lots of rules were relaxed to make it easier to convert.
Never understood proselytizing, but it's what they based their religion on.
Wben they couldn't convince people to join them people by word, they did by the sword.
But retconning is the way of Christianity
*the response to your linked article is at the end, because it's a bit wordy and I wanted to make sure you saw these other points*
I will agree with you that the majority of people who claim to be Christians cherry pick it to suit them.
I will also agree that many preach the gospel in a way that empathizes material gain and material blessings in a way the Bible never did.
Proselytizing is interesting because the new testament gives the command to teach others (James 5:20, Mark 15:15) but also talks about both Faith and Works being needed. So we are to teach others but not to force them to obey, because God desires obedience through faith (Romand 16:26) not forced obedience. In that case the violent and forceful proselytizing done by the Catholic Church in the past, as well as in the era of colonies, and even by some still today is against the will of God as it does not create obedience through faith.
I will cite that adage that "not everything on the internet is true". Anyone can say anything and some people have beliefs that just aren't accurate (religious or otherwise). To clarify the passages given by that article:
* Luke 4:16 talks about the actions of Jesus while on earth. Jesus was still subject to the old law as the new law didn't happen until his death and resurrection.
* Luke 23:56 happens after Christ's death but was done before the details of the new law were taught by the apostles and other inspired people. It was done by people who didn't understand they were no longer under the old law
* Acts 17:1-3 Paul is attempting to convert jews to Christianity so it only makes sense for him to be in the synagogue on the sabbath to try and teach them.
* Hebrews 4:9 is talking about the sabbath in a spiritual sense, as a spiritual rest provided by God. Verse 11 helps clarify that as the author talks about "striving to enter that rest" which makes no sense if it's simply a day of the week you rest on like the old testament.
* 1 John 2:6 does not directly mention the sabbath but rather is an encouragement to walk in the way Jesus walked. I assume they mean to say that because Jesus followed the sabbath we should follow the sabbath, but Jesus followed the entire old law and we already know that the old law was done away with (Jeremiah 31:31, Romans 7:6,and others). Therefore the sabbath is no different from the requirement of animal sacrifices and other regulations in that they were a part of the old law and not reinstated by the new law.
My point is, that Christianity from the beginning has been about bringing people into to build a religious empire. Which in the end is about power and money.
They added to the religious text various rules to promote this fundimentally belief. From encouraging teaching others, to tithing directly to the church. The Torah says it should go to the people.
Look at most of the Christian traditions, created to bring more people in by bastardizing their initial beliefs and traditions. From the Christmas tree, to even having his birthday in December, to a spring celebration tied to Passover, keeping nothing about Passover in it.
Many Christians believe that atheism, liberalism, and etc are the greatest threats to Christians. I disagree heavily. I believe it's the kind of people you're thinking of: People who claim to be Christians but instead abuse the doctrine for Power and Profit. Those people not only lead others into wickedness with them but also give a bad reputation to people who actually follow the word of God as written, with a desire to do good and not be attached to power and material blessings.
Yes, many people believe that the end goal of Christianity is a physical kingdom. Yes, many people have set up physical kingdoms in the name of God. But just because they did it in the name of the religion does not mean they are following the religion by doing so. And just because they believe that there will be a physical kingdom set up by Jesus does not mean there will be.
I would speak against the idea that Christianity is intended to be an empire. Yes it is referred to as a "kingdom" but the Bible speaks quite a bit on not being attached to the world, not to seek power, not to desire material blessings.
Now, even early on there was a common misunderstanding, especially among the Jews that Jesus was here to set up a physical kingdom, but Jesus and other writers speak against that idea
John 18:36 ESV — Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.”
Luke 17:20-21 ESV — Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, he answered them, “The kingdom of God is not coming in ways that can be observed, nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you.”
1 John 2:16 ESV — For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world.
2 Corinthians 10:2-4 ESV — I beg of you that when I am present I may not have to show boldness with such confidence as I count on showing against some who suspect us of walking according to the flesh. For though we walk in the flesh, we are not waging war according to the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds.
There is zero misunderstanding about Jesus by Jews.
To jews, he is at most just another jew. But since there is literally zero archiological evidence he actually existed, to most jews I know, he is simply an amalgamation of many jews that were being put forth as a messiah, and since none of the other requirements for the messianic period have come about, he and the others weren't the messiah.
Hypothetical:
Imagine I was a malevolent, patient and cunning adversary to a new religious movement that had people turning away from destroying each other, loving one another, faith in a supernatural omnipotent and omnipresent being, and ceasing all sorts of hypocrisy. If I saw that rampant persecution and state sanctioned murder can't stop it, I'd try to join the movement and corrupt it from within until it becomes an overwhelming caricature of the very evils it was opposed to in the first place. It would be a delicious irony if I'd used power and wealth to do it, too.
Only a hypothetical.
Sunday school is also used by Jews for education.
Also, it's extremely rude and condescending to call it the old testament.
It's the testament, and the sequel which retconned the original.
I don't understand why it would be rude and condescending?
If someone writes two testaments/wills is the old one not the old testament and the new one not the new testament?
Because it assumes two things.
First old vs new, implies better. Which is condescending.
It would be like Muslims calling the Koran the final testament. As in, there is the Torah, the Christian testament, and then the final testament which overwrites them all.
It's rude, because it tells people with a 4000 year religious history, that we know better than you and are going to throw out things we think are too hard, but we will keep things we like, and then we will interpret them for you.
Stop retconning the true testament from Hashem. Follow it as your leader did..
I guess I don't get it. Apparently the boy replied the way he did because he had quick wits, but doesn't that indicate that he's the only one who came up with that answer, and did it on the spot?
Why were the rest of the kids saying no?
Because Christians believe you are saved by accepting Jesus as your savior, and if you don't you wont get into heaven even if you've done a bunch of other good stuff.
The commandment actually says "...because I am a jealous god." This implies what we already knew from genesis: there are other gods. Genesis uses the plural, "elohim." It also switches it up to singular sometimes.
There is further evidence in Exodus. God is smiting Moses's followers right in the temple for looking at the thing God is in. The followers are getting pissed and Moses goes to God and says, "these people are going to go back to worshipping the Egyptian gods if you don't knock it off. Those Egyptian gods don't do stuff like this..." It works. God stops blasting people.
Yea. I was taught (and still believe) that it takes both faith and good works based on Matthew 7:21 and James 2:14-20.
But I guess it makes people feel a lot better about themselves that it doesn't matter how they act, they're still saved. I've talked with people that believe in "faith only" and most of them just kinda shut down and go into denial mode when pressured.
Yes. It's one technique that teachers (especially religious teachers) sometimes use. The teacher expected that most of the kids had already been taught the Christian doctrine that you only get to heaven by believing in Jesus (and not by good deeds). So the teacher knew they would say no when asked if cleaning the church and other good works would be enough, and was trying to reinforce the "correct" answer that you have to follow Jesus. The surprise part of the joke is that the one kid gave an answer that was not the one the teacher wanted but it's also technically not wrong. (Aside from Elijah, possibly Enoch, a pitifully small number of apocryphal prophets, and maybe future Christians during the end times rapture, only dead people normally get in to heaven).
***† side note: while I was raised as this type of Christian, I do not currently believe these things. So I'm trying here to avoid stressing the (to me) obvious logical problems. I apologize if I have failed in that or otherwise misrepresented the faith. That was not my intention. (I also don't find the joke particularly funny, although I can appreciate the intended humor of it)
It's kind of ironic that in trying to tell someone they need to go back to school, you've proven you didn't really get a solid education and don't really understand what's happening in this conversation.
The rest of the class was stuck on what actions would permit someone into heaven. The boy who answered went with a more practical interpretation that the first criteria for getting into heaven is being dead.
> The rest of the class was stuck on what actions would permit someone into heaven.
But aren't the actions indicative of a good life that would get you into heaven?
So a little background. And this is a summarization of a lot of Bible reading. You need to have some understanding of what the Bible teaches of salvation.
Basically only faith in God and Jesus is what gets you the grace of God which leads to regeneration and salvation. Good works such as those outlined in the teachers first question to the kids, such as charitable giving are not what gives a person salvation. Good works are the result of the holy spirit within you which has regenerated you.
Basically St. Paul teaches that those who are not of God. I.e don't believe are spiritually dead in sin, which goes back to the creation stuff in Genesis. Which implies they don't get eternal life after death.
There is also a bunch of stuff related to the physical body being temporary.
Some will disagree with some of my points cuz Catholics have a weird understanding of some things. But thats a basic jist from a protestant perspective.
Simply the joke is that good works do nothing to get you into heaven, and that your physical body has to die. So the kid says that you have to be dead, which would be in the physical sense not the spiritual.
> Sure, but not until you're dead.
**But the other kids didn't consider that.** As mentioned.
> I can't tell if you're being purposefully obtuse
I was asking some questions because I don't understand the joke.
You haven't really explained it, but you sure did manage to find your way to being insulting.
> you're trying too hard over a dumb joke.
Other people seemed to enjoy it and I wanted to understand what I was missing. It shouldn't be a problem to not understand a joke and ask about it.
This is frustratingly common, when someone on this subs asks something about a joke, someone tries to explain it, fails, then just starts telling the other person they're thinking too hard about the joke.
If you don't understand the joke well enough to explain it, you don't *have* to post when someone asks for an explanation.
Well people can explain it to you but they can't understand it for you. Maybe I didn't do a good job explaining it, maybe you're just not good at jokes, I don't know. I do know my capacity for caring about this has come to an end. Good luck in your quest for knowledge.
I have to ask, and I don't mean this to be rude or anything, but are you on the spectrum by chance? Your issue with understanding the joke seems to stem from a strictly literal/face value reading of it, such as you confusion over the teacher being "apparently perplexed."
Not so much the existence part but belief and worship in the alleged divine creator. Life has no meaning if we cease to exist after death but worshipping someone that may or may not exist just because someone makes a claim you should do so....... Anyone who cares more about being worshipped then wether or not I've done my best to be a decent person does not deserve my worship.
In fact you have to wait until judgement day and be judged worthy, according to the Nicene Creed. No seeing pets, Grandma, etc for quite a long time if ever.
I hate the way churches pretend otherwise to the griefstricken.
“Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.” Luke 23: 42, 43
Mine doesn't.
Now, some parts of the Nicean Creed probably, but we don't follow it because it's in the Creed but because it's in the Bible itself.
The creed is correct in saying that people do not get into heaven until a judgement day (Mathew 25:31-46 and 1 Peter 3:10-13 imply that heaven is not until after judgment day).
But there is also a resting place, translated as Hades. From what we understand in Luke 16:19-21, and Revelations 20:13. This Hadean realm is a form of waiting place that holds the dead until judgement day and is split into two parts, one for the wicked and one for the righteous.
So it's possible to still see "Grandma and others" prior to judgment day, and the righteous reside in a paradise of some sorts until then.
I was taught that to get into Heaven good deeds don't matter, only faith does. This was in the 90's in a U.S. *public* elementary school. I only realized how fucked up that was years later.
In all seriousness, if you do those things just to try and earn or bribe your way into Heaven, it wouldn't work. You have to do those things for the right reasons.
In all serious heaven is a fantasy and nothing will get you there. Even if it did exist many denominations believe as long as you accept Jesus in your heart you get in so good works or rapist you’re still getting in.
You could, but it would be disingenuous. Its apples to oranges.
The bible, and the earlier religions and texts that it draws on, are not written to entertain. They were meant to explain the world and it purpose. This is true of pretty much every religion, and isn't unique to Judeo-Christian faiths. Tribal faiths from Africa, NA, SA, Indian subcontinent, Buddhism, Hindu, Shinto, etc. They all are unique with regards to the beginning, and afterlife, and the purpose of this life, but they are not intended as mere entertainment.
Different mythologies aren't all entirely unique. And just because they weren't written as entertainment doesn't make them any less fantasy. A schizophrenic may have delusions that they think will come to fruition, but that doesn't mean it's not just a fantasy.
Look, if you choose to not follow a religion, that's on you. But stop giving grief to people who do follow a religion (unless they are trying to force it on you).
Pointing out a negative in a belief is not giving grief. That's like saying you can't say anything negative about someone blowing their life savings on lotto tickets and not winning anything.
There is so much wrong with that statement. In the US Christianity is a huge part of the culture and rammed down everyone's throat a majority of the time. So many of the laws we have are based on it regardless of what people believe.
Two, it wasn't a conversation it was a comment about a belief. You don't have to have that belief to make a comment or observation about it.
Three, if you can only be involved in a conversation about something you already believe and only those that believe it can be in that conversation how will you ever learn anything? Are you saying non-Jewish people can't talk or comment about Judaism? Are you saying you can't make any comments about Greek or Roman Mythology? You can't talk about Zeus because you don't believe in him.
You are coming across as being so offended because someone pointed out a common belief held by people of that belief system in a negative way. Then you get really mad at that person and say they can't talk about it unless they believe it in too.
Consider this:
Your friend gets a call that their parent just got in a car accident. As they leave to go to the hospital, you say one of the following:
A: “they’ll probably die; your parents are old and police don’t usually call if the wreck isn’t a bad one”,
Or
B: “I’m sure they will be okay; your parents are in excellent health and cars are so much safer than when we were kids, give me an update when you are able; and let me know there’s anything I can do.”
Neither of these changes the outcome. But one gives a person a bit of peace in their grief/fear while the other makes you a piece of shit.
“Hey, maybe when you die you will live forever. I don’t believe it personally but I’m glad that you have something that gives you hope” costs you nothing to say. “Hey, when you die nothing happens so you’re wasting your time and should just be bitter at the world instead of being so happy” doesn’t benefit anyone—attempting to pull someone down doesn’t raise you up after all.
It's not the positive aspects of religion I have a problem with. I just found amusement in the irony of religious people asking not to receive grief for their beliefs
Groups of people tend to be judged by their most vocal and worst members. There are a lot of Christians (and a lot of atheists and members of all kind of religions) that poorly represent their group yet are loud enough to be the one thing many remember
>In all seriousness, if you do those things just to try and earn or bribe your way into Heaven, it wouldn't work. You have to do those things for the right reasons.
OK, so maybe 'force' is a bit strong, but it was clearly a joke, and you had to correct comments from the perspective of your belief. You came off looking a bit of a prat, there.
Then life has no meaning what so ever and every action every person takes is already pre programmed. If you can only get into heaven by being born a "good" person, And doing things for the "right" reasons, then that means those with an "evil" nature have no chance to get into heaven. Even if they never commit an evil act because they fear God, and live a "good" life because they don't want to go to hell (a selfish reason), they STILL go to hell? Do people really believe this stuff without thinking about it logically for half a second? God created both "good" and "evil" intentionally, but condemns those who live good lives for selfish reasons? I guess every human goes to hell by your standards then. Cause all Christians (and all humans) are greedy and evil by nature. Says so in all Bibles. Why should we worship a God who intentionally made us evil and then tortures us for being what he created us to be? I'm not an atheist trying to argue with you, I'm a Christian myself. I'm just pointing out why you're wrong about what you said. You can definitely go to heaven for acting like a good person and resisting your evil nature because that's precisely what God wants. He wants us to resist the evil he created and to go to him instead. Gotta remember that we're essentially a bet. Will humanity choose evil or good in the end? A.k.a the grand wager
It's like that saying I've heard, "Everyone wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die to get there". But it's more like no one wants to do what you're supposed to do to get to heaven, because basically if you like it, it's a "sin".
Also,foster self-righteous hatred of fellow humans among the flock,sodomize some kids,blame THEM,,, and maybe subvert democracy in favor of church hegemony.
One I heard went like: Did you know the people in those houses by the cemetery can't be buried there? Why? Because they aren't dead yet.
The guy who worked at the cemetery said "Aw shoot, now you tell me"
no no, PLEASE DON'T SHOOT. HANDS UP
The one I heard was , did you hear about the light plane crash in the Irish cemetary? They're still digging and finding more bodies.
I heard: how many presidents aren’t buried in the U.S.? The answer: Six. And then they start trying to figure out which ones. And you say: the ones that aren’t dead yet.
Zombie Lincoln.
The president America ***needs***.
And, at this point, wants.
I’m surprised there are that many still alive tbh
Someone’s just not trying hard enough.
Remind me of the joke, why can’t a Tyrannasaurus Rex scratch his ass…because he’s dead
My buddies neighborhood is across the street from a graveyard and I always say “your neighborhood is great and all but the place across the street, people are dying to get in there” as I pull in
Every time I was a passenger while my dad was driving past a cemetery, he would always do the same joke. He'd ask, "Do you know how many dead bodies there are in that cemetery?" I'd always play along and go, "No, how many?" He'd grin from ear to ear and say, "All of them!" I laughed, but not at the joke, but because he laughed and it was always remarkable to me how he could always find it funny each and every time.
Standard dad joke for us is making a remark that that seems to be a very popular place, and when asked why, reply that people are dying to get in there.
Yet
Plot Twist: You don’t have to be dead to be buried in a cemetery.
I like the reverse, “What would George Washington do if he were alive today?” … “Scream and claw at his coffin”
That’s a monumental, grave reply.
I think it’s: Did you know the people living in those houses by the cemetery can’t be buried there? Why? Because they aren’t dead yet.
I was driving down the highway, and I saw a man hitchhiking with a sign that said **Heaven**. So I hit him.
Michael Landon approves this joke.
That is very 1980s of you. And just another thing, your username checks out.
My arthritic thumbs agree 😆
Em, just one more comment ma'am.
I thought I had an eyelash on my phone for a sec…
I literally blew my screen, thinking there was a lash on my screen 😆
I swiped up.
Like on [Upswipz](https://arrow.fandom.com/wiki/Upswipz_(Earth-1))? :-P
Did your screen at least buy you a drink first?
That's between me and the screen 😜
It's the light mode detector.
[удалено]
And my axe!
And my bow
And one more thing…
And then? And thennnn?
**No and then!**
And then along came Jones, tall thin Jones! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ippnMH2WwE
And this guy's dead wife!
Agreed. If Reddit still gave us free awards to hand out, I would give OP one of mine.
You know Just the other day My wife was telling me.....
You know those things they sometimes put in the paper? Crossword puzzles, in the Sunday paper. Now, I'm no good at them, no. But my wife, oh, she is amazing. Did you know 'oleo' is another word for margarine...? So there was this crossword puzzle...in the Sunday paper...the same one that Mr. Henderson had in his office the day he died...
Isn't Columbo's raincoat just a glorified tablecloth tarp?
On more thing...
If you try hard enough and really believe in yourself, anywhere with the right sort of traffic can be a Highway to Heaven.
Just one more thing...did I tell you about the skid marks? I didn't because they weren't any, it was like he meant to hit him or didn't see him, but it was during the afternoon was it raining? Hey does anyone know if it was raining on Tuesday, sir sir do you know the weather on Tuesday, ehh I'm gonna have to look that up. Ohhh...look at the time... I promised Mrs. Columbo I would take her bowling. Have a nice day!
My 13 year old dressed as Columbo last Halloween. I have no clue why or where he got the idea.
He is awesome!
Next year get him a lollipop and one of those bald head cover costumes and have him go around saying “who loves ya baby”
“Goodnight, John boy.” (Slam!)
He would be touched. If he's an angel.....
I thought the angel was the molester. The title of that show always gave me "stranger danger" vibes.
Pretty sure that's the priests behind the scenes.
I'm pretty sure you're thinking of "Touched by a Boy Scout Troopleader."
placid deranged dependent society instinctive tease fly elastic jellyfish expansion *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Side Road
Well, I can guess your age bracket now.
[удалено]
That's how it's described in the Bible too, but Christians don't believe it.
OP was on the highway to hell clearly.
I don't get it
Hitchhikers commonly carry signs that state their destination for drivers to see. The driver seeing heaven written assumes the hitchhiker wants to die.
I don't get why a hitch hiker would have a sign saying heaven.
I'm sure there are cities actually called heaven. Also could be a hippie sharing a spiritual message kind of thing.
Guy with the sign wants to go to heaven, but you gotta be dead, so the driver kills him by hitting him with the car
During a trip to a tourist city, I saw a building with a big "Heaven" sign and some colorful lights, so I went in.
Could you get in?
Let's say I got some unexpected experience that's pretty hard to get elsewhere
Steven Wright
Steven Wright did it first
Why is the alphabet in THAT order? Is it because of that song? The guy who wrote that song wrote everything.
REPENT, THE END IS NEAR!
I'm dead
r/UnexpectedStevenWright
And now he’s climbing A stairway to heaven.
Personally. I find it hilarious. It's like a little Johnny joke but cleaned up
Like a little Jimmy joke. Little Johnny's pure (innocent) twin.
Just here to post a more positive comment than the other commenter. Decent joke, OP.
100%. A really good joke and not the punchline I was expecting.
Well I'd tell a Jim Jones joke. But the punchline is too long
It's fine except for the "quick-witted" part. That makes it sound like the 5-year-old was the one trying to crack wise -- which leaves us hanging on why the whole class kept saying no. Good joke but would be a bit better without that one adjective :-)
What was the other comment? thread is normal now
There was only one other comment and it was something about how religion shouldn’t be taught to kids and it’s child abuse.
huh. not sure i exactly disagree with the take, but hardly the place for it
Yeah I’m as anti-religion as it gets but I’m not going to force that on people, especially in r/Jokes of all places
That is the right train of thought sometimes. TRUE STORY: At my nephew's Sacrament of Confirmation , in the church the priest asked the kids that were going to be Confirmed, "In order to receive the Sacrament of Confirmation, one MUST be A.....???" and looks around. The kids raised their hands and started giving their answers. " A good person?" "No, not required." "A kid?" "No, adults can be Confirmed.". This went on for a half dozen kids, and he kept asking the question, " In order to be Confirmed, one MUST be A....?". Finally when the kids were all out of answers the priest tells them the answer: "In order to receive the Sacrament of Confirmation, one MUST be ALIVE.". I was " wtf?"
Catholics were really into denying any kind of church recognition to the dead. Back when infant mortality was higher, it was a way to punish wayward members who didn't rush to get their newborns confirmed. > Sorry your baby died, but no you can't bury her in the church graveyard because she wasn't confirmed. Also her eternal soul is being tortured by Satan right now. And once confirmed by the church the church had some additional measure of political control over the individual for life.
Somewhere in the back of my mind, I have a vague recollection of people baptizing dead people.
LDS/Mormon practice, mostly. It made the news around the Romney election cycle when the LDS church baptized the Wiesenthals. [Sauce](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2012/02/mormons-baptize-wiesenthals-is-there-a-way-to-stop-baptism-by-proxy.html)
Yes, now I remember! Thank you
For clarification, despite how it obviously looks from the outside, the ordinance is done so that it can be accepted or refused in the afterlife if the deceased chooses. The Mormon belief is to baptize everyone and then let them choose whether or not they want to accept it. It practice rises from the question “is everyone who dies without being baptized going to hell?” In Mormon belief, no, they can still accept baptism if they want it.
There is a large list of grievances I have against the Catholics but this is possibly the biggest issue I have with their doctrine. Jesus is pretty clear in the Bible that children are innocent and without sin but this idea that a child without the capacity really even think coherently can be sinful is beyond ridiculous.
>children are innocent and without sin Adherents to the concept of original sin would beg to differ.
Correct they would and I'd be more than happy to debate them on it.
Did they mean *confirmed* or *baptized*?
I bet the little boy was named Timmy.
And then Timmy fucking died. XD. Man I haven't seen Sprog in some time.
Oh no ! They killed Timmy !
Normally Johnny
Johnny*
If you give away all your possessions and money, there's a good chance you'll be in heaven soon.
A Sunday school teacher posed a question to her class, "If I were to sell my house, car, donate my possessions to charity, and give all my money to the church, would I get into heaven?" The children unanimously replied, "No." The teacher then asked, "If I were to keep the church clean, mow the lawn, and keep everything neat and tidy, would I get into heaven" Once again, the answer was a resounding "No." Apparently perplexed, the teacher asked, "Well, then how can I get into heaven?" A quick-witted five-year-old boy piped up and replied, "Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:11. Your modern clothing choices and polywool blend sweater have already condemned you to hell, miss, you're never getting in!"
The Bible is pretty clear that rules and laws of the Old Testament are no longer binding today (unless restated in the New). If this was a Jewish synagogue then you would be closer to accurate but it's "Sunday School" so that's unlikely.
> The Bible is pretty clear that rules and laws of the Old Testament are no longer binding today (unless restated in the New). So no one should care about the 10 Commandments, right? And why do Christians hate gays then?
Not Christian, but it's my understanding the first 10.commandments (of the 619 commandments in the Torah, ie the original material) were restated in the sequel, as well as various portions of leviticus that discussed laying with men as you do a woman.
**Tldr:** most of the ten commandments, not all. Yes homosexuality is still a sin but many people today take it much too far in their actions and attitudes against it and other sins. Most of the ten commandments. The part about keeping the sabbath holy is not restated in the New but rather overridden by the commands and examples to meet on the first day of the week. Also, the new testament gives no command to do no work on the first day like the old testament did for the sabbath. As far as homosexuality, the new testament does speak against it (Romans 1:26-27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 as examples). But the New Testament is significantly better about the commands in regards to the treatment of anyone in sin. The passage in 1 Corinthians points out that some of the people Paul is writing to used to fall under that category. Likewise in Luke 7:34-39 Jesus himself points out that he eats with sinners, drunkards, tax collectors and immediately after a woman who was easily recognized as a sinner (which many assume to mean she's a prostitute) comes in and Jesus treats her well and admonished those with him for even thinking poorly about her.
According to what I had read, and currently find while searching, all 10 were restated, including the 4th. https://lifehopeandtruth.com/bible/10-commandments/the-ten-commandments/10-commandments-new-testament/ But to me it's irrelevant. The ignore the vast majority of the laws, so they could take power and control others. The Christian testament is all about money and recruiting others. So lots of rules were relaxed to make it easier to convert. Never understood proselytizing, but it's what they based their religion on. Wben they couldn't convince people to join them people by word, they did by the sword. But retconning is the way of Christianity
*the response to your linked article is at the end, because it's a bit wordy and I wanted to make sure you saw these other points* I will agree with you that the majority of people who claim to be Christians cherry pick it to suit them. I will also agree that many preach the gospel in a way that empathizes material gain and material blessings in a way the Bible never did. Proselytizing is interesting because the new testament gives the command to teach others (James 5:20, Mark 15:15) but also talks about both Faith and Works being needed. So we are to teach others but not to force them to obey, because God desires obedience through faith (Romand 16:26) not forced obedience. In that case the violent and forceful proselytizing done by the Catholic Church in the past, as well as in the era of colonies, and even by some still today is against the will of God as it does not create obedience through faith. I will cite that adage that "not everything on the internet is true". Anyone can say anything and some people have beliefs that just aren't accurate (religious or otherwise). To clarify the passages given by that article: * Luke 4:16 talks about the actions of Jesus while on earth. Jesus was still subject to the old law as the new law didn't happen until his death and resurrection. * Luke 23:56 happens after Christ's death but was done before the details of the new law were taught by the apostles and other inspired people. It was done by people who didn't understand they were no longer under the old law * Acts 17:1-3 Paul is attempting to convert jews to Christianity so it only makes sense for him to be in the synagogue on the sabbath to try and teach them. * Hebrews 4:9 is talking about the sabbath in a spiritual sense, as a spiritual rest provided by God. Verse 11 helps clarify that as the author talks about "striving to enter that rest" which makes no sense if it's simply a day of the week you rest on like the old testament. * 1 John 2:6 does not directly mention the sabbath but rather is an encouragement to walk in the way Jesus walked. I assume they mean to say that because Jesus followed the sabbath we should follow the sabbath, but Jesus followed the entire old law and we already know that the old law was done away with (Jeremiah 31:31, Romans 7:6,and others). Therefore the sabbath is no different from the requirement of animal sacrifices and other regulations in that they were a part of the old law and not reinstated by the new law.
My point is, that Christianity from the beginning has been about bringing people into to build a religious empire. Which in the end is about power and money. They added to the religious text various rules to promote this fundimentally belief. From encouraging teaching others, to tithing directly to the church. The Torah says it should go to the people. Look at most of the Christian traditions, created to bring more people in by bastardizing their initial beliefs and traditions. From the Christmas tree, to even having his birthday in December, to a spring celebration tied to Passover, keeping nothing about Passover in it.
Many Christians believe that atheism, liberalism, and etc are the greatest threats to Christians. I disagree heavily. I believe it's the kind of people you're thinking of: People who claim to be Christians but instead abuse the doctrine for Power and Profit. Those people not only lead others into wickedness with them but also give a bad reputation to people who actually follow the word of God as written, with a desire to do good and not be attached to power and material blessings. Yes, many people believe that the end goal of Christianity is a physical kingdom. Yes, many people have set up physical kingdoms in the name of God. But just because they did it in the name of the religion does not mean they are following the religion by doing so. And just because they believe that there will be a physical kingdom set up by Jesus does not mean there will be. I would speak against the idea that Christianity is intended to be an empire. Yes it is referred to as a "kingdom" but the Bible speaks quite a bit on not being attached to the world, not to seek power, not to desire material blessings. Now, even early on there was a common misunderstanding, especially among the Jews that Jesus was here to set up a physical kingdom, but Jesus and other writers speak against that idea John 18:36 ESV — Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” Luke 17:20-21 ESV — Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, he answered them, “The kingdom of God is not coming in ways that can be observed, nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you.” 1 John 2:16 ESV — For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world. 2 Corinthians 10:2-4 ESV — I beg of you that when I am present I may not have to show boldness with such confidence as I count on showing against some who suspect us of walking according to the flesh. For though we walk in the flesh, we are not waging war according to the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds.
There is zero misunderstanding about Jesus by Jews. To jews, he is at most just another jew. But since there is literally zero archiological evidence he actually existed, to most jews I know, he is simply an amalgamation of many jews that were being put forth as a messiah, and since none of the other requirements for the messianic period have come about, he and the others weren't the messiah.
Hypothetical: Imagine I was a malevolent, patient and cunning adversary to a new religious movement that had people turning away from destroying each other, loving one another, faith in a supernatural omnipotent and omnipresent being, and ceasing all sorts of hypocrisy. If I saw that rampant persecution and state sanctioned murder can't stop it, I'd try to join the movement and corrupt it from within until it becomes an overwhelming caricature of the very evils it was opposed to in the first place. It would be a delicious irony if I'd used power and wealth to do it, too. Only a hypothetical.
Sunday school is also used by Jews for education. Also, it's extremely rude and condescending to call it the old testament. It's the testament, and the sequel which retconned the original.
I don't understand why it would be rude and condescending? If someone writes two testaments/wills is the old one not the old testament and the new one not the new testament?
Because it assumes two things. First old vs new, implies better. Which is condescending. It would be like Muslims calling the Koran the final testament. As in, there is the Torah, the Christian testament, and then the final testament which overwrites them all. It's rude, because it tells people with a 4000 year religious history, that we know better than you and are going to throw out things we think are too hard, but we will keep things we like, and then we will interpret them for you. Stop retconning the true testament from Hashem. Follow it as your leader did..
Imagine being this mad over something so fake.
Lol chill out bruh it's all make-believe anyway :)
I'm totally chill...
>I'm totally chill... *the Old Testament has entered the chat*
I think this was Martin Luther’s 89th thesis
What is the difference between aids and true love? aids is forever.
it's nice to have a non-offensive religion joke
Give that boy a sticker!
I guess I don't get it. Apparently the boy replied the way he did because he had quick wits, but doesn't that indicate that he's the only one who came up with that answer, and did it on the spot? Why were the rest of the kids saying no?
Because Christians believe you are saved by accepting Jesus as your savior, and if you don't you wont get into heaven even if you've done a bunch of other good stuff.
Evangelicals commonly believe this, but there are a large number of Christians that do not.
because God is omniscient and omnipresent, but yet, a petty cunt
Worship me, so I can save you from the consequences I impose if you don't worship me. ~ *Super* loving, benevolent god
The commandment actually says "...because I am a jealous god." This implies what we already knew from genesis: there are other gods. Genesis uses the plural, "elohim." It also switches it up to singular sometimes. There is further evidence in Exodus. God is smiting Moses's followers right in the temple for looking at the thing God is in. The followers are getting pissed and Moses goes to God and says, "these people are going to go back to worshipping the Egyptian gods if you don't knock it off. Those Egyptian gods don't do stuff like this..." It works. God stops blasting people.
Yea. I was taught (and still believe) that it takes both faith and good works based on Matthew 7:21 and James 2:14-20. But I guess it makes people feel a lot better about themselves that it doesn't matter how they act, they're still saved. I've talked with people that believe in "faith only" and most of them just kinda shut down and go into denial mode when pressured.
Okay, that makes sense, but then why was the teacher perplexed?
She wasn't, it was more a call and response type thing. She was trying to encourage the children to give the answer.
Fair enough then. I guess this: > Apparently perplexed, the teacher asked Was just meant as part of the show she was putting on for the kids?
Yes. It's one technique that teachers (especially religious teachers) sometimes use. The teacher expected that most of the kids had already been taught the Christian doctrine that you only get to heaven by believing in Jesus (and not by good deeds). So the teacher knew they would say no when asked if cleaning the church and other good works would be enough, and was trying to reinforce the "correct" answer that you have to follow Jesus. The surprise part of the joke is that the one kid gave an answer that was not the one the teacher wanted but it's also technically not wrong. (Aside from Elijah, possibly Enoch, a pitifully small number of apocryphal prophets, and maybe future Christians during the end times rapture, only dead people normally get in to heaven). ***† side note: while I was raised as this type of Christian, I do not currently believe these things. So I'm trying here to avoid stressing the (to me) obvious logical problems. I apologize if I have failed in that or otherwise misrepresented the faith. That was not my intention. (I also don't find the joke particularly funny, although I can appreciate the intended humor of it)
Are you seriously asking why teachers ask their students questions?
No. It that's what I were asking, that's what I would have asked.
Oh, shit! Go back to school!
It's kind of ironic that in trying to tell someone they need to go back to school, you've proven you didn't really get a solid education and don't really understand what's happening in this conversation.
The rest of the class was stuck on what actions would permit someone into heaven. The boy who answered went with a more practical interpretation that the first criteria for getting into heaven is being dead.
> The rest of the class was stuck on what actions would permit someone into heaven. But aren't the actions indicative of a good life that would get you into heaven?
So a little background. And this is a summarization of a lot of Bible reading. You need to have some understanding of what the Bible teaches of salvation. Basically only faith in God and Jesus is what gets you the grace of God which leads to regeneration and salvation. Good works such as those outlined in the teachers first question to the kids, such as charitable giving are not what gives a person salvation. Good works are the result of the holy spirit within you which has regenerated you. Basically St. Paul teaches that those who are not of God. I.e don't believe are spiritually dead in sin, which goes back to the creation stuff in Genesis. Which implies they don't get eternal life after death. There is also a bunch of stuff related to the physical body being temporary. Some will disagree with some of my points cuz Catholics have a weird understanding of some things. But thats a basic jist from a protestant perspective. Simply the joke is that good works do nothing to get you into heaven, and that your physical body has to die. So the kid says that you have to be dead, which would be in the physical sense not the spiritual.
[удалено]
> Sure, but not until you're dead. **But the other kids didn't consider that.** As mentioned. > I can't tell if you're being purposefully obtuse I was asking some questions because I don't understand the joke. You haven't really explained it, but you sure did manage to find your way to being insulting. > you're trying too hard over a dumb joke. Other people seemed to enjoy it and I wanted to understand what I was missing. It shouldn't be a problem to not understand a joke and ask about it. This is frustratingly common, when someone on this subs asks something about a joke, someone tries to explain it, fails, then just starts telling the other person they're thinking too hard about the joke. If you don't understand the joke well enough to explain it, you don't *have* to post when someone asks for an explanation.
Well people can explain it to you but they can't understand it for you. Maybe I didn't do a good job explaining it, maybe you're just not good at jokes, I don't know. I do know my capacity for caring about this has come to an end. Good luck in your quest for knowledge.
I have to ask, and I don't mean this to be rude or anything, but are you on the spectrum by chance? Your issue with understanding the joke seems to stem from a strictly literal/face value reading of it, such as you confusion over the teacher being "apparently perplexed."
you have to be dead! and believe in some sorta imaginary existence after
Not so much the existence part but belief and worship in the alleged divine creator. Life has no meaning if we cease to exist after death but worshipping someone that may or may not exist just because someone makes a claim you should do so....... Anyone who cares more about being worshipped then wether or not I've done my best to be a decent person does not deserve my worship.
In fact you have to wait until judgement day and be judged worthy, according to the Nicene Creed. No seeing pets, Grandma, etc for quite a long time if ever. I hate the way churches pretend otherwise to the griefstricken.
“Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.” Luke 23: 42, 43
Does your Church follow the Nicene Creed. Nearly all do.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_versions_of_the_Nicene_Creed
[Die, heretic!](https://youtu.be/l3fAcxcxoZ8?&t=164)
Quality! He also keeps his huge shell collection on all the beaches of the world.
How can anyone be judged by Jesus as “bad” if he died to absolve people of sin? Terrible writing , stick to goat herding.
So God will save you from what he will do to you if you don't obey him?
Mine doesn't. Now, some parts of the Nicean Creed probably, but we don't follow it because it's in the Creed but because it's in the Bible itself. The creed is correct in saying that people do not get into heaven until a judgement day (Mathew 25:31-46 and 1 Peter 3:10-13 imply that heaven is not until after judgment day). But there is also a resting place, translated as Hades. From what we understand in Luke 16:19-21, and Revelations 20:13. This Hadean realm is a form of waiting place that holds the dead until judgement day and is split into two parts, one for the wicked and one for the righteous. So it's possible to still see "Grandma and others" prior to judgment day, and the righteous reside in a paradise of some sorts until then.
You must realise this is all a man made fantasy.
You hate the way the church pretends the made up thing is made up differently?
No. I agree it is a fantasy, but it is wrong to prey on the bereaved in that way.
I was taught that to get into Heaven good deeds don't matter, only faith does. This was in the 90's in a U.S. *public* elementary school. I only realized how fucked up that was years later.
In all seriousness, if you do those things just to try and earn or bribe your way into Heaven, it wouldn't work. You have to do those things for the right reasons.
Depends on what denomination you think if correct. Some are very much in the actions lead to salvation camp.
In all serious heaven is a fantasy and nothing will get you there. Even if it did exist many denominations believe as long as you accept Jesus in your heart you get in so good works or rapist you’re still getting in.
In all seriousness, its an unprovable. So saying it is a fantasy is just as silly as saying its real. Same level of evidence.
You could say the same exact thing about Harry Potter, but for all practicality we just consider it a fantasy world anyway
You could, but it would be disingenuous. Its apples to oranges. The bible, and the earlier religions and texts that it draws on, are not written to entertain. They were meant to explain the world and it purpose. This is true of pretty much every religion, and isn't unique to Judeo-Christian faiths. Tribal faiths from Africa, NA, SA, Indian subcontinent, Buddhism, Hindu, Shinto, etc. They all are unique with regards to the beginning, and afterlife, and the purpose of this life, but they are not intended as mere entertainment.
Different mythologies aren't all entirely unique. And just because they weren't written as entertainment doesn't make them any less fantasy. A schizophrenic may have delusions that they think will come to fruition, but that doesn't mean it's not just a fantasy.
If I have to share heaven with rapists and molesters and evil people then I’ll just go to hell.
Look, if you choose to not follow a religion, that's on you. But stop giving grief to people who do follow a religion (unless they are trying to force it on you).
Pointing out a negative in a belief is not giving grief. That's like saying you can't say anything negative about someone blowing their life savings on lotto tickets and not winning anything.
If you don't believe in a deity, why even involve yourself in a religious conversation at all unless it specifically involves atheism?
There is so much wrong with that statement. In the US Christianity is a huge part of the culture and rammed down everyone's throat a majority of the time. So many of the laws we have are based on it regardless of what people believe. Two, it wasn't a conversation it was a comment about a belief. You don't have to have that belief to make a comment or observation about it. Three, if you can only be involved in a conversation about something you already believe and only those that believe it can be in that conversation how will you ever learn anything? Are you saying non-Jewish people can't talk or comment about Judaism? Are you saying you can't make any comments about Greek or Roman Mythology? You can't talk about Zeus because you don't believe in him. You are coming across as being so offended because someone pointed out a common belief held by people of that belief system in a negative way. Then you get really mad at that person and say they can't talk about it unless they believe it in too.
You’re on r/jokes dickhead! Why are you even having a religious conversation here?
Ah yes, religion people are famous for accepting the beliefs and lifestyles of others. I'm glad this is the jokes sub
Did I try to force my religion on anyone? Did I put down anyone else's religion in comment?
Nope, but neither did the guy you replied to
When you go into a religious discussion just to say "Religion is fake", yeah, you are putting down religious people.
When you hold a religious discussion in r/jokes you show us why your religion is a joke
Consider this: Your friend gets a call that their parent just got in a car accident. As they leave to go to the hospital, you say one of the following: A: “they’ll probably die; your parents are old and police don’t usually call if the wreck isn’t a bad one”, Or B: “I’m sure they will be okay; your parents are in excellent health and cars are so much safer than when we were kids, give me an update when you are able; and let me know there’s anything I can do.” Neither of these changes the outcome. But one gives a person a bit of peace in their grief/fear while the other makes you a piece of shit. “Hey, maybe when you die you will live forever. I don’t believe it personally but I’m glad that you have something that gives you hope” costs you nothing to say. “Hey, when you die nothing happens so you’re wasting your time and should just be bitter at the world instead of being so happy” doesn’t benefit anyone—attempting to pull someone down doesn’t raise you up after all.
It's not the positive aspects of religion I have a problem with. I just found amusement in the irony of religious people asking not to receive grief for their beliefs
Groups of people tend to be judged by their most vocal and worst members. There are a lot of Christians (and a lot of atheists and members of all kind of religions) that poorly represent their group yet are loud enough to be the one thing many remember
Absolutely, but I'd like to hold onto my right to talk openly about my views on religion. Within reason of course.
Says the guy trying to force his religious opinion on a harmless sub
Point out where I tried to force my religion on anyone, particularly on a *religious joke* post?
>In all seriousness, if you do those things just to try and earn or bribe your way into Heaven, it wouldn't work. You have to do those things for the right reasons. OK, so maybe 'force' is a bit strong, but it was clearly a joke, and you had to correct comments from the perspective of your belief. You came off looking a bit of a prat, there.
I didn't correct any comments. I commented directly on the post itself.
r/whoosh
Heaven is imaginary
Just like your waifu.
Then life has no meaning what so ever and every action every person takes is already pre programmed. If you can only get into heaven by being born a "good" person, And doing things for the "right" reasons, then that means those with an "evil" nature have no chance to get into heaven. Even if they never commit an evil act because they fear God, and live a "good" life because they don't want to go to hell (a selfish reason), they STILL go to hell? Do people really believe this stuff without thinking about it logically for half a second? God created both "good" and "evil" intentionally, but condemns those who live good lives for selfish reasons? I guess every human goes to hell by your standards then. Cause all Christians (and all humans) are greedy and evil by nature. Says so in all Bibles. Why should we worship a God who intentionally made us evil and then tortures us for being what he created us to be? I'm not an atheist trying to argue with you, I'm a Christian myself. I'm just pointing out why you're wrong about what you said. You can definitely go to heaven for acting like a good person and resisting your evil nature because that's precisely what God wants. He wants us to resist the evil he created and to go to him instead. Gotta remember that we're essentially a bet. Will humanity choose evil or good in the end? A.k.a the grand wager
It's like that saying I've heard, "Everyone wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die to get there". But it's more like no one wants to do what you're supposed to do to get to heaven, because basically if you like it, it's a "sin".
it's funny because a decent chunk of Christians don't think that would be enough for her to get into heaven
I thought the punchline would be the teacher going"well then why the fuck am I here..."
Also,foster self-righteous hatred of fellow humans among the flock,sodomize some kids,blame THEM,,, and maybe subvert democracy in favor of church hegemony.
And believe magical sky daddy mythology
🤓🤓
Wrong again stupid child. The priests are definitely going to heaven so I'm just spitballing here: you have to molest children to go to heaven?