You can't say he's not a God of love just because he follows some rules.
I can most certainly say he's not a just and loving God if he wrote the rules
that govern who is and is not allowed entrance into "his afterlife" and then only extended his offer of salvation to a select group.
Having said that, what rules would you consider "fair" for a God to make in who gets to be in his afterlife?
Equal opportunity of salvation through his message to mankind would be fair. Any unequal distribution of that message (And thus the opportunity) would be unfair. Further, providing some actual evidence for his existence and the validity of the Bible would help - otherwise, he's condemning skeptics like myself to eternal torment.
I don't see any logical way to go about it other than salvation through the Christian (or similar) method.
He could simply allow entrance into Heaven to anyone after death as part of the natural progression of human existence.
Honestly, in my mind, what goes on between people who haven't heard of Christ and God is something between them and God and not really my personal problem.
If someone hasn't heard of Christ and God, there's nothing
going on between them and God - that's my whole point.
I don't see any explanation in your responses showing how God's unequal and inconsistent distribution of his message fails to constitute a contradiction with his supposed loving nature. The Bible says God loves all mankind, and sent Christ to atone for our sins so that we could be granted entrance into Heaven, so long as we (Well, so long as we follow a shitload of arbitrary and nonsensical rules, but among them...) believe in Christ. To withhold that message from any
of his children (And subsequently condemn them to eternal suffering) is contradictory to the notion that he loves us all
. Either he doesn't love us all, or the message is wrong.
So I said religion makes as much logical sense as love. You told me love was a product of natural forces, so religion is too. The fact that neither makes any logical sense as a concept outside of that was my entire point.
Outside its own context, virtually nothing makes sense. Both love and religion are products of natural forces, albeit different ones. The underlying forces allowed for greater proliferation of the species that experience them, though religion (A misapplication and byproduct of the pattern recognition that created it) has been a greater destructive force than beneficial in the time since its inception. We, as a species, have thrived in spite of religion, not because of it.
"I find it elevating and exhilarating to discover that we live in a universe which permits the evolution of molecular machines as intricate and subtle as we."