Christians: Can a Non-Christian Go to Heaven?

Guys, guys, we are in the 21st century!!  My thing with religion is, I love Christ, God and I love to read the Bible, and I always will, regardless of what church I go or don't go to or if I go to any church at all - its all on the inside, from the heart.

Now, as a Christian, loving and respecting other people, regardless of their creed, colour, religion, orientation or whATEVER other difference u can  think of should come naturally. Whilst we are here on earth, TODAY, RIGHT NOW, IN THE PRESENT, what are we doing? Are we loving and respecting one another? Or are we neglecting to do that and instead fantasizing, very selfishly I might add, about the richness of our individual reward from God for 'serving' Him.

There are 2 points here. (1) How do you serve God? Is it
(A) by following, blindly, ancient rules and traditions observed centuries ago in Bible times + going to Church every Sunday? Or is it (B) by thinking like JESUS would and applying kindness, virtue e.t.c in your everyday interaction with others.     
   
(2) If you answered (A) to the above question, you are missing the point big time.....If you truly love God, you will know that there is no one particular way to show this love, but several ways, big and small. Furthermore, Christianity is NOT some kind of  transaction where you do X (whatever you might imagine that may be) and GOD gives you Y (a guaranteed place in heaven )  in return. No.   GOD is way more intelligent than that - he sees into the heart of every man - WHAT'S IN YOUR HEART WHEN YOU ASK SUCH A QUESTION (Can non-Christians go to heaven?). We are all children of God.......let's try to remember that.

I think we should let God defend Himself when it comes to issues of whether one will go to hell or not. That's why He came up with the whole idea, anyway. How would you rank my greatgrandpops who lived in the days where there were no clothes and really, a tree was considered sacred? I wonder....

@ AbbeyMarie
You put a lot of faith in a theory of salvation that was developed 4th century in a political struggle between the priests Arius and Athanasius. It was Emperor Constantine himself that pushed for the deification of Jesus because it suited his political needs better

but if you honestly repent on your death bed, even after having commited the most atrocious crimes against humanity, you will go to heaven. This is wicked.

Why would I be less qualified than anyone else?

And an honest person who tried to do good all his life, but does not believe will go to hell for all eternity. What do you call that?

If that is the case, than your God is pure evil. By no stretch of the imagination can an all good God do such a thing.

God cannot be evil nferyn,that is a title reserved for the fallen angel, lucifer. My God is a righteous God and no evil or impurity can be seen in Him. He gives/showeth mercy to whoever asks of Him. Whether murderer or rapist. God sees the heart and will forgive whoever repents of his/her evil ways. If you call that evil, if you call that wicked, that of cause is your opinion. You can continue to stretch your imagination still doesnt change the fact that God is GOD and God was never and will never be evil.

Vey true chrisd, thank you for those verses. God punishes evil but will forgive if you repent sincerely. God is sooo far from evil!

The judiciary would be evil for condemning a criminal if:
* they know beforehand what the criminal is going to do
* they have the power to prevent the criminal from commiting his criminal act
* they chose not to act, thus allowing the criminal to do harm
* they condemned the criminal afterwards, even though thy could have prevented the criminal act in the first place
This is not only evil, it is also wicked
Now apply the same logic to your God

GOD is actually coined from the word Good.

Evil is the absence of good/GOD.

Truth be told, GOD is not the one punishing people..albeit old testament wrtiers of the bible had lil revelation as per the person and work of satan. He is the accuser of the brethren and doer of evil.

GOD's commandments and principles are like an hedge round us. If u break...the serpent would bite. GOd isnt an evil doer. U get evil as a result of your disobedience..a consequence of your action...a principle in line without laws of nature.... law of "cause and effect"

I'm calm, don't worry. You cannot possibly maintain that God is omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent, while at the same time evil exists on this world. This is just impossible.

Is it, I didn't know. I have not seen any etymological entries indicating that God stems from Good

So God splits himself up to allow evil to exist. Why?

Ultimately, evil are the acts that harm others.  Are you changing the meaning of the word evil to disobedience?

God chose to create humankind free, and that evil is the result of our abuse of that freedom. Evil is not God’s fault; it is ours. This defence applies only to moral evil; natural evil does not result from the choices of free agents, and so cannot be justified in this way. Natural evil therefore poses a greater threat to belief in God than moral evil.

A generic response to the problem of evil question its fundamental assumptions. It denies that God is morally good, casting doubt on whether he would prevent evil if he were able to; the second denies that evil exists, casting doubt on whether there is a problem to solve at all.

Yes, it seems that it is leading that way

The argument may succeed in casting some doubt on the supposition that a good God would eliminate all suffering; God's benevolence and his justice may exist in tension.

Perhaps a more robust approach to resolving the problem of natural evil is that which holds that it is necessary for the universe to contain some evil in order for it to contain some good. Good and evil, according to this position, are relative terms, like up and down or past and future; one cannot have one unless one has both. If this is correct, if it is impossible for one to exist without the other, then perhaps God was justified in creating a world containing evil because it was only by doing so that he could create a world containing good.

Even if the previous suggestion is resisted, a similar argument might be proposed, holding that evil is necessary in order for certain types of good to exist. Specifically, the existence of evil allows for goods that oppose evil, opening up possibilities for bravery, for compassion, and for mutual dependence, for example. These higher-order goods could not exist otherwise. A world without suffering would lack such goods as these, and would therefore be inferior.

What you think?