Why Do Christians Grieve?

[Amanda]

Whoa there, lady.

I didn't say I hated anyone. I didn't say we should exterminate anyone. I just said that I fear Christians, (though you're right, I should've specified: most Christians that I've met), and feel outraged and angry at their self-righteous behavior.

For example. My grandmother just died about a month ago. She was an agnostic. All four of her sons are agnostics. All of her sons wives, except one, are agnostics. During the wake we all said something about my grandmother. And then Pat, the Christian daughter-in-law, who knows that Christianity was disapproved of by my grandmother and that it would be disrespectful to preach at her wake, gets up and reads from her prayer book and tells us that my grandmother is in Heaven. Who does she think she is?!

I grew up an agnostic in Southwestern Idaho, a Mormon/Protestant stronghold. The shit I went through because my beliefs were so unfathomable to these people! The personal attacks that I had to defend myself against!

The fact that my uncle can't marry his life partner of 15 years! The fact that my grandmother was reduced to a poor quality of life because physician assisted suicide is illegal, although she never wanted to live that way and preferred death over what her last years were. The fact that my high school peers viewed me with suspicion because I didn't have any morals. From an agnostic point of view, we live in a theocracy. It might not seem that way to you, but your a believer who is probably surrounded by believers. You might think I'm just being dramatic, but look at all the attacks we non-believers make against your religion...its because we're angry for what your religion has done to us, that's why. And because its ridiculous! It might not be the best reaction, but people are people.

Because Christians think they're religion is the only right one, they behave self-righteously. And that's not very nice. You even label eachother "real" or not "real" Christians.

And the media and public schools didn't teach me to dislike religion, Christians did. I've been to your churches. I was kicked out when I got angry at a bible school teacher for teaching that homosexuals were going to go to Hell. I was weirded out when a forty-something year old man put his hand on my head and prayed for my soul. I felt victimized when my sophomore year girlfriend's parents moved her to her grandparents' hundreds of miles away because I wasn't Christian.

Yes, you're faith is scary. That you would believe an ancient book of Jewish myths despite all the evidence contrary to it being true. Why do you believe what the Bible says...cause its says its true?

A lot of ground to cover... I'll try to do it justice.

Daughter in law... people cope in whatever way they can. How can you be upset at anyone for clinging to their strength in a trying time? I sense in you a lot of unrest about issues of religion and spirituality. it would be easy for me to consider you less than worthy of my effort but I don't. I love you. And I want to reach out and show you that there is goodness and worthiness in all people and and things. She was doing the best she could. Surely you've done your best and fallen short, haven't we all? Love her for trying. That's all we can do.

An agnostic in hostile territory... people often fear the unfamiliar. You know this, don't let their fear be your burden. Find your way, in your way. Don't let other peoples judgements be your barrier.

We live in a theocracy... Ah the grass is always greener. On my side of the fence we wonder why you all try so hard to silence us. Move to where things are more open to your beliefs and you will find more peace.

Self-righteousness... a lot of people are afflicted with it. it's not a Christian-only thing.

Disliking religion... that's ok. I dislike a lot of religion too. But religion and your relationship with God aren't the same thing. You call yourself agnostic... what do you believe?

Your religion is scary... if you think about it religion is scary. it's probably the most important thing we can think about. It can guide us to wondrous heights or it can lead us to ruin. So I would say all religion is scary.

 

[Againsheila]

And again, you've made it clear, you didn't want an answer to the question...you wanted to attack people of faith.

Of which faith?

From what he's said so far, I'm thinking people of any faith, and especially those of Christian faith.

 

[KittenKoder]

And again, you've made it clear, you didn't want an answer to the question...you wanted to attack people of faith.

Of which faith?

From what he's said so far, I'm thinking people of any faith, and especially those of Christian faith.

Okay ... just making sure you weren't like so many others who think there is only one.

 

[Cecilie1200]

That seems like a rationalization to me; as though you are reaching for an apt explanation to dismiss any threats to your religious beliefs (or should I say reinforcements to any doubt your my feel the need to suppress).

You asked a question, I answered it. You believe as you wish, and I'll believe as I wish.

I think you only asked the question because you wanted to attack religion, you really didn't want an answer, did you?

Do you think its an attack? Or a reaffirmation?

I think it's clear, YOU are attacking people for their religious beliefs...you weren't interested in getting an answer, you only wanted to find a chink in someone's belief so you could attack it. You have as much as admitted that.

I think CMM asked a good question and as a Christian myself, I didn't take it as an attack although I must admit to not having been around much and not knowing his style at all.

I've asked the question before myself. If we truly believe the scriptures then why do we grieve at the loss of a loved one. We should be celebrating their entrance into the Kingdom of God rather than mourning our loss. But that is hard, and I have to admit part of me wonders if it is not in fact some form of doubt.

I can only pray that all doubts will be relieved when the time come, but for any Christian to claim they have absolutely no doubts whatsoever seems to me to be almost sacreligous (okay, I know that is not spelled right but screw it, I'm not going to dictionary.com!) Doubt is just one form of temptation that we need to overcome in the trials of life and if you do believe, you will believe that God will provide a way through it, see 1 Cor 10:13.

Immie

Okay, if you didn't see his post as offensive, then you didn't read his entire post. And it's sacrilegious not to be vulnerable to a certain type of temptation? It's a sin for everyone not to have the same experiences, thoughts, and feelings you do? Is that it?

No, I don't have any doubts. If you think it's sacrilegious for me to be different from you, or perhaps farther along in certain aspects of my life and learning as a Christian . . . well, you should get over yourself.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You asked a question, I answered it. You believe as you wish, and I'll believe as I wish.

I think you only asked the question because you wanted to attack religion, you really didn't want an answer, did you?

I want a real answer. Do you really believe that all these people who believe in an afterlife, believe it without any doubt, and although they lose a loved one or feel a perceived righteous anger because of a wrongful death that was in the news, that they mourn because they miss that person or are angry because those who were wrongfully killed will be missed? Even though those who've died have gone to a place of overwhelming peace and happiness? To me that seems contrived. Perhaps you really do believe it, but if I have a friend or family member who moves to Botswana and I may never see them again, I don't grieve beyond just wishing we could've hung out more. If they died and I would never see them again, then my pain would seem equivalent to the pain of other mourning people whose loved ones have just gone to paradise.

Sorry, but you can't equate a friend moving to another country with the losing your wife/husband or child to death. It's just not the same.

Of course it's not the same. If someone moves away, you can still talk to them on the phone or Internet, write letters, exchange pictures and videos, visit each other . . . No phones, Internet, or postal service to Heaven.

In addition, as I said in my earlier post, dying almost always hurts. It's hard to feel undiluted joy when someone you love dies, because you're also having to deal with the knowledge of how much they probably suffered in the process. Even if, as with my father, you're feeling relief that their suffering is now over, you're still really close to the fact of that suffering and pain. Now, years later, I've moved past that to focus almost totally on the "happy in Heaven" part of it, but when it first happened . . .

 

[Cecilie1200]

I want a real answer. Do you really believe that all these people who believe in an afterlife, believe it without any doubt, and although they lose a loved one or feel a perceived righteous anger because of a wrongful death that was in the news, that they mourn because they miss that person or are angry because those who were wrongfully killed will be missed? Even though those who've died have gone to a place of overwhelming peace and happiness? To me that seems contrived. Perhaps you really do believe it, but if I have a friend or family member who moves to Botswana and I may never see them again, I don't grieve beyond just wishing we could've hung out more. If they died and I would never see them again, then my pain would seem equivalent to the pain of other mourning people whose loved ones have just gone to paradise.

Because your friend in Botswana is still alive and even though you suspect you will never see him/her again, you don't know that and you do know that you can contact him/her anytime you really want to. That isn't available if your friend is dead.

You grieve because your loved one is no longer with you, you don't grieve for the departed, they are already gone nothing you can do will affect them. It doesn't matter if you believe in an afterlife or not.

My Aunt knew she was dying and held a "celebration" of her life. We all went to see her one last time. She was happy to see us all and we were happy to see her. When she died, there was no funeral, she didn't want one, she felt she'd already had it. She wanted a wake, and she wanted to be there. It's wonderful that she was able to have her wishes fulfilled. I hope I can do the same when my time comes. I don't want a funeral, I want a party.

Now we are back to the fact that you don't really want an answer to your question, you just wanted to find another way to attack religion.

I don't think he's attacking religion so much as he is confused. For those who need absolute proof, there just is none. I usually ask people who don't believe whether they think we just came about as a complete accident. Take a look at everything that was necessary for us to exist at all. Was it all just by luck? As big as our universe is, and we really don't even know the answer to that, what lies beyond our universe? If it started out as a big bang 15 billion years ago, what was there before?

Who knows? Maybe God is some high school student in a universe much bigger than our own and we're his high school science fair project.

You don't think he's attacking religion? What did you think this part of his post was?

"Hey, the terrorists just bombed us! Yay!"
********************************

"Hey, Christy!"

"Hi!"

"Guess what?"

"What?"

"My kid just choked on a lincoln log and died!"

"Oh, you must be so proud!"

"Yeah, isn't it great?"
**********************************

You thought that was a reasoned, respectful expression of curiosity in our beliefs, did you?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think its awful that Christians believe those who don't accept Jesus as their personal savior burn for all eternity in Hell. That just seems like the worst thing to believe.

What about people of other faiths? What about those who have never been exposed to the teachings of the Bible? What about those who are utterly incapable of believing in the Bible and its seemingly unrealistic stories? Do all of them burn for all of eternity through no fault of their own?

It seems impossible that a God that is supposed to be the embodiment of unconditional love and mercy would send anyone to a place as terrible as Hell.

That's one of the hypocrisies of Christianity which turns me off to the faith and the further ramifications of which that makes me regard its adherents with suspicion and fear.

I like how you imply that one believes something based on how "nice" or "awful" it is, rather than whether or not one honestly thinks it's true. Hey, I think it's awful that you believe a human being standing on the surface of the sun would be vaporized.

"That's one of the hypocrisies of Christianity"? WHAT is? The fact that it considers its beliefs to be the truth? Maybe you ought to look up the word "hypocrisy", because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. And it seems to me that what really turns you off about Christianity is that it refuses to modify itself to suit you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I sometimes wonder whether the battle between good and evil, right and wrong, continues in the afterlife. Heaven is supposed to be perfection, but could it be that heaven is the end goal on a long journey with this life only being one of the stepping stones?

According to the book of Revelation, it continues.

 

[Cecilie1200]

How is it a hypocrisy?

God is rejected continually by humans the world over. They ridicule him, they jeer at those who believe in him. Yet he continues to love us. We hated him and he sent his son to earth to die a hideous death in our place.

Because although he's a God of love, he is also righteous, and the ultimate judge. You can't be a judge, though you may love all man, and not punish. Every person who has been offered salvation and rejects it is as guilty of Jesus' murder as those who committed it. Yet they would be accepted if they would only accept Jesus.

The bible is the key to understanding. Man thinks he has the capacity to understand on his own, and thinks in his arrogance that he doesn't need God. But the truth is, God is and ultimately, those who reject him will not attain heaven. That isn't a choice I made, it's just the way it is.

You may find it repugnant, that's because you have a skeptic's heart and have hardened your heart, and insist on attributing human characteristics to God. While we share some of God's characteristics, in the end, he's god, and he uses a different measuring stick. Heaven has to be perfection, and perfection cannot exist if you allow the damned to co-exist with those who are saved. That's the problem with earth now. It won't be like that in heaven.

This is what I'm talking about. This kind of self-righteous, fanatical, fundamentalism that causes wars and rife and hatred between human beings; that causes further disconnection from reality and forcefully imposes itself on others.

The above beliefs aren't rational and since I can't believe in something that isn't rational or reasonable (not that I won't its that I CAN'T) I won't believe. If someone as literally minded as AllieBaba obviously is can even understand the word play I just used. But, even beyond that, I wouldn't believe. To me its just awful that someone can perceive the world that way. Its inhumane.

"Isn't rational". Translation: doesn't conform to the way I want the universe to be.

You know what? Feel free to make up any beliefs you like. But please don't have the unutterable hubris to come in here and denigrate the beliefs of others as irrational, untrue, hypocritical, and hateful for daring to disagree with you. The way I see it, the only self-righteous, hate-filled fanatic around here is you with your anti-
Christianity attacks.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I can't take all your points in one post...it's just too much. She thinks she is someone mourning the loss of a loved one and expressing it in the way that makes her feel best.

When my little brother died, I cried, and cried and cried...I couldn't stop crying at his funeral, but when they asked us to come up and talk. about him, I stepped up and I don't remember everything, but I stopped crying while up there and my sharing about my brother had everyone laughing. I then sat down and started crying again. Everyone grieves in their own way.

The fact that you condemn her for that says a lot more about you than it does about her.

Fear causes hate... the Nazi's feared the Jews and that turned into hate and that turned into the holocaust. Congrats, you're a short step away from starting your own.

I feel for your sister in law, being related to someone that fears and hates her the way you do.

Alright. Talking to you is pointless. I fear, therefore I hate, and I'm pretty much a Nazi? Ok, whatever. Believe what you want to, as I'm sure there's nothing I can say that would ever widen your perspective.

Judging from your posts, I'd say you consider talking to anyone who's not going to either kiss your ass or renounce their faith pointless.

While we're widening people's perspective, perhaps you should consider that YOUR views and beliefs only look like bright, shining, reasonable truth from where YOU sit. To others, you're every bit as scary as they are to you, and at least as offensive, if not more. After all, YOU are the one who started a thread to mock and ridicule THEM, not the other way around. You planning on modifying YOUR beliefs to please THEM, or is that only a one-way street?

 

[Cecilie1200]

And again, you've made it clear, you didn't want an answer to the question...you wanted to attack people of faith.

Of which faith?

From what he's said so far, I'm thinking people of any faith, and especially those of Christian faith.

That would be "Any faith that doesn't mirror my own personal viewpoint."

 

[LiveUninhibited]

I think its awful that Christians believe those who don't accept Jesus as their personal savior burn for all eternity in Hell. That just seems like the worst thing to believe.

What about people of other faiths? What about those who have never been exposed to the teachings of the Bible? What about those who are utterly incapable of believing in the Bible and its seemingly unrealistic stories? Do all of them burn for all of eternity through no fault of their own?

It seems impossible that a God that is supposed to be the embodiment of unconditional love and mercy would send anyone to a place as terrible as Hell.

That's one of the hypocrisies of Christianity which turns me off to the faith and the further ramifications of which that makes me regard its adherents with suspicion and fear.

I like how you imply that one believes something based on how "nice" or "awful" it is, rather than whether or not one honestly thinks it's true. Hey, I think it's awful that you believe a human being standing on the surface of the sun would be vaporized.

"That's one of the hypocrisies of Christianity"? WHAT is?

That seems to be referring to the previous sentence, "It seems impossible that a God that is supposed to be the embodiment of unconditional love and mercy would send anyone to a place as terrible as Hell."

Of course the love is conditional, it has to be requited in a small way. Christians seem to believe that in order for Jesus to save you, you have to first believe he saved you by dying a terrible death. I am not sure how the idea of God being merciful and hell can be reconciled.

My main problem with it is how arbitrary it is. The fate of eternal bliss or torture is determined by basically telling God/Jesus, whose existence you can't even verify, that he's awesome. This is mostly independent of how terrible the person was on a human scale. So a serial baby rapist killer who accepts Jesus is going to heaven, while Gandhi is going to hell. There is no logic in that system of justice at all.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think its awful that Christians believe those who don't accept Jesus as their personal savior burn for all eternity in Hell. That just seems like the worst thing to believe.

What about people of other faiths? What about those who have never been exposed to the teachings of the Bible? What about those who are utterly incapable of believing in the Bible and its seemingly unrealistic stories? Do all of them burn for all of eternity through no fault of their own?

It seems impossible that a God that is supposed to be the embodiment of unconditional love and mercy would send anyone to a place as terrible as Hell.

That's one of the hypocrisies of Christianity which turns me off to the faith and the further ramifications of which that makes me regard its adherents with suspicion and fear.

I like how you imply that one believes something based on how "nice" or "awful" it is, rather than whether or not one honestly thinks it's true. Hey, I think it's awful that you believe a human being standing on the surface of the sun would be vaporized.

"That's one of the hypocrisies of Christianity"? WHAT is?

That seems to be referring to the previous sentence, "It seems impossible that a God that is supposed to be the embodiment of unconditional love and mercy would send anyone to a place as terrible as Hell."

Of course the love is conditional, it has to be requited in a small way. Christians seem to believe that in order for Jesus to save you, you have to first believe he saved you by dying a terrible death. I am not sure how the idea of God being merciful and hell can be reconciled.

My main problem with it is how arbitrary it is. The fate of eternal bliss or torture is determined by basically telling God/Jesus, whose existence you can't even verify, that he's awesome. This is mostly independent of how terrible the person was on a human scale. So a serial baby rapist killer who accepts Jesus is going to heaven, while Gandhi is going to hell. There is no logic in that system of justice at all.

Well, I'm sorry to tell you AND him that a lack of misunderstanding on your parts doesn't constitute hypocrisy on our part. And your entire post reveals that the problem here is that YOU simply don't understand the teachings of Christianity, and are therefore stating them according to what you think they are, and then judging Christianity as though your guesses were doctrine.

 

[Father Time]

Then can you help us out, I've asked other people specifics about Christian doctrine and their answers have been wishy washy.

How does one's fate effect how God/Jesus/St. Paul/whoever judge them?

Edit: On second thought perhaps I should ask a priest. Now I just need to find a place on the internet where priests gather that hasn't been trolled (like every other site on religion).

 

[LiveUninhibited]

I like how you imply that one believes something based on how "nice" or "awful" it is, rather than whether or not one honestly thinks it's true. Hey, I think it's awful that you believe a human being standing on the surface of the sun would be vaporized.

"That's one of the hypocrisies of Christianity"? WHAT is?

That seems to be referring to the previous sentence, "It seems impossible that a God that is supposed to be the embodiment of unconditional love and mercy would send anyone to a place as terrible as Hell."

Of course the love is conditional, it has to be requited in a small way. Christians seem to believe that in order for Jesus to save you, you have to first believe he saved you by dying a terrible death. I am not sure how the idea of God being merciful and hell can be reconciled.

My main problem with it is how arbitrary it is. The fate of eternal bliss or torture is determined by basically telling God/Jesus, whose existence you can't even verify, that he's awesome. This is mostly independent of how terrible the person was on a human scale. So a serial baby rapist killer who accepts Jesus is going to heaven, while Gandhi is going to hell. There is no logic in that system of justice at all.

Well, I'm sorry to tell you AND him that a lack of misunderstanding on your parts doesn't constitute hypocrisy on our part. And your entire post reveals that the problem here is that YOU simply don't understand the teachings of Christianity, and are therefore stating them according to what you think they are, and then judging Christianity as though your guesses were doctrine.

What is incorrect about my understanding, then?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Then can you help us out, I've asked other people specifics about Christian doctrine and their answers have been wishy washy.

How does one's fate effect how God/Jesus/St. Paul/whoever judge them?

Edit: On second thought perhaps I should ask a priest. Now I just need to find a place on the internet where priests gather that hasn't been trolled (like every other site on religion).

I don't understand your question. How does one's fate affect their judgement? Their judgement would be their fate.

If you can phrase a question so that it makes sense, I can attempt to explain the Christian doctrine of sin, Heaven, Hell, etc.

 

[Cecilie1200]

That seems to be referring to the previous sentence, "It seems impossible that a God that is supposed to be the embodiment of unconditional love and mercy would send anyone to a place as terrible as Hell."

Of course the love is conditional, it has to be requited in a small way. Christians seem to believe that in order for Jesus to save you, you have to first believe he saved you by dying a terrible death. I am not sure how the idea of God being merciful and hell can be reconciled.

My main problem with it is how arbitrary it is. The fate of eternal bliss or torture is determined by basically telling God/Jesus, whose existence you can't even verify, that he's awesome. This is mostly independent of how terrible the person was on a human scale. So a serial baby rapist killer who accepts Jesus is going to heaven, while Gandhi is going to hell. There is no logic in that system of justice at all.

Well, I'm sorry to tell you AND him that a lack of misunderstanding on your parts doesn't constitute hypocrisy on our part. And your entire post reveals that the problem here is that YOU simply don't understand the teachings of Christianity, and are therefore stating them according to what you think they are, and then judging Christianity as though your guesses were doctrine.

What is incorrect about my understanding, then?

Damn near everything you said.

God's love is not conditional, for starters. Just because you don't go to Heaven after you die doesn't mean that He ever stopped loving you. Having it returned is not a condition of its existence.

Second, what Christians believe is that salvation is not automatic. Jesus's death on the cross was not an automatic soul wash for everyone. It was a gift, the ability to have your sins wiped away, but you must choose to accept it. And if you refuse it, He's not going to drag you to Heaven kicking and screaming.

Third, God didn't create Hell for humans at all. He created it for Satan and his fallen angels. It's not His fault that some humans choose to give their souls to Satan and join him in his eternal prison.

And that's the biggest fallacy I'm seeing here, by the way: the idea that God sends people to Hell. He doesn't. They choose to go of their own free will.

Salvation is not arbitrary. It's available to everyone. They must merely choose to accept it. It's also not based on "telling God He's awesome". You have to believe in God, in His desire to save you, and you must express the willingness to let Him. That's it.

Your remarks concerning baby rapists and Gandhi are only relevant if salvation and Heaven were dependent on you earning your way in. But you don't. It's another big misunderstanding people have. One does not go to Heaven because one is a good person and "deserves" it. What could you, or anyone, do that would be great enough to impress the Almighty Creator of the Universe? From His perspective, we are all sinners, which means we are all the same: tainted and distanced from His presence. The only way anyone's getting into Heaven is through His grace and mercy, and we are all equally in need of it.

You almost had a glimmering of understanding of this when you said "This is mostly independent of how terrible the person was on a human scale." It is ENTIRELY independent of that, because God is not a human. He's not taking people to Heaven as a reward for their good works. He's welcoming His beloved, rebellious, prodigal children home, regardless of the mistakes they've made, and mourning the ones who never choose to return to Him.

 

[LiveUninhibited]

I do appreciate your honest attempt to answer my questions, but unsurprisingly my doubts have not been erased.

God's love is not conditional, for starters. Just because you don't go to Heaven after you die doesn't mean that He ever stopped loving you. Having it returned is not a condition of its existence.

It seems hard to believe that love could be present when he condemns you to eternal torture in Hell, particularly if reason could not have led you to him.

Second, what Christians believe is that salvation is not automatic. Jesus's death on the cross was not an automatic soul wash for everyone. It was a gift, the ability to have your sins wiped away, but you must choose to accept it. And if you refuse it, He's not going to drag you to Heaven kicking and screaming.

If everybody knew that was the choice, and we define Heaven and Hell in traditional terms, very few would reject it. Sure bliss would be meaningless and boring, but better than torture/destruction. The problem is that it requires faith to even believe that a choice exists. There are competing religions to contend with, not to mention the fact that science and reason seem to point away from faith.

Third, God didn't create Hell for humans at all. He created it for Satan and his fallen angels. It's not His fault that some humans choose to give their souls to Satan and join him in his eternal prison.

Few people knowingly make that choice. Satan's existence is as dubious as that of anything supernatural. There's no evidence of Satan in the world. People are perfectly capable of doing bad things without help.

And that's the biggest fallacy I'm seeing here, by the way: the idea that God sends people to Hell. He doesn't. They choose to go of their own free will.

You honestly believe that, deep down, atheists, Hindus, Muslims all know they are choosing Hell and Satan?

Salvation is not arbitrary. It's available to everyone. They must merely choose to accept it. It's also not based on "telling God He's awesome". You have to believe in God, in His desire to save you, and you must express the willingness to let Him. That's it.

It's clearly not available to everybody during life. Not everybody hears of Jesus, and the idea of Jesus doesn't make too much sense, to me and many others, upon hearing of it. Why would an innocent and superior being sacrificing himself have anything to do with forgiving sins? It doesn't seem logical...

Your remarks concerning baby rapists and Gandhi are only relevant if salvation and Heaven were dependent on you earning your way in. But you don't. It's another big misunderstanding people have. One does not go to Heaven because one is a good person and "deserves" it. What could you, or anyone, do that would be great enough to impress the Almighty Creator of the Universe? From His perspective, we are all sinners, which means we are all the same: tainted and distanced from His presence. The only way anyone's getting into Heaven is through His grace and mercy, and we are all equally in need of it.

Of course all of this requires that we start with the assumption that there is a One, omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent creator. Even given that, how else would we judge human behavior except by human standards? I don't judge dogs by human standards. Why would a god judge humans by god-like standards?

It's very easy to conceive of a more fair system. One could give different punishments for different levels of sin. Nobody deserves eternal torture, but Hitler might deserve to experience the pain of all of his millions of victims, which might take awhile, and I might deserve to do the same for a smaller number of victims. Upon serving that sentence, the soul (which we are assuming exists), would be sent to heaven or reincarnated.

You almost had a glimmering of understanding of this when you said "This is mostly independent of how terrible the person was on a human scale." It is ENTIRELY independent of that, because God is not a human. He's not taking people to Heaven as a reward for their good works. He's welcoming His beloved, rebellious, prodigal children home, regardless of the mistakes they've made, and mourning the ones who never choose to return to Him.

I said that because I've studied this, including reading the Bible, and talked to hundreds of people about it. I certainly would rather believe in an afterlife, but I can't believe in something merely by wanting to. It would have to make sense first.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I do appreciate your honest attempt to answer my questions, but unsurprisingly my doubts have not been erased.

God's love is not conditional, for starters. Just because you don't go to Heaven after you die doesn't mean that He ever stopped loving you. Having it returned is not a condition of its existence.

It seems hard to believe that love could be present when he condemns you to eternal torture in Hell, particularly if reason could not have led you to him.

Covered this later on.

Second, what Christians believe is that salvation is not automatic. Jesus's death on the cross was not an automatic soul wash for everyone. It was a gift, the ability to have your sins wiped away, but you must choose to accept it. And if you refuse it, He's not going to drag you to Heaven kicking and screaming.

If everybody knew that was the choice, and we define Heaven and Hell in traditional terms, very few would reject it. Sure bliss would be meaningless and boring, but better than torture/destruction. The problem is that it requires faith to even believe that a choice exists. There are competing religions to contend with, not to mention the fact that science and reason seem to point away from faith.

You vastly underestimate the human capacity for denial and tunnel vision. Also, blaming God because YOU are recalcitrant and He doesn't just overwhelm you and take all choice and freedom away from you is a little unreasonable.

Few people knowingly make that choice. Satan's existence is as dubious as that of anything supernatural. There's no evidence of Satan in the world. People are perfectly capable of doing bad things without help.

Lots of people knowingly make that choice. I know any number of people who were raised as I was, had the same training from birth that I did, and knowingly chose to turn away from it.

There's lots of evidence of Satan. Your remark concerning people being bad on their own shows a misunderstanding of who and what he is. Satan isn't the source of all evil, and he doesn't make people do bad things, or cause bad things to happen. He merely tempts humans to give in to the evil that lives inside of all of us.

You honestly believe that, deep down, atheists, Hindus, Muslims all know they are choosing Hell and Satan?

In this day and age? Yes. Very few people are left in the world who do not have access to the teachings of all the major religions with which to make their choices. So I do honestly believe that they did knowingly choose to believe what they do, knowing that if they are wrong and Christianity is right, that is what it means.

It's clearly not available to everybody during life. Not everybody hears of Jesus, and the idea of Jesus doesn't make too much sense, to me and many others, upon hearing of it. Why would an innocent and superior being sacrificing himself have anything to do with forgiving sins? It doesn't seem logical...

This is the 21st century. Do you have any idea how utterly out of touch with the rest of the world you truly have to be to have never had access to the teachings of Christianity? Particularly when you consider that Christians have been working for centuries to make sure everyone gets that opportunity via their missions work?

I suspect the reason it doesn't make much sense to you is that you've never actually listened or tried to understand it without imposing your own preconceptions onto what you were hearing.

As to the question about sin and Jesus's sacrifice . . .

First of all, you have to rid yourself of the notion that "sin" is defined as "things that are bad according to the human conception of bad and harmful to others". Sin is actually defined as "disobedience to God". This means that it is possible to commit a sin without doing anything that other humans would consider unacceptable. Jonah refused to go to the city of Nineveh, and that was a sin, not because there was anything inherently wrong with staying where he was, but because God had told him to go. You see?

Now, when you knowingly choose to do the opposite of what God wants you to do, you move yourself farther away from Him, spiritually speaking. One sin probably is not enough to damn your soul to Hell - probably - but to be in a state of sin is to be in an overall state of rebellion against God.

What you have to understand, and what many non-Christians (and even some Christians) find hard to accept, is that we are owned property. Initially, we are owned by God by virtue of the simple fact that He made us. However, He gave us the choice of not belonging to Him, if we don't want to. What that means is that we then become the property of Satan instead. If we die under those conditions, he claims his property and takes it home with him. A state of rebellion against God is a choice to become the property of Satan.

While God will allow what belongs to Him to pass out of His ownership if we so choose, retrieving that property from the clutches of Satan required that it be bought back, that a substitute be made. Because He loves us, God - in the form of Jesus - chose to become that substitute. He became a human, took the rebellion of all of us upon Himself (which subsequently condemned Him to Hell, same as it does us), died, went to Hell, and then came back out and returned to Heaven. At that point, the debt incurred by each of us when we sin was paid. Now we have only to accept that payment on our behalf.

Your remarks concerning baby rapists and Gandhi are only relevant if salvation and Heaven were dependent on you earning your way in. But you don't. It's another big misunderstanding people have. One does not go to Heaven because one is a good person and "deserves" it. What could you, or anyone, do that would be great enough to impress the Almighty Creator of the Universe? From His perspective, we are all sinners, which means we are all the same: tainted and distanced from His presence. The only way anyone's getting into Heaven is through His grace and mercy, and we are all equally in need of it.

Of course all of this requires that we start with the assumption that there is a One, omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent creator. Even given that, how else would we judge human behavior except by human standards? I don't judge dogs by human standards. Why would a god judge humans by god-like standards?

Yeah, believing in religion does sort of require that you believe religious precepts.

How else would we judge human behavior? By the standards I just told you, which have already been told to us. And they aren't "god-like standards" the way you mean them. They're completely achievable by any human on Earth, since they require nothing more than the desire to achieve them. Your standards would actually be much more difficult to achieve than God's. It's not comparable to you expecting a dog to walk on his hind legs and drive a car. It's comparable to you expecting him not to bite your hand when you try to pet him.

It's very easy to conceive of a more fair system.

Yes, but He wasn't trying to create a "fair" system, and certainly not one that's "fair" by human lights.

One could give different punishments for different levels of sin. Nobody deserves eternal torture, but Hitler might deserve to experience the pain of all of his millions of victims, which might take awhile, and I might deserve to do the same for a smaller number of victims. Upon serving that sentence, the soul (which we are assuming exists), would be sent to heaven or reincarnated.

Are you not listening to me? You're still talking about "punishment", and acting as though this is about meting out human justice for crimes. God doesn't send you to Hell, and certainly not to punish you for your sins. If you go to Hell, it's because you chose to go there, and by that standard, it doesn't really matter what act or acts you committed to convey that choice. And going to Heaven isn't a reward, because there is nothing you, or any human, could do to deserve it. God loved Hitler every bit as much as He loves you or me, and nothing Hitler did changed that.

You almost had a glimmering of understanding of this when you said "This is mostly independent of how terrible the person was on a human scale." It is ENTIRELY independent of that, because God is not a human. He's not taking people to Heaven as a reward for their good works. He's welcoming His beloved, rebellious, prodigal children home, regardless of the mistakes they've made, and mourning the ones who never choose to return to Him.

I said that because I've studied this, including reading the Bible, and talked to hundreds of people about it. I certainly would rather believe in an afterlife, but I can't believe in something merely by wanting to. It would have to make sense first.

I'm sorry, but you really haven't studied this at all, for one good reason: you haven't been open to truly understanding it. You've been trying to force your own perspective of how the universe is onto it, and then declaring that "it doesn't make sense" because it doesn't match up to what you think it should be. When you allow for the possibility that you've been mistaken about the order of things and open your mind to the change in perspective required to see Christianity on its own terms, you will begin to comprehend it. You might still disagree, but it won't be because you're demanding that we conform to you and we refuse.

 

[LiveUninhibited]

You vastly underestimate the human capacity for denial and tunnel vision. Also, blaming God because YOU are recalcitrant and He doesn't just overwhelm you and take all choice and freedom away from you is a little unreasonable.

No I'd rather believe in Christianity than believe I don't exist after death. I just don't see any evidence for the former.

But this isn't only about me or anybody blaming that which they cannot reasonably presume to exist. I don't think free choice is even a fair assessment of the situation. It's quite a different choice for the preacher's son versus the imam's son. The imam's son may be conceptually aware of Christianity, but it is presented as the lies of his enemies. Being conceptually aware of something isn't useful. There are many religions besides Christianity and no compelling reason that Christianity is the correct choice, let alone that any religion has it right.

Lots of people knowingly make that choice. I know any number of people who were raised as I was, had the same training from birth that I did, and knowingly chose to turn away from it.

They turned away from it as a conscious choice of choosing Satan and Hell. That still seems far-fetched.

There's lots of evidence of Satan. Your remark concerning people being bad on their own shows a misunderstanding of who and what he is. Satan isn't the source of all evil, and he doesn't make people do bad things, or cause bad things to happen. He merely tempts humans to give in to the evil that lives inside of all of us.

Satan is redundant. This temptation you refer to requires no supernatural source. People are tempted to have sex? Why? Because sex feels good? Why? Because having sex is required to make the next generation and helps to forge social ties for an interdependent species. There are many examples.

In this day and age? Yes. Very few people are left in the world who do not have access to the teachings of all the major religions with which to make their choices. So I do honestly believe that they did knowingly choose to believe what they do, knowing that if they are wrong and Christianity is right, that is what it means.

Very few? Would even one ever be acceptable? Are there special rules for those who cannot understand the concept of Jesus, like a baby or a mentally disabled person?

First of all, you have to rid yourself of the notion that "sin" is defined as "things that are bad according to the human conception of bad and harmful to others". Sin is actually defined as "disobedience to God". This means that it is possible to commit a sin without doing anything that other humans would consider unacceptable. Jonah refused to go to the city of Nineveh, and that was a sin, not because there was anything inherently wrong with staying where he was, but because God had told him to go. You see?

Yes I have heard that, I just haven't been able to reconcile that with reason. After all, "I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." -Galileo. Yet if we use that sense, reason, and intellect, we find problems with Christian doctrine and the Bible itself. Trying to stick to what you said, though, why would a perfect god find it necessary to assert himself in such a way over his inferior creations? Such perfection would simply go without saying. It sounds very medieval to me. The jealousy and wrath of the God of the OT seems barbaric and juvenile.

Sure, these are the opinions of a mere mortal, but a mere mortal who has exactly no evidence for this superior being, that I'm aware of anyway.

What you have to understand, and what many non-Christians (and even some Christians) find hard to accept, is that we are owned property. Initially, we are owned by God by virtue of the simple fact that He made us.

There's just no common ground to be had. Every point you make requires a presupposition I don't find reasonable. Evidence suggests people evolved from lower lifeforms, and I don't believe people can be legitimately owned.

However, He gave us the choice of not belonging to Him, if we don't want to. What that means is that we then become the property of Satan instead. If we die under those conditions, he claims his property and takes it home with him. A state of rebellion against God is a choice to become the property of Satan.

In order for a choice to be anything but a lottery, you would have to have a rational basis for the choice. Where is Christianity's high ground over other religions? How can anything supernatural at all be verified?

While God will allow what belongs to Him to pass out of His ownership if we so choose, retrieving that property from the clutches of Satan required that it be bought back, that a substitute be made. Because He loves us, God - in the form of Jesus - chose to become that substitute. He became a human, took the rebellion of all of us upon Himself (which subsequently condemned Him to Hell, same as it does us), died, went to Hell, and then came back out and returned to Heaven. At that point, the debt incurred by each of us when we sin was paid. Now we have only to accept that payment on our behalf.

Why would a substitute need to be made? That makes no more sense than a king executing an innocent man who volunteers to be executed in order to forgive the guilty people willing to thank the innocent man. How is that comparison invalid?

Yeah, believing in religion does sort of require that you believe religious precepts.

How do you arrive at those precepts, logically?

How else would we judge human behavior? By the standards I just told you, which have already been told to us. And they aren't "god-like standards" the way you mean them. They're completely achievable by any human on Earth, since they require nothing more than the desire to achieve them. Your standards would actually be much more difficult to achieve than God's. It's not comparable to you expecting a dog to walk on his hind legs and drive a car. It's comparable to you expecting him not to bite your hand when you try to pet him.

My standard is difficult to achieve? It sounded more like a do-the-crime-pay-the-time approach, which would be fair.

As far as the "achieveable by anybody who desires to" you have to realize that's not how it is. Not everybody can believe something only because they want to.

I'm sorry, but you really haven't studied this at all, for one good reason: you haven't been open to truly understanding it.

Does open to understanding mean surrendering reason and a sense of fairness? If a god were all powerful and benevolent he would be compelled to create a fair system.

You've been trying to force your own perspective of how the universe is onto it, and then declaring that "it doesn't make sense" because it doesn't match up to what you think it should be.

The universe does not appear to operate how I think it should. Is there any basis to think people are awarded or punished according to how much they harm others after they die? No. There is no apparent fairness in the universe. And that might be because there is no God. The universe operates within natural laws that I have no say over but can be detected by quantitative analysis. The supernatural, let alone God, cannot be assumed to exist from scientific inquiry or reason as far as I can tell so far.

When you allow for the possibility that you've been mistaken about the order of things and open your mind to the change in perspective required to see Christianity on its own terms, you will begin to comprehend it. You might still disagree, but it won't be because you're demanding that we conform to you and we refuse.

Don't forget that while Christianity makes no sense to me, I absolutely would rather believe it than what I believe. Again, it's obviously true that the universe does not conform to what I want. And again, not everybody can believe something that doesn't make sense by sheer willpower. It comes down to the fact that everything I can perceive about the universe so far does not mesh with the Christian concept of God. There's no evidence for the supernatural.