Do Christians Fear Death?

[Ben Kenobi]

Great party!

Played volleyball for 3 hours, then out to a late dinner.

[Ben Kenobi]

Sounds like you have a pretty messed up conception of Good, Evil and Justice. When is it ever just to hurt someone knowing that it will not better the world?

Why do you assume that Justice cannot do any good? I am not talking about retaliation, but about holding a criminal accountable for his actions. If you do not hold a criminal accountable, is it not the innocent who suffer depredations from the strong?

Under what sort of conditions is this good? If someone kills my son, why should I go out of my way to pursue punishment?

No, but it is not wrong to seek justice for your son in having his killer arrested, and tried.

Spite? Vengance? You're idea of "Justice" is the culmination of everything bad about mankind.

I agree, but I disagree that the judgement of God is done out of spite, or out of vengeance, but rather, to justly hold everyone accountable for their decisions made in this life.

That kind of justice is pure Evil. How convienent to speak of love one second, and then the indulgence of your sadistic pleasures in another under the blanket of "Justice".

It is sadistic to speak of putting a murderer in jail for his crime?

Justice is giving to each what they deserve. Nobody, no matter how horrible they are, deserves to have pain and suffering needlessly inflicted upon them.

I agree with both of these statements. First of all, those who go to Hell, deserve their judgement, and those who suffer there have chosen that suffering.

Nobody, no matter how terrible their crimes, if they can be helped deserves to be denied that help. We imprison people because they pose a danger to others. We imprison people in hopes of rehabilitating them. But, we should never imprison someone just for pure vengance.

This is not for vengeance, but for accountability.

A truly good, all-powerful and all-knowing God would NEVER damn ANYBODY to hell.

If we cannot choose hell, then we cannot choose heaven. It is that simple. A heaven for all, cannot be a heaven, but rather a worse hell than hell for those who have chosen that path.

Heaven means being in eternal contact with God, and if you have rejected God, why would this be heaven for you? Wouldn't it be worse than Hell, where you finally, for the first time, are completely cut off from him?

Those, who do not love God, would rather deny him and suffer for eternity, than submit themselves to God.

[Ben Kenobi]

The creation of the church and the writing of the gospels took place after Jesus' death and was done by his followers. Throughout the gospels his disciples are always screwing things up and get the message wrong.

Fair enough, these are both true.

I wouldn't trust these guys to deliver the teachings of Jesus perfectly, that is why I look at the overall message of Jesus rather than go into specifics.

So you trust your own interpretation moreso than the testimony of those who knew him?

Secondly, before the disciples wrote down the Gospels, and before the death of Christ, they were disciples. Afterwards, they were Apostles, and filled with the holy spirit.

Look at the change in all of them after the death of Christ, and after Pentecost in Acts. These are the men who wrote down the Gospels.

So, when hell is hardly mentioned, I don't think to much about it.

That's rather foolish, given stuff like this:

Matthew 25:1

The Parable of the Ten Virgins

"At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. Five of them were foolish and five were wise. The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them. The wise, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps. The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep.

"At midnight the cry rang out: 'Here's the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!'

"Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps.

The foolish ones said to the wise, 'Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.'

" 'No,' they replied, 'there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.'

"But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut.

"Later the others also came. 'Sir! Sir!' they said. 'Open the door for us!'

"But he replied, 'I tell you the truth, I don't know you.'

"Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour."


Christ is warning to be prepared for the day of his return, and that those who are not ready, will not be with him.

Secondly, I see Christ as a reformer he learned how to connect with the Oversoul. I think his teachings are very valuable. But I don't worship him as God and try to talk to him. After all, he isn't there, and it is hard to talk to someone that isn't there.

"Yet before Abraham was, I am"

Why do you think his teachings to be valuable when he teaches that he is God, knew the Prophets of Israel personally, and that he plans to rise from the dead, leave to heaven, and return again in the future?

That he teaches those who will have good things in this life often suffer in Hell, while those who suffer in this life, enjoy Heaven for eternity?

He was not an earthly reformer. His kingdom is not of this Earth.

You seem to accept him when he agrees with you, and reject him when he says something you do not like. That hardly means you respect his teachings. You respect yourself.

I do not see why it is absolutely necessary to talk and pray to it. If that works for you, than go for it. I just think that there are many different ways to connect with this energy, and I think the best way for me is through meditation and contemplation.

Then why should it matter what you do, if you cannot talk or pray to this impersonal force? Sure, you meditate, but how this influence an impersonal force?

If God is a person, then I can see this very clearly, that he will be moved by your entreaties.

I do not mean that in itself Christianity has a problem of not being spiritual. If you look for it you can find lots of Christian teachings dealing with meditation and contemplation, especially from St. Ignatius. Just in every interpretation of Christianity I have seen (including all of the religious schooling I've gotten) the most important parts of the religion are: getting into heaven by following the moral teachings, and prayer. Meditation is encouraged but it doesn't seem to be a central part of mainstream Christianity.

You seem to be arbitrarily separating prayer from meditation in order to establish this conflict. Christians make no division. For us, prayer and meditation flow from each other. This is why I think you see Christianity as not putting as much emphasis on what you believe meditation should be.

Why is God a person? The problem I have with this belief is that it is not something that God is or should/would be but it is a cultural belief that has seeped into religion. For 3 million years, humans came along and lived within the ecological system just like any other organism. But then, several thousand years ago, we figured out how to become sedentary, agricultural, civilized societies. The key distinction between the two different ways are that the tribal hunter-gatherers lived within the ecosystem, and the civilized people controlled it. This separated the civilized people from other organisms, so it lead us to believe that we are superior to all organisms and that we are God and have the right to control the planet's ecosystem.

What do you know of the beliefs of those who hunted and gathered rather than settling and farming. Do you know that they did not believe in God?

I'm sure they did, and that many could not imagine a God that was not also a person, that they could speak to and pray to.

It seems to me, more of a recent construct of a God that you cannot speak to or pray to is one that people believe in, even the Hindus acknowledge the personality of God.

Most Buddhists seem to elevate Buddha to that position.

So in our religions, because they are man made, believe that God must be a person.

So why then what you believe, as a religion without a personal God, is not man-made, while my beliefs are?

That makes no sense me. If one is man-made, why not the other?

If a religion was truly divinely inspired, in the manner that Judaism and Christianity claim to be, God would not tell the people that they were created in his image and that he is a person.

Why not? That seems the most obvious sign that this is in fact, divinely inspired, given that these teachings cannot be derived from earthly facts.

He would probably also tell the people to change their lifestyle.

You don't believe the Christian God asks people to change their lifestyle!

Astonishing. Read the OT, how long does God spend trying to beat it into the heads of the Jews, that he desires mercy and not sacrifice?

So yes, I don't believe Christ is God. I just see him as a brilliant thinker, a reformer, and someone who learned how to connect with the Oversoul.

Yet he claims to be God. Why do you believe that some parts of scripture are correct and others are in error? Surely it seems convenient that everything you happen to believe of Christ, is true, while everything that does not fit in with what you believe Christ should be does not.

I think we have a much more difficult task to help others, and not just to avoid hurting them.

Which is why he asks us to help others. No other religion phrases this command in this way. All the others say we are to avoid hurting others, as you have said earler.

True, not only must we not hurt others, it is good to help them. Service leads to happiness and it is the second level of happiness (above pleasure and below true happiness, the latter comprising of being, knowledge, and joy).

Where are you getting this from? Second level of happiness?

The earliest Gospel, Mark, makes one reference to hell, and what they were talking about was Gehenna, a garbage dump outside of Jerusalem where sacrifices were taking place. I wouldn't say it is conclusive that hell exists.

Have you read the references in the OT on this place? If became a place where people burnt their children to appease Moloch.

Yes, I can think of no better way to describe Hell, than to refer to Gehenna.

Another good point. The idea of nothing existing in itself and only existing relative to other things is a common philosophy in both east and west. But the thing is, I'm not sure if there is heaven. guess is that when we die, our souls just become part of the great Oversoul. In other words, the energy is recycled and will end existing in other things. I just don't know what happens to one's consciousness when they die.

Christianity is very clear on this point, that we retain our consciousness, as we gain a new body, better than our old one.

I can't think of anything better than that to look forward to, rather than becoming one with the void, lost for all eternity.

Cygnus put what I was trying to say better than I did. Damnation doesn't help. Ben used the prison analogy. But I don't believe in throwing people in prison just for the sake of punishment. Punishment does not make anything better. Prison exists not for punishment but for deterrence and rehabilitation. If there is a hell, it would be temporary and for the purpose of rehabilitation.

Earthly punishment must include rehabilitation because we are not perfect judges. We make errors, and incarceration allows us to correct our mistakes.

God, as a perfect Judge, can read all hearts. If a person has been repentent of his sins here on Earth, than he will be forgiven. He is the judge, and not us. However, those who refuse to repent of their sins, are to be confined to Hell, because for them, it would be worse to be in the presence of God for all eternity than to be removed from his presence.

We see Hell, as eternal suffering, only when we acknowledge the presence of God in our lives. We rely upon him every day, and for us, to remove him, is worse torture than we can imagine.

I am sure it will be so for those who go to Hell, to see the pleasure of others, but they will remember that this is the choice they have made, to reject God.

[Whaleboy]

BK, in the interests of my laziness, what's your argument?

[johncmcleod]

So you trust your own interpretation moreso than the testimony of those who knew him?

Secondly, before the disciples wrote down the Gospels, and before the death of Christ, they were disciples. Afterwards, they were Apostles, and filled with the holy spirit.

Look at the change in all of them after the death of Christ, and after Pentecost in Acts. These are the men who wrote down the Gospels.

Point taken. However, the people that wrote the gospels didn't know Jesus, they were writing what had been transmitted through the ages.

Matthew 25:1

The Parable of the Ten Virgins

So the concept of hell didn't even get in the gospel until the second book, a revision of the first, was written? If the belief of Hell was so paramount, 'Mark' would've written a lot more about it.

"Yet before Abraham was, I am"

Why do you think his teachings to be valuable when he teaches that he is God, knew the Prophets of Israel personally, and that he plans to rise from the dead, leave to heaven, and return again in the future?

That he teaches those who will have good things in this life often suffer in Hell, while those who suffer in this life, enjoy Heaven for eternity?

He was not an earthly reformer. His kingdom is not of this Earth.

You seem to accept him when he agrees with you, and reject him when he says something you do not like. That hardly means you respect his teachings. You respect yourself.

Why do I not believe him when the Bible says he is God? Because a) I don't even know if that is exactly what he said, and b) even he did say it, I don't believe him. Mohammed said that God spoke to him in his dreams and that the Koran is the ultimate word of God. Joseph Smith said that God spoke to him too, and that's where we get the Book of Mormon. And in fact, before Jesus, there was another man that claimed to be the Messiah. So how do I know that Jesus is right and all of the other religions are wrong?

I don't agree with everything that Jesus said. I don't believe that he is God. But just because I disagree with one of his beliefs doesn't mean I should throw out all of his teachings together. I think a lot of his teachings are great. The ones that I agree with, I say "Hey, he's right." The one's that I don't agree with, I either say "Hey, I think that is wrong because..." or if the teachings seems to contradict his more important overall message, I say "Hey, that doesn't seem to be part of his overall message."

Then why should it matter what you do, if you cannot talk or pray to this impersonal force? Sure, you meditate, but how this influence an impersonal force?

If God is a person, then I can see this very clearly, that he will be moved by your entreaties.

I think I'm not explaining myself clear enough. I don't meditate in order for this energy to divinely intervene on my behalf. I don't believe that it will do this. I meditate just for the sake of connecting with this force.

You seem to be arbitrarily separating prayer from meditation in order to establish this conflict. Christians make no division. For us, prayer and meditation flow from each other. This is why I think you see Christianity as not putting as much emphasis on what you believe meditation should be.

Well from what I have been taught, prayer and meditation seem to be too different things (yet similar). Prayer is talking to God, meditation seems to be a different process. Successful meditation is sometimes described as 'the absence of thought.' It is consciousness on a different level. The Hindus believe that there are three parts to the mind. There is the conscience, the sub-conscience, and on a greater level than that there is the inner self. The goal of meditation is to reach this state and connect to the inner self. But I guess I am wrong in separating prayer and meditation. They are simply two different methods for the same thing.

What do you know of the beliefs of those who hunted and gathered rather than settling and farming. Do you know that they did not believe in God?

The hunter-gatherers did believe in God. They believed that the elements and nature were God.

I'm sure they did, and that many could not imagine a God that was not also a person, that they could speak to and pray to.

Actually, the hunter-gatherers didn't view God as a person. That belief didn't come along until later. The hunter-gatherers worshipped nature, so God came in many different forms. he wasn't a person. And they didn't really talk to him either. They made sacrifices and asked him to help them, but it wasn't prayer as we know it.

It seems to me, more of a recent construct of a God that you cannot speak to or pray to is one that people believe in, even the Hindus acknowledge the personality of God.

Yes, the Hindus do. But they see God in a different way than westerners. I'm not Hindu. The Hindu belief in God is in between my belief of God and the western belief of God, my belief is just more similar to the Hindu belief.

Most Buddhists seem to elevate Buddha to that position.

I know, and it really pisses me off. As Emerson once wrote, "To be great is to be misunderstood." Just like all great thinkers, Buddha was misunderstood and instead of a reformer became viewed as a God. This happened because people just couldn't understand such radical thought and they screwed it up. The same thing happened to Jesus.

So why then what you believe, as a religion without a personal God, is not man-made, while my beliefs are?

That makes no sense me. If one is man-made, why not the other?

Well, both religions are man-made. All religion is man-made. Religion is a method of worship and beliefs. The reason why I think your image of God is man-made? Because it views God as man. This is because man made up this belief, not God.

Why not? That seems the most obvious sign that this is in fact, divinely inspired, given that these teachings cannot be derived from earthly facts.

Because it wouldn't make sense for God to appear as a man. Why would he be a man? Why would he be one particular organism? What separates man from the rest of the world? Why would God be a man? Because man made the image of God, that is why.

You don't believe the Christian God asks people to change their lifestyle!

Astonishing. Read the OT, how long does God spend trying to beat it into the heads of the Jews, that he desires mercy and not sacrifice?

I wasn't clear what I meant by lifestyle. I didn't mean God never told people to change their ways. What I meant was that God would tell the people to live again within the ecosystem instead of trying to control it. If God would've told people this, the earth wouldn't have been destroyed.

Yet he claims to be God. Why do you believe that some parts of scripture are correct and others are in error? Surely it seems convenient that everything you happen to believe of Christ, is true, while everything that does not fit in with what you believe Christ should be does not.

No, I just think that a) he was like Buddha and didn't claim to be God or b) he did claim to be God, but he's wrong. It is not that it is convenient, just a lot of the stuff about Jesus' teachings that I disagree with don't fit into his overall message. And as for him being God or not, I think that maybe it was part of his teaching, that he was God. But I just think that part he got wrong.

Which is why he asks us to help others. No other religion phrases this command in this way. All the others say we are to avoid hurting others, as you have said earler.

No. I said "Treat others as you would like to be treated." Help is under this category. If another person is in need, and if you were in his situation and would like to be treated with help, than treat that person with help. The idea of helping other fits in well and is encouraged by the golden rule.

Where are you getting this from? Second level of happiness?

That was my fault. I should've explained what I was alluding to. One of the Hindu teachings that I agree with is that there are three levels of happiness. That is where I got that from. Success is the second level.

Have you read the references in the OT on this place? If became a place where people burnt their children to appease Moloch.

Yes, I can think of no better way to describe Hell, than to refer to Gehenna.

But Jesus didn't say that you would go to a place like Gehenna. He just said you will go to Gehenna. It wasn't metaphorical. Gehenna wasn't the symbol for hell. Jesus just said that you'd go to the actual place Gehenna, but not in the sense of being damned eternally.

Christianity is very clear on this point, that we retain our consciousness, as we gain a new body, better than our old one.

I can't think of anything better than that to look forward to, rather than becoming one with the void, lost for all eternity.

I understand the Christian belief on consciousness. I'm just not sure if I believe it. And yeah, maybe it would be better (of course only for those who are good and go to heaven, whatever the criterion is) for the Christian belief to exist. That won't make me believe in it though. But of course becoming one with the universe might not be as bad as it's cracked up to be. Maybe it is heaven and is just as good.

Earthly punishment must include rehabilitation because we are not perfect judges. We make errors, and incarceration allows us to correct our mistakes.

God, as a perfect Judge, can read all hearts. If a person has been repentent of his sins here on Earth, than he will be forgiven. He is the judge, and not us. However, those who refuse to repent of their sins, are to be confined to Hell, because for them, it would be worse to be in the presence of God for all eternity than to be removed from his presence.

We see Hell, as eternal suffering, only when we acknowledge the presence of God in our lives. We rely upon him every day, and for us, to remove him, is worse torture than we can imagine.

I am sure it will be so for those who go to Hell, to see the pleasure of others, but they will remember that this is the choice they have made, to reject God.

I still don't see how damning people makes things better. That is why I don't believe in Hell. It just doesn't really make anything better. And as for not being in the presence of God being the ultimate suffering, what about aetheists? They don't believe that God is in their lives, yet I know some aetheists that aren't suffering. You will probably respond by saying, "Even if they don't think God is in their lives, he is in their lives." But how? How is he in everyone's life? The God that I believe in is in everything, so he is in their life (and therefore the concept of Hell could exist under my belief system, though I still don't believe in it), but my beliefs are a whole lot different than yours. According to (your) the Christian beliefs, God said we were up to ourselves until Jesus comes again. That there would be no more divine intervention. So according to Christian belief, God isn't in our lives. That is why Hell wouldn't be different than living here. But then again, what if here is Hell? What if this is Hell and we just don't know about it?

[johncmcleod]

Off topic: Can you cite all of the Biblical passages that say homosexuality is bad? I don't know what tomorrow will bring in the crusade against the religious right, so I'd like to know what I'm up against.

[Whaleboy]

johncmcleod, you're my new personal hero until at least Friday!

Religious right

[MrFun]

religious right


mainstream Christians

[johncmcleod]

Yeah, the religious right make me really angry. Like the other day I was explaining to them that laws are secular, and in this country we separate church and state, so therefore ruling by the Bible is a really bad idea. She responed by saying "But Christian influences are bound to seep into our laws anyway, so there is no point in trying to separate the two."

I am kind of scared of the direction we're going in. I'm afraid that we'll get a "Third Awakening" and turn into a theocracy.

[johncmcleod]

religious right


mainstream Christians

Those two have become synonamous.

[MrFun]

That is your O P I N I O N.