h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I have indeed heard from Christians what you say there too. But due to the black and white thinking that seems to dominate the minds of many Christians, the end result does end up coming out pretty much as I had described.

You can argue an escalation of sins performed by Christians until it becomes clear that not sinning is much less important than faith in Christ.

Point being, whatever you do or have done you will get saved as long as you have faith in Christ. This is a feature of the belief that perturbs many people - after all, why should a conviced child molester (to use the most popular example of evil right now) get into Heaven just because they converted to Christianity shortly before they died, but some nice person who never did any deliberate harm to anyone, never broke the law, etc. etc. should be denied that just because they are agnostic?

That's one of the things that does perturb a lot of people. My personal way of looking at it is that to be forgiven you have to repent of your sins, now if a convicted child molester feels genuine remorse at the terrible thing that they have done (and not convincing us, but God, who does know) than I think you would have a hard time justifying him not getting into heaven. But I think that remorse doesn't have to expressed in a Christian context for it to be valid, if you know that you have done wrong, and are sorry, even if you don not consciously ask God for forgiveness, you will be forgiven. I believe that Jesus died to save the world from their sins, not just those that believe in him, hence my belief in the just heathen. I don't think that you have to be a christian to get into heaven (hardly fair on those amazonian indians who have never been exposed to the word of god for example), but then I'm also not a literal Bible follower. I have a lot of the same concerns that I have seen expressed in this thread about fundementalsim and so on, but this kind of thing occurs all the time, like the pharisees in jesus' time. And look at the stance he took with them...

Napnod - Part of being a Christian is believing that the only way to heaven is through Jesus. If you aren't bigoted then good for you! But it's still a fundamental part of the Biblical Jesus's teachings that only people who believe in him and follow him will go to heaven. And if you don't believe in that, then how could you possibly be a Christian? Christianity embraces the highest form of blind obediance - ie : omnipotent God that you aren't entitled to question. You can't just go changing the rules to suit yourself. That's not how it works and that is precisely WHY I dislike it so much. People deserve better than that...

Hmm interesting .. Could you elaborate on how this compares to the Pharisees please? I don't see the connection here ..

Good question, and to be honest, I don't know the answer to it.

The only thing I've figured out is that people can change, even in the last moments of their life. Maybe they have been "bad" their entire life, but I think if they really and truly believe at a last moment conversion like that, they may indeed go to heaven. Of course, converting and actually *converting* are two totally different things. A moral agnostic going to hell is a bit harder to explain, and to be honest I don't know quite what I think about it. But it's not my place to judge, either. I do know that it's pretty black and white theologically that if you don't believe in Christ, you're not going to heaven, at least according to everything I've ever been taught. But I also know that we are all judged separately. So I don't know. In the case of the agnostic, I think maybe we have to remember that the person had their entire life to convert. If they heard every argument and still couldn't decide, even if they were a good person in general, I think they would still probably go to hell, whether because whatever bad they'd done in their life was never forgiven or because they didn't believe in Christ.

Hmm. That last paragraph really didn't have a contradition in it when I set it out in my head.

There is, of course, the whole deal about the age of accountablity which may play into this. If one never hears about Christ, they can't be condemned. If they're still living in their Eden, before they know what sin is, they can still technically have eternal life.

But I'm no theologan.

Such blind obedience isn't limited to Christianity, not by a long stretch. Other religions demand similar levels of devotion. As do 'cults' (though often the only real distinction there is popularity, not method.)

And I am always shocked at the flippancy Christians have regarding the death of Jesus.

THE MAN DIED. I mean, how can you just sit there and take that so casually? He was killed for you lot...and the best you can do is hope he comes back and does it again, instead of taking responsibility for your own actions.

There's another thing.

Exactly. Which is why I am anti-religion. I said earlier in the thread that it's not only Christians I criticise... And I certainly don't use my opinion of a persons religion (or politics) to determine whether I like them or not. I have a jolly fun time with both Napnod and Amy...

Um, yeah, we're allowed to question God. It's central to real belief, I think. I hate the movie "The Apostle" but one thing it says is very true about just this thing - 'sometime he talks to God, and sometimes he yells at God." Any real Christian will tell you they've yelled at God, very likely met with a "are you done yet so I can explain?" afterwards. Even Jesus yelled at God when He was on the cross.

I think the point wasn't so much that he died, it was more the combination of him dying and then living again.

And I am often told that the physical death part is quite irrelevant compared to his three days or so of being separated from God, which is more important, it seems.

Though, yes .. I tend to find that Christians are more flippant (or at least less worried) about death in general, basically because they know they are going to Heaven.

Um- 1 - if you've read Revelations, you'll know that Christ isn't supposed to come back and redo what He already did. That'd be silly.

2 - I certainly do not regard the death of my own Savior with any kind of flippancy. I cannot tell you how many times I've felt totally unworthy of a gift of this magnitude - Easter is a *very* serious time for me. I do agree that it was necessary to undo the mess in Eden, but that doesn't mean I think it was "okay" for another human to die for me, divine or not.

3 - Funny, Saturnine, I coulda sworn you hated me.

You're allowed to question God? Are you sure? So...say you don't agree with one of the commandments...you'd be allowed to change it? You're allowed to question God as long as you agree with him in the end.

1. He wasn't supposed to die in the first place...

2. Ever thought about rejecting the "gift"? What kind of father kills his own son?

3. Yeh. Daggers and Knives.

I'm supposed to be watching HOme and Away dammit!!!

*has to run and check to be sure*

Er, there is no "thou shalt not question your God" commandment. I'd love to know where you got that idea from.

1 - Uh, yeah.

2 - One who knows it's for the best, likely. But then you make it sound like it was *easy*... and plus if you take into account the whole Trinity concept, it was actually suicide. But I'm backing myself into a corner, aren't I?

3 -

Ok, so maybe I should rephrase that - "question and DISAGREE with God"...

Although, I'd like to know how he would respond.

*poof!*

Pillar of Salt.

Hmm... amusing observation here - why is it whenever someone likes to disagree with me they bring in the whole bit about Lot, his wife, and his two daughters?

1. HAH! Got you there.

2. Suicide? Explain. And "it was for the best" is a bulls**t phrase (if you'll excuse the rudeness). He put his son into a minefield to die. Why couldn't he just forgive humanity? Why was a blood sacrifice needed? Why his own son?

3. Don't point that at me young lady.

I like the story. T'was one in my "Children's Bible Stories" book...funny ideaology that. Give a 5 year old a book about death, murder, war and sin. Go figure. And you all wonder why I am so

1 - I mean, uh, yeah, yes He was.

2 - You ever read about the links between the Fall and Christ? Ever? Humanity screwed it up. Having Christ *was* forgiving humanity. But since we screwed it up, we have to reconcile stuff, too. And thus comes in the whole deal with free will. That's sort of what I mean by saying it was for the best. It was required. People shunned eternal life and went for the knowledge of good and evil instead. Having Christ "forgive" someone is sort of a misnomer. He took our place. None of us deserve heaven. But, in a very bad analogy, Christ's death was to sort of give us a waiver when we are judged. Like, you go down to the tax office and they say "oh, you need to pay this and this and this" and you pull out a special piece of paper that says you really don't. Turns out they need to pay *you* instead. It's sort of the same idea. His ressurection was to show that He now had overcome death as well as damnation. I'm thinking that was more for a symbolic thing rather than actual literal stuff - He has always had power over the devil.

Why his own Son? Who can stand in for everyone except someone who's perfect?

3 - Young lady? Dear child, I have 3 years on you.