How Many Christians Are There?

[hrothgar]

The God you seem to prefer is the one you need to cower before because you can never know whether you are good enough or not. My God provides a free way to atone for your sins and a way to know where you stand. It is a beautiful religion because despite your mockery, Christ still died for you so that you could be reconciled unto Him.

If there is a god, I hope that he is a merciful one...

I hope that he will judge me by my intentions...

I hope that he will be understanding...

 

Above all, I hope that he isn't hung up rote adherence to some stupid little ceremony, because from where I'm sitting the odds that I guess which of the umpteen different denominations out there is the right one seems pretty damn slim.

[luke warm]

So, we cower before God because he will damn us if we don't

this isn't true, richard... speaking for myself (i'd like to speak for everyone, but that's a character flaw), i don't cower before God at all... i view him as a father, i view him as one whose love for me is far beyond my understanding...

Beautiful religion you got there Todd...

yes, beautiful and simple, which is why it is hated by some

In short, I'm a hell of a lot more comfortable with a "God" who applies intelligence and discretion than I am with one who condemns Ghandi to burn because he didn't chant the right magic words....

ghandi isn't condemned, if that's his fate, because of a failure to chant magic words... there are no magic words...

If there is a god, I hope that he is a merciful one...

he is... an understanding of christianity isn't really possible without an understanding of sin, and what it means to be sinful... we're told that all have sinned (missed the mark of God's holiness)... we're told that the wages of sin is death... even ghandi sinned, as good a man as he was...

 

but because of God's mercy, he gave us a way to live (life being defined as being in the presence of God) in spite of being condemned to die (death being defined as eternity out of God's presence)... but our way out cost God a great deal, a price that could only be paid if ones love outweighed other considerations

 

all salvation requires is a knowledge that one is a sinner in need of salvation, that we could never save ourselves, but that God could save us... he gave to us, free of charge, this gift... all we have to do is accept the truth of it - believe it to be true

I hope that he will judge me by my intentions...

he has already judged you, and me, and all of us... because of sin, we are guilty... the wages, or penalty, is death... we can never have enough good intentions, or do enough good works, to cancel that penalty... it would take one who knew no sin, a sinless man, to ransom the rest of us... that's why Jesus came as a man, it's part of the jewish "kinsman redeemer" theology... only a man could ransom another man, only a sinless man would be an acceptable sacrifice - one without spot or blemish (theologically speaking)

 

think of sin as a virus, one passed from father to offspring, one that everyone is born with... unless the concept of sin is grasped and accepted, the rest will not follow... unless a man can see that he is a sinner, he will never be able to see why his works or intentions are meaningless

I hope that he will be understanding...

we can be very thankful that he is understanding... he understood that we'd never be able to save ourselves, he understood he'd have to somehow do it for us... a perfect sacrifice would be needed... believe it or not, even your sins were paid for by Christ on the cross... all your past, all your future sins... he took the penalty that should be yours, he paid the debt... but you have to accept that gift, you have to believe it to be true

[Winstonm]

The entire argument surrounding the sacrifice of the son of god as the ultimate atonement for mankinds' sins is flawed.

 

Jesus in his own words said he came to "fulfill the law." If his mission on earth was to be a sacrifice to fulfill the law, then the law must have held that for sin there must be a sacrifice. His sacrifice fulfilled the law. If the law has been satisfied, there can be no repercussion for sin. If there is no repercussion for sin, there is no need to believe in god, christ, or santa claus.

 

I have stated my beliefs in other threads, but will do so briefly here. I do believe there is such a universal law and it is natural - the law of actions and consequences.

 

Christ said, The wages (consequences) of sin (action) is death. Therefore, if Jesus was the perfect consequence (sacrifice) for action (sin) then the law has been fulfilled and no longer has power over actions.

 

It is like the right to an abortion - you don't have to believe in it to be still covered by the law.

[mike777]

If you personally accept his sacrifice, yep....

 

To repeat is only takes faith the size of a mustard seed. :)

[luke warm]

Christ said, The wages (consequences) of sin (action) is death.  Therefore, if Jesus was the perfect consequence (sacrifice) for action (sin) then the law has been fulfilled and no longer has power over actions.

excellent, winston... if you don't mind i'd like to show why faith is the one thing that is needed... if you've a mind you might want to read or reread the book of hebrews here, paul (or whomever wrote it) does a better job

 

for years before christ, jews from all over would travel once a year (on yom kippur) to wherever the ark of the covenant was located... there was a temple there, and the inner sanctum was called the holy of holies (that's where the ark was kept)

 

this was the jewish day of atonement, the day the high priest would enter the holy of holies (he was the only one who could) to offer a sacrifice for the nation of israel... this sacrifice was to atone for all the sins of all the people for the year just ended... but the blood of the sacrifice couldn't take away the sins, it could only cover the sins... and it could only do this for the past year

 

once the high priest emerged, which showed the sacrifice was accepted by God (that's why a rope was tied around one ankle of the high priest, to drag him out if God *didn't* accept the sacrifice - he would be dead and nobody but he could enter), the people's sins were forgiven for that year

 

imagine you were a jew back then, imagine you were there... now imagine that during all of this you thought to yourself, "this is a crock... my sins aren't forgiven just because that guy killed a goat and sprinkled blood all over the place" ... do you think your sins could be forgiven if you didn't *believe* them to be?

 

now jump ahead to the new testament, especially the book of hebrews... the OT was written to point the way to Christ, as an explanation of things to come, although it was only in looking back that this could be seen... Jesus Christ was sent by God not only to be the perfect sacrifice, but to also be the High Priest... he sacrificed himself ("i lay down my life for them, no man can take it, i lay it down")... even though he died on the cross for your sins, you must believe it to be true... if you *don't* believe it, then it isn't true - for you... see?

 

The entire argument surrounding the sacrifice of the son of god as the ultimate atonement for mankinds' sins is flawed.

no.. it might not be understood completely, but that doesn't make it flawed

Jesus in his own words said he came to "fulfill the law." If his mission on earth was to be a sacrifice to fulfill the law, then the law must have held that for sin there must be a sacrifice. His sacrifice fulfilled the law.

yes, the sacrifice was part of the law... but that isn't what's meant by "fulfill the law"... his *life* fulfilled the law... see, he was the only man to ever obey God's law, in thought and deed... in that way is he said to have fulfilled the law... he had to obey perfectly (we couldn't) else he would not have been sinless, he would not have been an acceptable sacrifice...

[Winstonm]

If you personally accept his sacrifice, yep....

 

You are either stating you own opinion or you miss my point.

 

My point is that if Bill Gates decided to pay the parking tickets of everyone who ever lived, is alive now, or will live and will get tickets in the futrue, it doesn't matter if you know Bill Gates personally or even believe in him - you still won't have your car towed.

 

The law has been fulfilled. The consequences for illegal parking have been paid in full.

[mike777]

Not if you do not give Gates personal permission to pay your fine.

 

 

I cannot just go in and pay your parking fine without your permission and participation.

 

I cannot just go in and serve your prison term if you are convicted.

 

That would be a miscarriage of Justice. Justice being the key word here.

[hrothgar]

ghandi isn't condemned, if that's his fate, because of a failure to chant magic words... there are no magic words...

Lets be clear: When I am talking about "magic words" I'm referring to Todd's insistance that accepting Jesus as your personal saviour is an absolute necessity for salvation.

 

I don't find it logical that your god of "peace and love" so hung up on ceremony that he would condemn Ghandi for a failure to believe. Moreover, from my perspective, if your God does behave in such a manner, he's not worthy of my (or anyone's) worship.

 

All you have is a blind guess regarding which of 1001 different cults is right.

At the end of the day, what differentiates your choice of cults from Islam, Hinduism, Mormonism, or what have you.

[Winstonm]

imagine you were a jew back then, imagine you were there... now imagine that during all of this you thought to yourself, "this is a crock... my sins aren't forgiven just because that guy killed a goat and sprinkled blood all over the place" ... do you think your sins could be forgiven if you didn't *believe* them to be?

 

Absolutely. 100% yes. If the action was valid, the result is valid, even if you do not believe the result.

 

yes, the sacrifice was part of the law...

 

Did you ever wonder why this is so? What is sacrifice and what is its purpose? What does it fulfill that god couldn't ignore if he is all poweful? Simply because it was Jewish tradition to sacrifice to atone for sin does not make it valid - many cultures have used sacrifice to appease their gods - what makes Jewish sacrifice different from Mayan sacrifice? Belief. That is all.

 

However, if you view it from the concept of a natural law of the universe - that even god cannot ignore - that actions have consequences then you have some basis for sacrifice as a consequence of action.

 

If you expound on this with a concept of an all-loving god, how can you rationalize a god who would condemn someone to death if god had a choice? It is illogical. Only if god had no choice in the matter would he allow damnation to occur.

 

This theory of god/law/sacrifice fits in much better with the questions about Ghandi and others of good works being condemned to hellfire. And it answer those questions about all those who never heard the word and those who lived outside of Judah and had no high priest and all the other religions throughout history - including Islam.

[mike777]

Yes God is all powerful, but that does not mean God can create himself. If all powerful is not the correct phrase pick another. God is subject to logic, he cannot create himself out of nothing.

 

If you believe God is the God of Justice, that is part of the nature of God, then Sin demands Justice. If you believe that Sin does not demand Justice than you deny the nature of the Christian God.

[Al_U_Card]

Guess there is no chance of any coffee smells in here.....

[Winstonm]

Not if you do not give Gates personal permission to pay your fine.

 

Yes, even without permission. The law has been fulfilled - there is no more law. There are no more parking tickets to be paid - you cannot give permission for something about which you have no idea has occured, an event that does not happen.

 

There is no fine to be paid. You never have a pink ticket stuck under your windshield. As far as you know, you were lucky they didn't catch you this time - little did you know they never catch anyone - because the law has been fulfilled.

 

And if you were born 10 years from now, you would not even know that once upon a time the police used to give out parking tickets - but they don't any more because all past, present, and future fines have been paid in full.

 

You don't have to believe it, say thank you, or even know what happened - you are still exempt from parking fine punishment (consequence).

[mike777]

Winston, no Bill Gates cannot pay everyone's parking ticket without some higher power apporving it. There are conditions.

 

I cannot serve your prison term without permission, there are conditions.

 

Jesus did not die and absolve your sins and fulfill the law as it pertains to you, personally, without conditions.

 

His love is unconditionial to you, Justice comes with a condition.

[Winstonm]

If you believe God is the God of Justice, that is part of the nature of God, then Sin demands Justice. If you believe that Sin does not demand Justice than you deny the nature of the Christian God.

 

What is the difference between sin/justice and action/consequence? What is the justice in eternity in damnation for failure to have the right to be introduced to this doctrine?

 

Do you truly believe that everyone who ever lived from the time of the death of jesus unitl now have all had the opportunity to be enlightened that they had to believe in him to avoid hellfire?

 

How is it just, then, that those who had no chance to believe are punished?

 

It makes more sense if they are relieved of consequence without having to believe - and this is an action of perfect love - that you relieve the burden of consequence without asking anyting in return - not even belief.

[Winstonm]

Guess there is no chance of any coffee smells in here.....

 

One would have to awaken first, no?

[mike777]

"Do you truly believe that everyone who ever lived from the time of the death of jesus unitl now have all had the opportunity to be enlightened that they had to believe in him to avoid hellfire?"

 

Yes, this is the old what about the poor guy in the middle of nowhere who never heard of Jesus, very common and excellent question. There are books written on this subject.

[Winstonm]

Jesus did not die and absolve your sins and fulfill the law as it pertains to you, personally, without conditions.

 

His love is unconditionial to you, Justice comes with a condition.

 

Mike, don't get me wrong. I understand where you are coming from. I was raised in a strict enviroment that taught me the same thing you are saying - until I finally figured out for myself that it was a bunch of crap.

 

And I don't mean to put you down with that comment - or anyone else who believes that way - as I know how extremely difficult it is to break away from that indoctrination. It almost drove me into insanity. Those who have not been indoctrinated into the hard evangelical faiths cannot grasp the base, underlying fear that warps your personality. It is hard to describe to one who has not suffered the religious abuse of the consequences of being told at ages 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and on and on about a vengeful god who will make you burn in hellfire forever - rembember, these are ages where you believe still that Santa Claus is real and the Tooth Fairy brings your quarters - and when the authority figure (preacher) thunders at you twice on Sunday and once again on Wednesday night that you are doomed, you will burn, unless you follow the leader - well that deep of imbedded fear of god's wrath for disbelieving is almost impossible to overcome.

 

Back to you points:

 

"Jesus did not die and absolve your sins and fulfill the law as it pertains to you, personally, without conditions.

 

His love is unconditionial to you, Justice comes with a condition"

 

You present a paradox. These two statements are mutually exclusive. If one is true the other cannot be true.

 

Uncoditional love is love without conditions. If god is unconditional love (which he should be), then he cannot place conditions - it would be impossible, a violation of his nature. (And I happen to believe the story of the prodigal son is not at all about the son but a parable to teach what the love of god is like. In that story, the father (god) did not try to stop the son, did not judge him, did not condemn him, did not punish him, did not ask in fact anything of the son - only gave to the son what the son asked - his inheritance. And when the son returned the father did not demand repentence, contrition, repayment, or belief. The father in this story never changed, never faltered in the way he treated his son. His love for his son was unconditional. It was the consequences of his own actions that caused the son to return. To the father, none of that mattered.)

 

Now, if we take this story and compare it to the ideology you espouse, then the son would have had to have to pay conditions to return - the father would have said, yes, you are welcome back but have to slop the hogs for a year as repentence. But there was none of that. It was unconditional acceptance.

 

If the sacrifice was an act of love without conditions, how can there be conditions to accept it? If it was an act of Justice, then Justice has been served and belief or lack of it has no bearing.

 

And you do not have to serve my prison term, and I do not have to give you my permission to do so - because there was never a crime committed. It was wiped off the books - unconditionally.

[mike777]

You raise excellent points.

 

A more complete answer is going into the Nature of God and understanding what it means if he is fully the God of love and fully the God of Justice.

I agree that God does not act against his nature.

 

As to your second point, if I understand your argument, you are saying there is no sin or evil in the world, it does not exist today, it is not a crime? The answer is there is.

[Winstonm]

"Do you truly believe that everyone who ever lived from the time of the death of jesus unitl now have all had the opportunity to be enlightened that they had to believe in him to avoid hellfire?"

 

Yes, this is the old what about the poor guy in the middle of nowhere who never heard of Jesus, very common and excellent question. There are books written on this subject.

I have found that those who write these books are biased and trying to prove their own beliefs - they start with the concept that belief in jesus in necessary for salvation - and then write and very deep and convoluted theses as to why that is so and how it pertains to the guy in the desert who never heard of jesus.

 

I think this is better served as an example of Occam's razor: instead of a book, I can summarize in three simple sentences.

 

There is a natural law of action and consequences to which both mankind and god must adhere. God found a way to fulfill this law for mankind so that mankind is no longer subject to the provisions of this law. Because this was an act of unconditional love, god asks nothing in return.

[Winstonm]

As to your second point, if I understand your argument, you are saying there is no sin or evil in the world, it does not exist today, it is not a crime? The answer is there is.

 

I hate to dominate this thread but am trying to answer your questions.

 

I am saying there is evil in the world and there is crime, but no punishable sin for these actions. Actions still have consequences, as that is a natural law. The consequences of spiritual death, though, have been absolved - removed from the pages of the lawbook. Fulfilled.

 

If original sin has been conquered, that means both past, present, and future sins have been conquered, as someone born 10 years from now will still be stained with original sin. If sin is possible, then in theory someone who sins an instant before a mugger shot him in the head, killing him instantly, would be condemned to hell, as he hadn't had time to ask forgiveness - and even in the strict evangelical sects, you can't ask for forgiveness in advance. The only way for this to make sense logically is not to have to ask - sin has been pre-forgiven, which in essence eliminates sin as a punishable spiritual deed. Which also fits in with another theological question of a baby born with original sin who dies in the first year of life. Does the baby go to hell? Yes, I know, age of accountability and all that - but then you are saying that until accountability the baby is not a human being, right? Because if it were a human being, it would have to be stained with original sin. Again, instead of convoluting, why not apply Occam's razor? The sin is not counted against anyone - ever - from birth until death. A lot simpler than accountability ages and such, isn't it?

 

If you don't accept this you can read my book - it's not very good but it's short. :)

[mike777]

Again if I understand you saying there has been a final judgement, and there is no punishable sin for evil crimes committed today. Judgement has been passed the penalty paid without condition.

 

This is not mainline Christian theology.

Final judgement day has not come yet.

However, I respect your beliefs.

 

There are many counterarguements to what I wrote above. One possible theme is

we are born into sin, our nature is sinful. We cannot act against our nature. We do not have that amount of free will. It would be unjust of God to punish us for sin we do not have responsibility over. God cannot act unjustly.

[mike777]

A second counter arguement is that God called some of us to be saved, not all, at the dawn of time, he did not call me......why blame me?

[Winstonm]

Again if I understand you saying there has been a final judgement, and there is  no punishable sin for evil crimes committed today. Judgement has been passed the penalty paid without condition.

 

This is not mainline Christian theology. 

Final judgement day has not come yet.

However, I respect your beliefs.

The feeling is mutual. Everyone is entitled to hold their own beliefs.

 

And you expressed well what I have tried to say - the only thing I would add is I believe there is still earthly consequences for evil actions, but as far as spiritual consequences those have been rendered mute.

 

And you are quite right that I do not believe in a day of judgement - I believe this to be - along with the stories from the old testament - Jewish folklore and myth, not so different from Greek mythology or other tribal folklore. It would make sense to me that a culture of peoples who have been oppressed as often as the Jews would like to hold out a hope for a get-even day where god whomps up on all the pharoahs who did the Jews wrong - I believe in southern U.S.A. culture this is known as "opening a can of whup-ass" on their butts.

 

If you hold out hope for an eventual get-even, whup-ass day, you can tolerate a lot of oppression along the way - opiate of the people - see how that ties in?

[Winstonm]

A second counter arguement is that God called some of us to be saved, not all, at the dawn of time, he did not call me......why blame me?

I grow weary of this debate - every time this subject is broached by someone who has a background in the Wesleyan judgemental-god theologies, I can recognize the fear that underlies all their beliefs - even if they themselves cannot see it and will not accept it as there.

 

It is not a love of god that holds these denominations together - it is fear of damnation - of god's justice - of god's wrath. Fear is a powerful tool.

 

The only way to know god is to lose the fear of god; if your concept of god is that of a punishing, wrathful god, then I suggest you destroy him and recreate a god that does not punish.

 

If you do not fear god, then you do not fear to question god, his decisions, reasons, wrath, and vengeance. But when you fear god, you defend his decisions, reasons, wrath, and vengeance - because you are afraid of what he will do to you if you doubt.

 

A god you fear is not a god worthy of loyalty - you don't have one-on-one, heart-to-heart conversations with someone you fear, that you bow and scrape to please.

 

In my world, I don't serve a monarch god - god is simply a buddy to whom I can turn over any problem too big for me to solve and he always does the right thing with it, the thing that turns out to be in my best interest - even when I don't understand. I can trust a buddy to do that - without fear.

 

For some, god is a someone to whom you must kneel, genuflect, and show deference. To me, god is someone with whom you exchange high fives.

[helene_t]

I certainly don't believe in the free will (although I admit it's a very practical concept in moral reasoning, which is probably one of the reasons why the illusion of the free will evolved). I'm less sure about sentience, which I consider a puzzling phenomena. Pinker's "How the mind works" disappointed me and Penrose's idea that sentience relies on an Einsteinian meta-quantum explanation for wave function collapses seems, although intriguing, not plausible and his argument suffers from lack of a foundation in modern biology.

 

However, I can say this much about sentience: "my" sentience is bound to my brain and will decay as my brain decays. I strongly believe that this should be obvious to everyone who has a basic knowledge of neuroscience and is able to put intuition aside for a moment and focus on what can objectively be said.

 

I like the hardware-software metafore for the brain-sentience system (although sentience is just one of many functions of the software the runs in our brains). Just like a running software session can be evacuated to another CPU before the original CPU wears out, it is theoretically possible to copy a human's sentience to another platform (whether made of silicon or neural tissue). Something akin of this has been demonstrated in epileptic patients who had their corpus callosum seized and subsequently develop dual sentience systems. Making a human's sentice immortal may one day be possible but I don't expect to live long enough to acquire that privilege. So I have to opt for Gerben's solution which is quite difficult with my limited gifts. I certainly won't be immortalized as a great bridge player.

 

As for whether Gandhi went to Hell or Heaven, I don't care. Sending him to Heaven could serve two purposes:

1) an altruistic concern for Gandhi's comfort-loving soul. But that applies to Hitler and Stalin as well, maybe even to GW. If there's a limited number of available bedrooms in Hotel Heaven, I would probably keep Hinduist and Bhudists out since they should be able to do OK in Hell by meditating.

2) to motivate others to follow Gandhi's example in order earn a Green Card to Heaven. But that won't work since we will have no way of knowing if he went to Heaven or not.

 

If I were God, I would send some prophets to tell the earthlings that they would be rewarded in Heaven if they followed the example of Ghandi. But in the end I would send everybody to Heaven. Then again, people who don't "deserve" (whatever that means) to go to Heaven, I wouldn't have created in the first place.