Something (else) I don't get about Christianity

[yuvgotmel]

A dog doesnt tell it's master what to do, nor does a student tell the teacher what lesson is to be learned.

That is the second time that I have seen you analogize "people-and-god" with "dog-and-master." That is rather disturbing. Do you really feel the equivalent of a dog? Though one could debate whether a dog can go to heaven or not, still the overall "feeling" of it is kind of sad and well...disturbing.

 

[astarath]

The metaphor is to serve as a representation of the master/servant relationship. The reason the dog/master metaphor is so useful is because a large majority can relate to the metaphor and understand the ridiculous concept of a pet trying to dictate the actions of the owner. It does not mean in any measure that I consider men to be dogs. It means that I consider men to be servants of God. And as servants we are not to dictate the actions or attitude of our master.

 

[yuvgotmel]

The metaphor is to serve as a representation of the master/servant relationship. The reason the dog/master metaphor is so useful is because a large majority can relate to the metaphor and understand the ridiculous concept of a pet trying to dictate the actions of the owner. It does not mean in any measure that I consider men to be dogs. It means that I consider men to be servants of God. And as servants we are not to dictate the actions or attitude of our master.

That sounds like Islam, from what has been described to me lately. Without derailing this thread any further, I'll give you a quick link to a thread that sums up how I feel about that sort of thing: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?p=763539#post763539

We should probably take future discussion into another thread or PM. Thanks.

 

[astarath]

Right but the key difference is that when I say love God I include Yaheshua. To love him is to accept his crucifixion and his place as the son of God. This is not congruent with islam.

 

[Katzpur]

Wait. If I am a good person but I don't believe in God, I can still go to Heaven?

Depends upon who you ask, I guess. According to LDS doctrine, absolutely.

 

[astarath]

Depends upon who you ask, I guess. According to LDS doctrine, absolutely.

Truly a belief in God is not neccessary in LDS?

 

[Katzpur]

Truly a belief in God is not neccessary in LDS?

In my religion, it's a bit more complicated than being saved versus being damned. Unfortunately, I'm going to have to sign off for the evening and won't be able to explain what I mean. I will say, however, that the Latter-day Saints probably believe in the biggest Heaven and the littlest Hell of any Christian denomination. Heaven, to us, is comprised of several different "degrees of glory," and a belief in God would most definitely be required of anyone who was to enter into the highest of these. If you happen to be interested in a more in-depth explanation, read posts #1, #3 and #4 of the thread called "The LDS Doctrine of the Afterlife."

 

[astarath]

Perhaps someone else can clarify then from an LDS perspective as to why all people of the OT would be invited to heaven if a belief in God is required?

 

[Katzpur]

Perhaps someone else can clarify then from an LDS perspective as to why all people of the OT would be invited to heaven if a belief in God is required?

Since I'm just about ready to dash out the door, and nobody's addressed your question, I'll just make a brief comment. I'm not sure if you read the posts I directed you to and misunderstood them or if you took one quick glance at them and decided that they were too long to bother with, but this question should have been answered there. We don't believe that the opportunity to believe ceases at death. Those who did not believe during their lifetime or who died with an incomplete understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ will be given the opportunity to learn, repent and progress during the period of time between when they die and when they are resurrected. The spirit, after all, merely leaves the physical body at death and does not cease to exist. All humankind, whether they lived prior to Christ (as was the case with the people in the Old Testament) or after Christ will be given that opportunity. The way in which people lived their lives (based upon the knowlege they had during mortality) will be an important factor in how they are ultimately judged, but not the only factor. Furthermore, as I said earlier, we do not understand Heaven to be a one-size-fits-all kind of place, but that we will each be rewarded according to our faithfulness, with some receiving a greater portion of God's glory than others.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

That concept portrayed is contradictory to the teachings of Yaheshua. He clearly says "truly all those that cry Lord..Lord in heaven will not enter the gates. You will say I spoke your name and sent away demons in your name Lord. The Lord will reply I never knew you!!" as well he told us that "a good tree will bear good fruit a bad tree will bear bad fruit, this is how you will tell bad from good by the fruit of their tree."

In whole, to claim you know the Lord is not enough to be said it must be shown in your actions and your works. As well though works alone are not enough, you also must have faith in the Lord and Yaheshua. So in all actuality all three of them go to hell!!!

Well I'm glad you at least admitted that your examples were pretty extreme, but what I really wonder is this: Do you really think that the average Christian sees salvation in these terms? I'm sure some do. I've run across some here on RF who do. But there are a lot of us who don't -- including nearly 13 million in my denomination. Seriously, you should have included a poll for Christians only, asking, "Is this what you believe?"

Mercy,

The kind of heresy in the OP only applies to fundamental evangelical Christianity in America.

I don't think that this reflects Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, or Coptic Christianity. Orthodoxy - and even the Reformers - taught that Chrisitian living is just as important or more so than belief in Jesus Christ to get to heaven.

The heresy propounded in the OP is a very modern idea and has no place in Christian teaching whatsoever.

See, this creates more problems than it solves.

We're not just talking about God's handing out a merit badge or taking it away. This is friggin' eternity we're talking about here. Now not only does it seem that God's standard for heaven-vs-hell may not be just, it looks as if he was vague about the entry criteria. Why on earth did he do this?

Also, believe it or not, many self-professed Christians do believe the very thing that the OP describes.

God isn't a dummy. Here is something to consider.

What would a person who truely believed in Jesus Christ live like? If I believe in Christ, I will obey His teachings and then I wouldn't do those things listed.

God has said what will happen to those who claim to have faith in Christ but don't live like they believe:

Mark 7:6-9
6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with [their] lips, but their heart is far from me.
7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, [as] the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Matt 7:16-21
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

See above. Also see Acts 2:21--"Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved."

 

[astarath]

See, this creates more problems than it solves.

We're not just talking about God's handing out a merit badge or taking it away. This is friggin' eternity we're talking about here. Now not only does it seem that God's standard for heaven-vs-hell may not be just, it looks as if he was vague about the entry criteria. Why on earth did he do this?

Also, believe it or not, many self-professed Christians do believe the very thing that the OP describes.



See above. Also see Acts 2:21--"Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved."

Ah welcome to being an ebionite. We do not follow the Epistles of Paul for just this reason they contradict and confuse the clarification that Christ gave us. Christ said it simple because God wished it so.

Love God
Love One another.

Do this you go to heaven, very simple tasks to do and show in your actions.
Dont do this you go to hell. Your choice not God's

 

[UnTheist]

Ah welcome to being an ebionite. We do not follow the Epistles of Paul for just this reason they contradict and confuse the clarification that Christ gave us. Christ said it simple because God wished it so.

Love God
Love One another.

Do this you go to heaven, very simple tasks to do and show in your actions.
Dont do this you go to hell. Your choice not God's

It is not my choice, because God decided that non-believers are somehow more immoral and cynical than believers. I can gurantee you that I will not burn forever, because I know that is not how a Just and merciful God would be.

You need nothing more than to be a good person. Actions matter, not your beliefs. How does believing in God make anything better? If that is how you believe God to be, then you are worshipping the wrong God.

 

[astarath]

It is not my choice, because God decided that non-believers are somehow more immoral and cynical than believers. I can gurantee you that I will not burn forever, because I know that is not how a Just and merciful God would be.

You need nothing more than to be a good person. Actions matter, not your beliefs. How does believing in God make anything better? If that is how you believe God to be, then you are worshipping the wrong God.

Without God and his teachings you have no concept of right and wrongs save the morals and ethics of the society in which you were raised which in this age are sorely lacking. Good deeds have their merit but without God have no purpose. The belief to give them purpose is the beauty of the salvation and the miracle of the Atonement.

 

[UnTheist]

Without God and his teachings you have no concept of right and wrongs save the morals and ethics of the society in which you were raised which in this age are sorely lacking.

Absolutely wrong. This the same BS that Christians use as an excuse against Atheists. Morals come from within. And I can tell you my morals didn't come from God. I am just as sane, if not more, than any religious person on earth.

Good deeds have their merit but without God have no purpose. The belief to give them purpose is the beauty of the salvation and the miracle of the Atonement.

Morals have really nothing to do with God. Some form of an ethics system is necessary to make a stable society. All those secular countries are doing fine without God. I wonder what's so bad about them.

Morals can lead us to better, safer, and happier lives, and many are doing so without God. Is that not enough purpose for you?

 

[uumckk16]

A dog doesnt tell it's master what to do, nor does a student tell the teacher what lesson is to be learned.

A dog can't tell it's master what to do...

If a teacher is giving a student information that doesn't make sense, is the student not allowed to point out the mistake? If my English teacher told me that the Great Gatsby was set in 18th-century France, I would certainly point out the error. If God supposedly gave a doctrine that doesn't make rational sense to somebody, why should they not question it?

At any rate, I think you're over-simplifying the God-human relationship. What about a pair of lovers - they will certainly point out each other's mistakes. Or a parent-child relationship - the parent will get upset with the child for disobeying them, but they won't hate them or turn them away (hopefully!).

God removed the apparent confusion of 10 commandments and limited them to 2.
1.Love God
2. Love you neighbour

He requires that you follow these commandments.

Okay. Sure. But...

To deny the existence of God is not loving it is extremely disrespectful!

I disagree. For some it is simply the way their mind works - "seeing is believing." I believe that by loving our neighbors we are showing our love for God. If I love God's creation and God's children, do I not love God as well, even if I don't directly admit it (or even deny it)?

 

[astarath]

A dog can't tell it's master what to do...

If a teacher is giving a student information that doesn't make sense, is the student not allowed to point out the mistake? If my English teacher told me that the Great Gatsby was set in 18th-century France, I would certainly point out the error. If God supposedly gave a doctrine that doesn't make rational sense to somebody, why should they not question it?

But the student didnt tell the teacher to teach about the Great Gatsby. And as God is infallible we would never be in a postion to correct whatever lesson he deems fit.

If I love God's creation and God's children, do I not love God as well, even if I don't directly admit it (or even deny it)?

No! To love the creation is not to love the creator. You can love a painting by Da Vinci but not love Da Vinci himself. You can marvel at the wonder of Michaelangelo's David but not have a care for Michealangelo.

God requires that we love both him and his creation. This can not be done if you refuse to accept that there is a God.

 

[uumckk16]

But the student didnt tell the teacher to teach about the Great Gatsby. And as God is infallible we would never be in a postion to correct whatever lesson he deems fit.

Right...But if the teaching is incorrect or doesn't make sense, then maybe the teaching should be questioned.

No! To love the creation is not to love the creator. You can love a painting by Da Vinci but not love Da Vinci himself. You can marvel at the wonder of Michaelangelo's David but not have a care for Michealangelo.

God requires that we love both him and his creation. This can not be done if you refuse to accept that there is a God.

Well, we obviously view God quite differently. I am a panentheist, and so I believe God is present within all. So by loving the creation, in my view, one does love the creator.

I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[astarath]

Right...But if the teaching is incorrect or doesn't make sense, then maybe the teaching should be questioned.

An infallable God with an incorrect teaching?

I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I dont agree with that

 

[UnTheist]

I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Nope. His idea of God can't be respected. I can tell you now that his opinion is an unreasonable one, and the God that he is describing doesn't exist.

 

[UnTheist]

Right...But if the teaching is incorrect or doesn't make sense, then maybe the teaching should be questioned.

An infallable God with an incorrect teaching?

I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I dont agree with that

An infallable God with an incorrect teaching?

The God you are describing is indeed falliable and incorrect

I dont agree with that

You don't agree with anything anybody says unless they agree with you.