A while back I was reading an evolution thread (which I can’t find to save my life…it was only a couple of months ago) and this subject came up. Someone said that Christians believe that non-Christians (and often even Christians that don’t belong to one’s own sect) will go to hell when they die. Tomndebb said that this was not true. Others argued that they had been told multiple times by the godly ones that they would burn for eternity, and this has been my experience (growing up in the South) as well.
So the basic questions here are for Christians:
Do you believe that people who never accept Christ as their savior are going to hell?
If not, how does that work for you? As I always understood it, one of the central tenets of the faith is accepting Christ as your personal savior in order to gain access to heaven. Am I wrong about this or are there ways around it?
Atheists:
What has your experience been? Would you say that most Christians have implied or told you that you were going to hell?
My sister believes that everyone who is not a member of her breakaway sect of Southern Baptists is going to hell. Not all Christians have that kind of astonishing certainty that they’ve got all the answers knocked down into a little plastic box like that —most of them seem to think that at least other theistic people have a possible shot at getting into heaven, especially if they are Christian; and, reciprocally, aren’t quite so sure that all of their own ilk are necessarily going to get the engraved Paradise invitation for that matter.
But yeah, they do exist, “Our specific Christian denomination is going to heaven and everyone else is gonna burn in hell” Christians.
It is worth pointing out that while some Christians maintain that non-Christians may or will not go to hell. The bible, and the words of Christ in the bible, are pretty clear on the topic that yes non-Christians will go to hell.
Most I know have said or implied this, but according to my observation the proportion of those who do so are less on this board than represents Christianity as a whole. It’s worth noting that when trying to convince you that you should be Christian, many Christians will talk up hell as a very bad place to be. When asked why a loving god would send people to hell, many will then trip all over themselves to tell you that hell isn’t really that bad or maybe all non-Christians will go there, YMMV.
Just read a Chick tract to see how many Christians sincerely believe that. (Remember that until recently, that was the offical dogma of the Catholic Church, too.)
For me, I don’t believe it, and while I haven’t asked my fellow believers (Lutheran protestant in Germany), hell and damnation/salvation is simply not an everyday topic in our churches or religion classes. It’s more along the line “God loves everybody” without specifically mentioning the sacrifice or blood; and how we should strive for justice and fairness and love for fellow people here on Earth right now, that’s important.
To me, the NT has two basic ideas of Christ’s message:
belief in Jesus is important (the exclusive one, where everybody else doesn’t go to heaven)
loving everybody is important (the inclusive one, where everybody who is nice goes to heaven).
I now go along with interpretation two. Others think interpretation 1 is right.
There’s also the explanation, that while Heaven (in the sense of being together with God) exists, Hell (in the sense of a burning place with demons) doesn’t. The non-Christians have turned away from God, so why would they want to spend eternity with him? They want to be someplace else; punishment isn’t necessary.
(I only make jokes that I would prefer Hell as nice warm place to Heaven as sitting on a cold, draughty cloud in a nightgown…)
Also “non-Christian.” I used to date a girl who was quite insistent that Catholics aren’t Christians; also Episcopalians; also Lutherans. Pretty much any church that wasn’t majority black to hear her say it.
Just like anything else, there are those who do and those who don’t.
It appears that those who are Christians on this board lean toward the latter view, but there have been examples of the former over the years, too.
Inre this:
I was under the impression that Jesus wasn’t necessarily pushing a cult of personality, but wanted people to be better Jews. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
As to my own experience, I’ve met and spoken to Christians from both camps. And while those who are hell bent on damning me are annoying, even they are sometimes willing to look at Christianity in an objective light. Followers of Brother Jack Chick that I’ve encountered, though, are never willing to listen to anyone who disagrees with them. Those who don’t automatically judge anyone as hell- or heavenbound seem to be a little less. . .excitable. . .shall we say. Needless to say, I usually enjoy their company a wee bit more.
John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
The church I went to as a kid certainly took this to mean that if you were not a Christian, you ain’t going to heaven. Reading it today as an atheist adult, that still seems to be the likliest interpretation, at least of this English translation.
I’ve heard Christians say that that line simply means that one should emulate Christ to go to heaven. Frankly, that sounds like a bit of a stretch to me, IMHO. It might be better interpreted that way pre-translation, I suppose.
Wow, I was surprised to see that I finalized that thread!
To the OP-
I believe no one goes to Heaven except through Jesus.
I believe that good C’tians have a direct pass into Heaven because
of Jesus.
I believe that those who deliberately reject Jesus will have a tougher
time getting into Heaven.
I believe that between now & the Final Judgement, God/Jesus has
a lot of tricks to grab up a lot of people who live & die without
knowing Jesus to get them into Heaven.
I believe that in the End, everyone who wants Eternal Life w/ God/Jesus
will be granted it, and those who just refuse that risk, at worst, Eternity
to wallow in their own worst selves. Maybe by the grace of God/Jesus,
they will be allowed however long it takes to get it together, or they
may be allowed to fade out of existence.
No one will be in Heaven who refuses to come to God through Jesus,
though I don’t believe that this life will settle everything
While I agree with your conclusions Revtim, I think the verse you give is the one called most pertinent by Christians wishing interpret it as saying something different. I think the following references from Jesus add considerable clarity.
“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” Mark 16:16
“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.” John 3:36
Yes, that’s what current interpretation of Biblical science is. (Just as Martin Luther didn’t want to start his own church, just reform Rome).
But this interpretation and background isn’t known to the US fundies - they have their roots at the end of the last century when Biblical science was starting in Europe, because they specifically rejected all that and insisted on literal interpretation (and on the Bible being true down to the last jota). They only learn the Christian interpretation of the NT, that Jesus is the Christ and so on, and only see the NT through that lense, not with a critical approach to a text.
I don’t exactly go around asking Christians if they think I am going to Hell (as an atheist), but the few times that I have had such discussions I’ve been told flatly that I am destined to go to Hell. I even had them re-state it to make sure I wasn’t misinterpreting.
On one occasion I countered by saying “sorry, but a religion that bullies me into believing isn’t one I want anything to do with”. The person then spent the rest of our discussion trying to convince me that believing out of fear is a legitimate reason to practice a religion. He drew some silly analogy to a mob boss loving his family, but if you upset the boss you can expect punishment. Needless to say I have no intention of converting any time soon.
Constanze, are you saying that the Catholic Church recently proclaimed as a point of doctrine that one could achieve salvation without being a Roman Catholic or without even being a Christian? I was astounded to hear you say that, since it goes against one of the most basic doctrines of Roman Catholicism for the past 2000 years: “Outside the Church there is no salvation”.
Would you happen to have the exact cite or document in which the RC Church declared that? Does anyone?
Personally when I read the Bible I tend to, as an atheist, trust the bits where Jesus says, “I am not a God. I am just another person.” than the bits where he says, “I am the sone of God, and you must believe me or die in hell.” That I can tell, like constanze said, Jesus didn’t intend to start his own religion, but rather just to fix two issues he had with Judaism at that time. One being choosing the word of rules over the message of kindness, and the second being to grow a pair and not lower the Jewish god before the Roman gods.
Given item number one, and some other bits in the Bible where specifically Jesus himself was being quoted, I would generally vote that part of his point was that God liked the heathen who saved innocents than the Jew who killed the heathen for his women.
Well, I don’t believe in hell, so maybe it would be better for a Christian to define that. As for non-Christian; I would probably define that as someone who does not belive that Christ was the son of god, or that he died for our “sins” or that we need to be saved, etc. That might be better defined by people who identify as Christians as well.
I don’t have a cite, because both my books are in the german version, but it’s either in “Vicars of Christ” (history of the Roman Catholic Church) or “The Great Myth” (history about Jesus) by Peter DeRosa.
He says that the offical dogma “Outside RC no salvation” wasn’t dropped, but quietly modified to include protestants and heathens of good will. (Since the RC can’t ever officially drop a dogma or doctrine, but have changed their mind about several things, they just don’t mention what would be considered embarrassing even for Catholics today, or interpret the words differently.)
The Church does not claim that all non-believers are damned and certainly does not claim that all non-Catholics are damned. This is not to claim that no Catholic authority has made those claims, some have, but it has never been doctrine or a formal teaching of the church. (The last priest to preach that only Catholics were saved was excommunicated.)
There are both Christians and members of the subset of Christianity, Catholics, who do believe that only Christians (or Catholics) are saved, but that views is opposed to many other Christians.
Actually, the whole notion of who is saved is one that has been wrangled over for years, but the church has never declared that one must be Catholic to be saved.
The formulation Ex Ecclesiam non Salus est was not coined in regards to dividing Christians from pagans, but in regards to a schism in which people who claimed to be Christian were also claiming to be not part of the church. And, again, there are theologians and pastors who have argued for the more restrictive interpretation, but they have always found people in the church who disagreed with them.
The whole concept of Limbo with which the church toyed for (far too) many years was based on a recognition that damnation was not a reasonable judgment for a person who simply had the historical accident of not being in the church. And, again, there have been theologians, including Augustine of Hippo, who argued for the most punitive understanding, but they have always found opponents within the church and have never had their speculations elevated to the point of church doctrine.