In my opinion, this is the most logical answer to my question.
There seems to be a presumption in this “save them from Hell” thing that God is an asshole who tortures people eternally, no matter how good they may have been in their lives, just because they failed to be convinced, without evidence, which religion was the correct one. How is this belief consistent with a benevolent God?
I said the first part, not the second part. I don’t believe the second part at all. I would argue that being a good Christian was pretty simply defined by Jesus in the parable of the sheep and the goats. Jesus also said the only thing you had to do to earn eternal life was to love God and love your neighbor. Nothing about proselytizing. If you think your loved ones deserve to be eternally tortured, you must not love them very much anyway.
Moving thread from IMHO to Great Debates.
“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”
Nevertheless, he said the only two things you had to do to get eternal life was to love God and love your neighbor. He also defined those things as being equivalent in the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats ("…whatever you do to the least of my brothers, you do to me"). Jesus didn’t say you would go to Hell if you didn’t preach at people.
Do you think God sends people to Hell who don’t deserve it?
I know the answer. The Catholic Church during the Inquisition had significant secular power, and thus was able to get away with things that would put someone in jail today. Not that Catholics are particularly blameworthy - in Elizabethan England Catholics who would sneak into the country to spread the word got their heads chopped off.
What would you prefer them to do? Would that work either?
[/QUOTE]
I’m saying I find it weird that they don’t attempt to convert me, not that I wish they would.
A few people have asked which faiths these “deeply religious friends” belong to. Well, the friends I had in mind are either Muslim, probably Sunni, and a couple of people I know belong to a small (cough cult) Christian group that I can’t remember the name of.
I’m pretty ignorant on the details: perhaps neither of these faiths believe that non-believers are automatically damned.
And they are absolutely positive about it. Of course, when you ask them to justify their beliefs, it suddenly becomes a matter of faith which is independent of evidence.
If you love God (and Jesus), you won’t treat the Great Commission as a polite suggestion to accept or discard as you feel like doing. “Love ya, Jesus, but that stuff you commanded me to do in your name? Yeeeaahhh… kind of busy today and don’t really feel like it. Still think you’re swell though. Honest! Ok, see ya in Heaven!”
I think that’s a meaningless question. “Deserve” according to whose criteria? If God sends you to hell, one would presume that God thinks you deserve it. My opinion on whether or not you deserve it seems pretty moot.
My simplistic answer is that, generally, believers view God as an idealized version of themselves. Since they wouldn’t put their friends in hell for an eternity just for non-belief, they don’t believe God would do that either. Even if the dogma they supposedly hold true teaches the opposite. And in the end, nobody alive can prove either side correct.
While you give this as a reason to proselytize, in my view it can also work exactly the other way - causing people to shy away from making their belief systems public; especially when the dogma doesn’t match their actual beliefs.
To use a metaphor, Heaven is a very exclusive club. If you’re not on the list, you can’t get in the door. Nothing else matters.
The responsibility of a Christian is to send out the invites, so that nobody can use “I was never asked to RSVP” as an excuse.
Jesus said it, not me. Jesus said all you have to do is love your neighbor. Take it up with him.
Presumably you would have to agree that God can’t be wrong, so you would also have to agree that whoever God sends to Hell deserves it, right? Therefore if God sends your loved ones to Hell, you would have to agree that they deserve it, because God can’t be wrong.
Most clubs don’t torture you forever if you decide not to join. Why do people who turn down the invitation deserve to be tortured? Why do they require an “excuse” not to join a club they’re not interested in? What business is that of the club? Do you really think that your God tortures people forever, even if they’re good people, just because they fail to guess, with no evidence at all, which fantastic religious beliefs are the correct ones? Why would you follow such a God? Pure fear? You might as well worship Cthuhlu.
Furthermore, if someone never does receive the invitation, what happens to them? Do they still get tirtured by your God, or do they get a free pass because they weren’t invited. If not being invited gets you a free pass, then wouldn’t it make more sense NOT to invite anybody, because then you would insure they get to heaven?
Makes me think of this Discworld quote:
Nitpick : the Inquisition didn’t kill any Jew refusing to convert, because it only had authority over christians. Being an actual Jew would have been a “get out of jail” card inquisition-wise.
The victims of the inquisition were Jews already converted to christianism, or in fact in general their descendants, when they were suspected, rightly or wrongly, to actually secretely keep the Jewish faith, or possibly simply to keep Jewish customs.
This isn’t completely true. Jews were given a choice of converting or being expelled. They were not allowed to live as Jews within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal (same went for Muslims).
I’m questioning your definition of “love” which apparently begins and ends with saying “I love you”. If you love someone and they say “Do this because this is really, really important to me” and you blow it off without care, I’m personally going to question how much you actually love them and how much you just say you do.
If your concept of salvation is “I’m going to heaven because I love Jesus just like it says but I won’t do what Jesus wants me to do and I don’t feel like trying to talk to my neighbors about Jesus but I love them both” then I guess that’s fine for you. I disagree and therefore disagree with your conclusion that evangelizing isn’t important or expected of Christians but I guess that’s where we stand.
Ok? Am I supposed to be all outraged and insist that my loved ones can’t possibly deserve it or something? If God sets the rules and God puts the rules out there and someone decides to ignore those rules and do whatever they want, I should say that’s good enough because I don’t want them to face consequences?
I guess I’m not following.
Too late to edit, but on the topic of loving God, Jesus says:
“‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”
I personally can’t reconcile ignoring the Great Commission (or any of Jesus’ teachings) with loving God “with all your heart and all your soul and all your mind”. Maybe other people can but that’s kind of a non-starter for me. You don’t claim to love someone completely and then ignore them when it’s inconvenient or uncomfortable.
I’m defining it as Jesus did in the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats.
I’m not saying your supposed to do anything. I’m just asking how you feel about it. Do they deserve it or don’t they? Either they deserve it or God is wrong. Which is it?
How about the Jews who died in the Holocaust? They deserve eternal torture too, right? Or else God is wrong.
Does this sound like a loving God to you?
By the way, where exactly are these “rules” you speak of? As far as I know, God has never said a word to us.