The Atheist and the Pastor

[RitterSport]

Let’s talk about two people, an atheist named Adam and a Lutheran pastor named Pete.

Adam lacks any belief in the supernatural, God or gods, or any sort of afterlife. This is a provisional position, and like any null hypothesis, he’s willing to revisit it if new evidence comes to light. So far, no luck. For the purposes of this thread, I’d like to define “atheist” as someone like Adam who simply lacks belief in God or gods, and makes no positive statement about the existence of higher powers, etc.

Adam is married to, uh, Eve, and they have a few kids. Eve is Pastor Pete’s sister, so A&E’s kids are Pete’s nieces and nephews.

Eve went to Pete when her kids were young and asked him to baptize (Christen? Whatever Lutherans call it) her kids. Pete had been trying to get Eve (a believer) to find a church where she lives and refused to baptize her kids until she did so. Eve, while still religious, had no interest in finding a local church. Other than this, Eve and Pete got along fine and he loved her and his nieces and nephews.

Now, I’m not sure what Lutherans believe, but I don’t think they are universalists. So, I think that by refusing to baptize the kids, Pete was potentially damning his own nephews and nieces to hell for all eternity, according to his own belief system. I imagine it’s not a permanent get-out-of-jail-free card, but I suppose the baptism would cover them until they were old enough to have the capacity to either accept Jesus as their personal savior or reject Him. Now that they are adults, and are also atheists (having simply been brought up without much church-going), it probably doesn’t matter either way.

But, for a few years, these kids were in mortal, eternal danger, according to Pete’s own belief system.

What’s the debate? Based on this essentially true story, I posit that Adam’s sincerity in his own lack of belief is deeper than Pete’s belief in God and an afterlife. No loving uncle would put his own flesh and blood at eternal risk to make a point with his sister, not if he truly believed what he preached. On the other hand, if the atheist wasn’t pretty comfortable in his lack of belief, he should have been hounding his brother-in-law to just do the baptism, just in case something terrible happened to the kids.

What say you?

[Crotalus]

I am protestant, but not Lutheran. My understanding of mainstream protestant beliefs is that 1) baptism or christening is not required for salvation, and 2) children are not in danger of damnation before they reach the maturity to make their own informed decisions about their faith.

[Covfefe]

You can’t really get cut and dried answers from Lutheran pastors on the assurance of the sacrament of baptism itself saving. It isn’t magic and as they believe life begins at conception, they are all putting every soul at risk in the event of a miscarriage anyway, though they would word it differently than I just did.

Let’s say Pete agreed to baptize the children, the couple proceeded to live a lifestyle otherwise devoid of church and other Christian influence, and the child died at a young age. A Lutheran pastor would pray for the child’s soul and offer scriptural words of consolation, however it’s questionable whether a funeral would be held in the manner it would for a fallen devout believer. I am not sure a pastor following guidelines would compel a parent to find a church home before baptizing an infant, but taking some sort of Bible information class or counseling session might be a prerequisite.

[DPRK]

It is perfectly reasonable and expected for an atheist to want to keep his kids well away from any churches, mosques, baptisms, fish-god temples, etc., but isn’t that ultimately between him and his wife? What does the third person have to do with it?

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

This shouldn’t be too surprising. A great many religious people have not really thought the implications and consequences of their beliefs through, and belief in heaven and hell are most certainly among those. See for example this thread: over half the people who voted thought that at least some people deserved to be tortured forever. Eternal torment and damnation. That’s not something someone can reasonably advocate for without, in my eyes, being a goddamn monster - at least, if they thought it through. Because I don’t think most of them thought it through. For most people, the idea of hell is this far-away thing. To once again

[quote from Unsong]
(Unsong) (and by the way, this chapter is worth reading in full if you still have any doubt that hell is not an absurd, immoral concept):

“It seems like we’re running out of time,” said Thamiel. “But don’t worry. Later on, many of you will have all the time in the world to learn more about us. I’m not going to say if it’s ten percent or ninety percent of you; I love to watch you squirm because you don’t know. I’m not going to tell you whether you come here for believing the wrong thing, or doing the wrong thing, or what the wrong thing is, or any of that, because I want you to be totally incapacitated with fear that everything you do might be tossing yourself into my hands. I want your dreams to be haunted by the knowledge that when you die, you might very well be herded into a realm where your hunger and thirst increase as always but you will never eat or drink again. Where your body feels pain like normal but can never die; where your mind is as easily spurred to suffering as on earth but where it can never crack into the release of insanity. I want you to know you’ll be crammed into boiling hot cages, flayed, gutted, raped, lacerated, that we will rip out your eyes and pour boiling oil into the sockets and do it again and again and again.

“I want you to know that all of those people who say that Hell is the absence of God, or Hell is a name people give to their suffering on earth, or Hell is other people, or Hell is oblivion, or Hell is some nice place where atheists get to live free from divine tyranny – all of that is wishful thinking. Hell is a place full of fire and demons under the earth where you will be tortured forever. It’s exactly what it says on the tin.

“Finally, I want you to know that you will sin anyway. This is the best part. For a couple of days, or a couple of weeks, you’ll be horrified, you’ll try to change your ways, you’ll be like the alcoholic promising he’ll never have another drop. Then the memory will fade, your normal habits will take over, and everyone will be back to the way they were before. You can’t save yourself. You’re not strong enough. Your basic nature will out – not to be all Calvinist about it, but it’s true – and you’ll make up some comforting excuse and get on with your life.

But you won’t live forever. And when you die, I’ll be waiting.”

(Thamiel is this universe’s version of satan. Bolding mine.)

We see this all the time. Devout religiousity is no predictor of moral behavior. Just to bring up the obvious example: bishops of the catholic church, pastors and preachers of protestant denominations, high-ranking ministers of the JWs and Mormons, all have been caught raping children, with their associates all too willing to cover for them. And of course, that doesn’t stop a great many people from indulging in far lesser sins. People who believe with all their heart that sinners and non-believers will be damned to eternal torture aren’t willing or able to live in accordance with their own religious beliefs.

And let’s not even get into the clusterfuck that is belief in heaven.

So yeah, expect that the average believer has not thought these concepts through - if they had, they probably wouldn’t believe in them.

[Chronos]

I don’t know the Lutheran view, but I have a hard time imagining a Catholic priest withholding baptism in this way. For that matter, under Catholic teaching, Eve could validly baptize the kids herself, if she wants them baptized.

[RitterSport]

@Crotalus

I am protestant, but not Lutheran. My understanding of mainstream protestant beliefs is that 1) baptism or christening is not required for salvation, and 2) children are not in danger of damnation before they reach the maturity to make their own informed decisions about their faith.

Is this true? Then, why bother with the christening? Is it just an empty show? If this is true, then this thread no longer makes any sense. I’d love for a Lutheran, or someone knowledgeable about that sect, to speak up.

@Covfefe

…
Let’s say Pete agreed to baptize the children, the couple proceeded to live a lifestyle otherwise devoid of church and other Christian influence, and the child died at a young age. A Lutheran pastor would pray for the child’s soul and offer scriptural words of consolation, however it’s questionable whether a funeral would be held in the manner it would for a fallen devout believer. I am not sure a pastor following guidelines would compel a parent to find a church home before baptizing an infant, but taking some sort of Bible information class or counseling session might be a prerequisite.

In this case, the pastor knows all about the mother’s background and beliefs, since he’s her brother. Seems unlikely that counseling would be needed.

@DPRK

It is perfectly reasonable and expected for an atheist to want to keep his kids well away from any churches, mosques, baptisms, fish-god temples, etc., but isn’t that ultimately between him and his wife? What does the third person have to do with it?

Why would you say that? Eve wanted the kids baptized and Adam didn’t object or care either way – to an atheist, it really is just an empty show of course.

@Budget_Player_Cadet

…

So yeah, expect that the average believer has not thought these concepts through - if they had, they probably wouldn’t believe in them.

Of course, we’re not talking about the average believer, but instead a pastor in the church. In fact, a PhD in whatever you get from a seminary.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@RitterSport

Of course, we’re not talking about the average believer, but instead a pastor in the church. In fact, a PhD in whatever you get from a seminary.

I don’t know that this makes much difference, to be honest. A real conception of heaven and hell is one of those things that earnest belief and examination doesn’t help you with, because the concepts are so fundamentally insane when carefully examined that it’s not really possible to examine them closely and still hold your beliefs without some serious cognitive dissonance. I honestly think “I haven’t thought through the consequences of my actions” is the most rational explanation here, because your summary in the OP is pretty on-point, and the dude probably isn’t an insane psychopath.

[senoy]

Lutheran baptism is a way in which God’s grace enters the world. It is not the only way and it is not required for salvation. It is an important rite that allows God’s grace into your life, but it is not a ‘permanent’ thing, nor is it necessary for salvation. The end result of the children growing into unbelievers is the same regardless of whether they were baptized as children or not. It does not convey a magical ‘get out of jail free’ card to them. Baptism is desirable, but hardly compulsory. They teach that the earliest disciples were not baptized, so baptism can hardly be considered required. Lutherans also believe that merely hearing the Gospel message is a means of grace, so Pete may have felt that making the parents into liars before God would not have been worth the sacrament since merely by speaking to the children regarding the tenets of the Church, he would similarly be bringing them grace.

[SenorBeef]

I mean, this is just one tiny example in what seems like a bigger, more obvious fact to me.

Most Christians believe that not acting the right way will land you in punishment. For eternity. There’s some disagreement about what the “right way” is, but it’s a trait shared amongst almost all of them.

If you believe believe that not doing X, or doing Y, will land you in eternal torture. You sincerely believe that. Then not doing X, or doing Y, would be the most insane, ridiculous, wrong course of action you could possibly do.

Imagine, for a moment, that your child was kidnapped by a crazy person and tortured in their basement. For hours, this person raped them, cut away parts of their skin, gave them third degree burns, whatever you imagine being the most horrible stuff you could come up with. Now imagine that person kept them alive for years doing this. Now imagine that this person kept them alive for a million years doing this. Or a trillion. The trillion years of your kid being tortured is literally infinitesimally small compared to the eternal torture that the most common Christian ideologies promise.

As a parent, you would be horrified at the idea of your child being tortured for even an hour. You’d do anything to prevent it. And yet… we see Christian parents with non-believing/non-saved kids, who, do what? Hint to their kids occasionally that they should go to church? Maybe weave Jesus into a conversation here and there?

Your kid is going to suffer ETERNAL PUNISHMENT on their current path, and the best you can do is maybe spend 10 minutes or even an hour a day trying to help them out?

Of course, it doesn’t have to be your kid. I would be horrified that complete strangers could potentially suffer this unimaginable fate. It’s just a stronger link with kids, because you chose to bring them into this world, and you might’ve created a life which will spend maybe 80 years on Earth, and then a trillion trillion trillion trillion (repeating) period in the afterlife.

If you hold these beliefs, what happens in your life is utterly trivial compared to the eternity that lies beyond.

Would people commit adultery or steal or do any of the other bad things if they seriously believed that the punishment would be infinite? Would people be at peace thinking that some fraction of the human race, including some fraction of the people they love, will suffer for eternity?

If you honestly, sincerely believed these things, and you weren’t a monster, you would spend every possible moment of your life trying to save people. Your family, strangers, anyone who would listen to you. Even if you only ever managed to save one person, it would be infinitely more important than anything else you could do in your life.

People who were sincerely religious would spend their whole lives trying to emulate the life of Jesus, or spend every free moment they had trying to convert people, or living the life of a monk, or some other complete amount of dedication. They would never themselves sin, because the consequences of that sin are infinitely bigger than any pleasure or gain they would get from that sin.

Which leads me to conclude - very few people actually believe this shit. If they would, it would occupy their every thought, and every goal in life, and every waking moment. As it should. Because the 80 years you have on this planet are nothing, nothing at all compared to what comes after.

People believe it just enough to get over their own fear of death, or to reinforce whatever agenda they want to believe (god told you to hate the gays!) but no further. If they sincerely believed the whole package, there’s no way they would act like they do, it would be completely insane.

[Kent_Clark]

Part of the Lutheran rite of baptism specifically asks the parents, " do you promise to nurture this person in the Christian faith as you are empowered by God’s Spirit, and to help him live in the covenant of baptism and in communion with the church?" Since Adam and Eve have both made it clear they won’t, it’s clear to the minister that the request for a baptism is not being done in good faith.

As noted upthread, Lutherans do not necessarily believe baptism is necessary for salvation. Baptism is a pathway for entry into “the church,” and the spiritual support and commitment that includes, but individual salvation depends (according to Lutheran teaching)* solely* on accepting Jesus.

[RitterSport]

@senoy

Lutheran baptism is a way in which God’s grace enters the world. It is not the only way and it is not required for salvation. It is an important rite that allows God’s grace into your life, but it is not a ‘permanent’ thing, nor is it necessary for salvation. The end result of the children growing into unbelievers is the same regardless of whether they were baptized as children or not. It does not convey a magical ‘get out of jail free’ card to them. Baptism is desirable, but hardly compulsory. They teach that the earliest disciples were not baptized, so baptism can hardly be considered required. Lutherans also believe that merely hearing the Gospel message is a means of grace, so Pete may have felt that making the parents into liars before God would not have been worth the sacrament since merely by speaking to the children regarding the tenets of the Church, he would similarly be bringing them grace.

So, what happens to kids who die before they are able to make any sort of choice to accept Jesus as their savior, according to the Lutherans? If you’re under, say, four years old, you don’t really have the mental capacity to make any faith decisions?

I understood baptism to be a way to get babies through their first years, before they are properly introduced to Jesus and can make their own faith decisions. Baptism would be a get-out-of-jail card if you’re too young to understand. Once you’re old enough to understand, if you still don’t accept Jesus, you’re basically out of luck. Where does this analysis go wrong?

SenorBeef, what you describe is actually sort of covered in The Good Place, in its usual amusing fashion. I don’t want to spoil anything, so I’ll leave it at that.

[RitterSport]

@kunilou

Part of the Lutheran rite of baptism specifically asks the parents, " do you promise to nurture this person in the Christian faith as you are empowered by God’s Spirit, and to help him live in the covenant of baptism and in communion with the church?" Since Adam and Eve have both made it clear they won’t, it’s clear to the minister that the request for a baptism is not being done in good faith.

As noted upthread, Lutherans do not necessarily believe baptism is necessary for salvation. Baptism is a pathway for entry into “the church,” and the spiritual support and commitment that includes, but individual salvation depends (according to Lutheran teaching)* solely* on accepting Jesus.

I think Adam wouldn’t make that commitment, but Eve would have. Whether she followed through might be a different story, but I’m sure that, at the time of the baptism, in her heart she would agree.

[SenorBeef]

@RitterSport

SenorBeef, what you describe is actually sort of covered in The Good Place, in its usual amusing fashion. I don’t want to spoil anything, so I’ll leave it at that.

Huh. I’ve heard some good things, I’ll check it out.

[FlikTheBlue]

@SenorBeef

I mean, this is just one tiny example in what seems like a bigger, more obvious fact to me.

Most Christians believe that not acting the right way will land you in punishment. For eternity. There’s some disagreement about what the “right way” is, but it’s a trait shared amongst almost all of them.

If you believe believe that not doing X, or doing Y, will land you in eternal torture. You sincerely believe that. Then not doing X, or doing Y, would be the most insane, ridiculous, wrong course of action you could possibly do.

Imagine, for a moment, that your child was kidnapped by a crazy person and tortured in their basement. For hours, this person raped them, cut away parts of their skin, gave them third degree burns, whatever you imagine being the most horrible stuff you could come up with. Now imagine that person kept them alive for years doing this. Now imagine that this person kept them alive for a million years doing this. Or a trillion. The trillion years of your kid being tortured is literally infinitesimally small compared to the eternal torture that the most common Christian ideologies promise.

As a parent, you would be horrified at the idea of your child being tortured for even an hour. You’d do anything to prevent it. And yet… we see Christian parents with non-believing/non-saved kids, who, do what? Hint to their kids occasionally that they should go to church? Maybe weave Jesus into a conversation here and there?

Your kid is going to suffer ETERNAL PUNISHMENT on their current path, and the best you can do is maybe spend 10 minutes or even an hour a day trying to help them out?

Of course, it doesn’t have to be your kid. I would be horrified that complete strangers could potentially suffer this unimaginable fate. It’s just a stronger link with kids, because you chose to bring them into this world, and you might’ve created a life which will spend maybe 80 years on Earth, and then a trillion trillion trillion trillion (repeating) period in the afterlife.

If you hold these beliefs, what happens in your life is utterly trivial compared to the eternity that lies beyond.

Would people commit adultery or steal or do any of the other bad things if they seriously believed that the punishment would be infinite? Would people be at peace thinking that some fraction of the human race, including some fraction of the people they love, will suffer for eternity?

If you honestly, sincerely believed these things, and you weren’t a monster, you would spend every possible moment of your life trying to save people. Your family, strangers, anyone who would listen to you. Even if you only ever managed to save one person, it would be infinitely more important than anything else you could do in your life.

People who were sincerely religious would spend their whole lives trying to emulate the life of Jesus, or spend every free moment they had trying to convert people, or living the life of a monk, or some other complete amount of dedication. They would never themselves sin, because the consequences of that sin are infinitely bigger than any pleasure or gain they would get from that sin.

Which leads me to conclude - very few people actually believe this shit. If they would, it would occupy their every thought, and every goal in life, and every waking moment. As it should. Because the 80 years you have on this planet are nothing, nothing at all compared to what comes after.

People believe it just enough to get over their own fear of death, or to reinforce whatever agenda they want to believe (god told you to hate the gays!) but no further. If they sincerely believed the whole package, there’s no way they would act like they do, it would be completely insane.

Some Christians (Calvinists maybe?) have developed a work around for this problem. If I understand their beliefs correctly, they think that God will save them regardless of how they behave in this life. I assume that the people who developed this particular belief did so after reaching the same conclusion that you did.

[Thudlow_Boink]

@RitterSport

Based on this essentially true story, I posit that Adam’s sincerity in his own lack of belief is deeper than Pete’s belief in God and an afterlife.

You can’t infer that. You can only infer that it’s deeper than Pete’s belief that baptism (or Christening or whatever Lutherans do) is necessary and sufficient to secure the kids’ eternal safety.

[Thudlow_Boink]

@FlikTheBlue

Some Christians (Calvinists maybe?) have developed a work around for this problem. If I understand their beliefs correctly, they think that God will save them regardless of how they behave in this life. I assume that the people who developed this particular belief did so after reaching the same conclusion that you did.

It is a standard Christian (not just Calvinist) belief that salvation is a gift, not something that we do or can earn by being good enough.

[FlikTheBlue]

@Thudlow_Boink

It is a standard Christian (not just Calvinist) belief that salvation is a gift, not something that we do or can earn by being good enough.

I know that Catholics don’t believe this, and assumed that the churches most similar to the Catholic Church (Episcopalian, Church of England, etc.) had similar beliefs as well.

[RitterSport]

@Thudlow_Boink

You can’t infer that. You can only infer that it’s deeper than Pete’s belief that baptism (or Christening or whatever Lutherans do) is necessary and sufficient to secure the kids’ eternal safety.

To be honest, I no longer understand what Lutherans actually do believe baptism does. Can someone clear that up for me? As usual, I’m learning new things every day at this place.

[RitterSport]

@SenorBeef

Huh. I’ve heard some good things, I’ll check it out.

It’s in the third season, which is pretty good, but I think the first two are better. They also cover the trolley problem in excellent fashion! If you like philosophy and ethics, you’ll probably get a kick out of it. You really have to watch the seasons in order, though – first two are on Netflix if you have that.