Hey, I have been dealing with intense mental health issues for a long time now. They have progressively got worse and I am now getting suicidal thoughts (my doctor knows about this). I am looking at religion as a way to find peace in this world but I am plagued by doubt on the validity of it.
I read your comment to a post asking why Christianity is more correct than other religion and part of your response was " I'm a Christian because I find that Christianity is the best explanation for life as I see it."
Do you mind explaining to me why it is the best explanation? I don't want to be argumentative at all and I am completely open minded but when I think of there just being 1 god that just made everything for no particular reason and if we don't sin then we go to a happy place when we die, it just seems pointless to me and doesn't make sense.
Board index ‹ Christianity
15 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Re: Christianity and the Truth
by jimwalton » Tue Jan 28, 2020 3:10 pm
I am so sorry to hear about your mental health issues that plague you even to the point of considering suicide. I've been there, if that's any consolation to you that you're talking to someone who has also struggled. I'm glad you're getting help. I've discovered that no place in life is dark forever. If you can just hang on, get help, keep trying, and not lose hope, things will eventually change for you. I'll be glad to talk with you whatever you want to talk about.
First of all, the Bible would refute your thought that "God just made everything for no particular reason." The Bible tells us that God made the universe to show us His glory (Psalms 19.1) and as a fitting temple for Him to dwell in (He's too great to live in a temple made with human hands; Acts 17.24). And God created people so He could have more children to show His love to. He wanted us (Romans 8.16-18, 29-30; John 1.12; Hebrews 2.10). So it's not pointless at all, but we can talk about this more.
You specifically mentioned my comment about Christianity being the best explanation for life as I see it. I'll elaborate on that and then we can talk about it.
1. I'll start off just generally. I think the God is the Bible is the kind of God I would expect if a God truly exists, and Jesus is the kind of person we would expect to see if God visited the planet. Their beings conform to our highest reasonings of theology and philosophy. God must be all-knowing, all-powerful (without self-contradiction), completely other (transcendent) and yet completely engaged (immanent), loving but just, judging but merciful, maintaining standards and yet full of grace, never-changing but flexible to human situations, communicative, good but can crack a whip when that is called for, eternal, creator, able to work wonders, and yet knows how to play by his own rules at the same time. This is the God we would expect to see, and this is the God we see in the Bible. As far as Jesus, we would expect compassion, power, kindness but doesn't take guff from detractors, fearless, relational, words of authority and truth, knowledge of people and situations, knowledge of the past and future, sacrificial and not self-oriented, and full of patience but not a pushover, meek but not a doormat, assertive, humble, and yet confident. This is exactly what we see. It corresponds to reality.
This is different from Allah of Islam. Allah is not personal, doesn't interact with people, doesn't answer prayer, and cannot be understood. In my mind, what's the sense of a god like that?
I know some people criticize God as an immoral monster, but that's because they don't take time to understand the texts. We can talk about this if you want.
2. The Bible presents a world just as we see it. It presents a world where evil is real (as opposed to other religions like Hinduism, where evil is an illusion—someone like you is not struggling with anything real; yeah, as if that's the case. Hinduism doesn't make sense to me that way—and where God lets things take their course but intervenes to keep his plan of redemption on track. It portrays humanity as noble but hopelessly lost, moral but corruptible, both good and evil, torn between self and others, having a conscience, knowing purpose, aware of morality, acknowledging beauty, capable of creativity, but in some ways animalistic and capable of horrific behavior. We see all these things in real life.
3. The Bible portrays "religion" not as a way to earn a place in God's graces, but as God reaching out to us, to love his way into our hearts. To me this corresponds to reality, because if we have to earn our way, we are all in hopeless trouble. We've seen what people are like. But if God would just reach out to us, invite us into the kingdom, pay any sacrifices himself, and make a way for us to find him, come to him, and be redeemed, this makes sense as the only possible way someone could ever find salvation, and this is what the Bible teaches.
4. A true religion must engage the whole of the human nature, not just the mind and not just the emotions. It can't possibly just be about swaying to the music, entranced and brainless, caught up in the rhythms, spells, notions and potions (like animism). By the same token, it can't possibly just be about deep philosophy, ironing out theological conundrums, connecting intellectually with the mysteries of the universe and transcending humanity to enter the divine. True religion engages the mind and can fulfill the most intellectual queries, but at the same time enjoy expression, joy, uplifting emotions and the pull of our hearts. True religion is for the scholar and the child, the rich and poor, the civilized and the barbarian, the slave and the free, the man and the woman, the scientist and the poet. Christianity conforms to these categories.
5. A true religion must make sense out of history. It doesn't function above it or without it, compete against it or necessarily endorse it. Christianity is a historical religion (in contrast to Hinduism and Buddhism) where God works in history and among history, accomplishing his purposes, involved in people's lives, bringing out the redemption of all creation.
6. A true religion must makes sense out of science. It doesn't function above it or without it, compete against it or necessarily endorse it. Christianity teaches principles of cause and effect, beauty, regularity, predictability, beauty, purpose, design, and a world in which science is not only possible but explained.
7. Christianity teaches purpose, significance in humanity, forgiveness for wrongs, life out of death, hope for the hopeless, redemption, fairness, love, beauty, a God who is there, knowledge, conscience, renewal, and meaning. I think it addresses all of these (#s 1-6) with far greater satisfaction than other religions to such a great extent that I consider Christianity to be true.
I haven't even mentioned such things as the beauty, power, and authority of the Bible, the resurrection of Jesus, and the life changes that Christianity brings to so many. Such things are convincing to me, though objects of scorn to others.
8. In addition, I gain a relationship with God. In Islam, with Allah, one worships God, but there's no relationship. God is "out there" and unknowable. In Hinduism there is no relationship, either. I am my own god. Say what?
9. I am forgiven from my sins and my slavery to sin. This "animal" inside me can be taken away; the darkness can be replaced with light.
10. I am given new life in Christ. I am a new creation. The old has passed away; the new has come! What great news.
11. Christianity gives my life meaning and purpose. I live for the greatest cause of all: for the glory of God.
12. I am a Christian because I find that the evidence for Christianity is convincing. I go by evidence, not by blind faith. To me Christianity is the best explanation for the world as I see it, for life as I see it, and for the evidences I see in the Bible of its truth (historical, psychological, spiritual).
13. God changes lives. In Jesus my mind is transformed and renewed and my actions are focused to the direction of purpose and significance: the glory of God, the improvement of life, justice in the world, hope and help for the poor, and goodness toward humankind.
As far as other religions, I don't find the worldviews of Hinduism, Islam, or Buddhism either consistent, true to life, or fundamentally true. I've explained a little bit about these; we can talk about them further if you want.
Islam that doesn't make sense to me is the radical transcendence of Allah: the distance between man and God is impossible to cross. Repetition and submission are the rule, not any kind of a relationship. And there is no certainty of heaven for the common person. It is all "the will of God," they say. One's destiny is left at the mercy of an unknown and unknowable will. That's doesn't make sense to me. Zacharias says, "When relationship is swallowed up by rules, political power and enforcement become the means of containment." That's Islam, and we've seen that to be true.
Islam is a religion of the Book, as opposed to Christianity, which focuses on the person of Jesus. But how does one hold that the written text is perfect (which it is not; there are textual variants)? Also, Jesus didn't come to give a certain group of people ethnic worth. That's Islam. Jesus loved the world and came to save the world.
To me, Hinduism also comes up lacking. They believe in the relativity of truth and not absolute truth. But how do they know that's absolutely true? They believe that there was no creator; we are the emanation of the divine. But then there's no diversity, particularity, or personality, which doesn't correspond to reality. They believe that evil and suffering are an illusion (we both know that isn't true). They define morality not as doing or being good, but as denying oneself. Hinduism just doesn't meet the criteria of truth in my mind.
I'm obviously willing to discuss any of this more. Just let me know.
First of all, the Bible would refute your thought that "God just made everything for no particular reason." The Bible tells us that God made the universe to show us His glory (Psalms 19.1) and as a fitting temple for Him to dwell in (He's too great to live in a temple made with human hands; Acts 17.24). And God created people so He could have more children to show His love to. He wanted us (Romans 8.16-18, 29-30; John 1.12; Hebrews 2.10). So it's not pointless at all, but we can talk about this more.
You specifically mentioned my comment about Christianity being the best explanation for life as I see it. I'll elaborate on that and then we can talk about it.
1. I'll start off just generally. I think the God is the Bible is the kind of God I would expect if a God truly exists, and Jesus is the kind of person we would expect to see if God visited the planet. Their beings conform to our highest reasonings of theology and philosophy. God must be all-knowing, all-powerful (without self-contradiction), completely other (transcendent) and yet completely engaged (immanent), loving but just, judging but merciful, maintaining standards and yet full of grace, never-changing but flexible to human situations, communicative, good but can crack a whip when that is called for, eternal, creator, able to work wonders, and yet knows how to play by his own rules at the same time. This is the God we would expect to see, and this is the God we see in the Bible. As far as Jesus, we would expect compassion, power, kindness but doesn't take guff from detractors, fearless, relational, words of authority and truth, knowledge of people and situations, knowledge of the past and future, sacrificial and not self-oriented, and full of patience but not a pushover, meek but not a doormat, assertive, humble, and yet confident. This is exactly what we see. It corresponds to reality.
This is different from Allah of Islam. Allah is not personal, doesn't interact with people, doesn't answer prayer, and cannot be understood. In my mind, what's the sense of a god like that?
I know some people criticize God as an immoral monster, but that's because they don't take time to understand the texts. We can talk about this if you want.
2. The Bible presents a world just as we see it. It presents a world where evil is real (as opposed to other religions like Hinduism, where evil is an illusion—someone like you is not struggling with anything real; yeah, as if that's the case. Hinduism doesn't make sense to me that way—and where God lets things take their course but intervenes to keep his plan of redemption on track. It portrays humanity as noble but hopelessly lost, moral but corruptible, both good and evil, torn between self and others, having a conscience, knowing purpose, aware of morality, acknowledging beauty, capable of creativity, but in some ways animalistic and capable of horrific behavior. We see all these things in real life.
3. The Bible portrays "religion" not as a way to earn a place in God's graces, but as God reaching out to us, to love his way into our hearts. To me this corresponds to reality, because if we have to earn our way, we are all in hopeless trouble. We've seen what people are like. But if God would just reach out to us, invite us into the kingdom, pay any sacrifices himself, and make a way for us to find him, come to him, and be redeemed, this makes sense as the only possible way someone could ever find salvation, and this is what the Bible teaches.
4. A true religion must engage the whole of the human nature, not just the mind and not just the emotions. It can't possibly just be about swaying to the music, entranced and brainless, caught up in the rhythms, spells, notions and potions (like animism). By the same token, it can't possibly just be about deep philosophy, ironing out theological conundrums, connecting intellectually with the mysteries of the universe and transcending humanity to enter the divine. True religion engages the mind and can fulfill the most intellectual queries, but at the same time enjoy expression, joy, uplifting emotions and the pull of our hearts. True religion is for the scholar and the child, the rich and poor, the civilized and the barbarian, the slave and the free, the man and the woman, the scientist and the poet. Christianity conforms to these categories.
5. A true religion must make sense out of history. It doesn't function above it or without it, compete against it or necessarily endorse it. Christianity is a historical religion (in contrast to Hinduism and Buddhism) where God works in history and among history, accomplishing his purposes, involved in people's lives, bringing out the redemption of all creation.
6. A true religion must makes sense out of science. It doesn't function above it or without it, compete against it or necessarily endorse it. Christianity teaches principles of cause and effect, beauty, regularity, predictability, beauty, purpose, design, and a world in which science is not only possible but explained.
7. Christianity teaches purpose, significance in humanity, forgiveness for wrongs, life out of death, hope for the hopeless, redemption, fairness, love, beauty, a God who is there, knowledge, conscience, renewal, and meaning. I think it addresses all of these (#s 1-6) with far greater satisfaction than other religions to such a great extent that I consider Christianity to be true.
I haven't even mentioned such things as the beauty, power, and authority of the Bible, the resurrection of Jesus, and the life changes that Christianity brings to so many. Such things are convincing to me, though objects of scorn to others.
8. In addition, I gain a relationship with God. In Islam, with Allah, one worships God, but there's no relationship. God is "out there" and unknowable. In Hinduism there is no relationship, either. I am my own god. Say what?
9. I am forgiven from my sins and my slavery to sin. This "animal" inside me can be taken away; the darkness can be replaced with light.
10. I am given new life in Christ. I am a new creation. The old has passed away; the new has come! What great news.
11. Christianity gives my life meaning and purpose. I live for the greatest cause of all: for the glory of God.
12. I am a Christian because I find that the evidence for Christianity is convincing. I go by evidence, not by blind faith. To me Christianity is the best explanation for the world as I see it, for life as I see it, and for the evidences I see in the Bible of its truth (historical, psychological, spiritual).
13. God changes lives. In Jesus my mind is transformed and renewed and my actions are focused to the direction of purpose and significance: the glory of God, the improvement of life, justice in the world, hope and help for the poor, and goodness toward humankind.
As far as other religions, I don't find the worldviews of Hinduism, Islam, or Buddhism either consistent, true to life, or fundamentally true. I've explained a little bit about these; we can talk about them further if you want.
Islam that doesn't make sense to me is the radical transcendence of Allah: the distance between man and God is impossible to cross. Repetition and submission are the rule, not any kind of a relationship. And there is no certainty of heaven for the common person. It is all "the will of God," they say. One's destiny is left at the mercy of an unknown and unknowable will. That's doesn't make sense to me. Zacharias says, "When relationship is swallowed up by rules, political power and enforcement become the means of containment." That's Islam, and we've seen that to be true.
Islam is a religion of the Book, as opposed to Christianity, which focuses on the person of Jesus. But how does one hold that the written text is perfect (which it is not; there are textual variants)? Also, Jesus didn't come to give a certain group of people ethnic worth. That's Islam. Jesus loved the world and came to save the world.
To me, Hinduism also comes up lacking. They believe in the relativity of truth and not absolute truth. But how do they know that's absolutely true? They believe that there was no creator; we are the emanation of the divine. But then there's no diversity, particularity, or personality, which doesn't correspond to reality. They believe that evil and suffering are an illusion (we both know that isn't true). They define morality not as doing or being good, but as denying oneself. Hinduism just doesn't meet the criteria of truth in my mind.
I'm obviously willing to discuss any of this more. Just let me know.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9108
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Christianity and the Truth
by Purple Berry » Tue Jan 28, 2020 10:15 pm
Thank you so much for the through response. I just have some questions.
I find it hard to grasp the concept of God coming from nothing. What goes through my mind is, how is there total blankness and then an entity (God) comes to fruition out of nowhere and therefore creates the universe in order to spread love. It’s very confusing to me.
And heaven and hell is also very confusing. At the end of this life, from a Christianity perspective we would either go to heaven and be very happy or go to hell and be tortured. Why could we not just be happy all along? And why would God chose to torture certain people. Certain people that were raised in a religion (and possibly brainwashed).
Thirdly, do you think Christianity can offer me peace and freedom from a lot of my suffering? If so, what are things I should be doing daily in relation to Christianity? Or better yet, what do you do?
I find it hard to grasp the concept of God coming from nothing. What goes through my mind is, how is there total blankness and then an entity (God) comes to fruition out of nowhere and therefore creates the universe in order to spread love. It’s very confusing to me.
And heaven and hell is also very confusing. At the end of this life, from a Christianity perspective we would either go to heaven and be very happy or go to hell and be tortured. Why could we not just be happy all along? And why would God chose to torture certain people. Certain people that were raised in a religion (and possibly brainwashed).
Thirdly, do you think Christianity can offer me peace and freedom from a lot of my suffering? If so, what are things I should be doing daily in relation to Christianity? Or better yet, what do you do?
- Purple Berry
Re: Christianity and the Truth
by jimwalton » Tue Jan 28, 2020 10:16 pm
Thanks for writing. i appreciate your response.
> I find it hard to grasp the concept of God coming from nothing.
No matter you believe, you believe something is eternal, whether energy, some kind of quantum reality, or deity. Something has to be eternal.
Right now science is telling us that the universe was not eternal—it had a beginning. There was a point when the Big Bang went BANG, but before that was just a dimensionless singularity where the laws and forces of nature didn't exist, and even nature didn't exist. That leads me to believe that whatever caused the Bang to go BANG is outside of nature, always existed, and is a powerful and purposeful cause. That leads me to the person of God. I believe God is the entity that always existed: timeless, pre-existent, powerful, and purposeful. Since the universe could not have brought itself into existence out of nothing, something else (or someone else) did. As we define God, we would expect God to be self-existent, eternal, powerful, and un-created. From what we know of science and the universe, the universe has not always been around. So we can talk about that.
> And heaven and hell is also very confusing. At the end of this life, from a Christianity perspective we would either go to heaven and be very happy or go to hell and be tortured. Why could we not just be happy all along?
The idea of religion is not just to be involved in some kind of experience. In Christianity, the idea is that God is personal, that He loves us, and He wants us to be in a personal relationship with Him. Christianity is about a relationship, not really about a religion (though that's how people categorize it anyway).
So, maybe think of it like a marriage. God wants to love you, and he wants people who will love Him. But suppose you don't love God, and you don't want to be with Him. Should God force you into the "marriage" anyway and FORCE you to love Him? Of course not—that's not love at all. That misses the whole point.
So here's the deal: any people who choose to love God and want to be with Him can be with Him; it's an open invitation. But people who don't love God and don't want to be with Him aren't going to be forced.
Next step: God is life, love, forgiveness, and peace. So if you choose God, that's what you choose. But if you choose against God, then you get non-life, non-love, not forgiven, and no peace. The Bible calls that hell. It's your choice. God wants you next to Him, in the "marriage." He has expressed His love for you, and invited you to come be part of His family. But He can't force you. You make the decision to be part of life and love or to be apart from it.
> why would God chose to torture certain people
God doesn't torture people. If you choose to have nothing to do with love, life, forgiveness, and peace, you choose to be separated from God instead. That's its own agony.
> do you think Christianity can offer me peace and freedom from a lot of my suffering?
Yes, I do. Millions of people have found in Jesus peace and freedom from suffering. I have found it myself.
> If so, what are things I should be doing daily in relation to Christianity?
The first step is to make a decision to choose God. If I can still use the analogy of marriage, you come to the place in life where you want to give yourself in love to a spouse, to deny yourself for that person, to sacrifice for that person, and to love them with all you have. That's what coming to God is like: you make a choice to respond to His love with your love.
Second, once you have done that, it helps to read the Bible to understand the person of God better (you want to get to know your "spouse" as well as possible). In your particular situation I'd start with 2 Corinthians and the Gospel of Mark.
Third, talk to God. We call it praying. He won't "talk" back, but tell Him about your day, and about your worries, the things that went well, and the things that did't.
> what do you do?
I take a piece of a Bible text and mull it around in my mind all day, figuring it out, like what it means and what it's saying to me. Here are a few that I found helpful when I was in a deep emotional pit.
Psalm 23
2 Corinthians 1.3-11
2 Corinthians 12.7-10
Psalm 40
I read these texts like a starving person, filling my mind with them to understand every sentence, every line. God never talked to me in prayer, but He did show me when I read these texts lots of things that changed the way I thought.
Let's keep talking, if you want.
> I find it hard to grasp the concept of God coming from nothing.
No matter you believe, you believe something is eternal, whether energy, some kind of quantum reality, or deity. Something has to be eternal.
Right now science is telling us that the universe was not eternal—it had a beginning. There was a point when the Big Bang went BANG, but before that was just a dimensionless singularity where the laws and forces of nature didn't exist, and even nature didn't exist. That leads me to believe that whatever caused the Bang to go BANG is outside of nature, always existed, and is a powerful and purposeful cause. That leads me to the person of God. I believe God is the entity that always existed: timeless, pre-existent, powerful, and purposeful. Since the universe could not have brought itself into existence out of nothing, something else (or someone else) did. As we define God, we would expect God to be self-existent, eternal, powerful, and un-created. From what we know of science and the universe, the universe has not always been around. So we can talk about that.
> And heaven and hell is also very confusing. At the end of this life, from a Christianity perspective we would either go to heaven and be very happy or go to hell and be tortured. Why could we not just be happy all along?
The idea of religion is not just to be involved in some kind of experience. In Christianity, the idea is that God is personal, that He loves us, and He wants us to be in a personal relationship with Him. Christianity is about a relationship, not really about a religion (though that's how people categorize it anyway).
So, maybe think of it like a marriage. God wants to love you, and he wants people who will love Him. But suppose you don't love God, and you don't want to be with Him. Should God force you into the "marriage" anyway and FORCE you to love Him? Of course not—that's not love at all. That misses the whole point.
So here's the deal: any people who choose to love God and want to be with Him can be with Him; it's an open invitation. But people who don't love God and don't want to be with Him aren't going to be forced.
Next step: God is life, love, forgiveness, and peace. So if you choose God, that's what you choose. But if you choose against God, then you get non-life, non-love, not forgiven, and no peace. The Bible calls that hell. It's your choice. God wants you next to Him, in the "marriage." He has expressed His love for you, and invited you to come be part of His family. But He can't force you. You make the decision to be part of life and love or to be apart from it.
> why would God chose to torture certain people
God doesn't torture people. If you choose to have nothing to do with love, life, forgiveness, and peace, you choose to be separated from God instead. That's its own agony.
> do you think Christianity can offer me peace and freedom from a lot of my suffering?
Yes, I do. Millions of people have found in Jesus peace and freedom from suffering. I have found it myself.
> If so, what are things I should be doing daily in relation to Christianity?
The first step is to make a decision to choose God. If I can still use the analogy of marriage, you come to the place in life where you want to give yourself in love to a spouse, to deny yourself for that person, to sacrifice for that person, and to love them with all you have. That's what coming to God is like: you make a choice to respond to His love with your love.
Second, once you have done that, it helps to read the Bible to understand the person of God better (you want to get to know your "spouse" as well as possible). In your particular situation I'd start with 2 Corinthians and the Gospel of Mark.
Third, talk to God. We call it praying. He won't "talk" back, but tell Him about your day, and about your worries, the things that went well, and the things that did't.
> what do you do?
I take a piece of a Bible text and mull it around in my mind all day, figuring it out, like what it means and what it's saying to me. Here are a few that I found helpful when I was in a deep emotional pit.
Psalm 23
2 Corinthians 1.3-11
2 Corinthians 12.7-10
Psalm 40
I read these texts like a starving person, filling my mind with them to understand every sentence, every line. God never talked to me in prayer, but He did show me when I read these texts lots of things that changed the way I thought.
Let's keep talking, if you want.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9108
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Christianity and the Truth
by Purple Berry » Wed Jan 29, 2020 1:14 pm
Right on. So I should develop a relationship with god via talking with him and also praying to him daily / throughout my day. As well as reading the bible daily.
Regarding the idea of hell. So if someone doesn’t love god then they will be tortured? I think it would make more sense that they would just cease to exist or something like that. But even that seems a little extreme considering there are people born into muslim families who are brainwashed to believe in Islam. Is hell sort of a meaning for something that isn’t actually what it is? Or do people who are not Christian really burn for eternity?
Regarding the idea of hell. So if someone doesn’t love god then they will be tortured? I think it would make more sense that they would just cease to exist or something like that. But even that seems a little extreme considering there are people born into muslim families who are brainwashed to believe in Islam. Is hell sort of a meaning for something that isn’t actually what it is? Or do people who are not Christian really burn for eternity?
- Purple Berry
Re: Christianity and the Truth
by jimwalton » Wed Jan 29, 2020 1:29 pm
> So if someone doesn’t love god then they will be tortured?
As far as my reading of the Bible, the only "torture" of hell will be the agony of being truly separated from God. The figure of "fire" is just a figure of speech; it's not literal fire. Sometimes hell is described as darkness. Fire just an image of how awful it will be to be truly separated from God.
> I think it would make more sense that they would just cease to exist or something like that.
The problem with "ceasing to exist" is that there's no sense of justice there. If they just cease to exist, then a guy like Hitler got away with it. "Do whatever you want, 'cause you won't have to pay for it. You'll just cease to exist." So Hitler, Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, Pol Pot, or Josef Stalin—they just get away with it. There's no justice in that. We might as well all just do what we want—rape, murder, theft, who cares! We'll all get away with it. When life is over, we cease to exist. That doesn't make more sense to me.
> But even that seems a little extreme considering there are people born into muslim families who are brainwashed to believe in Islam.
Yes, people are brainwashed, and God will take that into account. He will take all things into account. But there are millions of Muslims coming to Jesus. I have heard first-hand reports from people in Iran and Iraq, as well as Syria, that there is a great movement of Muslims to Christianity. (Of course, you never hear about it on the news.)
> Is hell sort of a meaning for something that isn’t actually what it is?
There's every reason, if we believe the Bible, to believe that hell is real. But the images of hell are exactly that: figures of speech. Hell is no more "fire" than heaven is "harps and clouds." It's figurative language to speak of agony vs. peace, and isolation rather than love relationship.
> Or do people who are not Christian really burn for eternity?
I don't think anyone "burns." And it may not be for eternity. Not all Christians, you should know, believe in the traditional concept of hell. There are theories about reconcilationism, semi-restorationism, modified eternalism, and annihilationism, all with some kind of scriptural backing. In other words, hell isn't necessarily eternal for all who enter it. It may only be eternal for those who refuse to be reconciled.
There is no indication of different levels of heaven or of hell (like Dante's Inferno), but there are degrees of reward and degrees of punishment, so that it's all perfectly fair.
Why I bother to point this out is because often those who consider hell to be unfair are picturing the same punishment for all, which is most likely not the case, and infinite punishment for finite crimes, which may also not be the case. People will be punished according to the works they have done (2 Corinthians 5.10).
In other words, here's the real deal about eternity, what the Bible is SO emphatic about: God will be perfectly fair with everyone. There is no need for anxiety that God has created a system of horror, that people will be judged unfairly, that injustices will be done and people will be sent inappropriately somewhere, or that God will somehow go against his attributes just to torture people. We may not know about the real character and duration of hell, but there are ate least two truths that bear on the issue: God will be fair, and God is not cruel.
So here's the scene: God invites each person into a loving relationship with himself. He has prepared a wonderful place for them, and leaves the door wide open. It doesn't make God barbarous that a person refuses to come in and chooses of their own free will to stay outside in the chaos. There's a Book of Life, but there's no Book of Death. But people who reject God choose to be separated from him, and they will go to a fate that was never meant to be theirs. We are free agents, and the choices we get to make regarding spiritual truths are real choices. God does not force anyone towards heaven or hell. Those choices are ours alone to make.
What the Bible says is that God loves you (Jn. 3.16), knows that you can't save yourself (since no one is worthy), and so has made every provision for your rescue, offering it as a free gift to all comers. We must repudiate what separates us from God (repent of our sins), and turn to him in love (very different from "religion". It's much like a marriage ceremony, where you forsake all others to commit yourself in love to the one who loves you.) But since love must always be chosen and never forced, he informs and invites all people to come to him for rescue (salvation). The choice belongs to each individual, and it is always ours to make. No worthiness is involved, but only choice and love. All sincere comers will be accepted. All who refuse and choose to have nothing to do with God will endure the consequences of that decision: life without God, and eternity without God, if they get all the way to the end of life spurning his every invitation. They weren't created bound for hell, and Jer. 18.1-12 lets us know that they always have a legitimate choice to do as they wish with their lives. God will make adjustments according to their free-will choices. The path to hell is never a certainty unless the person in question makes it such.
For the sake of analogy, let's suppose there are two doors, one leading to eternal separation from God, and one leading to eternal joy in his presence. Door #1 was only prepared for Satan and his sycophants, and door #2 was prepared for all people. Jesus is standing between the doors, and as people approach, he expresses his love for them and invites them to enter door #2 and bliss. But when people grab the handle to door #1, he cries out to them, "Don't do that. It's a terrible thing. You don't want to go there. Come this way, into door #2." But they choose to enter door #1 anyway.
Here's the bottom line: If you know the Christian God is one of perfect love, mercy, and justice, then turn to Him and become part of his family. That is the real message of the Bible: come, share the life God offers you, and come into unity and belonging with the God who loves you. There won't be anything unfair. You just want to make sure that neither you nor anyone else you love or know ends up in the category of "the doomed." Come to Jesus and let His life fill you. I can guarantee you that the absolute truth of the Bible is that no one will be dealt with wrongly, unfairly, or unjustly. Take that to heart. If you don't really want to face God with a heart against Him, then turn your heart towards Him.
C.S. Lewis makes some interesting observations about hell. I'll reword them and summarize some of them here: You object to the doctrine of hell. What are you asking God to do? To wipe out past sins at all costs and to give anyone who wants it a fresh start, smoothing difficulties and offering help? But He has DONE that. That's what his death and resurrection were all about. OK, then, are you asking God to forgive you? It's a RELATIONSHIP. He will forgive anyone who wants it, and cannot forgive those who choose not to be forgiven. To leave you alone then? Well, I'm afraid that's what hell is.
If a game is played, it must be possible to lose it. If there is a way that must be found by the will, and by love, then it must be possible to refuse it. If the happiness of a person is honestly the result of self-surrender, then no one can make that decision except himself, and he may refuse. I would love to say everyone will be saved. But then I'd have to ask, "Will they be saved against their will, or with it?" If I say "against their will," I'm in the middle of a contradiction; how can self-surrender and love be involuntary? But if the answer is "With their will," it begs the question: "What if they will not give in?"
So, with all that has been said, and with all the disagreements, even from Christians, about hell, I can conclude with confidence with this statement: Those who turn away from God will be separated from the life of God. Though we can't be sure about the form or duration of that separation, this we can be sure of: it will be a horrible experience, and God will be fair about the form and duration of it. If you reject God, you take your chances.
As far as my reading of the Bible, the only "torture" of hell will be the agony of being truly separated from God. The figure of "fire" is just a figure of speech; it's not literal fire. Sometimes hell is described as darkness. Fire just an image of how awful it will be to be truly separated from God.
> I think it would make more sense that they would just cease to exist or something like that.
The problem with "ceasing to exist" is that there's no sense of justice there. If they just cease to exist, then a guy like Hitler got away with it. "Do whatever you want, 'cause you won't have to pay for it. You'll just cease to exist." So Hitler, Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, Pol Pot, or Josef Stalin—they just get away with it. There's no justice in that. We might as well all just do what we want—rape, murder, theft, who cares! We'll all get away with it. When life is over, we cease to exist. That doesn't make more sense to me.
> But even that seems a little extreme considering there are people born into muslim families who are brainwashed to believe in Islam.
Yes, people are brainwashed, and God will take that into account. He will take all things into account. But there are millions of Muslims coming to Jesus. I have heard first-hand reports from people in Iran and Iraq, as well as Syria, that there is a great movement of Muslims to Christianity. (Of course, you never hear about it on the news.)
> Is hell sort of a meaning for something that isn’t actually what it is?
There's every reason, if we believe the Bible, to believe that hell is real. But the images of hell are exactly that: figures of speech. Hell is no more "fire" than heaven is "harps and clouds." It's figurative language to speak of agony vs. peace, and isolation rather than love relationship.
> Or do people who are not Christian really burn for eternity?
I don't think anyone "burns." And it may not be for eternity. Not all Christians, you should know, believe in the traditional concept of hell. There are theories about reconcilationism, semi-restorationism, modified eternalism, and annihilationism, all with some kind of scriptural backing. In other words, hell isn't necessarily eternal for all who enter it. It may only be eternal for those who refuse to be reconciled.
There is no indication of different levels of heaven or of hell (like Dante's Inferno), but there are degrees of reward and degrees of punishment, so that it's all perfectly fair.
- Matthew 11.22-24 & Luke 10.12: Jesus says it will be “more tolerable” for the people of Sodom and Gomorrah than for the people of Capernaum. That would indicate to me a more harsh punishment and a less harsh punishment.
- Matthew 23.14: Jesus tells the Pharisees they will be punished more severely for the way they are deceiving the people and living as hypocrites.
- Revelation 20.13: Each is going to be judged according to what he has done. Since that is the case, then the punishments and rewards can’t be the same for everybody.
- and finally, Luke 12.47-48 (workers are punished with more or fewer blows). There are degrees of punishment, and even sins of ignorance are treated differently than sins of intention.
Why I bother to point this out is because often those who consider hell to be unfair are picturing the same punishment for all, which is most likely not the case, and infinite punishment for finite crimes, which may also not be the case. People will be punished according to the works they have done (2 Corinthians 5.10).
In other words, here's the real deal about eternity, what the Bible is SO emphatic about: God will be perfectly fair with everyone. There is no need for anxiety that God has created a system of horror, that people will be judged unfairly, that injustices will be done and people will be sent inappropriately somewhere, or that God will somehow go against his attributes just to torture people. We may not know about the real character and duration of hell, but there are ate least two truths that bear on the issue: God will be fair, and God is not cruel.
So here's the scene: God invites each person into a loving relationship with himself. He has prepared a wonderful place for them, and leaves the door wide open. It doesn't make God barbarous that a person refuses to come in and chooses of their own free will to stay outside in the chaos. There's a Book of Life, but there's no Book of Death. But people who reject God choose to be separated from him, and they will go to a fate that was never meant to be theirs. We are free agents, and the choices we get to make regarding spiritual truths are real choices. God does not force anyone towards heaven or hell. Those choices are ours alone to make.
What the Bible says is that God loves you (Jn. 3.16), knows that you can't save yourself (since no one is worthy), and so has made every provision for your rescue, offering it as a free gift to all comers. We must repudiate what separates us from God (repent of our sins), and turn to him in love (very different from "religion". It's much like a marriage ceremony, where you forsake all others to commit yourself in love to the one who loves you.) But since love must always be chosen and never forced, he informs and invites all people to come to him for rescue (salvation). The choice belongs to each individual, and it is always ours to make. No worthiness is involved, but only choice and love. All sincere comers will be accepted. All who refuse and choose to have nothing to do with God will endure the consequences of that decision: life without God, and eternity without God, if they get all the way to the end of life spurning his every invitation. They weren't created bound for hell, and Jer. 18.1-12 lets us know that they always have a legitimate choice to do as they wish with their lives. God will make adjustments according to their free-will choices. The path to hell is never a certainty unless the person in question makes it such.
For the sake of analogy, let's suppose there are two doors, one leading to eternal separation from God, and one leading to eternal joy in his presence. Door #1 was only prepared for Satan and his sycophants, and door #2 was prepared for all people. Jesus is standing between the doors, and as people approach, he expresses his love for them and invites them to enter door #2 and bliss. But when people grab the handle to door #1, he cries out to them, "Don't do that. It's a terrible thing. You don't want to go there. Come this way, into door #2." But they choose to enter door #1 anyway.
Here's the bottom line: If you know the Christian God is one of perfect love, mercy, and justice, then turn to Him and become part of his family. That is the real message of the Bible: come, share the life God offers you, and come into unity and belonging with the God who loves you. There won't be anything unfair. You just want to make sure that neither you nor anyone else you love or know ends up in the category of "the doomed." Come to Jesus and let His life fill you. I can guarantee you that the absolute truth of the Bible is that no one will be dealt with wrongly, unfairly, or unjustly. Take that to heart. If you don't really want to face God with a heart against Him, then turn your heart towards Him.
C.S. Lewis makes some interesting observations about hell. I'll reword them and summarize some of them here: You object to the doctrine of hell. What are you asking God to do? To wipe out past sins at all costs and to give anyone who wants it a fresh start, smoothing difficulties and offering help? But He has DONE that. That's what his death and resurrection were all about. OK, then, are you asking God to forgive you? It's a RELATIONSHIP. He will forgive anyone who wants it, and cannot forgive those who choose not to be forgiven. To leave you alone then? Well, I'm afraid that's what hell is.
If a game is played, it must be possible to lose it. If there is a way that must be found by the will, and by love, then it must be possible to refuse it. If the happiness of a person is honestly the result of self-surrender, then no one can make that decision except himself, and he may refuse. I would love to say everyone will be saved. But then I'd have to ask, "Will they be saved against their will, or with it?" If I say "against their will," I'm in the middle of a contradiction; how can self-surrender and love be involuntary? But if the answer is "With their will," it begs the question: "What if they will not give in?"
So, with all that has been said, and with all the disagreements, even from Christians, about hell, I can conclude with confidence with this statement: Those who turn away from God will be separated from the life of God. Though we can't be sure about the form or duration of that separation, this we can be sure of: it will be a horrible experience, and God will be fair about the form and duration of it. If you reject God, you take your chances.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9108
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Christianity and the Truth
by Purple Berry » Thu Jan 30, 2020 10:11 am
That makes so much more sense to me. It is a sense of torture due to separation but not necessarily literally burning alive for years.
I have to be honest, for some reason I find it very difficult to grasp the concept of god. I’ve tried being more spiritual and it made me feel a little crazy. So your main point is that there has to be something that started all of this. That makes sense. And we are here because the person (or entity) that started all of this wanted to spread his consciousness. That makes sense. But why him? Why is he the person that is the ultimate being that came from nothing?
I have to be honest, for some reason I find it very difficult to grasp the concept of god. I’ve tried being more spiritual and it made me feel a little crazy. So your main point is that there has to be something that started all of this. That makes sense. And we are here because the person (or entity) that started all of this wanted to spread his consciousness. That makes sense. But why him? Why is he the person that is the ultimate being that came from nothing?
- Purple Berry
Re: Christianity and the Truth
by jimwalton » Thu Jan 30, 2020 10:25 am
> for some reason I find it very difficult to grasp the concept of god
Here's one way that might make sense of God to you. We know that everything is not material. Some things are real even though they are non-material, like time, or our memories.
Evidence of our thoughts and feelings shows that we are more than just material objects, even biologically. Part of what we are born with and our nature as humans includes non-material realities. Biologically it comes from the same place everything else comes from: our human nature.
What's more, our sense of self (and perception of self, not just in thought, but as an entity) gives evidence that we have a conception of a non-material self.
Our perceptions of truth and falseness (which are necessary for scientific inquiry) betray a belief that among the random and chance happenings of evolution and naturalism, content (apart from natural phenomena that we can empirically experience) has arisen that we can trust to be reliably true. (The conditional probability that our cognitive faculties are reliable, given naturalism together with the proposition that we have come to be by way of evolution, is low.) The reliability of cognitive content in addition to self-perception gives evidence that something besides pure materialism is present in our beings.
OK, so since we know that non-material things exist, and that some of those non-material things are part of us, then it's fair to extrapolate that there also exist non-material things that are NOT part of us. The concept of God isn't all that "out there."
>So your main point is that there has to be something that started all of this. That makes sense.
Sure. If something doesn't exist, it can't make itself come into existence. Something else has to make it come into existence.
Another thing that science tells us: first causes always have to be personal. Sure, there are endless complex chains of cause-and-effect, but anything that starts a new chain is personal. Those billiard balls will sit there on the table for eternity unless someONE starts them moving.
So if we have the possibility (and evidence) that non-material entities exist, and that those can exist outside of ourselves as well (like time), and if we know that all first causes are personal causes, then the causal mechanism to the universe was likely outside of time, non-material, and personal. Aren't we getting close to a concept of God?
> But why him? Why is he the person that is the ultimate being that came from nothing?
If there's only 1 ultimate being that had no beginning, then it wasn't exactly a choice. But if the first cause had to be timeless, eternal, powerful, and personal, along with purposeful (since we see purpose all through science), we are honing in on a description of God.
And, just to add in here, I don't think it's possible that there are more than one ultimate being. If there were, they would eventually come into conflict with each other, as free agents. And if they never came into conflict with each other but instead were in perfect harmony, they would be ultimately redundant, which would be meaningless. So I don't think it's possible that there are more than ultimate being. Which is taking us even closer to a concept of God. Every step of logic takes us closer to an ultimate, supreme, supernatural being who is eternal, powerful, personal, and purposeful.
And there's actually so much more I haven't touched on yet. I think it adds up to a strong case.
What do you think?
Here's one way that might make sense of God to you. We know that everything is not material. Some things are real even though they are non-material, like time, or our memories.
Evidence of our thoughts and feelings shows that we are more than just material objects, even biologically. Part of what we are born with and our nature as humans includes non-material realities. Biologically it comes from the same place everything else comes from: our human nature.
What's more, our sense of self (and perception of self, not just in thought, but as an entity) gives evidence that we have a conception of a non-material self.
Our perceptions of truth and falseness (which are necessary for scientific inquiry) betray a belief that among the random and chance happenings of evolution and naturalism, content (apart from natural phenomena that we can empirically experience) has arisen that we can trust to be reliably true. (The conditional probability that our cognitive faculties are reliable, given naturalism together with the proposition that we have come to be by way of evolution, is low.) The reliability of cognitive content in addition to self-perception gives evidence that something besides pure materialism is present in our beings.
OK, so since we know that non-material things exist, and that some of those non-material things are part of us, then it's fair to extrapolate that there also exist non-material things that are NOT part of us. The concept of God isn't all that "out there."
>So your main point is that there has to be something that started all of this. That makes sense.
Sure. If something doesn't exist, it can't make itself come into existence. Something else has to make it come into existence.
Another thing that science tells us: first causes always have to be personal. Sure, there are endless complex chains of cause-and-effect, but anything that starts a new chain is personal. Those billiard balls will sit there on the table for eternity unless someONE starts them moving.
So if we have the possibility (and evidence) that non-material entities exist, and that those can exist outside of ourselves as well (like time), and if we know that all first causes are personal causes, then the causal mechanism to the universe was likely outside of time, non-material, and personal. Aren't we getting close to a concept of God?
> But why him? Why is he the person that is the ultimate being that came from nothing?
If there's only 1 ultimate being that had no beginning, then it wasn't exactly a choice. But if the first cause had to be timeless, eternal, powerful, and personal, along with purposeful (since we see purpose all through science), we are honing in on a description of God.
And, just to add in here, I don't think it's possible that there are more than one ultimate being. If there were, they would eventually come into conflict with each other, as free agents. And if they never came into conflict with each other but instead were in perfect harmony, they would be ultimately redundant, which would be meaningless. So I don't think it's possible that there are more than ultimate being. Which is taking us even closer to a concept of God. Every step of logic takes us closer to an ultimate, supreme, supernatural being who is eternal, powerful, personal, and purposeful.
And there's actually so much more I haven't touched on yet. I think it adds up to a strong case.
What do you think?
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9108
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Christianity and the Truth
by Purple Berry » Fri Jan 31, 2020 9:51 am
I think what you’re saying makes a lot of sense. But it is a very hard concept for me to grasp. You’re right, it makes sense that there has to be something or someone that created all of this. But I can’t grasp that there was nothingness and then a God came to fruition out of this nothingness. Then what created God? Nothing? It makes it really difficult for me to understand.
To be honest my view of the world right now is that there has to be a point to all of this. We are conscious of our own consciousness. We are more than our body’s. However, as I stated above, how can there be nothing yet someone came to fruition from nothing and that person is therefore God? It’s really hard to understand from my point of view. Why is God, God? And how is any of this even possible?
To be honest my view of the world right now is that there has to be a point to all of this. We are conscious of our own consciousness. We are more than our body’s. However, as I stated above, how can there be nothing yet someone came to fruition from nothing and that person is therefore God? It’s really hard to understand from my point of view. Why is God, God? And how is any of this even possible?
- Purple Berry
Re: Christianity and the Truth
by jimwalton » Fri Jan 31, 2020 9:57 am
Thanks for continuing to talk to me. I think you're right that there has to be a point to all of this. Our minds go in that direction: Why are we here? What is the purpose of life? Why is there something rather than nothing? How is it that I am self-aware? (...and about a dozen other questions.)
But we as Christians don't believe that God came to fruition out of nothingness. We believe that God was always there. Something had to have always been there. To me, when I look at the evidence, the evidence points to a metaphysical being (not from nature), who is personal, powerful, and eternal. I know—it's a lot to wrap one's head around, but something had to have always been there.
Another thing that weighs on me is that science, as good as it is, can explain only part of this picture (how things got here; why they are the way they are), but theism can explain it all. Theism has sufficiency of explanation. And theism is actually the simpler explanation (Occam's Razor), whereas science has some real gaps to jump (like abiogenesis, the origin of DNA, the existence of consciousness, and what made the Bang go BANG).
But we as Christians don't believe that God came to fruition out of nothingness. We believe that God was always there. Something had to have always been there. To me, when I look at the evidence, the evidence points to a metaphysical being (not from nature), who is personal, powerful, and eternal. I know—it's a lot to wrap one's head around, but something had to have always been there.
Another thing that weighs on me is that science, as good as it is, can explain only part of this picture (how things got here; why they are the way they are), but theism can explain it all. Theism has sufficiency of explanation. And theism is actually the simpler explanation (Occam's Razor), whereas science has some real gaps to jump (like abiogenesis, the origin of DNA, the existence of consciousness, and what made the Bang go BANG).
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9108
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
15 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests