Why do Christians believe you go to hell if you don't accept Jesus?

55 YO wrote:

The concept of salvation is far more complex than a non-believer can accept. They lack the ability to discern things to know what was written, and what is said to them about what was written.

However, I will try to put it in the simplest terms that I can for everyone.

First, man was created in the image of God, in order to be a reflection of God in this world. Man sinned, and thus was fallen. The Old Testament was written to explain just how difficult it was for any man to live up to the standard of perfection, making man realize that he could not save himself. Once the standard was set, God sent His Son to show the grace of God in His offering up of Himself to pay the price for sin. Once man admits that he is incapable of living up to the standard, he can then come to Christ in humble repentance. Those who do so will receive eternal life with God, and those who reject the free gift will become eternally separated from Him. What this separation is actually like is beyond our ability to explain, but I can safely say that it will be without all of the blessings that being with God can offer a soul.

This is a very brief explanation of how I believe it from scripture, but I think it explains it well enough for everyone to understand my thoughts. Yes, there are a lot of specifics not included, but there is enough for the points needed to be made.

Non-believers can feel free to flame this post.

Precious Roy wrote:

55 YO wrote:

The concept of salvation is far more complex than a non-believer can accept. They lack the ability to discern things to know what was written, and what is said to them about what was written.

However, I will try to put it in the simplest terms that I can for everyone.

First, man was created in the image of God, in order to be a reflection of God in this world. Man sinned, and thus was fallen. The Old Testament was written to explain just how difficult it was for any man to live up to the standard of perfection, making man realize that he could not save himself. Once the standard was set, God sent His Son to show the grace of God in His offering up of Himself to pay the price for sin. Once man admits that he is incapable of living up to the standard, he can then come to Christ in humble repentance. Those who do so will receive eternal life with God, and those who reject the free gift will become eternally separated from Him. What this separation is actually like is beyond our ability to explain, but I can safely say that it will be without all of the blessings that being with God can offer a soul.

This is a very brief explanation of how I believe it from scripture, but I think it explains it well enough for everyone to understand my thoughts. Yes, there are a lot of specifics not included, but there is enough for the points needed to be made.

Non-believers can feel free to flame this post.

All very nice fluffy stuff, but why do you get sent to hell if you don't buy into it but otherwise live a life doing good deeds and being a loving parent, etc.? Gandhi goes to hell but the Catholic priests who conspired to molest little boys go to heaven (so long as they "repent")?

Or maybe Man created God in his image because Man, having achieved a higher form of intellect over the animals could not accept his mortality and needed to believe that there would be life after death. Wrapping all that up in a bunch of books with compelling stories about miracles and commandments from God allowed man to be God on earth and create places of worship where man could control his fellow man for his own benefit and power.

55 YO wrote:

The concept of salvation is far more complex than a non-believer can accept. They lack the ability to discern things to know what was written, and what is said to them about what was written.

However, I will try to put it in the simplest terms that I can for everyone.

First, man was created in the image of God, in order to be a reflection of God in this world. Man sinned, and thus was fallen. The Old Testament was written to explain just how difficult it was for any man to live up to the standard of perfection, making man realize that he could not save himself. Once the standard was set, God sent His Son to show the grace of God in His offering up of Himself to pay the price for sin. Once man admits that he is incapable of living up to the standard, he can then come to Christ in humble repentance. Those who do so will receive eternal life with God, and those who reject the free gift will become eternally separated from Him. What this separation is actually like is beyond our ability to explain, but I can safely say that it will be without all of the blessings that being with God can offer a soul.

This is a very brief explanation of how I believe it from scripture, but I think it explains it well enough for everyone to understand my thoughts. Yes, there are a lot of specifics not included, but there is enough for the points needed to be made.

Non-believers can feel free to flame this post.

jamese1045 wrote:

WinstonSmith wrote:

You're lucky to live in a society that was founded on Judaeo-Christian morality.

Atheism has no moral foundation. Morality is entirely subjective on the atheist world view.

If the Nazis win World War 2 the Holocaust would be taught to have been morally good and people like you would have no way of knowing you were monsters.

Im lucky? For Christianity? Do you have any idea how cockamanie that is? Please read some history of war and its causes. Religion. What "foundation of morality" that you claim Atheists ( to which I am not commited) lack do you refer? scripture, bible, Qoran, because the only foundation of right and wrong I recognize and practice is personal thought, action, and responsibility. I dont need doctrine, rituals, scripture, costumed old men to explain morality to me--for their control and politics. You abdicate personal responsibility to organized bodies of greedy and corrupt pitchmen who only want your cash and loyalty, thinking that will buy you an "afterlife" above and beyond anything you deserve. Now tell me how deluded and arrogant I am for expecting no reward but the satisfaction of appreciating whats real, evident, tangible, and in the vast scope of things, quite wonderful!

Precious Roy wrote:

55 YO wrote:

The concept of salvation is far more complex than a non-believer can accept. They lack the ability to discern things to know what was written, and what is said to them about what was written.

However, I will try to put it in the simplest terms that I can for everyone.

First, man was created in the image of God, in order to be a reflection of God in this world. Man sinned, and thus was fallen. The Old Testament was written to explain just how difficult it was for any man to live up to the standard of perfection, making man realize that he could not save himself. Once the standard was set, God sent His Son to show the grace of God in His offering up of Himself to pay the price for sin. Once man admits that he is incapable of living up to the standard, he can then come to Christ in humble repentance. Those who do so will receive eternal life with God, and those who reject the free gift will become eternally separated from Him. What this separation is actually like is beyond our ability to explain, but I can safely say that it will be without all of the blessings that being with God can offer a soul.

This is a very brief explanation of how I believe it from scripture, but I think it explains it well enough for everyone to understand my thoughts. Yes, there are a lot of specifics not included, but there is enough for the points needed to be made.

Non-believers can feel free to flame this post.

All very nice fluffy stuff, but why do you get sent to hell if you don't buy into it but otherwise live a life doing good deeds and being a loving parent, etc.? Gandhi goes to hell but the Catholic priests who conspired to molest little boys go to heaven (so long as they "repent")?

Or maybe Man created God in his image because Man, having achieved a higher form of intellect over the animals could not accept his mortality and needed to believe that there would be life after death. Wrapping all that up in a bunch of books with compelling stories about miracles and commandments from God allowed man to be God on earth and create places of worship where man could control his fellow man for his own benefit and power.

Mikeh33 wrote:

Pointing it out again wrote:

Let's start with that.

In your typical day/week/... how many times do you find yourself cooperating with others? How many times to you find yourself in conflict with others?

Oh I freely admit that I cooperate with people all the time. That isn’t my point. My point is that cooperation isn’t the default setting for humanity, and that a theory of primal cooperation among humans in the distant past leading to some evolutionary adaptation for cooperation that is somehow realized at the DNA level is theoretical at best. Finally, I maintain that no basis for peace or prosperity can be found by appealing to primal cooperation as a governing principle for mankind. It leaves too many questions unanswered.

Why, this very morning I practiced true non-cooperation. The freeway was very congested on the way to work. Rather than wait in a very long line at the exit, I skipped ahead to the front, poked my nose in, and got a space. I probably saved 20 to 30 minutes. I was a little embarrassed, but embarrassment never stop me before!

In all seriousness, my cooperation with others is in part conditional. I am more likely to work closely with my family, my church, and other members of the Christian community. For example, I avoid charities not connected to these institutions.

I do my best to live in non-cooperation with our wider Western ethic of radical individualism and moral revolution. I have tried to teach my children exactly the opposite. I did not send my children to public school. I have taught them that many of the institutions and individuals that dominate American culture are reasoning from a faulty foundation. So in a sense I have taught them non-cooperation.

I might be atheist wrote:

55 YO wrote:

The concept of salvation is far more complex than a non-believer can accept. They lack the ability to discern things to know what was written, and what is said to them about what was written.

However, I will try to put it in the simplest terms that I can for everyone.

First, man was created in the image of God, in order to be a reflection of God in this world. Man sinned, and thus was fallen. The Old Testament was written to explain just how difficult it was for any man to live up to the standard of perfection, making man realize that he could not save himself. Once the standard was set, God sent His Son to show the grace of God in His offering up of Himself to pay the price for sin. Once man admits that he is incapable of living up to the standard, he can then come to Christ in humble repentance. Those who do so will receive eternal life with God, and those who reject the free gift will become eternally separated from Him. What this separation is actually like is beyond our ability to explain, but I can safely say that it will be without all of the blessings that being with God can offer a soul.

This is a very brief explanation of how I believe it from scripture, but I think it explains it well enough for everyone to understand my thoughts. Yes, there are a lot of specifics not included, but there is enough for the points needed to be made.

Non-believers can feel free to flame this post.

I have no argument with you believing what you want, but we both know you must have some doubts. I know because I was taught the same thing before becoming a scientist and learning to criticize my own thinking using real critical thinking and verifiable evidence.

Also, I read through the entire Bible and there were awful things done to people for just doing something like collecting wood to heat their home on the sabbath (death). In the New Testament, a couple who didn’t give all of the proceeds from selling their land to the apostles was killed. The Bible is filled with meanness, threats, and predictions of end times for all humanity.

My life is much less complicated and happier just ignoring such noise, following my inborn hunger for learning what is real, and trying to get along with others in my community - no matter what they choose to believe.

WinstonSmith wrote:

Precious Roy wrote:

Jesus was a great moral philosopher who attracted a following because he stood up against the social order imposed by the Romans. The Sermon on the Mount is really a call for civil disobedience against the Romans. The theology of Jesus's teachings was basically borrowed from Judaism's belief in the Kingdom of God. Jesus's moral teachings were part of his call to repent before the coming of the Kingdom of God. If God is going to directly rule over human kind, it is a good idea to start doing good deeds and stop all the raping and killing.

After Jesus was crucified by the Romans, his followers wanted to keep his movement alive. They created the myth of Jesus's resurrection, virgin birth, etc. to basically shoe horn Jesus into Judaism's belief in a messiah while maintaining monotheism in contrast to the Roman's polytheism. As the early Christians were basically just an offshoot of Judaism, they needed to find a way to attract more followers. In Judaism, the concept of Heaven was a complicated belief in seven different levels where God and all the angels hung out. Then there is Paradise, which sort of a Jewish version of an afterlife, but complicated.

Christians saw an opening in the afterlife to attract Jews and Romans away from their theology (or lack thereof). Jews were very good at creating a bit of a members only club by requiring circumcision for men. That could really only be done at birth. Trying to do circumcision in adulthood during the mid Classical Era was horrifically painful and could lead to infection and death. So there was an opening to recruit followers.

Instead of a vague afterlife through the myth of Paradise, Christians decided that they would create their own members only club by requiring followers to accept Christ as their savior. In doing so, Christians were promised eternal life after death. And they threw in Heaven as a kicker. Then, to make sure any doubters or stragglers could be pulled in, they added the idea of Hell for those who did not accept Jesus. And to top it off, good Christians were obligated to spread the Gospel and convert as many souls to Christianity as they could in order to bring about the second coming of Christ.

To say that the belief system is all just clever marketing to try to make the Christian church dominate in society is not too far off. Between Islam, paganism of a number of different variations, Roman polytheism, Judaism and many offshoots and variations of the foregoing, there was a lot of competition to get people in to your Church, Synagogue, Mosque, Temple or whatever. The power of leading a religious group was second only to the emerging states and the receding power of the Roman empire. So, you could do really well for yourself if you got a lot of people to join your church and follow Christianity.

The actual reality of what happened to Christ's early followers completely and utterly destroys this bizarre theory you've copied and pasted.

precious toy wrote:

I might be atheist wrote:

I have no argument with you believing what you want, but we both know you must have some doubts. I know because I was taught the same thing before becoming a scientist and learning to criticize my own thinking using real critical thinking and verifiable evidence.

Also, I read through the entire Bible and there were awful things done to people for just doing something like collecting wood to heat their home on the sabbath (death). In the New Testament, a couple who didn’t give all of the proceeds from selling their land to the apostles was killed. The Bible is filled with meanness, threats, and predictions of end times for all humanity.

My life is much less complicated and happier just ignoring such noise, following my inborn hunger for learning what is real, and trying to get along with others in my community - no matter what they choose to believe.

Clearly not a scientist. Many of what is depicted in the Bible was demonstrating the time period of which had occurred. Many of the atrocities you listed where local and national laws and rules, and not God's. Can you see this?