How do you choose a variation?

[Coralie]

In answer to your OP: What seashale said.

Besides that, I just want to address something, adding to what acorn said:

So what's with the human sin children are born with?
It seems kind of unfair, that if a child was born and then he/she died two days later, he's going to hell. Nice one, eh?

Be careful not to generalise on Christian opinions without fully understanding them. You may have read that Christians believe this, but I've never personally met one who does.

If you want to know more about the Orthodox Christian view of "original" sin, especially as compared to the Augustinian view (which has led to strange ideas in Western pop-culture about babies going to hell), you can read about it here: www.antiochian.org/ancestral-versus-original-sin

 

[mrcatzilla]

I stumbled upon an interesting post elsewhere, and would like to see your comments:

tdellaringa[/URL]]As a Christian who does believe in the afterlife, I'd like to point out one thing for general consumption. Most information you hear about life after death from Christians is non-Biblical. In other words, you get the "He's with God now" stuff a lot, or "He's burning now" too.
The subject of resurrection and the second coming is quite clear in Paul's writings. But because most Christians a) Don't read their Bibles and b) Ignore them when they do, you get superstition instead of doctrine.
Summary
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. So we all die. Jump to Christ's second coming. Christ comes - and here's the key the MOST Christians ignore completely. He comes and he first raises the dead. Then those who are alive and remain are caught up with him.
But notice - WHEN he comes, THEN he raises. Clearly he is not here yet, so clearly nobody is raised. Where are these people then? Well, they're DEAD. It's pretty obvious. Awaiting resurrection.
No, they didn't float to heaven. This is clearly unbiblical, though popular to say. Nor are they in some kind of false hell. So I am not at all surprised OP saw nothing. And I think those that do - it's a product of their own subconscious no matter what they see.
For the record, I don't believe in hell either - hell is clearly the grave, and nothing more - if you study it properly. Sheol. Gehenna is a real place and not some hell. Hades is also the grave (greek).
I've not burdened anyone with verses or links, I just wanted to point this out. I've come to these conclusions after years of study and prayer. And while this is not "mainstream" Christian belief, there are more Christians than you realize who understand these truths. I believe most current Christian teachers are either apostate, ignorant or flat out liars and cheats. Most churches are garbage. (I don't attend church at all, we home worship.)
Lastly, we also believe that Christ saves all, whether you believe or not. HE did the saving, not us. The Bible states that salvation has come to all men. Another unpopular verse.

 

[mrcatzilla]

I stumbled upon a post elsewhere (a reply to a post on near death experience), and would like to see your comments on it:

As a Christian who does believe in the afterlife, I'd like to point out one thing for general consumption. Most information you hear about life after death from Christians is non-Biblical. In other words, you get the "He's with God now" stuff a lot, or "He's burning now" too.
The subject of resurrection and the second coming is quite clear in Paul's writings. But because most Christians a) Don't read their Bibles and b) Ignore them when they do, you get superstition instead of doctrine.
Summary
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. So we all die. Jump to Christ's second coming. Christ comes - and here's the key the MOST Christians ignore completely. He comes and he first raises the dead. Then those who are alive and remain are caught up with him.
But notice - WHEN he comes, THEN he raises. Clearly he is not here yet, so clearly nobody is raised. Where are these people then? Well, they're DEAD. It's pretty obvious. Awaiting resurrection.
No, they didn't float to heaven. This is clearly unbiblical, though popular to say. Nor are they in some kind of false hell.
For the record, I don't believe in hell either - hell is clearly the grave, and nothing more - if you study it properly. Sheol. Gehenna is a real place and not some hell. Hades is also the grave (greek).
I've not burdened anyone with verses or links, I just wanted to point this out. I've come to these conclusions after years of study and prayer. And while this is not "mainstream" Christian belief, there are more Christians than you realize who understand these truths. I believe most current Christian teachers are either apostate, ignorant or flat out liars and cheats. Most churches are garbage. (I don't attend church at all, we home worship.)
Lastly, we also believe that Christ saves all, whether you believe or not. HE did the saving, not us. The Bible states that salvation has come to all men. Another unpopular verse.

 

[St_Worm2]

I stumbled upon a post elsewhere (a reply to a post on near death experience), and would like to see your comments on it:

Though this guy(gal?) strays pretty far outside the pale of orthodoxy, at least he's honest enough to admit it. His afterlife beliefs concerning hell (or rather, the lack thereof), universal salvation, and soul sleep (unconscious death), are not exegetically correct and go against the teachings of the church (Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox) .. which is most likely why he "worships" at home ..

--David

 

[mrcatzilla]

Herein lies the problem.
It's what the church says against what the bible says, even though the church is supposed to preach the word of the bible, but does so very selectively.

 

[St_Worm2]

Herein lies the problem.
It's what the church says against what the bible says, even though the church is supposed to preach the word of the bible, but does so very selectively.

Hi Mr.C, actually, the problem typically lies with folks (like the one who's post you brought here) who bring their own presuppositions to the table and bend the Word of God to fit those presuppositions. In this guy's case, I'm sure his excuses for pulling verses out of context and claiming that they mean something else than they do is because he simply doesn't want to believe that there is a literal "Hell", or that anyone actually deserves to be punished by God for anything they've done (or something along those lines). But the Bible is clear on these matters. That Hell exists, that God will judge and punish unbelievers, and that the soul, though separated from the body, is conscious after death, can be clearly understood from a proper exegesis and is why the Church, Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox, all basically hold to the same beliefs concerning these things. This fellow has changed the meaning of the Biblical text to suit his fancy.

--David

 

[ebia]

I stumbled upon an interesting post elsewhere, and would like to see your comments:

He's not far off. Resurrection is a future event - into a renewed, redeemed creation: the New Heavens and New Earth.

The New Testament is kind of vague about the intermediate bit between death and that resurrection, sometimes calling it asleep, sometimes 'with Christ', and so forth. It isn't given much air-time because it's not the important bit - future resurrection is the important bit.

He's potentially a bit misleading about 'caught up in the air' - when an Emperor comes the people go out to meet him not to go back to where the Emperor came from but to welcome him and walk into the city with him. Paul tells the Messianic version of that with cloud symbolism drawn from Daniel, but it's not about being whisked off through the air to some other place.

 

[freeport]

I've come here to ask a question:
How exactly does one choose which of the many Christian variations to follow?

There is no variation with God.

One either has God has a Father. Or not.

 

[mrcatzilla]

There is no variation with God.

One either has God has a Father. Or not.

Sure there is, there are so many religions in this world! Why would you think yours is special?

What's wrong with Islam btw? Same God, except treats Jesus as a prophet, not the messiah (the messiah is yet to come).
It's just another variation, where the messiah comes only once, whereas in Christianity (and its derivatives) the messiah came 2000 years ago (approximately, as nobody really knows when and never will), and will come again at some uncertain future to finalize everything.

Also, I am wondering, what happens after everyone is saved/not saved? The Earth is empty? Sounds like the end of the world.

 

[bluelime2]

I have to wonder why the mods on this forum allow trolling.Genuine seekers are seeking truth, not as many excuses as they can find to attack christianity. Even when given the answers to the questions they've asked, time and time again.

 

[mrcatzilla]

You are confused.
I am not trolling, I am merely continuing to ask questions. In my opinion, I am asking relevant questions.
If you are not able to answer them - well, I guess you should leave this thread and not come back.

Is it not natural to counter-argument? Last time I checked, I posted into "Exploring Christianity", under the assumption that I may ask anything here and await an answer.

 

[Coralie]

Herein lies the problem.
It's what the church says against what the bible says, even though the church is supposed to preach the word of the bible, but does so very selectively.

Two points:

1. You can't say what the Church is "supposed" to do--you wouldn't be able to comprehend that without submitting to Church teaching. I'm sorry if that sounds blunt, but it's the truth. The fact is, the Church isn't "supposed to preach the word of the Bible", it's supposed to preach God's word to world, which includes traditional, orthodox (note the small 'o'!) interpretation of the *whole* Biblical text--not just the parts that sound cool on their own, or when they're taken out of context.

Biblical interpretation is a MASSIVE subject. For 2000 years, very intelligent, highly educated people have committed their entire lives to studying this text. It's not a question of "what about what this random person said on the internet this one time? doesn't that mean that the church is actually not doing the right thing??!1!" I don't mean to sound dismissive--forgive me--but it really does boil down to that.

2. It doesn't matter what happens immediately after death. These issues have no bearing on salvation. Even if this fellow is actually The Ultimate Biblical Interpreter (TM), and we ordinary Xian are misguided on what happens immediately after death, who cares? Jesus will come, and then all will be revealed.

Don't get stuck on little issues... if you want real understanding, you start with the big things first (is there a God? If so, what is His nature and what does he require of me? etc.), and once you've resolved those, you move on to smaller and smaller things. Otherwise you just get needlessly annoyed, because you haven't even decided the basic premise of your arguments yet.

 

[seashale76]

What Coralie said.

Also, the Church existed before the New Testament. The Church verified the canon of Holy Scripture, and the Church interprets Holy Scripture. The Holy Scriptures are an integral part of the Tradition of Christ's Holy Church.

It always interests me to see non-believers who have been so obviously influenced by sola scriptura.

 

[mrcatzilla]

Oh, I have decided on the big things a while ago, I'm just trying to understand how it is possible for billions of people to honestly believe in something as real as Santa Clause.
And don't even talk about taking things out of context, that's exactly what the church is famous for.

Now, about "random person on the internet said this and that".
I was just impressed by his beliefs, as those beliefs are something I can actually respect. Also, I think (having not read the religious text in question) that it can't seriously tell you there's this nice place where you eternally live and everything's swell, or that there's this bad place where you keep being tortured for eternity. ..Which is why I brought up his opinion, as it is more educated in sense of scripture than mine.
And you didn't actually refute that, btw.

I want to read both the Bible and the Qur'an. It's just so hard to find time for such things. And that's not to say it's a very exciting read...

 

[rosenherman]

I am sorry if some of you misunderstood me - I am not a believer, nor will I ever be for numerous reasons

mrcatzilla, you have no idea whether you'll become a believer or not. None of us know what the future will bring. I know as a non-believer this will mean nothing to you but one of my favorite sayings is "If you want to hear God laugh, tell Him your plans."

I will mention that reason and logic play a big role in my life. I am the type of person, to whom you have to prove your statement if it is to be held as true.

Actually you should say you have to prove. I can prove it all over the place and if you don't accept what I provide as proof, it is meaningless.

This really annoys my parents, when they tell me, for example, don't mix cucumbers and milk.

I'd be willing to guess that it sickens them to think of anyone mixing cucumbers and milk. What a grotesque combination; sort of like liver and I can't imagine what (I hate liver).

I will question that and look for info before I accept as a fact

As you should for anything. If you search for information and facts, you'll come to the correct conclusion.

If I don't find enough convincing information, I will probably try it

Probably the best way to determine the truth of anything is to try it.

I just wanted to find out - how is it that there are so many variations on this particular organized religion.

There are as many variations of Christianity as there are favorite foods. Christianity is a faith that requires you to accept that God is and that His Son died and was resurrected; and through that all your sins are forgiven. Everything else is pretty much window dressing. Some religions may say that you have to do this or that in order to be saved; that is fine for them, but it is unbiblical.

 

[seashale76]

The difference between Santa Claus and Saint Nicholas (a real person- a bishop from 4th century Myra- was at the 1st Council of Nicea) is the difference between the Christianity one sees in western culture these days and the faith that was Traditioned to the Apostles (Orthodoxy); in other words, one is a myth based off of the truth and one is actually the truth.

I also notice that you have alluded to the idea of hell more than once in this thread. I copy and paste this old post of mine quite a bit around here, and I'll do it again for your benefit:

Think of it this way. God is Love and His presence is like fire. How one endures this fire has everything to do with how they were tempered in this life, just like the three righteous youths in the fiery furnace (Old Testament) were able to joyfully walk around unharmed in the fire, so did others who didn't love God perish just being near the fire. The fire didn't change.

Here is a quote from an old Wikipedia article on the topic (that doesn’t seem to be around anymore) that I thought explained it pretty well: "For many ancient Christians, Hell was the same "place" as Heaven: living in the presence of God and directly experiencing God's love. Whether this was experienced as pleasure or torment depended on one's disposition towards God. St. Isaac of Syria wrote in Mystic Treatises: "... those who find themselves in Hell will be chastised by the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love, undergo greater suffering than those produced by the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart, which has sinned against love, is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that the sinners in Hell are deprived of the love of God ... But love acts in two ways, as suffering of the reproved, and as joy in the blessed!" This ancient view is still the doctrine of the Eastern Orthodox Church."

 

[Coralie]

Oh, I have decided on the big things a while ago, I'm just trying to understand how it is possible for billions of people to honestly believe in something as real as Santa Clause.

I mean this in the nicest possible way... why do you care? Do you like to mock people who don't believe what you do? That seems cruel to me--and it's definitely trollish, too.

And don't even talk about taking things out of context, that's exactly what the church is famous for.

How do you know--you say you've never read the Bible? You're probably not qualified to make that sort of judgement. When you've read the whole Bible and a few Patristic commentaries on each book, and then you can start throwing statements like that around.

I think (having not read the religious text in question) that it can't seriously tell you there's this nice place where you eternally live and everything's swell, or that there's this bad place where you keep being tortured for eternity. ..Which is why I brought up his opinion, as it is more educated in sense of scripture than mine...And you didn't actually refute that, btw.

Wait--you want me to refute a random interpretation of a huge chunk of unspecified Biblical text that you've never read, and that you also don't believe in since it's the prooftext of a religion as silly as Santa Claus, and which therefore makes no difference to your life anyway?...

But you already feel this fellow has a more educated sense of scripture than you do... although you've never read it, of course...?

If you insist. Of course, you would have no way of knowing whether I was right or wrong, since you've never read the Bible or been taught to interpret it correctly.

Disclaimer: Many interpretations exist of small theological issues like this. None of them matter. All that matters, loosely speaking, is that you can say the Nicene Creed without twitching, as it were. What I am giving you here is a sort of personal academic criticism of what your friend has written. I am not saying that he is not a Xian for believing what I believe. Make sense? (That is also the reason why I didn't "refute" his post initially.)

"As a Christian who does believe in the afterlife, I'd like to point out one thing for general consumption. Most information you hear about life after death from Christians is non-Biblical. In other words, you get the "He's with God now" stuff a lot, or "He's burning now" too. The subject of resurrection and the second coming is quite clear in Paul's writings."

Paul was not the only writer of the Bible. His writings are relatively small compared to the entire text. If you read only Paul's writings and not the whole OT and the Gospels, you will have an extremely biased view.

But because most Christians a) Don't read their Bibles and b) Ignore them when they do, you get superstition instead of doctrine.
This guy seems to believe he can interpret his Bible without the advice and guidance of the Church as a body. Most Xians (i.e., the Catholics and the Orthodox, and parts of the Anglican/Episcopalian Church) do not believe this. That immediately places his interpretation in a tenuous position. I would not take this guy seriously.

Summary
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. So we all die. Jump to Christ's second coming. Christ comes - and here's the key the MOST Christians ignore completely. He comes and he first raises the dead. Then those who are alive and remain are caught up with him.
I'm not sure what he's referring to. The "soul that sinneth, so shall it die" refers to the killing power of our own evil, which makes our souls metaphorically "dead" while our bodies still walk around. It also, by extension, refers to the Edenic sin, which brought death into the world for the first time. So I'm not sure why he's brought that into a discussion of the afterlife.

But notice - WHEN he comes, THEN he raises. Clearly he is not here yet, so clearly nobody is raised.
I'm not sure what verse he's referring to. Probably 1 Corinthians 15? If so, the "raising" he talks about is Christ's resurrection after the crucifixion, and our being "raised" from the death of sin that happens in this life (see above).

Where are these people then? Well, they're DEAD. It's pretty obvious. Awaiting resurrection.
If he's referring to 1 Cor 15, he's misinterpreted what that chapter means.

No, they didn't float to heaven. This is clearly unbiblical, though popular to say. Nor are they in some kind of false hell. So I am not at all surprised OP saw nothing. And I think those that do - it's a product of their own subconscious no matter what they see.
OK--if he believes that, it's fine with me. Maybe we do all chill out in our graves. It doesn't matter either way.

For the record, I don't believe in hell either - hell is clearly the grave, and nothing more - if you study it properly. Sheol. Gehenna is a real place and not some hell.
He has oversimplified a massive chunk of theology here. Read this for a thorough explanation: Heaven and Hell in the Afterlife This article explains the translation and cultural meaning of the words Hades, Gehenna, Sheol, and many others as metaphors for the "hellish" bit of the afterlife. Note that it's a metaphor. In fact, what seashale said is closer to the truth.

Hades is also the grave (greek).
No; Hades is the "underworld", not the grave. See the works of Homer for more information.

I've not burdened anyone with verses or links, I just wanted to point this out. I've come to these conclusions after years of study and prayer.
Fair enough, but that does make his argument impossible to refute.

And while this is not "mainstream" Christian belief, there are more Christians than you realize who understand these truths.
I believe most current Christian teachers are either apostate, ignorant or flat out liars and cheats. Most churches are garbage. (I don't attend church at all, we home worship.)
2 Thess 2:15: Stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.
Proverbs 13:1 A wise son heeds his father's instruction, but a mocker does not listen to rebuke.
Proverbs 17:9: He who conceals a transgression seeks love, but he who repeats a matter separates intimate friends.
1 Cor 13:4: Love is always patient; love is always kind; love is never envious or arrogant with pride. Nor is she conceited.

Lastly, we also believe that Christ saves all, whether you believe or not. HE did the saving, not us. The Bible states that salvation has come to all men. Another unpopular verse.
2 Tim 3-5: For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior: Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.
Your friend has a poor grasp of Biblical Greek, it would seem. You see that "will have" I highlighted? That shows a subjunctive verb--it denotes a hope, not a reality. It means that God wishes dearly to save all men, not that he will save all men. That's why the "have" is placed in the sentence too.

mrcatzilla, my suggestion to you is to try not to bait Xians--try to listen to them and be respectful. Your current approach seems trollish, and doesn't make atheists out to be very nice people. Just my $0.02.