How to advise newly-Christian friend who thinks that only Christians can go to heaven

[poguemahone]

A friend has recently become a Christian, and is very happy and excited about the whole thing.

She's having a bit of a tough time, however as she's getting into conflicts with people who don't share her beliefs. In particular she holds that only Christians will go to heaven. She's traveling in a non-Christian country so I can only imagine upset for everyone concerned.

We knew each other years ago when she was a lovely sweet girl but a bit wild, and she recently sought me out, probably because I've always been a Christian. She's keen to pick my brains on things like this, and I'm feeling a bit of pressure to get the advice right.

I've told her that:

• I believe people of all religion and none can go to heaven if they're good people.
• Although Christianity makes utter sense to me intellectually and emotionally, not everyone has been exposed to the same (cultural) background as me.
• God's fair if nothing else, so for example to discount millions of people who've never heard of Jesus, would just be unfair. (Likewise for people who've not seen great examples of Christians, who're happy with their own religion etc)

But she's asking for more info and I'm really no expert on this. Any advice?

I am laughing at your damnation website particularly the little diagram halfway down "notice the fire in the earth"!

Just mean that I'm glad others think it is racist

Greeny, that story is hideous and sums up a lot of American christianity

Good, innit? ROFL!!

I love "Inside Earth from textbook"

God is a jealous god. He's not fair, or undiscriminating, or just.

God is God, and that's all there is to it - and he gets to say whose name is down and who's not coming into the magical club.

Annie - are you me? I could have written your post about being a miserable Christian. Except I'm not Jewish now.

i don't believe that.

TAFKAtheUrbanDryad - [looks around furtively] - no I think I'm me.... hang on, I'll check..... pretty sure I'm me!

Dammit this argument is far too much fun! I'm supposed to be editing girlie porn a romance novel but have wasted all afternoon on this instead and it's nearly time to collect DD2 from the CM. Bother! So much work, so little time!

Has anyone ever explained why someone had to die to pay for sins? Since christians generally say that our morals don't count and that god sets the rules then the rule that someone had to die was his.

So he could have made a rule that for everyone to be saved jesus had to eat a banana.

Okay if you think that undignified then it could have been that for everyone to be saved Jesus had to walk 100 miles while praying or fast or something. The dying on the cross was just an arbitary thing, but people speak as though it was the only way.

For that matter since christians also say we have to sin, that we are made so we can't be 100% pure then why is there any blame attached that must be 'paid for'

I suppose Jesus death was the ultimate sacrafice to make. God sacrificed his own son, I guess it doesn't get more serious than that.

Ok, no-one had to die in that sense. Christians believe Jesus was fully man and God so it was God choosing to die a really terribly painful death. God's choice to become a man to see what it was like to be ridiculed, humiliated and tortured.

So it was all his choice.

The second part onagar is - we are made imperfect, incapable of acting without sin - so the blame attached is not our own imperfectness but for failing to submit to the will of God.

Hope that makes sense.

In theory, it means someone could submit fully to the will of God and be perfect - which is what Christians think Jesus is.

So it's all just God setting us up for a fall?

Nope, it's him taking the fall.

The other alternative would have been denying us free will. I'm bloody glad that it's a free choice to be a loon like me.

Free will? I refer you back to my poisoned drinks analogy.

It's important to remember (WARNING BLASPHEMY ALERT) - that there is a long tradition of blood sacrifice in pre-Christian religions. And a long tradition of the King dying to save his people, or to make the grain grow, or to make Spring come again.

How is it a straightforward choice between god "taking the fall" and our being denied free will? That seems simplistic.

IMO (and it is only my opinion) - it's not just taking the fall it was a choice to live as a totally pure, spiritual man and not survive in the world. It was our free choice to crucify him.

One of the outcomes of the crucifiction is that people daily choose not to follow the really sinful life, turn away from animal sacrifices , murder, violence.

And I don't really believe or care about blasphemy - he's big enough and ugly enough to care of himself. And most importantly I do not think it should be a crime against the state. I want to live in a secular society where there is freedom of religion.

If it was God's choice to become a man to see what it was like to be ridiculed, humiliated and tortured then it wasn't exactly for us then, but for educational purposes.

But if it was for us then god decided that the price for our 'sins' was torture and death for his son/himself. Just a quick death wasn't enough and torturing for even longer was too much. One crucifixion balanced it out.

After all he could have brought jesus back to life to die once for each person so just once was what he considered appropriate.

The second part "we are made imperfect, incapable of acting without sin" Which is the point isn't it.

It was god's idea that we be made imperfect yet we owe HIM a debt for deciding to create and then kill a body (jesus) to pay off a debt which is owed to... no one at all. If anyone was at fault it was god. You may say you prefer free will, but it wasn't your choice to get it. It was god's choice and his alone.

The submitting to god's will wouldn't help anyway unless it happened at birth for every single human since there would still be some sins to pay for.

" It was our free choice to crucify him"

Sorry, but that can't be true. It was set up to happen from the start so it had to happen. It would have wrecked everything if he hadn't died.

I guess Judas was the real hero of that story and didn't even get the credit.

Hey, maybe god realised how badly he had treated man. Remembered the slaughters he'd ordered personally (all those women and children) and the disease and pain he'd programmed into the system.

Maybe he felt that it would only be fair if he felt the pain too. In which case the crucixion was christ dying to atone for HIS sins.

Seeker Hi - didn't disappear because I couldn't take the heat - far from it, but because I have other things to do with my day than MN, I guess we all do.

What I find interesting about this thread is all the anger coming from the atheists and non-Christians and all the patience and love coming from the Christians as they try to put forwards why they believe what they do in the face of some truly unpleasant abuse.

I suspect that most of the atheist people on this thread wouldn't dream of talking to their friends in this way, but I think by and large the Christians would be prepared to say all that they've said to their friends not because it makes them feel better but because if you thought you had... oh say the cure for a terrible disease... you would feel deeply selfish not sharing it.

I accept that an internet forum is a brilliant place to hear from other people about their views in a way that you'd probably never hear from other people because they'd be too scared to say it. i am pleased that my horizons have been widened as to what people who don't know Jesus believe about him. But I and my Christian friends who have posted on here have done so not out of cleverness or a desire to harangue but purely because we wouldn't want anyone to go to Hell if we could help it. Ask yourself why you want to post.

Sorry , for atheist , read also Jew, liberal, agnostic etc... wouldn't want to assume all the critics have no faith in God.

"truly unpleasant abuse" I must have missed that. Can you be more specific?

The strongest comments have come from other christians pointing out the errors in what fellow christians believe. Or was it my last post that upset you. Is it blasphemy you are objecting to.

Off to put kids to bed - will hopefully post later on if it's still going. Not wussing out. And onagar no it wasn't the blasphemy comment.

For truly unpleasant abuse try

'the whole creepy infantilising Christian dynamic '

and

'small minded, bogoted racist bullshit'

and

'Idiotic Christians '

and

'So you're saying that all those millions of people who worship gods other than your Christ are wrong? And you and your ilk are the chosen correct ones? That's exactly the smug, entitled arrogant, sanctimonious and judgemental attitude I've come to expect from christians.'

and

'Echoing the sentiments of the few sane people on this thread I have never been happier to be an atheist than I am reading this bilge.

and

'You sad brainwashed fools debating the list of criteria for getting into an imaginary club run by a big bearded dude. And smugly condemning those of us who don't follow your dogma.'

and

'Poor brainwashed things'

and

'Just tell your friend that she can believe whatever nonsense she wants to but she has no right to go around telling everyone or condemning people who don't believe in the same fairy nonsense stories as she does.'

and

'There are a few who stand on street corners desperate to convert others in love because they believe that tosh.

They are the ones I respect, even though they may be in mental distress or be misguided. At least their heart is in the right place.'

and

'What a load of dogmatic arse.'

and then ask yourselves if those of you who are so happy to hurl stones at christians - and specifically evangelical christians at that - would also happily hurl those stones at proponents of any of the other world faiths? Maybe you would?