Do you believe that 2007 will have the second coming of Jesus Christ?

[JSojourner]

Believing in the second coming, the rapture, or whatever one wishs to call it is a mental disorder.  Why? Because there is no such thing.  To believe in something that does not exist is a mental disorder.  It is to say that Jesus rose from the dead when in fact, dead people don't rise from the dead.  This is not to say that Jesus did not exist, because he did, and he was a wonderful man.  However, the "story" that he rose from the dead is only a story because, as I already stated, dead people don't rise. 

Okay, let's look at it another way.

Jesus Christ existed.  You grant that.  So do I.

On numerous occasions, this "wonderful man" claimed to be God...accepted worship from other people...and was tried and executed because of this.  Remember, though Rome ruled Palestine, all matters theological were relegated to the courts of the Sanhedrin.  And they did not kill Jesus because he feed the poor or called for social justice.  They killed him because he said, "Before Abraham was, I AM."  For a Jew to say, "I AM" is the very soul of heresy.  It is to say, quite unmistakably, "I AM that I AM."  He said he had the power to destroy the temple in three days.  And raise the temple up in as much time.  Whether he spoke of his body or the temple in Jerusalem -- he was claiming to possess the power of God.

So, I wish to challenge your assertion that Jesus was a wonderful man.

Can anyone claim such divinity and power and not be evil?  Or insane?

Jesus was crazy.  Or a rotten person who led people astray.

Or...

He was who he claimed to be.

In which case, resurrection from the dead is a no-brainer.

[JSojourner]

Jesus was crazy.  Or a rotten person who led people astray.

That's all you really needed to say, to hit the nail on the head as it were.

Well, I added something I think is essential.  A third option.  He was crazy.  Or insane.  Or He was precisely who He claimed to be.  )

[JSojourner]

Okay, let's look at it another way.

Jesus Christ existed.  You grant that.  So do I.

On numerous occasions, this "wonderful man" claimed to be God...accepted worship from other people...and was tried and executed because of this.  Remember, though Rome ruled Palestine, all matters theological were relegated to the courts of the Sanhedrin.  And they did not kill Jesus because he feed the poor or called for social justice.  They killed him because he said, "Before Abraham was, I AM."  For a Jew to say, "I AM" is the very soul of heresy.  It is to say, quite unmistakably, "I AM that I AM."  He said he had the power to destroy the temple in three days.  And raise the temple up in as much time.  Whether he spoke of his body or the temple in Jerusalem -- he was claiming to possess the power of God.

So, I wish to challenge your assertion that Jesus was a wonderful man.

Can anyone claim such divinity and power and not be evil?  Or insane?

Jesus was crazy.  Or a rotten person who led people astray.

Or...

He was who he claimed to be.

In which case, resurrection from the dead is a no-brainer.

Why is it a dichotomy between actually being the Son of God and being evil and insane?  It seems to me that it would be entirely possible for someone who truly believes himself to be the Son of God (and is not) to still have a good message to tell.

That's a very thoughtful question.

Here's why, in my opinion. 

I don't believe you can accept the worship of other people, as Jesus did, and not lead them astray.  Leading people astray is cruel.  Now, if Jesus came along -- as John the Baptist and many of the prophets did -- and said, "I am not God but I have a message for you" -- then well and good. He could tell people to live their lives in this or that way...encourage them to do good...and remind them to pray, read the scriptures and help the poor.

But he, like Reverend Moon, Jim Jones, Father Divine and a host of others throughout history claimed to be God in the flesh.  And he demanded and accepted worship.  Jim Jones did so many wonderful things in his ministry.  But he also claimed to be God...and wound up leading his followers to their doom.  The same could be said of Jesus.  Nearly all his earliest followers, for at least three hundred years, were put to death or forced to live under the most brutal persecution.  All because he said, "I AM that I AM".  (In saying this, he was effectively say -- to the Jewish mind, in particular -- I am the I AM who gave Moses the law.   So, you shall have no other Gods but me.  A carpenter?  From Nazareth?

Too many people died or suffered because he claimed divinity.

Someone cannot do such a thing and not be cruel...or crazy. 

Or, perhaps it's worth considering, he actually WAS God. 

[JSojourner]

Jesus was crazy.  Or a rotten person who led people astray.

That's all you really needed to say, to hit the nail on the head as it were.

It is comments like this that ensure the United States will never elect an atheist President.

As a Christian, I see absolutely no reason a President cannot be an Atheist.  I am repulsed by comments like those of former President Bush (41), that Atheists shouldn't even be considered citizens.

Because I believe in Jesus, who taught -- "Treat others as you would wish to be treated" -- it's simple.  I wouldn't want a Christian to be disqualified from holding office because he was Christian.  So, I wouldn't want an Atheist (or Jew or Muslim or Wiccan) disqualified either.

Many of my fellow Christians miss this.  The Great Commission of Jesus was to go into all the world and preach His Gospel.  Well and good.  But His Great Commission should never supercede or overrule His Great Commandment (do unto others).  The two should, ideally, compiment one another.

[JSojourner]

Many of my fellow Christians miss this.  The Great Commission of Jesus was to go into all the world and preach His Gospel.  Well and good.  But His Great Commission should never supercede or overrule His Great Commandment (do unto others).  The two should, ideally, compiment one another.

actually, if you reject Jesus as God, then you can't say "do unto others" was Jesus' Great Commandment, for "do unto others" originated in the Law of Moses.

Of course, I don't reject Jesus as God.  I affirm the Nicene and Apostle's Creeds.  And you're right about the origin of "the heart of the law".  Indeed, even the law of Moses came down to this...Jesus clarified that for all time.

My overarching points are two-fold, however....

1.  A person probably cannot be intellectually honest and just assign Jesus the "good teacher" role.  As C.S. Lewis said, "he is either liar, lunatic or the Lord of glory".

2.  A comment was made (which I evidently misinterpreted and for which I apologize) indicating that an Atheist would not make a good President.  While i didn't get the gist of the dispute between the two involved, I still maintain that a Christian should do to others as he would have done to him.  Therefore, unless he has no problem with forbidding people from holding office based on their Christian faith, he should not wish to preclude those of no religious faith from holding office.

President George H.W. Bush, though in many ways a good and decent man, made an egregiously anti-American and un-Christian comment some years ago when he said he didn't know if an Atheist should even be considered a citizen.

[JSojourner]

All people are evil.  What a wonderful worldview.

yes, the ground around the cross is level - which is why Paul said, "Christ came into the world to save sinners, of which I am the worst."

You won't find jmfcst and I in agreement very often.  But on this, we do agree.  At least to the degree that no human can every attain or perform or otherwise reach the perfect goodness of God.

Which is why, from a Christian worldview, God came to bear our imperfection in Jesus...and bridge the gap between broken humanity and perfect divinity.

[JSojourner]

Okay, let's look at it another way.

Jesus Christ existed.  You grant that.  So do I.

On numerous occasions, this "wonderful man" claimed to be God...accepted worship from other people...and was tried and executed because of this.  Remember, though Rome ruled Palestine, all matters theological were relegated to the courts of the Sanhedrin.  And they did not kill Jesus because he feed the poor or called for social justice.  They killed him because he said, "Before Abraham was, I AM."  For a Jew to say, "I AM" is the very soul of heresy.  It is to say, quite unmistakably, "I AM that I AM."  He said he had the power to destroy the temple in three days.  And raise the temple up in as much time.  Whether he spoke of his body or the temple in Jerusalem -- he was claiming to possess the power of God.

So, I wish to challenge your assertion that Jesus was a wonderful man.

Can anyone claim such divinity and power and not be evil?  Or insane?

Jesus was crazy.  Or a rotten person who led people astray.

Or...

He was who he claimed to be.

In which case, resurrection from the dead is a no-brainer.

Why is it a dichotomy between actually being the Son of God and being evil and insane?  It seems to me that it would be entirely possible for someone who truly believes himself to be the Son of God (and is not) to still have a good message to tell.

It seems to me that one could also be evil and insane, and nonetheless be the Son of God.

OK, now that's just scary.

It is, I would suggest, a position that has been posited before.

When my best friend was murdered, I went through a tremendous crisis of faith and almost lost my faith.  I never discounted that God was.  I did seriously question what KIND of God was.  Perhaps God was a monster or a madman after all.  There is ample evidence in this world, leading people to that conclusion.

I no longer share it.  But since this is not a religious forum, and I am truly not here to proselytize, I won't expand.  

[JSojourner]

Many of my fellow Christians miss this.  The Great Commission of Jesus was to go into all the world and preach His Gospel.  Well and good.  But His Great Commission should never supercede or overrule His Great Commandment (do unto others).  The two should, ideally, compiment one another.

actually, if you reject Jesus as God, then you can't say "do unto others" was Jesus' Great Commandment, for "do unto others" originated in the Law of Moses.

Of course, I don't reject Jesus as God. 

understood, i was talking through you not to you.  sorry for the confusion.

Not a problem.  Big, convoluted threads like this can do that.  I misconstrued someone else.  This is one reason I like this bunch.  You're all pretty easy going.

[JSojourner]

You won't find jmfcst and I in agreement very often.  But on this, we do agree.  At least to the degree that no human can every attain or perform or otherwise reach the perfect goodness of God.

Which is why, from a Christian worldview, God came to bear our imperfection in Jesus...and bridge the gap between broken humanity and perfect divinity.

Since we're well on our way towards this topic now, anyways, this is something that has always bugged me: what difference exactly is it supposed to make to believe that Jesus was the Son of God and all that?  I've seen good and bad people who were allegedly "saved" and I've seen good and bad people who were not.  As far as I can tell, whether or not one believes (or says he believes) doesn't exactly have much of a bearing on how one acts.

Probably one of the most distasteful parts of Christianity for me is the part that you hear over and over from people trying to convert others, which is that you get eternally tortured in hell if you don't believe that Jesus was the Son of God, etc.

Since you asked...  ;-)

First, let me preface by saying that I really hear what you're saying and I share a lot of your discomfort.  In particular, I am troubled by Christians who know where everyone is going to spend eternity.  As a boy, the pastor of the church I attended did a sermon the Sunday after Elvis Presley died entitled, "Why Elvis Burns in Hell".  Old Pastor Allen had everyone down there -- Elvis, Rock Hudson, every Pope in history, all the Jews and any woman in our congregation who wore slacks or listened to the devil's music (anything with a beat!).  I bought that whole line of b.s. for a good while and wasted a lot of my youth in fundamentalism.

I think the question about what difference Jesus makes is the best one anybody can ask.  Forget hell and damnation or heaven and reward.  If God is just, and he/she is, then God will do what is right.  Yes, there is truth in the theological doctrine that Christ atoned for our sins on the cross and one must believe that. 

But before one should wrestle with that business, I think it is best to simply consider Jesus.  His teachings, His claims, His behavior and the difference he has (or hasn't) made to others.  I get this question a lot.  Is Mahatma Gandhi in hell today?

Hell, how should I know?  A good fundamentalist Christian will say yes, unless at the last second of Gandhi's life, he repented his Hinduism and accepted Jesus as "his personal Lord and Savior".  Ick.  I hate that phrase.  It makes Jesus sound like wallet or a makeup compact.  Small, personal and all mine!  Bah!

I believe people are judged based on the light they have and what they did with it.  If they hear and believe Jesus is the Son of God who died for their sins and rose from the dead...if they believe and understand it...then yes...they are accountable for that should they still reject it.  But my late brother could never grasp it.  Yet he was as good and decent and kind a man as ever lived.  Is he in hell?  Rather, I ask, "Is God good and just?"

The heart of the matter is what YOU think of Jesus.  What, if any, attraction does he hold for you.  How does he compare to other good religious teachers (and there have been some wonderful ones through the centuries)?  And do I think, feel, intuit or somehow know that he is as alive today as ever he was...and might actually be calling to me.

Yikes!  Shades of Pat Robertson!  Ugh.  I didn't mean to sound that way.

But God does call people.  Not to hate and destruction as Robertson seems to think.  But to love, inclusion, mercy and courage. 

Jesse Ventura once said he thought Christians were a bunch of weak, spineless cowards.  I think he was referring to the religious right, but even if that's what he meant, he was wrong.  But I've heard that from others. 

Yeah -- we've had a lot of turds in our ranks, left and right.  Even our best and most noble representatives have screwed up.  John Calvin, an intellectual giant whether you agree with him or not, had people murdered. Dr. Martin Luther King, maybe the greatest American of the 20th century, had an affair.

The great Mahatma said, "I like your Christ.  Your Christians?  Not so much."  So if I could, I would ask that wonderful man..."Then what of Jesus?  What of his claim to deity?  What of his promise that whoever believes in him and follows him would have an eternal spring of hope welling up inside him? What do you do with Jesus?

I know what I'd like to do with a lot of his followers!  And I am pretty sure what a lot of people would do with me!  LOL!

[JSojourner]

[long post]

I appreciate your taking the time to write such a detailed response, but it unfortunately didn't really answer my question.  I suppose my question basically is this: why does God reward people with eternal bliss for last-minute faith after a life of sin, yet punish people with eternal torment for a life of service that lacked faith?

Or whether or not this is the case, I suppose.  It's all I ever hear from people attempting to save my soul from my clearly debaucherous, sinful life.

I just don't see why faith in Jesus' divinity is necessary for anything.  One can easily appreciate his message without believing that he was the Son of God.

Sorry...I got carried away.  :-)

I have never bought into the notion that Hitler makes it to Heaven at the last second because he gave mental assent (sp?) to a theological concept...while Mahatma Ghandi burns in hell because he rejected, or simply didn't understand, the idea.

I know what you're getting at.  Most Christians, me included, believe that no matter how good one's deeds and life are, it isn't enough.  At the same time, I part company with them when they assert that all one must do is say a prayer, raise a hand and accept a theological idea.

Works and deeds DO matter.  They are evidence of the grace of God at work in humanity...in ANY human, regardless of faith.  I think what the writers of the scriptures were trying to say when they insist people are saved by grace and not works...is that counting on one's own goodness is tricky and uncertain ground.  How good is good enough.

I remember seeing Muhammad Ali interviewed (on 60 Minutes, I think) before he lost his ability to speak clearly.  He told the interviewer that he would sign autographs, answer letters personally, take time and talk to fans and do charity work for hours on end...every day...day in and day out.  When asked why he was so "fan-friendly" and altruistic, Ali said he hoped that by doing enough good...he might possibly gain entrance into Heaven.

I remember thinking what a beautiful person he was and how generous.  But at the same time, feeling sad that he had so much angst and uncertainty.  He didn't know how much good to do.  And I suspect he wondered if taking time away from his family for his fans or even for a good cause might be less good than the alternative.  Who knows?

How good is good enough?

This is where Christ comes in.  He gives us his goodness.  He is good FOR us.  We needn't worry or fear because a perfect God could only be satisfied with a perfect sacrifice. 

The horrendous mistake so many professing Christians make is to assume that because this spiritual transaction has taken place, it's no longer essential to do good.  Particularly the good that moves us out of our comfort zones...like seeking justice, defending the poor and minorities and caring for creation. 

I've had fellow Christians say to me, "I'm under God's grace.  Jesus took my sin and gave me His goodness and that's that.  Now, I try not to hurt anyone and live as I please."

Doesn't work that way.  And that attitude makes me wonder if there was ever a genuine encounter with Jesus Christ.  He's supposed to change things and shake things up.  He came to make us better people.  Not healthier, wealthier or happier. 

To your specific question:  I have real difficulty believing God does punish good people with eternal torment, simply because they fail to go forward at some tent revival or fill out a card at a church service. God looks on the heart of each man or woman.  I do believe God looks to see Jesus  and his vision imprinted there.  But suppose the person lives as though that imprint is there (Gandhi is a fine example) yet never confesses faith in Jesus?  Perhaps he didn't understand the message.  Perhaps he never heard the message.  Perhaps the message was so bolloxed by the messenger (you know -- hypocrites, charlatans and spiritual headhunters), that the person just couldn't accept it.  I believe God, in His/Her mercy, takes all that into account.

The question I usually drive at (but only with those who invite the conversation -- I do NOT believe in hammering people and I particularly despise Christian "witnesses" who treat non-Christians as subhuman, damned or unworthy of friendship) is simply:

Does Jesus speak to you?  No, not audibly.  But his written words...his historical example...the great good done in his name over the centuries?
(Yeah, I could write an even lengthier tome about the evil done in his name and believe me -- I am ashamed of it.)

But if he speaks to a person today, what does he say?  And what does that person say in response.

I guess that's where it comes down for me.  But as to eternal damnation, I sometimes wonder if the ones who proclaim it the loudest might just be the ones who most merit it.

[JSojourner]

To your specific question:  I have real difficulty believing God does punish good people with eternal torment, simply because they fail to go forward at some tent revival or fill out a card at a church service. God looks on the heart of each man or woman.  I do believe God looks to see Jesus  and his vision imprinted there.  But suppose the person lives as though that imprint is there (Gandhi is a fine example) yet never confesses faith in Jesus?  Perhaps he didn't understand the message.  Perhaps he never heard the message.  Perhaps the message was so bolloxed by the messenger (you know -- hypocrites, charlatans and spiritual headhunters), that the person just couldn't accept it.  I believe God, in His/Her mercy, takes all that into account.

Thank you for another detailed response.

I'm curious why you say, though, that you don't believe that someone would not be given eternal punishment for not believing in Jesus.  I suppose that one section in particular that I'm looking at is Mark 16:15-16, which reads as follows:

"[Jesus] said unto [his desciples], Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.  He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."

This is quoted over and over by people who say that it doesn't matter what you do if you don't believe.

Although in reading other verses that I looked up, I do sort of find it confusing, as in Matthew 7:21-23 and Matthew 25:31-46, in which it sounds as if people who do good things will be rewarded while people who do bad things are the ones who will get eternal punishment.

If God intended for there to be one clear message, he didn't do a very good job...

Yeah, I intend to have words with him about that some day. 

I am convinced that the Matthew 25 passage is pivotal, but pertains exclusively to governments and people groups.  Jesus is very clear here that "the nations" are being judged.  This, to me, is proof-positive that nations are accountable to God for their treatment of the least and the last.  How God can damn a nation and not individuals is problematic, but perhaps the leaders of those nations bear the wrath for their behavior.  I am not sure.  But the flaccid argument that government is not responsible for the plight of the poor, the marginalized, the oppressed or the prisoner is utterly smashed on the rock of Jesus' Matthew 25 teaching.  (as well as some other powerful pronouncements from Jeremiah, Isaiah and Amos.)

As to the Mark passage, it is one I have never believed to be authentic.  I believe it was added much later.  Jesus did encourage his disciples in other Gospels (repeated in St. Luke's Acts of the Apostles) to go into all the world and make disciples.  But no mention is made there of damnation.

Even if you don't view the Mark passage as altered or redacted in some way, how is any of it consistent with the character of Jesus unveiled in the rest of the Gospels?  Did he intend his followers to drink poison and handle snakes as a test of faith?  Some Pentecostals think so, but no authoritative scholar ever did.

If someone you know is fixated on damnation (and they are always fixated on the damnation of someone other than themself, aren't they?), then I would simply respond to them as Jack Nicholson did in "As Good as it Gets"...

"Go peddle crazy someplace else.  We're all stocked up here".