To be honest, most of this paragraph makes no sense to me at all, and you've neglected to answer most of my questions. The burden on your mind isn't fear, but "concern about those who may end up in Hell"? ie. yourself and the people you know, right? "Concern" equals fear. The phrase "God fearing man" came about for a reason.
You're right. The Bible even says to fear God. I interpret that both as to have reverence towards God, and to have a perspective such that you realize he is the creator and you are the creation. That you may feel this way or that and like or dislike the way he does things, but in the end he has the final say. I do not interpret it to mean that I need to walk on eggshells and worry about getting struck by lightening.
This, along with the whole realization of the existence of God and all of the spiritual realities that exist are more of a burden than thinking that I am only responsible for my actions insofar as how they affect my surroundings (including people) and my future on this Earth.
Ok, I will try to do a better job of answering all of your questions. I just want to preface it by saying that all of the discussion between you and I stems from a misunderstanding of my comment about atheism. I simply said that atheism might be a more comfortable belief system for me, but I am convinced otherwise, so it is not possible. Also, I am not here in this thread to argue and try to defend Christianity as a religion.
No, not at all. I'm saying that Atheists don't look at it that way. 'Eternally rotting in the ground' is very much the negative religious spin on Atheism. Why must there be an "eternal reward" anyway? Do I really deserve a reward for being a decent human being?
As I said before, I was just being a bit poetic and ironic, and a little bit metal, in the way I said that. In my view we should all feel a responsibility to live a good life and respect others. I think the reward for that kind of life comes naturally as far as living more at peace and in harmony with others. Avoiding connsequences is also part of that reward. In other words, not commiting crimes keeps peace in society, as well as keeps you from going to jail. This is not to say that doing the right thing always has the desired results, and this is true within Christianity as well. So no, I don't think I (you, whoever) deserve a reward for being a decent human being.
Actually we live on in the memories of those we knew, and our mark is made in whatever large or small way because we were here. Why does having no afterlife have to mean our existence was worthless?
I didn't say that. Yes we make a mark and people remember us and are affected by our existence, but to the dead person, their own existence stops and consciuosness ends.
This is a prime example of the reason religion was started in the first place: Scaring people into doing good, or be damned to eternal Hell. The 'burden on your mind' is fear.
I think there is a lot of misunderstanding when it comes to the whole "scaring people into doing good" thing. The eternal reward of Christianity comes not as a reward for good deeds done. The position of Christianity is that nobody is worthy of the etrnal reward, but that God paid the price for it through Christ's sacrifice and it is now available for anyone who would accept the gift. Righteousness is attained positionally, not by good deeds. Yes, Christianity goes on to teach that there is sin and that it should be avoided. It teaches us ways to be a good human, as discussed above. This is a good thing. Again, I am not here in this thread to argue and try to defend Christianity as a religion. I am simply answering your statements about the teachings of Christianity and how your statements don't correctly represent them.
And your logic fails when you think about the mass murderers who 'find God', ask forgiveness and believe they will go to Heaven.
How about just being a decent person NOW because it's the right thing to be in the society we live in instead of because of concern about being judged and penalised after you're dead?
The second statement is addressed above.
I think I see what you're saying about my logic failing. That a "bad" person can get a similar eternal "reward" as a "good" person, and so this is effectively the same as what I said about in atheism that everyone gets the same result, no matter what life they live. What I can say about that is that the "reward" is not based on deeds, and the point I was making about the atheistic world view is that there is no higher power to answer to about anything done in a person's life. It is simply a fact that there is less pressure on one's existence when there is nobody to answer to.
It seems bizarre to me that you're content to live your life knowing you can never reach some "unachievable standard". None of us are worthy, and we only have a fulfilling life because God gave it to us. What about all the evil bastards in this world who live extremely fulfilling lives? And this "truth" you speak of, what is it? How is it truth? How do you know it's truth? And is it accepted without question?
First off, I do not accept it without question. I question it and continue to evaluate it. I know that many of you think that all Christian are just sheep who follow without question, but that is untrue and frankly insulting.
I do believe that all good things come from God, and I don't believe that those good things are limited to Christians. We all (most of us) have good things in our lives. Good music, good food, relationships...the list goes on. The rain falls on the good and the bad. People profit from ill-gotten gain. The world is not fair. But I believe that a relationship with God can bring a peace into a life that is beyond circumstances, and transcends human understanding.
I believe in an unacheivable standard, but also that it has been attained for me. I am content because I am content, and am thankful for what I have.
As far as truth goes, I cannot prove to anyone what the truth is, and I honestly can't even be 100% sure of it myself. That is where faith comes in. I do have faith that it is true. By past and present evaluation I have become convinced. I am also convinced that what I believe that I know is a tiny percentage of the whole picture and I am sure that I am incorrect is some of my thinking about what is true. What more can I say?
