Do Christians really believe most of us are going to hell?

[GrandizerII]

I personally don't think that most Christians really believe that we're going to hell.

Anyway, I decided to google about this as I was pondering this and stumbled upon this article written by an atheist:

http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=1852

This guy said exactly what has been on my mind all this time. I know when I was a Christian, I didn't act like I was as concerned as I should have been about my loved ones being in eternal danger, even though I'd go out of my way to protect them from real danger.

So I, in a contradictory way, accepted with certainty that hell was eternal and most were going to suffer there eventually, but never acted like I cared enough. And now when I think back, I probably never really believed most of the stuff preached by Christianity but just was never conscious of that fact until near the end of my former faith.

[The Grand Nudger]

Oh cmon, why call them liars when they self identify as tools?

[GrandizerII]

Oh cmon, why call them liars when they self identify as tools?

The label "liar" should be applied to someone who consciously lies. The post is not suggesting they consciously do.

Anyway, this thread isn't meant to to apply derogatory names to Christians. So "liar, tool", both unneeded right now.

[The Grand Nudger]

Hahaha, okay, okay. Let me offer an alternative. Yes, some christians absolutely do think we're going to hell. But they're decent, line toe-ingly average people, so it's difficult to process that sort of negative expectation. Instead - they just don't process it at all. Leading to a christian who, without malice, and unthinkingly - does really believe that we're going to hell.

Clearly your experience suggests another valid explanation. I bet we could come up with a whole lot more too.

edit: I want to add here, that my explanation doesn't require me to call subconscious bullshit on every christian I meet. Something very normal, very well attested, and generally non menacing or overtly self-delusional might be occurring. Whereas yours has to call peoples beliefs- about their beliefs, into question. So that throttling about my choice of words in the last post seems a bit less severe than that, to me. In any case, I don;t even know how we might propose to measure peoples beliefs about their beliefs. Christians do unchristian things - they remain christian. So their actions (or inaction in your example of not rushing to save your loved ones from hell) isn;t really indicate of a belief - about a belief. I don't know what would be.

[GrandizerII]

Hahaha, okay, okay. Let me offer an alternative. Yes, some christians absolutely do think we're going to hell. But they're decent, line toe-ingly average people, so it's difficult to process that sort of negative expectation. Instead - they just don't process it at all. Leading to a christian who, without malice, and unthinkingly - does really believe that we're going to hell.

This is not an alternative. This is practically the same as what I'm talking about.

And why does it seem like you are misconceiving my post as suggesting malice in Christians?

Yes, I'm discussing the subconscious and questioning whether Christians are truly conscious of whether what they profess is truly what they believe, regarding hell mainly.

I'm not saying this can be operationalised in a scientific manner either.

[The Grand Nudger]

Meh, science schmience. What I mean is, how do we go about questioning the self professed beliefs of others? What framework would be valid if our beliefs - about our beliefs, could not be stated as fact, accepted as a premise. An axiom. It's a sort of logical rabbit hole. I mean, I accept questioning them as useful, I'm onboard...but any claim you want to make about the belief of another simply -has to be corroborated by that other-...or else it's just imagination at play. You may think you're right, you may be right...but that doesn;t mean that they believe that you are right.

My alternative is not practically the same. It is entirely different. In your scenario, from your example, you conclude that perhaps you did not really believe what you thought you believed. I accept that. It's insightful, it's authoritative -for your experience anyway (if your beliefs about your beliefs can be believed)-.

In my example, they really do believe - exactly what they profess to believe....and they've found some other way to deal with whatever dissonance you might imagine that this could create.....if they even feel any. This is not a judgement of these people, it is not an issue of malice. It;s just a statement of what may be possible, that happens to have examples easily evident in our experience.

Let me put it to you this way. I could ask a couple theists on this board if they believed I was going to hell. They'd say yes...and they'd mean it. Completely and utterly.

[GrandizerII]

In my example, they really do believe - exactly what they profess to believe....and they've found some other way to deal with whatever dissonance you might imagine that this could create.....if they even feel any.

So you're saying not much (if any) cognitive dissonance going on in their minds. I can accept that as an alternative, but again, this thread isn't about making absolute statements about Christian (if that's what you thought I was trying to make), rather about pondering potential dissonances that go on in the minds of Christians regarding hell and going with past experience and such, seeing as there have been several former Christians confessing to these cognitive dissonances.

Yes, Christians can say they believe we're all going to hell. And it's possible some may truly believe this without doubt.

Anyway, I think I should've added the question for former Christians:

Did you truly believe most people were going to hell?

[The Grand Nudger]

So you're saying not much (if any) cognitive dissonance going on in their minds.

I'm saying I can't tell you heads or tails about what's going on in anyone else's mind, ultimately - but that it seems to me that a complete lack of dissonance (or a strategy for overcoming it) is in the realm of reason, yes.

this thread isn't about making absolute statements about Christian (if that's what you thought I was trying to make), rather about pondering potential dissonances that go on in the minds of Christians regarding hell and going with past experience and such, seeing as there have been several former Christians confessing to these cognitive dissonances.

course not, course not. Just cautioning against the dangers - from the point of view of communicating ideas ...when we start to impeach beliefs, about beliefs. Explaining why I, personally, accept that statement of belief at face value until they deign to inform me of their change in opinion, themselves, if that ever happens.

[Mudhammam]

I wonder, if a person can simply pick and choose which words of Jesus they embrace and take literally--and clearly Jesus had some awful, idiotic views about unbelievers and hell-- then can I still claim to be a Christian while rejecting all the bullshit in the New Testament? (I'm down with the "blessed are the poor" and "love thy neighbor" and the general idea of redemption through suffering bits).

[GrandizerII]

I wonder, if a person can simply pick and choose which words of Jesus they embrace and take literally--and clearly Jesus had some awful, idiotic views about unbelievers and hell-- then can I still claim to be a Christian while rejecting all the bullshit in the New Testament? (I'm down with the "blessed are the poor" and "love thy neighbor" and the general idea of redemption through suffering bits).

That's a good point.

The Westboro Baptist, for example, would definitely not see Christians ignoring all the nasty stuff preached in the Bible to be true Christians, but simultaneously, other Christians could also argue that the Westboro Baptist guys are not true Christians because they ignore all the other passages focusing on love, which sometimes contradict the former passages on hell and God hating people, etc.

But is there really a difference between most atheists and most Christians with regards to what is accepted as truth in the Bible? Sure, atheists don't profess belief in God and all that, but a Christian (at least according to the pure meaning of the word, which means "follower of Christ") doesn't have to. And if Christians can reject certain passages in the Bible and still be considered Christians, why can't atheists?