Is it hypocritical for Christians to be terrified of death if heaven is

L

Lilalena

Registered Senior Member
Is it hypocritical for Christians to be terrified of death if heaven is supposed to be a place of perfect happiness...?

The context I'm interested in is jihad. Could the above serve as a strong enough rationalization for a killer who in spite of all the brainwashing may still have some scruples about killing?

Note:
The above is just the briefest way I can think of to phrase the question. I dont really believe being afraid of death is hypocritical even if you're religious (of any faith) .
 
Lilalena said:
Is it hypocritical for Christians to be terrified of death if heaven is supposed to be a place of perfect happiness...?
Click to expand...
We all fear change. Even fabulous, positive changes cause anxiety. In the case of the irrational supernaturalists, no matter how desperately they believe in the oxymoron of "life after death," they will still be separated from their loved ones, and it's a big leap of "faith" to be certain that the perfect happiness of heaven will drive away all sadness, all wistfulness, all regrets over that.

Not to mention, if they have young children, the children will become orphans, and it's unlikely that they will be altruistic enough to say, "Oh well, Mommy is in heaven now having the greatest fun imaginable (without us), so we can simply stifle our broken hearts for the next sixty or ninety years until we finally get to see her again." What sane mother is going to hop on the Heavenly Elevator with that on her conscience and no second thoughts?

Not to mention, someone who has been divorced and remarried, like the majority of Americans, will (eventually if not immediately) meet both spouses, or all spouses, in the case of Americans. That's gotta trigger some major anxiety!

Not to mention, how many people are certain that they've led a decent enough life to be admitted to heaven? Paradoxically, the most devout people, who have actually led the most moral, sinless lives, are the ones who worry about this stuff more than the rest of the population. Some of them are likely to be the most fearful of all!
 
From a human point of view, it can't be called 'hypocritical'
but the context I'm interested in is jihad and whether the idea of this as a hypocrisy in christians could be strong enough to rationalize killing christians.
 
Generally people live for others they become attached to like siblings, children, spouses and even just because you like eating a bagel in the morning. If you kill a Buddhist you cant just say "well he's gonna have another life anyway".
 
Lilalena said:
From a human point of view, it can't be called 'hypocritical'
but the context I'm interested in is jihad and whether the idea of this as a hypocrisy in christians could be strong enough to rationalize killing christians.
Click to expand...
I don't understand the question.
  • 1. Christians believe that they will go to heaven.
  • 2. Heaven is wonderful.
  • 3. Therefore Christians have no reason to be apprehensive about death.
  • 4. Yet many Christians are afraid of dying.
  • 5. Some non-Christians believe this is hypocrisy.
  • 6. Therefore they believe that they have the duty to kill them for being hypocrites.
Is this what you're saying?

I have already argued that #1 is not universally true. Many Christians believe they are not perfect and have reason to wonder whether they will in fact go to heaven. I have also argued that #3 is not universally true. There are many valid reasons why a Christian might have mixed feelings about dying, even if he's going to heaven.

I question the validity of #5 and 6. Of all the reasons I have seen quoted for the attacks by Muslims on Christians, this was never listed. (I avoid calling it "jihad" since it insults the concept of jihad and there's no point in pissing off the hundreds of millions of Muslims who don't hate us.) I've never even seen the issue of hypocrisy brought up at all. Just as many Muslims are afraid of death as Christians, for the same reasons. The terrorists can't be unaware of this, and I doubt that they go around calling their own friends and family "hypocrites."
 
I guess you're referring to what happens in some of these smaller cults, like the one that followed the comet...they seek to go ahead with their entrance into their perception of heaven by planning their time of death. Basically a mass suicide. Perhaps that's one reason why such acts are deemed as sins, so as to not allow that loophole, because a church where people keep leaving can't be supported very well financially.

On death/dying...dying is the change that's feared, especially a long event with much suffering. Death itself shouldn't be feared, because either you'll be in a better place, or you won't exist, but it's the transition to that point that's scary.

If anything can be considered hypocritical is the mourning of a loved one if you do believe they went to heaven. I can see maybe this being passed off as just sad about their leaving the rest of the family behind, but that's a bit selfish. Although there are some cultures that do celebrate the funeral with that aspect of joy after the initial grieving.
 
Yeah what's wrong with you sissy christians go be Jihadis already and get it over with!. last one alive is a panzy!


(Please dont arrest me Im only joking)
 
Lilalena said:
(could) the idea of this as a hypocrisy in christians (...) be strong enough to rationalize killing christians.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I should edit this to “…..(could) the idea of this as a hypocrisy in christians (...) be strong enough for a young would-be terrorist to rationalize to themselves the killing of Christians.”

Fraggle Rocker said:
I don't understand the question.
  • 1. Christians believe that they will go to heaven.
  • 2. Heaven is wonderful.
  • 3. Therefore Christians have no reason to be apprehensive about death.
  • 4. Yet many Christians are afraid of dying.
  • 5. Some non-Christians believe this is hypocrisy.
  • 6. Therefore they believe that they have the duty to kill them for being hypocrites.
Is this what you're saying?
Click to expand...

1-4 yes but not 5 & 6.

If you’re thinking from a humanitarian perspective, there is no contradiction, as you and John99 have shown. However, to a fundamentalist terrorist leader/indoctrinator, only the superficial point of view is useful.

Therefore :

5. Fundamentalists leaders will choose to believe this is a contradiction
6. They can then use it to create a fallacy.
7. The fallacy could go something like this:

a. by being afraid of death, Christians are not facing their own beliefs / are being hypocritical
b. it’s “OK” to kill them
c. to force them to face their own beliefs.
d. which will remove their hypocrisy.
e. therefore, one is only helping them by killing them

So could the above fallacy serve as a strong enough rationalization for a killer who in spite of all the brainwashing may still have some scruples about killing?

I imagine suicide bombers have a few logical sequences drilled into them that they can fall back on in case they falter at the moment of truth. And I imagine the above can be one of them. I wonder if anyone else thinks it could.


== Actually Chi you got where I was coming from, even though you were only joking. I was thinking about how a superficial contradiction can be dressed up in any way (for instance, as logical to appeal to intelligent young fundamentalists; or as a sort of swagger to appeal to the not so intelligent young fundamentalists).
 
For a Christian, going to heaven is not a sure thing, simply because you belong to that herd. It comes down to the actions of the individual. The analogy is like going into an exam that will decide your entry (or not) into the college of your choice. People are not 100% sure whether they will make the grade. It is not enough to just belong to the Christian herd, rather it is based on being an individual who earns passage through a lifetime of effort.

A Muslim suicide bombing sees their impending action as a sure thing backdoor into heaven. They too are not sure how they will do on the exam of life. Having a sure thing in their pocket dispels some of the fear associated with the uncertainty of death. So when the time for action appears there is less fear of the exam, afterwards, since he has a get into heaven card he can flash.

In Christianity, most people will likely end up in pergutory, which is sort of the community college before the college of heaven. Going from the half way house, to heaven is dependent on the impact your life has left on others. It is their love and prayer whuch intercedes with the admission process. If you have been less than a nice person, but not bad enough to go to hell, one could end up in limbo, if there is no intercession. Many people are objective enough to fear becoming a lifetime student in the half way house.
 
i always thought the concept of religious purgatory didn't make sense.

if anything, this existence would fit closer to purgatory or a testing ground of good vs evil.

For a Christian, going to heaven is not a sure thing, simply because you belong to that herd. It comes down to the actions of the individual. The analogy is like going into an exam that will decide your entry (or not) into the college of your choice. People are not 100% sure whether they will make the grade. It is not enough to just belong to the Christian herd, rather it is based on being an individual who earns passage through a lifetime of effort.
Click to expand...

this is not what the religion is based on. it's that human effort is not enough and that is why jesus christ was sacrificed for their sins. just by being 'saved' one can enter heaven as long as they ask for forgiveness.

actually the only unpardonable sin in that religion is considered unbelief or blasphemy against the holy spirit.
 
Last edited:
Lilalena said:
So could the above fallacy serve as a strong enough rationalization for a killer who in spite of all the brainwashing may still have some scruples about killing?
Click to expand...
These guys are one-percenters with more than one screw loose, so the terrorist leaders don't bother trying to appeal to them with logic. They simply tell them that the Christian nations, especially America, have restarted the Crusades, and that we are trying to overthrow Muslim governments, kill Muslims, and occupy Muslim nations.

For the life of me, I can't figure out where they got that silly idea.
wellwisher said:
In Christianity, most people will likely end up in pergutory, which is sort of the community college before the college of heaven.
Click to expand...
In modern times Purgatory (sp.) is strictly a Catholic doctrine. Very few Protestants believe in it. (I don't know about the Eastern Orthodox churches.)
Many people are objective enough to fear becoming a lifetime student in the half way house.
Click to expand...
Purgatory is, by definition, temporary. It is a place where souls are prepared for Heaven. If an individual has sinned so badly, and not repented, that he can never qualify for entry into Heaven, he will simply be sent directly to Hell.

Note that, at least in America, the majority of people who identify themselves as Christians believe in Heaven, but only something like 25% of them believe in Hell. These answers are stupid enough by themselves, I guess the pollsters never bother asking them if they believe in Purgatory. ;)
 
Lilalena said:
Is it hypocritical for Christians to be terrified of death if heaven is supposed to be a place of perfect happiness...?
Click to expand...

Yes I think it is, 'cause if you truly believe that you are going to heaven, then you wouldn't be afraid. The fear comes from not knowing (doubt), not trusting in heaven; so if you are afraid of death you cannot say that you believe in heaven and that you are going there 'cause the statement is a contradiction, a hypocrisy. And if you are afraid of death, like most human beings are, then you should say that you like the concept of heaven, but you are not sure or really don't know if it's true; that would be the truth but you don’t normally see Christians stating such things.
 
Yes, religion is responsible for suicide bombers. There is no way they would do that if they didn't think there was an afterlife reward.
 
I don't think so. I mean I do believe in an afterlife. However, there is one thing I am afraid of when I die. Its the pain I will have to experience. Death is always a painful thing to experience, not only on a physical sense but also on a mental sense. Many people are stressed on the fact that if they die, they are going to leave people behind. People either they are too attached too, or people who are dependent on them. There are other reasons too.
 
By definition, yes it would be hypocritical. Not only would they be going to some perfect place, but they will finally get a chance to meet their savior and lord. Or, so the logic goes. At that rate, may as well wish for death.
 
I guess the problem here is the contradictions in the Christian definition of happiness. To be able to serve others unselfishly may be the paragon of true Christianity but in the end, a built-in mechanism allowing people to be controlled like puppets is deemed more important by religious leaders hence unselfish christians must also be capable of renouncing / leaving their loved ones in order to blindly serve only God in case called upon by their leaders or ... by death.
 
Religious people have natural instincts just like the atheists. One practical difference between these two orientations, is religion unconsciously assumes there are higher aspects of the brain/mind (firmware) that can be developed that are more evolved than animal instinct. The God projection creates the proper relationship between the ego and this firmware, since the highest firmware is not subject to ego control.

Relgion often do what appears to be repression of natural instinct (stricter control of instinct) in favor of an mental abstract code of alternate human action. Although this can help develop the higher level brain firmware, it does not neutralize natural instinct, since natural instinct is still part of the body's natural control system. The net result is the religious people can be just as vulnerable to fear, when there is a shift in firmware activity back into natural instinct. But other times, when the higher firmware is active through faith and conditioning, one can step outside the limitations of the instinctive firmware such as fear.

Atheist do the same thing, except that tend to use a slightly lower level firmware that is then overlapped with the instinctive firmware. The composite is not exactly natural, but is relative, having been modified by abstractions supported by competing empirical science. It is slighly lower than the religion based firmware since it is more ego-centric and based on firmware that one can control. There is usually less conscious distance to the instinctive firmware causing the fear of death to remain more conscious for an atheist.

In general terms, the lowest level firmware is instinctive and helps regulate the needs of our animal body, just like it does for any animal. For modern man, the instinctive firmware is analogous to our horse. Like a horse, this firmware is self sufficient, yet subject to ego control, if you can tame the horse firmware. The two different higher level firmware are analogous to the rider on the horse. The astractions and ideas help direct the horse while making use the power of the horse to achieves ends. But the horse is still autonomous and under his own instincts and needs to be forced or coaxed into action if that conflicts with its own instincts.

The highest level firmware is less like the casual rider or the farmer using his horse's power to pull a plow. Rather is more like like the knight on his horse. Both the knight and his horse are battle tested, running into battle full steam ahead without fear, feeling only adrenline and excitement, due to firmware separation.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top