What's at stake?

[Elijah John]

Assuming that Jesus is not God, there seems to be a clear violation of the first commandment, that we are to have "no other gods before me (YHVH)".

What is at stake here, how serious an infraction of God's primary law is worshiping Jesus?

Does the gravity of this situation make those who worship Jesus more biased in favor of keeping Jesus as their God and the object of their worship, rather than opening themselves to evidence of the contrary?

Two or three things occur to me, that I will share after some replies.

I think that most Evangelicals swear that those who DO NOT worship Jesus spend eternity in hell...pretty high stakes.

But what if they are wrong, what if the reverse is true, what if there is punishment FOR worshiping Jesus, if he is NOT God? What then are the stakes, if worshiping Jesus is indeed a form of idolatry?

[Divine Insight]

I can't help but suggest that the very idea that there exists a jealous egotistical God who would be mean to anyone for being confused about religion is nothing short of insane. If such a God exists, it surely must be an insane psychopath itself.

The problem is that if a truly compassionate intelligent and caring God exists, then it wouldn't care how you "worshiped it" as long as your intent is sincere. This would not only apply to those who might be mistakenly worshiping Jesus, but to all other religious concepts throughout the world. It wouldn't matter to God whether you are a believer in the Hebrew religions or some other totally unrelated spiritual religion.

All a genuinely caring God would care about it is a person's intent and sincerity.

I would even suggest that this must necessarily go far beyond religion entirely. If a truly compassionate sane God exists that God must also recognize decent atheists as well. In fact, I have always held the position that a decent atheist would basically be God's greatest achievement of creation. What could be better than having created souls who actually want to do good in the world yet they actually believe that life is just a natural accident of some sort and when they die that's the end of it.

A righteous atheist is the absolute epitome of righteousness. It actually a righteousness that transcends God himself.

This very idea that there exists a "jealous God" who will hurt people for worshiping a wrong concept of God is truly insane. Especially considering how screwed up these jealous God religions truly are. Look that the Muslims and Jews, they seem to hate each other in the name of this original jealous God and they aren't even using Jesus as a weapon of hatred.

Even the Jewish Pharisees were supposedly worshiping the "Correct God" but for some extremely strange reason even though they prayed to this God he never helped them. Instead he allowed these devoted worshipers to become corrupted by Satan or whatever.

These Abrahamic religions are so utterly absurd the only thing that amazes me about them at all is that people actually still take them seriously to this very day. And that's actually quite scary. Especially considering that these religions are not only the cause of much political unrest, violence, and bloodshed, (especially in the Middle East), but they are even plotting to have more Holy Wars potentially culminating in the ultimate "Battle of Armageddon".

There are many religious people who would actually go to "war" over these God myths.

If you're an atheist you vividly realize that this is like people going to war over Zeus!

In fact if your a member of any Non-Abrahamic philosophy or religion you can clearly see that these Abrahamic religions are a serious threat to world peace.

This whole "Jealous God" concept has got to stop.

Here you are arguing over whether this jealous God approves of "Jesus Worship". This is just a case where the Abrahamic religions are pointing fingers at each other. All in the name of a supposedly egotistical jealous God.

This is so unbelievable that people take this stuff seriously.

Do you honestly believe that there exist an immature jealous egotistical God who is out to hurt people for "innocently" worshiping the wrong God Myths? And he's also going to condemn every atheist and non-Abrahamic theism to hell for not worshiping the "Correct Version" of Hebrew Mythology?

By the way, I thought you were in support of the teachings of Jesus? And that's what you found so "beautiful" in the Bible.

If so, why are you now trying to make a case that the original jealous God of the OT would actually be upset with those who follow Jesus as his "Only begotten Son"?

And if you're going to condemn Christianity, then which Abrahamic version do you think people should be worshiping? Judaism? Or some version of Islam? Remember, every version sees God differently, so they can't all be worshiping the same jealous God.

What's the difference what name you use to call God? If your idolization of that name does not represent the actual God then you'd still be worshiping the "Wrong God" even if you got the Name right.

These jealous-god religions have nothing to do with any God. Clearly, they are nothing more than inventions of mankind created in an attempt to try to own the patent rights on God.

It's men who want to hate you if you worship the "wrong God".

If there is a God I'm quite sure that God isn't hateful. On the contrary that would go against the very idea of a God. After all, a hateful God would be a Demon, not a God.

So unless you believe that God is a Demon, why would you believe that God would hate anyone for not knowing which religion to follow?

In fact, why would a God even hate people for not believing in religion at all?

That's insane.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

seems like an alternate version of Pascal's wager. The same flaws that apply to Pascal's wager apply here.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Assuming that Jesus is not God, there seems to be a clear violation of the first commandment, that we are to have "no other gods before me (YHVH)".

What is at stake here, how serious an infraction of God's primary law is worshiping Jesus?

Does the gravity of this situation make those who worship Jesus more biased in favor of keeping Jesus as their God and the object of their worship, rather than opening themselves to evidence of the contrary?

Two or three things occur to me, that I will share after some replies.

I think that most Evangelicals swear that those who DO NOT worship Jesus spend eternity in hell...pretty high stakes.

But what if they are wrong, what if the reverse is true, what if there is punishment FOR worshiping Jesus, if he is NOT God? What then are the stakes, if worshiping Jesus is indeed a form of idolatry?

If Jesus was simply a man, no more and no less, or if perhaps he never existed at all, then the universe will go on exactly as it always has. Nothing what so ever will be effected.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

seems like an alternate version of Pascal's wager. The same flaws that apply to Pascal's wager apply here.

How so, Daniel, please elaborate.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]

You're ranting again. As Diana admonished another poster, can you please dial back the rhetoric a bit?

But at least you address the OP with this:

-----"The problem is that if a truly compassionate intelligent and caring God exists, then it wouldn't care how you "worshiped it" as long as your intent is sincere. This would not only apply to those who might be mistakenly worshiping Jesus, but to all other religious concepts throughout the world. It wouldn't matter to God whether you are a believer in the Hebrew religions or some other totally unrelated spiritual religion.

All a genuinely caring God would care about it is a person's intent and sincerity."----

And and your observations here touch on something I alluded to in the OP that I was hoping to cover. That God (YHVH) may well be compassionate enough, intelligent enough and big enough to allow for some misunderstandings from His creatures, without consigning them to everlasting torture.

If God judges on belief, getting the right belief is paramount. If God however judges on behavior and attitudes, then that allows for more leeway in His judgements, and any sincere, loving and compassionate Muslim, Buddhist, Taoist, Christian, Deist or Atheist for that matter, could be covered and judged "saved".

But if the "right belief" Fundamentalists are right, God sends those with mistaken beliefs to hell.

But that all depends on Jesus supposedly being God. If they are wrong about that, and God DOES judge by correct belief, could they themselves (the Fundamentalists) be in peril of everlasting torture? Wouldn't that then, according to Fundamentalist own standards, be a major violation of the first commandment, putting Jesus before God, and thus guilty of the sin of idolatry?

Oh, for the record, I DO revere the teachings of the man Jesus, the very human prophet.

And questioning his Divinity does not mean I respect his teachings any less. I do NOT believe that the historical, the real Jesus ever claimed to be God, so that is not one of his teachings as far as I can see.

But nothing I said here indicates that I consider him to be God Himself. I do not.

Also, since Jesus is so close to God, perhaps the misunderstanding is understandable that one would mistake him for YHVH.

[Elijah John]

Assuming that Jesus is not God, there seems to be a clear violation of the first commandment, that we are to have "no other gods before me (YHVH)".

What is at stake here, how serious an infraction of God's primary law is worshiping Jesus?

Does the gravity of this situation make those who worship Jesus more biased in favor of keeping Jesus as their God and the object of their worship, rather than opening themselves to evidence of the contrary?

Two or three things occur to me, that I will share after some replies.

I think that most Evangelicals swear that those who DO NOT worship Jesus spend eternity in hell...pretty high stakes.

But what if they are wrong, what if the reverse is true, what if there is punishment FOR worshiping Jesus, if he is NOT God? What then are the stakes, if worshiping Jesus is indeed a form of idolatry?

If Jesus was simply a man, no more and no less, or if perhaps he never existed at all, then the universe will go on exactly as it always has. Nothing what so ever will be effected.

Not necessarily, if there DOES exist a God, and Jesus is NOT God incarnate, what then, are the implications of worshiping Jesus? Wouldn't that be a form of idolatry?

Please assume a Theistic argument if you can, for the purposes of this thread.

[Freddy_Scissorhands]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

seems like an alternate version of Pascal's wager. The same flaws that apply to Pascal's wager apply here.

Yep, just my thought.
Pretty much whenever you hear "What's at stake...?" or "What if you are wrong...?" or "Let's compare the consequences the different views have..." it usually (not always, but very often) is fallowed up by a version of Pascal's wager.
Truth is not determine by whatever consequences might be the best/worst/most pleasant...
And when we believe something, we usually are not getting convinced of something else, by simply appealing to potential consequences.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

seems like an alternate version of Pascal's wager. The same flaws that apply to Pascal's wager apply here.

Yep, just my thought.
Pretty much whenever you hear "What's at stake...?" or "What if you are wrong...?" or "Let's compare the consequences the different views have..." it usually (not always, but very often) is fallowed up by a version of Pascal's wager.
Truth is not determine by whatever consequences might be the best/worst/most pleasant...
And when we believe something, we usually are not getting convinced of something else, by simply appealing to potential consequences.

OK Freddy, I give you the same challenge as I did with Daniel, please demonstrate how your post relates to the OP, and assume for the sake of argument that God does exist, and if Jesus is not God, what then? Given the prevalence of Jesus-worship and all, and the prohibition of not having any god's before YHVH. (the first commandment), how serious an infraction is it to worship Jesus, in your opinion?

No, I am not going to let the other shoe drop with any form of "Pascal's Wager".

[Freddy_Scissorhands]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

seems like an alternate version of Pascal's wager. The same flaws that apply to Pascal's wager apply here.

Yep, just my thought.
Pretty much whenever you hear "What's at stake...?" or "What if you are wrong...?" or "Let's compare the consequences the different views have..." it usually (not always, but very often) is fallowed up by a version of Pascal's wager.
Truth is not determine by whatever consequences might be the best/worst/most pleasant...
And when we believe something, we usually are not getting convinced of something else, by simply appealing to potential consequences.

OK Freddy, I give you the same challenge as I did with Daniel, please demonstrate how your post relates to the OP, and assume for the sake of argument that God does exist, and if Jesus is not God, what then? Given the prevalence of Jesus-worship and all, and the prohibition of not having any god's before YHVH. (the first commandment), how serious an infraction is it to worship Jesus, in your opinion?

No, I am not going to let the other shoe drop with any form of "Pascal's Wager".

So, the original poste brought up this:

"I think that most Evangelicals swear that those who DO NOT worship Jesus spend eternity in hell...pretty high stakes.

But what if they are wrong, what if the reverse is true, what if there is punishment FOR worshiping Jesus, if he is NOT God? What then are the stakes, if worshiping Jesus is indeed a form of idolatry?"

This does sound a lot like Pascal's wager... or at least something very similar.
Of course, Pascal's wager works toward the goal, that it is less risky to believe in a god, than not to believe in a god.
This version, so far, doesn't exactly point to what conclusion it wants to arrive (or if at any at all), but it seems to work towards the idea, that the risk, that we would take if one or the other was true should be something that we have to take into consideration when determining, what we should believe about Jesus.

As I've said, given that you haven't presented any conclusion drawn from your thought-process in the original comment, you might be going in a completly different direction, which is fine...
That's why DanielTheDragon wrote "seems like". Because all we can tell so far is, that the premisses seem to end up in a similar flawed conclusion that is based on simple risk-evaluation... in the same way that Pascal's wager is.