If There's No Heaven/Reward...

[connermt]

If there was no heaven/reward promised to those who follow a deity based on faith (aka christianity), would you do it?
In essence: Would you be a christian if there was NO reward (heaven)?
If so, why? (We already know the 'why not' so no need to ask it here.)

[Furrowed Brow]

If there was no heaven/reward promised to those who follow a deity based on faith (aka christianity), would you do it?

As there is no reward I'll carry on as is. If I thought there was a reward I'd carry on as is. I don't respond to rewards very well. But if I believed in some kind of supreme being it would be one that did not dish out rewards. That idea just feels immature and egotistical. The idea of finding peace, seeking wisdom and treating other people well is its own reward and does not need an extra bonus reward on top.

Strangely I find myself quoting Winston Churchill. He once said "We are all worms, but I do believe that I am a glow-worm." Worms and glow worms do not live long and are fleeting. If there were a God the one I'd imagine is one in which we are ephemeral but if you live a good life you are a glow worm. You do not get eternal life or rewards but you do get noticed and your life stands out, is appreciated and will be remembered. That is about the only picture of God I've ever found half way moving. But then you don't need God to be noticed if you have friends and family. It should be enough to be remembered well by a few folks for a generation or two before you are forgotten. Why would we want anything more? The answer is ego. It's a self serving projection of yourself. The Abrahamic religions particularly seem to encourage this and I find it unsightly.

Thus the idea of "following a deity" does not appeal. I can understand how the idea that you are not completely alone appeals, but I can just as easily live without that thought and feel content and happy about that. If there were a supreme being I like the sound of one who notices us and hopes to have a peaceful friendship with us before we are gone. I do not like the sound of a God who wants our love. That feels unnecessarily needy for a supreme being and somewhere underneath that demand I sense a sociopath who swats worms. This is one reason I'm sure in myself that the idea of God wanting us to worship/love him is a human projection.

There is little in theology and religious doctrine I find pretty, but I do like the meaning and intent of shalom. A god that noticed us and wished us shalom and left it at that would be an okay god.

In essence: Would you be a christian if there was NO reward (heaven)?

I could not be a Christian under any circumstance. There are elements of its doctrine and ethics I find disturbing, and however I look at it is always looks like a false consciousness. If there was a religion with a doctrine that boiled down to a philosophy that said something like find peace, do as little harm as practically possible, enjoy other people and treat them well, I'd find that attractive.

[dianaiad]

If there was no heaven/reward promised to those who follow a deity based on faith (aka christianity), would you do it?
In essence: Would you be a christian if there was NO reward (heaven)?
If so, why? (We already know the 'why not' so no need to ask it here.)

Yeah, I would remain LDS if there was no 'reward' promised, because it's as good a moral and ethical system as any out there, and better than a bunch. If we are only going for 'this is the way to treat others and still have a good life," then sure.

Or to put this another way, I have faith that there is an afterlife, but if I found out for certain there wasn't, I can't see any need to switch moral codes, because this one works just fine.

I might have a different view if the moral and ethical code I live by required me to be less than ethical in order to receive said reward, but it doesn't, so I don't.

[Zzyzx]

.

If there was no heaven/reward promised to those who follow a deity based on faith (aka christianity), would you do it?

Heck no. I wouldn't be a Christian even with the promises (and threats) -- because they cannot be shown to be anything more than a sales pitch offered by religion promoters -- and I am not easily intimidated or duped.

There is no advantage for me to follow (or worship) a deity. I certainly do not need an external moral / ethical code -- or any reason to "hope" for anything beyond what I have -- and no reason to ask favors of a "deity."

[dianaiad]

.

If there was no heaven/reward promised to those who follow a deity based on faith (aka christianity), would you do it?

Heck no. I wouldn't be a Christian even with the promises (and threats) -- because they cannot be shown to be anything more than a sales pitch offered by religion promoters -- and I am not easily intimidated or duped.

There is no advantage for me to follow (or worship) a deity. I certainly do not need an external moral / ethical code -- or any reason to "hope" for anything beyond what I have -- and no reason to ask favors of a "deity."

With all due respect, Zzyzx, you DO need an 'external moral code,' because all moral and ethical codes are external. That is, they need to be learned. Infants and small children are innocent, but 'innocent' isn't the same thing as 'moral' or 'ethical.' They must be taught.

We know this because of the very few feral children who have been studied; there is no instinctive moral/ethical code. Humans aren't the only animals on the planet who must be taught their code of behavior, either; pretty much every animal that cares for its young beyond birth must teach behavioral skills.

You might alter your code during your lifetime, once you get to the point where you can intelligently think about it...but without having been taught a code in the first place, you would never have gotten to the point where you COULD think about it.

So now you may have internalized such a code, but....you didn't invent it.

[Furrowed Brow]

...., you DO need an 'external moral code,' because all moral and ethical codes are external. That is, they need to be learned. Infants and small children are innocent, but 'innocent' isn't the same thing as 'moral' or 'ethical.' They must be taught.

We know this because of the very few feral children who have been studied; there is no instinctive moral/ethical code. Humans aren't the only animals on the planet who must be taught their code of behavior, either; pretty much every animal that cares for its young beyond birth must teach behavioral skills.

You might alter your code during your lifetime, once you get to the point where you can intelligently think about it...but without having been taught a code in the first place, you would never have gotten to the point where you COULD think about it.

So now you may have internalized such a code, but....you didn't invent it.

You might be premature here Dianaiad and it may pay to be a little more cautious in your generalisations. Here are some links to articles and papers arguing some aspects of moral behaviour are innate. Whilst there is common sense in what you say it seems that some researchers are arguing things are not so clear cut.

http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/22/3/186.abstract
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... of-babies/
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/12/us/ba ... als-ac360/

[1213]

If there was no heaven/reward promised to those who follow a deity based on faith (aka christianity), would you do it?
In essence: Would you be a christian if there was NO reward (heaven)?
If so, why? (We already know the 'why not' so no need to ask it here.)

I think I would be disciple of Jesus anyway, because the teachings of Jesus are good.

[Zzyzx]

.

So now you may have internalized such a code, but....you didn't invent it.

Let's look at it a different way Dianaiad.

As a child I rejected Catholicism and its associated moral code -- and choose instead to base my decisions and behavior on experience in my environment (including reading widely) and upon reasoning -- deciding what I accepted and what I did not from a multitude of sources (including family, society, the Army, academia, religion and various other isms and philosophies).

Not one of those sources accounts for more than a few items. Many overlapped.

Would it be rational to conclude that I followed an external moral / ethical code? If so, which one? How could anyone claim that I followed one of the available codes if I accepted only a tiny proportion of what it promotes?

Most people, I suspect, do much the same. Even those who follow a Christian moral / ethical code seldom (never?) actually follow it completely, but "pick and choose" what they want to follow and make excuses for not following completely.

I can understand the appeal to many people of simply accepting external codes or guidelines. Doing so avoids the necessity of using judgment to form conclusions -- and avoids taking responsibility for decisions. People often prefer to avoid making decisions and prefer to avoid responsibility for their decisions -- which may be fine for them but doesn't work for me.

[Zzyzx]

.

I think I would be disciple of Jesus anyway, because the teachings of Jesus are good.

Which of the teachings attributed to Jesus are actually his -- and not injected or altered by Paul/Saul and/or the gospel writers (whoever they may have been), or others over the centuries?

Unless one has a dependable / accurate way of determining what Jesus actually said, they are likely to be following the teachings of others. Apparently no one who actually witnessed his teachings and "miracles" personally made a record of them. Decades or generations or centuries later people wrote about what "Jesus said" -- but how do they know that?

[cnorman18]

Very many Jews do not believe in an afterlife of any kind. My wife doesn't. Me, I don't know. Doesn't much matter to me anyway.

As I indicated to the now-absent and unlamented "Artur Axmann" -- I never thought that being obsessed with making sure my own precious little self got into Heaven was a particularly attractive way of approaching the issue of how to behave in this life and how to treat others. A trifle selfish, and more than a trifle childish -- as if one needs a Big Daddy standing over one with a big paddle called Hell and a big bag of candy called Heaven to "motivate" one to behave as one ought anyway.

If there IS a God, I suspect He expects us to live and think like grownups. Heaven is beside the point. But maybe that's just me.