Should I Willingly Become a Vampire?

[Purple Knight]

For the purposes of this question, theists are free to use whichever vampire lore and/or canon they prefer, as long as the vampire retains their mind but cannot somehow be redeemed. In other words, if you think Buffy's Angel is a good guy who is potentially going to Heaven, that one's out.

So here's the scenario: I am offered a chance by a chain letter to be turned into a vampire. It's your run-of-the-mill pyramid scheme, only with quasi-immortality thrown in.

As an atheist who is not open to being converted to Christianity precisely because I'm appalled by the concept of sin transference or a whipping boy, my understanding is that I will not go to Heaven anyway. I would stand at the gates of Hell and tell God to throw me in because I absolutely do not accept someone else's suffering as punishment for my sins.

So, here's the question: Will it even matter if I murder people?

As a vampire, I will live as long as I can avoid dying to some scary fellow with a stake in his hand. If I can't get very, very flesh blood, I will have to kill humans for it, but I don't intend to kill more than I need to get along. I don't intend to be starving and barely able to move, but I don't care for whatever sweet bonus or sick new ability I get for draining 1001 humans in a day, either.

Here's the rub of this question:

As I understand it, as an evil undead, and likely the most evil thing walking the earth, I am not worse off in the needing forgiveness category than someone who sins in small unavoidable ways but refuses to accept Jesus. (If I am wrong, please enlighten me.)

However, it doesn't really matter if I up my game from sinning in small, unavoidable ways, to murdering a few humans occasionally. The horrible mass murderer needs no more forgiveness than the common atheist. Is this true?

And since I will live longer, pure benefit, at minimal cost, right?

[Purple Knight]

What are unavoidable sins? To what is your idea of sin based on?

The concept of unavoidable sins is based on the idea (yours, not mine) that everyone sins. No matter what I had done, you would say I was still a sinner, so logically, some sins are unavoidable.

It seems the OP is stuck on a quantitative understanding of sin. I understand that Rabbinic Judaism often presented sin in quantitative terms, but it knew that sin was not quantified, any more than a disease was quantified. Doctor's don't say, "You have strep throat 76 percent". You either have it, or you don't.

Right. I either have sin or I don't. I have it. This means I am not worse off by becoming a murderous vampire than I am now. I'm exactly as guilty now as I would be if I take the offer, which leads me to believe I ought to.

This is the heart of what I'm getting at. By pronouncing everyone exactly as guilty as everyone else, Christianity gets a huge benefit: Everyone must atone.

The flip side isn't often looked at, which is that I have nothing to lose by doing worse stuff than I'm already doing.

So you (a hypothetical potential vampire) wouldn't accept someone suffering for your sins in order to gain eternal life, but you would accept others being murdered (by you) to gain a longer life?


Interesting...

There is a difference, and the difference is that:

I'm not glorifying vampirism as a moral system.

If you want me to eat dung, just don't ask me to tell you it's chocolate ice cream. Most of us would kill if we had to, to stay alive; I'm just thinking a few steps ahead. That's not the same as accepting a whipping boy for my sins and claiming it's moral. I want there to be a good reason to ball up the chain letter, toss it, go on with my mortal life, and die. I just can't find one in the Christian morality scheme.

According to Christians I am already as immoral as I can possibly be. I am already as sinful as I can possibly be. So why shouldn't I accept the offer? Give me a good reason and I won't.

Unless you are one of the 1%, I think you have a better chance at changing yourself so that the reflection you project onto the Mirror Mirror Phase, will be expected to be better.

So do I get you right when I say that the first phase after death is specifically designed to help people do this?

Do you agree or disagree that very, very few people will ultimately end up in Heaven?

[William]

[Replying to post 10 ]

William: Unless you are one of the 1%, I think you have a better chance at changing yourself so that the reflection you project onto the Mirror Mirror Phase, will be expected to be better.

Purple Knight: So do I get you right when I say that the first phase after death is specifically designed to help people do this?

William: Partly. My focus though, was more on this - the prior phase - to the next phase.
But this phase here and now is designed to incorporate individual choice to change and project a more - convivial image upon the mirror of the next phase...which is why I wrote "I think you have a better chance at changing yourself so that the reflection you project onto the Mirror Mirror Phase, will be expected to be better."

Purple Knight: Do you agree or disagree that very, very few people will ultimately end up in Heaven?

William: That really all depends on how many believe that they will in relation to those others things - conscious and subconscious attitudes - hidden agenda's, et al which make up the total individual. Remember, each individual creates their own next-phase reality, so I couldn't say how many Heavens there are compared with how many Hell's but figure it is besides the point as it is not a competition and many Heavens are still created through judgmentalism and can appear to outside observers as more comfortable types of Hell...but Hell's nonetheless.

[1213]

…
The concept of unavoidable sins is based on the idea (yours, not mine) that everyone sins. No matter what I had done, you would say I was still a sinner, so logically, some sins are unavoidable….

When I have said everyone sins? How is that my idea? Even if everyone would sin, I don’t see any good reason to think it is unavoidable.

[Clownboat]

…
The concept of unavoidable sins is based on the idea (yours, not mine) that everyone sins. No matter what I had done, you would say I was still a sinner, so logically, some sins are unavoidable….

When I have said everyone sins? How is that my idea? Even if everyone would sin, I don’t see any good reason to think it is unavoidable.

Romans 3:23 New King James Version (NKJV)
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

Sinning is therefore unavoidable according to 'your' holy book.

[Purple Knight]

Even if everyone would sin, I don’t see any good reason to think it is unavoidable.

There are eight billion people alive today, and about 100 billion people have ever lived in total.

None of them have avoided sinning.

We've all tried.

I see a pretty monumental reason to think it's unavoidable.

But that's not even the heart of the issue. If I need as much forgiveness as the mass murderer, one wonders why I don't become a mass murderer, since it's not worse than whatever I've already done.

I can't think of a good reason in the Christian moral structure to ball up that chain letter, though I would that there would be one.

[Wootah]

…
The concept of unavoidable sins is based on the idea (yours, not mine) that everyone sins. No matter what I had done, you would say I was still a sinner, so logically, some sins are unavoidable….

When I have said everyone sins? How is that my idea? Even if everyone would sin, I don’t see any good reason to think it is unavoidable.

Seriously? The only human not to sin was Jesus. Surely you agree?

[1213]

…
The concept of unavoidable sins is based on the idea (yours, not mine) that everyone sins. No matter what I had done, you would say I was still a sinner, so logically, some sins are unavoidable….

When I have said everyone sins? How is that my idea? Even if everyone would sin, I don’t see any good reason to think it is unavoidable.

Romans 3:23 New King James Version (NKJV)
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

Sinning is therefore unavoidable according to 'your' holy book.

That doesn’t mean it is unavoidable. I believe it is possible to not sin, if one is a child of God.

He who does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. To this end the Son of God was revealed, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whoever is born of God doesn't commit sin, because his seed remains in him; and he can't sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are revealed, and the children of the devil. Whoever doesn't do righteousness is not of God, neither is he who doesn't love his brother.
1 John 3:7-10

[1213]

…
None of them have avoided sinning.
We've all tried…

Difficult to say, I don’t know them all.

I see a pretty monumental reason to think it's unavoidable.

But that's not even the heart of the issue. If I need as much forgiveness as the mass murderer, one wonders why I don't become a mass murderer, since it's not worse than whatever I've already done.
….

Why do you think it is not worse than what you have done already?

Obviously, if one has broken law in one point, he is lawbreaker and that’s it, but I don’t think it means all things are equally bad. All though, if something is not as bad as mass murder, I don’t think it makes it then ok and not bad or wrong.

But, I think it would be good to understand this:

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Mat. 25:46

To have eternal life, one must be righteous. One can have many things forgiven, but if one is not righteous, it doesn’t really matter. And if ne is righteous, he doesn’t want to do mass murder, or even smaller crimes.

[Purple Knight]

Why do you think it is not worse than what you have done already?

Because:

It seems the OP is stuck on a quantitative understanding of sin. I understand that Rabbinic Judaism often presented sin in quantitative terms, but it knew that sin was not quantified, any more than a disease was quantified. Doctor's don't say, "You have strep throat 76 percent". You either have it, or you don't.

In Rabbinic literature and in the gospels and Paul it is the same. Sin is a disease which impacts the whole person.

...And because the punishment is exactly the same: Say I'm sorry and accept Jesus.

The punishment for mass murdering is saying I'm sorry and accepting Jesus, or I go to Hell.

The punishment for whatever I've already done is saying I'm sorry and accepting Jesus, or I go to Hell.

If mass murdering really is worse than whatever I've already done in Christian theology, I fail to see where in Christian theology I'm supposed to get evidence for that conclusion.

I want to ball up that chain letter and toss it in the garbage. I just don't see any reason to in Christian theology, and no one has given me one. If I'm taking some sort of plunge here and becoming less worthy by becoming an evil undead, then I won't do it. But if I literally have nothing to lose - if nothing changes - I just don't see why I shouldn't accept the offer.

[1213]

Why do you think it is not worse than what you have done already?

Because:

It seems the OP is stuck on a quantitative understanding of sin. I understand that Rabbinic Judaism often presented sin in quantitative terms, but it knew that sin was not quantified, any more than a disease was quantified. Doctor's don't say, "You have strep throat 76 percent". You either have it, or you don't.

In Rabbinic literature and in the gospels and Paul it is the same. Sin is a disease which impacts the whole person.

Ok, thank you, I can agree with that. Person is a sinner, if he has done even on small sin. That doesn’t mean that some things could be worse than others. But, for you, it may be the same, not necessary for others.