GOD DOES NOT IMPLY THERE IS AN AFTERLIFE OR THAT INJUSTICES ARE MADE RIGHT BEYOND THE GRAVE
The Sadducees were the branch of Judaism that believed in God but not in a life
after death or in a resurrection. These doctrines were not in the Torah and they
wanted to revere the Torah alone as scripture.
They held that the concept of an all-good God would not necessarily imply that
there was a life after death.
God is a mystery of a million paradoxes. God is no argument for a life after
death for you don’t really know what he would do. He is necessarily
incomprehensible to our mortal minds. If he is an argument for life after death
then there should be no mystery in religion.
The Sadducees taught that life is a gift. If you get a gift of $5, you have no
right to complain that it wasn't $10. So they concluded that if God gives you a
few years of life and death is the end you cannot complain. So the Sadducee
could argue that when God is good enough to give us a life at all we should be
grateful even if death is the end. He does not owe us anything and would have
the right not to keep us alive beyond death. But that would be true if we did no
truly good works at all or was rewarded only in this life for our goodness. God
could give you a reward before you do the works for he knows you will do X
amount at least. That explains how a person can do great good and then die. It
is because the good has already been rewarded.Some say that belief in God
implies that there is no afterlife for if there were it would prevent us being
selfless for we could anticipate a reward in it. That is not claiming that you
can’t be selfless if you are going to get a reward after death for your good
deeds. Perhaps there is a reward and you don't know. It is claiming that if you
believe in life and rewards after death your good deeds are less selfless or not
selfless at all. We must remember to, that life is a reward by itself. Many of
us would rather live forever in poverty than not live at all. Let us think of
reward as life and as the blessings we get in life for having done good.
When there is a choice between selfless love and gratitude for the reward you
have to choose the former. It is not a sin to be churlish when you have to be
for that is not being churlish but having no alternative. Gratitude that
rejected love would be false gratitude.
Love is sacrifice according to all the religions. Where there is no belief in
the afterlife, it follows that your good deeds will be more altruistic for there
will be no reward expected. To be selfless believing that there is a reward
cannot be as good as being selfless believing that there is no reward if
altruism is good at all. You might not do the good deed for a reward in either
case but it is better for you if there will be a reward or if you believe there
will be. It is harder to do good believing there will be no rewards so it is
more loving. It shows that you want to do good more because it is good and not
for a reward etc. You would be at least slightly less sure of that if a reward
was a possibility. God must desire that we be perfect altruists so there can’t
be a life or reward after death or he does not want us to believe in it.
But what if he rewards in this life? Maybe he would but he cannot for rewards
are spiritually bad for us according to the religious doctrine that love is
sacrifice. Once we hear of rewards, we are never sure if they had a little
influence in us doing good. Then they lessened the goodness for true good cares
only about good not rewards at all.
God acts like he is boss. The fact that God may have power does not give God the
right to tell people what to do. And the fact that God is good still does not
give God the right to boss people for before we can listen to him we have to be
sure he is good meaning that we should know what good is without depending on
his authority. If we can be good without God then he should not be bossing us
for bossing is an evil thing and needs to be necessary to be justified. So God
as Lord and King represents immorality and evil and power – which is what the
clergy want him for. We are his slaves. Any rewards he gives he gives not
because we are sons but they are like the gifts a slave master can give his
slave. Such gifts are an insult for a gift implies you don’t deserve or have
earned what you get. If it is right to have a slave, then it is hard to see how
it could be right or necessary to be kind to the slave. If a person should not
be compensated for their work they should not be compensated for their work.
God has power and his creatures need him totally even just to breathe so they
are always creatures - they are always slaves. If God does not exist then it is
degrading to say he exists for that is telling us we are slaves when it is not
true.
Rewards make God worse not better for they are not what he can think he ought to
give though they are good for us. Perhaps we should believe that there is no
life after death though there might be one? Perhaps God can’t tell us if there
is one. That too would detract from self-sacrifice so he would have to believe
that it is out of the question.
One major argument for an afterlife is that one is needed for God to make up for
injustices that happen in this life. In this life the good suffer while the
horrendously wicked go unpunished and life is a stroll for them. This argument
is an emotional one disguised as good sense. It says more about the kind of
person that accepts it than anything else. The good will not want a reward or
the wrongs done to them made right. And what is the point of having the wicked
suffer when they are not on earth anymore? We need punishment as a tool but only
in this life and it is about protecting the innocent and not correcting a moral
imbalance. Punishment cares about stopping the criminal but not fixing his dark
heart.
Jeremy E Sherman Ph.D: "There is no God to enforce fairness. The universe does
not right wrongs, it just rolls along. This assumption can be handy too. It’s
motivational in that it puts the burden on us to work for fairness. But it’s
demotivational too. If the universe isn’t fair, then to hell with fairness. Grab
whatever you can and don’t worry about consequences. No one is policing this
dog-eat-dog jungle. Just be the biggest dog you can be."
www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ambigamy/201804/is-it-better-believe-the-universe-is-fair-or-unfair
Fairness means that it is not enough to believe there is something fair out
there. There has to be really something fair. In other words, fairness demands
that if you say somebody is fair or a fair God exists then it is unfair to think
there is fairness when there is not. Fairness then is about truth and fact. To
say there is a fair God is a foundational thing which means you are very unfair
if you are wrong. Errors about fairness draw you to deliberate unfairness. When
you are unfair by accident you will be more inclined when you find out to be
unfair on purpose. Fairness matters so much that it does not matter if it is
accidental or deliberate. There is more to right and wrong than good or bad
intentions. Good intentions are not important if it is okay to cause loads of
harm just because your intentions are noble. To argue that intentions alone
matter is really just caring about how people feel about themselves not the
truth and not the principles of justice and love and truth.
If it is true that there is no inconsistency between there being a good God and
his making a universe that goes bad then God or not the universe and life are
not fair and may never be.
I disagree with Sherman's argument that the universe being unfair is
demotivating. If it is demotivating we can still fight that lack of motivation
so even if it works it is not a strong enough argument that we should believe in
God or support such belief. You can be fair because the universe is not fair. It
is all the more reason to be fair. If the universe is not able to do sums that
is not stopping you from doing them.
The idea that there is no God to promote justice means you have to do for others
what a God should be doing for them. Even if there is a God we should be doing
good for others that he is not doing and doing it with an f**k you attitude.
Anger against how things are is a good thing if it drives us to help so much as
one person who would not have been helped or helped so well otherwise. Better to
rage against how things are even if this means insulting God than to be resigned
to it and leaving people to suffer.
Religion centres on God's forgiveness. But it does not do anything. It is
allowing a second chance but it not doing anything to help it to happen. Getting
forgiven and getting reconciled are two different subjects. Forgiveness is like
an abstract decree. God has supposedly attached things to the decree such as
promising to help you and your life be better in the future but even if he
didn't the forgiveness would be not lessened. What is attached to the decree
does not mean the decree does anything but that it does not. Forgiveness is a
core teaching and shows us how useless the doctrine of God is. It is as important
to daily life as algebra.
People feel they have to forgive God. Sometimes they just do it automatically
without even realising. The person who thinks they accept what God has allowed
to happen to their baby and the viruses he has made that torment her in fact are
forgiving not accepting. There is something obscene about forgiving God for what
he allegedly does to children so clearly it is the case that God is a hindrance
to real fairness not a support.
If we are here to sacrifice ourselves and to suffer why should God make up for
our unjust suffering? It does not make sense. If morality is painful for us is
God to compensate us for that? Do you compensate a child when you have to put
stinging ointment on his wound? We would be expected to love our enemies
altruistically even when they are tormenting us to death. Morality is tough
business. Even if we can’t do good for the enemy having a good will towards them
is being self-sacrificing and that good will demands testing. If sacrifice is so
good that no matter how terrible it is we must do it then there is no need for
rewards. Indeed rewards would defeat the purpose and take away a chance to
sacrifice.
You can’t really make up for injustices for you cannot make them not to have
happened. Even God cannot undo the past. Accepting that is better than getting
rewards or told that the past was not so bad. God cannot really right wrongs for
even he has to accept that the past is the past and try to make a better future.
That is not righting wrongs but preventing things from getting worse. A gift
given to a person who had a terrible past is just a gift and even if intended to
be amends fails to be. A murder victim who goes to heaven to live forever is
still a murder victim. Their existence is not as good as it should have been
when you take account of the whole picture. The evil done to them still happened
and that is a black mark - forever.
It is thought that those in Heaven are happy for they forget suffering and
forget that there are loved ones suffering in Hell. Christian happiness in this
life involves the same process. Rewards and attempts to right wrongs are
pointless when we forget them or if God makes us forget them. To say that God
will put the balance right is to make it as good an idea to become the target of
as much abuse as possible as to be perfectly happy. It destroys morality. If the
evils in life are made up for by God then the evils have more or less to be
forgotten.
If the afterlife exists and you are as sure of it as you are that a person that
is not stabbed through the heart will live on, it is impossible to condemn
murder for it is only killing a body but not the person. The person can still
develop and learn if she needs to. And the distress of the relatives would be
down to ignorance for why mourn if the person is alive? God condemns murder so
death must be the end. It must be the final end for why condemn putting a person
out of existence for a while if they can come back? That is just like making
somebody fall asleep. Belief in the afterlife is only harmless if you keep it
just as a weak belief and not as a certainty. Christianity wants you to treat
faith as knowledge and that is sinister.
The doctrine of God implies that there is no life beyond the grave.
People are trained to take comfort in the idea of God who will keep them alive
after death but this is a false hope for even if God existed why think that he
would do that? There is no reason to think we can live on. However it is still
possible that we survive death. We have no reason however to think that we do
and to really care for our lives in this world we have to abandon the concept.
BOOKS CONSULTED
AFTER DEATH – WHAT? Fred Pearce, Christadelphian Publishing Office, Birmingham
ETERNAL LIFE, Hans Kung, Collins, London, 1984
GOD AND THE NEW PHYSICS, Paul Davies, Penguin Books, London, 1990
HANDBOOK OF CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Monarch,
East Sussex, 1995
JEHOVAH OF THE WATCHTOWER, Walter Martin and Norman Klann, Bethany House
Publishers, Minnesota, 1974
IS THERE LIFE AFTER DEATH? Paul Kroll, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena,
California, 1988
MIND OUT OF TIME, Ian Wilson, Gollanez, London, 1981
LIFE AFTER DEATH THE WONDERFUL FACTS, Alan Hayward, Christadelphian, ALS,
Birmingham
REASONS FOR HOPE, Ed Jeffrey A Mirus, Christendom College Press, Virginia, 1982
TEACH YOURSELF PHILOSOPHY OF MIND, Mel Thompson, Teach Yourself Books, London,
2003
THE AFTER DEATH EXPERIENCE, Ian Wilson, Corgi, London, 1987
THE DEVIL HIDES OUT, David Marshall, Autumn House, Grantham, 1991
THE LIFE OF ALL LIVING, Fulton J Sheen, Image Books, New York, 1979
THE INCREDIBLE CREED OF JEHOVAH WITNESSES, Frs Rumble & Carty, TAN, Illinois,
1977
WHATEVER HAPPENED TO HEAVEN? Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Publishers, Oregon, 1988
The Web
www.csicop.org/sb/9803/reincarnation.html
Case of Reincarnation Re-examined by Joe Nickell. This refutes the reincarnation
claims of Jenny Cockell.
BIBLE QUOTATIONS FROM:
The Amplified Bible