Would Christianity still exist if apostasy wasn't unforgivable?

[Magna]

Apostasy: the abandonment or renunciation of a religious or political belief.

A common interpretation of Jesus' saying that the sin against the Holy Spirit is considered unforgivable by God is that Jesus was referring to apostasy. If that interpretation is true and that's really what Jesus meant and that apostasy is in fact THE worst sin a person can commit (ie damning them to hell for eternity), would Christianity still exist today if apostasy was NOT considered to be an unforgivable sin?

Christian A to Christian B: "Did you hear about Colin? He left the church and doesn't believe any longer."
Christian B: "Huh. Oh well, to each their own, just as it says in the Bible."
Christian A: "Exactly. So how was your weekend?"

It seems to me if the totalitarian requirement of belief, faith, etc wasn't a requirement and faith/belief was optional according to God's word, then it's possible that Christianity may not exist today or if it did it would likely be a fraction in numbers as it is today.

 

[Hazel_1914]

I've always heard that the sins that were unforgivable were presumption (thinking you don't need forgiving) and despair (where you don't think you can be forgiven at all), because the folks afflicted with those will likely never seek the mercy of God.
Apostasy is forgivable. I've fought long and hard to even stay a Catholic, and when I go to confession there's never any qualifications on what kind of sins I've committed. Sometimes I've craved apostasy just like I have been sometimes nostalgic about times when I was suicidal--either way, I'd like an easy way out.

But there's no easy way out.
There is, however, mercy of God and on that I rely.

 

[Suzanne]

To add to another slant on that word. When someone does intensive study; starts going to meetings and acting on what they have learned and at the point of baptism, answer two very important questions and if they say a resounding YES and then, go forth with baptism and after a while, happily serving their God. But, something upsets that and because of not liking on how it is handled etc, opens their figarative heart to satanic attacks and then gets their ears "tickled" by false reasonings and then, joins in that false reasoning, in order to carry others away.

Apostasy is acting just the same as satan acts and thus, is unforgivable and so should be.

However, in truth, most faiths, do not go through INTENSIVE study of the bible; start acting on what they are learning. In other words: not having their hearts moved; just their heads with knowledge. So, in that regard, apostasy does not actually exist.

If one is being told: all you have to do is accept the lord and no matter the evil things you do now, won't matter, because your sins are forgiven. In fact, the one who is teaching such lies, will be the one held accountable.

 

[Fino]

I don't understand. If a person were to leave the church, why would they believe in sin?

 

[Hazel_1914]

Apostasy is acting just the same as satan acts and thus, is unforgivable and so should be.

If the greatest Luciferian trait would be either pride or disobedience--these are at the heart of literally every decision to turn away from God--so if I carried your argument to its logical conclusion that would imply that every single sin is unforgivable (and should be.)
Protestant Heaven doesn't sound like a very populous place.

 

[Knower of nothing]

It seems highly likely it'd wane and become smaller but more extreme sects. The rate at which faith spreads on its own merits is far smaller than the rate at which people leave it through their own decision. It is the cultural and familial influence that keeps it alive. Where and to whom you're born decides what you end up believing in far, far more often than a natural discovery and alignment to a faith. This personal connection is twisted by the need for acceptance in the close community such as parents, or later, friends. When you have a vested interest in the opinions of those around you, you can easily convince yourself to stick with a faith you'd otherwise abandon. This is a very important tool of social survival.
There are some resources available to help people with avoiding the abuse that can arise from attempting to leave a faith or cult to which they are attached by community.

 

[Magna]

I don't understand. If a person were to leave the church, why would they believe in sin?

I would assume most people would not continue to believe in sin or at least in the same way as their former religion taught.

As an example, in an earthly true totalitarian state where choosing to leave results in severe punishment or death, would that same state have the same amount of citizens if choosing to leave did not result in any punishment or death and instead living there was entirely and freely optional?

There is a parallel here and my point of contemplation. Here are just a few examples interpreting Jesus' saying about the unforgivable sin to be aspostasy:

The Unpardonable Sin - The Gospel Coalition
The Unpardonable Sin Explained | The Christian Advocate
Will you go to hell if you commit a unforgivable sin?

 

[Tom]

A common interpretation of Jesus' saying that the sin against the Holy Spirit is considered unforgivable by God is that Jesus was referring to apostasy.

I don't know if it is that common. I never heard that before.

One translation of the verses I believe in question

Scribes: “He is possessed by Beelzebul,” they say. “By the prince of demons he casts out the demons” (Mark 3:22).

Jesus: “Truly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the children of man, and whatever blasphemies they utter, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin” — for they were saying, ‘He has an unclean spirit.’” (Mark 3:28–30)

Now I don't know what it means exactly but I wouldn't go around saying things like that about God.

 

[Fino]

If you believe in Jesus, your sins are forgiven. Are you saying this involves coercion?

 

[Streetwise]

I don't understand. If a person were to leave the church, why would they believe in sin?

sin has different names in different religions in dharm(anglicised hinduism)its karma and sin is coming back as!!!, in other religions there are other words, even in atheism there are consequences for actions, sin is an anglicised term judaism has a slightly different view

 

[Judge]

I see the whole issue of apostasy let alone religious dogma in general as inherently mortal concepts. Reflecting the manifestations of man- not of God. I choose to believe that we are eternal souls and always have been since our inception. Which makes any notion of threats and consequences for our actions while reincarnating on this plane of existence more or less pointless.

That while we choose if and when to reincarnate to this secondary mortal plane of existence, when we die we simply return to our primary plane of existence. And that if something happens to prevent this transition from being successful, it's likely to be of our own making rather than as a result of our actions as a temporary and mortal soul. That threats and consequences themselves are mortal in nature, and do not reflect the existence of an immortal soul.

Rather than dwell on a struggle of good and evil as catalysts for determining whether we make it back to our primary plane of existence, that a concept of Yin and Yang may be much closer to the mark. An understanding of how opposing forces interact with one another which truly makes for the "fabric of our mortal lives". That few if any souls are exclusively good- or evil. Making for experiences that we will take back to keep as cherished and reviled memories of a mortal existence. Experiences that we cannot truly have on our primary plane of existence.

In essence, if I had to rank religions in terms of how close to metaphysical reality they may be, I'd have to rank Christianity closer to the bottom than the top. Advocating an elaborate dogma of risk and reward for eternal beings doesn't seem logical. But then I suppose that's at the crux of such argument. That I do not believe we earn our immortality. That it is our natural- and perpetual state.

 

[Yeshuasdaughter]

Apostasy is not unforgivable! People are always losing faith and coming back. It's the frailty of the human condition. It's our struggle with God. I don't know how many times I've lost faith and then repented. Maybe even daily sometimes. People going through painful experiences often lose faith. But it's those times also that teach you that Jesus is the true comforter and savior of humanity. That, like the story of the footprints on the sand, He isn't leaving you alone, he's been carrying you all this time (even if you were tantrumming like a 2 year old the whole time).

Christianity is about God reaching out to mankind, and each of us making a decision whether or not to take His hand. Not the other way around. And The Bible clearly says that nothing can separate us from the love of God.

 

[Magna]

I see the whole issue of apostasy let alone religious dogma in general as inherently mortal concepts. Reflecting the manifestations of man- not of God. I choose to believe that we are eternal souls and always have been since our inception. Which makes any notion of threats and consequences for our actions while reincarnating on this plane of existence more or less pointless.

That while we choose if and when to reincarnate to this secondary mortal plane of existence, when we die we simply return to our primary plane of existence. And that if something happens to prevent this transition from being successful, it's likely to be of our own making rather than as a result of our actions as a temporary and mortal soul. That threats and consequences themselves are mortal in nature, and do not reflect the existence of an immortal soul.

Rather than dwell on a struggle of good and evil as catalysts for determining whether we make it back to our primary plane of existence, that a concept of Yin and Yang may be much closer to the mark. An understanding of how opposing forces interact with one another which truly makes for the "fabric of our mortal lives". That few if any souls are exclusively good- or evil. Making for experiences that we will take back to keep as cherished and reviled memories of a mortal existence. Experiences that we cannot truly have on our primary plane of existence.

In essence, if I had to rank religions in terms of how close to metaphysical reality they may be, I'd have to rank Christianity closer to the bottom than the top. Advocating an elaborate dogma of risk and reward for eternal beings doesn't seem logical. But then I suppose that's at the crux of such argument. That I'd not believe we earn our immortality. That it is our natural- and perpetual state.

Your comments are interesting. You bring up a good point about good and evil. Another aspect that illustrates apostasy is that Christianity is in many ways, black and white/binary. Good and evil. One or the other. Evil exists because good exists, as an antitheses to it.

I've wondered if Judeo-Christian cultures had been built instead on a secular foundation if there would actually be less evil in the world than there is. Certainly not all, but a lot of "evil" is a push back from, rebellion from, attack against "good" for the sake of wanting to be "bad". Take away the binary aspect and the desire for push back, rebellion from or attack against isn't there.

An example of what I mean in more concrete terms is the "drug war". The Mexican drug cartels are arguably more powerful now than the Mexican government. Physical dangers aside, drugs are "bad" (ie immoral, "evil") according to many and according to most laws. The drug trade, drug use and the evil caused by it is truly staggering. If/when drug us is viewed as something that's neither "good" nor "bad", then it looses some of its allure (ie desire to do something forbidden/"bad").

 

[Judge]

I've wondered if Judeo-Christian cultures had been built instead on a secular foundation if there would actually be less evil in the world than there is. Certainly not all, but a lot of "evil" is a push back from, rebellion from, attack against "good" for the sake of wanting to be "bad". Take away the binary aspect and the desire for push back, rebellion from or attack against isn't there.

Good question.

Though from my own perspective I wouldn't speculate such a thing on a religious premise, but rather from a philosophical one.

Falling back on the works of Thomas Hobbes, whose beliefs centered around the very nature of man, but in a more pessimistic sense than from the philosophical perspective of John Locke, whose outlook was far more optimistic, emphasizing the "inalienable rights" of man.

Or to put it simply, that given our nature more often than not we seem to be a self-destructive species. The antithesis of who- and what we are on "the other side". - By design.

 

[Tom]

I do have to add that if it was up to me, something else would be unforgivable.

 

[Fino]

I do have to add that if it was up to me, something else would be unforgivable.

View attachment 86591

Finally. a truly just God.