If Josef Stalin had "truly repented & accepted Christ" on his death bed...

according to Christian teaching, he'd get let in Heaven, right? No harm, no foul, no punishment?

 

I should think so. Is that supposed to be a problem?

 

Perhaps for his victims who went to the gulags....or who suffered under the Holodomor.

But then again, "justice" is very ephemeral according to the Bible....depends on which Testament or which story you're reading.

 

According to christianity yes, he would get to heaven. That's one of the reasons I'm not a believing christian. Such a morality is disgusting.

 

The vast majority weren't anything to rave about themselves, which of course is why Stalin was able to wield such power in the first place*; but those victims who had truly repented of their own sins would not have begrudged Stalin the same unmerited grace of which they themselves were beneficiaries.

Beyond that, as C.S. Lewis observed, in this world things always fall short of justice, whereas God's good pleasure is to transcend it; so those who insist on others getting their "just desserts" have no room to complain when they find themselves scarfing up the same loathsome swill.

* See The Gulag Archipelago for particulars.

 

Dunno what you think morality has to do with it, since that is no constraint as far as God is concerned, as He doesn't need morality any more than oysters need to be constrained by laws against driving while intoxicated.

 

I think it's immoral that a horrible person like Stalin could ever be forgiven. It's the worst insult to all his victims that none of their suffering matters, and that Stalin would be absolved from all responsibility, just as long as he accepts a third party as the son of god. It's sick morality in my view, and did I believe gods existed in the first place it would only reinforce my view that god must be a very evil god.

 

How so, since if they forgive him their suffering won't matter to them?

Read the OP again and you'll see you've left something out.

So essentially, you couldn't accept a God who isn't exactly as judgmental as you are. I've got that about right, haven't I?

 

To me, the morality issues of Christianity are just icing on the Reasons For Disbelief Cake. The absurdity of the entire proposition, its lack of supporting evidence and sundry information revealed through history, archaeology and anthropology WRT the origins of and earlier inspirations for Christianity's mythologies all give me plenty of reason to reject it. The wickedness of Yahweh and his followers is of secondary importance to me; I would reject Christianity even if Yahweh had been the bastion of love and virtue according to scribblings that Christians like to pretend that he is.

 

But the victims are not forgiving him. Jesus steps in and forgives stalin on behalf of everyone, despite not having any right to do so. Just like I can't forgive you for the crimes against a third person.

What would that be?

huh? If i believed in gods I'd be forced to accept him no matter what, else i'd be denying my own reality. I'd just consider him a very evil god. I don't really understand your question tbh. But you're right in that god has nothing to do with morality.

 

Then he and they are cut from the same cloth, since it was Stalin's own refusal to forgive those who tormented him as a child that propelled him on his way to becoming a mass murderer.

Where do you get that idea?

And you make this pronouncment by what authority, exactly?

Actually you could, if you were vested with such authority by a higher power, as the President of the US is to grant pardons. Similiarly, Christ is vested with such authority by the Supreme Judge.

He would have to truly repent.

Read it again if you have to. Have I got it right or not?

That has nothing to so with it, since "gods" can be objectified whereas God cannot.

Evidently you have no understaning of what it means to believe in God.

I'd say that's because your intellect has rushed to the rescue to protect your consciousness from an unpleasant reality.

I never said anything of the kind, obviously.

 

Now....after all the Christian apologia on how even a monster like Stalin could be let into Heaven....


read some OLD Testament and its ideas on "justice"....see if they match up?

 

No need, obviously, since a pardon relieves the criminal of the burden imposed by justice.

 

So a pre-Jesus Stalin would go to Hell....but a post-Jesus Stalin can get a Free Get Out Of Jail Card?

 

There's no such thing as a pre-Jesus anybody, hth.

 

??? How would a person have "accepted Christ"....BEFORE Jesus was born?!?!?

 

"Before Abraham was, I am."

~ guess Who

 

Okay, so a person born BEFORE Jesus was born, could act like Stalin, and go to Heaven by....becoming a Jew?!?!?

Are you actually sure of the topic here???

 

I never implied any such thing, obviously.

Plenty. You're just predictably clueless about the religion you have so much contempt for.

 

You said there were no "Pre-Jesus" people.....what the hell does that mean?

I asked what could happen to the "soul" of a Josef Stalin-like person BEFORE the arrival of Jesus....versus what could happen to him AFTER the arrival of Jesus.

After Jesus.... on his death-bed, he could repent and go to Heaven.
Before Jesus....what?

 

It means there are no people who existed before He existed. What else WOULD it mean?

Same thing. You're welcome.

 

Stalin in heaven? Well with god all things are possible...he must've been very sincere in his repentance to merit such a reward

 

Indeed. But fun fact: the conflict between my own morality and christianity's was what made me start to question it as a child.

You're equating stalin to his victims?..

Because only the victims themselves can forgive Stalin. Jesus can't just walk in there and claim to be able to speak on their behalf. Christianity really spits in the face of a victims of opression when they say stuff like that.

What authority does Jesus have to forgive on other's behalf?

Now we're talking about different things. I'm not talking legality, I'm talking morals. Neither the president, nor Jesus, has the authority to forgive on others' behalf. Besides, I do not believe in god so I rather doubt Jesus' authority to begin with.

Truly repent to his victims, not jesus.

Judgemental? I'm just upholding common morality here. And no, it's not about accepting god, I do not believe he exists to begin with.

What? Of course he can.

Accept as in acknowledging the existance of, which I don't. But if I actually believed in gods, how could I ever be so stupid as to not 'accept' them? That'd just be knowingly stupid.

Oh, really? What unpleasant reality?

You said he is not constrained by nor need morality. If he's not bound by morality, then god is not moral.

 

You will find 99% of Christians refuse to answer the question, and resort to the No True Scottsman Fallacy.

 

If you insist on dumbing it down to that, you're not interested in communication.

Actually they have no more authority to forgive than they have to condemn; or, if you prefer, their authority to do either has the same source as Stalin's.

Happily, He doesn't need their approval.

More accurately, it lightly esteems the fraudulent sense of superiority the victim revels in by condemning the oppressor.

Already answered that. Don't ask me again.

According to the US Constitution you're wrong on the first count, and according to the Gospels you're wrong on the second.

Impossible. You can do both or neither, but not just one.

Common to whom, other than judgmental egomaniacs?

Then it's pretty stupid to blather away about what authority His Son doesn't have.

So He can be objectified even though He doesn't exist. Who knew omnipotence had such mind-blowing implications?

That's not the word I underlined, so it's not the word you should be focusing on.

That your conception of morality is morally bankrupt.

Which of course is not a problem in the least, seeing He is love, and seeing morality only manifests itself in the presence of temptation, to which God has never been subjected or susceptible.