Nope. Lots of stuff commonly believed by Christians isn’t from the Bible. (Though sometimes they’ll do a lot of mental gymnastics to assert that what they believe is from “the only reasonable interpretation” of the Bible.)
Just a few other things commonly believed by Christians not (or at least only dubiously) from the Bible:
- The seven deadly sins
- The nine circles of hell
- The seven levels of heaven
- Transubstantiation
- The trinity
my favourite misbelief is that people are already in heaven, and that hell is a ‘place’.
What the bible claims will happen: second coming of Jesus happens; believers are resurrected, believers are raptured, and then war breaks out. Jesus fucks off with the angels and everyone left on Earth is “in hell” (permanently separated from God).
Everything about hell being a demonic underworld is from Dante’s Divine Comedy.
Oh so we are all already in hell. Got it.
If you’re an atheist: we’re in hell, literally.
If you’re a Christian: we’re where hell will be, when Jesus comes back with cigarettes and half a bottle of bourbon.
I already suspected as much.
Fire and Brimstone Hell is also commonly believed, but not actually in the bible, if I recall right.
Most of the punishment around Hell in the Bible is less about Hell itself, and more about not being able to enter Heaven and join God, and all of that, as oppose to Hell itself being punishment.
Transubstantiation is kind of in the Bible. Matthew 26:26-28
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”
Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the[a] covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
The discussion of transubstantiation is just how literal “my body/blood” is.
Transubstantiation is the doctrine that it ceases being bread and wine. Which St Paul kind of debunks in his first letter to the Corinthians at Chapter 11, where he refers to it as bread.
“For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”
What you’re talking about is consubstantiation, which is where the body and blood physically coexist in the bread and wine, which can be derived from the Bible.
Is it possible Paul is referring to the accidents, not the substance?
There’s a surprising amount of modern Christian lore that actually comes from The Divine Comedy, the granddaddy of all ascended fanfic.
Don’t forget Paradise Lost, also a great hit
I love transubstantiation. It’s basically mandatory to believe it to be a catholic. A lot don’t understand it though. But if you find one that does, ask them to explain why it’s not cannibalism.
Well, you see, Jesus is all god, but also all man. And we literally eat his flesh.
But it isn’t cannibalism because … look it just isn’t, OK?
What a weird fucking question!Try this - We’re humans, but Jesus is an aasimar. Depending on what rule set he’s on, he’s probably something like a divine soul sorcerer, too.
Because shut up, that’s why.
That humans eventually become angels.
Though, there was one human who did, in an apocryphal book. And then was elevated yet again to being a second diety; there were apparently strains of Christianity which were DUOtheistic! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enoch
Want a rabbit hole of apocryphal knowledge, start digging into gnosticism. It’s like more internally consistent Christianity. Also depending on which flavor and particular interpretation, you could arrive at such truths as: Satan runs the church. God(old testament) is an asshole and a fool. Jesus (specifically the divine aspect Christ) is on a rescue mission to save God’s mom, Sophia, from the prison world that is earth, that God made specifically to trap her. Judas is a tragic hero who has to kill his friend, Jesus, so that Christ can escape the prison world.
It’s wild, it’s a more interesting story than Christianity, and I can ABSOLUTELY see why most of these books were branded heresy.
Matthew 20:30
“At resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.”
I think that’s where the sentiment comes from. It’s explicit in Mormonism (I think). In mainstream Christianity the saved don’t become angels, they become like angels.
… they become like angels.
In the sense that they no longer have sexual or romantic urges, would be my reading of that passage. Angels have no belly buttons!
Yes that’s the context - Jesus saying no one will be married in heaven. Either angels are asexual or they’re all male. The latter is a little more likely given all angels in the bible are presented as male. Which if that’s the case has weird implications for what female Christians become when they’re resurrected. Some weird male equivalent? So now we’re “all like the angels”?
All male. So no marriage, only sex.
Ha that was my thought too. Joking aside, it’s actually one of the weirder anti-gay arguments from the new testament, that the reason Jesus is saying “obviously” there’s no marriage in heaven is that everyone is like the angels, who are all male. So Jesus was appealing to the “absurdity” of male-male marriage.
Not the strongest argument but definitely one of the weirder ones I’ve heard…
Wow, haven’t heard that one yet, yeah, that’s pretty weird. What would even angels be male for? Oh, I’m thinking too much, this is not meant to be logical, right? Thanks for showing me another bizzare corner of religious thoughts.
Women don’t go to heaven. What a silly question
This is much more of a list of stuff commonly believed by Catholics, not so much by Christianity as a whole.
The seven heavens is an extension of the seven named heavens of Judaism. Islam also has seven named heavens.
There is a reference to a third heaven in the Bible and a reference of ten heavens in a book that was not included by the Council of Nicaea.
Purgatory aswell
https://www.britannica.com/topic/purgatory-Roman-Catholicism
Presumably Limbo too, then
Limbo for unbaptized infants is a theological opinion that has fallen out of popularity in favour of other, more merciful theories.
The Trinity is clearly taught in the Bible. Sure, not in explicit Athanasius creed form, but Jesus even said “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19).
Notice how “Name” is singular, implying the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is one thing, or at least equal. Jesus is referred to as God, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are also. And it’s made clear that there is one God. The Athanasius Creed is just the Trinity clearly defined in a single text. Clarifying interpretation (like the Nicene Creed).
Seven deadly sins are based off of various sins listed in the Bible, but most of it has kind of been overhyped and overemphasized. It’s useful for giving a rough idea of what sin is, but it’s been meddled with over time.
Like watching people argue fanfic canon in here. 😅
That’s exactly it, and I’m surprised more people don’t see it that way. For such fiction, there will almost always be a bigger nerd that eclipses your own knowledge on any particular aspect of canon, and yet someone pays half-attention to a child’s curriculum or reads a Dawkins or Hitchens book and it’s treated as an insult to their intelligence to politely inform them of something they may have missed.
At least fanfic arguments tend to lean more civil, and are generally seen as an expression of zeal between peers who all enjoy the same thing, albeit with differing opinions on the details.
Minimize it all you like, but no one ever started a bloody war over “Encounter at Hotpoint”. Yes, all human culture is alike in some ways. Very clever observation. I think you will find that most of the people engaged in this discussion are not even Christian. It’s still significant and meaningful, if not to us personally, to the world we exist in.
This is one of the more interesting, informative and respectful discussions I have seen in a few days. Why shit on it. The age of edgy Internet atheism has passed. It’s okay just to BE an atheist now. No one is coming for you. You can stop fighting.
You mean Encounter at Farpoint? Or is that just some reference I’m missing. I’m not gonna rule out starting a war over Encounter at Farpoint at some point in the furture though, if for no other reason than the sheer irony.
So is “God helps those who help themselves”
The sentiment is there though…
2 Thessalonians 3:10 “While we were with you, this we commanded you: If someone won’t work, then neither shall they eat”
I always liked Stephen King’s version better. Pray for rain all you want, but dig a well while you wait.
So, Peter at the gates comes from a more or less literal interpretation from the passage where Jesus was making Peter the first pope. “To you I hand the keys to the kingdom of heaven….”
What Jesus was saying is that Peter got to decide who was in the Blood Ritual Cannibal Club,
Keep in mind, the books were written well after Jesus died, and the scriptures weren’t canonized until 300 years later; at the council of Nicaea- which was called specifically to “unify” the church. A lot of the choices about what was canon or not was specifically made to protect the bulk of the bishop’s authority (by drawing a straight lineage of succession from Peter.)
Ah. The Holy Bible. Literal word of God (Edited and abridged by man.)
Because even their perfect God can’t write a perfect book.
Honestly, the whole thing becomes a LOT more intriguing when you start adding back in the non-canon books. And I can totally see why the church deemed them heretical in a lot of cases, they pretty well fly in the face of a powerful centralized church, and if you’re in power, seeking to maintain it, it only makes sense to destroy them.
Jesus was a rebel. He hated the state. Assuming he was a real person, he was a bastion of hope against an authoritative rule.
Considering literacy rates among the lower classes ~2000 years ago, it’s not really surprising there was a lot of oral tradition until he was co-opted to control the people. And oral traditions usually lead to exaggerated elements, such as miracles.
Think about what we’d be saying about George Washington or any of the other founding fathers, if reading and writing weren’t commonplace, and most of what we knew of him was oral tradition. Hell, even despite the writings, we still have a heavily romanticized view of them.
Like what?
I heard that in the bible their are other gods.
Back in the day when you were in Norway you worship the Norse gods. If that guy got on a boat and went to Greece he would worship the gods there, not the ones from home.
“You shall have no other gods before me”
What does that mean? Gods don’t exist or they do but Yahweh is the most important? The second seems more likely to me.
Even the big guy needs middle-management sometimes.
St Peter doesn’t judge you! He’s always depicted with a book that already contains the judgements. He has no real authority, he’s just the gatekeeper.
I wonder if enough technicians go to heaven could the pearly gates can be automated so St Peter can finally retire.
Imagine being sent to hell over a database error
Going to name my kid [NULL] so he has a fighting chance.
Little Bobby Tables is gonna break the pearly gates
They use an id system
Imagine being sent to hell to be a database administrator. MySQL and Access, obviously
THE FACTORY MUST GROW
St Peter gets laid off, and unionises the other saints to go on strike.
Lucifer was cast out of hell for forming the first union.
It comes from Matthew 16
15 “But what about you?” Jesus asked. “Who do you say I am?”
16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
[end quote]
So, yes, authority given to St Peter to “bind and loose” in heaven and on earth. How that’s supposed to work alongside it being Jesus separating the sheep from the goats is anyone’s guess.
The reason this takes place at the “pearly gates” is because the new Jerusalem descending from heaven in Revelation is described as having giant pearls for gates.
He just checks the no fly list.
I’ve never heard about Peter judging or the gates etc. in all my religious upbringing and didn’t realize this was an actual belief.
I just knew this pearly gates thing as a movie cliché, from Tom and Jerry to modern shows copying that idea.
Even “the bible” isn’t “the bible”.
“Protestant Bibles have only 39 books in the Old Testament, however, while Catholic Bibles have 46.” source
Neither of these mention St Peter at the pearly gates, though. The biggest addition the Apocrypha makes is a record of someone praying for the dead. Protestants generally still do recognise the Apocrypha, but just as historical records and not authoritative, hence not a part of the Bible.
In Matthew 16 Jesus gives Peter the “keys to the kingdom” and in Revelation the new Jerusalem has pearls for gates. That’s where it comes from.
The pearly gates are biblical. I think the keys are taken a bit literally. But that’s interesting to think about, actually
Every denomination has a different Bible, with different books they consider Canon. For instance, the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo church has a staggering 81 books. They consider the book of Enoch canon, which almost every other denomination considers apocryphal. Interestingly, the book of Enoch corroborates a lot of information from other apocryphal texts, such as the origin of nephilim.
lol. The OG Bible, you mean The Torah, Jesus isn’t even in that one.
Although some would argue there’s a lot of foreshadowing.
Most Christian think of it like a cartoon. At least from what I can tell. Nobody actually seems to believe Peter is at the gates, but it is sometimes fun/useful to pretend that is what happens instead of trying to figure out what the judgement day really means (we often think of that like a court room with God as the judge and jury, but the scripture is not clear and so it isn’t really any more correct that Peter at the gates)
Can’t speak for Catholics but most reformed protestants (evangelicals) will be being taught their sins are already washed away and any judgement for the ‘saved’ after death is only about their quality of walk with god and quality of reward in heaven, it’s not a heaven/hell judgment. That’s only for the ‘unsaved’.
Fascinating. Classism, in heaven. Work yourself to death so that you can enjoy a better neighbourhood of heaven than your neighbour.
Mormons have three tiers of heaven. According to some, even Hitler would make it into the lowest tier. I’m not sure what you’d have to do to actually go to hell, which is supposedly just lonely infinite darkness away from the presence of God.
Ex-mormon, the canon is that to go to “outer darkness” you need to have perfect faith in god, like you know he exists as you know your dog exists, and still deny him. So practically the only people on earth eligible to go there are those who’ve actually seen him or have been sufficiently convinced by one of his angels or miracles, or otherwise witnessed some heavenly shit like that that sheds all doubt, which is why Hitler probably didn’t go there. Also now that I’m remembering this, the “outer darkness” isn’t really a place, you just get shunned by god (light being a metaphor for god and truth)
I’m not sure what you’d have to do to actually go to hell,
Be mormon, then say mormonism is false. It’s their only unforgivable sin.
hell, which is supposedly just lonely infinite darkness away from the presence of God
So, “days ending in a Y”
I mean, sure, you could argue we’re already there.
“But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.”
However it’s obtained it’s something very hard for the well resourced and powerful to do. Jesus anticipated it’s the “very least” in this life who have the capacity to be recognised as “first” in the Kingdom.
Aren’t you staying dead for millenia until the second comming and the judgement day ? To my understanding the reason why Christian burry their dead rather than burning them is that they need to resurrect on jugement day
Many Christians cremate.
There was a time, not that long ago, when cremation was not an option for Catholics. At some point, the church changed its mind. Maybe in the seventies or eighties?
That’s very interesting. I’ve never heard about that. I’ll take a dig sometime soon. An example of dogma changing to suit practical needs. Would be good to know the conditions that are necessary for that to happen.
Doctrine is revealed slowly and incrementally like the unfolding of flower petals, but discipline can change as the need arises. Cremation was avoided originally because it was associated with disbelief in the resurrection.
this is my favorite explanation, by Leslie mann, of the role of St. Peter:
No, not at all. God does the judging.
Matthew 19:28
Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
[end quote]
Whether “12 tribes of Israel” here is figurative of the global church or not, there still definitely some role in judgement delegated out to the apostles.
Interesting
deleted by creator
…the St. Peter part is made up…
Which stands in stark lack of contrast with the rest of the bible.
