Death bed conversion

lugha

I was hemming and hawing about whether to take this here or to A & A but in the end tails is tails …

I read / heard Richard Dawkins once say that he would consider video recording his final moments alive to refute any subsequent suggestions that he might make a death bed conversion. Presumably he feels that believers would seize on this as evidence that his convictions in relation to atheism were less that total.

I find this curious as I would think that such a conversion if anything would strengthen the argument for atheism. I.e. the fact that someone who persuaded himself and many others of the reality (as he would see it) of atheism when his views are informed by rational reasoning would reject these same reasoned arguments at a time of distress and uncertainty surely indicates that belief in a higher power is a viewpoint we arrive at because of an anguished desire for it to be true and not because we can make any kind of persuasive argument that it might be?

In short, death bed conversions. Prompted by fear or a truth learnt late?
What do we think?

robindch

lugha wrote: »

he would consider video recording his final moments alive to refute any subsequent suggestions that he might make a death bed conversion.

The belief that Darwin converted to christianity on his deathbed is a common urban legend amongst creationists. Perhaps suppose he's just trying to stop them doing the same thing to him after his death?

lugha wrote: »

I find this curious as I would think that such a conversion if anything would strengthen the argument for atheism.

I don't quite see how it could strengthen the "argument" for atheism. Rather, I believe that deathbed conversions weaken christianity by (as I think you imply) suggesting that one's reasons for abandoning one belief and asserting another might have more to do with the swishing of the tails of Old Father Time, and less with rational argument.

humanji

TBH, we can't really know until we experience it. I'm agnostic and can't imagine that I'd convert to any religion when I die but if a god(s) did exist, then it'd surely be in their power to somehow appear to you in your final moments and thus let you know of their existence.

So, basically I'm saying that an athiest/agnostic will most likely always say that a death-bed conversion is due to fear, while a theist will most likely say it's due to seeing the light. And we'll never know the truth until our dying moments (unless we're killed suddenly, but that's going off on a tangent).

--amadeus--

It's my get out of jail free card. I reckon I could live a life of utter sin and debauchery and then recant at the last minute and wholey accept god.

Because Jesus said that it's all about the one lost lamb. I also understand that if you are in imminent danger of death then no priest is needed to absolve you of your sins. I assume that as I stare into the chasm I will be able to muster some genuine sorrow and so will fervently regret my sins and believe 100% in a god so I should be good to get fast-tracked to my assigned cloud and harp. Pffft, why bother with all this praying, charitabe works and religious stuff? Of course if it's all predestined anyway then I don't even need to recant, if I'm chosen I'm chosen so it's all good.

(please note the above is a debating position and does not neccesaraly represtet my real views!)

AtomicHorror

I wouldn't judge him harshly for it. It's like taking the morphine at the last moment. Grabbing a comfort blanket. Can't say I'll be any stronger at the end myself, but that wouldn't constitute anything meaningful. Dawkins has never claimed to be anything more than human, yet he holds that religious thinking is a very human trait.

PDN

If someone sees sense at the end of their life then fair play to them.

Only God knows whether such death-bed conversions are real or not.

If Dawkins did make such a death-bed conversion then I wouldn't see it as something to trumpet about.

Dave!

Indeed, it's the same as the 'no atheists in foxholes' argument. We're only human. Try as one may to be rational and logical in their life, when presented with a situation that pushes human emotion to the very limit, it's perfectly understandable that someone may either (a) decieve themselves, or (b) undergo a genuine conversion.

AtomicHorror

PDN wrote: »

If someone sees sense at the end of their life then fair play to them.

Only God knows whether such death-bed conversions are real or not.

If Dawkins did make such a death-bed conversion then I wouldn't see it as something to trumpet about.

Would you see it as a some manner of "proof" that Dawkin's is incorrect though? I think that many would use it in that manner.

Fanny Cradock

--amadeus-- wrote: »

It's my get out of jail free card. I reckon I could live a life of utter sin and debauchery and then recant at the last minute and wholey accept god.

Because Jesus said that it's all about the one lost lamb. I also understand that if you are in imminent danger of death then no priest is needed to absolve you of your sins. I assume that as I stare into the chasm I will be able to muster some genuine sorrow and so will fervently regret my sins and believe 100% in a god so I should be good to get fast-tracked to my assigned cloud and harp. Pffft, why bother with all this praying, charitabe works and religious stuff? Of course if it's all predestined anyway then I don't even need to recant, if I'm chosen I'm chosen so it's all good.

(please note the above is a debating position and does not neccesaraly represtet my real views!)

Well that would depend on a person actually knowing the moment of their death and being able to convince themselves (and God) that they have seen the light as opposed to simply hedging their bets. I wonder if those who take this approach honestly believe that it is possible to construct your life so as to guarantee that they will have a sincere conversion on their deathbed?

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Would you see it as a some manner of "proof" that Dawkin's is incorrect though? I think that many would use it in that manner.

Would you?

Bar the initial embarrassment for many of his more passionate followers (and I deliberately use the term) I would think that this conversion wouldn't prove anything about the existence of God. As for Dawkin's being incorrect, the man would testify to as much himself if he was converted. It is then left up to the individual to decide if this really changes anything. So, in conclusion, such a conversion would probably make some compelling reading, but the 'proof' would remain as elusive as ever.

wolfsbane

--amadeus-- wrote: »

It's my get out of jail free card. I reckon I could live a life of utter sin and debauchery and then recant at the last minute and wholey accept god.

Because Jesus said that it's all about the one lost lamb. I also understand that if you are in imminent danger of death then no priest is needed to absolve you of your sins. I assume that as I stare into the chasm I will be able to muster some genuine sorrow and so will fervently regret my sins and believe 100% in a god so I should be good to get fast-tracked to my assigned cloud and harp. Pffft, why bother with all this praying, charitabe works and religious stuff? Of course if it's all predestined anyway then I don't even need to recant, if I'm chosen I'm chosen so it's all good.

(please note the above is a debating position and does not neccesaraly represtet my real views!)

I'm afraid anyone using these tactics would be in for a nasty surprise.

Such is the nature of the human heart/soul that it will not truly repent and believe of itself. It hates God at a fundemental level. So death-beds will produce only a false repentance in such hearts. For anyone to be saved - to truly repent and believe and so receive God's forgiveness, God must change their evil nature.

You are also very mistaken about predestination - those who are predestined to eternal life are predestined to truly repent and belief first. So any why bother attitude will only continue to prevail in those who are non-elect.

If you want to be saved from eternal wrath, you need to truly repent of your sinful life and trust in Jesus Christ as your Saviour. If you presume on God and think to leave it till your death-bed, you are demonstrating a wilful rejection of His command to repent and believe today. Tomorrow may never come for you in this world, but it surely will in the next. When you lift up your eyes in hell, what will you think then of all the opportunities you despised?

PDN

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Would you see it as a some manner of "proof" that Dawkin's is incorrect though? I think that many would use it in that manner.

I am sure that many would use it in that fashion.

I'm not very impressed by Dawkins' thinking now, so I don't see that it is likely to improve if he is ever in the throes of a terminal illness. A death-bed conversion would be a testimony to the universal fear of death (something most of us recognise anyway) but would hardly be proof of anything else.

I do hope Dr Dawkins doesn't get too offended if he hears we are discussing the unlikely event of his hyopothetical conversion.

Fanny Cradock

PDN wrote: »

I do hope Dr Dawkins doesn't get too offended if he hears we are discussing the unlikely event of his hyopothetical conversion.

Heavens forbid!

triple h

there was this old man who had lost his faith did not believe in god or anything
on his death bed his people asked would he like to see a priest the old man
said it would'nt do any harm so the priest was called as the priest was praying
over him and shaking holy water on him the priest asked if he renounced
the devil the old man opened one eye looked at the priest and said this is not the time to be making enemies.

lugha

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

.... his (Dawkins) more passionate followers (and I deliberately use the term)

I would take issue with the word followers more so than passionate.

Dawkins has a high media profile and consequently can influence opinion. But I don’t think anybody “follows” him in a religious sense that see themselves as atheists affiliated to the church of Dawkins! An atheist believes there is nothing. And unlike religion there is no variation on the interpretation of nothing. There is no need for leaders or followers.

Fanny Cradock

lugha wrote: »

I would take issue with the word followers more so than passionate.

Dawkins has a high media profile and consequently can influence opinion. But I don’t think anybody “follows” him in a religious sense that see themselves as atheists affiliated to the church of Dawkins! An atheist believes there is nothing. And unlike religion there is no variation on the interpretation of nothing. There is no need for leaders or followers.

I never stated that anyone followed Dawkins in a 'religious sense'. The term follower doesn't necessarily have any religious connotations.

I will hold my tongue on the rest of your post for fear of opening a can of worms.

PDN

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I never stated that anyone followed Dawkins in a 'religious sense'.

Of course you didn't. But you must realise that we have to be very careful with our terminology because some atheists are just so sensitive.

The A&A forum is peppered with posts that refer to Christians and their beliefs in the most pejorative terms - but if over here we use such a dreadful term as 'follower' in regard to atheists it can hurt their poor feelings terribly.

So, Fanny, a slap on the wrist for being so insensitive!

robindch

PDN wrote: »

The A&A forum is peppered with posts that refer to Christians and their beliefs in the most pejorative terms - but if over here we use such a dreadful term as 'follower' in regard to atheists it can hurt their poor feelings terribly.

"can" is arguable here. Noting that nobody has actually said they're hurt, perhaps "seems not to" is closer to reality.

...waiting for a flood of "help, I'm being persecuted!" posts...

MrPudding

wolfsbane wrote: »

Such is the nature of the human heart/soul that it will not truly repent and believe of itself. It hates God at a fundemental level.

Why would god create a creature that "hates him at a fundemental level?"

wolfsbane wrote: »

So death-beds will produce only a false repentance in such hearts. For anyone to be saved - to truly repent and believe and so receive God's forgiveness, God must change their evil nature.

Your god is all knowing and all powerful, why could he not change the persons evil nature in the instant of his death? Why do you put restrictions on your all powerful and all knowing god’s abilities? Where do you get that right?

wolfsbane wrote: »

If you want to be saved from eternal wrath, you need to truly repent of your sinful life and trust in Jesus Christ as your Saviour.

But why can someone not truly repent on their deathbed? I understand some people that have been following the rules for years might be a bit annoyed, and rightly so, but surely a person who genuinely opens his heart to god in his final moments in as entitled to be saved as anyone else. No? Where is the merciful and forgiving god?

wolfsbane wrote: »

If you presume on God and think to leave it till your death-bed, you are demonstrating a wilful rejection of His command to repent and believe today.

Yes. Like you did for years. The only difference is the person on his death bed left it a bit later. You rejected god for years and finally took him into your heart and now you are saved. Are you now saying that it is a matter of timing? What if your moment of enlightenment happened on your death bed? Does it make it any less real?

wolfsbane wrote: »

Tomorrow may never come for you in this world, but it surely will in the next.

And in this case it would be off to hell, assuming it exists of course (hold the bible quotes, I understand you believe it is real and have bible quotes to back it up,) but in the case where a person had a epiphany it hardly seems fair to send them to hell.

MrP

Dades

PDN wrote: »

The A&A forum is peppered with posts that refer to Christians and their beliefs in the most pejorative terms...

I blame the moderators!

/swishes cloak and leaves

Fanny Cradock

I would have preferred if you'd vanished in a puff of logic

Asiaprod

Dades wrote: »

I blame the moderators!

/swishes cloak and leaves

Too late, and you said you never post in Christianity:)

PDN

Asiaprod wrote: »

Too late, and you said you never post in Christianity:)

Obviously lurks here. Maybe a potential convert?

Dades

PDN wrote: »

Obviously lurks here.

Occasionally, when the flow is low, I wade across the Styx!

I won't be converting 'till that big lurker in the sky starts posting, though*.

* Not even on my death bed I hope...

Fanny Cradock

Ah, but anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about!

lugha

PDN wrote: »

Of course you didn't. But you must realise that we have to be very careful with our terminology because some atheists are just so sensitive.

The A&A forum is peppered with posts that refer to Christians and their beliefs in the most pejorative terms - but if over here we use such a dreadful term as 'follower' in regard to atheists it can hurt their poor feelings terribly.

So, Fanny, a slap on the wrist for being so insensitive!

I could explain. But I guess if I'm explaining, I'm losing .....

AtomicHorror

PDN wrote: »

A death-bed conversion would be a testimony to the universal fear of death (something most of us recognise anyway) but would hardly be proof of anything else.

My thinking exactly.

AtomicHorror

wolfsbane wrote: »

If you want to be saved from eternal wrath, you need to truly repent of your sinful life and trust in Jesus Christ as your Saviour.

What if you haven't led a sinful life but figure Jesus was probably just this guy, you know?

PDN

AtomicHorror wrote: »

What if you haven't led a sinful life

In that case you are Jesus.

JimiTime

AtomicHorror wrote: »

What if you haven't led a sinful life

PDN wrote: »

In that case you are Jesus.

AtomicHorror is the second coming? And he posts here?

Well.....

Dades wrote: »

I won't be converting 'till that big lurker in the sky starts posting, though*.

Will that be a full immersion, or will we just wet your head:D

AtomicHorror

PDN wrote: »

In that case you are Jesus.

I didn't say that I have lead a sinless life. Though I appreciate the possibility of being the second coming, it is far more likely that I'm just another minor antichrist. At any rate my question still remains. Why is the specific acceptance of Jesus as the son of God more important than living by his rules?

AtomicHorror

JimiTime wrote: »

AtomicHorror is the second coming? And he posts here?

Well.....


Will that be a full immersion, or will we just wet your head:D

Internetchrist is displeased. Do not mock my disciple Dades.

Okay, no more blasphemy from me.

Dades

Phew, escaped a splash and dash!
That holy water burns!

wolfsbane

AtomicHorror wrote: »

I didn't say that I have lead a sinless life. Though I appreciate the possibility of being the second coming, it is far more likely that I'm just another minor antichrist. At any rate my question still remains. Why is the specific acceptance of Jesus as the son of God more important than living by his rules?

Trusting in and obeying Jesus is one of God's rules. And no one can live by the other rules who hasn't first repented and put their trust in Christ.

MrPudding

wolfsbane wrote: »

Trusting in and obeying Jesus is one of God's rules. And no one can live by the other rules who hasn't first repented and put their trust in Christ.

Yes, but what if they don't repent and trust in Jesus until they are about to die? Just one of the questions I asked a few days ago. Here they are again in case you missed them:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=57258424&postcount=18

MrP

philologos

I personally don't care if Richard Dawkins records his last moments alive, I most certainly won't be watching them. Death bed conversions are just as valid as conversions that happen during your life according to the Gospels. There is a downside in that you miss the benefits of following God throughout your life though.

MrPudding

Jakkass wrote: »

There is a downside in that you miss the benefits of following God throughout your life though.

And they are? Genuine question, by the way.

MrP