One of Christianity’s most pernicious and harmful ideas is that a deathbed conversion is sufficient to erase all of your sins (“sin” being one of the worst ideas of all) and get you into heaven, a paradise of joy where you are rejoined with your grandparents and your childhood puppy and you get to eat soft-serve ice cream all day and instantly learn how to play a harp. Well, the details of an eternal life in paradise are left vague, but for sure you will be tormented and in despair for eternity for the sin of being an atheist or failing to obey your parents if you don’t express your love for Jesus. Great crimes can be forgiven if all you do is accept Jesus before you kick the bucket. Adolf Hitler might be burning in hellfire right now, but he could have been saved if, after ordering the murder of six million Jews, he had just let Jesus into his heart before allowing a Russian soldier to blow his brains out.
It’s so easy. They call us atheists hedonists who want to indulge in anti-social behaviors without consequences, but Christians have this bizarre imaginary get-out-of-jail-free card that allows them to commit any horror they want, as long as they have good timing and deploy their repentance excuse before they croak.
Let’s make it even easier. There are sects where not only must good Christians practice forgiveness of sins, but they are required to forget that a sin was committed at all, and most importantly they must not penalize anyone for a sin that they have repented. They create a culture of incessant cycles of forgiveness and forgetting, where you can commit horrible acts and not only get into heaven, but remain members in good standing of your church and community.
The abusers and victims all belonged to the Old Apostolic Lutheran Church, or the OALC, a Scandinavian-rooted revivalist church that teaches its followers that heaven is reserved just for them. To get there, according to current and former members, they must follow a strict doctrine, which emphasizes asking for forgiveness for their sins and says that being forgiven by a fellow church member washes away those sins.
What’s more, the church teaches that once a perpetrator is forgiven, anyone who speaks about the wrongdoing — including the victim — can be accused of harboring an unforgiving heart. Those who have left the church, as well as some who are still with it, say this means the burden of sin shifts from the person who committed the act to the person who refuses to let the matter rest.
The OALC has congregations in the US and Canada, particularly in Minnesota, Wyoming, and Washington state — the headquarters of the church are in Sweden, explaining the geographic distribution of the cult. And the OALC has a problem.
The OALC is full of pedophiles and rapists that can’t be purged from the church, because all a bad actor has to do is ask for forgiveness and not only will he be granted a Christ-like absolution, but everyone in the church is obligated to adopt a kind of communal amnesia and pretend the act never happened. It’s a kind of social experiment: what if people really took the doctrine of forgiveness of sins seriously? Now we know. It creates a haven for vile, rapacious behavior, and the bad actors will thrive. It’s an interesting conundrum that this doctrine, called Laestadianism, leads to an extremely moralistic, close-minded religion that at the same time creates conditions that allow extreme immorality to flourish.
The church’s emphasis on large families has created booms in places like Minnesota, Wyoming and southern Washington. Families rely heavily on one another socially, financially and spiritually while keeping their distance from what members often call “the world” — outsiders and secular influences viewed as dangerous or corrupting. Even ordinary activities like watching TV and dancing are treated as transgressions that must be confessed. One abuse victim said she felt anxious every time she turned on her car radio, fearing that if she listened to a pop song and died in a crash before asking forgiveness, she could go to hell.
While most of its practitioners live in fear of turning on a radio, some see the church as a playground for pedophilia.
Over 10 years, authorities alleged, Charles Massie had sexually abused at least seven girls. Some of the abuse occurred at his house and some at his businesses, where young girls worked part time. But the vast majority of the abuse occurred at church, according to court documents. Investigators tallied 832 incidents where Massie sat near the girls’ parents, allegedly fondling the girls’ genitals and breasts. One victim, who told the police she was 5 or 6 years old when she was abused by Massie, said that he “raped me with his fingers.”
Wyoming has charged Charles Massie with nine counts of sexual abuse and sexual battery. He is being held in jail in Nebraska, where prosecutors also have charged him in connection with sexual assaults. He has pleaded not guilty in both states. He could not be reached for comment.
When investigators in Moorcroft contacted families of the victims, they learned that the families already knew about the abuse. One had learned of it three years earlier, according to charges. But according to court records, none of them had told the police. Instead, the charges say, the father of some of the victims had told their preacher, David Lindberg, about the abuse in 2024. Charles Massie would later turn himself in, but not for another year.
The fox is in the henhouse, and the culture of the church is to adopt a willful blindness…very convenient for predators.
The Wyoming church isn’t the only one to face accusations that it failed to report abusers. In southwestern Washington in 2017, a jury convicted church member Carsie Tikka of raping a 9-year-old boy. But one woman, who was a member of the church at the time, said that years before he was charged, Tikka had assaulted her stepchildren and the leaders had done nothing to stop him. Instead, Tikka asked her family for forgiveness.
When secular society catches up to these criminals, it does what the church is incapable of doing. Tikka was convicted and sent to prison, but I don’t think he will learn.
Then Tikka illustrated the central problem facing prosecutors and victims alike — a powerful religious culture that prioritizes spiritual absolution over secular justice — with his final, defiant words:
“My sins have been forgiven,” Tikka told the judge. “Have yours?”
The all-powerful lord of the universe, source of all morality, has told him that raping boys was OK. Who are you to disagree with him?
I really shouldn’t be surprised this is a thing.
One thing that gets me about a lot of Christians: They think they’re entitled to forgiveness, which is not how humans work. Instead, they invent a god who acts like a vending machine for dispensing forgiveness in exchange for insincere repentance.
To answer that question : a decent human being with rational sane ethics that’s who.
I think the most truly stupid thing about this gimmick they pull is that they imagine a) their god is utterly stupid, and would actually fall for a last minute confession, and/or b) that “believing in Jesus”, if he was real does not require also, “believing in his message, at all, in any way shape or form.” Its, honestly, very weird. Even in the real world, if you ask someone for forgiveness, but you have no actual, honest, intent to change, be better, or not repeat your prior action, for which you claim to be repenting, either a) the person accepting this from you is a bloody idiot, or b) you are, for thinking they will buy what you are trying to sell them. But god… god just accepts any claim of repentance at all, any time, even at the last minute, whether you actually f-ing believe you really did wrong or not, or honestly repent or not, purely because you “believe in him.” Right…. Assuming he was real, either your god is a complete fool, in this case, or you are, for thinking he will buy this crap. Which just adds one more layer of, “No one in their right mind should be following this thing!”
@ 2
Lol. I love your self-image. Anyway…
opposed to forgiving and forgetting past bad behaviour are you Stevo?
I thought Hitler shot his own brains out?
Nah, the worst example of this mindset is this Chick Tract instead.
This is also what the fundie xians such as the Southern Baptists and Evangelicals say.
You see it on their bumper stickers sometimes.
“Christians aren’t better, just forgiven.”
They have the crime and other statistics to show for it.
If you look at any social problem such as divorce or child sexual abuse, it is always higher in Red states.
Xianity isn’t a source for morality. At best it is a source for obedience to obsolete rules and cult leaders.
Just to clarify a point. I’ve been told by many people that the Roman Catholics consider insincere repentance valid: unless things have changed they don’t. My parents were both brought up RC and it was made plain to them that any absolution given for insincere repentance was invalid. The point is backed in one of Guareschi’s Don Camillo stories where a murderer threatens to shoot him unless he absolves him though the murderer admits that he has only regrets not having killed more people.
Well, that eliminates any sign of remorse or contrition.
That statement should come up at every parole hearing.
Throw away the key.
This idea is based on Matt. 20, the parable of the vineyard. This landowner goes out one morning to Home Depot and hires some day laborers for a penny for the whole day. So they say, cool, and get to work. About every 3 hours he goes out and hires some more workers that ICE hasn’t rounded up yet. At the end of the day, he pays everyone a penny, starting with the last ones hired. Now the workers who’ve been at it all day are not cool with getting paid the same as the guys who only came by for a couple hours. Landowner says, “Hey you thought the wage was fair when you started, so what’s it to you if I use my own money to be generous to people who aren’t you?”
Jesus’ moral is the last shall be first and the first shall get screwed over. Many are called but few are chosen. Try to get chosen last, m’kay?
The main and only rule to get into heaven in the fundie xian sects of xianity has zero to do with morality or ethics or being a good person.
All you have to do is believe jesus is god.
What is this faith requirement?
It’s nothing really. You have to believe jesus was a real person who is also god, part of the Trinity.
The Calvinists go even further and claim that there is nothing you can do to get into heaven. It is all predestination and the god decided it before you were even born and never changes his mind.
So, it doesn’t matter what you believe or do in life.
If you try to make sense out of xianity, it never makes sense.
Made worse because xians don’t agree on anything including the number of gods. It can be between 1 and 5.
Catholics have the Trinity and also satan and Mary.
Remember hearing about a Catholic cult of angels that went so far to call Metatron, the head angel, “The lesser god” though I think that was a step too far.
Nit-picking. The concentration camps and death squads murdered at least 12 million of all groups. Not counting the millions deliberately starved to deth.
I can’t see panels from that Chick Tract that you lead with, without remembering the genius reworking of it into a Cthulhu comic: Who will be eaten first? Jack Chick tried to get it scrubbed from the Internet, but it still crops up if you look for it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Cthulhu/comments/1m9uxmp/who_will_be_eaten_first/
In one of Stephen Leacock’s stories Calvinists disagree on whether damnation required both faith and deeds.
@ Silentbob – 5th June 2026 at 9:17 am :
Umm, thanks I guess? Do you think it is false and, if so, why?
Depends on the context & specifics.
If there’s been recognition that that behaviour is bad and contrition and actions proving that then, yes, forgiveness can be earnt.
Depending on the severity of the acts requiring forgiveness.
Depending on the specifics of that “bad behaviour” and its consequences.
Depending upon the proof that that person has changed and is no longer continuing their bad behaviour and now opposes it among other things.
Obvs its subjective and will depend on the individual asking for forgiveness and the individual doing the forgiving or otherwise. Which will be up to them.
@5 Nemo — Yep, it was Adolf who blew Adolf’s brains out. Even someone as awful as Adolf Hitler is capable of doing great things to the benefit of mankind.
For Centuries religion has been the biggest, most horrible, superstitious sponsor and excuse for the most murder and violence evil humans can commit on the populace.
I’ve always been amazed at how the murderous catholic corporation sponsors murder and violence with their policy. Here is how it has always worked:
Rape or kill someone, go to mass, get forgiven, repeat as often as you wish, because some robe wearing pedophile in a closet says you are absolved of all responsibility if you repeat some mumbo-jumbo prayer a few times! WTF!
FWIW. My ethical axioms are :
Ethical Axiom #101 : All other people are equally people. No exceptions.
World is already bad enough – never make it worse, try to make it better.
So think and be kind to all others and the world we all have to share.
Most of all in three words Think, be kind.
Always think If I was in group X and was Y what would I do if faced with situation Z?
Always listen, think & try to be kind as you can be & not cruel.
Always think If this was me & there but for luck of birth and circumstances it could be. What would I want, what would I do?
What would be right? What would be possible? What would be most likely? What would help most & make things as good as possible?
I’ll admit I don’t always live up to these ideals but I do try to do so.
I don’t think we’ll ever achieve a perfect Utopia but I do think its always worth trying to get ever closer to it than we currently are & thereby make things better instead of worse.
I think these are a pretty good set of ethical rules. What do others think? Feedback welcome.
Nemo @ # 5 & dennyk @ # 17 – and blowing one’s own brains out is on the Sin List.
Therefore, as our esteemed host correctly notes, in the alternative history in which AH atones at the last minute and says the magic words to get into the eternal harpalooza, he would also have had to let someone else perform his cerebrumectomy.
On the topic of forgetting, we went to see the movie “The Sheep Detectives” last week – amusing movie and if you’re just looking for an enjoyable time, you might check it out.
Anyway, as part of the movie plot and world structure, its shown that the sheep have a collective ability to just forget any unpleasant knowledge or experience by simply identifying what they want to forget and counting backwards from 3. Sounds like these OALCers are of a similar breed.
Personally, I think if you wait until you’re on your deathbed to accept Jesus and ask for forgiveness for your sins, you should be allowed to enter heaven, but not until the last minute of eternity. Seems fair.
@19 StevoR provided some good ethical axions,
Here are the precepts we posit. Note: we offer them, but, do not push them on anyone.
Imperative Precepts
Exemplary and requisite for a worthwhile life, these precepts are intrinsic to the Omniascendent Principle and the Enchiridion of the Temple of Veracious Pacific Enlightenment
Preface: We are all fallible human beings. Life is most gratifying when we are diligent in all its aspects. We offer these precepts and encourage everyone to abide by them. But, we do not force our principles on others.
All these imperative precepts are interlinked and interdependent. Contrary to the popular self-deception of `cafeteria beliefs’, you cannot succeed by selecting certain precepts while ignoring or rejecting others. They must always manifest themselves in all the elements of human existence: Thinking, Communicating and Acting
A primary Imperative Precept: be Honest. This requires that you be as honest as you can with yourself and honest with others at all times. And, that your Thinking, Communicating and Acting are all consistent with honesty. We stipulate that Humility is an essential element of honesty.
Precept: be Responsible. A sense of Responsibility is a corollary of Honesty. Consider the consequences of your communications and actions. We we have a responsibility to communicate and act in ways that are are not destructive or harmful, but are as beneficial as can be to others and the world in which we live. We endeavor to live in a disciplined manner so that our own needs and wants are not injurious.
Precept: Control Your Emotions. There are two basic modes of human thought:
» emotional – feelings including love, fear, anxiety, hate, etc.
» rational – using reasoning and intellect and employing objective analytical and logical thought processes
Everyone experiences emotions. We should not ignore these feelings. But, thinking rationally first can prevent any damage caused by blindly acting on raw emotions. So, the most important question is: Do you control your emotions, or do your emotions control you?
Precept: be Rational. Reject superstition in all its forms, including beliefs, which are vague feelings in which someone places confidence without any basis in fact. Gather all the information on a topic and use objective, analytical thinking to find and accept the conclusion that conforms best with fact and reality.
Precept: be Pacific (peaceful) and thoughtful in all your Thinking, Communicating and Acting. Aggression and committing violence in any form harms all parties involved.
Precept: be Caring of others and of the world in which we live. And, reject all forms of greed. Do not hate people for innate characteristics which are mostly beyond their control. But, eschew violent, bigoted, hateful people and groups. Value individuals over organizations, especially corporations. Trust and respect must be earned. And, to be worthy of compassion and forgiveness requires the transgressor to recognize and admit to the error, to make a sincere request to be forgiven and have a true desire and to show success in reparation and an ongoing diligent effort to not repeat the transgression.
Precept: seek Enlightenment. This includes acquiring the prerequisites of: Knowledge (facts) and Intelligence (understanding of the knowledge) and then seeking Enlightenment (the wisdom to beneficially apply the knowledge and intelligence you gain.) Which means you also recognize that gaining wisdom is an ongoing process and none of us can become fully enlightened. Wisdom will help you in following these precepts with satisfying results.
Final consideration: abide by all these precepts and you will live a rewarding, satisfying and beneficial life. If you pick and choose among them you are fooling yourself and violating the primary Precept of Honesty. Remember, you cannot successfully hide from yourself.
entirety tm and c copyright 2016-2026 Don C. Windmiller. All rights reserved. contact@omnigma.org
I think rules are good if one wants to be ruled.
(I don’t)
Oh dear. Kantian categorical imperatives.
But allegedly optional. Heh.
(Someone does not know the meaning of ‘imperative’)
[Also, I am amused by the nym: Don C. Windmiller → Don Quixote, tilting at windmills — gotta be deliberate]
@19 StevoR posed his ideas as axioms and if he desires to have his own rules to live by, that is fine, his was a positive statement and has nothing to do with ‘being ruled’.
When one clearly writes that they only offer ideas they consider imperative precepts for themselves, that obviously imposes no constraints on any else. Unless someone is too ignorant to understand that.
I get so tired of petty pedantic posturing just to try to always belittle what others offer because someone has nothing better to offer from their own creativity. Someone’s pretzel eating apparently has gone to their head; ignorantly twisting everyone’s words and thinking they can make everyone accept their ignorant fantasy dictates as fact.
Ahem. If one lives by rules, one is ruled. That’s what it means!
I too offer ideas, only I do not consider them IMPERATIVE. They are guidelines. Aspirations.
Rules are for people who want to follow rules, whether or not self-imposed.
Not so much you did not try exactly that upon me. Hypocrisy is not admirable.
I twisted nobody’s words, rules and ruled are complementary.
More relevantly, I am not trying to make anyone accept their ignorant fantasies, unlike you.
(Your accusation is a confession)
Some Protestants might believe in salvation by faith alone – but that seems an awfully convenient belief to me. My view (which I think is common to Methodists) is that any “faith” that doesn’t lead immediately to actions is empty, while correct action without any faith at all is worthy of salvation, so everybody doing the right thing in it, regardless of what they believe, but people who are trusting in their faith alone are out of luck. Theoretically, someone who sincerely repents on their deathbed without any opportunity for good actions might be saved – but that’s such an edge case it’s not worth worrying about.
andrewnotwerdna, many versions of those Protestant Solae:
Sola Gratia (By Grace Alone),
Sola Fide (By Faith Alone),
Sola Scriptura (By Scripture Alone),
Solus Christus (Through Christ Alone),
Soli Deo Gloria (To God Glory Alone)
So, one branch of Protestantism. The whole tree is much bushier.
Interestingly, I made general remarks in @27. I didn’t mention anyone by name, but John Morales @28 seems to have taken my remarks very personally. If the shoe fits.
I have read some good comments here, however the quality of the conversation has deteriorated. I have people who have asked my help with Linux problems, which will be a more positive and rewarding experience, so I will abandon this now fruitless topic and leave others to be exposed to the pedantry.
Heh. How naive do you imagine I am?
But it’s for sure not about me! Heh.
(You are transparent)
@31 IKR?
I am surprised the criminal in the video didn’t ‘forgive’ his victim/s and accuser/s for real bonus points.
[meta]
Who is “the criminal in the video”, indianajones?
The OP is about a chick tract.
And #31 says zero about any video.
(A rather graceless flounce, is what it is)
Pierce R. Butler@20: “… and blowing one’s own brains out is on the Sin List.”
Suicide was not originally a sin with the religionists. Too many idiots believed the “going to heaven after you die” fantasy, that some early believers were committing suicide to get to heaven sooner. The church was afraid of loosing their ultra-credulous audience, and their resulting income stream, that they had to declare suicide to be a sin to stop the attrition.
https://academic.oup.com/book/24371/chapter-abstract/187251010
And today, many religious cults do not regard suicide as a sin, for at least two reasons. One, some churches actually recognize mental illness, while others, including the Catholic Church, still pretend that demonic possession is a real thing, “sometimes” (their wimpy escape clause, they have been using that for decades). Remember the Jesus fantasy where he forces demons into a herd of pigs (in a country where it was illegal to raise pigs) which promptly ran into the ocean and drowned. Hence, some suicides are actually due to demons. Note the numerous death cults that have committed suicide. Gasp, some were even Christian, despite the claims of other Christian churches. After all, there is only ONE TRUE Christian church, as many Lutherans, Catholics, Mormans, Pentecostalists etc. have told me multiple times. Brain death is a powerful virus with these loons.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/List-of-mass-suicides-of-the-20th-and-21th-centuries
zetopan @ # 35 – thanks for the backgrounder.
Of course, by 1945, the Catholic Fuhrer knew his church’s position – but also knew letting Stalin’s troops take him alive would turn out No Fun.
…in a country where it was illegal to raise pigs…
Not so sure about that: Romans wrote the rules in Palestine both when the alleged incident occurred and when it was written down. I’ve never tried to get between Italians and their pork sausage, but suspect it would be quite a challenge.
@29: I think the author of the Epistle of James would agree with that. The relation between Faith and Works even within just evangelical/fundamentalist theology (never mind Catholic) is complicated and inevitably some individuals and whole sects have come up with simplistic versions like “believe in Jesus and you’re instantly forgiven”. I don’t think I ever got it quite straight myself, but I’m pretty sure most of the people I was listening to 50 years ago would have said there was more to it than that; e.g. “faith” is more than just assent to a set of theological propositions, it includes a genuine sorrow over one’s sins and a commitment of the heart to change one’s life. That seems incompatible with a deliberate policy of sinning all one’s life and then repenting on one’s deathbed — could such a “repentance” be truly sincere, on a psychological level?
(And that is a way deeper dive into theology than I ever thought I would take in a Pharyngula comment. Like, I’ve had no reason to care about any of this for a very long time now).
@30: Pretty sure “Sola Scriptura” is not about soteriology, but epistemic authority, i.e. as opposed to “Scripture and Church Tradition”.
@35: The “Gerasenes” or “Gadarenes” (in whose region, east of the Sea of Galilee, the miracle is situated, in all three Synoptics) were not Jewish, and presumably had no prohibition on swine.
@6: I note that Chick cites Matt 7:22-23 (which on its face, doesn’t even really support his point) while ignoring Matt 25:33-46, which would seem to point in the other direction.
@raven #11
But it’s all bullshit, as proven by their own scripture:
The bible itself makes it clear that faith is not sufficient.
The really interesting thing is that this implies that you might successfully drive out demons, speak true prophecies, and perform miracles, without any divine support.
According to scripture, the ability to perform miraculous acts is not, in itself, proof of divinity. So, how do we know that Jesus is the Son of God? Since none of the miraculous acts are genuine proofs, how do we know that Christ is not a fraud?
If I recall my scripture correctly, Jesus had some things to say about anyone who would abuse a child.
According to Jesus, some sins are unforgivable and result in being cast into the lake of fire.
The idea that sincere repentance erases sins is invented by the church, just like selling indulgences.
30) Thank you John.
The requirements to get to heaven vary a huge amount between the 42,000 xian sects.
For the fundie xians, the bar is always pretty low. Which could explain why they are often the worst people in our society.
One of the most common ways is called “Once saved, always saved.”
To be saved forever in some fundie sects, you first have to be born again.
To be born again means according to them,
To be born again is to believe that jesus is god.
So here is the tl;dr version.
.1. Be born again by believing jesus is god.
.2. Then you are saved and once saved, always saved.
.3. From this point forward, whatever you do doesn’t matter. You will always be forgiven for your sins.
.4. Die and wake up in heaven.
How soon before some lib comes in to lecture us about how these OALC chuds “aren’t real Christians” because their version of Jesus isn’t some proto-hippie who had no problem with women’s rights or LGBTQ folks.
I always thought this was the most interesting part of the plot of Hamlet. If you genuinely believe this nonsense about forgiving all sins, then killing someone for a crime after letting them pray first is a reward, not a punishment.
It also means that if you believe in this doctrine then you do people a genuine disservice by preaching at them any time before their actual deathbed. I mean, they could go through their whole lives happy and then, when you tell them about the torture and hellfire for eating shellfish or wearing mixed cloth on their deathbed of course they’ll repent doing things that get them eternal agony so they’re just as good with god as if they’d lived life by the church’s arbitrary rules. So you’re being wantonly cruel by telling anyone about it beforehand, and I’m pretty sure Jesus wasn’t supposed to be on board with wanton cruelty, so non-deathbed preaching is probably a sin of some sort – or clearly should be – and if you don’t repent of it on your deathbed then you’ll burn…
How anyone can claim to believe such a logically inconsistent set of rules boggles my mind. When Carroll had the Red Queen say “Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.” I don’t think he was holding her up as an exemplar.