The Problem of Hell v.2

[juvenissun]

An omnipotent entity can't destroy a life. Yeah, it's a mystery.

He won't. So we say it "can not" to be destroyed.
In this view, it is very easy to see.

 

[juvenissun]

Perhaps, we shall see.


This is a non-answer. Okay, so you believe God is "righteous" and "holy." Okay. So? How does this justify eternal torment for people who do not believe in God? That is neither righteous nor holy.

So, if something is unholy, for example, then the unholy thing is against God. If one is against God, then he will not want to see God. God loves the person. But the person does not love God. So, God would leave that person alone.

Very simple. Isn't it?

 

[Skavau]

So, if something is unholy, for example, then the unholy thing is against God.

No, that sounds more like God declaring himself against "unholy things".

If one is against God, then he will not want to see God. God loves the person. But the person does not love God. So, God would leave that person alone.

Very simple. Isn't it?

So if God "leaves that person alone" he doesn't allow them tortured after death?

 

[Davian]

The evidence of God's existence has been clearly manifested to all people who have ever walked upon the face of this earth.

No, that has not been the case for myself.

God's invisible attributes , namely, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. They are therefore without excuse.

Not very clearly manifested, if "invisible" is used to describe them.

In other words, you have been given sufficient evidence to know God exists. That is why this is not a matter of evidence, but a matter of will.

No, it is a matter of evidence. If you had evidence, you would not need to say this.

Several atheists here have already acknowledged and admitted their disgust for Jesus Christ. They have said that even if He were to reveal Himself personally to them, they would wonder what right He had to tell them how to live their lives. This betrays the state of blindness, and hardness of heart within such a one.

Personally, I have no issue with Jesus, only the lack of support for claims of 'divinity.'

You all are no different than those who attributed the miracles of Christ as having being performed by demons.

The stories may also have been inspired by tricksters, illusionists, or complete fabrications.

No evidence will satisfy you because you will always have something to say.

In the absence of robust evidence, this is a throwaway comment.

Usually some smart, sarcastic, remark which only lends to further revealing your stiff necked, prideful arrogance.

No, you are projecting.

I also find it odd that atheists want to come to a Christian Forum and speak about evidence as if you actually think you are going to convert us to your meaningless, hopeless, lifeless, blind worldview that you are not even satisfied with.

Please, go on, and tell me what else I think about my life.

As if you are going to somehow get us to bow to your requests and commands. The truth of the matter is: Each and every person who has put their trust in Jesus Christ has the witness of God within themselves. I know God is true because He lives in me.

Given the demonstrable ability of humans for self deception, one should be wary of anecdotal evidence. How can you be sure of the experiences of these others that you speak of?

I know Jesus Christ died and rose again for my sins because I have been forgiven and I can love people who openly and unapologetically slander the one who died for them. I know my Redeemer lives and I know that I shall one day see Him face to face. I have posted all that I have for your sakes, not for mine. For that which I can know to be true only adds to my faith.

You know to be true, but cannot demonstrate to anyone else. Are you just guessing it is true?

Let each man and woman be convinced in their own heart. I say all of this in love. If you are drowning in the ocean and somone comes to you in a boat and throws you a life jacket, put it on!

Yes, but if you are on dry land, with no water to be seen, and the lifejacket salesperson won't stop trying to sell you their wares, can't show you the actual life jacket, and from the brochure you can see that it is full of holes and wouldn't hold anything afloat, one should not be surprised to be met with scepticism.

Why be suspicious about the motives of the one trying to save you?

Their inability to demonstrate the validity of their assertions.

Accept it and be thankful. But alas! I am afraid that many are too blind to see their predicament. I pray that ultimately you may be made to see. For if one is not willing to see the truth, then no one can show it to them.

What you assert as truth appears only to be religion.

There are very few people who actually are searching for the truth here.

You do not appear to be in that search.

Most just want to argue and berate and ridicule those who they cannot understand.

Speak for yourself. I am here to discuss. If ridicule is invited, it may occur. But with luck, and increase in understanding will happen on all sides.

If your atheistic view is so great, then live it and stop trying to get people who are sons and daughters of the most High God to follow you into nothingness.

Only if those people would keep their religious claims out of the politics, government, and education.

We have all that we could ever desire in our Blessed Lord. We have more than enough when we have Him.

Just not in any way that you can demonstrate.

 

[citizenthom]

I have no more rejected his company than I have 'rejected' the company of Thor, Zeus and Odin.

All of whom you have chosen to reject consciously.

Proof is subjective; the decision the believe or not to believe is personal. You have chosen not to believe in God and therefore not to follow Him. When you realize after death that you have made the wrong decision, you will be tormented by that fact--not because God wants it, or because Christians want it, but because that's the natural consequence of knowing you have given up eternal joy.

 

[Skavau]

All of whom you have chosen to reject consciously.

So why do you think I reject Zeus, Odin and Thor? Do you think I make a decision to be separate from them or do you think I reject them as a proposition?

Proof is subjective; the decision the believe or not to believe is personal. You have chosen not to believe in God and therefore not to follow Him.

I have elected to not believe in the proposition that Christianity makes due to a lack of evidence in favour of its proposition. I have reject Islam, Sikhism, Hinduism and all other faiths for similar reasons. My disbelief is based on a lack of evidence and not wanting to be apart. Additionally it is worth pointing out that belief is not a choice. I did not choose to not believe in Christianity, it is a consequence of my convictions.

Do you think Muslims have made the same choice, by the way? Do you think they reject the chance to be with God?

When you realize after death that you have made the wrong decision, you will be tormented by that fact--not because God wants it, or because Christians want it, but because that's the natural consequence of knowing you have given up eternal joy.

If that is so then God ought to put me out of my misery. Anything less would be immoral.

It is also worth pointing out that if I did end up in such a state after death and did feel such regret: It would not be me. It would be someone else with my mask.

 

[Elioenai26]

No, that has not been the case for myself.

Not very clearly manifested, if "invisible" is used to describe them.

No, it is a matter of evidence. If you had evidence, you would not need to say this.

Personally, I have no issue with Jesus, only the lack of support for claims of 'divinity.'

The stories may also have been inspired by tricksters, illusionists, or complete fabrications.

In the absence of robust evidence, this is a throwaway comment.

No, you are projecting.

Please, go on, and tell me what else I think about my life.

Given the demonstrable ability of humans for self deception, one should be wary of anecdotal evidence. How can you be sure of the experiences of these others that you speak of?

You know to be true, but cannot demonstrate to anyone else. Are you just guessing it is true?

Yes, but if you are on dry land, with no water to be seen, and the lifejacket salesperson won't stop trying to sell you their wares, can't show you the actual life jacket, and from the brochure you can see that it is full of holes and wouldn't hold anything afloat, one should not be surprised to be met with scepticism.

Their inability to demonstrate the validity of their assertions.

What you assert as truth appears only to be religion.

You do not appear to be in that search.

Speak for yourself. I am here to discuss. If ridicule is invited, it may occur. But with luck, and increase in understanding will happen on all sides.

Only if those people would keep their religious claims out of the politics, government, and education.

Just not in any way that you can demonstrate.

You seem to be under the impression that only a handful of people are Christians and claim to know their Lord personally. God's children are living throughout the world, hundred of millions of them from every nation. Many are giving their lives for people they do not know peronally in the defense and spreading of the gospel. For Christ said that it is by the love we have for one another that the world would know we are His disciples. And as I have stated earlier, I love each and every one of you hear. I do so because God loves me and loves you all. It is because of this love and because of the knowledge I do have about hell that I speak as I do. I would not be a friend to you nor would I be acting in love if I did not warn you about it's dreadful reality.

You speak of demonstrable evidence. Christianity's claims are demonstrably true in the life of each and every peron who comes to Christ and is born from above by the Holy Spirit of God. The change is wrought inwardly and is manifested outwardly. It has been oftentimes said that the best apologetic is a changed life. I believe this is true, for those who once knew me as a blasphemer and a reprobate now know me as a man who loves God and loves his neighbor as himself. With man this is impossible to accomplish, but with God, all things are possible.

 

[Elioenai26]

I feel it necessary to address this here and now because it has been used by every atheist here as their reason for not believeing in God. What evidence would be sufficient for you to put your hope, your trust, and you life into the hands of Jesus Christ. What would you consider to be sufficient proof that would convince you to believe in Him?

 

[Skavau]

You seem to be under the impression that only a handful of people are Christians and claim to know their Lord personally. God's children are living throughout the world, hundred of millions of them from every nation.

Muslims make rather similar claims for themselves and there are not that much fewer of them than Christians. Many adherents of other religions also claim some kind of insight into the supernatural and many of them will do it with as much conviction of anyone contained in Christianity.

God's children are living throughout the world, hundred of millions of them from every nation. Many are giving their lives for people they do not know peronally in the defense and spreading of the gospel.

I am sure they are. As brave and courageous as victimised missionaries might be, I can't help but hold more respect for people fighting against government and religious persecution in dictatorships and theocracies, or aid workers handing out food and helping to uplift those stuck perpetual poverty.

Someone doing the equivalent of handing out Dianetics however dangerous it might be helps no-one.

For Christ said that it is by the love we have for one another that the world would know we are His disciples. And as I have stated earlier, I love each and every one of you hear.

You can repeat this as sanctimoniously and as proudly as you like. So long as you keep insulting us and telling us what we think you will still be met with a certain degree of antagonism. That you wrap your actions and statements towards us as some act of compassion just rubs us further the wrong way.

I do so because God loves me and loves you all. It is because of this love and because of the knowledge I do have about hell that I speak as I do.

I cannot bring myself to worship a God that would allow billions of people to be tormented for eternity purely for not believing a certain way. Can't be done. This would be so even if I believe this God actually existed.

 

[Skavau]

I feel it necessary to address this here and now because it has been used by every atheist here as their reason for not believeing in God. What evidence would be sufficient for you to put your hope, your trust, and you life into the hands of Jesus Christ. What would you consider to be sufficient proof that would convince you to believe in Him?

This isn't the right thread for it, but I will make it so.

I'd first have to receive empirical evidence for his existence. Something that indicates he actually does exist and is you describes and/or I'd have to receive a reasoned argument that successfully demonstrates the necessary of his existence.

Now, that's that briefly anyway. There is a second part though.

If you did convince me of God's existence I would then have to be convinced that this being is worth worshiping. You (or him) would have to defend the necessity of hell to me and provide reasons why we are cursed with sin amongst other things. Simply put: I currently think the idea of hell for non-believers is evil and cannot bring myself to worship evil.

 

[Elioenai26]

This isn't the right thread for it, but I will make it so.

I'd first have to receive empirical evidence for his existence. Something that indicates he actually does exist and is you describes and/or I'd have to receive a reasoned argument that successfully demonstrates the necessary of his existence.

Now, that's that briefly anyway. There is a second part though.

If you did convince me of God's existence I would then have to be convinced that this being is worth worshiping. You (or him) would have to defend the necessity of hell to me and provide reasons why we are cursed with sin amongst other things. Simply put: I currently think the idea of hell for non-believers is evil and cannot bring myself to worship evil.

Do you have empirical evidence to affirm that God does not exist?

 

[Skavau]

Do you have empirical evidence to affirm that God does not exist?

No more than I do to affirm that Zeus does not exist.

A good job then it is that I have never claimed that God does not exist. I merely hold skepticism towards the claim that God does exist. That you still don't understand what atheism means is unbelievable.

 

[Elioenai26]

No more than I do to affirm that Zeus does not exist.

A good job then it is that I have never claimed that God does not exist. I merely hold skepticism towards the claim that God does exist. That you still don't understand what atheism means is unbelievable.

You must forgive me. Since there is such a diversity in the train of thought of atheists, I have to understand what your understanding of atheism is. Some atheists positively affirm that God does not exist. That is why I have to know.

So once again you are saying that you have no empirical evidence that God does not exist. Meaning that you cannot prove that He does not exist correct?

 

[Skavau]

You must forgive me. Since there is such a diversity in the train of thought of atheists, I have to understand what your understanding of atheism is. Some atheists positively affirm that God does not exist. That is why I have to know.

Atheists can believe anything but they all agree on one thing:

They do not believe that God exists. Some, but very few atheists go one step further and affirm that God does not exist. This has a distinction called soft vs. hard atheism or weak vs. strong atheism.

Weak Atheist: I don't believe in a God(s).
Strong Atheist: I believe there are no God(s).

All atheists are weak atheists but only some atheists are strong atheists.

As for me specifically I am an agnostic ignostic atheist with a dash of anti-theism as well (though that is informed by my moral views).

So once again you are saying that you have no empirical evidence that God does not exist. Meaning that you cannot prove that He does not exist correct?

Correct.

 

[Davian]

You seem to be under the impression that only a handful of people are Christians and claim to know their Lord personally.

No, but the number making that claim are irrelevant, and does not reflect on the validity of their claim.

God's children are living throughout the world, hundred of millions of them from every nation. Many are giving their lives for people they do not know peronally in the defense and spreading of the gospel. For Christ said that it is by the love we have for one another that the world would know we are His disciples. And as I have stated earlier, I love each and every one of you hear. I do so because God loves me and loves you all. It is because of this love and because of the knowledge I do have about hell that I speak as I do. I would not be a friend to you nor would I be acting in love if I did not warn you about it's dreadful reality.

You will first need to establish your assertions as 'reality.' You have yet to do so.

You speak of demonstrable evidence.

Yes - demonstrable, testable, repeatable by others. Falsifiable.

Christianity's claims are demonstrably true in the life of each and every peron who comes to Christ and is born from above by the Holy Spirit of God. The change is wrought inwardly and is manifested outwardly. It has been oftentimes said that the best apologetic is a changed life. I believe this is true, for those who once knew me as a blasphemer and a reprobate now know me as a man who loves God and loves his neighbor as himself.

None of which is demonstrable evidence.

With man this is impossible to accomplish, but with God, all things are possible.

But not falsifiable, and therein lies the problem.

 

[WonderBeat]

The True God has nothing to do with what is termed 'hell.' Hell is simply misunderstanding and ignorance which we cultivate of our own accord. Hell is a schoolroom teacher and it is this material earth, you don't have to wait till death. Hell is when you have isolated yourself to such an extent in order to feel "OKAY" that the effect becomes inverted and you begin to believe that you are alone and abandoned. None of this is true. Truth is being, truth is existence, truth is God.

 

[elopez]

The Problem of Hell

Many Christians and Muslims endorse the idea that all unsaved, or all non-believers will at death be tormented for eternity for their sin or for their non-decision in accepting the sacrifice of Jesus or Allah as God and Mohammed as his messenger respectively.

It depends on what you mean by "tormented." That usually carries connotations of one inflicting pain on another, while this is simply not true according to the doctrine of Hell. God does not directly torture one, and I don't think we should say any type of demons could either since there is no Biblical support for such an idea. In conclusion here, it cannot be logically claimed that there is a type of physical pain experienced in Hell since the immortal soul is immaterial.

When the Bible speaks of torment in relation to Hell, it is only symbolic of the self inflicting conscious state the soul really experiences in Hell. Kind of like someone going crazy in prison by realizing they are wrong and now is too late. Constantly thinking about it as that's all there is to do in Hell. That type of torment is more significant than anything physical, as that would really pose no threat to an immortal soul.

These same Christians and Muslims often claim at the same time that God is all-merciful and all-powerful.

Yes, but first I would like to define this. Omnipotence means that God is able to perform anything logically possible, not anything illogical or contradicting. For example, God cannot create a square circle. Not because there is an ability on God's behalf, but because the square circle itself cannot exist. So to say that God cannot create something that cannot exist is only fatuous.

My primary contention is that these claims are in obvious contradiction and cannot be reconciled. Either God is all-loving and proposes no hellfire for all non-Christians or God is evil and allows all non-Christians to be tormented for their lack of belief after death.

I think if it was so obvious it shouldn't take as long of a thread to show the obviousness. As of now those two conclusions as unwarranted, as there is no further argumentation to support them. There are no premises that connect to either of those conclusions, and until that is provided, there is no reason to pay them any attention.

My secondary contention is that anyone who vigorously defends this doctrine has serious moral problems in that they are willing to defend and approve of the potential and actual torture of billions and billions of people entirely for what they didn't think. That is the literal endorsement of permanent torture for thought-crime - punishment for what people think or don't think. I can actually think of nothing more depraved, more evil. The peak of the imagination for sadism cannot be eclipsed.

Again, this depends on what you are defining "torture" as. If you mean physical, or even inflicted pain on the souls of Hell, this is simply a misconception. Since you haven't expounded on the notion of "torture" this argument isn't that effective.

I invite all who defend this doctrine to enter this thread and morally defend the proposition that God allows people to enter hell for eternity.

Let's think about what it means for us to actually say, "God sends souls to Hell." We do not mean that God actively 'puts' one's soul in Hell. We mean that God distributes His everlasting judgement, and finalizes a punishment just as a judge for a court would. The judge doesn't actually walk the inmate down to jail, throw him in there and lock the doors. All the judge does is sentence the individual. More accurately, then, we could say "God sentences souls to Hell."

And then think about what got the individual in the situation of facing punishment anyway -- his crimes. This goes into your "Common Arguments" section.

Common Arguments:

We choose to go to hell by rejecting Jesus' offer of salvation.

• This is simply untrue. I do not believe in the divinity of Jesus and the offer of his sacrifice due to a lack of evidence and reasoned argument in favour of it. My skepticism on this point reflects only my convictions and has nothing to do with choosing hell. This argument also completely ignores the existence of Muslims, Sikhs, Zoroastarians and plenty of other theists that have their own understanding of redemption and paradise. Do you seriously contend that they rejected heaven and opted for hell? This argument is blatant nonsense.

While I do not agree with the way this argument is formulated, I do agree with the basic premise: one 'chooses' to go to Hell. Or more specifically, we choose to go to Hell indirectly. We can say this is not even because a rejection of Jesus but because of our sins themselves. It is because of our sins that we would find ourselves confronted with everlasting punishment, and it is those sins that we wanted to engage in. Just as the prisoner may not necessarily want to go to jail, but wants to commit the crimes that will put him in jail, he is responsible for his being in jail. The same can be said of everlasting punishment. One would be in Hell because they wanted to sin, or wanted to disregard the divine law. So it's not said that one would consciously reject Heaven for Hell, but consciously does the things that will make him experience Hell.

 

[Skavau]

It depends on what you mean by "tormented." That usually carries connotations of one inflicting pain on another, while this is simply not true according to the doctrine of Hell. God does not directly torture one, and I don't think we should say any type of demons could either since there is no Biblical support for such an idea. In conclusion here, it cannot be logically claimed that there is a type of physical pain experienced in Hell since the immortal soul is immaterial.

Okay. This is somewhat irrelevant. If you contend that those in hell do in fact experience pain and do so on a permanent level then you are in fact proposing a state where a certain class of people are "receiving pain" permanently.

When the Bible speaks of torment in relation to Hell, it is only symbolic of the self inflicting conscious state the soul really experiences in Hell. Kind of like someone going crazy in prison by realizing they are wrong and now is too late. Constantly thinking about it as that's all there is to do in Hell. That type of torment is more significant than anything physical, as that would really pose no threat to an immortal soul.

So according to you, do all non-Christians reside in hell? Is the requirement to avoid hell to repent of your sin through Jesus Christ and become saved?

Yes, but first I would like to define this. Omnipotence means that God is able to perform anything logically possible, not anything illogical or contradicting. For example, God cannot create a square circle. Not because there is an ability on God's behalf, but because the square circle itself cannot exist. So to say that God cannot create something that cannot exist is only fatuous.

Okay. Not entirely relevant as it my point of raising the characteristics of omnipotence and omniscience was to refer to the fact that God could if he willed end the existence of hell and end the suffering of those in it.

I think if it was so obvious it shouldn't take as long of a thread to show the obviousness.

People appear to have a confirmation bias regarding this. In what other walks of life do you see people openly condoning thought-crime and torture? Almost none in the secular liberal west but yet when people come to defend hell they are all too keen to churn out the most absurd of pseudo-justifications for it.

As of now those two conclusions as unwarranted, as there is no further argumentation to support them. There are no premises that connect to either of those conclusions, and until that is provided, there is no reason to pay them any attention.

I was explaining my contention. I await any willing believer in the hellfire doctrine to provide a good argument for why eternal torment or "receiving pain" for all non-Christians is justified. I am yet untroubled by anything anyone has ever said in defense of it.

Again, this depends on what you are defining "torture" as. If you mean physical, or even inflicted pain on the souls of Hell, this is simply a misconception. Since you haven't expounded on the notion of "torture" this argument isn't that effective.

This is just semantics. That I describe it as torture is completely irrelevent. Those who accept the hellfire doctrine necessarily believe that God allows through inaction or direct intervention the permanent suffering of billions of people for eternity. Anyone who tries to justify this as moral has serious moral problems.

Let's think about what it means for us to actually say, "God sends souls to Hell." We do not mean that God actively 'puts' one's soul in Hell. We mean that God distributes His everlasting judgement, and finalizes a punishment just as a judge for a court would. The judge doesn't actually walk the inmate down to jail, throw him in there and lock the doors. All the judge does is sentence the individual. More accurately, then, we could say "God sentences souls to Hell."

Okay.

I await a good justification for why all non-Christians ought to be sentenced to hell for eternity.

While I do not agree with the way this argument is formulated, I do agree with the basic premise: one 'chooses' to go to Hell. Or more specifically, we choose to go to Hell indirectly.

You play around with definitions to make them pointless. If I walk across a busy road do I choose indirectly to get hit over? What does choice even mean in that context? The only choice I made there was to cross the road. It might have been a poor choice based on the state of the road but I did not choose to get hit over by a car.

We can say this is not even because a rejection of Jesus but because of our sins themselves. It is because of our sins that we would find ourselves confronted with everlasting punishment, and it is those sins that we wanted to engage in.

Why do any sins we commit command eternal punishment, precisely? We live a finite life, not an infinite life. That is infinitely disproportionate by definition.

Just as the prisoner may not necessarily want to go to jail, but wants to commit the crimes that will put him in jail, he is responsible for his being in jail.

Right, but he did not choose to go to jail did he?

The same can be said of everlasting punishment. One would be in Hell because they wanted to sin, or wanted to disregard the divine law.

False dichtonomy. I do not want to "sin." I am an atheist. I reject the concept of sin. It does not enter my accepted vocabulary. Sin is a religious concept which I have no reason to accept. God bought me into a system, against my consent which I have no reason to even believe exists.

Same goes with 'divine law'. I have no reason to accept it. Don't believe it exists.

So it's not said that one would consciously reject Heaven for Hell, but consciously does the things that will make him experience Hell.

So you agree, the claim that hell is a choice is nonsense.

 

[Elioenai26]

Skavau, you don't believe in the Judeo-Christian God, therefore you do not believe in hell, so if this is the case, then our answers to you regarding the OP are going to be unbelievable as well. So what is your point?

 

[Skavau]

Skavau, you don't believe in the Judeo-Christian God, therefore you do not believe in hell, so if this is the case, then our answers to you regarding the OP are going to be unbelievable as well. So what is your point?

My point is to express to others who adhere to eternall hellfire for all non-Christians through argument how depraved and evil their beliefs are. To me, you are defending torture for thought-crime. You are actually as it stands in favour of having pain inficted upon me for eternity for what I think. I am trying to put it as sharply and as bluntly as I can to point out how horrific it actually is.

Can you not understand how obscene it appears from my perspective?