Is it moral?

[Strathos]

I'm an annihilationist, so I say no. But what is interesting is that few people seem to consider the converse - should doing finite good on earth deserve an infinite reward? To be logically consistent you would have to say no, and yet so many people think it's unfair that you don't get to go to heaven just for doing good deeds in life.

 

[oioimoi]

I'm an annihilationist, so I say no. But what is interesting is that few people seem to consider the converse - should doing finite good on earth deserve an infinite reward? To be logically consistent you would have to say no, and yet so many people think it's unfair that you don't get to go to heaven just for doing good deeds in life.

Funny thing is that impossible to know who is right. All we have is an opinion/faith, even if it's really popular one, still just an opinion/no solid evidence.

 

[Occams Barber]

But my answer would be that if our spirits are eternal and some chose to forever spew or manifest hatred towards others, then yes, they would probably only feel welcome and at home in an environment of eternal suffering.

Its 7.00pm on Monday down here (at the bottom of the other side of the world) where I live. I've been off the net enjoying a steak, half a bottle of good red and strawberries for dessert.

I looked at your answer and I'm left with the impression that you have an unusual version of hell etc. I'll try to explain by breaking down your answer:

..if our spirits are eternal..
As far as I know from conventional Christianity 'spirits' (souls?) are eternal. Are you suggesting that this may not the case? If 'spirits' have a finite duration what happens to them once this finite period ends?

... and some choose to forever spew or manifest hatred towards others,..
This introduces the concept that sinning (spewing hatred) can continue after death. Once again this is not a concept I've encountered in conventional Christian teaching. It also raises the question of what happens to those 'spirits' who don't continue to 'spew hatred'.

… then yes, they would probably only feel welcome and at home in an environment of eternal suffering.
I'm struggling with the idea that anything/body/spirit would feel at home in an environment of eternal suffering. If it/they felt 'at home' then this would appear to defeat the purpose of 'eternal suffering'.

I'm not suggesting that your view is wrong or right, only that it appears to be different to the conventional Christian view.
OB

 

[Hidden In Him]

As far as I know from conventional Christianity 'spirits' (souls?) are eternal. Are you suggesting that this may not the case? If 'spirits' have a finite duration what happens to them once this finite period ends?

No, no. I'm conventional in that, LoL. I was simply presenting it as a hypothesis since you're an atheist. Had I presented it as a statement of fact you might have taken issue with that, so I was doing so simply to be amelioratory.

... and some choose to forever spew or manifest hatred towards others,..
This introduces the concept that sinning (spewing hatred) can continue after death. Once again this is not a concept I've encountered in conventional Christian teaching. It also raises the question of what happens to those 'spirits' who don't continue to 'spew hatred'.

The issue here is that the damned keep very bad company in Hell. Their tormentors are demons, who taunt and ridicule them continually, manifesting absolute hatred for them; hatred in its purest forms. This ends up completely converting the soul over to the culture of Hell, which is one of expressing continual hatred for all things. There's a saying, "Bad company corrupts good morals." Well, if you have compromised morals already going in, being tormented by absolute evil will naturally eventually lead to a full deterioration of all that is good and decent in the human soul.

… then yes, they would probably only feel welcome and at home in an environment of eternal suffering.
I'm struggling with the idea that anything/body/spirit would feel at home in an environment of eternal suffering. If it/they felt 'at home' then this would appear to defeat the purpose of 'eternal suffering'.

I mean in the sense that bitterness is itself a type of torment. There is a torment and suffering that goes with walking in hatred and disdain for others. Such personalities naturally feel comfortable only around those who have like minds and hearts, and would not be able to tolerate being in the company of those who continually walked in forgiveness towards others. This in some ways would be an even greater torment to them, unless they could find some way to make everyone else feel the pain they were feeling.

I'm not suggesting that your view is wrong or right, only that it appears to be different to the conventional Christian view.
OB

Get deep enough into it and my views are actually somewhat unconventional, but on the surface we're still fairly in line with orthodoxy so far.

 

[Dave-W]

If this is the case, then it would seem that the punishment significantly outweighs the crime.

In the late 1800s, either Wyoming or Montana passed a law that set a sentence of 5 years in jail for first degree murder. There was a huge public outcry against the sentence saying "Its just killing someone." They did not think the punishment fit the crime.

What they failed to comprehend was the gravity of the crime.

And we fail to understand the gravity of sin.

 

[dmmesdale]

In the late 1800s, either Wyoming or Montana passed a law that set a sentence of 5 years in jail for first degree murder. There was a huge public outcry against the sentence saying "Its just killing someone." They did not think the punishment fit the crime.

What they failed to comprehend was the gravity of the crime.

And we fail to understand the gravity of sin.

"If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

 

[Inkfingers]

We have two choices of which "world" we wish to dwell in.

On one hand, an eternity of life and love. On the other, an eternity of death and suffering. Two different visions of the world. THAT's the choice being made here. Living with carnal mortal mind, in a world of endless death and suffering, or living with spiritual eternal mind, in a world of endless life and joy.

We either dwell in one of those visions or we dwell in the other, and the one we are born into is the dark one not the light. If we want to get to the light we have to surrender to it because the mortal cannot make the immortal...it can only accept it.

Who then choose the dark over the light? Only those who put pride before truth. They choose to live in a universe that offers nothing but endless death and suffering, rather than looking above the carnal appearance and finding a universe of endless life and joy that is a fuller truth.

 

[Albion]

I have no idea what Scripture says but I think oioimoi asks a valid question.

I find that Christians are a bit all over the place when it comes to hell, but the impression I have from this Forum, is that Eternal Damnation is the agreed standard.

Yes, standard is probably the right word for it. And that is the historic belief of Christianity.

If this is the case, then it would seem that the punishment significantly outweighs the crime.

My reply was more narrowly focused, however. In response to what was written, I took the view that it is not a given that most Christians believe that God will personally torture people forever. That there is a hell at all is another matter.

If God does not torture but people go where they have made themselves to go, that may change the answer to the question about God being moral.

 

[Occams Barber]

Yes, standard is probably the right word for it. And that is the historic belief of Christianity.



My reply was more narrowly focused, however. In response to what was written, I took the view that it is not a given that most Christians believe that God will personally torture people forever. That there is a hell at all is another matter.

If God does not torture but people go where they have made themselves to go, that may change the answer to the question about God being moral.

I think you're splitting hairs.

Whether God actually does the torturing or merely created the (hell) situation and allows it to happen He remains the one who is responsible.

The question still remains: Is eternal torture a reasonable response to all sin?
OB

 

[Inkfingers]

Is eternal torture a reasonable response to all sin?

Are you familiar with the Buddhist concept of Samsara?

 

[Occams Barber]

Are you familiar with the Buddhist concept of Samsara?

Nope
OB

 

[Albion]

I think you're splitting hairs.

Whether God actually does the torturing or merely created the (hell) situation and allows it to happen He remains the one who is responsible.

Perhaps I was, but my policy is to answer what is written, not what I intuit that the poster might be thinking in addition.

The question still remains: Is eternal torture a reasonable response to all sin?
OB

IS that the question now? If so, it is quite different from what the question was when the thread was started. For one thing, it was not asked if torture is reasonable but if God is moral, given the traditional belief in hell.

 

[Inkfingers]

Nope
OB

It is a very similar concept; of endless suffering.

 

[Occams Barber]

Perhaps I was, but my policy is to answer what is written, not what I intuit that the poster might be thinking in addition.

IS that the question now? If so, it is quite different from what the question was when the thread was started. For one thing, it was not asked if torture is reasonable but if God is moral, given the traditional belief in hell.

You're being unnecessarily picky again. OK so I paraphrased a little when writing off the top of my head.

Why not stop prevaricating and answer the question?
OB

 

[Occams Barber]

It is a very similar concept; of endless suffering.

Great - but we're talking about Christianity.
OB

 

[Albion]

Because...for one, you think that I had not answered the question of this thread when, in fact, I had done so--but it was answered more precisely than you cared to hear about. That's not my fault.

But if you want to ask your own question, all right.

I tend to think that God, being God with all that we attribute to the nature of God, is not immoral for allowing/creating an eternal hell of some sort.

 

[Inkfingers]

Great - but we're talking about Christianity.
OB

We are indeed. I am though explaining how endless suffering and death is the world that most people live in. It is the universe devoid of God...which doesn't exist really, but it does not stop people in their ignorance living there....

When such people look on the world they see billions of years of suffering.

 

[Occams Barber]

We are indeed. I am though explaining how endless suffering and death is the world that most people live in. It is the universe devoid of God...which doesn't exist really, but it does not stop people in their ignorance living there....

When such people look on the world they see billions of years of suffering.

My universe is devoid of God, but it exists, and I'm fairly happy thanks.

Where does this strange, pessimistic idea about 'billions of years of suffering' come from?
OB

 

[Inkfingers]

Where does this strange, pessimistic idea about 'billions of years of suffering' come from?

That is life in nature. A 20 year western european bubble on planet earth does not change that.

 

[Occams Barber]

Because...for one, you think that I had not answered the question of this thread when, in fact, I had done so--but it was answered more precisely than you cared to hear about. That's not my fault.

But if you want to ask your own question, all right.

I tend to think that God, being God with all that we attribute to the nature of God, is not immoral for allowing/creating an eternal hell of some sort.

So - God did it therefore it is intrinsically moral?

If you or I acted this way would we also be morally correct?
OB