Does morality exist without God?

[Eudaimonist]

So without God, morals don't exist?

Why are you asking this question? How does it tie in with our discussion?


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

First off... How do you know what you're saying is in the least bit accurate? How do you know what God's feelings are towards Atheists?

Because scripture tells us:

John 3:36
He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him
​

The unbeliever (and an atheist is an unbeliever) is lost; God's wrath is upon him.

Secondly, you are showing overt bigotry in even throwing out the idea that our "Gods" (which is a very questionable use of the word) are Wealth, Sex, Drink, Position, Drugs or Party Time. Pull your head out of your ignorant, bigoted ass and open your eyes to the reality that people that don't believe what you do are still good, hard working, stable contributors to society.

Hmm. Yes, I will agree that some/most atheists are "still good, hard working, stable contributors to society." I've had some good friends who were atheists. They are all these things, and they are still lost according to scripture.

I will also (although you didn't ask me to here) acquiesce that not all atheists are wealthy (or even seeking it), sex-minded; not all drink or at least drink to get drunk; (position??); not all do drugs or party all the time.

I will also go so far as to say that some atheists are ignorant, bigoted asses (you do mean this in the biblical manner, don't you?) who need to open their eyes to the reality that maybe, perhaps the Christian God is real and the scriptures are true.

In my case, I am employed in a career that I love. It pays enough to meet my needs, and save for eventual retirement. I drink socially, but very rarely get drunk and can't remember the last time I drank at home. I have never taken a drug of any kind, and for that matter haven't even smoked a cigarette in my life. And while I enjoy parties, the parties I go to usually consist of getting together to watch a sporting event on TV with a couple friends.

I have a happy, stable, fulfilling life. I enjoy a good debate about religion, however I have no anger towards religious people, unless they are disrespectful towards me first.

I'm happy for your contented happiness. I do think you are wrong about God and scripture, though (or at least wrong about your acceptance that you need Jesus). But for your personal, earthly happiness: hey, I'm glad for you. Really I am. No sarcasm in that.

Furthermore, you are making assertions about the opinions of your god and what happens after someone's death that you have no way of possibly knowing. Why would I be convinced or even concerned of that?

Again, if we are going to talk about the Christian God then we must do so in the context of the Christian belief. Then assertions made by Christians make a little more sense (at least those from sensible Christians -- I too have met some who are not). But, yes, in that context we certainly DO know what happens after death.

If you don't think that we are right, but you (as I think you said you do) like to debate religion then in the same manner that one might like to debate the virtues of a fictional story with another reader of fiction, get to know the Christian Bible and the various Christian beliefs (denominational beliefs) perhaps in your world as a fiction. Then you would be better versed to discuss it without anyone's feelings getting pinched.

But if you attempt to approach it from a philosophical realm of, for instance, is there morality without God -- well, that is outside of the Christian circle, so what "reality" does that question have? But, hey, let's talk.

 

[Eudaimonist]

The Christian Gospel message is not simply about "kindness." You don't make it to heaven, more to the point you are not saved, by being kind or doing good.

Right. I hope someguy14 absorbs what you are saying.

btw....hi Mark; nice to meet you!!

Hello to you! Bob, is it? It's nice to meet you too.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

Actually, Christ's teachings were a mixed bag. There were a number of great teachings attributed to him (However I may add none of the concepts he preached were original). Whereas he also preached a number of immoral things on top of baseless superstition.

No. Christ's teachings all pointed to the Love of the Father.

Jesus' teachings were original. But you must understand that His teachings didn't start with the incarnation. God created the world and created man. All that Jesus taught was from the beginning of time. What Jesus came for was to restore the relationship of man to God, a relationship broken by our transgression.

Muhammad also had a number of moral teachings, why not accept Islam based on the same criteria you are advocating? Or Buddhism, or Hinduism, or whatever? You can find some good moral teachings in any religion on the planet... but that does not make the religion true as a whole.

Well, because it isn't about "moral teaching." It isn't about kindness. Or doing good works. These things will not save you.

Muhammad was a great teacher. Perhaps some of his teachins were violent in nature to us. But Muhammad was a man and his grave site can be visited. Buddha was a man, and is now dead. Hinduism is a conglomeration of many beiefs and does not have a founder that we can point to as its author. We can't even say God made this, for they have many gods. In fact they are henotheistic.

Christianity is the only religion that professes that its author and founder, Jesus Christ, died but is dead no longer. That He rose from the dead and is seated in Heaven. That He is God Himself, one person of three in the Godhead, but One God. There is no gods beside Him.

I believe you should take good advice from any source, meaning the good elements of what Jesus had to say you can take note of. However, you don't need the superstition, or any kind of Christian belief to be a good, moral person. That makes Christianity redundant. We should instead put more focus on teaching rational thought, ethics and morality instead of Religion.

Again, the problem is that a "good, moral person" will still go to Hell if He does not know and accept Jesus Christ as Savior. You can be as "good" as you can, but you will still fall short of the perfection that God requires. You, as a man, simply cannot live up to the perfection requirement to be saved.

But Jesus came and died in your place, if you accept this gift, and He took the price for your sin: death. He paid that price so that you might have righteousness imputed to you. Right standing with God is "charged" to your account when you accept Jesus as Lord and Savior.

There are many good people on the road to Hell. There are even those who say they believe in Jesus, but they do not truly accept Him and they live a life that is not pleasing to God, and one day they shall say "Lord, Lord. But Jesus will say: depart from Me, for I do not know you." Because it isn't about doing good or knowing who Jesus was. It is about accepting Him as Lord and Savior. He is the only way to eternal life.

Now, I have no issue with rational thought. Ethics are great. And morality, even instead of religion, is awesome. But only if Jesus is at the center of it all. A relationship with Jesus Christ is central: not rational thought, not ethics, not morality. And if one is into religion instead of relationship then they are no better than the sons of Sceva in Acts 19:13-20 who said to the demons: "We exorcise you by the name of Jesus whom Paul preaches" and where the demons replied: "Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are you?"

You see, they knew the name; they did not have a relationship.

 

[someguy14]

Maybe if he loves me so very much, he could start to help with love and open arms and yadda yadda before all else fails.

It wouldn't ever fail without the wickedness that is in opposition to Him friend. Can't ever go wrong, with goodness. God Himself.

 

[someguy14]

It isn't about kindness. Or doing good works. These things will not save you.

Gods kindness friend. Mankind is incapable of doing good. Why callest thou me good, there is none good, but one, that is, God. Love is kind. God is love.

 

[quatona]

If your gods are wealth, sex, drink, position, drugs and constant party time, your not about to give that up eternal life in a place where you won't be with your gods..

These aren´t my gods at all.

 

[quatona]

So without God, morals don't exist?

Depending on your definition, they either exist with and without a god, or they don´t exist with or without a god.
Unless you define "morals" as a god given set of rules, of course.

 

[Eudaimonist]

If your gods are wealth, sex, drink, position, drugs and constant party time, your not about to give that up eternal life in a place where you won't be with your gods.. The truth is when you die, that party is over.

Not only aren't these my "gods" (or significant values) to me now, they weren't even such when I was in college.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Freodin]

It wouldn't ever fail without the wickedness that is in opposition to Him friend. Can't ever go wrong, with goodness. God Himself.

Can't ever go wrong, but fails, because of "wickedness".

And this "wickedness" is inevitable, because "mankind is incapable of doing good".

So what can I do to escape that? Nothing. If I could do anything, that would have to be "good"... and I cannot do good. In contrast to all those people who claim to be saved, by the grace of God or by accepting his gift (is accepting something "doing" or not?), where obviously God had no problems with overcoming the inherent "wickedness" that keeps him from doing the same for me.

That anyone could believe in such an incoherent system, and even think the origin of such a system is "goodness" is completely beyond me.

 

[Gadarene]

Life is a gift.

In that it's valuable? Sure, but who is doing the giving? Presuming givers into existence would be the same mistake you've been consistently making.

 

[Gadarene]

Landing in a nest of Athesist I realize God isn't on trial and He certainly has nothing to prove, He's not upset that you don't believe in Him, in fact Hesees you for what you are and allows you all the intertainment the world has to offer. It dosen't get any better that that for you, after that it's a down hill slide with no fun at the bottom.
If your gods are wealth, sex, drink, position, drugs and constant party time, your not about to give that up eternal life in a place where you won't be with your gods.. The truth is when you die, that party is over.

Pro-tip: atheism =/= hedonism.

And I'm sure you just happen to follow the belief system where God holds your hand through life and promises you super happy fun times in heaven forever because you're such a good person and not following a massive incentive at all....

 

[Dave Ellis]

in

Your tidy label does not apply , a Christian does not believe in pagan Gods thus we are not in your definition of theist. We have one God three beings , through Christ we have life eternal life . Our God is living and has always been and always will be, through our spirit we commune with him we know him in person, yes he talks to us. You may never know this joy of interaction with your creator, you may suffer eternal separation. With the majority world wide understanding Christ are you willing to throw the dice ? God is moved by faith if you turn your back you may not have the priveledge of death bed salvation. I sincerely hope you reconsider your views , take a step back and listen to Gods still small voice. Deep down we all know their is God you do as well. God is love he loves you and would not have you perish. God is just you must accept him Christ in your heart with out Christ there are no remissions of sin. It takes more faith to think like you than a Christian has, you are willing to gamble your soul.

What?

You don't need to believe in Pagan Gods to be a theist... A theist is someone who believes in ANY God. If you believe in the Christian God and none other, you are a Theist.

Secondly, there is not a majority world-wide understanding of Christ. In fact the vast majority of people on Earth are NOT Christian. There's approximately 2.2 Billion Christians out of 7 Billion people in the world. That means 4.8 Billion do not agree with you.

Lastly, How do you know what you know? You don't know what the intention or desires of your God are. Furthermore, you certainly have demonstrated you don't know what my beliefs are. The fact you are asserting "I know there is a God" shows you can't comprehend other world-views other than your own. I in fact do not believe that there is a God, please try to wrap your head around the fact that some people don't see things the way that you do.

As for Faith, there is none required. At least no more faith than it takes to reject anything else with absolutely no evidence to support it. You don't need to have faith to not believe in Zeus, or Baal... And the same goes for your God too.

 

[Dave Ellis]

It does exist. Are you interested in it?

Show me compelling evidence, and I will be more than happy to investigate.

Absolutely. It is true in all believers in God.
I am living proof of Gods word.

No you aren't

Some "Iranians" have claimed that the holocaust never happened. Pictures have been produced and witnesses.

You're attempting to change the topic to dodge answering the original point.

However, fine... We'll use the same standards of evidence. Produce pictures and verifiable witnesses of Jesus and his miracles, and then your statement will have some kind of validity. Until you can do that, please go back and try to address the original point.

It already is and yet mankind happened upon it. Receiving the knowledge. Receiving facts. One that was and is and always be aware of all, and yet mankind must "discover" it.

How do you know this to be true?

 

[Dave Ellis]

Noodles are a good, if pure. The Source of all goodness, Himself, The Creator of all, is God.
A noodle is a creation, and perishes. The Creator of all is eternal and the only One worthy of all thanks.

Blasphemer!

 

[Dave Ellis]

Buddhism teaches a method and promotes a reincarnation. A promotion of worldly gain, lust. Does not commit to an answer for a life void of wickedness. Wickedness is not a necessity. It focuses on how to gain advantage in a perishing world. Gives credit to none except how many works it can do to gain a better life. Reincarnation is a fable taught by those that fear, with doubt. Claiming to be content, for gain in a perishing world. Where death remains. Glorifying creation instead of the creator.

If I actually do a study of their writings, I can give you a better example of how it fails without God. God is essential. Perhaps you have a few writs to suggest how your comparing buddhism to Christianity?

You clearly do not understand what Buddhism is.

 

[Gadarene]

You clearly do not understand what Buddhism is.

Indeed.

I'm also wondering how exactly reincarnation is "worldly gain" and yet nary a comment is made about the reward for being a good Christian - permanent emotional bliss in a city made of bling.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Because scripture tells us:

John 3:36
He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him
​

The unbeliever (and an atheist is an unbeliever) is lost; God's wrath is upon him.

I'm fully aware of what Scripture says, however Biblical scripture is about as convincing to me as Koranic scripture is convincing to you. There are many flaws, contradictions and inaccuracies in Biblical scripture, with no evidence to back the assertion it was dictated by God. Because of this, I don't consider it a trustworthy source.

If you can show that John 3:36 is actually true, please do so.

Hmm. Yes, I will agree that some/most atheists are "still good, hard working, stable contributors to society." I've had some good friends who were atheists. They are all these things, and they are still lost according to scripture.

I will also (although you didn't ask me to here) acquiesce that not all atheists are wealthy (or even seeking it), sex-minded; not all drink or at least drink to get drunk; (position??); not all do drugs or party all the time.

I will also go so far as to say that some atheists are ignorant, bigoted asses (you do mean this in the biblical manner, don't you?) who need to open their eyes to the reality that maybe, perhaps the Christian God is real and the scriptures are true.

I don't disagree at all that some Atheists are ignorant bigoted asses (in the biblical sense of course!). On the flip side, many Christians are kind, generous and open minded. I wasn't making a sweeping condemnation of Christians as a whole, I was responding to the ignorant, bigoted claims of one person who seems to think I spend my life going from party to party constantly boozed up and high because I don't follow his theological belief.

I'm happy for your contented happiness. I do think you are wrong about God and scripture, though (or at least wrong about your acceptance that you need Jesus). But for your personal, earthly happiness: hey, I'm glad for you. Really I am. No sarcasm in that.

Thanks I also obviously think you're wrong about God and Scripture, but that doesn't mean we can't have a respectful discussion about it.

Again, if we are going to talk about the Christian God then we must do so in the context of the Christian belief. Then assertions made by Christians make a little more sense (at least those from sensible Christians -- I too have met some who are not). But, yes, in that context we certainly DO know what happens after death.

I agree you need to have an understanding of Christianity to debate what Christians think effectively. That being said, so many denominations believe so many different things, you also have to take much of it on a case by case basis. Christians can't even agree amongst themselves what is the word of god in most cases.

When debating, I usually ask what they believe, and why they believe it. Any appeal to scripture in my eyes is a null argument as not only to other Christians interpret the scripture differently, they can't prove that the scripture is accurate to begin with.

After that, there isn't much evidence to back up what they say, but a few people have raised interesting arguments over the years.

If you don't think that we are right, but you (as I think you said you do) like to debate religion then in the same manner that one might like to debate the virtues of a fictional story with another reader of fiction, get to know the Christian Bible and the various Christian beliefs (denominational beliefs) perhaps in your world as a fiction. Then you would be better versed to discuss it without anyone's feelings getting pinched.

I have read the bible cover to cover and was raised as a Presbyterian. I've read numerous books both based on Christian viewpoints, and Atheistic viewpoints. I've taken much effort to understand exactly what Christianity is, and have a fairly strong knowledge of the subject matter... And honestly the research into the historicity of the bible and Christianity as a whole is one of the major reasons why I ultimately rejected belief in the system.

But if you attempt to approach it from a philosophical realm of, for instance, is there morality without God -- well, that is outside of the Christian circle, so what "reality" does that question have? But, hey, let's talk.

Well, if the Christian circle is based on incorrect belief, then there exists two possibilities. Either morality stems from some other religion's God, or morality exists without God.

Since no other God is more or less plausible than the Christian one, I must by default assume morality exists without a God until the time God is shown to likely exist.

 

[Dave Ellis]

No. Christ's teachings all pointed to the Love of the Father.

Jesus' teachings were original. But you must understand that His teachings didn't start with the incarnation. God created the world and created man. All that Jesus taught was from the beginning of time. What Jesus came for was to restore the relationship of man to God, a relationship broken by our transgression.

If you're talking about his teachings about love of the father, you would be correct that his teachings were reasonably original. However, your original statement dealt more with love and kindness as a whole... in that sense everything he had to say (i.e. treat others as you would like to be treated) existed long before the time of Jesus.

Christianity is the only religion that professes that its author and founder, Jesus Christ, died but is dead no longer. That He rose from the dead and is seated in Heaven. That He is God Himself, one person of three in the Godhead, but One God. There is no gods beside Him.

That's not entirely accurate, Christianity does not claim Jesus as it's author, nor it's founder. Typically Paul is considered the founder of Christianity. The Authors would be countless, from the first people who wrote the first pieces of scripture, right up to modern-day church leaders.

Likewise, many other religions have examples of gods or demi-gods dying, then rising from the dead as proof of their divinity.

Again, the problem is that a "good, moral person" will still go to Hell if He does not know and accept Jesus Christ as Savior. You can be as "good" as you can, but you will still fall short of the perfection that God requires. You, as a man, simply cannot live up to the perfection requirement to be saved.

But Jesus came and died in your place, if you accept this gift, and He took the price for your sin: death. He paid that price so that you might have righteousness imputed to you. Right standing with God is "charged" to your account when you accept Jesus as Lord and Savior.

Please show how you know this is correct.

There are many good people on the road to Hell. There are even those who say they believe in Jesus, but they do not truly accept Him and they live a life that is not pleasing to God, and one day they shall say "Lord, Lord. But Jesus will say: depart from Me, for I do not know you." Because it isn't about doing good or knowing who Jesus was. It is about accepting Him as Lord and Savior. He is the only way to eternal life.

Now, I have no issue with rational thought. Ethics are great. And morality, even instead of religion, is awesome. But only if Jesus is at the center of it all. A relationship with Jesus Christ is central: not rational thought, not ethics, not morality. And if one is into religion instead of relationship then they are no better than the sons of Sceva in Acts 19:13-20 who said to the demons: "We exorcise you by the name of Jesus whom Paul preaches" and where the demons replied: "Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are you?"

You see, they knew the name; they did not have a relationship.

You're talking about demons and superstition while still claiming to respect rational thought. It's irrational to believe in those things, as they have no evidence to back them. Same goes for Jesus.

But what kind of morality does your God have if he's willing to torture someone for all eternity for not believing, when by necessity he would have created them knowing they were not going to believe? That's about the highest form of Sadism I can imagine.

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

If you're talking about his teachings about love of the father, you would be correct that his teachings were reasonably original. However, your original statement dealt more with love and kindness as a whole... in that sense everything he had to say (i.e. treat others as you would like to be treated) existed long before the time of Jesus.

Which is what I said, but I'm sure you mean "before the time of Jesus" differently than I said:

quote: ABlessedMan
Jesus' teachings were original. But you must understand that His teachings didn't start with the incarnation. God created the world and created man. All that Jesus taught was from the beginning of time.
​

That's not entirely accurate, Christianity does not claim Jesus as it's author, nor it's founder. Typically Paul is considered the founder of Christianity. The Authors would be countless, from the first people who wrote the first pieces of scripture, right up to modern-day church leaders.

It most certainly does. Christianity is not called Paulianity or Peterianity. It is based upon it's founder, Jesus Christ.

Further the scripture is considered to be the inspired Word of God. God, whom Jesus is a person in the Godhead, is the author of the Bible, through men like Paul, like Peter, like Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, etc.

And again, the authors can be counted (there are 40). And modern church leaders do not add to the canon.

Likewise, many other religions have examples of gods or demi-gods dying, then rising from the dead as proof of their divinity.

Other than mythology, which are stories of how things came to be, not religions that sane people follow: name some. There is no major religion that makes such a statement. There are only three world religions that teach faith in one supreme God -- Christianity, Judaism and Islam. Talking of any other "minor" religion is pointless.

Of the world religions some (like Hinduism) teach reincarnation -- the process by which a person will return to life in a future embodiment. But that is not resurrection. And none of these religions, esp. the three world religions mentioned, except for Chrisitanity, that teach not only that their founder died, was buried, and rose again from the dead with claims that people saw Him and interacted with Him after His resurrection (and not only that but people who were not intimate in writing the actual "stories").

So, mythology aside, I'd like to know of any major, practiced religion that teaches this. Mind you, this alone does not prove Christianity correct -- but rather it only shows it to be unique.

Please show how you know this is correct.

Again, the correctness of what I wrote is encompassed within the Christian belief system. You may certainly decide not to believe that system but it does not make it go away if it is true.

You're talking about demons and superstition while still claiming to respect rational thought. It's irrational to believe in those things, as they have no evidence to back them. Same goes for Jesus.

Well, if you place biblical record in with superstition then we waste time here talking. Again, discussion must have some basis. The Christian basis is the Bible and within that construct (you may call it fiction) demons and God and the devil and angels all exist. I would not call all the Christians in the world irrational, would you? Sure, some (perhaps many) believe from some form of mere superstition, but that is not what the belief is based upon.

When you say "same goes for Jesus" what do you mean? You are not one of those who claim that Jesus never existed, are you? For there is extra-biblical record of His existence. There are records that are not kind to Christianity, as well as records by some who converted later, like Josephus (oh the disparaged Josephus), who record facts of Jesus' life or the accounts of Chrisitans shortly after His life and death and resurrection.

Dave, there are great institutions of learning that study Christianity and study the Bible in its original languages so that they may form an orthodox understanding of the doctrines and theology taught within. If you think these learned men are irrational, then why are you here? Why are you not on some site where geeks seeks after the powers of Zeus or try to prove the reality of Hercules? Why do you not debate them? I venture it is because you know they are mythology, but you fear that Christianity is truth.

But what kind of morality does your God have if he's willing to torture someone for all eternity for not believing, when by necessity he would have created them knowing they were not going to believe? That's about the highest form of Sadism I can imagine.

Ahh. Now we get to the real issue. I do find that most people who give up on Christianity do so for this very reason, although they fail to admit it. I was raised in a Christian (albeit Catholic) household. I went through my stage of atheism and agnosticism. I know the reasons why I fell out -- it was the fairness of God and the pain He would bring. I remember well all my atheist friends at the time (and now, today) and the discussions that were had. Rejection centered around "God's sadistic side." Then, because we were "rational" we had to shift: we had to move from this banal rejection to a more formal, and austere position of logic and science. God being nothing more than superstition.

It was an illogical shift, really a reason to rebel against my parents, my community, even society at large. I didn't (and so far most everyone I know who moved from religion to "unbelief") reject God because I no longer felt He existed; I rejected Him because I didn't like Him anymore. That dislike grew into a vision that He simply must not exist. He couldn't.

But He did. And He kept on calling me in that small, still voice. And even as an atheist I would find myself making deals with this "non-existent God". Prove yourself to me! I cried out. And you know what: He did. Not in gigantic, recordable miracles and flashes of light, but rather in my knowledge that, yes, He exists. Ok, enough of my sap....

God does not torture someone. God simply gave man a choice.

Deuteronomy 30:15-19
“See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil, 16 in that I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in His ways, and to keep His commandments, His statutes, and His judgments, that you may live and multiply; and the Lord your God will bless you in the land which you go to possess. 17 But if your heart turns away so that you do not hear, and are drawn away, and worship other gods and serve them, 18 I announce to you today that you shall surely perish; you shall not prolong your days in the land which you cross over the Jordan to go in and possess. 19 I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live;
​

(Again, if we were going to debate Huckleberry Finn, we would do so around Mark Twain's book. We are debating the Christian God here, so we do so around the biblical record.)

Inherent here is that God has created everything. Nothing exists without God creating it (and all George Carlin jokes aside). So, set before you (and all mankind) is Life and Death, Blessing and Cursing.

Then God gives a clue: choose Life!

Two things are immediately apparent here: (1) you get to choose; (2) you should choose Life.

But what is important is that you get to choose [1]. If you choose Heaven, it is your choice; if you choose Hell, it is your choice (some actively choose this). If you choose to not believe, you have not followed His command to walk in His ways and to love Him. Therefore you have chosen to reject the Life that He offers.

So if you end up in an eternal Hell, then it is not a sadistic God who put you there, but it is you who put you there.

And as a final, short add-on: Hell (Hades) will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev 20:14). It is not an eternal place. There is no biblical record of eternal "torturing" as in the image of a black-hooded, WWF wrestler type with a whip and a scourge, beating you and tearing your flesh.... No, the lake of fire is likely an idiom that simply means an eternity without God. You have chosen seperation from Him -- you would have chosen Death. And within the Christian construct, God is Love. He is all that is Good. He is Blessing. So when you (your choice) go to where there is no God, you go to where there is no Love, no Good, no Blessing. You go to where there is only despair, hatred, curse, emptiness, loneliness. And that existence is akin to being put into a fire, and that pain will last for eternity, for your soul never ceases to exist.

-------
[1] - The other thought possibility is God makes a world where you have no choice, but He dictates your decisions and everyone is saved. But, again, if we are to discuss Christianity we must stick within the biblical record and not ventuer into "what-ifs."