Hell.

[Archie the Preacher]

I don't like the idea of anyone burning in Hell for eternity. Nor do I like the idea of anyone getting smashed up - killed, maimed, broken up, disfigured - in a car accident.

Therefore, I talk to anyone I can about driving under the influence of alcohol or 'drugs' and wearing seat belts. But there are those who get stupid drunk or high, then drive. There are those who refuse to wear seat belts for whatever reason. Some do both. Of these, some have automobile accidents and get killed, maimed, broken up or disfigured as a result.

I warn everyone I can about Hell as well. As much as I can, I advice people they need to have a relationship with God through Jesus Christ. Some ignore that advice.

How do I deal with it? I did my part. Everyone else needs to do their part. I cannot 'fix' it for them.

Is Hell a pleasant concept? Not to me. Does that change the reality of Hell's existence? No.

A couple of years ago I fell and twisted my left knee several times in a fairly short period of time. I also like to eat. So I'm not a big fan of ice, gravity and caloric content. However, my dislike or distain for the laws of nature don't seem to matter. Hell is one of those 'laws' of existence. (Perhaps not of this universe, but of existence.)

Not liking something doesn't make it go away.

 

[Skavau]

But beyond your question are those that have cognitively chosen damnation in hell. There are those that for power and money and the sex and respect it brings in this life, will commit great evil, knowing they are currently choosing damnation in hell. I'm speaking of people that fully know this, fully believe this, and have no intention of repenting. People that will butcher your 7 year-old daughter to death with a screwdriver and pliers if they're being paid in a bag of cocaine or cash to do that hit while they have you and your wife duct taped up and watching. They know they are going to hell, and they want to make as much money as they can in this life, and if possible bring you and your wife with them to hell if they can.

Doesn't matter if you don't believe men like this exist (they believe you exist). And it does not matter is you don't believe Satan and hell exists (they believe you exist).

None of those people deserve eternal torment in hell.

 

[Skavau]

I don't like the idea of anyone burning in Hell for eternity. Nor do I like the idea of anyone getting smashed up - killed, maimed, broken up, disfigured - in a car accident.

Therefore, I talk to anyone I can about driving under the influence of alcohol or 'drugs' and wearing seat belts. But there are those who get stupid drunk or high, then drive. There are those who refuse to wear seat belts for whatever reason. Some do both. Of these, some have automobile accidents and get killed, maimed, broken up or disfigured as a result.

This is not an accurate comparison. Being a victim of a car accident could be your fault, or it could be the fault of the driver, or the driver of the other car, or environmental factors, or some other unknown involvement from some other party. There is no-one around that will say to you that because you did X that you now deserve to be smashed up in a car accident. Or that if you drive without fastening your seat belt then should you crash, you would deserve that. It would be just. That would be a heinous thing to say yet in terms of hell, we see Christians say it too often.

Yes, like you, they don't like hell - they don't want anyone to go there and they advocate for what they believe is the best way to avoid it all the while doing this though they maintain its validity. They affirm that eternal torture for thought-crime is justified should you satisfy the requirements of entry. How is this ethical?

A couple of years ago I fell and twisted my left knee several times in a fairly short period of time. I also like to eat. So I'm not a big fan of ice, gravity and caloric content. However, my dislike or distain for the laws of nature don't seem to matter. Hell is one of those 'laws' of existence. (Perhaps not of this universe, but of existence.)

Not liking something doesn't make it go away.

No, but you're making excuses for the most monstrous concept man has ever conceived. If you find hell horrendous why is it you adulate the deity behind it?

 

[Archie the Preacher]

Now you want to ignore the answer. Pity.

This is not an accurate comparison.

Yes, it is. Both situations illustrate people who know - at least have been told - the prudent and correct way of doing something and insist on ignoring that right and prudent way in order to pursue their own course.

Not liking it - you or anyone or any group else - does not change reality.

Yes, like you, they don't like hell - they don't want anyone to go there and they advocate for what they believe is the best way to avoid it all the while doing this though they maintain its validity.

Pretending it doesn't exist is not the best way to avoid it. That is merely what appeals to their ego.

No, but you're making excuses for the most monstrous concept man has ever conceived. If you find hell horrendous why is it you adulate the deity behind it?

Interesting admission in this couple of sentences.

First you make the claim that man, not God, has 'conceived' the concept. Then, you challenge the deity behind it. You would do well to make up your mind.

And you would do well to face the reality. You want to ignore God and then be immune from the consequences of ignoring God. That just will not work.

 

[rstrats]

Archie the Preacher,

re: "I don't like the idea of anyone burning in Hell for eternity."


How about the lake of fire? Do you also not like the idea of anyone burning in the lake of fire for eternity? Fortunately it's only an idea because there is no scripture that says that anyone, other than the devil as the KJV has it, is going to be tortured for eternity.

 

[Skavau]

Now you want to ignore the answer. Pity.

Yes, it is. Both situations illustrate people who know - at least have been told - the prudent and correct way of doing something and insist on ignoring that right and prudent way in order to pursue their own course.

Not liking it - you or anyone or any group else - does not change reality.

Of course not, but again, no-one argues that people who flout driving laws actually deserve to be a victim of a car accident.

Unless I am mistaken and you actually specifically argue that (I hope not).

First you make the claim that man, not God, has 'conceived' the concept.

I do make that claim. That is probably because I am an atheist and I consider all religions to have their origins in, well, us. In any case my position on the conception and popularisation of hell is actually, at minimum 99% correct. Even if a God(s) exist and if that or those God(s) created a hell that would still mean that every other concept of hell that happens to not be true is fiction.

Then, you challenge the deity behind it. You would do well to make up your mind.

I do not believe in hell or God - I am challenging your perspective. You presumably do believe in hell and God. You also believe, and have compared hell to the result of a horrific car crash and have described it in less than favourable terms. If this is so, why is it that you adulate and praise God, the being you necessarily believe is responsible for hell when in another sentence you call hell awful?

And you would do well to face the reality. You want to ignore God and then be immune from the consequences of ignoring God. That just will not work.

Whether or not this is true is irrelevant to whether or not it is moral. If God has instituted permanent torture for "ignoring him", it would not make it ethical.

This would be a promise beyond the scale of anything humanity has ever done and could ever do. It is literally the most vile thing anyone could threaten anyone else with. Torture is wrong. Punishment for what someone thinks is wrong. We refer to countries that institute that as totalitarian states and ideally shun them for being evil. I can think of no clearer black and white moral stance to take than opposing torture for thought-crime.

 

[WindStaff]

Archie the Preacher,

re: "I don't like the idea of anyone burning in Hell for eternity."


How about the lake of fire? Do you also not like the idea of anyone burning in the lake of fire for eternity? Fortunately it's only an idea because there is no scripture that says that anyone, other than the devil as the KJV has it, is going to be tortured for eternity.

Atheists try to hinge on classical Hell, not wanting to indulge on the fact that a lot of Christian theology has moved toward a more logical premise of Hell in which one's punishment is commensurate to their wickedness.

Classical Hell is essentially Dark Age theology, where many simply abandoned the works of early philosophy and jumped the gun on fanaticism.

 

[rstrats]

WindStaff,

re: "Atheists try to hinge on classical Hell..."


As do most Catholics and Baptists.

 

[Eudaimonist]

As do most Catholics and Baptists.

Precisely.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Skavau]

Atheists try to hinge on classical Hell, not wanting to indulge on the fact that a lot of Christian theology has moved toward a more logical premise of Hell in which one's punishment is commensurate to their wickedness.

I've not seen you express any logic in your depiction of hell. The nature of torture is irrelevant if it causes immense suffering on a scale simply inconceivable.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

Atheists try to hinge on classical Hell, not wanting to indulge on the fact that a lot of Christian theology has moved toward a more logical premise of Hell in which one's punishment is commensurate to their wickedness.

Classical Hell is essentially Dark Age theology, where many simply abandoned the works of early philosophy and jumped the gun on fanaticism.

WindStaff, you and Skavau both misunderstand why a soul goes to Hell.

This may or may not enlighten either of you, but I have to try.

Those who go to Hell are those who reject God's love.

No one goes to Hell for murder, mayhem, homosexuality, smoking, parking in handicap places, not believing in global warming, failure to tithe, carrying (or carrying on with) guns, using bad words or mopery with intent to commit gapery.

The only reason one goes to Hell eternally is that one denies, rejects, ignores or otherwise avoids the Salvation of God. How does that have measurable levels of wickedness?

As I said before, not liking something does not change reality. Pretending it doesn't exist doesn't change anything, either.

 

[Skavau]

WindStaff, you and Skavau both misunderstand why a soul goes to Hell.

This may or may not enlighten either of you, but I have to try.

Those who go to Hell are those who reject God's love.

What does "rejecting God's love" entail? I do not believe in a God. I do not "reject" God, as you affirm, anymore than I reject Thor or Zeus. My 'rejection' which is implicit is based on my non-conviction of God's existence not a conscious act of rebellion or contempt.

In any case, even if I did reject God deliberately, even if I did believe in God but rejected his values anyway - how would that justify eternal torment? Since when is thinking a certain way valid grounds for torture?

As I said before, not liking something does not change reality. Pretending it doesn't exist doesn't change anything, either.

How likely hell may or may not be (I consider it incredibly unlikely) has nothing whatsoever to do with my contempt towards the concept.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I'm sure this has been posted about a lot. I'm an agnostic, leaning towards atheist. But recently I realized how sick the concept of Hell actually is. I was raised a Christian. We are taught about it in Sunday school, and think almost nothing of it. We are desensitized to it.

Anyway, how do you guys get around the thought of your coworkers, friends, etc., burning in Hell for all eternity in endless agony?

I don't share the popular understanding of hell. I say popular, not orthodox. There's a lot about modern popular religion that isn't particularly orthodox. Popular religion says that Christians hope to leave their bodies behind and fly up to a place called heaven and live there as disembodied spirits for eternity. That is popular religion, not orthodox Christianity. Orthodox Christian teaching is that there will be a resurrection of the body, and eternal life right here in the age to come; it's not about "us going up to heaven forever" but heaven, in a sense, coming down to earth forever.

So what about hell? I don't believe in a fiery chasm filled with lava where devils poke people with pitchforks for all eternity. That's simply not part of my religion.

I'd recommend a few places to get a far better, and broader scope of Christian ideas on the topic:

1) C.S. Lewis' The Great Divorce.
2) Fr. Hans Urs von Balthasar's Dare We Hope?
3) The writings of St. Isaac the Syrian
4) N.T. Wright


-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

Two questions for Christians who don't believe in the traditional, literal hell (lake of fire).

Jesus describes in pretty vivid detail, a man who dies and goes to hell and is being tormented in flames. (Luke 16) How do you explain His words if there IS no hell? Jesus spoke in many parables, yes, but He never invented imaginary places, His parables always dealt with real life, possible situations.

Second, what do you believe happens to souls who reject God, after they die?

It would help to understand how to read Jesus in the Gospels rather than attempting to read modern ideas onto Jesus.

Jesus speaks of Gehenna, translated as "hell" in some English Bibles. Confusingly another Greek word gets translated as "hell", namely Hades.

But here's the thing, "Hades" is how the Hebrew concept of She'ol is translated into Greek. She'ol or Hades is not "hell", it is "the grave" or "the pit", it's the underworld, the abode of the dead. Both the righteous and the wicked went to She'ol, because since everyone dies, everyone goes to the "place" of the dead.

In Jesus' time this common grave--She'ol--was conceived of in two parts, the place of the righteous dead which would have been called Gan-Eden (translated into Greek as paradeisos, Paradise), and the place of the wicked dead, Ge-Hinnom, transliterated into Greek as Gehenna. Gan-Eden literally is "Garden of Eden", the Greek word paradeisos comes from a Persian word pairidaeza, meaning "an enclosed garden". Ge-Hinnom literally is "Valley of Hinnom", a valley located outside the old city of Jerusalem where in ancient times the followers of Molech offered children sacrifices, and where many atrocities had taken place, in Jesus' time it was used as a garbage dump--where the waste of the city was disposed of, and also where the bodies of undesirables were disposed, and burned.

The language of "Gehenna-fire" is imagery taken directly from this association of the literal place outside of Jerusalem where things were burned up and applied to the state of the wicked.

Also, here's the thing, She'ol wasn't permanent. It was a place of waiting, until the Last Day, when there would be a Judgment, and the dead would be raised up. The righteous dead waiting at Abraham's side for the resurrection and Judgment, and the wicked dead in Gehenna waiting for the resurrection and Judgment.

This is why, also, John in the Apocalypse will speak of She'ol (Hades) itself being thrown in the lake of fire (and, for the record, given the apocalyptic nature of the Apocalypse, probably shouldn't be taken too literally).

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Archie the Preacher]

What does "rejecting God's love" entail?

Among other things, not recognizing He exists probably counts.

I do not believe in a God.

So? Are you so dense you do not understand refusing to believe He exists is rejecting Him? Are you attempting to establish a 'diminished capacity' defense?

Pretending doesn't change anything, Skavau. But you keep trying.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Among other things, not recognizing He exists probably counts.

You have a very odd idea of the word "rejects". It seems to me that you have to recognize that an entity exists in order to "reject" anything from that entity. For instance, that I would have to believe that Aphrodite exists in order to reject her love.

What atheists reject is the claim from human theists that a God exists, but no more than that.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Skavau]

Among other things, not recognizing He exists probably counts.

Right, and that's not a decision based in rejection, or hatred, or contempt or any low motive but conviction (or lack of). My non-belief in God has nothing to do with what I think ought.

Belief in what is is not a choice, but a conclusion. There is your category error.

So? Are you so dense you do not understand refusing to believe He exists is rejecting Him? Are you attempting to establish a 'diminished capacity' defense?

Pretending doesn't change anything, Skavau. But you keep trying.

Even if I was attempting to enact a diminished capacity defence, I wouldn't need to.

When is it ethical grounds to torture someone for what they think? We call nations that to do that totalitarian and view them resoundingly on the wrong side of history.

 

[South Bound]

WindStaff, you and Skavau both misunderstand why a soul goes to Hell.

This may or may not enlighten either of you, but I have to try.

Those who go to Hell are those who reject God's love.

Sounds like three of you who have misunderstood why the unregenerate go to Hell. People go to Hell as punishment for transgressing the laws of a Holy, Righteous, and Just God, not because they hurt God's feelings.

 

[Skavau]

Sounds like three of you who have misunderstood why the unregenerate go to Hell. People go to Hell as punishment for transgressing the laws of a Holy, Righteous, and Just God, not because they hurt God's feelings.

In which "transgressing the laws of a Holy, Righteous and Just God" constitutes basically the same thing as hurting God's feeling in the context of this discussion.

 

[WindStaff]

Two questions for Christians who don't believe in the traditional, literal hell (lake of fire).

Jesus describes in pretty vivid detail, a man who dies and goes to hell and is being tormented in flames. (Luke 16) How do you explain His words if there IS no hell? Jesus spoke in many parables, yes, but He never invented imaginary places, His parables always dealt with real life, possible situations.

Second, what do you believe happens to souls who reject God, after they die?

Historically speaking, all accounts to what people mistaken as Hell in the gospels are speaking of the Valley of Hinnom.

Eternal Hell is better evidenced in Revelation, and makes far better sense if one holds to partial preterism.