The Problem of Hell v.2

[Skavau]

Does anyone else want to take this? Defend this?

 

[Elioenai26]

Then the issue is shaded in grey, not black or white. As often as not and perhaps even more so, morality is cloaked in situation and perspective.


Those involved in the framework for legislation of civil law will. If it turns out unpopular then in time, it could change.


Many people in this thread. I understand the notion of hell being for the unsaved but I also understand that according to many Christians (including you, I believe) salvation is precluded based on what people don't think. That is to say that if one does not believe Jesus died for our sins and does not accept the sacrifice they will be tormented forever. This makes it the equivalent of thought-crime, an evil only found in totalitarianism and only supported currently by fascists and dictators.

And what's worse is the punishment for said thought-crime.


People do decide for themselves what is right or wrong. Societies at large do the same also, though I was not referring to that there.

I was saying that I condemn thought-crime and torture when someone brings an example of a human committing it. Why should I make exceptions for God?

Yes our thoughts are indeed criminal if they are unrighteous before one who sees all things plainly.

He who created the body, also created the mind and heart.

That is why Jesus said that if a man were even to look upon a woman and lust after her in his heart, then he is committing adultery.

Or that one who hates another in his heart is a murderer.

Many there are who harbor vile and evil thoughts all the day long, who if afforded the opportunity, would act upon such thoughts.

And many there are who are restrained from wicked abominations only because they desire to forego the consequential punishment of such wickedness.

Through all, the exaltation of self is like a poison which pridefully manifests it's deadliness in a thousand and a thousand ways.

 

[Gracchus]

Yes our thoughts are indeed criminal if they are unrighteous before one who sees all things plainly.

UH ... no! What is criminal is defined by statute, what is moral is decided by custom. And no one has ever demonstrated that they see everything, even through a glass, darkly.

He who created the body, also created the mind and heart.

There has never been a mind observed without a body, and the heart is part of the body --- nor has anyone ever shown a body being created.

That is why Jesus said that if a man were even to look upon a woman and lust after her in his heart, then he is committing adultery.

Maybe so, but he doesn't spread STD's, and doesn't leave cuckoo children.

Or that one who hates another in his heart is a murderer.

But as long as the hate is internalized, no one dies, and no one stands trial. I really don't care if you hate me so much it turns your bowels bloody, as long as you don't bother me with it.

Many there are who harbor vile and evil thoughts all the day long, who if afforded the opportunity, would act upon such thoughts.

And many there are who harbor vile and evil thoughts all day long, even day after day and year after year, and afforded the opportunity, never act out those thoughts.

And many there are who are restrained from wicked abominations only because they desire to forego the consequential punishment of such wickedness.

And some few there are, incredible and unfathomable to the rest, who are restrained from wickedness, even though they could get away with it, simply because they love the good. It is mainly religious people who seem to need a magic sky monitor to keep them on the straight and narrow.

Through all, the exaltation of self is like a poison which pridefully manifests it's deadliness in a thousand and a thousand ways.

Let's not forget that the most horrendous evils are perpetrated, not by individuals, but by groups acting in concert for alledgedly righteous motives. Jews think themselves better than goyim, Christians think themselves better than heathens, Muslims deny equality with unbelievers, and they all have histories of monstrous crimes committed in concert in the name of their "God". Others, use "Duty", "Honor", or "Country" as the justification. In any case, by acting in concert they can convince themselves of their own moral superiority, and deny their own resposibility. Every evil is more easily concealed in the group setting.

For those who don't read signatures: "It is because we believe absurdities that we are able to commit atrocities."

 

[Elioenai26]

UH ... no! What is criminal is defined by statute, what is moral is decided by custom. And no one has ever demonstrated that they see everything, even through a glass, darkly.

There has never been a mind observed without a body, and the heart is part of the body --- nor has anyone ever shown a body being created.
Maybe so, but he doesn't spread STD's, and doesn't leave cuckoo children.

But as long as the hate is internalized, no one dies, and no one stands trial. I really don't care if you hate me so much it turns your bowels bloody, as long as you don't bother me with it.

And many there are who harbor vile and evil thoughts all day long, even day after day and year after year, and afforded the opportunity, never act out those thoughts.
And some few there are, incredible and unfathomable to the rest, who are restrained from wickedness, even though they could get away with it, simply because they love the good. It is mainly religious people who seem to need a magic sky monitor to keep them on the straight and narrow.
Let's not forget that the most horrendous evils are perpetrated, not by individuals, but by groups acting in concert for alledgedly righteous motives. Jews think themselves better than goyim, Christians think themselves better than heathens, Muslims deny equality with unbelievers, and they all have histories of monstrous crimes committed in concert in the name of their "God". Others, use "Duty", "Honor", or "Country" as the justification. In any case, by acting in concert they can convince themselves of their own moral superiority, and deny their own resposibility. Every evil is more easily concealed in the group setting.

For those who don't read signatures: "It is because we believe absurdities that we are able to commit atrocities."

Thanks for sharing your opinions with us Mr. Gracchus.

We hope you have a wonderful weekend and that all is well with you.

 

[Skavau]

Yes our thoughts are indeed criminal if they are unrighteous before one who sees all things plainly.

I'm not quite sure what this is supposed to mean.

Probably because I'm a humanist, reject the idea of objective morality in a literal sense and not someone who applies meaningless terms redundantly.

He who created the body, also created the mind and heart.

That is why Jesus said that if a man were even to look upon a woman and lust after her in his heart, then he is committing adultery.

This is too often said. Sorry to say it, but Jesus is simply wrong. Lust of another sexually does not equate to adultery.

Or that one who hates another in his heart is a murderer.

Hating someone is not the same as murdering them. Terms are distorted here to mean little more than nothing.

Many there are who harbor vile and evil thoughts all the day long, who if afforded the opportunity, would act upon such thoughts.

This is probably true. This is why all societies that exist have established codes of conduct known as civil law that all living there are required to observe. It means a safer life for everyone, including those who would resort to evil if they could.

And many there are who are restrained from wicked abominations only because they desire to forego the consequential punishment of such wickedness.

Okay. This is true also. See above.

Through all, the exaltation of self is like a poison which pridefully manifests it's deadliness in a thousand and a thousand ways.

I'm not sure what this verbose proclamation against pride has to do with my points regarding torment in hell for thought-crime.

 

[Elioenai26]

I'm not quite sure what this is supposed to mean.

Probably because I'm a humanist, reject the idea of objective morality in a literal sense and not someone who applies meaningless terms redundantly.


This is too often said. Sorry to say it, but Jesus is simply wrong. Lust of another sexually does not equate to adultery.


Hating someone is not the same as murdering them. Terms are distorted here to mean little more than nothing.


This is probably true. This is why all societies that exist have established codes of conduct known as civil law that all living there are required to observe. It means a safer life for everyone, including those who would resort to evil if they could.


Okay. This is true also. See above.


I'm not sure what this verbose proclamation against pride has to do with my points regarding torment in hell for thought-crime.

Skavau, I think you would just be better off admitting that you have no leg on which to stand.

God does not exist, therefore hell does not exist.

All things are subjective i.e subject to the interpreter.

You ultimately are saying that you just dont like the idea of hell, that it is repulsive etc. etc.

We maintain that hell is real and purposeful.

You have your opinion, we have ours. There is no other way for you to view this issue. All is ultimately meaningless Skavau so what are you trying to accomplish ?

 

[Skavau]

Skavau, I think you would just be better off admitting that you have no leg on which to stand.

I'll decide what I admit and when I admit it, thanks. I don't feel in any need to concede anything for I don't feel I've been demonstrated incorrect on anything.

God does not exist, therefore hell does not exist.

Not relevant to this thread. This thread assumes for the sake of argument that they do exist.

All things are subjective i.e subject to the interpreter.

This is always true at all times whether or not God exists or not.

You ultimately are saying that you just dont like the idea of hell, that it is repulsive etc. etc.

I am saying that beyond repulsive it is morally indefensible.

You cannot justify the eternal torment of people of billions of people for acts of a finite lifetime. Even vicarious redemption, the way in which to avoid heaven is profoundly unjust. I believe every core of what you believe on this is immoral and unjustifiable and this thread asks people who share the belief to demonstrate otherwise.

You have your opinion, we have ours. There is no other way for you to view this issue. All is ultimately meaningless Skavau so what are you trying to accomplish ?

I'm trying to open your eyes to the obvious barbarism you believe.

You believe in a God that will through allowance or direction permit the permanent torment of people for not repenting of their sins (which you believe were imposed upon us). You believe that every single non-Christian that exists now and that has ever existed is undergoing permanent suffering for not accepting Jesus' sacrifice.

Worse, not only do you believe it - you approve of it. You approve of it and speak of it in pious terms. I would posit that this is worse than even holocaust denial, for I cannot imagine defending something that directly involves the infinite torment of most people who have ever lived with a straight face. You are defending what no dictator in history has even come close to imagining.

You then have the nerve to call yourself moral.

 

[Elioenai26]

I'll decide what I admit and when I admit it, thanks. I don't feel in any need to concede anything for I don't feel I've been demonstrated incorrect on anything.


Not relevant to this thread. This thread assumes for the sake of argument that they do exist.


This is always true at all times whether or not God exists or not.


I am saying that beyond repuslive it is morally indefensible.

You cannot justify the eternal torment of people of billions of people for acts of a finite lifetime. Even vicarious redemption, the way in which to avoid heaven is profoundly unjust. I believe every core of what you believe on this is immoral and unjustifiable and this thread asks people who share the belief to demonstrate otherwise.


I'm trying to open your eyes to the obvious barbarism you believe.

You believe in a God that will through allowance or direction permit the permanent torment of people for not repenting of their sins (which you believe were imposed upon us). You believe that every single non-Christian that exists now and that has ever existed is undergoing permanent suffering for not accepting Jesus' sacrifice.

Worse, not only do you believe it - you approve of it. You approve of it and speak of it in pious terms. I would posit that this is worse than even holocaust denial, for I cannot imagine defending something that directly involves the infinite torment of most people who have ever lived with a straight face. You are defending what no dictator in history has even come close to imagining.

You then have the nerve to call yourself moral.

You are a young man who has much to learn about life.

I used to be where you are. I used to think that I too knew it all.

But one thing troubles me with your responses.

You say that Christians are barbarians. I think this is as far from the truth as you could be.

When you maintain this view, you willfully overlook the benevolence of Christianity and it's effects upon civilization.

I pray your heart and mind are enlightened so that you may come to understand that hell is real, and God, not desiring that any should perish has made a way for you to have true life indeed.

If you reject this purpose for yourself, you are in a sense saying:

"I do not want to be with you God, you are loving, compassionate, merciful and gracious and I desire none of these things."

I assure you my friend, if you want an existence without Him, it is because that is what you want. Every man in the end gets what they want.

 

[Skavau]

You are a young man who has much to learn about life.

Oh spare me.

Address my points, please. Don't patronise me. I know you're good at it, but this isn't about me or you.

I used to be where you are. I used to think that I too knew it all.

I don't think I know it all. All I claim to 'know' here is that torture is wrong. Something you're apparently unclear of. I suppose you think torture is entirely appropriate if committed by God, but not at all if committed by humans.

As I type this, in fact I realise just how very hypocritical your words are. The foundation of your worldview, the very philosophy you endorse and advocate is based around having complete confidence and unquestioning faith in things that we simply don't know. You claim, with complete confidence that you know how life began, what happens when we die, what deity and exists and what he wants and how the universe began. You claim supernatural insight on morality and philosophy and everything.

Your entire worldview is based and predicated on you claiming to know everything that all of humanity needs to know. You are literally claiming extraordinary insight on things that are considered complete unknowns by humanity. Indeed, 'faith' itself - the pseudo-virtue you defend is invoked as your reason for such breathtaking arrogance.

So please sir, don't tell me I claim to know everything. I am nowhere near your standard on this.

But one thing troubles me with your responses.

You say that Christians are barbarians. I think this is as far from the truth as you could be.

Not quite. I say that Christians who defend the idea of eternal torture for thought-crime are barbarians.

When you maintain this view, you willfully overlook the benevolence of Christianity and it's effects upon civilization.

I pray your heart and mind are enlightened so that you may come to understand that hell is real, and God, not desiring that any should perish has made a way for you to have true life indeed.

This is irrelevant to any point I have made on this thread.

If you reject this purpose for yourself, you are in a sense saying:

"I do not want to be with you God, you are loving, compassionate, merciful and gracious and I desire none of these things."

No. I am saying:

"I do not want to be with you God, you are unloving, uncompassionate, unmerciful, ungracious and I desire none of these things."

I assure you my friend, if you want an existence without Him, it is because that is what you want. Every man in the end gets what they want.

How does me wanting an existence without God mean I want to be tortured?

 

[Elioenai26]

Oh spare me.

Address my points, please. Don't patronise me. I know you're good at it, but this isn't about me or you.


I don't think I know it all. All I claim to 'know' here is that torture is wrong. Something you're apparently unclear of. I suppose you think torture is entirely appropriate if committed by God, but not at all if committed by humans.

As I type this, in fact I realise just how very hypocritical your words are. The foundation of your worldview, the very philosophy you endorse and advocate is based around having complete confidence and unquestioning faith in things that we simply don't know. You claim, with complete confidence that you know how life began, what happens when we die, what deity and exists and what he wants and how the universe began. You claim supernatural insight on morality and philosophy and everything.

Your entire worldview is based and predicated on you claiming to know everything that all of humanity needs to know. You are literally claiming extraordinary insight on things that are considered complete unknowns by humanity. Indeed, 'faith' itself - the pseudo-virtue you defend is invoked as your reason for such breathtaking arrogance.

So please sir, don't tell me I claim to know everything. I am nowhere near your standard on this.


Not quite. I say that Christians who defend the idea of eternal torture for thought-crime are barbarians.


This is irrelevant to any point I have made on this thread.


No. I am saying:

"I do not want to be with you God, you are unloving, uncompassionate, unmerciful, ungracious and I desire none of these things."


How does me wanting an existence without God mean I want to be tortured?

Each sin a person commits has it's corresponding consequence of punishment.

Since each sin was committed against a holy God, the punishment shall be eternal in duration and it shall fit the sin. God shall be absolutely just when He consigns unrepentant sinners to receive what they have merited.

I dare say you would be offended if someone slapped you or spit in your face. Would you not?

What would you desire to be done to such a person?

Or, say you have a beloved son, your only son whom you love dearly. Let's say some wicked men take him and strip him naked and beat him and mock him and laugh at him and spit on him and scourge him and nail him to a cross, as if he were no more than a piece of meat, all because he says that he is your son Skavau. How would you feel? What would you do to these men? Would you wink your eye at them? Would you overlook this? No you would not. No one would.

 

[Skavau]

Each sin a person commits has it's corresponding consequence of punishment.

Uh, okay.

Since each sin was committed against a holy God, the punishment shall be eternal in duration and it shall fit the sin.

What a redundant statement.

If I 'sin' against another then I hurt them, not God. I make a victim of them and not God.

God shall be absolutely just when He consigns unrepentant sinners to receive what they have merited.

I have not reaped eternal torment on anyone. Nothing I have done deserves eternal torment. Nothing I could ever do warrants that.

I dare say you would be offended if someone slapped you or spit in your face. Would you not?

Yes. Though I would not insist on them being tortured.

What would you desire to be done to such a person?

An apology from them.

That would be it. Why, would you torture them?

Or, say you have a beloved son, your only son whom you love dearly. Let's say some wicked men take him and strip him naked and beat him and mock him and laugh at him and spit on him and scourge him and nail him to a cross, as if he were no more than a piece of meat, all because he says that he is your son Skavau. How would you feel?

I'd feel awful.

Too bad I did not do that to any child. Too bad I would have been duty-bound if I witnessed such an event to stop it. I am not held accountable and bound to a sacrifice that took places thousands of years before my birth.

What would you do to these men? Would you wink your eye at them? Would you overlook this? No you would not. No one would.

Not even they deserve eternal torture.

And I am not those men.

 

[Elioenai26]

Uh, okay.


What a redundant statement.

If I 'sin' against another then I hurt them, not God. I make a victim of them and not God.


I have not reaped eternal torment on anyone. Nothing I have done deserves eternal torment. Nothing I could ever do warrants that.


Yes. Though I would not insist on them being tortured.


An apology from them.

That would be it. Why, would you torture them?


I'd feel awful.

Too bad I did not do that to any child. Too bad I would have been duty-bound if I witnessed such an event to stop it. I am not held accountable and bound to a sacrifice that took places thousands of years before my birth.


Not even they deserve eternal torture.

And I am not those men.

Out of your own mouth you have said it.


I thank you for your time in writing here and speaking with me. I must ask leave of you now.

I hope to see you again in other threads.

Good day to you.

 

[Skavau]

Out of your own mouth you have said it.


I thank you for your time in writing here and speaking with me. I must ask leave of you now.

I hope to see you again in other threads.

Good day to you.

Out of my own mouth I said what?

 

[Skavau]

I'm feeling argumentative, and thus am bumping this. May update the OP as well.

 

[Elioenai26]

I'm feeling argumentative, and thus am bumping this. May update the OP as well.

Argumentativeness is a trait which rarely if ever is looked upon as being desirable or honorable.

Be that as it may, I would like to cordially extend an invitation to you to engage in a semi-formal debate on the topic of your choosing, in a format of your choosing. I feel it would be mutually edifying and will give you a chance to present a case for whatever you desire to be discussed for everyone to see. You can represent your side and I will be representing the Judeo-Christian worldview.

I hope to hear from you soon.

 

[Skavau]

Argumentativeness is a trait which rarely if ever is looked upon as being desirable or honorable.

Yeah, I know. I disagree. That's probably because I am argumentative.

Be that as it may, I would like to cordially extend an invitation to you to engage in a semi-formal debate on the topic of your choosing, in a format of your choosing. I feel it would be mutually edifying and will give you a chance to present a case for whatever you desire to be discussed for everyone to see. You can represent your side and I will be representing the Judeo-Christian worldview.

I hope to hear from you soon.

This topic, this thread.

 

[Elioenai26]

Yeah, I know. I disagree. That's probably because I am argumentative.


This topic, this thread.

Excellent! I thank you for accepting the invitation. What format would you like to go by?

 

[Skavau]

Excellent! I thank you for accepting the invitation. What format would you like to go by?

Just tit for tat.

Make your case in however much depth you like for why eternal torment in hell is a justified punishment/consequence for non-believers. I'll respond each time.

 

[madaz]

Or, say you have a beloved son, your only son whom you love dearly. Let's say some wicked men take him and strip him naked and beat him and mock him and laugh at him and spit on him and scourge him and nail him to a cross, as if he were no more than a piece of meat,

The christian god had full intention of making a "piece of meat" out of his son.

Its called human sacrifice.

 

[Elioenai26]

Just tit for tat.

Make your case in however much depth you like for why eternal torment in hell is a justified punishment/consequence for non-believers. I'll respond each time.

Are you wanting me to address the various contentions in your op, or just what you have written above?