What is the purpose behind an eternal hell?

[Davian]

No, everyone who disagrees with the truth is foolish and self-deceived.

At this point, you have only your religion. It has not been establish as truth.

As for being foolish and self-deceived, is that what you would call those that believed that disease was caused by demons, prior to the discovery of microorganisms?

What of the millions that believed that the Earth hangs motionless in space, while the cosmos rotates around it? Are they foolish and self-deceived? There is at least one self-described Christian in these forums that is of that opinion.

If you're self-deceived or deluded and I tell you that you are, am I wrong simply because you deny it?

I will conclude you are wrong, pending evidence of this deception or delusion that you allude to.

"I'm not convinced" doesn't require an excuse, it is an excuse. And, for the reasons Paul explained, God won't accept it.

Then God can be blamed for appearing to be fictional, by every objective means to date.

And rightly so.

That was sarcasm. It was not scary at all.

No one gets into heaven on the basis of their own merits. The doorway to heaven is through the perfect Person of Jesus Christ, not the moral quality or quantity of our deeds. As the Bible says, "For all have sinned and fallen short of God's glory."

Then in common terms, your theology is morally bankrupt. Rapists and serial killers go to heaven, but others burn forever for reasons beyond their control.

Sure you can. It isn't that you lack the capacity to believe. You exercise faith in all sorts of things every day. You just haven't chosen to do so toward God.

Try it yourself. Choose to believe that gods are only characters in books, right now.

Let me know when you have done so.

Selah.

 

[Davian]

You seem to think that hell was invented in order to control the populace? But the doctrine of hell really originated and developed during a time when the church had no control over any populace. So I was just pointing out that you're probably wrong.

No, I think the concept of Hell was incorporated as an incentive to believe. Reread my post.

 

[food4thought]

I am not aware of any difference. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, all religions are products of men.

What makes you think that? Why do you think others have found what you have not (evidence)?

Sure, you can lead with that, but the historical effect of religion on governments is observable.

Could it just be that historically every government has had it's own religion, and power corrupts? The actions of modern secular states tend to support that view, IMO.

Which is not in contradiction to what I said.

True, but my point was that Christianity in it's original form is not the type of "religion" that it seems you think it is...

 

[ewq1938]

Why is it forever instead of a finite amount of time?

Not all Christians believe in eternal torment. Many believe and have ample scriptural support for eternal annihilation which is what I believe in.

 

[ewq1938]

So if someone is born in a region, that happens to be of a different religion and they live a life of helping others, it is just punishment to have them experience eternal torment?

Rom 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

 

[Davian]

What makes you think that? Why do you think others have found what you have not (evidence)?

I have no idea if they have actual evidence or not, or if they have poor evidence, and low standards. I do not see belief as a conscious choice.

Could it just be that historically every government has had it's own religion, and power corrupts?

...and humans tend to be religious.

The actions of modern secular states tend to support that view, IMO.

Excluding the religious-type of governments, such as Stalin's "cult of personality", I do not see what you are getting at.

True, but my point was that Christianity in it's original form is not the type of "religion" that it seems you think it is...

My comment was not directed at the "original" form of Christianity.

 

[Davian]

I would say that it shows forth God's justice

What is this "justice" you speak of? Can I slaughter my neighbours and still go to heaven?

and acts as a deterrent for others.

As we have no demonstrable evidence for the existence of a biblical "Hell", or that anyone has gone there, how can it act as a deterrent to those that do not already believe?

I could see it as a deterrent for those with doubts about their religion, and this acts as a warning not to pull at loose threads in their theology, lest it all unravel for them.

 

[ewq1938]

What is this "justice" you speak of? Can I slaughter my neighbours and still go to heaven?

No because that's a sinful crime. If you did that, you could be found guilty of murder and sentenced to death...same basic thing God will do to the unsaved because their sins are worthy of a death sentence.

As we have no demonstrable evidence for the existence of a biblical "Hell", or that anyone has gone there, how can it act as a deterrent to those that do not already believe?

But at least you can't say you weren't warned. I don't think not believing is going to work as an excuse.

Luk 16:29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
Luk 16:30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
Luk 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

This is a similar example. These others did have the warning because they had Moses and the prophets so they will be without excuse when they die if they lived sinful unbelieving lives.

 

[Davian]

No because that's a sinful crime. If you did that, you could be found guilty of murder and sentenced to death...same basic thing God will do to the unsaved because their sins are worthy of a death sentence.

You did not answer my question. Can I slaughter my neighbours and still go to heaven?

But at least you can't say you weren't warned. I don't think not believing is going to work as an excuse.

Luk 16:29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
Luk 16:30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
Luk 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

This is a similar example. These others did have the warning because they had Moses and the prophets so they will be without excuse when they die if they lived sinful unbelieving lives.

Warned? When? If I tell you that your home is on fire, and to run outside and call the fire department, will you do so?

Why not?

 

[ewq1938]

You did not answer my question. Can I slaughter my neighbours and still go to heaven?

If you are forgiven of those sins. You can't if you aren't forgiven of those sins. God will know if you are truly sorry for doing them even if there is a repenance.

Warned? When?

That you are aware of this means you have been warned and know this information.

If I tell you that your home is on fire, and to run outside and call the fire department, will you do so?

My home isn't on fire. I simply have a fireplace and made a fire because it's cold where I live.

Why not?

Because 911 doesn't like it when people call but don't actually have a real emergency.

 

[aiki]

At this point, you have only your religion. It has not been establish as truth.

Well, obviously, I don't agree. I think it is the truth and I believe I have good reason to think so.

As for being foolish and self-deceived, is that what you would call those that believed that disease was caused by demons, prior to the discovery of microorganisms?

Ignorant, perhaps, but not self-deceived. In the absence of good reason to think otherwise, it's as good an idea as any. The difference between this situation and the one I described is that there has been good reason for people in every time to think God exists. For the reasons the apostle Paul outlines, ignorance isn't a viable excuse.

What of the millions that believed that the Earth hangs motionless in space, while the cosmos rotates around it? Are they foolish and self-deceived? There is at least one self-described Christian in these forums that is of that opinion.

Again, ignorant, not self-deceived. It is quite reasonable, I think, for people to come to conclusions from the appearance of things when they have no good reason to reject those conclusions.

I don't think the Christian you mentioned is typical of most Christians today. Exceptions don't determine the rule.

Then God can be blamed for appearing to be fictional, by every objective means to date.

I disagree.

Then in common terms, your theology is morally bankrupt. Rapists and serial killers go to heaven, but others burn forever for reasons beyond their control.

And why is it that a rapist or killer can gain entrance into heaven? Is it the rape and serial killing that qualifies them for entrance into heaven? Obviously not.

Whether or not a person goes to Hell is completely within their control. Every person intellectually capable of understanding the revelation of God in nature and in their own moral sense is fully responsible for their eternal destination.

There is only one way into heaven. And your good works ain't it. People get into heaven for reasons that have nothing to do with how well they've lived. That's not unjust. That's the best way to ensure, under the constraints of God's standard of perfect holiness, that the maximum number of people possible may gain entrance into God's kingdom.

Try it yourself. Choose to believe that gods are only characters in books, right now.

I already believe this.

Selah.

 

[Davian]

If you are forgiven of those sins. You can't if you aren't forgiven of those sins. God will know if you are truly sorry for doing them even if there is a repenance.

So where is the justice in a system where I can slaughter my neighbours and still go to heaven, yet others burn forever for reasons beyond their control?

That you are aware of this means you have been warned and know this information.

As I warned you that your home is on fire.

My home isn't on fire. I simply have a fireplace and made a fire because it's cold where I live.

Wait a minute; why did you not believe my warning? Did it not comport with observations of reality?

Because 911 doesn't like it when people call but don't actually have a real emergency.

I don't think I have a real emergency on my hands either, in the absence of a real warning.

 

[Davian]

Well, obviously, I don't agree. I think it is the truth and I believe I have good reason to think so.

Until you have established it as truth, it remains opinion, and you can put down the "foolish and self-deceived" stick.

Ignorant, perhaps, but not self-deceived.

What about foolish, once the truth has been revealed?

In the absence of good reason to think otherwise, it's as good an idea as any.

lol. Demons are as good as an idea as any? thank goodness the pioneers in the field of medicine thought differently.

The difference between this situation and the one I described is that there has been good reason for people in every time to think God exists.

I am not aware of these "good reasons".

For the reasons the apostle Paul outlines, ignorance isn't a viable excuse.

I am not claiming ignorance. My position is ignosticism.

Again, ignorant, not self-deceived.

What about foolish, once the truth has been revealed?

It is quite reasonable, I think, for people to come to conclusions from the appearance of things when they have no good reason to reject those conclusions.

As I have come to the conclusion, from the appearance of things, that gods like those in the bible are not real, and I have not been presented with good reasons to reject that conclusion.

Or is that only reasonable for people that agree with you?

I don't think the Christian you mentioned is typical of most Christians today. Exceptions don't determine the rule.

Indeed, but the question still stands; do you think of him as foolish and self-deceived?

I disagree.

On what basis do you disagree? Can you provide some objective measure that points directly to your "God"? No?

And why is it that a rapist or killer can gain entrance into heaven? Is it the rape and serial killing that qualifies them for entrance into heaven? Obviously not.

You have misrepresented what I said: the raping and serial killing do not disqualify them. How is that justice?

Whether or not a person goes to Hell is completely within their control. Every person intellectually capable of understanding the revelation of God

I have not been presented with a coherent definition of "God".

in nature

Observations of nature do not comport with the stories of the "God" character in the bible poofing a pair people and some animals into existence, and later, in a manner contrary to the modern understanding of genetics, repopulating the planet from a tiny group of individuals and animals that survived a unevidenced global flood in an unbuildable boat, a flood that killed the dinosaurs in a manner that only *appears* to be 65 million years ago, because the Earth is really only somehow 6000 years old.

and in their own moral sense

I do not see anything about my own moral sense that cannot be explained by evolutionary theory.

is fully responsible for their eternal destination.

I have not seen any compelling evidence that there is any such thing as an "eternal destination" beyond the death of my brain and the distribution of my constituent matter back into the world.

There is only one way into heaven. And your good works ain't it. People get into heaven for reasons that have nothing to do with how well they've lived.

Or how many they have slaughtered.

That's not unjust.

In common terms, it is morally bankrupt.

That's the best way to ensure, under the constraints of God's standard of perfect holiness, that the maximum number of people possible may gain entrance into God's kingdom.

Or, a means of having a religion that appeals to even the lowest members of society.

I already believe this.

You are an atheist already? That was quick.

Selah.

 

[ewq1938]

So where is the justice in a system where I can slaughter my neighbours and still go to heaven, yet others burn forever for reasons beyond their control?

The justice is from God deciding who is honest in repenting and who is not honest. Those that don't even care to repent or think they should are obviously easy to judge.

As I warned you that your home is on fire.

Wait a minute; why did you not believe my warning? Did it not comport with observations of reality?

Ok, let's go with the example you are using. If my home were on fire, let's say I was asleep and you bang on my front door then of course I would thank you for warning and helping. So in this reverse situation, I am trying to wake you by banging on your front door to tell you your house is on fire. Do you want to burn to death or will you listen to my knocking on your door?

I don't think I have a real emergency on my hands either, in the absence of a real warning.

Sure but in the example we are using, you are asleep and don't know there is a fire but I am awake and am trying to wake you up so you know.

 

[aiki]

Until you have established it as truth, it remains opinion, and you can put down the "foolish and self-deceived" stick.

I think it has been well-established as truth, or I wouldn't believe it. The arguments and evidences for God are many and sound and may be discovered in a host of books, videos and websites that explain the arguments and evidences. Now, you may reject it all as "opinion," but it nonetheless exists and properly satisfies the rules of logic and the principles of reason and evidence against which such things are assessed. Until you can demonstrate that it all fails to do so, you are the one exerting an opinion and may well be foolish and self-deceived.

lol. Demons are as good as an idea as any? thank goodness the pioneers in the field of medicine thought differently.

As I said, in the absence of any good reason to think otherwise, it's as good a reason as any.

As I have come to the conclusion, from the appearance of things, that gods like those in the bible are not real, and I have not been presented with good reasons to reject that conclusion.

Or is that only reasonable for people that agree with you?

Well, as I said, there are good reasons in abundance to think God exists. But they are good, not just if you happen to think that they are, but in their conformity to a more objective standard, which I have mentioned a couple of times now. Until you've shown that the reasons for belief in God truly fail to meet this objective standard, your rejection of it is unreasonable.

On what basis do you disagree? Can you provide some objective measure that points directly to your "God"? No?

An objective measure? Of what sort, exactly? Deductive reasoning (which is an objective measure) points directly to God, as the Kalam Cosmological Argument demonstrates.

You have misrepresented what I said: the raping and serial killing do not disqualify them. How is that justice?

God's holy justice demands the punishment of our wickedness. This is at the core of what justice is. But the demands of God's justice are so high no one of us could ever fully satisfy them - not the serial killer nor Mother Theresa. Only God, in His perfection and power, could ever make full atonement for our sin. And since God is also loving and merciful, He paid the penalty of our sin for us, suffering and satisfying the full extent of His justice on our behalf. Thus, God's salvation of vile sinners does not ignore or circumvent justice but meets it head on, satisfies it, and as a consequence is able to extend to us all mercy, forgiveness and love.

I have not been presented with a coherent definition of "God".

If you're looking for a very exhaustive, philosophical definition you can find one here:

www.reasonablefaith.org

Observations of nature do not comport with the stories of the "God" character in the bible poofing a pair people and some animals into existence,

Why would you expect the natural to comport with the supernatural? The material universe is to God what a clay pot is to the potter who made it. Do you expect the clay pot to possess all the attributes and abilities of the potter? Obviously not. The potter can do an enormous number of things of which the clay pot is not capable. So, too, with nature and the God who made it.

I do not see anything about my own moral sense that cannot be explained by evolutionary theory.

Well, obviously, I don't think the theory upon which you're relying is the best explanation of the human moral sense. I think a Moral Law Giver makes more sense.

I have not seen any compelling evidence that there is any such thing as an "eternal destination" beyond the death of my brain and the distribution of my constituent matter back into the world.

Well, "compelling" is a pretty subjective and shifting standard. What is compelling to one person is not necessarily compelling to another.

Or how many they have slaughtered.

Exactly. Though, if they reject God's atonement for their sin, they will spend all of eternity paying for their sin themselves.

In common terms, it is morally bankrupt.

No. Justice is satisfied. God has made sure of that. What you're really objecting to, it seems, is God's mercy. Apparently, you think God should be as unmerciful as you are. I'm very glad He is not. Maybe one day you'll be, too.

Or, a means of having a religion that appeals to even the lowest members of society.

Yes, it is wonderful how God stoops down even to the vilest of people and offers them mercy, grace and forgiveness! How good He is!

Selah.

 

[Davian]

The justice is from God deciding who is honest in repenting and who is not honest. Those that don't even care to repent or think they should are obviously easy to judge.

But as aiki has pointed out in this thread, that is not justice, but mercy. I can accept that your religion is not about justice, I just see the equivocation to be intellectually dishonest.

Ok, let's go with the example you are using. If my home were on fire, let's say I was asleep and you bang on my front door then of course I would thank you for warning and helping. So in this reverse situation, I am trying to wake you by banging on your front door to tell you your house is on fire. Do you want to burn to death or will you listen to my knocking on your door?

In the example we are using, there is no indication that the home is actually on fire.

Sure but in the example we are using, you are asleep and don't know there is a fire but I am awake and am trying to wake you up so you know.

Why are you waking me up and warning me of fire, when your warning does not comport with observations of reality?

Why would I consider this a real warning?

 

[anonymous person]

Before I begin, I understand there are different views on hell, but I only wish to discuss one....eternal conscious torment. Personally, I have started to break away from this view, but if there is any truth to it I want to discuss it. That said, for those of you who hold to this view, what purpose do you see in the design of such a place? Throughout scripture, for the most part, I can see that God has a method and reason to his laws and punishments. With that in mind, what purpose does burning someone alive in unquenchable fire for all eternity accomplish? Why did God choose fire for the punishment? Why is it forever instead of a finite amount of time? Please be respectful and on point regarding this topic.

Its purpose is to serve as a place where people can be who do not want to be with God. Simple.

 

[aiki]

..

 

[bhsmte]

Hang on. That isn't what I wrote. It is about justice and mercy, not mercy at the expense of justice. I made this pretty clear, I think. Interesting how you twisted my words...

Selah.

When it comes to how the God you believe in judges people then, does justice take priority, over mercy?

As I have proposed before, lets say you have a serial killer, who finds Jesus on death row and repents. On the other hand, we have the Hindu, who is born and raised in India and spends their life following their religion and also dedicating themselves to helping other people in need and not causing the pain and suffering of the serial killer.

In your opinion, how does the God you believe in, serve justice and mercy upon these two people, when they die?

 

[aiki]

When it comes to how the God you believe in judges people then, does justice take priority, over mercy?

As I have proposed before, lets say you have a serial killer, who finds Jesus on death row and repents. On the other hand, we have the Hindu, who is born and raised in India and spends their life following their religion and also dedicating themselves to helping other people in need and not causing the pain and suffering of the serial killer.

In your opinion, how does the God you believe in, serve justice and mercy upon these two people, when they die?

*Sigh* I had hoped to delete the post before someone responded. Ah, well.

The biblical answer to your hypothetical begins with recognizing that the standard for entrance into God's kingdom is His own holy perfection, not human morality. This is what the Bible teaches. We look at one another and think, "I'm no serial killer. I'm not a rapist. Compared to the hardened criminal, I'm a pretty good person." But as good as we may think we are in comparison to the worst people around us, we all fall far, far short of God's holy and perfect standard, which is Himself. Every single one of us has at one time or another been selfish and violated our conscience, and been guilty of dishonesty, deception and evil motives. However much good we do, then, it is all tainted by the evil we have done. If you pour a single drop of poison into a glass of water, all the water becomes poisoned. The apostle James put it this way:

James 2:10
10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.

The Moral Law of God has been likened to a chain. If you break one of the links, the whole chain is broken. This is what James is pointing out.

So, both the Hindu philanthropist and the serial killer stand before God condemned: both are unable to meet His perfect standard; neither of them is perfect. They have broken the chain. They have poisoned the water. In God's eyes, then, both of these sinners deserve Hell. The Bible tells us that the only way either of them will gain entrance into God's kingdom is through the Person of Christ and his atoning work on the cross for all sinners. This atoning work is a gift of God to sinners; undeserved, unmerited, and available to any who will receive it. If the serial killer or the Hindu philanthropist receive God's gift of salvation, they will be saved. This is entirely because of the merciful, gracious work of God, however, offered totally independently of the worthiness of the recipient of His gift.

Titus 3:3-7
3 For we ourselves were also once foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful and hating one another.
4 But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared,
5 not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit,
6 whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior,
7 that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

Selah.