I have told this witty insight some time back here. For the benefit of those who have not yet heard it, here it is again, to lighten your heart and mind in all these ruminations about hell.
Jesus says that in hell there will be fire and the pain of burning will be so excruciating that you will scream and howl and gnash your teeth.
For guys without teeth, God will provide.
Susma Rio Sep
Well torie and Vanilla I’m happy to oblige. I just located a previous thread of mine entitled For Vanilla; a universalist’s perspective
In there you’ll find a good deal of cites supporting my beliefs. Since then Vanilla, I have acquired additional verses to share thanks to Seige and Edlyn. Seige shared her verses previously in this thread. Edlyn’s verse reads
There is a difference between a God who is willing to cut a little slack and a universalist salvation. The verses that are proof-texted out of context to rationalize universalism have a less absolute message if interpreted hermeneutically. If how one behaves is irrelevant to salvation, then why so many exhortations to modify behavior? When taken as a whole, the verses that universalists cite have a more moderate reading–that God may cut somebody a bit of slack and it is His decision, not ours, to make, so don’t go around pretending to be God and damning other people.
I always read your posts, CJ!
So that is the only reason to love? You better love your neighbour or you suffer torment forever? Is that how God loves his children? Actually, a full repentance is required as I understand and inevitable for everyone for Jesus does not wish to lose one of whom has been given to him.
I have found some Christians who would say with glee that I’m going to Hell, while others also said the same thing, but had tears in their eyes. It’s generally the former group I encounter, and rarely the latter among the literal Hell believers. Many Americans still believe in a literal hell, 71% according to the link I provide. Even that self-described “plowboy” Billy Graham who preached fire and brimstone throughout much of his career, now admits he doesn’t know anymore, and nowadays in his sermons he refers to Hell as a separation from God which is what most Catholics are saying these days too along with other denominations. That link provided shows its displeasure of those who no longer teach a literal Hell and of it being a eternal Lake Of Fire.
*The notion that faith in Christ is to be rewarded by an eternity of bliss, while a dependence upon reason, observation and experience merits everlasting pain, is too absurd for refutation, and can be relieved only that that unhappy mixture of insanity and ignorance, called “faith.” *-- Ingersoll.
I have read it [the Bible] carefully. And if Bob Ingersoll isn’t in hell, God is a liar and the Bible isn’t worth the paper it is printed on.–Billy Sunday
JZ
Sorry to say it, but what a lame-ass quote! It’s like saying that basketball is all about 10 guys running around in shorts with a ball. ALL Christian groups believe you can be saved at any point (except supralapsarians who think you’re saved before you’re born). We Catholics like our ceremonies but no ammount a absolution ever saved a wicked man from going to Hell. IF the person is not really sorry not even the Pope can change his ticket to hell.
…there is no hell in this universe, and you are welcome to believe what you will, but please don’t peddle your papers unless you have some evidence.
** Voyager** Do you have evidence as to Hell not existing?
The link I gave states this: The Catholic catechism of the 19th Century emphasized a literal Hell, but the latest catechism (1994) plays down a literal Hell and pushes the idea that it is separation from God. So is there some latest catechism I need to find where Hell has fire once again? Also in ‘99 Pope Paul II rejects the reality of literal Hell too. He specifically states it is a “separation from God.” I believe tomndeb is one of the experts on Catholicism around here, and I could be mistaken, but I thought that poster also said Hell was a “separation from God“, and no literal fiery Hell, but I may have somebody else in mind too.
“** Voyager** Do you have evidence as to Hell not existing?”
Well, I’m not Voyager, but if you’re asking for evidence on existence claims affirming the negative on such a grand scale as this; then, you misunderstand the concept. Even in the affirmative it seems pointless to ask for evidence of it too, since it is a metaphysical concept.
JZ
Priest: “Do you repent your sins?”
Dying terrified scumbag: ::coughs up some phlegm, nods::
Priest: “I mean, are you really sorry?”
DTS: ::looks startled:: “Yes!”
Priest: "I just wanna be sure. I mean, I could give you the ceremony and all, but it won’t do you the slightest of good with Him above, if you’re not really sorry. Might as well give you a Twinkiebar, for the good it would do you in escaping Eternal Hellfire. So. How sorry are you? "
DTS: ???
Priest: I mean, did you ever think and stopped before you did it, again? In say, ah, twenty years? The very fact that you never did, well, it makes me suspicious. And He’s not stupid either, you know. So, take my advice and don’t die just right now, yet. I really can’t take the resposibility, you know.
DTS: Just hand me that damned Eucharist, you!
Priest: “Do you repent your sins?”
Dying terrified scumbag:::coughs up some phlegm, nods::
Priest: “Alrightie then.”
I stand corrected. :rolleyes:
This teaching called Hell’s Best Kept Secret pretty much sums up exactly what the important issues are. It’s here.
That or try C.S. Lewis’s The Screwtape Letters for an alternative. To me, telling others they are going to hell while failing to acknowledge my own sins is one of the things which, as my Baptismal Covenant put it, “draw [me] from the knowledge and love of God.” Therefore, as is said anytime a Christian is baptized into my church, be he 6 months or 60 years old, “I renounce [it].”
CJ
Do you have evidence that Oz does not exist? Valhalla?
In any case, anyone trying to scare me with hell had better give evidence that it exists first, not ask me for evidence that it doesn’t. If you are told that you will spend your next life as a cockroach unless you stop eating meat, is your first reaction to provide evidence that this won’t happen, or do you ignore the threat unless there is evidence that it will?
To a certain extent there is evidence that hell does not exist - the constantly changing descriptions of what and where it is, the fairly clear lineage of the concept from the pagans, and lack of anything about it before Christianity.
I still don’t get why eternal suffering in hell would be an incentive to become Christian. Other religions have nicer hells or even none.
Well, the salespitch goes like this: “Hell exists, whetether you believe it or not, and people, believe me when I say you don’t want to end up there! How can you prevent going to hell? By believing Our Brand of Christianity of course!”
So, it is not used as a positive incentive, but like a negative one, a scare. Much the way commercials today say: "20% of employees get fired every year. You could be one. Are you insured yet? "
Maastricht, you forgot to add ‘and God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life. Say this prayer, truly mean it, and you’ll never end up there’.
And the Godfather has a wonderful plan for your life. Kiss him on the cheek, pay your protection money ^H^H^H token of respect, and you’ll never wind up with a horse’s head in your bed.
Cardinal Spellman to Pope John after Christ shows up at St. Pats “What are we paying protection for, anyway?” - Lenny Bruce, Christ and Moses.
I’m sure I said evidence, not proof. Proof of an existential negative, unless there is something self-contradictory in the definition of the thing, is impossible. The default position must be that the thing does not exist, unless there is sufficient evidence to indicate the contrary. (And the need for proof is too strong for hell or god.)
As for your second point, I agree that Pascal’s wager answers this. It is to the benefit of a religion to say that the penalties for not accepting it are greater than the penalties for not accepting another.