The implications of hell.

[Czarcasm]

@truthseeker3

Well, this wouldn’t be the first time I’ve been accused of overthinking things; I’ll try to do a better job next time we meet. Until then, take care.

Point of clarification-I never accused you of overthinking the question. It was more a case of doing everything in your power to avoid the question as it was asked.

[wolfpup]

@SenorBeef

The moderately religious are far less sane. They acknowledge the stakes, and yet act as if they aren’t a big deal. This is a course of action that is simply not based in logic or sanity and is incredibly risky and callous.

So those annoying, very religious people who won’t stop hassling you about trying to save you? You should probably be grateful, their heart is in the right place, …

I disagree, as that’s a very narrow definition of what “moderately religious” might mean. For many, it might mean accepting generally the moral teachings of the Bible while rejecting the literalism such as the afterlife and the very existence of heaven and hell. Religion isn’t an all-or-nothing thing – that’s why fundamentalists are different from normal people. I think “far less sane” probably better describes the Biblical literalists who believe in groundless mythology.

[Velocity]

@hyperspaz

I’ve never met anyone who believes in Hell who isn’t positive they themselves are going to Heaven.

Most skydivers who believe in gravity also believe they’ve taken the necessary precautions to prevent themselves from falling to their death, so most people who believe in Hell also believe they’ve taken the necessary precautions to prevent themselves from going to Hell.
Whether they *will *avoid Hell, of course, is another matter entirely.

[truthseeker3]

@Czarcasm

Point of clarification-I never accused you of overthinking the question. It was more a case of doing everything in your power to avoid the question as it was asked.

I’m not trying to avoid the question, but I don’t seem to think about heaven the way you think I do. I’m not in it for the dead relatives; I’m in it for the pipe dream of perfect justice, so who ends up in hell is a lot less important to me than why - and that’s an unknown quantity.

If heaven really is an unearned gift which anyone can freely choose to accept or reject, then I think QuickSilver’s drug addict analogy (from post #15) is apt. (C S Lewis talks about the problem of separated loved ones at some length in The Great Divorce; his opinion boils down to “If people would rather be unhappy on their own than happy with God, that’s their prerogative - but they have no right to inflict their unhappiness on everyone else.” I mostly agree with that, but I don’t think people in heaven can be as cavalier about it as his characters are.)

But then, there are other interpretations of the bible that suggest - or flat out state - that getting into heaven is all about who you know. If the name of Jesus is like the secret password and some people know it and some people don’t… or if I can get into heaven because my parents pray me in; but you’re a heathen who never prays, so your kids are out of luck… then I would feel very differently about it. I might even feel that the god I love - the god who “shows no partiality” - does not exist after all.

Then, too, there are interpretations which claim that only a tiny fraction of people will be saved. If heaven only accepts 1% or 0.1% or 0.01% of souls, then it’s patently ridiculous to worry about who’s going to be in heaven “when” :dubious: I get there.