Since you didn’t answer the first time, is this what you’d say to an atheist child of yours?
Sin does cause you to go to hell. You’re born with original sin, and if you never hear the name Jesus Christ or any of his teaching, you’re fucked. This is the popular teaching among protestants, as I understand it, at least. Similarly, if you commit a sin and then die before you have any chance to repent, you’re fucked. So while repentence can bring you back into approved status, it’s the sin that puts you into disapproval in the first place.
My statement about tempting someone into commiting sin is an aside, really - my post would be the same without it, it’s just an interesting consequence of those beliefs.
Is this what you want to hang your hat on? Your conservative principles tell you that if you tempt someone into sin, and that gets them an unimaginably horrific punishment, well, you’re fine, fuck them. And if you could save someone from such a fate with a little effort, eh, fuck them, it’s on them. Got it.
And yet prosetylization is a core philosophy of Christianity. One of the main tenets is that you get out there and spread the word of God so that others may be saved. What are the chances you’d require to save someone to make it worth your time? If had a 99% chance to save someone from eternal damnation for 5 minutes of your time per day, would you do it? Or would you gleefully claim “haha, personal responsibility!” and not do so?
If you’re willing to invest 5 minutes for a 99% of saving someone, what about an hour for a 50% chance? A week for a 25% chance? A year for a 5% chance? Is a year of your time worth the possibility of saving someone from eternal torment? How much of your time is worth potentially preventing suffering on a scale greater than the cumulative suffering of all of humanity?
If I truly believed that others were condemned to eternal suffering, and that I had a chance to save them through my action, then if I did not spend every moment I had, trying everything possible, I would think I was a horrific human being.
I haven’t misconstrued anything. You have a belief system that says that people can suffer eternally, and that while you could potentially impact their chances, you’ve washed your hands of even bothering, citing your conservative principle of personal responsibility. You sit by while innumerable people suffer the worst possible fate.
Because I don’t know the story of Paul and the Jews. Is the lesson to be learned “fuck it, give it a token effort, and if it doesn’t take, just relax while they suffer eternally”? If so, then Christian doctrine is either internally inconsistent, or callous to the suffering that god himself inflicts.
For the purposes of the thread, I’m assuming sincerity. My whole premise is “if you sincerely hold these beliefs, then…” and extrapolating the logical consequences of those beliefs.
It’s not rigged. Let’s say I sincerely believed that eating cheese made your soul die, and that a mere shell of your old personality continued to animate your body, and that was the most horrible fate you could suffer. At the very least, you’d expect me to go out and tell everyone I knew not to eat cheese, and to try to get the message out there, right? And yet everyone would say “uh, ok dude, whatever, you’re crazy”. But if I truly believed that, and didn’t try to let anyone know, I would be a sociopath, or worse. You can simultaneously hold beliefs that other people find strange or distasteful, and feel that you’re annoying for raising them, but if you are a true believer, and you think you’re acting in their best interest, then you should try to convince them anyway.
Of course the cheese example is absurd - but actual religious prosetylization has a lot of social pressure behind it, and a big history of success, as billions of adherents show. Prosetylization is clearly productive.
So yes, religious people who try to push their beliefs on me are annoying. However, I’m always polite to them, and even thank them - I know that, deep down inside, they feel that they’re doing what’s best for me, even if I think that’s silly. On the other hand, if someone who claims to love me and feels that my soul is hellbound doesn’t do everything in their power to save me, they have shown the most grave disregard for my wellbeing.
I’m already living that life, and it doesn’t seem so bad.
Granting generously that your god actually exists, of course.
Please try to take this question seriously, for the purposes of this discussion: What do you envision Hell to be, and do you think that, once there, people stay there forever?
Why?
CMC fnord!
You’re suddenly flippant for a guy who was acting all offended earlier.
I don’t know what you should do. What I do know is that if I earnestly believed that people were going to suffer unimaginable torture for an infinite timespan, I would do everything within my power - everything I possibly could - to save them. I would do everything I possibly could to spread the “good word”. I would dedicate my life to ensuring that as many people as possible were spared this. Because anything less would be monstrous.
And I do mean anything. Do you remember Andrea Yates? Well, if the concepts of infants not being exposed to sin is true, then her actions were the single most righteous actions a person could possibly take. If it would save more souls, I would go around murdering infants, and I would be morally justified in doing so.
Christianity is horrifying.
Christianity is fucking horrifying! I love how casually and without thought you throw out a statement like this. For the love of whatever God you believe in, man, think about what you just said! Think about the statement you just made! You just casually, without much qualification, said, “You’re going to be tortured forever, and I’m okay with that”.
And never mind that what someone believes can hardly be said to be a choice. I can no more choose to believe that a god exists than I can choose to believe that my birthday is in May.
Also, is there no defensibility of ignorance? Remember, this is a god who apparently masks his presence and demands faith. There virtually cannot be solid, testable, reliable evidence of his existence. As a result, anyone who applies skepticism and methodologies which have proven themselves reliable in every other aspect of life cannot possibly know that the consequences are real. They’ve heard of them, but do not believe them, for the same reason you wouldn’t believe me if I said the dragon in my garage needs $50 or he’ll torch your house on Wednesday.
You believe he is omnipotent and omnipresent. God is therefore the ‘source’ of butterflies and sunshine as much as he is of guinea worms and genital warts.
The cognitive dissonance it takes to believe this coin has only one side never fails to astound me.
A few weeks back I got drawn into a discussion along these lines and the other guy abruptly declared that all the evil was because of Satan. I was tempted to ask that since he was maintaining that God had created the universe, hadn’t God also created Satan, but there really wasn’t any point.
Tell your friend he’s an heretic. Many people have been burned for believing exactly that.
Fine, I’ve read the thread now. The OP seems to boil down to:
Some people believe it’s possible to be damned to a hell where they are subjected to infinite suffering. Logically, this belief should be the only thing that guides their actions, trumping all earthly considerations. And yet, many people who profess to hold this belief seem blasé about it. Why is this? Do they not care? Are they in denial? Or do they not genuinely believe in this kind of hell after all?
Unless I’ve missed something, that makes your OP about twenty four-times as long as it needs to be; I hope you’ll forgive my being put off by this lack of economy.
As for my “Times infinity belongs in the schoolyard.” remark, it ties into your question (though admittedly with too much economy). In my experience, the vast majority of references people make to infinity come in two varieties: discussions of the afterlife, and schoolyard insults. “You’re stupid!” “You’re stupid times a hundred!” “You’re stupid times infinity!” “You’re stupid times infinity plus one!” Believers probably don’t like to dwell on the notion of eternal punishment in hell because the idea is similar in sophistication to juvenile taunts. Maybe they’re afraid that thinking about it too much will cause their faith to unravel (see the very first reply in this thread). Plus there are all of the nightmarish implications of the belief itself. This is more or less in line with option 3 from the OP.
Anyone who believes in eternal torment doesn’t have the first clue about the mathematics of infinity.
I have a hard time respecting anyone who would worship a God who would have such a thing. I just have to assume they don’t really examine their faith closely enough to see the obvious contradiction.
Heck, if I was convinced there was a Supreme Being who had a hell for me if I didn’t worship Him, I’d try like heck to accommodate Him to save my weaselly butt, but I suspect He’d figure out I actually loathed him. So, if that’s how God really is, I’m screwed.
Your post merits a score of TLDR’s. Fortunately I was able to quickly skim to the part where you stated your thesis. Do yourself a favor and try to be concise. You could have started with that (it was well put) and added the caveats and examples later, and your post would have been better received.
The Buddists believe that the enlightened one (what buddha means) ceases all existence and does not get reincarnated. According to The Teaching Company lectures I listened too.
That is Puddy in one of the truly hilarious episodes of Seinfeld. His delivery is so wonderfully dry.
As for this correspondent, I, while calling myself a Christian, perjure myself at the part of the Nicean Creed that refers to hell. I don’t believe in it, it makes even less sense than a heavenly afterlife. My personal afterlife fantasy is that well all have a big sit-down debriefing and discuss what we learned and were supposed to learn. We enjoy milk and cookies, take a nap and then wake up and hold hands with our true sweetie until bedtime. We do that everyday forever.
Vaguely amusing that this insight it brought to us by an immortal… 
Seriously, you’re quite right. As Learjeff notes, this is all indicative of ignorance of the real mathematics of infinity. This has always been the central flaw of neo-Platonic “Omni” theology. No, God cannot have infinite knowledge, nor infinite power. The terms cannot even be defined meaningfully.
A God might be Amazingly powerful – Unearthly! Class 5000! Beyond! – but “infinite” power is logically self-contradictory.
What does the term ‘choose not to believe’ actually mean? Could you choose not to believe something? How?
Why? What is self-contradictory about the statement ‘God has the power to do whatever he desires’?
That’s a different statement. Power to do whatever you desire is not infinite power.
What? If hell is infinite, God has the power to send you there, his power is infinite.
Let’s say you are right. Still not seeing anything self-contradictory.
We may be talking at cross-purposes, Sitnam. I’m not sure I understand what you are asking me.
What do you mean by “hell is infinite”? And why do you think that hell is infinite in that sense?