The strange concept of eternal hell suffering.

Great Debates
1

When I consider this concept some people have of eternal hell suffering, the more I consider it, the stranger it seems. I can’t see anything rational in punishing someone consciously for an eternity; it seems quite severe in fact, and merciless; two things that I would not even say describes God. And many religions have this deadly doctrine, which the ramifications of it has seeped into the consciousness of many cultures on earth. It seems quite strange to me.

For one thing, the punishment does not fit the crime. If a human lives , lets say on average 70 years; and lets say they don’t believe in God and live and die that way. How in the world of reason would it be fair for this human to be punished alive, every second of time, for 999,999,999,999,999,999 trillion billion quadrillion years, and after all that incredible level of horror, their time would not even have began, because they must go through this forever! I fail to see the sanity in that; how could the poor human even remain sane themselves during such an incredible level of misery and untold agony?

And then we are told by those who adhere to this incredible belief, that God himself has sanctioned this. Stunning, they expect me to believe that this great God of Love, Reason, Forgiveness, Grace and Mercy, is going to co-exist in eternity with this unending pain magnifier. As if he will make a monument of sin and evil.

Just too strange to me.

2

Well said.

3

Yes; you know I believe in God, but I do not believe in this doctrine of everlasting torture. And for that I cannot be a brother to many believers, because if you reject this horror, they will reject you.

Equally as strange.

4

Keeping people from sinning by telling them that straying leads to an eternity of torture, makes sense in the same way as keeping kids off drugs kids by telling them that toking one joint will cause you to accidentally microwave babies. By suggesting such extreme consequences you prevent any possibility that a cost benefit analysis could work against you. On the other hand in those who actually analyze the situation they realize that the scenario doesn’t make sense and your whole message falls like a house of cards.

I agree with you that an eternity of torture seems overkill. Even taking hitler as an example, I would think that after experiencing a thousand times over all of the pain that each individual experienced as a consequence of WW2 and the holocaust he would have suffered enough for his actions. Particularly for a god who suggested and an eye for an eye was too harsh.

5

Are there non-Abrahamic religions that preach this? Or rather, are there any that are neither Christian nor Muslim because I don’t believe this is part of the Jewish belief system.

6

Wouldn’t you more or less get used to it?

“Mornin’, Fred. How’s it going?”
“Ah, you know, same old same old…”

7

I reject the notion of a ‘loving god’ requiring a human sacrifice as a ‘ransom’ so that his creation can have a relationship with him - and the believers think this ‘sacrifice’ is a ‘good’ thing.

8

I think those two teach the eternal hell, there are others that teach a hell, but its not eternal.

9

I reject it as well. I believe Jesus sacrifice was enough, and no other sacrifice is required.

10

I just had to laugh when I read this; but its weird, such sarcasm should be employed to counter such insanity.

11

I’ve made a decision to try and remain sane and sober. Sarcasm isn’t enough, but I don’t have a lot else, and I don’t want to choose.

12

Very well stated.

13

Hah! Sound reasoning indeed!

14

You don’t see the irony in that statement?

“It was good that God required the sacrifice of Jesus - but as long as he doesn’t ask again”

15

I just have to use this, I hope Elucidator does not mind. What happened to sound reasoning in belief systems? Now I believe in God myself, but I believe that for him to even exist, he must be sound, intelligent, reasonable and sane. I see absolutely nothing sound, reasonable, intelligent or sane about eternal hell torment.

Imagine a conversation or even an existence in such a place; " Mornin’, Fred. How’s it going?" " Ah, you know, same old conscious torture and physical torment; except I don’t think its reasonable to assume that Fred got any sleep. Who’s going to sleep in hell? How are you going to sleep in a lake of fire? Who says the guardian Angels will even allow sleeping? What fun is there in torturing a human who is asleep? No, they must be conscious for every second of the " Holy Horror!" No passing out either!

And further imagine, if such a horror is to be even true, God must surely recreate these poor human sufferers, and make them " Super Sufferers!" How could a normal sane human even last, what, lets say 200 years of this punishing, and that’s giving them a large benefit of the doubt! No, God must make them some kind of totally new creation; kind of like a " Super Hero Sufferer!" Yes, that’s it. They must have the legs of the Incredible Hulk, because they must stand up for all eternity. They must have the skin of the human Torch, so that they can burn all day, every day, for all eternity but never burn up! They must have the lungs of Aquaman, so they can breathe in this lake of fire! They must have the body of Superman and eyes, so that they can endure this constant terrible level of existence.

And they must exist continually through all this without eating. Why feed people in hell? What are you going to feed them? Charcoal burgers? Who’s going to feed them, Angels? So how many Angels must God post at this great lake? It better be at least a legion, because in theory, after what, 7 billion years of suffering these formidable " Super Sufferers" might just be mad at God and try to get out; we would not want any of these things getting out, now would we.

16

Personally, I think people focus too much on the dogma.

Countless centuries of suffering can be laid at the feet of people who looked at the golden rule as laid out by their God(/'s Son) and decided that torturing, ridiculing, or ostracizing those that were different is just what that meant.

Eternal hell? No. And I consider myself Christian.

Fun fact: “Satan” means “accuser.” Until Revelations (following the biblical books form of a timeline), “satan” was a reference to those that would persecute the faith and/or persons of the faith. To have “satan” tempt you was to have a non-believer ask you to go to Baal’s orgy (come onnnnn. It’ll be fun!)

17

“Revelation”. No “s”. A common mistake.

18

The proper title is “The Book of Revelation” and is commonly shorted to “Revelations” to avoid the lengthier title. It is pluralized in this form because if you went around saying “Revelation” it would slow your speech patterns to avoid an S that your mind desperately wants to put there (it’s a collection and your mind knows that. It’s not ONE revelation, it’s a BUNCH of revelationS.)

“The Book of Revelations” = Bad
“Revelation” = Bad

:slight_smile:

19

I understand. I am definitely a believer in God, Christ and the bible, but I totally reject this eternal hell punishing thing. I can’t see a being such as God, being willing to co-exist in eternity with eternal misery, not after reading " Revelation", ( not RevelationS, as the poster pointed out), 21:4, " And he shall wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there shall BE NO MORE death, there shall NO LONGER BE ANY mourning, crying or pain, the first things have PASSED AWAY!"

Now surely if eternal hell punishing is to exist, then that means there will always be mourning, crying and pain, and this verse must be removed from the bible.

Along with more verses I am going to show. Something is seriously strange about this deadly doctrine.

20

Chinese Hell has 18 levels. Most are temporary purgatories, but the lowest, Avici, is eternal.

Buddhist Hell is not eternal, but the sentences last a very long time.