The strange concept of eternal hell suffering.

[simster]

@Mickiel

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.

This same god was willing to flood the planet in order to wipe out sin - who knows what else he might be ‘willing’ to do.

[Wesley_Clark]

The concept of reincarnation for spiritual growth is also evil, but not as evil as hell. The idea of an endless number of lives full of ignorance, pain, sickness, vulnerability and suffering to ‘learn lessons’ or ‘grow’ is astoundingly evil.

Thats the problem with religion. The world has evil in it and it is impossible to rectify a good creator with an evil world unless you are willingly blind. Our ability to enjoy life or find it painful is just a tool evolution created to control our behavior to enhance our survival odds. Religion attempts to convince us subjective consciousness is the core of existence, rather than a largely irrelevant peripheral aspect created late in evolution.

[Wesley_Clark]

@Mickiel

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.

If it makes you feel better in Zoroastrianism (the religion that was popular in Iran before Greeks and Muslims took over) hell is only 3 days long.

[BrainGlutton]

Greek Hades includes Tartaros, a Hell of punishment, and I recall nothing in Greek mythology to suggest it is not eternal.

Plato’s Republic – the “Myth of Er” from the last book – tells of a Purgatory and a Hell:

Well, I said, I will tell you a tale; not one of the tales which Odysseus tells to the hero Alcinous, yet this too is a tale of a hero, Er the son of Armenius, a Pamphylian by birth. He was slain in battle, and ten days afterwards, when the bodies of the dead were taken up already in a state of corruption, his body was found unaffected by decay, and carried away home to be buried.

He said that when his soul left the body he went on a journey with a great company, and that they came to a mysterious place at which there were two openings in the earth; they were near together, and over against them were two other openings in the heaven above.

In the intermediate space there were judges seated, who commanded the just, after they had given judgment on them and had bound their sentences in front of them, to ascend by the heavenly way on the right hand; and in like manner the unjust were bidden by them to descend by the lower way on the left hand; these also bore the symbols of their deeds, but fastened on their backs.

He drew near, and they told him that he was to be the messenger who would carry the report of the other world to men, and they bade him hear and see all that was to be heard and seen in that place.

Then he beheld and saw on one side the souls departing at either opening of heaven and earth when sentence had been given on them; and at the two other openings other souls, some ascending out of the earth dusty and worn with travel, some descending out of heaven clean and bright.

And arriving ever and anon they seemed to have come from a long journey, and they went forth with gladness into the meadow, where they encamped as at a festival; and those who knew one another embraced and conversed, the souls which came from earth curiously enquiring about the things above, and the souls which came from heaven about the things beneath.

And they told one another of what had happened by the way, those from below weeping and sorrowing at the remembrance of the things which they had endured and seen in their journey beneath the earth (now the journey lasted a thousand years), while those from above were describing heavenly delights and visions of inconceivable beauty.

The Story, Glaucon, would take too long to tell; but the sum was this: --He said that for every wrong which they had done to any one they suffered tenfold; or once in a hundred years --such being reckoned to be the length of man’s life, and the penalty being thus paid ten times in a thousand years.

If, for example, there were any who had been the cause of many deaths, or had betrayed or enslaved cities or armies, or been guilty of any other evil behaviour, for each and all of their offences they received punishment ten times over, and the rewards of beneficence and justice and holiness were in the same proportion.

I need hardly repeat what he said concerning young children dying almost as soon as they were born. Of piety and impiety to gods and parents, and of murderers, there were retributions other and greater far which he described.

He mentioned that he was present when one of the spirits asked another, ‘Where is Ardiaeus the Great?’ (Now this Ardiaeus lived a thousand years before the time of Er: he had been the tyrant of some city of Pamphylia, and had murdered his aged father and his elder brother, and was said to have committed many other abominable crimes.) The answer of the other spirit was: ‘He comes not hither and will never come.’

‘And this,’ said he, ‘was one of the dreadful sights which we ourselves witnessed. We were at the mouth of the cavern, and, having completed all our experiences, were about to reascend, when of a sudden Ardiaeus appeared and several others, most of whom were tyrants; and there were also besides the tyrants private individuals who had been great criminals: they were just, as they fancied, about to return into the upper world, but the mouth, instead of admitting them, gave a roar, whenever any of these incurable sinners or some one who had not been sufficiently punished tried to ascend; and then wild men of fiery aspect, who were standing by and heard the sound, seized and carried them off; and Ardiaeus and others they bound head and foot and hand, and threw them down and flayed them with scourges, and dragged them along the road at the side, carding them on thorns like wool, and declaring to the passers-by what were their crimes, and that they were being taken away to be cast into hell.’

And of all the many terrors which they had endured, he said that there was none like the terror which each of them felt at that moment, lest they should hear the voice; and when there was silence, one by one they ascended with exceeding joy.

[BrainGlutton]

There’s a lot unclear or contradictory-from-different-sources in Norse mythology, but Niflhel does seem to be eternal. (Not to be confused with Muspelheim, which is a realm of fire and fire-spirits but not an afterlife for humans; Niflhel is cold and misty.)

[Voyager]

@Mickiel

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.

In addition they believe that on the one hand you go to hell for not believing, and on the other God wants faith and is somehow against providing any decent evidence that something even exists to believe in. It is kind of like rigorously enforcing speed limits but not bothering to put up any signs.

[BrainGlutton]

@Voyager

In addition they believe that on the one hand you go to hell for not believing, and on the other God wants faith and is somehow against providing any decent evidence that something even exists to believe in. It is kind of like rigorously enforcing speed limits but not bothering to put up any signs.

God moves in extremely mysterious, not to say, circuitous ways. God does not play dice with the universe; He plays an ineffable game of His own devising, which might be compared, from the perspective of any of the other players*, to being involved in an obscure and complex version of poker in a pitch-dark room, with blank cards, for infinite stakes, with a Dealer who won’t tell you the rules, and who smiles all the time.

Footnote to above: * ie., everybody.

– Good Omens, Neil Gaiman & Terry Pratchett

[Mickiel]

@simster

This same god was willing to flood the planet in order to wipe out sin - who knows what else he might be ‘willing’ to do.

I don’t believe the flood was global, it was only where humans lived at the time. Why would God flood parts of the earth where there was nothing but land? That makes no sense. But the flood is an historical fact in my view, and its not circumstanial evidence that we have , its cultural. All these cultures and more have giant floods in their history;

Australia
Babylon
Bolivia
Borneo
Burma
Canada
China
Cuba
East Africa
Egypt
Fiji
French Polynesia
Greece
Guyana
Iceland
India
Iran
Italy
Malay Peninsula
Mexico
New Zealand
Peru
Russia
Vietnam
Wales
This is not happenstance luck or legendary myth in my view, its history. I mean goodness, something is there and coincides with the biblical story. But that’s another topic.

[Czarcasm]

And you have evidence that these all happened at the same time?

[Mickiel]

@Czarcasm

And you have evidence that these all happened at the same time?

Of course not, that would be quite something. But we have the cultural evidence , as I have listed, some physical evidence, the Black Seas existence, and the large amount of Sand in the middle East fertile crescent, ( what transports sand== water), and the bible; some finds in Archaeology; I think that’s enough to support there was something. The Archaeological find was called " The Gilgamesh Epic."

[simster]

@Mickiel

I don’t believe the flood was global, it was only where humans lived at the time. Why would God flood parts of the earth where there was nothing but land? That makes no sense. But the flood is an historical fact in my view, and its not circumstanial evidence that we have , its cultural. All these cultures and more have giant floods in their history;

Australia
Babylon
Bolivia
Borneo
Burma
Canada
China
Cuba
East Africa
Egypt
Fiji
French Polynesia
Greece
Guyana
Iceland
India
Iran
Italy
Malay Peninsula
Mexico
New Zealand
Peru
Russia
Vietnam
Wales
This is not happenstance luck or legendary myth in my view, its history. I mean goodness, something is there and coincides with the biblical story. But that’s another topic.

You’re confusing me - on one hand, you question why would god flood things where there was nothing but land? well, you can’t flood water! and tehn you go onto say that the flood was a historical event - now, you might caveat that it was a local (not global) - but that is not what your ‘book’ says, now is it?
Secondly, wether or not the flood happened, or on what scale is irrelevant - the God of your bible put forth a story that claims this is what was done - if the Bible is ‘his word’ then it means something… secondly, he’s just as willing to snuff out everyone that doesnt believe in fire in revelations.

You’re god also required a human sacrifice in order to allow ‘anyone’ to be saved.

Not a very good or loving god if you ask me.

[Mickiel]

@simster

You’re confusing me - on one hand, you question why would god flood things where there was nothing but land? well, you can’t flood water! and tehn you go onto say that the flood was a historical event - now, you might caveat that it was a local (not global) - but that is not what your ‘book’ says, now is it?
Secondly, wether or not the flood happened, or on what scale is irrelevant - the God of your bible put forth a story that claims this is what was done - if the Bible is ‘his word’ then it means something… secondly, he’s just as willing to snuff out everyone that doesnt believe in fire in revelations.

You’re god also required a human sacrifice in order to allow ‘anyone’ to be saved.

Not a very good or loving god if you ask me.

Of course its what the bible says, the flooding of " The World", meant " The people"- the people were the world, not the earth. But now this is my view, I am not Christian and they hold an entirely different view than mine. In my understanding of it, only the places where people were was flooded.

The person God required to be sacrificed was his only Son, which was a very loving act in my view, but I understand yours. I quess someone dying for you is not a thing of honor in your view, but it is in mine.

[ITR_champion]

@Mickiel

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.

I agree with you.

[Mickiel]

@ITR_champion

I agree with you.

Well yes, the whole concept of eternal hell punishing has something seriously wrong with it. And yet the fact that so many believers in God have accepted it, speaks volumes about human nature and how accepting we can be in our belief systems, if we think its somehow " Right." What can be right about making me suffer for all eternity, just because I don’t believe in you? Their doctrine is making God out to be an ego maniac who must be believed in or hes out to get you. And make you pay an eternity for it.

God is no such being.

Not in my view.

[simster]

@Mickiel

Of course its what the bible says, the flooding of " The World", meant " The people"- the people were the world, not the earth. But now this is my view, I am not Christian and they hold an entirely different view than mine. In my understanding of it, only the places where people were was flooded.

The person God required to be sacrificed was his only Son, which was a very loving act in my view, but I understand yours. I quess someone dying for you is not a thing of honor in your view, but it is in mine.

Hmmm - maybe you need to quit saying 'but it really means this" instead of what it says -

[QUOTE=GOD @ Genesis 6]
5 The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. 6 The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. 7 So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.”
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=GOD @ Genesis 7]
Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made
[/QUOTE]

So - GOD regreted everything he made - even tho up to that point he saw that it was ‘good’, and he declared that every living creature on the earth would die.

Since it was EVERY living creature - the flood from the bible can only be worldwide - it cannot be a ‘local’ event.

Then - he sent rainbows to say how he would ‘never do this again’ - and what do we get to suffer from in Revelation, in the ‘end times’ - death by fire - great - well, I guess ‘technically’ it ain’t a flood.

Any GOD that requires a sacrifice - read that again - ‘REQUIRES’ a sacrifice to do what he should have already done, that he clearly ‘can do’ - is a miserable creature and undeserving of any ‘worship’.

What makes this ‘requirement’ any more acceptable then other myths that required sacrifices for crops, volcanoes, rain, etc? Just because you ‘think’ so? well, your thinking is a bit off if you think that requiring any kind of sacrifice make him a ‘loving god’.

Regardless - your ‘God’ is a mad man - plain and simple.

[simster]

@Mickiel

Well yes, the whole concept of eternal hell punishing has something seriously wrong with it. And yet the fact that so many believers in God have accepted it, speaks volumes about human nature and how accepting we can be in our belief systems, if we think its somehow " Right." What can be right about making me suffer for all eternity, just because I don’t believe in you? Their doctrine is making God out to be an ego maniac who must be believed in or hes out to get you. And make you pay an eternity for it.

God is no such being.

Not in my view.

To God - since he is concieved being ‘timeless’ (a thousand years is a day, etc) “forever” is a foreign concept - and since he clearly is a bit confused anyway (good, bad - whatever, I got the gun), him torturing his ‘sinful’ creation means nothing to him - its all part of the plan, right?

[Trinopus]

To me, this has always been obvious. Even Hitler and Stalin didn’t commit infinite evil. They were humans, and, as bad as they were, their crimes were finite.

But…I had a chat with a Christian recently, who disagreed. He said that every human life is infinite in potential. There is no limit to what any given soul might accomplish. By killing a person, and taking away that infinite potential, a murderer is committing an infinitely evil act.

I still don’t agree… But it was eye-opening to meet someone who formulated that viewpoint clearly.

[BrainGlutton]

@Mickiel

Of course its what the bible says, the flooding of " The World", meant " The people"- the people were the world, not the earth. But now this is my view, I am not Christian and they hold an entirely different view than mine. In my understanding of it, only the places where people were was flooded.

You’re a Biblical literalist but not Christian? What is your religion, then?

[Voyager]

@Mickiel

I don’t believe the flood was global, it was only where humans lived at the time. Why would God flood parts of the earth where there was nothing but land? That makes no sense. But the flood is an historical fact in my view, and its not circumstanial evidence that we have , its cultural. All these cultures and more have giant floods in their history;

This is not happenstance luck or legendary myth in my view, its history. I mean goodness, something is there and coincides with the biblical story. But that’s another topic.

Big floods can easily become giant floods in legends. If anyone doubts that big floods can exist, I suggest they visit Colorado. Missouri 20 years ago or so was fairly large also, plus we can count the tsunamis, which someone in Fiji would think quite impressive.
Are the poor people in Colorado who got their trailers and all their possessions wiped out sinful - or does shit just happen?

[Voyager]

@Trinopus

To me, this has always been obvious. Even Hitler and Stalin didn’t commit infinite evil. They were humans, and, as bad as they were, their crimes were finite.

But…I had a chat with a Christian recently, who disagreed. He said that every human life is infinite in potential. There is no limit to what any given soul might accomplish. By killing a person, and taking away that infinite potential, a murderer is committing an infinitely evil act.

I still don’t agree… But it was eye-opening to meet someone who formulated that viewpoint clearly.

You also met someone who doesn’t know what “infinite” actually means. I guess people use it as a synonym for really, really big.