For those who say it’s a tough punishment, I’d say think of it as a seperation from God. God lets us pretty much run this planet as we care to. We make our own decisions - In the end God decides if we should live w/ Him or not based on our lives.
The beef I currently have is that we all are held responsible for the sins of Adam and Eve. I always hated group punsihments.
Eh. It goes all the way down to divorce court. Men have been paying for the sin of a woman since The Apple Incident[sup]TM[/sup]
Most people live like rabbits in a hutch.
Were the eternal flames of Hell lit to roast rabbits?
I think not.
Fine. But nobody is pretending that a potter love his vases as much as he would love his children.
You can make this point (that we aren’t up to God’s expectations, hence deserve to be casted away), but don’t go on pretending that God is loving, then. He’s just a pot maker unsatisfied with what he created (so, he’s also a poor potmaker. Don’t pretend he’s all powerful, either).
And finally, the pot maker will just cast away his pot. Except if he has a very bad temper, he wont trample on them hammer them, burn the remains in a furnace, etc… So, your God doesn’t have much in the way of self-control.
And don’t believe that it’s just rethorics. I really believe that a god like yours, casting people in hell for their sins would have to be unloving, limited in his power, and mean. Though mean would suffice. I can imagine an evil god who would like to create beings just in order to have them suffering for fun. Honestly a much more convincing and consistent theology, IMO.
And this would be just and merciful in what sense exactly?
The focus on suffering is very much a Western phenomenon. In the East, Christ’s suffering, though still very real, is incidental to His death, which itself is only important in that it enabled Him to destroy death by the resurrection. Suffering as a result of one’s choices, or suffering in the process of purifying oneself, is considered neutral, in the case of the former, as it is the natural result of one’s actions, or good, in the latter, as it is indicative of a good process happening. Suffering for the purpose of paying off some sort of debt for sin, or suffering for the sake of suffering (as if it were a good thing in itself), as is found in certain strains of Catholicism, is unknown in the East.
The concept of Hell, most likely, has joined such out of date dogma as the Flat Earth, in the trash can of ignorance. Hard to believe, that in the 21st century, there are those that still believe in such nonsense.
“All Religions die Slowly”…Confucius?
In the sense that if you’re 1) an atheist: you don’t believe in any higher power so there’s nothing to worry about -or- 2) you have denied God in a Christian sense and are therefor destined for Hell.
Did you notice how I made clear that I was speaking about Catholics? Or were you just looking for something to disagree with?
It’s a logistics problem.
Hell is full and out of necessity the assholes are living longer.
Exhibit A: Strom Thurmond
I’m curious as to what you think the Bible says on the subject of Hell.
If I understand Orthodox (capital O) Christian teaching correctly, Hell/Damnation is the exact opposite of the Absence of God. It is the inescapable Presence of God as experienced by those who have hardened themselves against Him.
Both the Absence view & the Orthodox “Presence” view make the concept of Eternal Damnation somewhat moral & reasonable. I haven’t ruled out Annihilation/Conditional Immortality or Ultimate Universal Salvation as possibilities either. I am certain that however it works out- all people shall know that Perfect Love & Perfect Justice prevail.
Perhaps you could demonstrate God’s Perfect Love & Perfect Justice by answering my question from earlier in the thread:
Assume an atheist behaves perfectly well in society during his lifetime, but dies while still not believing in God.
What happens to him?
Assume a serial killer sincerely repents on his deathbed.
What happens to him?
It’s up to God, who will judge with perfect justice and mercy.
It’s up to God, who will judge with perfect justice and mercy. Remember, though, the Wise Thief from the Bible, who repented on the cross, and was the first to enter Paradise after Christ.
Wait… you mean, we’re not IN hell?!
Let’s try phrasing this another way, then.
What were you taught might be the most probable outcome in each of these two situations?
I was taught when I was a catechumen that the Church makes no pronouncement on the ultimate fate of those outside the Church, and that it’s up to themselves and to God where they end up. The Church is the only sure method of salvation, but that doesn’t mean that everybody else is damned.
Just to answer the two above questions:
I was taught that an atheist doing good deeds doesn’t get to go to heaven, as in the Bible it pretty clearly states that it is only through Jesus that one can go.
As for the other, I was always taught that it doesn’t matter when you repent/believe, as long as you do it sometime. For those who always say they’ll do it right before they die, there’s the obvious counter or knowing when you’ll die. Not to mention, is it really belief if you’re only doing it just because?
As for hell, I think that a lot of it just has to do with the progression of suffering becoming much less emphasized. Suffering because we are all sinful creatures is being pushed away because as others have pointed out, it doesn’t necessarily make ethical sense. I think Theologue put it pretty well in his/her posts. The bible doesn’t really say much about eternal torment. I can only really remember one part where somebody seems to be in pain, and that’s the story of Lazarus and the Rich Man. Even there, though, the parable’s point isn’t to show what hell is like; instead it’s to illustrate how Jesus’ words should be enough. And it would have been really hard to do illustrate it as Jesus did without having the rich man be able to talk after he went to Hell.
My own personal view of hell was always that it is an annihilation. That jives with the idea of a loving God much more than eternal punishment does. Take away the idea of eternal punishment and I think that you’ve taken away a lot of the problems with believing in the Christian god.
Let’s try this yet again.
If you had to make a blind guess, based on what you have been taught throughout the years and on what you believe in your heart, what do you think the outcome of these two situations would be?
This is for yBeayf, of course, but others are invited to throw in their two cents.