Not at all. Your comment was in response to DrDeth’s post that said specifically his belief that Hell is temporary until they truly repent. If Bob is never sorry that he raped Mary and is completely fine with it, then why is Mary the problem again? If Bob says, “Geeze, raping you was wrong, that wasn’t something I’m proud of.” and Mary is more than willing to be his friend again, I’m still siding with Mary on this one. This is definitely Bob’s issue.
Well, one can certainly distort or misinterpret statements taken out of context and on their own. Since Sikhism requires you to be a good person, the statement is essentially saying “We don’t demand you be a Sikh. If you are a Christian, it is enough to be a good person and a good Christian.” Especially when you consider the teachings of Jesus, which are all about being a good person, despite how they may be interpreted today by modern American so-called Christians.
Have you not encountered this in the world? Where people do you wrong repeatedly, blame it on you and claim that any problems you have with them are all on you?
But, to be fair, pretty much every inspirational phrase, proverb, rule of thumb, or other piece of advice falls apart if you take it completely literally and start rules-lawyering it and treating it like a mathematical theorem or a legal statute.
Heh, I have, but it’s a pretty weak argument to make against DrDeth’s claim. “If Hitler’s down in Hell laughing it up that he killed millions and God’s leaving him there, then God is an A-hole and one assumes non-existent or somesuch…” all I’m saying is that’s a very interesting position to take. When you’re siding with Hitler on pretty much anything, you probably want to take a good hard look in the mirror and start asking yourself how exactly you got to this point.
I’m sorry, but
- The decision to create Hell is is the fault of the entity that created Hell.
- The decision to make it possible to spend an eternity in Hell is the fault of the entity that created Hell and made the rules…
- The decision to make all those that are “evil”(btw, who falls under that category? What exactly is the range of “evil”?) suffer the same fate is the fault of the entity that created Hell and made the rules.
- The inability to understand that if a person doesn’t truly repent after enough torture they are obviously severely mentally ill means that the entity that created Hell and set the rules is not worthy of my worship. The way I’ve heard Hell described, if I spent a weekend there I would sincerely apologize for killing six million Jews in WWII.
Nobody is siding with with Hitler.
Pretty sure you are here. I read it again. Your claim is that if Hitler is in Hell and not sorry for committing genocide then God is somehow ‘bad.’ This means that in order for God to be ‘good’ in your eyes, Hitler shouldn’t be in Hell at some point even if he’s not sorry or even ecstatic about his genocidal ways. I think that you’re going to need some serious rhetorical gymnastics to say that that’s not siding with Hitler.
It can be instructive to observe how the statements fall apart, though. For example this “I don’t care what religion you are, just be a good whatever” makes the implicit claim that all religions instruct their constituents to do things that, if obeyed, will result in better things for other people and society.
Personally I vehemently disagree - for some people being a “good whatever” means blowing things up or killing people. So to me the phrase doesn’t fail for semantic reasons, it fails because it fails to acknowledge the potential evils of religion. So even though I understand that the sentiment behind the phrase is good, I still recognize it as an excellent opportunity to get on my soapbox and say things that make people mad. Which, truly, is a reward in and of itself.
On a different subject, this whole business about whether judgement and punishment is just or not? You kind of have to first agree on what punishment you’re talking about. I will super cut off contact with somebody forever, if I don’t like them. I would not necessarily torture them forever, but there are certainly punishments and consequences that I would consider to be a reasonable reaction to various actions. For example a person who misses a question on a single test will never have a 100% in the class again. (Dun dun dunnnn!!!)
And no, I don’t think that christianity has anything resembling a consensus on what the punishment will be for various crimes/sins.
Good point.
Next time, try quoting what I say that you object to. You keep leaving out the “Eternal torture” bit-do you have any idea at all what torture can do? Nobody laughs through it, and it doesn’t take an eternity to get anyone to confess, repent, and ask for forgiveness. “Hitler laughing in Hell”, indeed. As evil as Hitler was, he was still human, not some sort of supernatural creature that would be immune to pain.
Then your argument makes even less sense. If you’re claiming that it’s impossible for anyone to not repent after some short amount of time and DrDeth is saying that’s all it takes to get to Heaven, then where’s your problem? There is no such thing as eternal torment then according to his model and your claim.
Besides Hitler, who else deserves an eternity in Hell for not repenting?
What is the least evil thing a person can do and still deserve such a punishment?
The point is that confession under such duress is unethical and immoral for Man and/or God, and imagining silly things like “Hitler laughing in Hell” to justify an eternity of punishment is not right.
After torturing them long enough and hard enough that their mind is destroyed, it stops being about punishment, and starts being about entertainment.
What told you that I was taking any issue with DrDeth’s claim? That’s an assumption on your part followed by a foolish accusation.
If one doesn’t believe in an all-knowing, all-powerful, all-loving God, then “That’s too awful to be true” is a poor argument for not believing something. But if one does believe in such a God, then it seems to me that it’s actually a pretty good argument. Why wouldn’t God do a better job preventing such a terrible outcome as billions of people being damned for all eternity?
You can say: “It’s free will; people have to choose God.” But, shouldn’t God at least be able to construct the most persuasive possible argument? I’ve met at least some Christians who believe that God continues making his case to us after we die, and that at least the vast majority of reasonably decent human beings will eventually be persuaded, regardless of what they believed in life. But for those who don’t believe that, but who believe that this life is our one chance to choose to accept Jesus as our savior or be forever damned, I have to ask: Is the available evidence in favor of Christianity as the one true religion really the best argument God can make? Why not provide more concrete evidence?
Nope, you have free will. You can pick Heaven or Hell.
Are the men who build prisons and pass laws responsible for the criminals who break them?
The decision to build prisons is whose fault?
The decision to commit a crime so heinous that you will spend the rest of you life in prison is whose fault?
Was Hitler mentally ill? Maybe, but doesnt he deserve punishment for what he did? Even perhaps eternal punishment? Ok, let’s give him a break- one year in hell for every Jew he had killed- in a particularly horrible way, btw. 600000 years should be enough, eh?
I agree. Altho not quite *siding *with Hitler, his claim seems to be Hitler doesn’t deserve punishment for his atrocities. 600000 years in Hell may be too good for him.