I don't know where you're from, but of my 25+ christian friends from different backgrounds and who go to different colleges, there isn't a single one who believes in hell.
I've spent the past 6 years or so (on and off) learning about Christianity so I believe I understand your argument that Christians do believe in hell and believe it to be awful so they try to save the people they know from it by teaching others Christianity. I'll try to briefly explain the problem with it, and by that I mean why so many non believers don't like the religion.
Jinsho's comment is basically what I believe. If a non believer is going to be a believer, they have a much much much much greater chance of doing so if they absorb information as a person, not as a non believer. Likewise, a believer who is trying to convert someone should do so from a person's perspective, not a believers perspective. You can't save me from danger if I don't believe it exists right? I'll give an example of a flipped script, but if you're familiar with this sort of thing, you can just skip the next paragraph.
Imagine a sort of reincarnation religion where if you believe that your soul is part of the earth and that the earth has a soul, when you die you'll be rebirthed as a better form of life, whereas if you don't, then you are rebirthed as a lower form of life. As a believer of this, I'd want to say "look I'm trying to save you from being a worm next life, so let me teach you about the soul of the earth". This is a useless base point because it's harmful to your current way of life to try and understand my way of life. This is why I think people randomly trying to teach strangers Christianity is a fucking horrible idea, because it's an arrogant and ignorant way of spreading the gospel.
The other horrible horrible idea is that this kind of teaching system is that square 1 is to avoid eternal suffering, instead of learning about God's glory.
The other problem with Hell is that its eternal. No one can comprehend just how long an eternity is. It reminds me of Douglas Adam's quote about how big space is.
"Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."
Well an eternity is a long time. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly long it is.
This makes me question why a benevolent God would allow such a place to exist. Surely no sin is worthy of eternal punishment. At some point, enough is enough.
I agree with your stance though, OP. I'm an atheist and you're a Christian, but that doesn't mean we can't get along.
As an aside, OP, have you studied any of the early Heresies? Like the Arian Heresy for instance? If not, I'll sum it up quickly; Just before the Council of Nicea, the theologian Arius pointed out some logical fallacies with the Trinity, the Afterlife, and the nature of Christ. The more well know philosophers, now known as the Christian Apologists, ended up winning the debate, but their arguments were basically nothing more than them repeating their position louder and louder until that's all anyone could hear. I bring this up because it seems like that's all the debate ever comes down to.
Ok, I sent a much longer PM to OP explaining my point of view, but I want to post a few paragraphs from it just to address one common thing that I am seeing.
This makes me question why a benevolent God would allow such a place to exist. Surely no sin is worthy of eternal punishment.
This is how most branches of Christianity view heaven and hell:
Hell is the complete absence of any of God's qualities. And since God is perfect, the absence of all those qualities, is an absolute imperfectness. Hell is not God actively punishing non-believers, but is instead, him removing himself from them... as they chose to reject him.
This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature.
If you don't believe in the doctrines of the Bible, then you can ignore my comment. No need to argue it. I'm not trying to argue whether this perspective is true or false, I am just trying to clear up misconceptions of what many people THINK the Bible says, when it is actually saying something else.
On June 09 2012 04:35 Thorakh wrote: Hell, eternal punishment for a temporary crime. Loving god, yeah right.
The problem with any religion is that they all claim to be right.
Remember, that which does not harm, cannot be wrong.
People sin all the time and won't find themselves in Hell. I sin but I believe I'll be in heaven. This isn't an excuse to sin but merely a fact. I think ClysmiC did a great job clarifying the view of Hell many (including Christians!) have.
There are a myriad of issues in which there are tons of opinions on who is right. That doesn't make the issues obsolete.
On June 09 2012 02:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Pascal's Wager ("I'm going to believe Hell/ Heaven exists *just in case*") is a logical fallacy. This is the best video I've ever watched that explains why it completely breaks down at all levels:
There may be other reasons to be a Christian/ theist... but Pascal's Fallacy is not a good one.
This video is an extremely bad argument against Pascal. Even alone on wikipedia you will find much better criticism against Pascal's wager than this one. But yeah, I agree, Pascal's Wager is not the way to go for a Christian.
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
I thought he presented in a very considerate manner. People complain about theists not trying to communicate, and he does a great job, and then you attack him.
Try thinking of it this way. You have to make some assumptions, so it's like a thought experiment. God creates everything. He is all that is good and perfect. He makes something (people) that are able to be flawed and gives them free will. They can choose to worship him in all his goodness. Or they can decide not to. If you choose God you can join him. He is perfect and holy and nothing that is imperfect or unholy can join him. (Jesus makes us perfect so we can do so). If you decided not to then he is unable to let you join him because you have not been made perfect. Once again, you'll have to just agree to these points to understand ClysmiC's and other's views. But for them, these are facts, truths, just the way things are.
I hope that helped you understand his point. If you're geniunely interested you could try C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity. It's not very in-depth but he has a great way of simplifying things in a brilliant way.
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
I send myself to hell in more than a dozen religions. What one to take?
OP at least made an effort towards constructive conversation, please keep it that way or this will close If you're simply not interested in a discussion why bother posting?
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
I send myself to hell in more than a dozen religions. Which religion to follow?
The main thing non-believers have to understand about Christians is our understanding of life after death. Without jumping into a giant explanation backed by many different biblical sources, let me underline one important notion: Christians believe in Hell. Yes, there are a great many other things that Christians believe about life after death, and all of our crazy ideas on how to get there, but the main thing non-believers must always remember is that we believe in Hell. Imagine if you believed in a place that existed after death that was filled with an eternity of unimaginable pain. An eternity. Not until all your “bad doings” have been repaid, but forever and ever without hope of reprieve. Now if you truly believe in your heart beyond a shadow of a doubt that such a place existed, wouldn’t you want to find a way to avoid getting sent to that place? And more importantly, once you found a way to escape such unimaginable terror, wouldn’t you want to inform all of your loved ones of this method? I believe that this is at the heart of every Christian, weighing on their souls constantly. However, it seems like fewer and fewer Christians are able to conduct themselves respectfully which leads me to…..
Fear should not be the main basis for any belief. It becomes just another form of totalitarianism. I'd rather rot in hell then have to spend an eternity worshipping someone who is the supreme being and creator of such a system. Especially when it's impossible to fake since an ominipotent being can read your mind. So unlike people who fake worshiping the supreme leader in North Korea, you'll have to genuinly sacrifice your own humanity and dignity just to live.
But then you're just a walking corpse. Fuck that son.
On June 09 2012 02:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Pascal's Wager ("I'm going to believe Hell/ Heaven exists *just in case*") is a logical fallacy. This is the best video I've ever watched that explains why it completely breaks down at all levels:
There may be other reasons to be a Christian/ theist... but Pascal's Fallacy is not a good one.
This is video is an extremely bad argument against Pascal. Even alone on wikipedia you will find much better critics against Pascal's wager than this one. But yeah, I agree, Pascal's Wager is not the way to go for a Christian.
I've read many different refutations for PW, and I think Matt Dillahunty (the speaker in the video) does a very good job of concisely explaining why it fails in so many of the most popular ways it's used in debates and discussions today. I think that this video alone would silence 99 out of every 100 theists who use PW as their central argument for believing in Heaven and Hell. Most theists are not philosophers either.
Instead of just dismissing it without explaining why, can you please elaborate on why it's "extremely bad"? Keep in mind his circumstances: he's responding to a random troll phone caller, completely off-the-cuff, without organizing any notes or research (other than his previous memory) ahead of time.
OP at least made an effort towards constructive conversation, please keep it that way or this will close If you're simply not interested in a discussion why bother posting?
It's a genuine question. Why is Christianity more true than all the other religions all claiming to be 'the one'?
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
I thought he presented in a very considerate manner. People complain about theists not trying to communicate, and he does a great job, and then you attack him.
Try thinking of it this way. You have to make some assumptions, so it's like a thought experiment. God creates everything. He is all that is good and perfect. He makes something (people) that are able to be flawed and gives them free will. They can choose to worship him in all his goodness. Or they can decide not to. If you choose God you can join him. He is perfect and holy and nothing that is imperfect or unholy can join him. (Jesus makes us perfect so we can do so). If you decided not to then he is unable to let you join him because you have not been made perfect. Once again, you'll have to just agree to these points to understand ClysmiC's and other's views. But for them, these are facts, truths, just the way things are.
I hope that helped you understand his point. If you're geniunely interested you could try C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity. It's not very in-depth but he has a great way of simplifying things in a brilliant way.
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
I send myself to hell in more than a dozen religions. What one to take?
OP at least made an effort towards constructive conversation, please keep it that way or this will close If you're simply not interested in a discussion why bother posting?
If the Creator is perfect, then so must be all His creations. A flaw in the creations is equivalent to a flaw in the creator.
We've all known brats and spoiled children. Their attitude and behavior problems are flaws. But we don't blame them, we blame their parents, their creators.
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
I thought he presented in a very considerate manner. People complain about theists not trying to communicate, and he does a great job, and then you attack him.
I'm not attacking the poster. I am saying that a God who says "worship me or I am sending you to hell," is a dick. Anyone who doesn't think the biblical God is a dick is kidding themselves. Again, not an attack on the poster.
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
I thought he presented in a very considerate manner. People complain about theists not trying to communicate, and he does a great job, and then you attack him.
Try thinking of it this way. You have to make some assumptions, so it's like a thought experiment. God creates everything. He is all that is good and perfect. He makes something (people) that are able to be flawed and gives them free will. They can choose to worship him in all his goodness. Or they can decide not to. If you choose God you can join him. He is perfect and holy and nothing that is imperfect or unholy can join him. (Jesus makes us perfect so we can do so). If you decided not to then he is unable to let you join him because you have not been made perfect. Once again, you'll have to just agree to these points to understand ClysmiC's and other's views. But for them, these are facts, truths, just the way things are.
I hope that helped you understand his point. If you're geniunely interested you could try C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity. It's not very in-depth but he has a great way of simplifying things in a brilliant way.
On June 09 2012 04:58 Thorakh wrote:
On June 09 2012 04:49 Myrkskog wrote:
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
I send myself to hell in more than a dozen religions. What one to take?
OP at least made an effort towards constructive conversation, please keep it that way or this will close If you're simply not interested in a discussion why bother posting?
If the Creator is perfect, then so must be all His creations. A flaw in the creations is equivalent to a flaw in the creator.
We've all known brats and spoiled children. Their attitude and behavior problems are flaws. But we don't blame them, we blame their parents, their creators.
Could you elaborate on why perfect Creator = perfect creation? In the assumptions I outlined, people were flawed, so people having offspring that were also flawed isn't an argument for God having to make a perfect creation.
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
I thought he presented in a very considerate manner. People complain about theists not trying to communicate, and he does a great job, and then you attack him.
I'm not attacking the poster. I am saying that a God who says "worship me or I am sending you to hell," is a dick. Anyone who doesn't think the biblical God is a dick is kidding themselves. Again, not an attack on the poster.
I apologize, I misapplied "What a dick". Sorry! Did my explanation help at all though? I mean if you view it from God's perspective (hard to do) Your creation rejecting what you asked it to do could be percieved as "dickish" no?
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
I thought he presented in a very considerate manner. People complain about theists not trying to communicate, and he does a great job, and then you attack him.
Try thinking of it this way. You have to make some assumptions, so it's like a thought experiment. God creates everything. He is all that is good and perfect. He makes something (people) that are able to be flawed and gives them free will. They can choose to worship him in all his goodness. Or they can decide not to. If you choose God you can join him. He is perfect and holy and nothing that is imperfect or unholy can join him. (Jesus makes us perfect so we can do so). If you decided not to then he is unable to let you join him because you have not been made perfect. Once again, you'll have to just agree to these points to understand ClysmiC's and other's views. But for them, these are facts, truths, just the way things are.
I hope that helped you understand his point. If you're geniunely interested you could try C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity. It's not very in-depth but he has a great way of simplifying things in a brilliant way.
On June 09 2012 04:58 Thorakh wrote:
On June 09 2012 04:49 Myrkskog wrote:
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
I send myself to hell in more than a dozen religions. What one to take?
OP at least made an effort towards constructive conversation, please keep it that way or this will close If you're simply not interested in a discussion why bother posting?
If the Creator is perfect, then so must be all His creations. A flaw in the creations is equivalent to a flaw in the creator.
We've all known brats and spoiled children. Their attitude and behavior problems are flaws. But we don't blame them, we blame their parents, their creators.
Could you elaborate on why perfect Creator = perfect creation? In the assumptions I outlined, people were flawed, so people having offspring that were also flawed isn't an argument for God having to make a perfect creation.
OH, I see the misunderstanding. I wasn't using spoiled children as an example of why God is flawed. It was an example of how a flaw in a creation represents a flaw in the creator. It was an analogy. Parents = God, and spoiled children = people.
If God were truly perfect, all his creations would be perfect as well.
When a brat throws a tantrum in a public place, I don't blame the kid (assuming they're under 6-7), I blame the parents for not raising their child better. When my video card overheats and melts, I don't blame the card, I blame nVidia for shoddy soldering.
I apologize, I misapplied "What a dick". Sorry! Did my explanation help at all though? I mean if you view it from God's perspective (hard to do) Your creation rejecting what you asked it to do could be percieved as "dickish" no?
I see it as dickish of the creator not to provide any evidence but still expect normal, rational people to believe in him.
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
I thought he presented in a very considerate manner. People complain about theists not trying to communicate, and he does a great job, and then you attack him.
Try thinking of it this way. You have to make some assumptions, so it's like a thought experiment. God creates everything. He is all that is good and perfect. He makes something (people) that are able to be flawed and gives them free will. They can choose to worship him in all his goodness. Or they can decide not to. If you choose God you can join him. He is perfect and holy and nothing that is imperfect or unholy can join him. (Jesus makes us perfect so we can do so). If you decided not to then he is unable to let you join him because you have not been made perfect. Once again, you'll have to just agree to these points to understand ClysmiC's and other's views. But for them, these are facts, truths, just the way things are.
I hope that helped you understand his point. If you're geniunely interested you could try C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity. It's not very in-depth but he has a great way of simplifying things in a brilliant way.
On June 09 2012 04:58 Thorakh wrote:
On June 09 2012 04:49 Myrkskog wrote:
On June 09 2012 04:27 ClysmiC wrote: This might be the better way to think of heaven and hell: God doesn't send people to hell if they can't "make it' into heaven. Instead, people send themselves to hell through their sinful nature, or by rejecting God. Yet, God still offers them a place in heaven if they accept him, as Jesus took care of the problem of man's sinful nature. .
This is one of the most absurd arguments that theists make. You send yourself to hell? Come on, God sends you to hell. What a dick.
I send myself to hell in more than a dozen religions. What one to take?
OP at least made an effort towards constructive conversation, please keep it that way or this will close If you're simply not interested in a discussion why bother posting?
If the Creator is perfect, then so must be all His creations. A flaw in the creations is equivalent to a flaw in the creator.
We've all known brats and spoiled children. Their attitude and behavior problems are flaws. But we don't blame them, we blame their parents, their creators.
Could you elaborate on why perfect Creator = perfect creation? In the assumptions I outlined, people were flawed, so people having offspring that were also flawed isn't an argument for God having to make a perfect creation.
OH, I see the misunderstanding. I wasn't using spoiled children as an example of why God is flawed. It was an example of how a flaw in a creation represents a flaw in the creator. It was an analogy. Parents = God, and spoiled children = people.
If God were truly perfect, all his creations would be perfect as well.
When a brat throws a tantrum in a public place, I don't blame the kid (assuming they're under 6-7), I blame the parents for not raising their child better. When my video card overheats and melts, I don't blame the card, I blame nVidia for shoddy soldering.
If nVidia was the perfect company, could it choose to make a faulty video card? I would say yes. I see the analogy, I'm just questioning it. I think the analogy of God being a father is a great one. Just like a father wants a child to grow up to it's best abilities and follow his teachings, God wants us to follow him so that we can join him in heaven.
I think God has more control over what he creates than what happens when I have a child. He can choose to make a creation that has the option to be imperfect. Granted there's no way we'd every manage to never "sin" but we always have a choice when we do. Regardless, I think that's where the analogy breaks down. They're good but you can only take thems o far sometimes.
I apologize, I misapplied "What a dick". Sorry! Did my explanation help at all though? I mean if you view it from God's perspective (hard to do) Your creation rejecting what you asked it to do could be percieved as "dickish" no?
I see it as dickish of the creator not to provide any evidence but still expect normal, rational people to believe in him.
And here I am, thinking I'm a normal and rational person I think many would argue there is evidence. Off the top of my head (and your use of evidence): The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict by Josh McDowell has a lot of stuff in it. If you're interested you can check it out.
As a devout agnostic, I actually think OP framed both sides quite well. Given that there are people who believe in hell and the ways to get there, how can you expect them not to push their ideas on others? It seems like the religious-nonreligious tension is unavoidable as long as there is this super-extreme idea of hell.
On June 09 2012 05:13 mordek wrote: I apologize, I misapplied "What a dick". Sorry! Did my explanation help at all though? I mean if you view it from God's perspective (hard to do) Your creation rejecting what you asked it to do could be percieved as "dickish" no?
I understand the explanation, I just reject it because it's absurd and probably the most offensive line of argument that theists can make.
If I have a child that I want to go to University, and they say no, so I lock them in the basement and torture them for the rest of their life, I'm a dick. It's not my "perception" that God is a dick. He is a dick(and much worse).
EPT
I think many would argue there is evidence. Off the top of my head (and your use of evidence): The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict by Josh McDowell has a lot of stuff in it. If you're interested you can check it out.
