• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Hell and consequences

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
This is kind of carried over from another thread but anyway.

I've noticed a trend in people who can be broadly classified as believers or people who want to believe that they have a preference for faiths which have no concept of hell.

Similarly there are wholesale condemnations of faiths or authorities because the "condemn people to hell", personally this is news to me, the best authorities in my own faith have concluded that if hell exists it is the abscence of God by the refusal of God, therefore the gates to hell are locked from the inside and the "condemned" hold the keys themselves.

Anyway, I tend to think that this is contingent to another secular trend away from thinking consequentially or about choice and consequence. I've thought there was a crisis in personal responsibility for while but this is something greater than this I think its more of a whole sale maturational crisis.

Consequential thinking develops around about 21yrs of age, at least in the western world, but that boundary is getting pushed back, back, back all the time.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
So your thesis here is that the disappearance of Hell from the Judeo-Christian cultural mind is stemming mainly from some avoidance of personal responsibility?

That seems a little bit... limiting.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
So your thesis here is that the disappearance of Hell from the Judeo-Christian cultural mind is stemming mainly from some avoidance of personal responsibility?

That seems a little bit... limiting.

No, I think they are part of a trend abhoring consequences, people dont like the idea of hell anymore, not just Christians (a minority of Christians are still keen on the idea because they think it'll happen to other people).

People dont like the idea of hell or personal responsibility because it implies choice, with a finality, once a choice is made its not easily unmade.
 

Polaris

AKA Nunki
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
2,529
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Similarly there are wholesale condemnations of faiths or authorities because the "condemn people to hell", personally this is news to me, the best authorities in my own faith have concluded that if hell exists it is the abscence of God by the refusal of God, therefore the gates to hell are locked from the inside and the "condemned" hold the keys themselves.
You're trying to foist responsibility for your beliefs onto those who don't share them. If I don't believe in hell--if the place is not in any way real to me--then I can't be held accountable for anything that arises from a real hell, simply because no such hell exists for me. If at a later date that changes, then I can take responsibility for a real hell, but until that time, hell will be a fiction that I have as little to do with as you do with the teachings of Muhammad. Just as you're responsible for living your life as if those teachings are false, so am I responsible for living my life as though Christianity is false; neither of us, however, can take responsibility for damnation, for the simple reason that we haven't been damned and don't believe we will.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
No, I think they are part of a trend abhoring consequences, people dont like the idea of hell anymore, not just Christians (a minority of Christians are still keen on the idea because they think it'll happen to other people).

People dont like the idea of hell or personal responsibility because it implies choice, with a finality, once a choice is made its not easily unmade.

I think my point here is, why are you bringing it up as if anyone can clarify what the truth is? You have an opinion that can't be validated by anyone here; you're assuming motives for a large cultural trend, and there's no way for anyone to either challenge or refute it, and at the end you'll just keep believing it regardless of what gets said.

So what exactly is your point in raising an unanswerable question, with your personal belief stated immediately in the OP? It's not even an open question, you already have selected an answer.

Stuff phrased this way is really more of a "blog" style of posting, where you can soapbox on your own conclusions and perceptions.
If you would like to instigate actual conversation, you could just bring up the topic without providing an answer, or saying, "Do you think it could be <this>? or what about <this>?" OPs would do better if they facilitated discussion rather than closing it down with the premise.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
I think my point here is, why are you bringing it up as if anyone can clarify what the truth is? You have an opinion that can't be validated by anyone here; you're assuming motives for a large cultural trend, and there's no way for anyone to either challenge or refute it, and at the end you'll just keep believing it regardless of what gets said.

So what exactly is your point in raising an unanswerable question, with your personal belief stated immediately in the OP? It's not even an open question, you already have selected an answer.

Stuff phrased this way is really more of a "blog" style of posting, where you can soapbox on your own conclusions and perceptions.
If you would like to instigate actual conversation, you could just bring up the topic without providing an answer, or saying, "Do you think it could be <this>? or what about <this>?" OPs would do better if they facilitated discussion rather than closing it down with the premise.

My point was to make conversation. I didnt know there was a big problem with how I'd phrased it.
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
No, I think they are part of a trend abhoring consequences, people dont like the idea of hell anymore, not just Christians (a minority of Christians are still keen on the idea because they think it'll happen to other people).

People dont like the idea of hell or personal responsibility because it implies choice, with a finality, once a choice is made its not easily unmade.

I think that many find the notion of Hell contrary to the notion that the entity who arbitrates your destiny there is "loving". Why is this so stigmatized? Well, because Hell has many descriptors in the Bible like:

And they built the high places of the Ba‘al, which are in the valley of Ben-hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire to Molech; which I did not command them, nor did it come into my mind that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin. Jeremiah 32:35

And he defiled the Tophet, which is in the valley of Ben-hinnom, that no man might make his son or his daughter pass through the fire to Molech. 2 Kings 23:10

other passages mention darkness and "weeping and gnashing of teeth" (e.g. Matthew 8:12; 22:13).

other parts of the NT when the term gehenna (translated as Hell in all English translations of the bible) is not used. The Johannine writings refer to the destiny of the wicked in terms of "perishing", "death" and "condemnation" or "judgment". St. Paul speaks of "wrath" and "everlasting destruction" (cf. Romans 2:7-9; 2 Thessalonians 1:9), while the general epistles use a range of terms and images including "raging fire" (Hebrews 10:27), "destruction" (2 Peter 3:7), "eternal fire" (Jude 7) and "blackest darkness" (Jude 13). Most biblical scholars believe this to be a symbol of eternal separation from God and God's presence. The book of Revelation contains the image of a "lake of fire" and "burning sulphur" where "the devil, the beast, and false prophets" will be "tormented day and night for ever and ever" (Revelation 20:10) along with those who worship the beast or receive its mark (Revelation 14:11).[11]

The New Testament also uses the Greek word hades, usually to refer to the temporary abode of the dead (e.g. Acts 2:31; Revelation 20:13).[6] Only one passage describes hades as a place of torment, the parable of Lazarus and Dives (Luke 16:19-31). Jesus here depicts a wicked man suffering fiery torment in hades, which is contrasted with the bosom of Abraham, and explains that it is impossible to cross over from one location to the other. Some scholars believe that this parable reflects the intertestamental Jewish view of hades (or sheol) as containing separate divisions for the wicked and righteous.[6][11] In Revelation 20:13-14 hades is itself thrown into the "lake of fire" after being emptied of the dead.



This is just simply the absence of God. This sounds brutal. Now, you may say that your officials deem Hell to be the absence of God, but at that point, it is merely a conjecture that holds just as much worth as Dante's Inferno from the Divine Comedy.

However, many liberal Christians will dilute it and say that no one goes to Hell, or that it's just a matter of poetry.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
Hell and Child Abuse

Hell was used by the Redemptorist Fathers to frighten me as a little boy. They were extremely graphic and I was frightened enough to believe I would go to Hell for dreaming about naked women as I fell asleep.

I now believe that the frightening of little boys and girls is a form of child abuse. So I rang the Redemptorists and asked for an apology.

But they refused, preferring to protect the assets and reputation of the Church rather than protecting little boys and little girls.
 

gromit

likes this
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
6,508
if hell exists it is the abscence of God by the refusal of God, therefore the gates to hell are locked from the inside and the "condemned" hold the keys themselves.

An interesting concept, to be sure. I'm not sure where I stand on afterlife, but I do believe we can create the condition of "hell" in our own lives by simple cause and effect of many of our decisions, by not dealing with our problems and the mess inside of ourselves, by shutting ourselves off to growth...

When you refer to hell, do you refer to it as a literal sort of fire and brimstone place or more of a state of mind/being?
 

niffer

New member
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
1,217
MBTI Type
ENfP
Enneagram
8w9
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
If someone is going to be religious for the sole purpose of escaping Hell as a fate, then they totally fail the point of religion.

However it also works the other way around. Being religious has many emotional benefits that are potentially attractive to many people. "I don't believe in Hell" or "I don't like taking responsibility for my future" probably isn't much of a buffer from making people want to enter religion, considering these benefits. What makes more sense to me is that many people simply aren't interested in these benefits, or they fulfill these benefits with other means in their lives.

I hope this was an appropriate contribution to the OP question.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
When you refer to hell, do you refer to it as a literal sort of fire and brimstone place or more of a state of mind/being?

Hell is plainly a metaphor. We have explored the world from the quantum atom to the expanding universe and find no evidence of Hell.

Unfortunately Hell has been used to frighten us into obedience.

The beginning of wisdom, we are told, is the fear of God.

And this God is the God of child abusers.
 
S

Sniffles

Guest
If someone is going to be religious for the sole purpose of escaping Hell as a fate, then they totally fail the point of religion.
Within Catholicism this is called "imperfect contrition". Perfect contrition is when you're religious or repentent out of love for God.
 

niffer

New member
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
1,217
MBTI Type
ENfP
Enneagram
8w9
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Hell is plainly a metaphor. We have explored the world from the quantum atom to the expanding universe and find no evidence of Hell.

Unfortunately Hell has been used to frighten us into obedience.

The beginning of wisdom, we are told, is the fear of God.

And this God is the God of child abusers.

The science of today is always what people accept as truth. But what about science and discovery of hundreds of years ago? As a scientific truth to them, the world was flat. What is true is, that science is always developing and new discoveries are constantly being made to keep changing the ways that we saw and thought of the Earth and universe from our previous notions.

The thing is, most people simply accept these scientific truths via knowledge that they accumulate from outside sources. Very few people experience sources of information first-hand.

To this extent, "science" is very much like "religion".
 
S

Sniffles

Guest
Actually no scientist or otherwise educated person since the 3rd century BC thought the world was flat.
 

niffer

New member
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
1,217
MBTI Type
ENfP
Enneagram
8w9
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Actually no scientist or otherwise educated person since the 3rd century BC thought the world was flat.

Lol, well, you know what I mean. They had other beliefs like believing that you could magically cause mice and frogs to appear out of nowhere by putting dirty laundry on their floor.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
To this extent, "science" is very much like "religion".

Yes, this is a question of authority.

So it is a question of which authority is more reasonable.

Science is based on evidence and reason, while religion is based on blind faith.

And in the 17th and 18th Centuries blind faith was replaced by the Enlightenment.
 
S

Sniffles

Guest
"Reason directs those who are truly pious and philosophical to honour and love only what is true, declining to follow traditional opinions, if these be worthless. For not only does sound reason direct us to refuse the guidance of those who did or taught anything wrong, but it is incumbent on the lover of truth, by all means, and if death be threatened, even before his own life, to choose to do and say what is right."
-Justin Martyr


awesomeface.gif
 

niffer

New member
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
1,217
MBTI Type
ENfP
Enneagram
8w9
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
What is appealing about being reasonable?

Furthermore, what is the definition of "reason"?

What is appealing about following faith?

What is the definition of a faithful or religious methodology?

I would like to see someone define and then compare these things. I wonder what we can learn from this comparison.
 
Top