Refuting the Christian Rationalizations of God Sending People to Hell

[Darkforbid]

The things they say -- out of their own mouths.

Like? Or is actually stating a reason against your nature

 

[Dawnofhope]

Whenever someone brings up the fact that a being who sends people to hell must be a moral monster, the typical response by Christians is something along the lines of "God gives people a choice to accept his offer of salvation or not, and God is just giving those who don't accept his offer what they want by not saving them since they never asked to be saved." However, this rationalization fails miserably and still makes the Christian god out to be a monster. For an analogy, consider a parent who is watching their child swim in a lake and can see that the child is drowning. Now suppose that the child does not ask to be saved or even outright rejects the parent's offers for help, and says "I don't need you, I can save myself!" Would a loving and benevolent parent who KNEW the child could not save themself sit back, watch the child drown and say "Fine. I won't save you because you rejected my offer" or would the parent save the child anyway? The parent who lets the child drown simply because the child rejected the offer for help is of course evil, and if this scenario happened in real life, we would immediately demand that the parent face prison time. Yet when Christians imagine their god doing the same thing, they call him "loving", "fair", and "just." Pretty ironic, isn't it?

As stated by another, the analogy of a drowning child is a poor one. The average life expectancy worldwide is about 70 years not the few minutes it takes to save a drowning child. During this time Most of us have had ample opportunity to work through the essential questions of life that are of practical value. We discover for ourselves that which leads to heaven or hell in this world and to act according. We are each accountable for our actions or inactions and consequences, positive and negative.

 

[Darkforbid]

I don't disagree with church and state separation has had limited success in actually making US more secular. But I don't think removing it would suddenly make things better, as it wouldn't suddenly end the religious conservative lawmakers and their religious agendas from play, nor change the amount of cultural saturation of fundamentalism we have.

I do think atheists should be far less concerned with petti separation issues like 'in God we trust' and focus on more impactful things like LGBT rights.

Well here they have more rights, a gay person can sit all day being critical of heterosexuality, yet a single homophobic comment can get you five years in prison

Do you think that's a gay right?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Well here they have more rights, a gay person can sit all day being critical of heterosexuality, yet a single homophobic comment can get you five years in prison

I certainly see that fearmongering by the religious right. Have yet to see it actually happen.

 

[shunyadragon]

Depends how you read it, if you think it's from the accumulated water from 40 days and nights of rain,, my faith would describe you as biblically illiterate

I am scientifically literate in geology, and in particularly geomorphology to know that there is absolutely no evidence for any sort of flood close to what is described in the Bible.

The Biblical Flood is refuted by any reasonable doubt.

 

[Darkforbid]

I certainly see that fearmongering by the religious right. Have yet to see it actually happen.

Yes, almost ever time someone gay or black gets into a fight its is claimed to be homophobic or racist

 

[Darkforbid]

I am scientifically literate in geology, and in particularly geomorphology to know that there is absolutely no evidence for any sort of flood close to what is described in the Bible.

The Biblical Flood is refuted by any reasonable doubt.

But you are claiming the bible says global flood, whereas it actually says all the lands they knew of were flooded

 

[Sand Dancer]

Is there anything sadder than Atheists who hang around religious forums?

Most of us were Christian at one time. We tend to know the Bible better than current Christians.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Go on then refute God's existence

You have to prove their existence first.

 

[PruePhillip]

I don't disagree with church and state separation has had limited success in actually making US more secular. But I don't think removing it would suddenly make things better, as it wouldn't suddenly end the religious conservative lawmakers and their religious agendas from play, nor change the amount of cultural saturation of fundamentalism we have.

I do think atheists should be far less concerned with petti separation issues like 'in God we trust' and focus on more impactful things like LGBT rights.

I support polygamy - the fast growing group in America.
You need to add a "P" to that group to avoid being accused
of polygamaphobia. Polygamists have rights too, you know.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

On the contrary, modern history is full of horrific things done in an attempt to stamp out religion.

As it is full of horrific things done by one religion in an attempt to force other religions to comply. Want examples, or are you bright enough to find them for yourself?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Well here they have more rights, a gay person can sit all day being critical of heterosexuality, yet a single homophobic comment can get you five years in prison

Do you think that's a gay right?

Would you be so kind as to support that assertion with some evidence?

First of all, what makes you think that a homosexual person is "critical of heterosexuality?" I'm gay, but if my parents weren't straight, I would not be gay -- I would not even exist!

Now, I'd also like to hear about the "homophobic comment" that "can get you five years in prison." To say that, you must have evidence that somebody made such a comment, and received such a sentence. So please provide an example of when that has ever happened.

 

[Darkforbid]

As it is full of horrific things done by one religion in an attempt to force other religions to comply. Want examples, or are you bright enough to find them for yourself?

I'm well aware of human history thanks

 

[Darkforbid]

Would you be so kind as to support that assertion with some evidence?

First of all, what makes you think that a homosexual person is "critical of heterosexuality?" I'm gay, but if my parents weren't straight, I would not be gay -- I would not even exist!

Now, I'd also like to hear about the "homophobic comment" that "can get you five years in prison." To say that, you must have evidence that somebody made such a comment, and received such a sentence. So please provide an example of when that has ever happened.

No sorry dude, googling for you is not my job, I live in the UK if that helps

 

[shunyadragon]

But you are claiming the bible says global flood, whereas it actually says all the lands they knew of were flooded

Actually no, the Bible without question describes the whole world flood including the highest mountains as declared by God, and God knows what the whole world is.

Even if you consider the known world they knew as the Middle East covering the highest mountains there was no such flood possible based on the geomorphological evidence.

 

[Thief]

"Fine. I won't save you because you rejected my offer" or would the parent save the child anyway?

and the parable of the good Sheppard

and He would free the lamb caught in the briar.....even on the Sabbath

and the parable of the Prodigal Son
a feast for the wayward......even in the face of the righteous

 

[Darkforbid]

Actually no, the Bible without question describes the whole world flood including the highest mountains as declared by God, and God knows what the whole world is.

Even if you consider the known world they knew as the Middle East covering the highest mountains there was no such flood possible based on the geomorphological evidence.

You think the book of noah was written by God?

 

[SomeRandom]

No sorry dude, googling for you is not my job, I live in the UK if that helps

You made the claim. The burden of proof is upon your shoulders, as per standard practice in discourse

I did do your job for you and all I could find were reports of people being arrested for literally attacking gay people. You know, like assaulting and bashing people, which is illegal in all civilised countries as far as I’m aware. Nothing I could find supports the claim of people being locked up for a homophobic comment. Hate speech or outright encouraging violence maybe, but not average run of the mill homophobic comments.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

God gives people choices. If someone ends up being punished it is because that person made the wrong choice. God is not to blame when a person is punished, the person is to blame

That kinda proves his or her point.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Whenever someone brings up the fact that a being who sends people to hell must be a moral monster, the typical response by Christians is something along the lines of "God gives people a choice to accept his offer of salvation or not, and God is just giving those who don't accept his offer what they want by not saving them since they never asked to be saved." However, this rationalization fails miserably and still makes the Christian god out to be a monster. For an analogy, consider a parent who is watching their child swim in a lake and can see that the child is drowning. Now suppose that the child does not ask to be saved or even outright rejects the parent's offers for help, and says "I don't need you, I can save myself!" Would a loving and benevolent parent who KNEW the child could not save themself sit back, watch the child drown and say "Fine. I won't save you because you rejected my offer" or would the parent save the child anyway? The parent who lets the child drown simply because the child rejected the offer for help is of course evil, and if this scenario happened in real life, we would immediately demand that the parent face prison time. Yet when Christians imagine their god doing the same thing, they call him "loving", "fair", and "just." Pretty ironic, isn't it?

It is ironic. True. The idea of grace etc is to help those even if they were drowning. A lot of times (for sake of analogy/topic) we are in delusions and don't know we're drowning. So, why expect a "blind" person to automatically know he needs help.

That's like blaming a blind person for not turning on the light so he can "see" his way out of a burning building. Then, tell the blind person "well, you should have asked for help?"

That, or saying "if you knew you were going to make that mistake, you should have asked so I can give you the correct answer."

I shake my head.