Refuting the Christian Rationalizations of God Sending People to Hell

[shunyadragon]

so if the angels decide you are some kind of schmuck.....
it's not your fault?

God decided our very human nature not angels.

 

[shunyadragon]

Interesting video. Thanks for posting it.

Maybe interesting from the perspective from a rather biased perspective of a few selected verses, but does not reflect the Biblical perspective of the condemned to Hell.

 

[shunyadragon]

No, according to the 'Book of Noah?' God ordered the world Flood as described in the OT, and confirmed it in the NT as ordered by God.

Noah's flood is most definitely refuted by the evidence regardless of whether you consider it a 'World Flood' or a 'Regional World Flood' of the world those who compiled the Pentateuch and the gospels and other books of the New Testament.

 

[Darkforbid]

So, are you saying you would also let a peer of yours (an adult, the same age as you) drown if they didn't ask for, or refused your help?

In other words... think before you post.

Yes, obviously It's very risk saving someone from drowning if they're simpley panicking! Saving someone who will fight you for the right to drown would be suicidal

Think before I post, did you think before you posted that,, at all?

 

[BilliardsBall]

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?

Sounds like you're reading the Bible wrong.

The parent DOES rescue the child from drowning (unlimited atonement) and offers the child a towel. The child then throttles their parent with the towel and throws them in the water to drown. What will the jury decide regarding capital punishment for this adult, sentient child of Hell?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Yes, obviously It's very risk saving someone from drowning if they're simpley panicking! Saving someone who will fight you for the right to drown would be suicidal

Think before I post, did you think before you posted that,, at all?

I guess I'm more of a risk taker than you then. 'Cause I'd feel completely compelled to attempt to help. And that because I care at least a little bit. Something that, if He exists, I don't think God does. Evidence and your words in this thread support me in this notion. And don't get me wrong - I don't care if God doesn't care... I'm just trying to set the record straight with all the people who adamantly state that He does. He doesn't. And again... that's IF He exists... which I am pretty sure He doesn't do either.

 

[Darkforbid]

I guess I'm more of a risk taker than you then. 'Cause I'd feel completely compelled to attempt to help. And that because I care at least a little bit. Something that, if He exists, I don't think God does. Evidence and your words in this thread support me in this notion. And don't get me wrong - I don't care if God doesn't care... I'm just trying to set the record straight with all the people who adamantly state that He does. He doesn't. And again... that's IF He exists... which I am pretty sure He doesn't do either.

I can say with out doubt your not

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

It is categorically WRONG to give people choices without also giving them sufficient information on which to base those choices. The teacher who says to the student, "I'm not going to teach you multiplication, but if you can't tell me what the product of 32 times 77 is, you fail, tough luck," ought to be fired and never allowed near children again.

Maybe God gives peopleplenty pf informayion and they jusy don't believe it. Do you think a robber does not know it is wrong to steal ?

 

[Yokefellow]

Hell Bible Verses

Nice list of verses. Not sure what your point is but none of them debunk reincarnation.

Hell is simply a parable for the womb and the process of reincarnation...

'Lowest parts of the Earth' is Hell, yet that's where you and I and everyone else came from.

When Jesus uses the phrase 'Child of Hell', it's literal...

Matthew 23:15
"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves"

The Lake of Fire is the portal back into the timeline. The Lake of Fire comes from the Old Testament and the Valley of the Son of Hinnom...

Leviticus 18:21
"And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD"

Those tossed into the Lake of Fire go through it. Moloch represents the womb of reincarnation...

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I can say with out doubt your not

Perhaps then I just take risks for what most people would consider better reasons?

 

[Sand Dancer]

With 2 billion Christians, it is easy to compare yourself with those who know less. It doesn't mean you are right because there are those who know the Bible more than you and I and say it is true.

We tend to understand the historical and cultural context of the text. Many don't.

 

[Kenny]

We tend to understand the historical and cultural context of the text. Many don't.

I'm so glad you do. It's important.

 

[Hawkins]

Now suppose that the child does not ask to be saved or even outright rejects the parent's offers

Strawman, re-read the Bible. It's all about wolves and sheep, weeds and wheat. No where says that the wolves or the weeds are God's children.

Moreover, the strawman argument itself is made from a HUGE assumption. Those in hell may not be humans at all. What defines a human is his conscience, that part belongs to God. In the end, the hell is about how God saved the last single human in a city of zombies.

 

[1213]

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." ...

I think it is more like this: some people want to reject God and they don’t want to be with God. Hell is the place where they can be eternally separated from God and it is what many “atheists” really want, at least if they speak the truth.

I believe people are destroyed in hell, because it is said:

And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
Matt. 10:28

If Godless people would live there eternally, they would turn it to eternal suffering for themselves. That is why I think they don’t live there, it would probably be too cruel. But it would also be cruel to force them live righteously with God, when they don’t want that.

 

[Prometheus85]

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?

There’s no such thing as hell. is. Hell is also an effective mechanism of control developed in its present form by human beings about 2,000 years ago. You know, "Give me 10 precent of your gross income or your soul will burn for all eternity in hell. The idea of hell as an eternal torture chamber dates back to about the age of Jesus. However, it seems to have been a fringe idea, since it does not appear in the Bible (except in Revelations which is very metaphorical).

 

[shunyadragon]

Nice list of verses. Not sure what your point is but none of them debunk reincarnation.

Hell is simply a parable for the womb and the process of reincarnation...

I did not say it debunked reincarnation. I said it debunked your false assertion:

You are absolutely, one hundred percent correct. As a Fundamental Christian, I can attest to that fact.

A loving God sending people to an eternity of torments is completely psychotic at minimum.

Yet... it's not Biblical. Not even close. It's a complete fabrication. One of the biggest lies ever told.

The quotes I provided clearly debunk the above.

 

[night912]

So no idea then

Why use words that you don't know the meaning to it. But obviously you do know what "religious" and "atheists" means right? That's why made a comment about those two words. Either way, just like your second post, after pointing out how much you made a fool of yourself, you got nothing else in response except for doing it again. Sad indeed.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

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's the equivalent of a maffia boss holding a gun to your head saying "you gotta be making payments... you have a choice, either you pay up or you face the consequences. please, don't make me shoot you"

If they guy still refuses to pay up and ends up getting shot as a consequence of that "choice", then that guy did NOT just kill himself.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

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

Theists taking the time to respond that in a thread questioning their beliefs instead of just answering the OP?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

This hypothetical situation also relies on verbal communication. A person won't go to hell for saying out loud, "I don't need God." but for continuously disbelieving in his heart and showing that in his actions.

That makes it even worse, btw.

It means that this god's idea of "justice" is to reward gullibility and to punish rationality.