Telling someone they are going to hell: religious duty or not your place to say?

[iamsharky789]

Telling someone they are going to hell: religious Duty or Not your place to say?

Many religions claim that their adherents are going to heaven, and the non believers are going to hell. Abrahamic religions have pushed this but even eastern religions believe this even.

My take on this is if someone tells me that I am going to hell, then it is my fundamental argument that a persons virtues is determined by his actions on earth.

The audacity of a person telling me going to hell makes me wonder who gave them the right to tell me. I am not a walk away type of person so it would be difficult for me to reason with an animal like that.

Any thoughts?

 

[Awoon]

Threats and ignorance from ancient writings. In they cant give you map to hell then they don't know of any hell themselves outside their own religion.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Only God knows the state of someone's soul, so no one should really be saying that.

 

[psychoslice]

For myself i don't believe in a heaven or hell, so its really meaningless to tell me about your belief in heaven or hell.

 

[Sees]

I don't take it very seriously when someone is just reading from a script and parroting doctrine and dogma.

Ask -

"Why does this make sense or seem likely?"

"Does this match up with your perception of reality and your experiences?"

"Does the story this came from have any weaknesses?"

"Has the source been shown to accurately know the future or destiny of anything in this world or outside of it?"

 

[Valjean]

On the other hand, if you were convinced the bridge was out on the road to Hooterville, would you withhold that from someone headed that way?

 

[Sees]

On the other hand, if you were convinced the bridge was out on the road to Hooterville, would you withhold that from someone headed that way?

I would be specific... if I saw it, who or how many said it, that it might be out if it's an old story with no known person making the claim or a jokester...

 

[nazz]

Telling someone they are going to hell: religious Duty or Not your place to say?

Not my place to say. But I do know a way to avoid it

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

On the other hand, if you were convinced the bridge was out on the road to Hooterville, would you withhold that from someone headed that way?

In that case, I'd have a number of obligations:

1. tell people that the bridge is out.
2. confirm that the bridge is actually out (i.e. not just rely on hearsay, even if I find it convincing personally).
3. be sure that people relying on my advice have enough information to decide how reliable it is (i.e. if it is just hearsay, I shouldn't portray it as solid fact).

You don't get obligation #1 without the others.

Edit: and if you can't meet obligation #2 to a reasonable degree, then you're not obliged to do #1.

 

[Sunstone]

On the other hand, if you were convinced the bridge was out on the road to Hooterville, would you withhold that from someone headed that way?

The issue I have with almost all proselytizing religious people is not that they aren't motivated by the best of intentions in telling me the bridge is out on the road to Hooterville. It is certainly possible they are genuinely concerned with my well-being. No, it is not that, but rather it is the fact they usually rely on the poorest measure of all measures that are available to them for determining whether or not the bridge is actually out. That is, they take it on faith that the bridge is out. They take it on faith they have accurate and reliable knowledge of heaven, hell, salvation, sin, etc. They take it on faith.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The issue I have with almost all proselytizing religious people is not that they aren't motivated by the best of intentions in telling me the bridge is out on the road to Hooterville. It is certainly possible they are genuinely concerned with my well-being. No, it is not that, but rather it is the fact they usually rely on the poorest measure of all measures that are available to them for determining whether or not the bridge is actually out. That is, they take it on faith that the bridge is out. They take it on faith that have accurate and reliable knowledge of heaven, hell, salvation, sin, etc.

Indeed. Anyone running around saying "the bridge is out!" to anyone who will listen needs to have a good answer to the question "how do you know the bridge is out?"

 

[Brickjectivity]

Abrahamic religions have pushed this but even eastern religions believe this even.

Don't forget the Toltecs, they Myans and many others. I don't think all Abrahamics believe it or that all eastern religions do.

 

[Skwim]

The audacity of a person telling me going to hell makes me wonder who gave them the right to tell me. I am not a walk away type of person so it would be difficult for me to reason with an animal like that.

Any thoughts?

I don't regard it as audacity at all, but merely their right to free speech. What one needs to do is ask himself what value should I grant this opinion and why? What has this person done to earn my respect for what he thinks? If nothing, then his opinion is meaningless to me. Go ahead and claim whatever you want about me, my future, or anything else. I have simply no reason to bring myself to care.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't regard it as audacity at all, but merely their right to free speech. What one needs to do is ask himself what value should I grant this opinion and why? What has this person done to earn my respect for what he thinks? If nothing, then his opinion is meaningless to me. Go ahead and claim whatever you want about me, my future, or anything else. I have simply no reason to bring myself to care.

There's an important exception to free speech that I think is at play here, ethically if not legally: negligent misstatement.

If one party gives advice, information or an opinion to another party in circumstances where the other person reasonably relied upon the advice, information or opinion, the first person may be liable for any loss or damage caused if the advice, information or opinion was given negligently.

Negligent Misstatement

When one person puts themselves forward as an expert, authority, or having special access to reliable information - and I'd argue that priests, ministers, and missionaries do just that - then they take on responsibility for the people who rely on their "expert" advice.

 

[Revoltingest]

Sometimes it's a religious duty.
Other times it's an insult or imprecation.
Either way, I'm OK.

 

[Badran]

I was told this statement many times both when i believed in heaven and hell and when i did not. In both cases i'd usually respond with "Cool." Unless i had a specific inclination to discuss or challenge what they're saying (which would depend on why i think they're saying it and my mood then).

I think it's almost always an irresponsible statement, even if sometimes well intentioned. Especially because at many times it is told to people while they're in a vulnerable state (and that includes the entirety of children). My parents said it and say it to me at times for example, and i don't doubt that many of those times they are very well intentioned.

But that of course is not always the case. Sometimes it's just used in petty quarrels.

 

[Skwim]

There's an important exception to free speech that I think is at play here, ethically if not legally: negligent misstatement.



Negligent Misstatement

When one person puts themselves forward as an expert, authority, or having special access to reliable information - and I'd argue that priests, ministers, and missionaries do just that - then they take on responsibility for the people who rely on their "expert" advice.

Hey, if you decide the guy is indeed an expert/authority on whatever subject he delivers his opinion then you're in a far different boat. My point is that unless he can convince you he deserves such respect, there's no reason to give it. AND, no reason to care about his opinion.
Want to care about Joe Blow's uneducated opinion on quantum entanglement go right ahead. Just don't come crying when you lost your last dollar based on his claims about it.

 

[nazz]

Indeed. Anyone running around saying "the bridge is out!" to anyone who will listen needs to have a good answer to the question "how do you know the bridge is out?"

That's the whole thing about warning people about something they don't think even exists. It's like telling a grown adult they better be good or Santa won't bring them any presents.

 

[ChristineES]

We are not supposed to condemn people, per Jesus commands. The people who do it, whether they are doing it as a "kindness" or as a warning, aren't supposed to. Only God alone can condemn someone.

 

[iamsharky789]

That's the whole thing about warning people about something they don't think even exists. It's like telling a grown adult they better be good or Santa won't bring them any presents.

So scripture wise, the bible specifically does not require christians to tell non-believers this? Where does it originate from then? How did these two concepts become associated aka the bridge?