What is the Point of Hell?

[Saint Frankenstein]

Can you blame them though? It's not any clearer than mud that God exists, it's not any clearer than mud of what morals one should have, and if you decide to have both, it's not quite clear.

Perhaps if God didn't separate them from himself their actions would have changed to something better.

A complete turning away from God is not just simple atheism. It's giving one's self over to all that is opposed to what is holy - hatred, violence, anger, greed, lust, pride and other things such as despair and nihilism when the person does not even attempt to find meaning or hope. What separates us from God are all the things that violate virtues such as charity, hope, mercy, compassion and forgiveness. There can exist atheists who are still searching for God in the way that they know how to do but don't think they've found Him, yet still leave the door open to Him.

If freewill exists in heaven, then evil exists in heaven. If evil doesn't exist in heaven, then evil is no longer a choice and thus freewill is tossed out like trash.

What a weird notion that you seemed to have made up yourself. No evil can exist in Heaven as nothing impure can exist in God's Kingdom. That's why when the rebel angels rebelled, they were cast out of Heaven.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

It is free will, They're forever evil because they're forever evil. They're not made to be that way, They choose that way, Their heart is that way because they made it that way.

You're not coming at this from a theistic perspective. God knows, He knows everything you'll ever do or think or say. He can judge you without error. Whatever punishment you recieve, You deserve. No more no less.

And you don't think thousands of years of constant agony would prompt someone to take a new outlook on what they should consider acceptable to do?
They choose to be evil, because they want to be evil, and even though they are in constant agony, they can't see that not being in agony is better than choosing to be evil?

Even the fact that you think someone can be SO evil that it is impossible for them to choose to be good, that they can "make their heart that way" but 50,000 years of screaming and burning won't cause them to think about changing?

And what percent of people, do you think are that inherently evil, that they absolutely MUST be evil? Was hell made for .000001% of the population? what about the people that have just done evil things? Murdered people, or stolen, or taken the lords name in vain? Do they get eternal hell, or temporary hell, or heaven, because they aren't the 100% evil like the unchangeable people you're talking about?

 

[Awkward Fingers]

A complete turning away from God is not just simple atheism. It's giving one's self over to all that is opposed to what is holy - hatred, violence, anger, greed, lust, pride and other things such as despair and nihilism when the person does not even attempt to find meaning or hope. What separates us from God are all the things that violate virtues such as charity, hope, mercy, compassion and forgiveness. There can exist atheists who are still searching for God in the way that they know how to do but don't think they've found Him, yet still leave the door open to Him.

Then I assume atheism sin't actually even a factor in this equation?
If a theist gives them selves over to hatred, violence..et al, they would go to hell too, right?
And if an atheist sticks with mercy, charity etc. then he's good to go?
Then why even mention atheist there?

If I changed that to "left handed person".. would it change the impact of your statement in any way, at all....
If a left handed person gives themselves over to the aforementioned, they go to hell, if they stick to the B list of good things, they don't go to hell?

 

[Thana]

And you don't think thousands of years of constant agony would prompt someone to take a new outlook on what they should consider acceptable to do?
They choose to be evil, because they want to be evil, and even though they are in constant agony, they can't see that not being in agony is better than choosing to be evil?

Nope. I don't think it would change their hearts.
Torture could make you kill a child, eventually, But do you think it could make you feel like killing that child was right/good?

And what percent of people, do you think are that inherently evil, that they absolutely MUST be evil? Was hell made for .000001% of the population? what about the people that have just done evil things? Murdered people, or stolen, or taken the lords name in vain? Do they get eternal hell, or temporary hell, or heaven, because they aren't the 100% evil like the unchangeable people you're talking about?

I don't know. I've never claimed to know.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

Nope. I don't think it would change their hearts.
Torture could make you kill a child, eventually, But do you think it could make you feel like killing that child was right/good?

Then by your definition of that person, I don't believe they have free will..
If there is nothing that can change their heart, then they lack choice.
If they lack the ability to change their mind, then they were created that way.

At that point, a god is responsible for not only the fact that they are suffering eternally, but also responsible for any action they made while alive, and that god lacks compassion, mercy and justice.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

As a side note, if you think no amount of torture could show someone their errors, what if compassion could?
If hell was a place to let people understand the wrong they've done, and that was a more effective form of causing people to learn compassion, would you accept hell as a place of empathy, and learning? Or does the idea of bad people suffering eternally sound better than a possibility of a not-torturey hell, where people learn empathy, but don't suffer? Out of curiosity. Hell as a huggy, group therapy style place?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Then I assume atheism sin't actually even a factor in this equation?
If a theist gives them selves over to hatred, violence..et al, they would go to hell too, right?
And if an atheist sticks with mercy, charity etc. then he's good to go?
Then why even mention atheist there?

Only God knows anyone's heart and soul inside and out. There are factors when it comes to people who are non-Christians, even those who live in Christian cultures and so are knowledgeable about the Gospel. For one, it depends on how good their exposure to the correct exposition of the Gospel is. Some people have been wounded by those who claim to be followers of Christ and so have a dim view of Christianity from this past harm.

Basically, God will judge them based on what they know and how hard they tried to live a holy life and seek Him. But the best way we know how to get to Heaven is by faith in Jesus Christ as Savior of the world, repentance and sorrow for sins and corporal and spiritual acts of mercy to others.

This is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says about atheism:

Atheism
2123 "Many . . . of our contemporaries either do not at all perceive, or explicitly reject, this intimate and vital bond of man to God. Atheism must therefore be regarded as one of the most serious problems of our time."58
2124 The name "atheism" covers many very different phenomena. One common form is the practical materialism which restricts its needs and aspirations to space and time. Atheistic humanism falsely considers man to be "an end to himself, and the sole maker, with supreme control, of his own history."59 Another form of contemporary atheism looks for the liberation of man through economic and social liberation. "It holds that religion, of its very nature, thwarts such emancipation by raising man's hopes in a future life, thus both deceiving him and discouraging him from working for a better form of life on earth."60
2125 Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the virtue of religion.61 The imputability of this offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances. "Believers can have more than a little to do with the rise of atheism. To the extent that they are careless about their instruction in the faith, or present its teaching falsely, or even fail in their religious, moral, or social life, they must be said to conceal rather than to reveal the true nature of God and of religion."62
2126 Atheism is often based on a false conception of human autonomy, exaggerated to the point of refusing any dependence on God.63 Yet, "to acknowledge God is in no way to oppose the dignity of man, since such dignity is grounded and brought to perfection in God. . . . "64 "For the Church knows full well that her message is in harmony with the most secret desires of the human heart."65


Catechism of the Catholic Church - The first commandment


Also: What "No Salvation Outside the Church" Means | Catholic Answers

 

[Awkward Fingers]

atheism:

Atheism
2123 "Many . . . of our contemporaries either do not at all perceive, or explicitly reject, this intimate and vital bond of man to God. Atheism must therefore be regarded as one of the most serious problems of our time."58
2124 The name "atheism" covers many very different phenomena. One common form is the practical materialism which restricts its needs and aspirations to space and time. Atheistic humanism falsely considers man to be "an end to himself, and the sole maker, with supreme control, of his own history."59 Another form of contemporary atheism looks for the liberation of man through economic and social liberation. "It holds that religion, of its very nature, thwarts such emancipation by raising man's hopes in a future life, thus both deceiving him and discouraging him from working for a better form of life on earth."60
2125 Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the virtue of religion.61 The imputability of this offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances. "Believers can have more than a little to do with the rise of atheism. To the extent that they are careless about their instruction in the faith, or present its teaching falsely, or even fail in their religious, moral, or social life, they must be said to conceal rather than to reveal the true nature of God and of religion."62
2126 Atheism is often based on a false conception of human autonomy, exaggerated to the point of refusing any dependence on God.63 Yet, "to acknowledge God is in no way to oppose the dignity of man, since such dignity is grounded and brought to perfection in God. . . . "64 "For the Church knows full well that her message is in harmony with the most secret desires of the human heart."65


Catechism of the Catholic Church - The first commandment


Also: What "No Salvation Outside the Church" Means | Catholic Answers

then that goes directly against what you said when you said "A complete turning away from God is not just simple atheism. It's giving one's self over to all that is opposed to what is holy"
in the links you provided, it states But once a person comes to know the truth, he must embrace it or he will be culpable of rejecting it.

Unless you're inferring that every atheist, that doesn't accept god, has either never heard of him, or HAS, by virtue of their atheism, given one's self over to all that is opposed to what is holy.
Otherwise, I see your earlier statement, and your links to be at odds with each other, unless I'm reading them wrong, if so, please let me know.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

then that goes directly against what you said when you said "A complete turning away from God is not just simple atheism. It's giving one's self over to all that is opposed to what is holy"
in the links you provided, it states But once a person comes to know the truth, he must embrace it or he will be culpable of rejecting it.

Unless you're inferring that every atheist, that doesn't accept god, has either never heard of him, or HAS, by virtue of their atheism, given one's self over to all that is opposed to what is holy.
Otherwise, I see your earlier statement, and your links to be at odds with each other, unless I'm reading them wrong, if so, please let me know.

Did you read the bolded part? It mentions some factors that must be weighed when it comes to non-belief. Sometimes the behaviors of so-called Christians play a part in people not believing in God and this can include not evangelizing people in the correct way.

 

[InChrist]

As a side note, if you think no amount of torture could show someone their errors, what if compassion could?
If hell was a place to let people understand the wrong they've done, and that was a more effective form of causing people to learn compassion, would you accept hell as a place of empathy, and learning? Or does the idea of bad people suffering eternally sound better than a possibility of a not-torturey hell, where people learn empathy, but don't suffer? Out of curiosity. Hell as a huggy, group therapy style place?

According to the scriptures it appears that there are some individuals, human and angelic beings, who simply want to be in rebellion to God, practice evil, and will not repent or change whether they experience His extreme judgment and painful consequences, such as indicated in Revelation (9:20-21; 16:9,11) or know first hand His peace, love,and compassion (Revelation 20:7-9; Isaiah 2:2-4)

 

[Thana]

Then by your definition of that person, I don't believe they have free will..
If there is nothing that can change their heart, then they lack choice.
If they lack the ability to change their mind, then they were created that way.

At that point, a god is responsible for not only the fact that they are suffering eternally, but also responsible for any action they made while alive, and that god lacks compassion, mercy and justice.

There is nothing that can change their heart because they've already chosen who they are. They choose every second of every day to be the person they are.

Just because they won't change their mind doesn't mean they don't have the free will to do so. They do, They just won't.

As a side note, if you think no amount of torture could show someone their errors, what if compassion could?
If hell was a place to let people understand the wrong they've done, and that was a more effective form of causing people to learn compassion, would you accept hell as a place of empathy, and learning? Or does the idea of bad people suffering eternally sound better than a possibility of a not-torturey hell, where people learn empathy, but don't suffer? Out of curiosity. Hell as a huggy, group therapy style place?

If compassion could work, it already would have.
God's given them His compassion in this life. That is essentially why we're here, To choose Him, To know Him.

Hell is not a place to understand what they've done wrong, I've already said that.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

Did you read the bolded part? It mentions some factors that must be weighed when it comes to non-belief. Sometimes the behaviors of so-called Christians play a part in people not believing in God and this can include not evangelizing people in the correct way.

I did read the bolded part, but how much of a factor do you think it plays?
honestly, you've been on this site a stretch, in your honest opinion, how educated about the bible would you say the average atheist here ( for example) is?

That implies that the atheists that have searched for god themselves just, didn't try hard enough, or did a poor job.. We just didn't have the right theist tell us in the right way, about god..
So, what is your thoughts on, for example, an atheist that is well read in theology, has honestly searched for god, has spoken to theists that could express the word of god clearly, and still find the evidence lacking?

I blame very little of my atheism on theists.. Yes there are horrible, hypocrites that are religious that make it look bad for everyone else, but these people are not my deciding factor..
..the only way I would possibly say that my atheism is a theists fault, is if I die and find out that theists everywhere had that empirical evidence that us atheists talk about all the time, and they decided, in a giggling, clandestine group conspiracy, to not show it to the world..
..That is about the only reason I think a theists inability to "teach me" the good word, should be in effect.

Seriously, the bolded part comes off to me, a little like atheists can't think for themselves, and if they'er atheists, we failed at explaining things to them in small enough words...(only not as mean as that sounds..)

 

[Awkward Fingers]

There is nothing that can change their heart because they've already chosen who they are. They choose every second of every day to be the person they are.

Just because they won't change their mind doesn't mean they don't have the free will to do so. They do, They just won't.

If they do have the chance to change their mind at any point, then there is ALWAYS the possibility that they will. You can't just say "Oh, they won't. no matter what happens, I know they won't, just because they won't"
If they can change their minds, then they can change their minds...
It's hard to find something that's more of a tautology than that.

If compassion could work, it already would have.
God's given them His compassion in this life. That is essentially why we're here, To choose Him, To know Him.

Hell is not a place to understand what they've done wrong, I've already said that.

How can you say it already would have?
Are you saying everyone in life, who does wrong, HAS definitely been shown compassion?
By your wording, compassion = BELIEVE IN MY GOD. so, a kind, charitable atheist, who helps his neighbors, and simply doesn't believe in god deserves an eternity of agony, with no chance for redemption, for simply not knowing and choosing and loving him?
Then if that IS how hell is set up, then god is not merciful.
To choose punishment when redemption is possible is the act of a cruel, sadistic god.

EDIT: I would even go so far as to add, the sheer fact that if I, a fallible imperfect human, think that a person that has done wrong and truly repents it should be removed from punishment once a fitting time has passed, and your god doesn't, then I am more merciful than your god.
And if I think that actions, no matter how evil, that were committed in a single lifetime should no be punished for 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times times infinity longer than the lifetime lasted, and that future, non-existent crimes should not be held against a person, then I am more just, by definition, than your god.

 

[InChrist]

That is the very antithesis of balance...
There is literally nothing you could do, in a hundred year or so long life, that would warrant an ETERNITY of punishment.
An eternity.. That is literally the farthest thing from justice or balance that you could possibly have, I would think.

If you can think of anything less balanced in justice than that, please let me know.

How many 100 yr lifetimes can you fit in infinity?

I think when people say things like this or believe the consequence of eternal damnation is too harsh it reveals a failure to take sin seriously, see in its true light or realize the extent of its eternal ramifications were it not dealt with as God has determined to do.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I did read the bolded part, but how much of a factor do you think it plays?
honestly, you've been on this site a stretch, in your honest opinion, how educated about the bible would you say the average atheist here ( for example) is?

I would say that most people in general, believer or non-believer, are not very educated about the Bible. I see many atheists or anti-theists on here trying to argue against the Bible based on ignorance. Exegesis and theology aren't fields that most people are very knowledgeable about.

That implies that the atheists that have searched for god themselves just, didn't try hard enough, or did a poor job.. We just didn't have the right theist tell us in the right way, about god..
So, what is your thoughts on, for example, an atheist that is well read in theology, has honestly searched for god, has spoken to theists that could express the word of god clearly, and still find the evidence lacking?

I would say that they're not searching for it in the correct way, such as basing their spiritual search on:

empirical evidence

Religion is not a science like physics and you'll always fail if you're trying to investigate the truths or non-truths of religion in such a way. Religion is more akin to art. It is in the realm of the abstract, the transcendent and the numinous.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

I think when people say things like this or believe the consequence of eternal damnation is too harsh it reveals a failure to take sin seriously, see in its true light or realize the extent of its eternal ramifications were it not dealt with as God has determined to do.

I think when people say this, they can't actually grasp how long an eternity of punishment would be, or truly weigh out what would have to be done to warrant a punishment of that immense, unfathomable magnitude. Or else they simply don't understand what "just" is.

Nothing, that can be done in a finite amount of time, deserves an infinite, unchangeable punishment. That is absolutely not justice, nor mercy.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

I would say that most people in general, believer or non-believer, are not very educated about the Bible. I see many atheists or anti-theists on here trying to argue against the Bible based on ignorance. Exegesis and theology aren't fields that most people are very knowledgeable about.



I would say that they're not searching for it in the correct way, such as basing their spiritual search on:



Religion is not a science like physics and you'll always fail if you're trying to investigate the truths or non-truths of religion in such a way. Religion is more akin to art. It is in the realm of the abstract, the transcendent and the numinous.

Then if there is a god, I would say, as I think many atheists would, that he is the one that created me to have the standards of evidence that I have.
It's not really a choice to believe something or not. You believe what you believe, until you are persuaded, in a manner that YOU ACCEPT, to believe something else.

So, if I'm an atheist because god made me with this set of standards, and "not believing in god because my standards were not met" is a reason to avoid punishment, then back to my previous statement.. Why even mention atheism at all?

A question or you, do you think there are any atheists out there, or at least even a very small percent, that HAVE had sufficient proof, to meet their requirements to believe, that have CHOSEN not to believe? That are actually lying about not believing in a god?

If not, how would atheism play any part in deciding a person's judgement?

EDIT: Words seem to be coming out oddly.... sleep is probably required before I can actuallly make the point I'm trying and failing to make. lol

Have a good night, St. F!

 

[InChrist]

I think when people say this, they can't actually grasp how long an eternity of punishment would be, or truly weigh out what would have to be done to warrant a punishment of that immense, unfathomable magnitude. Or else they simply don't understand what "just" is.

Nothing, that can be done in a finite amount of time, deserves an infinite, unchangeable punishment. That is absolutely not justice, nor mercy.

According to the scriptures "sin" deserves eternal separation so that is simply reality from my perspective whether we can comprehend it or not. Besides, It certainly would not be justice for God to let sin run rampant through all the universe infecting and damaging everything forever. As far as mercy is concerned the entire gospel is centered on the message that Jesus Christ paid for the sins of the world and endured the eternal suffering which we all deserve so that we may avoid paying this price of separation ourselves.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Then if there is a god, I would say, as I think many atheists would, that he is the one that created me to have the standards of evidence that I have.

God doesn't decide your psychology. You can change your standards of evidence. A good way to start is to understand what religion is and why it's different from science. If you can understand why art is different from science, you're on the right path.

It's not really a choice to believe something or not. You believe what you believe, until you are persuaded, in a manner that YOU ACCEPT, to believe something else.

Unless your standards are faulty. If the foundations are all wrong, you'll never find the truth of the matter no matter how hard you search.

So, if I'm an atheist because god made me with this set of standards, and "not believing in god because my standards were not met" is a reason to avoid punishment, then back to my previous statement.. Why even mention atheism at all?

I think I've addressed this above. You are capable of changing your mind to have the correct standards.

A question or you, do you think there are any atheists out there, or at least even a very small percent, that HAVE had sufficient proof, to meet their requirements to believe, that have CHOSEN not to believe? That are actually lying about not believing in a god?

No idea. Anything's possible when it comes to human viewpoints.

If not, how would atheism play any part in deciding a person's judgement?

EDIT: Words seem to be coming out oddly.... sleep is probably required before I can actuallly make the point I'm trying and failing to make. lol

Have a good night, St. F!

Lol. Good night. I'm overtired and not explaining things as well as I could, as well.

 

[Thana]

If they do have the chance to change their mind at any point, then there is ALWAYS the possibility that they will. You can't just say "Oh, they won't. no matter what happens, I know they won't, just because they won't"
If they can change their minds, then they can change their minds...
It's hard to find something that's more of a tautology than that.

How can you say it already would have?
Are you saying everyone in life, who does wrong, HAS definitely been shown compassion?
By your wording, compassion = BELIEVE IN MY GOD. so, a kind, charitable atheist, who helps his neighbors, and simply doesn't believe in god deserves an eternity of agony, with no chance for redemption, for simply not knowing and choosing and loving him?
Then if that IS how hell is set up, then god is not merciful.
To choose punishment when redemption is possible is the act of a cruel, sadistic god.

EDIT: I would even go so far as to add, the sheer fact that if I, a fallible imperfect human, think that a person that has done wrong and truly repents it should be removed from punishment once a fitting time has passed, and your god doesn't, then I am more merciful than your god.
And if I think that actions, no matter how evil, that were committed in a single lifetime should no be punished for 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times times infinity longer than the lifetime lasted, and that future, non-existent crimes should not be held against a person, then I am more just, by definition, than your god.

I'm sorry, But you keep twisting my words and ignoring all the explanations I've already given you. I've said yes, God can can know who will or won't do something. He knows their hearts. I'm not the one who determines anything, God is.

I've never said 'This is how hell works' I've only been postulating, To see how people feel about justice and hell concepts. So no, You're not more merciful or just. You're fallible and God is not.