Hell is more preferable to nonexistance?

  • Thread starter Thread starter adrian1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

adrian1

Guest
I heard an idea that struck me. Hell is thousands of times preferable to nonexistence. Better to be in hell than never exist.The status of devils is preferable to nonexistence. A university professor and I have also met this ideea în sermons, with reference to St. John of Damascus.

Do anyone know reference?
Is that true? In can’t undersant exactly how, but i think is true…
Referance from Aquinas or…
 
Last edited:
If you don’t exist how do you know you don’t exist?
 
How do you know hell isn’t non existence? Hell is separation from God, can’t get much more separated than ceasing to exist.
 
Existence is objectively good… Non-existence therefore cannot be considered good because it lacks existence. However, people’s subjective personal preference may vary. I imagine that they would rather not exist than exist in eternal suffering. In that regard i don’t think they much care about the objective quality of existence when faced with eternal suffering. But you ought to want existence, you ought to love existence because existence is good. Not doing so doesn’t change what ought to be.

In other-words existence would still be good even if you’re in hell. Thus to annihilate you from existence would be the same as saying that existence is not good, which is a contradiction.
 
Last edited:
The descriptions of hell in the bible show people suffering and being aware of their suffering; that wouldn’t be possible if they stopped existing. How do you weep without eyes? How do you gnash your teeth without a mouth?
 
My philosophy might be very immature… but I find the idea of anyone suffering eternally to be distressing. That leads to the next thought… perhaps people in hell want to suffer or like suffering as a condition of their irredeemable selfishness? Perhaps they will continue in hell, to genuinely hate what is good and innocent desire to destroy it for all eternity. Just a thought.
 
Good point but not everything in the Bible is literal so is there anything about these verses that leads you to believe they are? I’d check my bible commentary but I’m travelling for a few nights away from home.
 
DIdnt Jesus say it would be better if judas weren’t born? Therefore hell is worse.
 
Not. Hell can’t be worse than non-existance. Why God not destroy demons but send them to hell? He always make acts with maximum love.
 
Last edited:
If non-existance is better then hell, why create people who don’t save? Here is freedom mystery!
 
I think he meant it in terms of sensory perception. Better that he had never been born. Non-existence is better than the experience of hell, but that doesn’t mean that non-existence is better than existence with hell. That would be contradictory because Existence is good. Jesus would be in effect saying that it would be better that Judas never had a chance to choose God or hell. If it is truly better than hell to cease to exist then God would annihilate him, not put him in hell.
 
Last edited:
Why God don’t destroy all people from hell and all demons (now), if hell is worse than non-existance?
 
Why God don’t destroy lucifer after he fall? Why allow him in hell?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top