Is eternal suffering pointless?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Michael19682
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sure, I’m certainly not the first and won’t be the last to think this way. As Solomon says: “there is nothing new under the sun.”

Just want to be clear that I do not think hell proves God doesn’t exist or is evil, rather I think God proves hell is evil and doesn’t exist. If one takes hell as axiomatic, then God can’t be omniscient, omnipotent, and omni-benevolent simultaneously, in my opinion. But, I take God as axiomatic, so hell can’t exist, at least as it’s understood by traditional Christians, Zoroastrians, Muslims, and long-dead Greek pagans. I don’t think we should lose God while tossing out hell, they aren’t a “packaged deal” in my opinion.
Another, well stated.

John
 
In fact you are mistaken. We are in the prison until we can perceive and act. Could you please explain how a life after death could grant meaning to our current life? That is another form of life!
We shall be the same individuals with the same personality, the same history and the same responsibility for our actions and decisions.
 
I don’t think we should lose God while tossing out hell, they aren’t a “packaged deal” in my opinion.
Aren’t God and justice a packaged deal?

BTW The damage is indeed **collateral **but it is self-inflicted.
 
Aren’t God and justice a packaged deal?

BTW The damage is indeed **collateral **but it is self-inflicted.
It is a Package deal, but what is God’s justice? I don’t believe that God “Punishes” the wicked in the same sense that human beings punishes Criminals. God does not eternally torture the unrepentant for not following his agenda. I think that is a flawed way of looking at God’s justice and yet many Christians seem to look at it that way.

Does hell exist? In a sense yes. Did God create hell with the intention of torturing the wicked? No. A good God cannot do that because torturing is not a good. So what is hell? It is a state of being that one experiences in the eternal absence of heaven, and that experience results in suffering. This is God’s justice; that those who do not participate do not experience that which necessarily requires participation in regards to freewill.

Hell is not artificial. The Problem is that Christian language concerning God’s justice gives the impression that God intentionally and eternally tortures men and women with fire if they do not follow the righteous path. It becomes even more problematic when one considers the fact that God does not have to “burn” people in hell. Any truly rational person can see that such an act, even if it is believed to be for a greater good, is not metaphysically consistent with the existence of a God whose nature is Love. The failure of Christians to address traditional **vengeful ** language concerning the “ontology of hell” will inevitably put Christianity at odds with intelligently thinking people.

Those who understand what it means for God to be love will understand that justice expressed as vengeance is a metaphysical limitation on God’s nature, and perhaps the problem arises precisely because the Church has dressed up God’s “justice” in human concepts regarding how human beings deal with enemies both emotionally and physically. In reality it is man, not God, who wish to torture their enemies in hellfire for all eternity because of their emotional insecurity. As a result these feelings unfortunately have found their way into Christian language concerning God’s justice.
 
It is a Package deal, but what is God’s justice? I don’t believe that God “Punishes” the wicked in the same sense that human beings punishes Criminals. God does not eternally torture the unrepentant for not following his agenda. I think that is a flawed way of looking at God’s justice and yet many Christians seem to look at it that way.

Does hell exist? In a sense yes. Did God create hell with the intention of torturing the wicked? No. A good God cannot do that because torturing is not a good. So what is hell? It is a state of being that one experiences in the eternal absence of heaven, and that experience results in suffering. This is God’s justice; that those who do not participate do not experience that which necessarily requires participation in regards to freewill.

Hell is not artificial. The Problem is that Christian language concerning God’s justice gives the impression that God intentionally and eternally tortures men and women with fire if they do not follow the righteous path. It becomes even more problematic when one considers the fact that God does not have to “burn” people in hell. Any truly rational person can see that such an act, even if it is believed to be for a greater good, is not metaphysically consistent with the existence of a God whose nature is Love. The failure of Christians to address traditional **vengeful ** language concerning the “ontology of hell” will inevitably put Christianity at odds with intelligently thinking people.

Those who understand what it means for God to be love will understand that justice expressed as vengeance is a metaphysical limitation on God’s nature, and perhaps the problem arises precisely because the Church has dressed up God’s “justice” in human concepts regarding how human beings deal with enemies both emotionally and physically. In reality it is man, not God, who wish to torture their enemies in hellfire for all eternity because of their emotional insecurity. As a result these feelings unfortunately have found their way into Christian language concerning God’s justice.
👍 Any belief that conflicts with Christ’s teaching that God is a loving Father is obviously false. It is not the Catholic Church that is responsible for such errors but individuals who have distorted the meaning of His words by interpreting them literally…
 
It is a Package deal, but what is God’s justice? I don’t believe that God “Punishes” the wicked in the same sense that human beings punishes Criminals. God does not eternally torture the unrepentant for not following his agenda. I think that is a flawed way of looking at God’s justice and yet many Christians seem to look at it that way.

Does hell exist? In a sense yes. Did God create hell with the intention of torturing the wicked? No. A good God cannot do that because torturing is not a good. So what is hell? It is a state of being that one experiences in the eternal absence of heaven, and that experience results in suffering. This is God’s justice; that those who do not participate do not experience that which necessarily requires participation in regards to freewill.

Hell is not artificial. The Problem is that Christian language concerning God’s justice gives the impression that God intentionally and eternally tortures men and women with fire if they do not follow the righteous path. It becomes even more problematic when one considers the fact that God does not have to “burn” people in hell. Any truly rational person can see that such an act, even if it is believed to be for a greater good, is not metaphysically consistent with the existence of a God whose nature is Love. The failure of Christians to address traditional **vengeful ** language concerning the “ontology of hell” will inevitably put Christianity at odds with intelligently thinking people.

Those who understand what it means for God to be love will understand that justice expressed as vengeance is a metaphysical limitation on God’s nature, and perhaps the problem arises precisely because the Church has dressed up God’s “justice” in human concepts regarding how human beings deal with enemies both emotionally and physically. In reality it is man, not God, who wish to torture their enemies in hellfire for all eternity because of their emotional insecurity. As a result these feelings unfortunately have found their way into Christian language concerning God’s justice.
I completely agree with everything that you say with the exception of: “So what is hell? It is a state of being that one experiences in the eternal absence of heaven, and that experience results in suffering”. Suffering is still punishment and the suffering lasts for eternity without any end. I can understand a length of time in this absence of Heaven (suffering) dependent on the seriousness of and number of sins, much like a human justice system but not an eternity.
 
The “artificial” aspect of hell is the miraculous, endless, continuous existence of the damned. The eternally doomed supposedly have just as much eternal life as those in heaven! This is directly God’s work, and can’t be said to be natural unless humans naturally live forever. If they do, what precisely was the consequence of original sin? The alternative is clearly obvious: those who are totally evil and refuse to obey God could die and never “come back.” Hell is artificial and miraculous because it depends upon the physical resurrection of the doomed. Don’t believe me? Read Catholic Answer’s own tract. LOL that I have to convince Catholics of their own dogma even though I don’t believe any of it!
 
I completely agree with everything that you say with the exception of: “So what is hell? It is a state of being that one experiences in the eternal absence of heaven, and that experience results in suffering”. Suffering is still punishment and the suffering lasts for eternity without any end. I can understand a length of time in this absence of Heaven (suffering) dependent on the seriousness of and number of sins, much like a human justice system but not an eternity.
Time and space don’t exist in the spiritual realm. If we reject God’s love we alone are responsible for being isolated from Him and all those who love Him. If we make ourselves unlovable how can anyone possibly love us? Our suffering is self-inflicted and we are getting what we deserve for putting ourselves before everyone else. That is not unjust because if we repent we have the opportunity to make amends in Purgatory. Heaven and Hell are not the only options…🙂
 
I completely agree with everything that you say with the exception of: “So what is hell? It is a state of being that one experiences in the eternal absence of heaven, and that experience results in suffering”. Suffering is still punishment and the suffering lasts for eternity without any end. I can understand a length of time in this absence of Heaven (suffering) dependent on the seriousness of and number of sins, much like a human justice system but not an eternity.
Hell is self-punishment. God is not a giver of suffering. God punishes not like a king in a castle who taketh away the good, for God is good itself and cannot remove himself. But rather physical descriptions of divine punishment serve only as imperfect analogies of what we are in fact doing to ourselves. We are doing hell to ourselves by removing ourselves from the sacraments. We cut ourselves off from the good when we sin. It is not God who cuts us off, it is not God who really does the punishing. God is forever-giving of Heaven, there are no strings attached, and the only commandment is that we love. God only asks us to be as that which we were created to be.

There is no sin that can make God reject us. God is eternal love and thus the call to salvation is eternal and cannot change. It’s impossible for God to send us to hell. But we can reject God by sinning and we can remain in sin by not repairing that which unifies us to God and that is our capacity to love God.
 
Hell is self-punishment. God is not a giver of suffering. God punishes not like a king in a castle who taketh away the good, for God is good itself and cannot remove himself. But rather physical descriptions of divine punishment serve only as imperfect analogies of what we are in fact doing to ourselves. We are doing hell to ourselves by removing ourselves from the sacraments. We cut ourselves off from the good when we sin. It is not God who cuts us off, it is not God who really does the punishing. God is forever-giving of Heaven, there are no strings attached, and the only commandment is that we love. God only asks us to be as that which we were created to be.

There is no sin that can make God reject us. God is eternal love and thus the call to salvation is eternal and cannot change. It’s impossible for God to send us to hell. But we can reject God by sinning and we can remain in sin by not repairing that which unifies us to God and that is our capacity to love God.
👍 So the suffering of hell is not pointless. If it were, the joy of heaven would also be pointless! The point is that as we sow so shall we reap. It’s as simple as that! 🙂
 
The suffering caused by an incurable disease is undoubtedly pointless. What does that prove? Nothing more than the fact that the laws of nature cannot adapt themselves to every situation. The Catechism wisely points out that “the evils in nature seem to be linked to the limitations proper to creatures”. The laws of nature are created by God but it doesn’t follow that they have divine powers…
 
I once visited a powerful wizard who ruled over an island in the middle of the ocean far away from any other land. This island was a wonderful and peaceful place, and the wizard was acknowledged by all the inhabitants as a wise and good ruler. He had several simple rules, and if any of the islanders transgressed the rules, he would punish them. However, the citizens of this fair island could repent of their transgressions at any time, any number of times, and all would be forgiven, and peace would return to the island once again.

One of the wizard’s rules was “do not swim off of the island so far that you can’t get back to shore.” It seemed like a wise and obvious rule. However, I asked the wizard: what happens when an islander breaks this rule?" The wizard replied: “They kick, scream, and exhaust themselves as they drown, gasping for air and gulping down sea water in mortal terror.” I asked, “do you use your magic to help them back to shore?” He frowned, closed his eyes, and whispered his reply: “No, I let them drown, screaming and choking, again and again, each time bringing them back from the edge of death with my magic, as they drift farther and farther away from the island, never to return. They chose to swim away from shore, despite my warnings, and they must suffer the natural consequences.” The old man then let out a deep sigh, and gingerly sat upon his throne. A long and deep silence enveloped us both as I stood, appalled at the cruelty of this seemingly benevolent magician. “There is unfortunately nothing I can do,” he continued, “you know, free will and so on.”

Suddenly, a peal of shrill laughter erupted from the frail old man and reverberated throughout the ostentatious throne room. Even the statues seemed to cringe at the sound. “Yes, yes! Natural consequences! Of course!”

“What is so funny?” I asked. Before I could finish the question, the wizard was off running to the spiral stair case in the center of the throne room. “Come!” he barked with excitement. I rushed after him and climbed what seemed to be hundreds of flights of stairs until we came to the top of the lookout tower. Gasping for air I exclaimed, “What? What is it?” “Silence!” he shouted with a deep and forceful tone. I looked out of the tower and saw what appeared to be black dots far away on the horizon, floating just above the water line. In the quiet at the top of the tower, on a beautiful, clear day with only the slightest breeze coming from the north, I could make out the faintest of sounds. Like the memory of an echo, it floated gently to my ears.

Screaming. Wailing. Gnashing of teeth. Gurgling. Drowning. Spitting. Kicking. Splashing. All of this combined into a intense but barely audible din, like the sound of a far off train.

Without turning to me, the wizard stepped toward the edge of the tower and raised his outstretched arms toward the ocean. He spoke: “Do you see my children? Do you see how I love them very much? They disobeyed me, and yet I love them so much I nearly exhaust myself keeping them alive out there. I am getting tired friend, I have only so much depth of magical power, and since the great majority of my children choose to swim away from the island, I grow ever more weary each day sustaining them.”

Numb with horror, I stood totally frozen, unable to speak. "He swirled suddenly toward me and peered directly into my eyes. “Would you like to replace me, my friend? I will teach you the secrets of my magic, and you will sustain all of my children scattered across the sea, forever. Their screams will be like sweet music, soothing you to sleep at night and waking you with the sunrise.”

Almost as if involuntarily, I shouted with ferocious intensity: “You are NO ONE’s friend!” as I ran with great speed and plunged from the tower into the ocean. I swam away from that island with as much energy as I could muster, gasping for air and desperately trying to escape. Fortunately, a kindly old seafarer in a large, weathered, wooden boat filled with many animals was able to pick me up and take me back to the mainland.

I suppose, over the years, the old wizard had gone insane with either grief or loneliness, perhaps both. I do sometimes wonder whatever ended up happening to him and the island. Hopefully he has long since died, and the immense suffering of his citizens has come to an end. May none of us ever happen upon that cursed place!
 
I once visited a powerful wizard who ruled over an island in the middle of the ocean far away from any other land. This island was a wonderful and peaceful place, and the wizard was acknowledged by all the inhabitants as a wise and good ruler. He had several simple rules, and if any of the islanders transgressed the rules, he would punish them. However, the citizens of this fair island could repent of their transgressions at any time, any number of times, and all would be forgiven, and peace would return to the island once again.

One of the wizard’s rules was “do not swim off of the island so far that you can’t get back to shore.” It seemed like a wise and obvious rule. However, I asked the wizard: what happens when an islander breaks this rule?" The wizard replied: “They kick, scream, and exhaust themselves as they drown, gasping for air and gulping down sea water in mortal terror.” I asked, “do you use your magic to help them back to shore?” He frowned, closed his eyes, and whispered his reply: “No, I let them drown, screaming and choking, again and again, each time bringing them back from the edge of death with my magic, as they drift farther and farther away from the island, never to return. They chose to swim away from shore, despite my warnings, and they must suffer the natural consequences.” The old man then let out a deep sigh, and gingerly sat upon his throne. A long and deep silence enveloped us both as I stood, appalled at the cruelty of this seemingly benevolent magician. “There is unfortunately nothing I can do,” he continued, “you know, free will and so on.”

Suddenly, a peal of shrill laughter erupted from the frail old man and reverberated throughout the ostentatious throne room. Even the statues seemed to cringe at the sound. “Yes, yes! Natural consequences! Of course!”

“What is so funny?” I asked. Before I could finish the question, the wizard was off running to the spiral stair case in the center of the throne room. “Come!” he barked with excitement. I rushed after him and climbed what seemed to be hundreds of flights of stairs until we came to the top of the lookout tower. Gasping for air I exclaimed, “What? What is it?” “Silence!” he shouted with a deep and forceful tone. I looked out of the tower and saw what appeared to be black dots far away on the horizon, floating just above the water line. In the quiet at the top of the tower, on a beautiful, clear day with only the slightest breeze coming from the north, I could make out the faintest of sounds. Like the memory of an echo, it floated gently to my ears.

Screaming. Wailing. Gnashing of teeth. Gurgling. Drowning. Spitting. Kicking. Splashing. All of this combined into a intense but barely audible din, like the sound of a far off train.

Without turning to me, the wizard stepped toward the edge of the tower and raised his outstretched arms toward the ocean. He spoke: “Do you see my children? Do you see how I love them very much? They disobeyed me, and yet I love them so much I nearly exhaust myself keeping them alive out there. I am getting tired friend, I have only so much depth of magical power, and since the great majority of my children choose to swim away from the island, I grow ever more weary each day sustaining them.”

Numb with horror, I stood totally frozen, unable to speak. "He swirled suddenly toward me and peered directly into my eyes. “Would you like to replace me, my friend? I will teach you the secrets of my magic, and you will sustain all of my children scattered across the sea, forever. Their screams will be like sweet music, soothing you to sleep at night and waking you with the sunrise.”

Almost as if involuntarily, I shouted with ferocious intensity: “You are NO ONE’s friend!” as I ran with great speed and plunged from the tower into the ocean. I swam away from that island with as much energy as I could muster, gasping for air and desperately trying to escape. Fortunately, a kindly old seafarer in a large, weathered, wooden boat filled with many animals was able to pick me up and take me back to the mainland.

I suppose, over the years, the old wizard had gone insane with either grief or loneliness, perhaps both. I do sometimes wonder whatever ended up happening to him and the island. Hopefully he has long since died, and the immense suffering of his citizens has come to an end. May none of us ever happen upon that cursed place!
I didn’t know this forum is intended for fairy stories. :confused:
 
I didn’t know this forum is intended for fairy stories. :confused:
It seems to be the only way to make my point more obvious! Though Kant was a superior genius, Dostoevsky’s influence is far greater because he communicated through stories. Though Schopenhauer was a superior genius, Nietzsche’s influence is far deeper because he used stories. Though Socrates was a superior genius, Jesus’ influence is far greater because he communicated with stories. Some people don’t like or don’t understand abstract discussion.

The wizard is clearly evil and/or insane, which is precisely what I believe about the teaching of eternal hell: it makes God appear to be evil and/or insane. It is (unintentional) blasphemy, and I want to expose it. Many people are tormented by thoughts of hell: read the spirituality forum, or talk to many believers! I wish that fear and torment would be put to an end, and I will fight it, until someone can prove to me that God can be omniscient, omnipresent, and omnibenevolent but still preside over the smoldering ruin of so many of his children! And, find me one single reference in the Torah that says sinners will be punished, bodily and spiritually, in an everlasting hell. Something so important should be there!
 
It seems to be the only way to make my point more obvious! Though Kant was a superior genius, Dostoevsky’s influence is far greater because he communicated through stories. Though Schopenhauer was a superior genius, Nietzsche’s influence is far deeper because he used stories. Though Socrates was a superior genius, Jesus’ influence is far greater because he communicated with stories. Some people don’t like or don’t understand abstract discussion.

The wizard is clearly evil and/or insane, which is precisely what I believe about the teaching of eternal hell: it makes God appear to be evil and/or insane. It is (unintentional) blasphemy, and I want to expose it. Many people are tormented by thoughts of hell: read the spirituality forum, or talk to many believers! I wish that fear and torment would be put to an end, and I will fight it, until someone can prove to me that God can be omniscient, omnipresent, and omnibenevolent but still preside over the smoldering ruin of so many of his children! And, find me one single reference in the Torah that says sinners will be punished, bodily and spiritually, in an everlasting hell. Something so important should be there!
I agree with much of what you have stated but you seem to underestimate the horrific reality of evil. Is there any evidence that everyone will regret the needless suffering they have caused - not necessarily inflicted but permitted?
 
I agree with much of what you have stated but you seem to underestimate the horrific reality of evil. Is there any evidence that everyone will regret the needless suffering they have caused - not necessarily inflicted but permitted?
You’re right, I tend to be a Pollyanna optimist. I have no idea whether everyone will regret the evil they have done or permitted. If we refuse: we should die. The wizard should let us drown and be done with it, in my opinion.

If what I see as the wizard’s radical and insane evil is actually “love” then I have no idea how to make sense out of anything. Language and life will have been undone for me if hell is love. Maybe there is a way to reconcile it. I do not see it.
 
You’re right, I tend to be a Pollyanna optimist. I have no idea whether everyone will regret the evil they have done or permitted. If we refuse: we should die. The wizard should let us drown and be done with it, in my opinion.

If what I see as the wizard’s radical and insane evil is actually “love” then I have no idea how to make sense out of anything. Language and life will have been undone for me if hell is love. Maybe there is a way to reconcile it. I do not see it.
The Creator is not a Destroyer. It would amount to admitting defeat and disavow the right to life simply because a person chooses to be independent. Hell is more intelligible than extinction because it has its compensations. Only a lunatic would opt for sheer misery without any pleasure or satisfaction - or to disappear forever without a trace. Absolute power over one’s own life is not a temptation that can be rejected without a second thought. It is a consummation diabolically to be wished! (With apologies to the Bard.)
 
The Creator is not a Destroyer. It would amount to admitting defeat and disavow the right to life simply because a person chooses to be independent. Hell is more intelligible than extinction because it has its compensations. Only a lunatic would opt for sheer misery without any pleasure or satisfaction - or to disappear forever without a trace. Absolute power over one’s own life is not a temptation that can be rejected without a second thought. It is a consummation diabolically to be wished! (With apologies to the Bard.)
Questions:

If God does not destroy, why did he drown the entire earth (even if it is symbolic, what could it mean other than God is willing and able to destroy)?

Please cite a scripture, mystic, visionary, pope, council, doctor, saint, or anyone you deem to be a Roman Catholic authority who says that hell is a place of “pleasure” or “satisfaction.”

Please cite any part of the Torah that says we have a “right to life.” Life is a gift directly from God, it seems to me. He does not “owe” it to us.

I agree with you only a lunatic would choose to go to hell. It is sad and absurd that this is the “defensive line” of popular apologetics today. Indeed, only a lunatic would believe we have “absolute power over one’s own life.” We are totally dependent on God in each and every moment of our existence. Even if we deny God, we must acknowledge our dependence on nature, on other humans beings, on chance, or any number of things. Those who believe they are totally autonomous have lost touch with reality, and should be healed. If healing is impossible, they should be allowed to lapse from existence, not sustained in their eternal self-torment.

It is as though you stand with me and the wizard upon the lookout tower, and you say to me “Oh, don’t bother about the screaming, wailing, and gnashing of teeth you hear: they’re having a good time out there enjoying their autonomy and the various compensations that come with it.” :rolleyes:
 
The Creator is not a Destroyer. It would amount to admitting defeat and disavow the right to life simply because a person chooses to be independent. Hell is more intelligible than extinction because it has its compensations. Only a lunatic would opt for sheer misery without any pleasure or satisfaction - or to disappear forever without a trace. Absolute power over one’s own life is not a temptation that can be rejected without a second thought. It is a consummation diabolically to be wished! (With apologies to the Bard.)
Genesis is allegorical but it has a historical basis. Life did nearly become extinct due to natural causes and it has miraculously survived for billions of years:
12 And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come: 13 I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. 14 Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, 15 I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life. 16 Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth.” 17 So God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant I have established between me and all life on the earth.”
  • Genesis*
Please cite a scripture, mystic, visionary, pope, council, doctor, saint, or anyone you deem to be a Roman Catholic authority who says that hell is a place of “pleasure” or “satisfaction”.
Hell is not a place but a state of mind. No one would be foolish enough to say its primary feature is “pleasure” or “satisfaction” but neither has anyone dared to say it consists solely of unceasing, unmitigated torment for the simple reason that it wouldn’t make sense. The words of the Catechism are a measured response to the sadistic excesses of those who delight in describing the unceasing agony of the damned in all its gory detail:
The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.
Nothing more and nothing less than that suffices to present the truth. And what does that imply? A motive for being separated and a motive which is selfish. And why would that motive persist? I leave you to draw your own conclusion as to whether it is totally frustrated. The alternative is to admit we know nothing for certain about the nature of hell except that it is the alternative to heaven - if the distinction between good and evil is to make sense. Life is not a fairy tale in which there is always a happy ending and the villains vanish from the scene. They don’t disappear as easily as that because no one is totally evil or devoid of love. Their love just isn’t strong enough to break their addiction to themselves. The truth usually lies between the extremes of everything or nothing…
Please cite any part of the Torah that says we have a “right to life.” Life is a gift directly from God, it seems to me. He does not “owe” it to us.
God doesn’t owe it to us but He owes it to Himself because He has created us as His children in His image and likeness - and creation incurs obligations. He is a loving Father who is responsible for our well-being, not an autocrat who can do whatever He likes, no matter how inconsistently. Divine might is not divine right!
I agree with you only a lunatic would choose to go to hell. It is sad and absurd that this is the “defensive line” of popular apologetics today. Indeed, only a lunatic would believe we have “absolute power over one’s own life.” We are totally dependent on God in each and every moment of our existence. Even if we deny God, we must acknowledge our dependence on nature, on other humans beings, on chance, or any number of things. Those who believe they are totally autonomous have lost touch with reality, and should be healed. If healing is impossible, they should be allowed to lapse from existence, not sustained in their eternal self-torment.
“allowed to lapse from existence” is an euphemism for destruction. It implies irrational inconsistency on the part of God. Why create us in the first place? It would either be a mistake or a diabolical act.
It is as though you stand with me and the wizard upon the lookout tower, and you say to me “Oh, don’t bother about the screaming, wailing, and gnashing of teeth you hear: they’re having a good time out there enjoying their autonomy and the various compensations that come with it.”
For a start there is no screaming in hell. Emotive language has nothing to do with spiritual reality. Parables are not intended to be taken literally but to make us aware of the harsh reality of evil. “Don’t be naughty” is all right for children but adults need stronger language to make them aware of the danger of living for oneself at the expense of others. “I have never harmed anyone” is an excuse that doesn’t exonerate us from having permitted unnecessary suffering as the result of our indifference. Hell is nothing more than the continuation of indifference after death because it leads to a state of solitary confinement in which we have everything we want - except love.
 
I agree with you only a lunatic would choose to go to hell.
Ahhhh, but only a righteous man would worship love at the expense of his own agenda or self gratification, and it is certainly plausible that a man could think that the power of full autonomy without a king to rule him is worth the price of suffering. People in hell suffer to be their own God.

They are users of God’s creation; not participants. They are eternally selfish and any good work they produce from their nature is merely an accident of their ego and the practical implications of their environment. The definition of Evil is “selfishness”, and selfishness takes on many forms.

I think that much is clearly obvious to anyone with a strong sense of what it truly means to be good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top