Philosophical opinions on Hell

[ERose]

Its not time I need, but proof. Even those catholics who knowingly commit mortal sins, they do so because they are not entirely convinced of catholic teachings.

What kind of proof do you need?

Your second comment is not necessarily true. Turning away from God is not always caused by doubt sometimes it is caused by personal weakness, peer pressure, habitual issues, etc. Not only that but not everyone is on the same level of faith or devotion, which makes it easier for them to fall into tempation.

An example of what I am saying is you take someone who needs to loose weight. She knows that she needs to loose weight and she knows that the candy bar she is staring at in the store will not help her loose weight and she should not buy it. But she buys it anyway. Does this make her doubt that she needs to loose weight. No, it just makes her weak at that moment in time.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Adding ‘eternal punishment’ taints the decision process, and it is quite the condition. It’s like saying, “Here, take this delicious cookie. Oh, and if you don’t, I’m going to stick your face in the fan.” This is as much a threat as an offer.

Now imagine you face already is in the fan and someone offers you the cookie.

That is what God offers you by turning away from sin.

Do yourself a favor. Read C.S. Lewis’ The Great Divorce.

 

[AgnosTheist]

Have you ever taken the time to study any church fathers writings or do you just apply your logic of the moment to all situations?

nah i did not study any church fathers. this would be your folks’ opportunity of sharing their shining moments.

and uh different situations call for different ‘logics of the moment’.

 

[ERose]

I personally lean away from belief in an afterlife, but if there were one, what we “merit” is not applicable. Applying temporal concepts like justice or merit to eternity is like dividing by zero: It just doesn’t work.

If there is a benevolent, personal God, then I would expect everyone to be with God who wanted to, and those who didn’t would either be allowed to cease or in a place of non-torment.

Suppose you offered a priceless gift but then added the caveat that you’d beat the **** out of anybody who doesn’t take it…

Adding ‘eternal punishment’ taints the decision process, and it is quite the condition. It’s like saying, “Here, take this delicious cookie. Oh, and if you don’t, I’m going to stick your face in the fan.” This is as much a threat as an offer.

Wouldn’t one’s decision to follow God have that much more meaning if the alternative weren’t eternal torment? Then we would be more confident of peoples’ motives.

So lets pretend for a moment that you were God. And there was a heaven and a hell. What would you do with lets say a unrepentent Stalin or Hitler or this guy thats in the news for raping a 3 year old girl. What would you do with them?

 

[iamrefreshed]

yeah we all know that. so what if theres a broken bond, where is the sense in a supposedly loving god not to let an insignificant offense slide? just give the soul a mercy killing by ending its existence. is that impossible? is that unethical? to the contrary!

Why? One word…Justice.

We are all accountable for our actions.

Would you just let the murderer of your child walk? Wouldn’t justice need to be served?

 

[Southsider433]

how can a finite act cause an infinite offense? because God is infinite and he is infinitely sore about what a guy did? it makes no sense. why cant he just let it slide?

I found this interesting. How can a finite act cause an infinite offense. Would you agree or disagree that it would be similar to flunking(finite act) 1st grade grammer and it being on your permanent transcript with no way no way to change it. Whats done is done and there is no way to go back. This isn’t a perfect analogy but you get the drift.

 

[Wandered_Off]

So lets pretend for a moment that you were God. And there was a heaven and a hell. What would you do with lets say a unrepentent Stalin or Hitler or this guy thats in the news for raping a 3 year old girl. What would you do with them?

Well, if I were God, there wouldn’t be a Hell - at least not a permanent one, but…

In those cases, I would not be opposed to punishment consequences proportionate to their crimes. Suppose for a moment we gave Hitler the equivalent of a human lifetime for each of the 6 million Jews he had killed: 6M * say 80 = 480 million years. OK, if we’re talking eternity, that’s only a proverbial drop in the bucket relatively, but his sin was temporal. As I said earlier, the concept of justice is incompatible with eternity, because justice is based on temporal acts. Hey, what if we upped it a thousand times to 480 millennia? Still not even a smidgen of eternity. How much is enough? At that point, what is being served by torture? What lesson is left to learn? What is left to gain?

But as long as I’m God anyway, assuming I’m omnipotent, I probably wouldn’t have planted that silly tree there for those nudists to get to, and this whole thing would be hypothetical.

 

[Wandered_Off]

Now imagine you face already is in the fan and someone offers you the cookie.

That is what God offers you by turning away from sin.

So, in a sense, we’re already in Hell here? Is that the analogy?

 

[ricmat]

Well, if I were God, there wouldn’t be a Hell - at least not a permanent one, but…

In those cases, I would not be opposed to punishment consequences proportionate to their crimes. Suppose for a moment we gave Hitler the equivalent of a human lifetime for each of the 6 million Jews he had killed: 6M * say 80 = 480 million years. OK, if we’re talking eternity, that’s only a proverbial drop in the bucket relatively, but his sin was temporal. As I said earlier, the concept of justice is incompatible with eternity, because justice is based on temporal acts. Hey, what if we upped it a thousand times to 480 millennia? Still not even a smidgen of eternity. How much is enough? At that point, what is being served by torture? What lesson is left to learn? What is left to gain?

But as long as I’m God anyway, assuming I’m omnipotent, I probably wouldn’t have planted that silly tree there for those nudists to get to, and this whole thing would be hypothetical.

So when Hitler finally got out of Hell 480 million years later, and STILL wasn’t sorry, and hated you besides, and claimed that he never would repent and never would love you, what would you do?

And why do you call Hell torture? You still need to read “The Great Divorce”

Hint: Those that choose Hell – they think it heaven because it is what they pursued all their lives. Now they finally have it.

 

[Wandered_Off]

So when Hitler finally got out of Hell 480 million years later, and STILL wasn’t sorry, and hated you besides, and claimed that he never would repent and never would love you, what would you do?

I suppose I would allow him the option of annihilation.

And why do you call Hell torture? You still need to read “The Great Divorce”

Mainly because of the horrific descriptions in holy texts and religious literature, I guess. I’ll check out that book, although my reading list is crowded at the moment, so feel free to keep up the hints.

Hint: Those that choose Hell – they think it heaven because it is what they pursued all their lives. Now they finally have it.

Ah, so that explains why the rich man was so giddy in the parable. :ehh: If that were the case, then where’s the punishment part people are going on about?

 

[ricmat]

Ah, so that explains why the rich man was so giddy in the parable. :ehh: If that were the case, then where’s the punishment part people are going on about?

Parables aren’t necessarily accurate in that sort of detail. They are meant to teach a moral lesson, not geography, or philosophy. The lesson is that it’s better to be in Heaven than in Hell. Remember that the Jews of the time did not have a well developed theology of life after death. In fact, most Jews didn’t even accept life after death as a fact. So a simple example was needed.

But looking down from Heaven, having found the God that you sought, and chose to love, and found Him to be immeasurably more wonderful than could even be imagined, I suppose that Hell, the lack of God, can appear as nothing but torture. But from the perspective of Hell, it looks like what you’ve wanted all your life…

Some people freely choose to learn more about God, trust in God, love God during their lives. When they die, they WANT God. They’ve worked hard to find him and please him. Some people freely choose to ignore God in pursuit of “better” things. Some choose to defile God and worse. To the end, God honors our choice.

As I said, The Great Divorce can be read in 2 hours. It is worth fitting into your schedule. It would answer many of your questions about this.

 

[ERose]

Well, if I were God, there wouldn’t be a Hell - at least not a permanent one, but…

In those cases, I would not be opposed to punishment consequences proportionate to their crimes. Suppose for a moment we gave Hitler the equivalent of a human lifetime for each of the 6 million Jews he had killed: 6M * say 80 = 480 million years. OK, if we’re talking eternity, that’s only a proverbial drop in the bucket relatively, but his sin was temporal. As I said earlier, the concept of justice is incompatible with eternity, because justice is based on temporal acts. Hey, what if we upped it a thousand times to 480 millennia? Still not even a smidgen of eternity. How much is enough? At that point, what is being served by torture? What lesson is left to learn? What is left to gain?

But as long as I’m God anyway, assuming I’m omnipotent, I probably wouldn’t have planted that silly tree there for those nudists to get to, and this whole thing would be hypothetical.

Who said that mortal sin is temporal, especially to the level of Hitler? Mortal sin impacts the world at greatly outside of your perceived realm of influence. Lets keep looking at the impact that Hitler had on the world. One he influence the slaughter of 6 million jews. He started World War ll which led to the death of millions more people, due to World War II, we now have nuclear weapons that can literally destroy all life on this planet if a nculear war ever occurs, influence the rise of various hate groups throughout the west, which one group that immulated Hitler was responsible for the Oklahoma City Bombing. The list could probably go on and on. Why not include all the other individuals that he guided down into hell with him.

What I am saying is that sin is not only a turning away from God but it is also a turning away from mankind as well. Remember that sin always has a negative impact peoples lives.

Yes, hell can be used as a deterent for some and it should be a very good one, and to be honest if someone ends up there then he/she deserved it.

 

[Mijoy2]

I wonder if we can consider the horrors of hell a relative thing. In other words, if we consider heaven to be joyful and satisfying beyond our ability to comprehend, then anything short of that is hell. Therefore the graphic natures and horrors of hell we read about in scripture is, when spoken of, with respect to the Heaven we hope for.

Which, of course, would qualify our life on earth to be --hell-- respectively speaking.

Maybe this is overly optomistic. But it does, in a way, correlate to C.S. Lewis’s rendition of hell in his masterpiece, The Great Divorce.

 

[Mijoy2]

But looking down from Heaven, having found the God that you sought, and chose to love, and found Him to be immeasurably more wonderful than could even be imagined, I suppose that Hell, the lack of God, can appear as nothing but torture. But from the perspective of Hell, it looks like what you’ve wanted all your life…

As I said, The Great Divorce can be read in 2 hours. It is worth fitting into your schedule. It would answer many of your questions about this.

WOW! I read this immediately after my post. But this is said so much better.

 

[MH_au]

1. ]To go to Hell, one must have committed a mortal sin]To commit a mortal sin, one must be fully aware of and accept Hell as a consequence*]Full knowledge and consent cannot be achieved if a person is not sane*]What sane person, with full knowledge, accepts eternal damnation?
   
   On the other hand, if Hell does not exist, is it fair that murderers, etc remain as unpunished as the innocent person?

 

[iamrefreshed]

So, in a sense, we’re already in Hell here? Is that the analogy?

No. The point is that God offers us free will.

It’s not an ‘or else’ decision.

There can only be two choices if justice is to be served. God is just.

There are only 2 destinations. He wants you at the destination where He resides.

 

[Wandered_Off]

No. The point is that God offers us free will.

If most people will fall into disastrous and irrevocable consequences (which I say based on my possibly flawed interpretation of Matthew 7:14), then free will is a rather terrible offer that we’re clearly ill-equipped to properly handle with such consequences on the line. It’s like distributing machine guns to first graders… There’s bound to be lots of unnecessary carnage.

If there really is a decision to make of such monumental consequence - and let’s face it: What could be more important? - wouldn’t it be benevolent to clearly and unambiguously communicate the options and consequences without allowing conflicting information? Either God respects free will, in which case he is obligated out of that respect to provide detailed and reliable information of his existence and the existence of the choice to all people in order to allow them to make the informed decision of whether or not to obey him and his commands, or he cares nothing at all for free will and just wants people to accept his existence on faith and personal conviction alone, in which the choice is just a mockery and facade of genuine free will, IMO.

That assessment of free will holds for me only if there’s a permanent, tortuous hell. Otherwise, free will is a pretty good deal.

 

[iamrefreshed]

If most people will fall into disastrous and irrevocable consequences (which I say based on my possibly flawed interpretation of Matthew 7:14), then free will is a rather terrible offer that we’re clearly ill-equipped to properly handle with such consequences on the line. It’s like distributing machine guns to first graders… There’s bound to be lots of unnecessary carnage.

If there really is a decision to make of such monumental consequence - and let’s face it: What could be more important? - wouldn’t it be benevolent to clearly and unambiguously communicate the options and consequences without allowing conflicting information? Either God respects free will, in which case he is obligated out of that respect to provide detailed and reliable information of his existence and the existence of the choice to all people in order to allow them to make the informed decision of whether or not to obey him and his commands, or he cares nothing at all for free will and just wants people to accept his existence on faith and personal conviction alone, in which the choice is just a mockery and facade of genuine free will, IMO.

That assessment of free will holds for me only if there’s a permanent, tortuous hell. Otherwise, free will is a pretty good deal.

Well I believe He did provide detailed and reliable information of His existance. Our free will is to accept it or not.

If I’m not mistaken your idea is that God should:

not have created us

or

having created us, prove without any doubt His existance (maybe with a face-to-face) so you can choose heaven or hell.

Am I spot on?

 

[Wandered_Off]

Well I believe He did provide detailed and reliable information of His existance. Our free will is to accept it or not.

I get that from Muslims too, among others. The issue is that we are stuck taking the word of fallible humans for it, and they give us conflicting information. Uncertainty is not a bad thing if burning forever isn’t on the line. In fact, I think uncertainty is what pushes us toward God and all other knowledge, so I’m not saying uncertainty is always bad. It IS bad, however, when the most drastic consequences EVER are obscured by it.

If I’m not mistaken your idea is that God should:

not have created us

or

having created us, prove without any doubt His existance (maybe with a face-to-face) so you can choose heaven or hell.

Am I spot on?

Kind of close… If there is to be such a drastic decision as Heaven or Hell that is irrevocable and eternal, then respect for free will demands unequivocal, certain information to allow us a legitimate choice.

My personal view is that God didn’t set up an eternal torturous Hell that we could accidentally “choose”, and that doesn’t fit in the either/or you gave.

 

[iamrefreshed]

I get that from Muslims too, among others. The issue is that we are stuck taking the word of fallible humans for it, and they give us conflicting information. Uncertainty is not a bad thing if burning forever isn’t on the line. In fact, I think uncertainty is what pushes us toward God and all other knowledge, so I’m not saying uncertainty is always bad. It IS bad, however, when the most drastic consequences EVER are obscured by it.

You need not take anyone’s word for it. St. Paul, in Romans, talks about the ‘law written in our hearts’. That is, salvation for those who do not follow the law (Mosiac law). Not every human has had the opportunity to receive Jesus. God does not hold that against them. They will be judged by their actions against the law written on their hearts.

It not just faith or no faith that determines heaven or hell.

Kind of close… If there is to be such a drastic decision as Heaven or Hell that is irrevocable and eternal, then respect for free will demands unequivocal, certain information to allow us a legitimate choice.

You have the information to decide. You are of the opinion it’s not enough. You want ‘proof’.

My personal view is that God didn’t set up an eternal torturous Hell that we could accidentally “choose”, and that doesn’t fit in the either/or you gave.

It’s no accident, it’s choice. Today you cannot ‘accidently’ choose hell.

I think your basis for the argument boils down to you think it’s not fair?