The Problem of Hell

[aperture]

It was a question (Aren’t there people in this life who reject God and are happy, or are at least not experiencing the total suffering of hell?) not a point. And the question had an obvious answer: yes. Why do you think it’s a point, in particular a good one?

If it is true that people are disobeying God and are happy - if not as happy as they might be with God - an omnipotent God could hypothetically let them do that forever. I see this as a counterpoint to the Catholic idea that God can’t save a person from eternal suffering in Hell without removing their free will. Could He not simply extend their current life indefinitely?

Now you may say that this is an awfully selfish thing for a human to ask, and that God can’t just let people ignore Him forever. But your Christian God is infinite; a human cannot reduce Him. Why can He not do this?

This is ridiculous. You’ve proven something about Osiris with this quote? Get back on topic (all of y’all) and Zat, forget about even trying to get away with this kind of ridiculous claim here. There are way too many intelligent people here for that to happen.

At the very least point to an existing thread where this has been discussed, or an outside source. I am interested in this as well, although I understand how it would be off-topic.

 

[PAboy57]

Some people just can’t accept the truth so we continue to have threads like this one questioning whether God is good and how could He would allow people to go to hell for eternity.

Read the Bible, The Catechism of the Catholic Church, the writings of the Saints and Doctors of the Catholic Church, Catholicism for Dummies, The Catholicsim AnswerBook – The 300 Most Frequently Asked Questions and I could go on for a week.

God doesn’t put people in hell. We put ourselves there by choice period.

Lead a good life, obey the commandments and you eventually will get to Heaven. If you choose to not do this then you will go to hell.

Instead we try and skirt around the truth and have these debates. It is human nature to question all of this but please get with the program eventually for your own good.

One thing is for sure – At the end of the world you will either be in Heaven or hell for eternity. The choice is entirely up to you.

I hope you find the way to spend eternity with Almighty God and His Saints. He really wants all of us to join Him.

 

[tonyrey]

I assure you, there is nothing unique within Christianity. The ancient Egyptians aslo worshiped the king of kings, yet another murdered and resurected Deity, the God of life and death…Osiris.

Further, the golden rule of Jesus, is found throughout the world, in various cultures and religions…

Nothing is new and nothing is unique.

Then provide just one example of some one else teaching us to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us… before the time of Jesus of course.

 

[lemondiesel]

Buddha taught that women are a little above the family dog because they can talk and cook and make good family slaves.
Muhammad taught that it’s ok to beat your wife and rape and murder your daughter.
lemondiesel, have you graduated high school yet?

Like I said, they taught morality. I am talking about what their religions are founded upon after each of there deaths, because remember, many of these teachings were oral until **after **their deaths.

Do not even begin to talk about Buddha preaching about women like that when the Catholic Church is responsible for the murder of “witches,” which was around 50-100,000 at minimum.
I felt links would be better for you to compare.

Islam and Christianity, Differences and Similarities. Enjoy!
muslim-canada.org/islam_christianity.html#similarities_moral
(you will see the main core morals are very similar, like murder, stealing, etc)

Buddhism and Christinity, Similar beliefs
Buddhism, Christianity and all of the other major world religions share a basic rule of behavior which governs how they are to treat others.

Two quotations from Buddhist texts which reflect this Ethic are:
“…a state that is not pleasing or delightful to me, how could I inflict that upon another?” Samyutta NIkaya v. 353.
Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Udana-Varga 5:18.

This compares closely to Christianity’s Golden Rule, which is seen in:
“Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.” Matthew 7:12.
“…and don’t do what you hate…” Gospel of Thomas 6.

DesertSailor, please do not insult me like that, this is a public forum, and I am entitled to my opinion. Let’s be the bigger man and keep the insults to ourselves, kk great!

Oh sure! Can you prove the Egyptian god rose from the dead. We can prove Jesus did.

You can prove this how? By the Bible, a work written by man? Egyptians have records of their pharaohs being reincarnated, but are their records false because they are not the same story as Jesus? The closest thing you have to “proof” is the Shroud of Turin, and even the Vatican says it is left up to the individual to believe if it is from Jesus or not. Maybe you should refrain from making outrageous claims like that.

Simple point: If I know (and even if I had known for all eternity) that I will eat spaghetti tomorrow if my wife makes spaghetti for dinner, and I know that she will, this does not imply that I have already eaten spaghetti tomorrow and that I am actually the one who will make it.

Okay my apologies if I am still not getting this. Even if you have not eaten the spaghetti to be made in the future, you still know the spaghetti will be made. If you make it or not, you still know it will be made tomorrow, and end up in your belly. The spaghetti really has no other choice.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

And show that the people of the time (not somebody reconstructing and giving an opinion centuries later) absolutely believed that Osiris had died SPECIFICALLY FOR THEIR SINS, and thus had opened heaven and eternity to them.

 

[lemondiesel]

And show that the people of the time (not somebody reconstructing and giving an opinion centuries later) absolutely believed that Osiris had died SPECIFICALLY FOR THEIR SINS, and thus had opened heaven and eternity to them.

May I ask, and maybe this is for another thread, if Jesus rose from the dead, why were his followers shocked?

He already raised three people from the dead before this, so if its easy for him to do, why were they surprised? They should have been waiting outside the tomb because obviously he had the capability to defy death.

 

[lemondiesel]

Then provide just one example of some one else teaching us to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us… before the time of Jesus of course.

Zatzat and I are trying to show that all religions have very similar beliefs, because they all lead to the same God. We have just taken different paths to try and express that God.

 

[tonyrey]

And show that the people of the time (not somebody reconstructing and giving an opinion centuries later) absolutely believed that Osiris had died SPECIFICALLY FOR THEIR SINS, and thus had opened heaven and eternity to them.

And show Osiris founded a Church that has survived for over two thousand years, whose followers are to be found in every country in the world and include eminent thinkers and scientists from past and present…

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Zatzat and I are trying to show that all religions have very similar beliefs, because they all lead to the same God. We have just taken different paths to try and express that God.

Well, let’s say that God exists and that He teaches truth. He doesn’t come down immediately and start teaching them ‘all together’ though like any other ‘subject’, one starts with ‘beginning’ teachings, works up to intermediate, and finally the most difficult teachings.

Suppose a mathemetician was able to meet a man from Egypt 3000 BC – a period in which already people had ‘advanced’ beyond mere subsistence and were engaged in philosophy etc. But the mathematician could not start talking about quantum physics. Heck, he couldn’t even talk algebra or geometry! He couldn’t even use the zero! He would have to start with the BASICS because that is what people knew.

All the ‘basic’ things that are common to religion are common because they ARE ‘basic’. Simple. The first and earliest of revealed truth. Like a child first saying ‘mama and dada’. The child in a very short time will be capable of saying much more but the child has to start with the simplest and most basic words for the most ‘important’ things in his life–his parents.

Now, suppose that you have heard or read of these truths. You like most of them, but some of them sound strange or don’t suit you. So you ‘keep’ the truths you like and either ignore what you don’t, or say that these were ‘corrupted’ somehow, or ‘misunderstood.’

You ‘ignore’ ENOUGH of the truths and rather than being on the way to understanding truth, you are now heading away from truth.

 

[aperture]

God doesn’t put people in hell. We put ourselves there by choice period.

Lead a good life, obey the commandments and you eventually will get to Heaven. If you choose to not do this then you will go to hell.

Instead we try and skirt around the truth and have these debates. It is human nature to question all of this but please get with the program eventually for your own good.

Saying something is true because it’s true is just circular logic. If an infinitely loving God can’t logically co-exist with the existence of Hell, then there’s a problem here.

 

[tonyrey]

Zatzat and I are trying to show that all religions have very similar beliefs, because they all lead to the same God. We have just taken different paths to try and express that God.

You are but I doubt very much that Zatzat is - judging from the number of sarcastic comments he has made about religion…

 

[tonyrey]

Saying something is true because it’s true is just circular logic. If an infinitely loving God can’t logically co-exist with the existence of Hell, then there’s a problem here.

If… It remains to be demonstrated.

 

[lemondiesel]

Well, let’s say that God exists and that He teaches truth. He doesn’t come down immediately and start teaching them ‘all together’ though like any other ‘subject’, one starts with ‘beginning’ teachings, works up to intermediate, and finally the most difficult teachings.

Suppose a mathemetician was able to meet a man from Egypt 3000 BC – a period in which already people had ‘advanced’ beyond mere subsistence and were engaged in philosophy etc.Heck, he couldn’t even talk algebra or geometry!

All the ‘basic’ things that are common to religion are common because they ARE ‘basic’. Simple.

You ‘ignore’ ENOUGH of the truths and rather than being on the way to understanding truth, you are now heading away from truth.

Well, lets say God exists and he speaks the Truth. How do we know he didn’t tell the first conscious being about himself, and then just left, requiring that being to try and understand God, and to pass down His Word. To me, it seems like religion makes it** too **difficult.

The Egyptians built pyramids by 2700 BC, I think that mathematician would be utterly shocked. He wouldn’t teach them geometry or algebra, because these things are required in architecture. Let’s see any of us go build a pyramid. It just seems like you are another person who under estimates the true knowledge of the ancient people.

True, but shouldn’t it just be that easy?

So how do you know Christianity is not heading away from truth?

You are but I doubt very much that Zatzat is - judging from the number of sarcastic comments he has made about religion…

I do not agree with any religions and find them far from truth, I am just saying they are pointing to the same “God” or ultimate cause

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Well, lets say God exists and he speaks the Truth. How do we know he didn’t tell the first conscious being about himself, and then just left, requiring that being to try and understand God, and to pass down His Word. To me, it seems like religion makes it** too **difficult.

If all that we have to go on is opinion (yours, mine, or others), what makes YOUR opinion that religion is ‘too difficult’ valid but not ours? Personally, your supposition makes things a lot harder. So how did Mr. or Ms. "First conscious being’ if God just ‘left’ somehow manage to inculcate the truth into not just his or her tribe, but all over the world? Looks like you believe in Adam and Eve then. And if so, then you have the testimony of Adam and Eve (the Bible) and from that you see that God didn’t just leave. Somewhere you are acknowledging that either there is an absolute truth or else there is chaos. If there is only chaos, how are you even able to think? If there is absolute truth, then God exists and He has revealed it. If so, then since He assured us that we would be led to all truth, and He established not a book (valuable as the Bible is) but a Church, and since the Catholics (and Orthodox) can trace back to that church, it seems fairly logical that this Church would be capable of guarding truth.

The Egyptians built pyramids by 2700 BC, I think that mathematician would be utterly shocked. He wouldn’t teach them geometry or algebra, because these things are required in architecture. Let’s see any of us go build a pyramid. It just seems like you are another person who under estimates the true knowledge of the ancient people.
Would you mind TERRIBLY not putting words into my mouth or making erroneous judgments regarding my knowledge? Yes, the pyramids are an architectural wonder. So are the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, the Colossus of Rhodes, the Lighthouse of Alexandria, and Stonehenge, not to mention the Great Wall of China. I have not ‘underestimated’ the knowledge of ancient peoples simply by noting quite correctly that Algebra was a later accomplishment than 3000 BC. Geometric principles were in place in 3000 BC but not brought to fruition; still that did not mean that people could not perform great feats that utilize mathematics that they did not fully understand.

Let’s not EXAGGERATE the knowledge of ancient peoples either. The Egyptian of 3000 BC was recognizably human and he shared many things with us. . .but he had many differences as well. Some of them were more ‘admirable’ than some of the qualities we have today and SOME WERE LESS SO. We need to recognize and understand the context of his world.

True, but shouldn’t it just be that easy?

So how do you know Christianity is not heading away from truth?

I do not agree with any religions and find them far from truth, I am just saying they are pointing to the same “God” or ultimate cause

 

[mangy_dog]

Hey, I am writing a paper on the the problem of hell and wold like to hear your opinions/ answers on this “problem”, (anihilationism): We are finite beings and therefore can only sin a finite amount. So our temporal sins can only warrant a temporal punishment. Therefore, If God is all just, then hell cannot be eternal. This annihilationist view is held by Seventh day Adventists and Jehovah Witnesses. It must be admitted that this is, at least at first glance, a powerful argument. God could damn people for aeons and aeons and then annihilate them instead of damning them for eternity.

• Thanks in advance!

1. We are not finite beings. As of the moment of our conception - we continue to exist for the rest of eternity.
2. To sin a finite amount of time is one facet. However, the gravity of those sins can have an eternal effect on the soul of the person that dies in those grave sins and, not for lack of notice and warning.
3. We should be so graced to pay a temporal punishment for sins commited in this life - and sin no more. For the nature of sin is of such consequence - that it required for God to become flesh in order to destroy the isolating, destructive effects of sin, that are not permutated and doesn’t expire upon death.
4. God’s justice is eternally terrible as His Mercy is eternally wonderful. Hell doesn’t exist for His enjoyment in tormenting souls - it exist to ratify the desire of those souls and angelic beings that hate God and feel that He is the oppresor of their [freedom to do whatever they please whenever they please].
5. 7th day Adventists are deeply erred in this matter. And JW’s…well, they aren’t even christians! So, big deal that they believe this, that or the other thing.
6. So far you have the weakest argument I’ve seen in a long time on this forum.
7. God will never contradict His nature. Once a sentient being - with free will and intellect - has been created by God…that being will henceforth continue to exist.

There is eternal reward and there is eternal damnation. Think what you will but the only problem I see here is your personal hell.

 

[Betterave]

If it is true that people are disobeying God and are happy - if not as happy as they might be with God - an omnipotent God could hypothetically let them do that forever. I see this as a counterpoint to the Catholic idea that God can’t save a person from eternal suffering in Hell without removing their free will. Could He not simply extend their current life indefinitely?

Yes, he could. The next time someone tells you that it is a ‘Catholic idea’ that God can’t save a person from eternal suffering in Hell, without removing their free will, please ask for a source. I’d like to know where this belief comes from.

Now you may say that this is an awfully selfish thing for a human to ask, and that God can’t just let people ignore Him forever. But your Christian God is infinite; a human cannot reduce Him. Why can He not do this?

He can. The question is: should he? And the answer: no.

Analogy: the dean can grant admission to whomever he chooses. Should he grant admission to someone who cheats, just because he can? You might think, sure, why not? As long as he’s not taking away a spot from someone who didn’t cheat. But still: what are you presupposing in this case? Maybe the rule not to cheat isn’t arbitrary, maybe it’s for the greater good that selfish behavior actually be punished. That makes sense, doesn’t it?

At the very least point to an existing thread where this has been discussed, or an outside source. I am interested in this as well, although I understand how it would be off-topic.

I think it’s off-topic, and I think that’s enough said. If you’re interested, I suggest starting another thread on it.

 

[Betterave]

Okay my apologies if I am still not getting this. Even if you have not eaten the spaghetti to be made in the future, you still know the spaghetti will be made. If you make it or not, you still know it will be made tomorrow, and end up in your belly. The spaghetti really has no other choice.

Of course the spaghetti has no choice! The point is that my wife makes the choice to make the spaghetti and my foreknowledge of her choice does not change this fact and does not imply that I am *really *the one who made the choice. If you have some deep intuition to the contrary, please explain it.

 

[lemondiesel]

Of course the spaghetti has no choice! The point is that my wife makes the choice to make the spaghetti and my foreknowledge of her choice does not change this fact and does not imply that I am *really *the one who made the choice. If you have some deep intuition to the contrary, please explain it.

Yes but you knowing your wife will make food shows that you know you will get fed, no matter if its spaghetti or not. Spaghetti is just the food she wants to make, but you are still getting fed. So we can all make our own types of food, but in the end God is still being fed.

God already knows if we are going to heaven and hell the moment he created us. How we get there is our “free will” but God already knows our outcomes. It doesn’t matter if we make him spaghetti, soup, chicken, steak, etc, because these are all possible ways to feed him, but he still knows he is going to be fed. That is my point.

 

[Betterave]

Yes but you knowing your wife will make food shows that you know you will get fed, no matter if its spaghetti or not. Spaghetti is just the food she wants to make, but you are still getting fed. So we can all make our own types of food, but in the end God is still being fed.

God already knows if we are going to heaven and hell the moment he created us. How we get there is our “free will” but God already knows our outcomes. It doesn’t matter if we make him spaghetti, soup, chicken, steak, etc, because these are all possible ways to feed him, but he still knows he is going to be fed. That is my point.

Okay, that’s correct. But your point before, I thought, was that God knows he will be fed (with choices), therefore God is doing all the cooking (making (‘creating’) all the choices - see, e.g., post 58). That’s not correct.

 

[lemondiesel]

Okay, that’s correct. But your point before, I thought, was that God knows he will be fed (with choices), therefore God is doing all the cooking (making (‘creating’) all the choices - see, e.g., post 58). That’s not correct.

Lol I just thought of a question for my argument. “What if she didn’t make food” haha, like maybe she was in a car crash coming home from the grocery store or something

Would god feed himself or wha?