Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Religion  > Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 themadfiddler
Joined: 10/16/2006
Msg: 26
Why Is the Concept of Hell ImmoralPage 2 of 4    (1, 2, 3, 4)

So therefore, I think "The Second Death" is quite literally just that, a death which lasts forever and the people consigned to it just simply are no more. They cease to exist.


Oh...that's so much better then. Whew. You had me worried.


So instead of a malicious sadist who tortures people for eternity, he's just a demonic sociopath who blots them out of existence. What a relief.

So what you're telling me is this is the definition of a being who is, omnipotent, omniscient, and is just and loving...and this is the best he can come up with? Such a being, in his infinite wisdom cannot show his pitiful ant-like creations the error of their ways and transcend their short mortal existences but in a very venial and pitiful way eternally blots out their tiny lights like a pair of tweezers squishing the life out of a firefly.

Some God. Some love. But people "choose" this themselves, bring this second death upon themselves how? They do it by not making a leap of blind faith...no matter how good they may live their lives, no matter how kind they are, simply by not following the letter of the law of one element of this one religion?

Thomas Paine had it right.



There are matters in the Bible, said to be done by the express commandment of God, that are shocking to humanity and to every idea we have of moral justice.....Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistant that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and, for my part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel. [Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]


I for one couldn't worship a god that is my moral inferior.
 andigogo
Joined: 2/15/2007
Msg: 27
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/26/2007 5:20:20 AM
i think if you have been bad in life then you go to hell be good you go to heaven hense the saying "all good children go to heaven"
 bcdale42
Joined: 2/23/2007
Msg: 28
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/26/2007 10:59:16 AM
well. hell isn't where they suffer with fire and brimstone. its after the judgement. men and angels will be judged and some cast into the fiery lake of fire. where they will be tormented for all eternity with fire and brimstone..this place is eternal damnation. hell isn't eternal. its just a place to wait for the judgement seat of christ. as is paradise(the bossom of abraham).. hope this helps
 eternalknight
Joined: 8/19/2006
Msg: 29
view profile
History
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/26/2007 12:49:55 PM
Themadfiddler said:



"So therefore, I think "The Second Death" is quite literally just that, a death which lasts forever and the people consigned to it just simply are no more. They cease to exist.


Oh...that's so much better then. Whew. You had me worried.


So instead of a malicious sadist who tortures people for eternity, he's just a demonic sociopath who blots them out of existence. What a relief.

So what you're telling me is this is the definition of a being who is, omnipotent, omniscient, and is just and loving...and this is the best he can come up with? Such a being, in his infinite wisdom cannot show his pitiful ant-like creations the error of their ways and transcend their short mortal existences but in a very venial and pitiful way eternally blots out their tiny lights like a pair of tweezers squishing the life out of a firefly.

Some God. Some love. But people "choose" this themselves, bring this second death upon themselves how? They do it by not making a leap of blind faith...no matter how good they may live their lives, no matter how kind they are, simply by not following the letter of the law of one element of this one religion?"


Flaming me in your own lake of fire won't keep me from having my opinion. And you are certainly entitled to yours, sir. But you completely misinterpret what I have said.
But there is one thing I should add.
According to Romans chapter 5, eternal life is a free gift.
 themadfiddler
Joined: 10/16/2006
Msg: 30
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/26/2007 1:12:04 PM

Flaming me in your own lake of fire won't keep me from having my opinion. And you are certainly entitled to yours, sir. But you completely misinterpret what I have said.
But there is one thing I should add.
According to Romans chapter 5, eternal life is a free gift.


You are not the one being exposed to any flames here. The deity that would subject someone to sub-par morality is.

According to Romans Chapter 5 eternal life is a free gift...which you win by playing a shell game, and to win you play with Pascal's Wager.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager
 discombobulated61
Joined: 12/30/2006
Msg: 31
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/26/2007 2:53:02 PM
So there was this guy we'll call Jake. Jake took part in a swarming incident that resulted in the death of the victim. Eight guys simply swarmed and beat this guy to death. When brought before the judge Jake was asked why he did it. Jakes first thought was to claim ingnorance and that he didn't think the guy would really die from the beating. He didn't think that excuse would fly though so he claimed he did it because everyone else was doing it. The judge gave this some thought and then replied, I find you innocent, you are free to go.

Ok now, by way of show of hands how many people feel the judge was a just judge in letting Jake go free?

I'm hoping not too many people put there hands up. The judge, if he were a loving and just judge, would have to find Jake guilty and punish him to the full extent that the law will allow.

God, is bound by similar law. Because God is just and loving he must judge according to the law. His law that has been written and handed down through the ages. To do anything less would make Him an unjust and unloving God. And pleading excuses such as, ingnorance and everyone else was doing it will not wash. God does not turn His back on us. We turn our back on and rebel against him.

To understand the why of hell we need to also understand the what of heaven. Heaven is a perfect place that we go to too spend eternity. I for one like the idea of spending eternity in such a place and would hope God will do what ever is neccesary to keep heaven perfect. And to keep it perfect one of the things God must do is to keep out all rebellious hearts. Since all sin is rebellion, God has no choice but to turn away those souls who chose not to submit and play by the house rules. There is nothing unjust or evil about such a God.
 fitman2005
Joined: 8/18/2005
Msg: 32
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/26/2007 5:15:01 PM
Those who have had near death experiences do not report any kind of hellish experiences. Logically, based on these experiences, there is no Hell. People do report a learning experience, which can be called Purgatory, but also learning in the loving presence of God.



Designingwoman: You also can't discount the many testimonies of those who have had a revelatory(NDE or OBE) hellish experience. These would serve to testify of a literal Hell and confirm the biblical account of such a place. And if the biblical concept of Satan is true and he disguises as an 'angel of light,' who is called a 'murderer' and the 'father of lies', 'power of the air,' etc., with followers possibly in similar fashion--How can we be so sure that every NDE or OBE subject is viewing what can be considered truth??





As I understand it, this was in reference to their legacy of secular rulership and the patently unholy context of their dominion. As for dying in their sins, I'm given to believe that the tenet of "dying to sin" precludes dying in sin, yes? How were the rulers of the time, removed as they were from the common people, and thus Jesus' ministry, to even know to repent? Those blinded to the gospel to which they are not privy will necessarily lead others also blind, if that's the political system in use.



Feral: The religious Pharisees and such were --according to scripture, observing Christ and watching the proceedings as well as the common folk it would seem. More than one even invited Christ into their home to dine. In the book of Matthew we read Christ's indictment of these same. Chap. 23 vs. 13--Jesus proclaims that they "...shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them (common people) that are entering to go in. In other words these religious leaders were obstacles to entering God's kingdom which was being preached as being 'at hand." He continues--vs. 14-15, with the ultimate condemnation or charge: " Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widow's houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves." In verse 33-- "Ye serpents, ye generations of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?"

For me these statements by Christ and others reveal a literal place of punishment in the after life. Jesus did present a message of love and forgiveness IMO but it was a conditional message based on several factors. Jesus didn't just tell these people "now take it easy....you guys have it a bit off here now...and the religious machine has gotten a little outta hand..." --He told them exactly where they were going for their deeds and evil motive.



As for this, I'm curious. Are we saying that this was simply part of the ritual sacrifice and therefore didn't count? Ironically, I wasn't even addressing that particular specific. I'm talking about Jesus message of love and forgiveness.



--no it counted just as much as "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son...." you must look at the entire context of the message...we know that Christ interceeded for those that God would 'give' Him and not for the 'world.'

John 17:9 " I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine." 20,21: " Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they may be one; as thou father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me."



As for the rest, while poetic with the "love letter" gig, and all, it doesn't change or even address the question of whether or not it's moral for someone to be expected to suffer eternally for doing, perhaps, one or two things wrong in their lives. My simple question is, if we are to be convinced we're dealing with a beneficent deity, how does infinite punishment for finite sin support an argument for that beneficence?




The only answer I can give to this difficult question is this: We, ourselves are eternal spirits IMO. Is it perhaps that the decisions we make here and now to follow could have reverberating circumstances for all eternity? Especially in dealing with the consequences to a possibly holy God? For me this whole concept of one sin or two is a mute point if one ponders the possibilty of 'original sin' in reference to 'fallen' man. And if the revelation given us by Christ, Paul and others bears this concept out both here and in eternity, then who am I to judge? For I was born into this world as much as any other man or woman proclaimed to be in need of a spiritual newbirth in order to make me right in the sight of this God. And this is the message that I believe to be true. There must be truth somewhere on this planet--that I am certain of. And at the same time there are many untruths..............we must all choose a path at some point.
 themadfiddler
Joined: 10/16/2006
Msg: 33
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/26/2007 6:44:04 PM
So there was this guy we'll call Jake. Jake took part in a swarming incident that resulted in the death of the victim. Eight guys simply swarmed and beat this guy to death. When brought before the judge Jake was asked why he did it. Jakes first thought was to claim ingnorance and that he didn't think the guy would really die from the beating. He didn't think that excuse would fly though so he claimed he did it because everyone else was doing it. The judge gave this some thought and then replied, I find you innocent, you are free to go.

Ok now, by way of show of hands how many people feel the judge was a just judge in letting Jake go free?


Come now... 8 people beating someone and he didn't think it would result in death? At the very least it would merit a sentance of criminally indifferent manslaughter.

But what you are presenting is a black-white fallacy.

We are still back at Pascal's wager, just rephrased.

Let's take your story and add a few dimensions...

Let's say this judge has the ability to see all possible futures and read the souls of all men...since we are dealing with bizarre hypotheticals anyway. And let's say the judge is all powerful...why not?

So the judge has the ability to also rehabilitate as well as punish. To teach as well as damn. What would be the logic in simply erasing a being from existence when you could show it in a very real way the error of its belief...allow it to truly experience the pain caused by its sin... a judge with infinite power could do all of that if it so chose...if it was indeed a caring loving being, would not its priority be to teach and instruct - to lead by example?

What is the point of eternally destroying or damning a soul when you have the capacity to rehabilitate it? What person would, when truly face to face with the Creator of the universe, not be in a penitant mood...oh but by then the Christian Scripture says it's too late "I know ye not" and off to Hell with you? And that is somehow just?

Sorry but you'll just have to make a case for how that works in a sensible fashion. So far, as fallible a system as humanity has, even it is far more moral than that...and if we had the ability to see into the hearts of men mixed in with some omnipotence, I think we'd have the cracks filled up pretty tight.
 designingwoman
Joined: 9/4/2005
Msg: 34
view profile
History
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/26/2007 7:01:15 PM
Usually the "hell" type NDE's are related to people on potent drugs, that alter the mind and don't give the dying person the real experience of an NDE. They are most likely hallucinations since they are NOT the normal, standard NDE of being in a tunnel and meeting a Being of Light and encountering a Life Review. The "Hellish" experiences are an aberration because they are so few and far between. Hell does not exist at all. I think the concept is foolish and just as make believe as the Tooth Fairy. It's not REAL.
 Feral
Joined: 4/10/2005
Msg: 35
view profile
History
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 1:10:55 AM

Feral, you want to know how punishment for finite sin supports the idea of God's beneficence. It doesn't in my opinion

No, actually, I don't. And, no, you are quite correct, it doesn't. What I asked was, if as is claimed, the Christian God is a beneficent God, a God of love, then how can everlasting painful damnation even be part of His grand plan, much less the price of "falling short of the mark", as sin is described?

What really needs to be addressed is the issue of God's justice and His holiness.

As for holiness, it's perfectly logical to accept that a supernatural deity be described using a word that means "separate"; He is separate from, well, everything. At least in some people's interpretation. In others', He's part of everything, or is everything. Neither here nor there, I suppose. Ultimately, however, as to His justice, how is it just to punish infinitely for finite sins?

What people forget is that the Bible speaks more about the wrath of God than it does about the love of God

That's true, if we're talking the entirety of the commonly accepted Bible, including both the Old and New Testaments, the differences between which hint at either more than one or at least a schizophrenic God. Maybe this explains the idea of justice?

I believe God is a holy God whose wrath burns against sin and who must punish sin and avenge Himself upon sin.

Which is why, for the actions of two people, this holy, "just" God saw fit to instill in every human being at least the potential for that against which His wrath burns?

Because God is eternal, His wrath and fury against sin is eternal. That is why hell is eternal.

Except for...

I believe this whole this whole thread is based on a misconception: that God throws the INNOCENT into Hell.

Okay, all sarcasm aside, I believe you're close. The "misconception" may simply be that folks are getting the impression that God throws the relatively INNOCENT (as you say) into Hell. Possibly so, possibly not. But, consider: A man, born and raised in a culture millions of miles and thousands of years removed from knowledge of the sacrifice of Jesus, never having known the Ten Commandments of the Hebrews, looks with envy on the possessions of another. He doesn't do anything to the other guy, doesn't lie, cheat, steal, kill, or anything, but he wants what the other guy has. This is sin, yes? Guy's screwed. He don't know he's done wrong, don't know how to fix it if he did. Guy's thought, possibly once, about what it would be like to have what someone else has, and now he's got an eternity of agonising Hell to deal with, because a)he sinned, according to someone else's rules, b)he doesn't have the grace of Jesus to fall back on, and 3)Jehovah is pissed at the sin. Doesn't quite jibe with the fairness concept, or if you will, justice.

This whole thread is based on minimizing sin.

I don't agree. We're not minimising sin as a concept, it just doesn't make any sense that a soul be put through eternal torment as retribution for something that doesn't have eternal consequences (outside a fear-mongering, control-oriented dogma).

Many know why this occurred, but your claim of not punishing the innocent goes down a very slippery slope.

I'm given to understand that this was as a result of Jesus accepting responsibility (and therefore the guilt) for the whole world. Hence, on the cross, at the moment of God's forsaking Him, Jesus was in effect, guilty. Does this make sense?

What I think the Bible means by hell is a seperation from God. This cannot be immoral because we have a choice to worship God or ignore Him. God is just giving the people what they want.

Exactly the point I was trying to make earlier. Definitely seems quite a bit more just than "casting everybody into a lake of fire" kinda deal, you know?

If that were the case, I think we'd be seeing a lot more Ferraris and limos with Playboy bunnies in them.

I think he means more on a spiritual level, but if Jehovah wants to start a new trend, I might consider conversion...

I for one couldn't worship a god that is my moral inferior.

Hence, the reasoning for our interpretation of Hell being probably quite inadequate. Assuming, of course, its existence is at all possible.

i think if you have been bad in life then you go to hell be good you go to heaven hense the saying "all good children go to heaven"

How refreshingly simplistic. Guess I'd best get to being good, then, eh?

Msg 29

So, the point is, Hell sucks, but what comes after it is even worse? And, this mitigates the immorality of infinite punishment, how?

According to Romans Chapter 5 eternal life is a free gift...which you win by playing a shell game, and to win you play with Pascal's Wager.

Actually, it's not so much a shell game, and Pascal, if he had truly wagered the way he did, would have lost, assuming the Christian theology to be accurate. Point is, to avoid dying and burning for eternity in Hell (as the reasoning goes), it is necessary to, out of blind faith and against all logic, renounce one's nature as a biological being, embrace the divinity of a dubious historical personage, and either constantly live up to an impossible ethical standard or learn to repeatedly intellectually and emotionally flagellate yourself for the tiniest mistakes throughout your life. Good thing it's only three-score and ten years...

God, is bound by similar law. Because God is just and loving he must judge according to the law. His law that has been written and handed down through the ages.

So, basically, God has to punish people eternally for sin, because He's the one who said He had to do it? That's like an argument.

Since all sin is rebellion, God has no choice but to turn away those souls who chose not to submit and play by the house rules. There is nothing unjust or evil about such a God.

So, being just and all, such a God allows into Heaven all the heathen peoples that never heard his rules, yes?

...a revelatory(NDE or OBE) hellish experience. These would serve to testify of a literal Hell and confirm the biblical account of such a place.


Interesting point is that this is just as much arguably a result of psychology and belief as it is proof of one thing or another.

Eh? Eh?

How can we be so sure that every NDE or OBE subject is viewing what can be considered truth??

Eh? Eh?

In the book of Matthew we read Christ's indictment of these same.

Which, in my experience (extensive reading, discussion, prayer even --believe it or not!), is as a result of the pharisees' dedication to the letter of the law, as opposed to the spirit of the law, and their subsequent abuse thereof.

...therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.

This one does interest me, though. While it's acceptable to me that the concept of sin does not allow for "degrees" of sin (all sin is sin, and therefore evil, or what-have-you), are there "degrees" of damnation?

For me these statements by Christ and others reveal a literal place of punishment in the after life. Jesus did present a message of love and forgiveness IMO but it was a conditional message based on several factors. Jesus didn't just tell these people "now take it easy....you guys have it a bit off here now...and the religious machine has gotten a little outta hand..." --He told them exactly where they were going for their deeds and evil motive.

So, God's love is conditional? What? As for folks getting their comeuppance for "letting the religious machine get out of hand" [sic], what happens if one of these pharisees sees the light? Are they still screwed? Not tracking, here.

...we know that Christ interceeded for those that God would 'give' Him and not for the 'world.'

So, we're not talking about universal grace, to be enjoyed by anyone willing to give up their sinful life and follow Christ to the Father? We're more looking at this from the standpoint of the Calvinist, that while we humans may not know who they are, there are a finite number of God's "elect", and the rest of us (we still don't know who) are just SOL. Is that it?

" Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they may be one; as thou father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me."

I dunno 'bout anybody else, but the upshot of this, to me, is "the world." Maybe I'm tripping over some semantic/pragmatic/linguistic thing that just doesn't quite come through.

Is it perhaps that the decisions we make here and now to follow could have reverberating circumstances for all eternity? Especially in dealing with the consequences to a possibly holy God?

So, everything we do has some direct or indirect bearing on how the universe plays out after we're gone; is that what you're getting at? And, somehow, this translates to us in some way causing damage to God? Man, I'm just obtuse today, or something.

For me this whole concept of one sin or two is a mute point if one ponders the possibilty of 'original sin' in reference to 'fallen' man.

Because, as I recall (and correct me if I'm wrong), the concept of "original sin", while not mentioned at all in the account from which it is derived, is quite literally more of a curse than anything. Sort of a "you f***ed up, so your kids are gonna pay the price" gig. Once more, from the top: Jehovah set the rules, mankind is evil because of Adam and Eve, and we all go to the same place if we're bad, because that's the kind of God there is.

that alter the mind and don't give the dying person the real experience of an NDE.

The "real" experience of an NDE? How is one to judge? I mean, yeah, bad trips make a lot of sense as the basis for experiences parallelling what we're told to expect from Hell, but then, biochemically-induced hallucinations in the brain make just as much sense as anything else for the whole "light at the end of the tunnel" gig, too. Bottom line, I guess, without having experienced it, myself, objective interpretation of someone else's experience seems a tad unlikely.
 And Can It Be
Joined: 9/1/2006
Msg: 36
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 7:18:19 AM
Now I am going to bring the wrath of everyone down on me, but here goes.

This is what I believe for what it is worth:

God is glorified in the salvation of the elect, and God is equally glorified in the damnation of the reprobate.

Does God do everything He can to save every person who will ever be born? NO--he works effectually to save the elect only. The rest He passes by. God has made no provision to save the non-elect.

God is glorified in the salvation of his people to the praise of his glorious grace.

"The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extendeth or witholdeth mercy, as He pleaseth, for the glory of His sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonour and wrath for their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice" (Westminster Confession of Faith, Of God's Eternal Decree, paragraph 7.)

This is my opinion and not an attempt to claim exclusivity of truth, preaching, or proselytzing.

Flame away!
 honest_nice_guy
Joined: 9/18/2006
Msg: 37
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 7:24:14 AM
Since the thread is attended by so many who "know" what god thinks and plans, perhaps they could help me with a few puzzlements:
1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbours. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev.24:10-16). Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev.20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.
 SteveHD
Joined: 3/9/2005
Msg: 38
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 7:55:59 AM

Since the thread is attended by so many who "know" what god thinks and plans, perhaps they could help me with a few puzzlements:


Unfortunately you are quoting the Old Testament. Christians only cherry pick out of the old testament to use what is written their to condemn non-Christians and give them authority to rule over others. They are forgiven and that makes them free to look down on others while declaring it is the Lord's will that they do so.

What I never understood is that there is supposedly only one Bible, but there are so many Christian denominations. So many denomination engage in missionary work where they travel all over the world converting people to their denomination...that's just dumb...because then another denomination has to come along and "fix" it.

The funny thing is that those that are of a non-true-Christian faith are in the devil's hands. Wouldn't it make more sense for Christians to get their own Religion cleared up before they start converting others?

Will the Real Christian Denomination please stand up?
 dbz77
Joined: 12/5/2006
Msg: 39
view profile
History
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 8:14:46 AM

No, actually, I don't. And, no, you are quite correct, it doesn't. What I asked was, if as is claimed, the Christian God is a beneficent God, a God of love, then how can everlasting painful damnation even be part of His grand plan, much less the price of "falling short of the mark", as sin is described?

God decreed it thus; that is the only necessary explanation.

Ultimately, however, as to His justice, how is it just to punish infinitely for finite sins?

It is just becausde God, by virtue of His absolute power and absolute sovereignty, decrees it so.

Which is why, for the actions of two people, this holy, "just" God saw fit to instill in every human being at least the potential for that against which His wrath burns?

Precisely.

The eternal torment of sinners in Hell is a testament to the LORD's absolute might.


Michael
 SteveHD
Joined: 3/9/2005
Msg: 40
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 8:24:44 AM

God decreed it thus; that is the only necessary explanation.

You know this because...?


It is just becausde God, by virtue of His absolute power and absolute sovereignty, decrees it so.


By what authority are you claiming that statement?


The eternal torment of sinners in Hell is a testament to the LORD's absolute might.


Instead of just regurgitating commonly heard Sunday school teachings, why don't you try explaining what your saying.
 dbz77
Joined: 12/5/2006
Msg: 41
view profile
History
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 8:33:23 AM


God decreed it thus; that is the only necessary explanation.


You know this because...?

I read the Bible.


Michael
 themadfiddler
Joined: 10/16/2006
Msg: 42
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 12:25:32 PM

I read the Bible.


How nice for you. I'm sure most of the participants in this thread have. I have too. dozens of times. I have one from the Gideons on my scanner right now...it's under a stack of cds.

Alas your response amounts to 'snuh'. It's a logical fallacy. It's called circular reasoning and is the classical example of "begging the question."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

A. Bob never lies.
B. Bob says to Fred "I am telling you a lie."
C. Fred gets an aneurysm and dies due to the massive illogic of it.
D. Fred's relatives burn Bob as a witch.

It's a good way to blow up robots on Star Trek but in debates and discussions it amounts to an admission that you have no idea what you are talking about or are indeed some form of sheep robot yourself...and/or are on the verge of having your posts reported and deleted for trolling/preaching.
 osh42
Joined: 10/18/2005
Msg: 43
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 12:46:04 PM


I have heard and read from others that the concept of Hell, where sinners are sent to be tormented with fire and brimstone for all eternity, is immoral. Why would such a thing be immoral? It is no different than governments putting people in prison for breaking the law.


It is completely different. The theory of hell is it's forever. The theory behind jails is it is temporary. Plus when in jail your not tortured. Plus in jail there is education programs and medical professionals which try to help the convict have a change of heart and improve their life.

Thus the concept of hell is immoral.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 44
view profile
History
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 1:04:53 PM

Heaven is a perfect place that we go to too spend eternity. I for one like the idea of spending eternity in such a place and would hope God will do what ever is neccesary to keep heaven perfect. And to keep it perfect one of the things God must do is to keep out all rebellious hearts. Since all sin is rebellion, God has no choice but to turn away those souls who chose not to submit and play by the house rules. There is nothing unjust or evil about such a God.

Discombobulated (love that word), if you believe that keeping heaven perfect requires admitting only Christians because Christians submit rather than rebel, then I'd have to ask how did you ever manage to mount a horse that is so high. Christians make no claim to perfection, no claim to good being relative, therefor their presence in heaven would taint it as much as anyone else's.

Furthermore, how perfect can heaven be knowing your "unsaved" loved ones are not there also?



on the cross, at the moment of God's forsaking Him, Jesus was in effect, guilty. Does this make sense?

Feral, it makes sense on the sacrificial level, but it still does not make sense in the "God does not punish the innocent" level. Otherwise, one must add the qualifier: "... except when said innocent person is taking on the guilt of His elect."


I think he means more on a spiritual level

I'm sure. To make my point a little clearer and a little less tongue-in-cheek, I'll quote a movie that involved spiritual issues: "Since when do people know what they want?!"
 Feral
Joined: 4/10/2005
Msg: 45
view profile
History
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 5:39:24 PM

Now I am going to bring the wrath of everyone down on me, but here goes.

Wrath? Who's sendin' wrath? Dude, some of us might (okay, do) disgree with you, but wrath? Nah.

God is glorified in the salvation of the elect, and God is equally glorified in the damnation of the reprobate.

Why? What is honestly so glorious about being so small-minded that anybody that makes a mistake and doesn't beg for forgiveness to the point of being a moral and intellectual slave get punished for eternity? I just don't get it.

Does God do everything He can to save every person who will ever be born? NO--he works effectually to save the elect only. The rest He passes by. God has made no provision to save the non-elect.

Definitely Calvinism.

God is glorified in the salvation of his people to the praise of his glorious grace.

So, if grace is so glorious, and it's what glorifies Him, why not save everybody? Or at least give everybody a chance?

This is my opinion and not an attempt to claim exclusivity of truth, preaching, or proselytzing.

Cool beans, dude. I just disagree, since it doesn't actually make any sense to me.

Msg 38

Dude, it's been done to death. And it's not very nice, guy.

Christians only cherry pick out of the old testament to use what is written their to condemn non-Christians and give them authority to rule over others. They are forgiven and that makes them free to look down on others while declaring it is the Lord's will that they do so.

Come on, man. Not everyone who claims to be a Christian is a hypocrite. And, for those with the "equal time" thing on their minds, same thing goes for all other faiths. Thank you.

Will the Real Christian Denomination please stand up?

Not a bad idea for a thread, but it seems kinda out of place here, don't you think?

God decreed it thus; that is the only necessary explanation

Okay, I'll play. So, "God says so." Right? He didn't say it to me. Other people, other human beings seem to derive an obscene amount of pleasure from telling me stuff like that, but when it doesn't make sense (like you'd think a divine being might), I start to question. Sorry if I'm stepping on dogma's toes, here, but how about no dice?

It is just becausde God, by virtue of His absolute power and absolute sovereignty, decrees it so.

See above.

The eternal torment of sinners in Hell is a testament to the LORD's absolute might.

Because, a)it has little to nothing to do with His absolute love, 2)it keeps the riff-raff out of Heaven, c)it makes all the elitists feel better about being better than everybody else, and lastly)nobody can argue with that kind of logic because, "we say God said so". Riiiight. Forgive me if all this means to me is it's just some sadistic, morally unhinged b*stard waving His divine d*ck at all us lesser beings. Plain and simple, I get along fine with Jesus, Jehovah's okay, but the way they get portrayed sometimes makes me wonder what kind of deity some folks think they're dealing with.

You know this because...?


I read the Bible.

Funny, me too. The New Testament's got some interesting things to say about "turning the other cheek" and forgiveness. Funny how that sort of thing gets set aside to claim that someone is a sinner, and therefore evil, and therefore going to burn forever. It's actually kind of cute, you ask me.

...and/or are on the verge of having your posts reported and deleted for trolling/preaching.

Kinda harsh, don't you think? I mean, sure, the circular reasoning's annoying, but it's led to a new understanding of a given view of God, yes? And, I don't particularly feel preached at. More just surprised that this form of belief in an evil, vengeful God still persists (what with thousands of years of apologetics to work with...).

Furthermore, how perfect can heaven be knowing your "unsaved" loved ones are not there also?

I liked this one. I've actually had it explained to me that, alternately, they're there as "images" or "avatars" of them, for you (deceit in Heaven? Considering the impression of God I'm getting here, it might not be all that far-fetched), or that Heaven's so cool, you never miss 'em (which has its own problems, too).

Feral, it makes sense, on the sacrificial level, but it still does not make sense in the "God does not punish the innocent" level. Otherwise, one must add the qualifier: "... except when said innocent person is taking on the guilt of His elect."

Makes sense, but would that have to be said, especially when the "God does not punish the innocent" thing isn't actually mentioned in the Bible? Then, of course, there's also precedent, with the concept of scapegoats and the sacrifice of pure white lambs and what-not.

"Since when do people know what they want?!"

Amen to that, brother, amen to that.
 skypoetone
Joined: 3/24/2005
Msg: 46
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 6:09:08 PM
The OP has obviously been indoctrinated to believe that "Hell" or “Hades” is a for real place of torment in the afterlife, but the term (if he looks into the bible) will, itself, be noted as a place where all manner of dead things are cremated... right here on earth. The religious zealots of this world are only happy to try to scare the begeezus out of you with this rubbish.

A truly loving God would not seek eternal punishment, but understanding - like any decent parent would from their children my friend.
 dunrich
Joined: 5/13/2006
Msg: 47
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 10:12:23 PM
A truly loving human being, it could be argued, would never cage up another human being in a penitentary for life. But, our collective need for justice and punishment occurs when our wrath is raised by individuals who do things that raise our anger.

Right now, we are in a period of free will, there will be those on judgement day, who will claim that they didnt follow Gods will, because he wasnt strict enough, gave them too much freedom .

Well, when Christ returns, he will will rule this world with an iron hand. He will be returning with an army, a sword, to stop the armies of the anti Christ and from destroying this earth. His wrath will be great.

For a thousand years he will rule this way, telling us what is right or not. There will be no more excuses for diobediance from man, ignorance, pain, etc., will no longer be an excuse. People will still rebel how ever again, showing their true nature. At the end of the thousand years , we are told, Satan will once again, be let loosed for a little while, and there will be followers of him once again.

Just as we seem to be born with an inherant sense of justice that needs to be satisfyed, so it is with God. Like an errant deliquent, who disobeys our laws, and is given many chances, and keeps doing worse things until our wrath calls for him to be jailed, punished for life, so it is with God.

Man can never deem the concept of hell to be immoral. Why? Because that same sense of justice, so prevalent in man, ours elves, would then be deemed to be immoral. It just is not practical, to let incorrigable humans run wild in society causing death and destruction.

The same with God, of course he will not tolerate the same thing in eternity. Those will be separated by him, and will have " life" sentences where natural life is for eternity. Humans deem different laws to be broken, as being worse than others. Some so called victimless crimes are dealt with easier than others.

Well, not necessarily true with God. Disobediance of God, following Satan for example, is equivalent to adultery to God. He will divorce them and punish accordingly. Divorced from him for ever. With out Gods interference, man doing what ever he wants to other men, well that will be hell.

Humans do not think it is immoral, not to let an adulterous mate for example, share in your wealth when you die. Not many I know include them in their wills. Neither will God. Just as there is no such thing as no fault divorce , ( like our silly judicary and laws claim there is) with man, there will be none with God.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 48
view profile
History
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/27/2007 10:38:29 PM

With out Gods interference, man doing what ever he wants to other men, well that will be hell.

If you look at some places in the world (Rwanda, Congo, Iraq, etc.), many people are in hell right now... until they die. Are we really to think that God is saying, "You thought life on earth was bad..."
 dbz77
Joined: 12/5/2006
Msg: 49
view profile
History
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/28/2007 1:08:30 AM

Funny, me too. The New Testament's got some interesting things to say about "turning the other cheek" and forgiveness. Funny how that sort of thing gets set aside to claim that someone is a sinner, and therefore evil, and therefore going to burn forever. It's actually kind of cute, you ask me.

Jesus talked a lot about Hell. He speaks of "everlasting fire, prepared for the Devil and his angels" and "weeping and gnashing of teeth". There is the parable of the rich man and Lazarus.

"The smoke of their torment ascendeth forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night." - Revelation 14:11


Michael
 fitman2005
Joined: 8/18/2005
Msg: 50
Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral
Posted: 2/28/2007 3:08:32 AM
^^^^^^^Michael--do you believe in a 'purgatory' as well?
Show ALL Forums  > Religion  > Why Is the Concept of Hell Immoral