The Problem of Hell

[spidergoat]

The basic premise ...

We are supposed to fear Hell and be good little citizens, not question the Bible too much. Otherwise we would soon reveal massive contradictions. The Bible was not a comprehensive instruction manual for life by God, it is a collection of the writings of many people with differing agendas. That is why it is not consistent or plausable.

 

[lightgigantic]

Kenny

given that you advocate knowledge can be determined without a process, this doesn't help you any
”
Any empiracle process which reveals evidence for a claim is the ONLY way to determine wether something exists or not.

then it begs the question why do you belittle theistic claims without the application of the relevant process (in other words you reject the claims on the basis that the process isn't bona fide, yet remain hard pressed to establish what the said process is)

There is NO other way. Religion and scripture has no credible process either way since these are the same people who say that the animals went on board two by two.

the point is that you are not in a position to either verify or deny anything made in the name of theism, because you don't know what the process is - (the notion of invisible particles colliding to form substance is also an absurdity to a high school drop out - I don't think that we would place as a condition to elaborate knowledge that it can only be valid if it appears believable by consensus)

“
its also a bad attitude to deny a claim and flatly refuse the process advocated to verify the claim
”
You're just full of shit mate. The only process involved in the existence of hell is delusion. Hell exists as a means of control for people to follow the rules of x religion.

so your argument is - one of the side effects of saying hell exists is that it bears a social control therefore it is obviously false. Given that if hell does actually exist, it would be likely to bear a social control (just like if the police force actually exists, it would likely to bear a social control - in fact it would be useless unless it did) its not clear how this is a strong argument

Simple as that. Any intelligent creatures on other planets will start off society with invented superstitions like hell as a means for society to follow accepted morals and religions. That is why hell exists.

so in other words because it bears a real effect it is obviously false

 

[Adstar]

Adstar,

Perhaps we can come to some agreement on the Quran instead of the Bible.

Now, I am guessing that you have rejected the Quran as being the “Word of God”. If this is indeed so, and I fully expect that it is, upon what basis have you done so? What is it about the Quran that would ever make you think that it was not the “Word of God”? Or conversely, what would it take to convince you that it was?

Was it your own pride that made this decision for you, or was it something else? In your case, it could not be your own pride, because you apparently do not have any, so what brought you to this conclusion? Why would you ever think that the Quran is not the very "Word of God", if indeed you do think that?

Regards!

I reject the quran for basicly the same reason i rejected roman catholisism. Both teach counter to the teachings of the Messiah Jesus. Both have, and do justify Holy War/Jihad/crusade.

muhammed taught in rebellion against the teachings of Jesus just as the catholic church does and along with many other Christian churches who also support the doctrine of justifiable war set down by a catholic agent/twister of the teachings of Jesus.

The simple measure of The Words of Jesus eliminates most organised religions on this planet.

As for pride i do have my moments. I confess i can be a proud S.O.B at sometimes. But at least i know i am wrong when i am and am willing to admit it to God.

Once again its not about sin. Its about our attitude to sin.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[Blindman]

Hell is a corrupt human construct, deliberately designed and propagated by power hungry humans to meet their human desires.

 

[lightgigantic]

Hell is a corrupt human construct, deliberately designed and propagated by power hungry humans to meet their human desires.

So you have stated what it is.

Unless you also state why you believe it is this we don't have enough substance for much of a discussion outside of the exchange of tentative claims

 

[KennyJC]

Kenny
then it begs the question why do you belittle theistic claims without the application of the relevant process (in other words you reject the claims on the basis that the process isn't bona fide, yet remain hard pressed to establish what the said process is)

It's like your asking me to find a 'process' to perceive Humpty Dumpty... Completely pointless.

so your argument is - one of the side effects of saying hell exists is that it bears a social control therefore it is obviously false.

No, I'm not. But it's still obviously false.

Given that if hell does actually exist, it would be likely to bear a social control (just like if the police force actually exists, it would likely to bear a social control - in fact it would be useless unless it did) its not clear how this is a strong argument

If it was verified empirically and not by some pathetic imagined nursery rhyme.

so in other words because it bears a real effect it is obviously false

It has an effect... just like a belief that spotting 2 magpies is good luck has a real effect in the actions of said superstitious people. But "just because you feel it doesn't mean it's there".

 

[SetiAlpha6]

I reject the quran for basicly the same reason i rejected roman catholisism. Both teach counter to the teachings of the Messiah Jesus. Both have, and do justify Holy War/Jihad/crusade.

muhammed taught in rebellion against the teachings of Jesus just as the catholic church does and along with many other Christian churches who also support the doctrine of justifiable war set down by a catholic agent/twister of the teachings of Jesus.

The simple measure of The Words of Jesus eliminates most organised religions on this planet.

As for pride i do have my moments. I confess i can be a proud S.O.B at sometimes. But at least i know i am wrong when i am and am willing to admit it to God.

Once again its not about sin. Its about our attitude to sin.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

I am with you so far and I agree with you!

But... What is wrong with "justifying Holy War/Jihad/crusade"? Why is this a basis for rejecting the Quran as the "Word of God" or even the Catholic Church? If they are really right, if they really have the truth, wouldn't that make this practice justifiable?

 

[lightgigantic]

Kenny

then it begs the question why do you belittle theistic claims without the application of the relevant process (in other words you reject the claims on the basis that the process isn't bona fide, yet remain hard pressed to establish what the said process is)
”
It's like your asking me to find a 'process' to perceive Humpty Dumpty... Completely pointless.

another example of the "you are wrong because you are wrong argument"

“
so your argument is - one of the side effects of saying hell exists is that it bears a social control therefore it is obviously false.
”
No, I'm not. But it's still obviously false.

another example of the "you are wrong because you are wrong argument"

“
Given that if hell does actually exist, it would be likely to bear a social control (just like if the police force actually exists, it would likely to bear a social control - in fact it would be useless unless it did) its not clear how this is a strong argument
”
If it was verified empirically and not by some pathetic imagined nursery rhyme.

and since all empirical claims function by applying a process, its not clear why you discredit the process (ooops I forgot, "Theism is wrong because it is wrong")

“
so in other words because it bears a real effect it is obviously false

”
It has an effect... just like a belief that spotting 2 magpies is good luck has a real effect in the actions of said superstitious people. But "just because you feel it doesn't mean it's there".

therefore the logical conclusion would be that the argument that "hell is false because it controls people" is baseless

 

[Adstar]

What is wrong with "justifying Holy War/Jihad/crusade"? Why is this a basis for rejecting the Quran as the "Word of God" or even the Catholic Church? If they are really right, if they really have the truth, wouldn't that make this practice justifiable?

Amazing:

It is wrong to justify something that God has revealed is against his will. Jesus is my Lord/Ruler/Leader and all who claim to be followers of Jesus should say the same, If Someone claims that He is their Lord then they should agree with His Words. Those who believe in justifiable war or Holy War whatever tag they place on it are in clear rebellion against the Word of Jesus. I don't really know how to explain it any more clearly than i have. This is basic Word of Jesus stuff. But i suppose the basics are ignored by some and rejected by others.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[SetiAlpha6]

Amazing:

It is wrong to justify something that God has revealed is against his will. Jesus is my Lord/Ruler/Leader and all who claim to be followers of Jesus should say the same, If Someone claims that He is their Lord then they should agree with His Words. Those who believe in justifiable war or Holy War whatever tag they place on it are in clear rebellion against the Word of Jesus. I don't really know how to explain it any more clearly than i have. This is basic Word of Jesus stuff. But i suppose the basics are ignored by some and rejected by others.

I still agree with you, Adstar!

But... If the Hebrew scriptures also teach that justifiable war or Holy War is the will of God then should not they be rejected as well for the very same reason that you have rejected the Quran and the Catholic Church? Wouldn't that place anyone who believes in and agrees with the Hebrew scriptures in a position of "rebellion against the Word of Jesus".

If not, then why not?

Thanks!

 

[KennyJC]

Kenny

another example of the "you are wrong because you are wrong argument"

Wether or not you are wrong is not the issue - it's just irrelevant. If a caveman says an electron exists, even though it is true, it is just irrelevant until we find evidence that his claims is justified. Nothing subjective can be relevant or justified when claiming something exists. We can't give relevance to every single thing that a person claims which is why we should be biased towards those who at least present evidence which can be judged.

 

[lightgigantic]

Kenny



Wether or not you are wrong is not the issue - it's just irrelevant. If a caveman says an electron exists, even though it is true, it is just irrelevant until we find evidence that his claims is justified. Nothing subjective can be relevant or justified when claiming something exists. We can't give relevance to every single thing that a person claims which is why we should be biased towards those who at least present evidence which can be judged.

therefore in theism it is not just claims of perception - it also has claims of processes that bestow perceptions

 

[kl5k]

As far as I can tell, LG, according to the Bible, Hell is supposed to be eternal torment. So, the problems remain.

Do you have any other thoughts?

Thank You!

Hell is not eternal torment. Hell will destroy the unbelievers, but it will not last forever. The verses in the bible you are refering to are talking about the results being eternal. See Malachi 4:1-3.

 

[SetiAlpha6]

Hell is not eternal torment. Hell will destroy the unbelievers, but it will not last forever. The verses in the bible you are refering to are talking about the results being eternal. See Malachi 4:1-3.

Please consider the following...

"And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life" (Matt. 25:46).

In this verse, the same word "eternal" is used to describe the punishment of the wicked as well as the eternal life of the believer. The punishment is endless as is the eternal life of the believer.

There are many other verses that suggest this same thing.

Thank you for your comments!

 

[Warrior61]

Once again its not about sin. Its about our attitude to sin.

Are you sayin it is more on the intent? Our attitude toward sin could be a sin of itself.

 

[Warrior61]

Again I have to say this. The thread was started about hell and has now come to the Koran. Stick with the topic. Adstar was explaining to you his answers to the questions and you proceeded to turn away from that, a common tool used to avoid being wrong known as "Red Hairing."

 

[SnakeLord]

Stick with the topic. Adstar was explaining to you his answers to the questions and you proceeded to turn away from that, a common tool used to avoid being wrong known as "Red Hairing."

Not really, no. A key part of being human and having discussions is that those discussions 'evolve'. I know, that word has probably dragged you to tears but it's true.

P.S It's "herring".

 

[IceAgeCivilizations]

Yeh, "red hairing," I thought maybe he was talking about something that's as phoney as those purple-red hairdos the ladies find popular.

 

[Warrior61]

Not really, no. A key part of being human and having discussions is that those discussions 'evolve'. I know, that word has probably dragged you to tears but it's true.

P.S It's "herring".

thank you for pointing out my mistake. Discussions "evovle" (did I just type that). That is true, but why move on when you have not even come to a conclusion, unless you have arrived at truth and you never intended to discuss it but just to simply state your opinion. Notice how you understood what I meant despite my spelling mistake. How was that possible?

Thank you,
His son,
><>Warrior61<><

 

[Warrior61]

Yeh, "red hairing," I thought maybe he was talking about something that's as phoney as those purple-red hairdos the ladies find popular.

Thanks