Question about hell

[notachance]

This is a question for people who believe in a literal hell:

If my son didn't believe I loved him, and in response I locked him up in the basement and tortured him, wouldn't I have proved him right?

Doesn't the fact that God is the kind of guy who would torture me, by definition make him unworthy of my love?

[I AM ALL I AM]

I would agree that any discipline, school of thought or way of life that puts faith in the unfalsifiable before opinions based on empirical evidence, is bound to be flawed.

i would like to know, since most of you here are obviously men of science, what mathematical formula do you all use then to calculate what exactly "love" is, and who is or isnt "worthy" of it.

G'day Forumwarrior.

Interesting forum ID ... I didn't realise that there was a war upon this forum.

Do you credit science with only one discipline, that of mathematics ?

It is interesting that you attempt to restrict others to your false dichotomy. It appears that you are attempting to 'pigeonhole' individuals upon this forum to fit into your preconceived ideas about them so that you can conduct your 'war' upon this forum's membership that have differing ideas to your own.

Is this the only forum that you troll ?

hey look. its the guy that just got off forum probation stopping by to "contribute." thanks for your contribution "mate."

G'day Forumwarrior.

I note the absence of responding to the points made and contend that it shows that you are simply trolling.

[SteveC]

I wouldn't know though being a robot and all.

i had always thought of you as more of a vulcan. you know how on star trek when spock would raise his eyebrow, turn his head and say "thats illogical!" thats what i think of when im debating with people on this board.

with that in mind, its no surprise to me that they dont understand the simple concept of "you misbehave, you go to the basement where there is wailing and gnashing of teeth." i guess its not a logical concept.

Sometimes I feel like I'm debating the tooth fairy, when I read some believers' whimsical and emotionally charged descriptions of god.............and oh, let's not forget the heartfelt metaphors that are produced to hide the fact that their aren't any facts to describe god. Most often, I find believers reduce god to part creative writing lesson and part boxing lesson.

so youre not swayed by heartfelt metaphors, i get it. but you know, it takes all kinds of people to make a world. some people you cant get to with reasoning. others you have to yell and scream at. others stil require sharing, and caring, and kindness.

im sure that if you hold out long enough, youll find a believer that works for you. just stay optimistic.

Optimism I have for all sorts of things, just don't ask me to hold my breath.

[forumwarrior]

Dear ForumWarrior, I would like to discuss something you said earlier in the forum, before the debate got a little sidetracked with silly analogies.

You wrote:

Its my opinion that a locking in the basement is an act of love. and im trying to see where exactly we differ.

So lets get this straight.

I kidnap your 5 year old child, I put him in my basement and every day I torture him. When he's about to die from shock I give him an adrenaline shot to keep him alive. Then I go back to torturing him. If he loses too much blood I give him a transfusion to keep him alive and to avoid brain damage, so that I can be sure that he can still feel pain. Then I go back to torturing him. Not for an hour, not for a day, not for a week, not for a month, not for a year, but for his ENTIRE LIFE. Nothing but the worse pain a human body and mind can endure for his entire life.

Now. Please explain to me how this despicable torture could be considered "an act of love".

In what way am I loving your 5 year old child when I use pliers to rip his toe nails out?

Please break it down for me, step by step. In what way is torture "loving"?

If right before dying at age 35, after 30 years of uninterrupted torture at my hands, your son thought to himself "This guy probably doesn't love me, and I am justified in not loving him" would he be wrong?

If somehow, after 30 years, you somehow managed to save your son, would you tell him that he deserved to be tortured, and that my torturing him was a way of expressing how much I love him?

Now lets imagine a different scenario.

Your son doesn't get abducted by a sadistic human being. He just dies in a car accident when he's 14 years old. At that time he's in his rebellious phase and has rejected Jesus. So he goes to hell.

So now, he is confronted with the type of torture that makes what he would have endured in life seem like a joke. He doesn't need an adrenaline shot to avoid going into shock, he doesn't need a transfusion to avoid brain damage. It's not his body that is being tortured. It's his soul. It cannot die, yet it can feel pain and torment. It cannot escape the continuous torture of the lake of fire. And this doesn't go on for one year or ten years or a lifetime or ten lifetimes or a million years or a billion years. This goes on FOREVER. Without even the remote hope of eventually escaping the pain through death.

Now, please explain to me how this eternal torment could be considered an "act of love".

Please break it down for me, step by step. In what way is eternal torture "loving"?

talk about a silly analogy!

its evident to me that were not on the same page man. you imagine yourself being kidnapped getting freaking adrenaline shots.

i imagine it as god REWARDING people.

hell as i understand it is a place in the absence of gods presence. god is giving unbelievers what they want. a place where he is not there. how is that not love?

this is an interesting read.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm

[Alchemy]

Dear ForumWarrior, I would like to discuss something you said earlier in the forum, before the debate got a little sidetracked with silly analogies.

You wrote:

Its my opinion that a locking in the basement is an act of love. and im trying to see where exactly we differ.

So lets get this straight.

I kidnap your 5 year old child, I put him in my basement and every day I torture him. When he's about to die from shock I give him an adrenaline shot to keep him alive. Then I go back to torturing him. If he loses too much blood I give him a transfusion to keep him alive and to avoid brain damage, so that I can be sure that he can still feel pain. Then I go back to torturing him. Not for an hour, not for a day, not for a week, not for a month, not for a year, but for his ENTIRE LIFE. Nothing but the worse pain a human body and mind can endure for his entire life.

Now. Please explain to me how this despicable torture could be considered "an act of love".

In what way am I loving your 5 year old child when I use pliers to rip his toe nails out?

Please break it down for me, step by step. In what way is torture "loving"?

If right before dying at age 35, after 30 years of uninterrupted torture at my hands, your son thought to himself "This guy probably doesn't love me, and I am justified in not loving him" would he be wrong?

If somehow, after 30 years, you somehow managed to save your son, would you tell him that he deserved to be tortured, and that my torturing him was a way of expressing how much I love him?

Now lets imagine a different scenario.

Your son doesn't get abducted by a sadistic human being. He just dies in a car accident when he's 14 years old. At that time he's in his rebellious phase and has rejected Jesus. So he goes to hell.

So now, he is confronted with the type of torture that makes what he would have endured in life seem like a joke. He doesn't need an adrenaline shot to avoid going into shock, he doesn't need a transfusion to avoid brain damage. It's not his body that is being tortured. It's his soul. It cannot die, yet it can feel pain and torment. It cannot escape the continuous torture of the lake of fire. And this doesn't go on for one year or ten years or a lifetime or ten lifetimes or a million years or a billion years. This goes on FOREVER. Without even the remote hope of eventually escaping the pain through death.

Now, please explain to me how this eternal torment could be considered an "act of love".

Please break it down for me, step by step. In what way is eternal torture "loving"?

talk about a silly analogy!

its evident to me that were not on the same page man. you imagine yourself being kidnapped getting freaking adrenaline shots.

i imagine it as god REWARDING people.

hell as i understand it is a place in the absence of gods presence. god is giving unbelievers what they want. a place where he is not there. how is that not love?

this is an interesting read.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm

You are either trolling or debating unfairly.

No matter what page anyone is on, no reasonable definition of Hell could include it as a reward. Neither could any reasonable definition of love include eternal torture.

[Janx]

man i didnt think that a bullet between the eyes was akin to a spanking. but dont you fret janx, were talking about the same hell. the only place where there is an absence of god. the great lake of fire. the pit. sheol.

what we are differing on is the word LOVE. which is why i asked to understand how you logical empiricists are applying the word.

if i created a world, gave the inhabitants of it a couple of rules, and stated that those who didnt abide by the rules were going to spend their eternity in an unhappy place. i would expect that those inhabitants would know that me telling them so was an act of love. and that me following through with my statements is the fulfillment of my love.

My dear forumwarrior I have good news! We created this world you describe here on planet earth mid 20th century; it was called: Stalinist Russia. There was also a few books written about such a world; one was called: 1984

Now the interesting thing here is that many Russians genuinely loved Joseph Stalin and believed that he loved them back. Of course the people in the Gulags might have had a different opinion but most of them never got a chance to express it. It should be noted that we here on planet Vulcan do not agree with Stalin's methods even if many Russians continue to think that Stalin was a great man and would love to have him back.

but i like metaphors and stuff. so explain to me. what kind of "love" would be acceptable?

I don't want love from a God. Love is a dangerous emotion for such a powerful being. Love, hate, wrath, disdain, pleasure, it's like we are dealing with a guy on an acid trip. There is a reason, after all, why a president has to go through protocol before launching nukes. With great power comes great responsibility. Throwing a few billion souls into the lake of fire because they don't make you happy is kind of insane - ESPECIALLY if one's motive is love.

I want the same thing I wanted from my parents as a child and the leaders of nations today: a rational and just mind.

I have to thank you for this forumwarrior. Now I realized that this whole love thing is just a red herring for believers. Figures the most volatile, chemically induced and subjective emotion a human being can have would be given as an explanation for motives of a God. "God loves you" - what a divinely meaningless phrase.

A question for you sir,
Is a parent who locks their child up in a basement and tortures them for a decade justified in their actions if they claim their motive was genuine love for that child?

Cheers.

[forumwarrior]

Throwing a few billion souls into the lake of fire because they don't make you happy is kind of insane - ESPECIALLY if one's motive is love.

now i imagine if my blood were green i would see the world in a different light, but as it is now im not seeing it as insane. its kind of ingenious if you ask me. i mean what else should a god do with unbelievers?

and im not gonna answer that dumb question man. cmon now you can do better than that.

god is not locking anybody in any basement against their will. god is REWARDING those people according to their will.

[notachance]

talk about a silly analogy!

its evident to me that were not on the same page man. you imagine yourself being kidnapped getting freaking adrenaline shots.

i imagine it as god REWARDING people.

hell as i understand it is a place in the absence of gods presence. god is giving unbelievers what they want. a place where he is not there. how is that not love?

Dear ForumWarrior, people are accusing you of being a troll. I disagree. You are not being a troll.

You are just calling Jesus a liar.

Jesus says that in hell is "a furnace of fire where there is wailing and gnashing of teeth" (Mat 13:42). You say that Jesus is a liar.

Jesus says that those in hell will scream "Father Abraham, have mercy on me, for I am tormented in this flame". (Luke 16:24) You say that Jesus is a liar.

Jesus says "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the LAKE OF FIRE." (Rev 20:15) You say that Jesus is a liar.

Jesus says "The smoke of their TORMENT ascendeth up for EVER AND EVER: and they have NO REST DAY NOR NIGHT." Rev. 14:11. You say Jesus is a liar.

Jesus clearly said in Mark 9 that it's better to cut off your own hand or foot or to pluck your eye out, than to have to face the torment of hell. That's how BAD Jesus says hell is. But you are calling him a liar.

Jesus describes hell thus:
everlasting fire — Matthew18:8, 25:41
everlasting punishment — Matthew 25:46
everlasting chains — Jude 1:6
eternal damnation — Mark 3:29
eternal judgment — Hebrews 6:2
eternal fire — Jude 1:7
unquenchable fire — Matthew 3:12
the fire that never shall be quenched — Mark 9:43, 44, 45, 46, 48
fire unquenchable — Luke 3:17
mist of darkness is reserved for ever — 2 Peter 2:17
the blackness of darkness for ever — Jude 1:13

And you say that Jesus is a liar.

You say that hell is not a punishment, but a rosy place where those who don't like God can hang out in his absence.

But you know what, I'm going to let you off the hook. Let's assume you're RIGHT and Jesus is a liar, and hell is NOT a place of torment, but just a place where those who don't love God are allowed to freely hang out without him.

Well then that's GREAT! Because that means that its' totally, completely, 100% fine to NOT BE A CHRISTIAN. There are not eternal consequences to rejecting Jesus!

I can be a sinner all I want, and the worse that can happen is that after I die I get REWARDED (that's the word YOU used) with an eternity where I can keep sinning! An eternity where I can share thoughts with all the greatest scientists of our time (mostly atheists), hang out with some of the best jazz musicians who ever lived, and fornicate freely and eternally with all the hottest, sluttiest women who ever lived without fear of catching an STD or knocking them up! That's WONDERFUL. There is no way I' gonna accept Jesus now! Thank you for that advice, friend!

What you're telling me is that I should NOT stop sinning and I should NOT accept Jesus, because otherwise I might be stuck with an eternity in heaven, which I would not enjoy as much as the party downstairs in hell. Good thinking! Thank you!

Is that what you're saying, or might you want to reconsider and define hell as a place of torment, and stop calling Jesus a liar?

[Janx]

Throwing a few billion souls into the lake of fire because they don't make you happy is kind of insane - ESPECIALLY if one's motive is love.

now i imagine if my blood were green i would see the world in a different light, but as it is now im not seeing it as insane. its kind of ingenious if you ask me. i mean what else should a god do with unbelievers?

But your blood isn't green my dear forumwarrior. I don't care if you find it ingenious. I want to know if you find the scenario just. It's easy to make calls on things in a metaphysical realm but sooner or later we have to link this to reality. You are very much a part of planet earth and that is why my question to you stands.

Is a parent who locks their child up in a basement and tortures them for a decade justified in their actions if they claim their motive was genuine love for that child?

[Janx]

god is not locking anybody in any basement against their will. god is REWARDING those people according to their will.

Oh I get it. The sinners are asking for it. They knew what they were going to get. They took the road to get there. God obliged.

Nice attempt at a derail forumwarrior. Even if one does commit to ending up in hell how does that justify infinite torture? You can do better.

I mean what else should a god do with unbelievers?

Whoa there! We are discussing hell as a form of punishment aren’t we? So I'll answer this questions:

I mean [how] else should a god [punish]..?

The most severe form of punishment we have in this society is death. It is not ideal but merciful. Certainly death is more humane and civilized than infinite torture.

That was easy. Next question?

[Question Everything]

I would agree that any discipline, school of thought or way of life that puts faith in the unfalsifiable before opinions based on empirical evidence, is bound to be flawed.

i would like to know, since most of you here are obviously men of science, what mathematical formula do you all use then to calculate what exactly "love" is, and who is or isnt "worthy" of it.

Of course there isn't one.

Well, not quite. Love is caused by brain activity, and by measuring blood flow to and electrical activity of areas of the brain we can measure it, at least in theory.

So, science can explain what love is and even measure it. What science can't do is say whether or not love is good or bad.