Non-believers to BURN IN HELL!

[JoeyKnothead]

Some'll say that if you reject Bible tales, you'll burn in Hell.

For debate:
Please offer some means to confirm the veracity of the claim.

If the claim can't be shown to be true and factual, is it uncivil, or perhaps more importantly morally right to present such an argument in order to encourage religious belief?

Why might a response of "Go to Hell" be inappropriate in the face of such a threat to one's well-being, while the threat itself may receive a pass?

[JoeyKnothead]

Where has it been established that God ever procreated? Where has it been established the Son in question is a product of this procreatin'? Where has it been established this Son in question ever uttered a single, solitary word?

If you can prove to me that you exist, I can prove to you that God had a Son who walked and talked on the Earth. (Warning; this is a similar proposition that my mother proposed to me when I was a little boy; she told me if I can take some salt and put it on a bird's tail, I can catch the bird. I actually believed her and asked for the salt shaker and went out and tried it. I found it to be true.) For myself, I believe God had a son based on the evidence of the universe and the Bible. That is sufficient for me, but then I am not as smart as some. For my own existence, I have neither evidence nor proof, but I have faith in the Bible's explanation; God made me because He loves me, therefore I do in fact exist. It's all a giant leap of faith.

P.S. I own some birds now, a dove and some finches, and have never tried catching them.

Why even bother challenging the claims of some of the Christians on this site?

I challenge claims and I get a story about how some dude has some birds and he put him some salt on 'em? And his mom was proud about it? Who's mom ain't proud if their young'n passes stool in a timely fashion?

You ever eat any bird that didn't need some salt on it? You ever fry you up a chicken and got there ready to eat it, and you're just bustin' to holler out, "But whatever you do, don't you put no salt on it"?

What kind of evil, what kind of demon would deny you salting you up some fried chicken?

It would seem that the one undeniable fact, the one thing we can all agree on about God is, he didn't pre-salt the birds!

I must admit that Moses Yoder has me here - 'cause I've yet to see a bird, salty or not, that can confirm the claims that some dude carried about in the desert, and that Moses Yoder, through his encyclopedic knowledge of the effect of salt on birds, knows what all that carryin' on about there out there in the desert was about.

[Clownboat]

Where has it been established that God ever procreated? Where has it been established the Son in question is a product of this procreatin'? Where has it been established this Son in question ever uttered a single, solitary word?

If you can prove to me that you exist, I can prove to you that God had a Son who walked and talked on the Earth. (Warning; this is a similar proposition that my mother proposed to me when I was a little boy; she told me if I can take some salt and put it on a bird's tail, I can catch the bird. I actually believed her and asked for the salt shaker and went out and tried it. I found it to be true.) For myself, I believe God had a son based on the evidence of the universe and the Bible. That is sufficient for me, but then I am not as smart as some. For my own existence, I have neither evidence nor proof, but I have faith in the Bible's explanation; God made me because He loves me, therefore I do in fact exist. It's all a giant leap of faith.

P.S. I own some birds now, a dove and some finches, and have never tried catching them.

Why do you think it is that your standard of evidence is so much lower, than mine for example? (I do not mean this as an insult).

I see the same universe as you, I have read and studied the same Bible as you, yet it is insufficient for me, and I was raised a believer?

Thoughts as to why that might be?

[Zetesis Apistia]

Some'll say that if you reject Bible tales, you'll burn in Hell.

For debate:
Please offer some means to confirm the veracity of the claim.

If the claim can't be shown to be true and factual, is it uncivil, or perhaps more importantly morally right to present such an argument in order to encourage religious belief?

Why might a response of "Go to Hell" be inappropriate in the face of such a threat to one's well-being, while the threat itself may receive a pass?

I don't believe we can prove there is a hell, because I believe God operates in dimensions that he does not give us access to. I do believe that we can know some things by experience that may well indicate a hell. We know there is such a thing as suffering of the mind and soul. We know that dire circumstances can cause a degree of mental anguish that can cause a person to want to die rather than live. Why would this type of suffering cause a man to put a gun to his head? A man may be in very good health, possess great wealth, and have a loving family, and still take his own life because of his inability to endure the mental anguish that may well be the offspring of soul suffering. Can you explain why a man would do such a thing. My friend if there is no hell where is all of this heat coming from? Personally I believe we are all standing on the outskirts of hell, and I think you and I feel the heat from those flames from time to time. IMO

[Flail]

It seems to me that the whole (popular, traditional) idea of Hell, independent of its cruelty, is totally useless. There are only two reasons to punish someone: (a) to prevent the person from engaging in the same bad behavior in the future, or (2) to prevent others from engaging in it, based on the fact that they witness the punishment. In the classic, popular, version, in which sinners are tortured forever, neither of these considerations applies. The first because the punished individual, once condemned, has no opportunity to change his or her behavior, and the second because no one ever witnesses the torture of another person in Hell in time to decide to avoid their own participation. That leaves only the threat. But since the threat is not convincing to many people (usually the very same people that God wants to punish), a huge number of individuals won't respond to it (i.e., they don't believe it is real).

So what's the point?

Not only is Hell an incoherent concept, but so is BibleGod Heaven in my opinion. Removing our natural inclinations to correct our behavior via reformed conduct, retribution, trial and error, guilt etc are diminished when offered a membership pass to eternal happiness. Altruism and charity are best when done anonymously and without expectation of reward or fear of punishment as motivators....as was taught by Jesus, a message which has seemingly been watered down by Christianity's insistence on the selfishness of exclusive 'membership with benefits' and 'worship for salvation' promises.

As a side note, I always wonder how many people don't get charity from those who think that 'praying for the needy' is enough.

[EduChris]

Some'll say that if you reject Bible tales, you'll burn in Hell...Please offer some means to confirm the veracity of the claim...

Obviously some people do say this very thing; if we need to prove that some people say this, all we have to do is look at the OP wherein Joey makes this statement.

...is it uncivil, or perhaps more importantly morally right to present such an argument in order to encourage religious belief?...

Around here, the claim is more often presented as a strawman argument put forward by non-theists for the purpose of bolstering their own egos in the way that strawman arguments always seem to bolster the egos of those who gravitate toward strawman arguments in the first place.

Why might a response of "Go to Hell" be inappropriate in the face of such a threat to one's well-being, while the threat itself may receive a pass?

Personally, I think strawman arguments are not often "given a pass"; most often they are just not given any serious consideration by thoughtful people of good will.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 45:

Obviously some people do say this very thing; if we need to prove that some people say this, all we have to do is look at the OP wherein Joey makes this statement.

Why of course, no Christian in history has ever uttered the phrase

Revelations 21:8
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Is EduChris not a "True(tm) Christian"?

Around here, the claim is more often presented as a strawman argument put forward by non-theists for the purpose of bolstering their own egos in the way that strawman arguments always seem to bolster the egos of those who gravitate toward strawman arguments in the first place.

Meet the strawman himself.

Does EduChris deny that Christians have said or implied that non-believers will burn in Hell?

I propose that EduChris prefers to build his own strawman in an attempt to divert attention from what the OP seeks to discuss; the not uncommon usage of a phrase by Christians. It's openly and obviously an effort to avoid addressing the challenge laid out in the OP.

Why might'n this be? Might it be that claims of Hell can not be supported? Could it be that the very notion of Hell is merely a cudgel used by some Christians in order to strike fear into others?

Personally, I think strawman arguments are not often "given a pass"; most often they are just not given any serious consideration by thoughtful people of good will.

Then surely you'll understand why I don't give your strawman any serious consideration.

If you seek to say I do not offer good will in challenging claims, I would contend it's the claim I've challenged that doesn't offer any good will.


I contend that here's a perfect example of what it means to "debate" some Christians. Shift the conversation, shift the debate, shift, shift, shift. Shift until the OP is no longer relevant.

[Flail]

From Post 45:

Obviously some people do say this very thing; if we need to prove that some people say this, all we have to do is look at the OP wherein Joey makes this statement.

Why of course, no Christian in history has ever uttered the phrase

Revelations 21:8
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

I have had Christian TV (apparently the most monied and representative form of indoctrinating those of the Christian faith since being broadcast nationally with expensive air time) turned on for thirty minutes and have heard the above type of standard Christian mantra no less than three times already.

[EduChris]

...Does EduChris deny that Christians have said or implied that non-believers will burn in Hell?...

When you present a caricature of Christian theology, as it is bandied about in popular discourse among the uneducated of Christianity and non-Christianity alike, as though it had anything to do with the views of educated Christians, then you are presenting a strawman argument.

If you want to understand the views of educated Christians, there are plenty of good sources for information (and TV evangelists are not good sources, if what you're looking for is the views of educated, scholarly, credentialed Christians):

Saved from Sacrifice: A Theology of the Cross

The Mosaic of Christian Belief: Twenty Centuries of Unity & Diversity

Faith Seeking Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Theology

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 43:

I don't believe we can prove there is a hell, because I believe God operates in dimensions that he does not give us access to.

So, we can't know there's a Hell, but we can know God operates in dimensions "he does not give us access to". It would seem the one thing God doesn't give us access to is any way of confirming he even exists.

I do believe that we can know some things by experience that may well indicate a hell. We know there is such a thing as suffering of the mind and soul.

Where has Zetesis Apistia shown there's a soul to be a-sufferin'?

We know that dire circumstances can cause a degree of mental anguish that can cause a person to want to die rather than live. Why would this type of suffering cause a man to put a gun to his head? A man may be in very good health, possess great wealth, and have a loving family, and still take his own life because of his inability to endure the mental anguish that may well be the offspring of soul suffering. Can you explain why a man would do such a thing.

There's quite a bit of literature to indicate that chemical imbalances play a large roll in mental illness.

My friend if there is no hell where is all of this heat coming from?

The sun?

Personally I believe we are all standing on the outskirts of hell, and I think you and I feel the heat from those flames from time to time. IMO

So Hell is located in the sun?

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 48:

...Does EduChris deny that Christians have said or implied that non-believers will burn in Hell?...

When you present a caricature of Christian theology, as it is bandied about in popular discourse among the uneducated of Christianity and non-Christianity alike, as though it had anything to do with the views of educated Christians, then you are presenting a strawman argument.

Revelations 21:8
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Does EduChris deny the above passage is in the Bible?

If you want to understand the views of educated Christians, there are plenty of good sources for information (and TV evangelists are not good sources, if what you're looking for is the views of educated, scholarly, credentialed Christians):
>links<

Are the only "educated Christians" those who hold EduChris' beliefs?