Eternal Hell

[amortalman]

I have two questions primarily for Christians.

1) If your brand of religion teaches that unbelievers will be judged by God and cast into Hell and the Lake of Fire for eternity to suffer there with no possibility of death or escape, is this action by God a just punishment, and why?

2) The second question is purely hypothetical and reaches way out there. If your God gave you permission to do as you please concerning eternal Hell, to keep it, or to abolish it in favor of, say, annihilation, would you keep it or do away with it?

NOTE: In regards to question number one I'm thinking about the story told by Jesus of the rich man and Lazarus found in Luke chapter 16. The Lake of Fire is mentioned in Revelation 20:10-15 and 21:8.

To me, an eternity of suffering in Hell defies logic and any sense of compassion what-so-ever. During my years as a Christian in an evangelical church, I've heard many preachers preface a sermon on Hell by saying they don't like to talk about it and don't like the concept of it but they must preach it because that's what the Bible teaches. I was once a part of a Biblical teaching program for children 2nd through 6th grade. I can only imagine the nightmares some of them had after being told that without Jesus they would go to Hell forever. Someone might argue that it's better that than to go to Hell. But does the fear tactic really work, and if it does, is that the best way, to scare the hell out of them?

In my understanding of the Bible, and what is being taught to millions of people in evangelical churches around the world, there are two kinds of people who will be cast into Hell. Those who have never heard the gospel and those how have rejected the gospel after having heard it. According to that teaching, there are countless millions of poor souls being tormented in Hell right now because they never had an opportunity to hear about Christ. Furthermore, there are hundreds if not thousands that are dying every day and going to Hell for lack of an opportunity to decide. Is that just?

Finally, I'm hopeful that the second question will cut to the Christians heart concerning the doctrine of Hell and reveal the insanity of it. To me, someone who would keep Hell if given the chance to abolish it is a Sadist of the worse kind. But then again, if a Christian says that he would do away with Hell is he demonstrating that he is more merciful than God?

What say you?

[Claire Evans]

[Replying to post 176 by Claire Evans]


"Do you agree with me that without Satan, we could never be tempted to do evil?
Consider that God could not have have prevented evil from coming into this world even though He foresaw it. He did not have that ability. "

What is called satan did not exist untill Eve succumbed to temtation.

Call it ability or whatever God can not break his own divine law/order.

That story is not real. There was no Satan as a snake tempting Adam and Eve. It's a Sumerian story. You didn't answer my question. Can anyone be tempted to do evil if evil never existed?

[Monta]

[Replying to post 181 by Claire Evans]


"That story is not real. There was no Satan as a snake tempting Adam and Eve. It's a Sumerian story. You didn't answer my question. Can anyone be tempted to do evil if evil never existed?"

Are yu saying there was no temptation?

Can anyone be tempted if evil never existed? I have no idea whether it did or not. We've been given a snippet of creation while the universe is endless. I do not have a divine mind to understand why it was said in such a fashion but I do accept that God would not have created a sinful man and for man to be perfect he'd have to have at his disposal all the possibilites where he could fall as well. I do not have a problem with Genesis story and do not take it all literaly but figuratively as well.

[Claire Evans]

[Replying to post 181 by Claire Evans]


"That story is not real. There was no Satan as a snake tempting Adam and Eve. It's a Sumerian story. You didn't answer my question. Can anyone be tempted to do evil if evil never existed?"

Are you saying there was no temptation?

Can anyone be tempted if evil never existed? I have no idea whether it did or not. We've been given a snippet of creation while the universe is endless. I do not have a divine mind to understand why it was said in such a fashion but I do accept that God would not have created a sinful man and for man to be perfect he'd have to have at his disposal all the possibilites where he could fall as well. I do not have a problem with Genesis story and do not take it all literaly but figuratively as well.

Come on! How could one be tempted to do evil if evil doesn't exist? It's impossible! Doesn't evil deed start off with an evil thought?

Why should God create possibilities where we could fall? That's setting us up for failure! A perfect being cannot eventually sin. That's like saying God has the possibility of sinning Himself.

Adamu is the name in Sumerian mythology for the first man, created by Enki, the creator god and inventor of civilization."

More:

http://www.mega.nu/ampp/eden/roots.html


"The Book of Genesis tale of Adam and Eve is nowadays regarded as a symbolic myth, but several clues suggest that it drew upon an earlier account of a real event. The first clue is that God himself is described as one of the walking talking gods. The second clue is the presence of the Serpent " a well-known symbol for the ancient Egyptian gods, and particularly Enki himself, the genetic scientist who had created man. It is no coincidence that the modern symbol of medicine is a serpent entwined around a staff.

The third clue lies in the outcome of the Serpents intervention. Adam and Eves embarrassment at being naked, along with Biblical references to the acquisition of knowledge, clearly suggest that they were the first human pair to become sexually aware. The Old Testament suggests that this change was caused by the consumption of a fruit. This is a significant detail because, according to the scenario outlined so far, man was created by the gods as a hybrid creature, and hybrids are nearly always born sterile. The tale of sexual knowledge being granted in the Garden of Eden therefore carries a distinct ring of truth.

How exactly did a fruit bestow sexual knowledge on Adam and Eve? As mentioned earlier, the Serpent god was Enki, the genetic scientist of the gods, and the fruit with which he tempted Eve would thus seem to symbolise a deliberate genetic intervention by him. However, in order to confirm our suspicions, we must first address the questions of motive and opportunity, and we must produce a solid scientific hypothesis on how such a genetic change could have been introduced. The background provided so far provides all but one of the clues we need to reconstruct the event. The missing piece which solves the puzzle is the mysterious Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden.



Why the sudden change of mind? Why was it that this god, identified earlier as Enlil, originally wanted man to eat the fruit and live forever, but then decided to withdraw it from Adam and Eve? Why did it suddenly become necessary for him to expel them and safeguard the Tree of Life with a flaming sword? The answer is amazingly simple. Originally mankind was designed as a slave workforce which could be easily controlled, and his sterility was an essential control mechanism. However, with the granting of sexual knowledge to Adam and Eve, man acquired the means to independent reproduction. The longevity offered by the Tree of Life thus changed from an asset to a liability, creating a serious risk of an out-of-control population explosion."

http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/Articles ... 0Eden.html

The story of the Hebrew Adam and Eve story was clearly written by Kabbalists, which is Satanic. The clue is the Tree of Life in Genesis.

"According to adherents of Kabbalah, the origin of Kabbalah begins with the Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible). According to Midrash, God created the universe with "Ten utterances" or "Ten qualities." When read by later generations of Kabbalists, the Torah's description of the creation in the Book of Genesis reveals mysteries about the godhead itself, the true nature of Adam and Eve, the Garden of Eden, the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life, as well as the interaction of these supernal entities with the Serpent which leads to disaster when they eat the forbidden fruit, as recorded in Genesis 2."

http://www.crystalinks.com/kabbalah.html

http://www.jesusisprecious.org/false_re ... c_cult.htm

So don't take it figuratively even.

[amortalman]

[Replying to myth-one.com]

If my understanding of the Bible comes from what I was taught, from where does your understanding come? Teaching is essential to understanding. Why else do we have schools?
It is only your opinion, based on what you've come to understand, that my former views are not Biblical. I happen to think they were Biblical in the sense that they are supported by the Bible. It's just that the Bible does not teach the truth. Have you ever considered that YOU might be wrong? That's the problem with religion. Each religion and each denomination of a religion are blind to their own insanity. They can't all be right.

[amortalman]

[Replying to post 59 by onewithhim]

"People through the ages have believed in a literal FIRE because the clergy has told them it is real. The common person couldn't even read the Bible for a long time until it was made available through the printing press, around 1455, and then through the efforts of men like Tyndale who were burned at the stake for translating the Bible. Why did the clergy teach such a thing? How about to keep people under their control through fear?"

You are correct that "in times past...(they were told what to believe)" But since the Reformation, many intelligent, sincere, men and women have studied the scriptures on their own and have come to the conclusion that the Bible does teach that everlasting fire awaits those who reject Christ. My question was directed to those who still believe in eternal punishment. Do you think you have a handle on the truth? So does the followers of thousands of other religions. I believe it's arrogant to claim that our faith is the only true faith. Either only one is right or they're all wrong. I think they're all wrong.

I've been reading through these varied comments and everyone in so adamant - yes, even me, as to what they believe. When I step back and look at it that way, its pure insanity.

[Monta]

[Replying to amortalman]

"My question was directed to those who still believe in eternal punishment. Do you think you have a handle on the truth? So does the followers of thousands of other religions. I believe it's arrogant to claim that our faith is the only true faith. Either only one is right or they're all wrong. I think they're all wrong. "

All depends what you mean by punishment; mine would be to be in a place of loud music but other peple would love it.

The only faith we can talk about is our own. I can't say yours is right because i do not know it.
Yes they can be all wrong but it no excuise for not getting the right one for ourselves.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 186 by Monta]


[center]

Who wants to be wrong?[/center]

Yes they can be all wrong but it no excuise for not getting the right one for ourselves.

____________

Question:

• 
  
  How do we figure that out?
  
  

____________

[Tetragrammaton]

[Replying to post 186 by Monta]


[center]

Who wants to be wrong?[/center]

Yes they can be all wrong but it no excuise for not getting the right one for ourselves.

____________

Question:

• 
  
  How do we figure that out?
  
  

____________

The right one is the one you were born into of course.

If reason was not the means you got the belief in the first place, you have no way of judging which belief is right, since faith is just believing without doubting/questioning.

[Monta]

[Replying to post 188 by Tetragrammaton]

"The right one is the one you were born into of course. Smile

If reason was not the means you got the belief in the first place, you have no way of judging which belief is right, since faith is just believing without doubting/questioning."

Not many in Christian world remain in the faith they were born into.

Once your faith is confirmed you believe what else.
Questioning as to ivestigating and updating never stops

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 188 by Tetragrammaton]





[center]Let's reason this out[/center]

____________

Question:

• 
  
  How do we figure that out?
  
  

____________

The right one is the one you were born into of course.

That's the elephant in the room, isn't it?

I think there might be at least some exceptions to that rule, though.
Some people INSIST that they were "atheists" before they converted.

I suppose there must come a time when we decide to accept some kind of religious teaching or indoctrination or ... not. And then, I think there must be many instances when a believer must be choosing to keep the faith. If they rely on their indoctrination or religious teaching to decide... well, the conclusion is rather predictable, isn't it?

If reason was not the means you got the belief in the first place, you have no way of judging which belief is right, since faith is just believing without doubting/questioning.

I agree to an extent. We may have been trained to think poorly, but we can all learn how to think well later. Case in point: Me.

I was indoctrinated as a child.. for a very long time. It might not have been reason that GOT me my religion, but it sure was reason that got me OUT.

I heard this many times from other atheists, it's reason that really matters.
However, one first has to want to BE reasonable. Not everyone cares to be reasonable.
I mostly debate Christians in here who don't seem to care about their reasoning.

It's my opinion that if they DID.... it might damage their faith.
I know it did mine.