Absurdity Of Hell

[nailit]

Some religions ( and some R&S posters) postulate that hell is a just and final destination for unbelievers.
Apart from the obvious (eternal punishment for finite sins is unjust) can anyone conceive of a more sick doctrine in religion than that unbelievers will be tortured beyond belief...for eternity...for simply believing something different?

All religions have their own ideas of hell but even the Christians that I know have a hard time with this and struggle to cope with it.
(I actually know one Christian who lost his son to drug OD and cracked up after, with the thought that his son was burning in hell)
This idea that people will be tortured/burned for all eternity for the sin of not believing in the right God is one sick doctrine.

Anyone comfortable with the idea of eternal torture?

[Old_Geezer]

As a method of getting folk to obey the rules it goes too far. Common sense tells you how unlikely it is, but there only needs to be a nagging doubt whether it may be so...

[Theland]

The Bible teaches, quite literally, that God is a gentleman, and does not force His way into your life, or impose upon you.
He invites you to know Him, nothing forced.
If you reject Him, then He will reject you.
That is hell.

[Old_Geezer]

If "he" made folk, lack of force doesn't come into it, "he's " responsible, he opts to create the consequences. Clearly absolving "him" is just special pleading, trying to excuse "him" from a situation "he" is supposed to have caused as a possibility. Most likely explanation is that it's all nonsense. Just stated as if it were so to control the tribe.

[Theland]

OG - Then don't believe and don't lose any sleep.

[gness]

Theland...no gentleman would allow others to do his dirty work for him.....in his name....if he existed he'd put a stop to the evils of the Catholic Church.....x

[andy-hughes]

No-one on here needs me to tell them that religion on earth is based on power, and the way to apply power is through fear.

A very simple and basic way to get people to sign up to your particular version of religion is to frighten them with supposed consequences if they don't.

No-one ever got a religion off the ground by not understanding this basic premise of human psychology.

Of course, you may conclude that frightening people into believing what you want is simply cruel and inhumane … and you'd be right, it is.

[Theland]

The RC church is a cult, based on a corrupted Bible AND tradition.
There is always an AND in a cult.

[andy-hughes]

Theland - // The RC church is a cult, based on a corrupted Bible AND tradition.
There is always an AND in a cult. //

How are you defining a 'corrupted bible'?

[Theland]

Compare the 10 commandments in the catholic vulgate bible and the KJV.

[andy-hughes]

Theland - Obviously I can't be bothered to do that.

The point is, for any version of something to be 'corrupt', it means that someone has made the decision that one version is the correct one, and therefore any others are corrupt.

So who decides which the 'correct' version is - and what is their qualification for doing so?

[Old_Geezer]

The issue isn't about what a particular individual believes, in the main, no matter how the OP is phrased; it's about what actually is the case, and thus what each of us should believe.

[Theland]

Nailit - It always intrigues me why you consistently demonstrate an obsession with this religious itch that never gets satisfactorily scratched.
Why bother tormenting yourself?

[andy-hughes]

Theland - // Nailit - It always intrigues me why you consistently demonstrate an obsession with this religious itch that never gets satisfactorily scratched.
Why bother tormenting yourself? //

Mr Pot, have you met Mr Kettle?

[Theland]

The original Hebrew is correct.
Every synagogue has a copy.

[Theland]

OG - you are not coerced into any belief. Only invited.

[andy-hughes]

Theland - // The original Hebrew is correct. //

Says who?

[Theland]

God.

[Theland]

Andy - Pot & Kettle?
Don't think so.
I have my questions answered to my satisfaction, whereas Nailit seems to always be searching, and finding nothing, lambasts the likes of me for my statement of faith.

[Old_Geezer]

If one is made to be the person one is then coercion is irrelevant.

If I write a basic programme
10 PRINT "Hello World!"
I don't need to coerce the computer to print, "Hello World" because it's what I've already created it to do.

Clearly there's something wrong with the idea that we then send the PC to everlasting hell for doing what it does.

[Theland]

OG - with respect, you know more and have a higher moral standard than the author of morality?