mike_decock

That's what Christians fail to understand. Belief isn't a choice.

-Mike...

Mageth

They also don't understand the difference between "denying" god and lacking belief in god.

And how can I "choose to be separated" from something I lack belief in?

Mageth

Magus either missed or dodged some of the posts I made back on page 3 of this thread concerning the concept of eternity and the cruel, unjust notion of an eternity of "punishment" for each individual infraction, no matter how trivial, in a person's life. Add to that, a moral, kind, loving person whose "major" crime is not believing as Magus does is doled out the same punishment as the worst monster that's ever lived among humanity.

The only defense he has offered against the absurdity of believing in eternal suffering in hell as the only alternative to heaven while at the same time believing that god is omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent and created everything is that the unbeliever chooses to go to hell, in itself an absurdity.

Perhaps xians require that little bit of moral comfort to allow them to live with such a god, to allow them to sleep at night. And, thinking about it, I think that's right. I remember now that I was once "like" Magus, in that I believed in hell. I was taught from a young age that hell was a reality, and was to be feared as eternal punishment for leading a sinful life. As I got older, I found it hard to reconcile the concept of hell with the concept of a "loving" xian god/jesus. I tried the "you choose to go to hell" bit out for a while to try to quiet the cognitive dissonance that echoed in my mind from these two conflicting concepts. But it didn't work very well, and sounded so hollow that I had a hard time saying it, and when it did it made my ears ring.

"You choose to go to hell" may work for strangers, for the far-off, for Mageth et al through the Internet, but it's not much comfort when you apply it to your relatives and friends who aren't xians, but that you love and respect. I could not, cannot see the justice, the love, in a god that would subject or allow my brother, my neighbor, or my son to suffer eternally in hell, whether they "choose" to go there or not. By extension, that applies to all unbelievers, known or unknown.

That's the real issue to me - it's not important whether we choose to go to hell or whether god chooses to send us there, it's that god allows or even requires such eternal, horrible suffering as "punishment" for a finite existence. If god is the omnimax god xians claim him to be, he would not allow such suffering. If he allows such suffering, then he's not the god xians claim him to be - instead, he is a cruel, willful monster.

Radorth

Persecution complexes are not unique to Christians.

Very few Christian sites will ban you for stating what you believe. They just don't call gratuitous slander and cursing "free speech." I have seen atheists posting on Faith Forum (U.K.) for up to a year. They are reasonably courteous and are willing to live with the rules and leave because they get frustrated, I presume because they hope "the truth" will make converts here and there.

The ID forum is not run by Christians, yet you could never put down a Christian without being banned.

"Dose big meany Cwistians won't let us talk" is your paranoia talking.

Stop whining. Every site has different rules. You can live with them or not.

Rad

Radorth

So I take it if criminals lived forever, and continued to abuse people and commit injustices, you would not let them out at some point regardless. Is that correct?

Your comments oversimplify what the Bible says. There are many levels of hell apparently. It's true I disagree with many "fundy" Christians about purgatory and the possibility of after-death salvation. (Of course they missed the part about some servants receiving "many stripes" and "the Queen of the South" being the judge of unbelievers who saw Jesus themselves). Far as I can tell, "all manner of sin and blasphemy will be forgiven." It is those who keep sinning eternally who stay in hell eternally. There is nothing unjust about it. Letting them out is the only unjustice I can think of.

We've already seen a number of atheists admit they wouldn't care if it was all true, and God offered them salvation in exchange for repentance AFTER THEY WERE DEAD. They remind one of Lewis' example of the college professor who gets back on the bus to hell because everybody in heaven is treated equally. He can't have some special tenure, so he leaves.

"I'd rather burn in hell than serve in heaven" says it all I'm afraid. This statement exudes pride- the one thing that can keep us out of heaven eternally.

Being judged by your own unbending rules and judgements is not unfair at all.

Rad

Radorth

That's not my opinion. You are superimposing a simplistic belief system on me out of your own bias.

In the OT, the "lower parts" of hell (or Sheol) was not a happy place, so your assertion that it "had no goodness or badness" is simply false and we you are making what amounts to a semantical argument.

Huh? What was Jesus talking about then?

Oh wait. That was all made up in 325 AD and you're a Jesus-myther, right?

Rad

Mageth

Your comments oversimplify what the Bible says.

My comments are directed at a particular interpretation of the bible as illustrated here by Magus. As you illustrate, all sorts of spin can be put on the bible. Yours is perhaps an interesting one, and sounds a bit influenced by Roman Catholic interpretations.

Rad, suffering is suffering, and if god is indeed omnimax, he could choose not to allow anyone to suffer at all in an afterlife. Why isn't "death" enough for him? Why require an eternity of suffering for anyone?

I've seen a few xians on this site take that position (that, for the unbeliever, death is the end), and use the bible (quite convincingly) to argue that, for the unbeliever, the "punishment" is obliteration, annihilation. Indeed, I played the devil's advocate against one such poster (can't remember who), arguing for the "eternal suffering in hell" bit, and could not overcome his rather convincing argument that the bible teaches no such thing. I failed to find convincing scriptures to back up "my side" of the argument. I don't rememer any xian posters entering the fray on "my side", BTW.

Radorth

Heh. Well then, we can only marvel at what unsupported nonsense many atheists choose to believe.

Rad

Radorth

Or by the Bible which I can readily quote, unlike most of them.

Ironically, JW's think the "second death" means extinction altogether, but they don't have much else to go on. It's certainly possible people can choose extinction. I'm saying that people will not choose it anyway and will actually choose to live on in hell. The will to live is not going to go away in hell by definition. I believe "unquenchable fire" refers to their decrepit, incorrigible, self condemned spiritual state, not some physical flames burning them. In any case, I find Lewis' allegory scripturally sound and compelling.

Your "side" does not serve justice any more than the ascriptural beliefs of some fundies.

Rad

mike_decock

My apologies, after reading some of your other posts I see that you have somewhat of an unorthodox understanding of Hell that most Christians don't share. Like Mageth said, it appears your interpretation has some Roman Catholic influences.



It's not a mere "assertion" as I have provided evidence that Sheol is not a place of punishment after death. If you want to provide evidence that shows otherwise, we can discuss it.



In the instances where Hades is translated to hell (like in the parable of Lazarus), Jesus is using Hades (a Grecian concept) as an allegory for the spiritual state of the person, not as a destination of the afterlife.

The instances where Gehenna is used, it is either a symbol of moral corruption or as a symbol of destruction of the body and soul, again, not a destination of the afterlife.

I think that there is a historical Jesus underneath the mythical content of the New Testament. I don't approach the NT with a pre-conceived notion of what it means, I make my conclusions and modify my opinion as I evaluate the evidence. I'm not trying to force the evidence to support my opinion.

-Mike...