• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

If hell exists, would you realize you were there

Peter Grimm said:
God's law is not arbitrary, and we have the free will to be able to follow it and do good.
Click to expand...

Yes it is. There are plenty of religions that each have their own deity (or deities) so it is arbitrary.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
There is no evidence hell exists, so throw the idea out and this thread is revealed to be what it really is - useless.
Click to expand...

And yet, here you are?

zgoldsmith23 said:
So "god" is a malevolent, egotistical dictator. Got it.
Click to expand...

Illogical. Not sure where you get this idea, except that you clearly harbor quite a bit of anger toward Christianity.
 
Peter Grimm said:
God's law is not arbitrary, and we have the free will to be able to follow it and do good.
Click to expand...

Mmmm, yes. But none of this counters anything I said. He gave us "free will", made a bunch of rules he doesn't nominally enforce, knows that he set the system specifically against human nature (as he made human nature), waits till we die, and then BAM! Off to eternal damnation. It is nothing close to being analogous to a parent disciplining a child.
 
Actually, it fully refutes what you said. You claimed that God's law is arbitrary, that He sets us up to fail, and so to be punished for breaking God's law would be unjust.

God's law is not arbitrary because good and evil are simple concepts any human being can grasp intuitively. You have the free will to do either good or evil at all times. If you choose to do evil, you're not worthy of God's presence.

Ikari said:
Mmmm, yes. But none of this counters anything I said. He gave us "free will", made a bunch of rules he doesn't nominally enforce, knows that he set the system specifically against human nature (as he made human nature), waits till we die, and then BAM! Off to eternal damnation. It is nothing close to being analogous to a parent disciplining a child.
Click to expand...
 
Peter Grimm said:
Actually, it fully refutes what you said. You claimed that God's law is arbitrary, that He sets us up to fail, and so to be punished for it would be unjust.

God's law is not arbitrary because good and evil are simple concepts any human being can grasp intuitively. You have the free will to do either good or evil at all times. If you choose to do evil, you're not worthy of God's presence.
Click to expand...

If we can grasp these concepts intuitively, there is no need for a god to tell us of them nor punish us for them.

Nothing you said refutes anything. It's nothing more than deflection as you cannot actually address the meat of the argument.
 
How is what I said "deflection?" What point have you made that I haven't directly addressed?

Ikari said:
If we can grasp these concepts intuitively, there is no need for a god to tell us of them nor punish us for them.

Nothing you said refutes anything. It's nothing more than deflection as you cannot actually address the meat of the argument.
Click to expand...
 
Peter Grimm said:
How is what I said "deflection?" What point have you made that I haven't directly addressed?
Click to expand...

You're trying to make analogy between a parent, who has constant input into their child, and god, who set a bunch of rules and turned its back on us. The analogy doesn't work.
 
Don't get too hung up on the analogy. The point was just that it's possible to punish someone without being a sadist.

Ikari said:
You're trying to make analogy between a parent, who has constant input into their child, and god, who set a bunch of rules and turned its back on us. The analogy doesn't work.
Click to expand...
 
Peter Grimm said:
Don't get too hung up on the analogy. The point was just that it's possible to punish someone without being a sadist.
Click to expand...

Yes, but it is also possible to punish someone while being a sadist, so it doesn't really go anywhere into proving anything.
 
Right, but zGoldsmith made the assertion that God was a sadist because he punishes people. The point was to show how illogical that line of thinking is.

Ikari said:
Yes, but it is also possible to punish someone while being a sadist, so it doesn't really go anywhere into proving anything.
Click to expand...
 
Peter Grimm said:
Right, but zGoldsmith made the assertion that God was a sadist because he punishes people. The point was to show how illogical that line of thinking is.
Click to expand...

It's not exactly illogical if you can demonstrate long standing tendencies to specifically set a situation for failure in order to punish those who fail.
 
Green Balls said:
My fiance and I just saw a video about 1st, 2nd and 3rd degree burns and then it jumps into the existence of hell and how there will be burned and charred skin.

I don't believe in souls, heaven, or hell. I can understand the concept of a soul. To my understanding, a soul is energy. It lacks the physical limitations we have as humans, and that also means it cannot think or feel (since thinking and feeling are properties of a physical body). So if hell were a real place, you wouldn't feel the burning fire. You would not have any flesh to burn. And you probably wouldn't care if you were there since you can't think.

I included the video to get your thoughts on this.

Click to expand...


I don't believe in hell, but if there is one, my body will be rotting here on earth, and will be unable to feel the searing heat of an unforgiving, sadistic creator.
 
It's illogical because it presumes that we know God's motives for allowing Hell.

Ikari said:
It's not exactly illogical if you can demonstrate long standing tendencies to specifically set a situation for failure in order to punish those who fail.
Click to expand...
 
Peter Grimm said:
And yet, here you are?
Click to expand...

I had hope ... but not.

Illogical. Not sure where you get this idea, except that you clearly harbor quite a bit of anger toward Christianity.
Click to expand...

Not anger and it's not targeted towards specifically at Christianity. It is more disappointment and its targeted at everything from Christianity to Scientology - they're all a crock in my opinion.

Peter Grimm said:
Are good and evil really that unclear to you?
Click to expand...

Are you claiming good and evil are objective?

Peter Grimm said:
Right, but zGoldsmith made the assertion that God was a sadist because he punishes people. The point was to show how illogical that line of thinking is.
Click to expand...

Not a sadist because he punishes people, a sadist because he punishes people yet could stop it.

Peter Grimm said:
It's illogical because it presumes that we know God's motives for allowing Hell.
Click to expand...

If you are claiming it's illogical because we can't know, then your position is just as illogical as mine. You just called yourself illogical (as did I).
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Not anger and it's not targeted towards specifically at Christianity. It is more disappointment and its targeted at everything from Christianity to Scientology - they're all a crock in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I agree with your point of view. I never believed in religions or gods of any type. I had a fascination with Egypt around 6 years ago and started reading everything I could get my hands on. I stumbled across "The Egyptian Book of the Dead and The Mysteries of Amenta (1907)" by Gerald Massey. That was the first time I was exposed to the similarities between horus and jesus christ. I admit, Massey is a bit of a quack, but he was onto something. I'll stop before I derail the topic of this thread.
 
Supposing Hell, it's not physical pain, but spiritual pain eternal. And you would realize, that's the point.
 
Hell is an interesting topic, because it only appears as an actual place of torment for man in the New Testament. In the Old Testament, there is an unseen realm of the dead that both the righteous, and unrighteous enter upon death. In most of the verses concerning Sheol, it's either a bland, grey existence, or just death. The big sleep. Once you die, that's it, you're dead. It varies with the authors, but that's usually all it is. Then you flip over to the New Testament, and bam, nothing but eternal torment, flames, and gnashing teeth.

It's because of this vast inconsistency that I believed hell to be a fabrication when I was a believer. You get your rewards and punishments in life, because death is only an end.
 
Peter Grimm said:
It's illogical because it presumes that we know God's motives for allowing Hell.
Click to expand...

No, it analyzes a system and identifies long standing dynamics and tendencies of the system. It's not my fault if those long standing dynamics are god being an ass. Everything that happens happens by his will, yes? Ergo, he gets off on throwing people into hell. He knew full well what would happen and did it anyway, so at the very least it is extreme disinterest. Doesn't care.
 
Green Balls said:
My fiance and I just saw a video about 1st, 2nd and 3rd degree burns and then it jumps into the existence of hell and how there will be burned and charred skin.

I don't believe in souls, heaven, or hell. I can understand the concept of a soul. To my understanding, a soul is energy. It lacks the physical limitations we have as humans, and that also means it cannot think or feel (since thinking and feeling are properties of a physical body). So if hell were a real place, you wouldn't feel the burning fire. You would not have any flesh to burn. And you probably wouldn't care if you were there since you can't think.

I included the video to get your thoughts on this.

Click to expand...


I am a christian, and I think this atheistic(?) post is correct. Our thinking and feelings are a result of our physical bodies, and they must die with our physical bodies.

Hell is about burning the soul, a different set of senses ... emotions may be a part of that. And like physical fire disassembles physical structures, the burning of souls is a disassembly of souls.

It is highly possible, that half of the souls that there are become infeasible after life in physical bodies, and they simply need to be liquidated. It is also possible that souls themselves ask for such liquidation when they review their physical lives after it ends. It is also possible that they decide against their liquidation when everything else calls for it ... now that may very well be like sitting in the hot seat.
 
ab9924 said:
I am a christian, and I think this atheistic(?) post is correct. Our thinking and feelings are a result of our physical bodies, and they must die with our physical bodies.

Hell is about burning the soul, a different set of senses ... emotions may be a part of that. And like physical fire disassembles physical structures, the burning of souls is a disassembly of souls.

It is highly possible, that half of the souls that there are become infeasible after life in physical bodies, and they simply need to be liquidated. It is also possible that souls themselves ask for such liquidation when they review their physical lives after it ends. It is also possible that they decide against their liquidation when everything else calls for it ... now that may very well be like sitting in the hot seat.
Click to expand...

If you throw reincarnation into the mix, perhaps hell is being trapped as a soul without being allowed to inhabit a physical body again. Forever stuck in limbo.
 
Green Balls said:
If you throw reincarnation into the mix, perhaps hell is being trapped as a soul without being allowed to inhabit a physical body again. Forever stuck in limbo.
Click to expand...

This is VERY interesting. I think you are right. I've never thought of this this way. I wanted to open a thread some time ago to poll members how much work it took them to get themselves born. Maybe I should, and then we can probably get some stories what tried to hold them back. Maybe that would shed a closer light to this, ... I am still thinking that that limbo is actually transitionary to the elimination of their souls by forced breakdown.
 
ab9924 said:
This is VERY interesting. I think you are right. I've never thought of this this way. I wanted to open a thread some time ago to poll members how much work it took them to get themselves born. Maybe I should, and then we can probably get some stories what tried to hold them back. Maybe that would shed a closer light to this, ... I am still thinking that that limbo is actually transitionary to the elimination of their souls by forced breakdown.
Click to expand...

I didn't have a choice in my birth. When my mother's cervix was dilated and I was expelled from her, I was born - whether I liked it or not.
 
Green Balls said:
My fiance and I just saw a video about 1st, 2nd and 3rd degree burns and then it jumps into the existence of hell and how there will be burned and charred skin.
Click to expand...

Hell is the state of being alienated, by choice, from God. It is not literal burning, that is just a metaphor for the pain one feels turning one's back on God. Being in hell is always a choice, it seem like it would be impossible not to realize it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom