On Christianity, justice, and regret

[enki23]

Imagine, try to imagine, an infinitely long sanction for a finite crime. Imagining this perversely twisted kind of justice is one of the cornerstones of a number of religious doctrines, notably mainstream Christianity. Now there are those who, feeling guilty on behalf of their God, imagine the punishment to be small. They might content themselves by choosing to "believe" instead in an infinite dysphoric existence for the punished, endless marching days of interminable, if vague regret. The unrepentant left "without God" like a stubborn child left home to sulk while her friends go to Disneyland forever. Would that crime be less than that of a God who would burn a man for an eternity? Maybe it would, but I'm not sure how you would measure the difference.

I want to believe that I, even standing in the intolerable reality of such a monster, would defy him to my death. Doomed, then, I'd have no choice but to immediately and forever regret my decision, that I'd chosen what was right over what was best. Would a believer, maybe you in your never ending orgy of incorruptible bliss, find a moment to think about us, and regret choosing what was wrong?

[papau]

1. Why doesn't skinner rename this forum "hate god" or "atheist/agnostic"

[Deep13]

3. I think the OP asked a fair question. nt

[atreides1]

4. Why do the Faithful get annoyed so easily

I guess I will never understand why those who profess a deep and lasting belief in God, are always so easily annoyed by those who ask questions.

The poster never said they hated God, they just questioned why God does what he does, I know I do. And while I may never get an answer to my questions, maybe one day I will!

[kwassa]

11. Most faithful are not annoyed so easily, but it is really endless in here

We all know that this really an atheism vs. theism forum, dominated by a larger contingent of atheists. So what?

I just don't see any point in complaining about it, it is what it is, this is not the place for most theological discussion.

[Goblinmonger]

6. So you are saying

that atheists are not welcome in here?

[SidDithers]

9. ...

Sid

[Deep13]

2. If someone proved god exists it would only be half of the argument.

Someone would then have to prove that god is not a total bastard and was worthy of worship.

[Meshuga]

5. Are you sure you are not Satan and you are trying to seduce us to the dark side?

:-)

But seriously now, a God who uses entrapment as a way to pick people to join him in an afterlife does not deserve to be worshiped and is not worthy of anybody's time.

[rug]

7. "I . . . would defy him to my death."

If so, why do you think you would stop defying him after your death, assuming you survived.

The classic notion of hell is that people choose to be without God, hence hell. I don't know why anyone would change his or her mind simply because he or she died.

[enki23]

8. torture tends to do that to people

.

[rug]

10. The only torture in hell is in the wet dreams of fundamentalists.

[moggie]

12. The gospels seem to suggest otherwise

The mention of "fire" may be metaphorical, but, if so, it has to be a metaphor for an extremely undesirable state, surely? Where the new testament mentions hell, it certainly sounds like a place where nobody would want to be.

[rug]

14. That scriptural analysis is what separates fundamentalists from other Christians.

The heart of it is the difference one makes by using free will. To most it sounds very undesireable but to others the absence of God is the preferred choice.

[moggie]

16. How about the parable of the rich man and Lazarus?

Lazarus the beggar ends up in heaven, while the rich man, who was not a good man in life, ends up in hell. He calls out to Abraham and Lazarus for help, "for I am tormented in this flame". The flames may not be literal, but he certainly doesn't find his environment his "preferred choice".

What you call "scriptural analysis", others would call "spin": whitewashing the cruelty out of the bible to make it better fit our modern sense of what is acceptable. This is, on the whole, a good thing, but isn't it about time you just rewrote the bible to make this constant hand-waving unnecessary?

[rug]

19. As you say, it's a parable, to make a point, not literal truth.

Disregarding your comments about biblical cruelty and hand waving, do you think the rich man would actually do anything differently if he could? Remember the story about the rich man who asked Jesus what he could do to be saved? When told, "he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions." Mark 10:22.

It's a mistake to set up straw gods when talking about hell. There's really much wisdom in the actual teaching.

[enki23]

13. as i was saying in the post, any amount of sadness extended in infinite length...

would be incalculably, unimaginably horrible. "torture" is a word far insufficient. an eternity of hopelessness? of course i'd regret it. but that's not the point. my choice would have unimaginably negative consequences for me. yet, i'd still have been right to defy such an improbable monster. not the best thing, but certainly the *right* thing. and those living in eternal bliss? to grovel in front of such a being would be, perhaps, an understandable cowardice. but to actually *approve* of it? that's pure evil.

[rug]

15. Don't forget, any description of eternity includes the complete absence of time.

So any description of spending time in hell is meaningless. It's really a very existential question: Would one who spends life rejecting God, continue in death - the eternal present - to reject God? I don't see why not.

If you're an atheist it's as completely irrelevant as defying something that doesn't exist in the first place.

[enki23]

17. well, that's patently untrue

From Dictionary.com:

e·ter·ni·ty
–noun, plural -ties.
1. infinite time; duration without beginning or end.
2. eternal existence, esp. as contrasted with mortal life: the eternity of God.
3. Theology. the timeless state into which the soul passes at a person's death.
4. an endless or seemingly endless period of time: We had to wait an eternity for the check to arrive.
5. eternities, the truths or realities of life and thought that are regarded as timeless or eternal.

number one is that kind of eternity most "faithful" believe in, picture in their heads, hope for, and is exactly the sort of eternity believe in by the great majority of current and historical christians. as for the rest... "eternal present," "absence of time". not only are none of these things demonstrated to exist, but none of these things is demonstrated to even be *possible.* operationally define, if you will, what it would mean for a human to exist in the absence of time. what it would mean for thought to exist under those conditions. how anything whatsoever, in fact, could exist under those conditions. what, in fact, those conditions would actually mean, and how one could tell the difference between such a state and simple non-existence, even in theory. until someone can point to reasonable descriptions of these ideas that don't involve simply pasting words together to look profound, they aren't worth bothering with.

until then, i'll remain in the omnitemporal impresence of everythingness, where ALL is ONE (except when it is TWO), and laugh at them. along with my invisible pink unicorn.

finally, for the last bit. i'm not sure whether you're deliberately twisting what i said or are actually confused. in the almost inconceivably improbable event that i find myself face to face with a very real christian god, the kind of god believed in by the vast majority of very real christians, my disbelief, so i hope, would be replaced by defiance. clear enough? until then, it's not the deity i object to, it's the doctrine about that deity that shapes real people's real thoughts about really real reality.

[rug]

18. It's clear that you're prepared to defy something that doesn't exist.

Not only is it wasted bravado, it's stupid.

As to your more interesting point, definition 3 is exactly what I was talking about. And it is the definition of eternity that mainstream theology uses.

[JerseygirlCT]

20. Well, many of us awful Christians are actually universalists

and do not believe in hell. I believe we are all loved, every one of us, and every one of us who wishes to be with God will be.

Period.

[Dorian Gray]

21. I think that's nice

Jersey Girl... and I also think that's true. But, there are those who do not wish to be with God. That's a choice, and I do believe choosing to be away from God for eternity is what Hell is all about. (The absence of love and light, aka God.)

I don't believe that God tortures anyone. I don't believe that He chooses for anyone to go to Hell. And, I don't believe that Hell is a pit of fire. But, I do believe in Hell, though I also believe that going there is a choice that one makes for him/herself. And I don't think it's constant torture. It is an emptiness, though. Maybe that emptiness is painful as it's probably magnified if there is consciousness after death.

There is theology, both Anglican and Catholic, that support this POV, too. As for me, I wouldn't say that I'm quite an Universalist, but I do believe that if someone desires to be with God, he or she will be with God. And if someone doesn't want to be with Him, He won't force him or her to be there.

[JerseygirlCT]

22. Well, my thought on that is

that I'm not sure there's that one decision point, if you will.

Time means nothing to God, after all. I think God would welcome anyone, at any time, even after having been rejected. I think, in short, God leaves the light on for you.

(But I do admit that I certainly can't represent my thoughts as classical theology!)

[jody]

23. Why didn't the priests leave me ignorant?

Luke 12:47-48

And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not , neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

[struggle4progress]

24. Your attitude predates Christianity: it's a well-known old interpretation of the Prometheus myth

More recently, the Romantic poets rediscovered and popularized this interpretation of Prometheus, which thus became by the late Victorian era a commonly understood shorthand for rebellion-against-the-gods

The hope that humans will be judged is even older: the "weighing of souls" is depicted in Egyptian murals predating Greek civilization by thousands of years

You are, of course, free to understand a notion such as judgment however you choose and to like or dislike the idea as you think best. But perhaps you should consider the possibility that your interpretations of the notion do not necessarily coincide with the interpretations various other persons may have, and that your descriptions of other people's ideas may be mere stereotypes and not accurate reflections of what various other persons actually think

[Igel]

25. There are Xians that would agree.

They come in two 'flavors'.

There are those that believe that hell will be essentially uninhabited. I've always thought that they must believe that those who thirst after "righteousness" were rather in the position of a person thirsting after water while swimming in the middle of Lake Baikal.

There are those that believe that the "fire" of hell is quite literal, painful, and affects nobody longer than it would take for them to die in a fire. They are not forever burned, they are burned up forever. Then they can simply be forgotten, with time.

The dividing line seems to be whether or not a person believes there's some sort of immortal soul. (Christian) + (nothing immortal in you) --> transient 'hell', sort of like a trash dump for those who simply won't be carried over--hence the aptness of 'gehenna'.

(Christian) + (something immortal in you) leaves you with a sort of permanent hell--you can't be in heaven and you can't die. This is cruel, so other ways out from saying God is a sadistic bastard must be found.