Why I Find the Notion of Hell Absurd
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-11-2014, 08:59 AM
Why I Find the Notion of Hell Absurd
Another great article by Neil:

Why I Find The Notion Of Hell Absurd
Why I Find the Notion of Hell Absurd
by Neil Carter

In Why I Am an Anti-Fundamentalist, I mentioned that I cannot condone any form of theism which preaches the concept of Hell. That post was long enough already, so I moved my elaboration of that point to here. To someone like me, the notion of Hell is absurd for at least three reasons:

a.) There’s a lot of fuzzy ambiguous thinking about how this concept would even work. Presumably the torture of this “place” is supposed to involve burning with fire, and yet that means a physical body would need to be both raised from the dead (ew!) and able to be burned perpetually. Is this body still physical? Does it have nerve endings? And do the nerve endings just keep regenerating so you can feel the fire forever and ever? This reminds me of the moment in Sixth Sense when I realized that all the ghosts have on ghost clothes and one guy even had a ghost bike helmet and was riding a ghost bike. What exactly are those things made of? And are they made in ghost factories somewhere? It makes for great cinema, but get real!

b.) There is no redemptive purpose for such a place. Most effective punishment is educational or rehabilitative. When you are done with your punishment you’re supposed to have learned something. But there is nothing to learn from eternal conscious torment, which doesn’t even begin until the last moment is past in which you could do anything about the discovery that such a place isn’t just made up. What kind of sick monster would allow for such a place? For billions of people? An omnipotent god, no matter how committed to the notion of “free will” (a concept the writers of the Bible seemed entirely unconcerned about), is ultimately responsible for the existence of such a place. Christian theology teaches that people can only exist if God keeps such in existence through an ongoing creative act. That means that the only way one could continue to exist for all eternity–in any state whatsoever–would be through a willful act of said deity. Again, what a horrific thought.

c.) Finally, it makes no sense that one man could pay for the sins of millions (or billions) for twelve hours one Friday while it will take all eternity for one individual to pay for his own sins alone. It’s absurd when you think about it. A fourteen year old kid has to burn for all eternity because he looked a little too long at that girl on the other side of the room, and studied her form a little too intensely. For that he deserves eternal conscious torment. Meanwhile one guy sufficiently paid for the sins of billions over a twelve hour period on a Friday. I’m sorry, this whole thing just doesn’t make sense at all.



I find it a great irony that some would bristle at my calling the notion of eternal torment “unjust,” particularly if they have been taught to react to this by telling me I can’t call anything unjust if I am a naturalist. In other words, if there’s no external moral code imposed on us by a deity, then how can I judge anything as unjust, particularly the actions of said deity? That sounds clever for a few moments (it’s actually an old question, Euthyphro’s dilemma), until you realize that what you’re left with is a deity who has no discernible morals at all, only apparently arbitrary actions which, we are told, are not under any obligation to adhere to any sense of logic that we can discern as poor, limited, finite humans. Incidentally, do you see how all three of these previous points work together? How convenient. And how unimpeachable this makes this particular concept of a deity.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
14-11-2014, 09:16 AM
RE: Why I Find the Notion of Hell Absurd
I find point (b) to be really revealing of how the writers of the bible were clearly trying to control people.

Since hell can have no redemptive purpose, it's all predicated on what you believe in this life, in this world.

It's not about what you do in the next life, the important part is to obey here and now. The important part is to control people here and now!

I think the writers of the bible revealed their true intent with how they constructed the mythological hell and the rules for avoiding it.

If you could simply say "oops, my bad!" after you die, then there's no reason to do anything that the myth makers tell you to do. You must do what they say IN THIS LIFE or suffer eternal and irreversible punishment in the next life.

Perhaps they were true believers, but it seems awfully strange how they set up a non-redemptive afterlife as punishment for obedience and belief in this life. It looks to be a deliberate control mechanism injected into the myth. This is not surprising as Paul might have had some interest in neutering the rebellious mystery religions that were so abundant at that time that caused problems for the Roman Empire.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 09:44 AM
RE: Why I Find the Notion of Hell Absurd
Yea... Consider how come ghosts aren't nude? I think if I were a ghost I'd be perfectly happy to show off my bits & pieces. Why aren't there sightings if ghost orgies in Italy? They had tons of them in Roman times. And what about ghosts from the 1970s... most of the people who went to Studio 54 are dead, how come there aren't piles of ghosts fucking all over the place?! What with all the time at their disposal, you'd think they'd be fucking on every street corner in Manhattan!

Sorry; a bit off topic, just thinking out loud. Drinking Beverage

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like kim's post
14-11-2014, 09:58 AM
RE: Why I Find the Notion of Hell Absurd
Don't discount ghost nerves.

It's these ideas of eternal punishment that makes me think as long as religious/christian doctrine is beloved by those with power in rehabilitation and imprisonment systems, that it will never get to a stable point of helpfulness.

But anyway, the concept of hell in that form isn't in the bible at all. There is basically next to nothing in it describing hell. I think even parts of the dreamtrip ideas that Revelation calls up and it's all some bizarre concept made up to cause fear by random monks over generations.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2014, 02:00 PM
RE: Why I Find the Notion of Hell Absurd
(14-11-2014 08:59 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  Another great article by Neil:

Why I Find The Notion Of Hell Absurd
Why I Find the Notion of Hell Absurd
by Neil Carter

In Why I Am an Anti-Fundamentalist, I mentioned that I cannot condone any form of theism which preaches the concept of Hell. That post was long enough already, so I moved my elaboration of that point to here. To someone like me, the notion of Hell is absurd for at least three reasons:

a.) There’s a lot of fuzzy ambiguous thinking about how this concept would even work. Presumably the torture of this “place” is supposed to involve burning with fire, and yet that means a physical body would need to be both raised from the dead (ew!) and able to be burned perpetually. Is this body still physical? Does it have nerve endings? And do the nerve endings just keep regenerating so you can feel the fire forever and ever? This reminds me of the moment in Sixth Sense when I realized that all the ghosts have on ghost clothes and one guy even had a ghost bike helmet and was riding a ghost bike. What exactly are those things made of? And are they made in ghost factories somewhere? It makes for great cinema, but get real!

b.) There is no redemptive purpose for such a place. Most effective punishment is educational or rehabilitative. When you are done with your punishment you’re supposed to have learned something. But there is nothing to learn from eternal conscious torment, which doesn’t even begin until the last moment is past in which you could do anything about the discovery that such a place isn’t just made up. What kind of sick monster would allow for such a place? For billions of people? An omnipotent god, no matter how committed to the notion of “free will” (a concept the writers of the Bible seemed entirely unconcerned about), is ultimately responsible for the existence of such a place. Christian theology teaches that people can only exist if God keeps such in existence through an ongoing creative act. That means that the only way one could continue to exist for all eternity–in any state whatsoever–would be through a willful act of said deity. Again, what a horrific thought.

c.) Finally, it makes no sense that one man could pay for the sins of millions (or billions) for twelve hours one Friday while it will take all eternity for one individual to pay for his own sins alone. It’s absurd when you think about it. A fourteen year old kid has to burn for all eternity because he looked a little too long at that girl on the other side of the room, and studied her form a little too intensely. For that he deserves eternal conscious torment. Meanwhile one guy sufficiently paid for the sins of billions over a twelve hour period on a Friday. I’m sorry, this whole thing just doesn’t make sense at all.



I find it a great irony that some would bristle at my calling the notion of eternal torment “unjust,” particularly if they have been taught to react to this by telling me I can’t call anything unjust if I am a naturalist. In other words, if there’s no external moral code imposed on us by a deity, then how can I judge anything as unjust, particularly the actions of said deity? That sounds clever for a few moments (it’s actually an old question, Euthyphro’s dilemma), until you realize that what you’re left with is a deity who has no discernible morals at all, only apparently arbitrary actions which, we are told, are not under any obligation to adhere to any sense of logic that we can discern as poor, limited, finite humans. Incidentally, do you see how all three of these previous points work together? How convenient. And how unimpeachable this makes this particular concept of a deity.

God can do whatever he wants, and it would be moral.

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2014, 02:18 PM
RE: Why I Find the Notion of Hell Absurd
(16-11-2014 02:00 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 08:59 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  Another great article by Neil:

Why I Find The Notion Of Hell Absurd
Why I Find the Notion of Hell Absurd
by Neil Carter

In Why I Am an Anti-Fundamentalist, I mentioned that I cannot condone any form of theism which preaches the concept of Hell. That post was long enough already, so I moved my elaboration of that point to here. To someone like me, the notion of Hell is absurd for at least three reasons:

a.) There’s a lot of fuzzy ambiguous thinking about how this concept would even work. Presumably the torture of this “place” is supposed to involve burning with fire, and yet that means a physical body would need to be both raised from the dead (ew!) and able to be burned perpetually. Is this body still physical? Does it have nerve endings? And do the nerve endings just keep regenerating so you can feel the fire forever and ever? This reminds me of the moment in Sixth Sense when I realized that all the ghosts have on ghost clothes and one guy even had a ghost bike helmet and was riding a ghost bike. What exactly are those things made of? And are they made in ghost factories somewhere? It makes for great cinema, but get real!

b.) There is no redemptive purpose for such a place. Most effective punishment is educational or rehabilitative. When you are done with your punishment you’re supposed to have learned something. But there is nothing to learn from eternal conscious torment, which doesn’t even begin until the last moment is past in which you could do anything about the discovery that such a place isn’t just made up. What kind of sick monster would allow for such a place? For billions of people? An omnipotent god, no matter how committed to the notion of “free will” (a concept the writers of the Bible seemed entirely unconcerned about), is ultimately responsible for the existence of such a place. Christian theology teaches that people can only exist if God keeps such in existence through an ongoing creative act. That means that the only way one could continue to exist for all eternity–in any state whatsoever–would be through a willful act of said deity. Again, what a horrific thought.

c.) Finally, it makes no sense that one man could pay for the sins of millions (or billions) for twelve hours one Friday while it will take all eternity for one individual to pay for his own sins alone. It’s absurd when you think about it. A fourteen year old kid has to burn for all eternity because he looked a little too long at that girl on the other side of the room, and studied her form a little too intensely. For that he deserves eternal conscious torment. Meanwhile one guy sufficiently paid for the sins of billions over a twelve hour period on a Friday. I’m sorry, this whole thing just doesn’t make sense at all.



I find it a great irony that some would bristle at my calling the notion of eternal torment “unjust,” particularly if they have been taught to react to this by telling me I can’t call anything unjust if I am a naturalist. In other words, if there’s no external moral code imposed on us by a deity, then how can I judge anything as unjust, particularly the actions of said deity? That sounds clever for a few moments (it’s actually an old question, Euthyphro’s dilemma), until you realize that what you’re left with is a deity who has no discernible morals at all, only apparently arbitrary actions which, we are told, are not under any obligation to adhere to any sense of logic that we can discern as poor, limited, finite humans. Incidentally, do you see how all three of these previous points work together? How convenient. And how unimpeachable this makes this particular concept of a deity.

God can do whatever he wants, and it would be moral.

Then I guess stoning people is moral then.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2014, 03:26 PM (This post was last modified: 16-11-2014 04:32 PM by TheInquisition.)
RE: Why I Find the Notion of Hell Absurd
(16-11-2014 02:00 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 08:59 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  Another great article by Neil:

Why I Find The Notion Of Hell Absurd
Why I Find the Notion of Hell Absurd
by Neil Carter

In Why I Am an Anti-Fundamentalist, I mentioned that I cannot condone any form of theism which preaches the concept of Hell. That post was long enough already, so I moved my elaboration of that point to here. To someone like me, the notion of Hell is absurd for at least three reasons:

a.) There’s a lot of fuzzy ambiguous thinking about how this concept would even work. Presumably the torture of this “place” is supposed to involve burning with fire, and yet that means a physical body would need to be both raised from the dead (ew!) and able to be burned perpetually. Is this body still physical? Does it have nerve endings? And do the nerve endings just keep regenerating so you can feel the fire forever and ever? This reminds me of the moment in Sixth Sense when I realized that all the ghosts have on ghost clothes and one guy even had a ghost bike helmet and was riding a ghost bike. What exactly are those things made of? And are they made in ghost factories somewhere? It makes for great cinema, but get real!

b.) There is no redemptive purpose for such a place. Most effective punishment is educational or rehabilitative. When you are done with your punishment you’re supposed to have learned something. But there is nothing to learn from eternal conscious torment, which doesn’t even begin until the last moment is past in which you could do anything about the discovery that such a place isn’t just made up. What kind of sick monster would allow for such a place? For billions of people? An omnipotent god, no matter how committed to the notion of “free will” (a concept the writers of the Bible seemed entirely unconcerned about), is ultimately responsible for the existence of such a place. Christian theology teaches that people can only exist if God keeps such in existence through an ongoing creative act. That means that the only way one could continue to exist for all eternity–in any state whatsoever–would be through a willful act of said deity. Again, what a horrific thought.

c.) Finally, it makes no sense that one man could pay for the sins of millions (or billions) for twelve hours one Friday while it will take all eternity for one individual to pay for his own sins alone. It’s absurd when you think about it. A fourteen year old kid has to burn for all eternity because he looked a little too long at that girl on the other side of the room, and studied her form a little too intensely. For that he deserves eternal conscious torment. Meanwhile one guy sufficiently paid for the sins of billions over a twelve hour period on a Friday. I’m sorry, this whole thing just doesn’t make sense at all.



I find it a great irony that some would bristle at my calling the notion of eternal torment “unjust,” particularly if they have been taught to react to this by telling me I can’t call anything unjust if I am a naturalist. In other words, if there’s no external moral code imposed on us by a deity, then how can I judge anything as unjust, particularly the actions of said deity? That sounds clever for a few moments (it’s actually an old question, Euthyphro’s dilemma), until you realize that what you’re left with is a deity who has no discernible morals at all, only apparently arbitrary actions which, we are told, are not under any obligation to adhere to any sense of logic that we can discern as poor, limited, finite humans. Incidentally, do you see how all three of these previous points work together? How convenient. And how unimpeachable this makes this particular concept of a deity.

God can do whatever he wants, and it would be moral.

Since humans created god, he can only do what humans allow this imaginary being to do.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: