Basically the entire basis for belief in Hell rests on arguments from authority; the Bible says it exists, the Church says it exists, so I believe it exists. This is the believer's essential point of view.
Once you get beyond such things and start to actually analyze the concept, that's when you get into the interesting criticism. For example, when it comes to psychological manipulation, there is no greater "carrot" than the hope for Heaven, and no greater "stick" than the fear of Hell. Heaven promises you happiness beyond your wildest dreams for all eternity; Hell promises you suffering beyond your wildest nightmares for all eternity. Both concepts are infinite in scope, meaning that no matter how many good things you imagine, Heaven is always better; and as for Hell, no matter how many bad things you imagine, Hell is always worse.
So thus far, Christianity (and other religions who share these beliefs) employs the ultimate "carrot" and the ultimate "stick" and use them to manipulate hopes and fears to enforce a certain code of conduct and belief. Already one should become suspicious that a belief system that claims to possess the transcendent truths of creation (derived from a benevolent and omniscient creator) employs such crude means to keep its adherents in line (making them terrified to leave the faith on the one hand due to Hell, but also invested in staying for the hope of the possibility of Heaven on the other).
Then it comes to empathetic arguments which I believe are some of the most persuasive in terms of viewing Hell as the sadistic absurdity it is. You often hear believers themselves express pause on this issue, fearing the possibility that they might end up in Heaven, but some of their loved ones might end up in Hell. Christian apologists try to address this by claiming that Heaven is so amazing that you won't even be sad that people you loved in your earthly life are suffering unspeakable horrors for eternity. Let that one sink in because it is absolutely disgusting, not to mention repugnant to any sense of empathy humans are capable of.
Your spouse who you dedicated your life to, your child who you raised with love and care from infancy, both of these people and others could one day be living in absolute torment, begging to be annihilated from existence so the pain would stop and in response the all loving, all merciful creator's reply is: no. It's okay though, you won't be sad, because Heaven is awesome. To hell with that. Simply accepting this point of view requires some high degree of selfishness to me, thinking that as long as you're happy and not feeling sad that loved ones are in agony for eternity, then it is all ultimately bearable. That's not love, wanting to be basically ignorant of the suffering of family and friends just to ensure your own happiness in the presence of the very being that maintains those loved ones in that state of perpetual and unending agony.
Once you get beyond such things and start to actually analyze the concept, that's when you get into the interesting criticism. For example, when it comes to psychological manipulation, there is no greater "carrot" than the hope for Heaven, and no greater "stick" than the fear of Hell. Heaven promises you happiness beyond your wildest dreams for all eternity; Hell promises you suffering beyond your wildest nightmares for all eternity. Both concepts are infinite in scope, meaning that no matter how many good things you imagine, Heaven is always better; and as for Hell, no matter how many bad things you imagine, Hell is always worse.
So thus far, Christianity (and other religions who share these beliefs) employs the ultimate "carrot" and the ultimate "stick" and use them to manipulate hopes and fears to enforce a certain code of conduct and belief. Already one should become suspicious that a belief system that claims to possess the transcendent truths of creation (derived from a benevolent and omniscient creator) employs such crude means to keep its adherents in line (making them terrified to leave the faith on the one hand due to Hell, but also invested in staying for the hope of the possibility of Heaven on the other).
Then it comes to empathetic arguments which I believe are some of the most persuasive in terms of viewing Hell as the sadistic absurdity it is. You often hear believers themselves express pause on this issue, fearing the possibility that they might end up in Heaven, but some of their loved ones might end up in Hell. Christian apologists try to address this by claiming that Heaven is so amazing that you won't even be sad that people you loved in your earthly life are suffering unspeakable horrors for eternity. Let that one sink in because it is absolutely disgusting, not to mention repugnant to any sense of empathy humans are capable of.
Your spouse who you dedicated your life to, your child who you raised with love and care from infancy, both of these people and others could one day be living in absolute torment, begging to be annihilated from existence so the pain would stop and in response the all loving, all merciful creator's reply is: no. It's okay though, you won't be sad, because Heaven is awesome. To hell with that. Simply accepting this point of view requires some high degree of selfishness to me, thinking that as long as you're happy and not feeling sad that loved ones are in agony for eternity, then it is all ultimately bearable. That's not love, wanting to be basically ignorant of the suffering of family and friends just to ensure your own happiness in the presence of the very being that maintains those loved ones in that state of perpetual and unending agony.
