I am about to ask a serious but utterly reprehensible question

[Simon Moon]

---

In all genuine honesty...and I just came up with this today, and someone making a threat about hell in one of the threads convinced me it has to be asked. Please, don't hate me, this is not done out of malice or perversion, and is simply a ghastly version of a reductio ad absurdum.

To any person who will tell a child that they are a miserable sinner and deserving of an eternity of fiery torment - regardless of how easy they claim it will be to avoid this (and remember, you still deserve it, you've just been given undeserved mercy via salvation, right? You're still scum but they let you into the country club) - what is stopping you from saying that child deserves to be, say, raped? Surely flesh-searing torment without end is a worse fate, and surely some lava-skinned demon down there is going to get their hands on you at some point, right? So why would you say one and not the other, if one is far, far worse and yet can't be experienced on earth?

I expect the answers will disregard the fact that we are disregarding salvation, and be flimsy excuses at best rather than actual answers. If this does not prove once and for all anyone who ever introduces the concept of hell to a child is no different from a predator, nothing will.

If this was a step too far, just delete it. I'm so disgusted with religious people right now, I can't even separate them from their faith.

---

For those who argue against objective morality, there isn’t really a problem (how is rape wrong under a subjective morality) However; that is a different subject; and I’ll assume objective morality in the answer.

Well, first off all, there versions of secular morality that do have a objective basis, if the definition of objective is "Not dependent on the mind for existence". But you are correct, that is another subject.

I think that there are a couple of aspects to your question.  The first has to do with why something is wrong.   In the case of rape, I think that this has more to do with the why; rather than the what is occurring.   C.S. Lewis made the distinction of intentions when discussing morality, rather than the outcome.  He stated, that we are angry with the person, who attempts to trip us up, yet fails.  But not angry with the person who trips us by accident; even when the result is injury. There may initially be some emotion from the injury or embarrassment, but I think that for a rational person, this should subside.    Now from the principle in your example, the second case is “far worse” in result, so shouldn’t we be able to compare them?  I think that the answer is no, because the intentions do make a difference.   In the case of rape, the motivations are selfish, and set themselves on something that God has set apart to be Holy.  

The second aspect, is that I think you are working from a pop culture caricature of hell.  A Greek Orthodox would describe hell and the torment therein; as a result of separation from God.    I do agree with this view, but also think that some can take it too far (making it purely emotional and  self-inflicted), and I believe ignoring some parts of scripture.  While I believe that most of the descriptions of hell in the Bible are symbolic; they still represent that which they are symbolizing.  What the Bible describes is the consequences of sin, and the result of separation from God.  

So the answer is no; I wouldn’t agree with what you proposed, or do anything like that.  I don’t think that it is an equivalent comparison, nor accurate of the Biblical description.  I also assume that you are speaking of a fairly young child; in which case, I’m not going to have a discussion the way you represented it; in the first place.

But then the question was not meant for you then, since the question was meant for Christians that do tell their children the version of hell described in the OP. Quite a few Christians, I am sure you will agree.

---

This is a non-starter. 

Why would any Christian tell a child he/she is a terrible sinner and deserving of an eternity of fiery torment? No Christian denomination that I know of believes that that child is accountable for their sins until some "age of accountability" where they can understand such things. Only God could know when a person is to be culpable for their sins. In some cases, a person's mental disabilities might prevent that from happening their whole life. 

The rest of your reasoning is nonsense and your conclusions faulty.

Please quote Bible chapter and verse were it is mentioned that a child is not accountable until some "age of accountability".