Been thinking about some ex-theists' lingering fear of hell and why it's one of the toughest of the superstitions to shake off.

Is it because we evolved to survive by being afraid of the unknown or something that can hurt us? (better to be safe than sorry)

If so, then could it be possible that a strong part of indoctrination is the threat of hell to non believers more so than an attraction to God?
What I'm saying is that most people (subconsciously or not) become believers exclusively because it keeps them away from hell.
And the more faithful they are, the farther the bridge to hell.

I find it ironic that religious nuts out there who no not believe in evolution, do so because of evolution! (the need to survive hell?)

yes? No? Maybe?

Seems like just another just so story.

You don't need to say "Hell" there, you don't know if it's actually dangerous or just some hate from Heaven.

I'm not sure it's hell, more like fear of death in general.

(September 20, 2018 at 7:08 am)mh.brewer Wrote: I'm not sure it's hell, more like fear of death in general.

If you don't fear death you win the Darwin Award, thereby ending a line that doesn't fear death. Nature is a bitch.

(September 20, 2018 at 7:15 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(September 20, 2018 at 7:08 am)mh.brewer Wrote: I'm not sure it's hell, more like fear of death in general.

If you don't fear death you win the Darwin Award, thereby ending a line that doesn't fear death. Nature is a bitch.

Nah, the DA is for those who think they can cheat death.

I'm sure threats of hell are a potent factor in religious conversion. It's also arguably a greater factor among children and the young, among whom most religious conversion (or indoctrination) occurs. But it's not as clear that threats of hell are as effective in maintaining belief once it is established. Perseverance of belief as well as parental influence are likely factors there. Once you believe, for whatever reason, it's harder to stop believing than continuing along the same path. Thus threats of hell, parental influence, and perseverance of belief likely make up a perfect storm guaranteed to turn out faithful who, though they develop more sophisticated views ad hoc and post-conversion, likely owe their faith to early vulnerability having nothing to do with any "nobler" motives for believing.

There was some study I remember that found that some people respond more strongly to fear stimuli and others to reward stimuli. Everyone responds to both, I'm talking about to which they responded the strongest. (Also, this was a predictor of a person being either conservative or progressive).

This is one of the genius things of modern (by which I mean the last 1500 years) religious indoctrination. It includes the stick AND the honey, so it covers both ends of this spectrum.

Personally I never feared hell, even when I was very young and very deeply a believer. It simply never struck me as realistically fearful. Part of me simply dismissed it, because I figured God was loving so the vast majority of people, sinners or no, had nothing to fear from it.
I notice a lot of modern believers are the same. Take CL forinstance, and she has zero fear of hell, even though she admits she cannot know who goes and who remains. She's such a believer in the kind version of God that the scary version holds little sway over her psyche.

What’s truly the scarier thought here? Hell? Or the celestial dictatorship where you’re a praise-bot for all eternity?

I’m not entirely sure myself.

I would say a strong sense of self-preservation is in our DNA, and this is what religions can abuse with these intangible threats.