(April 30, 2012 at 7:18 pm)jess_essential Wrote: I personally do not believe in either the concept of a place full of sunshine and angels, nor a place of fiery depths and erupting valcanos of repeated death. They're both quite far fetched.

For sure.

I hope you have some moral reason for your view as well.

If not, I give this to Christians to try to help them think deeper into their theology. Some actually do.

Judgment and punishment go hand in hand.

Our human laws have a form of punishment where the penalty is graduated to fit the crime. An eye for an eye type of justice.
God‘s punishment seems to surpass this standard.

The definition I am comparing here is the eternal fire and torture type of hell and I am not particularly interested in the myriad of other definitions and theories that some use to supplant this traditional view.


To ascertain if hell would be a moral construct or not, all you need do is answer these
simple question for yourself.

1. Is it good justice for a soul to be able to sin for only 120 years and then have to suffer torture for 12000000000000000000000000 + years?

2. Is it good justice for small or mediocre sinners to have to bear the same sentence as Hitler, Stalin and other genocidal maniacs?
This might actually include God if you see Noah’s flood as God using genocide and not justice against man. Pardon the digression.

Punishment is usually only given to change attitude or actions and cause the sinner to repent.

3. Is it good justice to continue to torture a soul in hell if no change in attitude or actions are to result?

4. If you answered yes to these questions, then would killing the soul not be a better form of justice than to torture it for no possible good result or purpose?

Is hell a moral construct or not?

Please explain your reasons and know that ---just because God created it ---does not explain your moral judgment. It is your view I seek and not God’s as no one can speak for God.

Regards
DL

I find these questions to be rather irrelevant concerning that I do not even believe in a heaven or a hell. Now, for the people who care to believe in a hell, I would answer as such:

1. People in the real world do little stuff and get punished big for it. Why not in "hell"? Punishment should be universal. If you commit a crime, you should be punished for said crime.

2. If I stole mascara, and my counterpart robbed a bank, I would hope that we wouldn't even be in the same vicinity when being in jail. Does this mean that there should be a concept of different levels for "hell" for the believers, I am not sure.

3. The only thing that torturing something does is attempt to force them into compliance. If one is not complying, it usually get's it worse. It happens in almost every situation where torture is present.

4. Killing presents quick release, torture is much more effective when trying to imprint what was done wrong into the wrong dooer's head.

-- There is no "good justice", and there never will be.

(April 29, 2012 at 7:08 pm)Norfolk And Chance Wrote: Well I believe I have been given knowledge of God in a properly basic manner. I've explained this before and people differing about properly basic knowledge doesn't mean it cannot exist.

Well two me, two things seem obvious about God. 1) That his greatness is such that there can be nothing more to make him greater 2) That he is the living reality by which all other things exist.

As for the 1, you can deduce a lot from that. For example, if he was not loving, then he would be less great.

As for 2, to me it seems obvious that the essence of reality cannot be lifeless essence, but the true reality is something that is ultimate existence, not minimum existence. To me at least, it seems "time" cannot be generated reality without a Creator and Super reality. It also seems obvious that it is generated and this universe isn't just magically in motion, without a creator.

When I think of what this super reality must be, it seems to me like I know what it must be. It must be ultimately powerful, ultimately good, ultimately loving, ultimately compassionate, etc..

To me this knowledge doesn't seem far fetch , if this is a description of true existence.

What I mean by true existence, is what exists by virtue of itself. It seems to me, such a thing must be immensely great, as oppose to significantly nothing in the Atheist perspective.

It seems to me I've been given this knowledge much like I know other things in a properly basic way.

So that God is the True reality by which everything depends on, and that he is Ultimately Great are the properly basic knowledge to me, that seems obvious to me at least.

As for proving it, I think the nature of morality and honour and greatness points towards God...and once you acknowledge him existing, then us having properly basic knowledge of his existence is not far off and seems rather intuitive to believe that would be the case.

Quote:Please explain to me how you can witness your soul existing. Can you prove it?

Simply I can and I think everyone can, see that they are exactly that, if they reflect over the vision they constantly have over themselves. I can't prove it by a rational argument, you just have to look and reflect.

Quote:It is nonsense to believe that morality is god given. If god was disproven tomorrow, then what would you say.

I would say morality is a delusion then.

Quote:There are strong arguments against first cause whether you think infinite regress is false or not. The problem with first cause is always going to be that "something" needs to cause the first cause, but what caused that "something"?

This actually a weak argument.

Quote:Oh well that "something" must be eternal people say (a pure guess, and nothing like an explanation). The obvious counter argument is that if "something" was eternal that caused the universe, why couldn't the universe just be eternal itself, therefore no first cause, no need for god.

As I said, I believe infinite regress is proven illogical, as well as a universe at zero time creating time and laws that come with time to be illogical.

Quote:Then you have the latest thinking of Hawking and Krauss, who note that the energy in the universe has an equal amount of negative energy, therefore the sum total of the energy in the universe is 0. Nothing. The universe is nothing. If there was literally nothing before the big bang, it doesn't matter because it still is nothing now. No need for god.

Sophistry nonsense.

Quote:You might not think it but it doesn't make you right. Surely consciousness is the product of your brain interpreting it's senses? I don't know I could be wrong.

That has nothing to do with what I said.

Quote:If I can believe that my DNA in my cells due to evolution can build me to the blueprint of "me" without completely fucking up and making me a satsuma with an improbable green ear because they misread the plans, I can also believe that evolution can produce consciousness.

If evolution can produce something, it doesn't mean it can produce everything. I think this a fallacy many people are in.

Quote:Really what you are saying is you find it hard to believe that such complex things can evolve without a creator.

It doesn't have to do with complexity, but by the nature of the thing.

(May 1, 2012 at 2:09 pm)jess_essential Wrote: I find these questions to be rather irrelevant concerning that I do not even believe in a heaven or a hell. Now, for the people who care to believe in a hell, I would answer as such:

1. People in the real world do little stuff and get punished big for it. Why not in "hell"? Punishment should be universal. If you commit a crime, you should be punished for said crime.

Most criminals do not serve the time they deserve, many are let out early because of over crowding (that's not fair to our justice system). I agree with your last two sentences, not sure I understand the question.

jess Wrote:2. If I stole mascara, and my counterpart robbed a bank, I would hope that we wouldn't even be in the same vicinity when being in jail. Does this mean that there should be a concept of different levels for "hell" for the believers, I am not sure.

That is an ongoing argument in Christianity, I personally believe in different levels of punishment in hell, I can not explain how God will manage that.

jess Wrote:3. The only thing that torturing something does is attempt to force them into compliance. If one is not complying, it usually get's it worse. It happens in almost every situation where torture is present.

That is one reason I do not believe hell is a place of torture, if God were trying to bring people to compliance while they are in hell, that would mean the possibility of release, and release would be the opposite of eternal punishment. Release from hell has no Biblical backing.

jess Wrote:4. Killing presents quick release, torture is much more effective when trying to imprint what was done wrong into the wrong dooer's head.

-- There is no "good justice", and there never will be.

When God judges those who are going to hell they will understand why, no imprinting by torture necessary. A quick release is no punishment for one who has sinned against an eternal God, because God is eternal and will not forgive the sin of those in hell, the sin remains and is eternal.

(May 1, 2012 at 2:09 pm)jess_essential Wrote: I find these questions to be rather irrelevant concerning that I do not even believe in a heaven or a hell. Now, for the people who care to believe in a hell, I would answer as such:

Quote:1. People in the real world do little stuff and get punished big for it. Why not in "hell"? Punishment should be universal. If you commit a crime, you should be punished for said crime.

I agree but to give the same punishment to all crimes is not justice.
A petty thief should not be punished as severely as a murderer and if we would do so, every petty thief would kill to escape the punishment he will get.

Quote:2. If I stole mascara, and my counterpart robbed a bank, I would hope that we wouldn't even be in the same vicinity when being in jail. Does this mean that there should be a concept of different levels for "hell" for the believers, I am not sure.

Most only have one hell for all.

Quote:3. The only thing that torturing something does is attempt to force them into compliance. If one is not complying, it usually get's it worse. It happens in almost every situation where torture is present.

True but even if compliance is gained by God in hell, the torture continues on into eternity.

Quote:4. Killing presents quick release, torture is much more effective when trying to imprint what was done wrong into the wrong dooer's head.

True again but if that imprinting is successful and torture continues then it is done just for the sake of cruelty as no other benefit is to be gained.

Quote:-- There is no "good justice", and there never will be.

Could you expand on this thought?

It may be that we will never have or indeed want a perfect justice system but I think we can work to progress in that direction and I see some good aspects to the justice systems that secular governments are coming up with.

Regards
DL

---

(May 2, 2012 at 12:06 am)Godschild Wrote: [

When God judges those who are going to hell they will understand why, no imprinting by torture necessary. A quick release is no punishment for one who has sinned against an eternal God, because God is eternal and will not forgive the sin of those in hell, the sin remains and is eternal.

And the purpose for this everlasting punishment in hell is what if not just a show of cruelty?

What does God or anyone else gain?

Regards
DL

(May 2, 2012 at 11:51 am)Greatest I am Wrote: And the purpose for this everlasting punishment in hell is what if not just a show of cruelty?

What does God or anyone else gain?

It's all in the name of justice. Forget compassion, forget forgiveness, forget mercy, forget love, forget kindness, justice must take place.

(May 2, 2012 at 11:51 am)Greatest I am Wrote:

(May 2, 2012 at 12:06 am)Godschild Wrote: When God judges those who are going to hell they will understand why, no imprinting by torture necessary. A quick release is no punishment for one who has sinned against an eternal God, because God is eternal and will not forgive the sin of those in hell, the sin remains and is eternal.

And the purpose for this everlasting punishment in hell is what if not just a show of cruelty?

What does God or anyone else gain?

Regards
DL

Well it's not a show of cruelty, it is what it is, punishment for eternal sin. We gain nothing from it, that's not what hell is for, what is gained, eternal justice as promised by God. Teaearlgreyhot has been arguing that a balance between the saved and lost needs to be met, this is it. Eternal grace + eternal punishment = justice.

(May 2, 2012 at 7:10 pm)Godschild Wrote: Well it's not a show of cruelty, it is what it is, punishment for eternal sin. We gain nothing from it, that's not what hell is for, what is gained, eternal justice as promised by God. Teaearlgreyhot has been arguing that a balance between the saved and lost needs to be met, this is it. Eternal grace + eternal punishment = justice.

Except a) A sin committed temporally cannot be eternal and b) Your god's idea of sin is screwed up - what he calls sin isn't always sinful.

Can God love?

The answer has to be no since the "deity" is a fictional construct.

(May 2, 2012 at 7:07 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:

(May 2, 2012 at 11:51 am)Greatest I am Wrote: And the purpose for this everlasting punishment in hell is what if not just a show of cruelty?

What does God or anyone else gain?

It's all in the name of justice. Forget compassion, forget forgiveness, forget mercy, forget love, forget kindness, justice must take place.

Even forgetting all that, infinite purposless torture is no form of justice.

Cruelty is the only reward, not justice.

Regards
DL