Is the concept of an eternal hell for non-believers Not contrary to God’s merciful nature?

JayPS 2288

For all the stick that Jehova’s witnesses get, at least they agree that it’s a logical fallacy.

They believe in a 3-tiered afterlife.

One where good believes (only 144,000 of them) will ascend to Heaven.

The second where remaining good believers will live on early bliss for eternity (but not in heaven with God).

Thirdly, non-believers, the wicked, etc., will simply have their souls destroyed and they’ll cease to exist.

I don’t believe in any of it FWIW, but I’d love to hear opinions on the concepts of eternal Hell.

homer911

If there is an eternal Heaven, why should there not be an eternal hell? and to answer your headline question, God is giving you a lifetime, however long or short that may be for you, to accept His grace and come into a relationship with Him - that's pretty merciful

I certainly would not try and defined the the JW's interpretation of a few verses of scripture, an interpretation which is not consistent with the rest of scripture

'... God is giving you a lifetime, however long or short...'

A child up to age, say 9, is a bully or has even killed (someone like Jaime Bulger's killers) and get knocked down by a drunk driver. Do they go to hell for all eternity. If not, where does it say they won't.

JayPS 2288

At what age does a person become responsible for their own salvation? 18? 16? 12?

If Hitler repented at the end would he go to Heaven?

Would Ghandi be sent to Hell?

The DayDream

As you can see from the 1st reply, any answer a Christian will give will make just as little sense. But they'll make sure to tell you not to listen to the ridiculousness of some other faith, because clearly the one they picked to follow zealously is the right one, and everyone else is wrong and crazy.

When the truth is they're all nuts who believe in wacky stuff. It's actually a pretty easy gauge of someone's intelligence - the smartest people are usually the first to say, 'I could be wrong about this, but... ' while the dumbest people tend to be the ones who thump the table (or the bible) and roar their heads off about how right they are (Trump supporters are a good example of this).

And unfortunately that means there is no point trying to engage them in any discussion - they don't do logic, and they don't change their mind no matter how nonsensical their position is proven to be.

smacl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118966412#Comment_118966412

Mod: This is not a forum that allows you to take random digs at Christianity. Your post is both obnoxious and intentionally inflammatory to the intended audience of this forum and displays just the kind of pig headed intolerance you are complaining about. Please read the charter before posting here again.Thanks for your attention.

1. The purpose of this forum is to discuss Christian belief in general, and specific elements of it, between Christians and non-Christians alike. This forum has the additional purpose of being a point on Boards.ie where Christians may ask other Christians questions about their shared faith. In this regard, Christians should not have to defend their faith from overt or subtle attack.

looksee

Where do you get the reference to 'eternal hell for non-believers' from? Jesus didn't mention it - he did discuss the 'sheep and the goats' in Matthew 25:31 on, but the differentiation there was people who helped others and those who didn't, belief was not mentioned. Its perfectly possible for people of other faiths and none to do the things that Jesus discussed.

Further, believers believe they will go to heaven (or hell, but this is unlikely in the scenario of heaven being for believers) but since this is a matter of belief, how can they impose the consequences of belief or non-belief on others? If a person does not believe in God or salvation or however it is expressed, but wishes he did, he could have a miserable life of worry about the afterlife due to his inability to believe.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118966348#Comment_118966348

It's not a question of age of responsibility for one's own salvation, or indeed of personal responsibility for one's own salvation at any age.

In Christian theology, salvation isn't something you do; it's something Christ does. You can reject the salvation offered by Christ, though. One possible answer to the "at what age?" question — if you want to analyse it in those terms, which isn't the Christian tradition — is that a child lacks the maturity, and so the capacity, to reject salvation.

A second point is that we have to think about the hoary old question of "salvation by faith" versus "salvation by works". This is a point of theological difference between the Protestant and Catholic traditions and, like a lot of such points, it became quite confrontational, with each tradition tending to misunderstand the other's position, and then to frame it's own position in a polemical way, in opposition to that slightly misunderstood position. It doesn't always make for a healthy discourse.

Both sides can "mine" scripture for quotes in support of their position. There are passages which link salvation to belief (e.g. "He who believes in me will never die") and numerous others which link salvation to virtue, sometimes even to virtue without (explicit) belief (e.g. "“Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not take care of you?” Then he will answer them, “Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.” And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.’.)

I think we reconcile these by recognising that the "belief" spoken of here is not just formal profession of the creed, but faith - a belief in which we place our trust, a belief that shapes how we live. So, visiting the imprisoned, healing the sick, feeding the hungry, etc are acts of love, and people who do these things have faith in the importance and validity of love, and in the need for love to shape our lives. These people might, hypothetically, be atheists, but if the nature of God is love then they are among those who know god without knowing his name.

If Hitler had repented at the end, would he be saved? Yes, if he had repented. But repentance involves a fundamental reshaping of heart and mind; it's not normally an instantaneous event but an extended process. So Hitler repenting between the moment he shot himself and bit down on the cyanide capsule and the time of his death is a fairly improbably scenario.

Would Gandhi be sent to hell? Some Christians would say yes but most, I think, would say that there is no reason think so.

JayPS 2288

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118968498#Comment_118968498

But those Christians who say Ghandi isn’t in hell are contradicting themselves or cherry picking beliefs.

According to Christian teaching, those who reject Christ’s salvation go to Hell.

Hitler could quite literally accept Christ and repent and go to heaven. Ghandi, if he heard of, and rejected Christ would burn in Hell.

olestoepoke

The thought of an eternity spent anywhere is terrifying, I'll take option 3 please and thank you.

JayPS 2288

The goalposts seem to be constantly shifted.

Until the not-too-distant past, unbaptised babies who died went to limbo, now the church thankfully doesn’t take such a despicable position.

smacl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118969360#Comment_118969360

Mod: Given these points have already been directly addressed in Peregrinus' last post, my take on the above is and your subsequent post is to take a dig a Christianity without making any solid arguments to support your points. You received a warning for breach of charter, please read it before posting here again.

Thinkingaboutit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118970746#Comment_118970746

Limbo was never dogmatic teaching, but the Church suggested that some might never see God due to original sin which has to be washed away by the saving waters of baptism, but will also not be punished in any manner. No goals are shifted. A Catholic should be relaxed that you call it a 'despicable position.' Professional offence takers angry at a portion of a Christian's believes have no standing whatsoever. They wouldn't dare try it with Islam.

Anyone who asserts that there is universal salvation or that anyone who is 'basically good' is part of God's elect, that all or most are saved (like a certain bodybuilding bishop who says 'dare we hope all are saved') is misleading people, preaching error, even heresy. Salvation is only clearly possible for those baptised by water and the Holy Ghost (Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God, John iii. 5) I would note that Gandhi is a far more mixed and uncertain figure than those who make him a plaster saint. Anyhow, God can choose to save others, like the good thief, St Dismas, but without baptism, outside the Church, salvation is utterly uncertain. Nor it is certain for those within the Church. St Leonard of Port Maurice oft preached on that matter. The portion of those saved is unknowable, but no one can ever take it for granted. Teaching does not change.

Anyone can look at a German updated 2011 version of Fr Ludwig Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. Barring some text glossing matters in the light of V2, it is all there, including some unusual things like how a priest (under authority) can ordain other priests or deacons.

JayPS 2288

Do you not think it’s odious that a child (through no fault of their own) who wasn’t baptised and died, never saw salvation?

Where’s the logic that a loving God would bestow original sin upon an innocent baby?

Why doesn’t God prevent tragedies such a still births or infant deaths before the baby is baptised in order to stop babies going to

limbo?

looksee

Mod: Let's leave Islam (and any other) whataboutery out of the discussion please.

Also: Troll post removed

Jim2007

https://youtu.be/xL01jmT0MN4

Well OP, I guess the main man has the answer.

JayPS 2288

What if someone wanted neither heaven nor hell? Would God accommodate such a request?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118974956#Comment_118974956

Okay, if you insist, purgatory it is. 😛

JayPS 2288

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118974988#Comment_118974988

😂

What if I just want to cease to exist?

lisajanecawley

The concept of eternity is incomprehensible to any human being so I presume it doesn't exist. The Christian God wouldn't threaten us with something that our minds can't understand since he's the one who created us with a limited understanding of the world.

o1s1n

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118975009#Comment_118975009

So as a Christian are you then saying you don't think your belief will allow you to live forever? (be it on earth, in heaven etc?)

Doesn't that fly in the face of biblical teaching?

smacl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118975009#Comment_118975009

And yet the concept of eternity was conceived by humanity. Personally, I'm of the opinion that it is well within the capacity of the human mind to fully grasp abstract notions such as infinity and eternity. Perhaps what separates atheism and many forms of religious faith is the belief that our existence is fundamentally finite or not. I agree entirely that what any person can hope to understand is finite, we cannot appreciate eternity, but we can conceive it.

Peregrinus

I think the notion that, if we can't imagine it, it can't exist, is a fairly brave one. 😀

Gary kk

Old testament God was a bit of an ass if I recall correctly.

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118977211#Comment_118977211

Limiting is the word that comes to mind. There is nothing brave about limiting ones mind.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118977287#Comment_118977287

Although hell, damnation and similar concepts don't get much airplay in the Old Testament. Indeed, the afterlife is barely mentioned at all, so there's not very much about heaven or salvation either. Christian theology on this subject mostly draws on the NT scriptures.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118977314#Comment_118977314

To be fair, our minds are limited. If something is truly beyond our comprehension, well, it's beyond our comprehension. That's not a failure in courage on our part, or a self-imposed limitation.

But it does look to me a little arrogant to suggest that, if it's beyond our comprehension then it can't be real; that reality is limited by our understanding. I'd call that an error to which only the modern mind could fall prey.

Feisar

Non believer here, raised RC. God, merciful? I would suggest a good read of the Old Testament for anyone who thinks that!

JayPS 2288

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118977391#Comment_118977391

Why would God give us such a weak intellect so we can’t comprehend the afterlife thus giving people the scope to reject it, not out of arrogance but out of their own reasoning (or lack thereof).

dickdasr1234

You cannot prove/disprove the existence of god.

It is therefore solely a question of belief wherein logic is rendered futile.

If you believe there is a god, there is a god.

If you don't believe there is a god, there is no god.

Just like the dyslexic atheist who didn't believe in dog!

JayPS 2288

Why would god give us the opportunity to reject him and thus face damnation ?