Dealing With Hell After Deconverting

[Overcame Faith]

From my observations on ExC, for some people the issue of hell presents problems that they need to learn how to get past. I, too, thought of that issue after I deconverted. My thinking was that if I am wrong and Christianity is true, then by rejecting the religion I may be cast into everlasting torment after my death. The way I dealt with that issue was to study it and see if it made any sense. That got me past it to where now I am fully convinced that there is no Satan, no demons, no such thing as sin (including original sin), and, most importantly, there is absolutely, positively no hell in any form whatsoever. As I have said in other posts, my study was strictly limited to the Bible. I did not consult any ministers, no apologists, no other works. Rather, I went to the source material - the Bible and, as usual, the Bible is its own worst enemy.

 

These are a few of my conclusions. I will give them in shorthand fashion. If anyone wants more elaboration, please ask and I will do the best I can (or perhaps someone else can contribute also).

 

1. One would think that if god is eternal and unchanging that various doctrines like hell would be a consistent theme throughout the bible and not just the New Testament. However, when I went to the Old Testament, I discovered that the entire concept of hell was missing. There is a Hebrew word used in certain parts of the Old Testament which has been translated into English as hell (particularly the KJV version). The Hebrew word at issue is "sheol." However, sheol is properly translated as the grave and not hell and many of the modern english translations have so interpreted the word. What is more, there simply is no description of hell anywhere in the OT. These facts helped me realize that the concept of hell was something that was added into the NT and did not have its origins in Judaism, Christianity's predecessor religion. That, in turn, told me that the concept is quite suspect.

 

2. If god is a god of justice as so many Christians claim, then one would expect his punishments to take on at least a modicum of justice. However, the whole concept of hell totally lacks any basis for justice. Human societies have always struggled with something called proportionality. By that I mean that to have a just criminal system of laws and punishments, we must strive to make the punishment for engaging in criminal activity proportional to the crime that was committed. That is why we do not put someone in prison for life for a speeding ticket. Instead, we impose a fine of a couple of hundred dollars, maybe add some points on the driver's license, and then it's all over. On the other hand, if the NT concept of hell is true, then god lacks any justice at all. For even the smallest sin that goes unforgiven, the NT teaches that when the person dies they are doomed for an eternity of torment. Imagine if we tried to execute people for speeding. That would be an absolute outrage and no just society would ever tolerate even the thought. But, according to the NT, god does even worse because his alleged punishment is forever and ever and ever and ever!! This thought that hell as described in the NT was unjust told me that no just god would ever impose it and if one did then that god would not be just. If no just god would impose it and the god of the bible were just, then there could be no hell. On the other hand, if this god were unjust, then the Christian concept of god is a contradiction, which told me that there is nothing to worry about because the contradiction gave me good reason to doubt his existence, anyway.

 

3. It's all a matter of timing. Let's consider two hypothetical people. The first one is not a Christian. He or she is kind, gentle, gives to the poor, serves his or her fellow human beings and always considers others before him or herself. This person never cheats, steals, or says a cross word to anyone. One day this person is walking down the street and sees a married person and thinks in his or her mind that he or she would like to have sex with that person. Then the thought passes and the person goes on about his or her business of helping people. As he or she is crossing the street, he or she is hit and killed by a car. According to the NT, this person goes to hell because Jesus taught that even lusting in the mind is the same thing as adultery and adultery is a sin which, according to the NT, merits hell.

 

Now let's consider the other hypothetical person. This person lives a life of debauchery. He or she cheats, steals, rapes and pillages on a regular basis. This person ends up murdering one of his rape victims, is tried, and sentenced to death. Just before the needle is inserted into his arm to deliver the deadly syrum, he confesses his sin, accepts Jesus as his savior (and whatever else Christians say is necessary to receive total and complete forgiveness). Once this criminal dies, it's off to heaven for him.

 

So it's not a matter of how one lives their life for them to escape hell. Rather, it's a matter of timing the acceptance of Jesus just right. Once I thought about this, I knew there could not be a hell. The whole concept is so absurd as to make it totally implausable.

 

4. It's a matter of geography. To escape hell, one must believe in Jesus, repent, etc. When I thought about that, like so many others have, I could not help but think about the person born in the Amazon jungle who has never heard of Jesus. That person could never believe in that of which he or she never heard. Therefore, this person is doomed to hell once they die. Another absurdity.

 

5. It's a matter of having the ability to believe, repent, etc. Belief and repentence are things that people must be capable of doing. When I thought about that, I thought of babies. Babies are not capable of belief and so if a baby dies he or she must go straight to hell. Now, I know that many churches have wormed their way around this little problem by saying things like the baby was not capable of sinning and so must be admitted into heaven. It was because of things like that that I confined my study to the bible and not to what is taught by apologists and the like. If you read the bible there is no exception for babies - none!! Besides, babies are born with original sin according to the NT so the baby is a sinner and, absent belief, is destined to hell. Another obvious absurdity.

 

There are other things, as well, but, for now, I will leave it with the five I have set forth above.

 

If you are living in fear of hell now, calm yourself. It does not exist.

[Deva]

To me, an eternal hell seems so extravagant in a way. Look at nature. Nothing in the universe, including this present universe itself, lasts forever. It will come to an end one day (if I am wrong, someone correct me). Everything is in a state of constant change. How can there be such a thing as an eternal hell? It simply doesn't make sense to me.

 

Step away from Christianity. Don't listen to the sermons or the brainwashing. Hell does not exist.

[jackbauer]

Those are good points, particularly the first one. Hell was barely mentioned in the OT and any refrences to it in the NT were pretty vague. Even in romans, it says the wages of sin are DEATH, not eternal hellfire. I've actually heard some arguements from Christians who believe that hell is just non existance. It actually makes a lot more sense that way because if there was an afterlife, I'd find it pretty contrived that you would be doomed to one place forever. Like you said, the concept is too absurd to be believable. I'm beginning to think the idea of a big brother god who's watching everyone's thoughts words and deeds is just as ridiculous.

 

Unfortunately, I can also hear the apologetic responses "god's ways are higher than ours" "everyone deserves hell so we shouldn't complain about how the salvation method is delivered" "we have to trust that God will be just". They are pretty weak arguements, but they still raise that tiny thought of "what if?".

 

Fortunately, hell doesn't scare me as much as it used to. It just makes me extremely EXTREMELY angry.

[Overcame Faith]

Those are good points, particularly the first one. Hell was barely mentioned in the OT and any refrences to it in the NT were pretty vague. Even in romans, it says the wages of sin are DEATH, not eternal hellfire. I've actually heard some arguements from Christians who believe that hell is just non existance. It actually makes a lot more sense that way because if there was an afterlife, I'd find it pretty contrived that you would be doomed to one place forever. Like you said, the concept is too absurd to be believable. I'm beginning to think the idea of a big brother god who's watching everyone's thoughts words and deeds is just as ridiculous.

 

Unfortunately, I can also hear the apologetic responses "god's ways are higher than ours" "everyone deserves hell so we shouldn't complain about how the salvation method is delivered" "we have to trust that God will be just". They are pretty weak arguements, but they still raise that tiny thought of "what if?".

 

Fortunately, hell doesn't scare me as much as it used to. It just makes me extremely EXTREMELY angry.

 

I am really glad you are getting past the fear of hell and I don't blame you for feeling angry. The very thought that so many of us had that vicious slop thrown at us since childhood (in some cases) is cruel beyond anything else I can imagine of a religion imposing on people.

 

As for the apologists, that's why I ignored what they had to say and limited my study and thoughts to only the bible. My thinking was (and remains) that if the bible is true, then it can stand on its own without anyone's aid. Well, it can't stand on its own. On its own, it fails miserably.

[Guest wester]

Hell is only the mental abuse that humans foist upon each other - most specifically The existence of Hell would only prove that the Christian god is a sadisic totalitarian prick. Frank Zapa got it right:

 

"There is no Hell. There is only France."

 

The conclusion is that you should forget all this nonsense and get on with enjoying you life. Cheers

[Overcame Faith]

I also want to address some of the problems with hell that we see from time to time. For some people, the fear of hell is an irrational fear. I do not mean that in a negative way, at all. I mean it in the true sense of the words I used. It is a fear that is not calmed completely by reasoning one's way through it. It is a fear that resides deep within yourself. It may have what appears to be a life of its own and one over which you feel you have no control. It is for those of you in that situation, that my heart goes out to most of all. But you, too, can overcome your fears. I wish I had a sure fire way to tell you what to do to get past it, but I don't. However, I have a few things that others have said helped them and maybe it will help you, too.

 

1. Don't avoid the rational approach. Allow your intellectual self to come to terms with hell and to see that from a purely intellectual perspective hell does not exist.

 

2. Give yourself time. For some, time is an important ingredient to overcoming their fears.

 

3. Don't hold it in. Many have been helped by merely expressing their fears, either on ExC, or to others who have overcome their fears.

 

4. Don't be ashamed of your fears. It does not mean you are somehow less of a person, not as smart as others. It simply means that you have a fear which you must deal with.

[★ Citsonga ★]

Great post, OvercameFaith! With the way many struggle with the issue of hell, it's great to put it into proper perspective.

 

I don't want to hijack the thread, but for the sake of others reading it who are struggling with this issue and want as much help as they can get, I thought I would post here something I wrote a while back about hell. Several of the points will overlap what has already been said, but of course are framed differently. This is an excerpt from a quite lengthy letter I sent my parents detailing why I no longer believe in Christianity. Here it is:

 

The Lake of Fire

 

The Bible says that "the beast" and "false prophet" will be "cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone" (Rev 19:20), and that "the devil" will also be "cast into the lake of fire and brimstone" and that they "shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever" (Rev 20:10). After that we read that "death and hell" and "whosoever was not found written in the book of life" will be "cast into the lake of fire," which it also calls "the second death" (Rev 20:14-15). Though it doesn't specify here, one would assume that this implies that everyone thrown into this lake of fire would also be tortured forever, just like it says will happen to the beast, false prophet and devil. Granted, Revelation is highly symbolic, so one could argue that this is not meant literally, especially given the reference to a "second death." For the sake of this writing, though, I will treat it literally, as traditional Christians tend to do.

 

As a side note, many confuse "hell" with the eternal "lake of fire." However, as can be seen from the statement that "hell" will be "cast into the lake of fire" (Rev 20:14), they are technically not the same thing in the Bible. "Hell" here is the Greek term "Hades," which was used for the grave, the nether world, the realm of the dead. But, since most people think of "Hell" as the lake of fire, from here on out that will be what I am referring to when I use the capitalized word "Hell" in quotes. So, let's move on and take a closer look at the concept of eternal torture and what the Bible has to say about "Hell."

 

To hear Christians talk, "Hell" is one of the most important topics in Christianity. Indeed, what we supposedly need saving from is "Hell." Yet, if "Hell" is such a hot topic (pun intended), and burning eternally is the final punishment for the wicked, then why is the concept of the lake of fire completely absent from the Old Testament? Sure, the word "hell" is found in the KJV Old Testament, but it is the Hebrew word "Sheol," which means the grave, the underworld, the abode of the dead, a pit. Though there are several places where the Old Testament refers to "fire" symbolically, there is no place in it that says anything about eternal torture in fire (when preachers use Old Testament verses to prove "Hell," a quick look at the context always reveals that they mean something else).

 

In the Old Testament, the punishment for wickedness is said to be death (Eze 3:18-19; 18:20,24; 33:8-14; Psalm 37:20; Prov 2:22). Beyond that, Isaiah says, "They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, they shall not rise" (Isa 26:14). Daniel contradicts that by saying, "And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt" (Dan 12:2), but though it doesn't fit with most of what we see in the Old Testament, even this verse doesn't say anything about torture.

 

There is a significant Old Testament verse to mention, though. Jeremiah says, "Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that this place shall no more be called Tophet, nor The valley of the son of Hinnom, but The valley of slaughter" (Jer 19:6). In this verse, "The valley of the son of Hinnom" in Hebrew is "gay ben Hinnom," or "gay Hinnom" ("The valley of Hinnom") for short, and is the basis of a later Greek word "Gehenna" that referred to a valley south of Jerusalem where they reportedly burned trash, dead animals and at times the corpses of executed criminals. This "Gehenna" is translated "hell" in the New Testament.

 

So, for clarification, there are two Greek words translated "hell" in the New Testament. "Hades," as mentioned previously, refers to the grave or the netherworld. "Gehenna," on the other hand, was the city dump where refuse was burned. Now let's look at a few uses of "Gehenna."

 

When we read, "Whosever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire" (Matt 5:22), that "hell fire" is referring to the burning dump south of Jerusalem. So is the statement, "It is profitable for thee that one of thy members (body parts) should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell" (Matt 5:29-30). When we read, "Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell" (Luke 12:5), that is again using the burning city dump for imagery.

 

In addition we read, "And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched" (Mark 9:43-44). This is an often cited passage about "Hell," but let's dig deeper. Not only is this using the imagery of "Gehenna" discussed above, but it is based on an Old Testament quote that says, "And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched" (Isaiah 66:24). What is being talked about here is clearly not eternal torture, but simply mounting corpses. The worm not dying out is meant in reference to constantly having rotting corpses to eat on. Whatever "fire" may be referring to here, it is clearly not depicting the "Hell" that Christianity teaches.

 

Again, if "Hell" was such an important topic, then why would God avoid making mention of it throughout the entire Old Testament? Why repeatedly warn of death as punishment if eternal torture was really the punishment? With the complete absence of "Hell" in the Old Testament, and the idea growing out of the imagery of a burning city dump south of Jerusalem called the Valley of Hinnom in the New Testament, isn't it quite clear that "Hell" is merely a doctrine that evolved over time?

 

Beyond that, what about the ethics of "Hell"? How can justice be served by inflicting infinite torture as punishment for finite infractions? How is being burned forever a befitting discipline for mere mortals? What loving father would ever do such a thing? Would any good judge ever issue such an unfair sentence?

 

Jesus supposedly said that "whosever believeth" in God's "only begotten Son" will "have everlasting life," and that "he that believeth not is condemned" (John 3:16,18). In Christian theology, that condemnation is "Hell." However, what about all the people who die having never heard about Jesus? What about people raised in different cultures far removed from Christianity, those who are indoctrinated with other views (through no fault of their own) to the point that that they cannot believe Christianity when presented with it? What about the many, many people throughout the ages who simply never had the opportunity to believe in Jesus?

 

Some Christians try to weasel out of that dilemma by suggesting that God is just and will deal fairly with those other people. They may even cite the judgment based on deeds that Jesus spoke of in Matthew 25:31-46. While that may seem to be a noble thought, it is flat-out contradicted by the very quote from Jesus listed above, that "he that believeth not is condemned" (John 3:18). If one doesn't believe, then he's condemned, with no recourse. Besides, there are other logical problems with this argument. Since it indicates that belief in Jesus really isn't necessary for salvation, then what's the point in evangelizing and sending out missionaries? That's commanded in the Bible, of course, but it would be rather pointless if it was true that God would judge everyone justly anyway and that believing in Jesus really isn't necessary for salvation!

 

In addition, what about other people, such as myself, who know the story of Jesus quite well but study Christianity and honestly conclude that it is without merit? With regard to us, as well as the aforementioned people who never heard of Jesus or who were already indoctrinated with another religious view, how could a loving God condemn such people to eternal agony when God himself has refused to show himself? If the all-loving, all-powerful, all-knowing God of evangelical Christianity existed and wanted to have a relationship with every person, then there would be no question that he is real and Christianity is true because he would make it clear! Yet the majority of people in the world have not been convinced of such. Where is this Christian God who is supposedly reaching out to everyone?

 

Another common Christian response is to bring up the quote, "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" (Romans 1:20). Thus, it is argued, nobody has an excuse for not knowing, because "the creation" around us is proof. But is it really? If this verse was true and the natural world we see clearly depicted the Christian God, then everyone who looks at nature would automatically be convinced of the Christian God! Yet, throughout the world there are varying cultures with different religious views, and many of those people look at the exact same nature and see evidence of their gods! And other people look at nature and see no evidence of any god at all! How could this be if "creation" was so clear regarding the Christian God? Obviously, this argument from "creation" is simply false.

 

Think about this. You were raised in a Christian culture that convinced you that Christianity is true, but in the same way people raised in a Muslim culture are convinced that Islam is true, and people raised in a Hindu culture are convinced that Hinduism is true, and so on and so forth. The fact is that people's religious beliefs are primarily dependent upon demographics instead of logic, reason and indisputable evidence.

 

You cannot believe Islam to be true because you were programmed to believe Christianity. But the opposite is also true: Those who are programmed to believe Islam simply cannot believe Christianity. Put yourself in their shoes. What if you had been raised and indoctrinated with Islam, and therefore you could not believe Christianity? That would be no fault of your own; it would simply be the result of being raised in that culture. Would it then be fair to torture you in "Hell" forever and ever and ever, with no mercy and no relief, simply because you did not believe something that you had no ability to believe? Do you not see the absurdity and injustice in that? Do you really believe that a righteous, loving God would do that to his creation?

 

You've heard about "cruel and unusual punishment." Indeed, when someone commits a crime, we expect them to be punished, but we expect the punishment to be in accordance with the crime. However, how could any criminal deserve being tortured forever and ever and ever? We are mere mortals with a very limited life-span, so how could anything one does be worthy of unending agony? Such torture would be "cruel and unusual punishment"! And, again, the idea of issuing such punishment for a lack of belief by those who can't believe is even more problematic.

 

Clearly, any God who would torture people like that would have to be sadistic and unjust, because only a sadistic monster could be so cruel! To call any such God "good" is ridiculous, and is an insult to all that is good.

 

Given that the unjust nature of the doctrine of "Hell" is incompatible with the idea of a loving and just God, and given the way the Christian doctrine of "Hell" evolved out of the imagery of a burning city dump outside Jerusalem, it becomes quite clear that "Hell" is not something revealed by God, but merely a morbid myth that developed over time and became useful for scaring people throughout the ages.

[Overcame Faith]

I'm glad you made that great post, Citsonga. My intention was for others to make contributions.

[★ Citsonga ★]

As for the apologists, that's why I ignored what they had to say and limited my study and thoughts to only the bible. My thinking was (and remains) that if the bible is true, then it can stand on its own without anyone's aid.

 

Quite true. If an all-knowing, all-powerful God wanted to get a message out and wrote a book, then he wouldn't need a whole slew of professional interpreters to make the book seem better than it really is. (Beyond that, if he wanted to get a message out, surely he could come up with a better way than a book!)

 

As a side note, I was fortunate regarding "hell" in my deconversion. Though my deconversion was very difficult on many levels, the one thing I didn't go through is the fear of hell. During my doubting stage I knew that I was being honest in my search for truth, so I figured that if Christianity turned out to be true after all, then God would make it clear and keep me in the fold; on the other hand, I knew that if Christianity turned out to not be true, then hell isn't true either, and therefore it is nothing to fear.

[HanSoto]

I also came to the conclusion that there is no "eternal hell" back when I still contained my ideas to the Bible. A good book for someone who wants to see how that is possible from a Biblical perspective might want to check out "the evangelical universalist" by Gregory macdonald.

 

I still consider myself a universalist personally, but more for philosophical reasons rather than Biblical reasons.

[florduh]

If you realize that other Bible passages are in error, the verses often contradict each other, and much of the writing is at odds with reality - why single out the doctrine of Hell as the possibly true part?

 

Brainwashing. The fear of eternal torture is an effective tool of those who would manipulate your mind. Apparently many people know intellectually that Hell doesn't exist any more than a talking snake does, but the emotional scarring runs deeper than intellect. Those who need to should get any help necessary to overcome the irrational fear.

[florduh]

It's not as overwhelming as it was years ago, but it's still a considerable problem. I often wonder whether I'll ever break free.

Well, there has been progress! Hang in there. It's a long road for many people.

[jackbauer]

Those who need to should get any help necessary to overcome the irrational fear.

 

If only it were that easy, though. I have been through so many psychotherapists by now, that they are all a blur. These include cognitive-behavioral therapists and OCD experts. I still fear the Catholic concepts of mortal sin and hell. It's not as overwhelming as it was years ago, but it's still a considerable problem. I often wonder whether I'll ever break free.

 

Fuck.The.Catholic.Church. Fuck their strict rules limiting sex to only between a married man and women, fuck their idea of thought crimes sending you to hell, and fuck their idea of sins such as doubt and despair sending you to hell (to keep you from leaving), and fuck all the fear and guilt. The traditional model of the Catholic Church is one of the most oppressive and mentally abusive systems ever made.

 

Granted, the church I was in was Liberal with a pretty good priest, but I have known some conservative Catholics and they live a very restrictive and unhappy life. I was almost drawn into it myself and I found myself in a mental war with myself. It's bad enough that it's an authoritarian system, but I've a;ways got a holier than thou vibe from the more traditional types. They have ways of making one feel unworhy even when you've been driven to insanity by all these petty sins. Fuck them, fuck their dogma, and fuck their whinny persecution complex (the whole contraceptive thing is being blown way out of proportion).

 

Sorry for the off topic rant, but this is something that PISSES ME THE FUCK OFF.

[Chikirin]

Chimps "sin," they murder other chimps and steal bananas from other chimps, will there be a Lake of Fire for chimps? Of course not, the idea is ludicrous. So it is just as ludicrous that there would be a lake of fire for people.

[LivingLife]

The flip side of heaven is just as ludicrous. Would you really want to spend your life with all teh fundies? IMO that would be hell too. So IMO, you screwed either way.

 

Eternal dirt nap - aaah bliss.

[2Honest]

I'm thankful that I abandoned my belief in hell years ago (b/c of the same issues Citsonga wrote about). That spared me a lot of trouble when I deconverted a few months ago. My heart really goes out to those who still struggle with the fear of eternal torture.

 

I really appreciate your posts, OF. Thanks for taking the time to write about these issues. You clearly have a lot of concern and compassion for the people here.

 

2H

[Akheia]

Hell's such an outrageous concept. We're humans, so of course we fear punishment--especially punishment we cannot fathom the justice of for crimes we know in our hearts aren't that bad. I found the whole idea of an infinite punishment for finite, limited sins to be morally abhorrent--it's the single most ludicrous aspect of the entire Judeo-Christian mythos, if you want my opinion.

 

It's interesting, though, that even the most lovey-dovey wuvvy-kissy Christians, when push comes to shove, will threaten you and gloat about how they're going to be skipping that part of the afterlife while you suffer in it. The whole point of the religion is revealed in the last few seconds of just about every single witnessing session there's ever been: You must convert or you will die and suffer forever while everybody smart enough to kiss Hank's ass will be drinking margaritas and watching you scream in agony. It doesn't matter what crimes you committed. You might have done 1 small sin, or a million, or murdered every baby in the world. The punishment is the same for all of these--because a loving, just God apparently cannot conceive of even the limited justice that humans have evolved over our existence on Earth. The Bible is curiously silent about most of what Christians today consider "the doctrine of Hell," so as time went on we were happy as a race to just make shit up that sounded good. Like horror movie makers, we got better and better at figuring out what scared the shit out of humans. I mean, it's still the most ridiculous thing ever conceived, but even today even the most rational person can suffer that little niggling "What if..?" in the back of the mind.

 

If an action is motivated by fear or greed, it's probably the wrong action. If you're doing something because you're scared of "missing out" if you don't, or if you're scared you'll miss the boat, or scared you'll lose a huge payoff, you are almost certainly being manipulated. It doesn't matter if the action is buying a house or converting to a religion. Hell fits a manipulation tactic from top to bottom, so I reject it. I still say that if I found out tomorrow that Yahweh was real and exactly what the Bible made him out to be, I'd instantly join or create a rebellion against him, and I'd go to Hell with my head held high because I'd know I'd be going there because I refused to bend knee to such a monster.

[JadedAtheist]

Thanks OF. Great topic!

 

I know a fear of hell followed me around awhile and that it was hard to shake. I was a Calvinist, so to make matters worse I was convinced at some points that I simply wasn't part of the elect and that God was simply toying with me, he was purposefully damning me. If I thought about it too much I would freak out. Slowly, with nothing done but the passing of time, I noticed my fear of hell, then death went away. Now, I don't find Christian dogma concerning even in the very least.

[qadeshet]

There's no difference between the Christian threat of Hell and any other form of extortion. Just like the old protection racket.

[darwinfish]

For at least 6 months after I deconverted, I was more upset that there was no afterlife, then the thought that I might go to hell. Since then, my wife has asked me why I'm not afraid of hell. I've tried to explain to her that I don't believe it exists, but she is so ingrained in the faith, that that concept is too hard for her. I've even tried to point out that she's not afraid of any other religion's version of hell. But, I got no where with that. I've accepted that when I die, that's all there is. A part of me still is sad that there is no afterlife, I believed there was one for 30 years. But, I'm still much happier being honest with my beliefs instead of believing a fantasy that makes me feel better about death.

[owen652]

for me, the one thing that helped me realize how bogus the doctrine of hell really was, was actually thinking about heaven, and how the bible tells us that in heaven christians will be in perfect peace and happiness, with all our tears wiped away, no more sadness, sickness, death, yada yada yada. But how exactly is that possible if we are fully aware that our friends and/or family are downstairs, burning in agony? There are only two answers for the christian: either god changes our character when we get to heaven to become like him (uncaring, evidently), or he zaps our memory Men In Black-style, so we can go on living happily in heaven without any memories of our loved ones. Either way, this god is a manipulative prick and he deserves a special spot in his own Hell if it exists.

 

Idiotic horseshit. Why oh why did i ever believe it?

[Chikirin]

For at least 6 months after I deconverted, I was more upset that there was no afterlife, then the thought that I might go to hell.

 

yes. It made me realize I don't have an eternity, I only have a few more decades if I'm lucky. Initially it put a lot of pressure on me that wasn't there when I thought I was immortal. I almost would have preferred to exist, albeit in Hell, than to just pass out of existence like a dead animal.

[Overcame Faith]

Here's something I thought I'd share on this thread which deals with the fear of hell.

 

Here is a passage in which Jesus is ranting about hell:

 

⁴² “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea. ⁴³ If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. ^{[44] [b] 45} And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. ^{[46] [c] 47} And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, ⁴⁸ where

“‘the worms that eat them do not die,

and the fire is not quenched.’^[d]

Mark 9:42-48

 

The part I want to focus on is the quoted portion at the end of the passage. That passage is a partial quote from Isaiah. Here's the quote in full context:

 

²² “As the new heavens and the new earth that I make will endure before me,” declares the LORD, “so will your name and descendants endure. ²³ From one New Moon to another and from one Sabbath to another, all mankind will come and bow down before me,” says the LORD. ²⁴ “And they will go out and look on the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; the worms that eat them will not die, the fire that burns them will not be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind.”

Isaiah 66:22-24

 

 

Jesus' point in quoting Isaiah is that people will be thrown into hell where the worms that eat them do not die and the fire is not quenched. That leads one to believe that the person bound for the hell that Jesus describes will suffer eternally.

 

But look carefully at the full quote from Isaiah. In that passage, god is speaking about the good fortunes for those who bow down to him. And those fortunate ones will "go and look on the dead bodies of those who rebelled...." and then it goes on and talks about worms and unquenching fire. Those are dead bodies which, according to the passage, are in plain sight of those who bow down to god and who are living here on this earth. Those bodies are DEAD (undoubtedly killed by god for their rebellion) and their lifeless remains are on earth, not living in torment in hell. The worms that eat and will not die and the fire that burns that will not be quenched are mere metaphors for the fact that these people are dead and their bodies will decay. It is in no way talking about hell like Mark has Jesus saying.

[★ Citsonga ★]

Those bodies are DEAD (undoubtedly killed by god for their rebellion) and their lifeless remains are on earth, not living in torment in hell. The worms that eat and will not die and the fire that burns that will not be quenched are mere metaphors for the fact that these people are dead and their bodies will decay. It is in no way talking about hell like Mark has Jesus saying.

 

Exactly! Nowhere does it say that they're being tormented. It seems rather obvious to me that the reference to the worm dying not is an indication that the worms wouldn't die out because of having an endless supply of rotting corpses to feast on. As such, the "fire" can't be talking about hellfire, because the picture being painted is merely one of the fate of physical corpses.

[♦ ficino ♦]

But look carefully at the full quote from Isaiah. In that passage, god is speaking about the good fortunes for those who bow down to him. And those fortunate ones will "go and look on the dead bodies of those who rebelled...." and then it goes on and talks about worms and unquenching fire. Those are dead bodies which, according to the passage, are in plain sight of those who bow down to god and who are living here on this earth. Those bodies are DEAD (undoubtedly killed by god for their rebellion) and their lifeless remains are on earth, not living in torment in hell. The worms that eat and will not die and the fire that burns that will not be quenched are mere metaphors for the fact that these people are dead and their bodies will decay. It is in no way talking about hell like Mark has Jesus saying.

 

So you're saying that Mark misuses the book of Isaiah. You're not saying that Mark doesn't present eternal torment. In other words, Mark (or even Jesus, if he existed and really said this) misuses Isaiah to teach a doctrine of hell that was not part of Judaism at the time Isaiah was written. Correct?