Alternative "Humane" Hells

[megasamurai]

I've noticed that there are many different types of hell that Christians believe in, some of them being "humane" and superior to the other hells, but really? There's the idea of hell being in levels, where only the worst of the worst gets the fire and those who perform lesser offenses get lighter punishments. This is basically the modern version of Dante's Inferno, except modernized. Instead of fires, unbelievers get electric shocks or poked with needles or something. Is an eternity of this really that much a step up from a lake of fire? An eternity of pain is an eternity of pain regardless of the severity of it. Even minor things, like Chinese drip torture, becomes agonizing after a prolonged period of time. Hell being in levels doesn't make things better.

 

There's also the idea that god doesn't torture people in hell, Satan does. Still, isn't the idea of god sending people to a place where they'll be tortured by Satan sort of torture by proxy. Some atheist guy who saw a vision claimed he got raped by demons and stuff. Another version of hell is a place of isolation and loneliness. Billions of people will be in hell, but hell is such a big place that people wanting to go to hell to see their favorite rockstar won't get that wish granted. Some Russian dude had that vision. Yes, my church often taught mutually exclusive versions of hell based on these visions and the Sunday School teacher's views. Yet another hell is "separation from god" which had tons of different interpretations. I was taught that this was more humane than being set on fire, yet more painful as god is like the sun that provides warmth and love and separation from god means being unable to feel this love. People in hell will never be able to feel love or happiness without god's presence.

 

It is obvious that the idea of firey hell is controversial and replaced by "humane" hells, but are these alternative hells really morally superior? 

[sdelsolray]

Many Christians believe all sorts of things.  There are different ways to measure them...entertainment value, nonsense level, cognitive dissonance pressure, willful ignorance effort, among others.  It could, theoretically, become a full time job.

 

The hell beliefs are quite robust, as well as comical.  As you say, there are many different flavors.  There is also a fairly consistent dose of, "I'm special because I have eternal life" underlying the hell beliefs.

[megasamurai]

There's also a huge rivalry between Christians who believe they have the superior hell. Which Christian version of hell sounds most fun?

[sdelsolray]

I like the hard core separated from god "hell".  You know...I die and that's it, at least for me.  It's reality based, but just by coincidence.

[mymistake]

2 hours ago, megasamurai said:

There's also a huge rivalry between Christians who believe they have the superior hell. Which Christian version of hell sounds most fun?

 

Can I go to the one where all the party goers get sent?

[Joshpantera]

11 hours ago, megasamurai said:

Some atheist guy who saw a vision claimed he got raped by demons and stuff.

 

 

You gotta love how they like to throw in 'even an atheist' saw it. All bullshit, of course. 

[megasamurai]

Oh yeah, annihilationism, that's another version of hell. There are variations of this too where some annihilation is painless and some is your soul being burned to non-existence. That's how some Christians harmonize fire and destruction. Part of me wonders if non-Christians really consciously choose to go to hell, why don't they get to choose which version? 

[Orbit]

My favorite hell is a Chinese hell (there are several) where people have enormous bellies and tiny mouths.

[megasamurai]

There's also the differences related to the purpose of hell. Some Christians deny that hell is about judgement and it's about giving people what they want. If the only requirement for hell is wanting to go to hell, what's the point of the long judgement and trial. We are supposed to report on every word and action we did in our mortal lives. Why do this if hell isn't about judgement? Also, how can anybody go to heaven or hell if the trial would take a ....really, really long time to get through. No one's vision of heaven or hell includes judgement and the trial even though the Bible makes a big deal out of it. Do temporary visitors get to skip this long and tedious formality?

[♦ Fuego ♦]

Some from my old bible study group threw in with the CS Lewis view that unbelievers create their own hell. He wrote something about some elves that couldn't see that they were in Heaven due to their own unwillingness to see anything good, maybe it was part of the Narnia stuff. But that has nothing at all to do with the New Testament words about it. Jesus repeats over and over about "cut off and thrown into the fire", weeping, gnashing of teeth. (Note that his teachings were not part of Judaism and would have more than raised eyebrows if he actually spoke about it. Jews don't have a hell. More like a purgatory, or a kind of washing machine cycle of cleansing before returning to life here to try again - reincarnation of all or parts of your being.)

 

 

[mwc]

     The idea that Satan tortures people is absurd.  He supposedly rebels and gets rewarded with his greatest wish?  A kingdom of his own and the ability to do as he pleases within that kingdom?  But everyone else who does anything "out of line" isn't rewarded with anything but is sent as fodder to this other guy and his pals?  The original evil doer wins the lottery and everyone else pays the price?  Seriously?  How crazy is that?

 

          mwc

 

[♦ Fuego ♦]

I think the idea of Satan as king of hell comes from (again) merging of other religions where Hades/Pluto/Hel was the god/goddess of the underworld. That was not the intent of the Christian version at all. It was supposed to be a place of punishment for the disobedient, and ultimately there is the "second death" of the lake of fire for the devil and his angels and hell itself. But since the concept of damnation was borrowed from non-Judaic religions, it isn't a big surprise to see other concepts borrowed by the general believers, even though those concepts are not from the Bible. 

[megasamurai]

Supposedly, the flames are a metaphor for separation from god (or something else, whatever is in the hell of metaphorical flame), but saying that being separated from god is like being burned in a lake of fire does not make that sound more humane than literal fire. How does one respond to the "the flames are a metaphor" argument?

[◊ DestinyTurtle ◊]

How many angels dance on the head of a pin? People go coconuts articulating arguments about things they literally know nothing about (the bible is certainly vague about it, if it even mentions hell at all). 

 

That being said, maybe hell is a fake heaven where the people who believe others should go to hell go to. I mean, their idea of heaven isn't filled with the nicest people.

[mwc]

18 hours ago, Fuego said:

I think the idea of Satan as king of hell comes from (again) merging of other religions where Hades/Pluto/Hel was the god/goddess of the underworld. That was not the intent of the Christian version at all. It was supposed to be a place of punishment for the disobedient, and ultimately there is the "second death" of the lake of fire for the devil and his angels and hell itself. But since the concept of damnation was borrowed from non-Judaic religions, it isn't a big surprise to see other concepts borrowed by the general believers, even though those concepts are not from the Bible. 

     Yeah, I had originally said something like this in my post but it sort of took away from my point so I erased it.  It's just seemed better off focusing on how absurd the whole thing is as opposed to trying to figure out it's that way.  It's not my job to make apologies for their mixed-up beliefs (although we sure do seem to do that sort of thing a lot even if it's for different reasons than they do it for).

 

          mwc

 

[megasamurai]

Satan probably has just as many variations as hell does because the Bible is even vaguer on Satan. The whole Lucifer origin story isn't as neatly laid out as it's taught in Sunday School (was Lucifer even a fallen angel or a human king?) He's supposed to be main villain of the Bible but appears in fewer than ten stories. If Satan is such as big deal, why doesn't he do much, and his few appearances contradict as to whether he is an agent or enemy of god. It appears that Satan's transformation occurred between the testaments. Any experts on the history of Satan as a concept?