God is Infinitely Worse than Tyrants

[SalvIsWin]

I will explain where I took the name of the title from in a moment, but first let me give some background history on the concept or idea that is to be debated. David Lewis is a philosopher who wrote a piece called, 'Divine Evil' for a book called 'Philosophers Without Gods'.

This particular piece is interesting because it allows a different argument to be had concerning God, one that is different from the debate of whether God exists (usually within a Catholic or Christian sense). The basic tenet is that even if one were concede for the sake of argument that God existed, God would not be a being worthy of worship, and that what God does is essentially infinitely worse than what the worst of tyrants ever did.

Dan Dennet talks about the piece when discussing the book and says the following, which I have transcribed. I purposely leave out some of the puns or jokes that Dennet makes, and I leave the overall idea which is most accurate:

Lewis develops the following argument: the Christian God is one of judgment and punish; Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord. In fact, eternal punishment for unrepentant sinners and disbelievers, if you read the bible literally. In heaven or in hell you are eternal, it is this infinite pain. That seems to be the implication of the Christian bible.

How could you ever respect any body, who not only believed in, but worshiped a God that was the perpetrator of infinite pain; it's so un-proportional to what ever your crime is. An eternity of suffering? Can we admire the believers, Lewis asks, only if they are ignorant of the nature of the perpetrator.

The overall idea being that the Christian God is one that sends sinners and disbelievers to hell, which as described in the bible is a place of eternal pain and suffering. The key part here of course is that even if you're a good person by societal standards, it's a sin to not seek out and accept God, so you would going to hell. Once in hell, you're punished eternally, even though what ever your crime is or was could only have caused a finite amount of harm.

Example: Hitler is arguably the worst tyrant in history. For all the bad that Hitler caused, it was a finite amount. Our time on Earth is not with out end, but Hitler would be suffering in hell for all eternity, so an infinite punishment for a finite crime; the argument being made is that this is so outrageously un-proportionate.

The next part that is discussed by Lewis talks about the believers themselves, asking how could a reasonable person respect these believers who believe and worship a God that is the perpetrator of infinite pain? It's been touched upon in that quote, but here is a longer quote about it:

We dodge the consequence by keeping it all in soft focus, consoling ourselves with the thought that hellfire and brimstone are mere conceits that grown-up theists have gotten beyond the cartoon scenarios. That is probably the stance most favoured by those who worship the perpetrator, starting from their trust in God, they suppose that their must be some nice version of the story. One that will not end with literally billions of damned souls writhing in eternal agony.

Non-believers have been able to excuse their religious friends on the grounds that they're probably not clear-headed about the commitments of their worship. How could you condone that your friend worships such an evil perpetrator? Lewis then compares this God with Hitler.

Lewis doesn't just go after God as the perpetrator of such acts, but goes after the believers for having the gall to worship this God. Now I have brought this up with friends and acquaintances of mine, few of which are religious themselves, and some similar arguments are usually made. To avoid such a long first post though, I'll pose a question which underlines the basic tenets involved in Lewis' piece:

• What is your opinion of Lewis' piece?
• For a non-believer: What do you think of Lewis' claim that you have a responsibility to pose this to your religious friends, for they are the worshipers of the perpetrator?
• For a believer: What do you say to Lewis' argument? Lewis would claim your actions are inexcusable, how would you respond?

P.S. The link for the video in which Dennett speaks on Lewis' piece, and where I transcribed the quotes is this link: http://www.youtube.com/user/richarddawkinsdotnet#p/u/7/BvJZQwy9dvE You can see the part I speak of at 0:32:40 .

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

*Enter Ricky, WZ's resident theologian/philosopher*

I will explain where I took the name of the title from in a moment, but first let me give some background history on the concept or idea that is to be debated. David Lewis is a philosopher who wrote a piece called, 'Divine Evil' for a book called 'Philosophers Without Gods'.

This should be muy interesante.

This particular piece is interesting because it allows a different argument to be had concerning God, one that is different from the debate of whether God exists (usually within a Catholic or Christian sense). The basic tenet is that even if one were concede for the sake of argument that God existed, God would not be a being worthy of worship, and that what God does is essentially infinitely worse than what the worst of tyrants ever did.

What about other gods? And if God is superior to all, would God not be worthy of worship?

Furthermore, what this fella is doing is trying to take that which is infinite (the Ultimate) and judge it based on finite principles. Things like "worst" and "best" and "smelly" could not be attributed to the Infinite. Thus, before the argument is even made...I'm not sure it can stand on its own.

The overall idea being that the Christian God is one that sends sinners and disbelievers to hell, which as described in the bible is a place of eternal pain and suffering. The key part here of course is that even if you're a good person by societal standards, it's a sin to not seek out and accept God, so you would going to hell. Once in hell, you're punished eternally, even though what ever your crime is or was could only have caused a finite amount of harm.

What is hell? If hell is this place that we go to if we are wicked human beings, then how do any of us know about it? Did someone come back and say..."Man look out for hell. It sucks hardcore"?

Most of our concepts of hell come from ancient Greek/Roman mythology and likely Dante's Inferno, taking preconceived human notions of a wicked afterlife and applying them to the "hell" that is described in the Bible. Surely, hell could be something that is experienced in the present and not just some place of eternal suffering for not doing ABC.

Example: Hitler is arguably the worst tyrant in history. For all the bad that Hitler caused, it was a finite amount. Our time on Earth is not with out end, but Hitler would be suffering in hell for all eternity, so an infinite punishment for a finite crime; the argument being made is that this is so outrageously un-proportionate.

Ok, so what if Hitler was "infinitely" punished for finite deeds? Does that make God not worthy of worship? Since when were beatification dependent upon fairness?

Lewis doesn't just go after God as the perpetrator of such acts, but goes after the believers for having the gall to worship this God.

Well, if the "vengeful and angry God" theory was correct, and God is indeed in control...wouldn't one be stupid not to worship God? Otherwise we'd go to hell.

 

[SalvIsWin]

What about other gods? And if God is superior to all, would God not be worthy of worship?

This is an argument completely based on the Christian God and no other, if you try to extrapolate the argument to other religions it won't work.

What is hell? If hell is this place that we go to if we are wicked human beings, then how do any of us know about it? Did someone come back and say..."Man look out for hell. It sucks hardcore"?

Hell as is defined in the Christian bible, which is stated to be a place of eternal punishment.

Most of our concepts of hell come from ancient Greek/Roman mythology and likely Dante's Inferno, taking preconceived human notions of a wicked afterlife and applying them to the "hell" that is described in the Bible. Surely, hell could be something that is experienced in the present and not just some place of eternal suffering for not doing ABC.

Ok, so what if Hitler was "infinitely" punished for finite deeds? Does that make God not worthy of worship? Since when were beatification dependent upon fairness?

Well, if the "vengeful and angry God" theory was correct, and God is indeed in control...wouldn't one be stupid not to worship God? Otherwise we'd go to hell.

These are some good points, and some very good ideas to address right away before any more discussion is made. Like I said, the Hell being discussed is that within the Christian bible, where it says you are cursed in to eternal fire, mentions eternal punishment, agony, torment and things of the like. If you look at the terms of Hell and God more abstractly, then this argument doesn't work, but of course this argument is to be made when debating with Christians and no others. In the bible it is stated what will have you being tormented in hell.

Whether or not you're fine with an angry and vengeful God is where one opinion can differ from the other. Personally, I wouldn't be a worshiper of God if I knew this nature to be true. Besides, we can only speculate on how God would react to having worshipers that were loyal and sincere on the exterior, but seething with anger through gritted teeth on the inside, both of which an all-powerful being would recognize.

 

[antfarm612]

I've always thought about this. God must have a serious ego-complex if he tortures souls for all eternity for not believing he exists. What a dick.

 

[ABMorales787]

OK. This seems interesting. In my religion, it was taught that hell... Is Earth. Hell is the place where there is sin. That's Earth. The Devil and all of the fallen angels where exiled from heaven for envying God, they were sent to Earth and given a chance to apologize until Jesus was cruzified. Hell isn't some place in the core of the planet with horned red guys boiling people in cauldrins. That's cartoon bullshit. The eternal suffering that we were taught is to seize our existance and be burried permanently on Earth. Because its been said before. There is no fate worse than death. You have a chance at eternal life. When comes back (our religion is absed on the second coming of Christ) those ho inherit the good shall inherit eternal life while those who inherit the evil shall return death. God gives us a chance and he gives us some pretty straight forward guidelines. We aren't even obligated to foolw them.

All I've gotta say about the writer of the book is that he lacks knowledge on said subject. Not on the "omnisentient being" aspect because an "ominsentient being doesn't mean he'll be perfect and good, but on the religion aspect. If it were true that God condemns sinners to eternal torture that would litteraly yank out the backbone of what religion is supposed to be, wouldn't it? John 3:16 and the 10 comandments would just be wastes of time.

In response to the whoele "worship" thing, don't you "worship" your parents? They brought you to life. For that, you love and respect them. Always. Unless they betray you. They give you life and free will. Don't they deserve something in return? A hug in the morning. A kiss goodnite. A present on Mother/Fathers day. God doesn't force you to it. He just asks. The same way your parents would.

 

[The Roid Rage]

I'm not going to get into this one because I could see it getting pretty nasty. All I can say is that I am pretty appalled at the bad taste this is in, and that I pretty sick of watching Christianity and God come under fire for mans lack of understanding. It's always God and it's always Christianity taking the beating even though all it really tries to promote is a belief in a higher power and a clean lifestyle when you get down to it. The truth of the matter as told to me by the wisest man I ever knew was that it is very very simple to live by the word of God. We complicate it by trying to negotiate what things mean or don't mean, and try to find our way around the rules. If one simply obeys life becomes much simpler. Looking back at the first lesson in the bible, man refused to simply obey, and for it man payed dearly. Was it too much for your creator to ask to stay away from the forbidden fruit? Really? not really, but man who is imperfect was deceived and tempted by power and wisdom(as if that doesn't corrupt man still).

Contrary to popular belief I am not a bible toting hun, but I was raised with Christian beliefs. I believe those beliefs are good and meant to free men of their sinful ways, rather than put you on a choke chain as some perceive it. I've never once seen anyone take issue with Islam, or Buddahism, or any other religion but people never stop trying to tear down Christianity and truthfully it breaks my heart.

 

[SalvIsWin]

OK. This seems interesting. In my religion, it was taught that hell... Is Earth. Hell is the place where there is sin. That's Earth. The Devil and all of the fallen angels where exiled to Earth. Hell isn't some place in the core of the planet with horned red giys boiling people in cauldrins. That's cartoon bullshit. The eternal suffering that we were taught is to seize our existance. Because its been said before. There is no fate worse than death. All I've gotta say about the writer of the book is that he lacks knowledge on said subject. Not on the "omnisentient being" aspect, but on the religion aspect. If it were true that God condemns sinners to eternal torture that would litteraly yank out the backbone of what religion is supposed to be, wouldn't it? John 3:16 and the 10 comandments would just be wastes of time.

What religion are you talking about when you say 'my religion'. This is a piece on the Christian bible and Christian God, and Earth is clearly not hell in Christianity. Why do you say that the writer lacks knowledge on religion? It is true (if we concede the bible is truth) that sinners are condemned eternally to hell, that's the entire basis for which this piece was written, hence the part where Lewis remarks that believers excuse themselves by thinking their must be a nicer version of the story, one in which billions of souls are not writhing in eternal torment.

QUOTE=Riaku;2006500]In response to the whoele "worship" thing, don't you "worship" your parents? They brought you to life. For that, you love and respect them. Always. Unless they betray you. They give you life and free will. Don't they deserve something in return? A hug in the morning. A kiss goodnite. A present on Mother/Fathers day. God doesn't force you to it. He just asks. The same way your parents would.[/QUOTE]

Interesting that you name free will, because you are giving the free will to not worship God, and to just live a good life by societal standards, but then you would also be condemned to eternal torment for that choice. You have free will in your life on Earth, but unless you follow the rules God set forth, you will be eternally punished for it, and that's the point. You will be eternally punished for a finite crime.

Likewise, your parents are not your commanding authority, you are your own person. When your parents bore you, they took the responsibility of caring for you, and if at 18 you decide you want to leave, that's completely your choice. What if your parents said they will shoot you if you leave, it's not in their will for you to leave and live your own life? That would be utterly ridiculous, you're being punished because you're not following their will. Are you saying your parents have the right to dictate their will, regardless of it's severity because they bore you? That they gain that privilege?

I would argue that they do not. You're born to your parents, and for having cared for you and helped you grow, most reasonable person form a bond and sense of gratitude to their parents, but it's not required or a necessity, you have free will, you can do as you please.

I'm not going to get into this one because I could see it getting pretty nasty. All I can say is that I am pretty appalled at the bad taste this is in, and that I pretty sick of watching Christianity and God come under fire for mans lack of understanding. It's always God and it's always Christianity taking the beating even though all it really tries to promote is a belief in a higher power and a clean lifestyle when you get down to it. The truth of the matter as told to me by the wisest man I ever knew was that it is very very simple to live by the word of God. We complicate it by trying to negotiate what things mean or don't mean, and try to find our way around the rules. If one simply obeys life becomes much simpler. Looking back at the first lesson in the bible, man refused to simply obey, and for it man payed dearly. Was it too much for your creator to ask to stay away from the forbidden fruit? Really? not really, but man who is imperfect was deceived and tempted by power and wisdom(as if that doesn't corrupt man still).

Contrary to popular belief I am not a bible toting hun, but I was raised with Christian beliefs. I believe those beliefs are good and meant to free men of their sinful ways, rather than put you on a choke chain as some perceive it. I've never once seen anyone take issue with Islam, or Buddahism, or any other religion but people never stop trying to tear down Christianity and truthfully it breaks my heart.

You have never seen any one take issue with Islam? I don't take issue with Buddhism personally because as far as I know, Buddhism teaches a way of life, one that we could say is moral and just, and as a particularly nice selling point, there is no eternal hell for one to suffer in. If Buddhism were to be true as I understand, I wouldn't be punished eternally for not being a believer, or for not seeking out God to cleanse my taint for having been the descendent of humans that took the forbidden fruit. Buddhism teaches a way of life, but regardless if you intentionally lived your life according to Buddhism or not, it's the end result that counts, and I rather like that.

If Christianity taught people to live a moral and societal 'good' way of living, and that regardless of how, you would be rewarded for such, I wouldn't have a problem with that aspect. I would still have a problem with eternally punishing souls for a finite amount of sin, but the overall metaphorical pill would be easier to swallow, but as we both know, that isn't the case.

Furthermore, how do you rationalize a man being eternally tormented in hell even if he led a filling and societal morally correct life? In my opinion, there is an inherent flaw with the way man was designed assuming there is a God. More and more people are turning away from religion, and thus being condemned to hell. Many believe that they need to see more evidence for a God before their devote their life towards a church. How can be justified that one person is eternally rewarded in heaven for being a good person, yet another is eternally tormented in hell for being a good person, but just not taking that leap of faith required to devote yourself to God?

 

[FromTheSouth]

Salv, I like you, but I think you are wrong. The Christian God is forgiving. The Christian God gave his only son. The Christian God offers refuge for sinners.

The Jewish God is tyrannical. God is vengeful in The Old Testament, not the New. In The Old Testament, God is vengeful because people routinely reject him. Moses threw The Commandments against the ground, Abraham questioned him, and so it goes. God was vengeful to those who reject him. You don't have to believe in Him to accept his principles. To not murder, to not lie, to not cheat or steal...these are not principles one needs to believe in God, these are principles one should follow if he believes in man...God's greatest gift.

To suggest that God is tyrannical is a double edged sword. To point to Biblical massacres, like Sodom or The Flood or Eqypt is to accept The Bible as true. I don't see how one can point to those examples as fact of God's tyranny and completely ignore God's bounteous gifts to the world. You are only taking the bad as true and completely disregarding everything else taught about Him.

And, to say God is worse than Hitler....please. That is such a red herring. God gave us all life, according to The Bible you seem to quote in all its glorious evil.

 

[SalvIsWin]

Salv, I like you, but I think you are wrong. The Christian God is forgiving. The Christian God gave his only son. The Christian God offers refuge for sinners.

Just to be clear, I am merely agent for bringing this proposition to the cigar lounge. I tried in the original post to be unbiased and display the tenets at hand clearly, without confusing them with my own opinion, of course once the thread is underway I will supply my own thoughts as well.

As for the name of the thread, I couldn't think of the words that would accurately show what the post would contain, so I settled for an assertion implied by Lewis, which would most definitely be that God is infinitely worse than tyrants.

The Jewish God is tyrannical. God is vengeful in The Old Testament, not the New. In The Old Testament, God is vengeful because people routinely reject him. Moses threw The Commandments against the ground, Abraham questioned him, and so it goes. God was vengeful to those who reject him. You don't have to believe in Him to accept his principles. To not murder, to not lie, to not cheat or steal...these are not principles one needs to believe in God, these are principles one should follow if he believes in man...God's greatest gift.

To be honest I agree with the bolded part of your post, that's what I was getting at with my commentary on Buddhism, which doesn't judge the person on their motivation for being a good person, they don't care, as long as in the end you were. However that isn't the case with Christianity, if you and I lived equally good lives according to the word of God, you would proceed to heaven while I would be condemned to hell, because I did not seek out Jesus as my savior.

There is a fundamental difference with Christianity, because according to the bible you are tainted because of Adam & Eve, thus you need to be saved from that taint, and with out worship and repentance, God will not reward you with heaven.

To suggest that God is tyrannical is a double edged sword. To point to Biblical massacres, like Sodom or The Flood or Eqypt is to accept The Bible as true. I don't see how one can point to those examples as fact of God's tyranny and completely ignore God's bounteous gifts to the world. You are only taking the bad as true and completely disregarding everything else taught about Him.

And, to say God is worse than Hitler....please. That is such a red herring. God gave us all life, according to The Bible you seem to quote in all its glorious evil.

The argument isn't to say that God is a tyrant, but that he is worse than a tyrant. Even a tyrant only causes a finite amount of pain and suffering, but God is the perpetrator of eternal torment and suffering amongst people you and I would classify as good people. God gave life and free will, yet wasn't pleased with how his creations used their free will, and for that they were cast out from paradise. Now, multiple generations later, regardless of how I live my life, as a good person or not, I will suffer eternal punishment if I do not worship God and accept Jesus as my saviour. Do you not find that un-proportionate to the crime?

That's the basic question behind Lewis' piece, that believers are worshiping this being, despite the fact that God's will is responsible for the billions of writhing souls, with no chance of liberation.

 

[ABMorales787]

What religion are you talking about when you say 'my religion'.

7th Day Adventist.

This is a piece on the Christian bible and Christian God, and Earth is clearly not hell in Christianity.

Yes. It is. Hell is the place where evil resides. That would be right here. There's no alternate dimension where hellfire and brimstone are a common part of the scenery. Just why would Lucifer be so obsesed with the people here, if he's got his own place? That's because this is his place. He's fallen, and he doesn't want to be alone.

Why do you say that the writer lacks knowledge on religion? It is true (if we concede the bible is truth) that sinners are condemned eternally to hell, that's the entire basis for which this piece was written, hence the part where Lewis remarks that believers excuse themselves by thinking their must be a nicer version of the story, one in which billions of souls are not writhing in eternal torment.

Because if such piece was true, why the hell would christianity even be considered something good? Be good of God or He will smite you? Then why bother letting us live? We're bound to fuck up at some point of our life.

Interesting that you name free will, because you are giving the free will to not worship God, and to just live a good life by societal standards, but then you would also be condemned to eternal torment for that choice.

"Eternal torment" its always the negative and exaggerated one, isn't it? Again, if this were true, the bible contradicts itself. You gotta remember, the bible is the oldest book in the world. Its also written by man. Its words can become deluded over the years. Just like the latin language, now we have all these latin-based languages, the same goes for religion. No body will see it the same way. I think you and I make good point of that right now.

You have free will in your life on Earth, but unless you follow the rules God set forth, you will be eternally punished for it, and that's the point. You will be eternally punished for a finite crime.

No. You have a chance to ask for forgiveness. Pray God for forgiveness and follow his path and He will guide you. Its the whole basis of this. If everyone were quickly condemned for whatever sin they commited, heaven would be pretty much useless.

Likewise, your parents are not your commanding authority, you are your own person. When your parents bore you, they took the responsibility of caring for you, and if at 18 you decide you want to leave, that's completely your choice. What if your parents said they will shoot you if you leave, it's not in their will for you to leave and live your own life? That would be utterly ridiculous, you're being punished because you're not following their will. Are you saying your parents have the right to dictate their will, regardless of it's severity because they bore you? That they gain that privilege?

Salv. You're slipping. You didn't read the post right. You even quoted it.

In response to the whoele "worship" thing, don't you "worship" your parents? They brought you to life. For that, you love and respect them. Always. Unless they betray you. They give you life and free will. Don't they deserve something in return? A hug in the morning. A kiss goodnite. A present on Mother/Fathers day. God doesn't force you to it. He just asks. The same way your parents would.

Has God betrayed us? No. He still gives us the opportunity to accept Him and have a chance at eternal life if we are good people. Good. Its all there really is to it, but people complicate it so much. They always want to stretch it to their convenience rather than simply accepting that what they are doing is wrong.

I would argue that they do not. You're born to your parents, and for having cared for you and helped you grow, most reasonable person form a bond and sense of gratitude to their parents, but it's not required or a necessity, you have free will, you can do as you please.

God doesn't force you to adore Him. The same way I'm not forcing you to believe what I say.
Its your choice.

You have never seen any one take issue with Islam? I don't take issue with Buddhism personally because as far as I know, Buddhism teaches a way of life, one that we could say is moral and just, and as a particularly nice selling point, there is no eternal hell for one to suffer in. If Buddhism were to be true as I understand, I wouldn't be punished eternally for not being a believer, or for not seeking out God to cleanse my taint for having been the descendent of humans that took the forbidden fruit. Buddhism teaches a way of life, but regardless if you intentionally lived your life according to Buddhism or not, it's the end result that counts, and I rather like that.

Buddhism isn't wrong. Its their choice. They are following their beliefs. Nothing wrong with it. God won't "smite" them for following what they've been taught. He can't condemn over lack of knowledge or for viewing said knowledge from a different perspective. There's thousands of religions. All have their flaws.

If Christianity taught people to live a moral and societal 'good' way of living, and that regardless of how, you would be rewarded for such, I wouldn't have a problem with that aspect. I would still have a problem with eternally punishing souls for a finite amount of sin, but the overall metaphorical pill would be easier to swallow, but as we both know, that isn't the case.

Again. Every day people tell you this. The same every day people who print out the bible every few years. The bible is a basis. Nothing more. The bible says, the bible says. Fuck that, I listen to Jesus Christ. God Almighty.

In the end, you take what you read the way you feel it should be. Its faith.

Furthermore, how do you rationalize a man being eternally tormented in hell even if he led a filling and societal morally correct life? In my opinion, there is an inherent flaw with the way man was designed assuming there is a God. More and more people are turning away from religion, and thus being condemned to hell. Many believe that they need to see more evidence for a God before their devote their life towards a church. How can be justified that one person is eternally rewarded in heaven for being a good person, yet another is eternally tormented in hell for being a good person, but just not taking that leap of faith required to devote yourself to God?

Again. Everyday people tell you this. Is it that hard to believe that they will twist the words in their favor? Every church's objective is to convert you to their religion. They'll want you to follow their rules. Should you follow man's rules? Or the Lord Jesus Christ? And there faith comes to mind.

 

[SalvIsWin]

7th Day Adventist.

I've never heard of that, are there any significant differences?

Yes. It is. Hell is the place where evil resides. That would be right here. There's no alternate dimension where hellfire and brimstone are a common part of the scenery. Just why would Lucifer be so obsesed with the people here, if he's got his own place? That's because this is his place. He's fallen, and he doesn't want to be alone.

Hell is a place of eternal punishment, this is explicitly stated. Hell is also a place where only the sinners who have not repented are condemned to, it would contradict the bible to state that Christians right now are living in hell. To state there is no alternate dimension is the opposite of what I would expect a Christian to say, where else would heaven be? It certainly isn't a tangible place that we can reach, it must be part of another system of being. With the text of the bible, I would say it isn't logical to conclude what you're saying.

Because if such piece was true, why the hell would christianity even be considered something good? Be good of God or He will smite you? Then why bother letting us live? We're bound to fuck up at some point of our life.

"Eternal torment" its always the negative and exaggerated one, isn't it? Again, if this were true, the bible contradicts itself. You gotta remember, the bible is the oldest book in the world. Its also written by man. Its words can become deluded over the years. Just like the latin language, now we have all these latin-based languages, the same goes for religion. No body will see it the same way. I think you and I make good point of that right now.

Exactly, that's the question, why is God being worshiped and praised giving the explicit knowledge that the vast majority of beings that ever existed are not writhing in eternal torment. Eternal torment isn't an implication, nor is it an interpretation, it's explicitly stated. If you're saying that what's stated can still be wrong, that throws a wrench in to not only this argument, but any argument any one makes about religion, because how can you believe any thing at that point? Maybe one of the commandments isn't what was intended and all Christian's are sinners that haven't repented for breaking that one commandment.

No. You have a chance to ask for forgiveness. Pray God for forgiveness and follow his path and He will guide you. Its the whole basis of this. If everyone were quickly condemned for whatever sin they commited, heaven would be pretty much useless.

Has God betrayed us? No. He still gives us the opportunity to accept Him and have a chance at eternal life if we are good people. Good. Its all there really is to it, but people complicate it so much. They always want to stretch it to their convenience rather than simply accepting that what they are doing is wrong.

God doesn't force you to adore Him. The same way I'm not forcing you to believe what I say. Its your choice.

Indeed, according to the bible you do have the option to ask for forgiveness. How ever that's entirely the point of the argument, assuming the bibles word is true, is God deserving of praise and worship? God isn't simply worried about every one being a good person, because as I stated, I would be going to hell regardless, because I haven't accepted the Lord as my saviour.

What if I don't think I need to be saved? What if I chose that being a good person is my goal and I strive to attain that? I am still being condemned to hell, for all eternity at that. This is your benevolent God? God doesn't force you to adore him in the sense that it's your only option, but it is your only option that doesn't end with an eternally damned soul, which I take issue with.

Buddhism isn't wrong. Its their choice. They are following their beliefs. Nothing wrong with it. God won't "smite" them for following what they've been taught. He can't condemn over lack of knowledge or for viewing said knowledge from a different perspective. There's thousands of religions. All have their flaws.

Incorrect, you're required to seek the Lord as your saviour in order to be saved from eternal damnation. Buddhists will most definitely be condemned to hell at the end of their lifespan, for they were not baptized, accepting of the Lord as their saviour, etc. God most certainly condemn for having a different perspective, that's the argument at hand.

Again. Every day people tell you this. The same every day people who print out the bible every few years. The bible is a basis. Nothing more. The bible says, the bible says. Fuck that, I listen to Jesus Christ. God Almighty.

In the end, you take what you read the way you feel it should be. Its faith.

Noble, and I would agree with this sentiment, how ever if the word of the bible is to be taken literally, which this argument concedes as a means to make it's point, there is no room for interpretation, there is God's will, and there is 'other'. Like I said earlier, if you want to state that the bible's word isn't complete truth, and that it is open to interpretation, that's your prerogative, and I would be more accepting of that personally.

_______

Lastly, you have a more abstract view of God and of your own religion. You've stated about the bible being open to interpretation, as well as your view that God wouldn't condemn souls simply for having a different perspective, even though the bible would contradict this. This argument in the original post isn't to debate with you, as clearly you have a perspective I am fine with. The argument concedes two things:

• The bible is truth
• The bible is to be read and interpreted literally, which in my experience is how most Christian and Catholic churches run their show

When you don't view things that way, as you clearly do not, then the argument is void. The entire point is to point out the nature of God, and ask questions about why you would choose to worship such a being etc. However if you change the nature of that God because you state it's up for interpretation, obviously there is no argument to be had.

 

[The Roid Rage]

You have never seen any one take issue with Islam?

Not here on Wrestlezone no. Of course I watch the news and people have from time to time, but when they do whomever does is attacked and basically ostracized for saying anything. However, when it comes to Christianity it's time to have a field day, and no insult is great enough. You know that's the way it is, and you can't tell me being honest with me or yourself that that is right.

I don't take issue with Buddhism personally because as far as I know, Buddhism teaches a way of life, one that we could say is moral and just, and as a particularly nice selling point, there is no eternal hell for one to suffer in.

But see your words? “as far as you know”. Well here's the problem with that, you don't know. Neither do I, and neither does anyone else for sure. But what is wrong with embracing a religion that teaches that our actions on Earth have consequences past our existence here? If you touch a hot stove do you not get burned? What could be more just than saying “ I am God the maker of the heavens and Earth, follow a few simple rules and I will give you everlasting life in the kingdom of heaven, but if you do not there most certainly is a punishment for it.” It's not something that is to be sold and I am not a televangelist trying to sell you faith. Just because you don't like the idea of paying for your sins, and having to face an eternal consequence, doesn't mean that the religion teaching you that is inherently evil or that God is evil. Is everyone who is willing to punish you evil? Is it an authority thing, you can't handle the idea of an authority higher than yourself or man?

If Buddhism were to be true as I understand, I wouldn't be punished eternally for not being a believer, or for not seeking out God to cleanse my taint for having been the descendent of humans that took the forbidden fruit. Buddhism teaches a way of life, but regardless if you intentionally lived your life according to Buddhism or not, it's the end result that counts, and I rather like that.

Of course you like that, we'd all like that. But there is another source of reasonable credibility that tells us that is not the case, and logic alone should tell us that is not the case. Looking at the real world we live in there are consequences for our actions, so why would you think that God would not also have consequences for your actions?

If Christianity taught people to live a moral and societal 'good' way of living, and that regardless of how, you would be rewarded for such, I wouldn't have a problem with that aspect. I would still have a problem with eternally punishing souls for a finite amount of sin, but the overall metaphorical pill would be easier to swallow, but as we both know, that isn't the case.

Actually, I don't think that we both know that is the case. I think this might be an arena where I would have some knowledge for you that you might not have ever attained as I have been raised in the church and in the bible. Also based off of your assumptions I can tell that this isn't something you are as familiar with as say advanced consent, lol.

Christianity does teach people to live a moral way of life that is to translate into a good societal way of living. Think about it friend, if everyone were obeying as I mentioned, what would be the problem in society? Not one. But people do not want to obey, do not want to listen to God. People want to be their own authority and that is only human, which is why faith is so divine. Show me anywhere in the bible where it says “regardless of whether you lived a good clean life, if you don't do so because God told you to, your going to hell”.

Nowhere is that message sent. I am sure there are churches that would tell you that, but church folk don't always have it right, which is also why I am not apart of the church nor do I defend it. It is made very clear in the bible that righteous men of all religions and backgrounds shall inherit the kingdom of heaven. As I've said before, it's not as complicated as people make it, that is mankind for you though. You live and honor the things that God has asked of us which are really things that we should be honoring anyways, and not only are you gaining riches in heaven, but you would be leading a good and decent life which doesn't hurt you but helps you here too.

It is very telling of you to say that you would still have a problem with infinite consequences for finite sins as you call them. It shows that you have compassion and empathy, which also tells me that you must have a good heart because you don't want people to suffer. I admire that when I see it in a person, and I respect it above all else. Looking at it though, what else is to be done? If people could just defy God and still enter the kingdom of heaven than what point would there be in obeying and living the type of life God has asked you to live? We're not talking about your boss punishing you for not putting the special sauce on the burger. We're talking about God requesting man to simply obey the few rules he has laid out for us, and to do so not out of fear for consequence, but out of faith and trust that it is good and right because God has told us as much. If anything it's like God giving you some cribs notes on life to make the journey a bit easier. I can't tell you how much my faith has helped me throughout my life, and how many times it was all I had, and how often it still is all I have.

Furthermore, how do you rationalize a man being eternally tormented in hell even if he led a filling and societal morally correct life?

Here is what I am telling you, and it's not just me, it's what I have learned from the teachings of Christ. If have led a filling and societal morally correct life, you will not be eternally tormented in hell. I don't know if you've ever heard this but it is said in the bible “What you hold true on Earth, I will hold true in heaven.” meaning the laws of man. It is those who act against god, act against man, and society, and good, and decency, and those who have no mercy, and have no compassion and so on that have something to fear. The good of heart have nothing to fear. As it is said in the bible "If I am for you, Who can be against you?"

In my opinion, there is an inherent flaw with the way man was designed assuming there is a God. More and more people are turning away from religion, and thus being condemned to hell. Many believe that they need to see more evidence for a God before their devote their life towards a church.

People may turn away from God but that does not mean they are condemned. Remember that there is such a thing as forgiveness, and that doesn't mean it's spoken either. I am sure you have done wrong before, and wanted to be forgiven for it but maybe not said anything. Well, luckily God doesn't need ears to hear you, if it is within you God will see it and you will be forgiven. It couldn't hurt to actually ask, but I'm just saying, God hears more than your words.

Here's an example, there are tribes in countries where Christianity has never been taught, and they do not know those teachings as a result. However because they do not know and therefore do not worship God as described by Christianity, does not mean that they will be condemned either. In those tribes there are people who will live life as God has asked by choice and virtue, and some that will not. Just because they didn't subscribe to Christianity does not mean they will be condemned and I have never been presented with anything from the bible that says they would.

Another thing, It's not about devoting your life to a church. Church has become a mockery of what it once was, and was meant to be. The church is a place for sinners, so that they might repent of their sins, and draw strength and support from their fellow believers as well as God. It is also a place to give praise to God for all the gifts he has given us in this life as well as those that await us in the next. That is not so much the case today, it has become a place judgment by people who should be more worried about their eternal judgment than that of others. Now it seems that going to church is supposed to be something you do to either show status or to build an image to others rather than any of the things I mentioned it was really for.

For those reasons I have not been to a church for a long time, and do not encourage others to go. Church isn't necessarily a building either, Christ once said “Where ever two or more are gathered in my name, I will be there” as in the house of God i.e. church. That's all church is, a gathering of people in the name of God asking for forgiveness, strength, guidance, and exploring the lessons taught in the bible by Christ. I also understand the pressure churches put on people to fit their mold of the "right kind of person". I have been through that myself. If you don't shape up into that ideal than you aren't as good as the really holy people who never do a thing wrong, and are casting judgment upon people who don't answer to them.

How can be justified that one person is eternally rewarded in heaven for being a good person, yet another is eternally tormented in hell for being a good person, but just not taking that leap of faith required to devote yourself to God?

My friend, hopefully after reading some of the above you realize that is not the case. No one is tormented for being a good person. You can serve God everyday in everything you do. It doesn't require a leap of faith. It doesn't mean joining the cloth and becoming a priest, or even going to church. It's about honoring the body, the mind, and the spirit that God has given you, as well as the other people around you. It's about going forth at least trying to be a good person because by that faith you know it to be right and true, a gift to help guide you through life and the events it puts us through. It's not a get out of life problem free card either. God never said "Have faith and nothing bad will ever happen to you" but God does offer to see you through it with his help. You have to just sit back and let God reveal it all to you. He will give you opportunities to show your faith, or to act on his word. It's often a matter of making a choice, and that is what it all comes down to. Free will, and choice. God gave us these and gave us the info we needed to make a choice. If you consciously make the choice to refuse God, act against all his laws and commandments, how have you earned entry into the kingdom of heaven?

 

[antfarm612]

But what is wrong with embracing a religion that teaches that our actions on Earth have consequences past our existence here? If you touch a hot stove do you not get burned? What could be more just than saying “ I am God the maker of the heavens and Earth, follow a few simple rules and I will give you everlasting life in the kingdom of heaven, but if you do not there most certainly is a punishment for it.” It's not something that is to be sold and I am not a televangelist trying to sell you faith. Just because you don't like the idea of paying for your sins, and having to face an eternal consequence, doesn't mean that the religion teaching you that is inherently evil or that God is evil. Is everyone who is willing to punish you evil? Is it an authority thing, you can't handle the idea of an authority higher than yourself or man?

There is a big, big difference between burning your finger on a stove, being sent to prison for robbery, and living your entire life in a moral way, only to spend eternity in Hell because you didn't spend your life worshipping what is to us an abstract concept.

 

[One Punch Doug Crashin]

Through my soul searching I have found that all the major religions have the wrong idea about the Spirit upstairs. If religion has taught us anything, its the fact that there is a Hell when in fact that there is not. This idea was brought up by the major religions. When I say major religions I say Judaism, Chrisianity, and Islam. In reality it is not God who punishes, it is the Ego who punishes. We were not brought here to hate, we were brought here to love not in the physical sense but in the spiritual emotional sense. By the way I'm not discounting their theories as I was brought up Jewish.

 

[Mufasa]

I'm not a Christian, but I was raised in a Catholic household. One thing that stuck out from my experience of going to mass was every week they said "Lord I am not worthy to receive you, but only say a word and I shall be healed".

In my life I've also had the experience of being approached by baptists who told me I needed to be saved or else I'm going to hell. Their idea of being saved required not just being a kind person to my fellow man but actual devotion and worship of their god.

I think there is an emphasis on man being unworthy until he devotes himself to worshiping the Christian god in not all, but still many sects of Christianity.

 

[ABMorales787]

I've never heard of that, are there any significant differences?

Yes. We believe in Sabbath, the second coming, and that the Anti-Christ isn't a person but an entity. Check wikipedia.

Hell is a place of eternal punishment, this is explicitly stated. Hell is also a place where only the sinners who have not repented are condemned to, it would contradict the bible to state that Christians right now are living in hell. To state there is no alternate dimension is the opposite of what I would expect a Christian to say, where else would heaven be? It certainly isn't a tangible place that we can reach, it must be part of another system of being. With the text of the bible, I would say it isn't logical to conclude what you're saying.

Just what bible are you reading? How many time have you read it? I've taken 12 years of theology and I've learned that people way too easily take its contents too seriously without reading deep enough into it.

Exactly, that's the question, why is God being worshiped and praised giving the explicit knowledge that the vast majority of beings that ever existed are not writhing in eternal torment. Eternal torment isn't an implication, nor is it an interpretation, it's explicitly stated. If you're saying that what's stated can still be wrong, that throws a wrench in to not only this argument, but any argument any one makes about religion, because how can you believe any thing at that point? Maybe one of the commandments isn't what was intended and all Christian's are sinners that haven't repented for breaking that one commandment.

There you go again. Where has God personally mentioned that if you don"t follow Him, you'll face eternal torment? I've heard it out of the ministers mouth, out of a few apostles. But never out of Gods.

Indeed, according to the bible you do have the option to ask for forgiveness. How ever that's entirely the point of the argument, assuming the bibles word is true, is God deserving of praise and worship? God isn't simply worried about every one being a good person, because as I stated, I would be going to hell regardless, because I haven't accepted the Lord as my saviour.

No. That would be forcing you to it. God wants you to be good first and worship Him second. Being good is following His path. The worshiping follows. By being a good person, you are following the 10 Commandments. No lying. No killing. No adultery. Thats being good, right? Thats all He asks.

What if I don't think I need to be saved? What if I chose that being a good person is my goal and I strive to attain that? I am still being condemned to hell, for all eternity at that. This is your benevolent God? God doesn't force you to adore him in the sense that it's your only option, but it is your only option that doesn't end with an eternally damned soul, which I take issue with.

What part of "No such thing as eternal damnation" do you fail to read in my posts? You seize to exist. That's it. End of deal. Is there a fate worse than death? No. Because it strips you of any chance to make up for your mistakes.

Incorrect, you're required to seek the Lord as your saviour in order to be saved from eternal damnation. Buddhists will most definitely be condemned to hell at the end of their lifespan, for they were not baptized, accepting of the Lord as their saviour, etc. God most certainly condemn for having a different perspective, that's the argument at hand.

No. God isn't condemning. You are. You are assuming that because there is "eternal damnation", all evil will go there regardless. God is lenient. He won't just smite you because you choose not to believe Him. Its like going to work sick. You obviously aren't in condition to work so the boss sends you home. The boss is being lenient.

Noble, and I would agree with this sentiment, how ever if the word of the bible is to be taken literally, which this argument concedes as a means to make it's point, there is no room for interpretation, there is God's will, and there is 'other'. Like I said earlier, if you want to state that the bible's word isn't complete truth, and that it is open to interpretation, that's your prerogative, and I would be more accepting of that personally.

its a matter of faith. We are given evidence and then we choose to accept it in our own way. There are a 1000 religion. None are all correct. Its our choice to believe what we see.

Lastly, you have a more abstract view of God and of your own religion. You've stated about the bible being open to interpretation, as well as your view that God wouldn't condemn souls simply for having a different perspective, even though the bible would contradict this. This argument in the original post isn't to debate with you, as clearly you have a perspective I am fine with. The argument concedes two things:

Thanks.

The bible is truth

Mostly. Just remember that it was God given, but human written.

The bible is to be read and interpreted literally, which in my experience is how most Christian and Catholic churches run their show[/list]

That's probably why we hear so many nasty things about catholic priests. They, being more knowledgeable, bend what they know to suit them. They are telling you whats literal and whats symbolic. No. You're the one that needs to read for yourself. Its your decision to see it as fact, fiction, literal or symbolic. The bible isn't all symbolic. Nor is it all literal. "Man has changed Gods word to suit them. We, as followers of God must explore His word and seek the truth for ourselves".

When you don't view things that way, as you clearly do not, then the argument is void. The entire point is to point out the nature of God, and ask questions about why you would choose to worship such a being etc. However if you change the nature of that God because you state it's up for interpretation, obviously there is no argument to be had.

View it how you believe it. I've spread my gospel. Its your choice to believe it or see it as something else. I can't force you to see it my way because you aren't me.

 

[People's Champ]

The problem I have is that I don't believe that God sends people to hell or heaven. My belief is that when you die you die. That's it. There is nothing more. From The South brought up good points. God has given us life, his Son's life. In the Bible at 1 John 4:8 is said "God is love". Now how could a God be love and send people to hell to be tourted forever?

Besides, where in the Bible does it say that people who are bad are sent to hell to be punished forever? Not once does it say it. The term sheol or hades that is mentioned in the bible is actually our common grave. That is how it is literally translated. I could go on but the fact is this guy Lewis is pretty ignorant.

 

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

Surely, after centuries of people raping, stealing, murdering and blaspheming, DESPITE death penalties, and prison sentences etc, an all powerful being would have realised that if he expects his rules to be followed, he'd best show himself and prove he can enforce them, because punishment as a deterrent doesn't work. If we as people can recognise this, why can't God figure it out?

Mostly. Just remember that it was God given, but human written.

Which anyone could interpret to mean, 'Roughly 2000 years ago, some one got smashed on Opium, tripped the fuck out, and wrote a book. It's several millenia later, and some of us are STILL killing each other over whether we agree or not.'

I'm sorry, i don't mean to ridicule or mock anyone's beliefs but my belief is simply this:

The fact that there is more than one religion, should suggest to anyone with a fully functional brain, that none of them should be completely trusted/blindly followed. If God wanted me to follow something blindly without question, he'd have made me a lemming and not a human being.

And how anyone can believe in an entity that bestows life and then allows children to be stillborn, or encourages committing suicide in a manner that will also kill hundreds of other loyal believers, all in hope of killing 3 or 4 non believers, is beyond my understanding.

As far as i'm concerned, the Earth is a botched science experiment that they didn't bother to terminate.

Personal ranting aside, i'll now address Salv's point based on the parameters that he set.

If i were to believe in God, i'd personally resent him telling me that i'd be punished for not thinking his way. I can love and worship him for creating me, but it shouldn't be mandatory to follow his views to the letter because of that.

My parents talk a load of shit non-stop and make repeated mistakes (they are approaching 60 after all), so when i disagree with something they do or say, i'll damn well tell them. It causes a lot more arguments than we all really need, but it doesn't make me love or worship them any less. They are the sole reason for my existence, and i cherish life above all else, so i am eternally in their debt and i love them, even if sometimes it doesn't seem that way.

So if God does insist on following his rules his way, then i'd resent it, but still i wouldn't call him a tyrant. Tyrants are worse. At least the people God's punishing are his own children, whereas the tyrants have taken more than they were originally intended to be given, and refuse to give it back.

With God, he warns you of the consequences and gives you the choice. Tyrants present themselves as your saviour, and then rape you of everything you and everybody else hold dear for their own personal gain, enemies, friends and family alike.

So yeah, despite the 'eternal punishment' point, i'd still say tyrants are worse.

 

[DirtyJosé]

What is your opinion of Lewis' piece?

I would be interested in reading his stuff further, but in regards to this thread/post, I'm going to go with the opinion that he's reaching a bit for ammo to use on believers. I think he brings up some interesting questions, but it seems he cherry picks the best examples of God's vengeance from the texts and glues them together with real life examples. It seems more like a PR smear campaign than anything else. And really, shaming, guilt tripping, or embarrassing people out of a religion doesn't really work if they really believe it.

For a non-believer: What do you think of Lewis' claim that you have a responsibility to pose this to your religious friends, for they are the worshipers of the perpetrator?

I think that I have plenty of other ways to be a monumental dick that I'd rather try. Even if you wanted to criticize Christianity in general, there are much better areas to start in besides pointing out straw man arguments in ages old texts, translations, and popular imagery. So you believe in Jesus, his friend believes in Mohammed, and I believe in Krom. In the end, we're all pulling this stuff out of someone's ass, and wrecking real friendships over faith and speculation is a tragedy.

For a believer: What do you say to Lewis' argument? Lewis would claim your actions are inexcusable, how would you respond?

Again, if you are intent on wrecking a friendship to make a point, there are much more relevant arguments to make. Hit me with stuff about religion and warfare. Or religion and torture. Religion and slavery. Come at me with all that kinda of stuff that revolves around this physical realm. Don't try and take it to that other level, because that puts both us beyond anything but speculation, and nowhere near truth.

And I can do the same thing; why don't I go and cherry pick all of the G-man's greatest feel good hits and compare them to some of Humanity's local heroes and talk about how Mankind jobbed to God's infinite love, wisdom, and kindness? Because it's not a fair or logic based argument, that's why.

Even if it's all baloney, I'd still feel proud for having held myself to the ideal that there should truly be peace and love for everyone until the day I die.

Regardless, a great thread Salv.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Well, I think one problem is that this philosopher is that there is no specifically, singularly accepted idea as to what the Christian God is. Christianity in and of itself is not a single religion, but a collection of many that have broken away and branched off from the Roman Catholic Church. The various denominations of Christianity that we have today were created via different interpretations of the Bible, what it means, what God's ultimate purpose is, and so on and so forth.

For instance, many do see God as a bringer of vengeance and penance. Many paint God as an angry, almost tyrannical figure that hands out death and judgement with seemingly little regard for those souls. I've heard many a "hellfire and brimstone" sermon in my day. You have some, however, that see God as a bringer of light, wisdom, love and understanding. Some Christians don't really pay much mind to the goings on in the Old Testament as the Old Testament is all but essentially the same as the Jewish Torah. Instead, they focus on the New Testament and the teachings of Jesus and the various Biblical stories housed within the New Testament. Are they wrong for ignoring the Old Testament? Are they right? Is the Jewish God the same as the Christian God and, if so, does God have different ways of viewing different worshipers? Is God completely indifferent to the plight of mankind?

Also, Hell is mentioned and the Bible itself makes very few references to Hell in and of itself. All the hellfire and brimstone sermons are based on information that's been added over the centuries. At various times, powerful religions leaders within Christianity have added things to the Bible and, from what I understand, books and passages have been removed from it as well. Most of the images that come to mind when we think of Hell is rooted primarily in Dante's Inferno rather than the Christian Bible.

The great thing about philosophy is that you don't necessarily have to have solid, concrete proof in your beliefs. In its own way, any philosophy can be akin to someone's own religion. David Lewis' interpretation of the Christian God isn't something that I can disprove through scientific means. I personally don't agree with it in my heart, but I can't scientifically prove my beliefs either. Using finite tools to answer infinite questions is something that ultimately doesn't work. It doesn't mean that we shouldn't stop trying to answer them, howver, but there is no singular explanation. Maybe what it all boils down to in the end is merely believing whatever it is that gets you through the day.

 

[SalvIsWin]

This will be a long post, as I haven't been able to monitor this thread for the past few days, so I will reply to every one who has since posted. I will also try to make the post easy to read, I know it's a hassle to sift through walls of text.


Responding to Riaku

Just what bible are you reading? How many time have you read it? I've taken 12 years of theology and I've learned that people way too easily take its contents too seriously without reading deep enough into it.

There you go again. Where has God personally mentioned that if you don"t follow Him, you'll face eternal torment? I've heard it out of the ministers mouth, out of a few apostles. But never out of Gods.

I grew up as a Catholic, but clearly I am not now. God hasn't specifically mentioned any thing, any one living today has to refer to the bible for what is truth and what isn't, and in the bible it is explicitly stated that hell and heaven are eternal.

"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are
cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to
eternal life."

Lewis comments that woshipers of Jesus & God know of this, but they convince themselves there must be a nicer version of the story where billions of damned souls are not writhing in hell, but if we are taking the Christian bible literally, then that is what it states.

The bible has been changed, and there are different versions are well, but the idea of an eternal hell and heaven have stayed constant. Some research in to seventh day adventist stated that the sect didn't believe hell was eternal, so that's a different belief, but that wouldn't be reading the bible literally, and that's what this argument of Lewis' requires.

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. . . many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Jesus said that to Matthew, a warning to those who live lives without accepting the lord and Jesus, they will go to hell, that is considered iniquity (gross injustice or wickedness). You can decide not to believe that, or decide that's not exactly what he meant, but reading the bible literally, these are the clear interpretations.

No. That would be forcing you to it. God wants you to be good first and worship Him second. Being good is following His path. The worshiping follows. By being a good person, you are following the 10 Commandments. No lying. No killing. No adultery. Thats being good, right? Thats all He asks.

God wants you to accept Jesus as your saviour, accept that he died for your sins and live your life according to the bible. If you do not do this, you are going to hell. If you follow the commandments but acknowledge Jesus dying for your sins, you're going to hell, it's stated as a gross injustice to do so.

What part of "No such thing as eternal damnation" do you fail to read in my posts? You seize to exist. That's it. End of deal. Is there a fate worse than death? No. Because it strips you of any chance to make up for your mistakes.


No. God isn't condemning. You are. You are assuming that because there is "eternal damnation", all evil will go there regardless. God is lenient. He won't just smite you because you choose not to believe Him. Its like going to work sick. You obviously aren't in condition to work so the boss sends you home. The boss is being lenient.

You do not simply die, you are tormented in hell, this is explicitly stated:

And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no
rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for
anyone who receives the mark of his name."

And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of
burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They
will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

As for your statement that God isn't condemning, that can be argued. God rejects the souls of sinners and as a result they are condemned to hell for eternity. You have the option of living the life of God, of you are condemned to hell. You can state that it's your own actions that have you being condemned to hell, but Lewis' point is that God purposely created this place for sinners to be eternally tormented, and by rejecting their souls in to heaven, God is essentially condemning them to hell.

Not only that, but the bible speaks of God punishing you for your sins. The case isn't that Satan reaps your soul and therefore God is unable to act for your behalf, God defaults you to an eternity of hell.

That's probably why we hear so many nasty things about catholic priests. They, being more knowledgeable, bend what they know to suit them. They are telling you whats literal and whats symbolic. No. You're the one that needs to read for yourself. Its your decision to see it as fact, fiction, literal or symbolic. The bible isn't all symbolic. Nor is it all literal. "Man has changed Gods word to suit them. We, as followers of God must explore His word and seek the truth for ourselves".

Agreed, I do personally believe that the bible has been changed multiple times to suit the churches and men in powers needs, even if we disagree about whether the original text was true or not, we can both agree on this. Like I said, your view is different than what Lewis' perspective is arguing with, which is mainstream Christianity where the bible is read literally. However, I believe if Lewis were alive to today, he would say that your sect has interpreted the bible differently in order to create a nicer version of the story.


Responding to The Peoples Champ

The problem I have is that I don't believe that God sends people to hell or heaven. My belief is that when you die you die. That's it. There is nothing more. From The South brought up good points. God has given us life, his Son's life. In the Bible at 1 John 4:8 is said "God is love". Now how could a God be love and send people to hell to be tourted forever?

Besides, where in the Bible does it say that people who are bad are sent to hell to be punished forever? Not once does it say it. The term sheol or hades that is mentioned in the bible is actually our common grave. That is how it is literally translated. I could go on but the fact is this guy Lewis is pretty ignorant.

That is a view, however that isn't reading the bible literally then, and in which case you have a perspective that Lewis isn't trying to argue with. You even state that how can a loving God have purposely created a place for sinners to be eternally condemned and tormented, and that is the point Lewis makes, because if you read literally, that is the case.

The bible does say in various passages about eternally damnation, the fires of hell, and other such things, some of which I quoted above for Riaku. An inherent problem is that there are so many translations and different versions, but Lewis would argue that is the product of various believers trying to change the text of the bible in order to create a nicer version of the story.


Responding to The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh

If i were to believe in God, i'd personally resent him telling me that i'd be punished for not thinking his way. I can love and worship him for creating me, but it shouldn't be mandatory to follow his views to the letter because of that.

My parents talk a load of shit non-stop and make repeated mistakes (they are approaching 60 after all), so when i disagree with something they do or say, i'll damn well tell them. It causes a lot more arguments than we all really need, but it doesn't make me love or worship them any less. They are the sole reason for my existence, and i cherish life above all else, so i am eternally in their debt and i love them, even if sometimes it doesn't seem that way.

So if God does insist on following his rules his way, then i'd resent it, but still i wouldn't call him a tyrant. Tyrants are worse. At least the people God's punishing are his own children, whereas the tyrants have taken more than they were originally intended to be given, and refuse to give it back.

With God, he warns you of the consequences and gives you the choice. Tyrants present themselves as your saviour, and then rape you of everything you and everybody else hold dear for their own personal gain, enemies, friends and family alike.

So yeah, despite the 'eternal punishment' point, i'd still say tyrants are worse.

I agree with your statements, you clearly have a view mostly in line with Lewis. That being said, I think what Lewis meant with comparing God to Hitler (or tyrants in general) is that tyrants cause a finite amount of sin, torture, etc., whereas God must take responsibility for endless amounts of torture, harm and damnation.

Either way, it's not like that statement was the heart of what Lewis was trying to say, he was simply trying to get his point across in a very powerful way.


Responding to DirtyJose

I would be interested in reading his stuff further, but in regards to this thread/post, I'm going to go with the opinion that he's reaching a bit for ammo to use on believers. I think he brings up some interesting questions, but it seems he cherry picks the best examples of God's vengeance from the texts and glues them together with real life examples. It seems more like a PR smear campaign than anything else. And really, shaming, guilt tripping, or embarrassing people out of a religion doesn't really work if they really believe it.

I think that I have plenty of other ways to be a monumental dick that I'd rather try. Even if you wanted to criticize Christianity in general, there are much better areas to start in besides pointing out straw man arguments in ages old texts, translations, and popular imagery.

Again, if you are intent on wrecking a friendship to make a point, there are much more relevant arguments to make. Hit me with stuff about religion and warfare. Or religion and torture. Religion and slavery. Come at me with all that kinda of stuff that revolves around this physical realm. Don't try and take it to that other level, because that puts both us beyond anything but speculation, and nowhere near truth.

And I can do the same thing; why don't I go and cherry pick all of the G-man's greatest feel good hits and compare them to some of Humanity's local heroes and talk about how Mankind jobbed to God's infinite love, wisdom, and kindness? Because it's not a fair or logic based argument, that's why.

Lewis isn't trying to deny or undermine any of the good things that Jesus or God are responsible for, but there is one huge element that God is responsible for, which is the endless torture and condemnation of souls in hell. This isn't cherry-picking select passages, one of the very basic tenets of the bible is to live a good life, and that you will be rewarded. On the flip side, live a poor life, and you will be punished... eternally in hell.

What Lewis is trying to say is that there is a very large flaw with being a worshiper or God, because billions of souls will be condemned to eternal punishment for a finite amount of sin. Whether you think that's acceptable is more of the point, but it's clearly stated in the bible that this is the case. Besides, much like The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh mentioned, I am assuming your parents are very good people, but if they did some thing wrong or bad, you probably feel inclined to tell them. If a man lives a good honest life, but commits murder in his later years, he isn't excused because of his prior unblemished behaviour. To counter-argue against the condemnation of souls for eternity by stating that God has done a lot of good things as well only proves that God can be a mixed bag.

Even so, I would take tremendous issue with God if you lined up all of the good things God takes responsibility for against all the bad things. There is an outrageously unproportionate punishment being handed done by God, which is hell, which is the entire point of Lewis' piece.


Responding to The Game Rage

But see your words? “as far as you know”. Well here's the problem with that, you don't know. Neither do I, and neither does anyone else for sure. But what is wrong with embracing a religion that teaches that our actions on Earth have consequences past our existence here? If you touch a hot stove do you not get burned? What could be more just than saying “ I am God the maker of the heavens and Earth, follow a few simple rules and I will give you everlasting life in the kingdom of heaven, but if you do not there most certainly is a punishment for it.”

Of course you like that, we'd all like that. But there is another source of reasonable credibility that tells us that is not the case, and logic alone should tell us that is not the case. Looking at the real world we live in there are consequences for our actions, so why would you think that God would not also have consequences for your actions?

To clear up, what I stated is the truth about Buddhism. When I wrote that, I was only partially familar and was leaving myself an out in case I was incorrect on some points, but I did the research and I am correct, Buddhism judges you on moral character and societal character, so if you're a good person by our standards, you will be rewarded. Likewise, there is no hell in Buddhism, so there isn't a threat of 'Do well by me or else', there is a reward for the worthy, and nothing for the unworthy, I rather like that.

The point isn't that Lewis finds God punishing to be outrageous, it's the manner in which God punishes. If we were to be punished for our sins after death, and it was reasonable, I don't think Lewis with have a problem with the literal interpretation of the bible. The problem Lewis has is that you are eternally punished, forever, for a finite amount of sin. That is absolutely outrageous in Lewis' and my opinion and the argument is why would any one worship a being who is the perpetrator of this?

I am aware that societal good is not the same as doing good by the bible. I stated that to make a point that good people by 'our' collective standards would be going to hell for not seeking out and accepting the Lord, that is a sin, and you will be punished for that sin by the eternal torment of hell. The way you're phrasing your argument was part of Lewis' argument, that the believers tend to 'phrase nicely' or overlook certain elements of their God. There is an infinite (pun intended) difference between 'You're punished by God' and 'You're soul is eternally tormented with in hell'.

Show me anywhere in the bible where it says “regardless of whether you lived a good clean life, if you don't do so because God told you to, your going to hell”.

http://www.all-god.com/How-you-can-Know-that-you-are-SAVED.html

That is a link to the passage in question, and I posted it above for Riaku as well, the quote says:

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. . . many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

The point is that Jesus died for your sins, and if you seek out Jesus and the Lord, and accept them, you will be accepted as well. In any other scenario, you are condemned to hell, there is no other way around this.

To further explain, man himself is stated as not able to cast out demons, but because Jesus died for our sins, by accepting Jesus in to our hearts, we can have the power to do so. If you're not Christian, and not accepting of Jesus, then it doesn't matter what you do, you will be showing iniquity and will be condemned to hell. You can choose to believe this or not believe it, but if you read the bible literally, this is explicitly clear. Does that change your opinion of God?