Is the doctrine of hell something to be ashamed of?

[southernhybrid]

In response to Unknown Soldier: When I claimed the there are "good" religions, all I meant is that the values of those religions are morally positive, and the members of those religions are an asset to their communities. That is how I see most progressive versions of any religion.

I've read numerous books on religion and atheism over the course of my adult life. I've come to the conclusion that it's better to focus on the values of a particular ideology rather than the supernatural elements that I may think are false. Some even continue to make the claim that we evolved to be wired to believe in mythology. I don't know enough to accept that as a valid claim. Maybe some of us have brains that aren't wired to believe in mythology and some of us do. It's just not that important to me at this point in my life. While I still sometimes enjoy engaging in these discussions, I've come to understand that as long as the beliefs that we hold aren't harmful to others, it really doesn't matter if they are true. It's only when a group tries to force their ideology on others that it becomes potentially dangerous. There are plenty of things in science that were once believed to be valid but as we receive more data, we often realize that we once believed to be true is no longer valid. Even scientists often suffer from confirmation bias. For that matter, we probably all hold beliefs that probably aren't true, so why not try to be a positive influence on others, instead of trying to convince them that the myths they believe aren't true. I mean that in the general sense, not to you personally.

I'm glad that you clarified that you do treat people cordially regardless of their beliefs. I had the impression based on some of your posts that you judged people based on their beliefs. I apologize for that misperception. I realize that it's often very difficult to know exactly what someone means when our only means of communication is typing on a discussion board.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

In response to Unknown Soldier...

You should respond to me directly.

When I claimed the there are "good" religions, all I meant is that the values of those religions are morally positive, and the members of those religions are an asset to their communities. That is how I see most progressive versions of any religion.

If you already know what is morally positive, then religion is unnecessary in that regard. So obviously a "good" religion is more than just a code of good morals, or at least its members are seeking more than morality from it.

I've read numerous books on religion and atheism over the course of my adult life. I've come to the conclusion that it's better to focus on the values of a particular ideology rather than the supernatural elements that I may think are false. Some even continue to make the claim that we evolved to be wired to believe in mythology. I don't know enough to accept that as a valid claim. Maybe some of us have brains that aren't wired to believe in mythology and some of us do. It's just not that important to me at this point in my life. While I still sometimes enjoy engaging in these discussions, I've come to understand that as long as the beliefs that we hold aren't harmful to others, it really doesn't matter if they are true.

I disagree that beliefs need not be true. I don't see any advantages in being wrong or deceived or uninformed. Ignorance is not bliss for long.

It's only when a group tries to force their ideology on others that it becomes potentially dangerous. There are plenty of things in science that were once believed to be valid but as we receive more data, we often realize that we once believed to be true is no longer valid. Even scientists often suffer from confirmation bias. For that matter, we probably all hold beliefs that probably aren't true, so why not try to be a positive influence on others, instead of trying to convince them that the myths they believe aren't true. I mean that in the general sense, not to you personally.

Yes, essentially all of us tend to make errors. As for me, I prefer to correct my own errors if I can and do so for others. It's odd that you don't want me to correct people when I know they're wrong. If your new neighbor mistakenly thought that the garbage collection was Tuesday when it was actually Monday, would you just let her go happily believing what is wrong? What good would it do her? Would you not be doing her a disservice by failing to correct her?

I'm glad that you clarified that you do treat people cordially regardless of their beliefs. I had the impression based on some of your posts that you judged people based on their beliefs. I apologize for that misperception. I realize that it's often very difficult to know exactly what someone means when our only means of communication is typing on a discussion board.

If you're concerned that people get treated cordially regardless of their beliefs, then you should start with pointing that out to the religious. They don't have a good track record of treating unbelievers well. So contrary to your position, believing nonsense can lead to mistreating others. Critical thinking and sound education, although possibly hurtful in the short run, can help avert disaster in the long run.

 

[Politesse]

Perhaps you haven't been around any religious people other than conservative Christians.

I'm not sure. Most Christians don't come labeled.

If you disagree with but can easily understand what they're talking about, they're probably conservative. If you're frustrated and confused at how "inconsistent" they're being, they're probably liberal.

If I ask them if they're liberal or conservative, and they answer that they don't know the difference, then what?

They probably don't have particularly strong opinions about religion at all, in that case, so their affiliation is scantly relevant. I think most liberals know they are liberals, though. What with the constant attacks from "friend" and foe alike. Whereas conservatives are commonly taught that they are "just Christians", and may not have ever been exposed to other variations in the faith.

 

[southernhybrid]

In response to Unknown Soldier...

You should respond to me directly.

When I claimed the there are "good" religions, all I meant is that the values of those religions are morally positive, and the members of those religions are an asset to their communities. That is how I see most progressive versions of any religion.

If you already know what is morally positive, then religion is unnecessary in that regard. So obviously a "good" religion is more than just a code of good morals, or at least its members are seeking more than morality from it.

I've read numerous books on religion and atheism over the course of my adult life. I've come to the conclusion that it's better to focus on the values of a particular ideology rather than the supernatural elements that I may think are false. Some even continue to make the claim that we evolved to be wired to believe in mythology. I don't know enough to accept that as a valid claim. Maybe some of us have brains that aren't wired to believe in mythology and some of us do. It's just not that important to me at this point in my life. While I still sometimes enjoy engaging in these discussions, I've come to understand that as long as the beliefs that we hold aren't harmful to others, it really doesn't matter if they are true.

I disagree that beliefs need not be true. I don't see any advantages in being wrong or deceived or uninformed. Ignorance is not bliss for long.

It's only when a group tries to force their ideology on others that it becomes potentially dangerous. There are plenty of things in science that were once believed to be valid but as we receive more data, we often realize that we once believed to be true is no longer valid. Even scientists often suffer from confirmation bias. For that matter, we probably all hold beliefs that probably aren't true, so why not try to be a positive influence on others, instead of trying to convince them that the myths they believe aren't true. I mean that in the general sense, not to you personally.

Yes, essentially all of us tend to make errors. As for me, I prefer to correct my own errors if I can and do so for others. It's odd that you don't want me to correct people when I know they're wrong. If your new neighbor mistakenly thought that the garbage collection was Tuesday when it was actually Monday, would you just let her go happily believing what is wrong? What good would it do her? Would you not be doing her a disservice by failing to correct her?

I'm glad that you clarified that you do treat people cordially regardless of their beliefs. I had the impression based on some of your posts that you judged people based on their beliefs. I apologize for that misperception. I realize that it's often very difficult to know exactly what someone means when our only means of communication is typing on a discussion board.

If you're concerned that people get treated cordially regardless of their beliefs, then you should start with pointing that out to the religious. They don't have a good track record of treating unbelievers well. So contrary to your position, believing nonsense can lead to mistreating others. Critical thinking and sound education, although possibly hurtful in the short run, can help avert disaster in the long run.

It's fine for us to disagree.

All of the nicer Christians who know I'm an atheist have been very cordial to me. Some, but not all of the conservative Christians who know I'm an atheist have been nasty. I've even worked with some conservative Christians in the past who were very tolerant towards me, when I asked them to please turn off the religious music while we were reviewing medical charts for quality assurance. So, I don't like to make generalizations about any one group of people, as they are all individuals. Anyway, unlike some, I try not to judge. I really don't care how Christians react to me. That's on them. But, the more they get to know that we are atheists, the more likely they will realize that we aren't a bunch of hateful, evil people.

The funniest reaction I ever had was when I told a Black hospice chaplain who was visiting some of my patients, that there was a group of Black nonbelievers in Atlanta. He didn't believe me and said to me, "No. No way. Not the brothers!" After he got over it, I rolled my eyes and said, "yeah even the brothers". Actually the ATL group is made up of more sisters than brothers.

The conversation started when I asked him what he could do for me if I were dying. He started by asking me if he could pray for me. I told him, "No, Try again". I think it really made him think, as most Southern Christians assume that we are all Christians. That is one reason why I was always very open about my atheism when I was still working. But, Southern Christians are often very open about their beliefs, so if they are, then I am. If they aren't, then I don't say anything.

My husband was also very open about his atheism when appropriate at work. He actually had one very conservative Christian coworker tell him that he had misconceptions about atheists until he got to know my husband. Imo, that's a good reason to be open about our atheism. It's not to try and convert anyone. It's about helping people realize that the stupid stereotypes they've lead to believe about atheists are bullshit.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

In response to Unknown Soldier...

You should respond to me directly.

When I claimed the there are "good" religions, all I meant is that the values of those religions are morally positive, and the members of those religions are an asset to their communities. That is how I see most progressive versions of any religion.

If you already know what is morally positive, then religion is unnecessary in that regard. So obviously a "good" religion is more than just a code of good morals, or at least its members are seeking more than morality from it.

I've read numerous books on religion and atheism over the course of my adult life. I've come to the conclusion that it's better to focus on the values of a particular ideology rather than the supernatural elements that I may think are false. Some even continue to make the claim that we evolved to be wired to believe in mythology. I don't know enough to accept that as a valid claim. Maybe some of us have brains that aren't wired to believe in mythology and some of us do. It's just not that important to me at this point in my life. While I still sometimes enjoy engaging in these discussions, I've come to understand that as long as the beliefs that we hold aren't harmful to others, it really doesn't matter if they are true.

I disagree that beliefs need not be true. I don't see any advantages in being wrong or deceived or uninformed. Ignorance is not bliss for long.

It's only when a group tries to force their ideology on others that it becomes potentially dangerous. There are plenty of things in science that were once believed to be valid but as we receive more data, we often realize that we once believed to be true is no longer valid. Even scientists often suffer from confirmation bias. For that matter, we probably all hold beliefs that probably aren't true, so why not try to be a positive influence on others, instead of trying to convince them that the myths they believe aren't true. I mean that in the general sense, not to you personally.

Yes, essentially all of us tend to make errors. As for me, I prefer to correct my own errors if I can and do so for others. It's odd that you don't want me to correct people when I know they're wrong. If your new neighbor mistakenly thought that the garbage collection was Tuesday when it was actually Monday, would you just let her go happily believing what is wrong? What good would it do her? Would you not be doing her a disservice by failing to correct her?

I'm glad that you clarified that you do treat people cordially regardless of their beliefs. I had the impression based on some of your posts that you judged people based on their beliefs. I apologize for that misperception. I realize that it's often very difficult to know exactly what someone means when our only means of communication is typing on a discussion board.

If you're concerned that people get treated cordially regardless of their beliefs, then you should start with pointing that out to the religious. They don't have a good track record of treating unbelievers well. So contrary to your position, believing nonsense can lead to mistreating others. Critical thinking and sound education, although possibly hurtful in the short run, can help avert disaster in the long run.

It's fine for us to disagree.

All of the nicer Christians who know I'm an atheist have been very cordial to me. Some, but not all of the conservative Christians who know I'm an atheist have been nasty. I've even worked with some conservative Christians in the past who were very tolerant towards me, when I asked them to please turn off the religious music while we were reviewing medical charts for quality assurance. So, I don't like to make generalizations about any one group of people, as they are all individuals. Anyway, unlike some, I try not to judge. I really don't care how Christians react to me. That's on them. But, the more they get to know that we are atheists, the more likely they will realize that we aren't a bunch of hateful, evil people.

The funniest reaction I ever had was when I told a Black hospice chaplain who was visiting some of my patients, that there was a group of Black nonbelievers in Atlanta. He didn't believe me and said to me, "No. No way. Not the brothers!" After he got over it, I rolled my eyes and said, "yeah even the brothers". Actually the ATL group is made up of more sisters than brothers.

The conversation started when I asked him what he could do for me if I were dying. He started by asking me if he could pray for me. I told him, "No, Try again". I think it really made him think, as most Southern Christians assume that we are all Christians. That is one reason why I was always very open about my atheism when I was still working. But, Southern Christians are often very open about their beliefs, so if they are, then I am. If they aren't, then I don't say anything.

My husband was also very open about his atheism when appropriate at work. He actually had one very conservative Christian coworker tell him that he had misconceptions about atheists until he got to know my husband. Imo, that's a good reason to be open about our atheism. It's not to try and convert anyone. It's about helping people realize that the stupid stereotypes they've lead to believe about atheists are bullshit.

If you're not going to answer my questions, then there is no dialogue between us.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

If I ask them if they're liberal or conservative, and they answer that they don't know the difference, then what?

They probably don't have particularly strong opinions about religion at all, in that case, so their affiliation is scantly relevant. I think most liberals know they are liberals, though. What with the constant attacks from "friend" and foe alike. Whereas conservatives are commonly taught that they are "just Christians", and may not have ever been exposed to other variations in the faith.

The difference between conservative Christians and liberal Christians is that the conservatives know what they believe while liberals know better than to believe it all.

Anyway, it seems to me that Christianity started out being conservative. Factions of liberals came on the scene much later to dispense with the problematical details of the faith while clinging to the "meat" that they hope will get them to heaven. And if they never get to heaven, at least they didn't look too foolish trying.

 

[Politesse]

Anyway, it seems to me that Christianity started out being conservative.

You mean the part where the central figure was executed for challenging the religious conservatives of his time?

I suspect that Christianity, like all faiths with more than a few dozen adherents, is and always was home to a vast array of different personalities and perspectives. Labels don't change people nearly as much as you might imagine.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Anyway, it seems to me that Christianity started out being conservative.

You mean the part where the central figure was executed for challenging the religious conservatives of his time?

No, I'm referring to the first Christians interpreting the (Hebrew) Bible literally. That "central figure" you mention believed in a historical Adam, Eve, Noah, and Jonah. Jesus never backed off on any Jewish belief because he wanted to impress people with his acceptance of evolution like liberal Christians do.

I suspect that Christianity, like all faiths with more than a few dozen adherents, is and always was home to a vast array of different personalities and perspectives. Labels don't change people nearly as much as you might imagine.

Well, I didn't come up with those labels. Many Christians have labeled themselves. Besides, I'm referring to beliefs rather than labels.

 

[steve_bank]

I can find things of value to take away from say Aristotle, and things I may not find useful or arcaic and obsolete. I expect mostprobaly take philosohy that way up through the present.

The Jesus narrative even taken philosophically is particularly riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions. I read a book by a Jewish rabbi-phiospher A Guide For The Perplexed. Moses Memonomedes Circa 15th century. A consistent well crafted book on relgious and philisophical issues. He was known for reconciling secular philosophy and the Abrahamicc faiths, a bridge builder.

Jesus was a wall builder, 'it is my way or the highway'. It is me or go to Hell! Sounds a bit like Agnostic Christian Bishop.

 

[southernhybrid]

In response to Unknown Soldier...

You should respond to me directly.

When I claimed the there are "good" religions, all I meant is that the values of those religions are morally positive, and the members of those religions are an asset to their communities. That is how I see most progressive versions of any religion.

If you already know what is morally positive, then religion is unnecessary in that regard. So obviously a "good" religion is more than just a code of good morals, or at least its members are seeking more than morality from it.

I've read numerous books on religion and atheism over the course of my adult life. I've come to the conclusion that it's better to focus on the values of a particular ideology rather than the supernatural elements that I may think are false. Some even continue to make the claim that we evolved to be wired to believe in mythology. I don't know enough to accept that as a valid claim. Maybe some of us have brains that aren't wired to believe in mythology and some of us do. It's just not that important to me at this point in my life. While I still sometimes enjoy engaging in these discussions, I've come to understand that as long as the beliefs that we hold aren't harmful to others, it really doesn't matter if they are true.

I disagree that beliefs need not be true. I don't see any advantages in being wrong or deceived or uninformed. Ignorance is not bliss for long.

It's only when a group tries to force their ideology on others that it becomes potentially dangerous. There are plenty of things in science that were once believed to be valid but as we receive more data, we often realize that we once believed to be true is no longer valid. Even scientists often suffer from confirmation bias. For that matter, we probably all hold beliefs that probably aren't true, so why not try to be a positive influence on others, instead of trying to convince them that the myths they believe aren't true. I mean that in the general sense, not to you personally.

Yes, essentially all of us tend to make errors. As for me, I prefer to correct my own errors if I can and do so for others. It's odd that you don't want me to correct people when I know they're wrong. If your new neighbor mistakenly thought that the garbage collection was Tuesday when it was actually Monday, would you just let her go happily believing what is wrong? What good would it do her? Would you not be doing her a disservice by failing to correct her?

I'm glad that you clarified that you do treat people cordially regardless of their beliefs. I had the impression based on some of your posts that you judged people based on their beliefs. I apologize for that misperception. I realize that it's often very difficult to know exactly what someone means when our only means of communication is typing on a discussion board.

If you're concerned that people get treated cordially regardless of their beliefs, then you should start with pointing that out to the religious. They don't have a good track record of treating unbelievers well. So contrary to your position, believing nonsense can lead to mistreating others. Critical thinking and sound education, although possibly hurtful in the short run, can help avert disaster in the long run.

It's fine for us to disagree.

All of the nicer Christians who know I'm an atheist have been very cordial to me. Some, but not all of the conservative Christians who know I'm an atheist have been nasty. I've even worked with some conservative Christians in the past who were very tolerant towards me, when I asked them to please turn off the religious music while we were reviewing medical charts for quality assurance. So, I don't like to make generalizations about any one group of people, as they are all individuals. Anyway, unlike some, I try not to judge. I really don't care how Christians react to me. That's on them. But, the more they get to know that we are atheists, the more likely they will realize that we aren't a bunch of hateful, evil people.

The funniest reaction I ever had was when I told a Black hospice chaplain who was visiting some of my patients, that there was a group of Black nonbelievers in Atlanta. He didn't believe me and said to me, "No. No way. Not the brothers!" After he got over it, I rolled my eyes and said, "yeah even the brothers". Actually the ATL group is made up of more sisters than brothers.

The conversation started when I asked him what he could do for me if I were dying. He started by asking me if he could pray for me. I told him, "No, Try again". I think it really made him think, as most Southern Christians assume that we are all Christians. That is one reason why I was always very open about my atheism when I was still working. But, Southern Christians are often very open about their beliefs, so if they are, then I am. If they aren't, then I don't say anything.

My husband was also very open about his atheism when appropriate at work. He actually had one very conservative Christian coworker tell him that he had misconceptions about atheists until he got to know my husband. Imo, that's a good reason to be open about our atheism. It's not to try and convert anyone. It's about helping people realize that the stupid stereotypes they've lead to believe about atheists are bullshit.

If you're not going to answer my questions, then there is no dialogue between us.

That's fine. I dislike posting line by line in response to other posters, so I rarely if ever respond that way. I find it tedious and it adds more scrolling. We all have our own ways of doing things. I prefer a conversation to a debate. If that bothers you, fine. Don't bother responding to what I say if my style of posting doesn't work for you. I am never offended by people ignoring my posts.

 

[Tigers!]

One day a Jewish man named Eddie who did not practice his religion and did not believe its claims asked a Christian apologist named Frank where Eddie's deceased mother was. Eddie had explained that she was Jewish, never was a Christian, and was a good mother and wife to Eddie's father. She was also a death-camp survivor. Frank looked Eddie in the eye and explained that since Jesus is the only way to the Father, then no unbeliever can attain salvation. Since Eddie's mother had died without faith in Jesus, then at that very moment she was burning in hell with no hope of ever escaping.

This story is true up to the italicized text. Frank actually danced around the issue saying that he didn't know where Eddie's mother was. If Frank had been more direct, then he could have answered the way I said in the paragraph above. After all, that's what Jesus and his followers reputedly preached which anybody can verify by reading the New Testament.

So why didn't Frank just come out and tell Eddie what most of Christianity tells people? I think that Frank was too ashamed of his belief in hell to admit what he really believes. Eddie's mother was a good woman who deserved no punishment at all much less an eternity in hell. The Christian dogma of perdition is simply cruel and unjust. That's why hell is being spin-doctored and reinvented. Perhaps in older and more violent cultures hellfire for one's enemies was just the ticket, but in our modern, secularized age people are no longer so quick to believe such terrible things. Or if they do believe in horrors, then they are not quick to admit it.

I do not use the criterion of shame as to whether an idea or proposal should be considered?
I ask "Is it true?"
If it is true then whether it is "shameful" or not is an irrelevant side issue.
Truth does not care whether it is shameful or not.
Truth will always appear shameful to some people.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I do not use the criterion of shame as to whether an idea or proposal should be considered?
I ask "Is it true?"

Although the actual existence of hell is a different topic, allow me to say that the Christian doctrine of hell has no basis in reality.

If it is true then whether it is "shameful" or not is an irrelevant side issue.

That would be correct if the topic was whether or not hell exists, but the topic is whether or not belief in hell is shameful.

Truth does not care whether it is shameful or not.

Who said truth depends on respectability? I never did.

Truth will always appear shameful to some people.

Yes, difficulties with flatulence are a prime example of truths we may find shameful.

So with all due respect, for a guy who preaches relevance, you practice raising objections based on what is irrelevant to the topic.

 

[Elixir]

Is the doctrine of hell something to be ashamed of?​

Is that the same question as "Is belief in Hell shameful?"?
(Autocorrect also wants to know if belief in hello is shameful, BTW.)
There are more shameful things IMHO, but yeah - superstitions are nothing to be proud about.

Why do you ask? I wouldn't expect anyone who believes in Hell or Santa Claus to be ashamed of their superstitious beliefs.

But if you are a parent of a forty year old who still believes in Santa Claus, then maybe you have reason to be ashamed of their belief. Is that what you meant?

Do you have a kid who believes in Hell? I've found that believers in Hell who weren't conditioned to believe in Hell by their parents, are a vanishingly rare phenomenon.

 

[Tigers!]

In the interests of conciseness the answer to the OP is no.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Is the doctrine of hell something to be ashamed of?​

Is that the same question as "Is belief in Hell shameful?"?

Yes.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

In the interests of conciseness the answer to the OP is no.

I think a lot of people like the idea of their hated enemies suffering terribly. Christianity attracts such individuals. I must wonder about people who feel that way and the harm they might do to others.

 

[southernhybrid]

In the interests of conciseness the answer to the OP is no.

I might have reworded the OP to ask if the doctrine of hell is just. Sorry, Tigers, but there is no way that anyone can honestly say that a doctrine which claims that anyone outside of a particular religion or anyone who has committed crimes or "sins" during their lives, deserves to suffer for all of eternity. NO! There is no justice is such a belief. You can claim that everything god does or says is based on justice, but that's a pretty looney claim if one really thinks about it.

When my mother admitted to my husband that she no longer believed that I'm going to hell, I was happy for her. It didn't matter to me that my mother believed that nonsense, but I felt it must have been a burden for her to believe that her first born daughter who always had a very close relationship with her, would be spending eternity being tortured just because I am unable to find any truth in her religious beliefs. So, hopefully, the truth set her free.

 

[Elixir]

Is the doctrine of hell something to be ashamed of?​

Is that the same question as "Is belief in Hell shameful?"?

Yes.

Then it’s something to blame your parents for (usually).

 

[steve_bank]

This brings back a memory. In grammar school a nun I had for a teacher lost control and got angry at the class.

She scribbled on the blackboard with red chalk and told us that was hell and it was where we were going.

 

[southernhybrid]

This brings back a memory. In grammar school a nun I had for a teacher lost control and got angry at the class.

She scribbled on the blackboard with red chalk and told us that was hell and it was where we were going.

I know I'm off topic, although I attended public schools, my 3rd grade teacher was a nutty Catholic. Although we usually went home for lunch, sometimes we'd have a lunch party in the classroom on Fridays, back in the days when Catholics were forbidden to eat meat on Fridays. If anyone brought a meat sandwich to eat on a Friday, she's have a hissy fit. She frequently brought her religious beliefs into the classroom. She was very fond of St. Christopher and made us do a play about him. This is probably why my Baptist parents were happy when school prayer was removed from the classroom. They didn't like a Catholic teacher telling us what to believe. That was their job.

At least I never had a teacher that told the class we were headed for hell.