Why do people believe in hell?

[abaddon]

I am much healthier now and have changed my diet. Thank God.

^^^ The heart of theism in a nutshell. Misattribution.

 

[Learner]

I liked my old group identity. Getting out, sometimes getting drunk with the lads trying to look macho in front of the ladies after a few. Although one good thing now is, I don't try or care anymore, holding in my tummy, when an attractive lady walks by hehe. Not even turn my head around! How plain and boring it is... to be a believer.

It sounds the same. Only now you have a different group to hang out with, try to look pious in front of them. Rather than a rush at the sight of an attractive lady, now that rush comes at the sight of some religious icon. The "new life" sounds pretty much the same as the old, no more plain or boring.

You wouldn't be able to tell what I was, amongst a crowd. Besides, letting go of ego and not "professing to be wise" I like the sound of, in this group.

 

[Learner]

I am much healthier now and have changed my diet. Thank God.

^^^ The heart of theism in a nutshell. Misattribution.

Thank God yes, I wanted to be healthy again.

 

[abaddon]

I am much healthier now and have changed my diet. Thank God.

^^^ The heart of theism in a nutshell. Misattribution.

Thank God yes, I wanted to be healthy again.

Misattribution means you're thanking the wrong person. You did the behaviors to become healthier. Including God into the story is like walking the dog and then saying "Thank you God for walking the dog". Or if Mr. Smith taught you piano, you choose to thank God instead of Mr. Smith.

Can't you be more grateful to the actual person who did the actual work and give credit where it's due?

 

[DBT]

Well the gospel writers were Jews still.... while following Christ (a Jew) and they knew the OT was compatible because of the prophesies they see for Christ being the Messiah, although as you mentioned, rejected by some sects. The Priestly class disagreed with the Rabbinic class and the Essenes also Jews believed something diffrent to both, a little similar to Christianity in regards to God but quite different to other sects. Christians a name eventually adopted (formerly known as SAINTS) is merely an EXTENSION to the OT by a Jewish sect! It's a Pharisees V Saints (both Judaic) viewpoints of the OT IOW's.

They were Jews following a Jew, but the question is, did this Jesus the Jew meet the criteria of the prophesied Messiah. That's the issue. Orthodox Judaism says no, for the given reasons, he did not.

Yes of course... a no according to othordox Judaism.

The reasons that they give for rejecting Jesus as the prophesied Messiah being:


Jews do not accept Jesus as the messiah because:

Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies.
Jesus did not embody the personal qualifications of the Messiah.
Biblical verses "referring" to Jesus are mistranslations.
Jewish belief is based on national revelation.

But first, some background: What exactly is the Messiah?

The word "Messiah" is an English rendering of the Hebrew word Mashiach, which means "anointed." It usually refers to a person initiated into God's service by being anointed with oil. (Exodus 29:7, 1-Kings 1:39, 2-Kings 9:3)

(1) Jesus Did Not Fulfill the Messianic Prophecies

What is the Messiah supposed to accomplish? One of the central themes of biblical prophecy is the promise of a future age of perfection characterized by universal peace and recognition of God. (Isaiah 2:1-4, 32:15-18, 60:15-18; Zephaniah 3:9; Hosea 2:20-22; Amos 9:13-15; Micah 4:1-4; Zechariah 8:23, 14:9; Jeremiah 31:33-34)

Specifically, the Bible says he will:

Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28).
Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).
Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4)
Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world – on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9).

If an individual fails to fulfill even one of these conditions, then he cannot be the Messiah.

Because no one has ever fulfilled the Bible's description of this future King, Jews still await the coming of the Messiah. All past Messianic claimants, including Jesus of Nazareth, Bar Cochba and Shabbtai Tzvi have been rejected.

Christians counter that Jesus will fulfill these in the Second Coming. Jewish sources show that the Messiah will fulfill the prophecies outright; in the Bible no concept of a second coming exists.''

 

[James Brown]

I'm reminded of the joke about the Christian proselytizer who meets his match in a very knowledgeable Jew. The Jew says, "There were great rabbis who were contemporaries of Jesus, yet none of them were convinced, so why should I believe?"


The proselytizing Christian says, "Even your great rabbis weren't so smart about Moshiach. Consider Rabbi Akiva—he thought Bar Kochba was Moshiach!"


The Jew says, "Well, maybe Rabbi Akiva was right—perhaps Bar Kochba was indeed Moshiach."


The Christian is flabbergasted at this claim. "Don't be ridiculous, Bar Kochba could NOT be Moshiach. He didn't fulfill the prophesies regarding Moshiach. He didn’t restore David’s throne, he didn’t overthrow the Jewish oppressors, he didn’t usher in an era of peace and prosperity. And he was killed by the Romans. So of course couldn't be Moshiach!"


And the Jew just says, "Aha!"

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I don't think God cares about winning or losing.
Just right or wrong. Good or evil.
...satan the egotist on the other hand would be inclined to foolishly view it terms of a grudge match against God.

Ever read the Screwtape Letters anyone?

Satan as the devil is a later development. In the book of Job it was God who initiated the wager and test of Job's piety and instructs Satan on what he can or cannot do. God is fully in control of Satan, who acts as his agent, doing His bidding.

Which is another example of evil.

Golems, dybbuks, succubi and lots of fantasy involved with religious delusion. It has no end.

I liked my old group identity. Getting out, sometimes getting drunk with the lads trying to look macho in front of the ladies after a few. Although one good thing now is, I don't try or care anymore, holding in my tummy, when an attractive lady walks by hehe. Not even turn my head around! How plain and boring it is... to be a believer.

It sounds the same. Only now you have a different group to hang out with, try to look pious in front of them. Rather than a rush at the sight of an attractive lady, now that rush comes at the sight of some religious icon. The "new life" sounds pretty much the same as the old, no more plain or boring.

There's nothing wrong with group identity or even a bit of vanity. Vanity keeps us healthy. But if a person starts to worship that identity as religious peoople do, and divides people along such lines, well, you have the problem that is religion.

For all the weirdness that is religion it is this notion of worship that I find most perplexing. It has no purpose for a person that is intelligent, secure, confident, rational, observant, healthy, etc. Worship must be for a person that is afraid and needs help from a perceived protector. I can understand that need in barbaric settings. But it seems such a need would eventually dissipate as a person grows and matures.

 

[southernhybrid]

I never said or would say religion has no positive value. in the 70s there was the Divine Light Mission. A bogus operation in the USA by a family from India run by a teen as the head. I knew a woman who swore it turned her life around.

People swear by Transcended Mediation. The Beatles got hooked into the Maharishi until they realized he was a fraud.

Your religious experience is not unique. It is biophysical.

It is not what you believe, it is how you believe it. In modern terms it is about upping serotonin in your brain and endorphins through attitude. That is what gives that feel good religious state. Attitude affects brain chemistry.

Funny enough I sometimes used to sleep lesser than the 8 hours and I suppose .... I lacked the serotonin levels.

For me I get it from eating right, exercise, and avoiding tobacco, alcohol, and drugs. Grew out of drugs in the 70s and never smoked.. When I pass by alcohol in the store it does not even occur to me to get it. I get that good all over feeling radiating out from my belly. I do not attribute it to a god. Nothing mystical, serotonin and endorphins.

I wasn't out of shape in my earlier days but I sort of let go for some time. I am much healthier now and have changed my diet. Thank God.

I get it. You found something that you can identify with as well as something that you feel made you a better person. I don't have a problem with that specifically, but I do have a problem with some of the nastier parts of your beliefs.

I also resent the implication that one needs to be a Christian or a theist to be a morally upright person. I've known plenty of Christians who were very immoral, who cheated on their spouses, who drank too much, who insulted other people, who were racists etc. I've known quite a few atheists that were good people. Some were happily married college professors. Some were nurses, social workers, and there was one who was a talented physician. Others lived simple, frugal lives with very little interest in acquiring material things. The point is that being a Christian or an atheist doesn't mean you are better than anyone else. There are good and bad Christians and good and bad atheists. I'm simplifying of course, but I think you get the point.

So, getting back to the concept of eternal hell, it's difficult to understand why a good person is able to believe that other good people who simply don't share their beliefs, are condemned to eternal punishment by the supposedly all loving god who they worship. I only wish that those who find a need for religion, would choose one that is more humane. I'm not judging you Learner. I simply don't understand the attraction to your specific beliefs.

 

[Learner]

Thank God yes, I wanted to be healthy again.

Misattribution means you're thanking the wrong person. You did the behaviors to become healthier. Including God into the story is like walking the dog and then saying "Thank you God for walking the dog". Or if Mr. Smith taught you piano, you choose to thank God instead of Mr. Smith.

Can't you be more grateful to the actual person who did the actual work and give credit where it's due?

You have a point, but Its an everyday expression . I just thought to use that phrase and not to sound like a theist idiom idiot, rather than saying instead, "thank my lucky stars..." etc..

Skeptism (atheistic) ... you can form arguments on every word or phrase in a post

 

[steve_bank]

Thank God yes, I wanted to be healthy again.

Misattribution means you're thanking the wrong person. You did the behaviors to become healthier. Including God into the story is like walking the dog and then saying "Thank you God for walking the dog". Or if Mr. Smith taught you piano, you choose to thank God instead of Mr. Smith.

Can't you be more grateful to the actual person who did the actual work and give credit where it's due?

You have a point, but Its an everyday expression . I just thought to use that phrase and not to sound like a theist idiom idiot, rather than saying instead, "thank my lucky stars..." etc..

Skeptism (atheistic) ... you can form arguments on every word or phrase in a post

To be atheist is to be skeptical, therefore to be theist is not?

Do atheist have a different kind of skepticism than all else or is skepticism just skepticism?

 

[abaddon]

Thank God yes, I wanted to be healthy again.

Misattribution means you're thanking the wrong person. You did the behaviors to become healthier. Including God into the story is like walking the dog and then saying "Thank you God for walking the dog". Or if Mr. Smith taught you piano, you choose to thank God instead of Mr. Smith.

Can't you be more grateful to the actual person who did the actual work and give credit where it's due?

You have a point, but Its an everyday expression . I just thought to use that phrase and not to sound like a theist idiom idiot, rather than saying instead, "thank my lucky stars..." etc..

Skeptism (atheistic) ... you can form arguments on every word or phrase in a post

My point followed up on the same overall theme of your exchange with skepticalbip about how becoming a theist had changed your life for the better. So, no, it wasn't a nitpick of the two stand-alone words.

Skepticism (theistic) ... brain floating around in a haze, only connecting dots if they're attractive to the believer.

 

[ruby sparks]

...but the corollary of this is that since there are so many claims they can't ALL be false.

I'm afraid they can, Lion, because there isn't, unfortunately, necessarily any connection between the length of a list of supposed deities and the chances that the idea that there's a god are true. Do you have any idea how long a list could be drawn up for supernatural entities generally? Elves, faeries, leprechauns........at what point would you say that a certain number listed would, of itself, allow you to be justified in believing that any of those actually do exist?

The only thing that can reasonably be concluded for sure is that humans believe in a LOT of different types of what are called supernatural entities, of which gods are just believed to be quite influential ones. Very influential for monotheistic gods and very, very, very influential for omnimax ones such as are believed in by, say, Christians and Jews. Elves not so much, but imo an omnimax god is just an elf with extra-special supernatural abilities, or would be, if there were such a thing as elves, or gods.

The human mind (including mine) is prone to superstitious beliefs (aka woo). Psychology and neuroscience have offered a lot of evidence for this. The sheer length and variety of lists throughout recorded history might even be said to offer some support for it, including going back to when people worshipped tree gods (and wiki lists over 20 of those alone).

 

[ruby sparks]

Here you go. Pick a favourite. This is not even close to a complete list:

https://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?20372-Why-do-people-believe-in-hell/page25

(Post # 248. list was so long I put the link above)

So many...which one do you suggest? Perhaps I or someone can try to defend one of those gods (as "devills" advocate). May have to look up the scripture mind you, if you don't have it. Do you?

Learner, and I think you were just being partly whimsical, because seriously, you must have read quite a few of my posts since I've been here. Do you honestly think I would want to use something called 'scripture' which is in many ways just 'woo written down', to discuss the merits and demerits of a case for the existence of a particular supernatural entity? To me, it's all woo. What would be the point of consulting woo texts? It'd be like asking me to consult Icelandic Folklore to see if elves exist or not. The answer is not going to be in the texts.

Or, alternatively, you could tell me why you don't (I'm assuming) believe in elves.

Or, why I should believe there's only one god and not several (as in Ancient Greek theology)?

I ask because I'd like to know, by which I mean be given a convincing reason, with evidence if possible, why I, or you, or anyone, should believe in any particular sort of woo or even any woo at all?

Those were rhetorical questions. I don't actually want you to try to answer. Because I know you can only tell me 'what Learner thinks' or 'what believers think' and I'm looking for something more persuasive and more objective than that. And of course we both know that isn't available. If it was, there wouldn't be quite so many arguments about the claims involved in the beliefs.

By the way, the person who drew up that list (must have taken him bleedin' ages) did it to make a point, specifically to anyone who believes in one of the deities on the (very incomplete) list but not the others.

Let's say there's a thousand deities that could be listed, temporarily setting aside the millions in Hinduism alone, apparently, and setting aside lists of other supernatural entities. Let's just go low and settle for a thousand, and deities only. I believe in none. That makes me 100% atheist. Let's say you believe in one. That makes you 99.9% atheist. Saying you believe in what the Jews call Jehovah and Jesus (both were on that list) would only reduce the percentage to 99.8. I hope that potentially bad news, that you're at least 'very atheist', does not make you suddenly cough up your coffee all over your keyboard.

 

[ideologyhunter]

The field of comparative religion leads me to the conclusion that man is the great inventor of all deities. Almost all of these deities come with pompous majesty and we're always admonished in this life that we must never speak lightly, let alone mockingly, of any faith tradition. Well, screw that. There is some literature value to most mythologies; otherwise, when they're not silly and/or bizarre, they can lead to tangible regression in human society.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

...but the corollary of this is that since there are so many claims they can't ALL be false.

I'm afraid they can, Lion, because there isn't, unfortunately, necessarily any connection between the length of a list of supposed deities and the chances that the idea that there's a god are true. Do you have any idea how long a list could be drawn up for supernatural entities generally? Elves, faeries, leprechauns........at what point would you say that a certain number listed would, of itself, allow you to be justified in believing that any of those actually do exist?

The only thing that can reasonably be concluded for sure is that humans believe in a LOT of different types of what are called supernatural entities, of which gods are just believed to be quite influential ones. Very influential for monotheistic gods and very, very, very influential for omnimax ones such as are believed in by, say, Christians and Jews. Elves not so much, but imo an omnimax god is just an elf with extra-special supernatural abilities, or would be, if there were such a thing as elves, or gods.

The human mind (including mine) is prone to superstitious beliefs (aka woo). Psychology and neuroscience have offered a lot of evidence for this. The sheer length and variety of lists throughout recorded history might even be said to offer some support for it, including going back to when people worshipped tree gods (and wiki lists over 20 of those alone).

It's interesting, isn't it, how some of us can actually think fantasy is reality? That being the case, however, very, very, very, very few of us who actually make such claims actually behave as such, at least when it comes to carrying out life's rational requirements wrt survival. We might engage in good-luck-bringing behavior in that superstitious sense but in the main we behave rationally. Fantasy is an add-on to our rational behavior. We can live without fantasy, but we can't survive the other way around.

Believing in hell and other religious behaviors are brain exercise at best.

 

[ruby sparks]

It's interesting, isn't it, how some of us can actually think fantasy is reality? That being the case, however, very, very, very, very few of us who actually make such claims actually behave as such, at least when it comes to carrying out life's rational requirements wrt survival. We might engage in good-luck-bringing behavior in that superstitious sense but in the main we behave rationally. Fantasy is an add-on to our rational behavior. We can live without fantasy, but we can't survive the other way around.

Believing in hell and other religious behaviors are brain exercise at best.

I sometimes say, to a theist, if they accidentally sawed their lower leg off with a chainsaw while cutting logs, what would they do if they only had one option, pray, or get to a hospital?

Now, to be fair, the corollary of that is that many atheists (myself included) would probably resort to praying if there was no chance of medical assistance. Though I have met atheists who insist that they wouldn't. One was stuck on a glacier, and all seemed lost, at the time. I'm not sure my lack of belief goes quite as deeply as that. Possibly because of my upbringing, social/cultural influences, and maybe just the fact that I have a brain that is prone to woo just like anyone.

And indeed there are some theists who do just pray and do not go to hospital. I hate when they do that on behalf of their kids, but when it's an adult deciding for themselves I guess it's more or less up to them. With similar caveats about upbringing and social/cultural influences etc.

Me, I can't seem to stop myself invoking the name of god, or Jesus, when I'm in a tight spot and/or panicking. Or indeed when something really fab happens to get me out of a jam. At those times I admit I do indulge in what I would at other times call fantasy.

 

[Politesse]

The field of comparative religion leads me to the conclusion that man is the great inventor of all deities. Almost all of these deities come with pompous majesty and we're always admonished in this life that we must never speak lightly, let alone mockingly, of any faith tradition. Well, screw that. There is some literature value to most mythologies; otherwise, when they're not silly and/or bizarre, they can lead to tangible regression in human society.

I take it you haven't studied polytheism much! There are certainly other modes of deity besides solemn and all-powerful.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It's interesting, isn't it, how some of us can actually think fantasy is reality? That being the case, however, very, very, very, very few of us who actually make such claims actually behave as such, at least when it comes to carrying out life's rational requirements wrt survival. We might engage in good-luck-bringing behavior in that superstitious sense but in the main we behave rationally. Fantasy is an add-on to our rational behavior. We can live without fantasy, but we can't survive the other way around.

Believing in hell and other religious behaviors are brain exercise at best.

I sometimes say, to a theist, if they accidentally sawed their lower leg off with a chainsaw while cutting logs, what would they do if they only had one option, pray, or get to a hospital?

Now, to be fair, the corollary of that is that many atheists (myself included) would probably resort to praying if there was no chance of medical assistance. Though I have met atheists who insist that they wouldn't. One was stuck on a glacier, and all seemed lost, at the time. I'm not sure my lack of belief goes quite as deeply as that. Possibly because of my upbringing, social/cultural influences, and maybe just the fact that I have a brain that is prone to woo just like anyone.

And indeed there are some theists who do just pray and do not go to hospital. I hate when they do that on behalf of their kids, but when it's an adult deciding for themselves I guess it's more or less up to them. With similar caveats about upbringing and social/cultural influences etc.

Me, I can't seem to stop myself invoking the name of god, or Jesus, when I'm in a tight spot and/or panicking. Or indeed when something really fab happens to get me out of a jam. At those times I admit I do indulge in what I would at other times call fantasy.

Natural selection continues to weed out the ones that choose prayer over medical intervention and is the reason there are very, very, very few around.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Belief in hell does seem odd. Very odd. But I guess it makes sense to scare people out of questioning the faith, because once they look at it with an open mind, that starts the ball rolling?

I remember having a "Satanic Bible" (Lavey) as a teenager, not buying into any of it, but finding it absolutely hilarious that Christian believers wouldn't even want to touch it much less read it, as if there was some energy attached to it that would magically corrupt their souls.

I was one of the lucky few of my generation who never believed in God. I believed in Santa very briefly (my sister and I set a trap for him; my poor poor dad; still feel a bit guilty about that one), but never God. These days lots of kids grow up like that, but it was rare when I was a child.

 

[ruby sparks]

Natural selection continues to weed out the ones that choose prayer over medical intervention and is the reason there are very, very, very few around.

That sounds at least plausible.

After what I googled before my last post, I'm becoming interested in the topic of tree gods. I'm curious as to whether any of the omnimax monotheists here are prepared to make a case against tree gods, or even just polytheism. In some ways, tree gods are at least as good as and possibly a better comparison than my favourite, elves, because the word 'god' or 'gods' is explicitly involved, as is worship, presumably. But I still like the elves comparison too, not least because apparently they are still believed in by some. As are ghosts. Not to mention auras, though that's moving away from the specific 'entity type' superstitions.