ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Religion and Philosophy»
  • Atheism & Agnosticism

Do Atheists Choose to Send Themselves to Hell?

Updated on September 4, 2014
Source

A New Approach to an Eternal Question?

I often converse with theists on a variety of topics because they interest me, and I'm always curious to see different sides of an issue and discuss questions honestly and openly. One of the topics most often breached in one way or another is the Christian concept of hell - an eternal lake of fire that non-believers and followers of other gods or religions are doomed to forever. The concept of hell was a difficult concept for me to overcome in my journey out of faith, and it's one that many who are either struggling with their faith or are in the process of leaving it behind struggle with still.

Recently, however, I have had several people tell me in no uncertain terms that God does not send ANYONE to hell. Instead people send themselves to hell by refusing to acknowledge, worship or follow Him. This surprised me the first time I heard it, and it makes no sense considering all of the information. Yet it seems to the latest in a long string of excuses that believers posit for the immoral and unethical problem of eternal punishment by an all-powerful, all-knowing being for humans that he created. Does this new approach make sense? Not by a long shot. This hub will attempt to explain why this argument falls short, and highlight the reasons why fear (while powerful) is not an indication of love or true worship or faith.

Is Coercion Truly a Choice?

:Love me or I'll torture you forever"

While this may a sentence you'd expect to find in the latest slasher or psychological horror movie, it is the concept that I take away from reading the Bible and understanding the theology beneath it. In the believer's mind, God is often referred to as a Father figure who is perfect and above reproach. Therefore anything bad that happens in the lives of his followers is either as a result of their own inherent imperfection or as a result of Satan's influence.

The analogy of a mob-boss is not entirely out of place in this discussion. If you are a small business owner in a mob-controlled city, and a team of local mobsters approaches you with an offer, you may have to weigh your options carefully. Say that someone walks into your place of business and tells you that you can pay them a weekly stipend, and in return they'll look out for you and protect you. If you refuse to pay, however, they'll come back in a week and break your legs. After considering the options, you refuse to pay the sum. When the mobster comes back and follows through on his promise and breaks your leg is it your fault for not taking him up on his offer? Is this not comparable to the threat of eternal punishment for refusing to accept or worship the God of the Bible?

One of the arguments against the problem of Evil that is most common in apologetic circles is the argument from free will - but how free is free will considering the alternative? Love me and worship me or I'll torture you forever doesn't sound like that free of a choice - and were it framed in a different set of circumstances, most believers wouldn't buy it. Because it's framed within the scenario of their own chosen religion, however, they often see it as not only holy but just as well. This justification astounds me on multiple levels - especially considering the fact that in choosing this one deity to worship, they are ignoring similar threats from other faiths without a second thought.

Source
Source

What is Love?

According to the Bible:

1 Corinthians 13:4-8

4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away.

How does the God that the Bible posits stack up to this Biblical definition of what love is? Firstly, I don't see anything in this passage about fear being tantamount to love. Therefore the admonition to fear God seems a bit out of place. Secondly, the Bible claims that God is a jealous God, which would mean that he envies. (Exodus 34:14) God is also prideful in proclaiming himself the only God in existence, and commanding his followers to worship him to the exclusion of all else - to the extent of requiring people to leave their families behind to follow him. This would also qualify as boastful and self-seeking. We also know from Biblical passages that God is wrathful and quick to anger - even Jesus had a temper (Psalm 7:11) (Deuteronomy 29:27-28) (2 Chronicles 29:10) (Matthew 23) (Mark 3) and that God keeps a record of everyone's wrongs who has ever lived - or will ever live.

According to these comparisons, God does not fit his own definition of love - as we will see in the next section, the qualities of God displayed in the Bible even fit the warning signs for an abusive spouse or partner - not the loving, kind and generous God image that many Christians insist on putting forth at every opportunity.

Fear or Love?

I've often made the argument that the God posited in the Biblical text seems a lot more like an emotionally abusive partner than a loving, divine being. When comparing the signs of an abusive relationship with the actions, words and intents of the Biblical God, the similarities become almost undeniable.

1. Living Life on an Emotional Roller-coaster:
A partner that goes from loving and affectionate to angry punishment of perceived wrongdoings is not evidence of love - it's evidence of abuse. The God of the Bible went from loving protector to the people of Israel to a vengeful, jealous god who punished them for disobeying the rules that he recognized were impossible to follow - a situation that ultimately resulted in him sending his only Son to die in order to forgive the sins of mankind - sins that were a direct result of not following the rules he set forth in the first place.

2. Continual Isolation:
The God of the Bible himself claims that he is a jealous God - one that does not like to come in second place to anyone - or anything - else. His followers are expected to have faith in his promises and weather the bad storms that life brings them, all while worshiping and adoring him and praising his name. Questioning this God is tantamount to sin itself, and doubting puts otherwise good believers going through a rough patch on the path to hell itself. Christians are supposed to recognize that they're separated from the rest of the world, and that they are apart from it, awaiting their rewards in heaven while others serve out an eternal sentence of torture for not believing.

3. Insane Jealousy:
God admits that he's a jealous God who does not want to face competition of any kind from any other Gods, from money or from the people that surround his believers every single day. God demands worship and adoration, and he demands that his followers do their best to conform to his rigidly strict guidelines for life that he laid out in the Bible and in the example of Jesus. Failure to do so results in the blemish of sin on a person's soul - a sin that needs to be forgiven and washed away in blood before God can stand to be in your presence.

4. Anxiety or Nervousness:
The God of the Bible not only wants to be worshiped and adored, but he also wants to be feared. Fear is not love. A child with an abusive parent may fear what their parent will do to them at the slightest provocation - how much more is there to fear from a divine being who supposedly has the power to literally make your life hell on earth, and then send you to a literal hell for all eternity if you do not serve, worship or believe in Him properly.

5. Constant Reminders that You're Not Good Enough:
The traditional Christian theology teaches its adherents that mankind is inherently worthless and unworthy of the love of a divine Father. It's only by his grace that mankind can be saved the just punishment for their sin and evil, and by the blood sacrifice of his only Son - who is himself - who died to save the select few who are destined to accept him. Teaching children that they're dirty, sinful and unworthy carries a high cost to self-esteem and a recognition of talents, skills and abilities. It can cause permanent damage unless caught and corrected in adolescence or early adulthood, and linger on throughout an entire life of feeling worthless and not good enough except through divine intervention.

6. Feeling Trapped or Confined:
Survivors of relationship abuse who eventually broke free often recount that they felt trapped and unable to leave their abuser due to the level of emotional abuse that they suffered. Abusers tell their partners that they're unworthy - that no one else will ever love them, that they're not good enough to be loved and that without the abusive partner their lives will ultimately be meaningless. When the fear of eternal torture and punishment is added on top of this emotional abuse, the consequences can be dire. Questioning or doubting God even for a moment can often be seen as the unforgivable sin - which will land you in hell for eternity with no hope of redemption.

7. Taking All of the Blame:
Instead of taking responsibility for their own negative behavior or being held accountable, abusers often blame their victims for their behavior, and this concept is found scattered throughout the Bible. Since human beings are told that they're inherently sinful and unworthy, anything that they do can be seen as a result of their own inherent unworthiness. God, according to Christian theology, remains blameless. Since God is perfect, he often receives all of the credit for any good things that happen in believer's lives, but receives none of the blame when things go wrong. When something bad happens, it's a result of the believer's sin, lack of faith or the influence of Satan - sometimes a combination of all three. When Christians face illness, they are often told that the reason that God chose not to heal them is because they didn't have enough faith, removing the blame from the all-powerful being that they worship and placing it squarely on their shoulders.

Source

Does God Send People to Hell?

See results

The Ultimate Judge

Almost no one would ever choose eternal hell, knowing with certainty that it existed when the other alternative is eternal paradise. Atheists, on the other hand, do not willingly choose to go to hell - ultimately God is responsible for sending them there, regardless of this new apologetic tactic. It's simple when examined clearly in this if/then scenario.

IF:
1. the God of the Bible created all life
2. created the rules by which all life will be judged
3. Did not see fit to provide sufficient proof of His existence
4. God is the ultimate judge of who is saved and who is Damned

THEN:
God is ultimately responsible for sending over 2/3 of the entire population in the history of the earth to hell forever for either not believing He exists or for worshiping a different God.

It boils down to this. I choose not to go to hell. I also withhold belief of extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence - none of which has been presented, even when I was a believer. If God does exist and finds me worthy of damnation for failing to believe in Him or Accept him, then He will have to send me to hell on his own accord, because I choose not to go.

© 2014 Julie McFarland

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 2 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      I completely agree with you. I abhor the idea of stopping learning, and I'm insatiable about learning and knowledge and study. It is only by challenging ideas and breaking free of rigid dogmatism that we can understand and grow as individuals and as a culture.

      I was raised Southern Baptist, and there was definitely no concept of once saved always saved. You were constantly in danger of losing your salvation and spinning dangerously close to the pit of hell. Probably why I don't understand that belief or doctrine today since I was never raised with it.

    • William Avitt profile image

      William Avitt 2 years ago from Dayton, Ohio

      "They assume that I was never a Christian to begin with (that I was somehow faking my time in a Christian university studying theology, or faking my years as a missionary, etc) as if the knew my heart better than I did - complete strangers, mind you."

      That's because admitting that someone who truly believed fell away would challenge their heretical doctrine of Once Saved, Always Saved, and they are not willing to admit that Christianity is a journey to salvation, not an instant thing. They ignore that Paul himself talked about "enduring to the end."

      "While I'm sure we disagree on a lot, I do appreciate your stance and your view of things."

      That's ok. I truly enjoy having open discussions with people I don't agree with. Intellectual debate is the only way people truly grow in knowledge. If you only surround yourself with like minds, you become intellectually stagnate. Knowledge is like salvation in that it is a journey and you have to keep on learning and growing until the end.

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 2 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      Thanks for your comment William. The fundamentalist attitude and approach to atheists sincerely baffles me. They assume that I was never a Christian to begin with (that I was somehow faking my time in a Christian university studying theology, or faking my years as a missionary, etc) as if the knew my heart better than I did - complete strangers, mind you. Then they call me an apostate (or a heretic, but by the very definition of the word, I can't be a heretic. Apostate is more fitting.) Then they seem to derive pleasure from telling me I'm going to be tortured forever in hell. If that's supposed to be leading people TO god, it's not doing a very good job.

      I appreciated seeing you around the forums, and I'm enjoying your hubs. While I'm sure we disagree on a lot, I do appreciate your stance and your view of things. Thank you for being a voice of reason - they're few and far between the days.

    • William Avitt profile image

      William Avitt 2 years ago from Dayton, Ohio

      "Here's the thing, though. If I actively sought god, prayed for him, had other people pray for me and didn't find him, then went to look at the evidence and didn't find him, and then went to look at philosophy and theology and didn't find him, is it my fault for not accepting him?"

      Actually, no. I am Catholic and the Catholic church, at the 2nd Vatican Council, held that there may be a path for Atheists as well as non Christians of all faiths to still be saved, even though they have not accepted Jesus Christ. The reasoning behind this is because we do believe God to be all loving and all merciful, and that He will judge non Christians not by Christian standards, but by their own. Basically, how well did you keep God's Commandments as best as you are able to understand them. Basically, the Church's official position on salvation outside the Church is "God judges, Christians don't judge, God is all merciful so why would He send a sincere Jew or Muslim or Atheist or whoever to Hell for holding their sincerely held beliefs?" We don't believe He would.

      Fundamentalists don't like this stance because they like to think they are part of some elite club that makes them better than everyone else. Of course, holding that belief says a lot more about themselves than it does about God.

    • EncephaloiDead profile image

      EncephaloiDead 3 years ago

      Here's the link to that forum. Enjoy.

      http://pubrages.freeforums.org/index.php

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      I agree M.T - I've often considered writing a hub on the evolution of the concept of Hell, I just haven't gotten around to it. From what I understand (it's been awhile since I've taken that particular history class) the ancient Jews believed that all souls - both wicked and good - went to Sheol, which was neither a place of punishment or reward. God came and went from Sheol as he desired. This began to change during the Babylonian captivity, when they were exposed to Babylonian ideas and mythologies.

      Jesus often referred to Gehenna, which was a real, literal place of eternal fire where garbage and the bodies of criminals were thrown outside of the gates of Jerusalem. The evolution of the belief to a place of eternal punishment, fire and torture continued from there.

    • M. T. Dremer profile image

      M. T. Dremer 3 years ago from United States

      Say Yes To Life - I was referring to the old testament word 'Sheol' which, though translated as 'hell', is a more diverse word that doesn't specifically point to the place of sin and punishment popularized in Dante's Inferno. Many would argue that the modern concept of hell is more closely influenced by that professed work of fiction than it is by the Sheol translations.

    • Say Yes To Life profile image

      Yoleen Lucas 3 years ago from Big Island of Hawaii

      M. T. Dremer - regarding what the Bible says about hell, check out this link:

      http://www.biblestudytools.com/topical-verses/hell...

    • Austinstar profile image

      Lela 3 years ago from Somewhere in the universe

      @M.T. Dremer - I agree! They are like Charlton Heston saying, "You'll take my guns/bible when you pry it out of my cold, dead hands!"

      People that believe in "holy" books, seldom actually READ them. They just use them as symbols and "proof" that God exists.

    • M. T. Dremer profile image

      M. T. Dremer 3 years ago from United States

      I'm not positive, but I think the bible doesn't make mention of hell at all. The modern concept of hell was most prominently influenced by Dante's Inferno. Similarly, the idea that god is all loving is also in contrast to what the earlier versions of the bible described. As you pointed out, the old testament god was a jealous, mean-spirited deity that was to be feared more than anything else.

      I think Christianity's biggest downfall is how tightly it clings to the bible. Countless aspects of the religion have modernized over the years, except this core document, which still contains countless contradictions and lessons that most present Christians would disagree with if presented directly.

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      As for your actual claim, lybrah, a Google search for the historicity of the Bible only yields positive results from Christian sites. Of course Christians are going to claim the Bibles historic accuracy.

      Here's the thing - I'm the first person to admit that historically accurate things may be in the Bible. That doesn't make the whole book true or accurate, however. The Koran has historically accurate things in it as well. As far as actual historical places determining the truth of a claim, does that mean that because Spider Man takes place in New York City and new York City actually exists that Spider Man is real? Of course not. You have to have independent and non biased confirmation of historical events, and for many claims the Bible makes, there simply isn't any.

      http://www.patheos.com/blogs/hallq/2012/07/why-ath...

    • Say Yes To Life profile image

      Yoleen Lucas 3 years ago from Big Island of Hawaii

      Thank you for writing this hub. As someone who inadvertently joined a cult, and whose niece dropped out of high school to join one (under dire threats of hell), the information you provide here is extremely necessary. It wasn't until I saw my niece do this that I realized I was even in a cult. My current flashbacks regarding the experience have revealed to me that Christianity itself is a cult; there are way too many parallels between cults and its basic practices.

      "Love me and worship me or I'll torture you forever doesn't sound like that free of a choice - and were it framed in a different set of circumstances, most believers wouldn't buy it. Because it's framed within the scenario of their own chosen religion, however, they often see it as not only holy but just as well." Lots of them don't choose the religion; they're born into it. That explains their behavior.

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      Not to mention that the burden of proof rests on the person making the positive claim. I am working towards my master's in history and eventually my doctorate degree, and I have never seen a historian reach for the Bible as the ultimate source for historical fact. It's a lie, which is why she's unwilling to back it up. She can't. Shifting the burden of proof to others is fallacious and dishonest. If someone is going to assert something as fact, they should know what it is they're asserting, and have adequate evidence to back it up. Otherwise it's just meaningless words from someone whose integrity has been discredited.

    • Link10103 profile image

      Link10103 3 years ago

      Didnt you tell me that Google is not reliable, Lybrah? Yet you tell others to use it to prove your point rather than give specific sources...

      Since we are on the topic at least, use Google to search for the oldest surviving books in history. I found 2 that surpass 2000 years, which is contrary to your claim that the bible is the only book in existence to have survived that long.

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      Lybrah, why do you insist on making insulting and unwarranted assumptions about people? Before comments are visible in my hubs, I have to approve them, and I was busy for the last few hours. I do not sit around waiting for you to comment and instantly approve it. I actually do have a real life, a real family and obligations that take priority over hubpages. If you see fit to apologize for your assumptions and accusations, I may still allow you to comment. If not, everyone can now see how you really are and decide whether or not to interact with you.

    • profile image

      Lybrah 3 years ago

      Why did you ask me a question and challenge me only to block my comments and answers? If that's the way you want to be, fine. I don't need to talk to you either. And unlike some other people, when I say I'm done, I'm done.

    • profile image

      Lybrah 3 years ago

      I don't have to prove anything to you. If you just google it, you'd see that the bible is accepted by historians. It has been compiled over the years. First, Jesus's teachings were passed down by word of mouth. Then they were recorded into many books.

    • Buildreps profile image

      Buildreps 3 years ago from Europe

      Hi Lybrah ( and Julie), nice talking to you.

      It is not my bible. It is your bible too, but you're probably not aware of this. It is the Universal Truth, unedited and pure, directly from the source - Jesus Christ and his disciples. Reading and understanding this material is not so easy, for it is far away from all we've learned. Jesus only spoke in metaphors to make it more comprehensible, still it is difficult.

      Secondly - who is the author of the bible? This is what Julie suggests as well. This is crucial. Try to answer this one for yourself. When is the bible written? And what was the source for this information?

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      Then she would have to demonstrate how she knows, and back up her assertion that people go to it for history, etc.

    • Link10103 profile image

      Link10103 3 years ago

      I've heard of the book of dead and the Epic of Gilgamesh and the Bible's similarities to them, can't say I've heard of the codex though.

      And Julie, Lybrah "knows" that the Bible is completely accurate and that it is the number 1 source historians go to to learn about history. I feel like that info could be related to your question.

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      Lybrah, how much do you know about your bible and how it was written, who it was written by and how it was put together? Have you ever studied early Christian history?

    • profile image

      Lybrah 3 years ago

      Never heard of it. How do you know about it? Why do you think it is the real bible?

    • Buildreps profile image

      Buildreps 3 years ago from Europe

      Julie, you could consider to check the box "Comments must be approved before they appear". I have some hubs that attract too many of these kinds of comments that are way of the subject.

      The bible is full of nonsense. If you say this hoards of people are tumbling over you, because you say something that is just true. The bible is contradicts itself too much to be take seriously. It has been edited to keep people under control in fear of hell and suffering.

      Does anyone here on this thread heard of the Nag Hammadi codex? This is the true bible, hidden for nearly 1800 years in the desert of Egypt (near Nag Hammadi).

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      I'm going to repeat what I said to Lybrah. Please limit comments on this hub to the hubs content. My hubs are not the place for unrelated bickering.

    • Link10103 profile image

      Link10103 3 years ago

      I don't recall saying otherwise, but please continue putting words in my mouth.

      As far as the lie goes, treating me with respect does not include mocking my sentences a number of times and siding with people who insult me due to your inability to answer simple questions about your own faith, yet you claim you have done nothing but treat me respectfully. Usually, that's called lying.

      I can already guess what your response will be, and I also know that I will have to repeat myself yet again to someone almost twice my age because they cannot grasp simple concepts. You can go along with your traditional response, or blind side us and actually contribute something to this hub Lybrah.

      You should take your own advice, become the "better person", and choose the second choice.

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      Lybrah, my hub will not turn into a slinging match between you and link. If you have something to add to the topic, then add it. Future comments of this nature will not be approved.

      Secondly, didn't you say you were done taking to me? Is there a reason you're still wilfully visiting my hubs in order to simply bicker with someone else?

    • profile image

      Lybrah 3 years ago

      Oh Link, your privileges were revoked because you said something VERY INAPPROPRIATE. Stop trying to say otherwise. And when did I lie?

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      The stance that they must be making an impact and somehow "getting to us" is simply another ego driven Le to propagate their own need to shove everyone into predefined boxes. It's the way they see the world, and they don't like being challenged. I'm not seeking them out. When I ask questions it's not to bait then into an exchange where I can bully and dehumanize them. It's because I'm interested in the answer. They continually seek us out, ask questions about atheists and then act surprised and self righteous when atheists respond and correct them. They enjoy Insisting that it's a waste of their time, and the only way to justify their bad behavior is to turn around and blame someone else. I interact because I enjoy it. As soon as it stops being fun, I stop and take a break. Some of them simply are incapable of doing so, and ate unwilling or unable to make the distinction between criticism of a belief and criticism of a person - yet they have no problem "attacking" (using their definition of the word as anything that is not blind obedience) those who disagree.

    • Link10103 profile image

      Link10103 3 years ago

      My permission to answer questions was revoked for a day earlier this week. Apparently creating somewhat of a run on sentence makes all the words in a comment absolute gibberish and warrants people to ignore the posed question, mildly insult my proof reading abilities, and then get offended by my annoyed response and lie to my face.

      I thought my response to that was pretty tame all things considered, since it wasn't the first time to happen. I figure that I am just going to have fun and enjoy it when people back themselves into corners of their own accord and lash out, simply because I asked a question they couldn't answer.

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      Thank you jl. Unfortunately, I have had my moments of less than respectful exchange when things get under my skin. I try not to, but it happens. All I can do is to do my best to try harder and to not let it happen again. Thank you very much for the reminder and the encouragement. It's much appreciated.

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 3 years ago from New Zealand

      I always enjoy reading your work, JM, and I always learn something. You also always debate 'nicely' - no name calling, and gentle nudges in the direction of understanding - even if that understanding is only that they finally completely understand their own position...(it's unfortunate when they don't...). I respect that, and your wealth of knowledge...thank you

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      How can you possibly think that you're greater than something that you don't believe exists. I'm sorry, but that's like you telling me that you're smarter than the Roth fairy. Are you afraid of any other hell concepts from Islam, or are you afraid of hades? No? When you can understand why you're not afraid of them, maybe you can start to understand why atheists are not afraid of yours.

    • profile image

      Lybrah 3 years ago

      Do you consider yourself greater than God? Go ahead and keep telling yourself there's no hell--that's like a smoker saying he's not going to get lung cancer, and he smokes a pack a day.

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      Thank you as always for your respectful and insightful comments, Sheila.

    • profile image

      sheilamyers 3 years ago

      Thank you for stating your opinions on the topic. As always, you've presented your views in a way that drew me in and kept me interested. Most of my fellow Christians do probably resort to the argument that people send themselves to Hell because they don't want to lay something like that on God. But you're correct to say God is the one who makes that final decision. That's all I have to say about this topic.

    • Austinstar profile image

      Lela 3 years ago from Somewhere in the universe

      It's easy to blame just about anything other than ourselves for whatever the problem is. But basically, believing in something that has no basis in concrete evidence, no demonstrable reality (heaven or hell), and no physical appearance (There is no body for Jesus either), then they have only themselves to blame for falling for a con job.

      And that is what religion boils down to - a huge, magnificent con job.

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      Here's the thing, though. If I actively sought god, prayed for him, had other people pray for me and didn't find him, then went to look at the evidence and didn't find him, and then went to look at philosophy and theology and didn't find him, is it my fault for not accepting him? If he made me s moral agent and found nothing, if he hardened my heart or his from me intentionally, whose fault is it, really?

    • Austinstar profile image

      Lela 3 years ago from Somewhere in the universe

      Obviously you do not possess the correct 'code' that is needed to comprehend the books of the Bible. Maybe a short time in hell will convince you that God really does exist? Oh wait, you won't be able to save yourself once you have condemned yourself. Boss man say, "You missed your chance to love me". Too bad, so sad.

    • JMcFarland profile image
      Author

      Julie McFarland 3 years ago from The US of A, but I'm Open to Suggestions

      Hmmmm... interesting.

    • Buildreps profile image

      Buildreps 3 years ago from Europe

      No one is sent to hell anymore, these days. God decided to shut down hell due to a negative cost-benefit balance. Just joking:)

      Why would a loving God send his children to hell? Only the false god Jaldaboath will send humans to hell. Look through the delusion created by Jaldoboath and there will be no hell.

    • Link10103 profile image

      Link10103 3 years ago

      Im sorry, the staggering amount of rationality provided in this hub nearly blinded me, especially after my recent delvings into some of the Q&A's about homosexuality.

      I wonder if the person who told you that people send themselves to hell is the same person I have in mind, since I don't remember ever hearing that excuse before they said it.