Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

 


JESUS TAUGHT HELL WAS A TORTURE CHAMBER

 

The Bible indicates that Hell is a place for the damned will be raised from the dead for all eternity and bodies need to go to places.  When it says that why is it so crazy to imagine it being a fiery place?  The doctrine is that Jesus came to keep us out of Hell so no Hell means Jesus' mission was just nonsense.

 

Belief in things that are true should be allowed to develop naturally and the person's right to believe differently should be respected.  But God supposedly COMMANDS you to believe in Hell.  He just asks for belief in it but does not command you to believe the damned are there freely and won't leave or does not command you to believe it is not as terrible as traditionally depicted.  Belief in Hell is based on disrespect for yourself and others.   So don't pretend you care about those in Hell.  Don't pretend it cannot be a torture chamber.

 

A popular lie among Christians is that poor God does all he can to keep us from going to Hell, that is to live forever in sin and misery if we die in sin.  They blame the victims.  People who blame the victims cannot admit it.

 

A being who is supposed to be all-good deserves bigger suspicion of blame than a bad one.  Why?  You need an explanation from a good being why it is letting evil happen.  With a bad being you don't. This principle applies when innocent suffering takes place or when somebody goes to suffer punishment forever.  It is absolute proof that Hell is a doctrine not of hate but HATE for nobody even wants an explanation.

 

Jesus spared the legion of demons he had cast out of a man for a little while.  He spared them Hell.  They did not want to be sent back to Hell so they go into pigs and the pigs drown which must mean they went back to Hell then?  Yes - they would go to any extreme before they would endure a second of their torment.  2 Peter 2:3 uses the word apoleia which means utter extreme ruin. It is often translated destruction. It says their destruction does not slumber. What does that mean?  Apoleia means ruining a person and destroying them but not as in annihilation.  Their torment never slumbers.

 

In Matthew 13:41-42 Jesus says that if you are a sinner and not forgiven then angels will throw you into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels so they will torment you. Throwing somebody into a torture chamber is torturing.  Jesus said that those who do not show compassion to others will be delivered to the torturers by God until they pay God what they owe him.  He is very clear that Hell is not just where you put yourself but where you go to pay a debt of justice to God.  The modern idea that it is a place where you put yourself and where you suffer but not where you suffer punishment is heresy.

 

In Matthew 18:34-35 Jesus warns that you will be tortured by God through torturers he employs if you don't forgive your brother sincerely. If you are threatened to forgive the end result will be a very unsatisfying forgiveness. It will be passive aggression in the cloak of mercy. Jesus' gospel spreads torture and if you don't embrace the torture worse will wait for you in the afterlife!

 

If you do wrong the judge having a relationship with you will make your pain worse when you are given your punishment. Thus it can be the most loving thing to NOT have a relationship. God torments the damned by offering them a relationship.  That is passive aggression on steriods.

 

Notice how the angels put them in the blazing furnace.  Jesus means a literal furnace for he could mean it.  And people those days took all that stuff at face value.  They did not try to pretend that blazing furnace was a symbol.  And the apostles who were not theologians but ordinary people said they understood meaning they would have taken the straightforward interpretation.  Also, the parable is about fish being thrown away.  It will not be burnt.  In fact it is the good fish that will be burnt!  Jesus had the perfect chance to just say the wicked would be thrown away and there would be weeping and grinding of teeth and say no more.  But no he added an unnecessary detail about the blazing furnace because he believed there really would be a furnace.

 
The Bible speaks of Hell as torment by eternal fire. Nothing indicates that this fire is a symbol.  The mention of Hell being a place of darkness does not necessarily imply the fire is not real for it could work a different way from fire as we know it.  The fire could burn within the damned person and not be visible. Darkness happened at Mount Sinai when God came down to give the commandments EVEN though there was fire (Hebrews 12:18).  Read Exodus 19 and Deuteronomy 4-5. The Bible may call Hell a place of darkness or fire but that does not mean it has to be darkness all the time.   The fire and darkness are manifestations of the justice executed by God and they are indications that God is present and judging.  The notion that hellfire is a symbol is just us reading our modern ideas back into the Bible writings.  In the days the Bible was written nobody would have seen the idea of suffering in real fire after death as silly.  So the cause of the Hellfire darkness and burning is the presence of God!  The damned cannot bear him being present for they hate him.

 

The Bible speaks of worms in Hell which is way of indicating that the person in Hell is waste and rubbish just like the rotting and smelling body matter of animals that flowed out from the Temple every day that was live with worms.

 

Those who say it is absurd to think the fire is literal are forgetting that the absurdity of it does not mean the Bible did not teach it.  Many say that it is not really as absurd as liberal Christian liars say for there is no logical disproof of Hell.   If the believers are right to call Hell a mystery then there is no problem if it is eternal fire. It is odd how they argue that a baby being tormented by viruses made by God is a mystery and how some believers like CS Lewis want to make out that there is no pain in Hell only the loneliness without God.  It is as if they think punishment is wrong or the damned do not deserve suffering.  Whoever wants innocent suffering to be a mystery and non-innocent suffering not to be is clearly not a believer in justice but a wishy-washy liberal.

 

The notion that Hell is what happens to you if you won't let yourself love God in the afterlife tries to make out it is purely self-inflicted and that God does not decree anybody must go to Hell. Hell is refusal to enter the presence of God. But the book of Revelation makes it clear that Hell is not any kind of absence of God. They are tormented day and night in THE PRESENCE OF THE HOLY ANGELS AND JESUS THE LAMB. Read Revelation 14:10-11.

 

The same book of Revelation says that the evil will suffer in a lake of fire and brimstone.  The doctrine of creation suggests that God can make such a lake.  If there is such a lake then God is the tormenter.  If you think the lake is a metaphor it is still representing something God has made to torment the damned.

 

These hideous doctrines are from the Bible - supposedly authored by God - and the Church - which God gifted with infallibility so that it gives his teaching without error.


 

Most priests today define Hell as a place where there is no love for the love of God is shut out by the people in Hell.  The implication is that you have failed to relate to God enough to go to him forever to be with him.  Each one is alone and unloved. Each one has only her or his choice to blame. These doctrines are not in the Bible.  Jesus talks about Hell in judicial terms.  He said you have to make peace with the judge on the way to your trial.  This is not the language of one who says that forming a loving forgiving relationship with the judge solves the matter. 

 

If you love God and God is a judge who gives out judicial decrees you will love him for that.  The priests are advocating a bias against punitive justice and thus against God for a judging God might not be likeable but he will get respect.  It is paradoxically a message of, "I love you God if you punish nobody."  The end result is not a loving relationship with God but a conditional contract.

 

It is strange how people fear a judicial God who gives out punitive justice but the one that you need a relationship with is going to be more scary for who can enter the presence of a perfect God when sin is a barrier and a choice to say no go God?

 

The priests are telling lies to rationalise the contradiction between the everlasting misery of Hell and the doctrine that Jesus was the perfect man and pure fountain of wisdom. Jesus described Hell as everlasting punishment. Self-inflicted isolation is not punishment. To say that God does not punish is to say that the saint and the sinner should be equally praised. Hell is not defined as the state where there is no love but as the state of everlasting punishment. There may be no love there but that is not what makes it Hell. It is the punishment that makes it Hell.

 

To choose something properly you need to know what you are choosing. Respect for choice is often not so much about choice but to facilitate the formation of society. For example, a man and woman marry. They choose each other for life. So we are told. But in so far as they do not know how time will change the other person it is not a choice. In so far as they only think they know the other person it is not a choice. And we may have a strong belief that we are not dreaming or hallucinating our lives but that is not certainty. That imposes another limitation on choice. What we call choice is more about having to act than about making a proper choice. We have to do something - and doing nothing is doing something too. Society cannot function if we don't treat what people do consciously as a choice even though it is not really a choice or much of a choice. The system works well enough. It works despite the fact that limited free will is not free will at all but is a good substitute.

 

What if your decisions are partly caused by things outside of your control? That is no freedom at all. You will never know if you really chose anything. You can only believe but you know you could be wrong. And nobody - not even you - would have the right to accuse you of having meant to commit murder or some serious evil. And nobody would have the right to be sure that the heroic good you did was really from you.

 

Until you experience what an eternity of torture or suffering or loneliness is like you cannot really fully choose it. You may say, "But it makes no sense to expect people to endure something before they can choose to endure it." Yes it is impracticable. But that is not the point. The point is that if knowledge and choosing go together then because you cannot know except from experience what an eternity of suffering is like then you cannot choose it.

 

From all that, it is clear that it makes no sense to say that Hell is anything other than a torture chamber operated by a vindictive God and vindictive saints and angels.

 

Romans 9 : I speak the truth in ChristóI am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spiritó 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, 4 the people of Israel.

 

If Hell is entirely your own fault and due to you blocking God out and not God blocking you out, then how could the apostle Paul write in the Bible that he wished he could be lost after death if it meant others would not be lost? If Hell is not the rejection of God but is a place of torment then it makes sense for Paul to wish he could suffer it instead of others. But Paul could not wish that he would abuse and hate God forever even to spare others. Remember the Bible is the inspired word of God according to Christianity. Also, if Hell is all your own fault and is merely the rejection of God, then it makes no sense to wish that you could go there instead of others.

 

If you argue that God does not punish and rewards sins and thereby punishes the victims of the sinners by treating them as he does sinners, then if you believe in the version of Hell taught by those priests you will surely end up in it. You want a Devil for a God and that is what you will get if the existence of Hell is true.

 

Reason and experience show that the reason why we act is very complex. There is a mixture of good and bad reasons behind everything we do. No matter how evil you want to be, you will never be evil enough to walk into Hell and make your Hell. You cannot be bad enough to freely isolate yourself in Hell forever from the God who pleads with you to come to him. If you are in Hell then you have been shoved in.

 

Instead of honouring human nature by saying we can't become evil enough to willingly stay in Hell forever, believers put the fact that the existence of Hell is stated in their scriptures and Catholic faith first. They prefer to accuse us of potentially infinite evil than to contradict their scriptures and religion. God is evil if he asks us to believe and so if Hell exists it is where he unleashes his vindictiveness.


If Hell is horrible, it follows that God makes it so. Spirits donít have nerves so they should not be able to feel anything. God then must intervene to make them be capable of suffering. Also, if he raises their bodies from the dead on the last day, that is merely so that they be tormented in the flesh. Those who say he is not tormenting them are liars. It cannot be denied that he is being cruel. He is like a monster who makes weapons for the sadists to torment their prey.

 

If mere rejection of God hurts and that is the pain of Hell, then it is God who has ensured that it will be painful and the source of suffering. Those who reject God on earth are often happy. If those who are in Hell suffer then it is Godís doing. To deny that as Christians do makes the religion crueller than it already would be.

 

Many modern theologians emphasise that Hell is just a state of being where you have to endure your own selfishness for all eternity. If selfishness is really that unpleasant then why do we love being selfish? Their doctrine is really an advertisement for going to Hell!

Jesus never made the slightest hint that Hell was merely enduring yourself and your hatred for God and everybody else for all eternity. He spoke of it in terms of being punished for dying in a state of disobedience of God. He mentioned a soul being in Hell wanting his living relations warned so that they wouldnít end up in it. For Jesus, Hell was a prison where God administers everlasting punishment. That means you stay there against your will. A Hell where you stay of your own free will because you want to be selfish is not a prison or a place of punishment. Would jail be punishment if the door was left open?

The believers say such selfishness is immensely worse than any fire. If that is so then why are they so against the idea of Hell having a torturing fire? If the selfishness is so bad then the torturing fire is nothing. It might exist then after all.

 

Hell is about punishment not about reform. But even if it is not about reform it has to keep the door open so that the person can reform if they want to.  But it does not.  A God that does not leave that door open is pure evil. The doctrine denies that he leaves the door open. Thus Hell leaves us adoring an evil God and condoning and celebrating his evil.

 

Hell is not about putting you off sinning right now. It depends entirely on your disposition in your last moments of life. Earthly justice is far superior despite its stupid side than all that nonsense. At least it makes you think twice before doing wrong. You would need to want there to be a Hell when you follow such a useless futile doctrine. Religion may respond that it is not futile if it keeps you out of Hell. But that assumes there is a Hell in the first place. If there is not, then it is a very despicable doctrine indeed. And religion makes no real effort to verify the existence of Hell. It uses it to scare people. It does not care that it stoops so low to risk saying that the doctrine is true when it is not.

 

Not a single verse in the Bible says that Hell is not a prison but your own creation. If it is all your fault, then why did Jesus talk about it being a prison and a fire like Gehenna and a place where body and soul can be destroyed? Why didn't he simply say, "Repent. If you die in sin, you will not repent and you will lose God and your friends for all eternity". Simple! He didn't say it because he seen Hell as more than that! And how can anybody say Hell is not a torture chamber when God raises the bodies of the dead to life to endure its pains? Why not just let the soul suffer its loneliness?

 

Dave Hunt in his book, In Defence of the Faith, page 241, thinks that physical punishment of the damned is not much of a punishment no matter how terrible it is for the right and natural punishment for somebody who refuses a relationship of love with God is thirst for God and frustration and loneliness.  This does not alter the fact that the loneliness of the damned and their crave for God is totally unbiblical. The texts only care about the physical agonies.  That is all they speak of.  There are no warnings about the awful loneliness of Hell.  It is not mentioned at all and nobody sane would think that the Bible would outline physical torments and dwell on them for that would be akin to saying prison is about bread and water without mentioning being locked up.

 

The believers want to be at peace in Heaven and one of the things they want to be at peace with is the agony of the damned. Loneliness is allegedly the greatest pain of Hell for the damned has lost the God he needs. But it is a fact that no justice system can remain just and want people to be lonely. Nobody can deserve that. And you cannot inflict it on yourself directly. It is possible that a person should be lonely and are not. Recluses can be very happy. Loneliness is down to your genes not down to the lack of company. So if the damned are all lonely God is making them that way. Thus even if the damned suffer in Hell you cannot be at peace with their loneliness.