Hell

[/]

Very, very much no.

[Lexii, harbinger of chaos and sexual anarchy]

As a former  universalist, no

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

As a current Universalist, yes, but only if their spiritual journey requires them to. One thing that many Universalists fail to truly comprehend is that many people think they are unworthy of Heaven, Nirvana, whatever their preferred afterlife may be.  As such, they personally require some form of propitiation to take place before they can accept grace.  In the Christian tradition, Christ provides that propitiation for us thru his crucifixion.  Personally, as a Christian Universalist, I think the crucifixion was necessary because there are those who would not be willing to accept grace save by such a demonstration of God being willing to do whatever it takes to convince us stiff-necked sinners that our sins are not so great as to deprive us of God's love.  Yet, I don't deny that there may be those who cannot be convinced save by experiencing Hell as a form of personal propitiation.

I do realize my conception of Hell, more closely resembles the classic version of Purgatory, but my view of the afterlife is such that it occurs outside linear time, so even an infinity of time spent in Hell is not boundless.

[afleitch]

No. I question the morality of anyone who incorporates it into their spiritual justice system.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Your grave and purgatory and hell are used interchangeably.  And then there is the real hell, or the underworld. No, no one derserves to go there. But, there are demons around and you can believe or not if they come from there.

[afleitch]

Your grave and purgatory and hell are used interchangeably.  And then there is the real hell, or the underworld. No, no one derserves to go there. But, there are demons around and you can believe or not if they come from there.

Why associate 'demons' with 'bad'? If there are daemons why not good ones? As the Greeks assumed.

[°Leprechaun]

As a current Universalist, yes, but only if their spiritual journey requires them to. One thing that many Universalists fail to truly comprehend is that many people think they are unworthy of Heaven, Nirvana, whatever their preferred afterlife may be.  As such, they personally require some form of propitiation to take place before they can accept grace.  In the Christian tradition, Christ provides that propitiation for us thru his crucifixion.  Personally, as a Christian Universalist, I think the crucifixion was necessary because there are those who would not be willing to accept grace save by such a demonstration of God being willing to do whatever it takes to convince us stiff-necked sinners that our sins are not so great as to deprive us of God's love.  Yet, I don't deny that there may be those who cannot be convinced save by experiencing Hell as a form of personal propitiation.

I do realize my conception of Hell, more closely resembles the classic version of Purgatory, but my view of the afterlife is such that it occurs outside linear time, so even an infinity of time spent in Hell is not boundless.

First, I answered NO, but by no I mean am talking about eternal suffering. Hell exists but I don't think that anyone should spend eternity suffering, nor would most people want to. As to the quotation, I would point out that 19th Universalists were divided into two camps, one that believed in ultra-universalism, meaning that all go directly to heaven and don't have to spend any time in hell and the restorationists who believed in a period of appropriate punishment in a temporary kind of purgatory for the harm that they had commited.

[Classic Conservative]

Yes

[Small L]

Nobody should deserve to go there, but some people probably do.

[DavidB.]

Yes

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

As a current Universalist, yes, but only if their spiritual journey requires them to. One thing that many Universalists fail to truly comprehend is that many people think they are unworthy of Heaven, Nirvana, whatever their preferred afterlife may be.  As such, they personally require some form of propitiation to take place before they can accept grace.  In the Christian tradition, Christ provides that propitiation for us thru his crucifixion.  Personally, as a Christian Universalist, I think the crucifixion was necessary because there are those who would not be willing to accept grace save by such a demonstration of God being willing to do whatever it takes to convince us stiff-necked sinners that our sins are not so great as to deprive us of God's love.  Yet, I don't deny that there may be those who cannot be convinced save by experiencing Hell as a form of personal propitiation.

I do realize my conception of Hell, more closely resembles the classic version of Purgatory, but my view of the afterlife is such that it occurs outside linear time, so even an infinity of time spent in Hell is not boundless.

First, I answered NO, but by no I mean am talking about eternal suffering. Hell exists but I don't think that anyone should spend eternity suffering, nor would most people want to. As to the quotation, I would point out that 19th Universalists were divided into two camps, one that believed in ultra-universalism, meaning that all go directly to heaven and don't have to spend any time in hell and the restorationists who believed in a period of appropriate punishment in a temporary kind of purgatory for the harm that they had commited.

As should be clear already, I fall more in the restorationist camp.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Yes

Do Jews believe in hell? I genuinely don't know.

As for me, I feel that the idea of anybody - even Hitler or Ted Bundy or phone operators that put you on hold for three hours - deserve eternal torment. It just feels unambiguous ly wrong, and an area of theology that I cannot wrap my head around.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I admit I do like the get out solution of inventing celestial parole boards to rehabilitate you before you enter heaven, but it does feel very much like a non-biblical cop-out to the 'hell problem'.

[DavidB.]

Do Jews believe in hell? I genuinely don't know.

Not really, at least not in its conventional/Christian sense. The idea of olam haba (a "world to come") is quite universal in Judaism, both applied to afterlife and messianic times, but what olam haba (and Gehennom) essentially are is not exactly set in stone. The entire area of afterlife is seldom discussed and does not get much attention in Judaism in general, though there are, in fact, myriad different visions on it. To give you an impression, this is one of them, explained quite simplistically, but it is very much influenced by Chabad's hasidic outlook and by no means universal to Judaism (to the point that I probably know rabbis who think almost everything in that article is bull[inks]).

[°Leprechaun]

Yes

Do Jews believe in hell? I genuinely don't know.

As for me, I feel that the idea of anybody - even Hitler or Ted Bundy or phone operators that put you on hold for three hours - deserve eternal torment. It just feels unambiguous ly wrong, and an area of theology that I cannot wrap my head around.

Three hours? You have a lot more patience than I do.

[Clark Kent]

I'm not qualified to answer this question.

[Cory]

ITT: Otherwise smart people still manage to believe in things that are patently, utterly ridiculous.

[Weyfield]

I in no way believe in hell, but if such a terrible place did exist I strongly believe that no human should ever be subjected to it. We're all flawed in some way, though some people's flaws lead them to do deplorable things to themselves or other people. Though I don't believe anyone is inherently evil. No one is irredeemably awful. We're all just victims of circumstances - the things we have no control over often have the biggest impact on who we are, like where we're born, when we're born, who are parents are etc.
I find the concept of eternal suffering abhorrent and a shallow tactic to frighten people into behaving a certain way.

[Hillary pays minimum wage]

Hell literally means nothingness.  The idea of burning in hell can even be traced back to the Canaanites who burned their children in the form of child sacrifice to the god Molech at Hinnam Valley.  Hinnam translates to hell so their children were literally burning in hell.

[Mr. Smith]

Hell as in fire and brimstone? No

Hell as in the ultimate darkness where only the most wicked rest? Yes

Only for those who hear the complete fullness and understand the ramifications of the gospel, and still reject it entirely and those who rejected mortality in the first place.

Naturally, this means that only people who followed Satan before and maybe a very tiny number of dead people after are in such a state. I believe that most people here and now will still end up somewhere better than here in the end, as happy as they can allow themselves.

@Teach Peace/Weyfield: Eternal suffering is not something inflicted because "rah rah you disobeyed the commandments" nor because of some random predestination, it is something that is already there as a consequence. A place like hell if it did exist would probably be a mercy.

Everyone is given great and terrible circumstances for a reason, and it is how that adversity is handled, how the agency is used that brings forth the consequences of suffering or reward.

It's sort of like a cosmic version of not getting dessert and being sent to your room for not eating your veggies, the consequence of being hungry and not getting proper nourishment is still there regardless and whether or not you are sitting at the dinner table but not getting dessert or sent to your room, you aren't happy.

I think that's the biggest problem with the atheist vs traditional Christian debate on this matter, often it treats Hell and Heaven too much as a "Because God said so" sort of thing. Guess that's what happens when you have one side that doesn't believe in any higher powers that aren't proven and another side that treats God as if he's some kind of static entity...instead of just a Father who himself had to make mistakes and learn from 'em to get there, and far as known, avoided eternal suffering himself.

[RI]

Yes, of course. The fire/brimstone/torture hell is laughably non-biblical, but I'm personally fond of either the annihilationist view or the Orthodox view of hell.

In the Orthodox conception, everyone goes to God after death but how we react to God's presence determines whether that's a infinitely joyful thing or an infinitely painful thing. Those who live their lives in disdain for God will only find regret and sorrow in His presence once outside of time. Not unlike laying in the sun: those with sunscreen will enjoy the warmth while those without will burn in the heat.

If we reject that view under the "nothing sinful can exist in the presence of God" argument, then annihilationism seems the way to go. Ultimately, the specifics don't matter a whole lot to me as they're likely beyond my comprehension, plus que sera sera and all.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Annihilationism compared to eternal torment is both far more in keeping with the concept of a benevolent god and doesn't require importing a Greco-Roman view of the afterlife into Christianity.

[Cory]

Only for those who hear the complete fullness and understand the ramifications of the gospel, and still reject it entirely and those who rejected mortality in the first place.

So nobody ever, by your own definition? At least anybody who isn't already "saved". How convenient.

Naturally, this means that only people who followed Satan before and maybe a very tiny number of dead people after are in such a state. I believe that most people here and now will still end up somewhere better than here in the end, as happy as they can allow themselves.

Goalpost: moved. Escape hatch: established.

@Teach Peace/Weyfield: Eternal suffering is not something inflicted because "rah rah you disobeyed the commandments" nor because of some random predestination, it is something that is already there as a consequence. A place like hell if it did exist would probably be a mercy.

In what universe does that make sense? Certainly not one any rational person would exist in, which brings us to the utter absurdity of this thread to begin with.

Everyone is given great and terrible circumstances for a reason, and it is how that adversity is handled, how the agency is used that brings forth the consequences of suffering or reward.

Anyone who understands sociology or history knows that people are often results of their social and biological circumstance. Your belief in magic doesn't cancel this out. "Free will" as we know it is largely a myth. People are the result of their social circumstance subtly conditioning their every response to any given stimuli based on their prior experience.

It's sort of like a cosmic version of not getting dessert and being sent to your room for not eating your veggies, the consequence of being hungry and not getting proper nourishment is still there regardless and whether or not you are sitting at the dinner table but not getting dessert or sent to your room, you aren't happy.

This is so silly I don't know where to begin. You seriously think someone being sent to hell forever is parallel to a child being sent to bed without dessert until tomorrow.

I think that's the biggest problem with the atheist vs traditional Christian debate on this matter, often it treats Hell and Heaven too much as a "Because God said so" sort of thing. Guess that's what happens when you have one side that doesn't believe in any higher powers that aren't proven and another side that treats God as if he's some kind of static entity...instead of just a Father who himself had to make mistakes and learn from 'em to get there, and far as known, avoided eternal suffering himself.

*facepalm*

Totally Un-Biblical.

It's amazing the mental gymnastics otherwise smart people will go through to justify their belief in utterly asinine things.

Just admit that you believe in magic and think that you will go to a theme park when you die with the people you love. You will desperately dodge all the negatives of your faith with ridiculous "interpretations" that totally contradict basically all the established teachings of the faith your parent/s conditioned you to believe in or you thought gave your life meaning when you fell on hard times.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

I don't know if Hell exists, but if it does I would like to think it's not a place people are sent eternally, permanently separated from God or whatever higher power there is, and suffer immensely for arbitrary sins.


If it is that kind of place after all, then I'd say no. If it's vaguely a corrective place, then I'd say yes.


This question really hinges on what your ideas of Hell and the afterlife (or lack thereof) are like.

[Enduro]

It doesn't matter what I believe, it's not my choice who goes to hell or not.