A valid argument is not necessarily true. @Lonnie123 is correct–your premises are unproven assertions, which renders your conclusion unestablished.
No, the burden is on you to demonstrate your premises are true.
I am a Christian, and do not believe in the existence of Hell.
No, we were born into sin. By accepting Christ as our savior we then become (free) Christians and are saved from hell. So we never had what you call “freedom” to begin with. We started out in sin and then became free by accepting Christ.
It’s really a simple plan and one worth accepting as the alternative is actually quite horrible. Of course if you don’t believe in God or hell then that does not apply to …oh wait yes it does. You might not believe that it’s raining outside but that won’t stop it from raining. In other words your disbelief doesn’t change anything except your own eternity.
Put another way, are you really that sure that there is no God and no hell? Well…remember that time you were absolutely positive that_____________. You can fill in the blank. It might be “pass a test” “a certain girl would go out with you” “the boss was going to give you a raise”. Whatever it might be. And you were wrong. You were sure it would or wouldn’t happen and you were wrong. Yeah…that’s a bad feeling. But it’s nothing I’m sure compared to dying one day and waking up in hell and then thinking…OH NO… I was wrong." OUCH …BURNED literally…
Think it over.
I just wanted to pop back in here and say that I’m very happy with the direction this thread has taken. There’s really not much to explain when you’re an atheist. I just don’t believe, end of story.
I find it much more interesting to gain insight into the minds of intelligent believers.
Yes. 
That reminds me of a story I heard about a man who went to church for the first time. He wasn’t a believer, agnostic at best. The Priest spoke to the man directly after the Mass had ended. He told the man about who Jesus is and how we are all called to be ambassadors for Christ. The man asked the priest in a matter of fact tone, “What about a person in Africa who will never hear this story? How can they live according to Jesus?” To which the Priest replied, " Well, you have heard the story, so how are you going to live?"
This, to me, is the most silly of all arguments. “You were wrong once, but if you’re wrong this time it’s eternal damnation”.
Question: Does anyone really believe in a god that would subject someone to eternal damnation that devotes his/her life to helping all living creatures? He is kind to everyone, devotes time to help those less fortunate, and spreads happiness and love. Yet, is not really concerned one way or the other about the truth of some ancient book.
Next, a person wholly believes in God and Jesus, goes to church every Sunday, but is an a**hole as a person, does not help others in any way, and generally makes the world a worse place. (and we all know people just like this).
You’re telling me the all mighty, all knowing God rewards the second person with an eternity in heaven and the second with an eternity in hell??
No, the Bible is telling us all that if we do not accept Christ’s great sacrifice on the cross we are doomed to hell.
I didn’t write the book so don’t blame me.
Fair enough. I personally don’t live my life trying to please an egotistical, overly sensitive supernatural being. There is no valid reason to believe that Christianity expresses some Universal truths that Hinduism or Islam or _________ gets wrong.
I do, however, sway towards Buddhism where the deeds you do are for their own sake, and the doer is not motivated by some eternal reward. There is no requirement to believe (or disbelieve) in a supernatural being because it doesn’t matter. We’re here now and we can treat all creatures with love and see their reflection in ourselves. We know what is like to hurt, so why would wish this upon others? They are no different than we are.
A famous Zen priest asks two children:
“What is the purpose of eating breakfast”
Child 1: “The purpose of breakfast is to fuel us for the day”
Child 2: “The purpose of eating breakfast is to eat breakfast”
Zen priest: “I think Child 2 is correct”.
I thought that there were numerous outs for hell. Like really, the only way to get in is through committing any of the deadly sins (death of the soul, eternal damnation) without repentance at the time of final judgement.
The bible as I understand it gives you a ton of ways out. Obviously, the preferred way to go about life is through belief followed by actions, but it doesn’t have to be perfect, or even close for that matter.
As suggested by my comment above, I don’t think either is ‘going to Hell.’ That said, I cannot reconcile the description of the second individual; ie, someone who simultaneously is ‘wholly Christian’ but also uncaring of others. Just can’t square that circle.
I can. Some people just suck at it. There is no quantity of faith, like you don’t have to be ( I ) ← this tall to get on the ride.
We all suck at it. Most days I’m a miserable failure as a Christian; other days I’m worse. But the stark terms in which the second individual was drawn–s/he “wholly believes,” but “does not help others in any way”–simply doesn’t scan for me. IMO, by definition someone who acts that way cannot be said to ‘wholly believe.’
I guess I just have some sympathy for that type of disposition. It reminds me of my one brother. He has some faith. He wants to do better. But when push comes to shove, he’s a dickhead every time.
Then he feels bad about it and does something decent out of guilt. I don’t get it. We’ve talked about it before and even he can’t explain it. I guess it’s kind of like a compulsion for him.
[quote=“antiquity, post:95, topic:229234”]
Fair enough. I personally don’t live my life trying to please an egotistical, overly sensitive supernatural being. There is no valid reason to believe that Christianity expresses some Universal truths that Hinduism or Islam or _________ gets wrong. [/quote]
I don’t know your age or how long you have been searching and studying various spiritual topics. But, I strongly suggest that you continue your journey. You don’t have all the answers and neither do I. That’s why I look at this as an ongoing process.
For example Jesus Christ is an historical figure no different than other people from history. What does that mean? The Christian Bible itself is more accurate than the works of Aristotle and Socrates…it is a real historical document.
Of course we can all think what we want. You might have one version of God and someone else might have a different version. And a third person has no belief whatsoever. The only thing that I stress is that you base your belief on something concrete other than emotion, or what “seems” right in your own eyes.
Sort of like someone coming over to the US and not understanding our tax system or how powerful the IRS is. They might say:
“I don’t believe that if I don’t pay x number of dollars year after year that they are actually going to throw me in jail, I’m a good person and need that money to support my family, that IRS thing doesn’t even make sense.”
But…what did they base that conclusion on? It certainly was not knowledge and history. They hide their income and bang they are in jail…(of course the IRS first tries to extract as much money as possible ha)
Anyway, it’s your life and your decision to make I am only encouraging you to keep searching, keep reading and keep thinking about the topic. And ultimately base your decision not on what you “think” God should be like, or what he ought to be like…but what he actually is.
We all need to keep learning in order to grow spiritually.
Not according to the Christian Bible. It’s pretty clear in many versus. Here is just one:
John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
What is everyone’s thoughts on the Euthyphro Dilemma? Solutions?
Quoting you Zeb, but this quesiton is not specific to you, more for any of the people arguing that there is hell for non-believers.
Do you believe all non-christians are going to hell and deserve damnation for not worshiping Jesus? (keep in mind that is roughly 2/3 of the world population)
I don’t know how one can claim the Christian Bible is “more accurate than the works of Aristotle and Socrates.” And while the Christian Bible is an historical document in the sense that it was written a long time ago, serious biblical scholarship indicates the Gospels were written many years (60 or so at minimum) after Jesus’ death. Further, much of the text is self-referential; eg, major portions of the Gospels were cribbed from one another: Matthew/Mark/Luke (known collectively as the Synoptic Gospels) were clearly derived from a common text (with Luke and Matthew drawing heavily from Mark itself), whereas John was more independently sourced. There are also a number of contradictions within the Gospels themselves; eg, Jesus’ birth story. In this regard, Matthew (the most ‘Jewish’ of the Gospels) goes to great (and dubious) lengths to depict the birth story in a way to support the contention that Jesus was a direct descendent of David.
The point being, IMO the argument that ‘one should be a Christian because the historical evidence indicates that Christ was the Son of God’ is one that cannot survive an honest scrutiny of the historical record–it is a house built on a foundation of sand, so to speak.