Sep 10 2007
Hell-Promoting Christians
Via Why Don’t You Blog I came to read a whole string of anti-atheist comments to an excerpt from soon to be published book “In God we doubt.”
The Times Online summarized the book as follows:
He went looking for God and ended up an angry agnostic - unable to believe but enraged by the arrogance of militant atheists. It’s hard to see the purpose of the world, he says, but don’t blame its evils on religion.
Humphrys’ book aside it was the anti-atheist comments that left me pondering. In particular I found the usage of the concept of hell very revealing of how important it is to certain brands of Christianity and their struggle to make sense (for their followers) of why one should believe.
Virginia, Brisbane, Australia said,
The atheist are the stupid ones. They refused to believe that they will burn in hell for all eternity. There is really no point in trying to convince these people as they are the minority as God puts the belief in us when we were created. That is why there are very few geniune atheist if the truth were known.
The belief that an argument to be brought against atheists is that they are knocking on the gates of hell (as another vocal post said) is a debatable one, especially since atheists aren’t the ones obsessed with hell. Christians’ concern with hell goes so far that in certain circles the word ’hell’ can’t be spoken out loud. The mere mention of hell can be a curse in itself.
Another interesting aspect of ’hell’ that I got out of the 205 posts is that to have a heaven, you have to have a hell. Of course, this is classical Christian logic, but it made me realize that when all other arguments against atheism fail, there is one that always comes up as a final attempt–atheists don’t believe in hell that’s why they’re atheists. And if you don’t believe in hell it’s assumed you can’t believe in heaven, thus you can’t believe in gd. So if you could only believe in hell, maybe you’ll become a theist.
This concept of lack of believe in hell as the trigger of all non-belief is ironic for at least two reasons. One, many religions don’t believe in hell, yet they are theist (the closes to Christianity in this regard is Judaism). Two, it sounds somewhat as a confirmation that some believe only out of fear. If you would only believe in hell then you’d be scared shitless and you’d believe in gd.
Thus is leads me to believe there are such groups as Christian hell-promoters, who cannot make sense of life without clinging unto a concept of hell as the reference point that gives them balance in their beliefs. It is unfortunate as well that hell-promoters can’t understand those who have balance without hell. And if we are to compare the two propositions, which one would you choose, balance with hell as an option, or balance without hell as an option?
I’ve made my choice, I don’t believe in hell.
3 responses so far
Good post. God is so unpleasant, what with consigning people to hell for not being sycophantic enough, that it’s really just as well it doesn’t exist.
And how odd that religions have such detailed pictures of hell and very little in the way of images of heaven. I suppose heaven is so boring that noone would care about getting there (sitting on a cloud playing a harp and eating soft cheese, if the adverts are anything to go by) so that they have to make hell really scary to compensate.
Thanks Heather. It’s fascinating,the psychology of imagining such an unpleasant gd and such an unpleasant idea as hell. What would all believers do if gd decreed there will be no hell for 1,000 years as amnesty for all sinners? Could those trained to believe in hell be able to make sense of their belief system in the absence of hell?
I also don’t believe in hell. It was pretty easy for me though, since mormons don’t really believe in hell either. I was never really tempted by such tomfoolery.