Is Burning in Hell A Good Reason to Believe in God?

[Minor Axis]

When you want to put it simply, fear is nothing more than a can to fill with courage you either have or don't have. Fear fuels courage or it rejects it, and because fear is entirely based on belief and what goes on in your mind, I have to disagree with Axis; if you believe that there will be retribution after death then fear can play a MAJOR part, as this fear could prevent you from doing things in your life that you may or may not do, only because it boils down to fear. So many people are sheep; if they believe in this fear, then convincing them of retribution will be no problem.

I said Fear was not good when it comes to religion as far as being a good thing. It's not good, for lack of any concrete evidence, it is manipulative for some of the reasons you just mentioned. So you still disagree with me?

 

[Minor Axis]

But how can you divide what's good and what's manipulative so easily like that? It's almost as if you're saying that a fear that drives people to do good deeds is wrong because it is manipulative. Manipulative or not, how can it be wrong if the end result is working towards the good?

If you're talking entirely in 'concrete evidence terms' then we're on another entirely different plane; but what's that to do with manipulation when we are talking about mind power here?

Are you saying it's good for the church to manipulate people to believe in God because it's good for them? :eek The problem with manipulation when it comes to religion is that there is no evidence that the manipulators are working with the truth. Instead they are using it to get a desired behavior which includes control over people, indoctrination into an unsubstantiated dogma, and in most cases the controlling bureaucracy gets enriched by their control.

Instead if you want people to be good, try to focus on the inherent benefits of being good not threatening them with unsubstantiated eternal damnation. Why? Because if people are being good because they are being threatened, are they really good? It's not a good test of your moral qualities to think "I'm good because I don't want to burn." How good does that really make you?

 

[itsmeJonB]

do you believe in life after love?

 

[Tim]

...Manipulative or not, how can it be wrong if the end result is working towards the good?

...manipulation boils down to deceit but what if the deceit was pushing the person to be a GOOD person?

The means are just as important as the end result. You could pass a law where if you are caught speeding you will be shot to death on the spot. The end result would be that no one would speed and that's a good thing, but the means to that end are unconscionable. The means do make a difference.

I will not tell my children that they will burn for all of eternity alone in a lake of fire because they did not accept Jesus into their heart. If they want to learn about Christianity, I am more than willing to help them find the answers, but I will not introduce them to it through strong arm tactics. They will not follow the path out of fear as I was lead as a child. It's immoral to do that to anyone.

 

[Minor Axis]

What difference does it make how it comes about as long as the deeds themselves are good?

Like Tim said, the means matter. If you put any regard on "truth" as part of a moral standard, then it should matter. Another example- your goal is to win a political election. You can lie your ass off, character assassinate and win or you can tell the truth and loose. Or you can modify your position so you can tell the truth and win. Most people want the truth, they don't want to be deceived. The difference is very obvious.

 

[Minor Axis]

As we're going so deeply philosophical here, and as you used politics as an example, how exactly does being truthful allow you to function? If you said that lying is the only way to get forward, yet people want the truth, you're looking at a dilemma that isn't going to be solved - forgetting morality for the moment and getting down to realism, what people want and what they get don't always join up how we'd ideally want them to.

If you have to lie to function then you are deceiving people. As a general practice, in the end they won't be happy. There could be exceptions where you are a genius and you know there will be a different but better outcome than the people imagine, but this is the exception. For religion, there is absolutely no evidence you know what is best for everyone else based on your faith. You'd be guessing. Politics is easier. If you tell people you are going to lower their taxes and maintain the same level of services to get elected, you might be elected, but if you don't keep your promise everyone is going to be pissed. This is a realistic situation. If you tell everyone that you are going to start a war for 1) self defense due to WMDs 2) that it will be over in 6 months, and 3) they will welcome us with open arms to get popular support for a war and then it all turns out to be LIES, is that good or bad? Yes you got your war and the means made the end happen, but the end sucks and bunches of people are going to be pissed.

And if falsity is the only way to bring about a good result, then how can you say it's such a bad thing?

Because you are not a dictator and most likely are rationalizing that the good thing for you is good for everyone whether they like it or not or because they are too stupid to know what is good for them. If we are talking governments, that is not how democracy is supposed to work. And it's condescending because you believe you know what is best for everyone else, but do you? If the majority disagree with you then as a standard, lying to them is simply wrong.

Before you immediately seek to correct me, I do understand what you're saying, about the way you go about something being just as important as the end result. But sometimes there's only a certain way to get that end result, and as long as the result is good, how can it be so forcibly criticized? You could take the second world war as an example - obviously, it is not morally good for lots of people to die, but it was the only way to ensure victory against a tyrant.

You need to find a better example. Nobody I know of, including me would describe WWII as immoral because soldiers died for a necessary cause. The vast majority of U.S. citizens supported our efforts in WWII and as a country we have been lauded for it by most of the world for the last 65 years.

 

[Peter Parka]

What a silly example, using WWII. Yes, obviously innocent people died in the course of the war. Are you trying to sugest that it would morally have been better to let thousands of Jews and other innocents be tortured and sent to the gas chamber?

 

[Minor Axis]

If your religious beliefs are correct, then you are not deceiving anyone by indoctrinating them into a specific dogma. Problem is, no one knows if you are right or wrong.

 

[ssl]

this should be a fun read, however, i have to go home shortly, which also means eat, and more work.

 

[sharpies]

To believe that you are going to suffer, or be rewarded, for an eternity (or even a little while) after death means that you first must believe in a soul. I do not & therefore am very much immune to manipualtion of any (religious) kind.

If you are a bad boy, someone will take away your lollipop - well frankly I don't have a lollipop, so why can't I just continue being bad?

Allan

 

[Peter Parka]

Please dont respond if its just to be a troll

 

[Minor Axis]

To believe that you are going to suffer, or be rewarded, for an eternity (or even a little while) after death means that you first must believe in a soul. I do not & therefore am very much immune to manipualtion of any (religious) kind.

If you are a bad boy, someone will take away your lollipop - well frankly I don't have a lollipop, so why can't I just continue being bad?

Allan

If we are using a standard of "truth" then what you believe is really beside the point if it is not the truth. The problem is that nothing can be proven, but that does not mean it (your soul) could not be. However I acknowledge that you might be immune to religious manipulation.

 

[Dana]

I'll burn in Hell for a Klondike Bar!