Are there atheists in hell?

[Darat]

As I understand the theory - there is no evidence for 'multiverse', it's a proposed solution to solve specific problems - but at the moment, 'multiverse' does not, and can not fall within the domain of science.

I think you may have misunderstood where the theories that propose “multiverses” come from, it sounds like you think the theories are the English descriptions of those theories. They aren’t. Those theories are mathematical models, whether those mathematical models accurately model reality is entirely within the purview of science.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

I think you may have misunderstood where the theories that propose “multiverses” come from, it sounds like you think the theories are the English descriptions of those theories. They aren’t. Those theories are mathematical models, whether those mathematical models accurately model reality is entirely within the purview of science.

Can you cite one of these models that is within the purview of science?

 

[LarryS]

I think you may have misunderstood where the theories that propose “multiverses” come from, it sounds like you think the theories are the English descriptions of those theories. They aren’t. Those theories are mathematical models, whether those mathematical models accurately model reality is entirely within the purview of science.

there may be observations which can be best or only described using mathematical multiverse theory - but that doesn't mean the theory falls under the purview of science.

 

[Thor 2]

Just to clarify - Hell itself is everlasting, but that doesn't mean the suffering of the damned is forever.
Annihilationism

Do you find comfort in that thought perhaps?

What is the point of emphasising that Hell is forever if the damned are not in there forever? The whole idea of Hell has been conjured up in the minds of some seriously sick and silly people.

 

[arthwollipot]

Do you find comfort in that thought perhaps?

What is the point of emphasising that Hell is forever if the damned are not in there forever? The whole idea of Hell has been conjured up in the minds of some seriously sick and silly people.

...thousands of years ago, who had some very different perspectives on life, the universe and everything than we do today.

 

[Scorpion]

Do you find comfort in that thought perhaps?

What is the point of emphasising that Hell is forever if the damned are not in there forever? The whole idea of Hell has been conjured up in the minds of some seriously sick and silly people.

The Egyptian book of the dead contains references to a lake of fire in which sinners might be thrown after death. This was probably invented by Egyptian priests to scare people into obeying them. The Egyptian idea of hellfire was probably then stolen by Jewish scribes who wrote the bible. Then the idea of hellfire in the bible was stolen by Muhammad who describes horrible tortures in hell for unbelievers in his message.

 

[8enotto]

During certain dynasties of Egyptian history the best was your body preserved as intact as possible for future life. Throat and tongue intact so one can speak your name to the gods.

That means the worst was tortured to death, burned, and your ashes spread on a road where pack animals would use you as dusty pavement.
Reincarnation denied to the very fullest under Rameses the Great upon some failed traitors.

And today most would want thier ashes spread where they were happy, some special place in thier lives.
Not worrying if traffic was going to be using them as pavement.
We've come a long way in how we think about it.

 

[bruto]

During certain dynasties of Egyptian history the best was your body preserved as intact as possible for future life. Throat and tongue intact so one can speak your name to the gods.

That means the worst was tortured to death, burned, and your ashes spread on a road where pack animals would use you as dusty pavement.
Reincarnation denied to the very fullest under Rameses the Great upon some failed traitors.

And today most would want thier ashes spread where they were happy, some special place in thier lives.
Not worrying if traffic was going to be using them as pavement.
We've come a long way in how we think about it.

Pity the Egyptians sucked out the brains and threw them away. I guess when you're dealing with the gods you can dump the excess baggage.

 

[8enotto]

Not that much different today in the no brains required for religion.
Just repeat the dogma and pay your tithes. It's all good.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

The Egyptian book of the dead contains references to a lake of fire in which sinners might be thrown after death. This was probably invented by Egyptian priests to scare people into obeying them. The Egyptian idea of hellfire was probably then stolen by Jewish scribes who wrote the bible. Then the idea of hellfire in the bible was stolen by Muhammad who describes horrible tortures in hell for unbelievers in his message.

Oh good, you're back. Care to answer my questions? If you don't want to derail this thread I'm sure we could ressurect the spirituality one.

 

[arthwollipot]

The Egyptian book of the dead contains references to a lake of fire in which sinners might be thrown after death. This was probably invented by Egyptian priests to scare people into obeying them. The Egyptian idea of hellfire was probably then stolen by Jewish scribes who wrote the bible. Then the idea of hellfire in the bible was stolen by Muhammad who describes horrible tortures in hell for unbelievers in his message.

That does not correlate with the typical Ancient Egyptian afterlife narrative. According to the standard texts, a deceased person's heart is weight against a feather, and if it is found to be heavier - if the person is a sinner - then their soul is eaten by the crocodile goddess Ammit and forever destroyed.

 

[gnome]

I think it's fair to consider the question in the context of what the asker is trying to find out.

It seems trivial to note that someone who doesn't believe in hell thinks that nobody will be there because it doesn't exist.

Likewise, it doesn't say a lot to wonder if someone acted in a manner that would lead to hell for even a believer, whether being a nonbeliever would change the outcome.

So the main thrust of the question is--do those who accept the idea of hell as real, think atheists wind up there that would not otherwise but for their atheism?

Obviously the answer is different according to whom you ask. One of the more interesting answers I got from a theist was from a good friend who identified as Lutheran, though I do not know how closely he adhered to specific doctrine. I happened to ask him his thoughts, because he knew that I was an atheist. His opinion was that the otherwise righteous atheists are not punished with direct suffering in the afterlife for non-belief--that instead they are forever denied the presence of God--and even then not so much as an imposed state, as that they exclude themselves by their nonbelief.

Seems something like Limbo--they don't get burned or lashed or receive cruelly ironic punishment, but they also don't get tickets to the afterparty.

We were once so close to Heaven, Peter came out and gave us medals declaring us the nicest of the damned.

(from "Road Movie to Berlin")

 

[Finster]

I think it's fair to consider the question in the context of what the asker is trying to find out.

It seems trivial to note that someone who doesn't believe in hell thinks that nobody will be there because it doesn't exist.

Likewise, it doesn't say a lot to wonder if someone acted in a manner that would lead to hell for even a believer, whether being a nonbeliever would change the outcome.

So the main thrust of the question is--do those who accept the idea of hell as real, think atheists wind up there that would not otherwise but for their atheism?
Obviously the answer is different according to whom you ask. One of the more interesting answers I got from a theist was from a good friend who identified as Lutheran, though I do not know how closely he adhered to specific doctrine. I happened to ask him his thoughts, because he knew that I was an atheist. His opinion was that the otherwise righteous atheists are not punished with direct suffering in the afterlife for non-belief--that instead they are forever denied the presence of God--and even then not so much as an imposed state, as that they exclude themselves by their nonbelief.

Seems something like Limbo--they don't get burned or lashed or receive cruelly ironic punishment, but they also don't get tickets to the afterparty.


(from "Road Movie to Berlin")

Theoretically, that certainly could be the main thrust of the question but I seriously doubt that was the intent of the example in the OP. I can’t prove it without asking whoever posted the sign but I would be willing to wager the implication is that atheists go to hell for the crime of being atheists and when they find themselves in hell they are supposed to lament how wrong they were but now it’s too late. And whoever posted the sign is patting themselves on the back for being so clever.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Theoretically, that certainly could be the main thrust of the question but I seriously doubt that was the intent of the example in the OP. I can’t prove it without asking whoever posted the sign but I would be willing to wager the implication is that atheists go to hell for the crime of being atheists and when they find themselves in hell they are supposed to lament how wrong they were but now it’s too late. And whoever posted the sign is patting themselves on the back for being so clever.

Yep.

I whiplashed rapidly from...

First impression - "What a nice thought. How welcoming they are being to accepting atheists into heaven, or at least sparing them the fires of hell."

To... "Those smug bastards! You'll feel the wrath of God and burn in eternity, not as an atheist but as a new believer. But too late."

Pretty darn sure the latter was the intent.

 

[gnome]

Theoretically, that certainly could be the main thrust of the question but I seriously doubt that was the intent of the example in the OP. I can’t prove it without asking whoever posted the sign but I would be willing to wager the implication is that atheists go to hell for the crime of being atheists and when they find themselves in hell they are supposed to lament how wrong they were but now it’s too late. And whoever posted the sign is patting themselves on the back for being so clever.

I'll retract any claim to the intent of the OP, and substitute instead that the implied phrasing I suggested is the most interesting interpretation to discuss.

 

[catsmate]

During certain dynasties of Egyptian history the best was your body preserved as intact as possible for future life. Throat and tongue intact so one can speak your name to the gods.

That means the worst was tortured to death, burned, and your ashes spread on a road where pack animals would use you as dusty pavement.
Reincarnation denied to the very fullest under Rameses the Great upon some failed traitors.

And today most would want thier ashes spread where they were happy, some special place in thier lives.
Not worrying if traffic was going to be using them as pavement.
We've come a long way in how we think about it.

Elements of this continued into xianity, hence the use of dissection as a post-mortem punishment.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Elements of this continued into xianity, hence the use of dissection as a post-mortem punishment.

I'd say that came more from Greek and Roman notions of bodily integrity than from Egyptian beliefs about the afterlife. Christianity, like everything else, built on what came before but, like everything else, it borrowed most heavily from its closest neighbors. Remember that a lot of what we know of ancient Egypt is modern rediscovery after the birth of archaeology as a field of study; much/most of the information was lost for centuries. To a sixteenth century European, ancient Egypt was more myth than history. Even Jesus and his contemporaries knew the Alexandrine Greek Egypt rather than the ancient pharaohnic one. We ourselves are closer in time to Jesus than Jesus was to Cheops and the pyramid-building era.

 

[catsmate]

I'd say that came more from Greek and Roman notions of bodily integrity than from Egyptian beliefs about the afterlife. Christianity, like everything else, built on what came before but, like everything else, it borrowed most heavily from its closest neighbors. Remember that a lot of what we know of ancient Egypt is modern rediscovery after the birth of archaeology as a field of study; much/most of the information was lost for centuries. To a sixteenth century European, ancient Egypt was more myth than history. Even Jesus and his contemporaries knew the Alexandrine Greek Egypt rather than the ancient pharaohnic one. We ourselves are closer in time to Jesus than Jesus was to Cheops and the pyramid-building era.

You are very probably right. My study of the history of dissection doesn't go that far back.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

His opinion was that the otherwise righteous atheists are not punished with direct suffering in the afterlife for non-belief--that instead they are forever denied the presence of God--and even then not so much as an imposed state, as that they exclude themselves by their nonbelief.

That's the irony of it.

You see, atheists believe that when they die they cease to exist forever, which is exactly the final punishment that unrepentant sinners get. So they are going to Hell, but will never know it!

It gets weirder though. An atheist reaching the end of their life may welcome non-existence as a place of eternal rest free of suffering and the cares of the world, which is a kind of heaven or nirvana. Other religions tell you that their heaven is better, but would it be really? For an Atheist, being forever forced to accept the presence of a God they can't believe in would be torture, ie. not Heaven but Hell.

 

[gnome]

I sense a contradiction there--if I were to directly perceive the presence of a God, I would be fully capable of believing.