Re:California v Texas: America's future
by rms on Thursday July 09, 2009 @08:54PM
(#696928)
My preferred explanation of heaven and hell works for the religious and non-religious. Heaven is eternal union with God. Hell is eternal disconnect from God.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
From my experience with my families denomination, they see hell as the temporary disconnect from God followed by a lapse into non-existence. Which is an example of Daniel's point. There are different interpretations, so attacking a specific one, such as the hell fire interpretation, results in a weak argument.
I would sooner choose hell than follow a God that was holding damnation over my head, though I think I would be happier if I was so delusional.
Ah, well, the thread is dead.
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/152270
(sorry for presumed IP block to all those outside of the USA)
Re:California v Texas: America's future
by DanielBMarkham on Thursday July 09, 2009 @09:03PM
(#696939)
From my reading this seems to be the preferred usage by more modern Christians as well.
It certainly is a much more defensible position.
It's defensible because it's so vague.
But if it's fleshed out so that the afterlife of the damned is so unpleasant that they would end their existence if they could, it comes to much the same thing.
If it simply means annihilation, then fine. As I've noted, that's not how Jesus put it (according to the gospel authors, anyway). But OK.