How can you reasonably argue Hell does not exist?

A

Andrew G

New member
This point was brought up the other day when with some friends. How can anyone reason that Hell does NOT exist? We weren't asking if Hell DOES exist because that wasn't the argument.

These are the questions we kept asking each other:

Have you ever met anyone who has died and can tell you face to face, "Hell does not exist"?

With many near-death stories, doesn't an afterlife, of some sort, seem very possible?

How can anyone actually prove it doesn't exist?

We came to the same conclusion most of you are coming to, it seems the non-existence of Hell has literally no evidence. All of us happen to believe in God besides one of our friends. While we were discussing the subject, I could see my friend thinking deeply with, almost, a perplexed look. I could tell these questions bothered him.

We starting to talking about the importance and weight of such a matter since we are talking about eternity. Again, I could see this bothered my friend.

Our intentions of this conversation was not to single-out our friend by any means (in fact, we didn't know everyone's beliefs until we were finishing the conversation).

Afterward, my atheist friend and I started talking off to the side and he went on to explain to me how he "had never thought about it that way before." He went on further to tell me how he had always been convinced it was a "fairytale" or a way to get kids to behave because there wasn't any "real" evidence to support it. Now, he was looking at the question from the other side, how do we know if it doesn't exist? He's now in the process of finding out the truth for himself because he wants to make absolutely sure, he's right about it now (the possibility of eternity seemed to hit him extra hard).

My intents of this question is not to push my religious beliefs on anyone else but to simply ask this question: With all of the evidence in favor of Hell existing in comparison to no evidence regarding it's non-existence, how can anyone rationally say, it does not exist?

Please respond with reasonable answers and I welcome answers from all faiths and beliefs.
Nobody has answered the question. You all keep answering the same question, Does it exist?
No one has provided any evidence to support the non-existence of Hell......does anyone understand the questioin?
The burden of proof lies in the evidence supporting the NON-EXISTENCE of Hell. That is the question. I'm not asking if it DOES exist.
In conclusion to this question. Can everyone agree that by strictly sticking the question of the non-existence of Hell, there is no evidence? Again, I'm NOT arguing the existence or the type of Hell.
I should of wrote this earlier and I apologize to everyone. The real conclusion we come to with the question is; Shouldn't we want to be absolutely sure (especially if it's for eternity)?
 
"He's now in the process of finding out the truth for himself because he wants to make absolutely sure, he's right about it now (the possibility of eternity seemed to hit him extra hard)."
You made all that up - LYING for Jebus is still LYING.

"My intents of this question is not to push my religious beliefs on anyone"
Boolshit - how gullible do you think we are?

"With all of the evidence in favor of Hell existing in comparison to no evidence regarding it's non-existence, how can anyone rationally say, it does not exist?"
There is NO evidence.

Using that 'logic' convince me Goblin and Pixie do not exist.

“All you people need do is produce a god - ANY god - and atheism ends forever.
What seems to be the problem with that?”
~
 
Your question proves hell!

Honestly!

For anyone listening to that for five minutes it would seem like an eternity in hell!

No wonder posts like yours drive people further away from god and posters like you closer to the very place you claim!
 
The bible says for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believe in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 15 talks about how Jesus Christ is the true vine and we are the branches. Apart from him we can do nothing.

The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is erternal life

Psalms 14:1 says Only fools say in their hearts, "There is no God." They are corrupt, and their actions are evil; not one of them does good!

Many individuals say that there is no God, but there is no evidence to support that he does not exsist.

Trust in your heart rather than your friend, pray and ask God to reveal himself to you that you may know that he is real..

God Bless you
 
There is no proof for it to exist. Anyone can make something up and use the you can't prove me wrong argument. It's silly circular logic. Now go prove there is no big foot.
 
"We came to the same conclusion most of you are coming to, it seems the non-existence of Hell has literally no evidence."

Perhaps you should learn the rules of logic before embarking upon a discussion that requires an understanding of them to successfully engage in.

One of those rules is that the burden of proof lies with the claimant. If I tell you that Yoda is my tennis instructor, it is not your responsibility to prove that he is not. It is *my* responsibility to prove that he *is*, and it is not reasonable for me to expect anyone to accept my claim until I provide evidence to substantiate it.


"Nobody has answered the question. You all keep answering the same question, Does it exist?"

We have a reasonable understanding of how the emergent property of sentience operates. It is dependent upon the complex interaction of matter and energy in the material system of the brain, and there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that disembodied minds exist in the absence of a functioning brain to produce them.

This alone is sufficient "evidence" against the existence of any sort of "afterlife".


Addendum: "No one has provided any evidence to support the non-existence of Hell."

We don't *need* to.

But, despite that, I actually just did provide such evidence with my explanation of the contingency of a mind upon the existence of a material system.
 
From a christian-based perspective, the argument against Hell is common sense based on the evidence in the bible.

- The Old Testament contained no references to eternal torment. Hell is known as Sheol, which is the pit/grave. The Jews do not believe in the concept of eternal torment. That is a big issue because the OT is one of the foudations for judaism. If they don't believe it why should we?

- Hell, as in "eternal torment" IS mentioned by Jesus in the New Testament (Matt 25:41-46).

- The problem is that Hell is never mentioned in the Book of Acts, where all the disciples are going around preaching Jesus. If it was such a scary place, why didn't they even warn people?

- There is hardly a mention until the book of Revelation, which was written many decades after Christ was around.

- Eternal torment itself contradicts the supposed nature of a loving God. Even if God can't have sin in his presence, he doesn't have to torture people for eternity. He could just erase their existence.
 
Near-death experiences are pretty simple to explain. As a person's brain is being deprived of oxygen, they begin to hallucinate. People can hallucinate even unconscious and with no vital signs because it takes a few minutes for the brain to completely die. We are able to replicate "near-death experiences" in a lab. It's not that hard, and it's certainly not supernatural.

Second, you have it backwards. YOU are the one making the claim and YOU have the burden of proof. But I'll go ahead anyway, since it's so easy to disprove.

Third, Pascal's Wager is what you're calling upon when you argue believing is safer. How do you know your god is the right god? What if it's not? There are thousands of other gods. And there are infinity more possible gods that humans may not know about. The chances of you picking the right god are almost zero. Which means if there is a god, you would almost certainly go to the hell of that god for picking the wrong one. Also keep in mind you can't worship them all - most of them (including your god) demand to be worshipped exclusively. So Pascal's Wager is a completely flawed argument.

We can disprove the Christian hell by disproving the Christian god, which is easy. All we have to do is evaluate the characteristics of the Christian god, as described in Christianity.

The Christian god is described as omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent. That is impossible.

If he is omnipotent, than he must be evil because he knowingly creates people that he knows will not be saved. In fact, 65% of the world would have been doomed to hell from birth.

If he really is benevolent, then he can't be omnipotent - a loving god would save everyone if they had the power, so if he is benevolent but isn't saving 65% of the world, it's because he can't.

If he is omniscient, then he can't be omnipotent. Being all-powerful implies free will, but if he knows everything that will happen he has no free will. But if he has free will, then he can't be omniscient.

In addition to those logical problems, we have disproved how the Christian god supposedly created the world. The world is much older than 6000 years, Adam and Eve never existed, Jesus never existed, and... shall I continue?

Done. Christian god disproved, and hell disproved by proxy. Same with heaven.
 
If you believe in a soul, which in sure you do. How is it eternal? My guess on what you answer would be... except god/jesus to have eternal life. Well I don't except him. Does that mean my soul is not eternal? If so, how should it live in hell forever. Also, another thing could be the fact that the soul Is not a physical entity, hence, it does not feel pain of hell fire like the xians scare you with.
The story of hell is a tool, so you fear logical, open minded questions.
 
While we are being so reasonable as this. You also have no truly valid argument that you are not really a talking Aardvark. What unarguable evidence is there that you are not a talking Aardvark? No matter what you say, still, somehow, you really could be a talking Aardvark. You just never know! It could be true, somehow or other.
Its at least nice to know you are, at least, sharing you weed, with your atheist friend, though.(Lol)
I believe in God very strongly, but I'm going to have to go with the atheists on this one. It would be among one of the most illogical reasons to believe in something in existence.
The truth is shown by what is true and mostly by what is of benefit, not the weights of "the burden of proof". The concept of what the large majority of people in this world, believers and non-believers alike see as "proof" is an illusion. The human mind is finite by nature. It does not have the ability to ascertain "absolute proof" of anything, at all. The only proof it can have is "that which we accept due to overwhelming evidence. Even exact sciences like mathematics are based upon what are called "postulates". The laws of even addition, ,subtraction, the simplest things, are based upon rules called postulates which are defined as, "That which we accept, without proof, due to overwhelming evidence. "Absolute proof" of anything, does not exist, at least not within the capacity of the finite nature of the human mind. Our minds do not have the capacity to evaluate literally everything about everything, in order to be able to ascertain what most people think of as "proof". Its merely an illusion that such a thing even exists within human reasoning. Your question would be erroneous to conclude as validly inductive reasoning. It is even deceptive by omitting presentation of the genuine limitations of human reasoning. Its playing a game with peoples minds, not showing something of genuine value and or its reliability and worthiness to be accepted.
 
The possibility of an afterlife does not mean "Hell" (as envisioned by Christians and Muslims) exists. It's also possible that you will be damned for betraying or not worshiping a non-Christian god...but I doubt you lose any sleep over this.

Just like the possibility of rain tomorrow does not meant we will have a cataclysmic flood.

Granted, many many religions have 'bad places' (for lack of a better word) for people that do bad things.

But for the vast majority of religions throughout history, belief or non-belief has very little to do with the afterlife. Usually everyone goes to the same place (or a different level of the same place), and people may be judged by their actions (or not). Belief or lack of it isn't an action. Orthodoxy is characteristic of Abrahamic faiths; orthopraxy a characteristic of many others.

Humans have existed a very long time in comparison to Christianity, and there is a reasonable chance that Christianity will fade into obscurity like many other religions that came before it. In short, it is one of thousands of religions that have and will grace this Earth, and should be taken with a grain of salt.

Hell, as it exists in Christianity, has no basis in the old testament or Jewish beliefs, which is another argument that Hell, as some Christians conceive it, is really just a twisted / perverted version of the Greek Hades.

The word Hell itself comes from a Germanic root of Hel, meaning covering, or burial mound. Helheim was originally a dark, moist, neutral place, until Christian influence happened.

There is no evidence of Hell existing, save for a few words in the New Testament (which is largly pseudographia), and the interpretations of Christians (which in many cases probably aren't even Biblical).
 
[EDIT]
"The burden of proof lies in the evidence supporting the NON-EXISTENCE of Hell. That is the question. I'm not asking if it DOES exist."
What makes you think that? In any logical debate the burden of proof lies on the one making the positive claim. The positive claim is that hell exists. The neutral position is to remain indifferent to the claim until the positive claim can be proven. You are asking people to prove a negative, which is impossible.


There is no evidence to suggest the existence of hell. Near-death experiences are explainable through natural scientific means, those being chemical processes that take place in the brain before it shuts down that can cause hallucinations in some, but not all, people. Other than near-death experiences which are unreliable, subjective to individual people, and can be explained without the existence of the supernatural, what other evidence is there that supports the existence of hell? The bible has no evidence outside of itself so it, as well as other holy books, is not sufficient evidence to support the existence of a hell.

Taking all this into consideration, there is zero evidence to support the existence of a hell. There is also zero evidence to support the non-existence of a hell, but for a different reason: It's impossible to prove a negative. In any other logical situation, the default position would normally be indifference (non-assertion) until one is actually presented is a positive claim (an assertion). If someone makes the new assertion that a supernatural place exists, it is up to that person to prove that claim, while the other person remains skeptical while making no assertions. Why would it be up to the person making no claim to prove the person making a new claim wrong? With all evidence for the existence of a hell being explained naturally, why should the default position be belief in the existence of hell when presented with the claim. Any rational reaction would be to not accept the new claim until provided with sufficient evidence for why the claim is valid and should be believed.

To get to the point, there is no evidence to disprove the existence of a hell (because proving a negative is impossible), nor is there evidence to prove it (because all evidence in support is explainable without it's existence). So when presented with the positive assertion of it's existence, there is no reason to default to belief in it when there is no evidence in favor of it's existence. The normal position would be to remain indifferent to the new claim while making no assertions of one's own.
 
Is it underground? Can you dig there? Just to let you know not every Christian believes there is an actual hell this moment. Some Christians believe hell to come later in the end. Not every Christian is built the same way.
 
Of course HELL is not a place of torment but symbolizes ETERNAL DESTRUCTION. Why would a God who personifies love do something like that? HELL is actually a mistranslation of Gehenna which means the common grave of mankind. THATS IT. If you can't even back yourself up with one scripture, your opinion is tossed aside.

Before I let THE BIBLE tell you the truth about hell....

When making a conclusion based on the Bible, we must:
*Think logically Acts 9:22
*Think reasonably Acts 17:2,3
*Let scripture interpret scripture Acts 17:11
*Don't be overwise, humbly examine scriptures Matt 11:25
*So, the result will be what Jesus said, worshiping what we KNOW John 4:22
*Most importantly, God reveals and opens hearts Acts 16:14
Now, on to teaching you the Truth about hell based on scripture. If you can’t back yourself up scripturally, then be silent.
Jer 7:31; 32:35 – If a “Hell” were to exist, how would God feel about it?
Jer 7:32,33 – Hell is a mistranslation of Gehenna, and Gehenna is a Gr. Form of the Heb . Geh Hin-nom’, “Valley of Hinnom” and the Bible makes no mention of eternal torment in Gehenna. It was a massive yard where dead bodies would burn for the PURPOSE of being completely destroyed.
Jer 19:10,11 – “Hell aka Gehenna aka Valley of Hinnom” was in Bible times as a common grave of mankind.
Jer 31:40 – This scripture mentions “the low plain of the carcasses and of the fatty ashes”. This is generally accepted as designating the Valley of Hinnom. This is where the dead bodies and body parts would go.
Matt 5:3 – Likewise, Jesus was saying it’s better to give up one part of your body “than for your whole body to land in Gehenna”. If Jesus symbolized Gehenna as hell, he would be blamed for making an idolatrous practice the basis for the symbolic meaning of Gehenna!
Col 1:15 – Paul said to “deaden, therefore, your body members”. Similar to what Jesus said in Matt 5:3.
Matt 10:28 – If you pay attention, The Bible is pretty obvious in showing Jesus as symbolizing eternal destruction.
Mark 9:47,48 – In fact, read this scripture, and try to guess what Jesus was alluding to. (see below)
Isaiah 66:24 – Jesus alluded to this scripture describing Gehenna as a place “where their maggot does not die and the fire is not put out”. This scripture in Isaiah is meant, not for those alive, but already dead; the carcasses. How are you to believe this? Maggots can’t die? Fire can’t be put out? Again, it symbolizes eternal DESTRUCTION. Not burning forever and ever.
Things get more interesting about Hell.
Read Revelation 20:14 – Death is said to be hurled into this lake of fire, but death obviously cannot be literally burned.
Revelation 20:10 – The Devil, an INVISIBLE spirit creature, is thrown into the lake. Being spirit, he cannot be hurt by literal fire; because again, HELL is symbolic eternal destruction, not torment. (compare Ex 3:2 and Jg 13:20) This is not referring to conscious torment, because Ecclesiastes 9:5 says in death, there is no consciousness, no feeling of pain or suffering. Remember, the WHOLE Bible is in harmony.
There is so much more to prove scripturally but I can’t fit it in Yahoo. Sorry.
 
what evidence do you have that reincarnation doesn't exist?
with all the evidence in favor of reincarnation existing in comparison to no evidence regarding its non-existence, how can anyone rationally say it does not exist?
 
God exists because we believe He exists. There is no proof that He exists or ever existed, but billions of people turn to Him for guidance every day. For the same reason, hell only exists if we believe it to exist.
 
God exists because we believe He exists. There is no proof that He exists or ever existed, but billions of people turn to Him for guidance every day. For the same reason, hell only exists if we believe it to exist.
 
Back
Top