Philosophical Vegan Forum

If any god that is based on Ideas of Heaven and hell existed then suffering in our world would be irrelevant.I have several Ideas around this topic and would like to hear peoples opinion.
First whether you go to Heaven or hell nullifies any suffering why because if you go to heaven eternal bliss completely outweighs and mortal suffering if you go to hell the suffering out weighs the suffering you could feel on earth.However if this is true then there is no reason to punish anyone for there actions.Because no matter how bad they are the can never out weigh the two options the suffering or happiness you bring literally amounts to nothing.If thats the case there is no reason to punish or praise any action anyone does because it ultimately amounts to nothing and this nullifies the need for Heaven and hell to begin with.If ultimately there is no reason to punish someone there is no need for a hell and vise versa for heaven.

If all transgressions no matter how bad are nullified by either place then the actions it took to get there are irrelevant.The purpose is self defeating no action is worth eternal bliss or suffering and as such there is no reason for either.If your killer kills you baby so what he now has eternal bliss.By even suggesting eternal happiness you nullify any evil so what if Hitler killed the Jews they got eternal bliss didn't they?So what if you saved 5 million people they will get eternal suffering or bliss either way all actions are absolutely meaningless if such things existed.

I may be missing a giant hole somewhere I didn't notice so I would love to here feed back .Also sorry for any grammatical mistakes not my forty.

Good post. I think you are right on. What makes the Christian message so immoral is that you can end up in heaven no matter how much suffering you cause as long as you repent and accept Christ before you die. Whereas someone like a vegan atheist who reduces suffering while refusing to accept Christ will spend eternity in hell.

TheDarkendStar wrote: First whether you go to Heaven or hell nullifies any suffering why because if you go to heaven eternal bliss completely outweighs and mortal suffering if you go to hell the suffering out weighs the suffering you could feel on earth.

This is one excuse Christians use for using violence against others to convert them.

TheDarkendStar wrote: However if this is true then there is no reason to punish anyone for there actions.Because no matter how bad they are the can never out weigh the two options the suffering or happiness you bring literally amounts to nothing.

Christians do believe in killing people who are challenging Christianity (or, did until recently), because those atheists might spread their ideas and cause others to go to hell. Which is an outcome they don't want.

So, they would agree with torturing atheists in life, to persuade the atheists to repent (at which point they can be killed and go to heaven), and to discourage atheists from spreading their ideas and making Christians lose their ways and go to hell too.
Christians don't have to do this. They don't get any special prize for it. They just want to, out of the goodness of their hearts.

TheDarkendStar wrote: If thats the case there is no reason to punish or praise any action anyone does because it ultimately amounts to nothing and this nullifies the need for Heaven and hell to begin with.

Any actions except proselytism. Not because of the reward, though, but just because it's considered good. In the NT Jesus is said to have encouraged this in parable.
There IS some notion of greatest and least in the kingdom of heaven, so, you may get a greater bliss, or a fancier chair to sit in, or something. It's not clear.

That all is, of course, provided you have accepted Jesus and lived and/or died after his death and supposed resurrection.
Before Jesus, sin was a substance that needed to be cleansed with animal sacrifice.

TheDarkendStar wrote: If ultimately there is no reason to punish someone there is no need for a hell and vise versa for heaven.

Christians aren't inclined strictly to consequentialism. According to their doctrine, everybody has original sin, which is like a taint or filth.
Bad things in Christianity are also substance, not just consequence.
God can not admit those with sin into heaven. It would be like letting somebody with dirty boots into your clean house.
So, hell is where he puts them.

The only way to cleanse yourself of original sin (and all other sins), according to Christian doctrine, is Jesus.
Well, and animal sacrifice, before Jesus. It's less clear whether animal sacrifice is supposed to still work today.

brimstoneSalad wrote: Christians do believe in killing people who are challenging Christianity (or, did until recently), because those atheists might spread their ideas and cause others to go to hell. Which is an outcome they don't want.

So, they would agree with torturing atheists in life, to persuade the atheists to repent (at which point they can be killed and go to heaven), and to discourage atheists from spreading their ideas and making Christians lose their ways and go to hell too.
Christians don't have to do this. They don't get any special prize for it. They just want to, out of the goodness of their hearts.

"Out of the goodness of their hearts"? Yeah, sure. And i bet murderers believe murdering is the right thing to do, hence they do it xD
I doubt some christians even believe in God. I think they use him as a scapegoat for their actions, ergo, if they were to turture atheists, it wouldn't be to convert us nor to stop others from turning into atheism and going to hell; it'd be to stop us from turning others into atheism because they would lose money that way.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
"Tell people that there's an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority will believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure" -George Carlin.

Mateo3112 wrote: "Out of the goodness of their hearts"? Yeah, sure. And i bet murderers believe murdering is the right thing to do, hence they do it xD

Not usually. They'll often believe themselves justified to some degree (as a matter of rationalizing) because of something the "other"s did, but they're usually doing it out of vengeance or anger, or self interest as the core motivations.

This is distinct from religious fundamentalism, which drives otherwise good people to kill because they really think it's the right thing to do.

Steven Weinberg wrote:With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion.

Mateo3112 wrote: I doubt some christians even believe in God. I think they use him as a scapegoat for their actions, ergo, if they were to turture atheists, it wouldn't be to convert us nor to stop others from turning into atheism and going to hell; it'd be to stop us from turning others into atheism because they would lose money that way.

It's usually good practice to assume people believe what they say they believe unless there's clear evidence to the contrary. Sam Harris has spoken on this quite a bit.

brimstoneSalad wrote:It's usually good practice to assume people believe what they say they believe unless there's clear evidence to the contrary. Sam Harris has spoken on this quite a bit.

Christians not following their own rules should be evidence enough. Or even christians not reading the bible, i've seen quite a few of them.

Mateo3112 wrote: Christians not following their own rules should be evidence enough. Or even christians not reading the bible, i've seen quite a few of them.

Your forgetting that a majority of them don't believe these rules. They generally claim to believe in a combination of the New Testament and whatever Old Testament parts aren't inconvenient for them. They don't even have to follow what they believe to believe it. I can be a carnist with a vegan ideology. Is my ideology now a carnist one? No. This proves that they are hypocrites rather than people who don't believe what they tell you they do.

Cirion Spellbinder wrote: Your forgetting that a majority of them don't believe these rules. They generally claim to believe in a combination of the New Testament and whatever Old Testament parts aren't inconvenient for them.

Right, it's mostly a matter of ignorance and special pleading.

Cirion Spellbinder wrote: They don't even have to follow what they believe to believe it. I can be a carnist with a vegan ideology. Is my ideology now a carnist one? No.

Carnism is an ideology, meat-eating is a behavior. So you could be a person who happens to eat meat, but has a vegan ideology -- basically a person who is weak willed. Like a smoker who advises other people to not smoke.

Cirion Spellbinder wrote:This proves that they are hypocrites rather than people who don't believe what they tell you they do.

Technically the same thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy

It's reasonable to charge somebody with hypocrisy if that person doesn't hold his or herself to the same standard of belief, and feel bad about violating it. It's a common effect of cognitive dissonance.

Seeing that somebody doesn't follow a belief in practice is a good indication that the person probably doesn't actually believe it. But not a perfect one.

^Thank you for correcting me!