FaRmLaNd said:
Answering my question with a question is not really answering my question at all. I do not think its acceptable, or moral, or just to be tortured eternally for finite sin. I would rather non-existence. If hell was non-existence (and I've heard some interpretations that it is) I wouldn't mind. |
Well, maybe it is that. Fires do consume, and it is presumptive to believe that humans can be immortal on their own without help (and if Hell is something that is separation from God, then how does the mortal being remain sustained?). The need for Hell to be a place of suffering forever comes out of Western Christian thought and what is seen as "just". Beyond that though, I think there is a need to go through cognitively what is here. God has every right to do any with He likes (I use He there, because we are talking Christian context here), because all belongs to God. If it be suffering, or whatever, that is what it is. One doesn't even have to know or understand this, it either is or is not.
By the way, not minding non-existence is worth pondering over. Make the not-existing a reality in your mind and make it personal. I am not sure that it is an "I wouldn't mind". It might be preferable to suffering forever, but I don't really see it as an "I wouldn't mind" state either.