The Problems with Hell ender wiggins This essay is intended to focus on my problems with the so-called 'Christian' concept of 'hell.' According to Christians (the Catholics at least) hell is supposed to be a "state" in which a person is completely separate from God. But there is also the more traditional belief (that actually held by most of the people with which I converse) that Hell is a place where you will be eternally tortured/burned/etc. Now, you must understand that I am an atheist, specifically meaning that I don't believe in the existence of God. This essay will examine both the classical and contemporary definitions of 'Hell,' and will in turn show just how crooked, perverted and nonsensical they are. Then I will try to explore some reasons why Christianity felt the need to create the idea of Hell in the first place. So let us first examine the idea of Hell as a place where sinners go to be tortured. According to Christian mythology, it is said that Lucifer, an angel, lead a rebellion against God. For this reason, he was basically damned to Hell, given the name Satan, and was suddenly in charge of the "Torture the Sinners" department. First of all, this story doesn't make any sense. Think about it. Angels are supposed to be completely unsullied -- that is, they are pure, perfect, etc. Obviously, since Christians say that God is omniscient, he could not have created a sinful angel. One might say that he created the angel but did not know he would become sinful. Well that's a useless argument. First of all, a sinful angel is an oxymoron. If an angel is supposed to be pristine and holy, then it is a logical impossibility for it to become sinful. And the other problem follows this -- if God is supposedly omniscient and perfect, then it wouldn't make sense that he's make an imperfect being. And because he's omniscient, he must have known that the angel would become sinful. But let's forget about the numerous problems with the myth of Lucifer's fall to Hell, and analyze more closely the symbolism involved. If Satan was rebelling against God, that must logically mean that he didn't agree with God's rules. Not only that, it means that he was unwilling to follow any of God's rules. Therefor we must conclude that Satan is unholy and recalcitrant in following orders. So then we are told that if a human is sinful on earth, doesn't follow God's orders, or is a member of another religion, that he will be condemned to spend eternity in Hell. Well isn't that just great. This concept has so many logical fallacies it's amazing that people today continue believing it. Satan is supposedly the ruler of Hell, the Prince of Darkness. It's his role to punish the sinners who come to Hell by burning them alive, etc., etc. Wait a minute -- I thought that Satan himself was unholy and sinful, not to mention rebellious. How does it follow that if you are evil (according to Christians) and Satan is evil (according to Christians) that Satan would punish you? I mean, speaking from experience here, normally people who act the same get along well with each other. So would not Satan rejoice and become elated when a person goes to Hell? After all, it is God who intended us to be punished. Satan wouldn't carry out God's orders because he's rebellious. Would he not befriend for you also were unholy and sinful? Makes sense to me. Satan doesn't seem like that bad of a guy. But let us now look at the more contemporary stance of the church on the concept of 'Hell.' They basically define it as a 'state' where you have complete separation from God. What the hell does that mean? Am I the only one who doesn't understand it? I'll take some educated stabs at what I think it means, but it appears to me that the church purposely made the definition vague and incomprehensible. Maybe they realized that Hell is an immense contradiction to their faith. The church says it's like a 'state.' I take this to mean that it isn't truly a 'place' as is generally the consensus among the church members. So, does that mean that when you die your consciousness continues to function, but that no 'goodness' can enter your thoughts? It seems to me that it's impossible to have your mind functioning without anything for it to be in, or in relation to. When you get down to the workings of the mind, all of the information in your mind comes from external, outside sources. (Because of course the only thing one can know is that he exists.) Therefore, if 'hell' is merely a state, there would be no way to have any thinking at all, because there is nothing 'external' to you and hence you cannot have anything contained in your mind. Wow, doesn't that just contradict the idea of an afterlife/soul. But let's forget the problems with the language of the definition of Hell. What does it mean to have complete separation from God? I'm an atheist, and hence I am separate from 'god,' so does that mean that I am in (if you can say 'in') Hell right now? I mean, I obviously don't adhere to God's will, much less kowtow to Him. I think it's logically possible for me to say that I am separated from God. Therefor, I must be in Hell. And because the only place in which I am is Earth (or the universe), it follows logically that the universe must be hell. Wow, that's quite shocking. Of course, I could be 'misinterpreting' the definition of hell. But it's not like the church made it to be understandable. Things like that can be taken to mean whatever the hell you want, and I'm sure the people of the Church know it. So they'll just say I'm wrong. But hell, it makes sense to me (a hell of a lot more sense than the church makes of it.) But let's get to my last problem with the idea of Hell. The problem here deals with Hell's origins. Most Christians are adept enough to realize that God could not be in charge of Hell, a place where there is no God. Right. Makes sense to me. But then there is no way of instilling fear into men, and hence making them become Christians. What does one do? Well, they'll look at other religions of the time, take their beliefs, and call them there own. It's a lot like the way Microsoft runs it's business. For instance, most of the Christian belief in angels, hell, demons, Lucifer, etc., come from the Zoroastrian religion. The Zoroastrians had already developed a complex theology around the constant struggle between angels and demons. So, seeing the good opportunity, the Christians stole their belief and tried to incorporate it into their own theology. Big mistake. They failed...miserably. The problem revolves around the idea that the Christian god is loving, caring, forgiving, etc. It makes no sense then to say that God punishes you after your death if you don't follow all of his little rules. Therefore, there must be some 'evil' agent who tortures men in Hell! Aha! But this brings us back to our whole problem with Satan. It is also important to note that because Christians believe that God created everything, then it must necessarily follow that he created Hell. Wow, and this is supposed to be a loving and forgiving God? I knew the Christians were twisted...but sadistic? Think what you, and believe what you may, but I'm not afraid of going to hell. Of course, I don't believe that it exists at all, but even supposing it did, I still wouldn't be afraid. Personally, I would prefer to be hanging out with Satan. He seems like a pretty decent guy. And even considering the modern definition, I wouldn't mind being in a state without God. Maybe it would allow me to think more purely and to be less sullied by the adverse affects of religion. The purpose of this essay wasn't to bash Christians for being contradictory, ignorant, non creative bastards. I only intend to show why the Christian concept of Hell is so utterly incomprehensible, illogical, and...wrong.