Do atheist worry about eternal damnation?

[Godular]

That's really one of the reasons why I go with agnostic atheism. There are a vast multitude of differing definitions of what a god is, that proving whether one exists is an exercise in futility. Best to just go with "In the absence of evidence to support the existence of any god-thingie, I cannot and should not consider any stories about such entities as anything more than fanciful musings with the same physical substance as any other imaginary friend."

The futility isn't really in the vast multitude of definitions, since it's in principle possible that one of them might be correct. Rather, the difficulty is in the likely nature of an entity capable of creating a universe -- its characteristics are likely to involve phenomenon that we wouldn't be able to recognize by qualities existing and recognizable to us within the physical universe. This makes it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to confirm one of the definitions in a meaningful way even if one of those definitions happened to be correct by some vast cosmic accident. It's not really a matter of "absense of evidence" so much as "I couldn't possibly recognize any evidence even if schelnorak hit me over the head with it."

Granted, the practical implications for us is probably not all that distinguishable from agnosticism or weak atheism (lack of belief, not positive assertion against). It's just that since no coherent theory of "God" exists, we cannot possibly know what evidence to try to find. So the question of God's existence proves pointless even before we get to "absence of evidence."

We're... disagreeing? I feel like we both just said the same thing but I'll admit you said it better.

[A Humanist Resurrection]

Meh.

[Godular]

But I'm not.

I'm afraid of dying, that sounds rather awful, but the condition of "being dead" doesn't scare me.

You sure about that?

As you know, there are substances that can cause nearly instant death without pain. Since you are not afraid of being dead, that means you wouldn't be afraid of someone trying to inject you with such a substance, right?

Obviously not. You'd run away from a person trying to kill you without pain just as much as from a person trying to kill you in any other way.

Not because we're afraid of what's after. We just aren't enamored of our life ending.

[Constantinopolis]

Continued existence, under (almost) any conditions, is better than non-existence. As proof of this, notice that almost all atheists, even those who are suffering in horrible ways, generally do not choose to commit suicide. So, most people who [believe that they] are faced with a choice between pain and non-existence, typically choose pain as the lesser evil.

Of course, some people do choose suicide, but they are a very small minority.

That's not fear. It is acknowledging that this life is IT, and ending it early is just stupid.

The post you quoted wasn't about fear, but about the fact that continued existence (even in a painful situation) is usually considered better than non-existence, by most people who believe that they are faced with this choice.

[A Humanist Resurrection]

We're... disagreeing? I feel like we both just said the same thing but I'll admit you said it better.

Schelnorak 1:1 - Lo! Although thou may recieveth a reply upon a message board, those who replyeth needeth not actually be in disagreement. They needest only explaneth how they arriveth at the same place. Um, -eth.

Accept the word of Schelnorak or burn!

[Neanderthaland]

But I'm not.

I'm afraid of dying, that sounds rather awful, but the condition of "being dead" doesn't scare me.

You sure about that?

Yes.

As you know, there are substances that can cause nearly instant death without pain. Since you are not afraid of being dead, that means you wouldn't be afraid of someone trying to inject you with such a substance, right?

Obviously not. You'd run away from a person trying to kill you without pain just as much as from a person trying to kill you in any other way.

Congratulations. You've proven that I prefer being alive. Also, that I don't love syringes.

[Godular]

That's not fear. It is acknowledging that this life is IT, and ending it early is just stupid.

The post you quoted wasn't about fear, but about the fact that continued existence (even in a painful situation) is usually considered better than non-existence, by most people who believe that they are faced with this choice.

Your entire position has been about fear.

[Godular]

We're... disagreeing? I feel like we both just said the same thing but I'll admit you said it better.

Schelnorak 1:1 - Lo! Although thou may recieveth a reply upon a message board, those who replyeth needeth not actually be in disagreement. They needest only explaneth how they arriveth at the same place. Um, -eth.

Accept the word of Schelnorak or burn!

Cthulhu ftaghn, yo.

That is not dead which can eternal lie, and all that.

[USS Monitor]

But I'm not.

I'm afraid of dying, that sounds rather awful, but the condition of "being dead" doesn't scare me.

You sure about that?

As you know, there are substances that can cause nearly instant death without pain. Since you are not afraid of being dead, that means you wouldn't be afraid of someone trying to inject you with such a substance, right?

Obviously not. You'd run away from a person trying to kill you without pain just as much as from a person trying to kill you in any other way.

If someone is trying to steal your stuff, you're going to try to stop them, even if it's an item you don't expect to last forever and you aren't worried about what'll happen when it wears out.

Same concept. Even if you know your life will not last forever, and you accept that without getting worked up about it, it doesn't mean you're OK with someone taking it from you.

[The Novakian Empire]

Even though I've already answered this question, I feel I need to elaborate.

I'm in kind of a grey area between atheism and religion. I tend not to think about either very much, since I really, really hate thinking about what happens after death.

The two options are, at least for me, some kind of hell (or heaven, if Deus Vult!), or nonexistence.

To be honest, I would take hell every single time.
Nonexistence terrifies me to my very core. Consciousness and my existence would become a sudden stop, and at best I would be remembered by, what, less than a hundred people?
Even then, my friends and family would eventually forget about me, and die, as everyone shall.
As much as I hate to say it, I am irrelevant.
I have done nothing notable, and I have affected only a few people in a positive way. At my best, I am but a branch in a family tree.


I'm going to go and cry now.
Peace.

[Constantinopolis]

Well, good thing no one believes that infants go to hell, then.

As for those who believe that innocent people may go to hell simply for being non-believers, they are a minority of Christians (specifically, they are a subset of Protestants), and a very small minority of theists in general.

Please don't pull a no true scotsman. I remember quite clearly what I was taught. Unlearning it nearly drove me to suicide (so God could punish the apostate, no less), so it's not the kind of thing you're likely to easily forget.

Wait, so you were under the impression that all Christians (or even all theists) believe the same things, and you think that my pointing out that this is not the case constitutes a "no true scotsman"...?

No. Different Christian groups do not, in fact, believe the same things about Heaven and Hell. Actually Christian beliefs on these topics are really diverse. For example, these are the Orthodox Christian beliefs on the matter:

[...] It must be remembered that it is Jesus Christ alone that judges who is or is not saved. The Bible teaches that not all those in the Church will be saved, but some who are never visibly in the Church are nevertheless near and dear to the Lord. (How many times did Samaritan heretics exhibit saving faith in the Gospels?) Jesus is the exclusive Judge of all. On the last and great day, all human beings who have ever lived will be brought before the Lord for the final Judgment. The Creed of Nicea-Constantinople adequately summarizes the entire Tradition when it says of Jesus, He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead.

We can say much about those who will be ushered into the marriage supper of the Lamb, but we cannot say everything. Only the Lord has all the facts regarding the saved and the lost. God is Love; He is just and merciful. No one will be unjustly excluded from the Presence of God and the bliss of the day without evening. But there will be many surprises on that day, one of which will be the many excluded from the joy of the Kingdom who considered themselves members in good standing of the Orthodox Church! [...]

[Great Franconia and Verana]

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F Roberts

Found this and couldn't agree more.
Death is scary, but what comes after is meh, it's just nothing, just like before you were born.

[A Humanist Resurrection]

Wait, so you were under the impression that all Christians (or even all theists) believe the same things, and you think that my pointing out that this is not the case constitutes a "no true scotsman"...?

No. Different Christian groups do not, in fact, believe the same things about Heaven and Hell. Actually Christian beliefs on these topics are really diverse. For example, these are the Orthodox Christian beliefs on the matter:

[...] It must be remembered that it is Jesus Christ alone that judges who is or is not saved. The Bible teaches that not all those in the Church will be saved, but some who are never visibly in the Church are nevertheless near and dear to the Lord. (How many times did Samaritan heretics exhibit saving faith in the Gospels?) Jesus is the exclusive Judge of all. On the last and great day, all human beings who have ever lived will be brought before the Lord for the final Judgment. The Creed of Nicea-Constantinople adequately summarizes the entire Tradition when it says of Jesus, He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead.

We can say much about those who will be ushered into the marriage supper of the Lamb, but we cannot say everything. Only the Lord has all the facts regarding the saved and the lost. God is Love; He is just and merciful. No one will be unjustly excluded from the Presence of God and the bliss of the day without evening. But there will be many surprises on that day, one of which will be the many excluded from the joy of the Kingdom who considered themselves members in good standing of the Orthodox Church! [...]

I didn't mean to waste your time, but I retracted my previous post because I decided that I wasn't interested in debating with you what I was taught or the effect that it had on my life and present beliefs. With respect, your opinions are not relevant in either area.

But of course, we are debating other people's beliefs, and this involves including my own as well. So that's fair enough I guess. Meh again. I just flustered right now cause I'm remembering the whole "Turns out God's a dick, but I can't tell anyone or he might smite me" phase I went though. So I guess I'm done with this thread.

If you still wish to count this as a debating victory, please enjoy. You can even borrow my confetti.

**confetti**

[Neanderthaland]

Of course, if Sithrak is God, then we all get tortured forever no matter what we do.

That being the case, wouldn't you rather not devote your time to worshiping the asshole?

[Infected Mushroom]

What does this eternal damnation entail exactly?

[Godular]

What does this eternal damnation entail exactly?

Descriptions vary. If you go to niflheim, it's just cold and boring. If you piss off God you're just kicked out of his fan club and we're told that that's bad or something.

[Constantinopolis]

Wait, so you were under the impression that all Christians (or even all theists) believe the same things, and you think that my pointing out that this is not the case constitutes a "no true scotsman"...?

No. Different Christian groups do not, in fact, believe the same things about Heaven and Hell. Actually Christian beliefs on these topics are really diverse. For example, these are the Orthodox Christian beliefs on the matter:

[...] It must be remembered that it is Jesus Christ alone that judges who is or is not saved. The Bible teaches that not all those in the Church will be saved, but some who are never visibly in the Church are nevertheless near and dear to the Lord. (How many times did Samaritan heretics exhibit saving faith in the Gospels?) Jesus is the exclusive Judge of all. On the last and great day, all human beings who have ever lived will be brought before the Lord for the final Judgment. The Creed of Nicea-Constantinople adequately summarizes the entire Tradition when it says of Jesus, He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead.

We can say much about those who will be ushered into the marriage supper of the Lamb, but we cannot say everything. Only the Lord has all the facts regarding the saved and the lost. God is Love; He is just and merciful. No one will be unjustly excluded from the Presence of God and the bliss of the day without evening. But there will be many surprises on that day, one of which will be the many excluded from the joy of the Kingdom who considered themselves members in good standing of the Orthodox Church! [...]

I didn't mean to waste your time, but I retracted my previous post because I decided that I wasn't interested in debating with you what I was taught or the effect that it had on my life and present beliefs. With respect, your opinions are not relevant in either area.

But of course, we are debating other people's beliefs, and this involves including my own as well. So that's fair enough I guess. Meh again. I just flustered right now cause I'm remembering the whole "Turns out God's a dick, but I can't tell anyone or he might smite me" phase I went though. So I guess I'm done with this thread.

If you still wish to count this as a debating victory, please enjoy. You can even borrow my confetti.

**confetti**

What? Victory? I'm not interested in victory, to be honest I'm interested in proving to you that most Christians don't actually believe that God is a dick.

I was going to quote from the Catechism of the Catholic Church next...

[Constantinopolis]

You sure about that?

As you know, there are substances that can cause nearly instant death without pain. Since you are not afraid of being dead, that means you wouldn't be afraid of someone trying to inject you with such a substance, right?

Obviously not. You'd run away from a person trying to kill you without pain just as much as from a person trying to kill you in any other way.

If someone is trying to steal your stuff, you're going to try to stop them, even if it's an item you don't expect to last forever and you aren't worried about what'll happen when it wears out.

Same concept. Even if you know your life will not last forever, and you accept that without getting worked up about it, it doesn't mean you're OK with someone taking it from you.

Indeed. But I would never say "I'm not afraid of anyone trying to steal my stuff!" Of course I'm afraid of people trying to steal my stuff - well, I'm not afraid at this moment, but if I thought it were a real possibility that someone might try to steal something important from me soon, then I would be afraid of that, yes.

Congratulations. You've proven that I prefer being alive. Also, that I don't love syringes.

Preferring to be alive = being afraid of death (at least if death seems imminent).

Wanting to keep X = being afraid of something that threatens to make you lose X (at least if the threat is imminent).

Or maybe we're using different definitions of fear? When I say "being afraid", I don't mean screaming and shouting and crying in a corner, I mean the feeling you get that triggers your "fight or flight" instinct. The feeling of "I really don't want this to happen and I'm going to try my best to avoid it if I can". That is fear, by definition, as far as I'm concerned.

Your entire position has been about fear.

...my "entire position"? I've made several different and logically separate arguments in this thread so far. And just added a new one in my two posts above.

These arguments include:

- Existence is almost always better than non-existence
- Everyone is afraid of death
- Not all Christians hold the same view of the afterlife

[Godular]

If someone is trying to steal your stuff, you're going to try to stop them, even if it's an item you don't expect to last forever and you aren't worried about what'll happen when it wears out.

Same concept. Even if you know your life will not last forever, and you accept that without getting worked up about it, it doesn't mean you're OK with someone taking it from you.

Indeed. But I would never say "I'm not afraid of anyone trying to steal my stuff!" Of course I'm afraid of people trying to steal my stuff - well, I'm not afraid at this moment, but if I thought it were a real possibility that someone might try to steal something important from me soon, then I would be afraid of that, yes.

Preferring to be alive = being afraid of death (at least if death seems imminent).

Wanting to keep X = being afraid of something that threatens to make you lose X (at least if the threat is imminent).

Or maybe we're using different definitions of fear? When I say "being afraid", I don't mean screaming and shouting and crying in a corner, I mean the feeling you get that triggers your "fight or flight" instinct. The feeling of "I really don't want this to happen and I'm going to try my best to avoid it if I can". That is fear, by definition, as far as I'm concerned.

...my "entire position"? I've made several different and logically separate arguments in this thread so far. And just added a new one in my two posts above.

These arguments include:

- Existence is almost always better than non-existence
- Everyone is afraid of death
- Not all Christians hold the same view of the afterlife

Your initial position was that atheists should find what happens after death if our position holds to be terrifying, which was then conflated into being fearful of death itself. We are pointing out to you in turn that the two are not at all the same thing.

I am not at all afraid of what comes after death because that would be silly. Why would I be afraid of nothing?

[The Shrailleeni Empire]

Do Christians ever worry that they may not be following the correct religion, or the correct interpretation of Christianity, and that by so doing they may be setting themselves up for some level of uncomfortableness in the afterlife? Could the Hindus be correct? Or the Jews? The Muslims? If you are Catholic, do you worry that perhaps Protestants or Mormons have the real interpretation?

In short, Pascal's Wager makes less sense when you take into account other religions than Christianity. For the atheist pondering the wager it quickly becomes obvious that there are more than two choices, for what if the religion that you choose is actually the incorrect one? How can you tell, as an atheist, which religion is the "true" path to salvation and the avoidance of damnation? Each one presents equally valid (or non-valid, as the case may be) evidence for its monopoly on salvation. And so instead of the simple 50/50 chance that Pascal offers you now have hundreds of chances for damnation, and perhaps only one that is the correct path. In that case you may as well remain an atheist, because the odds of you choosing the "correct" religion are much, much lower.

Assuming these religions all require that you be a member of their religion in order to get into their variation of eternal pleasure, and if you aren't then you go into a variation of eternal torment, then is there not a substantiated argument for choosing at least one of these religions as being an atheist automatically condemns you to the correct religion's eternal torment? Of course, this is operating under the thesis that one of them is correct, which I don't think we can either rule out entirely or accept entirely, and thus have to simply consider.

Well that is a correct line of thinking yes. But of course we know that not all religions require that you be a member of the religion in order to achieve salvation/"good afterlife things," nor do they all condemn non-members to damnation/"bad afterlife things." So that actually further skews the odds of the wager, because for many religions the atheist, at least by virtue of atheism, isn't doomed to damnation anyway. In fact, some religions are more punitive to those who choose to follow a rival religion than they are to atheists.

So all in the all Pascal's Wager falls completely apart once you abandon the underlying assumption that Christianity is the only true religion, as does the argument that atheists should join a religion out of fear of damnation.

I personally do not worry about eternal damnation and haven't been swayed by this argument. I am quite comfortable with what appears to be the most obvious answer, that upon my death I shall cease to exist. I'd very much like to see how far I can carry this interesting and limited time of existence, but the actual end doesn't disturb me any more than the billions of years that I didn't exist before my birth.

[A Humanist Resurrection]

What? Victory? I'm not interested in victory, to be honest I'm interested in proving to you that most Christians don't actually believe that God is a dick.

**sweeps up confetti**

You cannot prove this to me. I already tried at one point, like I said, to the point that for a few days I considered suicide. If you were taught something different that doesn't get you to such a point, well, you were more fortunate than me.

But the God I was taught to believe in was certainly a malevolent dick. Of that, I am irrevocably convinced. And once the whole wanting to smite myself thing passed, I discovered that even if a just god exists, it still runs into the whole problem of a coherent definition which we could meaningfully recognize and comprehend. I'm still happy to try to find another way.

Go in peace friend. Really.

[Gim]

What? Victory? I'm not interested in victory, to be honest I'm interested in proving to you that most Christians don't actually believe that God is a dick.

**sweeps up confetti**

You cannot prove this to me. I already tried at one point, like I said, to the point that for a few days I considered suicide. If you were taught something different that doesn't get you to such a point, well, you were more fortunate than me.

But the God I was taught to believe in was certainly a malevolent dick. Of that, I am irrevocably convinced. And once the whole wanting to smite myself thing passed, I discovered that even if a just god exists, it still runs into the whole problem of a coherent definition which we could meaningfully recognize and comprehend. I'm still happy to try to find another way.

Go in peace friend. Really.

Constantinopolis, you were outnumbered, not outsmarted.

[A Humanist Resurrection]

Constantinopolis, you were outnumbered, not outsmarted.

You can have my confetti instead, if you like.

[Gim]

Constantinopolis, you were outnumbered, not outsmarted.

You can have my confetti instead, if you like.

Yeah, give me. I need it for my niece's birthday party.

[Infected Mushroom]

What does this eternal damnation entail exactly?

Descriptions vary. If you go to niflheim, it's just cold and boring. If you piss off God you're just kicked out of his fan club and we're told that that's bad or something.

Are there video games when you are eternally damned? Like LOL parties?