The problem with the inveterate Hell-mongers, is not only that they are unable to craft a single original rational premise (followed by a coherent syllogism) but they aren't able to rebut reasoned arguments either. This is sad, because it means any hoped for rational and intelligent exchanges are delimited by their inabilities. One then, often as not, ends up in an unproductive screaming match.
That isn't my intent here, only to note again that none of the arguments I've shown against the existence of "hell" have been refuted.
Let us briefly recap again, the two major ways Hell is disproven:
1) Logical:
This is the Hell-Infinite -God paradox.
Again, to summarize: The claimed "infinitude" (or omnipresence) of a (defined as infinite) deity is contradictory to the acceptance of a Hell!If one grants that "infinite" means extended to or pervading all of Being then there is literally no place left where - whatever it is- doesn't exist. Hence, if applied to "God" it means all inclusive of reality. Including ALL transcendent reality, assuming such exists.
The diagram shown illustrates the point. The whole vast field defined as "Omega" (Greek symbol) is taken to be one unitary Being or "God". It is taken to be literally infinite, meaning occupying all Being, all there is.
If one appends a Hell: meaning adding it (as below the dotted line) then this infinite Being is now delimited. In other words, it ceases to be omnipresent since its Being is foreclosed where Hell exists, unless one would argue that Hell is part of God.
Therefore, IF Hell is inserted, it contradicts the deity's infinite attribute by adding a separate entity which co-exists with that which is already claimed "infinite". This is even more radical than it seems, because "Hell" is argued by fundies to be the domain of "Satan" hence ipso facto could never be part of the infinite or divine. Thus, if Hell is asserted to exist and is claimed to be "eternal" then God cannot be infinite. If God is maintained to be infinite - meaning all inclusive of Being- the only conclusion is that Hell must be a part of God's Being!
Question: then why would anyone wish to join the divine if Hell is a part of It????
Answers? Huh? Eh what? Can't hear you! Oh, you don't want to go there? Okay, we understand!
2) Let's then move on to the next disproof, based on the biblical citation Matthew 25:46 which is the only one that uses "everlasting" and "punishment" in the same sentence.
The KJV rendering is again:
"And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal"
BUT, as I pointed out, cf.
http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2011/03/psycho-baby-hell-mongers-need-sippy-cup.html
i) Those words appear together only in some Bibles (e.g. the Weymouth New Testament has:"And these shall go away into the Punishment of the Ages, but the righteous into the Life of the Ages.")
and
ii) Even if one uses only the KJV version, the translation is in error. The Greek for "everlasting punishment" in Matthew 25:46 is "kolasin aionion." Kolasin is a noun in the accusative form, singular voice, feminine gender and means "punishment, chastening, correction, to cut-off as in pruning a tree to bear more fruit." Meanwhile, "Aionion" is the adjective form of "aion," in the singular form and means "pertaining to an eon or age, an indeterminate period of time.
Critical examination discloses the Bible speaks of five "aions", minimum, and perhaps many more. If there were "aions" in the past, it must logically mean that each one of them have ended! When one uses terms such as "past", "present" or "future" he's no longer referring to anything that's everlasting because the latter concept admits of no temporal distinctions! The New Testament writers spoke of "the present wicked aion" which ended during that very generation.
Obviously then it was followed by another "aion"-e.g. the "aion" in which we presently live, which will be followed by a future aion.The point? If there are "aions"past, present and to come, it must mean that aions don't last and the one we live in will also end. Thus, these "aions" are in no way never-ending or everlasting.
There are also verses describing "the consummation of the aions" (from which eons is derived) showing that each "aion" (nee, eon) ends, hence again can't be eternal! Why is it the hardheaded, blustering fundies don't get this? That they can't or won't distinguish a finite from non-finite amount of time? Well, maybe because they never took Greek or Latin!
Other notable examples:
-"the coming eon" (Matt.10:30, Luke 18:30)
-"the present wicked eon" (Gal.1:4)
-"the oncoming eons" (future) (Eph.2:7)
-"the conclusion of the eon " (present) (Mt.13:39,40)
-"the secret concealed from the eons" (past) (Eph.3:9)
Obviously, the Greek word "aion" transliterated "eon" cannot mean "eternal." A study into the Greek of the Biblical period and before will bear this out. Thus, Matthew 25:46 which embodies the Greek, "kolasin aionion", cannot mean "eternal punishment" but rather a "temporary punishment" or "temporary chastening". (Which would be more akin to a punitive 'timeout' like the old Catholic purgatory concept).
Thus, even IF Matthew 25:46 does refer to a real, putatively active "Hell" it can't be "everlasting, only temporary only. More to the point, and this is critical since I pointed it out to do with Bart Ehrman's studies of later additions by assorted scribes (link on the blog above), if we find that the translations show "eternal punishment" when the authors or copyists likely had to be familiar with these Greek forms (disclosing that "aion" is NOT eternal) then we have prima facie evidence for a deliberate copyist insertion to alter the meaning. In other words, a deliberately perpetrated FRAUD!
Since "Aionion" is the adjective of the noun "aion", then this argument applies to ALL forms, passages, words that contain these words, no exception. Are the fundies bright enough to grasp this? Doubt it, if they can't even solve the Hell-God-Infinite paradox(1)!
Hence, we must conclude that either: a) Matthew 25:46 is a bogus later addition, or b) Matthew 25:46 represents the deliberate, fraudulent alteration of an original text in which the Greek forms were changed to reflect an "eternal" as opposed to non-eternal duress or punishment.In either case, the hellfire fundies are either liars or stupid, or ignorant, take your pick.
Alas, it seems education does them no good, even when earnestly offered. They continue to revert to their defective beliefs and myths because these serve their ideology, as a useful tool to attempt to intimidate the non-gullible, or skeptical or unbelieving. We hope one day they'll wake up and stop acting like retarded clowns, but aren't holding our breaths!
That isn't my intent here, only to note again that none of the arguments I've shown against the existence of "hell" have been refuted.
Let us briefly recap again, the two major ways Hell is disproven:
1) Logical:
This is the Hell-Infinite -God paradox.
Again, to summarize: The claimed "infinitude" (or omnipresence) of a (defined as infinite) deity is contradictory to the acceptance of a Hell!If one grants that "infinite" means extended to or pervading all of Being then there is literally no place left where - whatever it is- doesn't exist. Hence, if applied to "God" it means all inclusive of reality. Including ALL transcendent reality, assuming such exists.
The diagram shown illustrates the point. The whole vast field defined as "Omega" (Greek symbol) is taken to be one unitary Being or "God". It is taken to be literally infinite, meaning occupying all Being, all there is.
If one appends a Hell: meaning adding it (as below the dotted line) then this infinite Being is now delimited. In other words, it ceases to be omnipresent since its Being is foreclosed where Hell exists, unless one would argue that Hell is part of God.
Therefore, IF Hell is inserted, it contradicts the deity's infinite attribute by adding a separate entity which co-exists with that which is already claimed "infinite". This is even more radical than it seems, because "Hell" is argued by fundies to be the domain of "Satan" hence ipso facto could never be part of the infinite or divine. Thus, if Hell is asserted to exist and is claimed to be "eternal" then God cannot be infinite. If God is maintained to be infinite - meaning all inclusive of Being- the only conclusion is that Hell must be a part of God's Being!
Question: then why would anyone wish to join the divine if Hell is a part of It????
Answers? Huh? Eh what? Can't hear you! Oh, you don't want to go there? Okay, we understand!
2) Let's then move on to the next disproof, based on the biblical citation Matthew 25:46 which is the only one that uses "everlasting" and "punishment" in the same sentence.
The KJV rendering is again:
"And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal"
BUT, as I pointed out, cf.
http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2011/03/psycho-baby-hell-mongers-need-sippy-cup.html
i) Those words appear together only in some Bibles (e.g. the Weymouth New Testament has:"And these shall go away into the Punishment of the Ages, but the righteous into the Life of the Ages.")
and
ii) Even if one uses only the KJV version, the translation is in error. The Greek for "everlasting punishment" in Matthew 25:46 is "kolasin aionion." Kolasin is a noun in the accusative form, singular voice, feminine gender and means "punishment, chastening, correction, to cut-off as in pruning a tree to bear more fruit." Meanwhile, "Aionion" is the adjective form of "aion," in the singular form and means "pertaining to an eon or age, an indeterminate period of time.
Critical examination discloses the Bible speaks of five "aions", minimum, and perhaps many more. If there were "aions" in the past, it must logically mean that each one of them have ended! When one uses terms such as "past", "present" or "future" he's no longer referring to anything that's everlasting because the latter concept admits of no temporal distinctions! The New Testament writers spoke of "the present wicked aion" which ended during that very generation.
Obviously then it was followed by another "aion"-e.g. the "aion" in which we presently live, which will be followed by a future aion.The point? If there are "aions"past, present and to come, it must mean that aions don't last and the one we live in will also end. Thus, these "aions" are in no way never-ending or everlasting.
There are also verses describing "the consummation of the aions" (from which eons is derived) showing that each "aion" (nee, eon) ends, hence again can't be eternal! Why is it the hardheaded, blustering fundies don't get this? That they can't or won't distinguish a finite from non-finite amount of time? Well, maybe because they never took Greek or Latin!
Other notable examples:
-"the coming eon" (Matt.10:30, Luke 18:30)
-"the present wicked eon" (Gal.1:4)
-"the oncoming eons" (future) (Eph.2:7)
-"the conclusion of the eon " (present) (Mt.13:39,40)
-"the secret concealed from the eons" (past) (Eph.3:9)
Obviously, the Greek word "aion" transliterated "eon" cannot mean "eternal." A study into the Greek of the Biblical period and before will bear this out. Thus, Matthew 25:46 which embodies the Greek, "kolasin aionion", cannot mean "eternal punishment" but rather a "temporary punishment" or "temporary chastening". (Which would be more akin to a punitive 'timeout' like the old Catholic purgatory concept).
Thus, even IF Matthew 25:46 does refer to a real, putatively active "Hell" it can't be "everlasting, only temporary only. More to the point, and this is critical since I pointed it out to do with Bart Ehrman's studies of later additions by assorted scribes (link on the blog above), if we find that the translations show "eternal punishment" when the authors or copyists likely had to be familiar with these Greek forms (disclosing that "aion" is NOT eternal) then we have prima facie evidence for a deliberate copyist insertion to alter the meaning. In other words, a deliberately perpetrated FRAUD!
Since "Aionion" is the adjective of the noun "aion", then this argument applies to ALL forms, passages, words that contain these words, no exception. Are the fundies bright enough to grasp this? Doubt it, if they can't even solve the Hell-God-Infinite paradox(1)!
Hence, we must conclude that either: a) Matthew 25:46 is a bogus later addition, or b) Matthew 25:46 represents the deliberate, fraudulent alteration of an original text in which the Greek forms were changed to reflect an "eternal" as opposed to non-eternal duress or punishment.In either case, the hellfire fundies are either liars or stupid, or ignorant, take your pick.
Alas, it seems education does them no good, even when earnestly offered. They continue to revert to their defective beliefs and myths because these serve their ideology, as a useful tool to attempt to intimidate the non-gullible, or skeptical or unbelieving. We hope one day they'll wake up and stop acting like retarded clowns, but aren't holding our breaths!
No comments:
Post a Comment