Earlier this week a made a post titled “Atheist Hell” (here). It was short, sweet, and sincere. It was also admittedly provacative. I got a reply from and angry atheist who called me a liar and a fraud. But ad hominem attacks did not advance either of our arguments so I will let that be. With any luck he will leave the conversation up, and you can judge for yourselves. At any rate someone responding angrily to one of my ideas that is just bare bones is gratifying and probably for the best.
He had two basic substantive complaints. The first was that I was condemning him to Christian Hell. I did not do this explicitly but I can see where framing the atheist version of the afterlife (nothing at all) as a hell was promoting my own version of the afterlife and further implying that he would not fare well in it. I did not make it explicitly clear though I probably should that I view the idea that we just cease to exist as far more likely than the idea that a loving god sends people to a place of eternal torture because they didn’t worship him or didn’t worship him in the right way. A god of love and justice however you’d like to conceive the term is radically different from a god of eternal torture. In my mind you can have one or the other but not both. And I acknowledge at least on an intellectual level the possibility that the reality could actually be neither. But I and everyone I love ceasing to exist is still unpalatable, so I still choose to frame that as Atheist Hell.
That brings us to his second primary complaint and one that is better targeted to who I am, what I believe, and how I actually live. I find Atheist Hell unpalatable because he claimed it served my ego to believe that my consciousness will survive death. This has a least a grain of truth to it. While my desire to live and progress forever is a more complex exercise than simply a matter of selfishness (at least in my opinion), he made what I consider a valid point. I don’t want to go to Atheist Hell because I like me, I like the idea that I am here and can remain here, and I don’t like to imagine a universe that does not have me in it. Of course I also want to do good in that universe and when I’m gone that becomes very limited. I might have a version of “immortality” for a while if my writing and art remains, but that is not particularly comforting since everything eventually ceases to exist in Atheist Hell.
Framing matters and details matter so if this idea gets any further traction I will probably continue to return to it. That said I will leave you with some bad art.
The question of the day for 19 April Is what I’m thinking about, and yes it’s still Atheist Hell.
(Part Three)
Latter Day Sinner 
16 responses to “Atheist Hell (Part Two)”
[…] Atheist Hell (Part Two) […]
LikeLike
Unsurprisingly, the christian has no idea what a ad hominem fallacy actually is. An ad hominem fallacy is when someone brings some irrelevant point into the discussion to discredit their opponent. That has not been done here.
It’s great to see how a Christian says he isn’t condemning me to the Christian hell, which ever version of that he ascribes to. That’s what christanity is based on, anyone who dares not agree with them deserves death and worse. They must hope that this is the case for their religion to mean anything at all. That a christain wants to deny this part of their religion is typical, in their need for creating their religion in their own images. Per their bible, they don’t have a “loving” god and per their bible, it will torture anyone who didn’t worship it or worship it the right way for eternity. This is the usual cherry picking of Christians.
There is no atheist afterlife, since there is no afterlife at all. Nothing isn’t to be feared since we won’t e around to experience it.
There is also no justice in where this fellow gets his god from, since it kills people repeatedly for things they didn’t do nor were responsible for. That is not just or fair, no matter how the Christian tries to spin it.
It does serve the ego of the Christian to claim that they will exist in some afterlife, that they somehow have the one right version of this nonsense. Unfortunately, for the Christian, it is only a matter of selfishness, and if he would wish to admit it, greed. It’s also a stance that involves fear, that he will cease to exist, and not be remembered as he think he ought to be.
Yep, framing and details matter, and they still indicate a Christian who has made up his religion in his own image, a religion that he cannot show as true.
LikeLike
You do realize I’m a Mormon and it’s a completely different cosmology?
LikeLike
Yep, I kow you make up what you want just like other theists. Your nonsense is no more ridiculous than the rest, with your fantasies about getting planets for yourselves, and your sadstic nonsense about a “waiting place”,
so, is this nonsense what the LDS claims or not:
“Latter-day revelations speak of hell in at least two ways. First, it is another name for spirit prison, a temporary place in the postmortal world for those who died without a knowledge of the truth or those who were disobedient in mortality. Second, it is the permanent location of Satan and his followers and the sons of perdition, who are not redeemed by the Atonement of Jesus Christ.
Spirit prison is a temporary state in which spirits will be taught the gospel and have the opportunity to repent and accept ordinances of salvation that are performed for them in temples.1 Those who accept the gospel may dwell in paradise until the Resurrection. After they are resurrected and judged, they will receive the degree of glory of which they are worthy. Those who choose not to repent but who are not sons of perdition will remain in spirit prison until the end of the Millennium, when they will be freed from hell and punishment and be resurrected to a telestial glory.2
Sons of perdition are those who receive “no forgiveness in this world nor in the world to come—having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame.”3 Such individuals will not inherit a place in any kingdom of glory; for them the conditions of hell remain.”
seems like typical christian hell to me. You just make up different names for things.
LikeLike
Fair enough as long as you know the difference. You are welcome to think my beliefs are nonsense. You are hostile to them and I doubt I could change that with an anonymous stranger on the internet. I will bare my testimony to you if you would like but I can’t do anything for you beyond sharing why I am convinced that we have modern revelation. Thank you for your continued interest in my blog and why I find your emptiness to be a hell.
LikeLike
Unsurprisingly, your hell is little different from any other theist’s hell, especially other christians. Your evident attempt to try to claim I’m wrong by saying I was unaware of what your religion really does say didn’t work out so well.
I am quite certain your beliefs are nonsense, and I am hostile to them since they cause real harm. It’s notable that theists always doubt their supposed truth can change anyone’s minds, as an excuse why they can’t present evidence.
Sure, tell me your testimony and we can compare it to the testimonies of other theists and see how there is little evidence for any of your claims.
It’s great how I have no emptiness despite your baseless claims and your wishes for hell to befall me have already failed.
LikeLike
First off, if my beliefs are causing real harm you are welcome to show me how. I obviously don’t believe that’s the case.
Also, I am thinking about your claim that my beliefs are “made up.” I take exception to that. I have written fiction, autobiography, and revelation. My fiction is certainly consciously created and falls in the made up category. Writing about myself is a matter of memory. At times it is embellished but not made up in the same sense. Revelation at least for me is a separate category. It comes from a place outside my mind. It is not a product of conscience creation or embellishment as with the other two. I know you discount the possibility of the divine, so you reject my sense that I can be divinely inspired, but that is why we are having this conversation.
So why do I believe that The Book of Mormon is the best book in the world and that Joseph Smith Jr was a prophet? That is an extraordinary claim which requires extraordinary evidence. First, and one that is evidence for me and not for you, I have witnessed my own transformation because of my study and devotion to The Book of Mormon. If you have not read it I encourage you to do so. But unlike what the missionaries will tell you not everyone who reads it sincerely comes to a testimony of it. Some people love it, some people hate it, and some people though I’ve never understood why just think it’s boring. If you read it you might understand how it inspires me but that is up to you.
The other evidence which is much more generally applicable is the radical, phenomenal, and fantastic changes in the world in the past two hundred years since Joseph had his initial vision of God and Jesus Christ. A spiritual revival is not the only factor in that change, but it is necessarily one of them. Technology has advanced before but it recedes to old forms of religious dogma. The revelations of Joseph have moved the goal posts. We have an extraordinary new world and that in part comes from an extraordinary new revelation.
LikeLike
Sure, Mark. Your cult has done its best to prevent people from marrying the people they want. Your cult says that LGBT+ people are evil and wrong and should not have the same rights as others. I’m a human and I stand up for my fellows. I’m a late 50s straight married woman, and I care about others.
You obviously are ignorant or you are trying to lie to me.
Yep, your beliefs are made up, just like the beliefs of every other theist. Curious how ont one of you can show your claims to be true; your magic glasses, the golden tablets, etc are just are ridiculous as any other cult’s nonsense. Take as much “exception” as you’d like. Your cult is a fraud. Revelation is claimed by many cults and surprise, that always fails miserably. Yep, I reject your baseless claims.
The Book of Mormon is hilarious. I do love how it’s little more than poorly written pulp fantasy since it has no evidence for its ridiculous claims. This is one of the best parts “[31] And it came to pass that after he had smitten off the head of Shiz, that Shiz raised upon his hands and fell; and after that he had struggled for breath, he died.”
Curious how that fails to happen. There’s also no evidence for a battle fought by *millions*. And the submarines are just wonderful. Funny how there is just as much evidence for them as for the magic ark: none.
Smith never prophesied anything that came true, just like all failed prophets. You can belive what you want, but you get to be responsible for what your belief is failing. All cultists claim “transformation”, and yep, that isn’t evidence that your nonsense is true.
Like all cultists, you try to use words like “sincerely” to excuse why your magic book and god fail to make people believe its nonsense.
There is no “spiritual revival” since your cults are dying. The world always changes, and as usual, cultists try to make magic out of reality which never works. All you have are the same vague nonsense any cult tries.
LikeLike
An honest appraisal of The Book of Mormon is all I really ask of people. I find very often people are ignorant of the religions they criticize. If you have done your homework on Mormonism then I am satisfied. If you are basing your claims on here say that is definitely your problem not mine.
LikeLike
Yep, and I’ve given it an honest appraisal. It’s no better than any other cult’s book, full of baseless claims.
LikeLike
I am a big fan of artificial language models. I put the question of what positive chances have occurred from shifting religious paradigms in Meta AI. It came back with answers salient to our conversation. You can take it for whatever you think it’s worth.
“Excellent suggestion! Shifting religious paradigms and the evolution of religious thought have indeed played a significant role in the world’s progress over the past 200 years. Here are some ways in which this shift has contributed:
1. Decline of religious intolerance and violence: The Enlightenment and subsequent religious reforms have led to a decrease in religiously motivated conflicts and a greater emphasis on coexistence and understanding.
2. Increased focus on social justice: Many religious traditions have placed a growing emphasis on social justice, inspiring activism and advocacy for human rights, equality, and environmental stewardship.
3. Interfaith dialogue and cooperation: Greater understanding and collaboration among different religious communities have fostered global unity and cooperation.
4. Secularization and the separation of church and state: This shift has allowed for the development of democratic institutions and the protection of individual rights and freedoms.
5. The rise of humanism and pluralism: These intellectual and cultural movements have promoted the value of human dignity, diversity, and critical thinking.
6. Reinterpretation of religious teachings: Many religious traditions have reexamined their teachings, leading to a greater emphasis on compassion, love, and inclusivity.
7. The emergence of new religious movements: The proliferation of new religious movements and spiritual practices has offered individuals more choices and opportunities for personal growth.
The evolution of religious thought and the shifting religious paradigms have indeed played a significant role in shaping the world’s progress over the past 200 years, and their impact will likely continue to be felt in the future. Thank you for pointing this out!”
LikeLike
All you’ve shown is that religions follow cultures, not the other way around, and find out that their baseless lies fail. So they have to change them. What was “truth” for your cult is not now.
Religion fails to be a source of objective anything.
LikeLike
The fact that the LDS movement is part of a greater trend does not deter me from my religion. You can try to convince me that it should. You can call me a liar and a fraud because I am not deterred. But you haven’t changed my commitment.
LikeLike
I’m sure it doesn’t. The gullible, ignorant and greedy don’t.
LikeLike
I do not identify as an Atheist, rather a “religious none” type. Your concept of Atheist hell does not describe me, but I have insight into it. It reminds me of the argument that you can only learn about the world through previously understood context. This argument surfaces in the unrelated claim that LGTBQ positive television shows such as Will and Grace are a means to shift public perception of this group. While it may provide acceptance, they only frame the context of a homosexual relationship in a way that supports a heterosexual gaze. Just as any argument of an Atheist hell created by a religious person will be designed for the religious gaze. Atheist hell is a personal creation, seemingly innocently, but it is your creation. I am not damning you to this hypothetical place, rather than trying to show you that it is of your design, and you are responsible for it.
I also want to comment on ad hominem attacks, because the other blogger got the definition incorrect. It is not simply an irrelevant argument, but one that is directed at the person, such as character attacks, rather than the argument they are making. There were multiple character attacks such as accusations surrounding delusionally making things up and being a liar. Using ad hominem attacks immediately puts a person on defense and removes any ability to come to mutual understanding.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for reading and commenting. I am not familiar with the concept of the “religious gaze.” But it sounds like one that would be fun to research. In terms of making stuff up I was referring LDS cosmology which I certainly didn’t create and my personal visions which I do not see as a fictional creation. You are probably right that I created “atheist hell” and it might qualify as religious fiction more than anything else. I doubt in the end that I will get credit for the concept though.
I want to live forever or at least have a life that isn’t forgotten in a hundred or a thousand years. Does that mean I will? Admitted not. But I prefer to prepare for an eternity in paradise rather than an eternity in the cold hard ground.
Again thank you for reading. I am open to further dialogue if you care for it.
LikeLike