Print Page | Close Window

Eternal Torture - Never-Ending Torment

Printed From: IslamiCity.com
Category: Religion - Islam
Forum Name: Islam for non-Muslims
Forum Discription: Non-Muslims can ask questions about Islam, discussion for the purpose of learning.
URL: http://www.IslamiCity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=9959
Printed Date: 18 April 2014 at 4:42pm


Topic: Eternal Torture - Never-Ending Torment
Posted By: Mateeri-al-ist
Subject: Eternal Torture - Never-Ending Torment
Date Posted: 09 August 2007 at 10:04am

According to Islam, is there a kind of 'hell' where people will find themselves suffering eternally? Such a notion is appalling and morally repugnant to me.

If there is a 'hell' in Islamic understanding, is it morally acceptable to you for a god to allow people to face eternal (never ever ending) torture? Have you no moral outrage at this?

Also, what kind of transgression is deserving of eternal torture?

Thanks.




Replies:
Posted By: Mateeri-al-ist
Date Posted: 12 August 2007 at 4:50am
Does nobody have a response to this? From my futher reading I gather that there is actually a 'hell' in Islam. No moral outrage at the thought of allowing never-ending torture?


Posted By: Israfil
Date Posted: 12 August 2007 at 9:45am

Materialist,

I hope your inquiry is sincere because I'll give you a sincere answer. In Islamic Eschatology (Study of Apocalypse) hell does exist and yes, you are tormented there. But let me clarify two things for you:

1) The duration of Hell

2) The physicality of Hell

1) The reason Hell is "eternal" is because in the next life (or the world to come) there is no concept of time. Since there is no concept of time the events endure thus becoming an infinite event. Because Hell is all one event all that is done there is endless. In similar fashion, Christians (and some Jewish thought) have a similar idea of Hell where the wicked endure pain for all eternity.

2) Hell is described physically because it is more done on the basis of giving the believers an idea of how dreadful it is. According to Islamic theology, the dead will be raised up both body and soul to God where all will be judged accordingly. Perhaps this explains why we get the sensation of pain and pleasure in the next worlds. According to the Qur'an Heaven is an endless pleasure but in contrast to this so will Hell be an endless torment.

Why is there no moral outrage?

Because as Muslims, we define our morality on the basis of what God has established in Islam. Of course, I may share differing views on certain ethical situations but for the most part, what Muslims believe in morality is on par with the rest of the world. Feed the poor. Help the helpless. Do good works. Do not be excessive in actions. Be good to your mate. Study the world so you may recognize divine providence. Now let me say that of course other Muslims may have differing views on this so do not think my opinion alone is unanimous. But understand here that  for Muslims, when one non-Muslim becomes cognizant of Muhammad (with proper education on Islam by the way) then that individual is in the sense, obligated to either choose or not choose Islam. Of course there is a choice in reality however that choice can also have repricussion.

Some school of thought say that the non-muslim that is properly educated on Muhammad and his message will be questioned by God on the Day of Judgement and will go to hell despite what he or she has done in the real life. The other school of thought holds that God will question the non-muslim on his/her rejection of Muhammad but will consider their good works and may determine that this individual will be in Hell for a short time. Another school of thought holds God may not send that individual to Hell at all. But in essence to all of this what they all equal to is God making the ultimate decision. There is no moral outrage because God ultimately decides all of this. The main essence to Islamic ethics starts with God and ends with us.

As far as what type of transgression we could do that lands us in Hell is Shirk or associating other dieties aside with God (or replacing God with them). Now mind you there are several schools of thought concerning Shirk which has several long interpretations I don't want to get into.

In my personal opinion being away from God the Creator is hell and no amount of fire or torment is greater than that. To me hell is like being trapped in a dark room with no light. In some sense I believe Hell is metaphircal to represent the pain and agony of being away from God not the literal but who knows? I hope I was some help Materialist.



Posted By: Hayfa
Date Posted: 12 August 2007 at 10:15am

Asalam Alaikym,

Welcome to the Forum.

I cannot say I have any scolarly knowledge. Israfil and others can address certain aspects far better than I.

Also, what kind of transgression is deserving of eternal torture?

Well here might be a few.. is you were to solely lok upon one's actions here on this earth. Here are a few of the genocides that happened in the 20th Cetury (unfortunately there are many). Really what do these people deserve?

Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50)

49-78,000,000

Jozef Stalin (USSR, 1934-39)

13,000,000 (the purges)

Adolf Hitler (Germany, 1939-1945)

12,000,000 (concentration camps and civilians WWII)

Hideki Tojo (Japan, 1941-44)

5,000,000 (civilians in WWII)

Pol Pot (Cambodia, 1975-79)

1,700,000

Kim Il Sung (North Korea, 1948-94)

1.6 million (purges and concentration camps)

I was talking to this guy who was an athiest. He did not believe i n God, afterlife, Day of Judgement etc. I said where is the justice then? He said death is justice. I said how can death be "justice" if we all die?

I pray that I go to Jummah (paradise). And it actually brings me hope and peace that people who are muderers, rapists, pedophiles etc. That they will face justice. There are acts that are evil.  

Again, welcome.

Hayfa

 



-------------
When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi


Posted By: Mateeri-al-ist
Date Posted: 12 August 2007 at 10:46am
Originally posted by Israfil

Why is there no moral outrage?

Because as Muslims, we define our morality on the basis of what God has established in Islam.

What you seem to be saying, in essence, is that you don't find it morally repugnant because the God of your holy texts tells you not to. Is that not a fair characterization of your answer there? Do you have no independent moral sense of your own?

To me, it is a wicked, evil deity that allows for an imperfect human who has made imperfect choices and has imperfect feelings to suffer eternally.

How is eternal torment not 'being excessive in actions'? How is it not barbaric brutality?

Why can't the all-powerful deity zap those 'sinner' souls (like, presumably, my soul) out of existence at death, rather than keep them alive, fully aware that they will suffer eternally?

In my personal opinion being away from God the Creator is hell and no amount of fire or torment is greater than that.

You can't be sincere in thinking hell is no worse than "being away from God the Creator". I think you might want to retract that, seriously.

I am an atheist, which means that you probably consider me "away from God the Creator". I am not in torment or fire.



Posted By: Mateeri-al-ist
Date Posted: 12 August 2007 at 10:48am
Originally posted by Hayfa

Also, what kind of transgression is deserving of eternal torture?

Well here might be a few.. is you were to solely lok upon one's actions here on this earth. Here are a few of the genocides that happened in the 20th Cetury (unfortunately there are many). Really what do these people deserve?

Prison or even the death penalty. Go crazy with some temporary torture if you really want. But are you suggesting that these flawed and deranged psychopaths deserve eternal torture? I feel like I need to explain what 'eternal' means as it horrifies me so much that you can be advocating never ever ever ending torment - for anyone!

No. Murderers, rapists, paedophiles, do not deserve eternal torture. Your view that eternally tormenting these people (as well as non-believers) counts as 'justice' is utterly despicable to me.



Posted By: Woodstock
Date Posted: 12 August 2007 at 11:03am
Not everyone believes hell is eternal. Some compare it to a prison where the sinner would reside till Allah sees fit.

6:128 and 11:106 - 107

I am not a Muslim but I do believe in what the Quran says


Posted By: Woodstock
Date Posted: 12 August 2007 at 11:06am
No I do not feel repulsed , If I killed 12000000 people I would expect to spend eternity in hell


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 12 August 2007 at 4:23pm
"Also, what kind of transgression is deserving of eternal torture?"

Well, materialism is one which comes to mind.    Just a joke. 

But seriously, it is one sin which is very much hated by God. 


-------------
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)



Posted By: Mateeri-al-ist
Date Posted: 12 August 2007 at 4:44pm

Originally posted by islamispeace

"Also, what kind of transgression is deserving of eternal torture?"

Well, materialism is one which comes to mind.    Just a joke. 

But seriously, it is one sin which is very much hated by God. 

Were you joking or not? If it is a "sin which is very much hated by God" then isn't it a transgression deserving of eternal torture?

I have little over twenty years of life experience which has led me to decide that materialism is just fine. Am I therefore deserving of eternal torture were I to die now? Is my misguided and ill-informed view to be punished so severely?

Other humans make other decisions which lead to millions of deaths. They are flawed, they have irrational emotions affecting them. It is, surely, utter nonsense and dangerous barbarism to say they are deserving of eternal torture.



Posted By: Israfil
Date Posted: 13 August 2007 at 12:51am

Materialist:

What you seem to be saying, in essence, is that you don't find it morally repugnant because the God of your holy texts tells you not to. Is that not a fair characterization of your answer there? Do you have no independent moral sense of your own?

To me, it is a wicked, evil deity that allows for an imperfect human who has made imperfect choices and has imperfect feelings to suffer eternally.

You are terribly misunderstanding my position and no, that is not the correct characterization. The idea here is not morally repugnant because the idea of hell is the recompensation for moral choice we do in this physical life. All moral actions are not equal and thus are subject to judgement. The reality of heaven and hell in the Qur'an are used to show the inevitability of our great deeds or our misdeeds. Is it a lawful world to allow some murderer who, aware of his/her actions go on murdering without some form of punishment?

Again the idea of eternal torture/or eternal bliss stems from the non-existence of time. As philosophers in ancient times have noted that time is measured by motion and since, the spiritual realm  is not subjected to neither motion nor change it is thus infinite. What we may think a lifetime here is perhaps a second there we don't truly know but I know that the Qur'an provides a foundation on ethics.

Why can't the all-powerful deity zap those 'sinner' souls (like, presumably, my soul) out of existence at death, rather than keep them alive, fully aware that they will suffer eternally?

I'm not an all-knowledgable creature so I cannot answer this in a way that would suit you. At the same time I can say why doesn't God make square circles a logical reality? These questions for now remain unanswered.

You can't be sincere in thinking hell is no worse than "being away from God the Creator". I think you might want to retract that, seriously.

I am an atheist, which means that you probably consider me "away from God the Creator". I am not in torment or fire.

This comment was made in the spiritual metaphorical sense not the actual sense. Hell ultimately represents being away from the "sight" of God. Just that alone is torment and really fire and pain is an additive of that suffering that is all what I meant.



Posted By: Mateeri-al-ist
Date Posted: 13 August 2007 at 4:53am
Originally posted by Israfil

Materialist:

What you seem to be saying, in essence, is that you don't find it morally repugnant because the God of your holy texts tells you not to. Is that not a fair characterization of your answer there? Do you have no independent moral sense of your own?

To me, it is a wicked, evil deity that allows for an imperfect human who has made imperfect choices and has imperfect feelings to suffer eternally.

You are terribly misunderstanding my position and no, that is not the correct characterization. The idea here is not morally repugnant because the idea of hell is the recompensation for moral choice we do in this physical life.

Firstly, "the idea of hell"? Why do you say "idea" now?

Eternal torture does not become any less evil if it is retribution for a wrong that's been done. We have moral feelings and statements about anything, any state of affairs. You clearly don't think eternal torture is barbaric and the very worst notion ever to be imagined. I would never love or forgive a deity that allowed there to be a place/dimension where eternal torture happens. That deity would be a primitive and evil entity.

All moral actions are not equal and thus are subject to judgement. The reality of heaven and hell in the Qur'an are used to show the inevitability of our great deeds or our misdeeds. Is it a lawful world to allow some murderer who, aware of his/her actions go on murdering without some form of punishment?

No. Murderers should be punished, incapacitated and deterred. What's that got to do with eternal torture?

Again the idea of eternal torture/or eternal bliss stems from the non-existence of time. 

Perpetual state of suffering - a one-moment state of suffering.. whatever. It doesn't change it, does it? It's silly and barbaric sadism.

Answer this: What is the purpose of the eternal existence of a soul in 'hell'?

What we may think a lifetime here is perhaps a second there we don't truly know but I know that the Qur'an provides a foundation on ethics.

I wouldn't want to get my ethics from the Qur'an, based on what you've told me. Luckily I don't have to. Nor do I have to get my ethics from the Bible - which is where the Christians think a solid foundation of ethics comes from - nor any other "holy book". My moral feelings just seem to be there, natural. Even away from the irrational feelings that are 'morals', the rational case for 'hell' being primitive needless harm is obvious.

Why can't the all-powerful deity zap those 'sinner' souls (like, presumably, my soul) out of existence at death, rather than keep them alive, fully aware that they will suffer eternally?

I'm not an all-knowledgable creature so I cannot answer this in a way that would suit you. At the same time I can say why doesn't God make square circles a logical reality? These questions for now remain unanswered.

Are you allowed to have an opinion of your own on this? Don't you think, based on what you do know now, that God should zap those hell-bound souls out of existence, rather than let them pointlessly suffer?

You can't be sincere in thinking hell is no worse than "being away from God the Creator". I think you might want to retract that, seriously.

I am an atheist, which means that you probably consider me "away from God the Creator". I am not in torment or fire.

This comment was made in the spiritual metaphorical sense not the actual sense. Hell ultimately represents being away from the "sight" of God. Just that alone is torment and really fire and pain is an additive of that suffering that is all what I meant.

As I said, I am an atheist. Am I not "away from the 'sight' of God"? I don't think you have a single thing to base your statement that such a situation is torment. Or am I in "spiritual metaphorical" torment?

As for my personal opinion on 'hell': it seems to me that hell is a relic of the human species' most primitive urges to see their enemies suffer. The hope of somehow surviving death is made even more attractive with a 'heaven' and the thought that the disbelievers/your enemies will be suffering greatly. It's a sadistic primitive kind of 'ha, see! ha!'. All totally made-up by silly humans of course.



Posted By: aka2x2
Date Posted: 13 August 2007 at 11:17am

Mateer-al-ist,

 

Muslims, by definition, have accepted that there is a God, Mohammad was a messenger sent by this God and the message he brought was the Quran. We did not invent or define the nature of God, nor did we choose what God should tell us, nor did we choose the method and the person He chose to deliver His message. Therefore, we have no knowledge about Heaven and Hell except what God chose to reveal to us in the Quran. This Book is available to all to read and make choices for themselves (as you have done).

 

The Quran tells us Heaven and Hell are eternal and Muslims accept this fact. If the idea is repugnant to you, no Muslim can help you. Muslims did not and do not have a say in the matter; God did not put it to a vote.

 

We can try to explain our understanding of the Word; we cannot change it to suit your sensibilities.



-------------

Respectfully
aka2x2


Posted By: Israfil
Date Posted: 13 August 2007 at 12:43pm

Firstly, "the idea of hell"? Why do you say "idea" now?

I call them "ideas" because we all have this vision on what Hell or Heaven is like when in reality we may be wrong. Fire to us may not be like fire in Hell, but more of an metaphorical sense of torment and pain however you may want to double check an Imam on the physical characteristics of Heaven and Hell.

Eternal torture does not become any less evil if it is retribution for a wrong that's been done.

Why do you call being in Hell torture? In our idea it may be torture but in the mind of God it is something else. Your interpretation of what Hell is obviously is nothing more than a subjective claim and really, you cannot prove that Hell is immoral. You have not provided any solid ethical claim that serving in Hell is immoral. Before you make a claim in saying Hell is an immoral place provide a solid claim that states that Hell is immoral. If the concept of Hell is to recompensate the wicked hos is it immoral?

We have moral feelings and statements about anything, any state of affairs. You clearly don't think eternal torture is barbaric and the very worst notion ever to be imagined.

Allow me to show my reductio ad Absurdum in that, you are like above, claiming that Hell is immoral without providing a solid defense on why Hell is immoral. Again, if you take into consideration that Hell serves those who commit great crimes why is the sentence and what it entails immoral? Provide proof. To say Hell is evil because it is torturous is not enough to make a solid claim on your position. Simply saying Hell is barbaric is also insufficient in your claim. I have debated better argumentative athiest.

I would never love or forgive a deity that allowed there to be a place/dimension where eternal torture happens. That deity would be a primitive and evil entity.

Another subjective claim without merit......

No. Murderers should be punished, incapacitated and deterred. What's that got to do with eternal torture

How is Hell not a punishment? That is the whole idea! Again don't confuse Hell with torture just because what you read is, in your mind torture. Take into consideration of the theology. You assume Hell is torture based on your idea of retribution. The theological concept of retribution is different than contemporary thought you must keep that in mind. You call this primitive? Frankly, I find it primitive for ancient human conquerors to skin and boil their victims alive simply for not serving in their empire primitive [See Genghis Khan]. Hell is also a place where wicked individuals are incapacitated both spiritually and physically what is your point?

Answer this: What is the purpose of the eternal existence of a soul in 'hell'?

Wow this question is borderline dumb in a way. I just explained to you that according to theology the spiritual dimension is absent of time which is a state of reality. It is such a reality that extends from Divine Emanation. Meaning, since God is not subject to motion, time, and space so to the reality that extends from divine emanation.

My moral feelings just seem to be there, natural. Even away from the irrational feelings that are 'morals', the rational case for 'hell' being primitive needless harm is obvious.

Another ignorant comment. Inital moral development is 90% societal [parental figures, extended family, television etc-but usually is developed by direct contact from a parental figure or figures] the other 5% is innate which comes from the faculties of your brain, particularly in various regions where mental processes occur the frontal lobe I suspect is one area where moral judgement may come from. The other 5% is simply developed from adulthood. Of course these percentages may vary but this is to show you that moral judgement is not innate. A baby is not born a moral creature and therefore, is neither good or bad nor is cognizant of both qualities. I find your classification rather unsupported.

Are you allowed to have an opinion of your own on this? Don't you think, based on what you do know now, that God should zap those hell-bound souls out of existence, rather than let them pointlessly suffer?

Yes I have an opinion and yes I also know that, while God can "zap evildoers out of hell" I also know that he can make square circles a logical reality in our minds but this has not come to pass.

As I said, I am an atheist. Am I not "away from the 'sight' of God"? I don't think you have a single thing to base your statement that such a situation is torment. Or am I in "spiritual metaphorical" torment?

FFS I'm referring to being in Hell. It represents being away from the sight of God. I mentioned that the pain and the fire and all of what the Qur'an describes may serve as a metaphorical basis of spiritual agony being away from God however I'm not at the liberity to say that this is universal this is my personal philosophica view. As far as your question on whether you are tormented that is a question you alone can answer. I do not know you. I also cannot judged you so if you're looking for me to say "yes your hellbound" forget it.

As for my personal opinion on 'hell': it seems to me that hell is a relic of the human species' most primitive urges to see their enemies suffer. The hope of somehow surviving death is made even more attractive with a 'heaven' and the thought that the disbelievers/your enemies will be suffering greatly. It's a sadistic primitive kind of 'ha, see! ha!'. All totally made-up by silly humans of course.

Very childish....

Me thinks Materialist just wants to argue his poorly defended position.

 



Posted By: Mateeri-al-ist
Date Posted: 13 August 2007 at 12:43pm
Originally posted by aka2x2

Mateer-al-ist,

 

Muslims, by definition, have accepted that there is a God, Mohammad was a messenger sent by this God and the message he brought was the Quran. We did not invent or define the nature of God, nor did we choose what God should tell us, nor did we choose the method and the person He chose to deliver His message.

 

I presumed that muslims are still open to discussion about their beliefs and maybe even willing to contemplate the possibility that they are totally wrong about reality.

 

 Therefore, we have no knowledge about Heaven and Hell except what God chose to reveal to us in the Quran.

 

And my question was asking what you thought about it. I wanted independent opinions, not "God's" opinion. Here's an opportunity to answer the question(s). Have you no moral outrage that certain people will face eternal never ever ever ending torture? What do you think Allah's purpose might be for those souls in 'hell'? Why does Allah not sound to you like an evil tyrant?

 

The Quran tells us Heaven and Hell are eternal and Muslims accept this fact. If the idea is repugnant to you, no Muslim can help you.
 

 

I hear a lot of moral statements from muslims. A popular one in today's world from muslims and non-muslims alike is how 'wrong' the US action in Iraq is/was. However wrong that war is, Allah's after-death policies to me are infinitely worse - infinitely more evil than anything the US has ever done.

 

Muslims did not and do not have a say in the matter; God did not put it to a vote.

 

All the more reason to explain how he's not a brutal dictator by telling me why you yourself think it's fine to continually punish forever.

We can try to explain our understanding of the Word; we cannot change it to suit your sensibilities.

As I said, I hope you're still open to discussion. I'm sure you wouldn't want to admit that you will never change your faith in the book no matter what you learn.

 



Posted By: Mateeri-al-ist
Date Posted: 13 August 2007 at 1:16pm
Originally posted by Israfil

Eternal torture does not become any less evil if it is retribution for a wrong that's been done.

Why do you call being in Hell torture?

That's what I've been led to believe. You yourself don't seem to doubt that hell is torture/torment.

You have not provided any solid ethical claim that serving in Hell is immoral. Provide proof. 

My questions, I think you'll notice, have been about moral feelings. Moral feelings are largely irrational (or a-rational I suppose). I don't have any 'proof' that eternal hell is immoral - there isn't really such a thing as 'immoral' except our feelings towards things. I suppose the amount of suffering involved in eternal torture is what makes it so repulsive an idea. Can you prove that hell is morally acceptable? No.

If you don't have a problem with your God's hell, I wonder if you have a problem (affective aversion) with murder? Murder is nowhere near as morally unacceptable - and causes no where near as much suffering - as allowing for the existence of eternal pain (of whatever kind).

I have debated better argumentative athiest.

Well, you can't know how 'good' I am at arguing in general, especially in what's essentially an issue of moral feeling. Quite a strange thing to include in your reply. Why did I need to know that?

I would never love or forgive a deity that allowed there to be a place/dimension where eternal torture happens. That deity would be a primitive and evil entity.

Another subjective claim without merit......

Yes, all moral statements are subjective claims and can be said to have no merit.

No. Murderers should be punished, incapacitated and deterred. What's that got to do with eternal torture

How is Hell not a punishment? That is the whole idea!

Punishment on Earth (reality) means temporary punishment.

Again don't confuse Hell with torture just because what you read is, in your mind torture. Take into consideration of the theology. You assume Hell is torture based on your idea of retribution. The theological concept of retribution is different than contemporary thought you must keep that in mind.

I am not a theologian so perhaps you could explain why it is incorrect to think of Hell as torture or retribution the way we normally think of it.

You call this primitive? Frankly, I find it primitive for ancient human conquerors to skin and boil their victims alive simply for not serving in their empire primitive [See Genghis Khan]. Hell is also a place where wicked individuals are incapacitated both spiritually and physically what is your point?

My point, as I think I've made clear, is that hell is a place where "wicked" individuals suffer forever and ever - for no apparent reason.

Answer this: What is the purpose of the eternal existence of a soul in 'hell'?

Wow this question is borderline dumb in a way. I just explained to you that according to theology the spiritual dimension is absent of time which is a state of reality. It is such a reality that extends from Divine Emanation. Meaning, since God is not subject to motion, time, and space so to the reality that extends from divine emanation.

I don't think any of that made sense. Care to give it another go?

My moral feelings just seem to be there, natural. Even away from the irrational feelings that are 'morals', the rational case for 'hell' being primitive needless harm is obvious.

Another ignorant comment. Inital moral development is 90% societal [parental figures, extended family, television etc-but usually is developed by direct contact from a parental figure or figures] the other 5% is innate which comes from the faculties of your brain, particularly in various regions where mental processes occur the frontal lobe I suspect is one area where moral judgement may come from. The other 5% is simply developed from adulthood. Of course these percentages may vary but this is to show you that moral judgement is not innate. A baby is not born a moral creature and therefore, is neither good or bad nor is cognizant of both qualities. I find your classification rather unsupported.

My "classification" was a report of personal experience, since I've been old enough to examine my morals. I didn't say I got them all genetically. If mine was an "ignorant" comment then yours, being "ignorant" of what I clearly wrote, is what?

I want to see the evidence you have for those percentages as I am not aware of any clear results on the subject of where our morality comes from yet.

Are you allowed to have an opinion of your own on this? Don't you think, based on what you do know now, that God should zap those hell-bound souls out of existence, rather than let them pointlessly suffer?

Yes I have an opinion and yes I also know that, while God can "zap evildoers out of hell" I also know that he can make square circles a logical reality in our minds but this has not come to pass.

You've missed the question there. I didn't ask if he 'can' do it, he's 'all-powerful' so that would be silly. I asked whether, in your opinion, he should zap them out of existence rather than allowing them to stay on in suffering.

As I said, I am an atheist. Am I not "away from the 'sight' of God"? I don't think you have a single thing to base your statement that such a situation is torment. Or am I in "spiritual metaphorical" torment?

FFS I'm referring to being in Hell. It represents being away from the sight of God. I mentioned that the pain and the fire and all of what the Qur'an describes may serve as a metaphorical basis of spiritual agony being away from God however I'm not at the liberity to say that this is universal this is my personal philosophica view.

So it was just speculation?

As for my personal opinion on 'hell': it seems to me that hell is a relic of the human species' most primitive urges to see their enemies suffer. The hope of somehow surviving death is made even more attractive with a 'heaven' and the thought that the disbelievers/your enemies will be suffering greatly. It's a sadistic primitive kind of 'ha, see! ha!'. All totally made-up by silly humans of course.

Very childish....

Me thinks Materialist just wants to argue his poorly defended position.

Methinks you are getting a little easily riled up, antagonistic and borderline malicious for a follower of the "religion of peace".

 



Posted By: Israfil
Date Posted: 13 August 2007 at 2:52pm

That's what I've been led to believe. You yourself don't seem to doubt that hell is torture/torment.

This boils down to what we perceive as are torture and what is not. Of course, me believing in Islamic ethics I do not believe it is torment, again, I cannot call Hell torment because my idea of torment may vary from the reality of what is Hell. I've kind of explained this before.

My questions, I think you'll notice, have been about moral feelings. Moral feelings are largely irrational (or a-rational I suppose). I don't have any 'proof' that eternal hell is immoral - there isn't really such a thing as 'immoral' except our feelings towards things. I suppose the amount of suffering involved in eternal torture is what makes it so repulsive an idea. Can you prove that hell is morally acceptable? No.

You have no proof that Hell is immoral yet, claim that "moral feelings" are irrational? You claim Hell is an "evil" place [I noticed the shocking symbolism of this remark]. what I'm trying to get you to understand is, you cannot make a claim about one thing and claim to not know another thing if these two things are related. If you say that moral feelings are irrational then provide the defense for such a claim and then tie this into what you are trying to say in regards to Hell as being repulsive. This gives me an understanding of where you are coming from ethically. Simply saying you find moral feelings irrational for the sake of simply being irrational [I assume this since you have no said otherwise] is not sufficient for me.

My point, as I think I've made clear, is that hell is a place where "wicked" individuals suffer forever and ever - for no apparent reason.

This made no absolute sense. If Hell is a place for wicked people then there is an obvious reason why they would "suffer." Unless you consider God to be some sort of Sadinist deity that let wicked souls suffer for the sake of suffering this makes no sense whatsoever. Since we are discussing the Islamic ethical view of Hell torment, then this discussion involves God's consciousness of right and wrong action, therefore, this in itself provides a reason [from the Islamic perspective] on why God condemns a soul. You're the first person I've discussed with online that considers Hell "too much" for a soul. I mean, hey, since you claim to be an atheist I don't see how this even ffactors into your mind since you deny God's existence in the first place.

My "classification" was a report of personal experience, since I've been old enough to examine my morals. I didn't say I got them all genetically. If mine was an "ignorant" comment then yours, being "ignorant" of what I clearly wrote, is what?

I want to see the evidence you have for those percentages as I am not aware of any clear results on the subject of where our morality comes from yet.

Your classification is a non-academic one and although you say  they are based on experience how you stated your position earlier, in claiming morals are innate are inaccurate. The percentages I provided are exaggerations [but not far from truth] but you are free to read articles on Moral Psychology and if you request I can provide some particular readings. My intention in those percentages was to show, from what I've studied myself that majority of our moral development comes from our environment and the rest we develop through social interaction. Along with social interaction we access [through cognitive intuition] past teachings and experiences where we make a determination whether something is good or bad. So if your mother taught you not to steal from others and have since that time til' present reinforced this value, you most likely will not steal.

But if a baby is not taught this til' adulthood if the adult  steals he/she may not be aware of the moral consequences of stealing. This was my point. I apologize for making this long drawn out example but I was shooting for clarity.

I don't think any of that made sense. Care to give it another go?

This is my fault as I'm speaking in Philosophy lingo so I apologize.  you asked "what is the purpose for the existence of eternal hell?" I was trying to say that there are dual aspects to this reality. In one aspect, the purpose of Hell is to punish the wicked. But the other aspect of this reality is since Hell  exists in a dimension where it is not subject to motion and space it is said to be eternal because of this. Therefore, by recognition of this "spiritual law" it is to serve the purpose of enduring punishment. Since God infinitely exist the dimension the dimension that extends from God [thus Divine emanation] reflects this quality. If this is unclear I apologize but this is the best example I can give.

You've missed the question there. I didn't ask if he 'can' do it, he's 'all-powerful' so that would be silly. I asked whether, in your opinion, he should zap them out of existence rather than allowing them to stay on in suffering.

The reason I didn't directly answer this because I know the response you will say which will be "then why doesn't he do that, rather than creating Hell for wicked people to suffer?" And, I try to avoid this because I cannot answer for God. I really do not know why.

So it was just speculation?

No. This is merely how I interpreted Quranic text. I mentioned earlier that other Muslims may interpret the text different than I and I asked you to not hold my views as universal with respect to other Muslims. This is my own personal philosophical view which, some Muslims may disagree with.

Methinks you are getting a little easily riled up, antagonistic and borderline malicious for a follower of the "religion of peace".

You're right and I apologize for my abrupt rudeness. I'm currently working on a very long dissertation and I'm pushed for time to complete it. I'm also working overtime and very tired so forgive me. If you have any more questions please feel free to ask but I'm really hoping I'm clear at least on my end.




Print Page | Close Window