Religious tolerance and the doctrine of an eternal hell for disbelievers.

[Pancho Frijoles]

In Interfaith dialogue, and even in daily interactions with people from all faiths, I think that an essential principle is respect.
I mean, true respect.

To me, a hypocritical respect is thinking "I won't harm you here and now because of your religion, because that would bring me problems... but you deserve to be harmed later, at a place called hell, by a person known as God, because you don't believe the doctrines I believe"
True respect is thinking "I won't harm you, because I am convinced that no one should do harm to you because of your religion, now or in the future, here or anywhere".

How do you think that the doctrine of eternal hell for people from other religions interferes with Interfaith dialogue or daily interactions with people from all faiths?

 

[SalixIncendium]

How do you think that the doctrine of eternal hell for people from other religions interferes with Interfaith dialogue or daily interactions with people from all faiths?

I don't recall it ever having interfered in my dialogue with people of other faiths.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

In my case, @SalixIncendium , I have witnessed plenty of debates in which, once the contenders realize there is an impasse in the arguments presented, they resort to stating the relevance of having the right doctrine.
And the relevance is... if you don't adhere to it, you deserve to be tortured in hell forever.
Since in more than 95% of the cases nobody abandons their doctrinal beliefs, each one exits the debate thinking that the other will burn in hell... because he or she deserves it.

So I keep thinking: How can you know that someone really respects you, if he/she believes you deserve to burn in hell because of your religion?
How to cooperate in common projects at work, at colleage, at business? How to build a strong, peaceful community where everyone feels valued?

 

[Quintessence]

What is the purpose behind the creation of this purity test or litmus test of who is and isn't practicing "true respect?" Put another way, when and why is it necessary to pass judgement in this way while interacting with others?

I tend to be suspicious of these kinds of purity tests or litmus tests precisely because I don't see it as necessary. Many years ago I participated in an interfaith group with Evangelical Christians who straight up said to the faces of us Pagans "I believe you are going to hell, but I still respect you" (more or less) and then their behavior backed up where their mouths were - we were treated with respect by them. For all practical intents and purposes, what someone does is way more important than what they believe.

 

[SalixIncendium]

In my case, @SalixIncendium , I have witnessed plenty of debates in which, once the contenders realize there is an impasse in the arguments presented, they resort to stating the relevance of having the right doctrine.
And the relevance is... if you don't adhere to it, you deserve to be tortured in hell forever.
Since in more than 95% of the cases nobody abandons their doctrinal beliefs, each one exits the debate thinking that the other will burn in hell... because he or she deserves it.

So I keep thinking: How can you know that someone really respects you, if he/she believes you deserve to burn in hell because of your religion?
How to cooperate in common projects at work, at colleage, at business? How to build a strong, peaceful community where everyone feels valued?

Whether nor not someone respects me or believes I will burn in hell because of my religion is about them, not about me.

I have no concept of eternal damnation in my worldview. Hell, just like anything else that can be perceived, is temporary.

 

[PureX]

In Interfaith dialogue, and even in daily interactions with people from all faiths, I think that an essential principle is respect.
I mean, true respect.

To me, a hypocritical respect is thinking "I won't harm you here and now because of your religion, because that would bring me problems... but you deserve to be harmed later, at a place called hell, by a person known as God, because you don't believe the doctrines I believe"
True respect is thinking "I won't harm you, because I am convinced that no one should do harm to you because of your religion, now or in the future, here or anywhere".

How do you think that the doctrine of eternal hell for people from other religions interferes with Interfaith dialogue or daily interactions with people from all faiths?

My experience with religion (Catholicism) pretty much was that this kind of extreme religious elitism was ignored at "ground level". I at no time growing up thought or felt any trepidation about anyone going to hell because they weren't Catholic. I suspect the previous genertions may have held onto these ideas somewhat more intently, but by the time I came into the world (late 50s) it wasn't something anyone my age took seriously. Same goes for the "purgatory" thing. These were religious ideas that belonged to a previous era. We were aware of them, but they were not considered relevant to one's spiritual walk. In fact, if we had really discussed it, I suspect they would have been viewed as 'stumbling blocks'.

As far as any effect on interfaith dialogue. I suspect that was more hampered by the common group dynamics that one would find in any group trying to interact with any other group.

 

[Spice]

In my world, if someone tries to convert me rather than challenge my thinking, or even loving share what is near and dear to them, I might take issue. I'm all for sharing and questioning as long as there's no ulterior motive. I do still learn and I'll always be open to thought.

Here in the Southern Bible-belt of the US, two passage-aggressive statements often heard that make me laugh aloud, are "Please come to church. They need you and you need them." And my favorite..."I'll pray for you."

Of course, being the imperfect me, I may not be able to resist saying "While, bless your heart." (You probably have to be southern to understand the implications) LOL

 

[PureX]

In my world, if someone tries to convert me rather than challenge my thinking, or even loving share what is near and dear to them, I might take issue. I'm all for sharing and questioning as long as there's no ulterior motive. I do still learn and I'll always be open to thought.

Here in the Southern Bible-belt of the US, two passage-aggressive statements often heard that make me laugh aloud, are "Please come to church. They need you and you need them." And my favorite..."I'll pray for you."

Of course, being the imperfect me, I may not be able to resist saying "While, bless your heart." (You probably have to be southern to understand the implications) LOL

My favorite southern retort of a similar kind was the, "Well, alrighty, then". It could be delivered like a slap in the face, OR as a simple affirmation, and they'd sound exactly the same in either case.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

In my world, if someone tries to convert me rather than challenge my thinking, or even loving share what is near and dear to them, I might take issue. I'm all for sharing and questioning as long as there's no ulterior motive. I do still learn and I'll always be open to thought.

Here in the Southern Bible-belt of the US, two passage-aggressive statements often heard that make me laugh aloud, are "Please come to church. They need you and you need them." And my favorite..."I'll pray for you."

Of course, being the imperfect me, I may not be able to resist saying "While, bless your heart." (You probably have to be southern to understand the implications) LOL

"...and don't your momma love you."

 

[TransmutingSoul]

In Interfaith dialogue, and even in daily interactions with people from all faiths, I think that an essential principle is respect.
I mean, true respect.

To me, a hypocritical respect is thinking "I won't harm you here and now because of your religion, because that would bring me problems... but you deserve to be harmed later, at a place called hell, by a person known as God, because you don't believe the doctrines I believe"
True respect is thinking "I won't harm you, because I am convinced that no one should do harm to you because of your religion, now or in the future, here or anywhere".

How do you think that the doctrine of eternal hell for people from other religions interferes with Interfaith dialogue or daily interactions with people from all faiths?

I see it is a bounty that God informs us of our full potential and tells us of the result of our choice to either pursue or not to pursue that potential.

Life reflects this on many levels, the results that come from good choices and bad choices reflect the warnings.

Regards Tony

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What is the purpose behind the creation of this purity test or litmus test of who is and isn't practicing "true respect?" Put another way, when and why is it necessary to pass judgement in this way while interacting with others?

One example comes to mind: religious schools.

IMO, the curriculum we teach to children is everyone's business. Indoctrination in schools - religious or not - is done to instill values and encourage behaviour for the rest of the students' lives.

I tend to be suspicious of these kinds of purity tests or litmus tests precisely because I don't see it as necessary. Many years ago I participated in an interfaith group with Evangelical Christians who straight up said to the faces of us Pagans "I believe you are going to hell, but I still respect you" (more or less) and then their behavior backed up where their mouths were - we were treated with respect by them. For all practical intents and purposes, what someone does is way more important than what they believe.

Are you sure you weren't mistaking politeness for respect? They aren't the sane thing.

For most people, what a person does flows from what they believe.

 

[Spice]

How do you think that the doctrine of eternal hell for people from other religions interferes with Interfaith dialogue or daily interactions with people from all faiths?

I have experience in one of my "truths" that when the issue of hell comes up I sometimes rely on: My faith is in God. If He wants me in hell, may His will be done.

Personally I don't believe in another place called hell. I believe hell is a state of mind and heart that we experience at our own hand in life. To quote Bob Marley: "Complaints are prayers to the devil."

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Personally I don't believe in another place called hell. I believe hell is a state of mind and heart that we experience at our own hand in life. To quote Bob Marley: "Complaints are prayers to the devil."

My take on it is "complaining is volunteering."

 

[Spice]

My take on it is "complaining is volunteering."

I'll have to mull over that one......

Oh, brain woke up while peeling an orange -- yep, like that one! It's like, why wait for the draft.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I see it is a bounty that God informs us of our full potential and tells us of the result of our choice to either pursue or not to pursue that potential.

Life reflects this on many levels, the results that come from good choices and bad choices reflect the warnings.

Regards Tony

Hi, TransmuttingSoul

One thing is the consequence of our bad actions. The Scriptures constantly warn us against that.
Another thing, however, is the consequence of an intelectual error.
Not all intelectual errors lead to bad consequences. And most importantly, intellectual errors by themselves do not deserve eternal punishment.
This is why the Gospels show Jesus teaching that men will be rewarded according to their deeds, not according to their creeds.

 

[Quintessence]

One example comes to mind: religious schools.

IMO, the curriculum we teach to children is everyone's business. Indoctrination in schools - religious or not - is done to instill values and encourage behaviour for the rest of the students' lives.

Maybe it's different where you grew up, but where I grew up, the purpose of education was to learn basic factual information that is relevant to be a functioning citizen in a democratic nation. How to read and write. Basics of your nation's history and government. Literature and art. Doing basic math and algebra, knowing basic science. That sort of thing. While values and behavioral stuff was tangentially part of that it was almost never the focus. Where included, it was self-reflective and rarely prescriptive except in cases where the child was being behaviorally disruptive to the entire classroom.

Are you sure you weren't mistaking politeness for respect? They aren't the sane thing.

For most people, what a person does flows from what they believe.

Politeness, manners, common courtesy is a form of showing respect. I couldn't care less what is going on in someone's head relative to what they actually do and how they actually behave. And the ideas in someone's head don't have some linear one-to-one correspondence to their behavior anyway. I'm not gonna assume how beliefs translate into behavior until I actually see the behavior from that specific individual human.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

It would be interesting to know how the common German citizen who supported Nazism treated Jews in his community on a daily basis.
Perhaps such a common citizen did not inflict any direct harm and treated them as he would treat any other person… but approved that others (their supreme leaders) sent them to forced labor camps.
Was this true respect?

I dont know at which critical moment our beliefs change our behavior.
Perhaps most Evangelical fundamentalists who claim to believe that Jews or Muslims will burn in hell for ever DO NOT actually believe those things in their hearts. What do you think?

 

[Spice]

It would be interesting to know how the common German citizen who supported Nazism treated Jews in his community on a daily basis.
Perhaps such a common citizen did not inflict any direct harm and treated them as he would treat any other person… but approved that others (their supreme leaders) sent them to forced labor camps.
Was this true respect?

I dont know at which critical moment our beliefs change our behavior.
Perhaps most Evangelical fundamentalists who claim to believe that Jews or Muslims will burn in hell for ever DO NOT actually believe those things in their hearts. What do you think?

Three very good books to read on the subject of Nazi-Germany citizenry are:
1) School for Barbarians, Education Under the Nazis, by Erika Mann
2) Waltraud, A True Story of Growing Up in Nazi Germany, by Tammy Borden
3) The Book Thief, Markus Zusak (fiction)

 

[YoursTrue]

In my case, @SalixIncendium , I have witnessed plenty of debates in which, once the contenders realize there is an impasse in the arguments presented, they resort to stating the relevance of having the right doctrine.
And the relevance is... if you don't adhere to it, you deserve to be tortured in hell forever.
Since in more than 95% of the cases nobody abandons their doctrinal beliefs, each one exits the debate thinking that the other will burn in hell... because he or she deserves it.

So I keep thinking: How can you know that someone really respects you, if he/she believes you deserve to burn in hell because of your religion?
How to cooperate in common projects at work, at colleage, at business? How to build a strong, peaceful community where everyone feels valued?

There are some here who profess a belief in God but are loathe to express their real beliefs beyond saying they believe in God.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Not all intelectual errors lead to bad consequences. And most importantly, intellectual errors by themselves do not deserve eternal punishment.

Agreed, I do not see we are punished for intellectual errors carried out in good faith, with good intentions.

Yet those errors, in themselves, will/do have consequences.

All the best.

Regards Tony