HOME  Why its a mistake to give the Catholic Church support via membership or donations



Many Christians admit that they see some sins or crimes as inconceivably horrible and so worthy of damnation that inside they just curse and wish evil on the people that commit them. They argue that this is God's gospel written on the heart telling them that everlasting and merciless banishment from the presence of God and his angels and saints is the only appropriate thing. You can be sure that with people like that there are many people they don't care about and if they end up in Hell.

Main Points

Christians and Muslims believe unrepentant sinners will go to Hell forever if they die.  Some say it is your own creation or God puts you there because you deserve it.

They argue that nobody goes there - not even a child - who would have chosen differently and better if they got another chance and lived longer.  In that way, they admit how unsympathetic they are.  Not even God can know what would happen in a future that never happened.  Hell is a malicious doctrine in itself and in how it affects believers.  The saints in Heaven must have a malign attitude towards the damned.

Believers say that the most evil thing you can do is ignore such a wonderful God and even killing babies is not as bad.  If you kill babies, you are more evil in so far as you intend to reject God by this action than you are for actually killing.  Thus you ask for Hell if you reject God.  This is an extremely judgemental doctrine.  Even if you don't think there is a Hell, the notion that God alone matters still accuses you of the ultimate evil if you reject or ignore God.

Many are okay with saying you keep yourself in Hell but do not like saying God has anything to do with it.  So they are happier with saying you deserve it than that God gave you justice!  That is bizarre and hypocritical and sentimental of them.

Nobody can know if Hell exists. They can only believe it does. Belief can be wrong for people can easily err.

Therefore it is vindictive to preach that people can deserve Hell. Belief is not enough. You need to know before you can have the right to teach that Hell exists.

Punishment is only needed on earth as a necessary evil for some control of bad people is necessary. It is not needed in the afterlife. To hope that there punishment then is just vindictive.

To take comfort in the notion that the damned suffer in Hell and it is all the damnedís own fault and own doing is judgmental. Anybody can feel okay with the suffering of another if they find some way to imagine that most or all of it is their own fault. Human nature likes to do that for it does not like feeling a lot of outrage over the suffering of others and is too uncaring to most people anyway.

Believers sometimes comfort themselves by imagining that only one in billions is going to go to Hell. That is as callous as saying it is okay for some strangers baby to die out of billions but not okay if too many die. It does not matter if there is one person in Hell or billions. It is still terrible.
Suffering and evil
How can an all-good God let evil happen? Why do babies suffer if God has the power to prevent it? The Christians claim that part of the answer is that suffering is temporary. That is a lie for they believe that certain sinners will suffer everlasting punishment in Hell.

If all the answers to the problem of evil fail that means they are evil themselves. Christians are answering evil with evil. The answers condone God allowing evil to happen. That is bad enough but if you say there is a Hell the evil you are condoning knows no bounds.

Wishful thinking?

You are suffering at the hands of another. You may make yourself feel better by deciding that one day they will pay for being bad. They may pay in the afterlife. You feel better when people tell you to hit her or him. You will not do it but wish you could but you are glad they support your wish that you could hurt the person. None of the responses is sensible. The person might never pay. Also, being violent to them will only escalate things. Wanting to see violence will only lead to you wanting it more. That is not good either. If you were truly good you would rather see the person reformed than punished.

Fosters relativism

Hell is a doctrine of hate. Jesus said that unless we believe in him and get his forgiveness we will go to Hell forever at death deprived of mercy for all eternity. Threatening damnation to those who differ from you in belief is worse than threatening it to those who break the rules of morality. The doctrine of Hell has driven many Christians into becoming moral relativists for they think it fosters tolerance and they view Hell as the worst form of religious intolerance in principle.

Relativism says that if its wrong for me to have an abortion for no reason it could be wrong for you. So my morality is not your morality. This makes no sense and if morality is real and not just opinion then relativism is intolerant. But religion has forced many to prefer the intolerance that capsulated in popular moral relativism.

It needs to be stressed too that suggesting God's role eternal damnation is right is relativism. It is calling evil good. Religion may condemn relativism but it shares the blame for it.


Predestination is the doctrine that God does not look at the goodness in anybody but assigns some at the first moment of their existence for a future in an eternal Heaven or an eternal Hell. Many Christians regard this doctrine as rigid and inhuman and revolting and blasphemous.

But the doctrine of Hell that many of these people believe in teaches that if you die rejecting God you get predestined to everlasting torment. The believers don't seem to care because they say you made God predestine you.

Some sects teach that anybody who does not join them will be damned forever. The Catholic Church says that God has given the Church to bring us to salvation but he can work outside it to save people. There is the ordinary way to get into Heaven but God is not absolutely restricted to it.

Babies that die unbaptised are predestined to exclusion from Heaven forever! It was not their choice.

If God predestining you for Hell unconditionally is so terrible then why? Because Hell is terrible.

The victims are blamed

If you are in Hell you are in Hell forever. If you are not in Hell then you might change for the better. Surely it is better to risk somebody sinning for countless centuries or forever as long as God keeps the door open in case they will repent. Many evil people will change given long enough. The Church reasons that it is an insult to God to expect him to honour the intransigence and malice of the sinner by keeping the door open. But he is not honouring those attitudes. He is waiting to see them overcome even if that never happens. The Church persists in saying that the notion that God is obligated to keep the door open is blasphemous. What the Church is doing is simply attributing evil to God and calling it good and insulting those who see it to boot! It is blaming the victims as well.

Roman Catholicism teaches that homosexuals and adulterers and heretics and murderers and blasphemers will suffer everlasting torment in Hell if they die without repenting. When you tell the Catholics that they hate the homosexuals and adulterers and heretics who go to Hell forever for their sin, they say, "We do not hate them. Neither does God. Nobody condemns them. They condemn themselves. They are condemned by their own choices." But that is what the do-gooding people who hate you say. They like to blame the victim. And it is not true that you condemn yourself - you cannot judge or punish yourself. If bad things happen after doing wrong that does not mean you brought all of the bad things on yourself. It might be said that some of the bad things are consequences but you cannot say they all are. Or you might not know what are consequences and what are not. If I cut my finger off, the bad consequences will be the risk of infection, being unable to do certain things because of the loss of the finger and the trauma of what I have done. But the infection is caused not by the cutting but by the lack of care. It is possible to try to get an infection and fail. So it is really down to bad luck and a bad immune system. And if I practice I will be able to do without the finger. And what is done is done. If I cannot accept what I have done, is that down to me or my psychological makeup? If the trauma is down to the way I am, then it is a result of the way I have responded to cutting the finger off and not the hacking off of the finger. The so-called consequences are not really consequences and it is judgmental hypocrisy to say they are. Whether it is adultery or heresy or any other action, it is true that the consequences are not really consequences. If I am offered entry to Hell forever to suffer I will decline. Those who sin to deserve Hell cannot really choose Hell. Part of them is blind to what it entails. They might believe in theory that eternal torment is awful but it has not sunk in. To take them seriously if they choose Hell and to put them there is cruel. You cannot choose anything properly unless you have full knowledge of what you are choosing.


The Catholic claim that those who commit mortal sin choose Hell is a strange one. They choose sin not Hell. You don't say a burglar who is caught chooses jail by what he has done. You say he has broken a law and that is the problem. The problem is that he has chosen to break the law not that he has chosen jail. To say sinners choose Hell and burglars choose jail is to say that law is not about protecting right and wrong but about giving people the good or evil they ask for. That stance is downright evil and vindictive. It implies that the law should have rules just for the heck of it. Justice is irrelevant.

The notion that it is not sin that puts you in Hell but not repenting implies that sin does not really matter but repentance does. Such a view makes no sense. If sin does not matter then failing to repent should matter even less. In summary, religion saying it loves or cherishes the wellbeing of sinners as sinners or that people going to Hell is a tragedy and completely against the will of God and its will is sanctimonious BS. To love sinners as sinners is to love their sins. To love sinners as potential non-sinners is not loving them either. It is safe to say that if religious people mostly do love sinners they love them conditionally (that is "love" not love) and it is about attracting them to give up the sins - they are not loved for being sinners. But if you love people that conditionally, can you expect people to believe you when you say that Hell is what sinners bring on themselves and that you care if they choose it? You either gloat or do not care.

If the wellbeing of people comes first, then it follows that Hell being the consequence of their actions is irrelevant. They should if possible be saved from this consequence. If it is possible to prevent them going to Hell even if they choose it then it should be prevented. Then it would follow that Hell is not really a consequence of their action. It is a consequence of there being no way of stopping it happening to them. Hell is really just about trying to put the blame on the damned. To believe in it is objectively vindictive.

Suppose the power of choice exists and you are given a choice between being tortured to death and dying your hair green. You choose to dye your hair green. You choose it freely. You were forced into making the choice but it was still a choice because you could have chosen to be tortured to death. Its a lie to say you had no choice. So God can force you into Heaven by your own choice and indeed should for if he doesn't he will be forcing you to do something else. Forcing you into Hell by making you make a choice is not better than forcing you into Hell.

What does believing in Hell say about you?

To believe something is to will it to be true. Belief is caused by evidence. It makes you see that something seems likely to be true.

Catholics are not only to hold that the teachings of their faith are true or real. They are to treat and perceive these beliefs as realities. In other words, if you are a Catholic and you believe in everlasting torment in Hell you are TRYING to make it a reality for those who you believe should go there. You might not know who these are but that is not the point. You are still vindictive in principle. Whoever believes in Hell is not a good person no matter how much charm or alms they have to give. Jack the Ripper could have been a philanthropist aside from his dastardly murdering impulse.

The Catholic teachings that we are born in original sin and are obligated to obey the pope by baptism into the Church and to become saints who have a life of misery and who will go to Hell forever if we die in unrepented serious sin say something about the believer. And it is this. The believer wants these horrible teachings to be true deep down even if he feels revulsion for them. The atheist does not acquiesce to evil to that degree. Miracles in Christianity no matter what laudable purpose they seem to have are used to encourage these evil ideas.


To say one is condemned by one's choices is judgemental. To cast a negative judgment on the deeds and person of others is to try and make yourself feel superior. If you are really confident and happy with how you are as a person you will not do that.

A Roman Catholic prayer calls upon St Michael the Archangel to put Satan back in Hell. That sounds vicious. The Church may say that Satan belongs there and that we would send him back there not because we are bad but because we are so good that we give him what he wants. If that is what he wants then why does he have to be sent back? The Church says that if we go to Hell to suffer forever, it is what we have asked for and God kindly grants it. This is an obviously absurd teaching. It shows the Church is actually grateful to God for putting demons and people in Hell. The Church makes excuses for evil.
Instead of honouring human nature by saying we can't become evil enough to willingly stay in Hell forever, believers put the fact that the existence of Hell is stated in their scriptures and Catholic faith first. They prefer to accuse us of potentially infinite evil than to contradict their scriptures and religion. God is evil if he asks us to believe and so if Hell exists it is where he unleashes his vindictiveness.
Christianity preaches innocent until proven guilty and yet without proof it accuses you of being capable of living forever without God just out of spite! That is a tremendous accusation. The Church never worried about accusing Judas Iscariot and the Jews of murdering Jesus without proving it! The accusations against the forefathers of the Jewish people who died in the Holocaust are an insult to the dead.
Vindictive in every way

Believing a doctrine can be objectively vindictive or subjectively vindictive or both.

If I decide you committed a crime just because I felt you were guilty then I am vindictive.  If I decided it because of the evidence then it is completely different.  And so it is with the idea of Hell. Christianity actually wants to believe in Hell. Some Christians say they don't like it. But when they accept Hell clearly they must also like it. They like it enough to accept it. You can dislike and like something at the same time. They like it more than dislike it. The Christians don't look for evidence that people can be stubborn enough to go to Hell for all eternity.  No.  They decide people can be bad enough just because Jesus Christ or somebody said so.  If they started with evidence from human nature their adopting the belief might not be motivated by vindictiveness.  Indeed evidence itself wouldn't justify belief that human nature could go to Hell and stay there.  Proof would be needed.  The less evidence the more vindictiveness lurks there.  It may be stronger subliminally than consciously.  But it is no less real.

Can't call the Church a liar?

No genuinely good person would say that we must be capable of hating everybody for all eternity just because we can't call Jesus and the Church liars. Yet the Catholics emphasise and parrot this very idea. If the pope said that paedophiles want to become demons at death to possess children what would we think of somebody who argued that we must accept this for we must not call the pope mistaken or a liar?  It shows plenty of concern for defending the doctrine-maker but none for the slandering of the human person.  It is no excuse to say that no specific person is being accused. To say somebody in a group is a liar and bad is to put suspicion on all members of the group. There is nothing to be praised in being unspecific. To say any person could choose to be evil for all eternity insults us all for you could be speaking about anybody.

Rather you than me!

Catholics do not believe in a God who will punish them. They donít like that concept. They donít mind the thought of a God who will punish other people as much. Fervent believers in Hell clearly do not think they are going to go there but that other people will. The Bible says we are all sinners and if I am a sinner and feel Hell is something for others to worry about going to not me then I am smug and arrogant. I insult those people by worshipping my perception of a God who has it in for them and not me. I glorify my own arrogance in my "humble" worship.

If we are all sinners as they say, and if we sin many times every day as the Bible teaches, then clearly we should see the doctrines of a punishing God and everlasting punishment as mainly motivated by a vindictive desire to see people suffer. If you think you should be punished, you may want to see others punished with you. It helps you. We find being punished more bearable if others are punished with us. But while religious people talk about all people being sinners they usually are thinking more of others being sinful than themselves. Also, if you see others as deserving punishment you may feel less bad about hurting them. Jeremiah spoke of Jewish righteousness as being filthy rags. Jesus said that a sincere Pharisee who did good works and thanked God for helping him to do them was still rejected and his good works did nothing for him. Those teachers are saying that even in the midst of doing good works we might still be actually evil. The good we do is motivated by the desire to conceal the evil inside and so it is evil in reality.

The Satan doctrine fuels the fire

The Devil, according to Christian conspiracy theory, is behind so many events in the world. He influences people and pulls their strings to get what he wants. If you believe in a being as impossible to love as the Devil, you will believe that sinners are opening their hearts and indeed have opened them to his influence and are hence co-conspirators with him. How could you love sinners if you believe in the Devil and that they are part of something even worse than the sins they commit?

Some say that you can hate the sinner by loving them to sin and loving their sin for their sin degrades them and will eventually, if unrepented, destroy them in Hell. They are perfectly right if there is a Hell. Now do you understand why Christians believe the Devil is a charming individual? He needs to be in order to lure people to such a horrendous fate and especially if they have been warned!

Christians believe that the demons and lost people in Hell want us to be tempted to sin and indeed try to tempt us so that we may be damned with them. That reminds you that there were times that you would have liked or like people to go to Hell yourself. You believe that it is spite against God that essentially puts people in Hell. If you are able to believe that people can be bad enough to endure the agony of everlasting despair in Hell over petty spite then does that not draw suspicion on you? And what about others? These doctrines are not the kind of doctrines conducive to human wellbeing.


The doctrine of Hell does no good. It does not deter many from sin. Teenagers and young people do not feel they can die so it will hold no fear for them. Also you can repent on your deathbed anyway to dodge Hell. To accept such a horrible but useless doctrine is to indulge in nasty wishful thinking. When a harmful doctrine does no good it is held for vindictive reasons.

Belief keeps you in Hell

Christians often teach, "Damned people feel they are right and that is why they stay in Hell. The unforgivable sin mentioned by Jesus is actually people believing they know better than God. They are too arrogant to repent. The damned in Hell sincerely believe that God is wrong. They are so sure of it that they refuse to turn to him despite their suffering." That would unsettle anybody. You can think you are good and be sure you are sincere and still be committing this sin.

Slippery slope

If you can justify God sending people to Hell to sin and suffer for all eternity you can justify anything. This point alone shows that spite is a motivation for the doctrine. If that is not spite then nothing is. If a person sweetly said that Anna should be encouraged to stay with her brutal rapist husband we would see that person as vindictive. So why do we not see authentic Christians as vindictive for encouraging us to believe in Hell?

Cooling the fires

Trendy liberal Christians tend to lie that Hell is not a torture chamber. But that is not the point. All agree that being cut off from God forever is the worst thing about Hell and that any physical pain would be nothing compared to that. The liberals cool the fires of Hell or say they are a symbol. They comfort people with that. That is manipulation for they still think the fires represent something far worse than the torment of fire. And the liberals ignore the fact that being cut off from God does not mean he cannot put them into some kind of paradise. They whitewash the doctrine of Hell.

The Liberals smile sweetly and may tell you that if you take drugs and commit suicide or have forbidden sex you cannot go to Hell for God understands. They give the impression they think nobody is bad enough to go to Hell or to be put in it. Mention Hitler to them ...

God has no right to judge

There is no need for God to judge us. He is almighty and ultimately in control of all things. Why punish people just for the sake of punishing? A God of judgment is a God of hate.

If virtue it's own reward then vice is its own punishment. So there is no need for God. His Hell is vindictive.

Last minute conversion

All Christians believe that you can get a free pass into Heaven. You can live a life of sin and still go there if you repent and receive Jesusí forgiveness at the end. The repentance might be weak enough but Jesus takes it as enough and wipes your sins away.

This proves that the doctrine of Hell is not about helping to make the world a better place at all. There can only be one conclusion. The doctrine is vindictive.

Why do people fall for the belief?

The notion of Hell becomes popularised when people hear of it and start to fear that it might be true. Fear leads to hate. There is enough to fear without Hell.

Few Catholics can give reasons to justify belief in Hell and that it is an ethical idea. Most Catholics just accept it out of habit or because they are expected to. This certainly shows they care more about what they want to believe than what they should believe. They say they believe when they really mean that they feel there is a Hell. To base such a gruesome doctrine on feeling is vindictive. To condone it because you feel it is true is vindictive in the extreme.

If we are sinners and need religion and the state to curb our behaviour and thinking, then Hell not worth the risk of making some vindictive. We all know believers who relish the doctrine and hope their enemies will burn in Hell. Even if there is a Hell, the fact remains that the doctrine has spawned more spiritual poison than any other. The hatred of Christian fundamentalists towards members of non-Christian religions and towards atheists is well documented in America. They will be told outright that they are going to Hell.

If I were an evil person but didnít have the guts to hurt people, I would have to comfort myself with the thought that there is a Hell for them to suffer in forever. The smile which they think is a mark of friendship is really a smirk as I revel in the thought of them being damned. The doctrine is just what an evil person would invent.

Sometimes the Christian likes to be smug and think he is too great to go to Hell and that it only happens to other people especially people like Trampy Tina the local whore down the road. That is horrible. Indeed the doctrine is so scary and hideous that if you are not scared then you clearly think it is for others and not you. Everything I do is protective of myself and my feelings. For example, I know its dangerous for me to hurt others and punish them so I satisfy myself by the thought of them getting damned. I protect myself by giving the responsibility for their torment to God. I protect myself from the anger that wishes to see them hurt.

If I decide you committed a crime just because I felt you were guilty then I am vindictive. If I decided it because of the evidence then it is completely different. And so it is with the idea of Hell.
Christianity actually wants to believe in Hell. The Christians don't look for evidence that people can be stubborn enough to go to Hell for all eternity. No. They decide people can be bad enough just because Jesus Christ or somebody said so. If they started with evidence from human nature their adopting the belief might not be motivated by vindictiveness. Indeed evidence itself wouldn't justify belief that human nature could go to Hell and stay there. Proof would be needed. The less evidence the more vindictiveness lurks there. It may be stronger subliminally than consciously.

Everlasting punishment is such a terrible and dangerous doctrine that we are entitled to assume that Christians believe it out of a desire to hurt themselves, or more likely, to see others hurt. If we are entitled to assume anything at all, we would certainly be entitled to assume that.

Love sinner hate sin?
Anybody staying in Hell for all eternity is suffering from stupidity not evil. Thus the doctrine that they deserve it or validly ask for it is vindictive.
To say we freely choose Hell is to say we choose to become pure sin and so God gives us what we want. Let us study this.
We know that you cannot love the sinner and hate the sin for the sin reveals the sinner. The two cannot be treated as separate for to hurt the sin means to hurt the sinner.
The Catholic book, Ecumenical Jihad says that gay people usually are the ones who reject this love sinner but hate sin stuff. It says they are identifying their sin with all of their personality. In other words, they are saying there is no distinction between their sin and their entire selves (page 45). There is real rancour in the bookís assertion that this is what Hell is, sinners admitting they are their sin and preferring to suffer in Hell forever rather than turn to the God who loves them and hates their sin for they see his hatred of sin as hatred for them. This puts the gays in the same boat as the damned. And Christians canít care much about the damned for they would go out of their minds if they did. Terrifying! If it were not for the sanctimonious hate the sinner but love sin doctrine this classification of those who reject it as extreme sinners would not exist. If they are extreme sinners then any good they do is false for they equate themselves and all their being with sin. Humanists will not have attitudes like that towards people who do that for they reject free will and see evil as sickness.
If Hell is for those who hold they are their sin it follows that to see through the hypocrisy of love the sinner and hate the sin is to guarantee your damnation. This is pure vindictive hatred on the part of the Church. They want us to rot in Hell forever for the truth and for seeing through their pretence. It must be an extremely grave sin.
The Christians say they donít judge people but sins. They say that if you sin seriously then you are identifying yourself with your sin and making a complete choice for evil and against God. They say that everybody is Hell is there because they believe the sinner cannot be separated from the sin and that sin reveals the sinner so to hate sin is to hate the sinner. But if we are that bad if we commit serious sin then some interesting conclusions arise.
The damned must really become that evil when they identify themselves with their sin. They close themselves off from God forever and irrevocably. There is nothing left that God can work on to change them so all good is gone from them. That is why they must stay in Hell forever.
If so those who would be damned if they died now and those who are damned must be seen as having no genuine good in them. To hate their sin would be to hate them for they identify themselves with their sin. If Christians believe the reason for eternal damnation is that a totally evil choice is made then they cannot look for anything to praise in mortal sinners, that is, sinners who deserve Hell. The sinners then must be hated. When somebody is totally evil and is sin that person would have to be hated to avoid loving the sin. The doctrine of Hell certainly urges Christians to hate sinners.
Faith in the God who would send you to Hell forever arises from vice not virtue and no matter who says the doctrine is not caused by some level of hatred for others that is exactly what is behind the doctrine. Also, the many bad things that arise from belief in God are enough to show that to believe in a God and also in Hell makes you a very bad person indeed no matter how your outward actions appear. What could you expect for you are believing that a bad God who gives you unhealthy faith has the right to abandon people to Hell forever? Who does he think he is and who do you think you are? Good and evil are too close and easily confused for anybody to deserve a cruel punishment and especially one like eternal punishment. Even evil consists largely of good intentions Ė the only thing that is wrong with evil is that it is perverse or harmful good. Not only does the Church cause a lot of hatred by brainwashing people into seeing good and evil as complete opposites when they are not opposites but cousins but it has to invent the doctrine of Hell as well.

If you love the sinner and you hate the sin, surely then you must hate the sins of those who are on their deathbed taking their last breath far more than people who have time left to repent? You must hate the sins that will carry them to hell more than sins that might be repented before the person dies. "Love the sinner and hate the sin" is a smokescreen. It is needed to make the religious system look innocent if its members start to hate sinners. But as human beings are not basically good, and the Church admits they are not, it is clear that the rule cannot really be put into practice. If it can be, it isn't. We like to do good that will make us fit in the community reasonably well. It is done not because it is good but because it serves our purpose. We like to hate but tend to do it in an underhand way while claiming to hate sins not the people who sin. We can be sure that people are all doing this because it is exactly the kind of hypocrisy they need to form a community. It is an essential.
If you really love people and you fear them going to Hell forever you will tell them how much it upsets you that this may happen to them and warn them to abandon sin. How many Catholics do that for example? One in a thousand? Oh the hypocrisy. It is bizarre to vehemently oppose say drug takers for the harm they do to themselves and not to worry far more about Hell. The destruction worked by drugs is nothing in comparison.
Can you be smug about Hell?
Christians admit that all sin is rooted in pride and when they say that they are all sinners let us take their word for it that pride motivates their preaching about Hell for a heart given to pride cannot issue humble acts but only acts that superficially appear humble. The response given is that all preachers must realise that it could happen to them. But anybody who takes precautions can afford to be self-righteous. Born again Christians are self-righteous for they say they have chosen Jesus which is a righteous act in their opinion and that those who do not do as they have done are going to rot in Hell forever and ever. Their claim that God does all the work but they cannot mean that. It is obvious they have to take responsibility for it.
Christians say it is humble to insist that God did your good deeds not you. The implication is that it is arrogance and pride to say they are all down to you. But if I take all the credit for painting a beautiful picture and that is arrogance then imagine how arrogant it is to claim that God used me to do it? I am claiming I know that and have experienced that. But I cannot know what and have not experienced anything like some being doing it through me. I am parading my alleged humility and claiming that my human acts are divine acts. There is no bigger boast than claiming that your paltry deeds are divine!
Catholics who go to confession and communion often are taking all the best precautions and can be fairly confident that they will go to Heaven. When they warn about Hell they think themselves to be more sensible and righteous than those who need that warning more than they do. They think that they have more right to walk the earth than them. Christians know fine well that self-righteous people cannot be made as humble as they ought to be by the thought that they could be damned so their saying that preachers knowing they could be damned means they are not self-righteous when they preach to sinners is utter nonsense. Itís a desperate cover-up but it fails to mask how vicious and self-righteous and pompous the Hell doctrine is.
Human nature is very contradictory. The tongue that praises one person can ruin another. Do not let the charm of some Christians make you feel that their reverence for Hell is tolerable and worthy of respect. Remember that we are social creatures and will abandon morality and our principles to fit in. It might be a struggle to do it but we will at least try. The person who venerates Hell for vindictive reasons will turn on the charm for she is programmed by her social nature to bluff.
Need faith in God to believe in morals?
The false view that we must believe in God to seriously believe in morals shows how vindictive belief in Hell is. If God commands right because it is right then we donít need belief in God to be moral. By implication we need belief in Hell even less. Surely belief in God would take priority over belief in Hell! Suppose Hell is a good doctrine. Then it follows that Christians should not be saying you need to believe in God to believe that morality is authentic and not just opinions. They should be saying you need to believe in a God who punishes unrepented evil eternally to really believe.
The Christians ask if something is moral just because God commands it or if God commands it because it is moral. If actions are right only because God commands them then what if he commands us to torture and slaughter the old women next door? And if God does not create morality it follows that moral standards are true whether there is a God or not. Neither of these options show that we need God to believe in morality. It is either one or the other. The Christian claim that both are false and that morality is Godís nature cannot work for it has to be one or the other. If morality is Godís nature then the questions are still not solved. Its another copout again. God says it matters that we believe in him so clearly he commands us to believe the Christian lie. It follows then that belief in God is dangerous to morality and right and wrong and for a Christian to say there is a Hell is therefore just plain nasty. Their excuse that God is so good that there has to be a Hell is shown to fail then. Because goodness is independent of God he cannot have the right to damn anybody.
Merely possible?
Some daring theologians want to teach that Jesus and the Church have never declared that anybody is going to Hell but have merely said that it is possible (page 1176, Catholicism, Father Richard P McBrien, HarperSanFrancisco, New York, 1994). But Jesus in the gospel promised to send a person to Hell for not visiting prisoners and said that Judas the traitor is going to his own place. Jesus predicted what he would say to those who came before him without loving God. He said he would tell them to go away for he never knew them and they would be condemned. It is more than a possibility when it is easy to go to Hell. Jesus predicted that people would be lost forever. Other theologians are saying that Hell is not God punishing us but us rejecting God. Others are saying that because God is the source of all good and community we are rejecting all that is good and all that has to do with community so we are choosing to destroy or annihilate ourselves and so Hell is where we cease to exist.
Such considerations are saying that punishment is bad. They certainly arise from a suspicion that it is better to believe we make our own Hell than that God has anything to do with it. They arise from a suspicion that believing you could be so bad that you annihilate yourself is better than believing that God punishes you forever! They are attempts to sweeten people to Christianity who are turned off by the evil vindictive God of traditional faith by appealing to their finding equal or worse evils almost attractive! So a God who punishes somebody mildly for all eternity is an abomination and believing in a Hell, a madhouse, which a person freely creates is better! How absurd.
Reform excluded
Hell is about punishment not about reform. But even if it is not about reform it has to keep the door open so that the person can reform if they want to. A God that does not leave that door open is pure evil. To worship such a God is vindictive. Imagine then how vindictive it is to approve of his Hell? The doctrine denies that he leaves the door open. Thus Hell leaves us adoring an evil God and condoning and celebrating his evil.
The notion that if you really believe there is no Hell then you will kill and do all sorts of terrible things is saying that the only thing that stops religious people from being total psychos if their fear of Hell is taken away. People who need faith in hell to restrain themselves are irreformable - they prove that by saying others can go to Hell and do and belong there.
Believers do not really act like they believe say that people living together unmarried are in danger of Hell. Then they worship a Jesus who taught the doctrine. If Jesus was that mistaken and blesses their hypocrisy it is another example of how even after the demise of pagan religion, man is still worshipping Gods brought down to his own imperfect and biased and crafty level. Challenge believers in Hell even more urgently than you would challenge a Holocaust denier. This has to be taken very seriously. People need to terminate membership in Churches that teach the doctrine of everlasting punishment. If a religion is man-made and that wrong you have to find a better one.
APOLOGETICS AND CATHOLIC DOCTRINE, Most Rev M Sheehan DD, M H Gill & Son, Dublin, 1954  
APOLOGETICS FOR THE PULPIT, Aloysius Roche, Burns Oates & Washbourne LTD, London, 1950
ENCHIRIDION SYMBOLORUM ET DEFINITIONUM, Heinrich Joseph Denzinger, Edited by A Schonmetzer, Barcelona, 1963
GOD IS NOT GREAT, THE CASE AGAINST RELIGION, Christopher Hitchens, Atlantic Books, London, 2007
 ĎGOD, THATíS NOT FAIR!í Dick Dowsett, [OMF Books, Overseas Missionary Fellowship, Belmont, The Vine, Sevenoaks, Kent TN13 3TZ] Kent, 1982
HANDBOOK OF CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS, Peter Kreeft & Ronald Tacelli, Monarch, East Sussex, 1994
HAVE WE TO FEAR A DEVIL? Fred Pearce, The Christadelphian Office, Birmingham
HEAVEN AND HELL Dudley Fifield, Christadelphian Publishing Office, Birmingham
HELL Ė WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS ABOUT IT, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, 1945
JEHOVAH OF THE WATCH-TOWER, Walter Martin and Norman Klann, Bethany House, Minnesota, 1974
LIFE IN CHRIST, PART 3, Fergal McGrath SJ, MH Gill and Son Ltd, Dublin, 1960
RADIO REPLIES VOL 1, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1938
REASON AND BELIEF, Bland Blanschard, George Allen & and Unwin Ltd, London, 1974
THE BIBLE TELLS US SO, R B Kuiper, The Banner of Truth Trust, Edinburgh, 1978  
THE DEVIL, THE GREAT DECEIVER Peter Watkins, The Christadelphian Birmingham, 1992
THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF BIBLE DIFFICULTIES, Gleason W Archer, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1982
THE FOUR MAJOR CULTS, AA Hoekema, Paternoster Press, Carlisle, 1992
THE KINDNESS OF GOD, EJ Cuskelly MSC, Mercier Press, Cork, 1965
THE LIFE OF ALL LIVING, Fulton J Sheen, Image Books, New York, 1979
THE REAL DEVIL, Alan Hayward, Christadelphian Bible Mission, Birmingham
THE REALITY OF HELL, St Alphonsus Liguori, Augustine Publishing Company, Devon, 1988
THE SERMONS OF ST ALPHONSUS LIGOURI, St Alphonsus Ligouri, TAN, Illinois, 1982
THE TRUTH ABOUT HELL, Dawn Bible Students, East Rutherford, NJ
WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY ABOUT HELL? Radio Bible Class, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1986
WHATEVER HAPPENED TO HEAVEN?, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1988
WHY DOES GOD? Domenico Grasso SJ, St Paul Publications, Bucks, 1970