Love sinner hate sin when translated into love the damned person hate their damning sin?

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.  Some say it is both judicial and a choice.

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.

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 book’s 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 can’t 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 don’t 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 – 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.


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. It's 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.

Talk about "its their choice" is a cover for, "I don't have to do anything about it thank goodness."  The fact that we are connected by our common humanity and are not really individuals no matter how hard we try to be is ignored.  Choice is not an excuse for saying you can do nothing.


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.

If you worship a God like that then you need to think about your "moral" compass.

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 it is 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.


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.


No Copyright