Can You Go to Hell Without Knowing God Exists?

I grew up in a society that is both culturally diverse but fairly conservative religiously. It was not uncommon for people of one faith to be familiar with the beliefs and practices of another. Even as someone not particularly devout, I have always been appreciative of people's adherence to their faiths and interested in religion as a subject.

One of the things that always appealed to me was the fairness and forgiving nature of God. Regardless of the religion, this was something constantly told to me by my more devout friends and relatives. God is infinite in wisdom, fairness and love for all his creations. Naturally, I sought to stress test this assertion.

If God is all forgiving, why does he sentence people, who are otherwise good and just to eternal damnation simply for not following a particular set of rituals or practices? Most of the time, I get the same talk about wilful ignorance. That the sin lies in having seen the truth and still denying it. Fair, I guess. Every religion thinks they're the right one so therefore that makes the others incorrect and if you were supposed to know better, then you'd be accountable.

But then I wondered, what happens to people who don't even know the concept of religion at all? If I live my life never hearing the word of God or of a particular faith, have I committed a grave sin without even realising it? Think about the humans of the past when the world was less interconnected or even people now who live in remote or isolated locations. What will become of them?

I put that question towards my circle and the answers were interesting albeit far less certain.

"Maybe God will punish them, maybe not."

"They must have done something bad in their past life."

"There's a different way to judge them."

"Some people are just doomed from the start."

"I don't know. Only God does."

I was not satisfied with these answers. As someone who studied law, I am familiar with the concept that a person cannot be punished for a crime if they do not know what they are doing is wrong and have had no reasonable opportunity to ever learn before this.

God forgives when man can't. But when man forgives shouldn't it mean that God has? If he is the most fair and just, I could not accept the possibility that he would create people simply to damn them to hell without giving them so much as a chance to learn. But still these people exist.

So, I dove right into it. I spoke to scholars and other religious authorities while doing a little research on my own too. Let's see what they have to say about the question at hand. What does mainstream religion really say about the fates of people who never heard about God?

Christianity

Christianity itself is among the most diverse religions with many different sects, denominations and interpretations. Thus, the answer to this question varies depending on different levels of orthodoxy. Still, these different answers remain rooted in the passages of the Gospel.

More orthodox Christians believe that people who never hear God's word cannot use it as an excuse as they believe that God has given everyone the capacity to somehow learn about him. A commonly cited verse is in Jeremiah 29:13 which states "You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart".

A contrasting answer argues that those who do not hear of God's word are nonetheless given an innate sense of morality. Romans 2:15 states "Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them."

This verse is interpreted as saying that people who are not given the opportunity to learn about Christianity are instead judged on the content of their character.

In addition to this, other Christian arguments range from predestined damnation, the inevitable salvation of all of mankind and submission to the uncertainty of the fate of such people. Thus, this shows that even within a single religion, this question is not something that can be answered with uniformity or certainty. What lacks in certainty at least makes it up in wide validation or at the very least, shared uncertainty. If you have any preconceived notion, there will be a Christian perspective that already agrees with you. If you're not sure, Christianity says that's ok too.

Islam

While no stranger to opposing denominations and interpretations, Islam is interestingly much more firm in its stance in how ignorant non-believers are dealt with. The verse in the Quran that is often cited to address this question is Surah al-Isra 17:15. It states "And We never punish until We have sent a Messenger (to give warning)."

Many Islamic scholars interpret this verse as evidence that God will not punish those who have no opportunity to learn about Islam for not believing. They also further specify that this also applies to people who were introduced to an incorrect version of Islam and had no way of knowing the truth. Most scholars believe that in such cases, individuals will be judged based on their personal sense of morality and conduct. More conservative viewpoints do argue that a basic belief in a higher power is still necessary for salvation.

Islam also explicitly mentions the classes of people who fall under this category. In the Hadith or the teachings of Prophet Muhammad, he mentions the "deaf" or people who never heard about Islam, the "insane" or people who never had the capacity to learn, the "old" or those who find out too late and can no longer reason, and people who lived between the times of Jesus and Muhammad. Scholars usually interpret that last point to also include anyone who lived in an age where Islam was not known.

Thus, the Islamic interpretation only states that people who learn the true tenets of the religion or are given the opportunity to do so but willingly refuse are the only kinds of non-believers who will be punished by God. Ignorance through no fault of the individual is not a sin and to me, that makes for quite the satisfying argument about the fairness and justness of God.

Judaism

Completing the trifecta of Abrahamic religions, Judaism is actually the most interesting one so far. It doesn't answer the question but instead makes the question itself irrelevant. In Judaism, one does not actually have to be a Jew to achieve salvation.

The Talmud tells of a set of rules commonly known as the Noahide Laws. These are 7 rules sent down by God to Noah that are meant to apply to all of humanity regardless of their faiths. These rules are the acknowledgement of God, avoiding blasphemy, not committing murder, not committing theft, not engaging in improper sexual relations, not eating the meat of a living animal and establishing courts of law.

As long as people follow these rules, they can go to heaven without the need to ever subscribe to the Jewish faith. Yet again, I found myself with quite the satisfactory answer. For the most part, the Noahide Laws were simply asking people to stick to very basic concepts of morality and legality, something that as a student of law I greatly appreciate.

It's also very interesting how in Judaism, questions of knowing or wilful ignorance are a complete non-factor. Add on to that the Jewish belief that Hell is not a place of eternal damnation and you've got quite the convincing argument in favour of God's fairness.

Hinduism

Departing from the Abrahamic faiths, the Hindu perspective is also interesting as once again, there is no explicit requirement to adhere to Hinduism in order to achieve salvation. Rather than speaking of strict adherence to rituals or inherent morality, Hindus believe that everyone is inherently divine.

To most Hindus, it is karma that determines our path to salvation. Good deeds gain us better karma and faith, rather than a prerequisite, is instead viewed as a tool that can be used to keep away bad karma.

Hindus also believe in the concept of reincarnation where an individual is constantly sent back into the world in various forms depending on their karma and deeds in their past lives. While strict adherence to the religion is not explicitly stressed, there are those within the Hindu faith that still argue for its importance in obtaining salvation. However, due to reincarnation, faith is seen as being inevitable. People will be reincarnated until they eventually obtain salvation through a gradual understanding of the Hindu faith.

Personally, I find the Hindu view to be the most idealistic one. Not only does it stress the inevitable salvation of all souls but that a person is able to be given multiple chances to improve and work on their character and good deeds over the course of multiple lifetimes. To learn a lesson repeatedly until it is right sounds a lot more fair than eternal punishment to me.

Buddhism

Like Hinduism, Buddhism contains elements of reincarnation, karma and more emphasis on good deeds over the actual faith itself. In Buddhism, heaven and hell do exist but are just two of several realms that a soul can pass through. Unlike in other faiths, none of these realms are permanent and can be traversed based on one's karma.

While adhering to the religion does help improve one's karma, it is not the be all and end all to determine where a person goes at the end of their life. Instead, Buddhism provides clear guidelines on things you can do to achieve salvation, what to avoid on the journey as well as sins that guarantee a rebirth in hell.

Like Judaism, these are mostly things that ensure people live based on the most basic tenets of morality. No killing, theft or sowing discord among others. While some sects of Buddhism do stress belief in the Buddha as being important, overall morality and good deeds are still primarily responsible for determining one's fate.

What struck me about the Buddhist perspective is the seeming impermanence of salvation and damnation. Rather than telling people that they are automatically saved or predestined to rot in hell, it instead encourages a constant practice of good deeds and upstanding morals. Add on to that the lesser emphasis on the faith itself and Buddhism's teachings of introspection and knowledge seeking and once again, you got a pretty fair argument.

Having really gone deep into these religions, explored the perspectives of multiple interpretations and looked into their basic tenets and scriptures, this much is clear. God does not automatically damn you for not knowing of his teachings. It could be because ignorance is not a sin, that damnation is not permanent or that goodness even without faith is sufficient for salvation.

If the scriptures itself speak of the inherent goodness of those who do not share the same faith as us, we have no reason to see them as permanently damned or doomed without knowing it.

Perhaps most interestingly, is how many religions provide certainty by demolishing the question altogether. Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism in particular do not consider non-practice to be a mortal sin at all. Thus it does away with this narrative that all non-believers go to hell.

While I doubt that I myself will ever be blessed enough to live even more closely to the tenets of my faith, I have come out of this with a greater understanding and a far deeper appreciation for religion as a whole. At the end of the day, practice and rituals only get you so far. Being a good person does just as, if not more of the heavy lifting towards your salvation.

For those of you who argue that your God is a fair and just one, I am far more inclined to believe you now.