Is Hell really just a fear tactic used to convince people to become religious? The person shown in the above image certainly thinks so. And sadly, they are not alone. Many people believe what this man believes. There are three main flaws.
First off, he is painting a thin line with a thick brush. Although I'm sure there are some people out there whose main motivation is the fear of punishment (more on that when we get to flaw three), I actually don't know a single Christian who even considers Hell among their reasons for belief. I've heard several testimonies, some of which are very personal, some of which are just "I studied the evidence and drew this conclusion." No testimony I've ever heard has included "I was told I'd go to Hell if I don't believe, so now I believe."
But what's more is that there is a doctrine known as Annihilationism*. Annihilationism comes in various forms, both as an official doctrine of a false religion, and as a personal belief held by individuals, including many actual Christians. Annihilationism is the belief that if the wicked face any punishment at all, it is a temporary one. Some believe the wicked don't even wake up, others believe they do get resurrected, but once again eventually die. In both scenarios, Hell can hardly be considered a motivating factor.
The second flaw is that fear is a legitimate tactic to use when an actual danger is present. Our world is filled with warnings. It's a dangerous world. Many things threaten our health, and even our lives. Something doesn't even have to be immediately threatening to receive such a label. As I like to joke, I like my coffee to come with a warning label. This isn't even a lie. My favorite coffee brand, Death Wish, genuinely does come with a warning label. And that's just coffee. Sugary products, cigarettes, alcohol, these all come with warning labels about how consuming them may have negative side effects, and yet most people will acknowledge that these warning signs are rather important.
There's also the problem of the law, which of course is more applicable in this situation. Warning labels aren't just for natural dangers, but we also warn each other about the legal status of our actions. Wearing a seat belt, for example, is not just a precaution against serious injury or death during a high speed crash, but also may result in injury or death to one's wallet, because if a police officer spots you, he will fine you.
Thus, the argument that Hell is just a fear tactic is inconsistent because no rational person would ever apply it anywhere else. "But Hell isn't real", the skeptic will cry. But this is the very belief he is attempting to defend. So not only is his argument inconsistent, it's circular! You cannot say Christianity shouldn't preach Hell because Hell doesn't exist any more than you can say atheism should die because it leads there.
Which brings us on to the third flaw: Belief precedes fear. You cannot fear that in which you do not believe, and so how can Hell be a contributing factor to belief? Some people ignore the warning signs, whether out of lack of belief, or just lack of care. The same applies to law breaking. The large prison population is evidence that not everyone fears the (very real) law. To illustrate this point further, there are many religions that involve some form of punishment for unbelief.
The original comment mentioned both Christianity and Catholicism. It is no secret that this ministry is as opposed to Catholicism as it is to atheism. Catholicism preaches a completely different method of salvation, to the point where I, as a vocal opponent of the Catholic Church, have a high chance of going to Hell, or at the very least am destined to spend a very long time in Purgatory before I finally get to Heaven. And yet, my biggest "fear" when addressing Catholicism is that I will receive scores of angry comments from Catholics at a faster rate than I am able to read or respond to.
Islam's teaching on the eternal destiny of Christians is even less ambiguous. Not only have I committed the unforgivable sin of shirk, meaning I am guaranteed to go to Hell, but also, according to Sahih Muslim 6665 (and a few other Haddith), Allah will personally take the sins of a Muslim and put them on my back. In other words, if Islam is true, I am not only going to pay for my own sins, but for the sins of a Muslim as well.
So, if fear is such a critical contributing factor to belief, why am I neither a Catholic or a Muslim? The fear of the Catholic or Muslim Hell does not convert me to their religion simply because I need to believe their religion to believe their Hell exists. In the same way, if you are not at least inclined to believe in Christianity, the Biblical Hell has no hold over your mind. The original commenter is proof of this, because evidently Hell is not scaring him into belief.
Thus, the argument that Hell is just a fear tactic without which Christianity would die is illogical. It fails on three levels. The existence of Annihilationism shows people can believe a religion without fear of punishment, the argument is inconsistent and circular, and belief precedes fear, and thus fear cannot motivate belief. It's amazing how easy it is to defeat the most common arguments levied against Christianity.
*For clarification, Bible Brain does not endorse the unBiblical doctrine of Annihilationism. I mentioned it only to demonstrate that the fear of Hell cannot possibly be a motivation for some Christians.