Hell - and its purpose

DinoBot

Hi,

One thing which has always puzzeled me is the concept of hell. Now I know all three of the main religions (christian, Islam and Juddahism) have this concept but they all have a different slant on it.

My main question is: Is hell in the church nowadays the hell from the old testiment or has the concept evolved from that. And what do you see as the main function of hell ?

wolfsbane

DinoBot said:

My main question is: Is hell in the church nowadays the hell from the old testiment or has the concept evolved from that. And what do you see as the main function of hell ?

Hmmm. The 'church nowadays' generally does not believe in hell, as far as I can see. They don't really believe much of what you will find in the New Testament. They are too modern for that.

The New Testament, which the Evangelical churches historically adhere to, takes the little of what the OT revealed and greatly expands it with the teaching of Christ and the apostles. Most of what we know of hell comes from the lips of Christ Himself.

The main function of hell is the vindication of God's righteousness in the punishment of sin. Like a ruler today who let the guilty go unpunished, so God's character would be impugned if there was no hell.

Hell is that terrible place where the sinner is consciously punished eternally for his offences against God.

DinoBot

>>Hell is that terrible place where the sinner is consciously punished eternally for his offences against God.

Thats the bit that gets me. Why does God need to punish the sinners eternally. I can understand the concept of hell as punishment and to ensure we all do good while here on earth out of fear of going to hell but beyond that Im lost.

For instance, eternal is a long time, so say at the end of the world the good go to heaven and the bad to hell. So for the fist few million years the people are still in hell. Why ? What purpose does hell have then ? Why if all the good are in heaven would having sinners in hell benifit anyone ?

What is the purpose of hell then ?

BrianCalgary

DinoBot wrote:

>>Hell is that terrible place where the sinner is consciously punished eternally for his offences against God.

Thats the bit that gets me. Why does God need to punish the sinners eternally. I can understand the concept of hell as punishment and to ensure we all do good while here on earth out of fear of going to hell but beyond that Im lost.

For instance, eternal is a long time, so say at the end of the world the good go to heaven and the bad to hell. So for the fist few million years the people are still in hell. Why ? What purpose does hell have then ? Why if all the good are in heaven would having sinners in hell benifit anyone ?

What is the purpose of hell then ?

I look at it this way.
It isn't a place where God sends souls to be punished. Those who choose a relationship with God through Christ have their choice honoured and spend an eternity in the presence of God.
Those who choose to reject reconciliation with God, through Christ, are given their choice for eternity. An existence without God.
The former is described in the Bible as Heaven, the latter as Hell.

Hell is needed to accomodate those who turn their back on God.

DinoBot

Hi,

You say Hell is "needed" for those who turn there backs on God. But this brings back to my question. WHO needs it ?

Once heaven is established who will care that the other souls who did not get into heaven are kept in hell or not?

Is it not true that you will be happy in heaven so I dont think the people will give a passing thought to those in hell so the only one who will know they are there is God.

Also, are you saying that the people in hell will also have eternal life ?

archdukefranz

DinoBot wrote:

Hi,

You say Hell is "needed" for those who turn there backs on God. But this brings back to my question. WHO needs it ?

Once heaven is established who will care that the other souls who did not get into heaven are kept in hell or not?

Is it not true that you will be happy in heaven so I dont think the people will give a passing thought to those in hell so the only one who will know they are there is God.

Also, are you saying that the people in hell will also have eternal life ?

We all get eternal life, some of us get to spend that with God, others without.
Because we are designed to be in unity with God, without God is... well hell

pbsuxok1znja4r

You could think of hell as merely an existence entirely outside of God. It's kind of a question of moral polarity' - when you die, have you been good enough so as to be compatible enough to be unified with /experience God? If so, then you are with God and in a heavenly existence. If not, then you are entirely wihtout God in an existence devoid of all things good.
The thing is, if hell is an existence completely without God (and therefore without a single ounce of 'good'), then how can any evil exist in hell? I believe it is true that evil cannot exist without good; it is kind of a subset of good, mathematically speaking.
So this leads me to believe one of two things:
A) Hell is an existence without God, but is neither good nor bad; just good-less. (this depends on whther you believe evil is an absence of good or an opposite or a perversion of it.)
B)Hell is an existence with God, but is unpleasant for those who tend toward hating goodness.

Now for someone who believes in God, like I do, the possibility of any kind of existence 'outside' of God, seems logically impossible, so I'm inclined to go with option , above.

Then again, I believe there is an inherent little core of unchangeable 'good' in all humans, so that leads me to believe that existence in God would always be happy, regardless.

So, maybe, for those who reject God, hell is actually being with God. Maybe, when the time comes, we will all be re-united with God, but for those who are not 'aligned' with good/God, it will be a wholly unpleaseant experience.

turbot

Hell refers to slums that were located around Jerusalem at the time.

The organisation known as the Vatican / Roman Catholic church (run by the Romans) have used "Hell" as an idea to control people, by claiming that people who didn't follow the "spiritual" instructions they distributed may go to hell in the afterlife. The spiritual instructions they distributed included giving money and time to the church and promoting it on their behalf, a bit like a big MLM organisation. Their usage of this idea is pure propaganda.

From a more practical perspective, both heaven and hell are a state of mind.

If you think about it, hell is supposed to represent the most painful / unbearable idea imaginable; being burned for all eternity... But if you believe in such a place, then realise what you believe in, is what you have imagined, based upon the teachings of the catholic church. If you had had no exposure to any christian teachings, you wouldn't know a place called hell existed, and it wouldn't be in your imagination.

I encourage anyone to openly albeit discerningly explore other religions to find more appropriate spiritual truths than those of christianity, which largely attempt to monopolise the spiritual knowledge of people who behave too obediently with the instructions they have distributed.

Rev Hellfire

My understanding of hell and I'm not well read up on this is that it is a place of self induced suffering.

The souls (and angels) within its domain are trapped by their own state of mind, the suffering comes from not been able to come to god, but the only thing which prevents them is themselves.

If you be believe in an all forgiving god, then the idea that hell is unescapable once you reach it doesn't make sense. Even satan (assuming he isn't actually acting a role prescribed for him) could return to the fold, it is his pride which prevents it.

toiletduck

wolfsbane wrote:

Hell is that terrible place where the sinner is consciously punished eternally for his offences against God.

wouldn't you eventually get used to the pain though

wolfsbane

DinoBot said:

Thats the bit that gets me. Why does God need to punish the sinners eternally.

He doesn't say. Perhaps to give an eternal vindication of His righteousness.

What is the purpose of hell then ?

To punish the wicked, so proving that He is a just and holy God.
Brian Calgary said:

It isn't a place where God sends souls to be punished. Those who choose a relationship with God through Christ have their choice honoured and spend an eternity in the presence of God.

I beg to differ with my brother Brian. It is indeed due to their choice that they are put in hell, but hell is not some God passively accepts. He created it for the express purpose of punishing the fallen angels. He also determined that all who reject Him are also to suffer such punishment.

The eternal state of the lost is described as being in 'torment', in the 'outer darkness', away 'from the presence of God', in 'the lake of fire',where their 'worm does not die and the fire is not quenched'. Rev. 20:10 tells us the devil and his agents will be 'tormented day and night forever and ever.'

Here is one description of the Judgement which Jese gives us: Matthew 13:36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away and went into the house. And His disciples came to Him, saying, “Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field.”
37 He answered and said to them: “He who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the tares are the sons of the wicked one. 39 The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels. 40 Therefore as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age. 41 The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, 42 and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

wolfsbane

turbot said:

The organisation known as the Vatican / Roman Catholic church (run by the Romans) have used "Hell" as an idea to control people, by claiming that people who didn't follow the "spiritual" instructions they distributed may go to hell in the afterlife. The spiritual instructions they distributed included giving money and time to the church and promoting it on their behalf, a bit like a big MLM organisation. Their usage of this idea is pure propaganda.

They certainly used hell for that purpose, but it does not mean hell is their invention. Hell is revealed to us in the Bible, most notably from the lips of Jesus. That a corrupt organization used that truth to enforce obedience to their ideas does not invalidate it. The proper use of hell is to warn people to flee from it by repenting of their sin and trusting in Jesus Christ for their forgiveness.

wolfsbane

Rev Hellfire said:

If you be believe in an all forgiving god, then the idea that hell is unescapable once you reach it doesn't make sense.

But the Bible does not so describe God. He has set a time limit on His offer of forgiveness. Indeed that offer does not extend to any of the fallen angels. Even some people have moved beyond the place of forgiveness - by commiting the unpardonable sin.

For us men, the word is Is.55:6 Seek the LORD while He may be found,
Call upon Him while He is near. If we wait too long, He will no longer be near. The rich Man in Hases would have loved to be out, and wanted to send word to his brothers so they would not come to that aweful place.

wolfsbane

toiletduck said:

wouldn't you eventually get used to the pain though

Not according to the Bible:
Rev. 14:9 Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10 he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”

Rev Hellfire

On the infinite compassion of the Christian god I shall have to disagree with you wolfbane. To my mind there is no limitation placed on that forgiveness if it is truly sought.


PSALM 85:2
You have forgiven the iniquity of your people; You have covered all their sin.

ACTS 26:18
to open their eyes and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me

JOHN 1:9
If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness

wolfsbane

Rev Hellfire said:

To my mind there is no limitation placed on that forgiveness if it is truly sought.

Wel, you are entitled to your opinion. It just is not in line with either Scripture or the historic position of the Church. Repentance is for this life. too late after that. Hence the need now to 'flee from the wrath to come'. If we could do so any time after we were in hell, I'm sure it would soon empty. Note also my point that the fallen angels were not atoned for by Christ - so no forgiveness is possible for them.

Sapien

wolfsbane wrote:

To punish the wicked, so proving that He is a just and holy God.

To prove to whom?

turbot

Guys,

When are you going to wake up and realise that:

- What you read about in the Bible is translated, and represents selective chinese whispers of a bulky collection of select (& out of context) hebrew texts. You've used this as an external authority, mitigating your personal need to think these things through deeply for yourself. Wake up. Think for yourself. For your spiritual good and everyone elses.

- The Vatican / Roman Catholic church have largely monopolised access to this information, and constructed insidious networks to govern the distribution of such information. You've been fed ideas on this since you were young and didn't know better and swallowed them whole; though it doesn't mean they are true

- It's ridiculous to think that God is like a cranky father figure type who lives in the sky, yet he also has his own giant dungeon known as hell for people who don't want to do everything they are told. Wake up and realise these are myths designed to control you. This is propaganda designed to scare you into being obdedient.

If you believe in Hell as it's portrayed, in different Words this is like God having his own giant S&M club in the basement of the universe. These are ideas and fables that have been misused. Be wary of thinking of them as anything more than such.

It's reasonable to conclude that the fruits of the way you live partially determine what happens in your future, but this is way different to broadly grouping human impulses as sins, encouraged by the devil, and archaic rules designed to rob you of your personal and spiritual power and freedom you are supposed to follow.

There is a zen in mastering yourself, but this isn't about fighting with yourself. It's about achieving a kind of gnosis.

wolfsbane

Sapien said:

To prove to whom?

Good question. To everyone, men and angels alike. An example of this principle is seen in Ephesians 3:10 to the intent that now the manifold wisdom of God might be made known by the church to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places, 11 according to the eternal purpose which He accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord

wolfsbane

turbot said:

- The Vatican / Roman Catholic church have largely monopolised access to this information, and constructed insidious networks to govern the distribution of such information. You've been fed ideas on this since you were young and didn't know better and swallowed them whole; though it doesn't mean they are true

I object! As a card-carrying Ulster Protestant brought up in 'the blue skies of Freedom', I demand someone smells this man's breath!

The Bible version of hell is not the invention of Rome or any church, cult/sect, unless you define Christianity so. It has been abused at times to enforce obedience to men rather than God, but that doesn't make it any less true.

My impression of the Christian hell - whatever about the others, I suppose discussion of those doesn't belong here? - was that it was just a place away from the christian god, and the only torment was being away from yahweh

BrianCalgary

turbot wrote:

Guys,

When are you going to wake up and realise that:

- What you read about in the Bible is translated, and represents selective chinese whispers of a bulky collection of select (& out of context) hebrew texts. You've used this as an external authority, mitigating your personal need to think these things through deeply for yourself. Wake up. Think for yourself. For your spiritual good and everyone elses. .

The Bible is translated from Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic texts. Peopel such as wolfsbane, excelsior and myself have thought for ourselves and come to the conclusion that the Bible is the inspired word of God. (Not to say that others do not think). Turbot, your thinking matches that of the world, so the same could be said of yourself, that you are following the world like a sheep and not thinking for yourself?

turbot wrote:

- The Vatican / Roman Catholic church have largely monopolised access to this information, and constructed insidious networks to govern the distribution of such information. You've been fed ideas on this since you were young and didn't know better and swallowed them whole; though it doesn't mean they are true.

I was raised independant of the RC Church. We use the same Bible (except for the apocryphal texts) so the RC has not got a monopoly and with the network of information in the world today there is no way that any one organisation can monopolise the flow of information. You should try reading books by Lee Strobel and Josh McDowell. Josh set out to prove Christianity wrong and now is on eof the apologists for Christ. Lee Strobel did an extensive study on Christianity and interviewed top people in their fields to come to th econclusion that Christianity is true. All done independant of the RC church.

turbot wrote:

- - It's ridiculous to think that God is like a cranky father figure type who lives in the sky, yet he also has his own giant dungeon known as hell for people who don't want to do everything they are told. Wake up and realise these are myths designed to control you. This is propaganda designed to scare you into being obdedient. .

He is not a cranky old man. He is a loving Father that wishes you to have a full rewarding life. He knows what is best for you because He knows you better that you know yourself. He can also see the benefits and consequences of your actions, why not listen?

BrianCalgary

BrianCalgary wrote:

The Bible is translated from Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic texts. Peopel such as wolfsbane, excelsior and myself have thought for ourselves and come to the conclusion that the Bible is the inspired word of God. (Not to say that others do not think). Turbot, your thinking matches that of the world, so the same could be said of yourself, that you are following the world like a sheep and not thinking for yourself?

Perhaps it may have started out that way, but is it not possible that various passages at least might have been mistranslated along the way by people who thought "this must have meant to mean..." or something similar? I can't dig up anything right now, but there are at least a few examples of the hebrew being mistranslated into english. Would this not affect the original word of yahweh (if it was that)?

BrianCalgary

bluewolf wrote:

Perhaps it may have started out that way, but is it not possible that various passages at least might have been mistranslated along the way by people who thought "this must have meant to mean..." or something similar? I can't dig up anything right now, but there are at least a few examples of the hebrew being mistranslated into english. Would this not affect the original word of yahweh (if it was that)?

Before the Dead Sea scrolls were found the earliest translation of the OT was dated around AD1000. When that edition was compared to a modern version and the Dead Sea scrolls the only differences were in spelling. Ie colour vs. color.

Also anytime a fragment of NT is found it matches up with our current earliest manuscripts. The original language manuscripts are constant.

When translating into English from Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek there are words that are not directly translatable so the meaning of the phrase has to be considered. Even in English today there are regional variations in words (Co. Cork and 'langer', langer means nothing here). There are over 24,000 manuscripts of the NT in existence with the earlisest dating to the first century. In comparison the Iliad by Homer has less that 1000 manuscripts dating, I think, 1200 years after it was written, scholars would tell you that what we have is what Homer wrote. Yet people pose questions such as yours some with a desire to know others with a desire to discredit, the NT we have today is as it was written 1900 yeras ago. Th eOT matches with what the Jews would have used in the century prior to th ebirth of Jesus.

So I would say that the possibility is always there to mistranslate, that is why it is wise to look at a few translations and then check the meaning of the original word to come to find what the author wanted to communicate.

Ah, as long as you're not just going by the english version.

As for the illiad, I don't think there would be so much scope or politically motivated reasons to mistranslate it - it is possible, I think, that something like that would have happened.

I'll see if I can dig up sometime what I've read about the mistranslations.

BrianCalgary

bluewolf wrote:

Ah, as long as you're not just going by the english version.

As for the illiad, I don't think there would be so much scope or politically motivated reasons to mistranslate it - it is possible, I think, that something like that would have happened..

True. However throughout history being a Christian and following what was written ahs led to ridicule, torture and death. Not much motivation for something that's a lie.

bluewolf wrote:

I'll see if I can dig up sometime what I've read about the mistranslations.

That would be interesting. Thanks for the contribution. (remember that there a group of Fundies that would say King James only.)

BrianCalgary

BrianCalgary wrote:

True. However throughout history being a Christian and following what was written ahs led to ridicule, torture and death. Not much motivation for something that's a lie.

Say there's a current trend to dislike something or other. Then perhaps, a passage that could mean different things depending on how you look at it might be translated so it could fit in with the trend. That's kind of what I'm getting at, though of course I don't have anything to back it up, just suggesting it as a possibility.

Speaking of which - was the whole "witch" thing in the bible only mentioned once, and actually a mistranslation of "poisoner"? Don't have the passage to hand, sorry.
Anyway, I'll leave that til I can get something more concrete for you.

That would be interesting. Thanks for the contribution. (remember that there a group of Fundies that would say King James only.)

Hehe, even I know KJV is unreliable >.< And no probs

BrianCalgary

bluewolf wrote:

Say there's a current trend to dislike something or other. Then perhaps, a passage that could mean different things depending on how you look at it might be translated so it could fit in with the trend. That's kind of what I'm getting at, though of course I don't have anything to back it up, just suggesting it as a possibility.

Has been done and will continue to be done, as we try to justify our actions. Fundamentalists come to mind. People will also put certain verses as being more important over others without taking into context the message of the Bible. I think the reason passages mean different things is because the passage isn't read in the context with due consideration of who it is written to.

biko

So what happened to all the naughty people that died before christ was born? Are they also burning in the christian hell? Isn't a bit unfair, they didn't even know about Jesus and stuff...

Btw, this is my 666st post, just had to post here

BrianCalgary

biko wrote:

So what happened to all the naughty people that died before christ was born? Are they also burning in the christian hell? Isn't a bit unfair, they didn't even know about Jesus and stuff...

Btw, this is my 666st post, just had to post here

Those that died before christ were looking forward to the Messiah, so are OK. See when Christ, Elijah and Moses appeared together. We know that Elijah and Moses are in Heaven.

We now rest in the assurance that the Messiah has come and trust in Him.

(I miss beautiful Galway)

turbot

BrianCalgary,

The Bible is translated from Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic texts. Peopel such as wolfsbane, excelsior and myself have thought for ourselves and come to the conclusion that the Bible is the inspired word of God. (Not to say that others do not think). Turbot, your thinking matches that of the world, so the same could be said of yourself, that you are following the world like a sheep and not thinking for yourself?

Do you want me to say Baaaa?

You are outrageously sloppy and imprecise in your statements and your thought.

Just because you can name two other people you claim have thought for themselves and as well as you, doesn't make your perspective the only right one, or the only truth. I fully accept you three believe this to be so.

I personally, based upon my life experiencs and my thinking for myself, completely disagree. Furthermore, I don't require that we agree to coexist peacefully or interact usefully at some levels.

You say my thinking matches that of the World? What on earth do you mean?

Don't you mean that my thinking matches a significant cluster of people in the World who you've grouped into a category and generalised and labelled as the World? Be careful of your sloppy use of worlds and categorisation.

My thinking does not isomorphically match that of the most of the people within World, although there may be parallels with some of my ideas.

Nothing about what I've said or expressed implies that I've derived my opinion based upon an awareness of what I perceive most people in the World think. I find it amazing you make such ridiculous logical leaps, and suspect that you are more of a sheep than perhaps you realise.

How do you know the Bible is divinely inspired?

How do you know that the translations are divinely guided?

How do you know that my thinking matches that of the World?

How do you know you share the exact same views as wolfsbane and excelsior?

How do you explain that, as you claim my thinking matches that of the World, that as a result, I am following the World without thinking for myself, therefore making me a sheep?

As you claim to have thought for yourself, you should have no trouble in answering these questions.


Also, God is not a HE. He's not a guy in the sky! These ideas you sheepishly hold to be real are in my opinion, more patriarchal nonsense embedded into the metaphors that govern your sense of reality.

BrianCalgary

turbot wrote:

BrianCalgary,

Just because you can name two other people you claim have thought for themselves and as well as you, doesn't make your perspective the only right one, or the only truth. I fully accept you three believe this to be so..

They are just two people from this post who are identifiable. I could come up with thousands that I have come in contact with in Calgary alone.

turbot wrote:

You say my thinking matches that of the World? What on earth do you mean? ..

That your viewpoint match those seen in popular media, government institutions and others hostile to Christianity and the church. Whatever views we come up with they are influenced by others in some way shape or form. The question is can you back up your belief system or not?

turbot wrote:

How do you know the Bible is divinely inspired? ..

In a short answer, it was written over 40 generations, by over 40 people from all different walks of life, on three continents and three different languages yet they all agree on moralities. I can't even get agreement on a moral question in a class of 14 yearolds from the same neighbourhood. All the prophecies in the Bible have come true, especially with respect to the Messiah. Only God could have done that.

turbot wrote:

How do you know that the translations are divinely guided? ..

I would say that the ones that I use are because they all generally agree on the translations. But, that is why when one is doing extensive Bible study it is imperative to go to the original language to properly determine meaning.

turbot wrote:

How do you know that my thinking matches that of the World?

That your viewpoint match those seen in popular media, government institutions and others hostile to Christianity and the church. Whatever views we come up with they are influenced by others in some way shape or form. The question is can you back up your belief system or not?

turbot wrote:

How do you know you share the exact same views as wolfsbane and excelsior?

By their posts and private conversation.

turbot wrote:

How do you explain that, as you claim my thinking matches that of the World, that as a result, I am following the World without thinking for myself, therefore making me a sheep?

That your viewpoint match those seen in popular media, government institutions and others hostile to Christianity and the church. Whatever views we come up with they are influenced by others in some way shape or form. The question is can you back up your belief system or not?

turbot wrote:

Also, God is not a HE. He's not a guy in the sky! These ideas you sheepishly hold to be real are in my opinion, more patriarchal nonsense embedded into the metaphors that govern your sense of reality.

How do you know that God isn't a He? The Bible refers to Him as Father. I never thought of Him as a 'guy in the sky', nor have I ever subscribed to thsi since the age of about 5. God is a Spirit who is everywhere at all times and knows everything. Where does Christianity as a patriarchal faith come from?

006

Just curious BrianCalgary.Have you read up the history of Christianity and how it evolved through the ages?How do you think that Christianity spread throughout all the lands,was it just divine enlightment by the masses? Is it possible that Christianity prevailed with the use of treachery? Fear? Violent oppression?

BrianCalgary

006 wrote:

Just curious BrianCalgary.Have you read up the history of Christianity and how it evolved through the ages?How do you think that Christianity spread throughout all the lands,was it just divine enlightment by the masses? Is it possible that Christianity prevailed with the use of treachery? Fear? Violent oppression?

Yep. Doing a study on it now. We're up to the split between east and west.

The conclusion is that the man made institution has changed throughout the centuries, but the message of Christ has not. The Bible we have today is as written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, and Jude. I'm amazed at how the message and the Bible has survived all the nonsense that has gone on within the institution, there has to be divine intervention.

When you look at the persecution of Christians in parts of the world today Christ's church is prevailing with the threat of oppression against it. In the past it has grown because it was socially acceptable to do so, and at times because it was socially necessary.

turbot

BrianCalgary,

You are exactly the kind of oppressive christian, unaware of your own thought processes in a way that you attempt to impose your belief on others, that I consider to be the most harmful and destructive type.

They are just two people from this post who are identifiable. I could come up with thousands that I have come in contact with in Calgary alone.

Incorrect.

You *think* you share the same views, based upon your inept ability to be precise in your thought, and to understand the psychology governing how people build maps, models and views of the world.

Just because you have organised a bunch of people in your mind whom you think agree with you, doesn't mean that they agree with you. You might think this, and even believe it totally. You don't understand how your thinking process affects this, or why it's stupid.

Since you can't climb inside their heads, you literally don't understand the thought processes that govern the beliefs you are upholding.

You don't understand that for every single word, you have a signficantly different inner representation than everyone else. You don't understand that the people you cite and imagine have the same beliefs as you, will never share exactly the same beleif system. There are too many variables in the universe and in your minds and neurology and language and ways of interacting with reality. Do you understand this?

That your viewpoint match those seen in popular media, government institutions and others hostile to Christianity and the church. Whatever views we come up with they are influenced by others in some way shape or form. The question is can you back up your belief system or not?

Yes; I can and much more than you can.

Firstly I was raised Christian. I grew up with certainty of belief, and faith. I went to a catholic school and church under my own initiative until i was 16.

Since then I have extensively studied:
- Hypnosis
- Marketing
- A multitude of approaches to spirituality
- Shamanism
- Computer science
- Meditation
- Healing
- Alternative Medicine
- NLP (Neuro Linguistic Programming).
- Multiple approaches to spirituality

Through these experiences, I have had numerous experiences of changing my entire belief systems, over and over and over again.

I have personally gone from believing in God, to holding numerous and totally contrary. With particular reference to belief systems, I have extensively studied the works of Robert Anton Wilson, Richard Bandler, Robert Dilts, who write about belief systems, along with many marketeers who attempt to influence people. These experiences, collectively have led me to my personal belief systems. I can choose what I believe, and use such beliefs usefully. I suspect you do not have this mental elasticity, which is why you behave so ignorantly.

In a short answer, it was written over 40 generations, by over 40 people from all different walks of life, on three continents and three different languages yet they all agree on moralities. I can't even get agreement on a moral question in a class of 14 yearolds from the same neighbourhood. All the prophecies in the Bible have come true, especially with respect to the Messiah. Only God could have done that.

Wow. You are so ignorant.

Firstly, everything you've read, and your interpretations are inside your head, and collectively form your model of the World.

Maybe you have found ways of making sense of the bible that include organising each different scripture to have exactly equivalent meanings to you. This is you personally. Don't you realise that a different person could read the same verses, and reach a different interpretation, and it is this very difference that makes people interesting?

Don't you realise that if you were smarter, you could find ways to understand everything so it fits together, and with the same content and find ways to understand everything so it completely disagrees with itself. Just because you have used one limited process for understanding the bible means you are just ignorant of the process of understanding itself.

You should study literature and art, and realise that appreciation of these things is highly personal. You uphold a ridiculous illusion that your views are the same as the people you think agree with you.

I also suspect:
- You do not have a lot of fun, nor do you laugh regularly and often, at least 4 times an hour
- People find it hard to be around you. Inside you, you have a driving insistance to be right. You find anything that compromises your belief system uncomfortable. A part of you is scared of discovering you are not right. This fear forms the basis of living in ignorance.

If you truly believe your belief system is the right one, why should you be afraid? Why do you demonstrate you have no clue about how belief systems are constructed, installed, modified?

Please can you explain:
- Why are there differing stories of the Garden of Eden, some of which include Lillith?
- Why is the story of the virgin birth of Jesus by Mary suspiciously similar to the stories of the Persian Mother Goddess, Anahita, which predate the biblical stories by 5000 years?
- Why did the God in the bible, during the great flood, choose to kill every animal on the planet, except two of each that Noah herded into an ark? Did God know nothing about genetics? Why did God kill all the baby animals? Is this not a vicious and horrible thing to do?
- Why are churches across the World built upon old pagan worship grounds?
- What happens to devout buddhist monks when they die?
- What would happen to your belief system if you gave up christianity for lent? Would Jesus consider this to be a sacrifice?

I would say that the ones that I use are because they all generally agree on the translations. But, that is why when one is doing extensive Bible study it is imperative to go to the original language to properly determine meaning.

Do you speak more than one language? Do you speak the original languages of the bible? Don't you realise an exact translation is impossible due to grammar differences amongst languages, and these same differences literally shape the thought processes of people who use them?

If you claim to be a scholar of the bible, how do you explain the vasty differing interpretations of the Worlds leading scholar in biblical texts, Zaccharia Sitchin? He reaches vastly different interpertations than those popular ones bandied about in the churchs I have experience of.

I suspect it is you who does not think for yourself, and you demonstate this by citing other people in an attempt to back up your beliefs.

OK. Lets have a contest about who can best back up their belief system.

My belief system is grounded in multiple, highly developed processes for exploring the universe:
- Experientially testing the extent to which I can change my whole belief system, to understand personally how it is constructed
- Experientially testing multiple approaches to spirituality and what I can do with them, including how I can help and heal other people, including what happens when I operate through vastly diverse belief systems
- Reading widely and extensively
- Exposing myself to a vast array of sensory experiences
- Learning from people in all walks of life
- Conversing and interacting with people from all backgrounds and faiths, including christians, muslims, wiccans, voudons, agnostics, gnostics, freemasons, occultists, psychics, druids, theoretical physicists, psychologists, monks (of different faiths) therapists to name but a few. Have you done this?

Since you only have a very limited and short statement about my viewpoint, how do you know my viewpoint matches that seen in popular media, government institutions? You don't know why *my* viewpoint is, other than a very select range of statements you comment on sloppily.

My viewpoint is not the category you fit it into in your head. The reason you make such assertions is because you don't actually properly listen to what I'm saying, and make utterly stupid leaps of logic whereby:

Because I'm expressing sentiments that I think hell is an idea used to control people, you think that this means my viewpoint matches that expressed in the popular media and government institutions. Firstly, there is no one viewpoint expressed in such areas, there are thousands. Secondly, I've only been exposed to a spectrum of these expressed in popular media.

How do you know that God isn't a He? The Bible refers to Him as Father. I never thought of Him as a 'guy in the sky', nor have I ever subscribed to thsi since the age of about 5. God is a Spirit who is everywhere at all times and knows everything. Where does Christianity as a patriarchal faith come from?

[/QUOTE]

God is not a person. God is not an individual. God is a word that a significant cluster of the populace of the World use as a term to refer to a variety of understandings; ranging from a guy with a beard in the sky, to an all knowing being, to an idea associated with source energy and the afterlife. The universe is much more complex, and sophisticated than anything you can represent in your brain. It's bigger than the biggest conceptions of what is real. If you don't understand how your brain works in this equation, you make ignorant assertions. There are multiple definitions for God. God is something different to each person who uses that. Until you realise this you will be stuck in a thought trap that makes you, to me, sound foolish and stupid.

And please, study Zen. You demonstrate complete ignorance about how you, as the perceiver, in your brain, make sense of the information in your senses.

40crush41

(I havn't read all of this thread)
I don't think I came up with this on my own, but through living I understand that heaven is a place where God can be perpetually honored and praised. Those on earth who found great joy in doing this will continue to do so and live in complete bliss with thier Father, while those who did not follow God will live away from Him .. which is the absence of love.. which would be hell.

40crush41

006 wrote:

Just curious BrianCalgary.Have you read up the history of Christianity and how it evolved through the ages?How do you think that Christianity spread throughout all the lands,was it just divine enlightment by the masses? Is it possible that Christianity prevailed with the use of treachery? Fear? Violent oppression?

The early church faced all of those things, yes.

or are you referring to the Crusades?
How familiar are you with the history of the Catholic Church?


*edit* I think I read enough of the posts now.
Turbot -I don't know if I'm understanding you correctly, so let me know if I'm off.. but about hell being made up as a means of propaganda to scare and control people.
Hell is as much part of the Christian faith as Heaven is. I don't see how it is logical for people to believe in one and not the other. If you truly believe in an all-loving God, then where does the evil come from? If the only force was this all-loving God, then we would be in Heaven. Obviously we are not -there is evil, the lack of goodness, so where does it come from?.. well, Satan. Where does Satan reign? Hell. Unless if I'm grossly wrong, I think its safe to say that God didn't create Hell for the sole purpose of locking the wicked up, but instead b/c of the creation of free-will there was a corruption of the good (aka evil) due to Lucifer's excessive pride.

This may be a bit simple, but its near 2 am and I'm tired. My point is, there is more to hell than just the scare, its is fundamental to the faith and without it there would be no religion.

Ask me to elaborate any part of this post that requires some clearing up OR if I'm way off a target -thatd be great.
Peace~Beth

Asiaprod

40crush41 wrote:

The early church faced all of those things .....the use of treachery? Fear? Violent oppression?

I think you may have missunderstood that the comment.
The church did not face those things, the Church employed those things

40crush41

Well, if your discussing the early church -they were persecuted.
But I'm going to assume the Crusades period.
I didn't misunderstand. I'm saying there is a misunderstanding -That the Church is much much greater than the Western Church and the Patriarch of Rome.

In the end, the Crusades devasted the Eastern Church, as a Byzantine priest I know puts it, "Lets not talk about the Crusades, you hurt us more than the Muslims"
My point: 006 was saying that the spread of christianity was spread through treachery/fear/violent oppression when the truth is the Church has faced these things and survived -Terribly harmed by the hand of her sister city Rome.
Yes, Roman Catholicism is the more prominent, but there is no doubt that the Eastern/Orthodox Churches are alive and thriving.

Sites:
http://www.crisismagazine.com/april2002/cover.htm
http://www.crisismagazine.com/julaug2005/feature1.htm
I understand that these are Christian sites, however, that is why I only shared the information given about Catholics figuring there was no way to twist the information favorably for either side.

robindch

> Well, if your discussing the early church - they were persecuted.

In comparison to the persecution ladled out by christians once they had assumed power in Byzantium, this persecution by the Romans amounted to very little indeed, despite the persistent mythology to the contrary. Do you think it very likely that a 'persecuted' sect could have gone from zero to taking over the Roman Empire in under 300 years?

> In the end, the Crusades devasted the Eastern Church, as a Byzantine
> priest I know puts it, "Lets not talk about the Crusades, you hurt us
> more than the Muslims"

Do you mean an Orthodox priest? Whatever -- I think his comments are accurate; the crusades, it seems to me, were at least as much about the Roman church reasserting control over the people of the churches of the former Eastern Roman Empire, as they were about gaining control over muslims.

> there is no doubt that the Eastern/Orthodox Churches are alive and thriving.

In places, it is, while in other places, it's on its last legs. Read William Dalrymple's excellent From The Holy Mountain, which documents his travels about the Middle East, meeting christians of various sects.

stevejazzx

what is the purpose of hell?
Indeed, surely an all knowing, all loving deity would have created a more spiritually devisive mechanism for treating the wicked than 'burning them for all eternity'.

Surely hell should be a place where corrupt spirits are healed. This would make more sense wouldn't it.
It wouldn't fair well however for mankind to be secure in the knowledge that whatever hainous crime it committed that in the end it would be healed and not punished.

Someone has mentioned that even 'Satan' could return to heaven but his pride prevents it, what if he changes his mind?

Can regular souls who have been damned to hell by god be forgiven or is there some kinda legal clause in the bible preventing this?
Like the great clause that is Presumption i.e you can't die with an automatic belief that just because God is all loving and all forgiving he will forgive you, no you have got to really want forgivness and be really sorry for for your sins but this begs the question that:
if our final chance of forgiveness is at the time of our death how would 'Satan ever be allowed back to heaven' and conversely if 'Satan' is a fallen angel why was he permitted into the heaven in the first place by an all knowing god. To answer this one might say that God gave 'satan' free will upon letting him into heaven and 'satan' chose to turn his back on god. but if god offers free will after life to spirits then surely spirits damned to hell could also turn away from evil and back toward god.
So the question really what is the cut off point for gods forgiveness or is there any?

Dades

turbot wrote:

You are exactly the kind of oppressive christian, unaware of your own thought processes in a way that you attempt to impose your belief on others, that I consider to be the most harmful and destructive type.

This is a Christianity forum ffs.
Get a grip - you are not being oppressed, you are being disagreed with.

ON TOPIC Re the biblical version of Hell with eternal torment, fire and brimstone etc...

Haven't the punishments for crimes changed dramatically since those times? For example we no longer burn people alive, stone them, feed them to animals, crucify them or chop limbs off for "minor" crimes. [Yes, in other world societies such punishments may still occur but I'm assuming here this is considered barbaric in 2006]

So would the notion of Hell have been written to reflect the severity of the justice system of the time? Had the bible been written today, would Hell be a limbo type prison instead? Hell is less believable these days as it is simply too dramatic. Like something from The Brothers Grimm you would read your kids.

Just musing.

turbot

The Athiest,

I don't mind being disagreed with; in fact it's refreshing when I learn something useful and discover something better than I already know.

I use the word oppressive because peoples use of linguistics demonstrate their though processes.

IMO, BrianCalgary has no developed awareness of his own thought process, nor demonstrates any reasonable insight into mine. His mis-categorisation of me and imprecise reasoning lends him to taking action empowered by ignorance. He's been fooled into thinking that christianity poses on truth, when every individuals experience of life is unique, as is their sense of spirituality, as is their personal truth.

Spirituality, when developed highly, leads to inner knowings yet he externally references what he claims to be true, as evidence he is right. His same thought processes form the basis of ignorant certainty, which leads to opressive thinking (and sometimes behaviours).

stevejazzx

The Atheist wrote:

This is a Christianity forum ffs.

Haven't the punishments for crimes changed dramatically since those times? For example we no longer burn people alive, stone them, feed them to animals, crucify them or chop limbs off for "minor" crimes. [Yes, in other world societies such punishments may still occur but I'm assuming here this is considered barbaric in 2006]

So would the notion of Hell have been written to reflect the severity of the justice system of the time? Had the bible been written today, would Hell be a limbo type prison instead? Hell is less believable these days as it is simply too dramatic. Like something from The Brothers Grimm you would read your kids.

Just musing.

Exactly, surely the greatest, wisest spiritual entity in the universe would not have created a place like hell for the logic of eternally punishing sinners and treating all sinners in the same way (afaik there are no varying degrees of punishment) is basic and mundane. There is nothing infinitely wise about this and it would seem and as 'the athesist' says portain to the time it was first concieved.

40crush41

as far as anyone knows, nobody knows the specifics of hell, and nobody knows the specifics of heaven.

Eyes has not seen, Ear has not heard.

stevejazzx

40crush41 wrote:

as far as anyone knows, nobody knows the specifics of hell, and nobody knows the specifics of heaven.

Eyes has not seen, Ear has not heard.

Waaaa.........?????
Anyone else?

BrianCalgary

turbot wrote:

BrianCalgary,

You are exactly the kind of oppressive christian, unaware of your own thought processes in a way that you attempt to impose your belief on others, that I consider to be the most harmful and destructive type.
.

How have I personally ever oppressed anyone?

turbot wrote:

You *think* you share the same views, based upon your inept ability to be precise in your thought, and to understand the psychology governing how people build maps, models and views of the world. .

So explain to us all the psychology of maps, models, and world views and how they work?

turbot wrote:

Just because you have organised a bunch of people in your mind whom you think agree with you, doesn't mean that they agree with you. You might think this, and even believe it totally. You don't understand how your thinking process affects this, or why it's stupid. .

I know because we communicate our thoughts, and ideas.

turbot wrote:

Since you can't climb inside their heads, you literally don't understand the thought processes that govern the beliefs you are upholding..

They tell me with words their thought processes

turbot wrote:

You don't understand that for every single word, you have a signficantly different inner representation than everyone else. You don't understand that the people you cite and imagine have the same beliefs as you, will never share exactly the same beleif system. There are too many variables in the universe and in your minds and neurology and language and ways of interacting with reality. Do you understand this?..

I have no idea what you mean, do we only imagine what people tell us?

turbot wrote:

Through these experiences, I have had numerous experiences of changing my entire belief systems, over and over and over again.

I have personally gone from believing in God, to holding numerous and totally contrary. With particular reference to belief systems, I have extensively studied the works of Robert Anton Wilson, Richard Bandler, Robert Dilts, who write about belief systems, along with many marketeers who attempt to influence people. These experiences, collectively have led me to my personal belief systems. I can choose what I believe, and use such beliefs usefully. I suspect you do not have this mental elasticity, which is why you behave so ignorantly.

Please elaborate on where I have been ignorant? and how I have behaved as such?

turbot wrote:

Wow. You are so ignorant.

Firstly, everything you've read, and your interpretations are inside your head, and collectively form your model of the World.

Maybe you have found ways of making sense of the bible that include organising each different scripture to have exactly equivalent meanings to you. This is you personally. Don't you realise that a different person could read the same verses, and reach a different interpretation, and it is this very difference that makes people interesting?

Don't you realise that if you were smarter, you could find ways to understand everything so it fits together, and with the same content and find ways to understand everything so it completely disagrees with itself. Just because you have used one limited process for understanding the bible means you are just ignorant of the process of understanding itself.

Why don't you enlighten us as to what disagrees with itself and tell me what is the only process I have used for understanding the Bible?

BrianCalgary

turbot wrote:

- I also suspect:
You do not have a lot of fun, nor do you laugh regularly and often, at least 4 times an hour
- People find it hard to be around you. Inside you, you have a driving insistance to be right. You find anything that compromises your belief system uncomfortable. A part of you is scared of discovering you are not right. This fear forms the basis of living in ignorance.

I think you would have to ask all the kids that I coach and teach, their parents. My friends at church, soccer, football, those that business associates that I work with and have worked with. They will probably be a better gauge on how much I laugh and how much fune I am.

turbot wrote:

-If you truly believe your belief system is the right one, why should you be afraid? Why do you demonstrate you have no clue about how belief systems are constructed, installed, modified?

What am I afraid of and where have I shown this fear? Explain to us how belief systems are constructed, installed and modified?





Do you speak more than one language?

French and English, a few phrases in Italian, Spanish and Gaelic.

Do you speak the original languages of the bible?

No, that is why one would use dictionaries.

Don't you realise an exact translation is impossible due to grammar differences amongst languages, and these same differences literally shape the thought processes of people who use them?

That's is why one would use different translations and the origianl to come to a conclusion.

If you claim to be a scholar of the bible, how do you explain the vasty differing interpretations of the Worlds leading scholar in biblical texts, Zaccharia Sitchin? He reaches vastly different interpertations than those popular ones bandied about in the churchs I have experience of.

Never claimed to be ascholar. Just a student. Why don't you tell us about Zaccharia Sitchin and his interpretations?



OK. Lets have a contest about who can best back up their belief system.

My belief system is grounded in multiple, highly developed processes for exploring the universe:
- Experientially testing the extent to which I can change my whole belief system, to understand personally how it is constructed
- Experientially testing multiple approaches to spirituality and what I can do with them, including how I can help and heal other people, including what happens when I operate through vastly diverse belief systems
- Reading widely and extensively
- Exposing myself to a vast array of sensory experiences
- Learning from people in all walks of life
- Conversing and interacting with people from all backgrounds and faiths, including christians, muslims, wiccans, voudons, agnostics, gnostics, freemasons, occultists, psychics, druids, theoretical physicists, psychologists, monks (of different faiths) therapists to name but a few. Have you done this?

There seems to be a lot based on experiences. How does that relate to truth? I am interested to know how you help and heal people?


Since you only have a very limited and short statement about my viewpoint, how do you know my viewpoint matches that seen in popular media, government institutions? You don't know why *my* viewpoint is, other than a very select range of statements you comment on sloppily.

Same way that you know that I'm no fun and follow blindly along with what has been fed me by the Christian church.

turbot wrote:

-Because I'm expressing sentiments that I think hell is an idea used to control people, you think that this means my viewpoint matches that expressed in the popular media and government institutions. Firstly, there is no one viewpoint expressed in such areas, there are thousands. Secondly, I've only been exposed to a spectrum of these expressed in popular media.

Of course there are thousands. How can they all be right? Where has Hell been used to control people?

God is not a person. God is not an individual. God is a word that a significant cluster of the populace of the World use as a term to refer to a variety of understandings; ranging from a guy with a beard in the sky, to an all knowing being, to an idea associated with source energy and the afterlife. The universe is much more complex, and sophisticated than anything you can represent in your brain. It's bigger than the biggest conceptions of what is real. If you don't understand how your brain works in this equation, you make ignorant assertions. There are multiple definitions for God. God is something different to each person who uses that. Until you realise this you will be stuck in a thought trap that makes you, to me, sound foolish and stupid.

I have now lost track as to how many times you have called me stupid, ignorant or foolish. You mention that the universe is to big and complex that I can figure. Have you got it figured. If so, tell us all about it?

And please, study Zen. You demonstrate complete ignorance about how you, as the perceiver, in your brain, make sense of the information in your senses

How is studying zen going to be beneficial?

BrianCalgary

turbot wrote:

-Please can you explain:
- Why are there differing stories of the Garden of Eden, some of which include Lillith?
- Why is the story of the virgin birth of Jesus by Mary suspiciously similar to the stories of the Persian Mother Goddess, Anahita, which predate the biblical stories by 5000 years?
- Why did the God in the bible, during the great flood, choose to kill every animal on the planet, except two of each that Noah herded into an ark? Did God know nothing about genetics? Why did God kill all the baby animals? Is this not a vicious and horrible thing to do?
- Why are churches across the World built upon old pagan worship grounds?
- What happens to devout buddhist monks when they die?
- What would happen to your belief system if you gave up christianity for lent? Would Jesus consider this to be a sacrifice?

-There is only one account of the Garden of Eden in the Bible. Chapter 1 of Genesis is an overall description. Chapter 2 focuses on Day 6.

-Probably because a virgin birth is considered a miracle in all cultures. I don’t think that the Persian Goddess Anahita actually lived whereas Jesus and Mary did.

-He also spared seven of certain kinds, I’ll ask Him the specifics when I meet Him face to face. He developed genetics, so yes. Not as vicious as what mankind was doing to each other at the time. Besides the animals went to Heaven,, so they were better off. J

-Probably a good spot to put them. Who cares where they are, it is what they are doing that is important. Are they bearing spiritual fruit?

-They don’t know Christ so they are off to Hell (the simple answer)

-I wouldn’t give up Christianity for lent or for anything. Why would I?

BrianCalgary

40crush41 wrote:

as far as anyone knows, nobody knows the specifics of hell, and nobody knows the specifics of heaven.

Eyes has not seen, Ear has not heard.

Sorry for the sojourn. I'll take a poll: Should I continue to respond to turbot, or is everyone tired of the exchange?

Heaven is described in Revelation. So is Hell. Jesus also decribes Hell in the NT in a few places. I'm terrible at remembering references, but I can get them for you.

As a Christian my desire is to be in the presence of my Lord. A place where there a no more tears and pain. (Also the best soccer fields imaginable, no mud in the 6 yard box:) )

Whereas Hell is ouside of community with God.

Dades

BrianCalgary wrote:

I'll take a poll: Should I continue to respond to turbot, or is everyone tired of the exchange?

Apart from being way OT it's clearly not going to go anywhere, though it's hard to resist.
I may be a sceptic but do I believe in trolls.

BrianCalgary wrote:

(Also the best soccer fields imaginable, no mud in the 6 yard box)

Heaven is high grade astroturf!