Hell

[the_light]

Hell is a holy consequence - it is God ordained.

If you suffer in hell for eternity, then the punishment is infinitely greater than the offenses you committed while on earth! God is the definition of justice, so how can this paradox make sense?

I'd also like to know why any suffering at all makes sense.

Either hell is where you are actively tortured... or its the new-age toned-down version where you just suffer with regret for your decision.

If you're being actively tortured by a being (ie Satan, demons), then I am especially confused by hell. You conclude a god doesn't exist, and the retaliation of that god is to cast you out of his presence, leaving you to be harassed by the evil fallen angels (who are not in god's presence for an entirely different reason - pride, jealousy, etc).

If regret for not being in his presence is your hell... then why would God leave you? If you genuinely wanted to serve God, why would he not allow you?

I once had this paradox easily explained (in my own mind). I saw unbelievers on the same level as Satan, they knew (maybe deep down inside) that God existed. By actively rejecting him, unbelievers were essentially requesting hell. The problem is that explanation requires everyone to know that God exists. Even the Bible says we should accept that God exists, but how does that appeal make sense unless someone can honestly believe there is no god?

[DukeOfEastaboga]

Hell is a holy consequence - it is God ordained.

If you suffer in hell for eternity, then the punishment is infinitely greater than the offenses you committed while on earth! God is the definition of justice, so how can this paradox make sense?

I'd also like to know why any suffering at all makes sense.

Either hell is where you are actively tortured... or its the new-age toned-down version where you just suffer with regret for your decision.

If you're being actively tortured by a being (ie Satan, demons), then I am especially confused by hell. You conclude a god doesn't exist, and the retaliation of that god is to cast you out of his presence, leaving you to be harassed by the evil fallen angels (who are not in god's presence for an entirely different reason - pride, jealousy, etc).

If regret for not being in his presence is your hell... then why would God leave you? If you genuinely wanted to serve God, why would he not allow you?

I once had this paradox easily explained (in my own mind). I saw unbelievers on the same level as Satan, they knew (maybe deep down inside) that God existed. By actively rejecting him, unbelievers were essentially requesting hell. The problem is that explanation requires everyone to know that God exists. Even the Bible says we should accept that God exists, but how does that appeal make sense unless someone can honestly believe there is no god? 1) How is hell God ordained? Hell was created for satan and his demons, and was never entended for humans but when adam and eve sinned they could no longer enter into the presence of a holy God. 2) God offered up his son as a payment for you sin and if you reject that then that rejection is infinatly greater than any punishment God can give you. 3) NO WHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT SAY THAT SATAN TORTUES PEOPLE. He is bound to hell after the last judgment just like everyone else. 4) Question for you, If there is no God then how did life begin? Let me save you some time. Evolutionist would say that the conditions for such an occurance were just perfect, but they can not explain what those conditions were. So to put it bluntly they have no answer for this question.( so much for science) However the search for this answer brings people to the realization that there is a God.

[salvationfound]

If you suffer in hell for eternity, then the punishment is infinitely greater than the offenses you committed while on earth!


First off sounds like an objective statement. Why isn't it possible for a crime to constitute an
unlimited sentence? If God feels that a crime you've committed deserves unlimited
sentence why is he objectively wrong?

2nd how do you know the person still isn't committing the offense in Hell? If they are then your
point has no merit.



I'd also like to know why any suffering at all makes sense.


What do you believe is the suffering that occurs to a person in Hell?



Either hell is where you are actively tortured... or its the new-age toned-down version where you just suffer with regret for your decision.


I always think of Hell as a place where God lets go of you completely. Everything else is the
consequence of that happening but God's involvement is nothing more than letting go.



then I am especially confused by hell. You conclude a god doesn't exist, and the retaliation of that god is to cast you out of his presence,


So no matter how badly you may reject God he should always do things for you? There is never
a moment where God is allowed to say, "You've rejected me! Enough is enough! I leave you
alone now". Sounds to me like the cold-hearted thinking is from you not from God.



If you genuinely wanted to serve God, why would he not allow you?


Who are you talking about? Obviously I want to serve God and he allows me. Are you talking
about people currently in Hell?



I once had this paradox easily explained (in my own mind). I saw unbelievers on the same level as Satan, they knew (maybe deep down inside) that God existed. By actively rejecting him, unbelievers were essentially requesting hell. The problem is that explanation requires everyone to know that God exists. Even the Bible says we should accept that God exists, but how does that appeal make sense unless someone can honestly believe there is no god?


Since your going by your own perspective and not necessarily mine I see no reason to respond
to this. Although I have to say if I had this view I might have a problem with Hell myself.

[M.Talkingsworth]

Hell is a holy consequence - it is God ordained.

If you suffer in hell for eternity, then the punishment is infinitely greater than the offenses you committed while on earth! God is the definition of justice, so how can this paradox make sense?

I'd also like to know why any suffering at all makes sense.

Either hell is where you are actively tortured... or its the new-age toned-down version where you just suffer with regret for your decision.

If you're being actively tortured by a being (ie Satan, demons), then I am especially confused by hell. You conclude a god doesn't exist, and the retaliation of that god is to cast you out of his presence, leaving you to be harassed by the evil fallen angels (who are not in god's presence for an entirely different reason - pride, jealousy, etc).

If regret for not being in his presence is your hell... then why would God leave you? If you genuinely wanted to serve God, why would he not allow you?

I once had this paradox easily explained (in my own mind). I saw unbelievers on the same level as Satan, they knew (maybe deep down inside) that God existed. By actively rejecting him, unbelievers were essentially requesting hell. The problem is that explanation requires everyone to know that God exists. Even the Bible says we should accept that God exists, but how does that appeal make sense unless someone can honestly believe there is no god?

Hi The_light,

Just to clear things up from the beginning, I think that there are lots of paradoxes inherent in the traditional views of hell. Despite this, it is an interesting topic of discussion and I would like to add my thoughts to the logical possibilitiy of the matter.

Here are some thoughts:

1) The Bible often describes God as wrathful and vengeful. While this does not sit well with some concepts of God it is undeniably in scripture. Perhaps after the trouble God went through in creating people and then becoming a human and dying on the cross, He is angry that people will still reject him. Perhaps from his perspective this is completely fair and since he runs the show that is the end of the story. This certainly seems to wreak havoc on the "omnibenevolence" which is often ascribed to God. I think this can be overlooked, at least by the Biblical Christian, because there are scriptural reasons to reject omnibenevolence. In fact the existence of hell is one of them!

2) I think that when the Bible was written, belief in God was more universal than it is today due to God's necessity to explain phenomena which we now understand to be 'natural'. Therefore, those people who rejected God presumably did so to escape the moral implications of God and not simply due to a lack of evidence. I think that this is why there is little addressed to those who simply don't believe. It is noteworthy that in Jesus' teachings, those who were condemned to hell were condemned for doing wrong things and being wicked. I think the Bible simply does not address the issue of atheism.

3) It is possible that once created, humans cannot be destroyed completely. Perhaps there is a "soul/spirit" that lives on and must be dealt with somehow. If the soul is unfit for heaven due to choices made during life, then there must be somewhere else for it to go. Presumably if this other place is home to people who are "wicked" and this will make it an unpleasant place to abide.

I think that Hell is a logical possibility if one bases his theology on the Bible alone. If one tries to impose other ideas on God not found in the Bible, then I think logical contradictions will crop up.


I have tried to explain that I understand the difference between rejecting the concept of God due to a desire to do moral evil and rejecting God due to a belief that there is insufficient evidence to warrant belief. I do not mean to imply that all non-theists believe as they do because they wish to be free to perform wicked deeds as they please.

Cheers,

Matt

[the_light]

Matt, thank you for your response, after the first two I was beginning to worry that nobody had anything to say about this.

Duke attempted to deny his religion's reality...


How is hell God ordained?

Then proceeded to declare scientific ignorance, somehow proving hell was ok...


Question for you, If there is no God then how did life begin?

Then SF answered my question by repeating it...


Why isn't it possible for a crime to constitute an unlimited sentence?

Then totally confused me with completely nonsensical statements like...


Sounds to me like the cold-hearted thinking is from you not from God.

But your response... no denial, no claims of ultimate understanding... just plain honesty.


Here are some thoughts:

1) The Bible often describes God as wrathful and vengeful. While this does not sit well with some concepts of God it is undeniably in scripture. Perhaps after the trouble God went through in creating people and then becoming a human and dying on the cross, He is angry that people will still reject him. Perhaps from his perspective this is completely fair and since he runs the show that is the end of the story. This certainly seems to wreak havoc on the "omnibenevolence" which is often ascribed to God. I think this can be overlooked, at least by the Biblical Christian, because there are scriptural reasons to reject omnibenevolence. In fact the existence of hell is one of them!

2) I think that when the Bible was written, belief in God was more universal than it is today due to God's necessity to explain phenomena which we now understand to be 'natural'. Therefore, those people who rejected God presumably did so to escape the moral implications of God and not simply due to a lack of evidence. I think that this is why there is little addressed to those who simply don't believe. It is noteworthy that in Jesus' teachings, those who were condemned to hell were condemned for doing wrong things and being wicked. I think the Bible simply does not address the issue of atheism.

Neither do I... except where it says (in atleast one place) that people should believe in God's existence... and that the wonders of the world should make it clear as day that God made this place. It also says we are born into sin... so a saving is necessary no matter what. These things might have been sufficient 2000 years ago, but today we are no longer impressed by lightening, the stars, or denial of evolutionary science.


3) It is possible that once created, humans cannot be destroyed completely. Perhaps there is a "soul/spirit" that lives on and must be dealt with somehow. If the soul is unfit for heaven due to choices made during life, then there must be somewhere else for it to go. Presumably if this other place is home to people who are "wicked" and this will make it an unpleasant place to abide.

The destruction of the soul is something that interests me, thanks for bringing it up. It seems like something that should be so easy for an infinitely powerful God... after all, he created it, why not put it out of its eternal misery?

I understand your view of rejecting God, and the two distinct types of "rejection"... and that is one of my issues with the consistency of hell... I can imagine there have been a countless number of people who didn't accept Christ because it simply didn't make sense to them with their worldview & knowledge set. It just doesn't make sense that those people should be in eternal torment for not accepting what to them is a wild claim... if you demanded of me today that I believe in the Christian God... I could not force myself to do this... I could say it with my lips, I could walk the walk, maybe even think just like a Christian, but deep down I would still feel the same - the world is godless.

Its not enough for a skeptical unbeliever to hear from Christians "well your logic just doesn't work"... I guess thats where being infinitely less than God's greatness is Christianity's shelter.

[Word_Swordsman]

Hell is a holy consequence - it is God ordained.

If you suffer in hell for eternity, then the punishment is infinitely greater than the offenses you committed while on earth! God is the definition of justice, so how can this paradox make sense?

For some folks on earth, life here is all there is. A murderer is often put in prison for the rest of his life. Why do we do that? To punish alone? part of the thinking is to SEPARATE murderers from society. It's along the lines of most people not willing to let a known child molester babysit their children. We don't want them in our homes or wandering the neighborhood. God doesn't want sinners who don't repent to share eternity with Him and the rest of us going there. They just won't fit there. They won't make tried and true citizens in Heaven. So perhaps you think God should show justice there by allowing what men don't allow here?


I'd also like to know why any suffering at all makes sense.

It is injustice to connect God to deliberate imposition of suffering. He would no more do that than a good parent would pinch a child just to teach him a lesson. Suffering comes because of sin and sinners in the world. Yet, Jesus submitted to suffering at His trial and on the cross for us. In His scheme of things no suffering is required of God's children. If you stray outside His protection, you will likely suffer.


Either hell is where you are actively tortured... or its the new-age toned-down version where you just suffer with regret for your decision.

Sinners all will be there in hell, each suffering because of how they exercised freewill to choose how to live. Satan and his angels will be there suffering too. Hell itself is nothing but a place of suffering. If you climb into a hot oven, will you suffer because God didn't didn't stop you, or because you climbed in?


If you're being actively tortured by a being (ie Satan, demons), then I am especially confused by hell. You conclude a god doesn't exist, and the retaliation of that god is to cast you out of his presence, leaving you to be harassed by the evil fallen angels (who are not in god's presence for an entirely different reason - pride, jealousy, etc).

As others have already written, there is no indication Satan or any being will impart suffering to you. If you walk into the middle of the Sahara without provisions, you will likely suffer not due to some torturer, but the conditions there. Most beings capable of inflicting harm would probably stay out of there.


If regret for not being in his presence is your hell... then why would God leave you? If you genuinely wanted to serve God, why would he not allow you?

God allows you to carry out your own will now on earth. If He forced you to serve Him you would call Him a slave master. The regret you mention will be an emotional thing accompanying suffering for choosing to follow Satan there. Anyone truly wanting to serve God is certainly welcome to follow Jesus. Following Him leads you to Heaven.


I once had this paradox easily explained (in my own mind). I saw unbelievers on the same level as Satan, they knew (maybe deep down inside) that God existed. By actively rejecting him, unbelievers were essentially requesting hell. The problem is that explanation requires everyone to know that God exists. Even the Bible says we should accept that God exists, but how does that appeal make sense unless someone can honestly believe there is no god?

The Bible makes strong cases for not believing God exists making people into the lowest of fools. There is just too much seen, tasted, felt, heard, or otherwise experienced to rule out existence of God. REJECTION of that living God is what puts you following Satan to his destiny. Believing in your heart there is no God is where the evidence against an unbeliever rests. God reads the heart. Words of a man's lips are too unreliable, though ultimately do reveal what is buried deepest. If a lifestyle speaks heavily of a person's declaration there is no God, no responsibility to a higher being, then that goes a long way toward a decision that person is rejecting God. The ultimate and irrevocable rejection is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. once a person sinks that low there is no more sacrifice, no blood, no hope for repentance. But even in that God reads the heart to determine the sincerity of the words.

Jim

[M.Talkingsworth]

Matt, thank you for your response, after the first two I was beginning to worry that nobody had anything to say about this.

I know how you feel. Sometimes it is difficult when I think I have a wonderful thread and I get a response other than what I desired.



Neither do I... except where it says (in atleast one place) that people should believe in God's existence... and that the wonders of the world should make it clear as day that God made this place. It also says we are born into sin... so a saving is necessary no matter what. These things might have been sufficient 2000 years ago, but today we are no longer impressed by lightening, the stars, or denial of evolutionary science.


I actually think there is reason to challenge the idea that we are born sinful. The concept of original sin is not explicit in scripture, but has been inferred from scripture. You may not care though... just thought I'd throw that in there.



The destruction of the soul is something that interests me, thanks for bringing it up. It seems like something that should be so easy for an infinitely powerful God... after all, he created it, why not put it out of its eternal misery?

I understand your view of rejecting God, and the two distinct types of "rejection"... and that is one of my issues with the consistency of hell... I can imagine there have been a countless number of people who didn't accept Christ because it simply didn't make sense to them with their worldview & knowledge set. It just doesn't make sense that those people should be in eternal torment for not accepting what to them is a wild claim... if you demanded of me today that I believe in the Christian God... I could not force myself to do this... I could say it with my lips, I could walk the walk, maybe even think just like a Christian, but deep down I would still feel the same - the world is godless.

Its not enough for a skeptical unbeliever to hear from Christians "well your logic just doesn't work"... I guess thats where being infinitely less than God's greatness is Christianity's shelter.

Have you ever had an experience that made you think that God is there?

Cheers,

Matt

[Zeluvia]

If you graphed the bible...with the personality of God on one axis, and the concept of hell on the other....would you see god get nicer while hell got worse?

Hell started as sheol, just a place of the dead....nothing happening there...and ended up a burning pit of fire and brimstone...

God started vengeful, wrathful, jealous, and kind of immature IMO and ended up Love....

Curiouser and Curiouser ....

[Lost]

I know how you feel. Sometimes it is difficult when I think I have a wonderful thread and I get a response other than what I desired.



I actually think there is reason to challenge the idea that we are born sinful. The concept of original sin is not explicit in scripture, but has been inferred from scripture. You may not care though... just thought I'd throw that in there.



Have you ever had an experience that made you think that God is there?

Cheers,

Matt

hmm well then you would have to challenge Paul then - have you fully tested the foundations for his doctrines?
I have just started doing that and I am not pleased with what I have found so far.
You must scrub your brain of all the Paul based doctrines that are stuck in there tho to start with and then assume nothing and just look at it as tho you have never seen or heard it before.

I am not predicting what my eventual attitude towards him will be - I wouldn't be that silly - my first impressions could be totally wrong - maybe.

[Glenn P]

Hell is a holy consequence - it is God ordained.OK.

If you suffer in hell for eternity, then the punishment is infinitely greater than the offenses you committed while on earth!OK, let's grant that. I don't believe the doctrine of eternal torment is biblical, but sure, let's grant that.

God is the definition of justice, so how can this paradox make sense?God is the definition of justice? That has no linguistic meaning at all!

[the_light]

The Bible makes strong cases for not believing God exists making people into the lowest of fools. There is just too much seen, tasted, felt, heard, or otherwise experienced to rule out existence of God. REJECTION of that living God is what puts you following Satan to his destiny. Believing in your heart there is no God is where the evidence against an unbeliever rests. God reads the heart. Words of a man's lips are too unreliable, though ultimately do reveal what is buried deepest. If a lifestyle speaks heavily of a person's declaration there is no God, no responsibility to a higher being, then that goes a long way toward a decision that person is rejecting God. The ultimate and irrevocable rejection is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. once a person sinks that low there is no more sacrifice, no blood, no hope for repentance. But even in that God reads the heart to determine the sincerity of the words.

YES, this is something I have said repeatedly (maybe not enough in this thread)... as Christians, you ASSUME that everyone knows that God must exist, you ASSUME everyone knows that science is evil and claims of spirits & miracles are actually real... you ASSUME it is evil intentions that leads to denying God's existence.

Those are bad assumptions... a result of being saturated with religious ideas, often starting from childhood.

[Zeluvia]

Originally posted by Word_Swordsman
The Bible makes strong cases for not believing God exists making people into the lowest of fools. There is just too much seen, tasted, felt, heard, or otherwise experienced to rule out existence of God. REJECTION of that living God is what puts you following Satan to his destiny. Believing in your heart there is no God is where the evidence against an unbeliever rests. God reads the heart. Words of a man's lips are too unreliable, though ultimately do reveal what is buried deepest. If a lifestyle speaks heavily of a person's declaration there is no God, no responsibility to a higher being, then that goes a long way toward a decision that person is rejecting God. The ultimate and irrevocable rejection is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. once a person sinks that low there is no more sacrifice, no blood, no hope for repentance. But even in that God reads the heart to determine the sincerity of the words.

Define the following terms as you are using them please:

Heart
Blasphemy
Experience
Living god


Responsiblity to a higher being....what specific responsiblities?

sacrafice, blood, ???? what do they have to do with the situation?

I suspect you are repeating what you have been taught, and have not really THOUGHT about what all this means, since these words do not sound original, or even in places coherent.

There are Christians on this forum that can argue very well without all this obscure, emotional, primitive language about the concepts that underlie what you are trying badly to express.

[the_light]

I actually think there is reason to challenge the idea that we are born sinful. The concept of original sin is not explicit in scripture, but has been inferred from scripture. You may not care though... just thought I'd throw that in there.

Whoa now... I think that is a bit extreme... don't most studious Christians hold the doctrine of original sin? What about logistics... If original sin didn't exist... then it would only be right for us to clear an entire continent of people... a blank slate... and dump a bunch of babies on it... Set it up so they could fend for themselves & successfully grow to adulthood... they & their decendents would be separated from the rest of us sinful folk, and could start the garden of eden over!... Well, thats a little crazy, but the underlying concept exists - w/o original sin we could potentially start over, right?


Have you ever had an experience that made you think that God is there?

No. Not yet.

[M.Talkingsworth]

hmm well then you would have to challenge Paul then - have you fully tested the foundations for his doctrines?
I have just started doing that and I am not pleased with what I have found so far.
You must scrub your brain of all the Paul based doctrines that are stuck in there tho to start with and then assume nothing and just look at it as tho you have never seen or heard it before.

I am not predicting what my eventual attitude towards him will be - I wouldn't be that silly - my first impressions could be totally wrong - maybe.

Hey Lost,

If I just stuck my foot in my mouth with challenging original sin, then it wouldn't be the first time I've tasted my own tread! My memory is not perfect, but I remember being somewhat unconvinced when reading typical scriptural "proofs" of "original sin".

Regarding "scrubbing my brain", a lot of that has been happening recently. For the better I hope!

Cheers,

Matt

[M.Talkingsworth]

Whoa now... I think that is a bit extreme... don't most studious Christians hold the doctrine of original sin?

I have never looked at the statistics, but I do know that many of the noteworthy theologians since the reformation have held to the idea of original sin. You are most likely correct in your intuition that most studious christians hold the idea of original sin. In that respect, it may be a little extreme. On the other hand, being in the minority does not always correlate with being wrong. :smile:


What about logistics... If original sin didn't exist... then it would only be right for us to clear an entire continent of people... a blank slate... and dump a bunch of babies on it... Set it up so they could fend for themselves & successfully grow to adulthood... they & their decendents would be separated from the rest of us sinful folk, and could start the garden of eden over!... Well, thats a little crazy, but the underlying concept exists - w/o original sin we could potentially start over, right?


Assuming we don't accitentally place any trees of knowledge of good and evil or serpents on aforementioned continent! Also, you can't have any of my babies. I want to keep them.

I suppose it would work until one of the babies decided to sin. Remember, according to Christian doctrine, Adam and Eve were created perfect and sinned, so sin came second. In genesis, sin was the result of a choice (or *was* the choice, depending on how you look at it) , not the cause. That is to say, adam and eve, with some prompting from the devil, brought sin to earth. I suppose if you wanted to get to the start of sin, according to Christian doctrine, it started with Satan's rebellion in heaven, but I am limiting my discussion to humanity.

Frankly, I think that sin is something that people make, not a part of people so even if you took newborns and somehow were able to cause them to form a society with no contact from sinful people, they would probably follow Adam and Eve and create some sin of their own.



No. Not yet.

What would such an experience entail?

Cheers,

Matt

[Zeluvia]

Original sin to me is a crazy concept, and I would like to know the history of it.

Any references?

[M.Talkingsworth]

Original sin to me is a crazy concept, and I would like to know the history of it.

Any references?

I think that it is strongly based on inferences from paul's writings and was first introduced by Augustine of Hippo.

Cheers,

Matt

[drachronicler]

Sheol of the Hebrews was simply a quiet resting place for the souls of the dead, good and bad.

We do not see a punishing hell in Jewish theology until Platonic Hell was introduced into the region by the Greek conquerors. Originally it was Gehenna, reserved only for gentiles.

The idea of Satan being cast into a lake of fire is taken directly from the Zoroastrian fate of the evil dragon Ahriman which the New Testament Satan was based. He is even bound and cast into an abyss first.

For centuries, it was a Christian belief that the wicked were simply consumed and destroyed by heavenly "dragons" as we see in the Apocolypse of Baruch. The dragon's name was "Hades" in this version and we see this depiction of virtually every Christian cathedral, of angels herding sinners into the dragons mouth. Even Satan is sometimes shown being consumed by this larger dragon.

The original "fiery serpent" Seraphim, (before their transformation into "cartoon angels") were also apparently these ancient hell dragons of early Judao Christian beliefs. There are a number of representations of God judging sinners with the wicked being swallowed by the reptilian guardians, who in some cases actually form the heavely throne with their coiled tails. It is interesting that other cultures shared this idea since the earliest times, such as the Ammat monster that swallowed the wicked in the ancient egyptian religion.

What basis might there be for this universal belief? Perhaps it was believed that the otherwise "immortal" soul could either be eternally trapped, or literally consumed/destroyed if ingested by a larger creature.

And then Dante "invented" the modern Christian conception of Hell, ruled by Satan, with an army of demons to punish people. The wickedest in this hell are still consumed by Satan, much like the early Judao-Christian Hell dragon, but most are simply tormented for eternirty. This Hell was more popular than simply being consumed by the "Hell Dragon", becasue it gave people hope of escape as Dante managed to do in the book. In a way, this is a latter day version of the Egyptian book of the Dead, with its "Instructions" on how to escape/survive the penalty of wickedness.

So in the final analysis, Christian Hell of today is based on a popular Medieval novel.

[the_light]

Sorry for the wait... took some days off from tweb... good ol relaxing time (this place is kind of stressful for us non-christians... its rough trying to convince the unbelievers :wink: )...


What would such an experience entail?

I'm really not sure, I can't answer that because everything I have witnessed thus far has not been compatible with a higher god.

[M.Talkingsworth]

Sorry for the wait... took some days off from tweb... good ol relaxing time (this place is kind of stressful for us non-christians... its rough trying to convince the unbelievers :wink: )...

Shoot, I can definitely relate. My other favorite website to go to is a blog called Daylight Atheism. Talk about throwing rocks at the proverbial hornets nest! I have to take breaks from there too. This is my relaxing place.


I'm really not sure, I can't answer that because everything I have witnessed thus far has not been compatible with a higher god.

Life sure is a booger isn't it!

Cheers,

Matt

[M.Talkingsworth]

... its rough trying to convince the unbelievers :wink: )...




One thought on this. I think that to some people orthodox Christianity with all it's creed makes enough sense to make them content. There are others who recognize that some things do not make sense, but they feel like they have perceived something real in it.

cheers matt

[Tladatsi]

Hell is a holy consequence - it is God ordained.

Oh, where in the Bible does it say that? Nowhere. There is no "hell" in the Bible. In both the OT and the NT the dead, both the righteous and the sinner sleep beneath the earth in Sheol.

An example is found in Gen 37:35where Jacob says "No, I shall go down to Sheol to my son, mourning." Thus his father wept for him.” Again in Gen 42:38he says again “My son will not go down with you, for his brother Joseph is dead, and he alone is left of his mother's children. If anything should happen to him, you would bring my gray head down to Sheol in deep sorrow." Certainly Jacob does not believe his son Joseph is burning in hell and that he plans on joining him.

Likewise in 1 Sam 28Saul uses a medium in Endor so he can speak with Samuel. The medium sees a spirit (elohim) rising up from the earth. When Samuel’s ghost realizes what has happened he complains of being "disturbed", as if he were awakened from sleep.

The souls of the sinners are found there too. In Numbers 16,the rebellious levites are consumed by the earth and sent to Sheol alive. In Kings and Chronicles the common phrase to described recently dead kings was he slept with his (fore) fathers, even those kings who "did evil in the eyes of God".

The souls of the dead, saint and sinner alike, are not active but quiescent. In Psalm 115:17it says “The dead cannot sing praises to the Lord, for they have gone into the silence of the grave.” In Psalm 6:5it says “For there is no mention of You in death; In Sheol who will give You thanks?” In Psalm 31:17it says “Don't let me be disgraced, O LORD, for I call out to you for help. Let the wicked be disgraced; let them lie silent in Sheol.”

In Mat 27:52it describes those who arose from their graves when Jesus rose as "those who slept". Paul uses the same description in 1 Cr 15:20. Paul in 1 Th 4 compares the living with those who were put to sleep, i.e. the dead. Paul tells the Thesselonians that when the Lord descends from heaven, those sleeping (believers) will arise and along with the living (believers) shall meet the Lord in the air (between heaven and earth). The believers who were dead were clearly not in heaven or hell or all of 1 Th 4: 13-18 makes no sense whatsoever.

One of the most ancient expressions of the Christian thought is the Apostles Creed , which says - in part - "He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended into hell (katelthonta eis ta katôtata). On the third day he rose again". Between His death on the cross and resurrection Jesus descended into hell to preach to the dead. This story is told in 1 Peter 3:19-20and elipically in 1 Peter 4:6, 2Corinthians 2:14(if Sheol is included in "everyplace"), and Ephesian 4:8-10 (if we take that his ascent is from hell and the captives are the dead). This story has traditionally been described in English as the Harrowing of Hell. It is obviously at odds with the idea of the good going to heaven after death while the evil suffering in eternal hellfire.

As a general closing comment, nowhere in the Bible does it ever say that anyone goes to heaven, good or bad, when they die (except Enoch who did not die). Similarly, there is no fiery hell below (everything in Revelations occurs after God's Kingdom is established here on Earth and after the general resurection).

[the_light]

AAAHHH... how often does this database recovery thing happen? So much for this thread, I'm not going to retype everything and try to get back on track.

[Tladatsi]

AAAHHH... how often does this database recovery thing happen? So much for this thread, I'm not going to retype everything and try to get back on track.

It is a judgement! This is what hell would be like.

[nickcopernicus]

Hell is a holy consequence - it is God ordained.

If you suffer in hell for eternity, then the punishment is infinitely greater than the offenses you committed while on earth! God is the definition of justice, so how can this paradox make sense?

I'd also like to know why any suffering at all makes sense.

Either hell is where you are actively tortured... or its the new-age toned-down version where you just suffer with regret for your decision.

If you're being actively tortured by a being (ie Satan, demons), then I am especially confused by hell. You conclude a god doesn't exist, and the retaliation of that god is to cast you out of his presence, leaving you to be harassed by the evil fallen angels (who are not in god's presence for an entirely different reason - pride, jealousy, etc).

If regret for not being in his presence is your hell... then why would God leave you? If you genuinely wanted to serve God, why would he not allow you?

I once had this paradox easily explained (in my own mind). I saw unbelievers on the same level as Satan, they knew (maybe deep down inside) that God existed. By actively rejecting him, unbelievers were essentially requesting hell. The problem is that explanation requires everyone to know that God exists. Even the Bible says we should accept that God exists, but how does that appeal make sense unless someone can honestly believe there is no god?

Nick:

For Nick, hell would be having to spend an eternity with the god of Christianity, ergo if the god of Christianity exists, and the basic doctrine of Christianity true, then Nickcopernicus is going to heaven....


I mean.. No sex, drugs, or techno music? That sucks. Just hanging around Christians for an eternity worshiping god or whatever? That would get pretty boring after a few billion years.


Cheers,

Nick

[the_light]

For Nick, hell would be having to spend an eternity with the god of Christianity

Oh my. Them are fighting words


That would get pretty boring after a few billion years.

Its interesting that Christians talk about "eternity" & whatnot... God is "outside" of time, atleast thats the current reasoning... so is Heaven "outside" of time? If so, what does it mean to have an experience, or a thought when those events are time-based?

And if Heaven is "in" time... well, I agree... doing anything for an eternal amount of time would get boring... yikes... I can't imagine living for thousands of years, much less millions, billions, trillions, ugh

[nickcopernicus]

Oh my. Them are fighting words
Nick:
And they were typed with untter honesty.

the_light:
Its interesting that Christians talk about "eternity" & whatnot... God is "outside" of time, atleast thats the current reasoning... so is Heaven "outside" of time? If so, what does it mean to have an experience, or a thought when those events are time-based?

And if Heaven is "in" time... well, I agree... doing anything for an eternal amount of time would get boring... yikes... I can't imagine living for thousands of years, much less millions, billions, trillions, ugh
Nick:
At the end of the day, the_light, absurd notions such as having beings exist outside of time is ridiculous. If a being exists outside of time then it's nessesary that they don't have free will.

How exactly can one make a decision if there was never a time when they made that decision?


Cheers,

Nick

[Tladatsi]

Long ago there was a TV called "Twilight Zone".

In one episode a low life petty criminal is shot by a police officer and dies. He ends up in the after life. He gambles all the time and never looses, he can rob any liquor store and get away with it, and he has girls galore. He wonders what he did to get exactly what he wanted. So his guide takes him to his file and they review it together. Never did nothing good for nobody. After a while he gets bored, there is no real danger, he gets everything he wants with no trouble. Finally he cannot stand heaven any more and demands to be sent to hell, at least there might be something interesting there. He is then advised that he is NOT in heaven, he IS in hell.



Nick:

For Nick, hell would be having to spend an eternity with the god of Christianity, ergo if the god of Christianity exists, and the basic doctrine of Christianity true, then Nickcopernicus is going to heaven....


I mean.. No sex, drugs, or techno music? That sucks. Just hanging around Christians for an eternity worshiping god or whatever? That would get pretty boring after a few billion years.


Cheers,

Nick

[M.Talkingsworth]

And if Heaven is "in" time... well, I agree... doing anything for an eternal amount of time would get boring... yikes... I can't imagine living for thousands of years, much less millions, billions, trillions, ugh

You, sir, have clearly never surfed a perfect wave! :smile:

cheers,

Matt

[nickcopernicus]

Long ago there was a TV called "Twilight Zone".

In one episode a low life petty criminal is shot by a police officer and dies. He ends up in the after life. He gambles all the time and never looses, he can rob any liquor store and get away with it, and he has girls galore. He wonders what he did to get exactly what he wanted. So his guide takes him to his file and they review it together. Never did nothing good for nobody. After a while he gets bored, there is no real danger, he gets everything he wants with no trouble. Finally he cannot stand heaven any more and demands to be sent to hell, at least there might be something interesting there. He is then advised that he is NOT in heaven, he IS in hell.
Nick:

I do remember that TV show... It was pretty spooky like that.

Of course, if you'd seen that episode of "The Simpsons" where Homer Simpson went to hell, Satan had him eat a whoooolata doughnuts. :lol: It was supposed to make Homer hate being glutinous, but Homer still loved eating doughnuts. It was freaking hilarious.

In the end, I think that one would get bored no matter what one did. Although I have to admit that as much of a nerd and party freak as I am, doing a real live infinite Advanced Dungeons and Dragons (version 3.5) quest with Sex, drugs, and various music would not get old for at least a few billion years.


Cheers,

Nick

[M.Talkingsworth]

Nick:

I do remember that TV show... It was pretty spooky like that.

Of course, if you'd seen that episode of "The Simpsons" where Homer Simpson went to hell, Satan had him eat a whoooolata doughnuts. :lol: It was supposed to make Homer hate being glutinous, but Homer still loved eating doughnuts. It was freaking hilarious.

In the end, I think that one would get bored no matter what one did. Although I have to admit that as much of a nerd and party freak as I am, doing a real live infinite Advanced Dungeons and Dragons (version 3.5) quest with Sex, drugs, and various music would not get old for at least a few billion years.


Cheers,

Nick

Living forever would not get bored if you had your memory "dumped" every once in a while, sort of like re-incarnation.

Cheers,

Matt

[the_light]

Living forever would not get bored if you had your memory "dumped" every once in a while, sort of like re-incarnation.

Cheers,

Matt

Somehow I don't think perfect souls will have amnesia...

[nickcopernicus]

Living forever would not get bored if you had your memory "dumped" every once in a while, sort of like re-incarnation.

Cheers,

Matt
Nick:

True dat.

But as the_light pointed out....that's....not exactly what glorified superpowerd bodies do is it?

In any case, being assigned to permanent groundhogs' day.....is gay.

Cheers,

Nick

[M.Talkingsworth]

Somehow I don't think perfect souls will have amnesia...

Why?

[M.Talkingsworth]

Nick:

True dat.

But as the_light pointed out....that's....not exactly what glorified superpowerd bodies do is it?

In any case, being assigned to permanent groundhogs' day.....is gay.

Cheers,

Nick

I'm not so sure. You already said that living forever would be unbearable. I think that if I had that opportunity to live an enjoyable life over and over without realizing it, being happy all the time, I would be very tempted to choose that over dying and ceasing to exist. In any case, I am pretty sure I am not the one who makes that decision so I do not have to worry about the choice.

Cheers,


Matt

[M.Talkingsworth]

Nick:

True dat.

But as the_light pointed out....that's....not exactly what glorified superpowerd bodies do is it?

In any case, being assigned to permanent groundhogs' day.....is gay.

Cheers,

Nick

Groundhog's day was only bad because he remembered.

[nickcopernicus]

I'm not so sure. You already said that living forever would be unbearable. I think that if I had that opportunity to live an enjoyable life over and over without realizing it, being happy all the time, I would be very tempted to choose that over dying and ceasing to exist. In any case, I am pretty sure I am not the one who makes that decision so I do not have to worry about the choice.

Cheers,


Matt
Nick:
To a large degree, TW, I agree with you. However, that would raise the question as to why we don't have that in the first place. What use is earth?

Cheers,

Nick

[M.Talkingsworth]

Nick:
To a large degree, TW, I agree with you. However, that would raise the question as to why we don't have that in the first place. What use is earth?

Cheers,

Nick

Maybe we do have that already and earth is it. See you on the next time around! :smile:

Cheers,

Matt