Hell. To be or not to be?

[Paleocon]

Modern physics shows thing can come from nothing within the universe.

That's not true. But even if it were, it would still beg the question, why are the laws of physics such that something can come from nothing, as opposed to being otherwise.

The Gospel of John wasn't identified with the Apostle John until the 2nd century, no-one knows who actually authored it. And The Gospel of Matthew is a retelling of Mark, with added emphasis on Christ's divinity. Neither were authored by eye witnesses.

That is a false and unsupported claim. If you are going to refuse to believe the eyewitnesses just because you don't like what they have to say, that says more about you than it does the truth of the matter.

 

[RAMOSS]

Or scientists who unilaterally claim that God cannot exist.

Not even Dawkins says that. However, one must first ask 'What do you mean when you say God??' Can you define what you mean? What IS God? Can you define God beyond alleged actions?

 

[Ancient Herald]

Not even Dawkins says that. However, one must first ask 'What do you mean when you say God??' Can you define what you mean? What IS God? Can you define God beyond alleged actions?

I cannot define God except upon a personal level.

But i would want real proof of his (or even her as they case might be) existence, and then i'd want a long talk with that being about what he or she truly means for me and what the Bible actually says.

 

[Riveroaks]

Not even Dawkins says that. However, one must first ask 'What do you mean when you say God??' Can you define what you mean? What IS God? Can you define God beyond alleged actions?

That's a good point Ramos. Exactly right.

From ancient times there were religious definitions of God(s) and then philosophical definitions.

The earliest gods were the Babylonian, Egyptian, and Greek gods.

Then there occurred around 1450 BC the Israelite (now Jewish) God(s) -- I say God(s) because ELOHIM are a plural name.

During the Greek phase of ancient history (500 - 300 BC) the philosophers began to define God as well -- only in the singular.

Our modern pseudo-Christian name for God comes from the ancient Greek philosophers. Greek philosophy greatly influenced St. Augustine and San Tomas Aquinas, which is how the Greek philosophy got into the modern Catholic and Protestant doctrines and dogmas.

So you are right -- that is always the first thing anyone needs to define.

 

[Riveroaks]

I cannot define God except upon a personal level.

But i would want real proof of his (or even her as they case might be) existence, and then i'd want a long talk with that being about what he or she truly means for me and what the Bible actually says.

If you read Bertrand Russell's book "The History Of Western Philosophy" it will help you with that God thing.

 

[Ancient Herald]

If you read Bertrand Russell's book "The History Of Western Philosophy" it will help you with that God thing.

i have, and it didn't.

But If I may counter, you should try Erasmus's In Praise Of Folly.

You can find the full book for free at the Gutenberg project.

 

[Riveroaks]

i have, and it didn't.

But If I may counter, you should try Erasmus's In Praise Of Folly.

You can find the full book for free at the Gutenberg project.

I'm reading Russell for the 3rd time.

It takes several careful readings.

He goes into deep detail about how the concept of "God" in philosophy evolved, starting from the Olympian gods, on to the philosophical concept of God-ness, then on through the 3 broad classes of schools of philosophy -- the romanticists (who searched for and tried to prove God), the technicians (who maintain God cannot be proved), and the pragmatists (who avoid the God issue completely and focus on practical modern ethics).

 

[Goshin]

Does that mean only 144,000 people of the tribes of Israel accept Christ, or do they get in regardless of that?

During the Great Tribulation, at least... or such is my understanding of the current state of apocalyptic interpretation, which latter must always be considered a bit uncertain given the complexity of interpretation of same.

 

[Glowpun]

Lately I have been contemplating the concept of hell.

The idea of suffering for all of eternity due to having made a few poor choices seems barbaric to me.

Now some acts that are committed are heinous and barbaric almost beyond belief. But we now know and understand some people are incapable of empathy and reasoning. If someone can't make a choice about an act, if they are per-programmed, how can they be held responsible ultimately?

Why some people need that level of fear in order to control their impulses also seems barbaric to me.

If God is loving, how can a loving God condemn a weak individual to an eternity of suffering.

Do you believe in hell?
Is there a need for hell?
What will it be like?

That is the reason why I became an agnostic. Religions are made made institutions for the purpose of controlling social and political behaviors.

 

[Ancient Herald]

That is the reason why I became an agnostic. Religions are made made institutions for the purpose of controlling social and political behaviors.

Well, some of them anyway.

i don't believe the Christian religion was meant to be a tool to control people, just that power mad money hungry imbeciles misused it that way.

In doing so they've created a trap.

One that is exceptionally hard to get out of.

 

[Riveroaks]

Well, some of them anyway.

i don't believe the Christian religion was meant to be a tool to control people, just that power mad money hungry imbeciles misused it that way.

In doing so they've created a trap.

One that is exceptionally hard to get out of.

You are correct.

That is precisely why my 2nd of 10 modern commandments says "beware of organized religions."

 

[Riveroaks]

That is the reason why I became an agnostic. Religions are made made institutions for the purpose of controlling social and political behaviors.

Agnostic has nothing to do with religion or organized religion.

Agnostic is a philosophy that contends that it is unknowable whether there exists a God or God(s).

Agnostics also do not believe in doctrines, dogmas, or revelation.

Agnosticism was originally called skepticism, which is an early form of Sophism.

 

[Hawkins]

Lately I have been contemplating the concept of hell.

The idea of suffering for all of eternity due to having made a few poor choices seems barbaric to me.

Now some acts that are committed are heinous and barbaric almost beyond belief. But we now know and understand some people are incapable of empathy and reasoning. If someone can't make a choice about an act, if they are per-programmed, how can they be held responsible ultimately?

Why some people need that level of fear in order to control their impulses also seems barbaric to me.

If God is loving, how can a loving God condemn a weak individual to an eternity of suffering.

Do you believe in hell?
Is there a need for hell?
What will it be like?

Why an immortal soul is needed in God's design perspective? Once a human died, his body will decay. Then no one ever knows who he is, not even the angels. Only God knows. "Only God knows" however won't be a valid open witnessing for his existence. A more permanent ID is needed by each human as a witnessing to show (say, to the angels) that he is the he from the beginning till the end.

Immortal soul is a Pharisaic concept dominated the Jews at Jesus time.*

God on the other hand, is completely incompatible with sin, He's trying with His best effort right now to bear with our sins. This situation will end after the Judgment Day. He will be happy again after the Final Judgment with the relief that He needs to bear with human sins no more. He will since then live happily with the angels and the saved in an eternity we refer to as Heaven.

Now what happens to the unsaved? Their immortal souls will have to go another path. God will completely ignore their existence. This state is commonly referred to as the permanent separation from God.

What happens when humans (angels alike) are put in such a state? Since God is the only source of good in this universe, without God's presence and His guidance those in such a separation will finally come to an end where all of them will become the same as the devil himself.

God has ever sworn the oath that they can never enter His rest. There won't be any grace under any name to spare them from the situation. Unless the only Jesus is put to disgrace the second time. This however won't happen.*

Finally, the unquenchable fire will come as a result.

 

[_Sal]

That is the reason why I became an agnostic. Religions are made made institutions for the purpose of controlling social and political behaviors.

I believe many people who break away from formal or standard groups think this way, yes.

 

[CrabCake]

the part I find confusing about that is there are quotes in the bible that say if God doesn't reveal himself to you then you will never find him, so how is that fair if he doesn't reveal himself does a person still go to hell and what is hell?

There aren't exactly any passages in the bible that say that. There is a certain soteriology prevalent among Calvinists which teaches this. It isn't based on any specific passages, but rather on a systematic approach that attempts to take everything the bible has to say about salvation and build a system that integrates all of it. It is not, however, the only such system and at least one equally compelling and competing soteriology exists, the Arminian or Wesleyan view of salvation.

In a nutshell, a Wesleyan would say that this view is incorrect. God does not choose to reveal himself to some and not others. What God does is he puts in each and every one of us something called "prevenient grace" which inspires us and pulls us towards a relationship with God. This grace is that drive we feel to seek out and know the divine. If we listen to it and allow it to work, it will lead us into a relationship with God and into saving grace. If we resist it and insist on doing things our way instead, God may let us have things our way and go on in life without him.

 

[nota bene]

I had to look up " soteriology," so I thought I'd share: the doctrine of salvation through Jesus Christ.

1760-70; < Greek s ō t ē rí (a) salvation, deliverance ( s ō t ē r - (stem of sōtḗr) deliverer + -ia -y3) + -o- + -logy

Soteriology | Define Soteriology at Dictionary.com

 

[_Sal]

There aren't exactly any passages in the bible that say that. There is a certain soteriology prevalent among Calvinists which teaches this. It isn't based on any specific passages, but rather on a systematic approach that attempts to take everything the bible has to say about salvation and build a system that integrates all of it. It is not, however, the only such system and at least one equally compelling and competing soteriology exists, the Arminian or Wesleyan view of salvation.

In a nutshell, a Wesleyan would say that this view is incorrect. God does not choose to reveal himself to some and not others. What God does is he puts in each and every one of us something called "prevenient grace" which inspires us and pulls us towards a relationship with God. This grace is that drive we feel to seek out and know the divine. If we listen to it and allow it to work, it will lead us into a relationship with God and into saving grace. If we resist it and insist on doing things our way instead, God may let us have things our way and go on in life without him.

an interesting explanation...I like that...thanks

 

[Ancient Herald]

There aren't exactly any passages in the bible that say that. There is a certain soteriology prevalent among Calvinists which teaches this. It isn't based on any specific passages, but rather on a systematic approach that attempts to take everything the bible has to say about salvation and build a system that integrates all of it. It is not, however, the only such system and at least one equally compelling and competing soteriology exists, the Arminian or Wesleyan view of salvation.

In a nutshell, a Wesleyan would say that this view is incorrect. God does not choose to reveal himself to some and not others. What God does is he puts in each and every one of us something called "prevenient grace" which inspires us and pulls us towards a relationship with God. This grace is that drive we feel to seek out and know the divine. If we listen to it and allow it to work, it will lead us into a relationship with God and into saving grace. If we resist it and insist on doing things our way instead, God may let us have things our way and go on in life without him.

That's something I've never heard before. Thanks.

 

[Medusa]

Lately I have been contemplating the concept of hell.

The idea of suffering for all of eternity due to having made a few poor choices seems barbaric to me.

Now some acts that are committed are heinous and barbaric almost beyond belief. But we now know and understand some people are incapable of empathy and reasoning. If someone can't make a choice about an act, if they are per-programmed, how can they be held responsible ultimately?

Why some people need that level of fear in order to control their impulses also seems barbaric to me.

If God is loving, how can a loving God condemn a weak individual to an eternity of suffering.

Do you believe in hell?
Is there a need for hell?
What will it be like?

individuals are weak but they are dangerous to the same degree

 

[_Sal]

individuals are weak but they are dangerous to the same degree

are all individual weak?
what kind of weakness do you see?

 

[Medusa]

are all individual weak?
what kind of weakness do you see?

We humans are weak.can we live forever ?

 

[_Sal]

We humans are weak.can we live forever ?

well I'm likely not the one to ask because I believe in multiple lives and an afterlife...

while many are weak in terms of various temptations of the flesh: greed, avarice, gluttony there are also people who are quite strong and heroic... no?

 

[Medusa]

well I'm likely not the one to ask because I believe in multiple lives and an afterlife...

while many are weak in terms of various temptations of the flesh: greed, avarice, gluttony there are also people who are quite strong and heroic... no?

you really dont understand ?

 

[_Sal]

you really dont understand ?

understand what?

I can't read your mind which is why I was questioning what you were saying in order to better understand ...