A logical problem witih "Hell"

page: 5
8
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Akragon
 

Dear Akragon,

Good to see you again. You're always thought provoking and that's valuable here.

I don't know if I want to commit to a lot of time to this thread, but I was drawn in by your use of "logical problem."

If I understand you, your argument is:

Pain is purely physical.
There is pain in Hell,
There are no physical bodies in Hell.
Therefore, there is no Hell.

Does that sound like a solid argument to you? Isn't it just as likely that the premise "Pain is purely physical" is flawed? As you pointed out, "torment" is often the word used. Certainly, our life experiences teach us that much torment is not physical. Attend a death bed, or a funeral, or receive divorce papers, or have your house burn down, or even have your pants split open at the High School prom. There is no physical pain there, but there is certainly torment.

Realizing that you have to spend eternity without the source of life, love, and goodness. Is that not torment?

With respect,
Charles1952


Hello my friend...

This topic was inspired by another thread where the OP ranted about another Christian telling him "he was going to burn in hell"

Now of course there is pain that is emotional... but "burning" in hell would require a physical body to experience said burning...

On the other hand... Spending "eternity without the source of life, love, and goodness" may be torment... but i do not believe in a God that would abandon his children in any case... That would be the OT God... who is not the one true God

IF the son of God said this...

18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.

How much more does his Father love us?





posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


Akragon, I'm impressed with your skepticism and logic!

What you wrote is absolutely true. Pain is a condition of life and physical existence. One must exist and be alive to feel pain and conceive of torment.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


It's weird how your response to anything that's posted about Jesus that you disagree with is "It's Paul's fault," isn't it? That guy gets almost as much credit for being omnipotent as Constantine does!



If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell. (Matthew 5:29-30 NIV)



“As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 13:40-42 NIV)



This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 13:49-50 NIV)


There are plenty of other quotes, but I suppose those entries from the non-Luke written Book of Matthew are Paul's doings, as well?



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne
reply to post by Akragon
 


Akragon, I'm impressed with your skepticism and logic!

What you wrote is absolutely true. Pain is a condition of life and physical existence. One must exist and be alive to feel pain and conceive of torment.


Thank you...

What baffles me about this is that Christians can claim that "God is love"... Yet some how they believe that tossing people into a firey pit or "lake of fire" is loving?

Though i know how they come to this conclusion...

Mixing the OT with the NT...

:shk:



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



There are plenty of other quotes, but I suppose those entries from the non-Luke written Book of Matthew are Paul's doings, as well?


Now you're just being silly...


When Jesus refers to Hell... Hes speaking in physical terms.

And he could also be refering to rebirth... Being thrown into hell could very well mean, returning to the "hell" we create for ourselves.

And either way its alligorical...

Or

Perhaps you believe Jesus wanted us to hack off our body parts as well?




It's weird how your response to anything that's posted about Jesus that you disagree with is "It's Paul's fault," isn't it?


its not weird... Luke is the only suspicious gospel... and only because of the possible influence of Paul...

Paul was a thief... a liar, and a self proclaimed murderer... and he clearly had a lot of influence on people...

Feel free to trust that type of person... i will not, and i quesiton anyone associated with him as well



edit on 13-12-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


I agree, Paul was a Roman and Rome is famous for taking other people's cultures and morphing them into their own. They did it with the Greeks and Egyptians so why wouldn't they do it to Christians as well? Anyone who can't see this connection is willingly ignoring it.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by jhill76
reply to post by akushla99
 




what is left is for all 'children' to learn in thier own time...


Very true. Even Satan has to learn, not to become good, but rather to stop putting up a fight.


Hello jhill76


...as an allegorical thoughtform construction...all 'creations' are meant to grapple with the ability to create anything they want, under the precept of FREE WILL...including the ability to deem themselves above that which created them...in essence, we 'entertain' the concept of our own satanic leanings by 'fighting'...the satanic 'forces' are none other, than the potent thoughtforms (created through FREE WILL) externalised and separated from us (as if we were not them)...
...all that has followed is a rationalising of the created thoughtform, a deliverance from it, and a way and means to do it...brought to you by prophets down the ages...same story, same MO to 'escape' it...

A99



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by akushla99
 


Hmm. That's an interesting way to put it. I can't say I disagree. Certainly, we have a way of projecting our fears and frustrations onto the outside world in such a way that we believe we are fighting monsters when in all actuality, we are fighting OURSELVES. This is why I have always enjoyed movies and games in which one of the foes turns out to be an exact copy of the protagonist. The most deadly enemy you can find is yourself, because you just can't defend against something you rely on to live, and because the weakness you ignore is the weakness that finishes you. You cannot avoid the imperfections within you, but you can use them to make yourself better.

Just like Matrix Revolutions, just like Kung Fu Panda 2 (yes, I will reference these movies because they exemplify precisely what I'm saying here) when you find inner peace, when you come to terms with your demons instead of fighting who you are, those demons no longer have any hold over you. You accept them, you compensate for them, you shake hands with them and learn who they are and how best to handle them. Morals are not always absolute because even the worst of sins have their moments to shine. Even the worst of crime has a time when it is appropriate. All things have a purpose.

That is the secret of "Satan". Do not fight. Accept, and you will see past the ugly visage to the opportunities that await.
edit on 13-12-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by akushla99
 


Hmm. That's an interesting way to put it. I can't say I disagree. Certainly, we have a way of projecting our fears and frustrations onto the outside world in such a way that we believe we are fighting monsters when in all actuality, we are fighting OURSELVES. This is why I have always enjoyed movies and games in which one of the foes turns out to be an exact copy of the protagonist. The most deadly enemy you can find is yourself, because you just can't defend against something you rely on to live.

Just like Matrix Revolutions, just like Kung Fu Panda 2 (yes, I will reference these movies because they exemplify precisely what I'm saying here) when you find inner peace, when you come to terms with your demons instead of fighting who you are, those demons no longer have any hold over you. You accept them, you compensate for them, you shake hands with them and learn who they are and how best to handle them. Morals are not always absolute because even the worst of sins have their moments to shine. Even the worst of crime has a time when it is appropriate. All things have a purpose.

That is the secret of "Satan". Do not fight. Accept, and you will see past the ugly visage to the opportunities that await.
edit on 13-12-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


Precisely...and all, and any 'rules' of any cosmological treatise, point you in this direction...no resistance, go with the flow, accept, work with etc etc...
...above, and over all of this, are these 'rules' which give you the hard and fast 'route'...but, of course, no-one is apt to be told what to do, by anyone...

...the road is narrow, we can see it...but will we walk it?...especially when we can debate all manner of ideations created through FREE WILL, that arbitrarily, deliberately, distract us (distract ourselves) from following 'guide-lines'...


A99



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
Perhaps you believe Jesus wanted us to hack off our body parts as well?


Well, if you believe what he said, that your choice is to spend some short period of time without a hand or eye, in exchange for an eternity of joy in his presence, it's kinda hard to refute that logic.


its not weird... Luke is the only suspicious gospel...


No, Jesus' words about Hell are fairly consistent. What I posted from Matthew is in line with what I posted earlier from Luke -- you're twisting Matthew to accommodate your beliefs, but you might as well twist Luke, as well.

Jesus taught that Hell was a real place that would result in an unpleasant existence for those who were there.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Sounds a lot like Earth if you ask me. You believe in the wrong version of hell, the version created by the church. Hell isn't a place you go to after you die, it's right here on Earth. This hell is a result of our works, we're already facing the consequences that you believe only come after we die.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



Well, if you believe what he said, that your choice is to spend some short period of time without a hand or eye, in exchange for an eternity of joy in his presence, it's kinda hard to refute that logic.


LOL...

theres NO logic in that...

So you basically believe its a good idea to mutilate yourself... IF it helps you get into heaven?

That my friend... is ridonkulous!


Again this is allegorical... He's showing the value of the material world as compared to the spiritual...




No, Jesus' words about Hell are fairly consistent. What I posted from Matthew is in line with what I posted earlier from Luke -- you're twisting Matthew to accommodate your beliefs, but you might as well twist Luke, as well.


Oh of course...

My interpretation of a verse is different then yours so i MUST be twisting things.... How very typical of you sir...


Jesus taught that Hell was a real place that would result in an unpleasant existence for those who were there.


He spoke in allegory and parable... No where in the gospels does it say "hell is real"...

He could very well be talking about this world as hell.... which can be a very unpleasant existance for some...

Plus if one takes into consideration certian gnostic texts... Hell is this world...

The ONLY passage that even comes close to saying hell is a reality is as follows...

28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

And IF one knows the word "hell" is actually Gehenna which was a real place in the physical world... the idea of the "christian" hell is blown right out the _

Personally i am more inclined to believe this means the soul is not allowed to leave the body at the time of death... thus being either buried or burned in this case whilst still "Trapped" within the body

That would be hellish.


edit on 14-12-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by adjensen
 



Well, if you believe what he said, that your choice is to spend some short period of time without a hand or eye, in exchange for an eternity of joy in his presence, it's kinda hard to refute that logic.


LOL...

theres NO logic in that...

So you basically believe its a good idea to mutilate yourself... IF it helps you get into heaven?


Hey, I didn't say it was pleasant, I said it was logical.

By your reasoning, immunizations are a bad idea, because it's not a good idea to go poking holes in yourself and introducing foreign substances, on the off chance that you might get sick someday.

Of course, we need not be lopping off hands or gouging eyes, as we have salvation through him, but his point, though extreme, is valid.


My interpretation of a verse is different then yours so i MUST be twisting things.... How very typical of you sir...


Yes, I sound like a broken record, because you're doing this all the time -- you habitually practice eisegesis, because the Bible doesn't say what you want it to say, so you read it in such a way as to conform to your beliefs. Jesus frequently refers to hell as being a real, physical place, where the wicked are punished for eternity. It is not an invention of Paul, it is not an allegory to "hell on Earth" or anything else that supports your logical problem posted in the OP.

Here's an idea... instead of starting with your expected result -- that hell can't exist because it implies a non-corporeal being suffering physical pain -- and then working your way backward to determine your interpretation of scripture, why not start with what Jesus says and follow that through to see if there's not a way to comprehend him saying it in a literal way.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



Yes, I sound like a broken record, because you're doing this all the time -- you habitually practice eisegesis, because the Bible doesn't say what you want it to say, so you read it in such a way as to conform to your beliefs.


Hey, Adjensen, guess what? There's a reason there's hundreds of denominations. This thing you just described here, it's a common practice. So what's that say about the general condition of Christianity?

Did you think of it that way? Or are you still adamantly ignoring it?


Here's an idea... instead of starting with your expected result -- that hell can't exist because it implies a non-corporeal being suffering physical pain -- and then working your way backward to determine your interpretation of scripture, why not start with what Jesus says and follow that through to see if there's not a way to comprehend him saying it in a literal way.


That would be awesome if there was any way to validate the claims of Jesus, period. We're pretty much trusting him because we trust the Bible, because it's the word of "God", because it SAYS it's the word of "God", and the Bible must be telling the truth about that because it's the word of "God", because it says so, and we can trust that this is the truth because it's the word of "God" and the Bible says so.

As far as I can see, there is no legitimate proof whatsoever that a divine being inspired the Bible. Nothing whatsoever. Only the word of a species that is notorious for lying to get the upper hand in a dog eat dog world. And what better tool of power than religion? What better bargaining chip than a man's soul?

When there is more reason to lie than there is to tell the truth, everything becomes suspect. And honestly, we're not longer interested in the truth. And that right there is the final straw in Christianity. At this point, our sanity relies upon hope, and Christianity is the one hope that was preemptively designed to be foolproof by default. Nothing has that kind of built-in insurance function - everything has an equal and opposite, and since mankind is the only species known to judge, guess what? It has the watermark of Homo Sapiens written all over it.

There's a reason we envision "God" as a human male.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
Double post.
edit on 14-12-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Triple post.


Damn internet connection.
edit on 14-12-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by akushla99
 



...the road is narrow, we can see it...but will we walk it?...especially when we can debate all manner of ideations created through FREE WILL, that arbitrarily, deliberately, distract us (distract ourselves) from following 'guide-lines'...


Sin is an opportunity. If we are constantly fighting sin, we are fighting opportunities to learn how best to handle our weaknesses. The worst thing you can do with a leaky pipe is ignore it.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by adjensen
 



Yes, I sound like a broken record, because you're doing this all the time -- you habitually practice eisegesis, because the Bible doesn't say what you want it to say, so you read it in such a way as to conform to your beliefs.


Hey, Adjensen, guess what? There's a reason there's hundreds of denominations. This thing you just described here, it's a common practice. So what's that say about the general condition of Christianity?

Did you think of it that way? Or are you still adamantly ignoring it?


Ignoring what, doctrinal differences? Of course not, I just don't think that they really matter. You seem to be implying that Akragon is just another Christian, when he'll tell you that he isn't. He likes some aspects of Jesus, but rejects the vast majority of Christian doctrine, and I have no problem with that.



Here's an idea... instead of starting with your expected result -- that hell can't exist because it implies a non-corporeal being suffering physical pain -- and then working your way backward to determine your interpretation of scripture, why not start with what Jesus says and follow that through to see if there's not a way to comprehend him saying it in a literal way.


That would be awesome if there was any way to validate the claims of Jesus, period. We're pretty much trusting him because we trust the Bible, because it's the word of "God", because it SAYS it's the word of "God", and the Bible must be telling the truth about that because it's the word of "God", because it says so, and we can trust that this is the truth because it's the word of "God" and the Bible says so.


As I've told you a bazillion times, I'm not a Fundamentalist, and don't believe that the Bible in the inerrant word of God, so any argument you make that presupposes that isn't going to work.

I believe that Jesus said the things that are recorded in the New Testament -- not in the same words, but with the same meaning, because it all "adds up" -- if you read the Bible holistically, looking at the overall picture, it is consistent. That's the point I'm making, rather than saying "okay I don't believe in hell, so what does my interpretation of Jesus' words have to be to support my case", try looking at his words as they are written and sort out what your beliefs about hell mean in the context of what he's saying. Since hell is consistently described, throughout the Bible, as a real place, what does that mean for OP's claims?

But, again, if you think that the whole thing is made up, then there's no point in having the discussion at all.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



But, again, if you think that the whole thing is made up, then there's no point in having the discussion at all.


The topic is the logical problems with "hell". So yes, this discussion is well suited for this thread. Because if there is a logical problem with hell, then it stands to reason that hell should be viewed skeptically.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by adjensen
 



But, again, if you think that the whole thing is made up, then there's no point in having the discussion at all.


The topic is the logical problems with "hell". So yes, this discussion is well suited for this thread. Because if there is a logical problem with hell, then it stands to reason that hell should be viewed skeptically.


No, that's not what I mean -- if you (the empirical "you", not you specifically) think that it's made up, then there's no basis for hell, no facts about it to debate and so there's no point in discussing it.

It's one of the things I don't understand about atheists -- they'll swear up and down that there's no God and that the Bible is a long work of fiction, and then try using the contents of that book to make a point about something. If God doesn't exist and the Bible isn't true, then claiming God is a homicidal maniac for killing everyone in the Flood is irrational.

Again, not you specifically, unless you think that the Bible is completely fabricated.





new topics
top topics
 
8
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join