A logical problem witih "Hell"

reply to post by Lazarus Short


So in other words, everyone has been going to hell for years? Because if you're not cremated, it's into the grave with you, and I haven't heard of anyone rising from the dead except for people who write books about it and people who drink from lead painted coffee cups. Oh, and myths written by superstitious sheepherders whose scientific expertise could fill a thimble with room to spare.

The Bibles I speak of are NT and OT.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

So in other words, everyone has been going to hell for years? Because if you're not cremated, it's into the grave with you, and I haven't heard of anyone rising from the dead except for people who write books about it and people who drink from lead painted coffee cups. Oh, and myths written by superstitious sheepherders whose scientific expertise could fill a thimble with room to spare.

The Bibles I speak of are NT and OT.

edit on 17-12-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

You belittle the scientific expertise of the Bible at your own risk. Do you not know how Solomon delved into science, as he recorded in the Book of Ecclesiastes? Or, if you really want to get down to it, check out the first recorded instance of the Scientific Method, including experimental and control groups, in the first chapter of the Book of Daniel. I am on solid ground here. You should be more respectful of the ancients.

As to people going to "Hell," yes, they've been going to the Grave for millennia, and that is what the resurrection is for - to give all those billions life again. A loving God does this, BTW.

OT? NT? Nice try to sidestep, but I know what they contain. I ask again: what translation?

reply to post by Lazarus Short


Does the translation make a difference? How many different translations of the truth are there? How does one truth have a dozen different versions, that are so differing as to prompt such a question?

It's not a side step. It's me attempting to get a clear answer out of a Christian who doesn't follow Christian beliefs.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


ofcourse the translation makes a difference. hss

reply to post by Angle


Then how do you know what the truth is? Which translation is correct? According to what you want to believe, or according to which translator you like best? The mere presence of variation undermines the guarantee of such material being labeled "truth". Truth doesn't vary.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Lazarus Short

 

Does the translation make a difference? How many different translations of the truth are there? How does one truth have a dozen different versions, that are so differing as to prompt such a question?

It's not a side step. It's me attempting to get a clear answer out of a Christian who doesn't follow Christian beliefs.

Yes, the translation does make a difference. Consider the New World Version, which mangles the Biblical text to support the Watchtower's peculiar doctrines. Or consider the "Clear Word," a Seventh-Day Adventist version which, again was biased to support SDA doctrines. Looking at the Greek and Hebrew behind certain key words in an English-language translation can just turn you belief system around, such as finding that "Hell" and "Sheol" mean "the grave" and not a place of fiery torment. I have freed myself from that heresy! Is this clear enough for you? IMHO, I do follow Christian beliefs, as Universal Reconciliation was the orthodox position in the early church: "Jesus Christ, the Savior of all men, especially those who believe." I could fill pages and pages with text supporting UR.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Angle

 

Then how do you know what the truth is? Which translation is correct? According to what you want to believe, or according to which translator you like best? The mere presence of variation undermines the guarantee of such material being labeled "truth". Truth doesn't vary.

Some translations are better than others, but if you want the Truth, you just have to learn Biblical Hebrew and Greek. No, I have not done that, as English is enough of a challenge for me.

reply to post by Lazarus Short


You say it is necessary to study Biblical Hebrew and Greek to get the truth. And you just admitted you haven't done that. So how do you know it's the truth?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Lazarus Short

 

You say it is necessary to study Biblical Hebrew and Greek to get the truth. And you just admitted you haven't done that. So how do you know it's the truth?

I engage in an ongoing search for a good translation. The best I have found so far is Ferrar Fenton's The Holy Bible in Modern English, for the OT, and Andy Gaus' The Unvarnished New Testament, for NT.

reply to post by Lazarus Short


Because you like what it says? Or because of your self-confessed lack of knowledge in the ways of ancient Hebrew grammar?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Lazarus Short

 

Because you like what it says? Or because of your self-confessed lack of knowledge in the ways of ancient Hebrew grammar?

Because of non-archaic language, and other features. In these versions, meaning leaps off the page like no other versions/translations I have seen - they are easy to understand. Remember that Hebrew and/or Greek scholars are rare critters.

reply to post by Lazarus Short


I'm seeing more and more scholars deciding that the Bible isn't as credible as people claim it to be. I'm thinking it has more to do with people being too lazy to find a better alternative, than it has to do with the actual veracity of the Bible. The Bible is the oil well of spirituality. At some point we'll need to find a better source of alternative energy, but we're too lazy and comfortable with what we have now.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Lazarus Short

 

I'm seeing more and more scholars deciding that the Bible isn't as credible as people claim it to be. I'm thinking it has more to do with people being too lazy to find a better alternative, than it has to do with the actual veracity of the Bible. The Bible is the oil well of spirituality. At some point we'll need to find a better source of alternative energy, but we're too lazy and comfortable with what we have now.

My faith has little to do with the actions of other people, even ministers of the Gospel or Theologians who lose their faith. Being aware of the haptatic structure of the Biblical text, and having had God speak to me on two occasions, my faith is fairly unshakable. I don't see your "oil vs alternative energy" metaphor as valid. I think our little discussion here is losing traction...

reply to post by Lazarus Short

I don't see your "oil vs alternative energy" metaphor as valid. I think our little discussion here is losing traction...

Is this discussion worth fighting to keep traction? That is up to you. I will continue to discuss because if we give up so easily, we don't deserve to find the truth.

The Bible is a common but inefficient medium of spirituality, versus other paths that are less common but are better suited to curb the temptations that the Bible otherwise leaves wide open for exploitation.

That's the purpose of the metaphor I used.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Lazarus Short

 

I don't see your "oil vs alternative energy" metaphor as valid. I think our little discussion here is losing traction...

Is this discussion worth fighting to keep traction? That is up to you. I will continue to discuss because if we give up so easily, we don't deserve to find the truth.

The Bible is a common but inefficient medium of spirituality, versus other paths that are less common but are better suited to curb the temptations that the Bible otherwise leaves wide open for exploitation.

That's the purpose of the metaphor I used.

Yes, the Bible is very inefficient. What if God had simply laid it all out explicitly and concisely? He chose another way, however, for He chose to unveil His secrets slowly, ever so slowly. Much of the Bible reads like dense-packed verbage, and at first you can't even make good sense of some of it. If you persevere, however, you will begin to see patterns emerge, and especially in the Law, you will, if you have the ability to see what you are looking at, begin to see a rough outline of the mind of God. I mean, you will see what He loves, what He hates, what He treasures, His sense of justice, mercy, and fairness. You will see that He tenderly regards the widow and the orphan, but despises the wicked.

As to your metaphor, please elaborate on: "...other paths that are less common but are better suited to curb the temptations that the Bible otherwise leaves wide open for exploitation."

reply to post by Lazarus Short

As to your metaphor, please elaborate on: "...other paths that are less common but are better suited to curb the temptations that the Bible otherwise leaves wide open for exploitation."

Mankind has a horrible habit of developing a sense of deserving, a sense of "I should have more than you."

And then Christian comes along with all this emphasis on the unworthiness on certain kids of people and on how we should become righteous in the name of this one dude. This sort of thinking provides all kind of pitfalls by which we can stumble down the wrong path and not even know it because we don't have the understanding to differentiate.

Other kinds of spirituality make it known that judgment and worth are very fickle concepts, and by no means an efficient method of defining our fellow man. I will make no specific references, because it would be good practice for you to study other religions in comparison to Christianity.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity


And then Christian comes along with all this emphasis on the unworthiness on certain kids of people and on how we should become righteous in the name of this one dude.

When you properly interpret the teachings of Jesus and the writings of His apostles, you know that in God's eyes we are ALL unworthy. However, based on the finished work of His Son, God grants us undeserved favor (grace) and earmarks us for His Kingdom. This nominal righteousness only becomes actual when we are resurrected and glorified. This is our hope as Christians - Christ in us - a fundamental change in our natures, done by God, something that we could never do ourselves. The "unworthiness on certain ki[n]ds of people" is a common opinion, but I think it is certainly bad theology.

reply to post by Lazarus Short

you know that in God's eyes we are ALL unworthy.

Some of my consternation comes from that. No parent should ever view their child as unworthy of their love or presence.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Lazarus Short

 

you know that in God's eyes we are ALL unworthy.

Some of my consternation comes from that. No parent should ever view their child as unworthy of their love or presence.

You are correct - I forgot the balance. The balance is that we are works in progress, and God sees not only our imperfect present, but our perfect destiny. Jesus died to make it so, and He said not to hinder the little children from coming to Him, as of such was the Kingdom of Heaven.

Originally posted by Lazarus Short

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Lazarus Short

 

you know that in God's eyes we are ALL unworthy.

Some of my consternation comes from that. No parent should ever view their child as unworthy of their love or presence.

You are correct - I forgot the balance. The balance is that we are works in progress, and God sees not only our imperfect present, but our perfect destiny. Jesus died to make it so, and He said not to hinder the little children from coming to Him, as of such was the Kingdom of Heaven.

You believe you are 'becoming'. You have forgotten that you are already 'being'.
If you believe you are a 'work in progress' then you do not feel complete. You are seeking to complete yourself in time.
God is 'timeless' being - this is wholeness, right here and right now.

Awake from the dream of separation:
youtu.be...

Being is seeking for being, it is a game of hide and seek.