A logical problem with "Hell": Part 2

page: 11
17
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rex282
The REAL crux of the WHOLE matter of Everything is... mankind does NOT have free will.It is the ONLY logical and truthful conclusion if there is a creator God /source(and there is ).God is 100% sovereign(the only sovereign there is) therefore everything that is God wills ...happens.It doesn't matter one bit what anyone else will is... Gods will trumps all and is in complete control of ALL things.

Man may make many choices all day for a lifetime however none of them are free from cause/effect...the most basic unbreakable law of existence. ALL was/is/will be caused by the Creator God.It can be no other way.If there is no creator God it is up to those that believe so to provide the burden of proof.It takes very little imagination to see the universe did not create itself. For those that say they believe all the scriptures read Isaiah 45:6 and Colossians 1:16-17 1 for a few of the many scriptures that support causation and the completely soveriegn will of The Creator God..

God does not have to prove anything to mankind that he exists and is the sovereign of all.He is not "pining" after humanity wishing they would come to love him or he'll fry you in a mythical hell for eternity.It is obvious God is very content that billions would believe that.because...God is causing it ALL for Gods purposes not ours.He is not worried about anyone receiving the eternal punishment of hell... there is none..just as is there is no heaven "somewhere out there" that the majority who believe in hell believe in...it is IN your midst.

Those doctrines are God giving man over to their reprobate mind of religion.... ALL is religion.i.e..The worship of MAN (themselves) as God.Idolatry.That is what man is doing when they think their will is free to "will" as they please". God the creator is causing EVERYTHING.He created EVERYTHING.He created light and dark and ..Good...and EVIL.That also means God is RESPONSIBLE for everything....in both senses of the word.

I am not trying to convince anyone of this because I know for a fact it is impossible to believe unless God reveals it (unveils..apocalypse).There is a reason and purpose for EVERYTHING even this great blindness that ALL of mankind was born with.All of mankind will be healed of this great blindness and see the futility of believing otherwise.In one sense it doesn't change anything... except your perception of LIFE! I wouldn't trade it for anything.


What you have described is an eminently 'zoomed out' view...describing all situational phenomena - macro and micro - as merely the will of god...and in a sense, this is correct (and you, in fact allude to it - then, decry its phenomenonilisation at an individual level??)...whatever, confusing in its scattergun approach...you are hitting some things...

Your last paragraph exactly describes why you do have FREE WILL (albeit, your adamant denial of it - one wonders then, who is denying?...you, or god?)

The inclusion of the 'exclusionist' paraphenalia of one 'johnny-come-lately' cosmologie, is testament to your claim that you have no will, and instead rely on referred passages that, 'your will?', or the 'will of god?' has cherry picked from relatively recent musings...Is your god exclusionist?...even of interpretation of itself?

I tend to agree with the thrust of what you present...but the ends of those pieces of string are very frayed, and unable to tie anything faithfully...

A99




posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 02:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by drivers1492
reply to post by Akragon
 




Everlasting fire has symbolic meaning... Not to be taken literally... Similar to what he said about hell, only when he spoke of "hell" it was a literal meaning... Look up the word Gehenna, it was an actual place where the bodies of the dead who couldn't afford a proper burial were thrown, and they used sulphur to dispose of the material so as not to spread disease. Which is where the fire and "brimstone" idea came from. The fires in Gehenna burned day and night which is where the "eternal fire" came from.


Would this same symbolic meaning include the writings stating that satan is thrown into an everlasting fire? Or were those particular instances not to be considered symbolic?
edit on 11-1-2013 by drivers1492 because: (no reason given)


hades is the word most commonly translated hell in the New Testament in Greek(Sheol in the Old testament Hebrew) Hades means the grave..the realm of inperception.Yahshua did NOT teach eternal damnation in hell.Everything he taught was in parables (metaphors) and NOONE (including the disciples) understood ANYTHING he taught UNTIL it was unveiled to them.

John CLEARLY states in the opeing verse ALL of Revelation is written in signs that signify with numbers and are word symbols (metaphors).ALL scripture is written in words AND numbers .Hebrew and Greek are both alphanumeric languages ..that wasn't an accident.The implication of that fact is FAR reaching.

The book of Revelation is The unveiling(apocalypse) of Jesus (Yahshua...Yahwehs(God) salvation/ deliverance) Christ (anointing..the power of God).it isn't the mythical blockbuster fantasy of the destruction of earth and mankind by an angry,petty, wrathful, crazy, bloodthirsty God on his creation.It is the salvation process of the elect,The first fruits, the 144 thousand(it isn't a "number of people its a value ) the bride of Christ ,The Christs of Christ,the Sons of God ,the inheritors,the overcommers,the priest and kings...etc...all are different names for the same thing.

The Book of The Unveiling is the most misunderstood book of all the books of scripture..ON PURPOSE(by God the author)!There is no eternal hell.It isn't even mentioned in revelation ...the religious superimposed it from other false doctrines as the lake of fire.The Lake of Fire is a symbol for the elect.There is no Red Dragon with ten heads or THE Antichrist(there's not one mention of it in Revelation) The beast is MANKIND who's number is 666(no it isn't Satans"incarnate in THE antichrist Trinity ..there is no trinity either)

These are all things God has blinded man with in plain sight.God is curing man of the worst disease there is WITH that disease...RELIGION..ALL is religion.



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by akushla99

Originally posted by Rex282
The REAL crux of the WHOLE matter of Everything is...


What you have described is an eminently 'zoomed out' view...describing all situational phenomena - macro and micro - as merely the will of god...and in a sense, this is correct (and you, in fact allude to it - then, decry its phenomenonilisation at an individual level??)...whatever, confusing in its scattergun approach...you are hitting some things...

Your last paragraph exactly describes why you do have FREE WILL (albeit, your adamant denial of it - one wonders then, who is denying?...you, or god?)

The inclusion of the 'exclusionist' paraphenalia of one 'johnny-come-lately' cosmologie, is testament to your claim that you have no will, and instead rely on referred passages that, 'your will?', or the 'will of god?' has cherry picked from relatively recent musings...Is your god exclusionist?...even of interpretation of itself?

I tend to agree with the thrust of what you present...but the ends of those pieces of string are very frayed, and unable to tie anything faithfully...

A99


As I said I know that no one can believe this in whole .I am not trying convince anyone of it.It is stated as The Truth it is.I didn't invent it.....it isn't dogma ...It is what it is.If you perceive it as frayed it is because it can't be communicated in it's entirety especially in a few short paragraphs but that isn't the point.

You have misunderstood many of my words.I never said I didn't have a will I said man doesn't have a "free" will.... free from causation.Our will makes choices however none of them are free from original causation which is all from the creator God.He is not "my God..God is God.I didn't "choose" him.

You proved the basic premise of what I said.Man's most innate desire is to be autonomous and sovereign no matter what their atom of good sense may be telling them.To declare you have free will does not make it so.You can cut your hand off because you choose to but God will have caused you to be a colossal fool because everything is ALL for Gods purposes.

This is the most frightening Truth man will ever have to believe(and all WILL believe it)....that THEY are not God(the master of their reality and destiny)..not even close.God is willing to go to great lengths to prove it to everyone.As the Borg say..resistance is futile..and foolish.



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 04:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Rex282
 


As I said I know that no one can believe this in whole .I am not trying convince anyone of it.It is stated as The Truth it is.I didn't invent it.....it isn't dogma ...It is what it is.If you perceive it as frayed it is because it can't be communicated in it's entirety especially in a few short paragraphs but that isn't the point. You have misunderstood many of my words.I never said I didn't have a will I said man doesn't have a "free" will.... free from causation.Our will makes choices however none of them are free from original causation which is all from the creator God.He is not "my God..God is God.I didn't "choose" him. You proved the basic premise of what I said.Man's most innate desire is to be autonomous and sovereign no matter what their atom of good sense may be telling them.To declare you have free will does not make it so.You can cut your hand off because you choose to but God will have caused you to be a colossal fool because everything is ALL for Gods purposes. This is the most frightening Truth man will ever have to believe(and all WILL believe it)....that THEY are not God(the master of their reality and destiny)..not even close.God is willing to go to great lengths to prove it to everyone.As the Borg say..resistance is futile..and foolish.

Belief is a mechanism of FREE WILL...
We have no need to 'invent' anything...'nothing new under the sun'...
You are right, a few short paragraphs is hardly enough...posting on forums such as these is like 'drive-by' commentary...
I would posit (quite strongly) that mans most innate desire is not mans desire, but gods desire...so I think we agree there...
...and I agree that it is gods purpose ultimately/initially and forever...but, individualisation and the condition of duality at this locum, required the ability to navigate the machinery autonomously (despite the purpose)...and this is where the conferrence of FREE WILL by a loving god/source to the splinters of itself is germinal...without this mechanism, there is no need or point in splintering oneself to experience the gamut of what you can create, in all its aspects...we are definitely NOT robots...the denial of FREE WILL (as a mechanism) points to very schizophrenic scenarios (where a god is concerned)...and muddies the waters of common sense systems (i.e. asking the ridiculous questions based on non-sensical machinations of a thing that is omniscient, omnipotent and the source of any and all musings of this nature).
We are not in a cage, we are not in hell...we are in the same place we have always been, but our FREE WILL has, and does, create these locums, right where we are - I mean the you, that is you...this is the result of the workings of the mechanism of FREE WILL...
Prophets, all prophets, say the same thing (regardless of denomination). All denominations have thier 'commandments'...they all elucidate what this mechanism can and should be used for...they are not rules, per se, but, instructions which affect us in pertinent ways (vis-a-vis our journey back)...sin (a word with such stupid connotations) are deflections/distractions from this route back...prolonging its eventuation...this is why things cycle, so that there are many chances, under many different conditions to have that light bulb go off in your head...

A99



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Joecroft
 


Out of the entirety of your ridiculous post, I feel the need to respond to only the telepathy portion.

Telepathy has been proven. Numerous times. Just because you cannot reach out and poke a copper wire or a plastic receiver, does not mean something isn't there. You just aren't perceptive enough.



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 




Originally posted by Akragon
What is left is that person/soul's Karma, even Karmic "debt"... which remains until its "resolved" in one way or the other...


The problem with those Gnostics texts below, especially the Apocryphon of John, is that they believed in both Hell, Heaven and Reincarnation.

You clearly believe in reincarnation, and have shown through the many threads you have made on this subject, that you strongly disapprove of this place called Hell. And yet, you are at the same time, using material, i.e. the Apocryphon of John, which also mentions Hell, within it’s theology…





Originally posted by Akragon
That actually suprizes me... I thought you would have noticed an Anti OT God trend in my threads


I did notice your Anti OT God trend, but I thought you had found the truth, which I outlined in my last post, but it’s now clear that you haven’t. Jesus makes too! many references in the NT, to the Abrahamic line, and the God of the OT…

So how do you propose to deal with all those passages…





Originally posted by Akragon
You like gnostic texts right?



Yes, I’ve read many of them, but I personally don’t believe that they got everything right IMO.




Originally posted by Akragon
Take a look over these two books... You'll get a better idea of what im talking about with the OT God...

www.gnosis.org...

www.gnosis.org...

The Apocryphon of James and John...



I’m not entirely sure how you are using the Apocryphon of James and John, to conclude that the God in Genesis, is not the God that Jesus represents…

Can you highlight a verse, or least give me a better idea of your thinking on this?…


- JC



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 





Originally posted by AfterInfinity
Out of the entirety of your ridiculous post, I feel the need to respond to only the telepathy portion.


That entire post was meant as a lighthearted joke. See my follow up reply to vethumanbeing, on the previous page…page 10.



Originally posted by AfterInfinity
Telepathy has been proven. Numerous times. Just because you cannot reach out and poke a copper wire or a plastic receiver, does not mean something isn't there.


Yes, I believe that Telepathy is real, and have experienced it myself. But my lighthearted joke, was written from the “Machines” perspective.



Originally posted by AfterInfinity
You just aren't perceptive enough.


It would seem that the lack of perception, was entirely yours. lol

- JC


Edit to add - And just out curiosity, where is the scientific evidence, that shows, telepathy has been proven?
edit on 16-1-2013 by Joecroft because: Edit to add question



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Joecroft
 



The problem with those Gnostics texts below, especially the Apocryphon of John, is that they believed in both Hell, Heaven and Reincarnation.

You clearly believe in reincarnation, and have shown through the many threads you have made on this subject, that you strongly disapprove of this place called Hell. And yet, you are at the same time, using material, i.e. the Apocryphon of John, which also mentions Hell, within it’s theology…


This is true, but since I am neither "gnostic" or Christian I have no need to adhear to specific beliefs in either religion. Gnostic beliefs are quite similar to the Christians in that they believe people are tortured in the afterlife... I hold no such belief because as I've stated many times on our forum, a loving creator would not torture his children.


I did notice your Anti OT God trend, but I thought you had found the truth, which I outlined in my last post, but it’s now clear that you haven’t. Jesus makes too! many references in the NT, to the Abrahamic line, and the God of the OT…

So how do you propose to deal with all those passages


I've found my own truth, which may not be yours... You should take a look over the passages Jesus quotes from the OT... they are very vague, and in all of what is written about him he rarely uses the OT... but when he does I believe this is because OT and the like were the only scripture available at the time... Being brought up in Judaism and taught their scripture from a child... HE uses it only to relate to what they knew of...

For example, I can quote Christian, Gnostic, hindu, or buddhist scripture with ease... but its pointless quoting Gnostic, hindu, or Buddhist texts when im talking to a Christian.


Yes, I’ve read many of them, but I personally don’t believe that they got everything right


I agree, but the same goes for biblical scripture as we both know...


I’m not entirely sure how you are using the Apocryphon of James and John, to conclude that the God in Genesis, is not the God that Jesus represents…

Can you highlight a verse, or least give me a better idea of your thinking on this?…


Gladly


John

This is Jesus speaking of Yaltabaoth

And having created [...] everything, he organized according to the model of the first aeons which had come into being, so that he might create them like the indestructible ones. Not because he had seen the indestructible ones, but the power in him, which he had taken from his mother, produced in him the likeness of the cosmos. And when he saw the creation which surrounds him, and the multitude of the angels around him which had come forth from him, he said to them, 'I am a jealous God, and there is no other God beside me.' But by announcing this he indicated to the angels who attended him that there exists another God. For if there were no other one, of whom would he be jealous?

The true God is not a Jealous God... For as it says, there are none like him so who could he be Jealous of?

The OT God knows there are others like him... which is why he is a Jealous so called "God...

Read the books my friend... Theres lots more one can learn from these two books

Heres my "story" on the matter... butchered story that is... but a story none the less

www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 16-1-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joecroft
reply to post by vethumanbeing
 





Originally posted by vethumanbeing
Nicely done Mom, I could have sworn I'd locked that door.


It was locked, but I have the secret Gnostic key to open it…



Originally posted by vethumanbeing
This planet is an experiment, no holds barred, free will and all; to see if humankind is going to figure it out for the very first time or kill itself (very tiresome) again.


I believe there was a time when all men lived in the knowledge of the truth and their divine connection to the Father God etc, but at some stage further back in time, that all changed.

All men must now strive to get back to living in that truth, before, like you mentioned above, we destroy each other.

Sorry for that first crazy reply, that is not my usual posting style, as anyone here on ATS will testify too.

Peace be with you…
- JC


I'd have used instead of a computer voice, a Florida golf course owner whom happens to be an Alligator hissing between grabbing golf balls thinking they are misplaced eggs while simoultainiously rolling in the mud. Do not duplicate the key whatever you do (ransom note forthcoming?) There was a time humans were godlike stripped of the phone line direct; why I reference the Lizards-they are our genetitists original and cannot help think they were partially responsible. I always liked the Cray did not reference. Hal? not so much even as an idea trustworthy not in space anyway.

Something tells me you need to make your ribald remarks more "RIBALD" or containing obvious irony, chiding (little bit) sardonisism, but NEVER EVER sarcasm or ridicule as these are personal truths (feelings) you are stomping all over. As for me personally; bring it on! as that is my arena of non-linear abstract thought playtime fun.

edit on 16-1-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)
edit on 16-1-2013 by vethumanbeing because: hope this helps
edit on 16-1-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)
edit on 16-1-2013 by vethumanbeing because: Not again, do alligators hiss with a southern accent?



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Joecroft
 


You realize I have to ask you this; would you like to, since you brought it up initially, duke it out with your knowelege of the Nag Hammadi Texts against my understanding of them? For me, it described what I was I learned nothing else other than OH that imperfectly describes me as very close. Better a Gnostic than a white sheeted tree hugger; and I do dislike having to couch words. You are interesting.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 04:48 AM
link   
reply to post by UnderGetty
 


Because they wanted to overthrow the Roman Empire. And they did. For two centuries, Christians destroyed and looted pagan temples, wiping out the European people's spiritual and cultural heritage. They proclaimed learning to be irrelevant (it was all 'worldly' and all you needed was to know Christ.) Their message spread among the lower classes, telling them not to care about being much in this life. They were pacifists, and when the Asiatic hordes came in, they rolled right over a weak, ignorant unpatriotic people. Constantine proclaimed Christianity the official religion of the empire because he could see it was going that way anyway.

Despite all of that, I still believe in Jesus. But you could not come up with a more tailor-made religion than Christianity to disempower European people. It plays right in to thier inherent sense of guilt, it takes advantage of thier generosity, tendency to self-sacrifice, and propensity for blind faith.

Christianity is the Jewish revenge against their Roman occupiers. The Book of Revelation is all about the destruction of Rome. Rome is the city on seven hills. Nero was the leader who was wounded in the head and people thought he would come back to life. His name and image were on the coins, and no man could buy or sell without using them, which amounted to worship. Even Nero's name = 666.

Sorry, bit off-topic there.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 08:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Snsoc
 


I'd have to disagree with you on a few points here. I agree that much of Revelation is talking about Rome, but I don't think Christianity overthrew paganism at all, pagans killed true Christians then turned around and hijacked the story of Jesus.

Revelation 12 is about Mary giving birth to Jesus and the dragon (Rome) devouring Jesus and turning him into the beast. In chapter 13, the seven heads of the beast are the seven hills of Rome, the ten crowns represent the 10 emperors who ruled around the time Revelation was written. The head of the beast that was fatally wounded but healed refers to the crucifixion and supposed resurrection. People follow and worship Jesus (the beast) and are in awe of him, just as it explains in verse 3. The dragon (Rome) is the one who gave the beast its power by "sweeping stars from the sky" (chapter 12), a.k.a. adding pagan themes into the story like the miracles and resurrection.

edit on 17-1-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)
edit on 17-1-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


The story of Jesus can be found in the story of Mithras, a pagan figure that was documented 1200 years before Jesus. So no, paganism really didn't hijack anything.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


What makes you think Rome didn't model their story around that of Mithras or Horus? Jesus wasn't born from a virgin and didn't travel with 12 (astrological/pagan number) disciples nor did he die then resurrect. Those are details added in by the pagans, so yes they did hijack it. Jesus was born just like anyone else is born, by a human mother AND human father.

The fact that Jesus shares the same story as Mithras, a PAGAN deity, should go to show that his story was messed with by the pagans.
edit on 17-1-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)
edit on 17-1-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 



What makes you think Rome didn't model their story around that of Mithras or Horus? Jesus wasn't born from a virgin and didn't travel with 12 (astrological/pagan number) disciples nor did he die then resurrect. Those are details added in by the pagans, so yes they did hijack it. Jesus was born just like anyone else is born, by a human mother AND human father.

The fact that Jesus shares the same story as Mithras, a PAGAN deity, should go to show that his story was messed with by the pagans.


So you're claiming that not only did pagan hijack Christianity, but even the truest of Christians isn't really Christian? So what do you call yourself, then? Because I'm fairly certain any Christian I know would look you in the eye and laugh themselves silly.

I want to discuss this matter with a "true" Christian. Seeing as how you obviously don't fit the bill, have a good day.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


You're the one who addressed me first, am I not supposed to respond to it? Just because what I said is logical and makes sense doesn't mean you have to put up your defenses and walk away.

You should learn from it rather than flat out denying it without explaining why. You believe the story of Jesus is nonsensical in some parts right? Maybe that's because someone turned it into nonsense in order to push an agenda? I think so and I believe pagans (Rome) are the ones who did it.

I don't call myself anything, I do not throw labels on myself. I am more a seeker than anything I guess.
edit on 17-1-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


You have declared both Christianity and paganism to be a lie. How does that even work?



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


What's so true to you about paganism? Do you even understand the religion and its history or do you just like it because it worships stars and planets?



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


You're the one who addressed me first, am I not supposed to respond to it? Just because what I said is logical and makes sense doesn't mean you have to put up your defenses and walk away.

You should learn from it rather than flat out denying it without explaining why. You believe the story of Jesus is nonsensical in some parts right? Maybe that's because someone turned it into nonsense in order to push an agenda? I think so and I believe pagans (Rome) are the ones who did it.

I don't call myself anything, I do not throw labels on myself. I am more a seeker than anything I guess.
edit on 17-1-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)


I think you'd need to ask Constantine himself when erecting his city; was he truely a Pagan or merely appeasing the general constituants in his realm. Was he Christian Roman, Pagan, both, or trying to avoid potencial conflicts by sneaking in obvious pagan references/ symboliology/myth into his architecture. He recognised it as legitimate as a belief system maybe even revered it (or was afraid of it) (or was superstitious).
edit on 17-1-2013 by vethumanbeing because: Salt goes over the left shoulder?



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by vethumanbeing
 


I honestly believe that no emperor of Rome had ever believed in any of the religions that they Instituted because they are the ones that started them. They only evolve their religions as best they can to fit their needs for power.

Constantine was in the guise of a pagan who saw a more efficient way to control the people so he legalized Christianity. Once he legalized it he started persecuting and murdering the pagans who refused to convert. Constantine was not religious at all in my opinion, only power hungry.





top topics
 
17
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join