The Christian Hell

[skasian]

I gave a list of hundreds of contradictions earlier.

Or, a subject which is irrefutable, since it concerns the bible - are the apocrypha. Men decided which bits went into the bible, men decide which bits get read in churches.



I've been discussing aspects of religion for 40 years - I see no reason to stop now.

Why do I do it?

It's entertaining, and very occasionally, enlightening.

It enables me to see where the issues I wish to take on are, how deeply they're entrenched and trying to find possible ways to counter them. Also, to make sure that sufficient record is kept of the non-arguments for creationism to ensure that it never, ever gets close to being taught in public schools.

Not a word of it, however, makes me angry. My writing can look like that because I'm a forceful kinda bloke - personally and in prose, but angry, I ain't. I can get angry at wilful ignorance, but that's about the only thing, so you have no more chance of angering me than converting me.





Don't you think that's a pretty arrogant attitude?

I know you just can't quite grasp that it is insulting, and to some degree, nor do I, but the plain facts are that some people find it insulting to be repeatedly told that they're going to hell.

Things are insulting because someone feels they are, not because the writer intends an insult.



So, you believe that the rule of "respect the belief of others" should only apply to non-christians? It's this simple - if someone else's beliefs make your assertion about hell insulting, then repeating it many times can only be disrespectful. Do we build fences around swimming pools? With that hot pan on your stove, do you put it right at the front, with the handle facing outwards? Even your own analogy shows the point - we think about other people as well as ourselves.

I always thought christianity taught that.

Mea culpa.



That was my point exactly - you don't know, because you won't have asked the right questions. It's not a case of interrogation, but simply sorting the group of atheists into materialist/rationalists and other sections, which tells you about what they do believe, unlike atheism, which only tells you about what they don't.

I've explained many times that atheists comprise a wide range of people who self-assume the tag, which is how it's meant to be.

On the other hand, materialist atheists are a group of people who do share similar beliefs and I would challenge anyone, anytime, to find a material atheist who seriously challenges the ToE.

Anyone else's opinion is irrelevant to me.

No, I dont mind non religious people like you that doesnt shout of offensive language about Christianity and its belief in hell since you are open to discuss without lack of respect. It is that some atheists and non Christians that gets themselves in angst about hearing somethings that they dont want to hear when it was their responsibility to put themselves in that position.

I am sorry for all the people that have felt the pain of me speaking out the belief in some Christians, but what do people expect out of this thread named as "The Christian Hell"? Wouldnt the rules that follow about Christian hell be inevitably brought up? In real life, the word hell represents the most insulting and abhorrent atmosphere. The thread that is called "The Christian Hell" obviously is going to contain some abhorrent components and it should be clear for people to realise this before allowing themselves to be into the discussion. I really have to ask you, is it my fault to bring up the most horrific truth about Hell? If it I have emphasised it too much, then I apologise, but I just want people to know that it is not in my responsibility to induce people to feel insulted, they should be the ones to expect that some component are going to be somewhat insultive.

It seems the rule that who ends up in hell is causing great harm for everyone. I vow that I never speak out this rule again. Now this rule is out of the way, what else is there to discuss about Christian Hell? There is not much about it, just souls in inexplicable pain, fear and all those detrimental emotions and feelings. Let see, if Christian Hell exists or not? Let us experience that ourselves in the end of time.

A thing I want to thank you about is your ability to control yourself when perceiving contrasting perspectives and views about Christianity that you may not necessarily agree with. You dont dispute without manners and respect out of your anger like some people here and in the world. And finally please, dont get any idea that I am trying to convert you, I have no intention to do so.

[Pendragon]

It's the reality, in your view, and it's insulting.

Just one quick question, my friend, for I do consider you a friend. Why be insulted by another's reality, as this is something you cannot believe and cannot see.

A quote from Thomas Jefferson:

"It makes no difference to me if my neighbor believes in no God or more Gods. It doesn't pick my pocket." This is paraphrased, as the exact quote is on my home computer and I am at work, but you get the idea. What someone deems worthy of belief and thinks you should know is no more insulting than for you to tell them you think they are being irrational. It should insult no one to hear someone out, and then agree or disagree and just move on.

That said, this thread should probably close, because this is getting us no further than when it first began. Some feel mankind is doomed to hell and others don't think so. That sums it up pretty good.

Do I think you are going to hell? I don't know you, and that would be judging, which the Bible expressly forbids. As I said before, I think Judgement Day will be filled with surprises for a lot of people, many of them who believe themselves to be solid Christians.

Sorry to post again after I folded, but I am certain you will forgive me.

God Bless

Pen

[Pendragon]

And to another friend, Skasian. You have openly made your point and have warned people about the reality of hell. Having done so, you are free from their blood should they wind in in that awful place. Further argument is unnecessary.

I think you are very sincere, and that you are concerned and caring. But what people cannot believe, they cannot believe. Go in peace, my sister.

God bless

Pen

[The Atheist]

It seems the rule that who ends up in hell is causing great harm for everyone. I vow that I never speak out this rule again. Now this rule is out of the way, what else is there to discuss about Christian Hell?

Other people have different ideas, and the point of the thread was to find a wide spread of opinion.

I think we have had that, but maybe it's been a bit overshadowed.

No matter - we're all in tune now.

Just one quick question, my friend, for I do consider you a friend.

Just as well - I'd be insulted if you didn't!

Why be insulted by another's reality, as this is something you cannot believe and cannot see.

My sentiments entirely - it's the same to me as David Icke's supporters telling me I'm insane because I don't see the evidence of alien lizards. You may as well threaten me with the Cottingley Fairies.

I would bet that everyone in this thread knew before they entered it that some christians feel the way skasian does. The problem seems to be the repetition of it, which does come across as arrogant, "You're going to hell!" repeated endlessly gets under the skin.

In NZ, at least, we can laugh at it because Hell is an extremely successful pizza chain company which makes the best pizzas outside of specialist Italian restaurants. Many churches have felt insulted by both the name Hell and its highly amusing and Satanic advertising, and have made an immense number of official complaints to the regulatory bodies. The RCC has even asked its members to boycott the company.

To me, this is the identical situation in reverse and I ask myself why on earth those churches would care about it at all. According to their own theology, the people involved cannot be christian and cannot harm the church or its members, so why the fuss?

As I said before, I think Judgement Day will be filled with surprises for a lot of people, many of them who believe themselves to be solid Christians.

Yep, we agree here, because if such a thing as a god exists, I bet humans have got him completely wrong.

Sorry to post again after I folded, but I am certain you will forgive me.

I'll give it serious consideration.

[Pendragon]

In NZ, at least, we can laugh at it because Hell is an extremely successful pizza chain company which makes the best pizzas outside of specialist Italian restaurants. Many churches have felt insulted by both the name Hell and its highly amusing and Satanic advertising, and have made an immense number of official complaints to the regulatory bodies. The RCC has even asked its members to boycott the company.

To me, this is the identical situation in reverse and I ask myself why on earth those churches would care about it at all. According to their own theology, the people involved cannot be christian and cannot harm the church or its members, so why the fuss?

Mountains and molehills, or Jesus' motes and beams. Camels and the eye of a needle, etc. Much ado about nothing. My motto is: If things are as they are, deal with it.

When it comes to churches, I have, as a Minister, had a lot of doors closed for speaking my mind. But I am sure there are others who would be glad to hear someone like me speak. Que sera, sera.

[weltanschauung]

How would you know whether if I dont question anything, sorry but you are very wrong. I question alot of things and most of these just cant be answered by humans. I question about why some periods of my life is so hard, I question God sometimes why I am not what He is expecting me to be, I question myself why somethings just seem so meaningless in life. I question myself what is worth the time and effort and what is not.
And yet you remark that I do not question? You have no authority to judge me in this way just because I am religious.

how do you know what "god" is expecting you to be? and why do you think he '"expects" anything at all?
what i dont understand is why do you see god as a person, but a huge one?
what i gather from what you say is that you see god as a gigantic superego, judging and pointing the finger down to his worthless children, an out of reach tyrant father, ordering around and expecting submission, or else punishment. i look at this kind of thought as infantile and under-elaborated, and that weltanschauung is the general rule in the world.
i dont believe in this god, because that is simply humankind's superego projection, and if there is something in this reality that is the demiurg, it is nature and the universe, and there isnt an outside force interfering and expecting anything, because the universe's laws are unavoidable and unchangeable. polarity and atraction and repulsion, that is "god". it is an eternal mechanism, but it doesnt think, cause we're the ones who do. a cloud and a rock and planet saturn dont think yet they're all alive, because the universe is alive, otherwise we wouldnt be here to question it.
therefore, god isnt "outside" of the world, watching and analising. god IS the world, we exist in "him", and he's not interfering and sending worthless parts of himself into an enternal ring of fire, because there is nothing outside of him.

[billyjack]

how do you know what "god" is expecting you to be? and why do you think he '"expects" anything at all?
what i dont understand is why do you see god as a person, but a huge one?
what i gather from what you say is that you see god as a gigantic superego, judging and pointing the finger down to his worthless children, an out of reach tyrant father, ordering around and expecting submission, or else punishment. i look at this kind of thought as infantile and under-elaborated, and that weltanschauung is the general rule in the world.
i dont believe in this god, because that is simply humankind's superego projection, and if there is something in this reality that is the demiurg, it is nature and the universe, and there isnt an outside force interfering and expecting anything, because the universe's laws are unavoidable and unchangeable. polarity and atraction and repulsion, that is "god". it is an eternal mechanism, but it doesnt think, cause we're the ones who do. a cloud and a rock and planet saturn dont think yet they're all alive, because the universe is alive, otherwise we wouldnt be here to question it.
therefore, god isnt "outside" of the world, watching and analising. god IS the world, we exist in "him", and he's not interfering and sending worthless parts of himself into an enternal ring of fire, because there is nothing outside of him.

the philosophers god. a new word is needed other than god though--too many anthropomorphic and religious implications. i've always been keen on allan watts name for it, "IT"

[weltanschauung]

agreed.

i watched this video once on youtube and i couldnt help laughing at it, because even though most christians arent this hysterically psychotic, i see all of the main characteristics of this lady in them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOpva_iit-8

now this is also something that makes no sense at all to me...
why is it that nature is so evil under their eyes? nature is everything that is pure, arent we the filthy ones?

[billyjack]

agreed.

i watched this video once on youtube and i couldnt help laughing at it, because even though most christians arent this hysterically psychotic, i see all of the main characteristics of this lady in them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOpva_iit-8

now this is also something that makes no sense at all to me...
why is it that nature is so evil under their eyes? nature is everything that is pure, arent we the filthy ones?

watched it: terrifying, vile, and cringefully funny. she's from the country i call home too...albeit the south

the beef with nature is some deep seeded self loathing that's beyond me...or self righteousness for that matter: too supreme to be part of the natural universe

[The Atheist]

i've always been keen on allan watts name for it, "IT"

Bit Steven King.

What's wrong with Lucas' Force?

[billyjack]

i hear "down under" there's a rather large proportion of people who claim jedi as their religion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedi_census_phenomenon

i can live with force, it, the, spaghetti monster, whatever. just so the implications of the word don't involve a heaven or a hell

[blp]

agreed.

i watched this video once on youtube and i couldnt help laughing at it, because even though most christians arent this hysterically psychotic, i see all of the main characteristics of this lady in them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOpva_iit-8

now this is also something that makes no sense at all to me...
why is it that nature is so evil under their eyes? nature is everything that is pure, arent we the filthy ones?

Those poor kids. They need to be taken away from that woman for their own protection. I actually couldn't watch it all, but it gives us a good, new way of understanding the subject of this thread, doesn't it? The Christian Hell. quod erat demonstrandum.

[blp]

What's wrong with Lucas' Force?

Seriously? I know it might sound a bit humourless, but I do really dislike the earnestness with which that creed's put forward in the films, the notion that what seem to be the limits of natural law are really just the limits of our own preconceptions. It's very anti-Kantian. And there are just too many people bumbling around with these kinds of ideas in real life for me to be able to see it as harmless in those movies.

[weltanschauung]

i hear "down under" there's a rather large proportion of people who claim jedi as their religion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedi_census_phenomenon

i can live with force, it, the, spaghetti monster, whatever. just so the implications of the word don't involve a heaven or a hell

hey, since you mentioned...

http://www.ooze.com/toolofsatan/

[weltanschauung]

Those poor kids. They need to be taken away from that woman for their own protection. I actually couldn't watch it all, but it gives us a good, new way of understanding the subject of this thread, doesn't it? The Christian Hell. quod erat demonstrandum.

quod erat demonstrandum indeed.