Why Hell? - SciForums.com

Tiassa

06-27-11, 05:48 PM

These aren't the best answers, I admit, and I'm not a Christian, but:

• Why do you believe that God feels there is a need to torture people in hell for eternity- for things that they had done on earth in a body that makes it very easy for them to sin in the first place?

I believe it's doctrinal. See Matthew 25.32-46 (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/rsv-idx?type=citation&book=Matthew&chapno=25&startverse=32&endverse=46), for instance.

I would also note that it's not always the proposition that the body makes it very easy to sin. To the one, the rules themselves can be described as problematic, such as Christ's standard of adultery (Matthew 5.32 (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/rsv-idx?type=citation&book=Matthew&chapno=5&startverse=32&endverse=32)). To another, there are some faithful who believe the Fall of Man at Eden was preordained; I don't have a copy of it on hand to quote directly, but there is a "Bible paraphrase" called The Clear Word, written by Dr. Jack Blanco, that transforms Genesis 3.22-23 (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/rsv-idx?type=citation&book=Genesis&chapno=3&startverse=22&endverse=23)—

Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever"—therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken.

—into an explanation by the Father to the Son that what happened was part of the Plan.

Obviously, neither of those points are definitive, and in truth I can't say how widespread Blanco's theology is; I do know it was controversial within his own church.

• Why is there a chance for repentance on earth but not in the afterlife?

Prevailing belief, I think. Some scattered considerations:

• When I was a child, someone taught a friend of mine that one could pray their way out of Hell. Maybe it was something to curb the nightmares after the scary stories unsettled the kids. I don't know; I have no idea where that one comes from.

• The theological record of Christianity includes "The Harrowing of Hell (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07143d.htm)", which K. M. Warren described in 1910 as:

... the Old English and Middle English term for the triumphant descent of Christ into hell (or Hades) between the time of His Crucifixion and His Resurrection, when, according to Christian belief, He brought salvation to the souls held captive there since the beginning of the world."

• Again, I'm pressed for a citation, as it's been several years since I read through the material, but there is a proposition that only humans can learn and evolve. Or, rather, the angels cannot. From that proposition, one might postulate the difference between the material and the spiritual, such that once transformed to a spiritual state—i.e., redeemed or condemned—one can no longer learn and evolve. Certainly, in some depictions of Heaven or Redemption, this is the case, as the redeemed become one with the total perfection of God. While nothing in that demands that a certain variant or corollary be true—e.g., that souls in Hell cannot learn and evolve—I can certainly see the intuitive attraction.

Again, I would disclaim that these aren't the best answers; one should not construe them in any context as a definitive assertion. But we must also remember that, when it comes down to vernacular faith, very little is scripturally or doctrinally pure.

In that context, we might recall the paternalistic aspects of Christianity; God the father, Jesus' appeal at Gethsemane to "Abba" (Daddy), and so on. There comes a point when parents reject the apologies and appeals of their children, very frequently after punishment for wrongdoing has been demanded. "I'm sorry!" doesn't always stop the spankings. It doesn't always get the child a shorter grounding term. It doesn't always get the game console back.

• Why do you believe God set it up for anyone to go to hell at all?

I have nothing useful to offer toward that at this time.

Thus disclaimed, some suggest politics. In this context, I recommend Elaine Pagels' The Origin of Satan, which is subtitled, "How Christians Demonized Jews, Pagans, and Heretics". The book examines the development of the Gospels, and presupposes the theoretical Quelle or Q-source asserted to underpin the synoptic books. Its overarching theme is to demonstrate how historical circumstances lent to the characterization of the Devil, alternately in the Jews, from whom the Christians splintered; then the pagans, in facilitating their conversion to Christianity; and ultimately in fellow Christians, asserting diabolical heresy. Even setting aside the question of the Q-source, it is a compelling historical overview of the Gospels.

Yet even that is insufficient, as prior to the period of Christ, there evolved an apocalyptic movement among the Hebrews that includes the myth of Satan's fall, seemingly making something like Hell a necessity.

• Why not just learn lessons on earth and gain growth from them, if one so chooses- instead of punishing a person for an eternity for having done things that might go against his "commands"? I mean why not just live and let live?

Not being of the faith, I will forego this question, for while I might speculate some about history, it would be inappropriate to apply such speculation to people who are capable of answering for themselves insofar as they are, in fact, presently alive.

• What about any of this/hell seems like unconditional love to you? Could you think of an alternative other than hell? If so what?

Again, I cannot answer this question, though I would note here—since I should probably note somewhere—that I have encountered an argument from Christian faith that there is no such thing as Hell. This looks to the eternal fire as the "second death", a form of annhilation. That is, the fire might burn eternally, but the soul is consumed, and thus forever denied any chance of finding union with God.

• Would you set it up for your child to live in a closet and torture them in a painful manner for not obeying or believing as you'd want them to? Don't you feel that is what God has done by setting it up for others to go to hell?

Not being of the faith, this is another question I cannot answer directly, though I would suggest that it comes back, at some point and to some degree, to vernacular faith. I'm not certain it would be fair to presume that every member of the corpus Christi has given reasonable—or, indeed, any—consideration to the question. To the other, that's also a fine reason to ask the question.

But some apparent paradoxes or contradictions in a faith construction can be explained—though not necessarily reconciled—by what seems a safe presumption that not everyone has stopped to think about that point.

All of which, of course, reminds that there is only limited utility in someone like me trying to address these questions for you in the sense of actually answering and resolving the apparent contradictions you suggest.

I'd like to hear an answer other than, "Well because he's God he can do these things" Okay, so the Biblical God has the power to do those things--but why would a loving God use such barbaric, unloving, brutal ways and why are those ways okay to you? How do you justify them?

If you wouldn't want to be raised by someone like that, marry someone like that, vote for a president who is like that then why would you believe and dedicate your life to a God like that?

I do not wish to leave the impression that I'm ignoring these issues, but as an infidel I am unable to offer an answer from faith.

Some critics—perhaps cynics—might suggest that the problem is one of faith. One accepts certain assertions and characterizations on faith. And it is not necessarily appropriate for faith to question. That is, if one accepts that God, as such, is the ultimate reality, then that reality is what it is. Thus, while our human perspective might suggest there is a contradiction between love and eternal punishment, we are not God. We are not the ultimate reality. On faith, we are to accept that one thing equals another, insofar as if we had God's perspective then it would all make sense.

There is a Hebrew tradition of the Shekinah, which would be the bottom circle on the Tree of Life, except that once upon a time something happened that caused this particular sephiroth to shatter. In this Hebrew tradition, we all who exist in Malkuth—the Kingdom—carry within ourselves a fragment of the Shekinah, and when we all return our shards, that the Shekinah might be whole again, the glory and unity of God will become apparent, and the sinful differentiation of the Universe that compels our animal needs be reconciled into a totality or divine harmony. The restoration of the Shekinah will make God's perfection manifest, as the word itself is derived from the Hebrew shakan (שָׁכַב), a verb pertaining to settling, dwelling, or residing.

It is not a doctrinal tradition, as I understand it. I can find those who would assert that Shekinah and Malkuth are synonymous. The tradition I describe is somewhat sectarian, descending from the controversial Isaac Luria as a Qabalistic theory developed in the sixteenth century.
____________________

Notes:

Weigle, Luther A., et al. The Holy Bible: Revised Standard Version. Second edition. New York: Thomas Nelson, 1971. Quod.Lib.UMich.edu. June 27, 2011. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/r/rsv/

Blanco, Jack. The Clear Word. Hagerstown: Review and Herald, 2000.

Warren, Kate Mary. "Harrowing of Hell". The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 7. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1910. NewAdvent.org. June 26, 2011. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07143d.htm

Pagels, Elaine. The Origin of Satan. New York: Vintage, 1995.

See Also:

Armstrong, Karen. A History of God: The 4000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1994.

Carcano

06-27-11, 05:59 PM

Why do you believe that God feels there is a need to torture people in hell for eternity- for things that they had done on earth in a body that makes it very easy for them to sin in the first place?

Why is there a chance for repentance on earth but not in the afterlife?

Why do you believe God set it up for anyone to go to hell at all?

This is precisely the theme behind the great dialog "between a priest and a dying man" written by the Marquis DeSade in 1782.

Here is the full text:
http://www.sade-ecrivain.com/Dialogue-Between-a-Priest-and-a-Dying-Man.html

ULTRA

06-27-11, 06:01 PM

I'm not at all sure that heaven and hell aren't simply metaphors, and subsequently a form of spiritual blackmail to hold people to the faith. In the scriptures, God is frequently wrathful, vengeful, angry or otherwise indisposed to human beings. Take one example that practically everybody knows, the Passover. The mass murder of thousands of men, women and children, innocent people as they slept. This was a crime against humanity if it ever actually happened..not really the kind of God I'd be happy spending eternity with.

spidergoat

06-27-11, 06:03 PM

Bowser

06-27-11, 06:10 PM

Bowser

06-27-11, 06:35 PM

There are some people with whom I wouldn't want to live. Rather than send them to hell, I might give them an option to live elsewhere. That would be the compassionate thing to do.

NMSquirrel

06-27-11, 06:40 PM

There are some people with whom I wouldn't want to live. Rather than send them to hell, I might give them an option to live elsewhere. That would be the compassionate thing to do.
send them to Australia..?

Bowser

06-27-11, 06:46 PM

send them to Australia..?

:D That's a thought.

heart

06-27-11, 07:01 PM

Tiassa,

Thank you for your reply! I guess I should have included hearing non-believers thoughts as well! :)

Seriously, a lot of your paragraphs began by apologizing for not being able to provide an answer from the Christian faith as you are an infidel-BUT then you followed with what you felt how some Christians might answer based upon your readings. Thank you for that and the resources. I have read some and have more to read but I do appreciate your post.

Again, I cannot answer this question, though I would note here—since I should probably note somewhere—that I have encountered an argument from Christian faith that there is no such thing as Hell. This looks to the eternal fire as the "second death", a form of annhilation. That is, the fire might burn eternally, but the soul is consumed, and thus forever denied any chance of finding union with God.

I have heard this from someone but when the Bible speaks of "eternal torment" how can one be eternally tormented if the soul ceases to exist?

I now wished I would have included hearing thoughts from non-believers as well! You've given thought out answers on how you feel some Christians might answer, If you'd like to add your own thoughts from your perspective I'd love to hear them. :)

heart

06-27-11, 07:03 PM

This is precisely the theme behind the great dialog "between a priest and a dying man" written by the Marquis DeSade in 1782.

Here is the full text:
http://www.sade-ecrivain.com/Dialogue-Between-a-Priest-and-a-Dying-Man.html

Thanks for the link. I will look at it tomorrow when I have a bit more time. ;)

heart

06-27-11, 07:04 PM

heart

06-27-11, 07:06 PM

Bowser

06-27-11, 07:13 PM

Tiassa,

Thank you for your reply! I guess I should have included hearing non-believers thoughts as well! :)

Seriously, a lot of your paragraphs began by apologizing for not being able to provide an answer from the Christian faith as you are an infidel-BUT then you followed with what you felt how some Christians might answer based upon your readings. Thank you for that and the resources. I have read some and have more to read but I do appreciate your post.

I have heard this from someone but when the Bible speaks of "eternal torment" how can one be eternally tormented if the soul ceases to exist?

I now wished I would have included hearing thoughts from non-believers as well! You've given thought out answers on how you feel some Christians might answer, If you'd like to add your own thoughts from your perspective I'd love to hear them. :)

I might be mistaken, but didn't Tiassa come from a Catholic upbringing. If so, he might be able to shine more light on this topic. Forgive if I'm wrong. It just seems to me that you once mentioned it.

heart

06-27-11, 07:17 PM

Hmm, as I said, I'm not equipped with the knowledge to answer. I think your points are very good. I just don't think we have anybody on board who can give you good answers...and I'm certain that someone has good answers. We simply don't have anybody who can give you a thoughtful response.

Wow! While I mean you no disrespect at all, you're kind of going on that you know absolutely nobody at Sciforums can give a thoughtful response? *takes a step back away from you to avoid items being chucked at you by others*
Joking (about the stepping back part) :p

God seems to have placed us in a pressure cooker...intentionally. That's how I would view it. Why? Is there something to be gained from the hardships of life? I'm a better person because of my experiences. Even though I've grown further from religion because of my history, I'm certain that many people have grown closer to god because of theirs.

I have no beef with learning hard lessons in life. What I have a problem with is the idea that a loving God would create a hell for us. Would we do this to children? No! To our loved ones? No!

There could be a rationalization for god's purpose, and that might be understood only by someone who believes in god. We may be out of our depth here simply because we don't have faith and understanding.

I've been on both sides of the fence

I could rationalize the suffering by saying we are immortal in essence, and that our pain is relative to our existence on Earth. As a consequence, temporary violence and blood sacrifice is minuscule when measured against an eternity, and may be a measure of our faith and love.

Would it be okay for a second if someone beat up your wife, child, grandchildren (if you have any, not sure you're old enough to so please do not take offense :) ) Then, too, if God is capable of anything then he is capable of finding a way without violence. I also think he sets a bad example period (violence, unnecessary killings, lying in order to win a war...This God looks more like Hitler than he does a loving God)

Don't get me wrong, I'm trying to make sense of it, too.

Hey, that's cool. I get what you mean.

heart

06-27-11, 07:19 PM

There are some people with whom I wouldn't want to live. Rather than send them to hell, I might give them an option to live elsewhere. That would be the compassionate thing to do.

Yes, that is certainly a better option than eternal torment

heart

06-27-11, 07:21 PM

Bowser

06-27-11, 07:22 PM

Bowser

06-27-11, 07:24 PM

:bugeye: that I once mentioned it or Tiassa once mentioned it?

Tiassa... I could be wrong. It just seems as though he mentioned that he went to Catholic school.

gmilam

06-27-11, 07:25 PM

There is no such thing as hell. "The wages of sin is death." "As for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all."

heart

06-27-11, 07:36 PM

I have an older brother who studied the bible and went to school in that effort. I'll call him and see if he's willing to endure you unfaithful heathens by visiting this forum. I can't make any promises, but I will try.

A religious version of you? :eek:

Tiassa

06-27-11, 07:41 PM

I might be mistaken, but didn't Tiassa come from a Catholic upbringing. If so, he might be able to shine more light on this topic. Forgive if I'm wrong. It just seems to me that you once mentioned it.

I was raised as a "holiday" Lutheran; that is, Christmas Eve, Easter, and so forth, but was not a regular churchgoer. I am confirmed to, I believe, the ELCA (http://www.elca.org/), and shortly thereafter went to a Jesuit high school (http://bellarmineprep.org/)—a desperate move to get away from a (public) school community I loathed.

It took years to "undo the damage" so that I didn't abjectly hate Christianity. You probably encountered part of that transition some years ago when we had our rounds about Measure 9, the Oregon Citizens' Alliance, and other such issues.

• • •

Seriously, a lot of your paragraphs began by apologizing for not being able to provide an answer from the Christian faith as you are an infidel ....

Oh, I'm just covering my ass on that point.

Thank you for your kind words, of course.

I have heard this from someone but when the Bible speaks of "eternal torment" how can one be eternally tormented if the soul ceases to exist?

In truth, I have no idea. You might have been around during the period when I encountered that argument, though I might have you mistaken for someone else.

But, suffice to say, I'm pretty sure that if I dig around in the archives, I can find the post, and I'm pretty sure I know whose name is on it. (Definitely not you, I should note.)

As such, it might have been a response to questions similar to those you've asked in this thread.

(Oh, right, I would be remiss to fail noting Gmilam's response at #28 (http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2773813&postcount=28), as that's a component of the explanation I recall.)

I now wished I would have included hearing thoughts from non-believers as well! You've given thought out answers on how you feel some Christians might answer, If you'd like to add your own thoughts from your perspective I'd love to hear them.

Thank you so kindly. As you can probably guess, I'm a bit judgmental about certain conundra of faith. This is largely because I hold the opinion that our beliefs can affect other people's lives.

For instance, I can say with comfort that I've known plenty of Quakers who would shrug and respond to your questions, "Well, that's part of the mystery of God, and our faith in Him." Those would not tell you that the questions are right or wrong; only that they defy specific answers.

And, in truth, that's the reply that unsettles me the least. I cannot account for Southern Baptists, Seventh-Day Adventists, nondenominational Christianity, televangelism, ad infinitum. And if I try, it often sounds sarcastic or embittered. For instance, the Catholics in school always offered answers that worked well enough if they stayed isolated in a rhetorical bubble, but didn't always work and play well with other points of faith when incorporated into a larger, functional scheme. So when I recite their answers, on such occasions that I can remember them precisely enough, it always sounds like my tongue is firmly planted in my cheek, or my head firmly fixed in my ass.

Bowser

06-27-11, 07:44 PM

A religious version of you? :eek:

He's actually pretty mild--doesn't preach or anything. I'm not certain where his convictions sit these days, but he was very much dedicated to it at one time.

These religion forums always seem to be lopsided and stagnant, because there's no counterpoint in the discussions. I want variety.

ULTRA

06-27-11, 07:59 PM

QUOTE=heart;2773716]I already have a good idea what Lori's thoughts are on the following- but would also like to hear from other Christians on the below as well.

Why do you believe that God feels there is a need to torture people in hell for eternity- for things that they had done on earth in a body that makes it very easy for them to sin in the first place?

This implies Hell exists inside of normal spacetime, that it is a physical place. I think though it's meant to be a metaphysical place and "eternity" might be an entirely different thing there.

As for the body thing, I'm sure we'd find new ways of "sinning" however we were built. The seven deadly sins are not all about bodies though - Averice, pride, jealousy etc.

Why is there a chance for repentance on earth but not in the afterlife?

Is this not what Purgatory was meant to be for?

Why do you believe God set it up for anyone to go to hell at all?

The bible suggests that Hell can be simply the absence of God. I could argue that we are already in such a place.

Why not just learn lessons on earth and gain growth from them, if one so chooses- instead of punishing a person for an eternity for having done things that might go against his "commands"? I mean why not just live and let live?

All authoritarian regimes have to stamp out all dissent or resistence quickly develops. A God cannot allow any challenges to his authority. That's why he sent Lucifer to hell in the first place.

What about any of this/hell seems like unconditional love to you? Could you think of an alternative other than hell? If so what?

If Gods' love was unconditional, he wouldn't need a Hell as he would be able to forgive unconditionally. This is not apparently the case however, and His love is certainly not unconditional.

An alternative would be a kind of spiritual university or college where "rough" souls would be cut and polished into shiny valuable ones.

Would you set it up for your child to live in a closet and torture them in a painful manner for not obeying or believing as you'd want them to? Don't you feel that is what God has done by setting it up for others to go to hell?

Judge not, lest you be judged. Usually any kind of misbehaviour in my experience is a symptom of unhappiness, in basic terms. It's better to treat the cause than the symptom.

I'd like to hear an answer other than, "Well because he's God he can do these things" Okay, so the Biblical God has the power to do those things--but why would a loving God use such barbaric, unloving, brutal ways and why are those ways okay to you? How do you justify them?

I don't. But in Biblical times Despots were often powerful people. Take Pharoh for example. He enslaved the Jews, but everybody took slaves back then. What made Pharoh so bad compared to the Romans who took slaves and made them fight each other to the death for fun, as gladiators?

If you wouldn't want to be raised by someone like that, marry someone like that, vote for a president who is like that then why would you believe and dedicate your life to a God like that?

If you were to live by the basic tenets of the bible, you should, on balance, live a good, healthy productive life compared to "Godless heathens". Many heathen societies were highly advanced however. The Greeks and the Romans were heathen by biblical standards until 2000 years or so ago.

Lori_7

06-27-11, 08:01 PM

Isn't the rejection of god considered a sin? Also, Lori, you make a lot of statements concerning your beliefs, but you seem to be short on rational. Can you explain why you believe the way you do?

in this regard, everyone is a sinner. so if what heart said in the op was true, we'd all end up in hell. the way i understand it, it's those of us who wish we weren't that get what we want...salvation. and as well those who are just fine with sin get to keep it.

i really just think that ultimately people get what they want. i want to be redeemed.

wynn

06-28-11, 03:02 AM

I already have a good idea what Lori's thoughts are on the following- but would also like to hear from other Christians on the below as well.

Why do you believe that God feels there is a need to torture people in hell for eternity- for things that they had done on earth in a body that makes it very easy for them to sin in the first place?

Why is there a chance for repentance on earth but not in the afterlife?

Why do you believe God set it up for anyone to go to hell at all?

Why not just learn lessons on earth and gain growth from them, if one so chooses- instead of punishing a person for an eternity for having done things that might go against his "commands"? I mean why not just live and let live?

What about any of this/hell seems like unconditional love to you? Could you think of an alternative other than hell? If so what?

Would you set it up for your child to live in a closet and torture them in a painful manner for not obeying or believing as you'd want them to? Don't you feel that is what God has done by setting it up for others to go to hell?

I'd like to hear an answer other than, "Well because he's God he can do these things" Okay, so the Biblical God has the power to do those things--but why would a loving God use such barbaric, unloving, brutal ways and why are those ways okay to you? How do you justify them?

If you wouldn't want to be raised by someone like that, marry someone like that, vote for a president who is like that then why would you believe and dedicate your life to a God like that?

I'm not a Christian, but the doctrine of eternal damnation (and related issues) is something I have taken interest in.

There is reason to believe that the notion of eternal damnation (hell without end) is a later interpretation, a matter of how some words were translated.

See:

It is a prevalent idea that the words "Eternal, Everlasting, Forever," etc., in the English Bible, signify endless duration. This essay aims to prove the popular impression erroneous. The inquiry will be pursued in a manner that shall be satisfactory to the scholar, and also enable the ordinary reader to apprehend the facts, so that both the learned and the unlearned may be able to see the subject in a light that shall relieve the Scriptures of seeming to teach a doctrine that blackens the character of God, and plunges a deadly sting into the believing heart.

The original Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek, by seventy scholars, and hence called "The Septuagint," B.C. 200-300,(1) and the Hebrew word Olam is, in almost all cases, translated AiónAiónios etc., (Aíwv, Aíwvios,) so that the two words may be regarded as synonymous with each other. In the New Testament the same wordsAión and its derivatives, are the original Greek of the English words,Eternal, Everlasting, Forever, etc.. So that when we ascertain the real meaning of Aión, we have settled the sense of those English words in which the doctrine of Endless Punishment is erroneously taught. It is not going to far to say that if the Greek Aión - Aiónios does not denote endless duration, then endless punishment is not taught in the Bible. We proceed to show that the sense of interminable duration does not reside in the word.

http://www.tentmaker.org/books/Aion_lim.html

A study devoted entirely to the use of the words for eternity in classical and Christian texts:

What is truly timeless? This book explores the language of eternity, and in particular two ancient Greek terms that may bear the sense of "eternal": aiônios and aïdios. This fascinating linguistic chronicle is marked by several milestones that correspond to the emergence of new perspectives on the nature of eternity. These milestones include the advent of Pre-Socratic physical speculation and the notion of limitless time in ancient philosophy, the major shift in orientation marked by Plato's idea of a timeless eternity, and the further development of Pre-Socratic insights by Epicurean and Stoic thinkers. From the biblical perspective, the intersection of Greek and Hebrew conceptions is reflected in Septuagint, as well as new inflections in popular terminology in the Hellenistic and Roman periods, and in the role of eternity in the theology of the New Testament. The profound cross-fertilization of Christian and classical philosophical conceptions in the works of the Church fathers and their contemporaries is explored, bringing the topic into the Patristic period. Christian theology in the first five centuries of the Common Era and its choice of vocabulary prove to be most revealing of larger doctrinal commitments. Above all debate raged on the question of eternal damnation versus the idea (deemed heretical in the Christian church after the formal condemnation of Origenism) of apocastastis or universal salvation -- that is, the belief that the wicked are not condemned to eternal punishment but will eventually be included among the saved. Terminology for "eternity" is often at the core of how these issues were debated, and helps to identify which writers inclined to one or the other view of the matter.
Ramelli, Ilaria, and David Konstan. Terms for Eternity: Aiônios and Aïdios in Classical and Christian Texts (http://www.gorgiaspress.com/bookshop/showproduct.aspx?ISBN=978-1-59333-694-3&1534-D83A_1933715A=5ba0f8dbb253e3ddec788d529e81b7df7582 728a)

What is perplexing to me is how come some people continue to believe in eternal damnation - how come they have such faith in the mainstream translations of the Bible and manistream Christian doctrines.

wynn

06-28-11, 03:16 AM

At the time the Bible was written, people tended to respect a ruler that could be barbarous in their wrath. Things have changed and it doesn't seem very fair anymore. The sooner we reject this miserable ideology the better.

We must also add considerations for translations of the Bible.
The history of the Bible, from its beginnings until today, is loaded with numerous text-critical issues.

What the current popular translations of the Bible say is not necessarily what the original meant.

Bowser

06-28-11, 05:59 PM

What the current popular translations of the Bible say is not necessarily what the original meant.

Good point. But who has taken the time to go back to those original works?

wynn

06-29-11, 12:49 AM

Good point. But who has taken the time to go back to those original works?

Some do. I quoted two references above.

Tiassa

06-29-11, 02:24 AM

Hell: Working Out the Bugs

Please, please, please don't make me actually quote Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man. Just pretend you read the book, and thus the counterpoint is perfectly obvious:

http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20110627.gif (http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2289)
Zach Weiner, Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, June 27, 2011

Just laugh. You know, it's supposed to be funny.

Never mnd.

chimpkin

06-29-11, 04:05 AM

Heart asked:
Could you think of an alternative other than hell? If so what?

Reincarnation.
You get to keep coming back until you stop screwing up.
That's why most Eastern religions consider it to be a bad thing.
Back again in the loony bin of the Galaxy *facepalm*.

Cifo

06-29-11, 10:20 AM

Lori_7

06-29-11, 11:57 AM

Me-Ki-Gal

06-29-11, 12:02 PM

nietzschefan

06-29-11, 12:05 PM

Let's face it, according to the nonreligious, you live your life and then you take a permanent "dirt nap" ... no second chances, no rewards, no "passing over". And believers and nonbelievers alike know that "you can't take it with you". Then religions come along and offer alternatives.

I've been a Christian now for many years, and it's no mystery to me that eternal salvation or damnation is not the ultimate goal of our belief in Christianity because, according to our faith, we are not the ones who control those things. The ultimate goal is actually to change our behavior here on earth ... behavior control. Not "behavior control" in the natural sense (ie, how "I" choose to act and say), but perhaps in the "supernatural" sense of allowing a perfect force external to ourselves (ie, the Holy Spirit) to work through us. Because, as our faith tells us, we are imperfect and we can do no thing perfectly. We must seek help outside of ourselves.

When you look at it from this world's perspective, after you've passed over, the only things of you that will remain of you are what you've said and done. So, if you know about the only truly "good" way to act, and if you haven't followed it, then ... oh well ... perhaps no better than a dirt nap. A dirt nap means you will not be conscious of anything; but hell means you will be conscious of your failure.

For nonbelievers, this should be their only concern about hell ... that Christianity means you won't take a dirt nap, you will feel remorse/regret (to say the least).

Nothing done out of fear is ever "good". It is always done "out-of-character".

If god is all knowing, he can recognize a person hedging his bets to "get out of hell". That IS what religion has become, not so much the promise of heaven but the avoidance of hell. When one really really thinks about it, the descriptions of both places are VERY very close to the same thing. The difference is one is about pain and the other about pleasure. Any philosopher can tell you that pain is the father of pleasure...there is no knowing pleasure without knowing pain first. Any activity done for eternity, is madness.

Most Atheists are not murdering fiendish criminals many "believers" say is the consequence of losing God.

Think about that. They can still add to society and make it better despite not being told to do it. Really think about that....

LIGHTBEING

06-29-11, 01:52 PM

To the OP:

I'd like to substitute the word God with Religion however and go on like this.

Because Hell scares children (and some adults) into belief. Propaganda, Indoctrination and illogical reasoning is key to it's survival.

wynn

06-29-11, 02:16 PM

Let's face it, according to the nonreligious, you live your life and then you take a permanent "dirt nap" ... no second chances, no rewards, no "passing over".

This is not true, it is a misrepresentation of the non-religious positions.

I am not religious and I do not believe that after death comes a "dirt nap" if any kind. I simply do not have beliefs about what happens after death.

The ultimate goal is actually to change our behavior here on earth ... behavior control.

That is worldly ...

For nonbelievers, this should be their only concern about hell ... that Christianity means you won't take a dirt nap, you will feel remorse/regret (to say the least).

For me as a nonbeliever, Christianity means that in order to do right in God's eyes, I must do things that I find absolutely repugnant.

Cifo

06-29-11, 09:51 PM

#1 Nothing done out of fear is ever "good". It is always done "out-of-character".

#2 If god is all knowing, he can recognize a person hedging his bets to "get out of hell". #3 That IS what religion has become, not so much the promise of heaven but the avoidance of hell. #4 When one really really thinks about it, the descriptions of both places are VERY very close to the same thing. The difference is one is about pain and the other about pleasure. #5 Any philosopher can tell you that pain is the father of pleasure...there is no knowing pleasure without knowing pain first. #6 Any activity done for eternity, is madness.

#7 Most Atheists are not murdering fiendish criminals many "believers" say is the consequence of losing God.

#8 Think about that. They can still add to society and make it better despite not being told to do it. Really think about that....

1. Yes, the Bible says that someone scared away from one sin will run smack dab into another sin. I worked in substance dependence recovery, and I saw it happen again and again and again. I agree that only 5 to 10% of people seek Christianity because of fire and brimstone sermonizing (which I myself fervently avoid and discourage).

2. Right, and, as far as I can tell, he's not too keen on anyone "hedging a bet" with him.

3. Christianity is both because it only offers two choices. You can't have one without the other.

4. Well, according to almost everyone, even atheists, there's a world of difference between pain and pleasure. That why this thread is entitled "Why Hell?" instead of "Why Heaven?".

5. Good for those philosophers, but science won't back this up. There's definitely pleasure centers in the brain that when stimulated produce pleasure sensations without the subject ever having felt pain.

6. That's one person's opinion. Maybe this also means that the "infinite duration" theory of the ultimate fate of the universe means that our physical existence is madness.

7. I don't recognize this as part of the Christianity that I have known for several decades. Why would atheists supposedly be murdering fiendish criminals?

8. Does this mean that humans are naturally good? Nature over nurture? Because, I tell you what ... I've been involved in the raising of several children, and I've noticed that every one of them needed to be taught to be good (because it does not come naturally to humans) -- and it takes several years for them to be taught the various ways of being good. To begin with, babies are born 100% selfish.

This is not true, it is a misrepresentation of the non-religious positions.

#1 I am not religious and I do not believe that after death comes a "dirt nap" if any kind. I simply do not have beliefs about what happens after death.

#2 For me as a nonbeliever, Christianity means that in order to do right in God's eyes, I must do things that I find absolutely repugnant.

1. By "dirt nap", I mean "Game over, man" or worm food or etc. There's no scientific evidence of anything beyond death except decay and putrification. Therefore, not having any beliefs that there might be something after death leaves only a dirt nap.

2. Absolutely repugnant things? Examples, please. The military funeral protesters and the abortion doctor killers are not living the Christian life.

wynn

06-30-11, 12:34 AM

1. By "dirt nap", I mean "Game over, man" or worm food or etc. There's no scientific evidence of anything beyond death except decay and putrification. Therefore, not having any beliefs that there might be something after death leaves only a dirt nap.

No, it does not. It only leaves an open question.

2. Absolutely repugnant things? Examples, please. The military funeral protesters and the abortion doctor killers are not living the Christian life.

Absolutely repugnant such as blind faith or believing that it is love that God tortures the majortiy of His children in hell for all eternity.

And you have given an example of something repugnant as well, twice now when you misrepresent what "lack of belief" may mean to a non-religious person. Continuing to commit logical fallacies is repugnant.

Cifo

06-30-11, 06:58 AM

No, it does not. It only leaves an open question.

Hmm.... Someone who believes in an open question is an agnostic (see definition below). I think someone who says that the existence of God etc is questionable and yet does not address those questions is an atheist in disguise. I have yet to find an atheist/nonbeliever who believes that the possibility of an afterlife is an open question.

Absolutely repugnant such as blind faith or believing that it is love that God tortures the majortiy of His children in hell for all eternity.

God does not ask for blind faith. Reading the Bible, associating with other Christians, etc leaves blind faith in the dust. Blind faith is, for example, believing without any evidence whatsoever (as in blindly believing that there's an alien spaceship behind a comet and that committing suicide is a boarding pass).

Yes, believing in an eternal dirt nap is more convenient to the non-believer than believing in eternal damnation. Decisions produce consequences, but some people want to avoid the ugly consequences of their decisions. Perhaps it would help to think of eternal damnation as "eternal regret". The "eternal" part of it is a given, considering that the universe has been around for 14 billion years and, without evidence that there's any "wear on the tread", it's probably good for another 14 billion years or more.

And you have given an example of something repugnant as well, twice now when you misrepresent what "lack of belief" may mean to a non-religious person. Continuing to commit logical fallacies is repugnant.

As to "lack of belief", I define a non-believer or a non-religious person (as we have discussed it) as an atheist.

An atheist rejects all religious belief and denies the existence of God.
An agnostic questions the existence of God, heaven, etc. in the absence of material proof and in unwillingness to accept supernatural revelation.
A deist, a historical term, was applied to 18th-century rationalists who believed in God as a creative, moving force but who otherwise rejected formal religion and its doctrines of revelation, divine authority, etc.
A freethinker, the current parallel term, similarly implies rejection of the tenets and traditions of formal religion as incompatible with reason.
An unbeliever is a more negative term, simply designating, without further qualification, one who does not accept any religious belief.
An infidel is a person not believing in a certain religion or the prevailing religion.

I too find logical fallacies repugnant (ie, causing extreme dislike or distaste; aversion; antipathy).

Lastly, I will admit to something that most Christians won't: Many people have become jaded to Christianity due to the wholesale ineptitude/hypocrisy of Christians over the years and, furthermore, Christians in general have spiritually isolated themselves from the rest of society to the point where the gap has now grown into a yawning chasm.

wynn

06-30-11, 02:41 PM

Hmm.... Someone who believes in an open question is an agnostic (see definition below). I think someone who says that the existence of God etc is questionable and yet does not address those questions is an atheist in disguise. I have yet to find an atheist/nonbeliever who believes that the possibility of an afterlife is an open question.

Those definitions are relative.

God does not ask for blind faith.

You know what God wants??

Reading the Bible, associating with other Christians, etc leaves blind faith in the dust.

To me, it would require blind faith to read the Bible and associate with Christians.

Yes, believing in an eternal dirt nap is more convenient to the non-believer than believing in eternal damnation. Decisions produce consequences, but some people want to avoid the ugly consequences of their decisions. Perhaps it would help to think of eternal damnation as "eternal regret". The "eternal" part of it is a given, considering that the universe has been around for 14 billion years and, without evidence that there's any "wear on the tread", it's probably good for another 14 billion years or more.

Why do you believe in eternal damnation?

I listed two sources earlier in the thread that show that the doctrine of eternal damnation is not biblical. How do you comment on them?

Cifo

06-30-11, 03:43 PM

Those definitions are relative.

Those definitions are cut-and-pasted verbatim out of my modern (and secular) dictionary, Webster's New World Dictionary & Thesaurus, [electronic] (2005).

You know what God wants??

Because I've read the Bible. Can't get it from reading Cosmopolitan or Scientific American or the two sources you provided.

To me, it would require blind faith to read the Bible and associate with Christians.

And this you know without ever having read any of it? Well, best wishes then. You know where to go if you're ever curious.

Let me say something you won't hear hardly any Christians say. Many people I encounter seem jaded and skeptical about Christianity, most likely because of all the incompetent/hypocritical "Christians" that actually turn people off. I don't blame you if you feel jaded and skeptical.

That's why I'm not a Bible-thumper (besides, no one listens to me anyway). St. Francis of Assisi supposedly said, "Preach the Gospel at all times and, when necessary, use words." This means, show people Christianity by living it. Actions speak louder than words.

Why do you believe in eternal damnation?

I've read it in the NIV and the ESV Bibles. Once a Christian has matured, then it's not so much about reward or punishment ... it's just the right thing to do.

So some nonbelievers come close in calling eternal damnation a "dirt nap". In that case, as your brain produces it's last conscious thought, will you consider yourself proud of gathering all the toys you can't take with you, or proud of all the things you've done that now are totally worthless, or will you drift off satisfied that you've not only loved your neighbors, but loved your enemies too as well as helped the poor and needy?

I listed two sources earlier in the thread that show that the doctrine of eternal damnation is not biblical. How do you comment on them?

Now that's blind faith. What we need to do is something scientific. Find the passages in question and cite them to me. I have a copy of the Hebrew-English Tanakh (aka Masoretic Text), Jewish Publication Society (2003/5764), as it has been faithfully passed down among the Jews through the millennia, and then I can tell you what the Hebrew actually says.

gmilam

06-30-11, 07:03 PM

Those definitions are cut-and-pasted verbatim out of my modern (and secular) dictionary, Webster's New World Dictionary & Thesaurus, [electronic] (2005).
They're still wrong.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=95294

Find the passages in question and cite them to me.
Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Death - not livng in eternal torment - death. The "soul" is not immortal.

Lori_7

06-30-11, 07:40 PM

Thats physical death g.

gmilam

06-30-11, 07:43 PM

Ecclesiastes 9:5

For the living know that they will die,
but the dead know nothing;
they have no further reward,
and even their name is forgotten.

I actually recommend the entire book of Ecclesiastes. It is most excellent.

Lori_7

06-30-11, 07:50 PM

Which is where the referenced eternal damnation comes from. Was that your point?

Bowser

06-30-11, 08:54 PM

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hel_bibl.htm

Seems pretty extreme, Lori. Do you REALLY believe there's a Hell as such?

wynn

07-01-11, 01:05 AM

You know what God wants??
Because I've read the Bible.

So what if you've read it in the Bible?
The Quran or the Bhagavad-gita or a number of other religious texts would say different things about God.

Why should anyone trust the Bible above other religious scriptures??

Can't get it from reading Cosmopolitan or Scientific American or the two sources you provided.

...
Well, best wishes then. You know where to go if you're ever curious.

This kind of reply is what I call a typical Christian attitude ... :rolleyes:

And this you know without ever having read any of it?

What makes you think I've never read any of it?

Let me say something you won't hear hardly any Christians say. Many people I encounter seem jaded and skeptical about Christianity, most likely because of all the incompetent/hypocritical "Christians" that actually turn people off. I don't blame you if you feel jaded and skeptical.

Well, you can now place yourself among those Christians who turn people off.

That's why I'm not a Bible-thumper (besides, no one listens to me anyway). St. Francis of Assisi supposedly said, "Preach the Gospel at all times and, when necessary, use words." This means, show people Christianity by living it. Actions speak louder than words.

If what you have shown so far here is "showing me Christianity by living it" - then I wish to never become a Christian.

I've read it in the NIV and the ESV Bibles. Once a Christian has matured, then it's not so much about reward or punishment ... it's just the right thing to do.

It's the right thing to believe that a god who punishes the majority of his children for all eternity, is a loving god?

So some nonbelievers come close in calling eternal damnation a "dirt nap". In that case, as your brain produces it's last conscious thought, will you consider yourself proud of gathering all the toys you can't take with you, or proud of all the things you've done that now are totally worthless, or will you drift off satisfied that you've not only loved your neighbors, but loved your enemies too as well as helped the poor and needy?

I don't know the future.

Now that's blind faith. What we need to do is something scientific. Find the passages in question and cite them to me. I have a copy of the Hebrew-English Tanakh (aka Masoretic Text), Jewish Publication Society (2003/5764), as it has been faithfully passed down among the Jews through the millennia, and then I can tell you what the Hebrew actually says.

They are cited there.

But here are some:

Matthew 25:41 (NIV)
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

Matthew 25:46 (NIV)
“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

2 Thessalonians 1:9 (NIV)
They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might

John99

07-01-11, 02:06 AM

To the OP:

I'd like to substitute the word God with Religion however and go on like this.

Because Hell scares children (and some adults) into belief.

Thats a bit of a stretch there.

To the OP, doesnt your puter have google?

Hell all you need to do is type "Hell" into the search box:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell#Eastern

:wtf:

gmilam

07-01-11, 07:07 AM

Which is where the referenced eternal damnation comes from. Was that your point?
Non-sequitor.

Some versions translate that line "as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all."

I'd advise that you actually read your Bible rather than just listening to the voices in your head. :bugeye:

Lori_7

07-01-11, 10:12 AM

Non-sequitor.

Some versions translate that line "as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all."

I'd advise that you actually read your Bible rather than just listening to the voices in your head. :bugeye:

and i would advise that you stop reading it if it's just a means to satisfy your ego-genda.

Cifo

07-01-11, 10:27 AM

So what if you've read it in the Bible?
The Quran or the Bhagavad-gita or a number of other religious texts would say different things about God. Why should anyone trust the Bible above other religious scriptures??
Because I studied and compared the major religions and philosophies. Let's straighten one thing out. The Christian God is different from other gods, so when someone talks about "God", I assume they mean the Christian God, not Allah, not Buddha, not Mithras, not Ahura Mazda, etc.

This kind of reply is what I call a typical Christian attitude ... :rolleyes:
Only the Christian Bible describes the Christian God. It's kinduva tautology. See previous answer.

What makes you think I've never read any of it [the Bible]?
Because you said: "To me, it would require blind faith to read the Bible and associate with Christians." And you've indicated that you don't have blind faith. Therefore, you've never read the Bible or associated with Christians. I'm sorry that I'm only using scientific logic.

Well, you can now place yourself among those Christians who turn people off.
If what you have shown so far here is "showing me Christianity by living it" - then I wish to never become a Christian.
What have I done to offend you?

It's the right thing to believe that a god who punishes the majority of his children for all eternity, is a loving god?
Let me clear this up. When adult people know that the only way to live is to love their neighbors (and enemies), and those people reject that way of life, then they get punished. There's no do-overs or reincarnations in life. It's a one shot deal. For example, where in any of this have I shown hatred toward my neighbors (you) or my "enemies" (I don't know that I have any!). There's more about this below.

But here are some:

Matthew 25:41 (NIV)
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

Matthew 25:46 (NIV)
“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

2 Thessalonians 1:9 (NIV)
They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might
Okay, these aren't in Hebrew, and they're not in the Tanakh. They are in the New Testament and they are in Greek.

Matthew 25:41,46 -- You don't have to worry about this because it's for Christians who see people suffering and refuse to help them. Matthew 25:34-40 is the first half of Christ's admonition to: #1 feed the hungry, #2 welcome strangers, #3 clothe the naked, #4 attend the sick, and #5 visit those in prison:
Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.' Then the righteous will answer him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?' And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.'

And, when so-called Christians see someone hungry, lost, naked, sick or in prison, and they simply say "Hey, good luck, I wish you the best" and do nothing (and unless they repent ... because God is a forgiving god) -- they will go to HELL. Because they knew the right thing to do, and they paraded around as though they were Christians, but in their actions they weren't ... they were hypocrites. And if anyone is rubbed the wrong way by hypocritical Christians, guess what? Christ feels it more than anyone else and has the ultimate solution for them.

2 Thessalonians 1:9 Again, let's read the verses ahead of this one.

This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering— since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.
This is pretty self-explanatory. People such as Hitler are burning in hell. Do you have any other verses?

gmilam

07-01-11, 01:19 PM

and i would advise that you stop reading it if it's just a means to satisfy your ego-genda.
Ooh - good comeback. Do you have anything of substance; I mean other than what the voices tell you? :rolleyes:

NMSquirrel

07-01-11, 05:00 PM

Let me clear this up. When adult people know that the only way to live is to love their neighbors (and enemies), and those people reject that way of life, then they get punished.

Matthew 25:41,46 -- You don't have to worry about this because it's for Christians who see people suffering and refuse to help them. Matthew 25:34-40 is the first half of Christ's admonition to: #1 feed the hungry, #2 welcome strangers, #3 clothe the naked, #4 attend the sick, and #5 visit those in prison:

And, when so-called Christians see someone hungry, lost, naked, sick or in prison, and they simply say "Hey, good luck, I wish you the best" and do nothing (and unless they repent ... because God is a forgiving god) -- they will go to HELL. Because they knew the right thing to do, and they paraded around as though they were Christians, but in their actions they weren't ... they were hypocrites. And if anyone is rubbed the wrong way by hypocritical Christians, guess what? Christ feels it more than anyone else and has the ultimate solution for them.
does not speak of inability to help (see #1)

#1 feed the hungry,
doesn't this include helping them to not become homeless?(help with rent and bills)
alot of churches try to do this, but the needs exceeds the donations, so with so many asking for money and their being so little to share the church is forced into a discretionary role. (i suppose the same applies if you change out the word 'church' and put 'people')

#2 welcome strangers,
i did that once..put him up for the night,he left a mess in my daughters bed (she was out of town for awhile)..eww

#3 clothe the naked,
i got a pile ready to go..

#4 attend the sick,
so if i spend enough attention on how bad i am messed up, does that count?(jk)

#5 visit those in prison:
they prefer conjugal visits.;)
(is that spelled right?)

Lori_7

07-01-11, 06:27 PM

Ooh - good comeback. Do you have anything of substance; I mean other than what the voices tell you? :rolleyes:

perhaps if you were actually interested in what the book has to say, you'd know that it refers to the voice of god (the holy spirit) communicating with people all the time.

Lori_7

07-01-11, 06:33 PM

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hel_bibl.htm

Seems pretty extreme, Lori. Do you REALLY believe there's a Hell as such?

i read the scriptures, but don't necessarily agree with all of the embellishments and interpretations given.

and yeah, i do. based on what i see of the environment that we create for ourselves here on earth, yes i do.

spidergoat

07-01-11, 07:30 PM

I like to slice the Bible up with an exacto knife, and extract it's messages like fortune cookies.

Lori_7

07-01-11, 07:51 PM

I like to slice the Bible up with an exacto knife, and extract it's messages like fortune cookies.

:roflmao:

wow, those would be some fortunes...like russian roulette.

wynn

07-02-11, 06:45 AM

praty

07-02-11, 09:01 AM

Signal's on fire!
Nice discussion guys.

Allow me to chip in by addressing the OP.
All these thoughts lead to a simple and straight picture. The existence of hell (or heaven) is as possible as the underpants stealing gnomes. Its all make-believe to strike the fear of punishment into the god-fearing.
Where is a good case for its existence other than unreliable scriptures?
What is problem in admitting we don't know?
It's the fear of the unknown that triggers the believe in reward-punishment mechanism.

Hitler isn't burning in hell, it's sad there isn't one for him to burn in.

It also makes me think if all this hell business is true, would we keep our brains after we die? That's the only way we would feel 'pain' and 'heat'.

Cifo

07-02-11, 09:22 AM

People should trust the Bible above other religious scriptures because you "studied and compared the major religions and philosophies"?
No, I believe in God because of what I have studied and discerned. Everyone gets to do as they please and decide for themselves. You too.

I was referring to God. I wasn't thinking specifically of the Christian god, but just God.
Okay, so it sounds like you've narrowed your belief down to one God and not a pantheon of gods. See, I didn't know this before.

By "a typical Christian attitude" I am referring to the belligerent tone in your comment.
Which comment?

What makes you think I've never read any of it [the Bible]?
Because you said: "To me, it would require blind faith to read the Bible and associate with Christians." And you've indicated that you don't have blind faith.I have not indicated that ; I have only said that I find blind faith repugnant.
...
I have read the Bible, I grew up among Christians, I went to church, I had Christian friends.
Okay, now I get it ... you've read the Bible, which I didn't know before.

Yes, and this "scientific logic" apparently means to twist around what people say.
I only thought that you would not do something that you found repugnant.

What have I done to offend you?
You're "being a Christian" ...
I would never say this, but do I get to say that you offend me by you not being a Christian? I would never say this, of course, because it's not true. You don't offend me. Why would it offend me? But would you allow this offensiveness to go both ways? Is it a two-way street, or is it only PC to beat on the Christians?

What about Muslims? Do you want to tell Muslims that Islam and them "being Muslims" offends you? Would you go to Mecca and shout it in the middle of a suq (a marketplace)? Would you tell them that their Shari'ah laws, honor killings, burqas, child brides, etc offend you?

If someone doesn't kill you, it means that they love you?
If you don't kill someone, this means you love them?

Huh?? I have no idea where this "kill"ing stuff comes from.

And they owe it to you to believe you love them if you don't kill them?No one owes me anything for any reason. [I]Who am I that someone would owe me something? No one owes me anything, and I want to make that point quite clear. No one owes me anything. Period. We're all grownups here, and we feel, think and do as we please.

Really? How do you know that [there's no do-overs or reincarnations in life]? Are you omniscient?
Again, that's what I believe because I believe in the Christian faith. Otherwise, hey ... we can do as we want because we're coming back to give it another try. It's like the movie Groundhog Day -- rob a bank one day, get laid the next, get hit by a train, jump to your death, pig out on pastries, etc. Have you seen the movie?

So this means I will burn in hell for all eternity those who do not know God]?
Well, actually, because you've said you read the Bible, then you do know God; therefore, your eternal resting place would depend on the second clause: repenting and following Christ.

Forever? For a finite action, they get infinite punishment?
Yup, people like Hitler get infinite punishment. There are no make-up exams or extra-credit projects or summer school. The semester is over, and the final grade is ... uhh ... final.

Look Signal, you've read the bible, and you've made your decision. I cannot convey anything more than what the Bible says. If you have questions, I'll try to answer them; otherwise, I don't have anything else to say here.

praty

07-02-11, 09:56 AM

Yup, people like Hitler get infinite punishment. There are no make-up exams or extra-credit projects or summer school. The semester is over, and the final grade is ... uhh ... final.

How are you so sure? Know something we don't?:scratchin:

Cifo

07-02-11, 10:15 AM

How are you so sure? Know something we don't?:scratchin:

It's what I conclude from what I believe. I don't need to explain the difference between to know and to believe, because it's readily available in dictionaries. I know the difference, and I believe you do too. ;)

praty

07-02-11, 10:48 AM

It's what I conclude from what I believe. I don't need to explain the difference between to know and to believe, because it's readily available in dictionaries. I know the difference, and I believe you do too. ;)

Fair enough.
But your believing it doesn't make it true.
I know you know that.:)

NMSquirrel

07-02-11, 01:59 PM

or is it only PC to beat on the Christians?
we have a winner..

wynn

07-03-11, 04:40 AM

By "a typical Christian attitude" I am referring to the belligerent tone in your comment.
Which comment?

You know what God wants??

Because I've read the Bible. Can't get it from reading Cosmopolitan or Scientific American or the two sources you provided.

To me, it would require blind faith to read the Bible and associate with Christians.

And this you know without ever having read any of it? Well, best wishes then. You know where to go if you're ever curious.

Okay, now I get it ... you've read the Bible, which I didn't know before.

And yet you made claims about me.

I would never say this, but do I get to say that you offend me by you not being a Christian? I would never say this, of course, because it's not true. You don't offend me. Why would it offend me? But would you allow this offensiveness to go both ways? Is it a two-way street, or is it only PC to beat on the Christians?

The one who considers himself superior is playing the victim, huh?

What about Muslims? Do you want to tell Muslims that Islam and them "being Muslims" offends you? Would you go to Mecca and shout it in the middle of a suq (a marketplace)? Would you tell them that their Shari'ah laws, honor killings, burqas, child brides, etc offend you?

More victim playing by those who have seen the light?

Huh?? I have no idea where this "kill"ing stuff comes from.

From Christians, who lower the standards of love so much that any kind of indifference gets to pass as "love".

We're all grownups here, and we feel, think and do as we please.

And so per God's will!

Otherwise, hey ... we can do as we want because we're coming back to give it another try. It's like the movie Groundhog Day -- rob a bank one day, get laid the next, get hit by a train, jump to your death, pig out on pastries, etc. Have you seen the movie?

Have you seen the whole movie?

Well, actually, because you've said you read the Bible, then you do know God; therefore, your eternal resting place would depend on the second clause: repenting and following Christ.

I do not know whether I know God or not.
But that, characteristically, does not mean anything to a Christian ... !

Look Signal, you've read the bible, and you've made your decision.

Defining my world for me, huh? No, I have not "made my decision".

I cannot convey anything more than what the Bible says.

Oh, yes, you can, and yes, you should. If you were human.

wynn

07-03-11, 04:42 AM

we have a winner..

Even more victim playing by those who have seen the light?!

But perhaps "religious tolerance" indeed means 'to let everyone say they are right and not oppose them in any way'. :rolleyes:

wynn

07-03-11, 04:44 AM

Allow me to chip in by addressing the OP.
All these thoughts lead to a simple and straight picture. The existence of hell (or heaven) is as possible as the underpants stealing gnomes. Its all make-believe to strike the fear of punishment into the god-fearing.
Where is a good case for its existence other than unreliable scriptures?

What is problem in admitting we don't know?

Because there are things that we do know, and that give us some reasons to extrapolate.

It's the fear of the unknown that triggers the believe in reward-punishment mechanism.

Is there any scientific evidence for this claim?

praty

07-03-11, 06:41 AM

Because there are things that we do know, and that give us some reasons to extrapolate.

Is there any scientific evidence for this claim?

Fair enough. With so many possibilities, anything could be right or everything wrong or some and so on.

No, no scientific evidence for this claim at this moment. It's my opinion.
But can you extrapolate the reason for this belief without any evidence? This seems the best to me.

Cifo

07-03-11, 01:26 PM

Okay, now I get it ... you've read the Bible, which I didn't know before.
And yet you made claims about me.
You said that reading the Bible or associating with Christians is repugnant to you. I figured that you don't do things that you deemed repugnant.

I would never say this, but do I get to say that you offend me by you not being a Christian? I would never say this, of course, because it's not true. You don't offend me. Why would it offend me? But would you allow this offensiveness to go both ways? Is it a two-way street, or is it only PC to beat on the Christians?The one who considers himself superior is playing the victim, huh?
Why would I be superior? I have my beliefs, you have yours. In fact, by believing in Christ, I realize I've committed more sins than if I inspected myself from a non-Christian perspective. Ask questions about the Bible, and I'll try to answer them.

What about Muslims? Do you want to tell Muslims that Islam and them "being Muslims" offends you? Would you go to Mecca and shout it in the middle of a suq (a marketplace)? Would you tell them that their Shari'ah laws, honor killings, burqas, child brides, etc offend you?
More victim playing by those who have seen the light?
I simply wondered how far the repugnance extends. So I ask you -- Do you find repugnant: honor killings, the "acid treatment", female genital mutilation, child brides and forced marriages?

If someone doesn't kill you, it means that they love you?
If you don't kill someone, this means you love them?Huh?? I have no idea where this "kill"ing stuff comes from.From Christians, who lower the standards of love so much that any kind of indifference gets to pass as "love".
Well then, they're not really Christians, are they. They're hypocrites. Christians can't be painted with a broad brush. On this indifference, someone may have tried to convince you that indifference passes for love, and they may get some people on earth to believe/accept it, but they won't pass the muster with Christ. That is, they will suffer for all eternity.

Have you seen the whole movie [Groundhog Day]?
Yes, I own the movie on DVD, and I've seen the whole movie plenty of times. Very powerful.

I do not know whether I know God or not.
But that, characteristically, does not mean anything to a Christian ... !
I know plenty of Christians who would love you, especially because there seems a horrible amount of hurt in you.

I have not "made my decision".
You said that reading the Bible and associating with Christians is repugnant to you. So, this "not made my decision" statement shows a different side of you.

I cannot convey anything more than what the Bible says.Oh, yes, you can, and yes, you should. If you were human.
For Christians, the Bible is the ultimate authority. I cannot give you any other assurances about eternity than what's in the Bible.

NMSquirrel

07-03-11, 01:57 PM

Even more victim playing by those who have seen the light?!
lets see the response if the attacks were on a minority person, lets attack gays and see how well that is accepted..

it seems humanity always has to have a scapegoat, this day and age it is the christian (not without merit,but unacceptable none the less)

But perhaps "religious tolerance" indeed means 'to let everyone say they are right and not oppose them in any way'. :rolleyes:

yes let them SAY whatever they like..its when they try to force their beliefs that cause problems.(doesn't matter right/wrong when something is forced)

oppose the force, not the talk..

i have always wondered..if it is truly right and true,wouldn't it have less opposition?

heart

07-03-11, 07:29 PM

lets see the response if the attacks were on a minority person, lets attack gays and see how well that is accepted..

Yeah, right. More like Christians can dish it out but they can't take it. Gays are attacked by Christians A LOT. In fact they attack a lot of folks they don't see as "holy". Now you want to bellyache that it's done to you guys?

NMSquirrel

07-04-11, 12:21 AM

Yeah, right. More like Christians can dish it out but they can't take it. Gays are attacked by Christians A LOT. In fact they attack a lot of folks they don't see as "holy". Now you want to bellyache that it's done to you guys?
doesn't make it right.

Bowser

07-04-11, 01:14 AM

doesn't make it right.

I agree. However, there's a whole lot more Christians than Atheists...

http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html#religions

I think there's just more Atheist on this forum.

Socratic Spelunker

07-04-11, 02:53 AM

Genotype

07-04-11, 03:44 AM

chimpkin

07-04-11, 06:11 AM

So I guess heaven is symbolic too? Or the entire afterlife thing might be symbolic? Or hell, Jesus didn't exist, everything was just allegorical? How do you infer which part is symbolic and which is not?

I guess study 2000-year-old common metaphors and use of symbolism in the popular culture of Judea?

Conversely you might argue about the meaning endlessly on discussion forums...:shrug:

Cifo asked:
as your brain produces it's last conscious thought, will you consider yourself proud of gathering all the toys you can't take with you, or proud of all the things you've done that now are totally worthless,

The things I do now are totally worthless, the junk I collect now is just extraneous detritus.
The point of life is life.
There is no profound meaning to the suffering, joy, terror and heartbreak.
Whatever delusion gets us to the end of it without turning us all into axe murderers is fine with me.

Cifo

07-04-11, 07:43 AM

Theres no torture in hell. ... There is no punishment

A warning in Luke 16 from Christ:

There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man’s table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores.

The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried, and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side.

And he called out, "Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame." But Abraham said, "Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us."

And he said, "Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house — for I have five brothers — so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment." But Abraham said, "They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them."

And he said, "No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent." He said to him, "If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead."

Socratic Spelunker

07-04-11, 01:43 PM

Christ didnt come up with that parable. He borrowed it from the Gemara Babylonicum. It was an old story that the Jews were already familiar with. Jesus used it to prove a point about loving God and neighbors, not about the nature of the afterlife. By His use of the parable, He didn't sanction the doctrine of fire and torment in Hell, He was just using an idea already familiar to his listeners to teach them something, as any good teacher would do.

If, by borrowing pagan doctrine, one says that He sanctioned it as truth, than we must also say that he taught that Mammon, the God of Riches is a real God. After all, Jesus said, "Ye cannot serve God and Mammon." So it's clear that just because he borrows an idea from heathens doesn't mean He thinks its true. Its just a teaching tool.

Socratic Spelunker

07-04-11, 02:04 PM

So I guess heaven is symbolic too? Or the entire afterlife thing might be symbolic? Or hell, Jesus didn't exist, everything was just allegorical? How do you infer which part is symbolic and which is not?

Common sense. The same reason we know that there won't be a literal giant beast with seven heads and ten horns, which are ten kings (that is, that this beast will have ten prominent, male, world leaders growing out of his heads) which will rise up out of the ocean and chase around a pregnant lady through a forest. It's a symbol. In a Book so full of metaphors and symbols, how do you infer that this single image is literal? Even if it is literal, the lake of fire and brimstone cant be Hell because Hell is thrown into it.

When Jesus spoke of Hell, He never used thee words sheol, hades, or tartarus, like other writers did. He invariable used the word Gehenna, which is not Hell, it was a flaming trash heap outside of Jerusalem where people threw the bodies of criminals and heretics to be burned. The fire there was never quenched, day and night, and there were always worms feeding on the bodies, and the smoke ascended up forever and ever. He uses this place to represent Hell not because hell is full of worms and fire, but because it was easily the most morally and physically repugnant image with which a jew would be acquainted. For example, just because He says the Kingdom of heaven is like a treasure buried in a field (Matt 13:44) doesn't mean you can get there by digging. Just because he says its like a pearl doesnt mean you can fit in it your pocket. And just because he says its like a fish net doesn't mean he's going to drag you in against your will and club you to death. And just beecause he says Hell is like Gehenna doesnt mean its full of fire and worms.

Jesus' teachings, just like Revelation, are full of symbols, how do you infer that this one image is literal? I hope it's not just because some preacher is screaming at you about it to scare you into paying him tithing.

Genotype

07-04-11, 03:43 PM

Common sense. The same reason we know that there won't be a literal giant beast with seven heads and ten horns, which are ten kings (that is, that this beast will have ten prominent, male, world leaders growing out of his heads) which will rise up out of the ocean and chase around a pregnant lady through a forest. It's a symbol. In a Book so full of metaphors and symbols, how do you infer that this single image is literal? Even if it is literal, the lake of fire and brimstone cant be Hell because Hell is thrown into it.

<snip>

Common sense also tells that there is no afterlife. So you agree that part is metaphorical right?

NMSquirrel

07-04-11, 04:08 PM

I agree. However, there's a whole lot more Christians than Atheists...

http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html#religions

I think there's just more Atheist on this forum.

i will have to remember that link next time someone says there are more non-believers...

Socratic Spelunker

07-04-11, 04:44 PM

Common sense also tells that there is no afterlife. So you agree that part is metaphorical right?

No. that's not common sense at all. Theists and atheists both make silly assumptions. If we were being truly logical, we'd all be agnostic.

I am a theist though, and a christian, for reasons that aren't really relevant here.

Dywyddyr

07-04-11, 04:57 PM

He invariable used the word Gehenna, which is not Hell, it was a flaming trash heap outside of Jerusalem where people threw the bodies of criminals and heretics to be burned. The fire there was never quenched, day and night, and there were always worms feeding on the bodies
Fireproof worms? :shrug:

No. that's not common sense at all.
How not? We have no evidence of an afterlife. No everyday experience with one. Thus: common sense tells us there isn't one.

Theists and atheists both make silly assumptions. If we were being truly logical, we'd all be agnostic.
Go away and learn what "agnostic means".

Bowser

07-04-11, 05:22 PM

I had to give it a look: "Gehenna." A very interesting concept that gives rise to other question. It seems that much was lost when the bible was translated into English.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gehenna

Thanks for the info, Socratic.

Socratic Spelunker

07-04-11, 05:31 PM

Fireproof worms? :shrug:

If jesus' words are to be taken literally, then they're immortal fireproof worms

How not? We have no evidence of an afterlife. No everyday experience with one. Thus: common sense tells us there isn't one.

The absence of evidence is debatable, but even if there was none, Common sense says absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. You can't say there is no evidence, therefore it does not exist, unless there was evidence to the contrary. You can only say we have no evidence, therefore we don't know if it exists. Agnostic, not atheist.

Go away and learn what "agnostic means".

A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.

Dywyddyr

07-04-11, 05:39 PM

Common sense says absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Common sense says if we don't encounter we can dismiss it.

A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
Nearly right. An agnostic says nothing can be known about the nature of god. One can believe (or not believe) in him, but still be agnostic.

NMSquirrel

07-04-11, 05:50 PM

Nearly right. An agnostic says nothing can be known about the nature of god. One can believe (or not believe) in him, but still be agnostic.
what if the nature of God is natural?

Dywyddyr

07-04-11, 05:56 PM

what if the nature of God is natural?
What if he is? We dn't know.

Presumably, if he is and we do find that out then agnostics (and atheists) will [mostly] disappear.

NMSquirrel

07-04-11, 06:06 PM

What if he is? We dn't know.
what if what we don't know is already known? (do we still not know it?)
'eureka' moments can fall into this, you had the information right there all along, then out of nowhere it just clicks..

Presumably, if he is and we do find that out then agnostics (and atheists) will [mostly] disappear.

no..just relabeled..

Dywyddyr

07-04-11, 06:11 PM

what if what we don't know is already known? (do we still not know it?)
Um...

no..just relabeled..
Really? Re-labelled how?

NMSquirrel

07-04-11, 06:31 PM

Um...
so if it is unknown why would you look for it in the known pile?

Really? Re-labelled how?
:shrug:
just saying, the ppl still exist, its the description that changes..

Dywyddyr

07-04-11, 06:51 PM

so if it is unknown why would you look for it in the known pile?
Huh?
Are we looking in the "known pile"?

:shrug:
just saying, the ppl still exist, its the description that changes..
Um, no.
If we know then those who accept the fact will no longer be agnostic (because they know) nor atheist (since, knowing, we can show that he does exist). Anyone after that claiming to neither know nor believe (presumably a minority) will be cranks (you know, like those who claim the Earth is flat despite the evidence otherwise).

NMSquirrel

07-04-11, 07:16 PM

Huh?
Are we looking in the "known pile"?
well..atheist tend to look there..(God doesn't exist if he is not known)

Um, no.
If we know then those who accept the fact will no longer be agnostic
but not..
"If we know then those who accept the fact will no longer be."

the person still exists. 'Who they are' changes, constantly and frequently,to limit a person to a label (he is just a <label>) is irresponsible to your own knowledge base.

Dywyddyr

07-04-11, 07:28 PM

well..atheist tend to look there..(God doesn't exist if he is not known)
ER, didn't you ask "what if god is natural?" Science looks at the natural...

but not..
"If we know then those who accept the fact will no longer be."
the person still exists.
But will no longer be agnostic nor atheist. Or are you claiming that theists are currently agnostics and atheists, just with a different "label"? ;)

NMSquirrel

07-04-11, 11:27 PM

ER, didn't you ask "what if god is natural?" Science looks at the natural...
and science dismisses God as being natural because they can see and measure the natural..

wynn

07-05-11, 06:02 AM

lets see the response if the attacks were on a minority person, lets attack gays and see how well that is accepted..

it seems humanity always has to have a scapegoat, this day and age it is the christian (not without merit,but unacceptable none the less)

Anyone who claims to know The Solution, The Way, The Truth
should be subject to scrutiny.

Whether they be Christians, Hindus, Muslims, humanists, GreenPeace acivists, whomever or whatever.

It is claiming to know The Solution, The Way, The Truth that puts the claimant into the special position of greater responsibility.

Words still mean something, at least to some people. Don't think you can just get away with it with some "everyone is right in their own way" or some such nonsense.

wynn

07-05-11, 06:07 AM

doesn't make it right.

What? Isn't talking about God "fun (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2775005#post2775005)"?

wynn

07-05-11, 06:09 AM

A warning in Luke 16 from Christ:

You yet need to establish the universal authority of the Bible.
I suggest you start a thread.

wynn

07-05-11, 06:46 AM

Fair enough. With so many possibilities, anything could be right or everything wrong or some and so on.

No, no scientific evidence for this claim at this moment. It's my opinion.
But can you extrapolate the reason for this belief without any evidence? This seems the best to me.

I have no idea how people have come to believe in the beforelife and afterlife.

But I do not think that people just make things up.

Dywyddyr

07-05-11, 06:54 AM

and science dismisses God as being natural because they can see and measure the natural..
Then either he's not natural or we haven't found him yet (and if we haven't found him there's no point speculating). :p

wynn

07-05-11, 07:11 AM

I know plenty of Christians who would love you, especially because there seems a horrible amount of hurt in you.

Really? They would love me for the "horrible amount of hurt in me"?

Well, in that case, they can just go screw themselves, as I will not be someone's opportunity for their delusions of grandeur.

http://coltmonday.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/jesus-facepalm.jpg?w=311

Cifo

07-05-11, 07:27 AM

A warning in Luke 16 from Christ:You yet need to establish the universal authority of the Bible.
I suggest you start a thread.
Christ talking about hellfire is on point in this thread entitled "Why Hell?" If Hell was Club Med, we wouldn't be having this discussion. The Bible was established as the universal authority about Christ over 1,500 years ago. The revisionists are the ones who lack authority.

So, Signal, I find honor killings, the "acid treatment", female genital mutilation, child brides and forced marriages both ungodly and inhuman. What about you?

Christ [...] borrowed it from the Gemara Babylonicum. [...] If, by borrowing pagan doctrine, one says that He sanctioned it as truth, than we must also say that he [...]

No. If I recite Aesop's fable about the fox and the stork to emphasize the moral of treating others as you want to be treated, it doesn't mean that I sanction all Aesop's fables as truth. Socratic Spelunker, if I agree with one of your comments, it doesn't mean that I agree with all of your comments.

Other instances are the Biblical prophets themselves, most of whom uttered certain prophesies on certain occasions and are not known as being prophetic throughout their lives. Another case in point is the book of Jude, which quotes a prophesy by Enoch, but does not mean that all that Enoch uttered was prophetic or even Biblical (which is why nothing of Enoch is in the Bible).

wynn

07-05-11, 07:37 AM

Christ talking about hellfire is on point in this thread entitled "Why Hell?" If Hell was Club Med, we wouldn't be having this discussion. The Bible was established as the universal authority about Christ over 1,500 years ago. The revisionists are the ones who lack authority.

It is not established that Christ, the Bible or Christianity are the authorities on reality.

So, Signal, I find honor killings, the "acid treatment", female genital mutilation, child brides and forced marriages both ungodly and inhuman. What about you?

Oh, it looks like you think I am (pro) Muslim or (pro) Hindu?

wellwisher

07-05-11, 10:47 AM

The basis for heaven and hell is connected to law of good and evil. Laws of good and evil are unique in terms of data storage within the human brain, since each such law will make use of two opposite emotional valences at the same time. Law tells us what not to do, and will make use of "fear" of punishment as a deterent against breaking the law. The same law will also tell us or imply the proper path to follow, that will bring us peace, security, and acceptance relative to culture.

Because these two emotional valences are opposite; fear/peace, the brain will store laws of good and evil data into two connected mirror locations each with its opposing emotional valence. The sum of all the laws of good and evil will populate the two mirror locations. The fear tone associated with one mirror location is symbolically called hell, while the peace and security location is called heaven.

For example, hell is traditionally occupied by all the fearful behavior connected to the fear side of the law. In hell there are killers, thieves, rapists, pain, suffering, ugly, punishment, etc. This data grouping has an impact on the neural energy economy, since it is not a natural part of the brain, but is a conditioned data induction.

Because this is not natural, this mirror lcation sets a potential in the brain connected to fear; fight/flight. This is why those who are too self righteous often do the very things they are against. The induction potential gets so strong, due to reinforcement, it starts to spontaneously depotentiate causing personality dynamics mediated via the imagination. The dark days of the church had too much fear in their laws of good and evil. The spontaneous release of potential resulted in atrocities.

Before Christ died on the cross, he preached doing away with law for righteousness in an attempt to remove the binary data induction caused by laws of good and evil. He reduced law to love God and love your neighbor. This was hardly a good data set to induce the mirror world of fear. Only a few hundred people were able to master this new POV. As history shows more laws of good and evil were added to increase potential.

The problem then and now, with getting rid of law of good and evil is a potential is already set within the brain before you begin. Without law, the short term effect is the path of least resistance and/or the highest potential reduction impulses. This would make lawlessness much worse, in the short term, until the potential is used up. Most people at the time of Christ, stayed with law to avoid this unsettling short term effect.

LIGHTBEING

07-05-11, 12:04 PM

Thats a bit of a stretch there.

To the OP, doesnt your puter have google?

Hell all you need to do is type "Hell" into the search box:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell#Eastern

:wtf:

It's not a stretch at all. Hell is one of the main ideas used to indoctrinate our children. Even adults use it to justify their thoughts on Pascal's wager.

Dywyddyr

07-05-11, 12:13 PM

The basis for heaven and hell is connected to law of good and evil.
Please show that there actually is a "law of good and evil".

Laws of good and evil are unique in terms of data storage within the human brain
Rubbish.

since each such law blah blah blah
The rest is supposition and word salad.

NMSquirrel

07-05-11, 05:09 PM

Anyone who claims to know The Solution, The Way, The Truth
should be subject to scrutiny.

i think the problems begin when that person claims their way is the ONLY way..all others are wrong..yes maybe it is..for them, just because God wants it a certain way in your life, does not mean God wants it the same way in my life....

and scrutiny, yes..devalued,no. just cause you don't see the value, does not make them worthless..

Whether they be Christians, Hindus, Muslims, humanists, GreenPeace acivists, whomever or whatever.
i question your association of non-religious groups with religious groups?

It is claiming to know The Solution, The Way, The Truth that puts the claimant into the special position of greater responsibility.
greater responsibility being salvation?
how can a human promise salvation? (humans don't make that decision,God does.)
claiming their way is the ONLY way,is a giant red flag for me..(God is the only way)

Words still mean something, at least to some people. Don't think you can just get away with it with some "everyone is right in their own way" or some such nonsense.
why is it nonsense?
if you were standing in a field looking at a rock you would describe it as you see it, you cannot see behind the rock from where you are, so you do not have a clear picture of what the rock looks like unless there is someone else standing behind the rock describing to you what the rock looks like to him, this gives you a clearer picture of what that rock truly looks like, but then the image you have of that rock is still not complete as you only have the description the other person gave you,incomplete compared to what the rock really looks like..

God is like that.. We each have a picture of what God is,our own personal perspective,the face that he shows me is not all there is to him,the face he shows you is different, it is from your perspective, that does not necessarily make it wrong because you see God different than I.(generic 'you', does not mean you personally Signal)
I say 'necessarily' because if you think God is telling you to 'force' others to believe as you do, you are wrong.

----

Then either he's not natural or we haven't found him yet :p
lol..didn't we start here?

(and if we haven't found him there's no point speculating).
um..why would you say such a thing? there is so many things wrong with that statement..
speculation is a scientific corner stone, why would you give a reason to dismiss it?
its like your saying 'we haven't found the truck keys, so lets quit looking'..

NMSquirrel

07-05-11, 05:17 PM

Originally Posted by wellwisher
The basis for heaven and hell is connected to law of good and evil.
Please show that there actually is a "law of good and evil".
first you intone there is no actual law..which intones that the only place the laws exist is within ones own head..

Laws of good and evil are unique in terms of data storage within the human brain

Rubbish.

then you call 'rubbish' when he says it is...

Dywyddyr

07-05-11, 05:37 PM

first you intone there is no actual law..which intones that the only place the laws exist is within ones own head..
Yup.

then you call 'rubbish' when he says it is...
No: this part: "unique in terms of data storage" is the rubbish.

NMSquirrel

07-05-11, 05:47 PM

Yup.

No: this part: "unique in terms of data storage" is the rubbish.

i read it as, we file things away in our brain as to good things/bad things,
why is that rubbish?

Dywyddyr

07-05-11, 05:50 PM

i read it as, we file things away in our brain as to good things/bad things,
why is that rubbish?
Did you miss the word "unique"?
Do you think that "good" and "bad" are any differently "stored" in our mind than anything else?

NMSquirrel

07-05-11, 05:53 PM

Did you miss the word "unique"?
unique in(to?) the brain..
he can elaborate what he means better than i could..that is just how i read it..

wynn

07-06-11, 04:48 AM

God is like that..

And again you talk about God, even though you said earlier:

close..trying to avoid ANY conclusion about Gods character..God is more than we could conclude.

chimpkin

07-06-11, 06:52 AM

Really? They would love me for the "horrible amount of hurt in me"?

Well, in that case, they can just go screw themselves, as I will not be someone's opportunity for their delusions of grandeur.

http://coltmonday.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/jesus-facepalm.jpg?w=311
:bravo:
Signal, I would never expect you to tell someone to go screw themselves.
If it wasn't for how much it would weird you out, I'd friend you at this point.:D

NMSquirrel said:
i think the problems begin when that person claims their way is the ONLY way..all others are wrong..yes maybe it is..for them, just because God wants it a certain way in your life, does not mean God wants it the same way in my life....

That's generally what I say, I just add the plurals.

Cifo

07-06-11, 09:35 AM

Christ talking about hellfire is on point in this thread entitled "Why Hell?" If Hell was Club Med, we wouldn't be having this discussion. The Bible was established as the universal authority about Christ over 1,500 years ago. The revisionists are the ones who lack authority.
It is not established that Christ, the Bible or Christianity are the authorities on reality.

Christ, the Bible and Christianity are the authorities on reality for Christians. Religion is a funny thing. Its adherents are the ones who define who they revere, what are their holy texts, etc. Those who aren't Christian, don't get to define/redefine Christianity or God.

Lori_7

07-06-11, 09:37 AM

since when does having compassion equate to having delusions of grandeur? that's ridiculous.

Cifo

07-06-11, 10:53 AM

since when does having compassion equate to having delusions of grandeur? that's ridiculous.

Having compassion means making yourself subservient ... spiritually and physically putting yourself in someone else's situation.

I help run a soup kitchen for the poor, homeless, etc. I bring the food and prepare it, I literally serve them their meals, I cater to their tastes, I use sign language for my deaf patrons, I've helped those patrons in wheelchairs, I prepare take home packages, and I clean up after they're gone. I even drive them home in bad weather.

Contrary to what some non-Christians may think, Christians like myself don't do this to earn "brownie points" or to "buy" our way into heaven (because we don't believe in those things), we do it because it's the right thing to do (according to our Christian beliefs).

Lori_7

07-06-11, 12:49 PM

Having compassion means making yourself subservient ... spiritually and physically putting yourself in someone else's situation.

I help run a soup kitchen for the poor, homeless, etc. I bring the food and prepare it, I literally serve them their meals, I cater to their tastes, I use sign language for my deaf patrons, I've helped those patrons in wheelchairs, I prepare take home packages, and I clean up after they're gone. I even drive them home in bad weather.

Contrary to what some non-Christians may think, Christians like myself don't do this to earn "brownie points" or to "buy" our way into heaven (because we don't believe in those things), we do it because it's the right thing to do (according to our Christian beliefs).

i agree with you, that it's the right thing to do. my comment was in response to signal's assertion.

LIGHTBEING

07-06-11, 01:31 PM

Having compassion means making yourself subservient ... spiritually and physically putting yourself in someone else's situation.

I help run a soup kitchen for the poor, homeless, etc. I bring the food and prepare it, I literally serve them their meals, I cater to their tastes, I use sign language for my deaf patrons, I've helped those patrons in wheelchairs, I prepare take home packages, and I clean up after they're gone. I even drive them home in bad weather.

That's awesome!

Contrary to what some non-Christians may think, Christians like myself don't do this to earn "brownie points" or to "buy" our way into heaven (because we don't believe in those things), we do it because it's the right thing to do (according to our Christian beliefs).

I agree, it is the right thing to do but not based on any particular religion you chose to subscribe to. I gave a homeless person a few bucks the other day not because of my belief/disbelief in a God or where my thoughts are on Sunday mornings, but instead because it is exactly the right thing to do. Helping others in need. We are, contrary to popular belief, inherently good moral creatures. I believe in humanity.

chimpkin

07-06-11, 06:53 PM

Having compassion means making yourself subservient ... spiritually and physically putting yourself in someone else's situation.

I don't define doing for others what you would wish for were you in their situation as subservience.

Makes me sound like I'm enabling them or something.

I view it as treating them as equally flawed, fallible, and terrifyingly fragile humans...and as a fellow human we all fall in holes both physical and metaphoric.
So I'd want someone to help me out.

So I help others out when I come across others needing helped out. I observe I'm doing a *bit* better, therefore I attempt to yoinck them up to the same ledge I'm on emotionally, or hand over some spare resources if I've got them.

Kind of random about this. I'm not very organized, and the local Christian interfaith charity people were very nasty to me when I dived their dumpster, so I'd have to drive elsewhere.

Hey, they don't want me diving their dumpster, they should stop throwing out so many useable donations and having a half-empty thrift store!

wynn

07-07-11, 03:19 AM

It is not established that Christ, the Bible or Christianity are the authorities on reality. Christ, the Bible and Christianity are the authorities on reality for Christians. Religion is a funny thing. Its adherents are the ones who define who they revere, what are their holy texts, etc. Those who aren't Christian, don't get to define/redefine Christianity or God.

I said it is not established that Christ, the Bible or Christianity are the authorities on reality.

I was not talking about reality for Christians, but simply about reality.

Since you preach, you apparently assume that everyone is in the same reality - and that there is no separate reality "for Christians" or "for agnostics" etc.

wynn

07-07-11, 03:20 AM

since when does having compassion equate to having delusions of grandeur? that's ridiculous.

i agree with you, that it's the right thing to do. my comment was in response to signal's assertion.

Where did I say that having compassion equates to having delusions of grandeur?

wynn

07-07-11, 03:32 AM

I don't define doing for others what you would wish for were you in their situation as subservience.

It's potential selfishness, manipulation, abuse of those in need.
It's what is sometimes called "idiot compassion" - seeing someone suffer and then doing what one thinks would alleviate that suffering, while having no regard for the needs and wants of the other person and also having little or not understanding of what it takes to make an end to suffering.

chimpkin

07-07-11, 05:15 AM

It's what is sometimes called "idiot compassion" - seeing someone suffer and then doing what one thinks would alleviate that suffering, while having no regard for the needs and wants of the other person and also having little or not understanding of what it takes to make an end to suffering.

Yes, you do have to watch out for being a compassionate idiot.;) Have to make sure you're responding to the situation, and the person... not your misconception.
I meant ..were I in need of help, I would like to be helped, in the way I needed helped and not in some other way. Which wouldn't help.

If my alternator's out, a fan motor does not solve the problem.
Nor would an alternator that is for a chevy, as that's not what I'm driving...

But people will get angry if you don't take that chevy alternator...

I do sometimes manage idiot elegance...cluelessly doing the right thing...

Cifo

07-07-11, 07:25 AM

Since you preach, you apparently assume that everyone is in the same reality - and that there is no separate reality "for Christians" or "for agnostics" etc.

Preach? Me? :roflmao: :bugeye:

Lori_7

07-07-11, 09:00 AM

Where did I say that having compassion equates to having delusions of grandeur?

maybe i interpreted this incorrectly?

Originally Posted by Signal
Really? They would love me for the "horrible amount of hurt in me"?

Well, in that case, they can just go screw themselves, as I will not be someone's opportunity for their delusions of grandeur.

wynn

07-08-11, 12:40 AM

Preach? Me?

Yes, you.

wynn

07-08-11, 01:12 AM

maybe i interpreted this incorrectly?

Originally Posted by Signal
Really? They would love me for the "horrible amount of hurt in me"?

Well, in that case, they can just go screw themselves, as I will not be someone's opportunity for their delusions of grandeur.

Apparently, you have interpreted it incorrectly.

Has anyone ever "loved" you "for the horrible amount of hurt in you"?

Enoc

07-08-11, 05:53 PM

Hell does not have to be a physical place. It can be also a state of mind. So in that sense Hell is not something completely external to a person but rather more like an internal mental state where a person is suffering mentally and is suffering alone. So the way I see it Hell is more like existential alienation.

chimpkin

07-09-11, 12:21 AM

Originally Posted by Signal
Really? They would love me for the "horrible amount of hurt in me"?

Well, in that case, they can just go screw themselves,

It was quite patronizing.

...I get annoyed as some of Sig's opinions (welcome to the human race, Signal, everybody annoys me:p) but am really liking per's intellect and sense of humor these days.
In RL, around intact, undamaged people... I find sooner or later many of them just give me this look that says: "You're weird and I don't like you."
It's why I like to dress like a freak, gets the weird right out in the open so they can reject me before I've wasted any time on them.
I am afraid if I hand homeless people money they are going to use it on an addiction, but I do have a tendency to buy them food or hand them some fresh fruit if I've just come from the store.

Hmm...my personal experience is that the mind can only take so much torment before it snaps.

Would a loving God increase our capacity to bear pain, so that he could torture us better for having not believed in His loving Self with no evidence given?

wynn

07-09-11, 04:10 AM

It was quite patronizing.

What was quite patronizing?

...I get annoyed as some of Sig's opinions (welcome to the human race, Signal, everybody annoys me) but am really liking per's intellect and sense of humor these days.

:yay:

In RL, around intact, undamaged people...

There are "intact, undamaged" people??
Where?

I find sooner or later many of them just give me this look that says: "You're weird and I don't like you."

Just because someone doesn't like you doesn't mean they are normal, or intact, undamaged.

Would a loving God increase our capacity to bear pain, so that he could torture us better for having not believed in His loving Self with no evidence given?

I have taken this into consideration, yes. It's what I understand by "eternal damnation".

Lori_7

07-09-11, 08:42 AM

Apparently, you have interpreted it incorrectly.

Has anyone ever "loved" you "for the horrible amount of hurt in you"?

i don't know. i kinda doubt it.

i was thinking "compassion", not love, so yeah, i misinterpreted it.

i think people should love each other, hurt or not.

chimpkin

07-09-11, 08:54 AM

Would a loving God increase our capacity to bear pain, so that he could torture us better for having not believed in His loving Self with no evidence given?
”
I have taken this into consideration, yes. It's what I understand by "eternal damnation".

Wow, I was just being snarky...as in who'd worship a deity as dickish as that?:bugeye:

I find sooner or later many of them just give me this look that says: "You're weird and I don't like you.

Just because someone doesn't like you doesn't mean they are normal, or intact, undamaged.

Well...I don't know quite how to respond to that. I've just always observed that I will say things that seem to disturb other people and cause them to ostracize me.

It's certainly happened before. I certainly always think it best to expect it. As it's easier to simply avoid contact if possible.

People hurt.

wynn

07-09-11, 09:57 AM

I've just always observed that I will say things that seem to disturb other people and cause them to ostracize me.

I think that such behavior can be a way to enforce one's boundaries, albeit not in a very productive and constructive manner.
Namely, instead of drawing a line, thinking and/or saying "I do not wish to associate with this person / I do not wish to talk about that / I do not wish to do that" and then acting accordingly (such as by leaving the place or turning to a different topic or task), one acts out, thereby effectively placing the responsibility for the upholding of one's own boundaries on the other person. Although such a strategy may bring about the desired result (ie. not associating with that person), it also has the side-effect of being disempowering, as one has not maintained one's boundaries oneself, but relied on the other person to do so.
An alternative to acting out would be to say No, to leave the place, turn to a different topic or task. In which case, one would maintain one's boundaries oneself - which feels empowering.

As it's easier to simply avoid contact if possible.

I think that avoidance hurts and disempowers oneself more.

chimpkin

07-09-11, 11:10 AM

Namely, instead of drawing a line, thinking and/or saying "I do not wish to associate with this person / I do not wish to talk about that / I do not wish to do that" and then acting accordingly (such as by leaving the place or turning to a different topic or task), one acts out, thereby effectively placing the responsibility for the upholding of one's own boundaries on the other person.

No.
Why would I do that? if someone crosses a big enough line with me, they draw back a bloody stump.
I just say something I think funny, or I say something that's honest and not intended to offend.

That would not offend me.
That's actually intended to draw the other person in...

And they look at me as if I'd just squatted and peed on the floor or something.:(
Acting out would be be acting with an abusive intent.

At Mall-wart, when last I bought sports bras... I made the comment to a clerk who struck up a convo with me...that I was buying sports bras so I wouldn't go "floopfloopfloop" when I run.

The clerk was very offended, and I stumbled around in a haze afterward, feeling ill.

It's the sort of look I get from "nice churchgoing folks" when I'm in all black, wearing my boots, skull doo-rag and my pentacle on the outside of my shirt. The "you're going to hell, and I'm not," look.
Basically, it's a reaction I get in many cases from acting in what is for me a relaxed, genuine, and festive manner.

And it really deflates my mood badly.
I get the impression I'm too weird for most people to be comfortable with.

I mean...I also do it as a sorting mechanism for other people...but simply because that's what I want to look like, too. Like an overgrown adolescent.

....I mentioned that sometimes I didn't feel like living in a casual conversation once...which for me, is a pretty casual thing to say, and the guy grimaced in disgust and walked away.
This was years ago.
I haven't forgotten how profoundly different and wrong it made me feel.
So people don't understand and they hurt.

wynn

07-09-11, 03:35 PM

I suppose one has to take responsibility for being the way one is, and one also has to take responsibility for living in the society one lives in.

Myself, I quite deliberately try to look and come across as average and as normal as possible.
But I work on having a private life. To me, it makes little sense, and is even dangerous, to wear my heart on the sleeve in one way or another. I experience a kind of delight to be able to behave in and experience many nuances in how I interact with others.

chimpkin

07-10-11, 01:20 AM

But I work on having a private life. To me, it makes little sense, and is even dangerous, to wear my heart on the sleeve in one way or another.

You mask, then. Not to say I don't. But I do so to do things like...keep my job. I mask for survival. I refuse to mask in situations where I do not have to. Masking all the time can lead to loss of self...and tremendous bone-crunching loneliness in my experience.
Because who knows the real you? Sometimes not even you anymore.

Lying, my own lies and those of others, screw with my sense of reality. Therefore I lie for survival reasons-my job-and don't lie elsewise. Lies set up dueling voices in my head about what actually happened.

My idea of dangerous is to sit with my back to a an entry door.
My idea of dangerous is to allow someone to walk up behind you.
My idea of dangerous is not to be watching one's surroundings in public.

I've survived the worst the horrorshow in my head could provide now. So I'm a lot tougher inside than I used to be...

Someone said, as a reason why she dresses goth...: "The difference between radiating negativity when looking normal and radiating negativity when looking like I'm late for a date with Anton LaVey... is that the latter gets me left alone, and the former gets me $h!it on."

wynn

07-10-11, 02:12 AM

You mask, then.

I don't see it as masking, though. It's simply a matter of practicality for me.
I don't feel threatened by appearing average.

Lori_7

07-10-11, 10:14 AM

You mask, then. Not to say I don't. But I do so to do things like...keep my job. I mask for survival. I refuse to mask in situations where I do not have to. Masking all the time can lead to loss of self...and tremendous bone-crunching loneliness in my experience.
Because who knows the real you? Sometimes not even you anymore.

Lying, my own lies and those of others, screw with my sense of reality. Therefore I lie for survival reasons-my job-and don't lie elsewise. Lies set up dueling voices in my head about what actually happened.

My idea of dangerous is to sit with my back to a an entry door.
My idea of dangerous is to allow someone to walk up behind you.
My idea of dangerous is not to be watching one's surroundings in public.

I've survived the worst the horrorshow in my head could provide now. So I'm a lot tougher inside than I used to be...

Someone said, as a reason why she dresses goth...: "The difference between radiating negativity when looking normal and radiating negativity when looking like I'm late for a date with Anton LaVey... is that the latter gets me left alone, and the former gets me $h!it on."

i have experienced times when not radiating negativity was an impossible task. somehow i managed to survive without losing everything...my job, home, friends, family, etc. but for me, over time, to see those things at risk made me realize that radiating negativity was not appropriate behavior.

i hate lies, and i am really not good at faking it. it was a dilemma, according to how i felt and how i saw things.

after what i went through i, like you, became stronger. i felt like going through it i was forced to be ok with myself. i was constantly having to re-examine my own intentions, and being ok with myself. looking back, the more ok i became with myself, and the stronger i became, the less inclined i was to radiate negativity. it was certainly a process though. the whole time i felt like i was at war with the world, but in the end i realized that i was really at war with myself. does that make any sense?

NMSquirrel

07-10-11, 06:27 PM

the whole time i felt like i was at war with the world, but in the end i realized that i was really at war with myself. does that make any sense?

the greatest demons we face are our own.

chimpkin

07-10-11, 09:23 PM

the whole time i felt like i was at war with the world, but in the end i realized that i was really at war with myself. does that make any sense?

Well...I used to be angry.

Now it's more a sense of sadness and frustration...I like people these days, but fear them as well, and they don't like me.
I am starting to like myself again, but others seem not to.

And if I act like myself, which I seem to have to do to like myself, then I usually have that moment.

I dunno, maybe me 4.0 will do a better job of interaction.

Kittamaru

07-10-11, 09:46 PM

personally, it is my belief that God doesn't want someone that HAS to love him (for he has the Angels for that), but rather someone that CHOOSES to love him. Hell is reserved primarily for those who commit incredible acts of evil (again, personally, I would think such things as child rapist/molesters and the like are right up there with mass-murderers, but that's just me) and/or those who reject the idea of salvation as a whole.

I don't like the idea that God is some angry super-entity bent on domination through the threat of eternal punishment - rather, I like to view Him as someone looking as much for the love of His children as the desire for His children to WANT to love him... for what is love that is forced? If you cannot help but love someone... is it still love? Just as we HAVE to breathe to live... if we HAD to love God... what would that "love" matter?

@ Cifo - thank you for stating what so desperately needed to be said - most "Christians" today are hypocrites in every sense of the word, from shunning and shaming those of other faiths to desiring terrible misfortunes upon those who do not believe "their" version of "The Word". It disgusts me... I consider myself a modified christian for the fact that, while I believe the bible is in fact a great read and full of important points and morals, it is NOT an absolute - it was written by man, translated by man, and has been distorted by man - not withstanding the fact that even if every word was the exact word of God Himself, it would still have been translated over and over by Man, right from the first writings. Thus, it is an imperfect book created by imperfect beings...

Christianity is NOT about persecuting others or pushing "your" religion as best... it is, at its core, about teaching and enlightening others who are looking for guidance... the crusades and other such debacles are almost entirely politically motivated :(

Kittamaru

07-10-11, 10:02 PM

You mask, then. Not to say I don't. But I do so to do things like...keep my job. I mask for survival. I refuse to mask in situations where I do not have to. Masking all the time can lead to loss of self...and tremendous bone-crunching loneliness in my experience.
Because who knows the real you? Sometimes not even you anymore.

Lying, my own lies and those of others, screw with my sense of reality. Therefore I lie for survival reasons-my job-and don't lie elsewise. Lies set up dueling voices in my head about what actually happened.

My idea of dangerous is to sit with my back to a an entry door.
My idea of dangerous is to allow someone to walk up behind you.
My idea of dangerous is not to be watching one's surroundings in public.

I've survived the worst the horrorshow in my head could provide now. So I'm a lot tougher inside than I used to be...

Someone said, as a reason why she dresses goth...: "The difference between radiating negativity when looking normal and radiating negativity when looking like I'm late for a date with Anton LaVey... is that the latter gets me left alone, and the former gets me $h!it on."

This actually leads to an interesting question... what do you do when you share your body with another consciousness? Not multiple-personality or dementia mind you, but a separate entity that is, in itself, able to come and go as it pleases (or is needed). At first I had thought it merely some sort of defensive measure concocted by my own tortured mind to protect my/it-self from the dangers around... but even when the danger subsided and others came to know this entity, it became apparent that he was, in many ways, my guardian "angel" if you will.

It has been a long time now since he had to protect me, and often instead I simply get words of wisdom or little nuggets of insight (much to the chagrin and confusion of others facing the same difficulty or situation that I am) simply whispered to me by this entity... and I have come to know him as a friend. What confirmed to me that I wasn't simply crazy was the fact that other people around me were able to recognize when he was around (and when he would take over) and noted a decidedly apparent change in every aspect of my being, including even my eye color and accent.

:shrug:

Just thought it interesting to share