Charles Manson

[dfnj]

I think Hell is a made up by men to manipulate the weak minded. An omnipotent God needs absolutely nothing from us. A creator God would love every part of His creation equally. So I would argue and omnipotent God is a God of unconditional love so everyone is allowed to pass through the gates of heaven to experience eternal heavenly bliss regardless of our Earthly sins or how we practiced (or not practiced) our religion. This would include Charles Manson and Hitler. Again, a creator God loves every part of His creation unconditionally.
.
You might argue then without the threat of eternal damnation everyone would act immorally. I would disagree with this idea. People act morally because of the golden rule and they are capable of feeling empathy. People who cannot feel empathy are psychotic in their behaviors regardless of the threat of eternal damnation. It's the same type of argument with gun laws. Gun laws do not prevent criminals from from doing crime. The threat of eternal damnation does not prevent sinners from committing sins. I would even argue further for some people the threat of eternal damnation actually encourages bad behaviors because people like to break taboos.

I think "good", "evil", and "sin" occur in an historical context. Clearly, by today's standards, slavery is is completely immoral even though within the Holy Bible slavery is not immoral. Again, I think the obsession with sin and salvation is just a tactic used by the feudalistic church to control and manipulate the masses for money or power or both. And even though the Bible says some crazy things, I think it is important not to lose the essential message of the Bible, and that is, morality and being moral is important.

As I said, I tend not to believe in Hell because of my faith in a God of unconditional love. However, I do believe you have a choice or a kind of reckoning after you die. In my way of thinking it is not God who judges you but your own character weaknesses. So this is what I think happens after you die (of course this account is not based on evidence. It is based on studying many mythologies throughout the World).

So here's what I think happens when you die. When you die you have two choices. Your first choice after you die is you can look directly into the face of God and experience God's infinite beauty. Or, your second choice, for whatever reason you feel you are not worthy of staring into the face of God, each of us being our own worse critics, and you turn away from looking into God's face.

So what happens with each choice. If you choose to look into the face of God and experience God's infinite beauty, what you experience is the very best possible experience one could have. Experiencing God's infinite beauty is a million times more satisfying and fulfilling than just having a brief moment of experiencing sex.

You become so enamored with God’s infinite beauty, all time ceases to exist, you stop having conscious thoughts, and you melt into the mind of God experiencing eternal heavenly bliss. The God experience is greatest possible experience one can have by definition. No other experience is so fulfilling and complete than the God experience, again, by definition. The God experience is like every cell in your entire body is having a simultaneous orgasm. Even though this only happens for a few nanoseconds before physical death, with your brain operating at 100% heightened neural capacity, it feels like eternity to the conscious self.

The second choice, for whatever reason, you decide to look away from the face of God. At that moment, God immediately gives you the power of omnipotence. Your mind enters a free-form delusional state where anything you imagine spontaneously comes into existence and is experience. Again, with every cell in your body heightened in excitation time slows down. For just a few nanoseconds you experience having the power of omnipotence for what is essentially eternity.

An omnipotent God can certainly dole out the power of omnipotence and still retain all his powers.

Now at first this may sound like a really good thing. But after millions and millions of years, which is only nanoseconds real time, living out all your petty profane desires and imaginations you will become extremely bored. Your mind will have exhausted every possible new thing to imagine. Every possible conceivable scenario of experience will have been played out millions of times over. After having sex with two chicks 10,000 times is probably enough. Eventually you will decide there's not point in turning away from God any longer and you will turn back and look into the face of God.

However, this time you don't look away. All the reasons you would have to look away have been resolved during your stint with omnipotent powers. And just after you look into the face of God you have a brief thought what the heck was I thinking when I turned away the first time? Time will then cease to exist and you experience everlasting heavenly bliss.

Now some of you may be thinking, gee, you die, you turn away from God and you get rewarded with the power of having omnipotence. This may sound unfair if you are immature in your thinking and you take pleasure at the thought of sinners suffering. Or maybe your heart is full of hate and you are seeking revenge against people who have sinned against you.

But from our omnipotent all-loving God's perspective, what better way to win over someone’s love so absolutely and completely than by perfectly giving them everything their heart desires? The real sad thing is why anyone would ever waste any time at all with their own petty and profane desires when they can be looking into the face of God basking in the glow of heavenly eternal bliss. Nothing we can imagine or invent could ever come close to experiencing God's infinite beauty. I just like the idea that no matter what everyone is saved.

 

[1robin]

So what happened to the "second death" - you previously said that this was what you meant by "hell" - but doesn't the Bible say the "second death" IS "the lake of fire"? So if you saying that "Hades" is also "Hell" then how does saying that Hades (= hell according to you) is thrown into the lake of fire (= second death according to the Bible = hell according to you) not equate to hell being thrown into hell - and how does that make any sense? You are not obliged to answer if it is too "over-complicated" for you. Just take comfort that the idea of hell is such a preposterous and inconsistent idea that it probably doesn't exist and you don't have to worry too much about condemning your fellow man in order to avoid going there.

Why do you have so many questions and so much confusion concerning a book you supposedly know enough about to reject? No offense, but until I understood the most widely accepted religion in human history and it's promise of conquering death I do not think I would line myself up against it or malign it.

Anyway, to you questions. While eschatology in general as a whole is some very complex stuff what your asking about is again, pretty straightforward.

1. Eternal and complete separation from God = What the second death is.
2. Hell and the souls within it being cast into the lake of fire and annihilated = How the second death occurs.

Let me explain some things that might make this easier.

1. God is omnipresent = If Hell is an actual place where the damned live forever then God must exist there as well.
2. If Hell is eternal punishment then eventually in every individual's case the punishment exceeds the crime.
3. Once all the human who ever have or ever will exist have been judged and sent to either Hell or Heaven then Hell serves no purpose. The most logical thing to do with something which no longer serves a purpose is to destroy it.
4. Scriptures warn that God can destroy our souls. Why warn people against something that won't ever happen?


I will give you my interpretation of what happens to every single person at the final judgment, who dies prior to Christ's return. I am going to skip hundreds of secondary events for simplicities sake, we don't need any 10 horned beasts muddying the waters.

A couple of notes first,
A. For the following it makes absolutely no difference what word is used in place of Hell. Time spent there will be exactly the same regardless of any label applied to it.
B. Resuscitated means to be brought back from the dead but not necessarily to eternal life. Lazarus was resuscitated.
C. Resurrected means to be brought back to life from the dead eternally. Jesus was resurrected.


1. They sleep (is the word the bible uses) in the grave until the final judgment.
2. At the final judgment every person who ever lived is reconstituted and resuscitated.
3. Every single person is judged.
4. Some (most) are condemned to Hell because they never accepted Christ or responded improperly to the revelation they were given.
5. The rest are allowed into the city of God through the "pearly gates" as is commonly referred to.
6. Those in Hell serve out the punishment their sin merits.
7. Those in Heaven go to a second Judgment where they are rewarded (in what form I do not know) for the Godly works.
8. Once Hell has served it's purpose every Godless person, Demon, and Satan are annihilated in the lake of fire.
9. The entire Earth is returned to it's state of paradise and a new Jerusalem built by God descends to replace to original Jerusalem.
10. In the end Hell and it's contents no longer exist and a paradise like earth with a bejeweled capitol of Jerusalem are left for our eternal enjoyment.

Now I left out a lot of details, secondary events, and there could be more to the story not contained in the bible but this should serve as an initial template. One thing is for sure what word is used for hell in this scenario is just a distinction that makes no difference.

 

[siti]

Why warn people against something that won't ever happen?

Er...dunno...why do some people warn their kids about the boogey man or about Santa Claus not bringing them anything good if they are not well-behaved? Of course these are symbols that serve to illustrate that if we do good, we receive good in return - we reap what we sow. Grown ups in the ancient middle east needed a slightly more involved plot - but the stories served the same purpose - to promote social cohesion and dissuade people from pursuing entirely selfish motives. And they managed to concoct a compelling tale. But it is quite preposterous for an educated person in the 21st century to actually believe that the "last enemy" will finally be brought to heel in a literal sense - I'm not even sure the authors of the sacred scriptures believed that - the author of Ecclesiastes (traditionally believed to be the wisest human ruler ever to walk the earth) said this (my bold):

"All things come alike to all: there is one event to the righteous and to the wicked; to the good and to the clean and to the unclean; to him that sacrificeth and to him that sacrificeth not; as is the good, so is the sinner; and he that sweareth, as he that feareth an oath. This is an evil in all that is done under the sun, that there is one event unto all: yea also, the heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead. For to him that is joined with all the living there is hope; for a living dog is better than a dead lion. For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. As well their love, as their hatred and their envy, is perished long ago; neither have they any more a portion for ever in anything that is done under the sun."​

Ecclesiastes 9:2-5
​

There's no "heaven" and "hell" in that - just life or death - and every living thing will ultimately suffer the same eventuality regardless of what they have done in life. Indeed, the author of Romans (traditionally believed to have been Christ's personal choice as 'apostle to the nations') wrote:

"...he that hath died is justified from sin...For the wages of sin is death"​

Romans 6:7, Romans 6:23
​

Clearly these passages are not intended to be symbolic. Clearly the passages about "Gehenna" and the "lake of fire" are intended to be symbolic. So how do we interpret the one in view of the other? Do we interpret the symbolic passages in terms of the above or the other way round?

For the sake of discussion lets go with he first option. Then the wages of sin is death, not eternal damnation. So the symbolic passages then employed hyperbole to underscore the desirability of being 'good' as far as we possibly are able (where being 'good' translates as 'following the social norms of the culture').

Of course there is also the issue of "the resurrection" that divided both the Jews and the early Christians in the 1st century. But that is really a different issue altogether. There does not need to be a hell for there to be a resurrection. But if everyone gets a resurrection, where is the motivation for being good in this life? Perhaps that is why it was necessary to bring in the notion of reward and punishment in the afterlife. But essentially, I think it (the heaven/hell reward/punishment theme) is a motif or a trope inserted to encourage obedience to social norms. But to hoist it to the status of "literal truth" in the multicultural, globalized reality of the 21st century world is to take the entire notion out of context - and that, I'm afraid, is potentially a very dangerous thing to do.

 

[1robin]

Er...dunno...why do some people warn their kids about the boogey man or about Santa Claus not bringing them anything good if they are not well-behaved?

No this won't quite work. Human beings are imperfect creatures who will lie to their children to get what they want. While God is a morally perfect being, incapable of lying to anyone, and does not need anything from anyone else. So your analogy just isn't quite going to et the job done.

Of course these are symbols that serve to illustrate that if we do good, we receive good in return - we reap what we sow. Grown ups in the ancient middle east needed a slightly more involved plot - but the stories served the same purpose - to promote social cohesion and dissuade people from pursuing entirely selfish motives. And they managed to concoct a compelling tale. But it is quite preposterous for an educated person in the 21st century to actually believe that the "last enemy" will finally be brought to heel in a literal sense - I'm not even sure the authors of the sacred scriptures believed that - the author of Ecclesiastes (traditionally believed to be the wisest human ruler ever to walk the earth) said this (my bold):

The bible is literally full of things that do not promote cohesion. Do you think the following are designed to produce social (in general) or even tribal (to be specific) harmony?

1. New International Version
Jesus said to him, "Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and proclaim the kingdom of God."
2. New International Version
"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
The sword here represents division. Christ came to form a radical group that from their very nature attracted the wrath of other groups. The same way and child who is different is picked on by all the "normal" cookie cutter children.
3. I believe I have already shown that God is a God of exclusivity. Separating the wheat from the tares, goats from the sheep, the Godly from the ungodly, his people from Satan's people, the wicked from the righteous, the obedient from the disobedient, the anointed from the un-anointed, those that are spiritual from those that live by the flesh, etc......I can show where God divides people all day long and I can show where God promotes unity within his own people.
4. What I nor you can show is that the bible taken as a whole appears to have origins in and trivial human desires. People who are founding a religion based on lies don't usually give up everything they have (including their lives) and live a life of suffering just without any meaningful material gain.

Let me give you a quote fro on of (if not the) greatest expert on testimony and evidence in human history about the apostles motivation.
Simon Greenleaf (1783-1853) was the famous Royall Professor of Law at Harvard University, and succeeded Justice Joseph Story as the Dane Professor of Law in the same university, upon Story's death in 1846.

H. W. H Knott says of this great authority in jurisprudence: "To the efforts of Story and Greenleaf is to be ascribed the rise of the Harvard Law School to its eminent position among the legal schools of the United States."

Greenleaf produced a famous work entitled A Treatise on the Law of Evidence which "is still considered the greatest single authority on evidence in the entire literature of legal procedure."

In 1846, while still Professor of Law at Harvard, Greenleaf wrote a volume entitled An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence Administered in the Courts of Justice. In his classic work the author examines the value of the testimony of the apostles to the resurrection of Christ. The following are this brilliant jurist's critical observations:

The annals of military warfare afford scarcely an example of the like heroic constancy, patience, and unflinching courage. They had every possible motive to review carefully the grounds of their faith, and the evidences of the great facts and truths which they asserted; and these motives were pressed upon their attention with the most melancholy and terrific frequency. It was therefore impossible that they could have persisted in affirming the truths they have narrated, had not Jesus actually risen from the dead, and had they not known this fact as certainly as they knew any other fact. If it were morally possible for them to have been deceived in this matter, every human motive operated to lead them to discover and avow their error. To have persisted in so gross a falsehood, after it was known to them, was not only to encounter, for life, all the evils which man could inflict, from without, but to endure also the pangs of inward and conscious guilt; with no hope of future peace, no testimony of a good conscience, no expectation of honor or esteem among men, no hope of happiness in this life, or in the world to come.

"All things come alike to all: there is one event to the righteous and to the wicked; to the good and to the clean and to the unclean; to him that sacrificeth and to him that sacrificeth not; as is the good, so is the sinner; and he that sweareth, as he that feareth an oath. This is an evil in all that is done under the sun, that there is one event unto all: yea also, the heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead. For to him that is joined with all the living there is hope; for a living dog is better than a dead lion. For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. As well their love, as their hatred and their envy, is perished long ago; neither have they any more a portion for ever in anything that is done under the sun."Ecclesiastes 9:2-5

I am not sure what your trying to use what you quoted above to say. ​

​

There's no "heaven" and "hell" in that - just life or death - and every living thing will ultimately suffer the same eventuality regardless of what they have done in life. Indeed, the author of Romans (traditionally believed to have been Christ's personal choice as 'apostle to the nations') wrote:

So what do we do with all these verses then:

BibleGateway.com -
And that is just for the "word" Hell alone.

BibleGateway - : Heaven
And that is just the "word" Heaven alone. There are 622 verses total that you must explain away.

"...he that hath died is justified from sin...For the wages of sin is death"

​

Romans 6:7, Romans 6:23

Romans 6:7 is specifically speaking about Christians and Christians alone. Yes once a believer dies he is free from committing sins or suffering from committing them. If you had read the previous and following verses you would have seen these same Christians go on to live with Christ in Heaven.
Romans 6:23 This verse is almost a repeat of 6:7 and applies strictly to Christians again and says of them again that they go on to live with Christ in heaven after physical death (the first death).

The non-Christians also suffer physical death but unlike those in the scriptures you found they go on to suffer the second death (eventual annihilation)

I can bury you in scriptures for the fates of each group if requested. When you read those verses in their full context they mean the exact opposite of what you interpreted them as meaning.
​

This post is growing too large I will address the rest of it in another post. Please wait on it before responding so you don't get to far ahead of me.

To be continued........

 

[1robin]

Of course there is also the issue of "the resurrection" that divided both the Jews and the early Christians in the 1st century. But that is really a different issue altogether. There does not need to be a hell for there to be a resurrection. But if everyone gets a resurrection, where is the motivation for being good in this life? Perhaps that is why it was necessary to bring in the notion of reward and punishment in the afterlife. But essentially, I think it (the heaven/hell reward/punishment theme) is a motif or a trope inserted to encourage obedience to social norms. But to hoist it to the status of "literal truth" in the multicultural, globalized reality of the 21st century world is to take the entire notion out of context - and that, I'm afraid, is potentially a very dangerous thing to do.

I thought I had left a lot of your post responded to but I think the above paragraph is the only thing I didn't really respond to in depth.

1. Resurrection applies to all people in the end days. Both the wicked and righteous are brought back to life to stand trial or face God's judgment. If there is a judgment there must be at least two categories into which all men must fit.
2. In the bible's case there are only two categories that all men are divided into. The redeemed and the damned. And there are two places the members of each group go to. The redeemed are destined for what is usually called heaven and the damned to a place or condition usually referred to as Hell.
3. If you think Hell is simply invented as a literary device to fool people into being good, how was that coordinated over the course of two millennia? Name me any other book written by half the number of authors over half the number of years that stuck to a literary tactic to induce a specific type of behavior.
3. Jesus himself said there was a literal Hell. I believe I will take his word over yours.