Let's talk about Hell

[no-body]

No_body



My point exactly, so if it don’t stop this so called “evolution” why try to HELP evolution by dampening a belief in hell? If evolution is true, why does it need your help?

Evolution in the biological sense doesn't need anyone's help as it happens no matter what. Evolution in the sense that I'd like to see the human species personally move past superstitions and pseudoscience.

How do you know it’s spreading “gullibility”? Would it not be also gullibility for me to believe in atheism without having all my questions for them answered? Of course it would, this works both ways sir.

I am fine with whatever you want to believe my problem is with the proselytizing and the doom saying. It scares people into falling in line with cultish behavior and to drop their critical thinking skills.

Really? What harm would believing in a hell do to the public? Give me a simple list in your OWN words please.

To the public? Nothing. Like I said my problem is with family mostly children who are ripe for that sort of brainwashing. If you are a grown adult and listen to the gospel and want to convert of your own free will, fine.

You guys? How do you know I am good at quoting scripture? Have you heard me quote scripture before? Also how do you know I am not good at answering your philosophical questions? Have you asked me any YET? No, you haven’t, right?

I usually reply in general to all the posts I've seen if you haven't quoted scripture I apologize, but no one has answered any of my questions. They just quibble over the semantics of scripture and deflect the question.

Useful to teach morals? What good is morals in your perspective?

Empathy. Love. A sense of unity and humanity that can be planted in the human consciousness whether a literal God exist or not.

So “TRUTH” is that which always get’s UPDATED then? Is that how it is? So anything that is OUTDATED is false? How is that so? TRUTH NEVER needs updating, since it’s perfect already. How do you know that this “ancient philosophy, set in stone” as you call it, is not TRUE? Just because you say it’s “outdated” does not tell me how you know it’s false.

How so? People can have barbaric behavior without Christian philosophy. Actually it all depends on the person, how twisted they are. They can take any “GOOD” or “DECENT” philosophy and twist it to pieces to suit their own agenda and be barbaric and then justify their actions. Just because someone or some people twist scriptures or a philosophy to suit their own agenda does not dampen the philosophy itself. The philosophy or religion whatever it may be must be dealt with on a level of logical argument against it based on the merits of what that religion says.

Of course the problem is fundamentalism in any religion, and these are the people I speak of. As long as people keep Christianity out of the secular government I have no real problems. I realize there are sane Christians out there.

At least that shows God to be a God of justice and Satan to be someone to be a who cares anything goes type of creature. But besides that, not EVERYTHING done in the name of God is truly done under God’s DIRECTION. People can USE God for their own selfish agenda, and yes, it happens. That’s why God said “do not use my name in vain”.

That doesn't sound like a perfect God to me.

 

[Danny Heim]

Yes. Belief that hell is the common stone-cold grave for dead mankind is in the minority, but not among Christians, rather among so-called Christians or Christendom.

Jesus was in hell - Acts 2vs27,31
Jesus slept while in hell - John 11vs11-14
Jesus unconscious until God resurrected Jesus - Ecc 9vs5,10

thanks very much for that, I appreciate it, I take back what I said

 

[Danny Heim]

It matters not whether a belief is widespread or not - what matters is whether it is TRUE or not.
Rev.12v9 says the whole world is deceived (obviously believing the wrong thing) this should give you a % of who is right and who is not.

I never asked for a % of who was right or who is not. I asked for a break down of beliefs about Hell. But now that you mention it, as far as I am concerned, any belief in Hell of any kind is wrong. URAVIP2ME answered me close enough, he said beliefs of your kind, his, Jollybear's and Etritonakin's are in the minority. Which is too bad, because what you guys believe about hell is much better, which means to me that our chances of evolving out of this altogether are also much better. Let's hope that soon it becomes the majority, then maybe we eventually will see Hell just being dropped completely.

 

[Etritonakin]

That doesn't sound like a perfect God to me.

God allowing imperfection does not make him imperfect -it make US imperfect temporarily.

God could have made everything work perfectly with no possibility of evil, but that would have prevented him from creating beings with true creativity. It would essentially have prevented him from his greatest purpose -which is to reproduce -to actually create more gods.

When he first created a truly creative being, the potential for evil then came into existence. Why? Because creativity requires the ability to choose -color, texture, material, size, shape -or anything else. It also became possible for the new creative being to choose to destroy what others had created, and to choose not to obey God. Choosing to not obey God is the same as choosing to destroy, as God's laws are in place to protect all of the creation. What God created was perfect intially -until it was affected by disobedient creative beings.
Any new creative being is essentially completely ignorant when first created. They may have talents, but have no experience. They essentially lack the data to make a truly informed decision about whether or not to obey God. God knew disobedience was a possibility, and still went ahead with his plans -because he knew experiencing the consequences of disobedience would provide the data necessary for new creative beings to make an informed decision -cease destroying -and choose to become perfect -part of a perfect system -no longer ignorant, and no longer tempted to be imperfect.

It is possible to have many systems within the one -so long as they are not opposed. This would make them essentially one large perfect system made up of many small perfect systems. Allowing opposing systems to exist only leads to conflict, misery and destruction -so he allowed this conflict for a time, so that we might learn that this is true.

 

[Danny Heim]

Stupid because you say so? You’re the authority on what is stupid? How do you know hell is stupid (MY VIEW OF HELL NOW)? Were talking about MY VIEW of hell, which I told you my view. Why is THAT view of hell, stupid? Tell me why my view is stupid.

I do not need to be an authority. It is obvious to the common onlooker. "Your view" is definitely much improved over the view that hellfire is eternal, and I hope the church as a whole will move in that direction also. That would mean Christians are moving away from eternal hell, which also means an evolution completely away from the idea of Hell would be in process, that's happy.

Why is it important that people “evolve” out of believing in hell?

It is important because it creates a block to cooperative thinking. When you have someone thinking that another is going to be punished on terms that the victim never agreed to, it creates a separation between the two. Example, you think that I am going to hell, because I do not believe the way you do (if I am wrong, then you've answered my second question of the post I asked earlier). You think this way, I think that way. Now, I am certainly not saying we all need to think exactly alike. It is the extremes that concern me. When you believe that I will suffer a hell it winds up putting us miles and miles apart. So then cooperative thinking is greatly hampered. Do not get me wrong, I realize that this is only one of many blocks, but it is a major block among those many and very difficult to overcome.

Here is something to ponder, tell me what you think of this: if SO many people believe in hell, do you think THAT many people are stupid? Do you think you’re smarter than MOST people?
yes and yes (though I would replace the word MOST with "those")

Also why is stagnated consciousness bad?

Well, would you like your consciousness stagnated?? Wouldn't you prefer to grow in consciousness? Explain this please, maybe I don't get your question, or its origins.

Also how do you know that it’s a stagnated consciousness and not the other way around? How do you know NOT believing in hell is NOT stagnated?

Good question, but I'm afraid the answer can only be seen as one rids themselves of the hell idea. Sorry for a lousy answer, but that's all I can say.



My view of hell, which I have stated in this thread, is logical, sound, and I believe to be correct. Who cares about other views of hell at the moment, my view of hell is the right one. So, from here on end, it would be best for you to answer me based on what I say about hell and not what others believe about it.

Hell of any kind, is anything but logical. The logic is automatically terminated since your God is supposed to be loving and just, there is no love in Hell and no justice in sending someone there.

Also even if my view of hell was widespread in Christianity, still why do you think it’s important to get it to that stage in order to eventually get it completely out of the church and public circle? In other words, why do you think my view of hell is wrong? Saying because it’s stupid, says nothing. Because I can shoot back and say your view of there being NO hell, that is stupid.

Your view is by far and way the closest to something one could call sane; if there has to be a hell. But its basic premise still suggest that there is a God out there that says we go his way or be punished, Stalin said that also. It all comes down to free will. You can't say we have a God that gave us free will only to wind up punishing us for not following him, that is NOT free will of any kind, that is tyranny. But the truth is we do have free will, how we got it I don't know, my guess is it did come from a creator. It would be a crude joke if that creator suddenly takes it from me if I fail to follow him/her/it. If that were the case, then he/she/it would not have given it to me in the first place.

 

[look3467]

JOB 16:5 But I Would Strengthen You With My Mouth, And The Moving Of My Lips Should Asswage Your Grief.

Job Does Speak The Same Words, And He Also Strengthen Them By Doing It. The Moving Of The Lips Is When The Mouth Of The Tomb Is Opened, And God Spews Jesus And All The Dead Out Of His Mouth; As They, the Ones Once Asleep, As In A Death, Go To Heaven As Arrows Shot Forth.

The Arrows Are Also Seen In Similitude When Jonathan Uses Three Arrows As A Sign To David.
David Is Hid In A Field The Same Way The Tomb Is In A Field Or A Garden.
Three Times The Word Of God Speaks Of Sending The Ones In Hell Out.

(1) ZEC 9:11 As For Thee Also, By The Blood Of Thy Covenant I Have Sent Forth Thy Prisoners Out Of The Pit Wherein Is No Water.

(2) ISA 26:19 Thy Dead Men Shall Live, Together With My Dead Body Shall They Arise. Awake And Sing, Ye That Dwell In Dust: For Thy Dew Is As The Dew Of Herbs, And The Earth Shall Cast Out The Dead.

(3) HOS 6:2 After Two Days Will He Revive Us: In The Third Day He Will Raise Us Up, And We Shall Live In His Sight.

REV 7:11 And All The Angels Stood Round About The Throne, And About The Elders And The Four Beasts, And Fell Before The Throne On Their Faces, And Worshipped God,

This Verse In Revelation Is The Day Of The Cross Finished, They All Fell Or Have Been Established.

REV 7:12 Saying, Amen: Blessing, And Glory, And Wisdom, And Thanksgiving, And Honour, And Power, And Might, Be Unto Our God For Ever And Ever. Amen.

REV 7:13 And One Of The Elders Answered, Saying Unto Me, What Are These Which Are Arrayed In White Robes? And Whence Came They?

These Are The Ones That Have Come Unto God From Hell, All Fell Short. All Saved By Grace. The Parable Of The Beggar And The Rich Man (Luke 16:20) Is When Jesus Takes All Sin, The People Are Sinless, They Are In Abraham's Bosom; Which Is The Body Of Christ. Jesus Now As The Rich Man Is In Hell.

REV 7:14 And I Said Unto Him, Sir, Thou Knowest. And He Said To Me, These Are They Which Came Out Of Great Tribulation, And Have Washed Their Robes, And Made Them White In The Blood Of The Lamb. >>>Ken1Burton

Ponder the words just said, and arrive at your own conclusion.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Danny Heim]

Jollybear, or anyone
I would like to explain a little further why the hell idea, of any kind, does not make sense and inhibits our ability to evolve to a much needed higher consciousness.

The main reason it does not make sense is because there are no mandates about. Meaning, there is no explanation in plain view. And the bible is simply not enough to explain, it is just a book, there are millions of books, old and new. If the creator were going to have it that we follow his/her/its will, and we were going to be punished for not doing so, then that would be very clear to All of us, otherwise, it becomes a dirty trick. But it is not clear to all of us.

Why do I say that? Because there are about as many beliefs regarding a creator as there are cultures, there are hundreds of cultures. That tells me we do not know didly about our creator. And since we don't know didly, that means to me he/she/it must have just made us, and then set us free to become whatever our free will leads us to become. Examining free will gives the answer to all these questions. Free will is natural, we know we have it, because by seeing that there is nothing to stop me from believing, doing or imagining whatever I choose, I know I have free will.

When you say, "But God told you your choices in the Bible". Well God also told me my choices in the Koran, the Vedas, the Tibetan Book of the Dead, in petroglyphs, in passed down oral traditions and so on. Who does one believe? And here is another thing regarding your particular belief that sets it apart from most all others. You claim to have the exact truth; most religions do not do this. And that, is why it is a block to our evolving. Most religions do not have this exclusive aspect to their belief, and that is why it is special in the sense it creates a block among all of us getting anywhere in raising to a higher consciousness, and why I fight it.

 

[look3467]

There are four things, points or parts to mankind.
1. Creation
2. fall
3. Judgment
4. Death

These four things befall every soul that breaks the womb.

Because it is that way, and getting back to heaven or to God's abode, requires that we be not dead as in number four above.

Thus, all who lived and died prior to Jesus are "held" in a holding place until such time as their liberation is made complete.

That place is referred in the bible as the pit, and is referred also as hell.

It is or was a prison of souls not yet liberated.

Jesus was sent there to do just that as my post above dictates.

That is according to the bible and none other source.

There are as you say many sources out there and the matter lies in which one we choose to believe.

I for one choose what the bible says verses all others as the bible to me is a complete book of God's work in His creation and salvation.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Danny Heim]

There are four things, points or parts to mankind.
1. Creation
2. fall
3. Judgment
4. Death

These four things befall every soul that breaks the womb.

Because it is that way, and getting back to heaven or to God's abode, requires that we be not dead as in number four above.

Thus, all who lived and died prior to Jesus are "held" in a holding place until such time as their liberation is made complete.

That place is referred in the bible as the pit, and is referred also as hell.

It is or was a prison of souls not yet liberated.

Jesus was sent there to do just that as my post above dictates.

That is according to the bible and none other source.

There are as you say many sources out there and the matter lies in which one we choose to believe.

I for one choose what the bible says verses all others as the bible to me is a complete book of God's work in His creation and salvation.

Blessings, AJ

And so you say, why would I not beleive Joe Blow down the street who says I'm going to become a planet when I die and produce a species that will follow me, makes as much sense as any. What sets your belief apart?

 

[Jollybear]

No_body

Evolution in the biological sense doesn't need anyone's help as it happens no matter what. Evolution in the sense that I'd like to see the human species personally move past superstitions and pseudoscience.

I also want the human species to move past superstitions and pseudoscience, but the big question I have for you is, how do you know that “HELL” is superstition and false?

I am fine with whatever you want to believe my problem is with the proselytizing and the doom saying. It scares people into falling in line with cultish behavior and to drop their critical thinking skills.

I agree, we should not just try to convert people, we should encourage critical thinking skills, but at the same time, if what we believe is true (hell namely in this case) the implications of that are HUGE. That means we would have to PERSUADE people to realize it’s existence (IF it’s true). We should not indoctrinate people and discourage questioning, but we should encourage them to question, ask questions, counter things, and then at the same time they do this, we should answer those questions, and persuade. If hell is real, we got to take it seriously. If it’s not real, well, we also have to seriously FIND THAT out as well. Both ways, it’s serious.

To the public? Nothing. Like I said my problem is with family mostly children who are ripe for that sort of brainwashing. If you are a grown adult and listen to the gospel and want to convert of your own free will, fine.

I agree, I think children should be taught BOTH sides to every subject and then let them decide. That teaches them critical thinking skills. Also at the same time, if hell is real, everyone needs to believe it, IF it’s real. Why? Because the implications of such a place are huge.

usually reply in general to all the posts I've seen if you haven't quoted scripture I apologize, but no one has answered any of my questions. They just quibble over the semantics of scripture and deflect the question.

Well, yes I can quote scripture, but my point is you grouped me into a certain group of people that you had former experiences with. This was my problem I had with what you said (no offense though). I believe all of us need to deal with people as individuals and not as groups. I do this all the time myself, deal with people as individuals. I would not say others should do it if I did not do it myself.

Also I am sorry that many folks have not answered your questions. If you’re willing, I am willing to take your questions very seriously with utmost care, and treat them as important. I will make an effort to answer them.

Empathy. Love. A sense of unity and humanity that can be planted in the human consciousness whether a literal God exist or not.

That’s interesting, and I also think that love and unity and humanity should exist whether God exists or not. BUT here is the problem, I don’t see how IF there is NO God, how morals (love, unity, humanity) can be justified. But WITH a God, I understand that it CAN be justified. With no God, there is no foundation or justification for morals being pushed forward.

Of course the problem is fundamentalism in any religion, and these are the people I speak of. As long as people keep Christianity out of the secular government I have no real problems.

Why keep Christianity out of the secular government when there can be SECULAR FUNDAMENTALIST POLITICIANS? Keeping Christianity out of it does not solve the problem, because there can be twisted secular people as well.

I realize there are sane Christians out there.

Good, do you realize there are insane secular fundamentalist politicians?

That doesn't sound like a perfect God to me.

What was imperfect about my statement? Here is what I said as a recap

“At least that shows God to be a God of justice and Satan to be someone to be a who cares anything goes type of creature. But besides that, not EVERYTHING done in the name of God is truly done under God’s DIRECTION. People can USE God for their own selfish agenda, and yes, it happens. That’s why God said “do not use my name in vain”.”

Tell me what was wrong with my defense of God here?

 

[Jollybear]

Danny_Heim

I do not need to be an authority. It is obvious to the common onlooker.

It is obvious to the common onlooker that the “traditional” view of hell is stupid you mean? Or do you mean that MY view of hell is stupid to the common onlooker?

"Your view" is definitely much improved over the view that hellfire is eternal,

When you say my view is “improved” from the traditional view, do you mean that my view is just LESS stupid then the traditional view, but that my view is STILL stupid? Could you clarify that for me? And if you do mean that my view is still stupid, just LESS stupid, could you tell me WHY it is? IF you think it is that is.

and I hope the church as a whole will move in that direction also. That would mean Christians are moving away from eternal hell, which also means an evolution completely away from the idea of Hell would be in process, that's happy.

1: how would it mean that there is an evolution completely away from the idea of hell would be in process?
2: why would this be happy to you to remove the concept of hell completely?

It is important because it creates a block to cooperative thinking. When you have someone thinking that another is going to be punished on terms that the victim never agreed to, it creates a separation between the two.

Yes, that it does create a separation of the two. But who should agree with who here? Should the hell fire believer agree with the none believer in hell, or should the none believer in hell agree with hell fire believer? Your all about becoming ONE and doing away with blockages, but that does not answer where they should be ONE on? On the believe in hell or none belief in hell? You would probably say, the none belief in hell people should be one on, but the believer in hell would say, lets be one on believing in hell, all of us, then we have cooperative thinking. So, who should agree with who and most importantly, WHY? Why should everyone be cooperative in believing in NO hell? Why should it not be the other way around, everyone believe in a hell? Could you answer that for me?

Example, you think that I am going to hell, because I do not believe the way you do (if I am wrong, then you've answered my second question of the post I asked earlier). You think this way, I think that way. Now, I am certainly not saying we all need to think exactly alike. It is the extremes that concern me. When you believe that I will suffer a hell it winds up putting us miles and miles apart. So then cooperative thinking is greatly hampered. Do not get me wrong, I realize that this is only one of many blocks, but it is a major block among those many and very difficult to overcome.

four questions I have for you.
1: if you think we don’t need to think exactly alike, why should we then think exactly alike on hell?
2: why is the extremes concern you?
3: how does me believing in hell and that you will suffer there put us miles away from each other IN THIS LIFE?
4: how is cooperative thinking hampered in all areas?

Well, would you like your consciousness stagnated?? Wouldn't you prefer to grow in consciousness? Explain this please, maybe I don't get your question, or its origins.

I mean, of course having a stronger consciousness does FEEL better, but why is our feelings important? If there is no God, no soul, no hell, no heaven, no after life, why is any of that important? What is the foundation of FEELING good?

Good question, but I'm afraid the answer can only be seen as one rids themselves of the hell idea. Sorry for a lousy answer, but that's all I can say.

This answer unfortunately does not work. If you don’t believe in hell, then apparently, you know what it’s LIKE or feels like to not believe in hell. So explain how your consciousness is stronger than mine by not believing in hell?


On an intuitive scale I can understand why believing in NO hell could be a RELIEF for some people. It gives them the sense that it’s ok to do anything they want (sins that is) and they won’t be PUNISHED with torment for it.

But, that is an intuitive understanding I have, what is your actual understanding based on actually NOT believing in hell?

Hell of any kind, is anything but logical. The logic is automatically terminated since your God is supposed to be loving and just, there is no love in Hell and no justice in sending someone there.

This is where you misunderstand justice and love. Let me define them and then you define your understanding of them and then we go from there. If God let EVERYONE go to heaven, sinful folks as well as the righteous, then there would be WAR in heaven. So, God is LOVING enough to REFUSE letting evil people INTO heaven. It’s equivalent to say the JUDGE in the courtroom REFUSES to let the criminal out into society because he is PROTECTING and LOVING the people in society. There is God’s LOVE. Now here is God’s JUSTICE, those sinful people broke his laws, now they must PAY with PUNISHMENT, therefore they go to hell, that is the jail house of God’s kingdom. Jail is anything BUT a paradise, it’s not meant to be a paradise, it’s meant to be PUNISHMENT. That’s justice, you must pay for your crime. God is loving and God is JUST. Of course criminals don’t LIKE justice, but does it matter what they like? NO, of course not. Of course they are going to TRY to get AWAY from justice being done to them. Justice is painful to undergo, but, that’s the NATURE of justice and for some, it will humble and teach, and for others it may HARDEN more. It depends on the person’s response and choice. But, justice must be served.

Tell me what is wrong with my explanation here? How is this not logical?

 

[Jollybear]

Your view is by far and way the closest to something one could call sane; if there has to be a hell.

“close to being called sane?” or IS my view SANE? If it’s not, WHY is it not actually THERE to be called sane?

But its basic premise still suggest that there is a God out there that says we go his way or be punished, Stalin said that also. It all comes down to free will. You can't say we have a God that gave us free will only to wind up punishing us for not following him, that is NOT free will of any kind, that is tyranny. But the truth is we do have free will, how we got it I don't know, my guess is it did come from a creator. It would be a crude joke if that creator suddenly takes it from me if I fail to follow him/her/it. If that were the case, then he/she/it would not have given it to me in the first place.

I think this is a misunderstanding of free will. Let me define what I believe free will is and then we go from there.

God gave free will and that means he gave us the ABILITY or POWER to CHOOSE to REJECT him or FOLLOW him. He did not give us this free will TO REJECT HIM, he gave it to us because he did not want to FORCE US to follow him. He did not want ROBOTS. So you must bring into the equation here God’s PURPOSE for giving free will. He did not give us free will so we could do anything we want, and LET us do it without any consequences, NO, he gave it to us so we would not be FORCED like robots to follow him.

That’s his MOTIVE for GIVING free will. So yes, as he gave free will, he also gives commands and warnings attached to those commands.

Also if you want to say God is tyrannical, well, you can say that if you want, but with God he has PERFECT knowledge and wisdom, therefore he knows what is BEST. Therefore to not follow him, is only being FOOLISH (the opposite to perfect wisdom) on our part, thus we only HARM ourselves thinking we KNOW better than the creator. Such thinking is obviously absurd. Our rebellion against him is based on mistrust of him, and we should not mistrust him, because he knows more than we do. He obviously does if he is the creator, right?

Jollybear, or anyone

I would like to explain a little further why the hell idea, of any kind, does not make sense and inhibits our ability to evolve to a much needed higher consciousness.

The main reason it does not make sense is because there are no mandates about. Meaning, there is no explanation in plain view. And the bible is simply not enough to explain, it is just a book, there are millions of books, old and new. If the creator were going to have it that we follow his/her/its will, and we were going to be punished for not doing so, then that would be very clear to All of us, otherwise, it becomes a dirty trick. But it is not clear to all of us.

Let me explain why it is not clear, yet is NOT a dirty trick at the same time. There is a streak of REBELION inside of people against authority, in this case, God’s authority. People have a streak of wanting to be their OWN boss of their life. This rebellion SOMETIMES shows itself in dishonesty, that means it will try to TWIST reality to make itself feel more comfortable while living. In this case, it will TWIST the CLEAR truth of God’s will, making it not so much clear anymore. Sometimes it does show itself in honest rebellion, that means it KNOWS what is clear, and realizes it and mentally assents to it, but then still deliberately rebels against it. They then know they will be punished for it, but they go ahead anyway and rebel. Rebelling in the honest way is NOT very comfortable in living. It is the more courageous way, granted, but it is still not very or completely smart. Now there is a third case, some who are not in rebellion, they are true seekers, but they are DECIEVED. If they seek a little harder with UTMOST carefulness, they then will come out of there deception. But it’s very easy to be deceived, all one has to do is not be careful and not seek. Be like a solder and walk in that mine field VERY carefully. It may be very boring going through that field for miles on end, but you get bored for one minute; you may have your leg blown off. Be very careful with reality and truth. Be humble; be vigilant and careful in finding truth. So, it’s not that it’s not clear, it’s that deception of reality is out there, by both Satan (originator of lies), and those who rebel and try to mislead. Next question, why does God allow that? Free will, he don’t FORCE them to stop, but in DUE time, he will punish.

Why do I say that? Because there are about as many beliefs regarding a creator as there are cultures, there are hundreds of cultures. That tells me we do not know didly about our creator.

Actually this is very subjective words. There is not hundreds of views of God. Yes perhaps many hundreds of LABELS of God, but actual explanations of God are VERY SMALL AMOUNT. It goes from monotheism, polytheism and pantheism. It pretty much does not go too far from there. So, yes we do know “didly” about the creator. I do anyway.

And since we don't know didly, that means to me he/she/it must have just made us, and then set us free to become whatever our free will leads us to become. Examining free will gives the answer to all these questions. Free will is natural, we know we have it, because by seeing that there is nothing to stop me from believing, doing or imagining whatever I choose, I know I have free will.

Just because there is so many things we can choose does not mean God just made us and left us to do whatever, all that means is that God’s VOICE is INSIDE all that clutter around it. Think of it like this, suppose in a cloud of a hundred people, your dad is yelling to you. You know your dads voice, so you tune out the rest and lo and behold your dads voice becomes more clear. God’s will is there amongst all that noisy deception out there. Yes, there is a will God has.

 

[Jollybear]

When you say, "But God told you your choices in the Bible". Well God also told me my choices in the Koran, the Vedas, the Tibetan Book of the Dead, in

petroglyphs, in passed down oral traditions and so on. Who does one believe?

Who does one believe? Well that one is easy to clear up, they just believe my views and it’s all settled, lol.

I’m kidding.

But for real though, who does one believe? That is where seeking comes in, argument comes in against all these views. The view that passes scrutiny THE MOST, is the one that is true. That’s the one we believe in.

And here is another thing regarding your particular belief that sets it apart from most all others. You claim to have the exact truth; most religions do not do this. And that, is why it is a block to our evolving. Most religions do not have this exclusive aspect to their belief, and that is why it is special in the sense it creates a block among all of us getting anywhere in raising to a higher consciousness, and why I fight it.

It’s not just the bible or Christianity that says they HAVE THEE truth, some other religions do the same thing, although not all religions do it. But pretty much any world religion makes exclusive claims. I make exclusive claims, but at the same time I am OPEN to have those claims scrutinized. And I am willing to throw away my belief IF I find out I am WRONG. But in the mean time, I don’t and will not believe I am wrong UNTIL shown otherwise through rigorous scrutiny.

But just because a religion makes dogmatic exclusive claims to having THEE truth does not make it NOT have THEE truth. Some obviously don’t have it, because they can’t ALL be true, and some may have it. Either one has it and the rest don’t, or the rest have a portion of it.

Why do you think that Christianity just wrong because it claims to have the exact truth?

Also if you fight it, you should fight it based on answering all these questions.

 

[Danny Heim]

But for real though, who does one believe? That is where seeking comes in, argument comes in against all these views. The view that passes scrutiny THE MOST, is the one that is true. That’s the one we believe in.

That makes sense, but the problem with it is that of all the views, including mine and yours, that can be presented regarding the afterlife, or life in general for that matter, are always going to come under the fire of reason since they do not have sufficient proof. No one can prove what happens to us after death, no one. So the only conclusion we can make with any certainty is that WE DON'T KNOW. That being said, the only left to do is have faith in a belief. Faith does not need reason or proof.

It’s not just the bible or Christianity that says they HAVE THEE truth, some other religions do the same thing, although not all religions do it. But pretty much any world religion makes exclusive claims. I make exclusive claims, but at the same time I am OPEN to have those claims scrutinized. And I am willing to throw away my belief IF I find out I am WRONG. But in the mean time, I don’t and will not believe I am wrong UNTIL shown otherwise through rigorous scrutiny.

Again, there is no need or reason to be open to be scrutinized, at least not using fact to scrutinize, because there are no facts available, none that would prove anything anyway.

Also, I think you are right that,” It’s not just the bible or Christianity that says they HAVE THEE truth, some other religions do the same thing". The difference is that Christianity has it in its doctrine to "go out unto all four corners of the earth and spread the word" or something like that. In other words, Christianity has a mission and that mission sets it apart from all the others in a dynamic way. Christianity becomes a campaign, I am not aware of that in other religions. And even when other religions do something even sort of like this, like say the Hari Krishna's, there is no threat of suffering if you don't convert.
I may be wrong about this as I am not a theologin in any ssense of the wrod.

But just because a religion makes dogmatic exclusive claims to having THEE truth does not make it NOT have THEE truth. Some obviously don’t have it, because they can’t ALL be true, and some may have it. Either one has it and the rest don’t, or the rest have a portion of it.


You answered the 64 thousand dollar question right there, "because they can’t ALL be true". And no, it is not, "Either one has it and the rest don’t, or the rest have a portion of it". Because it is also possible that no religion has the truth. In my opinion, they all have a portion of it perhaps, but none have THE TRUTH. And even if I am wrong, you still have to accept the possibility that none have it, becasue "the truth" has never been settled on by all who question it.

Why do you think that Christianity just wrong because it claims to have the exact truth?

As stated above, no one can claim it. If they had the exact truth, it would have made it to the papers.

 

[Jollybear]

Danny_Heim

That makes sense, but the problem with it is that of all the views, including mine and yours, that can be presented regarding the afterlife, or life in general for that matter, are always going to come under the fire of reason since they do not have sufficient proof.

I agree there is not 100% proof for any view, so all views must come under the fire of reason. Which view is MORE reasonable? We find that out by question, argument, logic, scrutiny. Which view is the golden truth? Let’s find out and put it in the fire, if it burns up, we know it was the wood of falsehood, if it don’t burn up, but starts to glow even more, we know it was the gold of truth.

No one can prove what happens to us after death, no one.

We cannot PROVE what happens after death with 100% certainty, but we DO have evidence and clues to what happens. This evidence comes in the form of near death experiences, certified DEATH experiences and out of body experiences. And also what I call corroborating near death experiences. These are things that the person while out of their body seen things that they later verified were actually there when they returned to their body. I find those are very compelling evidence.

So the only conclusion we can make with any certainty is that WE DON'T KNOW.

We don’t know with absolute certainty, but we can know beyond reasonable doubt. So it’s not a perfect knowledge, but its faith based on SOME knowledge and GOOD reason.

Also even if I was to grant you that we cannot know AT ALL. Still to reject ANY fire and brimstone message is thus taking a GAMBLE with THEE truth. If Christianity is right and one does not commit, they thus take a gamble with their soul, likewise if Islam is right and someone does not commit, they take a gamble with their soul. So even though “we don’t know” that is no reason to gamble it or take it lightly. We MUST KNOW, we MUST FIND OUT, we MUST be SURE because the implications are MASSIVE. The implications are TOO massive to ignore or take lightly.

That being said, the only left to do is have faith in a belief. Faith does not need reason or proof.

Oh wait now. Whatever I believe, I NEED reasons to believe something. I am not going to believe something FOR NO reason. I am also not going to believe something for SELFISH reasons either. I want “GOOD” reasons to believe in something. And what I DO believe in, I have GOOD reasons for it and some things I have even EVIDENCE for. So I don’t have faith in a belief that comes from a vacuum. Nor do I believe anyone should put faith in a belief that comes from a vacuum. I also don’t believe people do put faith in a belief that comes from a vacuum. All beliefs have reasons for them, those reasons are either GOOD or they are SELFISH. Whatever one believes it should NEVER, EVER be based on selfish reasons, otherwise you’re headed for destruction indeed. And you’ll most likely have a WRONG belief at that.

Although that said, I am a Christian, and I do realize there are people who believe in Christianity for selfish reasons. Their belief I believe is right, but that means in their case they were IN LUCK to get it right. BUT in their case they are also out of luck for being selfish as well.

Again, there is no need or reason to be open to be scrutinized, at least not using fact to scrutinize, because there are no facts available, none that would prove anything anyway.

Well, let’s look at this. Let me give a list of PURE FACTS, no interpretation. And you tell me if you agree with these facts and then we will go from there.
1: Fact one is people grow old and die.
2: fact two is people have had near death experiences, being consciously aware of their surroundings.
3: fact three is SOME people have had certified death experiences, brain not functioning, yet they were consciously aware of their surroundings.
4: fact four is some people have seen things while having a near death experience and then later verified it when they got resuscitated, which confirmed to be correct.
5: people have had and do have out of body experiences.

Now you may interpret all these FACTS as either hallucinations of the brain and coincidences. I interpret them as not hallucinations nor coincidences. I think my interpretation has slightly more weight since we have SOME corroborating near death experiences; and also because of certified dead experiences. These kinds of experiences give my interpretation more weight. Otherwise how do you explain them?

Also, I think you are right that,” It’s not just the bible or Christianity that says they HAVE THEE truth, some other religions do the same thing". The difference is that Christianity has it in its doctrine to "go out unto all four corners of the earth and spread the word" or something like that. In other words, Christianity has a mission and that mission sets it apart from all the others in a dynamic way. Christianity becomes a campaign, I am not aware of that in other religions. And even when other religions do something even sort of like this, like say the Hari Krishna's, there is no threat of suffering if you don't convert.

Well to my knowledge Islam has this mission to spread their word as well. So it’s not just Christianity. Also how is that a bad thing to spread the word? Would it not be bad if someone in a extreme drought found tons of water and told no one? Would it not be selfish to keep the “truth” to ourselves?

I may be wrong about this as I am not a theologin in any ssense of the wrod.

That’s ok to be wrong, we can be mistaken. But yes, Islam to my knowledge has a mission as well.

You answered the 64 thousand dollar question right there, "because they can’t ALL be true". And no, it is not, "Either one has it and the rest don’t, or the rest have a portion of it". Because it is also possible that no religion has the truth. In my opinion, they all have a portion of it perhaps, but none have THE TRUTH. And even if I am wrong, you still have to accept the possibility that none have it, becasue "the truth" has never been settled on by all who question it.

Right, I agree, either NONE have the FULL truth, or ALL have a portion of the truth, or ONE has the full truth and all the rest have a portion of the truth. But it’s inconceivable to me that NONE can have NO PORTION of truth AT ALL.

Now in my view I believe Christianity has the FULL truth, and all other religions have a portion of the truth.

As stated above, no one can claim it. If they had the exact truth, it would have made it to the papers.

No, it certainly would not make it to the papers, and if it did, it would be criticized by someone who read it. Not everyone would agree with it. As I explained above, some KNOW the truth, but rebel, some TWIST what they know is the truth to make themselves comfortable, and some are deceived by liars. Only the true seekers and those who are CAREFUL have ANY HOPE of finding the truth.

Your thoughts now?

 

[Danny Heim]

Danny_Heim



I agree there is not 100% proof for any view, so all views must come under the fire of reason. Which view is MORE reasonable? We find that out by question, argument, logic, scrutiny. Which view is the golden truth? Let’s find out and put it in the fire, if it burns up, we know it was the wood of falsehood, if it don’t burn up, but starts to glow even more, we know it was the gold of truth.



We cannot PROVE what happens after death with 100% certainty, but we DO have evidence and clues to what happens. This evidence comes in the form of near death experiences, certified DEATH experiences and out of body experiences. And also what I call corroborating near death experiences. These are things that the person while out of their body seen things that they later verified were actually there when they returned to their body. I find those are very compelling evidence.



We don’t know with absolute certainty, but we can know beyond reasonable doubt. So it’s not a perfect knowledge, but its faith based on SOME knowledge and GOOD reason.

Also even if I was to grant you that we cannot know AT ALL. Still to reject ANY fire and brimstone message is thus taking a GAMBLE with THEE truth. If Christianity is right and one does not commit, they thus take a gamble with their soul, likewise if Islam is right and someone does not commit, they take a gamble with their soul. So even though “we don’t know” that is no reason to gamble it or take it lightly. We MUST KNOW, we MUST FIND OUT, we MUST be SURE because the implications are MASSIVE. The implications are TOO massive to ignore or take lightly.



Oh wait now. Whatever I believe, I NEED reasons to believe something. I am not going to believe something FOR NO reason. I am also not going to believe something for SELFISH reasons either. I want “GOOD” reasons to believe in something. And what I DO believe in, I have GOOD reasons for it and some things I have even EVIDENCE for. So I don’t have faith in a belief that comes from a vacuum. Nor do I believe anyone should put faith in a belief that comes from a vacuum. I also don’t believe people do put faith in a belief that comes from a vacuum. All beliefs have reasons for them, those reasons are either GOOD or they are SELFISH. Whatever one believes it should NEVER, EVER be based on selfish reasons, otherwise you’re headed for destruction indeed. And you’ll most likely have a WRONG belief at that.

Although that said, I am a Christian, and I do realize there are people who believe in Christianity for selfish reasons. Their belief I believe is right, but that means in their case they were IN LUCK to get it right. BUT in their case they are also out of luck for being selfish as well.



Well, let’s look at this. Let me give a list of PURE FACTS, no interpretation. And you tell me if you agree with these facts and then we will go from there.
1: Fact one is people grow old and die.
2: fact two is people have had near death experiences, being consciously aware of their surroundings.
3: fact three is SOME people have had certified death experiences, brain not functioning, yet they were consciously aware of their surroundings.
4: fact four is some people have seen things while having a near death experience and then later verified it when they got resuscitated, which confirmed to be correct.
5: people have had and do have out of body experiences.

Now you may interpret all these FACTS as either hallucinations of the brain and coincidences. I interpret them as not hallucinations nor coincidences. I think my interpretation has slightly more weight since we have SOME corroborating near death experiences; and also because of certified dead experiences. These kinds of experiences give my interpretation more weight. Otherwise how do you explain them?





Well to my knowledge Islam has this mission to spread their word as well. So it’s not just Christianity. Also how is that a bad thing to spread the word? Would it not be bad if someone in a extreme drought found tons of water and told no one? Would it not be selfish to keep the “truth” to ourselves?



That’s ok to be wrong, we can be mistaken. But yes, Islam to my knowledge has a mission as well.



Right, I agree, either NONE have the FULL truth, or ALL have a portion of the truth, or ONE has the full truth and all the rest have a portion of the truth. But it’s inconceivable to me that NONE can have NO PORTION of truth AT ALL.

Now in my view I believe Christianity has the FULL truth, and all other religions have a portion of the truth.



No, it certainly would not make it to the papers, and if it did, it would be criticized by someone who read it. Not everyone would agree with it. As I explained above, some KNOW the truth, but rebel, some TWIST what they know is the truth to make themselves comfortable, and some are deceived by liars. Only the true seekers and those who are CAREFUL have ANY HOPE of finding the truth.

Your thoughts now?

Dang it, I just went threw and answered a bunch of your questions, but they got lost when I submitted them. It was because we are doing these long drawn out posts, maybe we can shorten them and do more of them or something?

 

[Jollybear]

Danny_Heim

Dang it, I just went threw and answered a bunch of your questions, but they got lost when I submitted them. It was because we are doing these long drawn out posts, maybe we can shorten them and do more of them or something?

That’s strange that they got lost. Do you remember what you did? Perhaps you pressed a wrong button or something?

But yea, I understand how that feels, one time I wrote out a 4 to 5 hour email about, then I deleted the whole thing by accident. You should have seen my face when I did that. I WAS MAD at myself. Boy was I mad. But anyway, I wrote the whole thing over, just not that day, I said “after all that, I’m done for this day”.

Anyway, yes we can do it in shorter steps. Lets pick up the part where I said this

“Well, let’s look at this. Let me give a list of PURE FACTS, no interpretation. And you tell me if you agree with these facts and then we will go from there.
1: Fact one is people grow old and die.
2: fact two is people have had near death experiences, being consciously aware of their surroundings.
3: fact three is SOME people have had certified death experiences, brain not functioning, yet they were consciously aware of their surroundings.
4: fact four is some people have seen things while having a near death experience and then later verified it when they got resuscitated, which confirmed to be correct.
5: people have had and do have out of body experiences.

Now you may interpret all these FACTS as either hallucinations of the brain and coincidences. I interpret them as not hallucinations nor coincidences. I think my interpretation has slightly more weight since we have SOME corroborating near death experiences; and also because of certified dead experiences. These kinds of experiences give my interpretation more weight. Otherwise how do you explain them?”

 

[URAVIP2ME]

We don’t know with absolute certainty, but we can know beyond reasonable doubt. So it’s not a perfect knowledge, but its faith based on SOME knowledge and GOOD reason.
Now you may interpret all these FACTS as either hallucinations of the brain and coincidences. I interpret them as not hallucinations nor coincidences. I think my interpretation has slightly more weight since we have SOME corroborating near death experiences; and also because of certified dead experiences. These kinds of experiences give my interpretation more weight. Otherwise how do you explain them?

How long were those certifiable deaths? Three or more days?

Would Jesus friend's death recorded at John chapter 11 fall into the category of 'certified' or 'certifiable death' ?______
Scripture does mention some resurrections that took place immediately or rather quickly after death. However, Jesus, in the case of Jesus friend Lazarus at John 11v17, Jesus friend was dead and buried for four [4] days.

Because of the way Jesus described his friend's death the apostles questioned Jesus as to why travel back two days to wake up someone sleeping? So Jesus plainly stated at John 11v14 that his friend was dead.

Jesus made the connection to a dead person as being in a deep sleep.

Where did Jesus learn that the actual dead are Not conscious?
By age 12 Jesus already had a well-rounded Scriptural education.
So Jesus would have faith based on accurate knowledge and good reason.
Jesus would have been taught the Psalms.
In the Psalms Jesus would have learned such verses as:
Psalm 6 v5 that in death there is no remembrance.
Psalm 13 v3 that the dead sleep the sleep of death.
Psalm 115 v17 that the dead do Not praise God.
Psalm 146 v4 that at death thoughts perish. Thinking stops.

Jesus would have been taught Ecclesiastes 9v5,10 that the dead know nothing. Conscious of nothing at all.

Jesus friend made no mention of what he experienced while dead for four [4] days before Jesus resurrected him.
Jesus made no mention of what he experienced while dead for parts of three [3] days before God resurrected Jesus.
If they were not asleep, but conscious in the grave, it would seem logical they would have informed us.

The prophet Daniel also believed [12v2,13] that the dead sleep in the dust of the ground, and Daniel looked forward to being resurrected [standing up] at the end of the days. That would be in the thousand-year day, or Jesus millennial-long day of ruling over earth. -Acts 24v15.

 

[look3467]

And so you say, why would I not beleive Joe Blow down the street who says I'm going to become a planet when I die and produce a species that will follow me, makes as much sense as any. What sets your belief apart?

Why should you believe anything period?

But if you should choose to believe in something, perhaps in the bible?

Otherwise, the field is open.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Danny Heim]

I just decided to start with the following questions of yours, you have simply asked so many questions that I am lost in is all. Not complaining, I wish I could have answered them one by one, but like I said, I did answer them and then lost the post. So, I tried to summarize it all here.

It is obvious to the common onlooker that the “traditional” view of hell is stupid you mean? Or do you mean that MY view of hell is stupid to the common onlooker?
I am going to throw out that your view is stupid, so forget that.

Yes, that it does create a separation of the two. But who should agree with who here? Should the hell fire believer agree with the none believer in hell, or should the none believer in hell agree with hell fire believer? Your all about becoming ONE and doing away with blockages, but that does not answer where they should be ONE on? On the believe in hell or none belief in hell? You would probably say, the none belief in hell people should be one on, but the believer in hell would say, lets be one on believing in hell, all of us, then we have cooperative thinking. So, who should agree with who and most importantly, WHY? Why should everyone be cooperative in believing in NO hell? Why should it not be the other way around, everyone believe in a hell? Could you answer that for me?
You make very good points here. First off, you need to understand that I am not looking for “cooperative thinking” for the purpose of spirituality or to solve the riddles of religious dogma, or to solve the question of the hereafter, or for harmony, or love and unity. My purpose is to save our butts. I am after hell because it takes us out of the here and now and puts us in after death. After death is not our problem at the moment, it is staying alive right now. And of course I believe it is morbid thinking, plus it sets us up in a tyrannical scenario. Those last two aspects are of the spiritual variety. But I am only making issue of them to try and persuade people to get away from them. And I am doing that because it causes a rift between us. And that is only true in the sense that we are so far apart in our thinking, not feeling. Hell represents the distance between us, see what I mean?
Now this is very important, I would not give a hoot about hell or Christianity’s one way or die dogma if we were not in such a dire need to come together. Religion in general put us all at a distance, but these aspects of the Christian religion are two of the biggest as far as I can tell, that is, the issues of the morbid thinking of hell and that Christian belief sets us up in a tyrannical scenario. Of course there is the Taliban, and they are just as bad, but I can’t talk to them because they’re hiding in bunkers, so you’re it for now.J
Beyond all this, Christianity is either back 2000 years in the bible, or off into the afterlife. Add to that, it believes God is going to come and do away with it all anyway, so why worry about it. It says we are all lost and can not do anything without god, so they sit and wait for God to show.
So, would all of us agreeing that the Christian belief is the truth solve this need of cooperative thinking? Maybe, but there would be a danger of it causing us to just wait on god, and we only have a 100 years, so say the scientists. Bottom line, we don’t have time for ideological differences, either we get rid of them, or find some way to put them aside and get busy with the task of saving our butts. I am not waiting for them to be put aside, because as long they are there, they will dominate the dynamics of our relationships. Right now, you are over there and I am over here, and there is no coming together.