Will Atheists & Polyheists burn in Hell according to Bible?

[jonathan180iq]

Scratching head....not sure I fully understand your question Jonathan. Are you asking what gave the religion the right to tell people what to think? If that is the question, then I have no answer. Personally, I don't feel children should be subjected to religion until they have the capacity for abstract thought and can decide what they beleive for themselves.

The upstart is the off-shoot, it is the new idea which evolved from the parent.
The parent is the original, which spawned the off-shoot.

The birth of an off-shoot does not necessarily validate its legitimacy, hence the question of why off-shoots are allowed to scold the parent.

 

[Unification]

I agree to a point, but my point is that the Tanakh has been studied by Jewish scholars for at least 2,000 - 2,500 years. I don't know that any of the church fathers ever took rabbinic studies into account when writing on Christian theology, which didn't even start until (and I'm being generous) the 4th century CE.Yet the "Old Testament" is quoted today with reckless abandon by people with no roots in its traditions.

Your point would be correct then. One subjective religion will never be understood by another's subjective religion and vice versa. The theology and doctrine will always differ, creating divide and arguments. Yet all would have the same God and same scriptures, a brain, a mind, a heart, a spirit, being conscious, bones, a body, eyes, ears, a nose, blood, all of the same components within the brain and body, same universe, and earth to live on, same necessities for life. Wherein would the ultimate truth lie then objectively?

 

[Jainarayan]

Who am I to say they are wrong?

They are wrong, imo, when they try to legislate their morality and beliefs and impose them on the rest of us. That's when they go too far.

 

[jeager106]

Indeed it was Milton and Dante that gave us the nightmarish images of hell in the first place.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Indeed it was Milton and Dante that gave us the nightmarish images of hell in the first place.

Yeah... I don't know about that.

Even without fanciful depictions, the "punishment of eternal fire" seems pretty bad...

Bible Verses About Hell - Scripture Verses Describing Hell

 

[jeager106]

Yeah... I don't know about that.

Even without fanciful depictions, the "punishment of eternal fire" seems pretty bad...

Bible Verses About Hell - Scripture Verses Describing Hell

Yes it does when one reads the bible without proper understanding.
What Dante did in his painting was give mankind an image that solidified in a picture that was objective. Previously people that
read the bible about hellfire and everlasting torment had a subjective mental image of hell.
This idea that the writen word is subjective to the reader is established fact. We all see things a little differently when we read something
even the exact same something.
Another reason I belief that one cannot get the true meaning from just reading the bible.
The book is huge and covers so many topics that study is a requirement.
Like reading a book on physics. One cannot just read a text book on physics and become a scientist. It requires
study and most often a study guided by a teacher.
Groups that came together to study the bible have sorted out the imagry, parable, metaphore and have created new religions based
one the best translations, and a lot of honest digging to get at the real meaning.

 

[JoStories]

The upstart is the off-shoot, it is the new idea which evolved from the parent.
The parent is the original, which spawned the off-shoot.

The birth of an off-shoot does not necessarily validate its legitimacy, hence the question of why off-shoots are allowed to scold the parent.

Thank you. I was just not getting that...brain cramp I guess. I guess I would say that, just like children which think their parents know nothing, so too, do off shoots think their version is the 'more correct' one. New ideas out pacing the old, know what I mean? Does that make it right? Of course not but it does happen all the time. Consider the posters here who,are adamant at times that this view is the only one that is correct.

 

[JoStories]

They are wrong, imo, when they try to legislate their morality and beliefs and impose them on the rest of us. That's when they go too far.

How do you see them legislating their morality or beliefs on us? Are you speaking of the debacle in Indiana with gay rights? Or perhaps the protests over religious icons in state parks? Because In all of those cases, I think they are incredibly wrong. What do you think can be done, however, when you have a right wing, strongly tea partiest republican government? I wish it were not so but as all as people continue to elect these people, we poor schmucks have to live with their idiocy.

 

[Jainarayan]

How do you see them legislating their morality or beliefs on us? Are you speaking of the debacle in Indiana with gay rights? Or perhaps the protests over religious icons in state parks? Because In all of those cases, I think they are incredibly wrong. What do you think can be done, however, when you have a right wing, strongly tea partiest republican government? I wish it were not so but as all as people continue to elect these people, we poor schmucks have to live with their idiocy.

Yes, all of that, and more. California's Prop 8, the failed (thank gods) FMA, I wish the American people would wise up, stop being fat, dumb and happy, and boot these nimrods out of office. I'm not some tree-hugging (metaphorically no, literally yes... nevermind ) bleeding-heart liberal, mind you. I have to be thankful for some big steps... overturn of DOMA and DADT, and the IRS recognizing same sex marriage in states that do.

 

[Unification]

Yes it does when one reads the bible without proper understanding.
What Dante did in his painting was give mankind an image that solidified in a picture that was objective. Previously people that
read the bible about hellfire and everlasting torment had a subjective mental image of hell.
This idea that the writen word is subjective to the reader is established fact. We all see things a little differently when we read something
even the exact same something.
Another reason I belief that one cannot get the true meaning from just reading the bible.
The book is huge and covers so many topics that study is a requirement.
Like reading a book on physics. One cannot just read a text book on physics and become a scientist. It requires
study and most often a study guided by a teacher.
Groups that came together to study the bible have sorted out the imagry, parable, metaphore and have created new religions based
one the best translations, and a lot of honest digging to get at the real meaning.

The true meaning would be objective for all of mankind.

 

[JoStories]

Yes, all of that, and more. California's Prop 8, the failed (thank gods) FMA, I wish the American people would wise up, stop being fat, dumb and happy, and boot these nimrods out of office. I'm not some tree-hugging (metaphorically no, literally yes... nevermind ) bleeding-heart liberal, mind you. I have to be thankful for some big steps... overturn of DOMA and DADT, and the IRS recognizing same sex marriage in states that do.

Well, let's be brutally honest thorb, there is no way we can do that as long as big brother is running congress. It's not the nimrods, though is very fitting to describe them, but rather medicine (healthcare cost), and pharmaceutical companies and insurance, oil, and of course, people like the shrub (forgive me, ex president Bush) wanting us to be in war. We little people have no chance while those idiots are running the country.

 

[jeager106]

The true meaning would be objective for all of mankind.

I don't believe so. Going back to more scientific things, like physics, the laws of physicts are universal and pretty much inviolate.
If one were to really study the bible, look for the best translations, study with descernment, then one would find universal truths
that could be inviolate. That was a strong statement and quite arguable and I know it.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Groups that came together to study the bible have sorted out the imagry, parable, metaphore and have created new religions based
one the best translations, and a lot of honest digging to get at the real meaning.

That would give an explanation for the subjective reality of all denominations - but what of the objective reality?
Aside from the subjective reading and convicted beliefs of the reader, or any religious material really, where is the objective truth to any of it?

I know this isn't exactly on the topic of Hell, but let's just get down to it.

Other than subjective explanations, what's the truth about Hell? It's obvious that even among the believers in this thread that there isn't a general consensus of what it actually means.
Jewish purists lean back on the mistranslated idea of 'Sheol'. Christians seems split between literal torture and damnation for eternity vs. a long sleep in the absence of god... Atheists obviously would just view death for what it is.... So which is it? There's only one objective reality, regardless of all the subjectivity running around....

Which is it?

 

[JoStories]

I don't believe so. Going back to more scientific things, like physics, the laws of physicts are universal and pretty much inviolate.
If one were to really study the bible, look for the best translations, study with descernment, then one would find universal truths
that could be inviolate. That was a strong statement and quite arguable and I know it.

True but one can also study the Vedas, the teaching of The Buddha, blavatsky's writing, the Tanakh, and more to get those universal truths, don't you think? IMO, the bible is not the only source of universal truths.

 

[Unification]

That would give an explanation for the subjective reality of all denominations - but what of the objective reality?
Aside from the subjective reading and convicted beliefs of the reader, or any religious material really, where is the objective truth to any of it?

I know this isn't exactly on the topic of Hell, but let's just get down to it.

Other than subjective explanations, what's the truth about Hell? It's obvious that even among the believers in this thread that there isn't a general consensus of what it actually means.
Jewish purists lean back on the mistranslated idea of 'Sheol'. Christians seems split between literal torture and damnation for eternity vs. a long sleep in the absence of god... Atheists obviously would just view death for what it is.... So which is it? There's only one objective reality, regardless of all the subjectivity running around....

Which is it?

What would make most objective and rational and spiritual sense is that we all have a devil(reptilian brain)

We all have experienced a conscious state of hell in the mind.

We all live on literal Earth in decaying bodies.

The gift of spirit/consciousness would be eternal. The physical body that one resides in dies. Since all we know is being conscious, according to us we are immortal since that's all we've known, there is no proof of anything else.

If the spirit/consciousness lives eternally, then it has to go somewhere. In another body, back to Earth.

Revolving cycle.

Perhaps the cycle is broken if one arrives at the ultimate truth. Perhaps since everything in the universe/nature is balanced, then the gift of life is eternal and always will be on Earth. If one lives like an animal in this life they will be a literal animal in the next. If one hates homosexuals in this life, perhaps they'll be one themselves in the next. Evolution and intelligent design both happened and they keep revolving in balanced circles. What is sown to our spirits in this life will determine the next set of circumstances of the next life. Death and birth are the same things. Over and over and over and over.

One shouldn't live their lives ignorant to the fact that they didn't have the freewill to create themselves, the circumstances they've been placed in, the ability that they have, or the knowledge they possess while another is in much poorer and has worse circumstances. This wasn't freewill or ones choice, or what one has earned themselves. An ignorant and vain, selfish Hollywood star could be the polar opposite in their next life.

Everything will always be balanced, equal, and just. Just as God is.

 

[JoStories]

That would give an explanation for the subjective reality of all denominations - but what of the objective reality?
Aside from the subjective reading and convicted beliefs of the reader, or any religious material really, where is the objective truth to any of it?

I know this isn't exactly on the topic of Hell, but let's just get down to it.

Other than subjective explanations, what's the truth about Hell? It's obvious that even among the believers in this thread that there isn't a general consensus of what it actually means.
Jewish purists lean back on the mistranslated idea of 'Sheol'. Christians seems split between literal torture and damnation for eternity vs. a long sleep in the absence of god... Atheists obviously would just view death for what it is.... So which is it? There's only one objective reality, regardless of all the subjectivity running around....

Which is it?

I don't think there is an answer to that. First of all, the concept of hell is never going to be objective as it's entirely allegorical. One can believe whatever one might like but they cannot prove it's validity to you. How does one prove a belief? Example; Santa Claus is delivering gifts each Christmas Eve. Millions if not billions of kids believe that but can anyone prove it? I guess the real question, at least for me, is why there is no real concensus on wha hell is exactly. And I don't think there will ever be true concensus.

 

[Unification]

I don't think there is an answer to that. First of all, the concept of hell is never going to be objective as it's entirely allegorical. One can believe whatever one might like but they cannot prove it's validity to you. How does one prove a belief? Example; Santa Claus is delivering gifts each Christmas Eve. Millions if not billions of kids believe that but can anyone prove it? I guess the real question, at least for me, is why there is no real concensus on wha hell is exactly. And I don't think there will ever be true concensus.

A good place to start is knowing what we all have in common, all of mankind.
That God would be no respector of persons and we all would be one and extensions of one another. A piece to the ultimate puzzle of truth would be in all religions. We all are conscious/alive. We all have a brain, 12 cranial nerves, an eastern and Western Hemisphere of the brain, bones, blood, a body we reside in that we didn't choose ourselves, all the other parts of the brain/mind, a heart, eyes, ears, a nose, DNA, the same earth, the same nature and universe, the same everything in order to live, etc. Rather than argue and fight and kill and destroy over the silliest and most meaningless subjective things, we can love peaceably and spread truth and have open minds.

 

[Unification]

True but one can also study the Vedas, the teaching of The Buddha, blavatsky's writing, the Tanakh, and more to get those universal truths, don't you think? IMO, the bible is not the only source of universal truths.

It's beautiful seeing all parts of every different religion in the bible, from the Christian, to Judaism, to Islam, to Buddism, to science, to philosophy, to nature, to universe, to them all. Also in most other religious texts. Same morals and meanings behind them all. Sorry if I've left some out, there are hundreds of thousands.

 

[jeager106]

That would give an explanation for the subjective reality of all denominations - but what of the objective reality?
Aside from the subjective reading and convicted beliefs of the reader, or any religious material really, where is the objective truth to any of it?

I know this isn't exactly on the topic of Hell, but let's just get down to it.

Other than subjective explanations, what's the truth about Hell? It's obvious that even among the believers in this thread that there isn't a general consensus of what it actually means.
Jewish purists lean back on the mistranslated idea of 'Sheol'. Christians seems split between literal torture and damnation for eternity vs. a long sleep in the absence of god... Atheists obviously would just view death for what it is.... So which is it? There's only one objective reality, regardless of all the subjectivity running around....

Which is it?

Death is death. Nothingness. The very long dirt nap.
This brings up resurrection. A whole 'nuther can of spaghetti.
I can only explain what is subjective, which of course is subjective to none other than the miserable me!
I CHOOSE to believe in what makes sense to me. This after long years of study, connecting the dots, as it were, finding things ongruent in scripture.
Subjective also. That I believe there is a Power greater than man in this universe. "God" works as well as anything.
That the dead will one day be brought back to life here on earth and have an opportunity to embrace whatever it is that God might be and live
on this earth, repairing the damage, make of this planet and paradise.
NONE of that can be objectivly explained.
No, of course not.
Faith. It's all I have and I love my faith.
I CHOOSE to believe that one day (soon I hope) God's plan will take action.
I'd hate to think mankind will go on murdering one another till the sun goes dark.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Not eeeeven a good try. I don't interpret the Eddas as they suit me, as Christians do with the Bible. They interpret and twist a religious text. The Eddas and Sagas are not directives or religious texts. They are tales and stories of what is believed to have occurred in the past. I can practice Ásatrú without ever having read the Eddas or Sagas. I can practice Ásatrú simply for what it is, faithfulness to the Aesir, and I can learn about the Aesir from children's story books.

I was referring to your ridiculous claim of cultural appropriation, paisan.