Who created Hell? (17 Viewers)

[Martin]

Look, it's 700 AD, right? And you're a prophet, so that means you have a one piece sarong and sandals. God placed all the prophets are random places on the earth, which means you could end up on a deserted island. So in order to get to where you need to go to deliver your message, you have to endure all the pitfalls of your journey, and since there aren't any trains, buses, planes, cars, you're doing this on foot or riding an animal. There isn't any police, so there are roving bands of robbers, wild animals, harsh climate, dehydration, foot sores, it's not picnic taking that trip. And what if you don't make it? Part of god's message is lost forever.

Btw I find it very disconcerting that we don't have all the prophets yet and we're trying to live on the messages that were delivered so far. That means there's a very real chance that there's a message that we're supposed to get that could restrict or contradict something we already know, which would mean that we're living our lives contrary to the will of god.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Zé Tahir]

Look, it's 700 AD, right? And you're a prophet, so that means you have a one piece sarong and sandals. God placed all the prophets are random places on the earth, which means you could end up on a deserted island. So in order to get to where you need to go to deliver your message, you have to endure all the pitfalls of your journey, and since there aren't any trains, buses, planes, cars, you're doing this on foot or riding an animal. There isn't any police, so there are roving bands of robbers, wild animals, harsh climate, dehydration, foot sores, it's not picnic taking that trip. And what if you don't make it? Part of god's message is lost forever.

I didn't say it was random. I just said that it made sense that every place on earth was given Gods message. Second of all, prophets aren't chosen at random either. They're special so they're picked by God for a reason. Just like an employer only picks the most qualified and not just anyone off the street. Moreover, that person you're referring to couldn't have just been placed on an deserted island. He was born in Arabia because that was the most backward part of the world. The transformation of the place stood as a testimony to what happens when you accept Islam.

Btw I find it very disconcerting that we don't have all the prophets yet and we're trying to live on the messages that were delivered so far. That means there's a very real chance that there's a message that we're supposed to get that could restrict or contradict something we already know, which would mean that we're living our lives contrary to the will of god.

I said that they all already came.

 

[Enron]

Martin. You haven't read either the Bible or the Koran? Dude you've got to read them before you dis or believe them. Otherwise you can only argue from a hypothetical perspective. I'm going to retreive my copy of the Koran tomorrow so I can address Tahir.

 

[Enron]

Also I noticed how no one cared to reply to my perspective of hell in the Bible. Isn't that what this thread is all about? The existence of Hell?

 

[HelterSkelter]

I think we need to get Tifoso Lou in here for that

 

[Enron]

I know. I'm way too theological for this crowd.

 

[sallyinzaghi]

Miiii amicoooooo

Martin, you're saying God doesn't uphold human rights because he tortures and the Geneva convention doesn't allow that so God is evil. Fair enough, but I think that's a rather unfair conclusion because not all (or most) humans agree on the whole torture thing anyway. That's comparing God to europeans. If you compared God and asians in terms of torture we'd probably be on the same page

 

[Enron]

If Martin would take a look at the OT. He would realize God is an angry sonofabitch. Jesus, Mohamed and the other prophs are the Nice Guy Eddies in this movie.

 

[Martin]

Martin. You haven't read either the Bible or the Koran? Dude you've got to read them before you dis or believe them. Otherwise you can only argue from a hypothetical perspective. I'm going to retreive my copy of the Koran tomorrow so I can address Tahir.

Also I noticed how no one cared to reply to my perspective of hell in the Bible. Isn't that what this thread is all about? The existence of Hell?

E, I think the vast majority of people who consider themselves "Christians" haven't read the bible. It's not a prerequisite and frankly noone cares if you did or didn't, I went to Catholic church until I was 14, did all the rituals and everything, and noone ever quizzed me on this. Christians don't care if you've read the bible, because the discussion isn't about the bible anyway. And frankly it's immaterial, because Christianity isn't based on a literal reading of the bible anyway, theologians will argue that the bible "isn't meant" to be read literally, you have to interpret it. So who says how to interpret, where's the Bible Handbook? In other words, read the bible, but you can't argue it because people don't think it should be taken at face value. So what's the point?

That's why it doesn't even matter if hell is mentioned in the bible, because as long as you go to church or a religious school where they teach this doctrine, you will learn that there is heaven and hell and noone is going to hold these priests to the bible or accuse them of twisting facts. They are the authority.

As for the Koran, from what I hear the same holds. What's more, Muslims will often say in their favor that you can't read the Koran in English and take what it says literally, because it's been mistranslated. Same scheme again, it has to be "understood", not merely read. And I'm ill equipped to read it in Arabic, so I don't even pass the first condition.

 

[Martin]

Miiii amicoooooo

Martin, you're saying God doesn't uphold human rights because he tortures and the Geneva convention doesn't allow that so God is evil. Fair enough, but I think that's a rather unfair conclusion because not all (or most) humans agree on the whole torture thing anyway. That's comparing God to europeans. If you compared God and asians in terms of torture we'd probably be on the same page

Yeah, I know. I'm trying to see the good in humans (my side).

 

[Lawnchair Bes]

Anyone care to reflect on my damn post?

isn't that what liberalism is all about and isn't it why liberalism is so great and because people can be moral without relying solely on fear is why Holland has been a success


but yeah, these "moral" people will never understand it

 

[Martin]

Here's something about Hell that's always been nagging me. While we humans have a whole spectrum of moral behavior, heaven and hell is a binary system. You get one or the other. There are two major problems with this.

1) All you have to do is..
Someone described human life as a test. If you pass the test, you go to heaven. But that means there is a certain threshold. If you are *this* moral, you go to heaven. If you're more moral than that, it changes nothing. So why bother? Why not just do the bare minimum and enjoy the pleasures of immorality beyond that? Maybe I don't kill anyone in my life, but I bet I can get away with tax fraud and insurance scams, and that's not enough to send me to hell. What's more, god approves, he still thinks I belong in heaven.

2) There's no hope for you
If you know you're going to hell anyway, there's no reason to even try. Suppose you killed some people. Okay, you're definitely going to hell. Now you could try to turn your life around and live a good life despite your past, but you don't get any credit for that, you're doomed. So if that's how it is, why not be Stalin and be the absolute worst person you can ever be? Because see, the punishment is gonna be the same anyway. There is no "each according to his sins..." in hell, everyone gets the same treatment. So why should I have to suffer as much as Stalin if my crimes are nothing compared to his? I might as well get my money's worth.

 

[Zé Tahir]

E, I think the vast majority of people who consider themselves "Christians" haven't read the bible. It's not a prerequisite and frankly noone cares if you did or didn't, I went to Catholic church until I was 14, did all the rituals and everything, and noone ever quizzed me on this. Christians don't care if you've read the bible, because the discussion isn't about the bible anyway. And frankly it's immaterial, because Christianity isn't based on a literal reading of the bible anyway, theologians will argue that the bible "isn't meant" to be read literally, you have to interpret it. So who says how to interpret, where's the Bible Handbook? In other words, read the bible, but you can't argue it because people don't think it should be taken at face value. So what's the point?

That's why it doesn't even matter if hell is mentioned in the bible, because as long as you go to church or a religious school where they teach this doctrine, you will learn that there is heaven and hell and noone is going to hold these priests to the bible or accuse them of twisting facts. They are the authority.

As for the Koran, from what I hear the same holds.

Where do you hear this? The Qu'ran is Islam. To us that is the word of God revealed to Prophet Muhammad by angel Gabriel. Islam has three fundamental parts to it:

1. The Qur'an - the word of God
2. Hadith - The sayings of the Holy Prophet
3. Sunna - the practices of the Holy Prophet

What's more, Muslims will often say in their favor that you can't read the Koran in English and take what it says literally, because it's been mistranslated. Same scheme again, it has to be "understood", not merely read. And I'm ill equipped to read it in Arabic, so I don't even pass the first condition

I don't know what type of Muslims you've met but that statement up there is ridiculous. If Islam is meant for the entire world then how can one expect people who don't speak Arabic to understand it? There's a reason why it's translated into different languages. Don't let them fool you, go ahead and read the Qur'an in what ever language you feel most comfortable in and then we'll talk.

 

[Osman]

Indeed, our local mosque hands out Quran's in Swedish for those who want.

 

[Martin]

I don't know what type of Muslims you've met but that statement up there is ridiculous. If Islam is meant for the entire world then how can one expect people who don't speak Arabic to understand it? There's a reason why it's translated into different languages. Don't let them fool you, go ahead and read the Qur'an in what ever language you feel most comfortable in and then we'll talk.

Are you saying that I could take the Koran, find some sentence that sounds ridiculous and you'd defend it without saying I haven't understood it right or the translation is wrong?

 

[Seven]

Are you saying that I could take the Koran, find some sentence that sounds ridiculous and you'd defend it without saying I haven't understood it right or the translation is wrong?

For what it's worth: I think no book that was written so many years ago should be taken literally today. I know muslims do, but then that's just wrong.

 

[Zé Tahir]

Are you saying that I could take the Koran, find some sentence that sounds ridiculous and you'd defend it without saying I haven't understood it right or the translation is wrong?

How can I blame the translation? I can say that you haven't look at the Qur'an at its entirety. The Qur'an wasn't written in chronological order so if you find something on one part it's better understood if you read other parts of it.

But if you read it in its entirety and present me with something that 'sounds ridiculous' and if I can't explain it then I'll give up

 

[rounder]

Oh I think it might be up for discussion.
Hope you don't mind me reorganizing the quotes.
Here goes:

Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of ETERNAL FIRE.

-Dude are you kidding me? This doesn't refer to hell at all. In fact, it is a direct reference to the wrath of god, which in this case is brought from the heaven by angels, not from the depths of hell by devils. Stay out of the OT as much as you can with this subject. God does his own dirty work and hands out direct smiting.


"And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched" (Mark 9:45)

- Doing bad things will lead to a bad end.

In a story Jesus tells, the man who is carried away into hell cries: ". . .I am tormented in this FLAME." Luke 16:24

- This is one is quite obvious.

Here is the entire quote:

"And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame." KJ

-It is obviously a cry for mercy to Jesus, by someone feeling bad about something they have done. In the King James version, hell is not mentioned.

Jesus says: "And shall cast them into a FURNACE OF FIRE: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." Matthew 13:42

-Alone this seems as if it is a direct mention of hell, but when read in context to the previous and following paragraphs.

Mat 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
Mat 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Mat 13:43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.(KJ)

-It basically states that angels will come down and cleanse the earth of evil. Whether or not this is a direct reference to hell is up for debate.

Jesus says: "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting EVERLASTING FIRE, prepared for the devil and his angels: . . ." [Note: hell was never originally prepared for people. However, because we have broken God's laws, God's justice now demands it.] Matthew 25:41

- The 25th chapter of Matthew is about helping those who need it. Helping someone who is sick, poor, or imprisoned. Again it doesn't directly call out hell, but it does hint at a punishment if one fails to lead the righteous life. Which would apparently be dealt out by angels and/or devils. Because of its placement in the context of the chapter it is difficult to say whether or not the everlasting fire is literal or a figurative shunning by society.

Jesus says in Matthew 5:22 "But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of HELL FIRE.

-This one is easy. I wrote a paper on this once. This part of Matthew reflects Jesus's teachings on anger. He basically says that being angry at someone without cause is just as bad as killing them. Its a teaching that anger leads down a bad road. Again, I don't think the mention of hell fire is to be take literal.
Jesus says in Matthew 18:8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast [them] from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into EVERLASTING FIRE.



-This is generally a warning of the danger of sin. Most importantly those of lust and as it is referred to earlier in the chapter, mocking the followers of Christ.


Revelation 20:15 says, " And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the LAKE OF FIRE.

- Basically says that everyone not "down" goes to hell. I'll concede this one, but I don't like to considering Revelation was written much later in history. The way I view Revelation is as a construct of man warning people to watch out for those who would manipulate them into following a "false" version of Christianity. To me it warns more of fundamentalism than it does the end of the world. But to each his own.


Revelation 14:10 says: "and he shall be tormented with FIRE and BRIMSTONE in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:"

- We should include the entire quote. When you pick and choose you aren't properly analyzing the context of the literature.

" The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:"(KJ)

-Again we get a reference to "fire and brimstone" which as we know generally comes from God. In addition, there is a mention of holy angels being present along with the Lamb of God (Jesus). Last time I checked Jesus and the angels were not the keepers of hell. Nor the proprietors of torment.


Revelation 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the LAKE which burneth with FIRE and BRMISTONE: which is the second death.

-Basically states that evil people and non-believer will be ressurected with everyone else but will end up in a burning lake which well end in there second death. It's very figurative. Hell is supposed to be a place of everlasting torment/punishment. This passage mentions a second death. In hell there is no death. The burning lake could represent many things, one of them being that the continuance of old habits will lead to death and the loss of a second chance.

A note on Revelation:
- The words Fire and Brimstone are used many times throughout the Bible, mostly in the NT and the Book of Revelation
- In some cases the f and b comes from the nostrils of horses, which is hardly the fire of hell.
- Revelation is very figurative book of the bible considering we "drink from a cup of indignation" and the many references to Jesus as the Lamb of God, the great city referring to women, and the waters referring to peoples the world.
- This use of figurative language suggests that revelation is not a literal piece, consistency of all things tells us that the Lake of Fire is not to be taken literally.
-When you think of f and b, they aren't used to preserve or punish but to destroy. An example is the story of Soddom and Gomorra.
- The point I am getting at is much of the Bible is written in a figurative tongue. Therefore it is not possible to take a "literal hell" away from it's reading without taking away other literal points, such as chopping one's foot off or tearing away your eyes when you have a dirty thought.

Hope this was helpful. Good luck reading.
-

If I got a book of literature, any book, I can easilly manipulate the words in such a fashion that could ultimately suggest the opposite of its intended meaning. What you have done here Enron is simply convince yourself that there is no hell; then you begin to almost elude the clear indications that hell exists.


I will give you one quote form the above and show you what I mean.


Jesus says in Matthew 5:22 "But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of HELL FIRE.

Look at the last sentence. What could Hell Fire possibly mean other than hell itself? Look at the words here, "judgement, council, hell, fire". Perhaps you are right though, to each his own.

 

[Zlatan]

Now religion suggests that life is a test, if you pass, you go to heaven, if you fail, you go to hell.

Jail and Hell are not evil, they are simply the negative destinies we achieve after faiiling the test.

Now, to conduct a successful test. all of the subject being tested should take the test under the same conditions, right? For example, in college, you'd be pretty pissed if other students had 60 minutes to do a test and you'd have only 25 to do the same test? That wouldn't be pretty fair, would it?

In the same manner, you cant expect people who live in incredibly different conditions to behave the same. It's not the same if a man steals so he can afford a new car or if he steals to buy food for his kids, etc, etc.

Also, isn't God supposed to be omnipotent? If so, than this test, life, free will is completely unnecessary, God should already know how we'll do the test. And, yes, I know, you'll mention free will and everything, but isn't the meaning of omnipotent that He "knows all, sees all, hears all"? If so, than regardless of our free will to make choices, He already knows what that choice will be or what our free will will be.

God isn't telling us " ok, live you're life, and when you are done, I will burn you in hell." He is giving us free will to decide for ourselves. He didn't make us into sheeps that will automatically obey him. We have the choice, it is in our hands, if we fail to comply, we face our destiny that we brought to ourselves because of our immoral lives.

Wow, great choice there. "Sure you can decide not to believe in God, but if you don't you'll burn in Hell".



Now, a few points unrelated to the above quotes. If for example a guy walking down the street sees a beautiful girl walking, and thinks "Man, I'd really like to kidnap her, rape her a and torture him for a few days", and means it seriously, not as a joke or a passing thought that anyone can have, but he's really prepared to do it, but then he doesn't because he's afraid of getting caught and going to jail, would you say he's a moral person? I wouldn't.

Now, you say that religion teaches morals by making people abide by the rules. But, IMO, that's not real morals, that's a fear of retribution, of punishment, same as in the example above, not real morals.

IMO, real morals can only exist in a state of complete lawlessness, where man is free to do what he wants how he wants, without any fear of punishment, by the state or by God. Only then can you see who is truly moral, and who acts morally without any outside influence, who doesn't kill, rape, steal even if he can.

Now, I'm not saying that would be a good society or that it's the way things should be, I'm only saying that only in these conditions can you really observe true morals.


2nd point. What about the people, nations, who did not know about the Bible, Qur'an, for example North American native, who had no exposure to today religions? They believed in multiple Gods and by todays understandings they should all go to Hell, even if they had no knowledge about today's religions.

Also, now we believe that the religions of ancient civilizations were wrong, the ancient Egyptians, the Maya, etc, etc. But who's to say that todays religions are the "correct" ones and that in 2000 years people won't look at them as we look at the religions before us, as false, ridiculous, etc?

Also, what about babies that die, being completely innocent creatures they go straight to heaven. Doesn't that give them an "unfair advantage"? Does it mean mothers should kill their babies at birth so they can go to hell? Doesn't mean it's unjust to other people who survived their childhood, because those babies passed the test without ever taking it? isnt that called cheating?


Enough from me for now.