Here’s a question for anyone who believes in the existence of HELL:

[Dubious]

(Like I keep saying, it is time for a new and more logical “material/spiritual” paradigm to replace the old one.)

Whatever that would be or become, if it again submits to some form of transcendentalism or afterlife, we're right back to square one.

You’re not understanding this properly, Dubious.

The new paradigm doesn’t need to be true.

It just needs to be more logical (more plausible) than the nonsense we’ve been dealing with over the last few millennia.

A couple of examples of “old paradigm” nonsense:

1. The belief in the Heaven and Hell idiocy I’ve been addressing in this thread.

2. The belief that the universe “is a product of chance” idiocy held by hardcore materialists.

We can do better.
_______

I don't believe I'm as misunderstanding as you think. For example I agree that the old belief in heaven and hell or Jesus having to die for out sins is pure garbage. Someone having to die for our sins I think is an especially reprehensible doctrine.

Contrary to the above, the idea that the universe is a product of chance is not so crazy. Heaven/Hell is obviously a human invention but can any person know for certain that the universe isn't a product of a chance collision of events? We also can't discount the possibility of it existing as just another infinitesimal within a multiverse manifold.

That you equate hard core materialists under the heading of idiocy makes no sense to me. One doesn't have to be hard core about it but to mostly exclude it from any future paradigm will cause any such newly designed representation to be foreshortened rather quickly.

Nihilism at this juncture may become its own paradigm, one we are likely to live with for a long time before the human psyche manages to erect new perspectives guiding consciousness to a more advanced, meaning inclusive, Weltanschauung.

But you're right when you say it doesn't have to be true and is not likely to be no matter how brilliantly it may have arranged itself to find a home in our cranium. It only has to serve as a temporary psychological truth whose value will be retained until it starts to erode diminishing its viability.

So, am I still not understanding this properly?

[seeds]

I don't believe I'm as misunderstanding as you think. For example I agree that the old belief in heaven and hell or Jesus having to die for out sins is pure garbage. Someone having to die for our sins I think is an especially reprehensible doctrine.

Well, perhaps not “pure” garbage, because from the perspective of Buddhist doctrines, until recently, it (the religion of Christianity) certainly has acted as a pretty stable “raft” that has carried a lot of humans across the waters of earthly life.

Contrary to the above, the idea that the universe is a product of chance is not so crazy. Heaven/Hell is obviously a human invention but can any person know for certain that the universe isn't a product of a chance collision of events?

I dare not reproduce them here, but if you have the time and patience, then please read my arguments against chance in my “What is Gravity” thread, beginning with the post that contains the Earth/Sun picture – viewtopic.php?f=12&t=23943&start=45#p357784

Now, of course, we’re all just speculating here, and I am certainly not suggesting that I can’t be wrong, but if you can provide me with some truly logical (plausible, well thought-out) counter arguments to what I proposed in the two conjoined posts in that other thread, then I’m listening.

We also can't discount the possibility of it existing as just another infinitesimal within a multiverse manifold.

You mean the way that you seem to vehemently discount the possibility of a transcendent context of reality or an afterlife?

Furthermore, in regards to the multiverse theory, I have yet to hear anyone come up with a description of what a sunless, planetless, lifeless universe would even be, or why it exists, or why it should even be called a “universe” in the first place.

Care to give it a shot?

Clearly, neither the chance hypothesis nor the intelligence hypothesis can be proven or disproven by anyone, hence the need for a new paradigm where both can live together in a relative state of peace.

That you equate hard core materialists under the heading of idiocy makes no sense to me.

I was proposing that the “chance hypothesis” was idiotic, not the materialists themselves. You know; hate the sin, but love the sinner.

One doesn't have to be hard core about it but to mostly exclude it from any future paradigm will cause any such newly designed representation to be foreshortened rather quickly.

Again, would that be in the same way you prefer to exclude transcendence from the representation?

Moreover (and ironically), the theory of God that I have been incessantly promoting for the last 50 years, fully embraces the idea (even mandates it) that humans should continue to believe that the universe could indeed be a product of chance. (I know, the guy is nuts, right? )

Nihilism at this juncture may become its own paradigm, one we are likely to live with for a long time before the human psyche manages to erect new perspectives guiding consciousness to a more advanced, meaning inclusive, Weltanschauung.

I can pretty much guarantee that almost no one, except for the aforementioned (transcendence rejecting) materialists, will be satisfied with a nihilistic Weltanschauung.

Look, I get it that any thought or mention of the possibility that a transcendent intelligence could be responsible for the creation of the universe, pins the needle on your “cringe-o-meter.”

Nevertheless, is there literally no room for any form of compromise in your world view with respect to transcendence? And if there is, then what would it require for you to be more open to such ideas?

But you're right when you say it doesn't have to be true and is not likely to be no matter how brilliantly it may have arranged itself to find a home in our cranium. It only has to serve as a temporary psychological truth whose value will be retained until it starts to erode diminishing its viability.

“...a temporary psychological truth...”

In other words, a new and temporary “raft” (paradigm) that might be able to accommodate everyone - something that will be abandoned on the shore of death.

So, am I still not understanding this properly?

No, as per your usual intelligent analysis and summation of certain issues, you nailed that last part fairly well...

...(especially where you said “you’re right” ).
_______

[Dubious]

I don't believe there's any point in continuing the conversation. We're too far apart to meet in the middle. It also seems we have misunderstood each other too many times to agree on anything the idea of transcendence being one of them. Nevertheless, it's all good; whatever one believes that makes life acceptable shouldn't be sneezed at. As you say, and I agree, it doesn't have to be true.

[gaffo]

Age, you are still writing in a way that is of no interest or value to me.

Yet here you are reading, and reply.

You have claimed that you're here to learn to communicate better -- so I'm showing courtesy by telling you why I have no interest in your volumes of nonsense, and that's why I will not be reading or responding in any detail right now.

I have said it before and it still STANDS. I KNOW 'you' better than 'you' know 'your own self'.

Anything you say only stands for you, in your noise -- which you seem to have an abundant and endless supply of. The products of your delusions are meaningless for anyone other than you.

For you to think that your distorted and noisy communication and claims would be of any significant use to anyone else, shows the severity and depth of your delusion and blindness. You don't have a clue, even about that!

If, as you say, that what I write is of "no interest or value" to you, then prove it.

I'm telling you why. Your projections are nonsense and your communication is distorted by all of your noise, so interacting with you in any significant way is not worth it. But (there is value in pointing out) you do serve as an example of such noisy potential existing in, and being used/distorted by, a human/being, which demonstrates for other humans/beings what to beware of and avoid in themselves. MANY have sight beyond yours -- there is nothing to be proven. You will have the capability of such recognition/awareness when you get tired of your noise -- and that will be apparent. Then we can have conversations without your noise disrupting the potential.

Concur, you are speaking of character, and yes one knows one's/other's character by the the fig tree.

does it bear fruit? or is it barren?

[gaffo]

it is also important to note Catholic Doctrine - (I do not know Protestent - welcome education on) - per Catholic, all persons that never heard the Word (this includes babies) go to "Limbo" - limbo eventually leads to salvation by default.

Catacizm states that those that never heard the word are not damned to hell.

and so via logic, that means the very existance of Christ damns more folks to Hell than if he never showed himself on Earth to be Chrusified.

so Christ is litterally an agent of death and damnation for more folks than if he never showed himself in the first place.

just sayin.

Yes, I have often pointed out that strange irony myself.

Indeed, it is especially obvious in the situation where Christian missionaries venture into remote jungle regions to impart the gospel to isolated tribes of humans who, after receiving the “good news,” are now subject to the potential of eternal damnation and torture.

Whereas, just prior to receiving the “good news,” their ignorance of any special rituals they needed to perform to keep them out of Hell would have gotten them off the hook.

The obvious point is that if the missionaries would have simply kept the information about Jesus a secret, then those innocent humans would have been perfectly fine with respect to the afterlife.
_______

Yep, but as you and i know we are thinking about it too much.

better to not think so hard, and just think "Hell bad, Jebus good" and carry on. ;-/.

[gaffo]

As you already KNOW I neither believe nor disbelieve ANY thing,...

Why in the world do you assume that I know (or even care) whether you believe or disbelieve anything?

But I do NOT assume absolutely any thing like this at all. I was NOT even thinking, let alone talking, about absolutely any thing like this at all.

You clearly assumed that I “already know” that you neither believe nor disbelieve anything.

What I was saying, and meaning, IS; I am just stating that I do NOT 'believe' any thing at all here, EVEN THOUGH I can SEE that you are waiting for a hell-'believing' human being. I was just making it CLEAR to you, and the readers, that I am NOT a hell-'believing' ANY thing. That was all I was saying, and meaning, by that part of my response.

[......]

By the way, to me, 'hell' is a PROVABLE FACT, and NOT just some thing, which is believed to be true.

As was fully expected, you are going to contort the meanings of your statements and attempt to draw me into another one of your black holes of endless labyrinthian word mazes and never actually provide any useful information.

I knew I was going to regret this.

why bother, its probably an highly functional AI Russian bot anyhow.

[gaffo]

BTW, i'd welcome Emanual Can's views on the original posit of this thread.

from his posts here i know he is a Christian (prob Canadian - though his location is an official secret - like acting President Cheney's for 8 yrs were, back in the day - seems like only yesterday), and a person of good conscience.

EC where are you when you need you?

I welcome your views Sir.

[gaffo]

Technical remarks: 1. Catholics do not believe dogmatically in limbo (or rather: the magisterium of the Catholic Church does not teach, that such a place exists. Relevant document: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congr ... ts_en.html)

Atheist born to burn here, and too lazy to check your link, but affirm you know more about Catholism than me.

if you are willing Sir, can you sum up your link in a post of a paragraph or less? - i.e. how Catholics do not affirm Limbo, per your Church's theology.

i really would appreciate it.

as i said prior, i do value learning, including more of your Faith's official dogma, but i'm too lazy to go read your link.

ya i know, lazy is one of the Seven, but i know i fail in that one (and prob at least 2 others of the Seven)...........

i would welcome a summation of the link you provided for me here, so i may learn something of your Faith.

otherwise - being lazy and not checking your link - i will have learned nothing ;-(.

[gaffo]

I just noted you only posted 8 posts. so are new here.

Welcome to the Forum Sir!

[gaffo]

The bottom line is that I am merely asking the believers in hell, that if they had the opportunity to do what Jesus supposedly did – sacrifice their life out of love and for the redemption of another soul from the torture of hell, would they do it?

for accuracy here, your above is not correct, for Jesus went to Hell for 3 days! - and He did not go there for any sins He committed (Jesus never committed a sin) - to save those in Hell, to be granted Heaven (i.e. to preach to Gospel to the dead-damned those 3 days.

Jesus LEFT Hell on the 3rd day to rejoin the Father in Heaven!!!!!!!!!!!! - no others in Hell today have that option to leave Hell, even if they accept Jessu as their personal savior!

so yes Jesus "died for our sins" - i.e. for the sins we comited here on Earth. But He did not die via his sins to go to Hell. He went to Hell sinless to save the dead sinners!!!!!!!!!!!! (but only if you died before Christ's life on Earth) - elsewise, like me as an Athiest in this life, after finding i was wrong and there is a God and that God is YHWH, and the Jews are wrong and the Father had a Son, and that Son is Jesus and not Sam/etc - when i repent from Hell and take God into my heart.........i still burn forever in Hell.

YHWH/and Son - make a frown face, maybe feel bad for a minute or two, then carry on.................

while i continue to burn forever in Hell for being born 2000 yrs too late for Salvation from Hell via Son of God's emmisary to Hell and his proclaimation of the good news and salvation of those in Hell with hears/hearts to hear and affirm the message.

and now that i think about it, maybe Jesus' Crusifiction would have been the greater sacrifice for Jesus if he died not only for the sins of those living there at the time (and those living before his time - Peter 2), but via the greater sacrifice! one step beyond the Bible's theology.

Jesus, YHWH's son who not only gave His life for the sinner living during his time/and those before his time, but also all those that shall live after Hsi time!!!!!

willing to be Crusified and to SIT IN HELL forever - the ultimate self sacrifice - if and/or until His father decides to save His Son/and the rest of us sitting in Hell.


just sayin, Jesus's Crusifiction was only half assed, if could have been more hardcore - meaningfull.

[seeds]

The bottom line is that I am merely asking the believers in hell, that if they had the opportunity to do what Jesus supposedly did – sacrifice their life out of love and for the redemption of another soul from the torture of hell, would they do it?

for accuracy here, your above is not correct, for Jesus went to Hell for 3 days! - and He did not go there for any sins He committed (Jesus never committed a sin) - to save those in Hell, to be granted Heaven (i.e. to preach to Gospel to the dead-damned those 3 days.

Jesus LEFT Hell on the 3rd day to rejoin the Father in Heaven!!!!!!!!!!!! - no others in Hell today have that option to leave Hell, even if they accept Jessu as their personal savior!

so yes Jesus "died for our sins" - i.e. for the sins we comited here on Earth. But He did not die via his sins to go to Hell...

gaffo, even though we are discussing mythological nonsense here, it would be nice if you would pay closer attention to what is actually written.

At no time have I ever suggested or implied that Jesus died and went to Hell because he committed sins.

Where in my posts are you getting that from?

I said (or at least tried to convey the idea) that he sacrificed himself out of love, and for the express purpose of trying to keep others from having to go to Hell. Read my next post where I address the irony of that situation.

(Continued in next post)
_______

[seeds]

_______

(Continued from prior post)

[......]
The obvious point is that if the missionaries would have simply kept the information about Jesus a secret, then those innocent humans would have been perfectly fine with respect to the afterlife.

Yep, but as you and i know we are thinking about it too much.

better to not think so hard, and just think "Hell bad, Jebus good" and carry on. ;-/.

Where’s the fun in that?

I mean, how can you debunk something if you do not put in some deep and serious thinking as to why something needs debunking?

And here comes that irony I mentioned in the prior post:

Besides, how “good” can Jesus be if he is going to see to it that you experience eternal suffering in Hell if you do not let him save you from the decision that he himself has made to torture you if you do not accept his offer to save you?

It reminds me of some kind of horror movie or terrible nightmare where you would be burning in a vat of boiling oil with the devil standing over you, laughing as he stokes the flames.

And in a desperate attempt to lash out at your demon tormentor, you scratch at his face, tearing away a mask that reveals Jesus underneath, who laughs even harder.

Again, and as I tried to make vividly clear in my post to bahman - viewtopic.php?f=11&t=29689&start=60#p461791 - we're dealing in mythological nonsense here.
_______

[Age]

What a few people, here in this forum, "see" and believe as being me, supposedly, proving some thing, "others" will actually SEE is the very evidence AND proof of how it is the brain, through the belief-system, which is what fools ALL people to "see" things, which are NOT actually there/here. And, they will SEE HOW it is actually the Mind, which is what is able to, (sit back and observe, as they say,) decipher ALL-OF-THIS, and SEE and UNDERSTAND what thee actual Truth IS.




I have ALREADY EXPLAINED, somewhat, how and why EVERY one so far has forsaken a life in 'heaven' for those already in 'hell'.

More preaching to the choir Age.

Oh for goodness sake Age, let them have their believed stories...because however the the MIND may be, the space of the Self remains ever the same.

Hey now, it would be very boring if OUR stories were all the same.

But I think what will be found is that it is as near as impossible, if not impossible, for human beings to have the same story. This is due to the very fact that EVERY human being has different, individually, lived experiences, and it is obviously 'experiences', themselves, which forms the different stories that each one has, individually.

Of course there will be SOME stories which are the EXACT SAME, and this is because human beings have shared the EXACT SAME lived experiences. Further to this, it is these EXACT SAME SHARED experiences and stories, which unites EVERY one together, and shows or REVEALS the True and big picture of Life, Itself.

You've just got to accept it Age, some stories will feature heavenly stuff, and some stories will feature hell stuff.

Why would you even ASSUME that I would not accept different human beings have different stories, about different things?

And that's just about the whole truth of it, like it or lump it.

I think, and hope, you will find that what 'you', individually, perceive is the "whole truth of it" is actually NOT thee, whole, Truth of things at all.

Really, you need to stop being so resentful and rejecting one side of the human dream story in absolute favor of the other.

If the 'dream' story matches or is aligned with the 'real' story, then you will find that I NEVER reject NOR resent the 'dream' story version.

What I hope you will also find is that I NEVER reject NOR resent any 'dream' story in and of themselves. This is because I KNOW EXACTLY HOW and WHY 'you', human beings, have and make up your very OWN 'dream' stories.

There are always two sides to every story,

And there is also Thee Truth.

and you know very well that there is just no way the story can ever be separated from the book of LIFE - exactly AS IT IS

I know a few things, but this is NOT YET one of them.

What is the book of LIFE, to you, - exactly AS IT IS?

We are the whole book Age...nothing can be done about that, but obviously you can always just skip the chapters that hurt or offend you as you sit back and observe this whole book you have written. If you've already written the story, then you've got nothing to complain about, nor do you need to explain anymore because it was all your own 'thoughts' anyway, so there's no need to get all hot and bothered, as you simply cannot undo the script once it's been scripted.

WHY do 'you' continually ASSUME that I get so called "hot and bothered" about any thing?

But there is one solution to all of this. And that is to not write the book at all, rather, just keep your heavenly hell 'thoughts' to yourself..it's really that simple, it is.

I wonder if the people in this forum who are suggesting that I STOP writing and saying things here in this forum have YET noticed WHY they want me to STOP writing and saying things here but they think that it is perfectly acceptable for them to keep writing and saying things, as though their own story has some sort of weight or more leverage over any other story?

You have also expressed a lot of your own 'thoughts' to tell me to "just keep my own 'thoughts' to myself". If this is not hypocritical and contradictory, then I am not sure what would be.

Considering the name of this thread, which you have just written this in, and what this thread was set up for, then telling "another" to "just keep their heavenly hell 'thoughts' to them self" seems to be about one of the most absurd and illogical things to do here.

But I don't want to come to an end wha! wha! wha! cries the man. I wanna keep talking about History, because there is nothing else I can possibly know.

This is what I have found very common among adult human beings, that is; they just like to LOOK AT and DISCUSS what they "know" from past experiences. Very rarely, if ever, do I find 'one' that wants to LOOK AT and DISCUSS what is actually needed in order to find new ways for humanity, itself, for example, to start living in True peace and harmony together, as One. What I have found, so far, is they will inevitably LOOK AT and TALK ABOUT things like; "BUT, look at the way human beings have behaved so far", or absolutely any thing else in history and use that as some sort of excuse for WHY things can NOT change, for the better.

Humankind's history is best to be used as a REASON to change, for the better, and NOT to be used as an EXCUSE to NOT change, for the better.

[Age]

Who said that Hell is a bad place?

Pretty much every religion that offers it up as a part of their dogma.

What if one enjoys suffering?

I’m just making a ridiculous speculation here as to the nature of torture in Hell...

(ridiculous, because the idea of Hell itself is ridiculous)

But the idea of 'hell' is PERFECTLY reasonable, and sensible, and logical. But, then again, 'you' and 'I' do SEE and UNDERSTAND things very differently, OBVIOUSLY.

...but are you suggesting that being endlessly dipped in and out of molten rock (with all of your senses intact) might be a real hoot for someone?

Are you aware that a 'person', them self, does NOT have any senses intact AFTER the body stops breathing and stops pumping blood?

Might it not get a little old and unenjoyable after a while...say, after the first millisecond?

To even think that the notion of a "human body being dipped in and out of molten rock" has absolutely ANY bearing at all on what actually happens and really occurs is absurd, to say the least.

I think the more pertinent question (at least in regards to Christianity) is why is the reason for any human needing to be punished eternally in Hell, based on what two mythological knuckleheads did in a mythological place called the Garden of Eden?

IF, and WHEN, you become OPEN enough to listening to, and HEARING, just HOW these stories fit in with the reality, which is about to shortly unfold, then let me KNOW and I will be the first One to explain ALL-OF-THIS to you.

By that line of reasoning, some of us should be in prison right now because our great, great, great, granddads rustled cattle or robbed trains.

Do you call this life, which you are living in now, anything resembling a Truly 'Heavenly'?

If no, then some would say this life is then 'hell-like', if not 'hell' itself.

Furthermore, couldn't all of this have been easily avoided if, back in Eden, God had performed some routine garden pest control and sprayed the place for talking snakes?

Again, let us KNOW when 'you' become OPEN, ENOUGH, to be able to listen and HEAR what thee actual Truth IS, and then I will let you KNOW what It IS. Until then just keep ASSUMING and BELIEVING 'you' ALREADY KNOW what the truth is, as surely this is helping you tremendously, correct?

That way, the newly created - addle-brained Eve - would not have been deftly persuaded to swipe the mythical fruit from the mythical tree to give to bone-head Adam who, apparently, was weak-willed and would do anything a pretty girl asked him to do (dang those pesky hormones).

There is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON WHY this was ALLOWED, or was CAUSED, to happen, which again can ALL be explained, very simply and very easily, to those who are OPEN, ENOUGH, to listening AND HEARING.

In which case, God would have had no reason to sacrifice his son for an “original sin" (an apple-swiping caper) that never happened.

If 'it' NEVER happened, then WHY are 'you' bringing this up and TALKING ABOUT 'it'?

(Btw, if God surely knew that Jesus wasn’t really going to die in any literal sense, and would simply be rejoining him back in heaven, then what did God sacrifice?)

So many questions.

With so many ANSWERS, which FILLS the puzzle in completely, and PERFECTLY, to FORM One very CRYSTAL CLEAR picture of ALL-THERE-IS.

(Like I keep saying, it is time for a new and more logical “material/spiritual” paradigm to replace the old one.)
_______

Well bring 'it' on, if 'you' can.

Oh, and by the way, the 'old' one is sufficient enough to bring the 'new' one on in a Truly logical, and sound, reasoned way.

To be able to SEE and UNDERSTAND HOW the, so called, "new logical, material/spiritual, paradigm will replace the old one" and create a Truly Heavenly existence for EVERY one, as One, those 'old' stories WILL BE used, in their True and Right perspective, to shine a LIGHT ON and REVEAL WHY 'you', human beings, have been continually misinterpreting, misconstruing, and misunderstanding what thee actual Truth of Life, Itself, IS.

SEE, when 'you' UNDERSTAND WHY 'you' have the MISUNDERSTANDINGS that you currently have, when this is being written, then True understanding unfolds, and then the 'new' Heavenly life can and WILL unfold, 'before your eyes', as they say.

The very things that are HOLDING 'you' ALL BACK is the very ASSUMPTIONS and BELIEFS, which 'you' ALL are currently HOLDING ONTO now, when this is being written. When 'you' can and do let them go, then ALL can and WILL BE REVEALED.

[Age]

(Like I keep saying, it is time for a new and more logical “material/spiritual” paradigm to replace the old one.)

Whatever that would be or become, if it again submits to some form of transcendentalism or afterlife, we're right back to square one.

You’re not understanding this properly, Dubious.

The first part of this statement seems to be a well worn track.

The new paradigm doesn’t need to be true.

This, to me, does not sound very logical. Would replacing the 'old' lie with a 'new' lie be really a very logical thing to do?

It just needs to be more logical (more plausible) than the nonsense we’ve been dealing with over the last few millennia.

Have you ever considered that, what 'you' call "nonsense", could just be the MISINTERPRETATION of, after all, just a 'story', which is what is actually "nonsense"?

A couple of examples of “old paradigm” nonsense:

1. The belief in the Heaven and Hell idiocy I’ve been addressing in this thread.

BUT, 'heaven' AND 'hell', themselves are NOT "idiocy". As they tell a story, which fits in HELPING the creation of a Truly peaceful and harmonious life to unfold for EVERY one.

With the True INTERPRETATION of those 'old' stories, then 'world peace' will actually unfold and come-to-be.

Also, and by the way, a BELIEF in any thing STOPS one from being able to SEE thee actual Truth of things.

2. The belief that the universe “is a product of chance” idiocy held by hardcore materialists.

We can do better.
_______

WHY do the ONLY things in Life that you call are "idiocy", just happen to NOT align with your very own BELIEFS?

Was this a 'product of chance', or a 'product of your OWN MAKING'?

Also, you have been wanting to get "others" to BELIEVE what 'you' do, so that you could then REVEAL your very OWN "new" paradigm. Just out of curiosity when will you actual SHOW OFF this, so called, "new" paradigm, and how does it relate to the Universe, Itself, NOT being a 'product of chance'?

Who or what created this Universe if It was not by chance?