First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply ~HELL~
Posted 4/3/13
HELL?

Hell does not exist. It is just a concept that humans made and if you think you`re gonna go to hell then YOU WILL go to hell. If there was a "hell" it would already be here on Earth.

Open your eyes people, look what loonatics run this Earth. Lies upon lies, corruption and war. Isn`t that "hell" already.... :phew:

I see the goodness still on this Earth, I`ve saved myself from the idea of 'Hell' the more you think about "hell" existing then it will manifest into your reality. Unless you stop thinking about it and focus on doing good and becoming a better person then hell will not exist.

You made up hell, so therefore it exists in your reality.
45426 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M & F / New Ameri...
Offline
Posted 4/4/13

tehstud wrote:When you were a child, did you believe in the Easter bunny, Santa Claus, monsters under the bed, and all those fictional beings? Because I did. Being skeptical is not innate and not predetermined. I believe this is due to science and our, relatively, comprehensive understanding of the fabric from which we are made.

Sure I believed in those things, when I was like 6. But I don't think using childhood as a basis for the innateness of skepticism is accurate. Have you ever seen the video of adult chimps vs children in learning how to obtain a treat that's been concealed within a box? Chimps were able to figure out that a combination of actions was not necessary in order to obtain the treat from the box, while even when presented with a see-thru box the human children insisted on performing the useless actions before receiving the treat. This shows as children, our innate ability to copy and learn is vital for our survival, even if what we are learning has no purpose. But after a certain period of that critical learning process we start becoming more and more skeptical about the value of what we are learning. So while being skeptic or having doubts about things isn't expressed early on, the propensity toward it is always there, hardwired in our brains and at the mercy of genetics to determine the variability of this trait from one individual to another.
743 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / CA
Offline
Posted 4/4/13

thekevin4 wrote:

blah blah blah religion blah blah blah


Lol
468 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
101
Offline
Posted 4/4/13
If we're talking religiously here, then there is no proof that god does or doesn't exist, and therefore, there is no proof hell does or doesn't exist.

No amount of science can disprove the existence of a god. Only the end of the universe will prove that.



jeizii wrote:

HELL?

Hell does not exist. It is just a concept that humans made and if you think you`re gonna go to hell then YOU WILL go to hell. If there was a "hell" it would already be here on Earth.

Open your eyes people, look what loonatics run this Earth. Lies upon lies, corruption and war. Isn`t that "hell" already.... :phew:

I see the goodness still on this Earth, I`ve saved myself from the idea of 'Hell' the more you think about "hell" existing then it will manifest into your reality. Unless you stop thinking about it and focus on doing good and becoming a better person then hell will not exist.

You made up hell, so therefore it exists in your reality.


Not necessarily. I would think that the hell portrayed by most christans would be 1,665,544x worse than whatever we can conjure up here.

Imagine forever. You can't right? Okay, so imagine that, and being burned constantly at temperatures higher than those of the core of the sun.

Except you don't die. That's awful.

I like to imagine hell as just...being dead. In the bible it says something along the lines of that. I'm not sure what it said, but I don't exactly have a bible at my disposal right now.

What if it is like, being aware of your nonexistence. Like, sitting isolated, forever.

All of this is making me want to start doing the whole god thing, oh golly.

But yeah, we don't know if god exists or not, and it basically there's no way to find out. Unless he comes down from the sky and says "Sup", or something. That'd be spooky.
22463 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Delaware
Offline
Posted 4/4/13 , edited 4/4/13

JustineKo2 wrote:


tehstud wrote:When you were a child, did you believe in the Easter bunny, Santa Claus, monsters under the bed, and all those fictional beings? Because I did. Being skeptical is not innate and not predetermined. I believe this is due to science and our, relatively, comprehensive understanding of the fabric from which we are made.

Sure I believed in those things, when I was like 6. But I don't think using childhood as a basis for the innateness of skepticism is accurate. Have you ever seen the video of adult chimps vs children in learning how to obtain a treat that's been concealed within a box? Chimps were able to figure out that a combination of actions was not necessary in order to obtain the treat from the box, while even when presented with a see-thru box the human children insisted on performing the useless actions before receiving the treat. This shows as children, our innate ability to copy and learn is vital for our survival, even if what we are learning has no purpose. But after a certain period of that critical learning process we start becoming more and more skeptical about the value of what we are learning. So while being skeptic or having doubts about things isn't expressed early on, the propensity toward it is always there, hardwired in our brains and at the mercy of genetics to determine the variability of this trait from one individual to another.


That wasn't meant to be taken seriously, which you did, while my actual claim is ignored. I'll reiterate. Our skepticism is learned, not innate. I believe this is due to science and our, relatively, comprehensive understanding of the fabric from which we are made. In school, we learn science with it's procedures and logic and proof. We are predisposed to skepticism and the nagging questions which science relies upon. I believe we are all products of our environment, and that if I had gone to a religious institution, my beliefs would be completely different.
Posted 4/5/13

creepysalad wrote:

If we're talking religiously here, then there is no proof that god does or doesn't exist, and therefore, there is no proof hell does or doesn't exist.

No amount of science can disprove the existence of a god. Only the end of the universe will prove that.



jeizii wrote:

HELL?

Hell does not exist. It is just a concept that humans made and if you think you`re gonna go to hell then YOU WILL go to hell. If there was a "hell" it would already be here on Earth.

Open your eyes people, look what loonatics run this Earth. Lies upon lies, corruption and war. Isn`t that "hell" already.... :phew:

I see the goodness still on this Earth, I`ve saved myself from the idea of 'Hell' the more you think about "hell" existing then it will manifest into your reality. Unless you stop thinking about it and focus on doing good and becoming a better person then hell will not exist.

You made up hell, so therefore it exists in your reality.


Not necessarily. I would think that the hell portrayed by most christans would be 1,665,544x worse than whatever we can conjure up here.

Imagine forever. You can't right? Okay, so imagine that, and being burned constantly at temperatures higher than those of the core of the sun.

Except you don't die. That's awful.

I like to imagine hell as just...being dead. In the bible it says something along the lines of that. I'm not sure what it said, but I don't exactly have a bible at my disposal right now.

What if it is like, being aware of your nonexistence. Like, sitting isolated, forever.

All of this is making me want to start doing the whole god thing, oh golly.

But yeah, we don't know if god exists or not, and it basically there's no way to find out. Unless he comes down from the sky and says "Sup", or something. That'd be spooky.



How would you know if God actually comes down ? How would people believe that if they dunno what God looks like...? You either believe in God or not
17051 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M / Suomi
Offline
Posted 4/5/13 , edited 4/5/13
We all humans are evil in way or another, so we all are going to hell, aren't we? Even if we try to be good and holy, we will still turn into evil sometimes. For me Hell is a very bad idea, because justice is not black and white.

"And what if there is a demon who wants to be an angel?"

It also would be pretty stupid if you go to hell just because you didn't belive in God or Jesus. Just thing about it! What if you help thousands of hungry people from starving, but you don't belive in god? Is this beliving in god thing more important than helping people?
Canute 
29260 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 4/5/13
Here are the philosophical proofs for God's existence: http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/Philosophers/Aquinas/aquinas_five_ways02.html. I think that St. Thomas Aquinas argues quite exactly why there must be a God in his five ways. At least, one should be acquainted with them before one thinks religious people are unreasonable.

And hell must exist, but it exists for those who do terrible things and die unrepentant. It does not exist for people who are ignorant of the truth and try to act rightly according to the knowledge they have or those who have repented for their sins. Of course, God is the final Judge in whether anyone goes to hell, and He often uses the slightest reason to excuse people so that fewer people go to hell than we think.

Of course, people who don't believe in hell are the ones who most often wind up there, because they see no need to repent for their terrible sins.
45426 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M & F / New Ameri...
Offline
Posted 4/5/13 , edited 4/5/13

Canute wrote:

Here are the philosophical proofs for God's existence: http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/Philosophers/Aquinas/aquinas_five_ways02.html. I think that St. Thomas Aquinas argues quite exactly why there must be a God in his five ways. At least, one should be acquainted with them before one thinks religious people are unreasonable.

And hell must exist, but it exists for those who do terrible things and die unrepentant. It does not exist for people who are ignorant of the truth and try to act rightly according to the knowledge they have or those who have repented for their sins. Of course, God is the final Judge in whether anyone goes to hell, and He often uses the slightest reason to excuse people so that fewer people go to hell than we think.

Of course, people who don't believe in hell are the ones who most often wind up there, because they see no need to repent for their terrible sins.
So Hell as it is described must exist because *someone* must think that ignoring the price of sins means that humans would be unrestrained in the amount of sins they are likely to committ? But what if the *desire* to not sin is an innate and sensible alternative to a untestable incentive to not sinning that ALL humans have? Furthermore because of the concept of sin itself, that any of our faults need reconciliation for a reason other than what is purely within ourselves as natural do-gooders rather than naturally evil, only lessens the value of conscious decisions not to committ acts harmful to others.

St Thomas Aquinas' argument is flawed because it is affirming the existence of God with the validity of repentence as the basis for which people choose to be virtuous. It's a circular argument. As I said in my opening post both God and Hell are suspect to be false, they can't prove each other and their illusion of importance is no more relevant than a prediction where a fly is going to land to gauge the weather tomorrow.
Canute 
29260 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 4/6/13
Oh, the link pertains to St. Thomas Aquinas' five ways of proving God exists philosophically. It has nothing to do with why there is a hell, the reasons for which I gave from what I remember about other people arguing why it must exist and which seem good to me. For more clarity, you probably want to read the article I linked to, but St. Thomas' arguments run like this:

1. Everything that exists has motion/energy, which goes from potentiality to actuality.
The collection of beings and objects need other beings to put them into motion.
However, the existence of chains of beings and objects which put each other in motion cannot be explained by the chains themselves.
Therefore, there must be a First, Unmoved Mover who caused the motion of all the other beings with potentiality and actuality without being Himself subject to being moved. (God is pure act.)
This being we call God.

2. Everything in existence is an efficient cause (caused by something else).
Something cannot be the cause of itself, because then it would be prior to itself, which is absurd.
In order to explain the existence of efficient causes, there must have been a First, Uncaused Cause.
This First Cause cannot be subject to change and corruption because that would make it an efficient cause of something else--which effectively rules out the physical universe being the cause.
The name we give to the Changeless, Incorruptible, Uncaused Cause is God.

3. In nature, we find that things are possible to be and not to be, i.e. contingent.
It is not possible for these things always to be, because the fact that they are contingent means that they did not exist at one point.
If everything is contingent, then at one time everything did not exist, which is impossible because then nothing would exist even now.
Therefore, there must be some existence which is necessary, not subject to corruption or causation, and causes all contingent beings to exist.
That necessary being is God.

4. (To tell you the truth, I find the fourth argument rather Platonic and not really as convincing as the others. So, look it up if you're curious.)

5. The world exhibits traits of being designed.
This is evident from the fact that non-intelligent beings (such as the sun, the position of the earth relative to the other planets) always or almost always act for the best possible end.
Unintelligent beings cannot act for an end unless they are directed by an intelligent being.
Therefore, an Intelligent Being directs the entire universe.
That Intelligent Being is God.

But now, let's get back to the topic of hell. I'm not sure that I see people as having an innate desire not to sin. It is true that people shun evil and seek what is good, (the basic definition of goodness is what everyone wants) but sin is always done because the evil act has an appearance of a good.

For example, a man sees someone with much money. Money is a good, which the man wants. He obtains it by theft. So, while the object is good (money), he obtains it through immoral means. Name any sin one likes, and one can see that the sinner has some good in view but because of circumstances or the way he obtains that good, the act is a sin. One only has to examine themselves to see that one is often pulled by pride to put someone else down for the sake of self-esteem, lust for the sake of pleasure, anger for the sake of revenge, etc. This sinful condition plagues all mankind and it is only through constant effort with God's grace that people overcome it.

However, many men are kept in line because they can clearly see that the most monstrous sins hardly ever produce advantage and are often very ugly indeed. (Man is not totally depraved, despite the claims of Lutherans.)

But, with the existence of God, we can see why there must be a hell. God is Lord of the universe. Lords are in charge of punishing the wicked and rewarding the good. If the wicked were not punished, could God, the Supreme Ruler of the universe, really be good? If the wicked had the same fate as the good? So, God in His justice punishes sinners with either hell, purgatory, or punishments in this life--the last being the most preferable. But, in His mercy, he pardons all the repentant, giving them either purgatory or punishments in this life for their offenses rather than hell and rewards them in heaven for the good they have done.

I must here add that sin does two things to the one who sins: 1) it damages their relationship with God and 2) it twists their soul. In the case of grave sin, it completely cuts them off from God. Whether the relationship is wholly or partially damaged, it requires God's grace and mercy to restore the relationship. In the case of the twisting of the soul, one must perform acts of virtue along with God's grace to right their souls. It is only when the soul's relationship with God is undamaged and their soul perfectly straight that it can enter paradise. So, you are very right to pick up on what sin does to the soul, but the fact that we deserve punishment from God, the Supreme Ruler, also needs to be addressed.
Wihl 
17674 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
L5
Offline
Posted 4/6/13
All religions come down to faith in something that can not be proved. Hence all arguments for them are circular.

Hell is used as the stick and heaven as the carrot.

So why do religions exist at all? Looking at the origins of the word religion, it means "to bind". So religion means to bind one into a system of conduct or behavior. Notice that force is a part of it. and then you see the dichotomy of how religions operate, preaching "turn the other cheek" while killing those who do not believe your religion.

Sorry if I stomped on your toes.

For fun look up the milk jug religion on YouTube.
Canute 
29260 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 4/6/13
The idea that there might be a demon who wants to be good is interesting, but that is not in accord with the nature of angels. Angels have more complete knowledge of what they are doing (their intellect is incredibly higher than a man's), and their wills are immutable--that is, they can't change their minds--because they are in eternity. So, neither can a good angel become a bad angel nor a bad one a good one. Each side made its decision once and for all with complete knowledge of how good or evil their decision was.

On the other hand, people are liable to ignorance and change their minds, which is proven by the fact that we repent. The sinful things which seem best to us at one point turn out to be a cause of misery: we either become disgusted with ourselves or see how our actions have hurt other people. Then, we wish that we had never done such an act and repent over it.

So, even though all men sin, not all men remain unrepentant. Hell is only for the unrepentant. One should keep in mind that even a man like Hitler could be saved if the evil of his actions had hit him in such a way as to provoke intense grief and the desire to do penance for his crimes. What can be more merciful than that?

If one helps starving people, he imitates and worships God through his merciful and loving actions. Even though he does not believe in God, I have no doubt that God would convert his soul even in the last moment of life. "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall be shown mercy." Belief in God is necessary for salvation, but some people are prevented by circumstances from learning the faith and God does not condemn them in their ignorance. Remember that God is infinitely merciful. Only people who do terrible sins and are adamant in their impenitence are condemned to hell. Can one really pity such a person or say that they deserve any other fate? If they won't even be sorry for terrible crimes against themselves and others?
Wihl 
17674 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
L5
Offline
Posted 4/6/13
I have yet to discover the origins of the universe in religion. Citing divine as the source is no different than citing big bang or a milk jug. Faith will prove anything as it is the suspension of logic and scientific inquiry. Science at least moves forward explaining things where religion has not. As science gets better, more is explained. When religion makes a motor to power a car without science I will seriously rethink my position.

Circular: God created both faith and reason.
Posted 4/6/13
Hell came from the idea of Gehenna (a valley somewhere on Earth used to burn trash) being a place where Moloch, or some other demon, would punish people. You can tell people they will be damned for their crimes and they begin to become scared over the possibility and try not to "sin" in order to avoid eternal torment.

When I look at things long and hard, I personally see a procession through history of fables told to control unruly people. The powerful stay powerful and the sheep stay in the flock with no independent thoughts of their own.
45426 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M & F / New Ameri...
Offline
Posted 4/6/13 , edited 4/6/13

Canute wrote:

Oh, the link pertains to St. Thomas Aquinas' five ways of proving God exists philosophically. It has nothing to do with why there is a hell, the reasons for which I gave from what I remember about other people arguing why it must exist and which seem good to me. For more clarity, you probably want to read the article I linked to, but St. Thomas' arguments run like this:
Sorry, I did read a bit of what you linked to but I thought you were summarizing one of Aquinas' points with your paragraph stating Hell must exist. I still think there are flaws in Aquinas' arguments aside from that but that's a different topic.


Canute wrote:

But now, let's get back to the topic of hell. I'm not sure that I see people as having an innate desire not to sin. It is true that people shun evil and seek what is good, (the basic definition of goodness is what everyone wants) but sin is always done because the evil act has an appearance of a good.
I really can't see any reason why someone, unless they have a mental deficiency would neglect an awarness of the consequence of stealing (both for them and the victim) just because of the possible benefit of gaining something of value. I'm not saying we should depend on this natural moral hesitation, or that retrospective thinking "is what I am doing hurting someone else? or what if I get caught?" as a method to deter evil since we also have laws and their enforcement in place. With every immoral act, people know or can know what they are doing is wrong. They just choose to ignore it, or have maybe gotten used to doing evil that they forget what they are doing wrong.

Maybe this is where you are saying the concept of sin comes into play, when people lose that abilty as you put it "restore their relationship with God" on their own like sin builds upon itself and causes you to become immune to the fear of the ultimate consequence. Therefore it doesn't take "grave sins" to do that, it takes a series of smaller ones so that it becomes habit. But that means that maybe people who cheat on their tax returns every year deserve hell more than child rapists and murderers.

While I can claim that's absurd, the absurdity still lies, for me, in the idea of Hell existing at all. My point is, when you choose not to do something immoral, that choice comes from within the heart, or it should, originating from both a morally instructive upbringing and the inherency of being cognizant of other's welfare because it contributes to your own welfare. Many people lose this ability, or it gets weakened somehow, and I think part of what contributes to that is this idea that sin breaks our morality unless you trade brownie points with God or a disciple of his shows you the way back to him so that God can grant you "grace" to help wash away this built up sin. It's all so deliberate and contrived it completely devalues the human condition. And that's what I can never accept or even think is something that's supposed to be good.

First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.