Bible Questions?

I thought you had said that the concept of hell was just a misinterpretation of bible passages?

Flip flop?

 

I have never said the word "Hell", the word sometimes used to translate the original language words Sheol and Hades used in the Bible, was not in the Bible. What I have consistently said is that the concept of "Hellfire" that people generally associate with the word "Hell" is not Biblical.

 

I'm confused, are you saying that there is or that there isn't a hell in the christian bible?

Or that there is a hell but there's no fire in it, just another type of suffering?

 

I think that the Bible is pretty much describing that death itself, the common gravedom of mankind, as being a kind of hell.

Seems like there is nothing to suffer since being dead and all.

Might be helpful:

http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/jdtabor/future.html

"The ancient Hebrews had no idea of an immortal soul living a full and vital life beyond death, nor of any resurrection or return from death. Human beings, like the beasts of the field, are made of "dust of the earth," and at death they return to that dust (Gen. 2:7; 3:19). The Hebrew word nephesh, traditionally translated "living soul" but more properly understood as "living creature," is the same word used for all breathing creatures and refers to nothing immortal...All the dead go down to Sheol, and there they lie in sleep together — whether good or evil, rich or poor, slave or free (Job 3:11-19). It is described as a region "dark and deep," "the Pit," and "the land of forgetfulness," cut off from both God and human life above (Pss. 6:5; 88:3-12). Though in some texts Yahweh's power can reach down to Sheol (Ps. 139:8), the dominant idea is that the dead are abandoned forever. This idea of Sheol is negative in contrast to the world of life and light above, but there is no idea of judgment or of reward and punishment. If one faces extreme circumstances of suffering in the realm of the living above, as did Job, it can even be seen as a welcome relief from pain–see the third chapter of Job. But basically it is a kind of "nothingness," an existence that is barely existence at all, in which a "shadow" or "shade" of the former self survives (Ps. 88:10)."

 

The words generally translated as "Hell" are Sheol and Hades, Both words basicly mean the grave. When I hear grave, I don't think of suffering of any kind going on, I tend to think of "dust you are and to dust you shall return" and that the dead are not conscious of anything. (Genesis 3:19; Ecclesiastes 9:5)

So once again, yes, depending on the translation you may find the word "hell" in the Bible but the concept of "Hellfire" is not in the Bible.

 

Do you believe the concept of "hell" or Sheol ect, is supposed to be used as a deterrent?

What is the purpose of mentioning it at all in the bible?

 

Thanx Rudenoodle, some very good questions, it's strange they aren't asked more often.

No, I do not think that it was in anyway meant to be a deterrent. Death itself was meant to be the deterrent. According to the Bible God said if you eat of the fruit you will die. There was no threat of a burning hell or eternal torture, something you think God would have mentioned, you know; “Oh by the way you’ll burn forever and be forever in pain too". It just seems like something God wouldn’t have forgotten to mention.

As for the purpose of mentioning it, honestly I never thought of this before but I would guess that it is just a convenient way of talking about all the dead without having to name them all individually. Kind of like instead of saying; Bill, Joe, Frank, Mary, Sue, Bob, etc. are all dead and awaiting the resurrection, you can say all those in Sheol are awaiting the resurrection. When you say Sheol, you would know that everyone that is dead and everyone that will be dead are included.

 

Does the bible mention eternal life as a reward for adhering to a specified code of conduct?

And if so under what pretenses is it offered by?

It sounds as if instead of an afterlife of torment you are leaning towards an oblivion of sorts to those who would violate what god supposedly wants of them.

Do you believe in immortality?

 

The Bible uses the phrase everlasting life, which has the sense that one could live eternally but not will live eternally.

Anyway the Answer is yes and no. Let me illustrate it this way, If you had taken a poison that was going to kill you, you must have the antidote. No amount of not taking the poison anymore will save you but after you have taken the antidote it would be a good idea not to take the poison anymore.

Like wise the antidote for our sins is the sacrifice of Jesus but after that we must not practice sin any more.

As for adhering to a specified code of conduct, we are not under a code of conduct like the Law the Jews had, as Christians we are to live by Christian principles with only a few rules thrown in.

Sorry, I’m not sure what you are asking here, could you please reword it?

Yes, in a way that is true. We are offered just life or death (oblivion). But the choice is ours.

Please try to understand the position we put God in when we make wrong choices.

As an illustration try to imagine a person who continually makes bad life decisions, you probably know someone who does, maybe this person is only 25 and their life is a mess, can you imagine that if this person lives to 80 or 90 and continues making bad life choices what their life would be like? Now imagine that you, like God, had the ability to extend this persons life for billions of years, would it be loving to do so? Wouldn’t that be the “Hell” everyone accuses God of?

Also God has the power to take away his free will but that would make him just a robot, would that be loving?

Immortality has the sense of being given life within oneself and that you will no longer need to depend on God as your source of life. The Bible speaks of a few being given immortality in that sense, Jesus being one of them.

 

To reword one of my previous questions, under what stipulations does the christian god offer life after death?

You had also mentioned the possibility of god stripping someone of free will and simply forcing them to think as he would and live as he see's fit and liken it to an unloving act, but isn't that exactly what eternal life with god would be the only other option being oblivion?

Heaven sounds more like a fascist state than an oasis of peace and love in my opinion.

I was also wondering how a man of god (as I'm guessing you are) reasons with the fact that so many religions have came before and after your particular beliefs?

Also what are your opinions on three of the most prominent monotheism's having sprung into existence in such a close geographic area?

 

The Egyptian book of the dead was inspired by the Jews at the time. Not 100% sure on that, to be honest, but that is my brief knowledge on it.

I don't understand exactly what you mean when you compare heaven to a fascist state. The rules are few and far between and are only there to help guide you away from sin, and sins is what takes us away from the source (God). When we move away from this source, then it'll be like taking a tree out from the ground so that it can no longer receive the life sustaining nutrients. I think that Heaven would be what Christians are expected to do on Earth. Like it is said, God's will is to be done on Earth as it is in Heaven. Meaning that the same rules apply in Heaven as they do on Earth. And as OWB has illustrated the guidelines are pretty basic and fair and are merely used to keep us out of harms way.

Why does there need to be any stipulations other than wanting his children to live close to him for all eternity? The resurrection will bring back to life those who followed Jesus' overall message: love. But I believe that everyone will be resurrected on the day of judgment. God knows what is true in our hearts so we can gain this connection regardless if you have ever heard of Jesus. The Bible, imo, is mostly here to guide us if we ever become lost. Living eternally, close to your creator, receiving everything that we ever need, and all that God asks in return is that we don't sin, but only as to keep us close to him and to help protect us and deliver us from harms way. Now, that's real love imo. In the end, not fascist at all.

So what happens, what I am getting from the Bible is this: Everyone, included Satan, will eventually end up in eternal paradise. As it is said, all will eventually praise God... including Satan, but only after the plan carries out its completion. As to illustrate further, you can't have Satan in paradise in the current mindset that he is in. That can only happen after he repents and I simply don't see that happening until the plan carries out and that Satan fails his plan and God completes His. Like when a man finds out a store is closed by tugging at the door to realize that it is locked. When another man see's this and asks, "Are they closed?", and the other man replies, "Yup, doors locked". Then after this is said and done, that man that asked goes up to the door and tugs on it, only to realize that it is indeed locked. He just HAD to see for himself, but the door remained locked. If only he trusted what he saw and heard. Satan is that stubborn.

God can strip someone's free will away but chooses not to.

 

How is it possible that god chooses us free will but already knows all of "creations" ultimate destiny?

 

Basically there are no stipulations, both the righteous and the unrighteous are to be resurrected seeing as death pays for our sins.

I said he has the ability, not that he would use it and the difference is that a person that has no free will can make no choices but a person with free will in paradise will have billions of choices he can make every day and among those choices is the choice, life or death but it is his choice.

Why does it sound like a fascist state? Because you have choice?

As an illustration suppose I said you could eat the fruit of every tree on earth but one and you started eating one fruit of each tree, except for that one, how long do you think it would take to eat of the fruit of every tree but that one? Now take into consideration that new trees start growing every day and that there are many trees with the same type of fruit as the tree I asked you not to eat of, just how restrictive do you think that would really be? I don’t know but it seems as if, you would have almost unlimited choices of what to do, with only one choice out literally millions, if not billions being removed and you think that would make it a fascist state.

Do you really think that no restrictions should be laid on anyone no matter how small? Even if others have to suffer, through no choice of their own, because you want to choose to do something that will cause their suffering? Is paradise suddenly not paradise because you don’t have the right to cause others to suffer?

Of course I believe God was before everything, so nothing really came before him and anything that came after is only imitation.

Judaism is the tutor leading to the Christ. Christianity is the way to worship God at this time. And I guess you mean Islam which does not have God’s backing.

 

What would you say to the Muslim who would claim that it was his god who was true and your god that was false?


Or to the Jew who believes Jesus was a false prophet?

 

It would sound as if your preaching that everyone painlessly ascends to heaven and that all is permitted in god's supposed kingdom.

Is it not "god's" way or oblivion?

What choice do you see in that decision?

 

Fine! Prove it.

 

We have free will, but the ultimate destiny is built into the design of reality itself. God gives us our abilities and attributes and we have to choose how to use these abilities. If you have a natural ability to calculate complex equations you can use this ability in a multitude of ways. That ability can be used for accounting, discovering the nature of reality, or using it to figure out how to con people out of their money. So you have all of these seats available to place your abilities in, and depending on your choices, leads to a different path but this path can always be changed at any moment.

What does this have to do with ultimate destiny? Well, like a man watching ants building their ant colony, there are only so many choices to be made, but the overall structure is understood by God and knows that a structure will be made. So instead of certain tunnels being in a zig zag shape starting from left to right, it can start right to left, or any number of combination. But in the end, tunnels are being built. Just like how the ants build their colonies, we build up God's plan under the available possibilities and underlining structure of nature. In the beginning, these ants would struggle and build a half-assed colony, but as time progresses they get better at it and better at it and many of their obstacles become less and of an obstacle. While all of this goes on, we choose at any moment how to lay down the tracks, but that these tracks end up leading to the same destination. In the end, analogies are useful, but don't do reality much justice. The plan is very convoluted but simple at its core.

The man watching the ant colony can send in some helpers and instructions but its still up to the ants to listen and take notice and take up the advice. The man can send a bug down to help create a tunnel in a certain way, but the ants can decide to use that bug or not. The bug can help to dig a tunnel, but other ants might decide to clog it back up, and thus making that bugs help useless. But that won't stop the bug from trying somewhere else until it finds a group of ants that decides to listen and take notice.

Personally, I like the building a house according to the blueprint analogy. At any moment you may choose to build the house in a slightly different way, but in the end, the house is being built and it's in our nature to build simply by existing. While this house is being built, you have all of these forces to contend with, but in general, the builder is more resilient than the forces that be and ends up persevering.

Does a mom or dad take their son's free will away if they realize that he will most likely not do that college paper on time? Knowing their son, they know that he has certain ways about him that he most likely will not break unless certain conditions are met, but at any moment their son can surprise them and choose to do that report instead of hanging out at the mall, for example. So them knowing their sons ways in no way takes their sons autonomy away from him. The same is true for God but at a more complex level. He chooses not to know by giving us free will, and if anyone knows how to accomplish this, then it would be God. He already rigged the system for himself to not know. He gave up that power because he wanted to. But at any moment can choose to break away from this if he chooses. But by doing so, he would corrupt the system and turn it into something else.

 

Why would everyone go to Heaven? I mean what for?

"Is it not "God" way or oblivion?" I believe you said one time you are an atheist, so for you oblivion is your only option, what choice is there in that, at least I have a choice other than oblivion and not a bad choice at that, living forever on a paradise Earth.

“All is permitted in god's supposed kingdom?” I never said “all” is permitted but you’ll probably have more freedom than you do now. You won’t have to worry about losing all your loved ones in death, you’ll be able to walk about freely without having to worry about being mugged, raped or robbed on the street but yes, you do have to give up some things, like war, murder and hatred. I know it’ll be a terrible loss but I think I can make the sacrifice.

 

:rofl:

 

Why would you not choose God's way? What's the difference between choosing God's way or the way of Hassan i Sabbah, Buddha, some guy down the street, or Mr. Potato Head?

You still end up choosing some way. Some ways are just more fruitful than others.

So even if their ends up being no paradise and the Bible is just a means to bring about a better life, which ends up proving to be the best path out of all the seeming ways that are available that we can decide on following. If we end up having only one precious life, it makes more sense to make the most of it than to not. Now certain behaviors that we engage in can prevent experiencing the good in life. It's not really a matter of opinion. This is tried and true.

You can't have a contract stating, "Ok, you have to sign this piece of paper that states that you give us permission to videotape you having sex with a complete stranger" and then expect, 'well, they signed the paper' so nothing wrong can happen. They decided on it. But in the Kinsey reports, these things happened and everyone thought everything was fine. But what ended up happening is that some of these couples got close because sex can bring up all of these feelings of attachment. But what happens when the guy isn't interested? Lots of heartache. My friend tells me to go to this website to get sex. I tell him, it might bring up issues if I have these affairs that I want to avoid. And he tells me, "oh no, don't worry, just sign up stating you just want 1 on 1 sex". But the thing is, what we expect to happen from a contract isn't always what ends up happening in reality. Philosophies are like these contracts that we sign up to. Some contracts are just better choices than others. Sometimes we aren't aware of being a part of any contracts, but that is besides the point. We all adhere to a contract, whether we like to admit to it or not.

Life is already risky and troublesome enough without piling on even more to it.

Let's all have wild orgies, gangbangs, suicide runs, rapes, snort up coke, shoot up heroin, go to 50 hookers a month, crime sprees, cheating on our spouses and girlfriends... woo wee, now that's living it up. It just makes us stupid and brings about a lot of VERY unnecessary pain that we can avoid, and ends up taking us away from a life that we could be experiencing that is far superior than 'living it up'. You can't 'live it up' if you're dead or fading into oblivion/the background and becoming a mere shadow of what we once were; a specter.

That's pretty much what the 'everything is permitted' philosophy brings about. Everything is permitted, so I guess I can go rape someone's wife. After all, it's all permitted, therefore, perfectly fine and dandy.

When someone tells me that they refuse to follow God's way, to me, it's the equivalent of saying: "Well, just call me Mr. Dangerous " It's absolutely asinine.