Hell?

[razeontherock]

And if such a human being [an unbeliever in Christ] is NOT to be damned, then I really see no content to the Christian proclamation at all.

I know if I delay responding to this now, it'll get lost. Consider the import of perspective! While we have never met, you have related that you can "see" G-d's Grace better via Pure Land Buddhism than you can in Christianity. And since I can both see it and recognize it as the same Grace I know, I can validate that, for what little that may be worth coming from me. And I'm pretty sure I'd never heard of Pure Land Buddhism before.

So for you, the content may be somewhat moot, or at best, a confirmation of what you already know, perhaps refining a bit here and there. Yet this in no way negates the content!

And for the benefit of other readers who may come across this, especially other C's who may find this offensive, Tariki has specifically referred to "Light"
in identifiable terms, which agree w/ Christ being that Light. I think Scripture is clear we are judged on our Faithfulness to the Light we have been given ..

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

I think it's clear that not all in hell suffer equally.

And you derive that clear notion from what, exactly? Not the verse you cited below, surely?
Weak, very weak. The most blatant and ham-fisted rationalization I've seen in a long time.

If even we mere mortals can see blatant injustice in Jane's scenario, surely it does not escape the Almighty?

One might think so, but fundamentalist Christians paint a different scenario.

 

[Tariki]

Now there's a word! I think it's clear that not all in hell suffer equally. Not only from those who have been there and re-told their experiences, but from Scripture. To say that Ann Frank suffers equally with the very Nazis who killed her loved ones? Seems to unduly stretch all the notions, IMHO.

Rev 16:7 And I heard another out of the altar say, Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous [are] thy judgments."

This is by no means a stand-alone verse, but the thought is expressed a myriad of ways. If even we mere mortals can see blatant injustice in Jane's scenario, surely it does not escape the Almighty?

On the other hand, exactly how His Judgments are true and righteous, I cannot pretend to understand, any more than I can pretend to know what all His Judgments are. I count myself fortunate to have been shown how Righteousness and Peace have kissed, and how Mercy and Truth have met ...

You might say I am infinitely more interested in exploring that side of the coin,
than in knowing the sordid details of "G-d's left hand."

Raze,

I would have spelt far more wrong than unexpugitated if I didn't check frequently...............but however spelt, I see you have not really given the "classic mainstream Christian" understanding an air. More an appeal of the self same kind as meepy.

Irrespective of the doctrine and the perfectly reasonable conclusions drawn from it given by Jane and others, it is merely asserted that the Judgements of God are "true and righteous". And further, the implication that "He" would see the injustice spoken of and not allow it. So really a bit of a mixture. A bit of meepy, but then a switch to implying that "His ways" are in fact our ways in some ways!

Like my own spelling............"Must try harder"

 

[razeontherock]

fundamentalist Christians paint a different scenario.

this forces me to ask, what actual contact have you had with "fundamentalist Christians?" What groups? Where? Because what you claim here seems like strawman to me.

 

[Crusader05]

Did you even read the OP? Also, you might take note that Faith is not virtue:

"And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; (2 Peter 1:5)

You might find that full passage, in context, to be interesting; but at the very least it smashes one false notion you expressed.

I was responding to Jane, not to the OP.

I see where you are coming from and I agree a temporary hell is less unjust than a permanent one. However, your opinion is not in the mainstream of christianity, which continues to preach that non-believers go to hell forever.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

this forces me to ask, what actual contact have you had with "fundamentalist Christians?" What groups? Where? Because what you claim here seems like strawman to me.

Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.

It may precede the official genesis of self-proclaimed evangelical fundamentalism by more than a century, but it's been HUGELY influential in shaping American Christianity in general, and fundamentalism's take on the afterlife specifically.

I'd also recommend Arthur W. Pink's collected writings.

And last but not least, there's always Jack T. Chick and his legendary cartoons.

 

[CryptoLutheran]

Apart from St. Isaac's description of hell (which is largely the position of the Eastern Orthodox today), some other influences on my thought have been C.S. Lewis and a parable/story which I can't remember the source.

Lewis on the one hand says that for those in Hell it may not actually be that unpleasant, that is it's more or less existence as we know it right now, and it's only from the vantage point of those in heaven that it seems horrible and filled with anguish. Another way Lewis describes hell is by saying that the doors of hell are locked from the inside. That is, nobody has to stay there if they don't want to be there, it's not that those in hell can't get out and are held there against their will, but that grace is beckoning them from the other side and they refuse to come out.

As for the story, it goes something like this: There was once a man who was shown the agonies of hell, he saw a great banquet hall filled with a great feast and a large table to fit everyone around with every kind of delicious food imaginable; however those at the banquet found themselves with very long spoons. Whenever anyone tried to feed themselves they clumsily would drop the food and were continuously going hungry. Soon after the same man was shown the glories of heaven, he saw a great banquet hall, just as the first, with a great feast and a large table to fit everyone around with every kind of delicious food imaginable. This time, also, they had the same very long spoons, but this time they were able to reach across the table and feed their neighbor across from themselves and were thus eternally satisfied.

The agonies of hell are not external, but internal, wrought from within ourselves by our own rejection of forgiveness of and mercy; God withholds His love, mercy, grace and forgiveness from none.

Likewise, I'm not convinced hell is forever; the concept of the Apokatastasis as a number of the ancient Fathers taught (such as Origen and St. Gregory of Nyssa) seems like something I as a Christian ought to hope for if I am to believe in a God of unconditional mercy who saves through the universal grace of the Crucified and Risen Jesus.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[razeontherock]

I see you have not really given the "classic mainstream Christian" understanding an air. More an appeal of the self same kind as meepy.

Irrespective of the doctrine and the perfectly reasonable conclusions drawn from it given by Jane and others, it is merely asserted that the Judgements of God are "true and righteous". And further, the implication that "He" would see the injustice spoken of and not allow it. So really a bit of a mixture. A bit of meepy, but then a switch to implying that "His ways" are in fact our ways in some ways!

Well I appreciate the perspective of CryptoLutheran here, who shows that what is today considered "mainstream" may well be either foreign, or at least minority opinion in the early Church. Surely Jesus' own Disciples know better than we born eons later?

Back to current mainstream ideas, they still can't hold to Jane's assertion of Ann Frank and her captors both receiving equal punishment. Any goodness in our ways would be surpassed by His ways ...

 

[Crusader05]

this forces me to ask, what actual contact have you had with "fundamentalist Christians?" What groups? Where? Because what you claim here seems like strawman to me.

I was raised in an independent Baptist church in which 'fire and brimstone' was a common theme. It was taught quite explicitly that non-believers, i.e. non-christians, most catholics and mainline protestants, were hell-bound for not believing in Jesus the right way.

 

[razeontherock]

Well Crusader, I can certainly understand you wanting to get away from that! Ick.

 

[Tariki]

this forces me to ask, what actual contact have you had with "fundamentalist Christians?" What groups? Where? Because what you claim here seems like strawman to me.

raze,

I appreciate you are not asking me, but I have had much contact with "fundamentalist" Christians. One incident, which in part led to my own rejection of such faith, was when a man who had "known Christ" for 30 years spoke as follows.......

He was speaking to someone who he thought was seeking to "reject Christ" and said (and this is from memory as close as I can remember)..

"I knew a lad like yourself once who I was seeking to bring to Christ. There was some sin in his life he wasn't prepared to yield up to the Lord. Every chance I got I spoke the word. In the end he started saying to me...."Go away, go away, I don't want to hear it anymore." But I continued to preach the word. The last time I saw him he was no more than a vegetable in an asylum."

He then leaned back in his chair,and with a deep sigh of contentment and wonder said....."Ah! the judgements of God!"

This is NOT gossip or hearsay, and I do not lie. Seek justification if you will. Your choice, your free will.

As has been said, "many evangelicals and fundamentalists have found the atrocities attributed to God to be more than they could in good faith live with. They have had to walk away from at least one version of the God that failed. God seemed to them to be made in the image of the ignoble, agressive dimension of mortal man. Some aspects of their evangelical faith were very meaningful to them, but they discovered that most of these meaningful and valuable aspects could be found elsewhere without the meaningless aspects."

For me, the elsewhere is the Pure Land. Amida has no left hand. (In a strange sense I won't seek to explain, WE supply that side of the equation)

All the best

 

[he lives]

Hell, that's no place I want to visit.
Been there
done that
got the t shirt.
Choose the truth and everlasting life.

 

[razeontherock]

Been there? In what sense? We have a sub-forum "dreams and visions" you might find interesting ...

 

[Crusader05]

Well Crusader, I can certainly understand you wanting to get away from that! Ick.

I appreciate your understanding, thank you.

 

[razeontherock]

raze,

I appreciate you are not asking me

Hey, it's an open forum. I appreciate input from all, especially a sincere perspective.

a man who had "known Christ" for 30 years spoke as follows.......

He was speaking to someone who he thought was seeking to "reject Christ" and said (and this is from memory as close as I can remember)..

"I knew a lad like yourself once who I was seeking to bring to Christ. There was some sin in his life he wasn't prepared to yield up to the Lord. Every chance I got I spoke the word. In the end he started saying to me...."Go away, go away, I don't want to hear it anymore." But I continued to preach the word. The last time I saw him he was no more than a vegetable in an asylum."

He then leaned back in his chair,and with a deep sigh of contentment and wonder said....."Ah! the judgements of God!"

*shudder* That's how long I have walked with the Lord. If for my birthday I asked to never be like that, I would be guilty of being like a Pharisee Jesus condemned. My only recourse is to pray "Lord have Mercy on me, a sinner."

Far from sighing w/ contentment as I lean back in comfort, I sigh in discontent at not being "more enough" for that time, and not having done enough ...

As has been said, "many evangelicals and fundamentalists have found the atrocities attributed to God to be more than they could in good faith live with. They have had to walk away from at least one version of the God that failed. God seemed to them to be made in the image of the ignoble, agressive dimension of mortal man. Some aspects of their evangelical faith were very meaningful to them

This is exactly the type of discussion I aim to foster! I find telling that most of my time on CF, there has been very little of that in the C only sections. I should add that lately there has been more of that there, but even so only amongst a minority. I am glad to see more C's participating in at least this thread.

Replying to this paragraph, I would call this "renewing the mind." 'Walking away from at least one version of the God that failed' would be G-d Himself smashing false idols, including the god we create in our own image. To quote Shrek, we have many layers, like onions ...

But my stance is to exhort believers not to throw out the baby with the bathwater; just to change the stinky bathwater before it turns putrid.

For me, the elsewhere is the Pure Land. Amida has no left hand. (In a strange sense I won't seek to explain, WE supply that side of the equation)

I think C also teaches that; we supply the left hand. With a little help from our (incorporeal) friends. And the often expressed sentiment here that said deities / demons are projections of our own psyche? At this point in history I don't have an issue with that; the entities are well-established enough in human culture to be dealt with that way.

 

[Meepy]

This is true but what can you do? You lead a horse to water but can't make it drink.

if it was an atheist horse it would be like "Your blackmailing me to drink water, never would I comply to a God who would pressure me to drink water in order to survive!". Then he would proceed to blame God for his thirst pangs. lol

 

[Arthra]

If you remember all the things you did in this life.. the good and the bad things with crystal clarity and the bad things outweighed the good.. I wonder if that could be a kind of hell? Seeking the mercy of God would be all that was left to you.

As we get older we do tend I think to ruminate on the experiences we had when we were young.. I concluded if I met myself then when I was young I wouldn't like me very much.. too self centered and short sighted and lacking in empathy.. I lost a lot of opportunities for friendships.

We would like to think that somehow what we do is in a vacuum not affecting anyone else but I believe it's more like the opposite.. We are inextricably involved with each other in one way or another.

 

[Robban]

Did the Rabbi explain why he thought the soul would experience pain? Did he think that the deceased wouldn't like the thought of the body being burnt?

If so, why should that be the case? Perhaps this is what would be needed for the soul (or the part remaining???) to finally say goodbye, "detach", and move on.

I don't believe in the existence of souls, but I were one, I don't think I would feel like hanging around ash.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Mark,
If you don,t beleive that souls "are", who then is this Mark that I am replying to now?
The body is the vehicle for the soul, without a soul the body can do nothing, without a body the soul cannot do anything.
Your soul is YOU, your personality, it is who you are. If you could change places with Abraham, the Creator would still have one Mark and one Abraham.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Mark,
If you don,t beleive that souls "are", who then is this Mark that I am replying to now?

Allow me to answer this question:

"Mark" is the sum total of that person's stored experiences, his biochemical memories, emotions, habits and so forth. The construct of the "self" that is Mark could not exist without the body.

The body is the vehicle for the soul, without a soul the body can do nothing, without a body the soul cannot do anything.
Your soul is YOU, your personality, it is who you are. If you could change places with Abraham, the Creator would still have one Mark and one Abraham.

Have you ever seen a brain-damaged person? Maybe a case of dementia in its final stages? The "self" can be totally obliterated even in *this* life, while the body still draws breath.
Everything that is distinctly identifiable as "us" relies upon information stored within the brain. Take that away, and what remains is - nothing.

 

[Robban]

Allow me to answer this question:

"Mark" is the sum total of that person's stored experiences, his biochemical memories, emotions, habits and so forth. The construct of the "self" that is Mark could not exist without the body.


Have you ever seen a brain-damaged person? Maybe a case of dementia in its final stages? The "self" can be totally obliterated even in *this* life, while the body still draws breath.
Everything that is distinctly identifiable as "us" relies upon information stored within the brain. Take that away, and what remains is - nothing.

So suddenly you are Mark?
So, what is your take on "Life"?