What's your philosophy for Hell? Hell only?

[steve_bakr]

Tell the "unvarnished truth", lol.

You mean, preach.

You are in the wrong forum.

Well, Davian, it started with a comment. Then there were a few responses, which I responded to; and it developed into a conversation. And I learned about a few things along the way, like the natural emergence theory.

I don't think of my posts as preaching, as I am not trying to convert you. I think it would be counterproductive to do that.

Since this is a philosophy forum, please see my post to Mark, where I discuss the relationship between philosophy and theology.

 

[DCJazz]

It's obviously a lie used to make people subservient and live in fear. A good idea to control the masses. When you think about having your skin burnt off over and over again for all eternity just remember God loves you. Haha what a joke!

Yeah it was real funny when they nailed him to the cross. Nevermind the whole 'dying for our sins' part.

Haha... haha... ha.

The real joke is that most people nit pick the details they want to hear, and chuck the rest. They also don't seem to understand the concepts of justice, choice, etc. Or they refuse to. Either/or.

I used to be afraid of hell, of going there. But then I realized that I couldn't do anything to save myself, so I relied on Christ for my salvation. Still do.

So when I mess up and sin, my first thought isn't "I don't want to die and go to hell". It's "I feel guilty because I can't live without sin, for God. But... he understands. And he'll continue to work in and through me."

So yeah. Pardon the sarcasm, but it just irks me when people see only what they choose to see, instead of the bigger picture.

Oh and in response to the OP, obviously I believe hell is a sentence of eternal torment. Notice I say sentence. That's intentional.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Yeah it was real funny when they nailed him to the cross. Nevermind the whole 'dying for our sins' part.

Haha... haha... ha.

The real joke is that most people nit pick the details they want to hear, and chuck the rest. They also don't seem to understand the concepts of justice, choice, etc. Or they refuse to. Either/or.

I used to be afraid of hell, of going there. But then I realized that I couldn't do anything to save myself, so I relied on Christ for my salvation. Still do.

So when I mess up and sin, my first thought isn't "I don't want to die and go to hell". It's "I feel guilty because I can't live without sin, for God. But... he understands. And he'll continue to work in and through me."

So yeah. Pardon the sarcasm, but it just irks me when people see only what they choose to see, instead of the bigger picture.

Oh and in response to the OP, obviously I believe hell is a sentence of eternal torment. Notice I say sentence. That's intentional.

The bigger picture is the fact that you have a God who apparently loves you, but is willing to see you go to a place where you'll burn for the rest of eternity.

It simply does not make sense.

 

[steve_bakr]

The bigger picture is the fact that you have a God who apparently loves you, but is willing to see you go to a place where you'll burn for the rest of eternity.

It simply does not make sense.

I don't know what the exact nature of hell is, except that it is somehow a separation from God as a result of rejection of His grace.

Jesus used the metaphor of the burning of the smoldering fires of a place of refuge near Jerusalem to demonstrate the consequences of sin to the ancient mind. I personally don't think hell is literally a burning fire.

The point is that no one enters into the state of hell without assenting to that fate. As I have told you, I believe that grace is being offered to all people at all times.

I believe that many atheists are rejecting a certain concept of God--i.e. explicit rejection--but don't necessarily reject grace. At some level, their lives may reflect a deeper acceptance of grace--i.e. a sincere search for truth and a moral life that considers the needs of others as opposed to a self-centered existence.

Aware of pre-conceptions, Karl Rahner often avoided the term "God," as many folks have concepts of God that don't necessarily reflect His nature, which is an Infinite Mystery. He often employed terms like "holy mystery," "infinite horizon," etc. I personally experience God as an Infinite Silence or an all-encompassing Presence.

 

[Rajni]

Yeah it was real funny when they nailed him to the cross. Nevermind the whole 'dying for our sins' part.

Churchdom reduces what Jesus allegedly went through by insisting that most of humanity will wind up in hell in spite of his efforts. So while they might not be considering what he went through a joke, they may as well be. The apparently-necessary hell-concept looks like some sort of backup measure in anticipation of a failure on Jesus's part in his stated mission of saving the world (as advertised in scripture).

Either there's "power in the Name" as is sung on Sunday mornings, or there's "power in my individual response to the Name". Can't have it both ways and still preach only one savior.

The real joke is that most people nit pick the details they want to hear, and chuck the rest. They also don't seem to understand the concepts of justice, choice, etc. Or they refuse to. Either/or.

Speaking of justice ... how is it "just" for an all-knowing creator to create someone that He knows in advance will wind up in this 'hell' in the end?

I used to be afraid of hell, of going there. But then I realized that I couldn't do anything to save myself, so I relied on Christ for my salvation. Still do.

If nobody can do anything to save themselves, then why wouldn't the pains Jesus went through on their behalf save all of them (assuming salvation is even needed, but that's another ball o' wax). If everyone's in the same boat of being unable to save themselves, then where's this picking-and-choosing who's saved and who isn't coming from?

So when I mess up and sin, my first thought isn't "I don't want to die and go to hell". It's "I feel guilty because I can't live without sin, for God. But... he understands. And he'll continue to work in and through me."

You might be surprised to know that not everyone needs the threat of hell to have such a relationship with the Lord. In fact, your testimony is proof that the hell-doctrine isn't necessary to draw people to God. Hopefully, Christians who believe that without the possibility of hell in the picture people would just sin-sin-sin will make note of this.

So yeah. Pardon the sarcasm, but it just irks me when people see only what they choose to see, instead of the bigger picture.

I feel the same way when the cherished hell concept gets tossed around. It definitely does not glorify God, as much as Christians seem to think it does.

 

[Davian]

Tell the "unvarnished truth", lol.

You mean, preach.

You are in the wrong forum.

Well, Davian, it started with a comment. Then there were a few responses, which I responded to; and it developed into a conversation. And I learned about a few things along the way, like the natural emergence theory.

I don't think of my posts as preaching, as I am not trying to convert you. I think it would be counterproductive to do that.

Since this is a philosophy forum, please see my post to Mark, where I discuss the relationship between philosophy and theology.

Since this is the Philosophy forum, do you think that preaching that your side of the discussion is the "unvarnished truth" is productive?

 

[steve_bakr]

Since this is the Philosophy forum, do you think that preaching that your side of the discussion is the "unvarnished truth" is productive?

The context of that comment is that I somehow felt more free to talk about my concepts and experiences with atheists than with some other Christians, as I did not have to worry about trying to make sure I was not offending their orthodoxy.

So, let's change "tell the unvarnished truth" to "speak more freely," because the latter is closer to my intended meaning.

I apologize for my poor choice of words.

 

[Davian]

The context of that comment is that I somehow felt more free to talk about my concepts and experiences with atheists than with some other Christians, as I did not have to worry about trying to make sure I was not offending their orthodoxy.

So, let's change "tell the unvarnished truth" to "speak more freely," because the latter is closer to my intended meaning.

I apologize for my poor choice of words.

Noted.

Thank you.