Ok I see people here are exceptionally sure god exists/christianity is right, but with all their arguements in defense I think hell is a rediculous[sp] concept. Just too many variables.

WHAT I THINK:

I honestly beleive hell was made up by the church to draw members, no not be a non-confromist, but because of the whole idea of it. So anyone that does not worship christian Gods ass is going to hell? It just makes no sense to me. What about people born into other religions? Another thing is the fact that not everyone gets equal oppurtunity to be "forgiven" by your "almighty" god. If a little 3 year old gets killed in a tsunami whose parents are hindu going to hell? Also one of those people who come to your door told me once that if you speak out against god youre going to hell, that its a crime he doesnt forgive. So a person that commits murder can be forgiven but a rebellious 11 year old who "knows no better" can't?

I am not atheist, not agnostic[sp], nor religious, I have not decided wether God exists or not, but I dismiss all these religions as crap. Yes I understand their "virtues" and that religion does keep some people good, but I would take all religions more seriously if it were not for the hell thing by christianity.

I agree with you completely. Although, hell is a usefull metaphor for the repercussions of an ignored conscience. But yea, throughout history I'd say it was just used as a way of scaring people into religion.

Yeah, and all the people before the advent of Christianity went to hell, too.

quote:Originally posted by Spic Power:

Ok I see people here are exceptionally sure god exists/christianity is right, but with all their arguements in defense I think hell is a rediculous[sp] concept. Just too many variables.

WHAT I THINK:

I honestly beleive hell was made up by the church to draw members, no not be a non-confromist, but because of the whole idea of it. So anyone that does not worship christian Gods ass is going to hell? It just makes no sense to me. What about people born into other religions? Another thing is the fact that not everyone gets equal oppurtunity to be "forgiven" by your "almighty" god. If a little 3 year old gets killed in a tsunami whose parents are hindu going to hell? Also one of those people who come to your door told me once that if you speak out against god youre going to hell, that its a crime he doesnt forgive. So a person that commits murder can be forgiven but a rebellious 11 year old who "knows no better" can't?

I am not atheist, not agnostic[sp], nor religious, I have not decided wether God exists or not, but I dismiss all these religions as crap. Yes I understand their "virtues" and that religion does keep some people good, but I would take all religions more seriously if it were not for the hell thing by christianity.

Why don't you go ask a catholic priest and really get the facts about hell. You will be suprised. Do you really know the rules and ordinances that go along with hell?

Why even take hell in a literal sense? Religion doesn't have to be strict. You can take christianity as a metaphor. It can be open ended; open for interpretation. That's how I take it. What if the idea behind hell isn't eternal physical punishment, but actually eternal mental anguish over the knowledge that you know you sinned? What if it's all a metaphor for the conscience? Heaven and hell are just about being at peace with one's conscience? Don't take everything as it's presented at you. If you're going to take a look at religions, then you better fucking learn to interpret and infer.

Hell is far too described as an afterlife event to be metaphoric. You all just want a way out of the literal meaning, which is exactly as it is. If it was supposed to be a metaphor from god, maybe it would have said it was. Stop trying to take after Philo and take the bible for it's innate retardedness.

If you study history and about the Holy Roman Empire, you'll learn that hell and such WAS invented. Those damn popes wanted so much control they made up so many lies. Remember that the church was against regular people being able to read the bible. They wanted the power for themselves so they made up such things.

hmm... I had heard that it was originally believed that people don't go to hell, they go to the "lake of fire" as a way of purging out their sins. Then afterwards they would be reincarnated on earth. And this was only for really evil people, too. The fallen angels were either in hell or on earth, depending on what source you go to.

quote:Originally posted by Kodadragoon:

If you study history and about the Holy Roman Empire, you'll learn that hell and such WAS invented. Those damn popes wanted so much control they made up so many lies. Remember that the church was against regular people being able to read the bible. They wanted the power for themselves so they made up such things.

Good point. Another interesting point is that the name of hell is Gehenna, which was also the name of a garbage dump outside the walls of one of the cities in the bible.

They burned the trash and dead bodies there with burning sulfur. Makes one wonder if this is where they got the idea of hell from.

Hell doesn't even exist in Judaism...so it's rather obvious it's an invention of Christianity...more specifically, Roman Catholocism...it just stuck with the other sects.

quote:Originally posted by KikoSanchez:

Hell is far too described as an afterlife event to be metaphoric. You all just want a way out of the literal meaning, which is exactly as it is. If it was supposed to be a metaphor from god, maybe it would have said it was. Stop trying to take after Philo and take the bible for it's innate retardedness.

Heaven forbid it be a *gasp* an extended metaphor http://www.totse.com/bbs/eek.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/eek.gif)

The reason people use metaphors is to relate complex ideas(like guilt and conscience) to things that people can understand(like physical pain and eternal damnation). I never said it has to be taken as a metaphor, but really you should look at something from all its sides before you declare it stupid and retarded.

If you take hell and heaven as a metaphor, then I think it makes much more sense.

Ummm.. It actually does say that Hell exists in the Bible...

And who says everything in the bible should be taken literally. Who said the parables should be taken literally. The bible does not need to be taken literally. You are allowed room for interpretation. Take it for what you will.

I don't understand why you people are incapable of understanding that things in the bible don't have to be taken at face value.

Ok so lets say the story of adam and eve is a metaphor for two cities that commited atrocities,and that they didnt eat fruit from the tree they did mass deforestation and thats what got them finished, fine, that still makes more sense than hell. One thing though, the original target of the bible doesnt sound like they were people to make metaphors of it. Im pretty sure that when the bibe was written it was taken literally, and recently a very smart christian told an increasingly apathetic population that it could be taken as a metaphor.

The original targets of the bible weren't exactly philosophers either. Do you really think that peasants in early Rome could have understood something as complex as a conscience? Metaphors are made to help people understand complex or abstract ideas. I think hell is a metaphor. You apparently don't. Neither of us is right being as we can't exactly ask the original author.

Whatever, it doesn't really matter to me. I'm just trying to offer a new perspective for what's in the bible.

The philosopher Philo interpreted his own Jewish texts allegorically, about 2,000 years ago. He noticed how the texts clashed with logic and reasoning, so he decided that all the myths should just be taken as allegories. It seems to me this is the same thing you are trying to do. People have realized how ridiculous the bible is, so they resort to changing it's interpretation. Or maybe only part of it? Next, Jesus won't have been a real man, just a metaphor for how we should live. And that whole section of "abraham begot....begot....begot...." section...that's obviously there to teach us some lesson. How valid is the almighty and perfect word of god when NOBODY can agree on anything? There are 3 major divisions and countless sects of christianity, it's just ridiculous.

I'd like to think there isn't really a hell... maybe it's just reincarnation or something until you can get your act together... but I'll tell you one thing: God better have a sense of humor, or we're all screwed.

Hell is the spiritual separation from God.

That's it.

When you understand what that truly means, you can comprehend Hell quite clearly.

Amethyst - Of course God has a sense of humor.

The Bible is riddled with His supernatural sarcasm...you can just TELL.

*lol*

quote:Originally posted by KikoSanchez:

The philosopher Philo interpreted his own Jewish texts allegorically, about 2,000 years ago. He noticed how the texts clashed with logic and reasoning, so he decided that all the myths should just be taken as allegories. It seems to me this is the same thing you are trying to do. People have realized how ridiculous the bible is, so they resort to changing it's interpretation. Or maybe only part of it? Next, Jesus won't have been a real man, just a metaphor for how we should live. And that whole section of "abraham begot....begot....begot...." section...that's obviously there to teach us some lesson. How valid is the almighty and perfect word of god when NOBODY can agree on anything? There are 3 major divisions and countless sects of christianity, it's just ridiculous.

Or MAYBE, just MAYBE the bible was originally intended to be taken in a non-literal sense. Do you know that it was supposed to be taken just the way it is? Why does it have to be taken that way? If you read a novel like Animal Farm or 1984 or Watership Down, or even A Modest Proposal, do you take what the author has written at face value? No! you interpret and infer what point the author is trying to get across. Why couldn't the bible be the same?

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

And who says everything in the bible should be taken literally. Who said the parables should be taken literally. The bible does not need to be taken literally. You are allowed room for interpretation. Take it for what you will.

I don't understand why you people are incapable of understanding that things in the bible don't have to be taken at face value.



So (metaphorically), you think that the red, 8-sided signs at intersections are "stoptional" signs? When (again, metaphorically), do you decide what the meaning is-- whether it really means "stop" or something of your own choosing?

(Now talking about the bible): You have to have a literal reference point in order to understand the metaphores and the parables.

Generally the Bible does this. God's Word (usually) points out when a word picture is being used to convey another point.

Also, since Jesus is God (and therefore doesnt lie) some of the (specific) parables must be taken both literally and metaphorically... example: Luke 18:9-14 (the parable of the Pharasee and the tax collector -- publican). If this was just a story to illustrate a point, then the the two men Jesus said went to the temple to pray, one being arrogant and self-justified, the other being humble and asking for mercy, would be a lie. Jesus conveyed metaphorical truth using literal truth. And if you think about it, Jesus also conveys literal truth using that same metaphorical truth, and this truth is allowed to be conveyed to anyone who reads the Word.

Metaphorical truth must first be built from literal truth. After a "literal truth foundation" is laid, then metaphorical truths can be built upon, using other metaphores. But since most people cant see much past their own nose, even extended metaphores need to be emphasized with literal truth.. again and again.

I just said that when reading the bible one should look at the content from different angles rather than just the literal one. The bible is literature so it should be treated like literature. I'm not saying that stuff shouldn't be taken in a literal sense, but it doesn't have to be.

I think that most of the bible(new testement really, not that well versed in the old testement) is metaphors. I think that the bible is filled with parables and stories to use as examples. Some of the stories may be the literal truth and are fact. Some may have been made up in order to convey a truth. Neither you nor I know the truth as to the validity of the stories in the bible.

God is a funny guy. He made noah build a gigantic boat all by himself (save a few family members) and then on the day of the flood, God shuts the door for Noah. Like I said, he's a funny guy...

quote:Originally posted by Spic Power:

Ok I see people here are exceptionally sure god exists/christianity is right, but with all their arguements in defense I think hell is a rediculous[sp] concept. Just too many variables.

WHAT I THINK:

I honestly beleive hell was made up by the church to draw members, no not be a non-confromist, but because of the whole idea of it. So anyone that does not worship christian Gods ass is going to hell? It just makes no sense to me. What about people born into other religions? Another thing is the fact that not everyone gets equal oppurtunity to be "forgiven" by your "almighty" god. If a little 3 year old gets killed in a tsunami whose parents are hindu going to hell? Also one of those people who come to your door told me once that if you speak out against god youre going to hell, that its a crime he doesnt forgive. So a person that commits murder can be forgiven but a rebellious 11 year old who "knows no better" can't?

I am not atheist, not agnostic[sp], nor religious, I have not decided wether God exists or not, but I dismiss all these religions as crap. Yes I understand their "virtues" and that religion does keep some people good, but I would take all religions more seriously if it were not for the hell thing by christianity.



and you really think what you say matters in an infinite scale? god created us, so if we choose to turn our backs on him - why shouldnt he throw us in the shit house? also someone who dosnt know about god or has not come of age (i think its 13 or 14 years old) doesnt go to hell if they die, for instance a baby from whatever parentage would go to heaven.

quote:Originally posted by severance:



and you really think what you say matters in an infinite scale? god created us, so if we choose to turn our backs on him - why shouldnt he throw us in the shit house? also someone who dosnt know about god or has not come of age (i think its 13 or 14 years old) doesnt go to hell if they die, for instance a baby from whatever parentage would go to heaven.

So a 20 year old living in a remote indonesian island who has NEVER been exposed to christian beleifs/influence and has never even heard of jesus who dies is goinme g straight to hell? Thats where I find it all ludicrous. Theres millions of people who never get a chance to be exposed to christian teachings, and that convinces me theres no hell.

Why don't you go and learn about and read about the aspects of going to hell before you make assumptions?

It's really weird when people take everything about the Bible literally. Even Revelations. Frankly, it's pretty retarded to not be able to see the symbolisms. Just see them, not understand them.

From my point of view there's no afterlife and Jesus makes that pretty clear. "The Kingdom of Heaven will come at the duration of your lives", "Let the dead bury their dead" and "You have to be reborn to enter the Kingdom of Heaven" all hint that the resurrection of the dead is of a spiritual kind, because the "dead" are already here. So, Hell is indeed "the spiritual separation from God" and not some place with fires and demons with forks. Wow, agreeing with Digital_Savior is weird.

quote:Originally posted by elfstone:

It's really weird when people take everything about the Bible literally. Even Revelations. Frankly, it's pretty retarded to not be able to see the symbolisms. Just see them, not understand them.

From my point of view there's no afterlife and Jesus makes that pretty clear. "The Kingdom of Heaven will come at the duration of your lives", "Let the dead bury their dead" and "You have to be reborn to enter the Kingdom of Heaven" all hint that the resurrection of the dead is of a spiritual kind, because the "dead" are already here. So, Hell is indeed "the spiritual separation from God" and not some place with fires and demons with forks. Wow, agreeing with Digital_Savior is weird.

*laughs*

Isn't it, though ? *smiles*

When Jesus said, "Let the dead bury the dead." he was basically saying that there is nothing on this earth more important than God. Nothing should come before Him.

As far as life after death is concerned, the Book of Daniel contains the first unequivocal mention of resurrection, and life after death.

John 3:16 - For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.

2 Timothy 1:10 - But is now made manifest by the appealing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.

The statement "you have to be reborn to enter the Kingdom of Heaven" means nothing more than that we have to die to self; meaning we have to die to our flesh. By being "reborn" through the blood of Christ, we become sinless in the eyes of God, giving us the privilege of being in His presence in Heaven.

So, I don't agree that all of these statements mean that there is no afterlife. If there wasn't, there wouldn't be a need for salvation, because there would be no Heaven, and no Hell. There would be no reward or punishment for our choices here on earth.

That means the entire Bible is untrue.

The rest of your post I agree with, though. Hell is not an actual physical place, but rather a "condition" of the soul.

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

Or MAYBE, just MAYBE the bible was originally intended to be taken in a non-literal sense. Do you know that it was supposed to be taken just the way it is? Why does it have to be taken that way? If you read a novel like Animal Farm or 1984 or Watership Down, or even A Modest Proposal, do you take what the author has written at face value? No! you interpret and infer what point the author is trying to get across. Why couldn't the bible be the same?

Those books are not spiritual in any sense of the word, and were written by MEN, not God. Nor were they inspired by God.

Why would God play mind games like that ? He wrote it as He wanted it to be read. The non-literal portions of the Bible are specifically titled "parables". In that way, we know what is just a story meant for teaching value, and what is literal.

When you read it, you know the difference.

You cannot say that the whole Bible should be taken literally, because most of Jesus' teachings were parables. Parables are stpries, intended to teach a moral or a lesson. In that sense, they cannot be taken literally, as you would the recording of a historical event.

But you also cannot say that the entire Bible is a story, meant to be taken in a non-literal sense. The books of I and II Kings give a very detailed genealogy, which should be taken literally.

In the acocunt of Noah, it is not said that the telling of it was in parable form. It is written as a factual account of an actual event. Though the account sounds far-fetched because of the nature of it, it should be taken literally, as it was written that way. (if you believe in the validity of the Bible to begin with.)

In the scriptures, God tells us that the Bible is the inspired word of God. He doesn't tell us that it is a nice story to be taken non-literally.

That is why it cannot be read with the same dismissive fancy as 1984.

It is not a fiction.

Xtreem - Not trying to detract from what you said, but I wanted to point out that in Italy, stop signs ARE optional.

One of the first things they told us when we got to our Naval Base was that driving was treacherous to our health, since traffic signs were "optional".

*LAUGHS*

Just thought you might find that interesting.

quote:Originally posted by Sentinel owl:

God is a funny guy. He made noah build a gigantic boat all by himself (save a few family members) and then on the day of the flood, God shuts the door for Noah. Like I said, he's a funny guy...

Umm...I don't get why that was funny.

*shrugs*

quote:Originally posted by KikoSanchez:

The philosopher Philo interpreted his own Jewish texts allegorically, about 2,000 years ago. He noticed how the texts clashed with logic and reasoning, so he decided that all the myths should just be taken as allegories. It seems to me this is the same thing you are trying to do. People have realized how ridiculous the bible is, so they resort to changing it's interpretation. Or maybe only part of it? Next, Jesus won't have been a real man, just a metaphor for how we should live. And that whole section of "abraham begot....begot....begot...." section...that's obviously there to teach us some lesson. How valid is the almighty and perfect word of god when NOBODY can agree on anything? There are 3 major divisions and countless sects of christianity, it's just ridiculous.

Man is a warring race. Why should this fact be any different in regards to how the Bible is interpretted and understood ?

The Bible was not so ridiculous in context when it was written. Our cultures have changed. That doesn't mean that the Bible should.

That means that more faith is required to believe in the Word of God than ever before. When Jesus walked the earth, miracles were abundant. Now, we are hard pressed to see anything close to miraculous, other than natural disasters. Our view of a miracle would be very different today...by the time Christ died, miracles were taken for granted.

Philo noticed that the Bible defied HUMAN logic and understanding. He was wiser than we recognize in thinking that, because the Bible is a spiritual book, and should only be studied under the influence of the spirit, so that it can be truly understood.

Only so much can come from reading it like you would any other book.

The genealogy that you refer to is in I and II Kings, and the purpose of it is to illustrate the fulfillment of the prophecy that Jesus would be born of nobility - through the line of David, both through his mother and his father, though from different descendents.

quote:Originally posted by severance:



and you really think what you say matters in an infinite scale? god created us, so if we choose to turn our backs on him - why shouldnt he throw us in the shit house? also someone who dosnt know about god or has not come of age (i think its 13 or 14 years old) doesnt go to hell if they die, for instance a baby from whatever parentage would go to heaven.

It really has nothing to do with the age of the individual.

It is about the mental ability to understand right from wrong, and choose according to what God commands.

Some people never achieve that mental capacity, such as in the case of those with profound mental retardation. How could God, in all justice, condemn people suffering from such an affliction to Hell because they couldn't decide for themselves ?

This is why children automatically go to Heaven. They don't have the ability to choose, which ends up being their "Get Out Of Jail Free" card.

quote:Originally posted by Spic Power:

So a 20 year old living in a remote indonesian island who has NEVER been exposed to christian beleifs/influence and has never even heard of jesus who dies is goinme g straight to hell? Thats where I find it all ludicrous. Theres millions of people who never get a chance to be exposed to christian teachings, and that convinces me theres no hell.

Nope.

Jesus says that NO ONE will have an excuse not to believe.

Even if that Indonesian man has never heard a single letter of the Bible, there are other ways to experience God. It's not the red-letter requirement that saves you...its the acknowledgement of God.

If you had never heard the Bible, but saw the awesome power of God in the creation of the world, then I think that would be sufficient.

There are many scriptures explaining that, but I am too lazy right now to post them. Sorry.

Suffice it to say: salvation is not as black and white as Western Culture would have the rest of the world believe.

Ultimately, it is up to God's discernment...the Bible is a good guideline for those that have access to it, but consider those in China who are persecuted (put to death) for even trying to follow Christianity. They may go their entire lifetime only having possession of a single PAGE of the Bible, yet they have more conviction and faith than an American with a whole collection of Bibles !

Greater is the Chinaman's reward...greater was his faith here on earth.

pardon my ignorance on the subject if applicable. The main arguement I see is for the bible to be taken metaphorically. When you tell a 5 year old about santa claus, the story with the reindeer and the workshop and chimney and stuff, you expect him to take it literally. The way I see it, the bible was written at a time when average people didn't even know much. people in those days beleived flies came from meat, rats came from rags, and worms came from rainfalls,sky was falt, etc. so Im sure that target audience beleived the bible how it was told.

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:

Those books are not spiritual in any sense of the word, and were written by MEN, not God. Nor were they inspired by God.

You know this how? How do you know that Orwell wasn't inspired by God, but the authors of the bible were? What makes you so certain? Even if they weren't inspired by God, what does divine inspiration have to do with the use of metaphors?

quote:Why would God play mind games like that ? He wrote it as He wanted it to be read. The non-literal portions of the Bible are specifically titled "parables". In that way, we know what is just a story meant for teaching value, and what is literal.

Why are they mindgames? I consider them tools for learning. Just because it isn't directly labelled as a parable or a metaphor, it doesn't mean it isn't one.

quote:You cannot say that the whole Bible should be taken literally, because most of Jesus' teachings were parables. Parables are stpries, intended to teach a moral or a lesson. In that sense, they cannot be taken literally, as you would the recording of a historical event.

But what makes you sooooooo certain that these teachings don't leave the realm of parables? What makes you sure that the entire bible isn't one large metaphor? How can you say that the bible is not a metaphor in complete certainty? You have no idea what the original divinly inspired authors were trying to convey(or should I say what God was trying to convey?). I'm just trying to show that there is more than one way to interpret the bible. You're not right. I'm not right.

quote:But you also cannot say that the entire Bible is a story, meant to be taken in a non-literal sense. The books of I and II Kings give a very detailed genealogy, which should be taken literally.

Why? Couldn't they be exaggerations to show the history of god? History has been invented before. What makes you so sure that the bible didn't create its own history? Nothing in the bible has to be taken a certain way. All of the bible is open to interpretation. That's what I'm tryinh to say.

quote:In the scriptures, God tells us that the Bible is the inspired word of God. He doesn't tell us that it is a nice story to be taken non-literally.

He also doesn't say it's supposed to be taken literally....

quote:It is not a fiction.

It may not be, but it is still open to interpretation.

quote:Even if that Indonesian man has never heard a single letter of the Bible, there are other ways to experience God. It's not the red-letter requirement that saves you...its the acknowledgement of God.

Hmm, that's a very interesting statement.

Are you one of those people who believes that different religions just see the same diety in a different light, and all go to heaven? Or do you believe that religions like Islam and Judaism are wrong because they don't believe in Jesus? Because if you think that only belief in Jesus saves, then the Indonesian man probably wouldn't ever come up with the idea about God having a son who died for everyone's wrongdoings, and therefore would not go to heaven.

There's also the rejection theory. According to it, everyone who does not reject Christ goes to heaven. However, that doesn't seem to be what the Bible says.

There's one more belief that I can think of that could account for God's fairness (for lack of a better word) with who goes to heaven -- reincarnation. Hey, some of the people back then thought John the Baptist was the reincarnation of Elisha.

So what do you think, huh?

Well, I'll tell ya...just not right now. *laughs*

My Percocet, my Ambien, and whatever else I could find lying around my kitchen has officially kicked in.

Sleep has finally come to me, and it is not something that I ignore.

Don't bother chastising me on the amount of drugs I take, because I just had an organ removed, and that is the only reason. *winks*

Good questions guys (napoleon, too).

I'll give them my best tomorrow.

Until then, adieu.

quote:Originally posted by Spic Power:

Ok I see people here are exceptionally sure god exists/christianity is right, but with all their arguements in defense I think hell is a rediculous[sp] concept. Just too many variables.

WHAT I THINK:

I honestly beleive hell was made up by the church to draw members, no not be a non-confromist, but because of the whole idea of it. So anyone that does not worship christian Gods ass is going to hell? It just makes no sense to me. What about people born into other religions? Another thing is the fact that not everyone gets equal oppurtunity to be "forgiven" by your "almighty" god. If a little 3 year old gets killed in a tsunami whose parents are hindu going to hell? Also one of those people who come to your door told me once that if you speak out against god youre going to hell, that its a crime he doesnt forgive. So a person that commits murder can be forgiven but a rebellious 11 year old who "knows no better" can't?

I am not atheist, not agnostic[sp], nor religious, I have not decided wether God exists or not, but I dismiss all these religions as crap. Yes I understand their "virtues" and that religion does keep some people good, but I would take all religions more seriously if it were not for the hell thing by christianity.

I think your full of shit

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

And who says everything in the bible should be taken literally. Who said the parables should be taken literally. The bible does not need to be taken literally. You are allowed room for interpretation. Take it for what you will.

I don't understand why you people are incapable of understanding that things in the bible don't have to be taken at face value.

So your saying that things dont have to be taken literaly but god existing does. If one thing s wrong then cant it all be wrong. Your basicly saying that 3+2=5 but 2+3 doesnt.

First- Spic, if you're not anything, you're agnostic. It's not a belief systmem, it's just a neutral state between belief and disbelief. The only way you can be not agnostic is with a belief system, otherwise you're agnostic. It's a binary choice.

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

You know this how? How do you know that Orwell wasn't inspired by God, but the authors of the bible were? What makes you so certain? Even if they weren't inspired by God, what does divine inspiration have to do with the use of metaphors?



I wanted to hit that, but you got it first. Point seconded.

Digital, "chinaman" is derogatory so please don't use it in the future.

I noticed several of you are misinterpreting napoleon's statements on metaphors and abstraction; you're taking him to mean that the entire bible is a metaphor. Incorrect. (If I may, napoleon) He was saying some things have to be taken with a grain of salt (metaphorically speaking).

Certainly the creation story doesn't seem so realistic in the face of science, so it would then seem to be a metaphor - things as metaphors always stand, because they are adaptable. To those who said "well why doesn't God just tell us straight out?" Well, if the Bible is divine (which isn't my place to say), it was mighty smart to use metaphors, which adapt with culture. In biblical times it was literal, now it's a symbol. It's a good system.

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:

*laughs*

Isn't it, though ? *smiles*

When Jesus said, "Let the dead bury the dead." he was basically saying that there is nothing on this earth more important than God. Nothing should come before Him.

Yes. And He likens those who put earthly matters before Him to dead people. This is a very important clue to understand Jesus. You can't overlook it and gives a new light to things like Resurrection.

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:



So, I don't agree that all of these statements mean that there is no afterlife. If there wasn't, there wouldn't be a need for salvation, because there would be no Heaven, and no Hell. There would be no reward or punishment for our choices here on earth.

That means the entire Bible is untrue.

The rest of your post I agree with, though. Hell is not an actual physical place, but rather a "condition" of the soul.

Ah, but there is a need for salvation, heaven, hell, reward and punishment. It's all here, in this life. An afterlife gives excuses for a life of evil when you have the chance to "repent" at the end of it and enjoy eternal bliss in heaven. From my point of view, Jesus just came here to tell us how things work. Man is made in a certain way that ensures rewards and punishments as immediate repercussions of his actions. Sin works in the same way fire burns when you put your hand in the fireplace. Jesus was just describing which are those actions, using metaphors. Unfortunately people were too stupid to understand Him.

Or was the misunderstanding intentional? But that's a whole new topic.

Anyway, this doesn't mean that the Bible is untrue in its entirety. It may mean that it's saying different things than what people think.

Duh! the whole concept of Hell is made up to scare people into doing what the almighty church says.

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

Why don't you go ask a catholic priest and really get the facts about hell. You will be suprised. Do you really know the rules and ordinances that go along with hell?

Why even take hell in a literal sense? Religion doesn't have to be strict. You can take christianity as a metaphor. It can be open ended; open for interpretation. That's how I take it. What if the idea behind hell isn't eternal physical punishment, but actually eternal mental anguish over the knowledge that you know you sinned? What if it's all a metaphor for the conscience? Heaven and hell are just about being at peace with one's conscience? Don't take everything as it's presented at you. If you're going to take a look at religions, then you better fucking learn to interpret and infer.

... i am so dissapointed with people like you that try to point others to go to fucking priests for information about how they are wrong. going to a fuckin priest to get facts about something they have obviously never seen is like going to someone who cant speak and asking them to sing for you.

Of course this is just my oppinion but w/e

quote:Originally posted by Eski:

... i am so dissapointed with people like you that try to point others to go to fucking priests for information about how they are wrong. going to a fuckin priest to get facts about something they have obviously never seen is like going to someone who cant speak and asking them to sing for you.

Of course this is just my oppinion but w/e



He doesn't have to go to a priest, but he should go out and actually gain knowledge on the subject that he is trying to talk about. Priests happen to be knowledgeable about this subject.

He just needs knowledge on the subject before he spouts his ill-informed opinion.

i was just bored and couldent think of anything else to type :P

If you beilieve everything Art Bell says then Hell in a place deep inside the Earth with lots of screaming people. Because he has a recoarding that was suposed to have benn made in a geologic deep hole test in Russia. Nothing remarkable about the sound itself, it is the story that makes it interesting. They claim these people drilled deeper than the acknowledged deepest hole, capped it and got the hell out of there after hearing the sound. It is uncomfirmable beacause it happened in Soviet Russia at an undisclosed place in Siberia.

Hell was made up by a pope somewhere in the dark ages, I don't remember wich one it was but I can ask a friend of mine who studies history.

In the old testament hell is never mentioned, jews therefor don't believe in hell. In the new testament are passages who can be interpeted as a form of hell. The most progressive christian interpetation of hell now is an absense of god, so if god is not in your life your actually in hell already (ain't that nice).