Out of the Haiti comes the question of whether hell exists or not.
Who presented the idea and why? Does it exist? Does there have to be one to make us behave - whatever good behaviour is? Or to make us capeable of living with injustice in this life?
Printable View
Out of the Haiti comes the question of whether hell exists or not.
Who presented the idea and why? Does it exist? Does there have to be one to make us behave - whatever good behaviour is? Or to make us capeable of living with injustice in this life?
I fail to see how the concept of "Hell" comes out of Haiti when its origens are far older than than that?
This basically sounds like yet another "is there a god or not" threads.
As much as I hate to quote Wiki due to its inconsistensies and lack of peer review:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell
Even a cursurery glance through the article will show you the concept is as old as sin itself, and differs depending upon which religion and historical era you study it from.
If my preception of the implication infered from above is correct your question is the same one asked by the philosophical field of ethics.
I agree with denuseri, this is basically the same as asking if there is a god. Without gods there can be no heaven or hell.
But then, is the reverse true? Can you have gods without having heaven or hell?
It would seem to me that, if you define heaven as a place of reward where your soul lives with the gods, then you must have a hell, a place of punishment, even if it's only a place without the gods. This seems to be the basic concept behind most religions.
And if you have a heaven without a hell? Then it doesn't matter if there are gods or not. Regardless of what you do, you end up in the same place.
What about heaven and hell without gods? Well, that doesn't work! Who decides who goes where?
I think being an atheist is easier. No gods, no heaven, no hell. Just here and now.
LOL, I think that was exactly what he meant... the question was raised within the thread about the Haiti quake as proof of god or not. Not that the concept of Hell originated in Haiti, and he started this thread as an offshoot topic.Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
And as far as that is concerned, you can totally believe in God and not believe in Hell as a place for punishment.
For that matter, you can believe there is no god (are no gods) and still believe that there is an afterlife... another plane of existance... or even multiple planes of existance... or even planes of existance into which you gain entry based on the residual "charge" of karmic energy you carry with you.
Carry a negative charge and you end up on the same plane with all the rest of the people who were evil on our current plane.
We have no idea what lies beyond... or not.
Try sliding that one past Pat Robertson. He knows. God told him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozme52
If anything, that's both proof of God and that S/He has a sense of humor. :4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Obviously! Only a god with a very warped sense of humor could have saddled the Earth with both you and I at the same time.:26:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozme52
The idea of hell or no hell was raised in the course of the Haiti discussion, and I think it merits a discussion on its own.Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
Why? Is an idea of a god inseperateable from the idea of Hell??Quote:
This basically sounds like yet another "is there a god or not" threads.
I know wikepedia like everybody else, thank you. But I am much more interested in what people think on an individual basis. That is why I am asking here, and not doing a research on the net about it.Quote:
As much as I hate to quote Wiki due to its inconsistensies and lack of peer review:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell
Even a cursurery glance through the article will show you the concept is as old as sin itself, and differs depending upon which religion and historical era you study it from.
Well, this is the philosophical list, right?Quote:
If my preception of the implication infered from above is correct your question is the same one asked by the philosophical field of ethics.
Why - excuse me - on earth not? It is intesting that these concepts are so closely connected in people's minds, I did not expect that at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Pagans have Gods, but no hell, and for many, no heaven either. You simply go back and join the source you came from. Buddhists believe in reincarnation as you deserve, but no heaven or hell. Of course whether or not Buddha is a God is a moot point, perhaps? Theosophists believe in a spirit world as part of learning process before being sent back in reincarnation, I am told.
Some Christians are godloving rather than godfearing, and do not believe in hell. I was born in a culture like that, christianity the official religion that few people thought about, but if they did, there was no hell in it.
Maybe you could have a heaven that you went to if deserved, and if not, you just sort of die? Actually the fragments of christianity I grew up in seemed altogether more interested in life and how to live it like a good person, than afterlife. Maybe you could call that a god without heaven or hell?Quote:
It would seem to me that, if you define heaven as a place of reward where your soul lives with the gods, then you must have a hell, a place of punishment, even if it's only a place without the gods. This seems to be the basic concept behind most religions.
As said, Buddhists think you do not end up in the same 'place' even if there is no hell or heaven.Quote:
And if you have a heaven without a hell? Then it doesn't matter if there are gods or not. Regardless of what you do, you end up in the same place.
The gods do not regulate where you end up, necessarily. The Hindus seem to believe that they cannot, karma decides where you end up in your next reincarnation.
The Hindus would say, yourself and your karma. Except that they do not have either ;-)Quote:
What about heaven and hell without gods? Well, that doesn't work! Who decides who goes where?
I know, its complicated :rolleyes:Quote:
I think being an atheist is easier. No gods, no heaven, no hell. Just here and now.
As so often, you assume that all religions are essentially the same as mainstream Xianity. But even within Xianity this isn't a given. Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe in heaven and hell in the sense of an ongoing reality, or in the immortaity of the soul: they believe that when you're dead you're dead, and stay that way till Judgement Day, when the saved will be raised to physical immortality on Earth while the rest just stay dead and gone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
There is a whole tract of religions that don't believe in an afterlife at all, except as a transition lounge between incarnations. And the Northern Tradition, while it envisaged great lives being rewarded with a continuation among the gods, saw the rest as going to a cold limbo whether they'd been good or bad. (Reputedly, one of the reasons they fell for Xianity, which offered heaven to ordinary folk without their having to do great deeds to earn it.) There is some evidence that the classical Greeks shared this view before they picked up the idea of hell from the East.Quote:
It would seem to me that, if you define heaven as a place of reward where your soul lives with the gods, then you must have a hell, a place of punishment, even if it's only a place without the gods. This seems to be the basic concept behind most religions.
According to Hindu and Buddhist tradition, it just happens: karma is a natural force, souls rise or fall as weights do. You can say prayers for the dead to help them to a better incarnation, but that's like magic, a way of giving reality a push, not an appeal to the gods as it would be in the Xian tradition.Quote:
What about heaven and hell without gods? Well, that doesn't work! Who decides who goes where?
I agree, it's simpler. But only in the same way that living alone is simpler than having lovers.Quote:
I think being an atheist is easier. No gods, no heaven, no hell. Just here and now.
There's a reason the Greeks said "The laughter of the gods is a terrible thing." :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Not so surprising, considering that most of us are fed those ideas from the time we're born.Quote:
Originally Posted by thir
Then what's the point of the gods? Why worship beings who, apparently, have no interest in or influence on your future?Quote:
Pagans have Gods, but no hell, and for many, no heaven either. You simply go back and join the source you came from.
But isn't the point of reincarnation that eventually one achieves some sort of pure state? If it's just a case of constant reincarnation, ad infinitum, what's the point for having gods?Quote:
Buddhists believe in reincarnation as you deserve, but no heaven or hell. Of course whether or not Buddha is a God is a moot point, perhaps? Theosophists believe in a spirit world as part of learning process before being sent back in reincarnation, I am told.
:eek:Sacrilege! No True ChristianŠ ... yadda yadda... etc. :rolleyes:Quote:
Some Christians are godloving rather than godfearing, and do not believe in hell. I was born in a culture like that, christianity the official religion that few people thought about, but if they did, there was no hell in it.
I suppose you can have that, but then I repeat, what's the purpose of the gods? Aren't they supposed to be the arbiters of our fate? Be good so the gods will reward you? That sort of thing?Quote:
Maybe you could call that a god without heaven or hell?
That's simply replacing the anthropomorphic gods with ones that are not. You still wind up with some non-corporeal force determining your fate.Quote:
The gods do not regulate where you end up, necessarily. The Hindus seem to believe that they cannot, karma decides where you end up in your next reincarnation.
:638:Most fairy tales are.Quote:
I know, its complicated :rolleyes:
Forgive me, but I was raised Catholic, essentially main-stream Xian, so that's where the bulk of my experience lies. But regardless of the terminology involved, the concept of virtually all religions is similar: be good so the gods will reward you.Quote:
Originally Posted by leo9
Still, you have the reward/punishment concept. Whether you call it heaven or not, it's still an afterlife (or afterdeath, actually) place among the gods. And you are punished by being sent to hell, or limbo, or Brooklyn, whatever you call it. Or by non-existence. It's still hell, for all intents and purposes.Quote:
There is a whole tract of religions that don't believe in an afterlife at all, except as a transition lounge between incarnations. And the Northern Tradition, while it envisaged great lives being rewarded with a continuation among the gods, saw the rest as going to a cold limbo whether they'd been good or bad. (Reputedly, one of the reasons they fell for Xianity, which offered heaven to ordinary folk without their having to do great deeds to earn it.) There is some evidence that the classical Greeks shared this view before they picked up the idea of hell from the East.
As I stated in the above post, this is just replacing anthropomorphic gods with something else. Still the same concept. And isn't the whole purpose supposed to be to achieve some form of nirvana or high state of purity? Sounds like heaven to me.Quote:
According to Hindu and Buddhist tradition, it just happens: karma is a natural force, souls rise or fall as weights do.
It's still a belief in magic, no matter who you are praying to, or for.Quote:
You can say prayers for the dead to help them to a better incarnation, but that's like magic, a way of giving reality a push, not an appeal to the gods as it would be in the Xian tradition.
Actually, I would disagree. It's much harder to live alone, knowing that you are the only being responsible for what you do. There are no gods to appeal to, no fairies to trip you up, no golden palace in the sky to go home to when you die. And when the world throws you a curve ball (fire, flood, earthquake, etc.) it's ultimately you alone who are going to have to pull yourself up and get yourself back into the game.Quote:
I agree, it's simpler. But only in the same way that living alone is simpler than having lovers.
It's much easier to just lie there, whimpering, wondering why your gods have abandoned you.
This isn't the first time people seem to have assumed that thir is male. Maybe it's because I used to have a picture of me with some random malesub at my feet. Now I have a new avatar (it comes from a classic Wonder Woman comic), maybe there will be less confusion :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozme52
After the Abbagavenny disaster in Wales, i think it was about then that i had a new train of thoughts. I dont think there is either a heaven or a hell, i believe our spirits travel around in the earths atmosphere until we eventuly get high enough to drift into the cosmos. Ghosts? well they are freak shadows of the past. Why is it the out of body experiences are all floating above their own body? Well someone had to say it in plain talk. I would like to believe, but i just cant bring myself to believe there is a heaven and hell in another dimension.
Regards ian 2411
While your beliefs are your own, I again have to ask, what evidence do you have for those beliefs? Ghosts? Out of body experiences? These have all been debunked repeatedly. There is zero evidence, despite perhaps millions of man-hours spent trying to prove them real.Quote:
Originally Posted by ian 2411
I do not need evidence to disbelieve in heaven and hell, and the thing about out of body experiences i dont really believe in that either, but i used it only as a point of refference, and once again i must agree on your logic. Not only wasted man-hours but money, and the scientists and professors will still be arguing about out of body experiences when they are on their deathbed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Regards ian 2411
Bob Dylan wrote something I really liked:
"..While paupers change possessions
Each one wishing for what the other has got
And the princess and the prince
Discuss what's real and what is not.." :cool:
My interpretation is that he's saying that the truly poor people (paupers) are those who are into the material world, and that the real royalty of society are those who explore the metaphysical.
I'd like to think that thoughts and time on this subject aren't a complete waste. It might just be my opinion, but I feel that optimism lies, if not within, at least next to metaphysics.
As for the main subject:
I'm pretty sure Haiti has nothing to do with 'Hell'. I'm not sure exactly what it means exactly. I know for some of the masochists here maybe purgatory would be it. But if we carry anything over to the other side, I feel the most likely would be our memories, so make them good. Cheers.
Damn!! I hate when I do that!! First Alex Bragi... now thir. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by leo9
My apologies. :wave:
No worries - it is not an insult :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozme52
Had problems with the system, but I'll give answering another try.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
I doubt that most of us have been fed these ideas from the start. Many religions as discussed before do not have heaven or hell, and quite a number of countries are non-religious whatever the papers might say.
It is not a given, by any means.
Why not?Quote:
Then what's the point of the gods? Why worship beings who, apparently, have no interest in or influence on your future?
If the first gods were invented as explanation for natural disasters, the first appeasement would be to try not to offend so as to cause a disaster. A thing of here-and-now, and quite understandable if you food -life - is depending on the weather.
But there are also findings that point to gratitude, to worshipping the powers that give all life.
Both presumably not based on a percieved individual interest from the gods.
Your guess is as good as mine :-)Quote:
I suppose you can have that, but then I repeat, what's the purpose of the gods? Aren't they supposed to be the arbiters of our fate? Be good so the gods will reward you? That sort of thing?
Well they might find out then.Quote:
Originally Posted by ian 2411
I suppose I've let my Western biases lead me astray. Again.Quote:
Originally Posted by thir
But isn't it true that, whether they have heaven/hell or not, most religions have some form of punishment/reward system for the after-life? And regardless of whether or not countries may be non-religious, the people in them tend to maintain some sort of religious ideals. Poland, for example, spent some 45 years under Soviet state-sponsored atheism (or more precisely, anti-religionism) and emerged as a rabidly Catholic country.
I understand the original rationale behind religions, believe me. But when you are finally shown that the weather is subject to natural laws and not the capriciousness of the gods, it's kind of silly to keep sacrificing the fruits of your labors for no gain. And it's wasteful besides. Time spent worshiping could be spent doing something more constructive, or even just more enjoyable and relaxing. Money spent on tithing could be better spent on better foods and medicines for your children.Quote:
Why not?
If the first gods were invented as explanation for natural disasters, the first appeasement would be to try not to offend so as to cause a disaster. A thing of here-and-now, and quite understandable if you food -life - is depending on the weather.
But then you must assume that there are such powers, and not just natural happenstance. And I'm not sure what findings you're talking about.Quote:
But there are also findings that point to gratitude, to worshipping the powers that give all life.
as far as i know, if hell descriptions were descriptions of suffering as a result of "sin" and the word sin means to lack, then it could be interpreted as suffering from our faults, or weaknesses. if Thorne, fairytales were to be used for the purpose of teaching a lesson, then the concept of hell could also. i don't believe in the reward/punishment thing for how we live in this life, to me its silly as we all screw up enough. but, if i don't grow and keep growing as a person on this planet i suffer. i suffer resentment, depression, anxiety etc. That version of hell i can stomach. Otherwise as a mom i find it hard to envision sending any of my kids to eternal suffering for anything they did at all and that is the only version of hell i have heard of.
Exactly my point. Virtually the entire Bible was intended as a teaching tool, stories told by priests and handed down from father to sun to teach the rule of law.Quote:
Originally Posted by 13'sbadkitty
As a father I agree as well. In fact, I cannot believe that any sane and moral person would willingly condemn children to everlasting torment for sins committed by their parents. So what does that say about Yahweh?Quote:
as a mom i find it hard to envision sending any of my kids to eternal suffering for anything they did at all
sadly i hope for those who believe in Yahweh that people are spiteful and mean and threatening rather than a God of imperfect love and compassion. i am not sure though, that the concept of a fiery tormented hell came from Judaism. As far as i have been told, Jewish people don't actually buy into the hell thing. Only that once this whole judgment day thing actually occurs that those not in the book remain dead. My mom always told me that but she was a Jewish atheist who converted to Christianity so what can i say about her knowledge? lol this is why i am none of the above!Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
It's true that they don't buy into the Christian version of hell, a place of eternal fiery torment. But they do ascribe to a place, or state, of punishment. And my comment about Yahweh was not so much regarding hell as it was about punishment.Quote:
Originally Posted by 13'sbadkitty
If God had really been perfect, there would be no possibility of Hell, nor would Satan have ever fallen because God's creations, being perfect creations, would be incapable of sin, even though they have free will, and there would be no need for punishment.
If God has to punish men or Mankind, that is proof that neither He, nor Man is perfect. Punishment under such circumstances would be completely unjust.
Unless of course the system is perfectly imperfect on purpose MMI.
"God made the universe a perfect box...then he put a hole in it so we could see."
Zen quote
Why would He ruin perfection unless He were flawed Himself?
Perhaps the Zen sage was recognising this.
Or, perhaps, as I have observed before, God was the first Sadist, in which case, wouldn't Heaven be Hell?
Or maby your idea of whats perfect doesnt exactly coincide with what was created.
If all was "good" would you have a way of distinguishing? Same-ness, without motion, all would be nothing. There would be no contrast by which to preceive nor would there be any need.
The perfection of imperfection, change, motion, contrast. From chaos a new way of preciveing order is revealed.
Yet doesn't this idea contradict the existence of heaven and hell? Heaven is supposed to be all goodness, no suffering, no evil. Same-ness, as you put it, without motion. No contrast. The same applies to hell. Constant suffering, unending, without change. Again, no contrast. So what's the point?Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
The truth is you can imagine an infinite number of variations on heaven and hell and any of them, or none of them, might be close to the truth. We do not, can not, know if they exist. All we have to go on is speculation and drug-induced visions. Not exactly credible evidence.
The point of having hevan and hell may just be to point out that duality exisits. Every coin has two sides so to speak.
You can believe or not in oh say the "wind" for instance as you wish, it makes no difference to the wind, it will still blow upon you all the same.
(though personally it would be refreshing for a change if while debating such things you would refrain from calling everyone;who doesnt believe exactly as you do, stupid, deluded, crazy or on drugs just once, I can assure you that just becuase one disagrees with anothers views on sprituality, it is not a foregone conclussion that they are in any way dimminished in their capacity for logical thought or incapable of being insulted by such sophistry)
That's a good explanation for the idea of heaven and hell, but not for the actuality.Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
That's true, but it's true for everyone. You can see evidence for the wind all around you when it blows. You can record that evidence. Others can see it with you. And we have scientific explanations for what it is and what causes it.Quote:
You can believe or not in oh say the "wind" for instance as you wish, it makes no difference to the wind, it will still blow upon you all the same.
But what if you were born in a glass bubble, never having experienced the wind, or rain, or any of the normal experiences of a human being. As you sit in your glass dome watching the world around you, one day you see that the trees are moving, and bushes and shrubs, and things are flying through the air. If you have no other means of determining what is causing such a disturbance it wouldn't be surprising if you decided that some unseen being was blowing those things around. After all, the only way you can feel a breeze is by blowing air through your mouth.
This is similar to how the idea of gods originated. Intelligent men and women who saw things happening in the world and didn't know how to explain them. So they invented powerful beings who did these things. And they needed to believe that these beings looked just like them, could walk among them. And they developed all kinds of stories about the world these beings lived in.
We know better now, of course. We know why the wind blows, why the lightning flashes, why the Earth trembles. We don't need gods to explain it any more. It's time we let them go.
This comment upsets me, denuseri. I've always tried to go out of my way to make sure I don't call people here names or try to denigrate them in any way. I've said repeatedly that people are free to believe what they want, I have no quarrel with that. And I most certainly don't consider them to be stupid because of their beliefs.Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
If someone talks to God she's praying, a devout person, perhaps a true believer. I might believe she was being silly but I wouldn't come right out and say it.
If someone tells me that God talks to him, I'm likely to believe he's deluded. I probably won't say it, but I'll think it. He may believe what he says, but that doesn't mean he's right. It doesn't mean I'm right either, but you can decide where you would place your bet.
If someone tells me that God not only talks to him but wants him to kill non-believers, I have to think he's crazy. And I'll say so. Loudly. To anyone who'll listen.
As for the drugs comment, which I believe is what may have set you off, I was referring to the practice of primitive "holy men" to fast for long periods, or to use mind-altering drugs, to stimulate visions which would fuel their belief in a spiritual world. It was in no way meant to imply that one had to be a drug-crazed loony to believe in such things. But let's face it: anyone who has read the Book of Revelations has to believe that John was using something pretty potent to have such visions. Or, like any good writer of fiction, he was making it up as he went along.
So I'm sorry if I implied any such things about anyone here. It's not my intention to belittle anyone for their beliefs. But if they profess those beliefs in an open forum they have to expect to be called on them. If your faith isn't strong enough to withstand such discussions, perhaps you should reexamine that faith.
I've spent my whole life letting people make outrageous claims without evidence. I've reached a point in my life now where I'm willing to stand up and call their bluffs. The world is getting crazy out there, and religious fanatics are among the craziest. Muslim crazies flying planes into buildings, or killing and maiming young girls for the "sin" of going to school; so-called Christian crazies picketing at the funerals of American soldiers; Christian leaders claiming that God is punishing the people of Haiti because their ancestors had the audacity to cast off the shackles of slavery; pedophiles hiding in the churches behind the robes of their leaders. The time for ignoring such nonsense is over. We have to fight these ideas, and these people. Or we'll all be dragged down into the darkness of fundamentalism.
You do, and I believe I do too, cast disparaging remarks about belief in the supernatural: All we have to go on is speculation and drug-induced visions. Not exactly credible evidence, for example. Perfectly true from our perspective and, frankly, unanswerable. But believers work on a fundamentally different set of precepts from those you and I follow, and science, to them, is deficient in its ability to recognise the divine. It is we who are to be pitied for our gullibility in trusting everything to science, reason and logic.
Yes, to some extent. But my comment about "speculation and drug induced visions" was not aimed at believers, as such, but at the preachers and church leaders who determine what a particular faith actually involves.Quote:
Originally Posted by MMI
There has been scientific study, and some evidence, regarding the propensity for the human mind to accept the supernatural, as a survival mechanism. (See here about this, too.) So believing in the supernatural is apparently the way we are wired. But when we have evidence which counters the supernatural, such as the mechanisms of weather, or the actions of volcanoes, holding to these superstitions would seem to me to be surrendering your reason in favor of fantasy.
After all, we no longer believe that Vulcan works at his mighty forge beneath Mt. Etna, do we? We no longer feel the need to place coins on the eyes of the dead to pay the ferryman on their journey, do we? So why must we hold so tenaciously to the myths of Yahweh, or Allah, or any other gods?
It is only the dogmatic religions that make so much trouble, in that they can create fundamentalists and command them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
As for the rest, I do not see the harm in that. Why should it upset you so much?
I would suggest that you read some of these.Quote:
Originally Posted by thir
Then ask, "What's the harm!"