|
|
| Posted: 19 Oct 2011 07:18 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 391
Join Date: Nov 2009
|
|
Quote:
Am I allowed to point out the building isn't really burning? Would you entertain for even a second that it wasn't if I showed you something that runs contrary to what you believe?
....
Source.
Hey Pak, it's a solid argument offered in the article, however it is just an argument and one that can be argued from the opposite side as well.
While fire is certainly symbolic speach and could refer to a purgetorial place of transformation, it could also be used to describe a place of torment and discomfort, and at it's core seperation from God.
Honestly, most of our understanding of Hell I would say actually comes from the parable of the Rich man and Lazarus the slave. Where in two men die one goes to what we would now call heaven, and the other goes to a place of torment. There is a good bit of philosophy that can be debated in that story (does the Rich man seek escape from his Hell because he understands the error of his way or because he simply wants to avoid the pain, in that we can take his being shut down when asking for Mercy less as God's eternal Damnation and more as the man's continued self importance, or it could just be God saying, that's it game over you missed your shot).
In the end, saying the bible doesn't say Hell exists is kind of like saying the bible dosen't say you cannot have a cheese burger. Certainly, the specific as it is undestood today isn't mentioned, but the commentary from the writings have lead many to embrace the notion, and really all the opposite view is doing is taking the same lines and writing a differnt commentary on them. There is no real reason to say the new interpretation is better or more right than the old.
|
| Posted: 19 Oct 2011 07:44 |
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
I actually don't have a dog in that race. My personal understanding (which obviously isn't widely shared, especially here) is that Hell is as much a fiction as Asgard or Hades or Atlantis or the Avengers mansion.
The idea that the description of it is based not entirely on faith or fancy and has some basis in reality with which we can examine what those scriptures might actually be saying, is not only comforting to me, and not only intellectually gratifying but offers me the ability to hold a conversation on the subject. This comes in handy when I have to withstand the occasional barrage of questions that us nonbelievers find ourselves in from time to time. Offering a counter or an option where the overly righteous were so sure there wasn't one not only creates amusing reactions but has served me as a form of self defense on more than a handful of occasions.
What is Hell? For the sake of argument, if you would apply the concept to someone who enjoys pain and Hell is necessarily a place of pain and suffering then Hell to this individual would be a place without pain or suffering and to punish them for their indiscretions they would need to be cast into Heaven or some other pit of comfort.
Ideas are funny things.
__________________But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
|
| Posted: 19 Oct 2011 09:16 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 391
Join Date: Nov 2009
|
What are you trying to say about Avengers Mansion here?
No but seriously, yes I get what your saying, there is really a very spritual argument that says that "hell" as it were is just the seperation from God (or your fellow man) you feel when you sin. That heaven and hell are your current states, that you are in hell if you seperate yourself form humanity (which is really the only sin singled out for punishment by Jesus)and is really the lack of pleasure you feel being a part of the human race.
That idea, is actually not hell as a place but a state of being related to your mental state is actually very in line with the norms of the day as well. Being cast out, exiled from your people was really considered at the time to be the greatest punishment one could recieve, even greater than death often as, to be a stranger was to be at the mercy of those not like you and like you in the sense that they had little mercy for those not like themselves. The idea that you could be in exile even within society if you made your heart hard and closed off your fellow man, would have a ring of truth to the first century audience, and a real fear for them as well.
There is an idea that people's views of gods and the afterlife were far less personal in ancient times, and in that your state as a living person was far more important to most people than any possible promise of elysian fields, and as such one can argue that reading these ideas from a personl here and now perspective is more truthful to their intent.
There you go Pak, you likely would have found more than a few fellow travelers in the time of Christ, maybe even with Christ himself. 
|
| Posted: 19 Oct 2011 09:20 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
We would have had lively discussions, no doubt. 
__________________But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
|
| Posted: 19 Oct 2011 19:58 |
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
|
Basically, in politics and religion you seek the truth, and you try to share your beliefs as best you can without offending people, but it's impossible to do that completely and still maintain one's integrity sometimes. You just try to do the best you can communicating, I guess.
As far as as a Presidential candidate goes, I want someone with high integrity and good leadership skills with a focus on conservative values. If he's a Christian that's a plus in my book, but I think I'd vote for a guy from another religious background if he were conservative over say a liberal Christian.
__________________Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
|
| Posted: 19 Oct 2011 21:48 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
That include a conservative atheist?
__________________But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
|
| Posted: 09 Nov 2011 07:25 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 391
Join Date: Nov 2009
|
Actually, I would wager a real Objectivist atheist could have a solid shot at the nomination right now.
They would need to stand up, be up front with their belifes, have some humility about it, of course, but stand firm on their ideals of small government and no hand outs.
Really right now the right wants someone authentic and committed to their cause to run, which is a feel good thing, though not likely to win an election, but sometimes you just want to feel good.
Really you know, the Republicans made their bones as the party of compromise, falling in line rather than in love, and building a coallition of unrelated interests to push a larger conservative agenda.
So their current rejection of compromise now, marks this now as a rebuilding year for the team but one where they want to feel good about their loss.
Sort of like have the one team in the MLB not juicing (not that one existed) you would lose and lose badly, but you could have a clean conience as you went to the game.
Right now the Republicans just want a clear concience, which is why it surprises me Paul isn't doing better, but with Cain (theoretically) on the ropes it might just be his time.
|
| Posted: 09 Nov 2011 14:50 |
|
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
|
|
Quote:
That include a conservative atheist?
He'd have to be very respectful of religious people and their rights to worship and not have a disgusted look on his face every time someone wanted to pray.
It would be difficult to see that unless it was someone who wasn't a firm atheist. Maybe someone open to discussion on the matter.
I couldn't vote for atheists that go around attacking Christians and hating God. Unfortunately, at least politically that's most atheists. A conservative atheist seems very contradictory. I think to be truly conservative a person would have to be at least open to the possibility of God, and to be able to respect those that believe in God.
__________________Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
|
| Posted: 09 Nov 2011 14:56 |
|
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
|
I probably would vote for a hypothetical conservative atheists over Obama. I'm not sure if Obama just doesn't pretend that he's a Christian anyway. I'd rather the politician at least be honest about what they believe.
__________________Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
|
| Posted: 09 Nov 2011 17:32 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 391
Join Date: Nov 2009
|
They all pretend to be Christian Tim. I think that's the point.
If any of these politicians, and I mean, any of them, truely feared the wrath of a righteous creator I think they would find less self serving occupations.
|
|
