Do You Believe We Are Living In Hell?

[Bill Mattocks]

I'll tell you this; if I owned Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas.

 

[CanuckMA]

Wait a minute.... Hell is New Jersey? I wouldn't think they'd make it so obvious...

No, no,no.

Jersey is where you go when Hell does not want you.

 

[Tames D]

If we were in Hell, we would have no capacity to make our lives and those of others better.

Out of curiosity, how would you know?

 

[Tames D]

Of course, for those of us who don't believe in hell, what does this make this place?

You tell me. That's kinda what I'm asking.

 

[Tames D]

So break out the booze, and have a ball. 'Cause that's all there is.

I'll drink to that

 

[Tames D]

Ok, here is my take on this. This is NOT hell. In my case, life has been too good for me to even consider it to be hell. Suffering, murder, torture, earthquakes, landslides, tornados, car accidents, rape, homes burning down, etc, etc, etc. that hasn't been my experience in this life, at least not yet.

But I have to ask the question, why is this happening to people? Good people. Is this heaven? Don't think so. But it's not hell.

Life is still good. Better for some of us than others.

 

[xJOHNx]

"L'enfer c'est les autres."

Always has been, always will be.

 

[pmosiun1]

Do you think this is Hell we are currently living in? Or do you believe this is an "inbetween' where we will either go to Heaven or Hell when we die? Or do you believe something different?

Heaven and hell is in our mind. It is not something that can be proven to exist. If you pass away and without the function of your brain because your body is no longer function, which holds you conscious and sub conscious, would you think you would be aware of this world?

An example is gut feeling, your gut does not actually tell you something is wrong, it is your brain that tells you.

 

[Joab]

I think this is an in between place, neither Heaven or Hell, when you die you end up in Heaven or Hell. I think this world is more like Hell than Heaven, and I think you can create your own Hell on this Earth but Hell is a place in the afterlife for those who reject Jesus's free gift of forgiveness from our sins. Jesus died on the cross and His blood will cleanse you of your sins, but if you reject this free gift you end up in Hell.

 

[kaizasosei]

My dad would probably answer the question with 'well maybe you live in hell but not me'

But funny thing is, i think the guy truly believes the world is a wicked place. So my dad would be prime candidate as someone who sortof believes the world is hell or Savage, Brutal and unfair.
Another person i know, firmly believes that we have come here in this life to work off past misdeeds. She blames all the work she has in life as the proof of former misdeeds and her goal, she says, is to work her butt off in this life to be able to come back in the next life as someone that doesn't need to work so much.
Interesting takes.

I guess it's all relative.

 

[Ken Morgan]

I think this is an in between place, neither Heaven or Hell, when you die you end up in Heaven or Hell. I think this world is more like Hell than Heaven, and I think you can create your own Hell on this Earth but Hell is a place in the afterlife for those who reject Jesus's free gift of forgiveness from our sins. Jesus died on the cross and His blood will cleanse you of your sins, but if you reject this free gift you end up in Hell.

I’m not trying to start up another religion vs. atheist battle here, but I do have a question?

Is it really about accepting Jesus or is it about one’s actions while on earth?

I may be an atheist, but I volunteer, I hold the door for people, I’ve never been involved in any criminal activity, I donate to charity, I say please and thank you, I genuinely care about others and I do my best to help others. Now I also know of some very religious people who are selfish, hypocritical, rude, dominating, and participate in extramarital affairs. Now if there is a heaven or hell, why would I not get to go, but this other person does? Am I not a “better” person? Do I not portray a more “Christian” attitude?

Again, seriously I’m not trying to start (already), a new debate, that will come on its own soon enough, but why would non Christians who lead good live not get to go? And Christians who don’t lead a good life be able too?

I know nothing about any other religions view of heaven or hell but I suppose this question can be expanded to those as well.

 

[kaizasosei]

Why bother with sort of attitude is totally rediculous. Tradition demands some of this, but to take is seriously is obviously a sin in itself, imo.
Accept Jesus? guess it's hardest to accept the truth. To accept ones life. To accept ones parents or children. I don't think jesus would care all too much about himself being 'accepted' by us dumbasses. I think his purpose and message is served in elevating us to a level of spiritual maturity. But people will always cling to an idea and use even religion to spread their own madness and attempt to gain power over others through such selfrightious and hurtful ways. It's ironic and mostly doomed to bear no fruit whatsoever.

Seems that the first step is achieved in realizing something is wrong. The second step is the ability to remanin neutral and be able to say no, perhaps even to resist somehow. But the ultimate would be to effectively strike the enemy down if not scare him into flight. The enemy being all truly evil or infantile views. Simultaneously making amends and coming to a compromise as human beings eye to eye, thereby successfully communicating. That is more than enough. Otherwise you're just wasting your time, putting your life in danger. Like Meister Eckhart said, what you eat becomes your body but what you believe in devours you and you become that thing. So be happy if you believe in good things.

Howz that sayin go,? Wrestling with the pig, everyone gets dirty but the pig loves it.



j

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I’m not trying to start up another religion vs. atheist battle here, but I do have a question?

Is it really about accepting Jesus or is it about one’s actions while on earth?

According to most Christian beliefs (varies by denomination), it is 'not by works alone' you are saved. The basic requirements for salvation according to Christianity are:

Baptism (you must be 'born again')
Belief (you must accept Jesus as son of God and your personal Savior)
Repentence (confession of sin, abhorrence of sin, and belief in Jesus as absolver of sin)
Forgiveness of the sins of others.

Some biblical passages indicate that you will also be judged by your works, but the basics found in the New Testament are above.

I may be an atheist, but I volunteer, I hold the door for people, I’ve never been involved in any criminal activity, I donate to charity, I say please and thank you, I genuinely care about others and I do my best to help others. Now I also know of some very religious people who are selfish, hypocritical, rude, dominating, and participate in extramarital affairs. Now if there is a heaven or hell, why would I not get to go, but this other person does? Am I not a “better” person? Do I not portray a more “Christian” attitude?

Certainly a more laudable attitude, that's for sure!

Note that no Christian is compelled to do good works, just to refrain from doing evil works. Judaism does commend good deeds (mitzvahs), but that's not a Christian requirement. Theoretically, a complete jackass of a person could get to Heaven by following the rules above - although it is presumed (and hoped) that a person 'Saved by Grace' also changes their outlook on life and their attitude, and becomes more of a loving, caring person such as you yourself are.

As to sinning, we Christians believe that all have sinned, and all continue to sin. Some Christians do not believe in Original Sin, but we all believe that we sin in our everyday actions, that we are not just saved, but continue to be saved, and will continue to need salvation by Christ's gift to us every single day for all of our lives. We cheat, steal, lie, hurt people, curse God, and perform all sorts of sins with great gusto, day after day. In little ways and in large ones. It is only through Grace that we are saved, but it is not a one-time deal like having your car rust-protected.

Heaven, according to Christians, is reserved for those who accepted Jesus as their personal Savior. According to the Catholic beliefs:

http://www.beginningcatholic.com/catholic-nicene-creed.html

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all that is, seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation, he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.[/FONT]

Not all Christians use the same wording as the Catholic Church, but many use some form of the Nicene Creed, so that's pretty much as close as you will get to a description of 'what Christians believe' that is required for Salvation.

Again, seriously I’m not trying to start (already), a new debate, that will come on its own soon enough, but why would non Christians who lead good live not get to go? And Christians who don’t lead a good life be able too?

John 14:6 is the basic premise. In it, Jesus says he is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father but through Him.

It's a harsh statement for non-Christians, but it is a tenet of our beliefs. If you don't believe in the Son, you can't get into Heaven. It's a rule.

You might enjoy this - I think it's hilarious. Points out some of the contradictions in Christian beliefs of this sort:

It is also a question that Christian theologians have wrestled with over the centuries. What about all the people who were born, lived, and died long before Jesus? How could they accept Jesus if He did not yet exist? And isn't it unfair to punish them for not accepting Jesus if they literally could not have done so?

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p122a5p1.htm

Catholics teach that when Jesus died on the Cross, He descended into Hell. Not the 'lake of fire' spoken of in Revelations, but a place where all souls go before Judgment, a place where God is not. Their condition there is not all the same; some await the Judgment 'in the bosom of Abraham' and are shielded from all harm and suffering. Some are not so lucky. Jesus, it is said "preached even to the dead" and those who heard and accepted His authority will be saved.

However, Jesus is no longer in Hell, and therefore anyone who has died since His Ascension into Heaven who has not heard His call, or anyone who had and rejected it, will be judged, condemned, and thrown into the Lake of Fire at the Judgment. Harsh stuff.

I know nothing about any other religions view of heaven or hell but I suppose this question can be expanded to those as well.

No idea there. I'm not even an expert in my own religion.

 

[kaizasosei]

It is often said that the heart of jesus as well as the entire story of jesus is 'a mystery'. I do somehow believe that there is a concious element to the universe and that it knows everything. So the only people that need to worry about 'HELL' are those that create it for themselves by being excessively evil. Tell me about it- Still, the question was, are we in hell over here... but the real hell, if one believes would mean a very undesirable state-


j

 

[CoryKS]

Everyone knows Hell is Detroit. So unless you live in Detroit, no.

Detroit is not Hell. Detroit exists so that people in Hell can say, "Well, at least we aren't in Detroit."

 

[kaizasosei]

What if heaven is right next to Detroit?

 

[Ken Morgan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gnQz32c5EA

Thanks Bill, I love that episode. Though honestly if "Lucy" was in charge of hell, I'd be her slave in a heart beat!! One of my favorites is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KSLRjDR4aQ&feature=channel

Ya know, honestly, again not trying to piss anyone off, but if I'm wrong and there is a god who judges everyone, I think he/she/it will base it totally on how we live our lives.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Ya know, honestly, again not trying to piss anyone off, but if I'm wrong and there is a god who judges everyone, I think he/she/it will base it totally on how we live our lives.

I hear that a lot, and I understand the sentiment.

However, considering that I belong to an existing religion, I am not free to pick and choose the attributes I would most like my Creator to have.

Given a mental exploration down the path of logic, however, it would as logical to assign any Creator the role of one who either does not know or does not care what we humans do with our lives or both.

Nature is indifferent. Therefore, it is logical to assume that nature's God is indifferent; after all, if there is a Creator, nature is a reflection of that Creator's attributes.

It also leads one to reflections on why it is necessary to be 'good' at all. Absent a Creator, there is no moral reason for a person to do anything good at all, unless doing so gives them pleasure or keeps them from experiencing unpleasantness or danger. Morality is purely a human invention; animals don't have it.

One may argue that doing good because a Creator demands it is not optimal; it's not doing good because one wishes to be good, but based on fear of eternal retribution. However, one may also argue that in the absence of a belief in a Creator that demands good behavior, one may obey 'moral codes' that might affect the person in question, but disregard any such moral demands that are likely to remain undetected. In other words, a person who did not believe in a Creator might just as well refrain from robbing banks, but steal whenever the opportunity presented itself and they were not likely to be caught. In other words, in the absence of a Creator or religious demands to behave in a particular way, there is no real reason to 'be good' other than to avoid getting caught and suffering the consequences. Ethics and morality become situational.

You can take it quite a bit further, and it's a fun exercise sometimes. I tend (as you can probably guess) to subscribe to the belief that no matter what ills organized religion cause in society, the underpinnings of all society, law, justice, and even morality, are based in religious understandings. Even in modern secular societies that are not 'religious' at all, the base concepts (killing people is wrong, raping is wrong) are religious proscriptions - not necessarily Christian, but religious nonetheless. Even atheists who 'do good' have their base morality informed by society, which in turn was based on religious codes and precepts.

In other words, you can take the man out of the religion, but you can't take the religion out of the man. Like the old dish-soap commercial; religion? You're soaking in it!

 

[Ken Morgan]

I hear that a lot, and I understand the sentiment.

However, considering that I belong to an existing religion, I am not free to pick and choose the attributes I would most like my Creator to have.

Given a mental exploration down the path of logic, however, it would as logical to assign any Creator the role of one who either does not know or does not care what we humans do with our lives or both.

Nature is indifferent. Therefore, it is logical to assume that nature's God is indifferent; after all, if there is a Creator, nature is a reflection of that Creator's attributes.

It also leads one to reflections on why it is necessary to be 'good' at all. Absent a Creator, there is no moral reason for a person to do anything good at all, unless doing so gives them pleasure or keeps them from experiencing unpleasantness or danger. Morality is purely a human invention; animals don't have it.

One may argue that doing good because a Creator demands it is not optimal; it's not doing good because one wishes to be good, but based on fear of eternal retribution. However, one may also argue that in the absence of a belief in a Creator that demands good behavior, one may obey 'moral codes' that might affect the person in question, but disregard any such moral demands that are likely to remain undetected. In other words, a person who did not believe in a Creator might just as well refrain from robbing banks, but steal whenever the opportunity presented itself and they were not likely to be caught. In other words, in the absence of a Creator or religious demands to behave in a particular way, there is no real reason to 'be good' other than to avoid getting caught and suffering the consequences. Ethics and morality become situational.

You can take it quite a bit further, and it's a fun exercise sometimes. I tend (as you can probably guess) to subscribe to the belief that no matter what ills organized religion cause in society, the underpinnings of all society, law, justice, and even morality, are based in religious understandings. Even in modern secular societies that are not 'religious' at all, the base concepts (killing people is wrong, raping is wrong) are religious proscriptions - not necessarily Christian, but religious nonetheless. Even atheists who 'do good' have their base morality informed by society, which in turn was based on religious codes and precepts.

In other words, you can take the man out of the religion, but you can't take the religion out of the man. Like the old dish-soap commercial; religion? You're soaking in it!

Oh so cool we could do a whole new thread on whether or not we get our morality from religion or we gave religion our morality!!!

I would argue that our morality is based in genetics rather than religion. We have certain inherant traits, as do all pack/group/social animals on how to behave so as to maximize the groups survival. Even very young babies show empathy towards others, its built in.

I find it insulting that people think it is impossible to be good without religion.

My heart is not in the debate right now though Bill. Gotta get some work done, then I'm off to yourside of the border for most of the week.

Here is a couple of good good links to give people something to think about. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCL63d66frs&feature=related

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I find it insulting that people think it is impossible to be good without religion.

I don't think it is impossible to be good without religion. People can do whatever they like, including choosing to be 'good'. I think religion or rather society-which-was-informed-by-religion defined what 'good' was first and then people were free to choose to adhere to those definitions or not.

I would argue that our morality is based in genetics rather than religion. We have certain inherant traits, as do all pack/group/social animals on how to behave so as to maximize the groups survival. Even very young babies show empathy towards others, its built in.

I think that's anthropomorphizing. We may well act by instinct based on personal survival and group survival, and animals may well show what we would consider 'empathy', but consider also that animals abandon the old and weak if they imperil the group; they take females by force in primate groups, steal, hide and refuse to share food, and so on. We may have hard-wired instincts for empathy, and I'm sure that has informed the religions we created, but that does not mean that all of what we call 'good' is based on genetics.