Heaven, Hell, and punishment.

Post Reply New Topic

This thread was inspired by Namiko's comment in that thread about the song.

I expect this comment to come out of a preacher or some kind of deacon, but not a fellow aspie (remember, we're all supposed to be concrete thinkers). Why should a person who grew up as a Bhuddist be sent to hell because they didnt have the 'correct' faith? The thing that I dont get about Christianity is that someone a killer can be sent to heaven if they apologize for their sins and accept christ. But someone who simply followed a different faith is automatically sent there, even if they lived a commendable life. Remember, I thought Christianity was all about forgiveness.

Why would a loving god condem people? Especially since said god did a really piss-poor job of convincing people that he actually exists.

Cause he doesnt exist and there are a lot of bigoted Christians that need to feel superior.

I have examined this theology of "accepting christ" and "just having faith" very closely and compared it with other religions primarily buddhism which has a firm basis of philosophical psychology. This is what I have determined.

In buddhism there are many teachings wich emphasize that we must eventually let go of the rational mind. This requires some "faith" but not on the level that many christian fundamentalists demand. It is a practical faith that is more like a fnal step than the preliminary and blind acceptance of a dogma.
After meditating for many years you may think, "I am only holding myself back" at this point you must abandon yourself, and all doubts and simply continue to follow the path.

I think that this principle is part of human conciousness. And christianity has expressed it in a way that has become misinterpreted over the years.

You sould see my post on the song

I totally agree - about the whole Christianity thing being misinterpreted . . . I've run across a very interesting interpretation of the whole 'Jesus is the way and the truth and the light' thing - that quote ends with something along the lines of Christ being the only way to reach heaven . . .
Well, what this quote says, and it makes perfect sence to me - is that you have to remember that Christ was speaking to a small group of people - and it may well have been true that for this small group of people He WAS truly the only way for them . . .

I just can't wrap my mind around the idea that God would condemn everyone else based on what went on in a small part of the middle east 2,000 years ago . . .

I always say that for me morality is a matter of thinking of what you are most likely to be doing when you die - will it be something good that helps people (including animals and other sentient creatures) or will it be something selfish and mean? That is the basic idea - and I think it is supported by the Bible, the Koran, Buddism, Wicca, the Torah, etc . . .

right on animallover

Christ generally referred to himself as the son of man.
This term is also used in the prophets and it seems to describe the ideal mind of man. Or that part of man that transcends himself.
So when Christ says "there is no way to the father but through the son."
I understand this to mean that the mind must be freed from its defilements.

I think Christ had become this son of man. When he said things like "I am the way the truth etc.." he must have been speaking from this archetypal point of view. Or he was the voice of something that resides in everyone. Thus it is insignificant if someone ever "heard" of him. If they have found the son of man in their hearts then that is enough.

Just my interpretation.

I'd get involved in this discussion, but it looks like most people here are just trying to rationalize away any lingering belief in God, Heaven, and Hell.

I can see why you would say that.
But see I just found too many inconsistencies in christianity, so I started reading other religions. What I found was that they all said the same thing basically. So then I came back to christianity and tried to get to the bottom of it and see how it related to all the other religions.
I could have just said it was nonsense and "become" a buddhist, but I would be lying to myself.

The problem is that a lot of christians don't want to be on the same level with other religions, they want to claim that theirs is the only way.
I just don't see how this is necessary or helpful.

A christian who murders people can go to heaven,
while a good Budhist who helps millions goes to hell?

I could post a really, really long examination of Heaven, Hell, and what roles they play in Christianity, why they are vitally important, and explain that it is often misinterpreted by most christians, but I don't have time. All I will say (for now) is this:

1. God doesn't send people to Hell. People send themselves to Hell. Literally. The Catholic chruch has never actually officially said that anyone is in hell, believe it or not. We simply do not know, and that is between the individual and God. Upon death, if we see God with eyes unclouded, there will be no uncertainty, and we can chose to reject him if we wish (which there will be no reason to, but we can still do this anyway). This will require relinquishing our selfish egos and the sin that ties us to them.

2. It may be through Christ that man's union with God is possible, but that does not necessarily mean through Christianity. The difference is subtle but very important.

3. No, that doesn't mean everyone is saved either. To believe that we, or everyone, is saved no matter what, or damned no matter what is a mistake. We must believe and act as if our actions and moral perceptions have consequences, because they do.

4. Hell is not punishment. The very word "punishment" implies a corrective action of some sort. God did not create Hell, sin created it. Hell is not a firey hot pit where you'll get to chat with Hitler, Caligula, and the Marquis de Sade while being goaded by men in red suits. If anything, it would be cold, dark, and utterly lonely. Hell is spiritual death. Hell is total isolation from God and the despair that goes with it.

So aspies can't be preachers or deacons, and all aspies have the exact same opinions on religion? Bit narrow minded there

Forgive me if this is either offendingly obvious or obviously offensive, but if you thought as concretely as you suggest wouldn't you be unable to understand the concept of concrete thinking? Isn't the idea of thinking itself fairly abstract?

This topic has haunted me for many years. As a child, I was never brought up in a truly religious or righteous household. I know people where it's like that show Seven Heaven in the houses. They were born into that. There are so many who are not. They are born into lives where they know not of christianity and the way of god and I had always thought, how could god not go out of his way for them simple because they weren't born in the right zip code. My own personal life got broken. I was a catholic but didn't receive communion until i was in like year 10. Then, alot of things happened in my life that hurt me. I used to pray to god every night but it was like he wouldn't listen. (I don't mean he in any real sense, it's just convenient). I had broken quite a few of the commandments. And i did so knowingly. I had felt so rejected by god. I used to say, 'I believe in god but he doesn't believe in me'.

It's a feeling like you're seperated from everything else. That is a kind of hell.

And so I've always had this guilt with me. I have been able to admit things and there's not a day that goes by that I don't think about it. My repentence feels so elusive.

So over the last few years, I suppose you could say I had gotten angry at god, he probably didn't like it. I said things like, I refuse to believe in a god that would not stop a soul from going to hell. A god that lets even just one fall is not the embodiment of goodness. I read things in the bible like, 'God is a jealous god, that's why you can only worship him' and I thought to myself, maybe that's a reflection upon the whole god created man in his own image. If god created man in his own image, that would therefore mean god has many qualities akin to man. What do we know about man? For every beautiful act they are capable of, they can commit so many unbearable acts of cruelty. Maybe worst of all, men can turn their backs on others in need. I think to myself, this god of man could be anyone I know really. It could be one of my friends, one of the people I see the street. Just a person controlling everything. If that's the case, are they the embodiment of god.

I read somewhere that the whole worshipping of false gods doesn't just refer to other religious, but it also refers to people's perceptions of god ourselves. Do we create our own version of god based on our wants and needs. If that's the case, is it the true god?

So I suppose there's a couple of scenarious. Firstly, there's no god. If that's the case, maybe the existentialists are right and you need to give meaning to your own life. Secondly, there's a god that's the purest embodiment of good and that god would not let a single human life fall into eternal tragedy. That in my mind is the true god of forgiveness. I know there are inumerable laws of god as written in books of men, but god is the greatest power and he can rewrite them. I suppose there's other options, but to me the final one is the god with the qualities of a man. That's the one who writes the list and says do not do this or you could go to hell. I am a catholic but I have free will. And if the god that exists is jealous and petty and small and is not all caring or loving... then, really, is he all that good?

I may be worshipping false gods in the minds of some people, maybe even in god's, but I'm sure that even the worst case scenario of the flawed god, I'd think that that god would like to believe in mine too. A flawed god would have to spend existence not knowing what it would be like to be truly godlike. In the words of T.H.White, 'Might is not right'. It's what you do with your power that defines your goodness.

BTW as of this time, god and I are on speaking terms.

There is no way about it. According to mainstream Christianity, buddhists, jews, muslims, etc are all going to hell, no matter how "good" they may be. If you start interpreting it in a different way, then that's not christianity, it's something you are making up. Christianity is very unwavering in its beliefs.

You might not like it. You might not agree with it. I don't. But God is the one with all the cosmic powers and stuff, and he does whatever the hell he pleases. It's not about what's fair and what isn't, it's about what God chooses to do. If he chooses to send people to hell, he can, because that's his prerogative- he's God.

Don't ask me, because I don't know why, but it's like that, and that's the way it is.

[quote="Sanityisoverrated"][quote]But God is the one with all the cosmic powers and stuff, and he does whatever the hell he pleases. [quote]

He does whatever the HELL he pleases. I don't know if that's ironic or not.

If that's the case, he sounds like a jerk and I wouldn't invite him around for dinner or lend him any money.

The paradox of the afterlife: nothing has been proven. Because if you could prove, beyond doubt that doing or believing 'X' would guarantee entrance into a blissful afterlife, everyone would do or believe 'X'.

Since rather than believing and doing 'X', everybody argues about 'X', 'Y', 'Z', 'Epsilon', etc, so by contradiction nobody's come up with a convincing proof yet.

For non-convincing (but funny) proofs see http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm