If Jesus died to forgive us, then why is there a Hell?

@RexRed,

huh? Wow, that went way over the hill...

In this dichotomy we see the difference between Jesus and Paul the apostle. Paul being the religionist and Jesus being the deist.

Jesus relied on parables and antidotes that seemed to encompass many systems of belief, where Paul stressed obedience over rationale and reason.

Paul writes this perplexing statement in Romans.

Romans 7:15 KJV
For that which I do I allow not: for what I would , that do I not; but what I hate , that do I .

Consider the contrast Paul is drawing here in Corinthians.

2 Corinthians 10:5 KJV
Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

Comment: In a way it appears to contradicts and reject the rationale and reasoning mind craft of Jesus for a newfangled version of old testament legalism and blind obedience.

1 Reply

Quote:

If you think that "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you" is morally sane, then why not take the message from Confucius...besides, Confucius's philosophy is way older than the ones of Jesus Christ.

And Galileo's science is much older than Einstein's... What was your point again? Older is better?

Jesus actually said love others as I have loved you which is a bit better than do unto others which was around in Confucius' day as an eye for an eye.

Jesus set the standard for love rather than letting others decide that for him.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

huh? Wow, that went way over the hill...

I think that was the hare... Smile

0 Replies

@Jason Dare,

Note this post from earlier in the discussion:

neologist wrote:

Read Genesis carefully. When God breathed life into Adam, he BECAME a living soul. Note: He did not RECEIVE a soul. The soul is mortal. That is why Solomon reminds us that the dead are "conscious of nothing at all". The state of death is one of inactivity. (Ec 9:5, 10; Ps 146:4) In both the Hebrew and the Greek Scriptures, death is likened to sleep.

Hell is the Anglicization of the Hebrew word sheol, or mankind's common grave. Since there is no consciousness in sheol, there is obviously no punishment in hell. The doctrine of a fiery hell is just another hoax perpetrated on humankind by power hungry clergy.

2 Replies

@neologist,

Neo, "became" or "was made" same thing...

0 Replies

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

Hell is the Anglicization of the Hebrew word sheol, or mankind's common grave. Since there is no consciousness in sheol, there is obviously no punishment in hell. The doctrine of a fiery hell is just another hoax perpetrated on humankind by power hungry clergy.

Neo you are looking back look ahead... What's with the lake of fire?

Revelation 20:10 KJV
And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Comment: Let's hope they are unconscious when that happens...

Cleansing is often not a washing of water but a cleansing or purging by fire. Something to have nightmares about? Just when you thunk it was safe to go outside...

Acts 2:3 KJV
And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.

Comment: Those Bible writers meant business... it is sweet cherubs with harps, caroling angels and grapes or armageddon and flaming swords of endless wrath and torture without end, beasts with a thousand eyes and red fiery serpents to boot.

Vengeance is mine sayeth the lord. I will make you write bad checks and the IRS will audit you! Smile

Psalms 95:11 KJV
Unto whom I sware in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest.

Comment: Sounds like the boogie man to me. Be good for daddy or else, DIE WORTHLESS SINNERS! Smile

It is nice to romanticize hell but again the Bible spreads its own brand of fear, fire, brimstone and intimidation spiced with Christmas cookies and kool-aid for poor Santa.

0 Replies

yeah, about that Revelations stuff.

You gotta give the big guy some credit.

He saved all the really scary and exciting stuff for the end book.

Steven King coulda done no better.

1 Reply

@RexRed,

Quote:

And Galileo's science is much older than Einstein's... What was your point again? Older is better?

Yes, older is better...meaning that the idea that is older lays the foundation for future innovation. "Galileo's science" helped modern science in the advancement of naturalistic knowledge...however, "Copernicus's science" was before Galileo's...and Galileo, in fact, followed Copernicus's scientific ideas and was able to advance better the understanding of cosmology...yes, scientist actually give credit to ideas that didn't original come from them but from previous scientists...unlike religion, which takes ideas from older religions and don't give credit to them...which in turn is called "plagiarism."

Quote:

Jesus actually said love others as I have loved you which is a bit better than do unto others which was around in Confucius' day as an eye for an eye.

Nothing coming from Jesus is original...even his holy attributes, which resemble older deities who were born of virgins, walked on water, performed miracles, were crucified (or killed in other ways) and three days later resurrected, ascended to heaven to forever rule next to his father...nothing original...nothing original whatsoever.

Quote:

Jesus set the standard for love rather than letting others decide that for him.

No, he didn't...you are assuming that Jesus moral principles were the first ideas introduced to society...but you're not taking in consideration the teachings of philosophers like Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Confucius, Epictetus, Horace, among others.

1 Reply

@RexRed,

Quote:

In this dichotomy we see the difference between Jesus and Paul the apostle. Paul being the religionist and Jesus being the deist.

Jesus relied on parables and antidotes that seemed to encompass many systems of belief, where Paul stressed obedience over rationale and reason.

Paul writes this perplexing statement in Romans.

Romans 7:15 KJV
For that which I do I allow not: for what I would , that do I not; but what I hate , that do I .

Consider the contrast Paul is drawing here in Corinthians.

2 Corinthians 10:5 KJV
Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

Comment: In a way it appears to contradicts and reject the rationale and reasoning mind craft of Jesus for a newfangled version of old testament legalism and blind obedience.

What reason?

You are out of your mind!

0 Replies

@Rockhead,

0 Replies

I realize I am not directly answering the question, but something I Have wondered since a few years ago I tried to respond in the religious section of A2k-- (probably should have my heading but since I dislike them and soon abandon them for lack of interest on any one's part and even my own...)

Why does it seem people of either a different faith, no faith or just skeptical in general, have so much interest in the Bible and Christianity, really to the point where it seems they know the Bible more than most so called believers? (by that I mean it seems to me a lot of today's Christians it is more of a cultural thing than really adhering to the bible and it's doctrine of which the last I heard they are even trying to change to reflect a more "conservative" outlook.

But anyway as to the question itself, in the NT it says plainly that Jesus died for our sins so we might be saved and it does require a bit more than just simple belief, after all as James so eloquently said, even the devils believed and trembled.

Lastly, it if you don't believe then in your minds, you have nothing worry about anyway so why is it so objectionable for others to believe it? Is it just a fun debate?

1 Reply

@revel,

The interest of agnostics and atheists in the bible has a very simple answer; the christians in this country are the majority, and they influence our politics and life in ways that prevents people from having all the freedoms necessary to advance equality and self-determination.

As an atheist, I see the contradictions in the way my own siblings who believe in christianity treat homosexuals by their belief and votes. They can't see themselves as homophobic, or that their votes treat others in disdain.

I also find the bible as full of contradictions, errors, and omissions. If it's the word of god, he screwed up royally.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Face it. You are in a minority. Your answer to revel on the interest in the bible of agnostics and atheists is not a simple answer as y0u have proclaimed.

By your answer is would appear that you hate the bible and believers because you do not like your political situation in your country. Not a very good reason, really. You could hate your politics without bringing the bible into it.

I would be interested in what omissions y0u are referring to. You seem to know a lot more about the bible than learned theologians.

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

You probably missed the main message of my post; and I don't hate "believers." How can I? Most of my family and friends belong to one religion or another.

You arrive at conclusions that are not stated by my posts. I don't "hate" the bible; but I will challenge anything that is not consistent, logical, or have much in the way of common sense, and that includes many posters on a2k and any other publication or media reporters.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

I actually can understand where you are coming from as a whole lot of conservatives in politics think they have Christianity in their pockets and use divide and conquer for anyone who does not state or vote with their stated beliefs in both religious and political circles , they have it so intertwined it is hard to see any line at all.

However, the two are not intertwined and never meant to be so despite words to contrary by various individuals who have twisted both the 'founding fathers' intent and the Bible to make it so. If you read Thomas Jefferson letters and others such earlier articles it is fairly easy to deduce the intent of the distinction between church and state and Jesus made it perfectly clear when he said two things. One is what is Caesar's is Ceasers and the kingdom of God is not of this world.

I agree wholeheartedly religion is a personal issue and should not in any way be coerced and really other than physically can not in any case.

I have issues with other religious beliefs and their books but I don't find it necessary to debate with them about the veracity of their religion and I just don't understand the degree of interest shown by others to tear down Christianity. Is all the animosity just because of the christian right and their desire to insert their own particular brand of (political) christianity on the rest of population?

I guess the reason I am so interested in the question is because I am so weary of politics and want to get into some good bible debates as a change of pace with any politics one way or another but there are none to be found.

1 Reply

@revel,

Fair enough. To include a little balance into religious' teachings, I required that our two sons attend (buddhist) church with their mother to learn about ethics and being good citizens. I also told my sons that when they were old enough to choose their own religion, that will be their choice.

My wife still attends church and some social functions during the week at her church. I also accept the fact that most children follow the religion of their parents, but both our sons now in their forties do not attend any church.

The buddhist church does not advocate their teachings into politics as with some other religions.
They don't worry about the "sins" or judge others, but try to live a good human life. I like that concept.

1 Reply

@Jason Proudmoore,

What, no mention of Newton? Oh, I forgot, he went batty and got side-tracked into alchemy and other weird stuff.

2 Replies

@RexRed,

Quote:

Jason an atheist believes there is no God and an agnostic confesses that they are not sure.

Yes, that's right...

Quote:

An agnostic leaves the door open to swing either way where an atheist has shut the door completely on any idea of God.

Agnostics wonder whether a god or gods exist...and they say that they can't make a decision to either side...but that right away categorizes them as being atheists, because they don't believe in god or gods...there are "strong atheists", "weak atheists", and agnostics...all three are considered atheists..

Quote:

While science is uncertain, though often doubtful, of God's existence an atheists thinks he knows more than what is unknown in science.

This makes no sense...isn't the majority of scientists atheist?

Quote:

Thus, and atheist without any real proof that God does not exist denies any chance that God may in fact exist though be in hiding, is sleeping, once existed and has died or prefers to remain aloof.

The argument of atheists is that there hasn't been any proof presented that validates the existence of god or gods...thus, making us arrive to the conclusion that there aren't any god nor gods...scientists even say that the world works as if there is no intervention of any god or gods...hope this is clear to you.

0 Replies

@Lightwizard,

Quote:

What, no mention of Newton? Oh, I forgot, he went batty and got side-tracked into alchemy and other weird stuff.

0 Replies

If Jesus died to forgive us, then why is there a Hell?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know