Hell is it or isn't it

its not going to be interesting because atheists (me at least) tend to know more about the religion then the people who believe it and i've already said like 5 times now that it says nothing what so ever about hell in original text, it was a later addition and the theology of the people that original translated it for western belief and i have been ignored multiple times so if any truths come out its not debated its just "my parents/Sunday school teacher told me it real so it is" and that about all you get in any religions topic from religious people as they only want to know the good or what they have been told and not go looking for them selves.

 

(you may refer to me as you please)
I am glad you enjoyed the article, like you I am very skeptical about the whole past life thing, but as you suggest it does present some interesting findings. I must say I was impressed by the professional and detached attitude of those invovled in the studies. I would not go as far as to say it offers proof to the concept of reincarnation, but it does at the very least offer some thoughts on an issue that is often clouded by bad science and bombarded by ignorant belief.

Why?
equitypetey has quite correctly explained his position on this and I think his view is held by some of the few people who post in the debate section on religious matters.

Time and time again have we seen those who espouse religion and belief based view-points gunned down due to very simple arguments. It is very odd to me when considering demographics that there seems to be a lack of people on RomUlation who can provide a robust defence of religious belief. It escapes me why those that hold a belief do not welcome debate by those who do not believe. @BloodVayne none of my thoughts are specifically directed at you, apart from my initial question, 'why?'

Getting back to hell and on topic. I think there needs to be some thought on the philosophic aspects of this idea. Some previous posters have touched on this, and I think a philosophic treatment of hell could be useful for those with relgious belief and those without. Such ideas as, 'hell is other people', 'hell is what you reap, given what you sow' and ....from Anton LeVay,
“A friend of mine who was a founding father of the Church of Satan, who later I compared notes with, said when he was a kid, he too managed to get into Sally's Nude Ranch, and in the corral he saw his Sunday school teacher!!! That was a real epiphany for him. From that moment on he was a Satanist.”

I repeat what I said earlier on this thread, belief in hell is unusual for those that believe in either(or both) the soul or God, also Christianity has the very odd idea of sin(the idea that a God can be offended by the actions of a mortal) that fuels the fire and brimstone of a modern death obsessed cult. Sadly there are those who do not need the concept of sin to create a bit of hell for those that may not agree with them, Christianity is not the most abusive religion in the world, to be honest most Christians are really good people. It is wonderful that the death affirming and intolerant deity that they worship has not clouded the hearts of many Christians who do not conclude a hell for the rest of us.
There are really amazing and beautiful people in really mundane and ugly religions, I imagine that must be hell.

 

Why?

That's exactly my point. All we ever get from these religious topics are:
1. Religious people who don't know jack shit about their "beliefs".
2. Religious people whose basic defence is "because my parents/family/church/pastor/the pope tells me" or pseudo-science that they heard on TV.
3. Being the atheist majority here that are usually more knowledgable about the topic, considering they are atheists, they completely outdebate the religious time and time again.

Why?
Because it's fucking boring. Not because I'm 'religious' and I "don't welcome debate", as you implied. All the religious topics take a very linear (and tiresome) path...

Let's analyze hell from a wider context. The definition of hell can be expanded to "judgment" in the afterlife (if you believe in an afterlife). A good judgment gives you "heaven", a bad judgment gives you "hell". Furthermore, it then becomes more of a philosophical debate on whether you believe that there is a so-called judgment day , rather than a straight-forward debate whether a place called "hell" truly exists or not.

One can also argue that we will all end up in a so-called "heaven". i.e. There is no judgment day, there is no heaven or hell option. I see quite a number of religious people have this belief. They are religious, but do not believe in a "hell". This is, of course, in line with what Christianity text (or other religions for that matter) states. Since god is benevolent and all-good , we all end up in heaven.

 

hades is another word for hell

 

who knew.... we don't could be the other way around.... now couldnt it??

 

Re: Hell is it or isn\'t it

I suppose the problem then rests with the religious community of RomUlation if what you say is true. I am not sure if I could suggest a solution. Perhaps it will interest you that I am not an atheist or an agnostic. For many years I have taken a great interest in religion but never felt inclined to consider myself a member of any. I think one of the problems that causes such suffering in religious debates on RomUlation is that those who do belong to a religion all seem to be of Christian stock. So we have the same arguments going back and forth on religion from only a Christian perspective. I for one would love to see the input from those of other religions.

I did take some time to think about my previous post before I posted it and I considered your position, my post was was never intended to suggest anything about your willingness to debate. I am sorry if I was not as clear as I had intended to be.

 

to be honest religious debate should be banned from the forum as it always is a bit flame-y and no one takes in anything and everyone leaves with the same perspective as they came in to it with.

 

The same idea could be applied to political or indeed many of the previous debate topics, I agree that many of the the posters and observers may not change their mind on a particular topic, but in my opinion debate should not be about changing minds but about offering ideas. For me, ideas are stimulating, it would be wrong for me to think or exclude any thoughts that people pose on these boards, even if I obviously oppose them. There is no better way, I my mind, for people of divergent ideas to come together than under a shared interest, and in the case of RomUlation that interest is games.

I salute those that had the balls to both consider and maintain open boards that include potentially inflamatory topics.

 

its fun!

 

The basic tenet of paganism is very similar to many of the Semitic religions and the Dharmic religions; the idea that good works gain good rewards that can be seen in one's life and in any afterlife. The basic idea is by being a good person you attract good people to you, and you reap the benefits by association. This is of course common sense and requires no particular belief. Paganism, as I understand it, is very life affirming and while punishment exists it does so in the immediate future of the individual and also in the afterlife. There is no concept of damnation in these religions, there is simply self punishment and redemption.

To me this makes sense as most religions who have a concept of the soul distinguish between the personality of an individual and the soul, so to damn a soul to hell due to the actions of the personality of that soul is wrong. I think the negative actions of personality on the soul can result in negative results for that person, and positive actions also affect the soul. I reject the idea that the soul is at mercy to God, as this idea defies free will. For me the soul is very much your responsibility and not at the whim of some God.

For those that reject the idea of the soul you are still left with the common sense idea that being a nice person brings rewards. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why atheists tend to be good people.

 

its called integrity, i choose to do nice things because it's nice to be nice, i do good things because i want to, i enjoy the things i do and its all because that's the way we should all treat each other.

i don't do bad things because its not a direction my moral compass swings not because i've been told by a higher power i'd be punished but because i just don't want to do bad things.

those that follow the belief of a god watching their actions and that will punish them in some form or another if they do bad can never really have true integrity because someone is always watching them.

 

I agree 100%. To be only good because you fear something is both stupid and dishonest. Most religions would also agree with you and the way you choose to conduct your life is a central tenet to most belief. It is a fine person who can do the right thing with no thought for any reward. For me this is the basis of real civilisation.

Good people are not made by religion, to be good requires nothing more than a commitment to doing what is right. At its best religion can aid a person to become a better individual, sadly a few religions seem to be working against the promotion of common values, such as freedom, respect, reflection and, as you say, integrity.

 

watever you choose, people should not try to change your decision

 

No they should not, others have no right over your thoughts. Nor do they have rights over your soul or your property or your race. Well they may do in places like America and Chad and the UK and Russia and everywhere else. We only have freedom of speech until we are stopped. Many religions would like to us to stop talking. Those that are atheistic would never want the dialogue of those in religion to stop. Who would they have to argue with otherwise The freedom to talk utter rubbish is the basis of freedom.

 

the freedom to talk ignorance....

 

yes! EXACTLY thats what i so don't like, why can't they just leave you alone, if they say you're gonna go to "hell" then why don't they just leave you to go there