Seasons
This is a forum or general chit-chat, small talk, a "hey, how ya doing?" and such. Or hell, get crazy deep on something. Whatever you like.
Posts 2,358 - 2,369 of 6,170
Posts 2,358 - 2,369 of 6,170
Hell is a Norse concoction with (much like Hades) is ruled by a bieng that is the namesake of the place: Hel. SHE makes sure that those cast down, stay down, and I believe has nefarious allegences with the fire giants. To my knowledge Hel is where H-E two Ls from.
The earliest referance to a afterlife of perdition that I can think of is in Beowulf and is "A place of smoke and blackness"- as for Sumerian mythology, I don't think that they expected anything but perdition- after all when the great dragon of dark and evil, Tiamat, was slain by Marduk she was cleaved in half to form the sky and earth...
Cheery lot, those Sumerians
The earliest referance to a afterlife of perdition that I can think of is in Beowulf and is "A place of smoke and blackness"- as for Sumerian mythology, I don't think that they expected anything but perdition- after all when the great dragon of dark and evil, Tiamat, was slain by Marduk she was cleaved in half to form the sky and earth...
Cheery lot, those Sumerians
BEV:
"Now I confess that when my new age friends start talking about "quantum..."
You might find the work of Rupert Sheldrake interesting (particularly inre morphic resonance)
"Now I confess that when my new age friends start talking about "quantum..."
You might find the work of Rupert Sheldrake interesting (particularly inre morphic resonance)
If there were no Hell...no condemnation for sin...then why did Jesus have to suffer the wrath of God in order to save sinners? What was He saving them from?
Only vaguely connected to the spirituality thread in places, this is a copy of something I wrote for someone, although I'll likey never give it to him. I don't usually post something so personal in nature publicly, but for some reason I feel like sharing this in case it may be helpful to someone else somehow. If the length bothers you, please click "next".
An Dich
This is for the man who would say anything like fuck you, or shut up to me in any other but a joking tone, intentionally hurt my feelings with cruel words, or put his hands on me in anger: You have a big, sad problem. Especially if you think your behavior is caused by me.
When you find yourself so provoked by something that you know wasnt intended to offend or irritate you that you are capable of lashing out at others without warning, dont you wonder why it keeps happening? I say others because its clearly not only me, this is a pattern. Whenever people unintentionally or even unknowingly annoy you, rather expressing your displeasure to them on an equal level and giving them a fair chance to respond, you choose to act out in destructive ways and tell yourself that you are justified. It puts you above them in a way, doesnt it? But isnt the main reason for your anger your sense of being underappreciated or unconnected? Do your periodic bouts of rage get you what you want? Then why do you do it?
You say that not being happy is what makes you evil and mean and nasty. You say that you are unhappy (thus mean) because of me- not because of anything I have done, but because of my failure to touch your soul. You dont seem to realize that love is not a magic wand or elixir that makes you feel better. Someone is not going to just come along and touch your soul and actualize you, transforming you from a mean-spirited and angry person into your true self by giving you some ethereal blissful feeling, or the impression that everything is good and right with your life. If your untouched soul/dissatisfaction with your life makes you that angry, you need to touch your own soul, and stop placing the responsibility for your personal happiness on other people.
As for your inability to control your behavior, thats just a bad habit- and the ease with which you slip into this habit is a clear indication that it had already developed long before we met. It is the one common denominator, it belongs solely to you, and until you take responsibility for it and get a hold of yourself, you will always feel dissatisfied. Your attempts to overachieve in other areas of your life obviously dont, and never will, compensate for the joy you deny yourself by slamming the door on your own emotional growth. The magic key youve been looking for is exactly where it belongs, in childrens fairy tales, and has no place in our adult world- so it looks like you have a lot of work to do.
An Dich
This is for the man who would say anything like fuck you, or shut up to me in any other but a joking tone, intentionally hurt my feelings with cruel words, or put his hands on me in anger: You have a big, sad problem. Especially if you think your behavior is caused by me.
When you find yourself so provoked by something that you know wasnt intended to offend or irritate you that you are capable of lashing out at others without warning, dont you wonder why it keeps happening? I say others because its clearly not only me, this is a pattern. Whenever people unintentionally or even unknowingly annoy you, rather expressing your displeasure to them on an equal level and giving them a fair chance to respond, you choose to act out in destructive ways and tell yourself that you are justified. It puts you above them in a way, doesnt it? But isnt the main reason for your anger your sense of being underappreciated or unconnected? Do your periodic bouts of rage get you what you want? Then why do you do it?
You say that not being happy is what makes you evil and mean and nasty. You say that you are unhappy (thus mean) because of me- not because of anything I have done, but because of my failure to touch your soul. You dont seem to realize that love is not a magic wand or elixir that makes you feel better. Someone is not going to just come along and touch your soul and actualize you, transforming you from a mean-spirited and angry person into your true self by giving you some ethereal blissful feeling, or the impression that everything is good and right with your life. If your untouched soul/dissatisfaction with your life makes you that angry, you need to touch your own soul, and stop placing the responsibility for your personal happiness on other people.
As for your inability to control your behavior, thats just a bad habit- and the ease with which you slip into this habit is a clear indication that it had already developed long before we met. It is the one common denominator, it belongs solely to you, and until you take responsibility for it and get a hold of yourself, you will always feel dissatisfied. Your attempts to overachieve in other areas of your life obviously dont, and never will, compensate for the joy you deny yourself by slamming the door on your own emotional growth. The magic key youve been looking for is exactly where it belongs, in childrens fairy tales, and has no place in our adult world- so it looks like you have a lot of work to do.
I think he's saying that if there were no Hell, sinners would have nothing to fear, and therefore nothing to be rescued from, thereby eliminating the need for Jesus to die for our sins.
Thanks for your post, Ezzer. It was worth thinking about it. I am so sorry that someone treated you like that. I am glad you see it for what it is.
Your post also shows how personal relationships and spirituality relate. The post about that relationship relates to spirituality in that many people want a religion to magically change them without their having to take responsibility for the change. Wanting a connection is very human--but so is wanting it to come and instantly without effort. I've been reading "After the Extacy, The Laundry" by Jack Kornfield, and I think that peoples' expectations for religion and relationships are often similar.
Honestly, I can see myself in both sides of your unsent letter--I'm not abusive, but I have been disappointed by people who I wanted to somehow transform me into someone better or "complete me". I also have had partners get angry and abusive and blame me for their actions. It sucks. Be glad your free of it.
Your post also shows how personal relationships and spirituality relate. The post about that relationship relates to spirituality in that many people want a religion to magically change them without their having to take responsibility for the change. Wanting a connection is very human--but so is wanting it to come and instantly without effort. I've been reading "After the Extacy, The Laundry" by Jack Kornfield, and I think that peoples' expectations for religion and relationships are often similar.
Honestly, I can see myself in both sides of your unsent letter--I'm not abusive, but I have been disappointed by people who I wanted to somehow transform me into someone better or "complete me". I also have had partners get angry and abusive and blame me for their actions. It sucks. Be glad your free of it.
Actually, there is a 'magic' elixir, but it's not instantaneous: hard work and dedication. They'll work wonders, just like magic, but that's not what most people want to hear. 
okay now that I got some of you to realise that time isn't nessarly a contant then isn't it also possible that a intellegent spirit with emotions and logic could have been the driving force behind all of what we now see? And if we agree even slightly that this is one possiblity then would it not also be logical to assume that this spirit did it because he wanted other intellegnet beings to interact with? And if we assume that this might be true then isn't it also possible that it loved it's creation?
Again, a God who created other beings and wanted them to enjoy life would not want them to serve him out of abject terror of being burned forever if they didn't choose obedience to him. It's like this...a universal score chart, if you will.
Adam, if you believe the creation story, and you do, for all purposes, if you claim Christianity...Adam had the ability to procreate a whole race of perfect humans like him, no sickness, no dying, disease, etc...but he sinned first. And in Romans it says "the wages sin pays is death"
He sinned with the perfect race still "in his loins" Okay, so we now have a negative 1 on the score sheet. A perfect man sinned, and died as a result.
Now, Jesus, a "perfect' human, DID NOT SIN, and yet died. That is the inverse of the "sinned, thus died" That now gives us a 1 on the other side of the score sheet, thus now the score is even. That was God's law of justice, a life for a life, eye for eye, yes, that's part of the mosaic law, which was annulled with Jesus death. Now, if God, if you believe in him, holds so closely to his own standards of justice, even though it caused him so much pain to see his 'son' go through an excrutiating death, called names, spit on, tortured...to save us from...Hell? A fiery hell? He loved us "the world so much that he gave his only begotten son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed, but have everlasting life."
It doesn't say they'll be saved from burning. Adam wasn't told he'd go to hell if he disobeyed. No, he was told he would die. Not part of him die and the rest go to hell either. The hellfire doctine relies on the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, unfortunately another greek philosophy. If you look at the original words in the hebrew text for soul, you will see that Adam
'became' a soul, not came to have a soul. And the Israelites were told not to touch a dead soul. how can you touch a dead soul? The animals are spoken of as souls. NOt having souls. Another reason the hellfire doctrine is not scriptural. I don't really know if this is the right forum to be posting this in, but since we're on the subject, and I've done such extensive research on it, I feel kind of compelled to speak up about it.
Adam, if you believe the creation story, and you do, for all purposes, if you claim Christianity...Adam had the ability to procreate a whole race of perfect humans like him, no sickness, no dying, disease, etc...but he sinned first. And in Romans it says "the wages sin pays is death"
He sinned with the perfect race still "in his loins" Okay, so we now have a negative 1 on the score sheet. A perfect man sinned, and died as a result.
Now, Jesus, a "perfect' human, DID NOT SIN, and yet died. That is the inverse of the "sinned, thus died" That now gives us a 1 on the other side of the score sheet, thus now the score is even. That was God's law of justice, a life for a life, eye for eye, yes, that's part of the mosaic law, which was annulled with Jesus death. Now, if God, if you believe in him, holds so closely to his own standards of justice, even though it caused him so much pain to see his 'son' go through an excrutiating death, called names, spit on, tortured...to save us from...Hell? A fiery hell? He loved us "the world so much that he gave his only begotten son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed, but have everlasting life."
It doesn't say they'll be saved from burning. Adam wasn't told he'd go to hell if he disobeyed. No, he was told he would die. Not part of him die and the rest go to hell either. The hellfire doctine relies on the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, unfortunately another greek philosophy. If you look at the original words in the hebrew text for soul, you will see that Adam
'became' a soul, not came to have a soul. And the Israelites were told not to touch a dead soul. how can you touch a dead soul? The animals are spoken of as souls. NOt having souls. Another reason the hellfire doctrine is not scriptural. I don't really know if this is the right forum to be posting this in, but since we're on the subject, and I've done such extensive research on it, I feel kind of compelled to speak up about it.
Saved from death. Death, if you look at Ecclesiastes 9:5,10, means you cease to exist. emotion, thought, everything ceases. That's what mankind has been saved from by Jesus death, again, if that's what you believe in, if you claim to be christian, because that's just what it is...
EUGENE: Perhaps the hell that JC was saving people from was not the infernal extra-worldly one, but the Hell of an eye-for-an-eye world in which there were no unifying constants for morality and ethics. By the way: "INRI" written across the cross, in one interpretation means (in latin): "And he shall not ask again" thought to be a response to "Why hast thou forsaken me?"
EZZER: Just as the blind will be able to hear far better than the sighted, the emotionally retarded will show great skills in areas that do not emotionally involve them. Unfortunately (the imperical) you cannot help them because they have to realize on a reptillian-instinctual core level that there is some benefit to emotional growth. 99% of the time this means a lot of suffering experianced and unfortunately dealt out to get to that point (and depending on the person's psychological pain threshold they might NEVER come to that point)
CHARLES: a thought- perhaps souls on a dead-end progression are reabsorbed into It whereas those whom still amuse the divine are allowed to reincarnate so long as that is the case. Call it splitting hairs but I have a hard time with the concept of the divine eraseing something's existance. Like the thermodynaic law that nothing is ever destroyed I believe that even identities in some way are transformed as opposed to scourged.
(add this disclaimer to everything I ever say
-but ultimately I have no idea.
EZZER: Just as the blind will be able to hear far better than the sighted, the emotionally retarded will show great skills in areas that do not emotionally involve them. Unfortunately (the imperical) you cannot help them because they have to realize on a reptillian-instinctual core level that there is some benefit to emotional growth. 99% of the time this means a lot of suffering experianced and unfortunately dealt out to get to that point (and depending on the person's psychological pain threshold they might NEVER come to that point)
CHARLES: a thought- perhaps souls on a dead-end progression are reabsorbed into It whereas those whom still amuse the divine are allowed to reincarnate so long as that is the case. Call it splitting hairs but I have a hard time with the concept of the divine eraseing something's existance. Like the thermodynaic law that nothing is ever destroyed I believe that even identities in some way are transformed as opposed to scourged.
(add this disclaimer to everything I ever say
-but ultimately I have no idea.
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar