The catholic church rammed that silly notion of heaven/hell through everyone’s throat for centuries, but Jesus’ direct quotes? I’m not so sure about that to be honest, although I’m no bible specialist in any way, shape or form.
Hell didn’t exist until JC brought it up unless I’m mis-remembering.
I don’t think that JC ever talked about a place called ‘hell’, but I’ll let the scholars in here answer that question. 
Well for someone who believes in the concept of heaven, I of course believe there is hell or whatever name we want to give it. So the concept of eternal life is salvation eternally with Jesus in heaven, the reverse is what you mentioned. Again, of course to someone who does not believe in that, it is laughable, I get that. And like what I tell my friends when they tell me to prove to them there is heaven and hell - I can’t. I have friends who came to believe from a state of disbelief, I have friends who have also moved the reverse way. So to me, this is really personal. I know this does not cut it with people who needs physical evidence, but to me, it is what it is. I have personally experienced what it means to have faith in God. Does not mean it will replicate in someone else’s life. We are all different, we all experienced life differently. And I definitely do not subscribe to God because of the fear of hell, I believed in God because of what He brings to my life.
One question: why is the notion of ‘heaven’ necessarily leading to the notion of ‘hell’? I know that Bosch’s pictures are spectacular, and that the catholic church likes the idea of eternal punishment for those damn nasty unbelievers who dare question it’s dogmas, but…
To me hell is just but a term use to describe that divide for those who accepted in God’s eternal salvation and those who do not. There are no mention of Hell I think but there are references of words like Hades where there is suffering of fire etc. I think, and this is my personal conviction. That the catholic church generally governs by fear, if you do this, you get this, if not you get punished, the focus is on what you do to get God’s favor. My belief in the protestant Christianity is focused on the works and grace of God.
I can only tell you how it looks in my mind. I believe in God and my faith is based on belief in balance He brings. While a good deed might be a reward in itself, a bad deed should merit punishment. Not all punishment can be exacted in this world, so I believe that it will be exacted in the one that follows.
That said, while I find Bosch’s paintings spectacular, my vision of hell is emptiness, not a cauldron where souls are boiled or a bonfire where they are burned for eternity.
1 Like
So is god 100% a man/male/meat and 2 veg?
I find it odd that people still believe in God, Jesus, Heaven and Hell etc especially in the modern day.
2 Likes
No, but it does give me a platform to challenge someone who says something that is incorrect about the Bible, when I have knowledge otherwise.
What is in play is Klopptimist said women didn’t teach in the Bible. He is wrong. They did.
Klopptimist then extrapolated out from that wrong starting point to comment on women in the modern day workplace, as though you can make a fair comparison with today’s cultural norms and a patriarchal society of some two thousand years ago.
I long ago concluded the thread is pointless. Anyone with any knowledge of anything - in this instance, I do know about the elevated role of women in the ministry of Jesus and also in the early church, especially in comparison to the society in which they lived - is shouted down.
I’ll be returning to this thread later today, currently in school. The argumentum ab auctoritate rather has my interest.
Degree in religion, 3 years you’ll never get back 
1 Like
@gasband well said about Jesus and his inclusion of women. It absolutely was against the cultural grain of the time and he was way ahead of society in that regard. Anecdotally, one of my fellow students wrote her dissertation on Jesus being a feminist. I don’t think he was, and that is a modern day label put on an ancient figure, but the point is there is a lot there in the Biblical record to build a dissertation with, in regard to how Jesus elevated the role of women in the society of his day.
The early church then built on that and had women pray in the public assembly, prophecy, teach… even teach men, which was shocking at the time in light of the synagogue model of the day. Women also took up leadership roles in the church.
That’s my basic point in this segment of the wider thread, and I entered the fray because it was being said that women couldn’t teach in the Bible.
You may be right! Still, I was interested in it, so I pursued an old model of education - be curious, learn about something you are interested in, rather than something that directly translates to an employment skill and can be seen as worth the money and time.
I typed out my wife’s degree thesis (reasons) in theology (first, I made a few edits)
Mary’s view on the environment and I kid you not.
I find this discussion interesting. 
A bad deed needs to be punished, while a good deed deserves reward. Ok, but who defines what is good and bad?
But let’s admit that a standard of what is good and bad is ultimately defined and agreed upon by everyone, for instance the ten commandements. We know that ‘bad’ deeds are often the result of bad education, social misery, traumas etc. So basically, one is more likely to commit bad deeds if already poor, badly educated, or traumatised by vicious parents, uncles, adults. All things no-one can control. Bad deeds will engender other bad deeds, while good deeds will obviously engender other good deeds.
Should the principle of punishment in after-life still enter the equation then? For instance, are traumatized people not already punished enough during their lifetime, even if they reproduce the evil things they endured as children themselves? Should they then go to Hades, Hell or whatever the name for eternity?
My take is that if you reflect about the above a moment, the only conclusion is that such a place doesn’t exist. Either there is no life after death, plain and simple. Or there is something like an afterlife, something in us survives, and then, we are forgiven, whatever we did during our short stupid life.
I for one simply can’t imagine sitting in Paradise for eternity (admitting that I’ve ‘earnt’ it, which is far from a foregone conclusion… 
) while knowing that some poor people have to endure eternal suffering. Paradise would turn to hell instantly for me in that case. I’d take out my pitchfork and rebel against the upper instances!
If we accept the notion that evil most often occurs through ignorance and lack of knowledge, and if God is genuine love and forgiveness as we are so often told, then that forgiveness has to be for everything and everyone.
I don’t agree with the ten commandments (mostly) will explain later. I did until somebody explained ALL their problems.
Which comes back to my first question: who defines what is good and bad? And how?
Good is that which comports with human (animal, environmental) wellbeing? Similar to moral and immoral.
Yeah. The Ten Commandments are absurd. The first few are just a jealous, petty god getting cross about people worshipping other gods. Most of the others are essentially thoughtcrime we have little control over.
Where is ‘thou shalt not keep a person in slavery’ or ‘thou shalt not go round raping people’?
1 Like
Throughout the bible, women are held as a lower status than men. That’s indisputable.
Well, firstly I think it’s not really reasonable to suggest that regarding women the difference between today and biblical times is a difference in cultural norms. One is objectively better than the other. For the simple reason that we don’t stone women for having sex or think that menstruation is demon possession.
Secondly, of course it isn’t a fair comparison, and that’s the whole point. Religious people can’t have it both ways. You want to take everything good about the bible and use it as proof of its relevance and divinity. But when someone like me or @Klopptimist point out something horrible you go ‘oh but that doesn’t count because you have to consider the cultural relativism at play’ or something.
This is why these conversations (you’re not the only one) always go wrong. It’s because you have made your beliefs literally argument proof through semantics and special pleading. That’s incredible frustrating, and doesn’t really get us anywhere.
1 Like