BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Mar 13 - 06:27 PM

I never fell for that "what if you are wrong?" trap.
.,,.
I haven't really fallen for it, Jack. I know that I just am not wrong. Just facetiously playing wotiffery, which can be quite a fun game if you don't play it too seriously.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Mar 13 - 06:49 PM

"if some god did create via aeons of evolution,it would reflect badly on said god.
i was listening to a discussion yesterday between an atheist and a theistic evolutionist who IMO did not do so well precisely because he already was conceding too much ground.i would love to see a debate by the likes of dawkins against a qualified creationist scientist like ,for eg johnathan sarfati.of course dawkins refuses - supposedly not to give creationism respectability.on the other hand if he did accept the challenge he could demonstrate what nonsense it is - could,nt he?.well i have no worries about any such fair contest demonstating which position is weak."

I agree with JtS that pete of the stars's latest post is fairly incomprehensible. Are you seriously saying, Pete, that God could not/would not/did not use evolution in his creation, that it "would reflect badly on him if he did"? Are you truly proposing that Dawkins's position would be "weak" if he were to debate with a "qualified creationist scientist"? Don't you realize that there is no such thing as 'creationism science', that there cannot be?

I have no problem with believing things through faith; to my mind we utilize faith in a thousand unnamed ways. But don't call it "science", for pity's sake.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Mar 13 - 07:17 PM

Pete--To follow Ebbie's remark, but with a different twist--

"debate by the likes of dawkins against a qualified creationist scientist.."

I'm sure you find it hard to accept this, but being a "creationist scientist" means he is wearing 2 hats at once. In so far as he-- or anyone- is being a creationist, he is not acting as a scientist- no matter what his scientific credentials. Science and creationism simply use two different standards to defend their claims. Creationism assumes from the beginning that religious claims are correct, and merely look for evidence to 'support' them. Science (done properly) make no assumptions and goes where purely scientific data takes it.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Mar 13 - 07:50 PM

On the whole, I'm ashamed to admit, I don't really "get" most poetry. To me, much of it seems to have been laboriously chiselled from the perpetrator's tortured brain. Not only laboured, but mannered too, in so many cases (though I love to little pieces "Miss Joan Hunter Dunn" by Betjeman - wonderful!). Yet, every now and then, something pops up that kind of cuts me to the quick, says something that I had inside me that I couldn't properly articulate for myself. To me, great poetry is the stuff that brings my own inchoate notions to articulate fruition. It doesn't happen often (I think I was turned off at school by having to study the lengthy and turgid poems of the addled Wordsworth). The little snippet of Blake I quoted a day or two ago:

To see a world in a grain of sand
And heaven in a wild flower,
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand,
And eternity in an hour

...is as beautiful an idea as anything by Mozart or Bach. It's a lovely nugget, a bright light to reach out to, still yet moving, in a long poem that is somewhat patchy elsewhere in its invention, but it's none the worse for that. Now Jack, enigmatically, inserted the word "sarcasm" in front of the well-known Blake-Parry anthem. I'm not sure whether he sees the poem in the same light as me, but I think the first half of the poem is a cynical rejection by Blake of the apocryphal tale of Jesus and Joseph of Arimathea sanctifying England when they allegedly made the trip to Glastonbury. Not of the trip itself (who knows?) but of the notion that sacredness was somehow bestowed on a country, just because the sacred feet of Jesus might have touched the soil, that could then go on to exploit people fully as shamelessly as the slave trade in those dark satanic mills (I come from Lancashire, where those dark satanic mills still belched out their smoke and sent people to early graves when I was a little lad). The second half of Blake's polemic (that's what I think it really is) serves to sweep away the complacent, received religious "wisdom" expressed in the first two stanzas, and almost amounts to a socialist aspiration to seize the means to transform England into a proud and decent country. Jaysus, I've typed bullshit there all right, but do pardon my sudden stream of consciousness outbreak!

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Mar 13 - 08:09 PM

well steve,we can at least agree that if some god did create via aeons of evolution,it would reflect badly on said god.

There is so much wrong with this little sentence that I hardly know where to start. First, no "god" "created" anything via evolution. The story of evolution is the story of acquiescence, over billions of years, in perfectly comprehensible and natural laws using natural materials. I know you find that so inconvenient, but, you see, I have evidence for what I say and you have none to counteract it.

i would love to see a debate by the likes of dawkins against a qualified creationist scientist

Can you have a triple oxymoron? Any scholar care to elucidate?

like of course dawkins refuses - supposedly not to give creationism respectability.on the other hand if he did accept the challenge he could demonstrate what nonsense it is - could,nt he?.well i have no worries about any such fair contest demonstating which position is weak.

The interwebby thingie is full of Dawkins' debates with all manner of people, including atheists, Christians, archbishops, evangelical types, evolution deniers and creationists. He is notorious for accepting any challenge that comes his way and he always acquits himself well, never mind what you think of him. Just google and spend a happy night watching Dawkins take on the world. Your suggestion that he "refuses" is just yet one more sign that you hugely enjoy talking directly out of your vast creationist bottom.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Mar 13 - 09:02 PM

Bugger! I can't resist! Here 'tis in full, A Subaltern's Love Song by the beloved John Betjeman, who's buried in a beautiful place I visit at least six times a year:

Miss J. Hunter Dunn, Miss J. Hunter Dunn,
Furnish'd and burnish'd by Aldershot sun,
What strenuous singles we played after tea,
We in the tournament - you against me!

Love-thirty, love-forty, oh! weakness of joy,
The speed of a swallow, the grace of a boy,
With carefullest carelessness, gaily you won,
I am weak from your loveliness, Joan Hunter Dunn.

Miss Joan Hunter Dunn, Miss Joan Hunter Dunn,
How mad I am, sad I am, glad that you won,
The warm-handled racket is back in its press,
But my shock-headed victor, she loves me no less.

Her father's euonymus shines as we walk,
And swing past the summer-house, buried in talk,
And cool the verandah that welcomes us in
To the six-o'clock news and a lime-juice and gin.

The scent of the conifers, sound of the bath,
The view from my bedroom of moss-dappled path,
As I struggle with double-end evening tie,
For we dance at the Golf Club, my victor and I.

On the floor of her bedroom lie blazer and shorts,
And the cream-coloured walls are be-trophied with sports,
And westering, questioning settles the sun,
On your low-leaded window, Miss Joan Hunter Dunn.

The Hillman is waiting, the light's in the hall,
The pictures of Egypt are bright on the wall,
My sweet, I am standing beside the oak stair
And there on the landing's the light on your hair.

By roads "not adopted", by woodlanded ways,
She drove to the club in the late summer haze,
Into nine-o'clock Camberley, heavy with bells
And mushroomy, pine-woody, evergreen smells.

Miss Joan Hunter Dunn, Miss Joan Hunter Dunn,
I can hear from the car park the dance has begun,
Oh! Surrey twilight! importunate band!
Oh! strongly adorable tennis-girl's hand!

Around us are Rovers and Austins afar,
Above us the intimate roof of the car,
And here on my right is the girl of my choice,
With the tilt of her nose and the chime of her voice.

And the scent of her wrap, and the words never said,
And the ominous, ominous dancing ahead.
We sat in the car park till twenty to one
And now I'm engaged to Miss Joan Hunter Dunn.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 25 Mar 13 - 04:02 AM

The harlot's cry from street to street
Shall weave old England's winding sheet.

My contribution to the Blake bit.

I don't need to contribute to the starry delusion as pete made a contribution that speaks for itself. Is that Christianity? no wonder it's becoming irrelevant in the real world.

Notice how Sailor Jack is becoming more evangelical in recent posts? Hope he doesn't pm a link to Watchtower. It does seem to be getting that way...

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 25 Mar 13 - 10:34 AM

If I knew the following about an opponent, I would not lower myself to debate with such an arrogant, ignorant, unqualified self publicist.

The following from Wikipedia.

""Jonathan Sarfati is an angry man who is a vocal proponent of Young Earth Creationism. Despite his insistence on using logic — using his qualifications to lend weight to his arguments — he often resorts to emotional appeals and name calling.
He is also startlingly ignorant of evolution, as seen in his book Refuting Evolution, wherein he states,
...evolution is not just about ape-like creatures turning into humans. Evolution is a philosophy trying to explain everything without God.
Before going full-time into creationist evangelism, Dr Sarfati was a chemist. He is also an expert chess player.
Sarfati has been a proper scientist, a physical chemist, with a B.Sc with honours and a Ph.D,[1] and claims several publications in this area, including in Nature. It should be noted that expertise in physical chemistry, although a proper hard science, lends absolutely no expertise on any aspect of biology.

Sarfati is an itinerant speaker and author. His ability to sell books or gain speaking engagements is based on his perceived authority within creationist circles, and his status as a "towering intellect". Thus, much material on CMI's website and in their printed matter is cringe-inducingly laudatory.
One article, An Awesome Mind, incorporates hyperbole like
·        "Very few people interested in creation/evolution issues would not have heard of Jonathan Sarfati. His books have become best-sellers—standard fare for Christians wishing to engage those who hold to evolutionary/long-age ideas. One of the reasons they have become such a powerful tool for Christianity is the amazing flow of his clear, crisp trademark logic, which has 'skewered' and silenced many an evolutionary detractor."
·        "Here was someone the Lord had blessed with a brilliant mind like a steel trap"
·        "Jonathan's response systematically demolished their arguments."
·        "The value of having a formidable talent who can quickly provide such solid answers—especially to Christians who feel intimidated by a barrage of the so-called 'facts' of evolution—cannot be overestimated"
If such fanfare fails to drive home the point, the article goes on with a section titled Audiences in awe, describing Sarfati's unsurpassed abilities. In relation to an exhibition of his chess skills,
·        an observer conveniently stating "This is astounding. World-class. The world's media should be here"
·        "It is truly astonishing to watch... For most 'mere mortals' like me, this kind of 'brain power' is an almost unimaginable gift."
The article then concludes that Sarfati is "A privilege to know".
The problem with the objectivity of such testimonies is that Sarfati is himself the editor of this material. This piece (one example of many) carries the byline of Gary Bates, Sarfati's colleague, and who works "one desk over" from Sarfati. But it is not disputed that Sarfati is identified as an editor of CMI's materials, and was chief editor in the Ex Nihilo magazine in which this piece appeared. Although this kind of self-promotion is not unusual for creationists, since they have no credibility outside the narrow confines of fundamentalism, Sarfati's self promotion has reached such giddy heights it would make a North Korean dictator blush.
Sarfati's debating technique is infamous for a "take no prisoners" approach that is so offensive, it regularly brings the reproach of other, more irenically-minded Christians. A Christian review of Sarfati's Refuting Evolution says Sarfati is "blinded by his own ideology and has probably never honestly and open-mindedly faced the main issue about which he writes", noting that Sarfati attacks Old-earth creationist Hugh Ross as a false teacher in need of Biblical rebuke. This is typical. Sarfati frequently retreats to "X calls himself a Christian, but..." succumbing to the classic "No True Scotsman" logical fallacy. Sarfati repeatedly and clearly implies non-Young Earth Creationists are barely saved, and are otherwise misguided, apostate, ineffective or tools of Satan for failing to take a literalist, presuppositionalist approach to scripture. This approach is typical of the more histrionic Creationist organisations, but Sarfati is its exemplar: Giving lip service to the idea that other Christians can sincerely disagree about doctrine without heresy, but taking the gloves off in personal argument, conducting desperate ad hominem rejoinders, and casting aspersion on any adversary's salvation or motivations.
Comments on fora where Sarfati has editorial control reveal repeated instances of Sarfati removing comments from those who rebut him and him then crowing over his "speechless" opponents. Sarfati also regularly retreats to name calling, referring to "celebutards" or "Commissar Obamov".
Sarfati has been known to employ the nom-de-guerre "Socrates" in online forums, even when commenting on himself. This is sufficiently well known that it is unlikely he still uses it when aiming for anonymity.""

At the top of the page which contains source links for almost every point made, in a yellow box, is the following:-

"This page contains too many unsourced statements, and needs to be improved.

Jonathan Sarfati could use some help. Please research the article's assertions. Whatever is credible should be sourced, and what is not should be removed.""

It is absolutely correct on one point only. Jonathan Sarfati could use some help, mainly psychiatric and anger management.

Bottom line:-

1. He has a doctorate in Physical Chemistry, miles away from even basic knowledge of biology, or any other discipline which would qualify him to comment on evolution on any other basis than as a layman.

2. Almost every comment extolling his intellect and knowledge comes direct from his own mouth, via his colleague Gary Bates at the next desk.

3. He isn't above cheating: ""Comments on fora where Sarfati has editorial control reveal repeated instances of Sarfati removing comments from those who rebut him and him then crowing over his "speechless" opponents.""

I think, Pete, you've picked a real dud there, but it seems Dawkins did take him on in a debate which was posted on Youtube on March 1st 2011

Debate

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: GUEST,DrWord
Date: 25 Mar 13 - 10:56 AM

no sarcasm intended. Just precisely what I said ["no disrespect"] and I'm glad you've found some of Bill's poetry!

& of course Blake is more than a writer. My earlier remarks about Blake in context also apply to the medium. Much of the work Blake himself valued most highly he engraved and printed in colour. As with all visual arts there is no substitute for the originals. Pretty good reproductions of some are in print, however. Again: I'm a book and library person, and a huge admirer of the collaboration and scholarship in Wiki. I hope you (and others) find enough in Blake to keep reading. Those of you with access to the Tate can see the real thing. Heavenly.

keep on pickin'
dennis

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Mar 13 - 01:01 PM

Is it just my player or is Sarfati's voice technologically altered? It is my suspicion (unfounded?) that back home in New Zealand or wherever, this interview is only on radio so that, for whatever reason, Sarfati's identity is withheld. The alteration is really badly done.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Mar 13 - 01:59 PM

"Notice how Sailor Jack is becoming more evangelical in recent posts? Hope he doesn't pm a link to Watchtower. It does seem to be getting that way."

Pardon me for explaining my religious ideas in a thread whose purpose is to examine our ideas about Heaven and Hell. If you don't want to read my religious beliefs you will not find them above the line or in a any other thread not about that topic.

If there is a metaphorical Jehovah's Witness in this case it is you. You have knocked on Gnu's door. After he told you not to, I might ad. No one has knocked on your door.

Please, Mr. Musket, examine yourself. Why did you open this thread if you are not interested? Why do you complain about seeing the subject of a thread addressed within a thread? Maybe the answers are closer than you think.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Musket
Date: 25 Mar 13 - 02:54 PM

I didn't know this was for superstitious people only? Pardon my French..

Twice I have contributed to this thread as per the thread title. Neither post was religious nor entertained religion. It merely said that there is the heaven and hell that describes your idea of perfection and your idea of your worst nightmare. Then there is the heaven and hell that is promised or threatened to you.

You, you may recall, started bringing fantasy into it. Heaven and hell are words that transcend religion as they are in everyday use, often by rational people.

My observation of you reflects the way you have started having a pop at anybody who doesn't share your delusion. Fine, I envy you. I really do. I wish I could believe in jam tomorrow. I can't though and find the defensive attitude of religious people on this and current threads to be somewhat disturbing. It seems alright to use the word atheist in a derogatory way, even to link it with the term militant. Yet the minute someone says they don't believe in all that God bollocks, you find it appalling. Yet does it occur to you that the opposite can apply? That religion tries to impede science, tries to control people yadda yadda yadda?

If I ever said I wasn't interested in a thread, you can tell because I don't go on it. If people can address this thread without reference to their imaginary friend, live with it.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Mar 13 - 04:48 PM

Mr. Musket.

Can you honestly say that you opened this thread not expecting it to be about what you call "fantasy?"

Again, please pardon me for discussing my religious belief on a thread started to discuss religious beliefs.

You are childishly baiting me now with terms like "God bollocks".

No one asked you about "religion tries to impede science, tries to control people"

People were asked to talk to gnu about Heaven and Hell.

No one was asked to bash people for believing those things. In fact you all were asked, very passionately to leave all of that at the door.

By you did it anyway. Barged in and spread you anti-religious prejuidices, your mundane and secular definitions of religious terms, your tendencies to provoke, taunt and utter playground insults.   And when you didn't get enough attention for your tantrum, you personally attacked my motives with a snide remark.

You are the evangelist on this thread. You need to live with that. Since I have clearly made my point, twice. I am done with this topic sir.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 26 Mar 13 - 06:09 AM

Good. Gnu can now sift through and see the answers to his OP.

Heaven is freedom to know how to think.
Hell is being told what to think.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 26 Mar 13 - 12:57 PM

It all goes back to one basic, and none of the posts have changed that one iota.

HEAVEN is a carrot, to acquire which the faithful are admonished to do as they are told, failing which there awaits the big stick called HELL.

Whatever posters may make of it on a personal level, it was, and is, an invention of organised religion, for precisely the above purpose.

The Greek Hades was the God of the underworld, the place dead people went to, not just evil people. Once there they were judged by a panel of three judges, Rhadamanthus, Minos, and Aeacus, who pass sentence. The very good go to the Elysian Fields. Others are singled out for special treatment. Sisyphus and Tantalus being prime examples of the latter.

The Catholic Church seized upon it as a controlling mechanism for the population as well, over the years, as a source of considerable income in return for indulgences.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Mar 13 - 05:54 PM

"A cynic knows the price of everything, and the value of nothing."

I'll tell you what heaven and hell are. Heaven is being in the presence of those whom you truly love. Hell is getting entangled in endless Mudcat Cafe threads where people are bitching about politics and religion.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Mar 13 - 06:11 PM

Musket - to add to what you said...

Heaven is the freedom to think for oneself.
Hell is being told what to think.

Heaven is freely living the way you wish to live.
Hell is being forced to live in some other way.

Heaven is freedom.
Hell is enslavement (to a dogma, a government, a slavemaster, a boss, a bad habit, a drug, a religious order, and any other form of outer control imposed upon oneself against one's own better judgement).

Heaven is peace.
Hell is war.

Heaven is love.
Hell is hatred.

Heaven is inner peace.
Hell is fear and inner torment.

Heaven is a sense of purpose.
Hell is having no idea what to do next.

Heaven is being interested and inspired.
Hell is being bored and frustrated.

Heaven is seeing yourself in others.
Hell is seeing every other person as just an opportunity or a threat.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Mar 13 - 06:13 PM

got more. ;-)

Heaven is a friendly dog.
Hell is a dog that wants to attack you.

(attitude is everything)

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: gnu
Date: 26 Mar 13 - 07:57 PM

Don... "It all goes back to one basic, and none of the posts have changed that one iota."

Apparently, you missed my post explaining the actual meaning of the concept as it relates to human "life" and discussing the concept's overall importance re the way one lives one's life, which has sweet fuck all to do with religion or any "child's play" carrot and stick crap. Read back. I am sure you will find it among all the nasty, pontificating bullshit about crap that has nothing to do with the OP.

No, don't thank me. It's my job as a superhero.

I thought my work here was done but, alas, no.

I guess my take on this thread is this.

It went south.

I went Wildebeeste!!!

I was told that my OP had been answered and ERGO... any other discussions or whatever were none of my business, thank you very much!

Welllll, seems to me that if the OP was answered (bullshit) then all the crap that ensued should have been posted to threads about all that other crap or a new thread started.

I guess what I am saying is, nobody can speak to a deaf man, especially if he chooses not to hear you. I asked a question. I listened. It was a great discussion until it was ruined. Now I come back to see what is going on and I see the dog has bitten it's own tail... again and again and again.

I know what the concept truly means. Those who try to make it in any way a religious concept or rule and shit upon the concept as it relates to living one's life in a "good" way simply because they perceive it as dictated by a religion do not - if you don't get that, wellll, don't worry... you can't end up in Hell for being stunned as me arse... matter of fact, it almost precludes you will. Be happy in your ignorance!

Go to Heaven you ignorant bastards! >;-)

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Mar 13 - 09:02 PM

"
I was told that my OP had been answered and ERGO... any other discussions or whatever were none of my business, thank you very much!"

I don't think you were told they were none of your business. I think you were asked to lighten up.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 08:22 AM

""Apparently, you missed my post explaining the actual meaning of the concept as it relates to human "life" and discussing the concept's overall importance re the way one lives one's life, which has sweet fuck all to do with religion or any "child's play" carrot and stick crap.""

With respect Gnu, I didn't miss it, I disagreed with it.

What you, and several others, are doing is taking a specific pair of terms which are linked inextricably with 3000 years of organised population control by a process of fear versus reward.

It is playing with semantics to take those words and apply them to altogether unconnected concepts, simply because those concepts are what you may think of as either good, or bad.

You may be (in fact you are) correct in your assessment of those concepts as good or bad, and I would have no quarrel with the use of moral/immoral, or ethical/unethical, but heaven, or hell they absolutely are not.

If one accepts the existence of heaven and hell, as propounded by the Ancient Greeks and much more so by the Catholic Church, they would, by definition be so far exceeding just good or evil as to be beyond our capacity to imagine.

If you don't believe in them (as I don't), they are a simple controlling mechanism.

The bottom line for me is this. Depending on your belief, they are either too good, or not good enough to apply to the concepts expressed here.

I hope this is comprehensible, as I had considerable difficulty in figuring out why I felt as I do.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 08:51 AM

There are innumerable different views about the concept of Heaven and Hell, Don, and they are found in most cultures that have ever existed, certainly aren't restricted to the Roman Catholic Church or the Greek Mythos.

What they all have to do with is human conduct in a moral sense, and the long range results and consequences of human conduct....this being a philosophical matter that is of great concern to ANY even moderately civilized community of human beings. The basic idea is this: Good conduct leads to good results in the long run. Bad conduct leads to suffering of one type or another...and may lead to punishment of one type or another...in the long run. (It also leads to people not liking you!)

We all know this. It's self-evident. It is reflected in the rules we teach our children about personal conduct, and in the civil laws that our communities enact to regulate conduct and to prevent (or punish) crimes.

You can call it "carrot and stick" if you want to...(shrug)...it doesn't matter...it's still necessary to have bad consequences for destructive actions in a community and in a society, and everyone understands that.

To extend these same factors into ideas about a world of spirit or an afterlife is perfectly natural....and most civilizations have believed in something spiritual and have had ideas about an afterlife (or ideas about karma and reincarnation).

What is surprising about any of that, and why would anyone find it objectionable?

You feel that the Church has used stories about Hell to control people? Well, yeah!!!! Secular society uses stories about arrest, trial, and jail time...and even execution....to control people! Meaning: to control their behaviour so they will hesitate before breaking the law.

As I said above...what is surprising about any of that? It's an inevitable feature of people attempting to form and regulate a workable, complex society.

Good behaviour has good results. Bad behaviour results in punishment and suffering as natural consequences OF that bad behaviour.

If it's that way in secular life, and it bloody well is, then why the hell shouldn't it be that way in religion too???????????? As above, so below. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. You commit the crime, you pay the price.

I gather you don't object to secular society controlling people through fear of punishment when they break civil laws. Why would you object to the church attempting to control people through fear of punishment when they break spiritual laws? (most of which are based on ordinary morality anyway)

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 09:17 AM

Good behaviour has good results. Bad behaviour results in punishment and suffering as natural consequences OF that bad behaviour.

If it's that way in secular life, and it bloody well is, then why the hell shouldn't it be that way in religion too???????????? As above, so below. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. You commit the crime, you pay the price.

I gather you don't object to secular society controlling people through fear of punishment when they break civil laws. Why would you object to the church attempting to control people through fear of punishment when they break spiritual laws?

Not very New Testament, this lot, is it?

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 09:28 AM

I know what you mean, Steve. ;-) But we all know perfectly well that behaving like a prat gets you into trouble eventually, don't we? Do you have any objection to that notion or would you favor a world where being a total prat doesn't bear any consequences at all? Tell me.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 11:58 AM

Gnu

I have to disagree with Don. At least in small part. Yes Heaven and Hell are very old concepts. They have been analyzed and referenced for at least 2000 years, by priests, by authors. The most influential example, Dante wasn't just presenting a stick. He was illustrating the moral comparison of earthly sins and saying some interesting things about human nature.

All of these analyses. All of these writings add up to one clear conclusion. There cannot be just one clear definition of "Heaven" or "Hell" you are welcome to say yours is right. But if someone sincerely tell you what it means to them, you have no ground to say that they were wrong. I think that every answer on this thread but one was a legitimate answer to your question and deserves respect.

On the other hand

If it is clear that they are taking the piss and deliberately misunderstanding, trivializing and mocking the question, As one person on the thread has done. Have at 'em.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 12:47 PM

Hello sailor!

And what gives you the right to be serious?

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 12:51 PM

Hello hand cannon! Shooting off another wad I see.

Its not a matter of rights. Its a matter of choice.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 01:19 PM

Well stop moaning about the choice of others then.

Anyway, thanks for calling me a wanker. Your Bible reckons that's a sin you know. You'll never go to heaven whilst being fascinated with my hell..

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 01:57 PM

I was just doing onto you something that gave you great pleasure.

Two things really, since it allowed you to express sure knowledge in something you claim no interest in. Be careful though. Every Christian judgement you make brings you one step closer to salvation.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 02:15 PM

Actually, Musket, the "sin of Onan" as described in Genesis, although often used as a synonym for the activity you rubricate above, was, from the words used,"spilled his seed on the ground", rather an act of coitus interruptus, surely, than of masturbation?

~M~ OLP (Official Legendary Pedant)

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 02:33 PM

""You feel that the Church has used stories about Hell to control people? Well, yeah!!!!""

It's not control per se that I disagree with. It's control by "Fairy Godmother" versus "Bogeyman".

Arrest jail time and execution are real, as are honours and knighthoods and the equivalents round the world.

Also that control has been misused for the material enrichment of the controllers. Go look at any major Catholic or orthodox Christian cathedral, or better still the Vatican, and see what they have accumulated, then consider how many poor people and sick people could be helped.

There are of course Christian churches which don't have the same riches, and they tend to be the more modern offshoots.

Our own Church of England owns huge areas of land, yet bullies parishioners to fund raise for maintenance costs of their churches.

None of that is a particularly edifying endorsement of the use of Heaven and Hel which has facilitated it.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 03:38 PM

Yes, you make some good points there, Don. The churches have, of course, often abused their power....and have often been taken over by greedy men who were out to increase their own wealth and power, in truth, rather than pursuing any honest spiritual ends. Such is the folly of humanity. You could say exactly the same thing about our political systems, banking systems, and large businesses....all were originally based upon worthy intentions, but have often become corrupted through the self-serving actions of venal men. Any system is only as good as the people at the top of that system.

You say that "Arrest jail time and execution are real, as are honours and knighthoods and the equivalents round the world."

Yes. We know they're real because they occur in this physical reality.

Spiritual rewards and consequences may well also be real. If so, they don't occur in this reality, but in another. We have no way of proving or disproving that at present, since direct proof of any other hypothetical reality is not attainable in this one, so we can neither categorically confirm nor categorically deny the possibility of spiritual consequences for one's actions.

There are countless ideas about Heaven and Hell, and about reincarnation, and karma, and various other theories. I don't know which is right...or if any of them are right...but I'm certainly willing to consider them as possibilities. I don't deny what I have no proof against...nor do I insist upon what I have no experiential proof in support of. I simply give it fair consideration, admitting that I don't know for sure. Some things seem more probable to me than others...but stating probability is not the same thing as stating certainty.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 03:49 PM

It's also a night club, in Kingston upon Hull.


From Hull and Hell, and Halifax eh!

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 05:51 PM

Are there other living things in Heaven and Hell apart from human beings? Are there dogs, cats, beetles, daisies, grass, toadstools, bacteria or viruses in those places? If "yes", how does God decide whether to send, say, an octopus to Heaven or Hell? If "no", where do wildebeeste, sharks and smallpox viruses go when they die?

One thing is certain, though, by destroying all of the other living things we currently share the planet with, we certainly aren't creating Heaven!

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: gnu
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 06:16 PM

Well, HELL'S BELLS! Ye lads are back on track big time! I am fuckin gob smacked!

Nice of youse to actually address the OP and provide legitimate discussions of same. I say that in the nicest sense and I am not being trite. I hope genuine discussion continues and leads where it may.

Bravo ALL!

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 06:34 PM

"an octopus to Heaven or Hell?"

Do you mean any octopus or one that has not accepted Jesus as his Lord and Savior?

Seriously, I would imagine that any animals in Heaven would be there for the benefit of the people.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 07:05 PM

"Seriously, I would imagine that any animals in Heaven would be there for the benefit of the people."

Is that the only reason that animals (what about plants and fungi?) are on Earth then - for the benefit of people? Who or what benefited from dinosaurs, say, before people evolved?

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 07:08 PM

Well, again...this is just hypothetical...but I think that if people have souls which survive physical death, then other living things probably do as well. I don't see why they wouldn't! So, yes, why shouldn't animals have a life in spirit if we do?

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 07:13 PM

Is "GUEST" shimrod?

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 07:49 PM

Yes, Jack it's me.

I have to say that what troubles me more and more about discussions like this is that they are so 'human centred' - there's an underlying assumption that humans live in isolation from the rest of Nature and are 'above it'. To the religious the rest of 'Creation' appears to be a mere detail - an afterthought. The irreligious or anti-religious case too seems to be framed in terms of human pre-occupations.

In a world which is falling to bits around us, I think it's time that we started developing a higher form of consciousness - one which begins to acknowledge the limits of our existence. If we were truly the 'pinnacle of Creation' we wouldn't be carelessly trashing everything in sight.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 08:52 PM

I've also been troubled by the human-centred thing, Shimrod, and it shows up in both religion and the other various aspects of culture.

However, it's not all that surprising. If rabbits had a planet-dominating civilization somewhere, I expect they'd have rabbit-centered religions and philosophies, and at least some of them would imagine God as a very large and powerful rabbit.

The thing is, though, you can look at humans 2 ways...

You can look at all the harm we've done. ("glass is half empty")

You can look at all the creative and beautiful things we've accomplished. ("glass is half full")

Either way, there's a lot to look at. I think it's an honor to be a human being...but if I were a rabbit, I'd feel the same honor in being a rabbit. People are far better off to believe in themselves than to despair over their errors. Animals are wise in their innocence. They accept what they are without question. So should we, and we'd be a lot happier.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 10:01 PM

For a lot of people Heaven is a reward for good behavior on Earth. IMHO Animals don't make moral decisions they just do as their instincts command. They can't earn Heaven but they have no risk of Hell.

Trashing the environment can be a sin in any number of ways. But if you are immoral enough to pollute, you are likely to go to hell for any number of reasons, IMHO.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 10:49 PM

I tend to think of Hell as a temporary condition, not a permanent one. I can't see any useful point in having "eternal damnation", but I can see a point in experiencing unpleasant consequences as long as you remain in an unpleasant attitude, so to speak. In other words...God doesn't condemn anyone to Hell, they put themselves in Hell on the basis of their own general attitude....and an attitude can change as time goes by!

When I'm speaking of "Hell"...I don't have any particular picture or definition of it in my mind. I'm not imagining the traditional fiery pit or anything like that. Likewise, in the case of Heaven, I'm not imagining any particular traditional scene either...not the clouds and harps, etc, nothing like that.

Why? Because I don't know yet, that's why. And I don't necessarily accept other people's versions of it, because they probably don't know yet either...nor do I literally accept versions of it in some ancient holy book such as the Bible, because the writers may not have known either, and furthermore they may have been speaking in symbols and metaphors rather than in literal terms.

Then too, there could be a great many different forms of both Hell and Heaven, many different levels and degrees of both...so one person's description might only apply to one of them.

For instance, I remember a rather funny cartoon in the Far Side. A guy has just arrived in Hell and he's looking around. It's a sort of barren, empty place without any vegetation or buildings, but there are a lot of people scattered around in easy chairs, all sitting alone and watching television.

"Wow!" he says to the Devil, "You've got TV here."

"Yes," replies the Devil with a wicked grin. "Unfortunately...it's ALL we've got!"

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Ebbie
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 10:59 PM

About whether *all* living things get to go to heaven, that's kind of problem-laden, right? They say that the air of Phoenix, Arizona, was excellent for people who went there to get away from their allergies. Until the people started planting the bushes, flowers and herbs that they missed from 'back home'.

So maybe transporting all manner of critters to heaven- see?

I like to think that all beings that can *love* are eternal.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 11:01 PM

By the way, in a lot of places in the Bible the word that has been translated in English as "Hell" was originally the Hebrew word sheol. That word does not mean a place of punishment or torture. Literally translated, it simply means "the grave" or "the place of death".

This is why Jehovah's Witnesses, among others, do not believe in a fiery Hell or a place of torment for the punishment of unrepentant souls. They think souls that are not saved simply go to "the grave", and experience nothing conscious at all there, but are simply not alive anymore. As for those who are saved, the JW's think that many will be resurrected in physical bodies in a completely restored Eden-like condition on Earth, while a much smaller number (144,000) will go to Heaven to be in the company of God.

It's quite a different viewpoint from that held by most Christian fundamentalists, who seem to be very taken with the idea of a fiery Hell and eternal punishment for the wicked.

All these different Christian viewpoints have arisen because of different interpretations and translations of the Bible over the past 2,000 years.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Mar 13 - 11:06 PM

"I like to think that all beings that can *love* are eternal."

That's a wonderful thought, Ebbie!

Regarding the plant allergies, that seems to be a huge problem for a great many people, and it may be why I tend to get depressed in the Springtime...for no apparent reason. I'm beginning to think it's probably a reaction to pollen.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 28 Mar 13 - 03:25 AM

Hello Sailor!

I'd piss myself laughing if, when I get there I bump into you...

Any more pontifications regarding what gets you to hell? May as well make it worth my while.   

I wonder which animals would deserve hell then, based on flawed logic with a slight nautical air?   My bloody greyhound pollutes alright. Farts in the house and shitd on my lawn. Whether you would give him the fire and brimstone codswallop is another story.   Presumably the dinosaurs are there because God was displeased with them and was happier with Noah. ..

Best not to discuss heaven and hell when ripped to your tits, it conjours up fantasies no chemical can get near. ..

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Mar 13 - 03:36 AM

"I'd piss myself laughing if, when I get there I bump into you."

A merciful God will keep us apart and not even Satan would be that cruel to me.

I'm going to stop taking to you now. Fire and brimstone I could take, but the tedium of your jokes is torture beyond the pale.

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Musket
Date: 28 Mar 13 - 06:08 AM

Heretics like me were put "beyond the pale" in mediaeval times, so your turn of phrase is rather apt.

It is Satan's job to be cruel, if the religious fairy stories are anything to go by. Although the God dude in old testament could be a bit of a bastard by all accounts.

Anyway, this does raise an interesting heaven and hell conundrum. If I were a God botherer, then heaven would be full of clap and be happy sanctimonious smiling Christians. My idea of hell is a place full of clap and be happy sanctimonious smiling Christians...

There are times when I feel I have reached heaven, and times when I reckon hell has caught up with me. So, I wonder if heaven and hell are a figment of your imagination? I wonder what else from the good book started that way?

I have a family branch that are Jehova;s Witnesses, (my Aunty married a bloke who became one to avoid being called up in the war and as with all brain washing, it kind of stuck...) and I am aware of their acceptance that there may well be the big zero once you snuff it. Two issues though. 1) They feel it is certain that there is a big zero, rather than state the lack of evidence for any other scenario, and 2) there are more Jehova's witnesses than there are places in paradise available according to their literature. Seems a bit of a bugger, especially as the place will be crowded what with a huge bunch of virgins for every Islamic martyr and God keeping Sailor Boy away from people who fail to take his waffle seriously.

Hell. That's the place to be. Low energy costs, entertainment, all my mates. Yeah, where do you sign up?

Subject: RE: BS: What is 'Heaven and Hell'?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Mar 13 - 07:13 AM

""Seriously, I would imagine that any animals in Heaven would be there for the benefit of the people.""

The Catholic Church states unequivocally that animals, possessing no soul, will not be admitted to heaven. This was one of the points which got me thrown out of the RI class.

I asked what would be the replacement in heaven, given the pleasure derived by humans from animals in general, and pets in particular. I said that it seemed weird that in a place which was to be the reward for goodness, we should have less pleasure than we had in life, and commented that, if I couldn't take my dog, I wasn't sure I wanted to go.

45 minutes outside the door, and a visit to the head for caning, and all these years later there is still no answer, and if it should turn out real, I don't think I've been rotten enough to be excluded, but if that dog isn't waiting I'll have to think carefully whether it's the place I want to be.

Don T.