Offshoot discussion of "what religion are you" thread

[Rían]

Originally posted by Baby-K
The truths (like mathematical / scientific theories) were proven in the past & still hold true today. The abstract concepts were either discarded when they were proven to be untrue OR they were kept & improved upon through the years.

And what about the scientific theories that were sincerely held in the past, due to evaluation of the current store of information, and then later shown to be untrue when we gained more information? Is there something special about this particular date that makes all currently held theories true? Or is it reasonable to assume that we will continue to gather more information and perhaps some of our currently held theories will be shown to be false?

[GrayMouser]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
(GreyMouser - whoops, forgot to finish my thought - here's the rest)


Well, again, this turns on your use of the word 'repent' - if you mean in the Christian sense, I disagree; I know of people (one of my best friends is one) who would rather be a non-Christian - and WRONG - than to be a Christian and saved, because being a Christian means, among other things, turning over lordship of your life (which you never really had, anyway, in the sense that you will ALWAYS be a created being, but this is a right and good thing) openly to God. So I would disagree that the worst pain people in hell feel is that they've caused the Lord pain; I agree that they will fully and clearly see the heinous nature of their sins, tho, but I think they will still be ANGRY about things rather than SORROWFUL.



And what about you, GrayMouser? You have a v. deep understanding of Christian doctrine in many areas. I'm especially glad to see your recent comments on the nature of sin and the goodness of God that were in your analogy, because I think it shows some deeper understandings. Can you understand the idea of fully seeing the nature of your sin but still not repenting?

Oh, absolutely - (to your last question) and of course the greatest sin is pride.

Milton's Satan : "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven"

I'm temperamentally inclined the same way myself, and tend to go along with EG; but one of my best friends ( a Fundamentalist missionary) claims that such a position is not possible for those in Hell; that whether I like it or not the True Nature of God is revealed so clearly to the damned (and the Saved, of course) that I would have to absolutely abandon my defiance in realization of the Divine Wisdom .

(I mean, of course, not to be forced to abandon it, but just to have the scales of pride drop from my eyes, so that my anger against God would convert to self-loathing.)

As for the Lewis idea, part of it is expressed in Perelandra-(Chapter 10):

Up till that moment, whenever he thought of Hell,
he had pictured the lost souls as being still human;
now, as the frightful abyss which parts ghosthood
from manhood yawned before him, pity was almost
swallowed in horror....
If the remains of Weston were, at such moments,
speaking through the lips of the Un-man, then Weston
was not now a man at all. The forces which had begun, perhaps years ago, to eat away his humanity had
now completed their work. The intoxicated will which had
been slowly poisoning the intelligence and the
affections had now at last poisoned itself and the whole
psychic organism had fallen to pieces. Only a ghost was
left- an everlasting unrest, a crumbling, a ruin, an
odour of decay.

As far as I remember, he goes into it in greater depth in the PoP-.(as well as his, umm, unusual ideas about Adam, but that's for another thread.)

[GrayMouser]

I just realized I sort of side-tracked myself.

I agree that the souls in Hell cannot come to a state of true repentance; but I do think that they are in such a state of awareness that they cannot remain defiant- they only exist in a state of despair. Again, I'm not an expert in Hadeology, but I can't see a situation (in Christian doctrine) where I'm in Hell saying to God "Yeah, I know I was wrong but I'll suffer forever before admitting it ." (Is that a parent's view peeking through?)


However, my original point- which I lost track of myself- was not whether or not the Christian doctrine is true, but whether or not it is the best cosmos one can imagine, in terms of combining free will, justice and mercy.

The purpose of my analogy was to say that I think the idea of Karma and reincarnation, as the Buddhists believe, is more just and merciful than the Christian idea of ETERNAL damnation.

So, even if the Christian Heaven and Hell do exist, God could have created a universe more in tune with (my, admittedly, human, limited ideas of ) Good.

(Not that I believe in either)

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

I agree with GreyMouser, that the karma, reincarnation system is more just. It also happens to be a bit of what I believe. Sort of. But that's because, having studied (thanks in part to Rian!) my various options, that seems to be the best. I can believe in whatever I want, ne? So I pick the most just, the one I like best. Sort of. (I notice I keep saying that...)

I was going to post that bit from Milton! Gah, ya beat me to it, GreyMouser!

Anyway, there's another bit on the "less free" stuff I was talking about before--even your personality and individuality is stripped from you in Hell, because, according to Christine doctrine as I understand it, once in Hell you realise your mistake and thus cannot even have your defiance. You just become one of the masses of people who were wrong and must spend eternity mulling over this. Or something like--I just woke up, so anything incredibly stupid that I say should be excused So: less freedom in choice, and no individuality once dead. That is what I mean by having less freedom.

[Rían]

Originally posted by GrayMouser
I'm temperamentally inclined the same way myself, and tend to go along with EG; but one of my best friends ( a Fundamentalist missionary) claims that such a position is not possible for those in Hell; that whether I like it or not the True Nature of God is revealed so clearly to the damned (and the Saved, of course) that I would have to absolutely abandon my defiance in realization of the Divine Wisdom .

(I mean, of course, not to be forced to abandon it, but just to have the scales of pride drop from my eyes, so that my anger against God would convert to self-loathing.)

And I can think of several passages in the Bible that would tend to support your friend's idea - the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, for instance. But the Bible also reveals information about the character of God, which is what I base my opinion on. And I see many times that: he who seeks, finds; to him who knocks, the door is opened; he who repents is saved. I DON"T see something like the following: "He who seeks Me with all his heart will find me - unless he happens to be in hell, poor sucker!" Now I'm very willing to be corrected by someone that knows more about this, but so far, I think my opinion is consistent with Scripture and the revealed character of God, and I think that those that are in hell are there because there is no possible chance of their choosing otherwise anymore. They will indeed have the "scales of pride" removed from their eyes, but there will still be rejection of God.

But it is only an opinion on both sides in this area. God has not revealed every last detail about Hell to us; our limited brains couldn't take it all in, anyway!

As for the Lewis idea, part of it is expressed in Perelandra-(Chapter 10): ......

I think there was some demon-possession involved in Weston's case, but I could be wrong. And I don't agree with everything that Lewis writes, by any means. Have you read The Great Divorce? Really a very good book by Lewis about hell, IMO, with some very profound insights, esp. on the question of how can anyone in heaven be happy if there is even 1 person sad in hell?

[Arien the Maia]

RÃ*an, are your beliefs similar to those of C.S. Lewis? I was curious because you quote him alot! I've never read any of his books other than the Chronicles of Narnia, although I would like to

[Rían]

Originally posted by GrayMouser
I agree that the souls in Hell cannot come to a state of true repentance; but I do think that they are in such a state of awareness that they cannot remain defiant- they only exist in a state of despair. Again, I'm not an expert in Hadeology, but I can't see a situation (in Christian doctrine) where I'm in Hell saying to God "Yeah, I know I was wrong but I'll suffer forever before admitting it ." (Is that a parent's view peeking through?)

Are you a parent?
Can you see something like "Yeah, I know I was wrong, but I still will refuse to willingly and joyfully subject myself to You in a proper creation/creator relationship." ?
(not that anyone would ever use such an awkwardly worded phrase, but can you see the idea behind it?)

However, my original point- which I lost track of myself- was not whether or not the Christian doctrine is true, but whether or not it is the best cosmos one can imagine, in terms of combining free will, justice and mercy.

The purpose of my analogy was to say that I think the idea of Karma and reincarnation, as the Buddhists believe, is more just and merciful than the Christian idea of ETERNAL damnation.

So, even if the Christian Heaven and Hell do exist, God could have created a universe more in tune with (my, admittedly, human, limited ideas of ) Good.

(Not that I believe in either)

Do you think that the rest of the Buddhist philosophy makes sense? What I've always had problems with is the absense of a strong GOOD, and the absense of a help out side of ourselves. That's part of what I really like in Tolkien's writing - there's such, I don't know, meat to it - there are STRONG goods (I can't express myself well here...).

Now nirvana is to be released from the cycle of suffering - but released to ... what? There is no god outside of ourselves. Frankly, nirvana seems rather ... boring to me (no offense intended to Buddhists!) compared to the strong joys of heaven. And following the Eightfold Path is in our own strength - what makes us think we can ever reach perfection on our own resources, when we see ourselves failing time after time?

Now Christians cannot be saved by their own efforts, but after salvation, there is plenty of good work to do with our own effort, and those that "run the race" well are rightly praised and commended.

[Rían]

Originally posted by Arien the Maia
RÃ*an, are your beliefs similar to those of C.S. Lewis? I was curious because you quote him alot! I've never read any of his books other than the Chronicles of Narnia, although I would like to

In most ways, yes. I think he's a very logical and deep thinker, and expresses things well. And I think that logic and truth are always on the side of Christianity!

I'd recommend Mere Christianity and The Problem of Pain for starters, if you'd like to read more of his works.

[Arien the Maia]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
In most ways, yes. I think he's a very logical and deep thinker, and expresses things well. And I think that logic and truth are always on the side of Christianity!

I'd recommend Mere Christianity and The Problem of Pain for starters, if you'd like to read more of his works.

thanks I'll check them out

[HOBBIT]

sure, then there is absolute truth. as in there has to be some explanation for everything, something is right.

and there has to be anyway, if i said that there was no absolute truth, then it would be absolutely true that absolute truth was false and therefore absolute truth would be true absolutely :P

[Rían]

Originally posted by Arien the Maia
thanks I'll check them out

Let me know what you think - I'd like to hear

And I should have said it a little stronger - I agree with him in all of his doctrinal positions that I know about. Some of his speculation (which he freely admits is speculation) I have some disagreements with, but so minor that I can't even think of any off the top of my head.

I've thoroughly enjoyed all of his books (except That Hideous Strength, which I thought was just unnecessarily gory) and have read them all several times. I've even ordered some from the publisher that were not in bookstores anymore. One of his lesser-known works, Till We Have Faces, took me 20 years to understand - and now it's incredibly meaningful to me and expresses some very deep truths. It's a wild ride of a book - but very deep and thought-provoking. It's a re-telling of the story of Psyche and Cupid.

[Rían]

Originally posted by HOBBIT
sure, then there is absolute truth. as in there has to be some explanation for everything, something is right.

and there has to be anyway, if i said that there was no absolute truth, then it would be absolutely true that absolute truth was false and therefore absolute truth would be true absolutely :P

Absolutely!!

[Rían]

OK, Hobbit, I just spend 10 minutes reading and re-reading your 2 posts, and I'm not sure where to start. I guess I'll start here:

THERE CANNOT BE MULTIPLE TRUTHS or what would be the point of being in one or the other? Make up your own religion, do whatever you want, believe what you want, follow whatever rituals you want - kind of defeats the whole purpose of it! If being a christian, jew, muslim, hindu, budhist, raelian makes no difference as to whether or not i get into heaven - then what is the point?

Well, you're consistent in this belief - "THERE CANNOT BE MULTIPLE TRUTHS" and "sure, then there is absolute truth. as in there has to be some explanation for everything, something is right." I agree with you here.

So what is your objection, exactly? When you mention "arrogance" in the people that think their beliefs are right, what, exactly, are you objecting to? They obviously believe the same thing you do, that there DOES exist absolute truth, and they feel, for various personal reasons (and puh-LEEZ don't say it's only a warm, fuzzy feeling! Maybe for some people, but not for me or most other Christians I know) that their beliefs are true. Therefore, other beliefs are NOT true, according to what you've said about absolute truth. Is is an attitude you're objecting to, or the logic? I think that Christianity is true; do you find me to be arrogant? I certainly don't think I'm superior to other people because I'm a Christian.

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
Yes, same author, and quite a good book, IMO....and applicable. I recommend both of them.

Ok, good then maybe someone at the charity I drop the book off to ("A Case For Christ") will enjoy it.

I see you haven't gotten to my question yet. PM me when you do. I probably will not have the time to check the "Christian Back-Patting" thread much(LOL, just kidding).

[HOBBIT]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
OK, Hobbit, I just spend 10 minutes reading and re-reading your 2 posts, and I'm not sure where to start. I guess I'll start here:


Well, you're consistent in this belief - "THERE CANNOT BE MULTIPLE TRUTHS" and "sure, then there is absolute truth. as in there has to be some explanation for everything, something is right." I agree with you here.

So what is your objection, exactly? When you mention "arrogance" in the people that think their beliefs are right, what, exactly, are you objecting to? They obviously believe the same thing you do, that there DOES exist absolute truth, and they feel, for various personal reasons (and puh-LEEZ don't say it's only a warm, fuzzy feeling! Maybe for some people, but not for me or most other Christians I know) that their beliefs are true. Therefore, other beliefs are NOT true, according to what you've said about absolute truth. Is is an attitude you're objecting to, or the logic? I think that Christianity is true; do you find me to be arrogant? I certainly don't think I'm superior to other people because I'm a Christian.

Ah, but you see I don't believe the same as them. Just because each believe in an absolute truth is irrelevant. Do you have the same beliefs as a muslim or jew? no.
And maybe i was not refering to you specifically - glad to hear that you don't think that you are superior. Others do. You think that your religion above all is superior - maybe you don't think that you yourself are superior to others, but i'm assuming that you view christianity as the best religion since you seem to be really into it.

Maybe YOU specifically are not arrogant, but many are and this is my objection you see. Take an example of the Middle East - the Arabs(Muslims) there view their religion to be superior hate the Jews and encourage hatred and homicide bombings - the Jews also really hate the Muslims. Well, maybe bad example? Because the violence there goes far beyond just religious fighting. There are also many clashes between Protestants and Catholics all over.

My point is just that most people of all religions view their way of thinking to be superior to all others - the right way - and that all other ways are definitely wrong. Not from you rian, but on this board I have gotten from many people (christians) that my beliefs were wrong, I was going to hell, they were going to pray for me, god and jesus still loved me, blah dee blah da blah :P Of course they never thought for a second that THEY might be wrong.

I am different because I do not see my way of thinking as the ultimate way of thinking. No one else has to experience what I experience and I value them just the same. Sure I believe what I think is right, but I do not think that it is absolutely right. I am open to the idea that I may be wrong - who knows who is right, if anyone? I may be wrong, but it seems to me that many people of the major religious faiths don't even really consider that they may be wrong. I also do not try to convert anyone to my beliefs. My beliefs are not superior to others just because I view them to be right. Who am i to tell someone to change their views? All I ask is that others listen to what I have to say.

I have a problem with religions that convert a lot. Like a quote from someone earlier: "and got to teach kids about Christ. 2 little girls in my group were saved and alot more were saved in other groups." What does that mean?? does it mean that you forcibly changed the beliefs of two little girls who have very impressionable minds? I'm not really sure what program you were talking about or what it is about though, but that is the impression that I got. Changing the beliefs forcibly of many Native Americans, African peoples, and various Island people and other natives (sorry for lumping em all together). Their belief systems were perfectly valid.

Which branches of Christianity don't go out to try to convert others?

[Agalayth]

A really good book is The Sunflower by Simon Wiesenthal. Simon Weisenthal, as you may know, is a Holocaust survivor. The book is about part of his time in the concentration camps. Here's what it says on the back of the book:

While imprisoned in a Nazi concentration camp, Simon Wiesenthal was taken one day from his work detail to the bedside of a dying member of the SS. Haunted by the crimes in which he had participated, the soldier wanted to confess - and obtain absolution from - a Jew. Faced with the choice between compassion and justice, silence and truth, Wiesenthal said nothing. But even years after the war had ended, he wondered: Had he done the right thing? What would you have done in his place?

In this important book, fifty-three distinguished men and women respond to Wiesenthal's question. They are theologians, political leaders, writers, jurists, psychiatrists, human rights activists, HOlocaust survivors, and victoms of attempted genocide in Bosnia, Cambodia, China and Tibet. Their responses, as varied as their experiences in the world, remind us that Wiesenthal's questions are not limited to events of the past. Often surprising and always thought provoking, The Sunflower will challenge you to define your beliefs about justice, compassion, and human responsibility.


It is a very interesting book, and I encourage all you - Jews or not - to read it.

[Coney]

Originally posted by Agalayth
[B]A It is a very interesting book, and I encourage all you - Jews or not - to read it.

I've read it.............and I can only echoe Agalayth............grim reading, but some reading has to be

[Agalayth]

Yes it is grim, but what Holocaust books/movies/stories aren't grim? It kinda comes with the territory.

[Coney]

Originally posted by Agalayth
Yes it is grim, but what Holocaust books/movies/stories aren't grim? It kinda comes with the territory.

Indeed. I spent about 8 months reading everything I could about the Nazi Holocaust..............in a vain effort to understand it

*no answers*

[Agalayth]

The 7th grade curriculum for my Hebrew School is all about anti-Semitism and the Holocaust. It is a very complicated part of history. We watched the replica of the trial of David Irving - a Holocaust denier who sued someone (I forget her name) because she wrote in her book that he indeed was a Holocaust denier. He ended up losing a lot of money on that case... It's hard to believe that there are people in the world who deny that the Holocaust happened, when there are survivors telling their stories, and there is all this information, and the locations, and the documents, and urgh it makes me so angry when I hear about these people.