tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post9215429020577014830..comments2024-03-29T03:30:25.637-07:00Comments on Metacrock's Blog: Does the Bible Really Teach That Hell is Eternal Conscious Torment? part 1Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)http://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-39147193342114351732013-08-21T05:21:20.752-07:002013-08-21T05:21:20.752-07:00davidk, thanks for your comments. good questions. ...davidk, thanks for your comments. good questions. I will try as best I can to answer them in my part 2 of hell which I'm about to write now.<br /><br />I don't know if I have answers but I'll think about it.<br /><br />"Sorry for using Christian terms in this Christian topic."<br /><br /><b>LOL I think I made clear in my last thing on Dave's challenge the way to overcome the worn out langue is to return to concrete gesture and live the gospel. Not to stop using language.</b>Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-22025800263391461292013-08-20T16:26:29.184-07:002013-08-20T16:26:29.184-07:00Thank you for this topic. I have been wanting to e...Thank you for this topic. I have been wanting to examine the Biblical teaching on hell; your article is timely for me.<br /><br />I have questioned for some time the traditional view that hell is a place of eternal torture. If God is just, then the punishment fits the crime.<br /><br />The caveat here is, What is the proper sentence for rejecting the work of Jesus Christ? Is it a greater sin than all other sins? Another question: If one is guilty of one sin and is, therefore, guilty of all, is the person who has led "good" life as reprehensible as a child molester?<br /><br />I used to travel across the country a lot and would listen to local stations while they were in range. I think it was a Seventh Day Adventist teacher who was talking about hell. He pointed out that the "Eternal Flames" was God Himself Who is an All-Consuming Fire. That piqued my interest.<br /><br />The Bible teaches that man is born spiritually dead giving rise to the question, What does spiritual death mean? I think it means that, aside from the work of the Holy Spirit's work of convicting man of sin, righteousness, and judgement to come, man has no means of interacting with God. Only after being born again, a spiritual rebirth, can man commune with God. <br /><br />Man is tripartite: body, soul, and spirit. Recognizing that the terms are sometime used interchangeably, generally speaking, we can say that the soul is the true man, the inner person, that which makes the individual who he/she is. The body, of course, is that with which man interacts with the physical universe. The spirit is that which with man interacts with the spiritual realm.<br /><br />To be spiritually dead is not analogous with physical death. A spiritually dead person can still interact with the spiritual realm but not with God. The spirit (and the soul) is/are eternal. <br /><br />I think that when a person dies, he/she does not lose consciousness. He/She is aware of the surroundings in which he/she finds him/herself. At the time of physical death, one loses interaction with the physical realm and is fully aware of the spiritual realm. While still physically alive/aware, one can cultivate the one's spirit and become more cognizant of the spiritual realm. For the Christian that would be done through the spiritual exercises.<br /><br />Questions I have:<br /><br />Is the unquenchable fire with which unrepentant man is tormented a real (spiritual?) fire or is it the All-Consuming fire of God? At the judgement, does an unrepentant person see the full Glory of God and then recognizing his/her folly of rejecting God torment him/her for eternity?<br /><br />Are there different different levels of punishment, or is the one "sin therefore guilty of all," and/or is the rejection of the Son a sufficient sin for all to be punished at the same level?<br /><br />Do I even know enough to be asking the right questions?<br /><br />I have not read all of your article. I have ADD and reading is difficult for me, and reading long articles on the 'Net is doubly difficult. I will have to cut and paste it into a Word document and print it out. I may have more comments after I do that and after I read the nest installment on this topic. Thank you.<br /><br />(Sorry for using Christian terms in this Christian topic.)davidknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-8133011714060601112013-08-20T06:00:11.844-07:002013-08-20T06:00:11.844-07:00"I've also run across mystics/phenomenolo..."I've also run across mystics/phenomenologists who use a framework I speculated about a couple years ago. I was surprised to see that. The basic idea is that what the Biblical traditions call "God" reveals the nature of things within a larger web or ocean of consciousness/generative potential. Being exposed to the more concentrated or original aspect of this interconnected network could cause discomfort and even destabilize localized, self-aware manifestations on the network (i.e. sentient beings with extensively reflective minds such as humans)."<br /><br /><b>That's why I have said that the big man in the sky imaged in OT is just a place holder. The real Christian tradition sees God as much ore than that.</b><br /><br /><br />"In any case, this is all academic for me, just speculating for the hell of it. Hell in any form really seem more about ascribing human needs of justice and judgement to a higher power. And it seems like theorizing and theologizing isn't where it's at for those for whom this kind of thing *is* more than academic. Books and ideas can't replace actual experience, which is necessary to better understand the writings anyway."<br /><br /><b>It's not just speculating and it is more than academic. You can't come from a background like mine with the old style Church of Christ and not take the question of hell seriously. It the most serious thing for that view.<br /><br />even though there is a speculative element the answer I take to it is deadly serious.</b>Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-66117489703548709172013-08-20T05:53:39.196-07:002013-08-20T05:53:39.196-07:00yes I have seen atheists for example who take refu...yes I have seen atheists for example who take refuge in nihilism. That's quite common and in fact they think any other view is arrogant. But that that is the view of the dog you use on the graphic. dogs are not nihilists. They love to be loved.Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-81711102466148201702013-08-19T16:12:52.027-07:002013-08-19T16:12:52.027-07:00Oh, and I forgot, here is another take on the lang...Oh, and I forgot, <a href="http://peacefulturmoil.blogspot.com/2013/08/refuge-in-nihilism-versus-refuge-in.html" rel="nofollow">here is another take on the language of judgement</a> that in a way could be thought of as spiritual death since you had mentioned that as well.tinythinkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17137637122776756669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-75748367594689585702013-08-19T16:00:32.992-07:002013-08-19T16:00:32.992-07:00There are many interpretations that suit the minds...There are many interpretations that suit the mindset of the group or individual. You are entitled to yours and to argue for it, but it seems as if much of the Biblical and extra-Biblical basis for both resurrection and hell has to do with the sense that if one can clearly see there is no justice before death, that people must be brought back to life for accounts to be settled. This is consistent with some material I came across a year or two ago from a Biblical scholar's blog regarding the divisions among the Jews about resurrection and the shift in the Biblical literature you referred to with one of your sources.<br /><br />I've also run across mystics/phenomenologists who use <a href="http://peacefulturmoil.blogspot.com/2011/03/reconciling-tradition-and-contemporary_05.html" rel="nofollow">a framework I speculated about a couple years ago</a>. I was surprised to see that. The basic idea is that what the Biblical traditions call "God" reveals the nature of things within a larger web or ocean of consciousness/generative potential. Being exposed to the more concentrated or original aspect of this interconnected network could cause discomfort and even destabilize localized, self-aware manifestations on the network (i.e. sentient beings with extensively reflective minds such as humans).<br /><br />Of course, the language is very ill-fitting. In a sense, the whole network or ocean would be "God", yet a locus or transcendent level of being would be present even as other aspects or levels of being experienced growth or decay. More bad fitting language. The localized self-aware beings would be part of a larger process of development, one stage in a larger pattern that would lead to a greater level of awareness and integration with the source.<br /><br />Using this terribly inadequate imagery, the idea of being exposed prematurely and too directly to the source, and the resultant discomfort and destabilization, would be like a seedling exposed to too much sunlight. This veers off from the standard Biblical view, which doesn't bother me, but it is consistent with my readings about mystical encounters and deep contemplative prayer.<br /><br />Robert Sardello's <i>Silence</i> talks a bit about being prepared to encounter the Presence in silence and is also consistent with the model I've described, referring to gatekeepers that test seekers and help them grow. It's definitely worth a read for anyone interested in the combination of phenomenology, meditation, silence, and so on.<br /><br />None of this requires or refutes an eternal conscious torment or annihilation. But it does point away from both. Time and space would be relative concepts anyway, and in a sense nothing would ever be truly destroyed, just transformed. The echo or memory of previous transformations would remain as well. Like an insect emerging from a chrysalis, it isn't the same as it what is was before but it isn't independent from its past either. <br /><br />In any case, this is all academic for me, just speculating for the hell of it. Hell in any form really seem more about ascribing human needs of justice and judgement to a higher power. And it seems like theorizing and theologizing isn't where it's at for those for whom this kind of thing *is* more than academic. Books and ideas can't replace actual experience, which is necessary to better understand the writings anyway. I mean, I get that you want to show why you can ditch hell and still be kosher with tradition, but your exposition isn't going to do much to change people's minds about the value or appeal of Christianity. It might shake up some of the fundamentalists but I doubt it.tinythinkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17137637122776756669noreply@blogger.com