Heaven & Hell

[Elen1107]

29 minutes ago, thormas said:

Ehrman is also a good guy in person. Definitely a bit quirky, a bit of a nerd (which I consider a compliment) and even a bit shy (odd as that might be to say) with little jokes that sometimes fall flat accompanied by his own little laugh at them.He is a great teacher/presenter, takes pains to be understood and genuinely cares about those in need (everything from his blog goes to his charities). 

Got to ask, have you met him in person?

I like nerds too.

29 minutes ago, thormas said:

I agree that his work (and the works of others) has been enlightening and enhancing for many people. 

I'm in agreement with you here and with your last sentence of your first paragraph. (for some reason the quote box wouldn't divide between sentences, just paragraphs).

[thormas]

I have, I live near where he teaches (my daughter also went to school at UNC-Chapel Hill) and I have been to a few of his book readings but also some of his presentations. There is a program  at UNC called Adventures in Ideas and they invite different professors to speak on art, literature, history, theater, philosophy, religion, etc. A presentation usually begins on a Friday afternoon, goes into the night (with a dinner break) and then picks up Saturday morning and goes until noon. I've been to two or three and they are always packed. What is great fun is when there is a coffee break and we get to mingle and you get a chance to just talk casually to him: very accommodating and generous with his time. 

He just had one at the end of February on 'Heaven & Hell' and it was sold out. I'm sure he'll have another in the Fall.

I don't know if you are part of his blog but he is definitely a nerd and has an amazing capacity for work and reading which he sometimes details. Amazing.

Edited March 6, 2020 by thormas

[romansh]

14 hours ago, PaulS said:

Rather I was trying to say that I think perhaps the more popular focus of discussion on here tends to be God/Bible/Jesus related because of a familiarity/commonality that most people here have in that area.

I don't think we're 'reduced' to anything.  Anybody can start a discussion thread on existence or any other matter at any time (providing its within our guidelines).  I myself think it might be very interesting to discuss - are you interested in kicking it off?

For me personally, whilst thinking about existence is of interest to me, because of my life experiences I also find a lot of interest in discussing misunderstandings and misteachings about the bible that Christianity in general either ignores or seems oblivious to. 

I have other interests apart from speculating about the meaning and authenticity of some 2000 year old story - namely sailing, breeding finches, gardening, camping and fishing, making things, drinking & socializing, parenting & family, and more - I just don't discuss them much here.  This forum is but one small aspect of my life.

I am sure you have other interests Paul, and I understand this site is not the optimal place to be discussing your hobbies, work and family etc. Though these should not necessarily be excluded. My point is there have been great advances in understanding on how the universe ticks made over the last two thousand years. How these may impact on our understanding of say heaven, hell, suffering … hey even the human condition remain untouched. What are the underlying causes for this phenomenon? You suggested "people sticking in their comfort zone".

But you will struggle to find threads on this website regarding what the last couple centuries have brought to bear. You will find lots of stuff on other ancient traditions. This is what I mean by 'reduced'

OK … I get it, this place is a stepping stone, more often than not, away from traditional religion. Baby steps I suppose.

[thormas]

Haven't we discussed some of this stuff in the past? Seems so.

Plus many of us use or assume those discoveries when we discuss 'ancient traditions' and give a 21st C spin to them. We can do this in large part because of the advances we have made and how those insights change a world view that must be part of how we understand or translate those traditions. 

I don't know many (any?) modern theologians or thinkers on the more PC side of things who accept traditional takes on heaven and hell or the idea of 'eternal' suffering. They also have a different take on the 'human condition' than did many before them.

[PaulS]

12 hours ago, romansh said:

My point is there have been great advances in understanding on how the universe ticks made over the last two thousand years. How these may impact on our understanding of say heaven, hell, suffering … hey even the human condition remain untouched. What are the underlying causes for this phenomenon? You suggested "people sticking in their comfort zone".

Okay, I think I see what you're getting at.  Less about this forum per se and more about why in general, participants here are perhaps focused mainly on only looking at our existence through this lense of a 2000 year old story etc, rather than discussing and considering other conversations, reasons, speculations, etc.  If that's what you mean then I still think it is because by and large, the 2000 year old story and beliefs are what many here are used to and familiar with, and in some cases don't doubt or are certain of in their own minds, so they possibly don't raise the other because it's just not on their radar or of no special interest so to speak. What comes to mind is participants who already feel their understanding of God/Jesus/ the Bible ‘speaks’ to them in a certain way, are probably less prone to raise other speculations about existence.  Perhaps there are other reasons why such isn’t of particular interest to others.  For me, it’s probably more a case of never really thinking about discussing it or knowing where to start.  I’m interested otherwise.

Quote

But you will struggle to find threads on this website regarding what the last couple centuries have brought to bear. You will find lots of stuff on other ancient traditions. This is what I mean by 'reduced'

Agreed.  I can only imagine/guess that that is mainly because those here already have a bent toward the 2000 year old story.  I guess people don't typically come to a Progressive Christian website (generally speaking) without a general interest in Christianity and more often than not, I guess many look to hold onto the familiar Christian narrative to some degree (consciously or subconsciously maybe), either because of belief or maybe simply comfort/familiarity.  Perhaps others don’t feel the need to discuss it because the feel they largely already have the answer about existence and rather just prefer to fine tune around the concepts they feel they already ‘know’ to some degree.

Like I said, I’d be happy to consider and discuss such different lines of thought.  Just not sure really where to start.  Got some ideas?

[romansh]

4 hours ago, PaulS said:

Okay, I think I see what you're getting at.  Less about this forum per se and more about why in general, participants here are perhaps focused mainly on only looking at our existence through this lense of a 2000 year old story etc, rather than discussing and considering other conversations, reasons, speculations, etc.

Exactly

4 hours ago, PaulS said:

 If that's what you mean then I still think it is because by and large, the 2000 year old story and beliefs are what many here are used to and familiar with, and in some cases don't doubt or are certain of in their own minds, so they possibly don't raise the other because it's just not on their radar or of no special interest so to speak. What comes to mind is participants who already feel their understanding of God/Jesus/ the Bible ‘speaks’ to them in a certain way, are probably less prone to raise other speculations about existence.  Perhaps there are other reasons why such isn’t of particular interest to others.

So their education never gave them pause for thought? The ramifications of physics, chemistry and biology? Perhaps I am a little different?  I am a product of my environment, even my secondary education specialized on the sciences, as did my tertiary education. Thereafter spending spend three and a half decades in a research facility. 

4 hours ago, PaulS said:

Agreed.  I can only imagine/guess that that is mainly because those here already have a bent toward the 2000 year old story.  I guess people don't typically come to a Progressive Christian website (generally speaking) without a general interest in Christianity and more often than not, I guess many look to hold onto the familiar Christian narrative to some degree (consciously or subconsciously maybe), either because of belief or maybe simply comfort/familiarity.  Perhaps others don’t feel the need to discuss it because the feel they largely already have the answer about existence and rather just prefer to fine tune around the concepts they feel they already ‘know’ to some degree.

While I get this … what I don't get is the apparent avoidance of the myriad aspects of the real world. Heaven and hell is such a nonsense concept at least the literal one, why even wonder about/debate what the ancients meant. Always remember my RI teacher telling us that Jesus taught from his own authority, and yet here we are looking to contemporary authorities to tell us what ancient authorities were actually telling us.

Well we could start a thread discussing the implication of the findings of science on human condition.

[PaulS]

5 hours ago, romansh said:

So their education never gave them pause for thought? The ramifications of physics, chemistry and biology? Perhaps I am a little different?  I am a product of my environment, even my secondary education specialized on the sciences, as did my tertiary education. Thereafter spending spend three and a half decades in a research facility. 

I think we are all products or our environment and if you had grown up in a Christian household, convinced that you were born into sin, needed saving by the grace of Jesus, and believed that Jesus was the vehicle required, then you would probably be a different product.  

5 hours ago, romansh said:

While I get this … what I don't get is the apparent avoidance of the myriad aspects of the real world. Heaven and hell is such a nonsense concept at least the literal one, why even wonder about/debate what the ancients meant. Always remember my RI teacher telling us that Jesus taught from his own authority, and yet here we are looking to contemporary authorities to tell us what ancient authorities were actually telling us.

From my point of view personally, I feel that what Christianity has done to so many in teaching the prospect of hell and telling people they are a product of their disconnection from God, that they are evil sinners, and that they need saving, has caused much pain and heartache in the world.  And this goes on today, in a huge way!  

So whilst I agree with you that Hell is a nonsense concept, I know there are many people out there who are in pain, who wrestle with this concept and the impact it has on their lives.  I think it is probably the worst evil Christianity can be known for.  I would like to see that message done away because it simply isn't true, and in the last couple of hundred years scholars have been showing why even the early Christians didn't believe in it.  So why does Christianity at large persist with this untruth and why any of us tolerate it?  None of us would accept a child being sexually abused, but our 'Christian' society tolerates them being psychologically abused.

So for me personally, when contemporary authorities such as Erhmann publish something that helps heal that wound, I like people to know.

5 hours ago, romansh said:

Well we could start a thread discussing the implication of the findings of science on human condition.

That would interest me - can you kick it off with a specific discussion point?  What are you thinking?  I find your knowledge and scientific approach quite intimidating sometimes though, I must admit, so can we keep it a little lower brow?

[Burl]

3 hours ago, PaulS said:

I think we are all products or our environment and if you had grown up in a Christian household, convinced that you were born into sin, needed saving by the grace of Jesus, and believed that Jesus was the vehicle required, then you would probably be a different product.  

From my point of view personally, I feel that what Christianity has done to so many in teaching the prospect of hell and telling people they are a product of their disconnection from God, that they are evil sinners, and that they need saving, has caused much pain and heartache in the world.  And this goes on today, in a huge way!  

So whilst I agree with you that Hell is a nonsense concept, I know there are many people out there who are in pain, who wrestle with this concept and the impact it has on their lives.  I think it is probably the worst evil Christianity can be known for.  I would like to see that message done away because it simply isn't true, and in the last couple of hundred years scholars have been showing why even the early Christians didn't believe in it.  So why does Christianity at large persist with this untruth and why any of us tolerate it?  None of us would accept a child being sexually abused, but our 'Christian' society tolerates them being psychologically abused.

So for me personally, when contemporary authorities such as Erhmann publish something that helps heal that wound, I like people to know.

That would interest me - can you kick it off with a specific discussion point?  What are you thinking?  I find your knowledge and scientific approach quite intimidating sometimes though, I must admit, so can we keep it a little lower brow?

No.  People are welcome to hold cynical and bigoted opinions against Christianity but this is not the place for attacks on other people’s faith beliefs.

There is a huge difference between sharing one’s spiritual path and cynically vandalizing the spiritual path of others.

 

 

 

[Burl]

I believe in heaven and in hell.  

I had a distinct vision when I was in my 30’s.  Heaven was a beautiful, pastoral scene with grass and huge trees.  Everyone wore simple, white clothes.  All were in small groups.  Conversing, walking, swimming, floating in mid air.  Calm and serene.

Hell was a desolate wasteland with no other company.  There was an old picnic table.  Small fires, hot coals (Like from a bbq grill; yards apart from each other) and sandspurs loosely scattered about.  Easily avoided, but I was bare footed.  The loneliness and ugliness were the overwhelming aspects. 

[thormas]

15 hours ago, PaulS said:

Okay, I think I see what you're getting at.  Less about this forum per se and more about why in general, participants here are perhaps focused mainly on only looking at our existence through this lense of a 2000 year old story etc, rather than discussing and considering other conversations, reasons, speculations, etc.  If that's what you mean then I still think it is because by and large, the 2000 year old story and beliefs are what many here are used to and familiar with, and in some cases don't doubt or are certain of in their own minds, so they possibly don't raise the other because it's just not on their radar or of no special interest so to speak. What comes to mind is participants who already feel their understanding of God/Jesus/ the Bible ‘speaks’ to them in a certain way, are probably less prone to raise other speculations about existence.  Perhaps there are other reasons why such isn’t of particular interest to others.  For me, it’s probably more a case of never really thinking about discussing it or knowing where to start.  I’m interested otherwise.

It is not just a matter of comfort and familiarity for some of us: it is the chosen means by which to interpret, understand and discover the meaning of existence, of everything.

And it is not the 2000+ year old stories. Many of us don't take many of those stories literally (being on at least 3 PC sites I don't see very many at all who do). How many PCs accept as fact or history genesis, exodus, passover, manna from heaven, Sinai,  the virgin birth, angels, Satan, temptations in the desert, old ladies getting pregnant, theistic incarnation, miracles, especially natural miracles, pentecost, resurrection as portrayed, atonement death. pentecost, and on and on?  What many do accept (to name just a few) are the insight therein: that there is God, humans are in relation to God and life has purpose/meaning and there is a way to be in creation.

There might be some who don't doubt certain thing or are certain in some of their beliefs (which is their right and which PC in general respects) but who does not raise or does not discuss "other stuff" because of that? Something might not be someone's expertise but there have been other discussions .........and disagreements. However, just like we don't expect the atheist to buy something because a PC says it, so too simply because someone with another interest posits something or presents an argument - doesn't mean that PCs have to buy it.

What some here fail to appreciate is that Christians live in the world of the 21st also. They accept that some beliefs or positions in Christianity (not necessarily the ones mentioned above) 'speak' to them but they also accept (after all they are progressives), for example, evolution, reject creationism, are amazed and read/ study about the universe along with history, literature, the arts, science, etc. And are interested, at times, in such discussions. But as has been said, the site is called PC which gives a hint s to what one might fine here to discuss.

Such Christians can speculate that the universe is eternal (or maybe not), if it came to be how is that possible, is it matter or mind that is the reality, etc.  Other, non-Christians, are free to say, I'm an atheist or an agnostic or both and I don't think life has any meaning or you make your own meaning or right and wrong are generational truths, etc.  that is what resonates with them for whatever reason. It is not what resonates for me in terms of answering the question about what 'it' means and how one is to live. 

I just did a fast check and cynicism which to me has some overlap with atheism predated Christianity and the 'first atheist' also predated Christ. We can also date atheism to the 16th C so does that mean that any who hold or share any such views 'by and large, the 2000 + year old beliefs, later in vogue in the 16th and once again in the present-day, are what they are use to and familiar with and don't doubt or are certain of in their minds?' 

I'm interested in other topics too. However if another begins to go from 'fact' or scholarly/expert positions to belief, I suspect that 'key' beliefs or positions of the atheist or agnostic or the cynic that resonate with them  - will not resonate with PCs. They certainly have a right to present their beliefs - as do Christians.  

 

 

 

 

 

[thormas]

1 hour ago, Burl said:

I believe in heaven and in hell.  

I had a distinct vision when I was in my 30’s.  Heaven was a beautiful, pastoral scene with grass and huge trees.  Everyone wore simple, white clothes.  All were in small groups.  Conversing, walking, swimming, floating in mid air.  Calm and serene.

Hell was a desolate wasteland with no other company.  There was an old picnic table.  Small fires, hot coals (Like from a bbq grill; yards apart from each other) and sandspurs loosely scattered about.  Easily avoided, but I was bare footed.  The loneliness and ugliness were the overwhelming aspects. 

I believe in 'heaven' but I have no idea what heaven means other than my belief that it is union or oneness in/with God. I also have no idea if all we need in one life before heaven or more are necessary.

I do not and have not believed in Hell for quite a while. You might find Hart's 'That ALL shall be SAVED' a good read. The guy is scary brilliant and a dense read at times but I believe he is totally on target. 

[thormas]

2 hours ago, Burl said:

There is a huge difference between sharing one’s spiritual path and cynically vandalizing the spiritual path of others.

Totally agree!

[Burl]

9 minutes ago, thormas said:

It is not just a matter of comfort and familiarity for some of us: it is the chosen means by which to interpret, understand and discover the meaning of existence, of everything.

And it is not the 2000+ year old stories. Many of us don't take many of those stories literally (being on at least 3 PC sites I don't see very many at all who do). How many PCs accept as fact or history genesis, exodus, passover, manna from heaven, Sinai,  the virgin birth, angels, Satan, temptations in the desert, old ladies getting pregnant, theistic incarnation, miracles, especially natural miracles, pentecost, resurrection as portrayed, atonement death. pentecost, and on and on?  What many do accept (to name just a few) are the insight therein: that there is God, humans are in relation to God and life has purpose/meaning and there is a way to be in creation.

There might be some who don't doubt certain thing or are certain in some of their beliefs (which is their right and which PC in general respects) but who does not raise or does not discuss "other stuff" because of that? Something might not be someone's expertise but there have been other discussions .........and disagreements. However, just like we don't expect the atheist to buy something because a PC says it, so too simply because someone with another interest posits something or presents an argument - doesn't mean that PCs have to buy it.

What some here fail to appreciate is that Christians live in the world of the 21st also. They accept that some beliefs or positions in Christianity (not necessarily the ones mentioned above) 'speak' to them but they also accept (after all they are progressives), for example, evolution, reject creationism, are amazed and read/ study about the universe along with history, literature, the arts, science, etc. And are interested, at times, in such discussions. But as has been said, the site is called PC which gives a hint s to what one might fine here to discuss.

Such Christians can speculate that the universe is eternal (or maybe not), if it came to be how is that possible, is it matter or mind that is the reality, etc.  Other, non-Christians, are free to say, I'm an atheist or an agnostic or both and I don't think life has any meaning or you make your own meaning or right and wrong are generational truths, etc.  that is what resonates with them for whatever reason. It is not what resonates for me in terms of answering the question about what 'it' means and how one is to live. 

I just did a fast check and cynicism which to me has some overlap with atheism predated Christianity and the 'first atheist' also predated Christ. We can also date atheism to the 16th C so does that mean that any who hold or share any such views 'by and large, the 2000 + year old beliefs, later in vogue in the 16th and once again in the present-day, are what they are use to and familiar with and don't doubt or are certain of in their minds?' 

I'm interested in other topics too. However if another begins to go from 'fact' or scholarly/expert positions to belief, I suspect that 'key' beliefs or positions of the atheist or agnostic or the cynic that resonate with them  - will not resonate with PCs. They certainly have a right to present their beliefs - as do Christians.  

 

 

 

 

 

Exactly.  Everyone should post what they positively affirm, but not bully others by calling their affirmations ‘nonsense’, ‘your religion is evil’, etc.

 

 

[romansh]

14 minutes ago, Burl said:

Exactly.  Everyone should post what they positively affirm, but not bully others by calling their affirmations ‘nonsense’

I positively affirm that there are certain aspects of religion I find as nonsense. ie do not make sense at least to me. 

3 hours ago, Burl said:

There is a huge difference between sharing one’s spiritual path and cynically vandalizing the spiritual path of others.

There is a huge difference between asking questions of a person's spiritual path including its validity and being cynical and a vandal.

[thormas]

1 hour ago, romansh said:

I positively affirm that there are certain aspects of religion I find as nonsense. ie do not make sense at least to me. 

There is a huge difference between asking questions of a person's spiritual path including its validity and being cynical and a vandal.

That's beautiful. I have found some things nonsense that are part of other positions and don't make sense to me.

 

Do we have vandals on the site? Should we call someone?

 

 

 

,

 

Edited March 7, 2020 by thormas

[Burl]

33 minutes ago, romansh said:

I positively affirm that there are certain aspects of religion I find as nonsense. ie do not make sense at least to me. 

There is a huge difference between asking questions of a person's spiritual path including its validity and being cynical and a vandal.

Asking questions would be politely asking for clarification or explication with the objective of gaining a deeper understanding.

Calling someone’s religious beliefs nonsense is dismissive.  So is being argumentative.

Rom, this is a spiritual forum not a scientific one.  We are not on a fact finding mission.  We are trying to maintain a sense of wonder, inquisitiveness, and attune our perceptions to revelation and enlightenment.

[thormas]

12 minutes ago, Burl said:

Asking questions would be politely asking for clarification or explication with the objective of gaining a deeper understanding.

Calling someone’s religious beliefs nonsense is dismissive.  So is being argumentative.

Rom, this is a spiritual forum not a scientific one.  We are not on a fact finding mission.  We are trying to maintain a sense of wonder, inquisitiveness, and attune our perceptions to revelation and enlightenment.

Or if someone already knows they find the 'answers' nonsense and invalid, simply don't ask at all. Move on..........

Respect........just a little bit (Aretha).

Edited March 7, 2020 by thormas

[romansh]

19 minutes ago, Burl said:

Rom, this is a spiritual forum not a scientific one

I am led to believe PC is accepting of ALL, even scientific and non spiritual people? Or is there something different about this particular forum?

12 minutes ago, thormas said:

Move on.

Even if I think it is harmful to the community?

I am sure you find some of my positions nonsense. These are the ones I would love to discuss.

[Burl]

25 minutes ago, romansh said:

I am led to believe PC is accepting of ALL, even scientific and non spiritual people? Or is there something different about this particular forum?

Even if I think it is harmful to the community?

I am sure you find some of my positions nonsense. These are the ones I would love to discuss.

Your poison Erlenmeyer chalice vís a vís Jesus changing water into wine at Cana might prove interesting.

[thormas]

30 minutes ago, romansh said:

I am led to believe PC is accepting of ALL, even scientific and non spiritual people? Or is there something different about this particular forum?

Even if I think it is harmful to the community?

I am sure you find some of my positions nonsense. These are the ones I would love to discuss.

Burl was talking about the forum, not individuals.  One can unabashedly cite the focus of the forum and the PC organization without excluding anybody in the acceptance of ALL. So ALL are accepted but neither should any of the ALL be dismissive of Christians simply because they don't feel some Christian beliefs are valid.

Yes, move on rather than there be dismissive. I don't share or accept some of the positions of all the Christians on this forum but I also have no need to dismiss them - sometimes I do make my case and support it. And, even though I might disagree, I don't believe there is any danger to the community. 

 

Did I mention you or disagreeing with you. Actually I don't even remember some of your stuff but I find some that I do remember of interest but simply don't agree with some and some simply doesn't resonate. 

Feel free to start a discussion and I will decide my level of interest. 

 

 

[romansh]

5 minutes ago, thormas said:

Burl was talking about the forum, not individuals

 

35 minutes ago, romansh said:

Or is there something different about this particular forum?

?

[thormas]

1 hour ago, romansh said:

I am led to believe PC is accepting of ALL, even scientific and non spiritual people? 

 

45 minutes ago, thormas said:

Burl was talking about the forum, not individuals.

individuals as in ........people

You're welcome

 

 

Edited March 7, 2020 by thormas

[thormas]

40 minutes ago, romansh said:

 

Really, start a new thread and see if anyone bites rather than continue this...............

[romansh]

33 minutes ago, thormas said:

You're welcome

I must admit I don't get that sense from you.

[thormas]

16 minutes ago, romansh said:

 

 

Dude...........

49 minutes ago, thormas said:

Really, start a new thread and see if anyone bites rather than continue this...............

 

Edited March 7, 2020 by thormas