Why I think the doctrine of Hell is problematic for Christianity
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-12-2015, 09:17 AM
RE: Why I think the doctrine of Hell is problematic for Christianity
(22-12-2015 09:08 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-12-2015 08:48 AM)jennybee Wrote:  So you are agreeing the Bible is an imagined creation of the Jewish people?

I believe what mostly every other historic christian tradition believes in regards to the bible, outside of fundie evangelicals. I read the Bible, just like I do novels, and other literature, whose depth and meanings are part of communal interpretations, and often quite deeper then what you scratch at the surface.

When I was a child reading the stories of the Garden of Eden, of Noah, of Samson, I read them with the same eagerness in which I read greek myths, and stories. No one discouraged me from doing so, but then again I didn't grow up in your church.

That is really how the Bible should be read--so I'm glad no one discouraged you from doing that. But in reading the Bible in that way--as literature--how do you distinguish it from other forms of literature (as say Harry Potter)? What makes the Bible more magical than other forms of literature--even other forms of literature at the time such as the Vedas from Hinduism (another "old" religion with ancient texts)?

"Let the waters settle and you will see the moon and stars mirrored in your own being." -Rumi
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jennybee's post
22-12-2015, 09:19 AM
RE: Why I think the doctrine of Hell is problematic for Christianity
(22-12-2015 09:13 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-12-2015 09:04 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  The bible certainly contains the notion of God deliberately causing suffering, so that interpretation is wrong. The book of Job is all over the map on the source of suffering, it has Lucifer causing it, but with God's approval.

So the chuckle heads are in collusion against humanity, depending on whether they have a bet with each other.

And then God makes a lie of omission in not telling Job about his little wager with Lucifer at Job's expense.

The book of Job is a damning story about the nature of this god concept.

The story of what takes place between God and Lucifer is entirely irrelevant to the question of Job, it's just a prop in the narrative. Job knows nothing of these things, and in fact when God appears to him in the closing of the narrative all that remains a mystery to Job, and it's this God who responds to him with a non-answer.

It wasn't the writers way of trying to give his audience an answer to the question of suffering, that Job is excluded from knowing. But places both the reader and Job in the same predicament, rejecting the old understanding, for one that leaves us in the dark.

That's your opinion. You actually have no way of knowing that.
In fact Job was assembled by it's editors as an attempt to make sense of the Exile, and answer the question of "How can the *chosen people* be left to the fend for themselves, and left powerless by invading enemies". The concepts in Job were already well known in ancient Near-Eastern literature before Job was written/assembled. There is nothing new in it, and it fails to answer anything, really.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2015, 09:20 AM
RE: Why I think the doctrine of Hell is problematic for Christianity
(22-12-2015 09:13 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-12-2015 09:04 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  The bible certainly contains the notion of God deliberately causing suffering, so that interpretation is wrong. The book of Job is all over the map on the source of suffering, it has Lucifer causing it, but with God's approval.

So the chuckle heads are in collusion against humanity, depending on whether they have a bet with each other.

And then God makes a lie of omission in not telling Job about his little wager with Lucifer at Job's expense.

The book of Job is a damning story about the nature of this god concept.

The story of what takes place between God and Lucifer is entirely irrelevant to the question of Job, it's just a prop in the narrative. Job knows nothing of these things, and in fact when God appears to him in the closing of the narrative all that remains a mystery to Job, and it's this God who responds to him with a non-answer.

It wasn't the writers way of trying to give his audience an answer to the question of suffering, that Job is excluded from knowing. But places both the reader and Job in the same predicament, rejecting the old understanding, for one that leaves us in the dark.

But Job 38 does give an explanation. The explanation is not to question. It's very clear that is what God is saying when he is talking to Job in that passage.

"Let the waters settle and you will see the moon and stars mirrored in your own being." -Rumi
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jennybee's post
22-12-2015, 09:21 AM
RE: Why I think the doctrine of Hell is problematic for Christianity
(22-12-2015 09:13 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-12-2015 09:04 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  The bible certainly contains the notion of God deliberately causing suffering, so that interpretation is wrong. The book of Job is all over the map on the source of suffering, it has Lucifer causing it, but with God's approval.

So the chuckle heads are in collusion against humanity, depending on whether they have a bet with each other.

And then God makes a lie of omission in not telling Job about his little wager with Lucifer at Job's expense.

The book of Job is a damning story about the nature of this god concept.

The story of what takes place between God and Lucifer is entirely irrelevant to the question of Job, it's just a prop in the narrative. Job knows nothing of these things, and in fact when God appears to him in the closing of the narrative all that remains a mystery to Job, and it's this God who responds to him with a non-answer.

It wasn't the writers way of trying to give his audience an answer to the question of suffering, that Job is excluded from knowing. But places both the reader and Job in the same predicament, rejecting the old understanding, for one that leaves us in the dark.

The book of Job doesn't leave us in the dark though, it shows what's going on behind the scenes. God is making a wager with Lucifer, and neither gives a damn about the suffering they are about to unleash.

If you're reading this as a purely mythological story about the nature of god, I don't see how you can come away with anything resembling a positive spin on this god concept.

He is capricious and in collusion with Lucifer to cause any amount of suffering and death that he wishes.

He won't even do his own dirty work, he sends Lucifer to do it and god will lie to your face about why he actually does stuff. Perhaps god finds his own reasons shameful and that's why he won't tell Job about his bet with Lucifer.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheInquisition's post
22-12-2015, 09:24 AM
RE: Why I think the doctrine of Hell is problematic for Christianity
(22-12-2015 09:20 AM)jennybee Wrote:  
(22-12-2015 09:13 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  The story of what takes place between God and Lucifer is entirely irrelevant to the question of Job, it's just a prop in the narrative. Job knows nothing of these things, and in fact when God appears to him in the closing of the narrative all that remains a mystery to Job, and it's this God who responds to him with a non-answer.

It wasn't the writers way of trying to give his audience an answer to the question of suffering, that Job is excluded from knowing. But places both the reader and Job in the same predicament, rejecting the old understanding, for one that leaves us in the dark.

But Job 38 does give an explanation. The explanation is not to question. It's very clear that is what God is saying when he is talking to Job in that passage.

Of course, everything that God says to anybody is very clear!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2015, 09:31 AM
RE: Why I think the doctrine of Hell is problematic for Christianity
(22-12-2015 09:21 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  The book of Job doesn't leave us in the dark though, it shows what's going on behind the scenes. God is making a wager with Lucifer, and neither gives a damn about the suffering they are about to unleash.

No it leaves the reader entirely in dark. No one particularly reading it imagines that their suffering is a product of a wager between the God and Lucifer. It leaves the answer to suffering as an entirely incomprehensible one. God gives no answer to the pleading Job, he renews and redeems his life, but leaves the heart of the central question unanswered.

Quote:If you're reading this as a purely mythological story about the nature of god, I don't see how you can come away with anything resembling a positive spin on this god concept.

He is capricious and in collusion with Lucifer to cause any amount of suffering and death that he wishes.

The OT writers were hardly prone to use the character of God in a positive spin, when he floods the world in Genesis, the character of God is left recognizing that it was all a mistake, that his attempt to rid evil from humanity was futile. This character becomes remorseful and repents of his very action. Their God character is often portrayed as very human like, prone to propensities and vanities of human beings, though none of them likely believed that God was like this at all.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2015, 09:33 AM
RE: Why I think the doctrine of Hell is problematic for Christianity
(22-12-2015 09:20 AM)jennybee Wrote:  
(22-12-2015 09:13 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  The story of what takes place between God and Lucifer is entirely irrelevant to the question of Job, it's just a prop in the narrative. Job knows nothing of these things, and in fact when God appears to him in the closing of the narrative all that remains a mystery to Job, and it's this God who responds to him with a non-answer.

It wasn't the writers way of trying to give his audience an answer to the question of suffering, that Job is excluded from knowing. But places both the reader and Job in the same predicament, rejecting the old understanding, for one that leaves us in the dark.

But Job 38 does give an explanation. The explanation is not to question. It's very clear that is what God is saying when he is talking to Job in that passage.

God is talking to no one. The authors are putting words (their own ideas) in his mouth. It's called a "literary device".

There is no "person" named *Lucifer* in the Bible. It's actually a rather poetic term. It means something like the "daystar".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2015, 09:40 AM
RE: Why I think the doctrine of Hell is problematic for Christianity
(22-12-2015 09:31 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-12-2015 09:21 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  The book of Job doesn't leave us in the dark though, it shows what's going on behind the scenes. God is making a wager with Lucifer, and neither gives a damn about the suffering they are about to unleash.

No it leaves the reader entirely in dark. No one particularly reading it imagines that their suffering is a product of a wager between the God and Lucifer. It leaves the answer to suffering as an entirely incomprehensible one. God gives no answer to the pleading Job, he renews and redeems his life, but leaves the heart of the central question unanswered.

Quote:If you're reading this as a purely mythological story about the nature of god, I don't see how you can come away with anything resembling a positive spin on this god concept.

He is capricious and in collusion with Lucifer to cause any amount of suffering and death that he wishes.

The OT writers were hardly prone to use the character of God in a positive spin, when he floods the world in Genesis, the character of God is left recognizing that it was all a mistake, that his attempt to rid evil from humanity was futile. This character becomes remorseful and repents of his very action. Their God character is often portrayed as very human like, prone to propensities and vanities of human beings, though none of them likely believed that God was like this at all.

Why did they write these stories then? How would you know what they believed?

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
22-12-2015, 09:41 AM
RE: Why I think the doctrine of Hell is problematic for Christianity
(22-12-2015 09:31 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-12-2015 09:21 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  The book of Job doesn't leave us in the dark though, it shows what's going on behind the scenes. God is making a wager with Lucifer, and neither gives a damn about the suffering they are about to unleash.

No it leaves the reader entirely in dark. No one particularly reading it imagines that their suffering is a product of a wager between the God and Lucifer. It leaves the answer to suffering as an entirely incomprehensible one. God gives no answer to the pleading Job, he renews and redeems his life, but leaves the heart of the central question unanswered.

Quote:If you're reading this as a purely mythological story about the nature of god, I don't see how you can come away with anything resembling a positive spin on this god concept.

He is capricious and in collusion with Lucifer to cause any amount of suffering and death that he wishes.

The OT writers were hardly prone to use the character of God in a positive spin, when he floods the world in Genesis, the character of God is left recognizing that it was all a mistake, that his attempt to rid evil from humanity was futile. This character becomes remorseful and repents of his very action. Their God character is often portrayed as very human like, prone to propensities and vanities of human beings, though none of them likely believed that God was like this at all.

What makes you say such things? I don't get some of the conclusions you want to just make in this thread. Like this, and comparing how Christianity doesn't have a don't question it nature to it because your experience was different which wasn't related to being taught the doctrine in a way the religion is largely is spread.

To the main first point, if you were reading the ideas of Christianity as a kid next to mythology, there wasn't much any difference. The difference is whether the religion is dead or not. Do you think the Greeks, Egyptians, Norse, Canaanites, Hindus, african trbies, american tribes, etc. believed their gods not to be the humanistic beings they portrayed them as in their legends? That's more what was the norm. & still was the case for early Hebrew believe, that's where EL & Ashura have their origins from along with the rest. Plus a book like JOB is considered the earliest and it's a story past down before they moved more to their monotheistic view of there being 1 true God. Some of these religions had a prime God but still mostly there was a lot of humanistic qualities including faults.

It's why it's clear to most reading the OT that the described God doesn't fit the philosophical "classical god" traits omni-qualities.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2015, 09:48 AM
RE: Why I think the doctrine of Hell is problematic for Christianity
(22-12-2015 08:00 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-12-2015 07:58 AM)Chas Wrote:  When examined, Christian theology fails every time. It is nonsense.

To you of course it does. But this tends to say more about you then Christian theology.

No, your bias is showing again.

Also, your poor grammar (it should be "than") Facepalm

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: