Does hell exist?

Penelope · Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 3:10 pm Post subject:

Intrabane Quote:

Interbane · Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 3:38 pm Post subject:

Your philosopy of fear is frail. ffff When I see a person with a million dollar car, I'm not afraid that I don't have it. That's ridiculous. I'm simply jealous that he has what I don't.

How about hoping that someone dies?

That sentence alone should make the point. It's similar to a weapon. It (hope / a gun) by itself isn't the danger, it's how it's used. If you use hope to motivate yourself to convince people to believe in a destructive dogma, it's like a robber using a gun to rob a bank, then killing the teller.

Penelope · Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 4:19 pm Post subject:

Interbane · Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 4:26 pm Post subject:

Penelope: "I think your lack of hope is destructive.

Whoa, don't jump to conclusions. I have a human's worth of hope. I also own a gun. You're missing my point. I hope everyone on earth lives a happy pain free life. I do NOT hope everyone on earth suffers. That would be "hope abuse." I also do NOT hope more people would believe in religion. That would also be "hope abuse." Well, in the recent years, Christianity isn't as bad as it was during the Dark ages. I still does damage however.

I enjoy other people's thoughts. I dislike ambiguity however.

Penelope · Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 4:46 pm Post subject:

Well, most 'thinking' people cobble together some kind of philosophy to live by during the course of their lives. And as we experience more and more (pleasure, pain, boredom) we alter our philosophy to make ourselves feel better.

So I suppose it is always going to be somewhat ambiguous.....especially if, like me, you don't adhere to a particular faith, and if you refuse to blindly believe the dogma. I just don't choose to blindly believe in Atheism, either.....but it's OK by me if others want to.

I mean, I have no fear of atheism now because I have talked to Frank, and Chris and the people on here. So I understand their reasons and I understand why they don't like my reasons....

Please note, before you attack.......I said reasons.....not evidence.

I have no evidence to offer.....but I have my reasons, which like many things.....which never the less exist.....are not demonstrable.

Wink

Interbane · Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 4:56 pm Post subject:

I don't wish to be seen as attacking. I enjoy debate.

My philosophy is simple; pursue the truth. What I understand to be true is extremely malleable and most times uncomfortable. If there is a debate or a hot issue, I lecture myself to not let my own pride interfere with my perspective before I start my brain engines.

I dislike ambiguity because it clouds the truth, and should always be explored until the fog is lifted to the best of your abilities.

If you have your reasons to believe in something, they should of course be reasonable. Being reasonable, they should also be coherent enough to relay via language... typewritten. If you are afraid that your beliefs aren't reasonable or coherent, maybe they need to be reexamined.

Penelope · Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 5:16 pm Post subject:

Interbane · Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 5:31 pm Post subject:

Actually, I don't own a gun, it was a hypothetical statement to show my point. Sorry.

I am uncomfortable with people who aren't willing to take opinions on their beliefs, or who are unwilling to explore them. I do this all the time to myself, though it is uncomfortable. I'm not saying that is your stance.

I think the greater danger to mankind is believing too strongly. There's no subject here, it doesn't matter all that much what you believe in, it's how strongly you believe. That's dangerous and arrogant. We shouldn't purposely leave things to ambiguity, in the event that when uncovered, the truth is somewhere else.

Beliefs can be built up within a person's worldview to support conclusions that could be dangerous. How else can terrorists justify their actions? A supporting set of beliefs can be the foundation to a pyramid of beliefs that aren't healthy. You should always deeply analyze what you believe.

Interbane · Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 5:36 pm Post subject:

Got my old user name back, thanks Chris!! I lose it as often as I lose my keys...

GentleReader9 · Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 5:57 pm Post subject:

I don't presume to speak for Penelope and I don't know what she meant to say or how she wants to answer. (Maybe she'll tell us?)

I personally, however, am finding it hard to visualize how hope, all by itself without any admixture of fear, anger, greed, a will to dominate, or some other form of selfishness to the point of violence, could cause destruction. All hope is by itself is openness to possibility for change; usually the connotation is that the hoped-for change would be for the better.

The cruelty of hope in the story of Pandora's Box (by which I do not mean the x-rated version since I haven't seen it...yet, but the Greek myth) is that it can be false, and therefore bitterly disappointing. How does hope, without something more hostile and active, create destruction?

As long as Penelope just hopes you will someday have something she finds to be comforting and enriching to have herself, she isn't hurting you. (Although I do see how it could be annoying). It would be when she decided to force it on you in order to satisfy her fear, anger or lust for power that the inquisitions would begin. And as long as you just don't like her idea for yourself and set that boundary, you are also not hurting her. But if you move to demonizing her and calling her dangerous and holding her responsible for heinous acts other people have done, then you are scapegoating her and you could turn out to be the witch-hunter faster than she does if you aren't very careful to identify what the actual danger around you is, and who it is coming from, and why.

Just an perspective. I have little or no will to force it on anyone. If you don't like it, as Chaucer and Boccaccio before him said, turn over the leaf and read another tale.

Interbane · Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 6:36 pm Post subject:

I hope that all people can see the truth and structure to the Nazi regime. Personally, it fills me with pride at the depth of the human intellect to realize what sacrifice must be made to ensure our gene pool is of the highest caliber...

Ideas and beliefs are contagious. They spread, and their method of contagion is widely varied. The bad part is that there are so many false or harmful beliefs or ideas. Some only mildly harmful or annoying, but still negative. If you have aids and bleed on me, I will be angry with you. If you hope for me to believe in nazism, I will be angry with you. Hope isn't simply openness. It contains bias. You will act upon that bias whether or not you realize it. All beliefs should be thoroughly examined.

GentleReader9 · Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 7:12 pm Post subject:

Yes, it is always beneficial to examine beliefs, as they really exist, on their own terms, in their real contexts, without distorting them. In order to show how a hope could be harmful by itself, you had to state something you don't actually believe. It's not exactly and literally lying, but it is taking something out of the context where it can be thoroughly explored and examined for true accountability. A person can only be held accountable for his or her beliefs if he or she is willing to be honest about what they are. The world is only safe for honest dialogue when we let other people speak for themselves without distorting what they are saying.

If we had an actual Nazi asserting the belief you stated at this forum and they were willing to be honest with us about the basis for that belief, we would be able to have a dialogue and understand if they were lying about the purity of their hope to manipulate others for an agenda of control, and if so, whether or not any fears were underlying that motivation. As it is, you were not being entirely sincere in claiming this belief, so we can't ask you as anything you say will be a projection.

Don't get me wrong. I have stated things here lightly, flippantly, carelessly at times, at times as a rhetorical strategy to create more dialogue I think will be interesting. I don't think you're doing anything wrong in a moral sense. I do think that since we are examining reason, ideas, motives and evidence we should discuss standards for looking at those.

Evidence can be looked at dispassionately by anyone and should apply to concrete, objective claims about the material world we share. That is one discursive context.

Reasons need to be looked at in terms of the argument or thought sequence they occupy and how well they belong there, logiaclly, rhetorically, or sometimes poetically and symbolically, depending on what is being argued or considered.

Motives, like fear, anger, greed, hope, love, generosity can only be rightly assessed and understood within an understanding of their context, i.e., the emotional and motivational state of the personality that feels and is moved by them. They need someone, the person who really feels what's going on around those motives in order for us to be sure of where they are coming from and where they are likely to go. We interact with that process that determines where they will go ourselves in communicating with the person, and we make the world more dangerous or safer for those we address and for ourselves as a result of our willingness to be authentic and honest, and to allow the other person to be the one who gets to speak to us about their position.

Telling someone like Penelope she intends, or will unwittingly cause with her careless intent, something that will hurt you when you know (or should know) she doesn't, isn't going to make the world safer. I truly believe that. You can hold me accountable for explaining as much about it as you want. You can tell me why you disagree and I promise to listen and be ready to revise my position if I am wrong.

Interbane · Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2008 1:21 am Post subject:

Gentle: "The world is only safe for honest dialogue when we let other people speak for themselves without distorting what they are saying."

Throw hypothetical rhetoric out the window?

"Telling someone like Penelope she intends, or will unwittingly cause with her careless intent, something that will hurt you when you know (or should know) she doesn't, isn't going to make the world safer."

And killing a logger won't save the forest. I'm making no attacks against Penelope. What I dislike is the contagious effect of certain memes. If that meme is a belief that does damage, I will speak out. The damage might be minor or insignificant, like the millions of chain emails that clog up email inboxes. I will speak out against that also. If you fail to send an email to 10 people, you will not die tomorrow. Stop wasting my time with that nonsense.

"If we had an actual Nazi asserting the belief you stated at this forum and they were willing to be honest with us about the basis for that belief, we would be able to have a dialogue and understand if they were lying about the purity of their hope to manipulate others for an agenda of control, and if so, whether or not any fears were underlying that motivation."

This hypothetical Nazi was a counterargument to the statement that hope is only a good thing. When I say that jealousy can exist without fear, then it's likely that other emotions can exist without fear. That was a different line of discussion and I had hoped was put to rest. We wouldn't need to interrogate the Nazi to see if fear was truly an underlying motive, since that wasn't my point.

My original point was that skepticism is a virtue. Hoping for someone to believe in something that isn't true isn't virtuous. The concept of heaven and hell is a belief trap. Once you believe, it's hard to break free of that trap.

Skepticism > Faith

Penelope · Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2008 10:40 am Post subject:

Interbane and GR - I agree with both you here.

It is not good to feel certainty in spiritual matters. I think that is probably why 'God' and spiritual truths remain so elusive and personal and inexplicable.

I can only explain myself by saying, that when I have managed to absorb or assimilate, certain spiritual matters, it is like a feeling of recognition...I feel as though I have rediscovered something that my soul has alway known.....or already knows. A feeling of timelessness.....and that we, as souls, have all the time in the World to discover the truth about what we are.

Now, doesn't that sound ridiculous? You see, I can't explain myself, so maybe, it isn't that important to try.

I do know that when mankind tries to categorise, analyse and pigeonhole 'God' or spiritual truths.....and when people believe they have it all sorted.....and then attempt to inflict their truth on others.....then follows the inquisition. With certainty.....follows the inquisition.....so, let us not be certain.....let us just have hope and encouragement, and if not love, then at least affection for one another.

We seem to be all feeling about in the dark.....with just enough enlightenment and encouragment to keep us interested.

Well, that's what it's been like for me. Wink

,

Interbane · Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2008 11:55 am Post subject:

Penelope: "I can only explain myself by saying, that when I have managed to absorb or assimilate, certain spiritual matters, it is like a feeling of recognition..."

That feeling can and has been explained scientifically numerous times. The human mind is incredible. Don't take that personally. Words can't express the complexity of this matter, of course.

I sometimes feel sorry for people that can't see the magic that is all around us and instead must believe in the fantasy of angels and demons and omnipotent beings. Reality is so must more mezmerizing than the illusion of religion.

Penelope: "I do know that when mankind tries to categorise, analyse and pigeonhole 'God' or spiritual truths.....and when people believe they have it all sorted.....and then attempt to inflict their truth on others.....then follows the inquisition."

The only people that have suffered rape, murder, slaughter, and other atrocities via inquisition are people who religion saw as nonbelievers. This is part of our history that motivates me to speak out against religion. I would never cross that line, it's ridiculous. Only someone with absolute faith would do something like this, too fearful of a false hell to change their beliefs.


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	ADVERTISE	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CHAT	CONTACT