|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:36 am
Do u Believe in heaven and hell....!!!
question confuse!!
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:45 pm
No I dont, I believe personally that belief in them is rather inanely stupid.
This should be in extended discussion and will be moved there in 24 hours.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 9:33 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:01 pm
I believe in haeven and hell in the emotional and sensational sense. I view that extreme pain, discomfort, and emotional stress is hell. pleasure, happyness, and joy is heaven.
The idea of heaven and hell origionates from stories passed down through generations from prophets who used halucinagenic drugs to "free" themselves from "the physical" and see "the spiritual". as one who has extensive firsthand knowledge of halucinogens I can tell you that when you take them and you are happy you see the most beautiful s**t ever imaginable. when you tak them while angry or upset, you see things like people being tortured and eaten by strange creatures, you see fields made up of human flesh and gigantic spires of bone. fire spews forth from the ground and you can't breathe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:02 pm
By the way? who let someone like you in here anyway? I know we are in need of new members but that's just too desperate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:09 pm
Sweet lord, Soryiu. I wondered if anybody would say that. xd
As a spiritual construct, I am of the more empirical sensibility: I'm not dead. I don't remember what it was like when I died, either. So, I can't say if anything at all exists beyond the pale. I assume that it does, given past instances of communication amongst my family with dead folks, as well as the haunted house I lived in for a while. However, as to heaven and hell specifically, I don't have enough information to make that judgement.
Now, do I think it's the likely thing to happen in the post-mortem? Hell, no. The existence of heaven- and hell-constructs would imply such things as objective morality, which makes no sense. Human morality is derived from our own instincts: we don't like being killed. As such, we usuallt consider murder to be what? Bad. However, the very presence of people who hold a different moral view than others is argument enough against the existence of universal moral law.
I also feel that the idea of a 'superior being,' such as would be responsible for the existence of a heaven and hell removed from human perception is somewhat foolish. Obviously, I can't say whether or not they do exist (and when I die, I'll fell pretty foolish if I run into Hera on my way), because, again, I don't have enough information. However, I feel that the existence of omnipotent gods is simply unnecessary. Do I believe in spirits? Sure. Mainly that's because of a belief that I've encountered them in some form or another, whether or not I'm right. Do I believe that some spirits can aquire a modicum of power? Possibly. It'd make sense. Do I think that the idea of a theological presence completely removed from and never really having been part of our world makes sense? No.
Personally, I am of the opinion that what comes to pass in the post-mortem is your own responsibility. I figure that there's probably some sort of astral plane out there, and you get your own little corner of it when you die, to craft into whatever you feel you should get.
Also, don't end a ******** question with exclamation points. It makes you look like a dumbass. A hyperactive dumbass, actually. Just like irregular capitalization: 'believe' is a verb, and since it is not in the beginning of a sentence, capitalizing it outside of a title makes no sense. Also, "Hell" is a proper noun, and thus should be capitalized.
I may seem like a d**k, but, well, I kind of am, when it comes to written language. The ability to communicate my thoughts via a couple of ink marks is remarkable enough to be worthy of a bit more respect than that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 5:58 am
Eros The Merciful Do u Believe in heaven and hell....!!! Quote: well i did untill Dio died. XP (for those who don't know, Heaven and Hell was the name of Dio's current band, a sort of reunion of Black-Sabbath)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:23 pm
Acknowledging the presence of a heaven and hell indirectly acknowledges an objective, specific rule set used to sort people into either category. Morality as it stands is almost never objective, and we lack the capabilities to determine the intricacies of such a rule set. The two options we are given are also polar opposites, and it is impossible to divide people into simply "good" and "bad". With people, there will always be gray area. That's part of what makes us human. Since the two entities we are given do not conform to fundamental human nature, it is unlikely they exist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 11:53 pm
The polar opposites of good and evil were, I feel, designed by us in order to give us a sense of a goal. Humans, by their very nature, are psychologically incapable of existing without some purpose or higher goal to strive towards. We constantly seek to better ourselves for the very sake of doing so. However, we must define what we mean by 'better' before we can work towards embodying that betterment. It's the same reason religion is so damn popular. It appeals to basic psychological needs of humanity, while giving them a predetermined structure to work from, so that we don't have to create our own set. In psychology, there are considered to be six stages in three categories of moral development. In a class I took, however, they were reduced to four stages, with two of the categories being fused into overall stages, which I'll share, because it's a bit easier (demonstrating my earlier point about human laziness). In Stage One, morality is simply geared to avoid punishment. In Stage Two, one's morality is geared towards self-interest: 'good' is defined as what is good for the individual at this stage. Stage Three is characterized by an adherence to social norms and laws, these being thought of as analogous to moral good. In this stage, a person will almost invariably adhere to these laws and norms, regardless of whether they can be deemed just or right. In Stage Four, the individual begins to recognize that itself and other individuals are in fact seperate from society as a whole, and begins to formulate its own moral guidelines. In this stage, a person realizes that rules and laws are not immutable representations of moral good, but rather changeable guidelines for preserving general social order. This stage is also characterized by the disobedience of laws or rules considered injust. The full six-stage version can be found on Wikipedia, here.Most people do not ever reach the stage of abstract moral reasoning displayed in Stage Four, and thus seek out a predetermined set of rules to cling to. Thus, Heaven and Hell. Most people do not ever formulate their own moral views, preferring to take their cues from an external source, i.e. standardized religion. Thus, I concur with Nyz in that it is impossible to categorize the whole of humanity, or even an individual person, in such a way as would be conducive to the idea of a heaven or hell, due to the ambiguous and subjective nature of morality. Besides, people are, by nature, always slightly unpredictable. A mass murderer buying a sno-cone for a poor child, for example. Or a Catholic priest being..... I don't know, nice. Kindness seems to be somewhat rarified among the clergy. Not saying it doesn't happen, but..... it certainly doesn't happen much. By the way, just what the hell does " question confuse!!" mean? I assume it's.... I don't know, a misspelling of 'confused' or something?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
