Rocky

OMG!

I appreciate the clarification of your position.

Parable - a form of story.

Seeking clarification on this point. Are you saying, the Bible (containing the revealed Word of God) does not contain ALL of the Word of God? To clarify my intent, I am not interested in arguing for or against, just understanding your point. Thanks.

The reason I highlighted by strikethrough, that part of your comment is because I fail to see the relevance of that question to the topic of this thread. Perhaps if you were to start another thread that focused the topic on the biblical basis for understanding of hell, that might be relevant. But I digress. Modgellan's correct about multiple reasons for asking questions. It's also important in discussions like this one to recognize that just because something pops into one's head (or thinking, or consciousness) doesn't mean it's necessarily true, logical or "spiritual." Empiricism "Empiricism is the philosophy of knowledge by observation. It holds that the best way to gain knowledge is to see, hear, touch, or otherwise sense things directly. In stronger versions, it holds that this is the only kind of knowledge that really counts. Empiricism has been extremely important to the history of science, as various thinkers over the centuries have proposed that all knowledge should be tested empirically rather than just through thought-experiments or rational calculation." Epistemology Epistemology (pronounced eh-PIH-stem-AH-luh-jee) is the study of knowledge. It raises questions like What is truth? Do we really know what we think we know? How can knowledge be made more reliable? ----- I am willing to tell you, Mark, that I do read the Bible but NOT the way (fundamentalism) we learned to do from Wierwille, twi or the PFLAP class. There's MUCH more knowledge and understanding of lots of areas of life to be learned when we don't limit our learning to ONLY the Bible. The Bible contains LOTS of STORIES. We humans often learn best from stories. That's why Television and motion pictures are such a powerful influence in today's Western Culture. Because they tell stories. Among the stories are the Myth(s) of Hell. Anyway, we grossly limit ourselves and limit our understanding of Christianity and spirituality by stuffing ourselves into the box of fundamentalism when reading and studying the Bible. One of the grandest ways we did that with Way Brain was to think that we got revelation about the meanings of Biblical stories by parsing Greek and Hebrew words.

Yes, I have asked you questions. Unless I've missed it, you seem to have -- for the most part -- not answered them. Also, in light of Raf's comments today, I'm wondering how relevant to the topic of this thread your last sentence (highlighted above) is.

But Mark, what's the difference? Are you saying that somehow the notion, not first conceptualized in the Judeo-Christian tradition, somehow got corrected as time went on? What about the sociological usefulness of the entire notion of hell? Are you suggesting that somehow it's not actually something useful to religions needing to find a way to hook enough followers into them to justify the time and labor of their ministers (who then would need to make a living)? Don't forget that you're the one who opened this can of worms in the first place.

The topic of this thread was, "The Myth of Hell." How did I miss that? I didn't realize that it was a thread on Mark's research and if I didn't want to focus on Mark's research, I'm wasting my time. My understanding of the topic was my starting point for contributing to the discussion. I talked about what a myth is. And I talked about the fact that notions of hell didn't start with Judeo-Christian traditions. Pardon me for not recognizing that you had a different idea of what constitutes a myth... or hell. This is the "doctrinal" forum, right? Pardon me for not realizing that doctrine can only be discussed here from the box that has walls beginning and ending with belief in fundamentalist Bible constraints. There's a whole lot of "doctrine" outside of fundamentalist frameworks these days. Doctrine that is rightly considered Christian.

Unless your internet search only returned you that one result, you seem to have a dramatic lack of curiosity about the origin of Myth(s) of Hell. Did you not find ANY references to any cultures/religions prior to "The Church?" Of course, "The Church" is part of the Judeo-Christian heritage, so naturally, when you limit your search to that, you're not going to be looking beyond the origin of the Old Testament. Did you look at this one? I'm not suggesting the final word on the subject can be determined by a simple internet search. In fact, I believe the opposite is true. One must explore what historians and cultural anthropologists who have made the subject their life's work have discovered. My point is that substantial philosophical concepts are not easily understood without serious, prolonged, in-depth research. And that I don't believe the Hebrew or Christian Bibles were the first place Myths of Hell are documented. But Mark, if it's important to you to evade my questions and to attack me personally in order to make yourself feel better, go for it.

Aren't you still evading the questions I posed to you?

Cutting to the chase, there's a whole lot more to understanding spiritual and godly concepts, notions and ideas than just whether it makes sense to you on your own advice. That includes understanding how and why and from where Myth(s) of Hell originated.

The phrase at the beginning of your quote talks about what? The rest of the quote is something else altogether. Who knows a person's thoughts except themselves? Are you suggesting that the things you write are revealed as truth to you by God's spirit and if I challenge you on what you claim to be the truth, it's because I don't want to understand the things of God? Don't YOU still have to "prove all things and hold fast that which is good?" Or is your potential shortcut justification to not have to apply critical thinking to what you claim and/or believe that God has revealed to you spiritually?

Is that an excuse so you can avoid having to make a sound, valid argument to support your premise? I'm concerned that if I answer your question, you'll stray farther from the nugget of the point that needs to be made, regardless of how I answer the question.

What did I say that led you to believe I am considering learning from Greek and Roman mythology? I read your post. I identified the concept upon which you seem to have made a premise. And I couldn't find anything that you said in your post to argue to support that premise. Your reply doesn't appear to address the fundamental concept or question I posed to you. God, as we know it (Him) is a social concept. How else would we know him other than by words spoken or written by people? Even as we understand the concept from the Bible, it's from words written by people. People are inherently limited in understanding of life and the cosmos. That's why scientists and academics are constantly searching for new information, new knowledge. About everything. The Hebrew/Israelite people were not the first society/culture to imagine God. Therefore, as I understand it, to understand the Myth(s) of Hell, we must understand what other cultures, from which the Hebrew people derived their ideas, wrote and said about them.

Thanks Raf. I prefer previews prior to clicking on youtube links.

The expression, " there should be no reason to learn from Greek and then Roman mythology..." is a statement (claim) that you made, Mark, without making an argument to even begin to explain to your readers why that should be the case. Further, you then proceed to approach your apparent thesis (The Myth of Hell) solely from the angle that the only thing necessary to understand the concept at all is to study certain words in original bible languages. I disagree. To understand the Myth of Hell, much more background, first and foremost cultural anthropology must be considered. IOW, where did the notion begin and in which cultures and societies. My hunch is it didn't begin with the Hebrew/Israelite people. Additionally, some people who take a critical thinking approach to the concept (symbolized in the image Sudo posted earlier) suggest the entire idea is all about social control by way of religion. My understanding is that a myth is a (not necessarily false) story. Genesis contains the Judeo-Christian origin myth. As noted scholar of Jewish studies, Jon D. Levenson, puts it:

I thought the expression was "hold my beer." LOL And I agree with cman, that IS a good one, Sudo.

This one has captured my fancy lately. One Voice not to be confused with groupthink, btw.

Here ya go, Twinky!

Highly plausible.

What's with the gal on right in the second row?

Wren, not Wrenn.

Oh...

Who is Jack Handey?