Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe
Sign in to follow this  
Mark Sanguinetti

The Myth of Hell

Recommended Posts

Some things are not found in the scriptures till they are found in life. Spiritual things I suppose. There are a lot of "myths" about many subjects, which can add to knowledge about the subjects.

I don't know how to change a topic name, I think it can't be done after the first few posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Mark Sanguinetti said:

Rocky, why are you considering learning from Greek and Roman mythology? Does this now add to your view of God and Jesus Christ? Or would you rather learn about Jesus Christ by reading the bible? Before your negative comments have you actually read the article? The article is more than only one page or only one paragraph. My article also covers the most negative worship perhaps in the entire bible. This was the worship of the pagan God Molech that resulted in the murder of children. This is seen in the Old Testament on page 4 of the article. Rocky, the myth of hell did not begin with the ancient nation of Israel according to the entire worded Old Testament as seen in the often read New International Version. There are no usages of the word hell in the entire Old Testament as translated into the NIV. Instead since the Koine Greek language was used for at least most of the original writings of the New Testament, the Greek word Hades was used. This is one of the three Greek words that is translated as hell in the New Testament and the Greek word with the most usages of hell. If you don't want to learn about Hades from me and the article, you can do a simple top of 1st page Google search.  Here it is.

http://christian-universalism.info/myth-of-hell-pg1.html

Regarding Sudo's graphic image. I find it interesting and a good example of religious denominations threatening their followers by saying that if you leave our denomination or join another conflicting doctrinal denomination, it looks like you will be going to hell after you die. I just giggled instead of getting scared. 

Also Rocky, I do not promote the first few chapters of the book of Genesis as being historical. Instead to me it shows spiritual truth.  And as you quoted from my post "...in Genesis chapter 3:1-6. Here Satan the spiritual being is symbolically referred to as a serpent". And doing another Google search, symbolically means: "purely in terms of what is being represented or implied." And in the next paragraph of my commentary of the first chapters of the book of Genesis, I write, "Figurative language is used". Figurative language goes beyond the literal meaning of the words to give readers new insights. And the graphic image that Sudo posted is a very good example of figurative imagery. 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rocky, it simply requires spiritual insight from God, the father, to understand spiritual content and concepts. This is seen in 1 Corinthians chapter 3. However, perhaps you also do not understand this. From the New International Version verses 10-14. This is what I see as some of the less complex parts of scripture. Other people are understanding scriptural content here. Do you even want to understand scriptural content? 

Quote

 these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit.

The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. 14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness,and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. 

 

Edited by Mark Sanguinetti
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no one here is without the spirit to understand, but I'm sure that grammar school battles don't contribute

tossing around ideas is encouraging though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mark Sanguinetti said:

Rocky, it simply requires spiritual insight from God, the father, to understand spiritual content and concepts. This is seen in 1 Corinthians chapter 3. However, perhaps you also do not understand this. From the New International Version verses 10-14. This is what I see as some of the less complex parts of scripture. Other people are understanding scriptural content here. Do you even want to understand scriptural content? 

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mark Sanguinetti said:

these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit.

The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. 14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness,and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. 

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rocky now shows he either has no interest in my post information on this subject. It looks like he does not even want to read it. 

1 hour ago, Rocky said:

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.

Then learn from other people. Then Rocky, if you are interested in this subject, do a Google search.  Here is an article titled, "The Church's Development of the Hell Myth"  http://30ce.com/developmentofhell.htm  This was seen after typing in your question with the wording: "Where did the myths of hell originate?"

Rocky we at least agree on this subject. "The Free Market is a Cruel Myth". However, perhaps Rocky will now disagree with me perhaps because I said I agree with him on this. Or perhaps he will complain about adding what is below his name to this thread, while putting the quotes around his whole phrase instead of around only "Free Market". 

Edited by Mark Sanguinetti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mark Sanguinetti said:

Rocky now shows he either has no interest in my post information on this subject. It looks like he does not even want to read it. 

Then learn from other people. Then Rocky, if you are interested in this subject, do a Google search.  Here is an article titled, "The Church's Development of the Hell Myth"  http://30ce.com/developmentofhell.htm  This was seen after typing in your question with the wording: "Where did the myths of hell originate?"

Rocky we at least agree on this subject. "The Free Market is a Cruel Myth". However, perhaps Rocky will now disagree with me perhaps because I said I agree with him on this. Or perhaps he will complain about adding what is below his name to this thread, while putting the quotes around his whole phrase instead of around only "Free Market". 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again and again and again. You keep ignoring all my posts and only looking at your words and beliefs. Sorry, but I do not want to waste my time attacking your posts. However, you are instead wasting your time disagreeing with my posts. Here is one sentence however that you just wrote, that I have NEVER DISAGREED with.

Quote

And that I don't believe the Hebrew or Christian Bibles were the first place Myths of Hell are documented.
 

The article is biblical and NOT a history lesson on the history of pagan religions that believed in hell. Instead I have stated at least a few times that hell did NOT begin with the Old Testament. Instead it begin with other religious beliefs and it has crept into some Christian denominations today. Are you one of the believers in hell?  If you are then believe what you want. If you want to read about the history of hell then here is another link to read. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell

Below is some information about the origin of the New Testament Greek word hades, which is sometimes translated as hell in the New Testament. Again if you believe in hell, then I don't care. Perhaps you can dream about it like you are on vacation in Arizona. 

Quote

The Greek word “hades” began with Ancient Greek religious mythology and not Christianity with Jesus Christ. In prior years before Christ’s birth, according to ancient Greek mythology, Hades was someone who was born as a son, but later became the lord of the underworld. Hades drew lots with his brothers Zeus and Poseidon to decide which part of the world each would rule. Zeus received the sky, Poseidon the seas, and Hades the underworld. Hades ruled the dead, assisted by others over whom he had complete authority. He cared little about what happened in the upper world, as his primary attention was ensuring that none of his subjects ever left his rulership. He strictly forbade his subjects from leaving his domain and would become very angry when anyone tried to leave death that was under his control. If they did he would punish them as he did with a mystical character named Pirithous.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scripture is a bottomless pit of hell by itself. The further it's taken the worse it gets. Time after time this has proven to be true. I've proven it to myself after more than 20 years of practicing the bible. As well as others here who have done the same. Clear thinking was replaced by words in a book. We took what we called spirit and demanded it to do our will and called it walking by the spirit. The spirit, Christ, is not a tool to be used, never will be.

 

Edited by cman
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with you Rocky.. It's not my purpose to denigrate someone's feelings and their research. Looks like a lot of time of was put into this. Oh, the wasted hours I spent studying "The Word" only to find out it was all fraudulent. I wonder at how all the priests of Osirus  got along with the priests of RA or Horus? Or the priests of Diana or Zeus? They all led their entire lives consumed by their beliefs in a lie.. Lies they would die for. Lives for which they would kill others for heresy. Things have not changed. Only the names of the current gods.. And for what? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The myths of hell with eternal torment for a lifetime of sin as believed by some do not have a loving mindset that follows the example of Jesus Christ. Instead the bible points out through Jesus Christ his son, that God is a God of love and this is what Jesus taught as his greatest commandment. To love God above all things and love your neighbor as yourself. Jesus in showing humility spoke of himself as the Son of Man, much more than as the Son of God. He was both, but he showed humility in calling himself the Son of Man, while relating himself to all of mankind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without some kind of threat of some kind of hell, most doctrines will fall apart. The sign on a church billboard down the road from my house says that "Jesus is coming back". Just another threat in my opinion. Based on the destructive non-loving doctrines that teach that Jesus Christ is not here and present, but will come back at some future time.

Love, yeah love is one of those concepts that some think that people need to be taught and defined. I don't think so. And what is it to love God? Please don't try to answer that for me or tell me what and how to get it done. Is it love for me to share my experiences with the myths of hell? Is it love to show where I got the hell from, how these "love god" bible people promote destructive teachings and practices?

Yes Jesus said a lot of things about love in the bible, so does Proverbs and Genesis and Deuteronomy. As well as the many souls I encounter daily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mark Sanguinetti said:

The myths of hell with eternal torment for a lifetime of sin as believed by some do not have a loving mindset that follows the example of Jesus Christ. Instead the bible points out through Jesus Christ his son, that God is a God of love and this is what Jesus taught as his greatest commandment. To love God above all things and love your neighbor as yourself. Jesus in showing humility spoke of himself as the Son of Man, much more than as the Son of God. He was both, but he showed humility in calling himself the Son of Man, while relating himself to all of mankind. 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rocky said:

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.

What you are suggesting is greed and not being service oriented and loving to humanity. It is better to be truthful, loving and service oriented. And this is the mind of Jesus Christ.

The mythology of hell has not been corrected today. Comparing the Old Testament to the New Testament this mythology has instead increased. And if you ask me questions you need to at least try to read and consider my answers to your questions.

Please remember that this is a doctrinal forum. Normally, a doctrinal forum would be for people that believe in Jesus Christ. The fundamentals of followers of Jesus Christ is that Jesus lived on earth, died for the sins of mankind and then God his Father raised him from the dead. Do the last few posters here believe in that? Or is this thought as mythology?

Rocky, the first few posters for this thread viewed this forum with a positive mindset. The can of worms that you figuratively stated has only begun with your posts and mindset. Is a can of worms negative to you? Or perhaps there are too many worms in Arizona. But perhaps think of this positively as there may be more worms in other states. 

Edited by Mark Sanguinetti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mark Sanguinetti said:

The mythology of hell has not been corrected today. Comparing the Old Testament to the New Testament this mythology has instead increased.

Can anyone here actually show how or point to where anything written in the Old Testament speaks of an eternal afterlife, living in heaven (i.e., any place other than on earth)?  Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think it's there.  All I've honestly been able to find or see there is the promise and hope of new (resurrected) life in what might be aptly described as "heaven on earth."  And, even if (yea, when) at some point that requires new heavens and a new earth (Isaiah 65:17 and 66:22), there appears to be no indication of man living anywhere aside from here on earth.    

All of which raises the question... If these prophets of old (and the nation of Israel) didn't actually have or believe in this apparently much latter view of heaven (i.e., inherent within the Pauline epistles), then what logic exists in thinking that they actually had any more of a belief in any sort of eternal life and everlasting torment in hell?  The grave was the grave.  It was not a place or torment, nor was it a place where man could know or experience anything.  There was no conscious or awareness of anything.  Thus, as I see it, this "mythology of hell" - as it is referenced in this thread - seems to be a rather pagan invention, and never had any other place in Old Testament scriptures.    

But, if you think otherwise, please feel free to show me where this is wrong.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TLC, your observations should at least be considered. They seem valid to me and show good biblical and spiritual sense. Certainly, more was known with Jesus Christ coming to earth with his teachings and insight.  Also with the gift of holy spirit from Jesus Christ,  this would mean more spiritual knowledge and insight. As an example of what you just stated. The nation of Israel when Jesus Christ came to them. As I understand it, people were looking for Jesus to be a King that would work to overthrow the Roman empire and put the nation of Israel as independent with power. Since he did not do that or work on that at all, they rejected him. The goal of Jesus was instead spiritual with the salvation of mankind and this was not seen by the nation of Israel, especially their political and religious leaders. Of course, they wanted the power and saw Jesus as a threat to their authority.

Also perhaps only one Old Testament verse addresses afterlife for mankind. This is scene in Daniel 12:2. Here is the quote from the Young's Literal Version.

Quote

`And the multitude of those sleeping in the dust of the ground do awake, some to life age-during, and some to reproaches -- to abhorrence age-during.

 

Edited by Mark Sanguinetti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mark Sanguinetti said:

Please remember that this is a doctrinal forum. Normally, a doctrinal forum would be for people that believe in Jesus Christ. The fundamentals of followers of Jesus Christ is that Jesus lived on earth, died for the sins of mankind and then God his Father raised him from the dead. Do the last few posters here believe in that? Or is this thought as mythology?

Wow.....and you think you are the one to say anything about anything

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Mark Sanguinetti said:

Please remember that this is a doctrinal forum. Normally, a doctrinal forum would be for people that believe in Jesus Christ. The fundamentals of followers of Jesus Christ is that Jesus lived on earth, died for the sins of mankind and then God his Father raised him from the dead. Do the last few posters here believe in that? Or is this thought as mythology?

 

THE ABOVE STATEMENT IS WRONG.

The doctrinal forum is to discuss doctrine.

It is NOT "for people that believe in Jesus Christ." It is for discussion of doctrine.

In practice, we devised a "questioning faith" subforum to isolate threads that would otherwise turn the entire forum into one perceived as hostile to believers. But the "questioning faith" subforum does not give anyone the right to declare unbelievers unwelcome in the doctrinal forum. As long as the posters are discussing the doctrine that is the subject of the thread, anyone of any belief is welcome to post on any thread in any forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Raf said:

THE ABOVE STATEMENT IS WRONG.

The doctrinal forum is to discuss doctrine.

It is NOT "for people that believe in Jesus Christ." It is for discussion of doctrine.

In practice, we devised a "questioning faith" subforum to isolate threads that would otherwise turn the entire forum into one perceived as hostile to believers. But the "questioning faith" subforum does not give anyone the right to declare unbelievers unwelcome in the doctrinal forum. As long as the posters are discussing the doctrine that is the subject of the thread, anyone of any belief is welcome to post on any thread in any forum.

I was simply asking questions. It was NOT declaring they were unwelcome. Yes, people ask questions here.  I have also asked questions. Rocky and cman have combined to ask me many questions. In this doctrinal forum, I simply want people to consider the bible and make sure that they are at least reading it. Some people in this doctrinal forum read scriptures much. With work in reading it can help our understanding. Others look to me like that they do not read the bible much anymore. 

Edited by Mark Sanguinetti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing wrong with them asking you questions.

There is nothing wrong with you asking them, or with trying to keep the conversation focused on the Bible.

 

There is something wrong with saying or implying that this forum is for believers. It's for anyone who wants to discuss doctrine

You raised an issue. They replied. (My replies are actually the least on-topic of the bunch).

Point is, I don't see where they're off topic, but if you want to report anything I'll alert one of the other mods.

Your call.

 

Meanwhile, a gentle reminder from ModKirk, circa 2010: 

The doctrinal forum has and will continue to play host to a wide variety of opinions, doctrines and favorite theologians. Non-Christians, including atheists, agnostics, and Satanists (yeah, really) are welcome here.

That being said, please keep the discussions on-topic. While discussing the existence of God, God's motives, the origin or reliability of the bible or the relatives merits of various religions and philosophies is certainly appropriate, consider the context of your discussion. Does your contribution add to or derail/detract from the discussion at hand? The flip side of this is that non-Christians have every right to weigh in on these threads. While it may be your opinion that a Buddhist or an Atheist doesn't belong in an argument about the Trinity or Predestination or answered prayer, the position of this board is that anyone may participate.

Please, play nice!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mark Sanguinetti said:

I was simply asking questions. It was NOT declaring they were unwelcome. Yes, people ask questions here.  I have also asked questions. Rocky and cman have combined to ask me many questions. In this doctrinal forum, I simply want people to consider the bible and make sure that they are at least reading it. Some people in this doctrinal forum read scriptures much. With work in reading it can help our understanding. Others look to me like that they do not read the bible much anymore

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.

Edited by Rocky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×