I was just wondering since I have read near deaths of hell fire and damnation.. What if the Christians are right that God is sadistic monster.. I know they think God is a good loving just judge.. But to me a God like that is a monster worse that Hitler and Joseph Stalin put together!!

What if the people saved in hellish near deaths, really were in just purgatory... The real hell is the Christian's hell..??

I'm just so confused.. Even, if God doesn't create this hell, why do people experience it??? It's the same as not creating it or not.. It is sadistic either way.. By creating it or letting people create it themselves..  

I know it's because are thoughts become real in the afterlife and all that jargon.. But why is that?? Although, I'd rather have it be that.. Than God really creating this type of hell.. But still that sucks too that just by fearing it at your death bed you can go there.. No matter if you were good or not..

To me I don't know what to believe anymore.. I don't see how anyone else can be sane after realizing that some people go to this type of hell .. It makes me sick that people are suffering in this type of hell.. I mean if hell was just temporary and emotional pain only... I wouldn't feel so sick about it.. But when hell is both physical and emotional pain that just makes me feel so sorry and depressed that there is a hell like this..

In my heart though I know there is no real hell, but my ego tells me differently..


Maybe my heart is to big.. Or the fact I fear I could go there too just by thinking it.. It makes me feel their pain..

peace

hi there, you said:  
I'm just so confused.. Even, if God doesn't create this hell, why do people experience it??? It's the same as not creating it or not.. It is sadistic either way.. By creating it or letting people create it themselves..
____

this the way I like to think of it: once upon a time we sat around in heaven twiddling our thumbs with a smile on our face. we played harps all day long. after awhile we wondered what else to do. so we spotted this planet looked appealing to the eye. we thought to make some flowers of variety. later we made some cars. so we could visit each other. have tea and crumpets like in the old days. :)
so we came in waves and broke up into different personalities and lived in houses that all look just the same. then some of us like to make trouble. we made dualing an art. women were supposed to stay home but we wanted some of the action too, so forget that! >:(  

get the picture? this is our world, we made it, god is getting tired of waiting for us to come home, but this dude is of utmost patience, I mean god is a woman too. god has no genitals, we made them up too.

its over so quick, take my word for it, you have to make the best out of the lemons you have, into some lemonade. chin up..this no time to be lamenting..love, alysia

what if the easter bunny is real and rules the afterlife?

what if the mighty morphin power rangers rule the afterlife?

we could speculate forever.  but one thing we do know for sure is that the bible is written by men and more or less fiction, or at the least very "contaminated" and not trustworthy.  if God is so smart and wanted us to actually follow it, he would give each person the chance to truly know the truth in a clear and simple manner and then make a decision before sending them to hell.  the idea that he sends his convoluted book to earth, where many people won't even get the chance to read it, and then decides whether to send you to hell based on that, is truly laughable, ridiculous and superstitious.  plus the idea that God is loving yet sends people to hell is just absurd.


Quote:

I'm just so confused.. Even, if God doesn't create this hell, why do people experience it???

supposedly because beliefs are strong.  if you can create any environment you want in the afterlife, what's to keep you from creating hell if that's what your beliefs bring to fruition?  to say someone couldn't create hell from their thoughts would negate the whole idea that your beliefs could create whatever you want.

thats very funny about the easter bunny Seeker, I didn't know you guys had a sense of humor..now I can't resist this cartoon..
I apologize to offend anyone.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/spiritvideo/Alysia/myspace2/myspace3/ShowLetter.gif

egg dying, nice :P

briggsandurlacher3,


briggsandurlacher3 wrote on Jul 29^th, 2007 at 10:28pm:

Even, if God doesn't create this hell, why do people experience it??? . . . I know it's because are thoughts become real in the afterlife and all that jargon.. But why is that??

It is an unfortunate fact of history that Christianity was born and grew up in the time of emperors and kings.  Unfortunate because our Christian god was then modeled on emperors and kings.  These guys owned everything within their realm and had unquestioned power and authority over everyone and everything within their realm.  Should such a king or emperor become displeased with the behavior or actions of one of his subjects the king could decide that person's fate with impunity.  To the dungeon to be left to starve to death, or tortured to death, cut up and fed to the dogs, whatever the king decided.  So, all the king's subjects figured out pretty quickly that they best do whatever they could to keep the king happy.  This kind of cruel, brutal, petty, loving, hatefull, all-merciful, vengeful, psycho-king became the template for the Christian god.  As a result they have an omnipotent, omnipresent, loving god who sits on a throne and must be obeyed without question lest he become angry and vent his brutal rage and anger on you as one of his subjects.  And since this Christian king's realm is all of everything, including eternity, his dungeon is portrayed as never-ending torture and pain for all of eternity.

How could this not  be confusing?  It's a ridiculous, psychotic, mix of internally conflicting personality traits taken from the templates of the rulers, kings and emperors, of the times in which Christianity's religions were created.  A loving, all merciful god you must constantly appease, suffer and sacrifice for lest he get mad at you and send you to the torture chamber (hell) for all of eternity.  A more convoluted plate of hog wash would be hard to find!  It's no wonder it's confusing!

Back to your question.

Explaining in detail how it is that thoughts can be things could take up an entire book.  Let's just say that Consciousness is some kind of "Stuff" (like teeny, tiny particles) that can be "organized" into any "form" by the thought of that form, or said another way, by imagining that form.  This Stuff is extremely pliable and easily "molded" by thought and imagining.

I was raised as a Lutheran.  All good Lutherans are taught to believe and imagine the existence of Heaven and Hell.  We were thaught to believe in a set of rules the Lutheran god supposedly uses to determine who gets loved and who gets tortured after death.  Just a single person imagining all this hog wash fantasy would create some level of Lutheran heaven and hell.  But, there isn't just one person doing it, there have been millions of them doing it since Martin Luther first laid out the basis of his belief system.  With all these people imagining and believing in Luther's imaginings great gobs of the Stuff has become pretty solidly molded to conform to their beliefs.  And from my experiences, and that of others exploring nonphysical realities, you have to share the Lutheran beliefs that molded the Stuff into Lutheran heaven or Lutheran hell in order to take up residence in these places.  You won't find any Catholics living there, they have their own beliefs and imaginings that create their own Catholic heaven and Catholic hell, and Limbo and Purgatory, etc.

So the short answer to why people experience hell (or heaven) is that they chose to do so by joining the belief system that created the place.  It is for me very sad and ultimately ironic that the ONLY reason people experience the hell their religion describes is because their religion created the place by getting them to believe it exists.  Lutherans in hell are there solely because their religion, not God, created that hell and the rules by which a Lutheran is sent their.

Okay, I'll get off that soapbox for a moment . . .


briggsandurlacher3 wrote on Jul 29^th, 2007 at 10:28pm:

To me I don't know what to believe anymore.. I don't see how anyone else can be sane after realizing that some people go to this type of hell .. It makes me sick that people are suffering in this type of hell.. I mean if hell was just temporary and emotional pain only... I wouldn't feel so sick about it.. But when hell is both physical and emotional pain that just makes me feel so sorry and depressed that there is a hell like this..

Me too!  That is one of the reasons I teach the Art of Retrieval.  We, the physically living, can be of service to our fellow human beings who are trapped in these horrible, religion-created hells.  We can assist the nonphysical Helpers who constantly work to retrieve those trapped folks and take them to a better place.

Bruce

How true yet how sad at the same time. That we as beings have created such hells for ourselfs. I prefer the belief system as many here have postulated as existing. Of Home and of the Garden, etc. A far better place to go than some heavens or hells in my view.

Thanks everyone for the help on this subject..!! Especially, Bruce for his great explanation!

I know God never created hell.. It's just hard to believe we have created hell..

I wish I knew how to have obe's so I could help retrieve people..!

From my research I believe the only ones who go to hell are the ones who have no remorse/hate God, and believe they are going to hell..

peace

Good explanation Bruce.

The reason that we have such a difference between our "Western" ideas and the traditional "Eastern" ideas arises also in terms of the environment in which people lived. The old rishis sitting by the Ganges could walk into the forest and pick papayas, mangos, breadfruit etc and thus felt that God must be a fruitful and bountiful God. The cycle of nature thus inspired belief in a perpetual cycle of creation and fruitfulness. Life was laid back, comfortable and accepting.

The tent makers on the edge of the Sahara saw a different world in which the entirety of nature seemed to be turned against everything, including human life. God had done nothing for these people, and was assumed to to be just as dangerous as the desert. Only by gathering in mutually supportive groups could we endure in these harsh conditions, and then only by staying close to the Nile etc. Life seemed to be a constant threat, and was terribly serious.

Our Jewish forefathers came from the desert tribes. They brought their traditions with them. Then, just as Bruce mentioned, the same restrictive ethic was built into all of our social systems.

dave

Hadn't thought of the historical origins of the Christian doctrines being formed in the era of kings and emperors or the difference between western and eastern spiritualities, trust this forum to make sense on a more 'mainstream' board you'd never get this type of insight or awareness, well done guys  ;)

briggsandurlacher,


briggsandurlacher3 wrote on Jul 30^th, 2007 at 5:26pm:

I wish I knew how to have obe's so I could help retrieve people..!

If the ability to do OBEs was necessary to do retrievals I would not be able to do retrievals.  I never got any good at OBE.  That's why I developed the simpler "Focused Attention" method that I teach.

Bruce

Never say die wrote on Jul 31^st, 2007 at 6:55am:

Hadn't thought of the historical origins of the Christian doctrines being formed in the era of kings and emperors or the difference between western and eastern spiritualities, trust this forum to make sense on a more 'mainstream' board you'd never get this type of insight or awareness, well done guys  ;)

thats true, I never thought of it that way either :)  for some reason I carried a feeling in this life of unease to think of people in power. power is so often abused over the common person. good analogy Bruce; really makes you think about priorities of government and religion getting all mixed up.
love, alysia

Bruce Moen wrote on Jul 31^st, 2007 at 7:12am:

briggsandurlacher, briggsandurlacher3 wrote on Jul 30th, 2007 at 5:26pm: I wish I knew how to have obe's so I could help retrieve people..! If the ability to do OBEs was necessary to do retrievals I would not be able to do retrievals.  I never got any good at OBE.  That's why I developed the simpler "Focused Attention" method that I teach. Bruce

same here, I have absolutely no control over obe.  the first one was done spontaneously from deep thought on the matter, but 20 yrs later I began to practice Bruce's style of letting the imagination lead me in the door, and the desire to do them of course. if you can list the steps down on paper, sometimes that may help, like one step is playing along with it..brushing doubts aside, you can slip in the back door in a manner of speaking. I've always been the sneaky sort, so I guess that description fits ok... :)   one can start the conversation for instance with a retrievee, then just stand aside and see what happens.
if I hadn't found this site, I would never have done any more retrievals I'm certain, I wouldn't even have known that I had done one without being able to talk about it.

the basic thing you need to do one is a desire to help someone without necessarily incriminating them, no judgement on them in other words, its humanity..we all need a little help now and then.

love, alysia

Bruce Moen wrote on Jul 30^th, 2007 at 10:25am:

We, the physically living, can be of service to our fellow human beings who are trapped in these horrible, religion-created hells.  We can assist the nonphysical Helpers who constantly work to retrieve those trapped folks and take them to a better place. Bruce

To me, this physical existence is the worst of all these hells. It is the most solid - because most people agree on its reality??

The fact alone that one life form has to eat other life forms in order to survive, is utterly repulsive to me. And that goes not only for animals.

Myself and many others are here to retrieve people, but this is not a nice short trip of an hour or two, after which we can return to the warm and cozy safety of our home. We have to spend a whole lifetime, and home's memory has faded away to a few tiny traces.

Fellow retrievers are few and far apart. I am only grateful for the internet which provides at least a little bit of connection.

dave_a_mbs wrote on Jul 30^th, 2007 at 11:10pm:

Good explanation Bruce. The reason that we have such a difference between our "Western" ideas and the traditional "Eastern" ideas arises also in terms of the environment in which people lived. The old rishis sitting by the Ganges could walk into the forest and pick papayas, mangos, breadfruit etc and thus felt that God must be a fruitful and bountiful God. The cycle of nature thus inspired belief in a perpetual cycle of creation and fruitfulness. Life was laid back, comfortable and accepting. The tent makers on the edge of the Sahara saw a different world in which the entirety of nature seemed to be turned against everything, including human life. God had done nothing for these people, and was assumed to to be just as dangerous as the desert. Only by gathering in mutually supportive groups could we endure in these harsh conditions, and then only by staying close to the Nile etc. Life seemed to be a constant threat, and was terribly serious. Our Jewish forefathers came from the desert tribes. They brought their traditions with them. Then, just as Bruce mentioned, the same restrictive ethic was built into all of our social systems. dave

Sweet, I was waiting on your reply! :) Thanks for your feedback!

Bruce Moen wrote on Jul 31^st, 2007 at 7:12am:

briggsandurlacher, briggsandurlacher3 wrote on Jul 30th, 2007 at 5:26pm: I wish I knew how to have obe's so I could help retrieve people..! If the ability to do OBEs was necessary to do retrievals I would not be able to do retrievals.  I never got any good at OBE.  That's why I developed the simpler "Focused Attention" method that I teach. Bruce

Oic, I thought that was the only way.. Wow, I've got a lot to learn.. I need to get your books Bruce.. It's just I"m busy with Neale Donald Walsch's right now..

peace

This is a great thread. I will be adopting some of the material here, such that you will hear it coming back from me later, Bruce and Dave, your own words, adopted into my thinking. I hope I remember to give credit.
More later when I have time.

Bruce's works make good reading - spend a few bucks and check them out.

dave_a_mbs wrote on Aug 1^st, 2007 at 1:18pm:

Bruce's works make good reading - spend a few bucks and check them out.

I fully agree with this statement.  So much so, that other books on the subject I find hard to hold interest in.  But, I do find myself referring back to Bruce's often.

Great thread and great responses..seems I know just when to come and read what I need..

Bravo Bruce!

You have painted quite a visible picture. There is no need for my coment here, fore it would just mirror your statment.

Getting this message out to people, that we and we alone are responsible for the reality we create for ourselves, through our beliefs, be it in the physical, while we experience this physical state, or after the transistion, by the Earth term called death, as we enter the non phsyical realms.

The realm of imagination is our next true home, and all those that transistion there, find out in a hurry, how, and why, they must control their thoughts.

It would be benificial to all human kind to explore this next realm while still having a physical body, so they can return to the physical and analyze this next realm, to better have a greater understanding of both worlds, and the whole truth about Earth's religions, and the earthly beings that created them.

On the other side, for all those that have explored there, whether conscioussly, or through a NDE, have all come back changed, being more loving, more understanding, less judgemental, and more caring about themselves, and to all human, animal, vegetable, and mineral Life, including the great spirit energy of the Earth.

Thoughts are powerful things, that need to be controlled in the physical state first, before one ventures to the next realm, although most are never enlightened by this information, due to the narrow mindedness of their current belief system.

It would be wonderful if everyone was.

Thannks Bruce, For all that you do to help make this a reality, for those that seek.

Dimensionally Yours,
Rick

I'd like to echo Rick's words - Thanks Bruce!

You'll have to decide for yourself about whether Christainity has the right answers or not - for myself, considerable Bible reading and study of early church history and Christian doctrimes, plus other religions , has left me thinking most of Christainity is nonsense. For one thing, the Jews did not believe in Hell or in the conecpt of original sin, which according to Christian doctrine is the reason we deserve it. And jesus himself was a Jew, who said he did not come to do away with one jot or tittle of the old Testament writings.

Most likely Hell was an invention of early Christians who wanted to get their own back on non-believers, especially those who (sporadically) persecuted them. Tertullian, for example, gloated at the idea of looking down from Heaven and seeing the roasting sinners, including people like dancers, singers and actors, who he joked would be even more nimble, tuneful and eloquent in their screams and jumps as they tried to avoid the flames

Orlando said "including people like dancers, singers and actors, who he joked would be even more nimble, tuneful and eloquent in their screams and jumps as they tried to avoid the flames"

::) oh oh, I'm in trouble then!

its true, Christianity invited hell to control the masses, make them tithe maybe, get the sheep in line by putting "fear of god" into them.

how can you fear what loves you so much it gave you a magnificent planet to live on?
I mean, some of us have grown to love the planet and wish to take care of it.
for some of us original sin concepts means we are born and automatically feel guilty that we are here, seeming separate from our maker. those in power hold the thought of death over others, as if death were a real condition of extinction.

Christianity said this, that to be born of woman is automatic sin, and is to take on the sins of the parents.
you can see this as karma if you want, but we do take on each other's errors, parents included. cast off guilt and you are then sinless, this is the teaching of the Christed way, that we are not already wretched to be born here. just look into a baby's eyes and you will see only innocense and beauty there, straight from heaven.

we are children who belong here, we have a right to love and be loved and spread joy and heal the sick and lame and mentally ill and our temporary home. we never did anything wrong to come here, and hell is simply fear of god's wrath, whom has none for us.
don't worry, religion is changing. One world, one religion, one brotherhood of man.
keep the vision, that is your job as it must be so for all of us.

if we have sinned we dont need to wallow around in it forever, we can change ourselves by being grateful for another chance. for 6 years now on this board all anyone can talk about is the reality of hell or whether it exists...geez...I'm waiting for the miracles to start rolling in!

love to all, you are my known and unknown family.

hello laffingrain. What a nice post  :) i honestly don;t know, at this stage in my life, if there is any sort of god or not, but i still believe in beauty and love and stuff - if you don;t you might as well go jump off a cliff. we can all try a little bit to make the world better. I agree a baby is a pure and innocent thing, and I also like to believe any of us can make a fresh start and be pure and innocent too. The useful christian ideas include not judging others and repenting of sins so as to start anew etc, even if they are bound up with lots of unhelpful other stuff (just one among many, I dislike the association of sexuality with sin, which i think has a lot to answer for. some people seem to feel that somehow only small children are innocent and adults have fallen from grace). On the other hand there's no point beating yourself over the head for not being "perfect". Who is? I don;t think the Jesus depicted in the gospels was, for example (how about the bit where he has a fit of anger and drives the tradres out of the outer court of the temple with a whip!! and they were only - historians suggest - money changers (so people could, as required, use the local currency to buy sacrificial animals), or selling  animals to be sacrificed in the temple - not T-shirts and souvenirs, or drugs and porn or something!!
I had a Pagan phase and used to pray to the Goddess but then something very unjust and painful happened to me after I had prayed for a good outcome to the situation and I don;t know any more if there is any real intelligence or benevolance to the universe at all. Would still like to think there could be... still, intelligent and benevolent people are a start

orlando123 wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2007 at 12:05pm:

You'll have to decide for yourself about whether Christainity has the right answers or not - for myself, considerable Bible reading and study of early church history and Christian doctrimes, plus other religions , has left me thinking most of Christainity is nonsense. For one thing, the Jews did not believe in Hell or in the conecpt of original sin, which according to Christian doctrine is the reason we deserve it. And jesus himself was a Jew, who said he did not come to do away with one jot or tittle of the old Testament writings. Most likely Hell was an invention of early Christians who wanted to get their own back on non-believers, especially those who (sporadically) persecuted them. Tertullian, for example, gloated at the idea of looking down from Heaven and seeing the roasting sinners, including people like dancers, singers and actors, who he joked would be even more nimble, tuneful and eloquent in their screams and jumps as they tried to avoid the flames

I agree, most of the bible is hogwash.. Yes, it has some truth to it too.. But it isn't technically the word of God.. {Plus, if Christianity was wiped off the face of the earth I would be joyful.. The fundimentailism of Christianity that is.. Liberal Christianity I don't mind.. Christian Universalism I don't mind that either! When it comes to fundies though I have a lot of disagreements about what they teach.. No offense to anyone that is a  fundi Christian.. I just think your religion does more damage than Good.. For instance the holy wars we have.. Look at What GWB is doing ! Also, look at the hell teaching.. It has caused people to go literally insane.. For instance, a woman drowned her kids in a tub to rid their chances of going to hell.. Since, the church believe there  is an age where kids are held accountable to go to hell.. Also, it has caused some people to become atheists who don't want to believe in a sadistic God of the  Christians..

I love how great this board is and this site.. It has opened my mind to think outside the box and break from the false views of God and the afterlife..


peace Orlando123!

LaffingRain wrote on Jul 31^st, 2007 at 11:52am:

Never say die wrote on Jul 31st, 2007 at 6:55am: Hadn't thought of the historical origins of the Christian doctrines being formed in the era of kings and emperors or the difference between western and eastern spiritualities, trust this forum to make sense on a more 'mainstream' board you'd never get this type of insight or awareness, well done guys  ;) thats true, I never thought of it that way either :)  for some reason I carried a feeling in this life of unease to think of people in power. power is so often abused over the common person. good analogy Bruce; really makes you think about priorities of government and religion getting all mixed up. love, alysia

Well Christian doctrine as we know it was settled at the Council of Nicea which was called by the Roman Emperor Constantine (4th century bc) who was a new convert to Christianity and wanted to sort out a set of official beliefs at a time when there were various competing ones. That's where we get the Nicene creed from. It was also the start of people who had differfnt ideas being persecuted as heretics. in order for Christianity to eventually become the official  religion of the empire it had to be all neatly formulated so as to say who had the right version and who did not

briggsandurlacher3 wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2007 at 5:48pm:

peace Orlando123!

and you too!

Still, I think it is pretty bogus that just by thinking you're going to hell, you'll get what you expect..  >:(

Bruce Moen wrote on Jul 30^th, 2007 at 10:25am:

briggsandurlacher3, briggsandurlacher3 wrote on Jul 29th, 2007 at 10:28pm: Even, if God doesn't create this hell, why do people experience it??? . . . I know it's because are thoughts become real in the afterlife and all that jargon.. But why is that?? It is an unfortunate fact of history that Christianity was born and grew up in the time of emperors and kings.  Unfortunate because our Christian god was then modeled on emperors and kings.  These guys owned everything within their realm and had unquestioned power and authority over everyone and everything within their realm.  Should such a king or emperor become displeased with the behavior or actions of one of his subjects the king could decide that person's fate with impunity.  To the dungeon to be left to starve to death, or tortured to death, cut up and fed to the dogs, whatever the king decided.  So, all the king's subjects figured out pretty quickly that they best do whatever they could to keep the king happy.  This kind of cruel, brutal, petty, loving, hatefull, all-merciful, vengeful, psycho-king became the template for the Christian god.  As a result they have an omnipotent, omnipresent, loving god who sits on a throne and must be obeyed without question lest he become angry and vent his brutal rage and anger on you as one of his subjects.  And since this Christian king's realm is all of everything, including eternity, his dungeon is portrayed as never-ending torture and pain for all of eternity. How could this not  be confusing?  It's a ridiculous, psychotic, mix of internally conflicting personality traits taken from the templates of the rulers, kings and emperors, of the times in which Christianity's religions were created.  A loving, all merciful god you must constantly appease, suffer and sacrifice for lest he get mad at you and send you to the torture chamber (hell) for all of eternity.  A more convoluted plate of hog wash would be hard to find!  It's no wonder it's confusing! Back to your question. Explaining in detail how it is that thoughts can be things could take up an entire book.  Let's just say that Consciousness is some kind of "Stuff" (like teeny, tiny particles) that can be "organized" into any "form" by the thought of that form, or said another way, by imagining that form.  This Stuff is extremely pliable and easily "molded" by thought and imagining. I was raised as a Lutheran.  All good Lutherans are taught to believe and imagine the existence of Heaven and Hell.  We were thaught to believe in a set of rules the Lutheran god supposedly uses to determine who gets loved and who gets tortured after death.  Just a single person imagining all this hog wash fantasy would create some level of Lutheran heaven and hell.  But, there isn't just one person doing it, there have been millions of them doing it since Martin Luther first laid out the basis of his belief system.  With all these people imagining and believing in Luther's imaginings great gobs of the Stuff has become pretty solidly molded to conform to their beliefs.  And from my experiences, and that of others exploring nonphysical realities, you have to share the Lutheran beliefs that molded the Stuff into Lutheran heaven or Lutheran hell in order to take up residence in these places.  You won't find any Catholics living there, they have their own beliefs and imaginings that create their own Catholic heaven and Catholic hell, and Limbo and Purgatory, etc. So the short answer to why people experience hell (or heaven) is that they chose to do so by joining the belief system that created the place.  It is for me very sad and ultimately ironic that the ONLY reason people experience the hell their religion describes is because their religion created the place by getting them to believe it exists.  Lutherans in hell are there solely because their religion, not God, created that hell and the rules by which a Lutheran is sent their. Okay, I'll get off that soapbox for a moment . . . briggsandurlacher3 wrote on Jul 29th, 2007 at 10:28pm: To me I don't know what to believe anymore.. I don't see how anyone else can be sane after realizing that some people go to this type of hell .. It makes me sick that people are suffering in this type of hell.. I mean if hell was just temporary and emotional pain only... I wouldn't feel so sick about it.. But when hell is both physical and emotional pain that just makes me feel so sorry and depressed that there is a hell like this.. Me too!  That is one of the reasons I teach the Art of Retrieval.  We, the physically living, can be of service to our fellow human beings who are trapped in these horrible, religion-created hells.  We can assist the nonphysical Helpers who constantly work to retrieve those trapped folks and take them to a better place. Bruce

Hooray for Bruce!!!!...Vote 1 Bruce Moen....For leader of the Jedi Council!! ;D ;D ;D. Darth.
May both sides of the force be with you. :)

This thread is just another example of this site’s unadmitted status as a hate source.  Fortunately, many non-religious posters have recognized this and expressed their horror to me in private messages.  Most of them no longer post here.  I regrettably find it necessary once again to expose Bruce’s mindless generalizations and the goose-stepping minions who gurgle their ignorant approval.

[Bruce:] “Our Christian God was then modeled on emperors and kings."
_____________________________________________________________
This pontification betrays Bruce’s lack of qualifications to address this subject.  In fact, the biblical God eagerly distances Himself from anthropomorphic conceptions.  God twice refuses to disclose a name to prevent anthropomorphism (Genesis 32:29; Judges 13:18).  In that pivotal moment in history when God commissions Moses to free the Hebrew slaves, God is appropriately evasive when Moses requests His name: “Tell them, I will be whatever I will be has sent you (Exodus 3:14).” God is precisely distancing Himself from the use of the regal model to conceptualize the divine. God also distances Himself from this anthropomorphic model in Isaiah 55:8-9:   “My thoughts are not like yours, and my ways are different from yours.  As high as the heavens are above the earth, so high are my ways and thoughts above yours.”  In John 1:1, 14, Jesus is conceptualized as “the Word” (Greek: Logos) in the sense of the rational self-expression of God in contrast to God in His unknowability.  The biblical use of regal language for God is figurative and subordinate to this anti-anthropomorphic underlying understanding.  

“[Bruce:] They have an omnipotent, omniscient loving God who sits on a throne…”
___________________________________________________________________
Actually the Bible never intends this image to be taken literally.  On the contrary, it champions God’s more sophisticated metaphysical status as the ground of all Being: e. g. “God is actually not far from any of us….In Him we live and move and exist (Acts 17:27-28).”  The biblical God is omnipresent, not confined to a throne as Bruce suggests.

[Bruce:] God “must be obeyed without question lest he become angry…”
____________________________________________________________
Another mindless generalization that ignores a far more subtle truth!  The Bible teaches that Jesus, being fully human, had to learn by trial-and-error like the rest of us.  This means that even Jesus was at one stage deficient in wisdom and less in divine favor than He later became (Luke 2:52).  More dramatically, it means that Jesus went through a DISOBEDIENT phase (Hebrews 5:8).  Despite all this, He was considered “sinless” (Hebrews 4:15). Sin is a state of chronic separation from God and nothing in Jesus’ learning curve caused such a separation for Him.  The same can theoretically be true of the rest of us.  Paul constantly refers to his weaknesses, but never once does he label them sins.  In fact, Paul has no guilt over his prior life as a persecutor of the church.  He freely admits that he sinned but rationalizes his sin by insisting that he had no yet come to faith and persecuted the church in ignorance.  In many ways, he is quite proud of his prior life as a non-Christian Jew (Galatians 1;13-14; Philippians 3:5-7)

The story of Adam and Eve is the story not of original sin and Paradise Lost, but of Paradise Outgrown and the birth of conscience.  Precisely for this reason, the “Fall” of Adam and Eve is nowhere treated in the Old Testament as a sin.  The doctrine of original sin implies that to be human is to be a sinner.  Indeed, even unbaptized babies are damned, according to this doctrine.  But the doctrine cannot be traced back before the 4th century and is the invention of Augustine.   In fact, the Bible teaches there can be no sin without a moral law that we knowingly and willfully violate (Romans 5:13), that we are judged according to the spiritual light we have received (Luke 12:48), that salvation is possible apart from formal profession of faith in Christ (Romans 2:7), and indeed that we in effect judge ourselves because we—not God—set up the standards by which we are judged (Matthew 7:1-2).  Nowhere does the Bible allow us to blame Adam for our own sins.  Rather, it teaches that we are responsible for own shortcomings and indeed for the afterlife that our choices help create.

God always wanted Adam and Eve to eat the forbidden fruit as part of their developmental process.  Only by disobeying do Adam and Eve become `like God´ and learn the difference between good and evil (Genesis 3:22).  In other words, their status as glorious creatures made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27-26) depends on the Fall!  In fact, God wants to save everyone (e. g. 1Timothy 2:6).  God wanted Adam and Eve to disobey so that the human quest for union with God would be fueled by gratitude in response to grace and mercy rather than by some sort of unctuous meritocracy: “God locked them into disobedience so that He might have mercy on them all (Romans 11:32).”  As Paul makes clear, God’s desire to save everyone is part of His goal to ultimately restore all of His creation back to union with Him (Romans 11:36).

[Bruce:] “His dungeon is portrayed as never-ending torture and pain for all eternity.”
_______________________________________________________________________
For those with a clean conscience but non-Christian values, Jesus’ poetic image of “few stripes” implies a very temporary sojourn in hellish planes (Luke 12:47).  Elsewhere Jesus employs the image of a debtor’s prison from which release can be gained by paying the debts owed (Matthew 5:25-26; 18:34).   The Bible envisages the possibility that even everyone in Hell will ultimately find union with God and worship God and Christ in Heaven (Philippians 2:9-11; Revelation 5:13). To that end the gates of Heaven are eternally open for traffic coming and going (Revelation 21:25).  The biblical term for Hell "Gehenna" refers to the trash dump outside Jerusalem in Jesus' day.  It is a symbol for wasted lives, not a literal realm of fiery torment.

Bruce’s ignorant pontifications overlook the obvious fact that in neither Hebrew nor Greek do the words translated “eternal” mean “forever.”  Rather, they simply mean “for an indefinite period of time.  This image is quite appropriate for ancients who can’t wrap their minds around the notion that God and the afterlife contain timeless realms.

Bruce prefers to ridicule as “psychotic” what he does not understand. How ironic that he overlooks the fact that the early church provides the earliest literary evidence for the doctrine of soul retrievals.  Paul approves the doctrine of proxy baptism for the unredeemed dead (1 Corinthians 15:29), which is based on the Jewish teaching that prayers for the dead can be effective (2 Maccabees 12:41-46).   Indeed, Peter teaches that retrievals from hellish planes can be performed by Christ (1 Peter 3:19-20) and apparently others as well (1 Peter 4:6).   In the early 2nd century, the church celebrates the possibility of soul retrievals from Hell much more explicitly as their understanding of New Testament teaching (see e. g. Apocalypse of Peter 14; Sibylline Oracles II), 

[Bruce:] “The only reason people experience the Hell that religion describes is because their religion created the place by getting them to believe it exists.”
______________________________________________________
Bruce overlooks the fact that many who experience a hellish plane  (e. g. atheists) experience it as a shocking refutation of their earthly skepticism about such planes.

Don

Don,

Why does it have to get personal?  If you disagree with certain statements, can you not refute them, and let the particular arguments stand on their own merits, without the colorful perjorative adjectives?

You missed the thread here, on page two of threads now, entitled "New testament Bible- a forgery and fable?"  The link to the online article, suggested that Constantine and committees literally created or cobbled fables and names into a common religion apart from the historical facts.  The article was annotated and referenced, so I was impressed by at least an attempt to provide source information behind the ideas.  I don't have the background to confirm or refute the linked story in the thread, but I found the allegations to be both interesting and disturbing.  

You ask how people could find themselves in a hell they never believed in while incarnate.  I think those who find themselves in a hell find themselves there as a result of like attracting like.  If they didn't realize the tenets of love of others, they find others like themselves.  Thus, the surprise is not that they were thrust into a biblical hell, but that they exist at all after death.  They may bemoan the fact that they are in a biblical hell, but in reality, they simply have no clue about like attracting like, love, karma and the laws of the universe.

Either way, I think there is a way to answer another in debate without using perjoratives.


Matthew

I don't see hate anywhere on this thread.. Just a dislike in what most Christians preach..


Don, if you don't like it here than go chat with your Christian friends.. While I'll chat with my "New Age Ghetto" friends that you like to call us.. You don't see me going on Christian boards.. I try to stay where I belong... MY threads aren't about starting arguments.. They are about getting stuff off my chest.. Otherwise I'd go to Christian sites and let them know their beliefs are full of fear and judgementalism..

Plus, leave Bruce out of this.. We are big boys and girls and can deal with our own confrontations..

peace

Don's real reason here(as said by a former poster a long time ago)is not to broaden his mind,
but to rescue or retrieve anybody back into the christian hegemony who has strayed from
the flock, and to disrupt and cause doubts among those who are borderline inquirers. Darth.
May both sides of the force be with you.  :) ps. The way he presents his proof, you would
think he was Gods private secretary!LOL. ;D ;D ;D

Lol , Darth! Nevertheless, I find him very useful here, because he knows his stuff.  That is, he knows his Christianity.  This is entirely separate from whether you choose to believe it or not.

To explore new territory, to generate new knowledge, you need to get beyond previous dogma.

Welcome back, Don. I was expecting to see you around here soon. Although I had not posted anything previously on this thread, yes, I agree with Matt here that it might be nice to just hear the facts, rather than the flack.

But I just can't resist your alliteration...that part made me laugh...

love, blink :)

I'm not sure I'd know where to start figuring out what the 'Christian' God actually is. Depending on which group you ask the possibilities range from a nasty vindictive old man with a long beard who somehow manages to love and at the same time impose the most violent of punishments on man (and that includes those who by an accident of birth never heard of him) to a distributed mind that of its nature manifests everything there is to run on love.

My personal take is that you are dealing with something that is ultimately ineffable - meaning that human traditions can only ever describe the reality in terms limited by language, intellect, state of consciousness and so on.

Which means that these descriptions must inevitably reflect the consciousness of the writer.  And that these descriptions must evolve or at least change as our insight develops....

Boris wrote on Aug 5^th, 2007 at 10:42pm:

Lol , Darth! Nevertheless, I find him very useful here, because he knows his stuff.  That is, he knows his Christianity.  This is entirely separate from whether you choose to believe it or not. To explore new territory, to generate new knowledge, you need to get beyond previous dogma.

Boris. He's not useful, he's a pain!! He just quotes endless 'stuff' written by others, hoping you
take it as his original investigations and findings....He's just another intellectual plagiarist in
the christian 'genre', knowing that 99.9% of us have not read it before....Hey! Do we browse
the internet or library's reading this(his) religious clap trap!?. No!. And he know this. So he
works away at your fragile emotional body, hoping to gain some or complete audience from
you. Darth. May both sides of the force be with you. :). ps. If I were to speculate, I would
say he was a right-wing catholic pope in a past life...Choose your date and person????

My love to you Don. Although I do not believe in the Church, I do beleave in God. I don't believe you mean harm in what you said here as I am sure you know you have no right to judge. You know who has that right. From what I have seen of Bruces writings, he also believes in a higher power. The name is not as important as the belief. Be not afraid of us. there is more love of God at this site than in many churchs.
Joe  

Hi bruce and briggs I did a retreavil on a friend who died a tragic death and i didn't have an obe.

I beleive that God loves us all and he knows that none of us are perfect,I agree joe,there is a lot of Gods love on here.

Love and God bless   Love juditha

I don't agree with the below.  It doesn't make sense having arguments against the Bible, without allowing for viewpoints that support.

[quote author=briggsandurlacher3 link=1185762480/30#31 date=1186335936]


Don, if you don't like it here than go chat with your Christian friends.. While I'll chat with my "New Age Ghetto" friends that you like to call us.

I just said that since, he complains so much about the so called hostility towards Christians.. Then why bother to come to a board you don't like.. That doesn't make sense to me..

peace

I have some very close and longstanding devout evangelical Christian friends with whom I often exchange views - mine coming from a strongly Buddhist/gnostic perspective.

They are great people, and we find ourselves agreeing time and time again on what is required of us in life, and why this may be.

But the factor that  time and again causes some issues is their emphasis on (and my refusal to buy in to)  absolutist belief in place of the application of teachings/intellectual understanding and intuitive insight in life to generate experiential knowledge. They insist on the literal existence of the Devil as a self existent objective reality, on literal interpretation of the Bible as the actual word of God, on the rightness and reality of both divine and civil punishment and retribution, and that to be 'saved' one must regardless of anything else hold certain key beliefs.

I regularly find myself on the receiving end of initiatives which start from the thought that 'it's such a pity that a nice person like you can't be saved while holding those beliefs', 'would you not x,y,z..... I also find that they simply refuse out of a fear of being led astray to read anything that I might offer them with a slightly Buddhist flavour. (I think they justify the 'risk' of talking to me on this stuff on the basis that I need setting straight)

Now they may of course be right, but not so far as I can detect. I find a considerable disjoint between their mostly  enlightened behaviours, and their beliefs. What I find too is that these absolute beliefs are a significant barrier to the exchange of knowledge and insight, and a potential cause of friction if one was to be inclined to get upset about this stuff.

It seems to me that this sort of somewhat fundamentalist insistence on 'our way or the highway' is fairly typical of many Christian groupings (even our local irish protestant rector for example blew his cover by denouncing Buddhism as a cult in a Christmas sermon a few years ago) , and is a big cause of issues such as those that have arisen in this thread.

Point being (at least from my perspective  :)). None of us has the right to dictate others' beliefs. God doesn't force anything. We were given free will for a reason. No human tradition or handed down belief system (they to varying degrees contain truths, but none is complete and all require interpretation) comes close to describing the totality of the territory - gnosis (put another way the ability to pilot one's own soul) follows from mixing taught or otherwise accessed knowledge with life experience.

Our task is surely to grope towards insight and light -  the work of road testing spiritual perspectives while progressing along the spiritual path is a key part of this evolution.

We may get it wrong on occasion, but (a) we can rely on forgiveness and love and (b) our own (grace assisted) compass is pretty effective anyway. There are those that decide to ignore the compass, but absolutist beliefs won't help them much anyway.

Which means that we surely stand to gain rather than to lose through the respectful sharing of perspectives between traditions??? Why should this be a cause for offence?

Don picks up new converts here. so when he name calls it means nothing personally. just another day of bringing in the sheaves..sigh...
he's a minister and he thinks he has to save souls and lay up treasures in heaven this way for himself, in a way, this is true, we get to heaven by helping each other, I think what Don and I disagree on the most is the method to use to get someone's attention in order to convert them. he likes to generate spark and some folks enjoy a good arguement, so whatever.

I don't want to convert anyone to anything. theres no need. surely the world is unfolding without me meddling with it to get it to unfold according to my wishes.  Newbies, it would be best to look for peoples post of genuine experiences they have undergone rather to become emeshed in holy wars, this way you can make up your mind, do not be swayed by eloquent languge and intellectual knowledge of the bible.
do your own work.

best wishes and keep the peace

Darth Benedict wrote on Aug 5^th, 2007 at 9:27pm:

Don's real reason here(as said by a former poster a long time ago)is not to broaden his mind, but to rescue or retrieve anybody back into the christian hegemony who has strayed from the flock, and to disrupt and cause doubts among those who are borderline inquirers. Darth. May both sides of the force be with you.  :) ps. The way he presents his proof, you would think he was Gods private secretary!LOL. ;D ;D ;D

yes Darth, you have it right. I submit prayers are in order for this board or invocations of peace. I do like Christians. I met a Christian the other day and he blew my mind. I was out of town when this Christian hit my car bumper, parked in front of my house. such a tiny scratch, I didn't notice. he drove back the next day to inform me of his insurance carriar stating he knew I wouldn't notice the scratch but he was a reborn Christian and felt responsible. I was touched and grateful. so Christians are good people too, the only thing I have against religion is forcing it down someone's throat like cod liver oil tactics.
I just want holy wars to cease. I guess I'm unrealistic.

we are all children of the universe, we have a right to be here, we are all deserving of god's grace and peace that passes understanding. may the gentle force sway your hearts into wisdom.

wrote on Aug 8^th, 2007 at 6:52am:

and that to be 'saved' one must regardless of anything else hold certain key beliefs.

My main problem also with any Christian apart from very liberal species. It is horribly divisive and surely just wrong, to say the universe is set up so you have to hear about and believe certain claims about a historical character (for whose very existance there is not even very strong evidence) and if you do you have an eternity of bliss and if not you have an eternity of suffering.. very silly when you think about it, but i defy any mainstream or more fundamentalist christian to tell me that is not what Christianity says

orlando123 wrote on Aug 8^th, 2007 at 5:27pm:

wrote on Aug 8th, 2007 at 6:52am: and that to be 'saved' one must regardless of anything else hold certain key beliefs. My main problem also with any Christian apart from very liberal species. It is horribly divisive and surely just wrong, to say the universe is set up so you have to hear about and believe certain claims about a historical character (for whose very existance there is not even very strong evidence) and if you do you have an eternity of bliss and if not you have an eternity of suffering.. very silly when you think about it, but i defy any mainstream or more fundamentalist christian to tell me that is not what Christianity says

Amen brother..

Not to offend, but i think that the locking down of dogma and the prohibition of thought in favour of blind belief is a relic of another of the methods the early church used and has continued to use to maintain its temporal power. One which has become a central part of the culture of many of the modern day churches.

Notwithstanding that there are differences in position, it's a pity that these debates so often grind down to arm wrestling and attempts to dominate, and so often lead to anger, upset and unpleasantness.

There's nothing wrong with a good robust debate carried forward in good humour and good faith, but compulsion is surely pretty futile in that the achievement of an enforced lip service has got to be meaningless.

'I don't want to convert anyone to anything. theres no need. surely the world is unfolding without me meddling with it to get it to unfold according to my wishes.' For sure Alysia, I agree. And I'd add that one of the primary mechanisms by which it unfolds is surely through our learning as we progress along the spiritual path. The process i tried to describe above, one which inevitably has to involve continuous reinterpretation of teachings and the meaning of experience.

The final point i'd make (and I'm probably guilty of overstepping the mark on this) is that it behoves us all to avoid pushing views that will offend or cause anger - which even if correct people are unable to objectively process. The reason for this being that even if the point is correct we risk driving them into closing (an illogical position of denial), something which may take them a very long time to reverse.

The slow drip of gently presented but consistently logical teaching can over time be far more powerful. Especially teaching that proves itself by truly helping people to transform theirs and others' lives for the better....

This is a big problem, which also exists with Islam - that those who are accused of being "extremists" are just taking the letter of what theri religion says seriously and fully. Mainstream Christainity has, from very early in its development, said if you don;t have the right beliefs you've basically had it. So I would find it hard to feel very close to a believer in this who must look at me and feel, at best, pity for what is going to happen to me. Likewise a devour Muslim will presumably look at me and see an infidel who is also most likely going to Hell. As far as the Koran goes the "people of the book" (Jews and Christians) are the best of a bad bunch when it comes to non-believers (they at least have some similar beliefs). But even these come in for strong criticism and Muslims are urged not to make friends with them.

That's precisely the point I was making about the gap between the hard line my friends profess Orlando, and how they mostly live.

They live very good lives and are lovely people, but it's in some ways in spite of what they profess. Quite apart from the issue of how it causes them to view me, actual adherence to the letter of what they actually say on quite a few matters would turn them into hardline fundamentalists...

The reason that Don is useful to me is this: I am a world saver,
and a Vulcan, so to speak, and in order to save the world, from
things heading to World War 3, we must correct certain beliefs.
Don does not have any beliefs that are hazardous, but he is part of
the picture of older beliefs being questioned. It is particularly
certain parts of Islamic beliefs that must be corrected, those
connected to jihad.

In this process, some beliefs must crash. I need to monitor this
process of belief system crashes and see how it goes. For instance,
Juditha is able to retain good Christian values, some of which are
reinforced by the new discoveries, while she is also able to work
in the world of the spirit that is shunned by conventional
religion. So she has adapted, away from narrower beliefs, although
she has had some difficulties along the way, as you have seen.

Don is in the position of having made a life and work commitment to
certain beliefs, some of which may be threatened by new
discoveries. This is a difficult position to be in and causes some
agitation. I watch with interest to see how he is getting along,
because he is an indicator of what may develop, as what we do here
becomes better known. Also, I think of him as a friend, because of
his expertise, and because those of us who are truth seekers feel a
certain kinship regardless of their particular persuasion. Or at
least, I feel that way. I feel I belong to some sort of community
at large regardless of doctrinal differences. And I seek to promote
this kind of feeling among people generally.

It is part of the process of making new discoveries, to monitor
their effect on people generally. This might be part of the
activity of this forum.

When UFOs first became believable, US government policy of heavy
suppression of knowledge about them was partly based on the fear of
culture shock to the people. It later turned out that the culture
shock was not that severe. Even the Catholic Church has survived
this.

It is similar here, in that new spiritual discoveries are a form of
culture shock to conventional belief. Actually it is a partial
thing. New discoveries do not cause a complete breakdown of what
was there before. Rather, we retain our good values. Our
US government ideologies now allow both spiritual belief and
intellectual freedom. This was a significant adaption, and a great
step forward, since the thinking of previous religions was not
aimed toward freedom. The word Islam means submission. Islam is
still aimed at submission, and they want us all to submit to them.

But a few young Moslems are waking up, seeing the useless fighting,
and may be ready for an update in their beliefs. I have actually
heard the word update used. This updating will be a critical
process now, and our knowledge developing here could play an
important role. Therefore we should continue to refine it and
discuss what we are ready to back up with evidence. Because the
confrontation with established belief is a part of the overall
process. There wont be any improvement without it. Also, the
challenge from the outside will continue to focus us on the
question of what is supported by evidence, and what is not.

Honestly, sometimes I pray in my mind a little to God for some reason, and when I do pray a little (rarely) I picture the God of the Christian bible.

Of course, I believe there is only one God, no matter what different religions call Him.

EliteNYC wrote on Aug 9^th, 2007 at 4:53am:

Honestly, sometimes I pray in my mind a little to God for some reason, and when I do pray a little (rarely) I picture the God of the Christian bible. Of course, I believe there is only one God, no matter what different religions call Him.

this above is a great summation of this entire thread so ditto as I believe all paths all religions are ultimately going to end up in the starting place anyway. more summation would be on my part, that Elite says "I picture the god of christian bible" and I wanted to say even if we are not a Christian, we still are influenced by living in a predominently Christian oriented society, simply because we are receiving other people's thoughts into our own mind, constantly through media, boards, family, etc. so we can call ourselves by any label, say, new age, Buddhist, Islam, whatever, but we cannot get out of relating with each other by default if nothing else.

so now for some bit of fun:

I was thinking how much I enjoyed this thread and all the different people on it and thought of labeling them for fun, hope nobody takes offense, as I don't mean that to take it that way. actually not just this thread, I was thinking of the entire board as a mansion, as an entire town, a village, a community we have turned into as I see people changing and growing and sharing and talking..

we have on our board all of these kinds of people (think of us as One)

* Bruce...Retrieval stock, writer, engineer, world traveler
* A doctor
* A hynotist, and former tube worm
* Several mediums
* A Vulcan
* A fire and brimstone Preacher/crossover mystic
* Several Buddhists
* Several drop in Obe adepts
* An astrologer or two
* Darth Vader
* A visionary retriever who makes movies
* Several Reiki experts/healers
* A projection of an ascended master group posing as an individual
* An avenging angel
* A social worker who can also do retrievals (aha!)
* several writers

I'm sure theres more..I myself am Internet hog godess of 2007.

love to all, alysia

Neat summary, Alysia! Would anyone like to add to that list?

Although, technically, I am not a social worker, I do support the process, so as to be a sort of helper toward the birth of brand new baby social workers.....it mainly involves sitting and listening to people and shuffling a lot of papers on my desk... :)

But I am present as the hopeful fledgllings depart for who knows where to perform their heroic tasks....

ha ha, you are such a darling, blink :)

p.s. By the way, the basement is clean!! My boss and me...well, I'll just say it was divinely inspired! The basement is now prepared for new renovations. I take that as a very good sign, and a reflection to me that the work is successfully being done at the lowest levels....

from the lowest levels Blink said, I may add also from the highest levels I can perceive that also working. symbolically the basement stands for the subconscious areas which are brought to surface manifestation, so I can label you Blink as the mediator who facilitates the newbies into their positions. that facilitate action I was made to understand is to "make easy."

a very important and needed beingness there to my perception, a humble person who will inherit the Earth through this service.

u r not one to toot your horn, r u? go ahead. I've been watching u and you have a fine note there, would like to hear more of it!

along these lines of taking an overview of a whole community and/or adopting a world view as our Boris has done and many here also, I thought yesterday about something I learned about humanity:
it was that we teach what we need to learn.

so we are always teaching who we are. which changes. by teaching who we are, the other person/s we interact with also are learning who they are by a sort of comparison value, so then we change inside ourselves by the act of interaction, of teaching who we are.
it seems during the shift in consciousness, which I for one am experiencing it is impossible to be who we were yesterday if we allow others to interact with us and affect us.
which is not negative to feel a part of a movement at this time. its quite positive personally.

Blink brings up something to consider for me. her path is a lot like mine in that she says she "listens" to people. shuffling paper is what provides the livlihood aspect, but it's the listening part that is the most important. same here. If I'm not receptive enough to listen, really to hear whats being said, I'm really not of any help to another spiritually speaking or materialistically speaking.

something happens to my heart chakra when I listen really well, I can hear music. I can hear god.
we are progressing. love, alysia

Darth mindlessly dismisses the Bible as the product of deluded "old men."  This is amusing because Darth knows nothing at all about the age of the biblical authors.  Mark, for example, was probably a young man when he wrote his Gospel.  Shortly before his martyrdom, Peter refers to Mark as "his son."

Alysia pontificates: "Christianity invented Hell to control the masses." Similarly, Orlando crows: "The Jews did not believe in Hell."  Both statements would prompt snickers from anyone who has read the many pre-Christian Jewish writings that report the torments of the dam-ned in Hell in more lurid details than the early Christians.  

Orlando chides Jesus for cleansing the Temple when in fact the merchants were merely changing money for the purchase of animal sacrifices.  Again Orlando has no clue.   The combined impact of Roman and Temple taxation deprived Jewish peasants of 40% of their income.  In times of drought and crop failure they could go bankrupt and starve.  Yet the Temple police would act like the Mafia, beat them up, and take their provisions forcibly.  By overturning the merchant tables Jesus is performing a characteristic symbolic action protesting the injustice of the Temple's oppression of the poor and prophesying the overthrow of the Temple establishment.  His prophecy of the Temple's destruction was fulfilled in 70 AD.

Orlando claims that the Council of Nicea "was the start of people who had different ideas being persecuted as heretics."  Wrong again!  Read any scholarly book on the history of heresy and you'll see that battles berween the orthodox and the heretics are traceable to the first century and are commonplace thereafter.  Note especially the 2nd century efforts to suppress Gnosticism, Marcionitism. amd Montanism.  Montanism should be of special interest to our female posters.  This movement was the Alamo for Christian women.  The bishop of Rome excommunicated these women for appointing women to leadership positions all over the Mediterranean world.  These women (e. g. Maximilla, Priscilla, and Quintilla) retaliated by excommunicating the bishop of Rome.  In the ensuing conflict, Montanism was eliminated.  Too bad too!  Not only did this suppression eliminate female church leadership until modern times; it also stifled the gifts of the Holy Spirit like prophecy and astral travel which these women were routinely exercising in church.  

Don

Hi there,

If I got it right, the older parts of the bible lacked of beliefs in heaven or hell, it was just more like you are blessed if you live according to the teachings of god, he will enrich your life, if you don't, it will be painstaking (a statement according to the "early" beliefs, I think it was in ecclesiasts, who tell, that the dead will have no knowledge at all)
So to say, literally heaven and hell during the lifetime, and no afterlife at all (so where should be a hellish afterlife if the beliefs tend to rather deny spare details of something like an afterlife, or like mesopotamian religions, which do not hold beliefs in a further existence ?)

And the thing about the invented hell.... they did not directly invented hell, but for an certain amount of money you could buy papers that should prevent you from going to hell.
What was exactly invented, was the outlook of Satan, which is more of a adaption from the greek god Pan, who was more of a god who provided the joys of life (like music and dance, also sort of a god of the nature) , which was a stinger in the flesh of the ones, who wanted to use the institution "church" to oppress others (again, it is not the words fault, but the receptors).
You would agree, that if you can be happy, the fear (that was exploited to gain money and power) would not really be that big that you would tend to prevent your self from hellish adventures. Their (to say who I think of those are, corrupt secular and clerical landlords), feudal system could only exist, because the "common" people held the belief that god wanted them to be the 3rd "layer" of people, that had to feed their "owners" (don't tell me they were free....).
So what in this case could work better than use "hell" as an instrument of fear, to misuse scripture to verify your position, that you want to make others believe is wanted by god (i never read that god has allowed to take others as slaves...so in fact, it is not what god really wants...), and the way to escape is buying those letter from the church (drain trade??) to set your soul free, the other way to accept their low position as servants never asking for more than to be in the favour of their master..... . This happened during the medival age, I think through this behaviour, the men of god, who misused their position in favour of power, nailed the meaning of christian religion to the cross. The Inquisition was just the expression of the fear, that the leading "layer" of society had of free minds, especially women who dared to know something....is as stupid as it sounds.

Nicea, to say one short thing about this, one point was wether Jesus Christ is divine or if he is not. So he was decided to part of the trinity, but not the creation itself.

Love,

pulsar

LaffingRain wrote on Aug 9^th, 2007 at 6:44am:

EliteNYC wrote on Aug 9th, 2007 at 4:53am: Honestly, sometimes I pray in my mind a little to God for some reason, and when I do pray a little (rarely) I picture the God of the Christian bible. Of course, I believe there is only one God, no matter what different religions call Him. this above is a great summation of this entire thread so ditto as I believe all paths all religions are ultimately going to end up in the starting place anyway. more summation would be on my part, that Elite says "I picture the god of christian bible" and I wanted to say even if we are not a Christian, we still are influenced by living in a predominently Christian oriented society, simply because we are receiving other people's thoughts into our own mind, constantly through media, boards, family, etc. so we can call ourselves by any label, say, new age, Buddhist, Islam, whatever, but we cannot get out of relating with each other by default if nothing else. so now for some bit of fun: I was thinking how much I enjoyed this thread and all the different people on it and thought of labeling them for fun, hope nobody takes offense, as I don't mean that to take it that way. actually not just this thread, I was thinking of the entire board as a mansion, as an entire town, a village, a community we have turned into as I see people changing and growing and sharing and talking.. we have on our board all of these kinds of people (think of us as One) * Bruce...Retrieval stock, writer, engineer, world traveler * A doctor * A hynotist, and former tube worm * Several mediums * A Vulcan * A fire and brimstone Preacher/crossover mystic * Several Buddhists * Several drop in Obe adepts * An astrologer or two * Darth Vader * A visionary retriever who makes movies * Several Reiki experts/healers * A projection of an ascended master group posing as an individual * An avenging angel * A social worker who can also do retrievals (aha!) * several writers I'm sure theres more..I myself am Internet hog godess of 2007. love to all, alysia

Which one am I?? Am I the avenging angel?? :)

peace

Hi Briggsanddurlacher, hmm. I wonder if you're German? :) Its too soon for me to try and figure out who you might be, but it's nice having you join us, for sure!
just guessing, and tell me if I'm right or wrong or in the middle..I picture you as in your early 20's say, 23 just came to me. a young man, most studious. I see you as Indigo star child, these are those who came to be here during what can be a troublesome time for humanity, they carry knowledge of the heart kind, and they are a vast group born all over the world as they are needed where they are.
the avenging angels have a tough job because of their sense of urgency and feelings of responsibility for Earth peoples and the Earth itself, but they are nonetheless on the side of justice and good to prevail. they can be brash and need to ask assistance as I do believe none of us can do any good here without each other and guidance from on high, which is like remembrance of your intentions for coming to Earth.
we can also find Indigo children here of all ages, 30, 40's, and on up as age of the body has little bearing on the other side. There are other labels for Indigo children who come in on different rays of all the spectrums. but Indigo is the transmutational healing color ray, so therefore their thoughts are predominantly of this color, and help people to change their minds, or transmute negative energy into positive.

I have no idea Briggs if anything I said is helpful or truthful about you, but as I said before there are some here which give me much inspiration to continue participating here as best I can. love to you all, alysia

No, no, Alysia, you're taking the symbolism of "Briggs/and/urlacher" all wrong.  The Bear archetype is the key to its interpretation.   This guy is grumpy like a Bear after a long hibernation from his spiritual quest.  Brian Urlacher represents his enthusiasm for his current outlook.  But Lance Briggs has Drew Rosenhaus as his agent and has made it clear that the Chicago Bears football team must trade him.  Briggs is in training camp only reluctantly, hoping for a trade that satisfies his salary demands.  Our boy is worried that he must sacrifice too much in time and discipline to learn astral projection.  So Drew Rosenhaus (of course symbolizing me, Berserk) may be able to lure him away to another team (i. e. Christianity).  However, our boy may not be willing to leave his comfort zone and think outside his current box.  So he may resign with the New Age Bears anyway with great reluctance.  In any case, the inevitable dissatisfaction may prevent inner harmony in our boy's soul.  We must eagerly await the training camp soap opera to see how this spiritual quest turns out.  In any case, the Bears will be no match for my beloved Buffalo Bills. ::)  

Don

LaffingRain wrote on Aug 11^th, 2007 at 9:06pm:

Hi Briggsanddurlacher, hmm. I wonder if you're German? :) Its too soon for me to try and figure out who you might be, but it's nice having you join us, for sure! just guessing, and tell me if I'm right or wrong or in the middle..I picture you as in your early 20's say, 23 just came to me. a young man, most studious. I see you as Indigo star child, these are those who came to be here during what can be a troublesome time for humanity, they carry knowledge of the heart kind, and they are a vast group born all over the world as they are needed where they are. the avenging angels have a tough job because of their sense of urgency and feelings of responsibility for Earth peoples and the Earth itself, but they are nonetheless on the side of justice and good to prevail. they can be brash and need to ask assistance as I do believe none of us can do any good here without each other and guidance from on high, which is like remembrance of your intentions for coming to Earth. we can also find Indigo children here of all ages, 30, 40's, and on up as age of the body has little bearing on the other side. There are other labels for Indigo children who come in on different rays of all the spectrums. but Indigo is the transmutational healing color ray, so therefore their thoughts are predominantly of this color, and help people to change their minds, or transmute negative energy into positive. I have no idea Briggs if anything I said is helpful or truthful about you, but as I said before there are some here which give me much inspiration to continue participating here as best I can. love to you all, alysia

You were right about everything you said.. Btw I'm Alex.. Do you remember me?? lol

I'm buy your book soon?? Even if you endorse reincarnation.. :)

peace

Berserk2 wrote on Aug 11^th, 2007 at 10:03pm:

No, no, Alysia, you're taking the symbolism of "Briggs/and/urlacher" all wrong.  The Bear archetype is the key to its interpretation.   This guy is grumpy like a Bear after a long hibernation from his spiritual quest.  Brian Urlacher represents his enthusiasm for his current outlook.  But Lance Briggs has Drew Rosenhaus as his agent and has made it clear that the Chicago Bears football team must trade him.  Briggs is in training camp only reluctantly, hoping for a trade that satisfies his salary demands.  Our boy is worried that he must sacrifice too much in time and discipline to learn astral projection.  So Drew Rosenhaus (of course symbolizing me, Berserk) may be able to lure him away to another team (i. e. Christianity).  However, our boy may not be willing to leave his comfort zone and think outside his current box.  So he may resign with the New Age Bears anyway with great reluctance.  In any case, the inevitable dissatisfaction may prevent inner harmony in our boy's soul.  We must eagerly await the training camp soap opera to see how this spiritual quest turns out.  In any case, the Bears will be no match for my beloved Buffalo Bills. ::)   Don

I've already been thinking outside the box.. That's why I left Christianity.. Christianity made me a close-minded judgemental person..  I don't want to be a part of a religion that preaches fear and condemnation..

Alex, you rascal!!! :)  you know what I was thinking as I did that post to Briggs? lol, I was thinking, hmmm, this Briggs feller is a lot like Alex, and where the heck did he disappear to?  now I am really amazed at this.
you know, I feel really talented these days! and here you are!!!

I was feeling sad Alex had gone too. I felt so close to you, I like almost everybody, but I admit I do have my bias like we all do. thanks for confirming my "hits!"

I trust myself better now.

Don

Just a quick one - OK, I made generalisations, but, as I said it the other thread, arguments like these can and do just go on and on depending on what bit of infomration you focus on. For example, when I said jews didn;t believe in Hell, I meant that in OT days this was not a focus for them. They were firstly more interested in this life and its rewards )often seen as coming from God, for good behaviour) and sufferrings, and when they thought about life after death, it was usually in relation to a sadowy, ill-defined palce called Sheol, which was not associated with punishment. I am sure you are right that the Christian idea of Hell did not emerge from a vaccum and was probably around in some jewish ideas at the start of the 1st Century - there were plenty of competing sects and opinions after all - for example the Sadducees, the leading upper class priestly sect, didn;t believe in any kind of afterlife at all as I recall (Josephus). I expect it was also influenced by Zoroastrianism. One thing I am pretty sure about is that the Jews, on the whole, were not awaiting the Messiah as someone who would save them from their sin (and hence hell), as they thought their temple sacrfices and so forth did this job (note how the author of the letter to the Hebrews crafts his arguments around his view that jesus has now replaced this system, to try to impress his fellow jews). Also I am pretty sure i am correct when I say they did not believe in "original" sin, which is explained by christians as the need for jesus' sacrifice. I mean, for goodness sake, God killed the whole sinful generation of mankind descended from Adam in the flood, leaving only the "righteous"Noah and his family with whom he made a new covenant. Nowhere is it suggested that this comes with a proviso that "sorry Noah, did I mention you and eveyone else are still condemned to a pretty nasty place I call hell because of what Adam did. Shucks I guess in a few thousand years I will figure out what to do about that one". Also the Jews did not see the awaited Messiah as someone who would be God in the form of a man, but just God's "anointed" representative, who they thought would create a new kingdom on earth, bringing back the days of prosperity of David and Solomon, but better.

As for heretics, I am aware there was conflict between different versions of Christainity before the Council of Nicea, but that event had the effect - and intention - of cutting though this and pinning down official dogma. As the agreed dogma would henceforth have the backing of the emperor, that meant that pretty soon things became rather unpleasant for "heretics".

Anyway, I decided a while ago that historical and theological arguments don't get you far and I didn;t come to this board looking to rehash all this sort of thing. I dare say you are better read and more up-to-speed on it all than me anyway, for whatever good it may do you. The whole area is one where black and white certainty can never be found so it will furnish scholars with material for argumnets for centries to come no doubt, none of which gets us any further in finding out what the menaing of life or the reality of spiritual matters might be

Briggs, etc, and Orlando,

My point is that both of you are creating cartoon-like false caricatures of Christianity and then using this lie to reject it.  I am calling you to an honest repraisal of a faith that has far more depth, profundity, and modern paranormal experiences than you can imagine.  In my last sermon my topic was "How Good Do You Have to Be?."  I explain all the ways that the myth of Adam and Eve has been distorted and misapplied to create a religion of guilt and the false idea that God writes us off for commiting just one mistake.  I demonstrated that "original sin" is not a biblical doctrine; it was invented in the 4th century by St. Augustine.  I demonstrated how Paul felt no lingering guilt for his past life persecuting the church.  In fact, he was very proud of his pre-Christian Jewish spirituality!  If you two are going to benefit from New Age spirituality, you need to learn the art of accurate spiritual perception.  I will see to it that you have a more accurate portrayal of Christian spirituality.  The audience consisted of conservative Methodists and they loved what I said.  So be prepared to abandon your glib stereotypes of the conservative Christian mentality.

Don

Don

If you are developing a progressive and positive version of Christainity (which is also, you say, based at least in part on a reassessment/study of early sources) then that's fine. But what I refer to in other posts is not just a straw man I have invented, but aspects of history or conventional Christian doctrines as taught for the last two millennia and still taught in many mainstream churches. For you to claim your teachings are "christianity"is  at least as misleading IMO (perhaps more so as yours seem less representative and held by fewer people) than for Bruce to see his childhood Lutheranism as "christianity"(which you complained about).

LaffingRain wrote on Aug 11^th, 2007 at 11:35pm:

Alex, you rascal!!! :)  you know what I was thinking as I did that post to Briggs? lol, I was thinking, hmmm, this Briggs feller is a lot like Alex, and where the heck did he disappear to?  now I am really amazed at this. you know, I feel really talented these days! and here you are!!! I was feeling sad Alex had gone too. I felt so close to you, I like almost everybody, but I admit I do have my bias like we all do. thanks for confirming my "hits!" I trust myself better now.

LOL That's good that you have great intuition!! So, how have you been lately?? I can't wait to buy your book..!!

peace

orlando123 wrote on Aug 12^th, 2007 at 11:23am:

Don If you are developing a progressive and positive version of Christainity (which is also, you say, based at least in part on a reassessment/study of early sources) then that's fine. But what I refer to in other posts is not just a straw man I have invented, but aspects of history or conventional Christian doctrines as taught for the last two millennia and still taught in many mainstream churches. For you to claim your teachings are "christianity"is  at least as misleading IMO (perhaps more so as yours seem less representative and held by fewer people) than for Bruce to see his childhood Lutheranism as "christianity"(which you complained about).

I agree, with you orlando123.. If, your Christianity is different than most fundimental Christian churches I applaud you Don.. But you need to realize the fundies been around a long time and still hold down the USA.. There are a very select few of liberal Christians like yourself.. I don't mind liberal Christians or Christian mystics, Universalists and Christian spiritualists.. So, I don't know why you and I arguing Don?? You are defending someone else's beliefs..  You are very misleading too..

peace

LOL That's good that you have great intuition!! So, how have you been lately?? I can't wait to buy your book..!!
___
I'm moving, if u PM your address I have some surplus books to give out free.
I just like to travel light, its not that I'm generous, lol.  :)

I'd just like to reiterate/clarify/ in relation to Jesus, that I have no problem with many of the teachings attributed to him or with people taking inspiration from him in one way or another, however I do have problems with anyone saying holding certain beliefs about him is in some way essential to our eternal happiness or pain. It is just this - which has been claimed by a large proportion of Chistians throughout history - which I find misguided and deeply unhelpful to human progress. It is for this reason I have pointed out some of the difficulties, for example, in being sure of exactly who he was and what he taught and did  and what he "means" etc (because historical evidence is scanty and all sorts of opinions, some logically bizzarre, have been put forward over the years). A good example of this problem is the Jesus Seminar, a group of 200 eminent Jesus scholars (of mostly fairly Liberal views ) who studied sayings and actions  of Jesus in the gospels, meeting up twice a year for a decade or so,  where they voted as to whether they thought it was definitely said or done by him, probably, possibly, or defintely not. Only about 18% of the sayings and 16% of actions were eventually agreed on as being definitely or probably true by most of the scholars. IMO this is not good enough if we are going to claim  that the ruler of the universe insists on us holding a specific set of beliefs about Jesus in order to have eternal heaven or hell.

If you personally feel you have insights and contact with him that help you, I say that's fine and positive, but no more so, IMO, than, for example someone saying they get  insights and confort from praying to Krishna, for example, which I would also be cool with if it helps them.

Also, if you personally aim to copy jesus and do the kind of things he recommended, that's also fine by me, even if sometimes if you took him literally it would be a bit impractical - giving all your goods to the poor and so on.

It is my personal belief that he existed and told people to pay less attention to finickety religious rules and more to loving each other, and that he was crucified, perhaps because he became unpopular with the religious elite (especially if the account of overturning the money-changers' tables is true). It is my view that he was an inspiring but not perfect person, and that, for example his belief was that the end of the world was coming soon and we should prepare for it. This turned out not to be true. I personally doubt he planned to die as part of his scheme and am doubtful about whether or not he claimed he would return from the dead, and/or actually did so (unless in a purely spiritual form). I also doubt he claimed to be in any form "God incarnate" (which would be extraordinary in orthodox Judaism and was not expected of the Messiah) but feel he wanted people to develop a more trusting relationship with the being /power he called his "father" (in the sense that God is father to us all). I think he was an observant Jew who did not want to start a new religion, but wanted a kind of version of what the Protestants were trying to do at the Reformation (i.e. to get back to what he saw as the essentials). I suspect the early church elaborated their beliefs about him after his death (including, for example, dredging the OT for anything that could possibly be made to seem a prophecy of him etc), then they continued for a long time to hope for his return from Heaven as they had believed him to be the awaited Messiah who was expected to transform the world. We know what happened next (Constantine, the Roman catholic Church etc). This is just my opnion and I don't particularly want to argue about it as it is unproveable.

orlando123,

Very well stated.

[smiley=engel017.gif]
E.

Thank you. However the post is now about twice as long as I just edited it  ;)