A Problem of Heaven

@SJoseph,

If i could take the guy seriously and not see it as a dramatic film audition ,then yes he has view that many hold, including me. But when has religion had any foundation in logic?...why the lighter:perplexed:

@xris,

He might try taking into account "Christians" who do not believe as he assumes "Christians" believe.

There isn't some monolithic bloc of believers. It's a diverse crowd out there....

Eh, but so much for honesty - I guess it's more fun to get on YouTube with a lighter and look serious and intellectual.

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas;95191 wrote:

He might try taking into account "Christians" who do not believe as he assumes "Christians" believe.

There isn't some monolithic bloc of believers. It's a diverse crowd out there....

Eh, but so much for honesty - I guess it's more fun to get on YouTube with a lighter and look serious and intellectual.

Which Christians are those? Only the most liberal modern day or those that don't understand the dogma of their religion. Take Roman Catholic...no take the Baptist denomination. (these are the two most popular sects)

If you don't believe that Jesus Christ is your lord and savior, you're going to hell.
If you don't believe in the trinity, you're going to hell.
If you don't believe that the Bible is the infallible word of God, you're going to hell.
If you don't believe in the resurrection, you're not a true Christian, and you're going to hell.
If you worship any other God other than the God of Abraham, you're going to hell.

*You don't hear individuals saying these things, but they will say things like "I'm not banishing you to hell, God is."

The video is saying that under these (and many more) beliefs, all Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, sinners that weren't saved, agnostics, and atheists are going to hell. The only thing the video assumes is that the viewer has a friend or family member that is in one of these categories.

Then in heaven, you have to somehow deal with knowing your brother, sister, best friend, crazy uncle, etc. is spending an eternity in fire being stung by hornets where their tears mix with their blood (as Dante depicted) instead of in paradise with you.

---------- Post added 10-14-2009 at 05:17 PM ----------

But I agree, the lighter was too much and takes away from the message.

@SJoseph,

Religion is more 'flexible' in some cases than people make it seem. Take the LCC (Liberal Catholic Church). Seven sacraments will make you a better person in the eyes of god, and really, they can be applied to non-christians.

@Leonard,

S.Joseph;97494 wrote:

Which Christians are those? Only the most liberal modern day or those that don't understand the dogma of their religion.

Or those who do not find themselves subservient to any particular dogma, or any particular organized body. Those Christians who are Christians in their closet, as Jesus taught. Or those Christians who belong to any number of fringe sects, or those Christians who, so many years ago, belonged to any number of sects which were suppressed by the power structure. It's a long list, and the number is far from insignificant - this is a population with a modern presence and a history powerful enough to get some recognition, even recognition from pathetic orators who can only dream of being pedantic.

S.Joseph;97494 wrote:

The video is saying that under these (and many more) beliefs, all Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, sinners that weren't saved, agnostics, and atheists are going to hell. The only thing the video assumes is that the viewer has a friend or family member that is in one of these categories.

Except that the individual in the video neglected to clarify that he meant something other than "Christian" when he used the term.

S.Joseph;97494 wrote:

Then in heaven, you have to somehow deal with knowing your brother, sister, best friend, crazy uncle, etc. is spending an eternity in fire being stung by hornets where their tears mix with their blood (as Dante depicted) instead of in paradise with you.

Maybe someone should tell this guy that Dante's work is not canonical.

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas;97810 wrote:

Or those who do not find themselves subservient to any particular dogma, or any particular organized body. Those Christians who are Christians in their closet, as Jesus taught. Or those Christians who belong to any number of fringe sects, or those Christians who, so many years ago, belonged to any number of sects which were suppressed by the power structure. It's a long list, and the number is far from insignificant - this is a population with a modern presence and a history powerful enough to get some recognition, even recognition from pathetic orators who can only dream of being pedantic.

Except that the individual in the video neglected to clarify that he meant something other than "Christian" when he used the term.

Maybe someone should tell this guy that Dante's work is not canonical.

I had a nice long reply in my head, but we are falling into a debate on semantics and I've spent my time so far defending your attacks against the vlogger, not the actual argument.

I would still like to hear a rebuttal against the underlying argument in the video. Working under the assumption that he said "some christians" instead of "christians", and that every other semantic error were corrected, how would you refute it? Your personal response was 70% of why I posted the video because I respect your opinions, but I have thus far in this thread I have been disappointed.

@SJoseph,

Completely off topic and probably useless information but the guy in the video is a soap actor. Perhaps that is why he leans towards the dramatic?

In some ways you can take his video out of context since he isn't exactly always talking purely to Christians even though the video is titled such but more often they are pointed to theists.

I kinda figured the lighter was a play with the biblical beginning as a more visual way of expressing the closure to the idea that christian thought is baseless therefore "let there be light" has been extinguished like the lighter at the end.

@Krumple,

S.Joseph;99483 wrote:

I would still like to hear a rebuttal against the underlying argument in the video. Working under the assumption that he said "some christians" instead of "christians", and that every other semantic error were corrected, how would you refute it? Your personal response was 70% of why I posted the video because I respect your opinions, but I have thus far in this thread I have been disappointed.

Alright, if we correct his generalization, and assume that he is only speaking about Christians who believe as he assumes them to believe (which is fine), then of course he has a point. My only problem is that his objection is pretty obvious - why should a good Buddhist be denied salvation? He shouldn't. But how difficult is it to attack the least considered variations of some viewpoint? It's one of those things you hit on that drives you on to learn more, because surely such a long established tradition is not so simple.

@Didymos Thomas,

I don't agree with the proposition that if you are made to forget about loved ones in hell or not care that you are not the same person. We forget things all the time. Not being able to recall something does not make you a different person. Whether you naturally forget something or are made to forget, the end result is the same.

@SJoseph,

Forgetting your wife, child, or brother is quite different than forgetting where you put your keys or what the kid's name was that beat you at the 3rd grade spelling bee.

Relationships and experiences shape who you are. If either is removed or altered, you take on a new form entirely.

@SJoseph,

Entirely? I don't see how. What if your opinion of them changed once you were in heaven? That you understood the justice of God and changed your mind about them. Would you now be a different person? We change our minds about people all the time, it doesn't change who we are.

@SJoseph,

Your concept of identity is quite different than his/mine. The video holds that if I were to accept knowledge of or to justify my loved one(s) being burned in eternal torment, it would be a different identity altogether; it would be an identity that my current one would undoubtedly detest.

@josh0335,

josh0335;99821 wrote:

I don't agree with the proposition that if you are made to forget about loved ones in hell or not care that you are not the same person. We forget things all the time. Not being able to recall something does not make you a different person. Whether you naturally forget something or are made to forget, the end result is the same.

I think the creator of the video wasn't making an attempt to persuade the viewer that they become a different person by simply forgetting. Rather, if such occurences were to befall him, he would become a different person entirely in that he himself, on earth, would never make the choice to forget about said people. Yet, this is the choice made by accepting salvation and heaven. It in short, he's telling Christians that, by accepting such terms that they, as he put it "do not deserve to be there" or have a reward such as eternal happiness, because he feels it's a immoral decision if the premises of heaven that are being claimed by the people he's addressing hold true.

@Persona phil,

Now as Christians we believe that we must love God first and most, before family, friends, etc. Now lets say you have a dog you love very much. But one day is gets run over and dies. Now you feel horrible. It's dead and will remain so and there's nothing you can do about it. But soon enough your dad brings home a new puppy. The love that gradually grows for the puppy makes the loss of your dog more bearable, and accepted. It's a horrible example, but I think that's how it goes. Our love for God makes it more bearable and accepted that one of your loved ones has been eternally damed... atleast I hope that's the case.

@Lithe Oleander,

Lithe Oleander;108620 wrote:

Our love for God makes it more bearable and accepted that one of your loved ones has been eternally damed... atleast I hope that's the case.

Why would you love a deity that would sentence your loved one to an eternity of damnation? That just seems absurd.

@Krumple,

Is it more accurate to say that God "sentences" them to Hell, or that they place themselves in Hell for their own actions via free will?

@SJoseph,

If you eat flesh of animals especially the cow et al ---you, me & our grandkids will continue to face war and destruction.

How quickly we forget after each genrational regional massacre. Mass acres of land are devoteed to slaughter houses (usually in perenial tornado alleys) resulting in battlefields where youth is lost in dire requests of "Why?" while proving their bravery in the trenches and fox-holes.

All living souls are living out the best way to past the time that that soul has cultivated while in Human-life's freedom to choose among their options to do the best thing.

Please chant Hare Krishna, pay your taxes and pursue eternal duty,
Bhaktajan

@SJoseph,

Heaven: all we can do is project what we like about Earth on it. Heaven only makes sense as a metaphor or symbol for the state of being filled with Love.

If someone actually conceives of God as Love, I can respect that. But when they suggest that this love-god is going to roast little people forever who never asked to be created in the first place, they are being absurd, in my ever-ever-so-humble opinion. Heaven is the con and Hell is the threat. But if a person obeys God for reward or out of fear, what is that but prudence?

@Reconstructo,

Quote:

to roast little people forever who never asked to be created

Living Souls are atomically small living sparks-of-conscousness known via actions in places far from the polished ivory towers of those above the fray of material existential living standards ---while their karma affords it to them ---for the time-being.

The Living Souls are [repeatedly conditioned within yet another material body birth after birth since time immemorial], by nature, always "Active" ---seeking gratification of their stimulus sensors, aka 'sense-gratification'.

So existential existence is all about hanging out seeking pleasure ---this is an absolute paradigm that all creatures seek out 'best that they can as afforded by the past cultivation of higher stratums of living'.

The little people are the 'cogs-in-the-wheel' ---and it is inescapable for the soul ---thus, working selflessly is a means of transcending toil and un-controlled & whimsical & selfish & illegal 'acts'.

The common laborer fills the cities of each metropolitan area in the world ---they are all seeking base desires and also, the goverment is set up to collectively provide the uninterupted satisfaction with their lot in life.

In addition to the above, of their own volition, all souls should take advantage of the leisure time to pursue higher goals ---the easiest activity for spiritual emancipation is "CHANTING GOD'S NAME FAME FORM PERSONALITY PARAPHENALIA ENTOURAGE AND PASTIMES ---aka THE HOLY NAME OF GOD" in congragational settings or on personal prayer beads or even silently ---even when (or especially when) your whole entire family and friends and teachers are living in the third world slums ---as shown on the television and cinema and novels.

Philosophy Forum

A Problem of Heaven

Quick Links

My Account

able2know