In Heaven or Hell? (Judas)

[rudemonk]

Re: In Heaven or Hell? (Judas)

so on what evidence do the miracle accounts stand. are you saying that Jesus literally believed Jonah was in a whale belly and came out.

on what biographical information- provable- do all the precedented and corollary myths which were incorporated into Jesus' stories stand?

Come on CD.

Updated references you say.

Biases indeed, my friend it is you who start from assumptions.

[rudemonk]

Re: In Heaven or Hell? (Judas)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ChurchDude</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In any event, one's bias is an important determinant in the acceptance or non-acceptance of any argument so at the end of the day it really is a matter of personal conviction and belief. </div></div>

wait...what?

you are saying the gospels- the canonicals, are all provably dated- agreed by consensus, within 50 years of Jesus' life.

that means you have proof upon which to say this, it is not a matter of belief or conviction, unless the evidence which you intend to introduce is a matter of personal conviction and acceptable due to your belief.

[quodlibet]

Re: In Heaven or Hell? (Judas)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Quodlibet</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">no not at all- I think the possession aspect only makes sense if one comes to the story- in it's variations and layers- the same way as those who first set it down did. They didn't know exactly how to handle Jesus's execution, and so the story sort of hopped about and various justifications were developed, one being that somehow Satan got into Judas and made him betray Jesus.

Then later that didn't make much sense according especially to the eschatological stuff paul was developing, but there it is. </div></div>



That would make their written words &quot;interpretative&quot;, instead of &quot;inspired&quot;... Their 'accounts' would then become 'speculation'...

If you take the account as gospel (pun intended) then wouldn't it be contradicted by your statement <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">...and so the story sort of hopped about and various justifications were developed...</span></span>? </div></div>

well I would say actually that the facts of the matter contradict the claims of the matter by some people.

</div></div>

What facts, what claims, which people?

This is a non-specific, non-committal, non-directional statement, please clarify.

[rudemonk]

Re: In Heaven or Hell? (Judas)

well it's a broad field of inquiry so it's kind of impossible to not be generic, without having to go into a whole essay or book about it.

the long and short of it is, there are lots of cases made but little proof- few verifiable facts of anything. nobody really knows if half the people in the gospels even existed. look at the secret mark example we were recently discussing, there are other textual additions for which a solid case can be made- such as the adulterous woman in John.

but what we do know is that the myth of christianity- as opposed to the reality- of christianity- is a subject which can be studied and falsified, and contrasted and judgements can be rendered. for example, recent advances in science, show that the christian salvation model as expounded upon by paul- is patently absurd. It was basically logically absurd before, but now provably.

It is a fact that God did not create Adam and Eve as it was told in the bible. This is actually interesting to me, because Jesus never really mentions them, although they are in his lineages. Nor does Jesus himself lay out the claims which Paul lays out, as to his mission.

If someone like Paul were to happen today, people would look at him like he was a David Koresh.

Jesus dying on a cross makes little sense when analyzed in the context of his supposed mission.

If we grant he was crucified, then it is easy to see how this would cause a great deal of confusion amongst his followers and disciples. He never once point blank said I came to die because Adam and Eve fell, and this will restore things. Which is absurd. God in the blink of an eye could just decide to restore things without all the immoral and sadistic hoop jumping most Christians would have us believe God wants.

the myths of christianity unfold in similar veins as other mythic structures- a scholar like campbell would argue that this is because of a combination of several factors but that psychologically the way humanity deals with the 'divine' - the message and story told to us through our subconscious, through the dream state- the only time the voice in our head is not under our conscious control so where does it come from?- in general this message develops along certain thematic elements which the majority of myth follows...add in the potent mixture of astronomical observations being mapped into myth and you start to mix up a powerful mythic cocktail, footprints of which exist throughout the world's rich tapestry of mythic systems...for example the ages of the antediluvian kings matching the biblical lineage in the OT, to matching the numbers of kalpas or great ages in India, to matching the number of warriors who stream forth from the doors of Valhalla to fight evil in the great war at the end of time...these are incontrovertible mathematical facts which show that the gospel evolution is also cut from this same cloth of myth making. christians run the danger of dealing literally with what is not meant literally.

as he says, the dream is the personal myth, the myth is the public dream.

so anyone who is a christian should do well by their faith to study it's origination, and not only that, but the context under which it developed to the best of their ability and to the best of the scholastic research. in short, know what they believe and why and if something no longer adds up or makes sense, stop clinging to myth as if it were fact. my personal opinion is that if this is done enough, we will start to see people start to actually live Yashua's teachings.

specifically, when I personally refer to the facts of the matter, certain things can be known. if bible accounts don't match, or agree in order, already we can see that the texts are subject to agenda. further, the layering of the texts also points to additions...as new texts emerge, this also forces considerations.

early christian groups, many of whom who were direct eye witnesses and experiencers of Yahsua, would probably be unrecognizable to today's christians.

very few christians practice the ascetic of Yashua today for example, outside of a few mendicant orders I can hardly think of many at all and many who I can think of aren't christian per se but are buddhist. his most point blank teaching nobody follows, not even the churches who supposedly worship the man.

[quodlibet]

Re: In Heaven or Hell? (Judas)

So to make a long story short(er), you seem to be suggesting that the teachings that you subscribe to seem to not only point to flaws in the text of the bible, but outright myths.

If that is the case, do you even subscribe to the idea of a heaven or hell? If not, then your subsequent arguments from that would be moot. If you do, then given your discount of the text of the bible, it would be useful for you to state the context of such beliefs.

[rudemonk]

Re: In Heaven or Hell? (Judas)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Quodlibet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So to make a long story short(er), you seem to be suggesting that the teachings that you subscribe to seem to not only point to flaws in the text of the bible, but outright myths.

If that is the case, do you even subscribe to the idea of a heaven or hell? If not, then your subsequent arguments from that would be moot. If you do, then given your discount of the text of the bible, it would be useful for you to state the context of such beliefs. </div></div>

I can state that the mythmaking process is well known and well studied. When you understand how it works and where it has worked in the past, it is relatively simple to see Christianity in the same way.

Every Christian accepts Zeus as a Myth, and the whole pantheon. They easily recognize the point of the stories- to explain thunder, earthquakes, etc.

But when a person examines their own faith, this critical eye gets shut off.

I don't claim to know if there is a heaven or a hell. IF there is either, however, that says quite a bit about God.

From the buddhist perspective, heaven is a moral and ethical impossibility if there is a hell.

it is interesting because in the apocalypse of peter, yashua basically says, don't worry, hell is only a short term dose, eventually everyone gets in, but don't tell them that or people won't be good.

[quodlibet]

Re: In Heaven or Hell? (Judas)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Quodlibet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
...
do you even subscribe to the idea of a heaven or hell?
...
it would be useful for you to state the context of such beliefs. </div></div>

...
I don't claim to know if there is a heaven or a hell. IF there is either, however, that says quite a bit about God.

From the buddhist perspective, heaven is a moral and ethical impossibility if there is a hell.
...</div></div>

Thank you for your response, it is much better than the topic ducking I see too often with this type of discussion.

I would like to get a little more understanding of the perspective you mentioned, as the basic statement does not indicate why heaven would be a moral and ethical impossibility given the existience of hell.

[rudemonk]

Re: In Heaven or Hell? (Judas)

because of several factors, some of which yashua touches on, such as forgiveness. but I think we can agree that a just and wise and perfect person is possessed with a strong degree of compassion.

so eternal damnation is irreconcilable with a just and moral god- especially if we are being told that condemnation is based on lack of belief or lack of loving. a truly compassionate and just and moral being could not damn anyone to hell at all for a lack of belief, or a lack of love.

i think we can also grant that in most conceptions heaven is imagined to be either a place or state which is perfect- to know that one's loved ones may not be in heaven but may be condemned to hell where they would be tormented and made to suffer incredible torment, would make a perfect state impossible if a person were ethical, just, and moral.

this is similar somewhat to the concept of ch'an (zen) buddhism embodied in the bodhisattva principle or the vow of Amitabha- this is the buddha who was on the doorstep of ultimate nirvana- yet he refrained from the ultimate extinguishing and decided not to enter ultimate nirvana until ALL sentient beings could enter with him.

yashua himself said what greater love is there than for a man to lay down his life for his friends. considering for a moment the claims being made in his behalf, that is an odd thing to say for one who is supposedly the son of god, aware of his own divinity, and in a sense knows that there is a wonderful afterlife to go to, if all of that were actually to be granted why would he say that. to lay down your life with absolute knowledge that death is not the end you could not imbue your sacrifice with any real meaning...

it is things like this that best illustrate the case for layers of textual additions, myth making, and the like.

[Nylah]

Re: In Heaven or Hell? (Judas)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">so eternal damnation is irreconcilable with a just and moral god- especially if we are being told that condemnation is based on lack of belief or lack of loving. a truly compassionate and just and moral being could not damn anyone to hell at all for a lack of belief, or a lack of love</div></div>

Is it lack of belief in God, or believing in God and still choosing to reject him that gets one damned to hell as it were?

To hang out with Satan you'd have to do what Satan did.....Satan knew God. It wasnt cause he didnt believe in God or didnt love God. He chose to turn his back on him fully aware of his existence.

Maybe we can ask is this what Judas did?

BTW - I think it is nonsense to say those who commit suicide are damned to hell. People who do such an act dont have the necessary internal tools to deal with pressures. And if God choose to hard wire them that what why is he gonna make them suffer for eternity for it? If one ends in hell it is for much greater offences than suicide.

This is one of the things where the Bible is out-dated as it were, since it was written in a time where mental illness isnt understood as it is today. Inspired or Interpretative indeed.