Heaven and HELL

That'd definitely make more sense. And Christians being influenced by Demiurge-hating Gnostics is the height of ridicule. You know the first thing Jesus did when he resurrected? That's right, he had some grilled fish with his crew.

There's also a few... peculiarities about it. Like how everyone in Heaven is white...

That aside, It does seem a bit like "Disney present "Heaven" the ride!"

I'd be much more impressed if the preacher just started explaining "Heaven will blow your mind in a way your human brain couldn't even BEGIN to process! Think of the happiest you've been, now double it, now think of being that happy all the time...NOW THROW THAT CRAP OUT THE WINDOW BECAUSE YOU CAN'T EVEN COMPREHEND HOW AWESOME HEAVEN IS!

YOU! Yes you in the third row looking confused...STOP IT! Stop trying to imagine how great heaven is! You CAN'T! It's TOO AWESOME for you to comprehend! STOP IT! DON'T MAKE ME COME OVER THERE! I WILL GO OLD TESTAMENT ON YOUR ASS! I'M NOT EVEN JOKING!"

edited 1st Oct '11 2:32:36 PM by Justice4243

Yes.

If not having a body is supposed to be so great, why do demons supposedly try to take ours?

Because shush you, we have to justify absolutist good and evil while simultaneously believing humans are fundamentally good.

It's not supposed to be "so great", which is why you get your bodies back at the end of the world (and why, Jesus got his body back after he rose from the dead, and (in Catholicism) why the Blessed Mother got hers back as well).

On Earth, the body and the soul are essentially inseparable. To take the body is to take the soul, and vice-versa.

This is more or less what I had come to believe, after I had decided to go elsewhere on my religious journey (technically, I'm still a Catholic, just not a practicing one), aka other forms of Christianity. Why, then, would heaven and hell be necessary, if there is already going to be a final judgement? If the judgement has already taken place, which is what separation into heaven and hell is for, why would God decide to redundantly judge us twice? Or, the other way around; why would a final judgement be necessary, if we are already rewarded by going to heaven or punished by going to hell?

Er, what's the point of a public trial, you know? Mostly a formality, you know, like putting the Sorting Hat on, except there's only two Houses. That we know of.

edited 1st Oct '11 2:31:14 PM by PacificState

Purgatory is when good sentences you to probation!

If Heaven is meant to be the ultimate reward, and hell the ultimate punishment, why would a second judgement be necessary?

Jehovah Witnesses just believe there is the one on Judgement day. Same with Muslims.

If we're assuming a more "When you die, you immediately reach your final reward punishment", I'd imagine there's just one judgement for when a person dies, but that Judgement day is the BIG one where many, MANY people are judged all at once.

This is more or less what I had come to believe, after I had decided to go elsewhere on my religious journey (technically, I'm still a Catholic, just not a practicing one), aka other forms of Christianity. Why, then, would heaven and hell be necessary, if there is already going to be a final judgement? If the judgement has already taken place, which is what separation into heaven and hell is for, why would God decide to redundantly judge us twice? Or, the other way around; why would a final judgement be necessary, if we are already rewarded by going to heaven or punished by going to hell?

The last judgement is based off of the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats in the Bible—wherein Jesus Christ himself is there, and every other human being is there, and the fullness of your good or evil is laid bare, how every person's evil and neglect of good has hurt others, and likewise, how everyone's good works and love has helped others. I think of it as the fullness of understanding about our species, and our relationship to God and to each other—it doesn't -change- anything, but it brings things to better light. Catholicism doesn't put as heavy as an emphasis on the end of the world as some Protestant sects do (no "rapture" for example), its one of those things that we will see when we see it I suppose.

Some Christian sects do think there is a time of change at the last judgement, and still others claim that the last judgement is the same as the "particular judgement"—that is our souls go to sleep until the end of the world, wherein they are awakened.

I for one believe in temporal death until resurrection. I don't think my soul will be bodiless, floating around for milennia.

Well either way, without a body/mind you won't experience time the way that an embodied human would—you are in the "eternal now" that God is in. And it wouldn't be "floating around" it would be in Heaven, Purgatory, Hell, Hades, etc.

But sure, the idea of soul sleep is sometimes criticized as it denies the soul's ability to exist outside of a body—the higher spiritual principle that is a major part of much of Christianity. Some Christians have gone against this, particularly the Seventh Day Adventists and the J Ws. Both of those groups also believe in annihilationism, it fits in that sense.

Eh, exactly, I don't believe the soul can exist outside of the body. It's part of it. And when the body gets damaged, the soul gets damaged too. Specifically, the brain. Yeah, I'm no spiritualist, I'm a very materialistic Christian.

edited 1st Oct '11 3:42:44 PM by PacificState

Yeah the connection between our body and our soul on Earth is undeniable to any sect of Christianity—the two coming together as a complete one that makes us human, its just that the longer oral tradition supposes our spiritual principle can transcend that and exist even before being reunited to a body.

The materialistic viewpoint does have a strong case for it if you take a purely scriptural approach and reboot your whole tradition, as the 7th Day Adventists and J Ws did. Its the deeper oral tradition of Catholicism/Orthodoxy which affirms the ability of the spiritual principle of humanity to survive outside any material substances.

That's platonist bullshit if you ask me. We shouldn't listen to pagans when it comes to our faith. The oldies were waaay too enamoured with the Plato and the Aristitle.

edited 1st Oct '11 3:55:30 PM by PacificState

Even though I'm not by any means a "materialist", I will agree that I think the major Catholic tradition was too firmly attached to Aristotle in many ways. In the end, he was as human as you or me.

{Amusing, but offtopic. The topic is 'Heaven and Hell', not 'Christianity in General' —Madrugada}

edited 1st Oct '11 4:49:35 PM by Madrugada

And Christians being influenced by Demiurge-hating Gnostics is the height of ridicule. You know the first thing Jesus did when he resurrected? That's right, he had some grilled fish with his crew.

I think the attachment to gnostic theories is because, for some bizarre reason, many christian sects had a fetish for transcendence over the physical world, which is why Plato was on their philosophical porn stash as well.

Considering that the Heaven/New Jerusalem in Revelation is very much physical, and how divine beings in general are described, I think the theme of transcendence is uncalled for.

edited 2nd Oct '11 5:18:47 AM by Gannetwhale