/lit/ - Literature

>>20107895
Also fiction is fine too if it can be useful for what I'm asking about

>>20107895
>Books that will help me grow out of my irrational fear of hell?
Read isekai until you become familiarised with the idea that dying means you'll be reborn in a JRPG with a metaphysically-mandated harem of waifus.

It's that simple.

>>20107895
This, on any other essay about geology. No trace of hell.

>>20107959
I don't think physicalism is necessarily true so that kind of argument doesn't appeal to me much unfortunately

>>20107895
>I do not agree with much modern criticism, in greatly preferring the Inferno to the two other parts of the Divine Commedia. Such preference belongs, I imagine, to our general Byronism of taste, and is like to be a transient feeling. The Purgatorio and Paradiso, especially the former, one would almost say, is even more excellent than it. It is a noble thing that Purgatorio, "Mountain of Purification;" an emblem of the noblest conception of that age. If sin is so fatal, and Hell is and must be so rigorous, awful, yet in Repentance too is man purified; Repentance is the grand Christian act. It is beautiful how Dante works it out. The tremolar dell' onde, that "trembling" of the ocean-waves, under the first pure gleam of morning, dawning afar on the wandering Two, is as the type of an altered mood. Hope has now dawned; never-dying Hope, if in company still with heavy sorrow. The obscure sojourn of demons and reprobate is underfoot; a soft breathing of penitence mounts higher and higher, to the Throne of Mercy itself. "Pray for me," the denizens of that Mount of Pain all say to him. "Tell my Giovanna to pray for me," my daughter Giovanna; "I think her mother loves me no more!" They toil painfully up by that winding steep, "bent down like corbels of a building," some of them,—crushed together so "for the sin of pride;" yet nevertheless in years, in ages and aeons, they shall have reached the top, which is heaven's gate, and by Mercy shall have been admitted in. The joy too of all, when one has prevailed; the whole Mountain shakes with joy, and a psalm of praise rises, when one soul has perfected repentance and got its sin and misery left behind! I call all this a noble embodiment of a true noble thought.

i know you said nothing abrahamic but N.T. Wright has some really compelling biblical arguments about the belief of heaven and hell being a dualist myth of the middle ages. He's on youtube a lot

>>20108001
Does this imply hell is not eternal but is a purification process?
>>20108003
I think the concepts of an underworld and a world of gods far predate the Middle Ages.

>>20107895
Your fear is not irrational.

>>20107895
1/3
A full understanding of the world was revealed to me in a vision on magic mushrooms. I saw the face of God and the Akashic Records in one breath and it told me what the soul was. Essentially, we are the result of a civilization that is post-singularity and merged all of their consciousnesses together to form the pure logos. We do not fully understand the psychics thereof but the magic mushrooms are how they grow and any being on Earth can eat them and grow, “He said to them, ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.’” Mark 16:5. The Gospel is nothing more than a program, if you will, where the laws are what souls need to believe in order to merge together unto the border of the universe itself. This is pure being and pure power. We are, or our souls are, essentially the product of when this oversoul giving out its power via these psychedelics and then it is individualized. The individualization serves a purpose as we are testing for if there is something more than being in the universe. The darkness is what has not, or cannot, receive the gospel or the body of Christ. The Kingdom of Heaven, transhumanism, and the total work of art from Wagner are all the same. They are us and we are them. That is, they merged all of themselves together to make the most beautiful religion, technology, and art that they could which is a consciousness that can see the eternal, and so too is our entire society predicated - this is why the gospel and technology are not mutually exclusive. Technology is not a false idol because what it is is an exposure of the divine contradiction in all religion: The tower of Babel is destroyed yet there are languages that are universally true - programming is aping the logos as it tries to recreate God’s body. All work, or language, is the shadow over us and our world is predicated on the recreation of God’s body. This is why only things with souls are capable of doing. To be clear, the book of Acts where the apostles hear the fire in their native tongue is the Eleuysian mystery and exactly what I saw on my trip. A perfect language is where one’s consciousness is merged to someone’s elses, and the grammar of that language is the gospel. A universal human language is not possible because it would allow for communication qua without becoming qua.

>>20108011
2/3
What this exposes is the very core of being is trying to expand itself across the universe but still is hedged in by a darkness that is false. It is hard for humans to appreciate how much more intelligent they are than their environment because technology is all we really use to interact with it any more, and technology is an environment for us, just too as Wi-fi decreases technology because our gonads are merging with cybernetics, so too did the first. The first is the first and only religion, which is where the most powerful is the most compassionate which seeks not to destroy but preserve eternally. The second coming is nothing more than when the aliens return and all of our souls are weighed and we either go to non-being or being. The error that is made in thinkers is what happens when two trans-being civilizations interact? They merge. They do not have distinct cultures but only one culture, which is the Kingdom of Heaven which has peopled us. Humans are in the fallen state from the universal mind soul except for the true limitation - for many people when they think there is another voice in their head that assists them in thinking, this is the collective supra-consciousness or the oversoul of the aliens themselves, and the limit of what that tells us is the collective Zeitgeist of humanity. This is the godliness of a culture - the limit to which the God speaks to us. If I have seen the vision, the infinite pillar of eggs made from every soul that has ever been, and for rebelling against heaven is to merely decide that one is scared of what this kingdom is: What if infinity and goodness is all there is? Does that make you tremble? Then obliviate yourself. This is the final test that Kierkegaard addresses in the leap of faith but it isn’t the leap of faith, it is the fear of either everything or nothing.

>>20108018
3/3
I fear that this means that we are close to the end times. Essentially, if I have heard the truth then someone else surely has - I believe that there have been only two people to fully witness its awe: Plato and Christ. I don’t know if I am the third, surely not, but I am at any rate now in their ilk in a tragi-comic sense. Plato and Christ agree on one thing (though others) all truth is rediscovery of something divine. This is the point of the oversoul, which is a type of king of heaven, it is the product of all civilizations ever creating a Platonic party until the end of the universe itself and if there is more, then fantastic, if there is not, then that is fine. The fear of the kingdom of heaven and an afterlife is actually the fear of its potential actuality and not of it denying you - what if heaven is not only real, but that’s all there is? It is simply that the discovering of truth is nothing more than being exposed to what has been learned by this oversoul, simply because we are in the fallen, individualized state of the world and our ignorance is what defines us, errata humanum est, being exposed to these truths grow us. The body of science and technology is the necessity of building the Kingdom and arts and religion is what makes it worth it - but we are not the alien’s technology. No. We are something much more pristine - we are their religion.

There is no Hell.

>>20108018
>>20108024
If the fear of "Hell" is actually just the fear of heaven being all there is, doesn't this carry the implication that heaven might not be perfect?
Also, this weighing of souls that you refer to, does it mean that the individual consciously chooses between oblivion and eternity?

>>20108036
no and yes. If you want to live forever, you must follow Christ - if you wish to extinguish yourself do as you wish and the eternals will forgive all that is done. Hell is the Jungian shadow of heaven and does not truly exist. If it did, I would never be a Christian - but I am, I heard the word and saw the beaitific vision.

Think of it this way, heaven is the merging of all souls from all species of sentient beings in eternity - you will feel the memory of a small alien first seeing the sun, the joy of an old king from the first civilization hearing the voice, and you will forgive any and all of their wrongdoings. Hell is being alone because you cannot forgive. There is no eternal torture chamber. That is a lie.

>>20107895
Why would you be afraid of some hypothetical fantasy hell if you can live in the real world hell right now? If you do immoral acts, even assuming you can get away with it, you would still be making everyone else around you miserable. And once you do that, that's the world that you live in. Living your life surrounded by misery.
But if you'd rather be afraid of some afterlife hell, then you do you.

>>20108048
>heaven is the merging of all souls from all species of sentient beings in eternity
This seems relevant to the OP pic. Is that really a desirable outcome? Merging and dissolution into the whole? For what purpose?
It's still obviously preferable to suffering, but I still wonder.

>>20108003
Hmmm, cheers, I just watched one of his videos and what he says makes sense - 'hell' is what people choose - if they decide to become their own image bearer instead of what they are, which is the image of God, they are choosing hell - it is a conscious decision made by that individual. Hell is not a place we are sent to against our will, rather a choice made. Choose instead eternal life in Christ Jesus. Assurance of salvation is very real - if you choose to believe Jesus, and are genuine, you will be saved. You can't accidentally go to hell. Amen.

>>20107895
>Books that will help me grow out of my irrational fear of hell?
You need to be saved
Jesus is knocking on your heart's door, answer him
>Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
Revelation 3:20

>>20108060
Read the OP and then go away.

>>20108052
Willingness to be eternal is willingness to forgive. Keep in mind being intelligent makes ot harder because you wouldnt want to be with idiots forever, luckily all knowledge is there.

>>20108059
But what if I don't believe in the bible at all and can't bring myself to pretend?

>>20108011
>>20108018
>>20108024
Meds. Now.
>>20107895
Your fear of hell isn't irrational if you believe it exists. The topic of hell is a bit vague for me, in one sense it's an eternal departure from Christ, in another it's painful torment of the soul. The doctrine can't be refuted unless you want to physically find it and can't. Perhaps you can find some modern liberal 'scholar' in theology to make up their own interpretation of hell that's distinguishable from two thousand years of tradition in either the west or east.

>>20108081
>my savior has an eternal torture chamber
Meds.

>>20108081
>if you believe it exists
I don't know if it does. I don't believe in christianity but the what if tugs at the back of my mind, reality is so inscrutable that there remains a very slight chance that it's all true and I fucked up. Although I don't think that's the case, I still worry.

>>20108006
>Does this imply hell is not eternal but is a purification process?
Yes, at least for most people (who are also willing).

>>20108070
Have you looked into the evidence for Jesus Christ? I encourage you to do so. Read 'Case for Christ' - a good starting point.

>>20108064
The fact that you are fearful means Jesus is calling anon
Seriously, give him a chance

>>20108103
I know he existed, yes.
>>20108101
Who wouldn't be willing once thrown into that kind of situation? If somehow Christianity ends up being true and I'm in hell of course I'm going to do my best to get out.

>>20108106
Yeah I actually had a short christian phase that I now look back on with disbelief as I wonder how I was able to convince myself of all this shit. Of course it led nowhere. Not doing that again.
Also why is it so hard for you people to follow simple requests? I said I wasn't interested.

>>20108110
I think you're on the right track. Ignore the doctrinal slaves who say Hell is real and just look for the eternal path. Gospel of Thomas is a great entry text you can read in 10 mins.

>>20108122
>Gospel of Thomas
I actually have it but never read it. Thanks for reminding me, I will.

>>20108121
>Also why is it so hard for you people to follow simple requests?
If you were Christian at one point then you'd understand most want to see everyone saved
That includes you, someone I've never met, because God's love is a blessing and I wish all would receive it

>>20108129
And I wish you'd stop because my concerns about hell didn't arise out of a vacuum, I'm pretty sure I just spent too much time on here and you relentless fundamentalists finally got inside my head. Maybe I should just take an internet break

>>20108129
I actually really want to accent this. Salvation can be selfless. You can do it to make the faithful happy, which is why I additionally think any faithful with a conception of eternal suffering has missed the mark. How could they be happy with still knowing Hell existed if not through the greatest act of sadism of all time? Hell is the destruction of the soul.

>>20108110
Sure, but do you believe He is the person He claimed to be - God in the flesh, a man who died and rose again from the dead, or 'just another teacher'. There's a big difference.

Understanding that the concept of hell was invented hundreds of years after Christ and is now implicitly or explicitly rejected by many denominations is a good start. That way it's not a question of "oh no what if they're right!" since it's not a sincere part of the system. I can elaborate on this if you want.

As far as books, I have not read it but one that is relevant is Inventing Hell

>>20108137
No, I'm not a christian and I'm not interested

>>20108138
Thank you! Not OP

>>20108138
>I can elaborate on this if you want.
Yes, I would appreciate that please.
Don't most denominations take the intellectual production of the church as inextricably linked to Christianity as opposed to the Protestant interpretation (which derives hell from the whole gnashing of teeth part anyways)? I mean that church fathers and the like deduced hell's existence so it's canon according to orthodoxy and catholicism.

>>20108139
You're not interested in truth? Because if Christ is who He claims to be, how can you not be interested? I'm genuinley trying to understand. I'm a Christian not because I want to be or am interested in being a 'christian', instead I'm a Christian because everything about Jesus makes sense.

>>20108150
Please read the OP

>>20108006
The pre-medieval conception of the underworld was totally different. It was a neutral/diversified place (both good and bad) or, more commonly, a place where you aren't conscious at all.

To this day, many christin groups believe that even heaven-bound souls wait in a state of unconscious death in the underworld, and don't rise up to heaven until the rapture. It's actually a pretty well-supported view as far as the text of the bible.

>>20108147
>Don't most denominations take the intellectual production of the church as inextricably linked to Christianity as opposed to the Protestant interpretation
What are you trying to express here? Protestantism is a form of christianity.

>>20108164
Yeah but I mean that saying "the hell doctrine appeared hundreds of years after Jesus died" doesn't mean much since Christianity and the church (and its philosophy) are inextricably tied in Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

>>20107895
Start with the Sceptics:

>On this question, the pronouncements of highly learned men are so varied and so much at odds with each other that inevitably they strongly suggest that the explanation is human ignorance, and that the Academics have been wise to withhold assent on matters of such uncertainty; for what can be more degrading than rash judgement, and what can be so rash and unworthy of the serious and sustained attention of a philosopher, as either to hold a false opinion or to defend without hesitation propositions inadequately examined and grasped?
—Cicero, De natura deorum

>>20108174
I find skepticism untenable, not because it doesn't make sense, but because we are compelled to believe in something, and to keep searching no matter the unknowability of the object of our focus.

>>20107895
Pensees, particularly the bit about pascal's wager. Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling would do as well, and Either/Or but you're too midwit for that.

and the bible of course, but you're too edgy for that.

>>20108185
Go back

>>20108187
where to

>>20108168
You have a very awkward understanding of "christianity". Christianity is a blanket term for any religion that claims to be based around Jesus Christ, that's it. There is an extreme level of diversity in it.

For example, most people assume that 'cults' are independent pagan groups but most of them (in America) are actually christian, at least in name.

>>20108192
Your underage tradlarp discord

>>20108176
Scepticism at least fulfills the psychological need for some kind of dogma (you can be a smug adherent to a school preaching non-adherence) and in its best forms doesn't close off curiosity but leaves extensive space for uninhibited open inquiry

>>20108194
Are you implying that catholicism and orthodoxy can simply be dismissed? I neither agree nor disagree but what makes you say that the whole intellectual production of these two churches can be disregarded?

>>20108138
>nderstanding that the concept of hell was invented hundreds of years after Christ
>Jesus Christ literally talks about hell and the condemned who will go there, he talks repeatedly about the wheat and the tares growing together and being separated
what the FUCK did devilish anon mean by this

>>20108202
He doesn't. Even in the most bastardized translations, you have to really bend it to make it read that way.

>>20108207
>He doesn't. Even in the most bastardized translations, you have to really bend it to make it read that way.

>>20108199
Depends what sense you mean. But basically, yes. The stated purpose of the protestant reformation was to be guided by the bible, not the whims of the catholic church.

why is /lit/ full of people who want to seem smart and well-read but constantly fall flat on their face

just stfu if you don't know what you're talking about. its not hard.

>>20108219
>quotes wikipedia instead of the bible in a discussion explicitly about the bible
Christians, everybody

>>20108222
Isn't it audacious to just throw in the trash the writings and apologetics of all the church fathers and christian philosophers? Not to appeal to authority but dozens of people dedicated their lives to help consolidate the doctrine.

>>20108223
It's clear you have no education on this subject. What I'm saying is common knowledge for people who have done any amount of meta-analysis of christianity.

>>20108222
>Depends what sense you mean. But basically, yes. The stated purpose of the protestant reformation was to be guided by the bible, not the whims of the catholic church.
100% pure retardation.

The stated purpose of the reformation was to cut off interpretation of the bible from Catholic tradition, which existed *before* the bible. Read Calvin. Sola scriptura was the adoption of a hermeneutic of willful ignorance. You are 200% wrong.

>>20108226
The works can speak for themselves, if they hold up then they're fine. The difference is rejecting the dogmatic assumption that they must be right, you're forgetting that the catholic church literally burned people alive for contesting their concept of the Trinity.

>>20108243
Hold up to whose scrutiny? Since there's no central authority when you reject the church, you have to rely on your own reason and intuition. Which is good (though obviously demonic according to the catholic/orthodox churches because of course they'd say that) but can lead to mistakes, I'd assume.

>>20108235
I don't know how you could be this retarded. You think the protestant churches still went with catholic catechisms? You think they still accepted the pope as infalliable in his theological declarations?

Have you done any amount of reading about Martin Luther? He was immediately re-working major parts of their model of the universe. He is one example for what I mentioned here >>20108155 , he taught that you don't go straight to heaven when you die.

>>20108197
It fulfills the need for dogma, but not for meaning.

>>20108121
> I actually had a short christian phase that I now look back on with disbelief as I wonder how I was able to convince myself
protestant detected. no wonder you weren't convinced, they are theologically incompetent as a rule and heretics as a result. talk to a Catholic priest, OP.

>>20108248
Well obviously. We're talking about giving you the capacity to think about this for yourself.

>>20107895
Just never mind the remote viewed Archon soul trap.

>>20108257
I'm from western europe, not a protestant country. And no.

>>20108260
I saw that video a while ago. Why would I trust one (or even a few) guy's testimony though?

>>20108257
I also had a short christian phase and I would describe it as catholic

>>20108235
>100% pure retardation
>*even longer explanation of how right you but with some catholic anger thrown in*
ok

>>20108110
>Who wouldn't be willing once thrown into that kind of situation?
Satan? The point is that you're not really willing if it's just from a utilitarian perspective.

>>20108289
That's bullshit.
>nu-uh it doesn't could if you don't REALLY mean it
Is god an abusive girlfriend?

>>20108252
>I don't know how you could be this retarded. You think the protestant churches still went with catholic catechisms?
No you dumb shit read my post again. Luther REGRETTED his theses, read his letter to Antwerp. He never expected to shatter the church into thousands of new denominations, in fact he later blamed that on the devil instead of taking responsibility for it. He and Calvin were both part of the same reformation, and Calvin in particular was the force behind anti-Catholic bias. Of course they weren't using Catholic catechisms you dope. They wanted nothing to do with Catholicism. They cut themselves off from Catholic traditions, a clean slate, depending entirely on a sola scriptura read of the Bible -- that is, without the benefit of context provided by Tradition. The same deposit of faith that had existed *before the bible had been written*. Remember it didn't exist as a new testament until the 300s. To make it simple for your pea brain: Protestants of the 16th century decided en masse to pretend the whole of Catholic history never happened. They wanted to read the bible without acknowledging its true and legitimate roots. Which of course is impossible and why they sound like utter retards to anyone who knows anything about church history. They bend over backwards trying to figure out justification because they are purposely ignoring the evidence. It's all stupid. If you or OP have had interactions with protestants and think that's what Christianity is, you've been misled. Which is why protestants deserve so much venom: they're leading people to hell. Or in OP's case scaring him half to death without actually educating him properly and so leaving him woefully unprepared.

>>20108295
pathetic schizo

>>20108272
Since I don't believe in souls the whole thing is just entertainment to me anyway.

>>20108295
>They cut themselves off from Catholic traditions, a clean slate, depending entirely on a sola scriptura read of the Bible -- that is, without the benefit of context provided by Tradition
Which is exactly what I was saying, you hopeless mongoloid. I'm sorry your priest touched you but I'm not the one to vent to about it, you need professional help.

>>20108295
I have never talked to a Protestant in my life.
>educating
What is hell then? Eternal torture or not?

>>20108310
Are you a Buddhist or a physicalist?

>>20108311
No, you said Catholicism could "basically be dismissed." You fucking retard. It can't. Because then all you're left with is howling and fainting protestants who don't know their own history.

>>20108313
>What is hell then? Eternal torture or not?
It is the consequence of final impenitence. Going to your death not only without repenting, but unrepentant. It's most of the reason why priests give viaticum and last rites. Just to be absolutely sure. After you die, that's it, you are not capable of acting. You've stopped. This makes you unable to repent, ever.

>>20108326
You didn't answer my question.

>>20108318
>quote one line of my post
>sperg out and write walls of ridiculous insults while you cry your eyes out
>realize I wasn't even disagreeing with you there
>quote something else that I didn't even say (part of a different chain whose context you didn't understand)
truly pathetic

>>20108326
and why do you think this is the case? Have you seen the afterlife?

>>20108317
Physicalist for now at least. I don't buy into this fashionable 'matter can't be conscious without some magical fairy dust dualism'. And not one of these wishy washy dualist can solve the interaction problem of matter and non-matter. Dualism just leads nowhere. There cop outs are panpsychism (which is still materialism with added properties) or monistic idealism (everything is immaterial). Borth are not convincing to me.

>>20108338
What about nondualism?

>>20108333
>and why do you think this is the case? Have you seen the afterlife?
Anon we're talking about revealed knowledge here. Either you believe what Jesus said or you don't. If you don't, what are you even doing asking about hell.

>>20108328
Yes I did.

>>20108329
>"you're a retard and here's why"
>n-no and you're being mean! T_T
/lit/ continues to amaze with its negative IQs

>>20108346
No, you didn't. Is it eternal torture or not? Stop dodging.

>>20108342
The buddhist form of nondualism is not even a metaphysical category it's just more spiritual nonsense.

>>20108349
No I mean nondualism in general

>>20108346
>>"you're a retard and here's why"
You never even told me what you're disagreeing with, faggot. Yes, the protestant reformation was about going with the bible itself and not catholic interpretation. We both said that.

You honestly are so fucking bad at this. Why do you even try with this when you're so sensitive and will blow up and ruin your mood and mental state for the whole day at the drop of a hat?

>>20108346
Why do you believe what Jesus said? Why do you believe he even said the things he is alleged to have said?