FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » A Letter From Hell(this makes me sick) (Page 3)

  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   
Author Topic: A Letter From Hell(this makes me sick)
Joldo
Member
Member # 6991

 - posted      Profile for Joldo   Email Joldo         Edit/Delete Post 
I think what's interesting about this video is that it implies this Josh character never really heard the Christian message. That means that those who have not had the opportunity to convert are also damned.

A prospect, I think, that doesn't speak well of that religion. In such a cosmology, I'd be proud to go to Hell.

Posts: 1735 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
In such a cosmology, I'd be proud to go to Hell.
Honestly? If such a religion were correct (something I have no faith in at all), I would probably be too angry at evangelicals for spending so much time kissing their own asses instead of spreading the word.

I mean, heh, there's a lot of tough talk about people rather wanting to go to a torment-style hell than submit to a creed they don't believe in, but frankly I don't buy it. People just aren't that tough. When we're threatened with torture, much less once it actually starts, we break. We don't stick to moral convinctions when splinters are being driven under our fingernails, or at least not for long.

So who here says they would choose an eternity of damnable torment in hell as opposed to submission to the will of god in the afterlife, even if that will is odious to you personally?

I mean, I'd love to say that I'd choose hell, but if I were given the choice just between me, God, and Beezlebub, and no one else would ever know? I doubt I wouldn't choose submission PDQ. Bearing in mind, of course, that the decision ends there (because in this silly religious hypothetical question of mine, it does) [Smile]

Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert
Member
Member # 3076

 - posted      Profile for Javert   Email Javert         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Rakeesh:
I mean, heh, there's a lot of tough talk about people rather wanting to go to a torment-style hell than submit to a creed they don't believe in, but frankly I don't buy it. People just aren't that tough. When we're threatened with torture, much less once it actually starts, we break. We don't stick to moral convinctions when splinters are being driven under our fingernails, or at least not for long.

But when dealing with that sort of torture, our torturers aren't omnipotent. They don't know what we're thinking, so we're free to tell them whatever it is that will get the torture to stop.

So yeah, if faced with that cosmology, I would want to lie to get out of all the nasty bits. But you can't exactly lie to someone who knows everything, can you? So off to hell I would go.

I would be happy with the fact that I wasn't submitting to what I thought of as a cruel and unjust god. And that, I think, would make hell just the tiniest bit bearable.

[ January 27, 2008, 03:04 AM: Message edited by: Javert ]

Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
So yeah, if faced with that cosmology, I would want to lie to get out of all the nasty bits. But you can't exactly lie to someone who knows everything, can you? So off to hell I would go.
I didn't make it clear in my silly hypothetical, but sincerity isn't relevant: all that matters is the submission part, not whether you mean it, unlike the short story A Thousand Deaths.

quote:
And that, I think, would make hell just the tiniest bit bearable.
If such an unlikely cosmology were correct, 'bearable' and 'hell' would be mutually exclusive, no matter how tiny.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert
Member
Member # 3076

 - posted      Profile for Javert   Email Javert         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Rakeesh:
quote:
And that, I think, would make hell just the tiniest bit bearable.
If such an unlikely cosmology were correct, 'bearable' and 'hell' would be mutually exclusive, no matter how tiny.
Depends on how this hell is set up. If I'm allowed to still be ME, then I would find it better.

If I were changed so I were no longer me, well, then I'm not me, so it doesn't matter that much what my answer is.

Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bokonon
Member
Member # 480

 - posted      Profile for Bokonon           Edit/Delete Post 
For the record, timecube wa sone of the earliest crank websites. It goes back to 1998.

-Bok

Posts: 7021 | Registered: Nov 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jim-Me
Member
Member # 6426

 - posted      Profile for Jim-Me   Email Jim-Me         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Joldo:
In such a cosmology, I'd be proud to go to Hell.

In most Christian cosmologies, all who go to hell are. YMMV depending on your definition of "pride".

Jay points out the beggar Lazarus and the rich man as and example of Jesus scaring people with hell, but that's not the point of the parable (IMO). I think it was another reiteration of a constant theme of His: do not judge people by what you see here... what you think you know is not the whole truth and may, in fact, be the exact opposite. The alcoholic homeless beggar may be a saint and the finely dressed family man in church every Wednesday and Sunday may well be headed for flames... so abandon the pretense that you know who is and isn't and simply treat all people as brethren.

Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Depends on how this hell is set up. If I'm allowed to still be ME, then I would find it better.

If I were changed so I were no longer me, well, then I'm not me, so it doesn't matter that much what my answer is.

I guess I'm not being very clear. I'm not saying, in this hypothetical, that you have to change to get into heaven. Just lie, say you submit to the will of God, and into Heaven you go, as opposed to eternal torment where you would have whatever pride you felt due for having been honest.

I'm asking this because, in these sorts of discussions, every so often pops up, "I'd rather go to Hell forever than acknowledge that this particular God is right!"

To me, that smacks of the same sort of pride that someone might have and say, "I wouldn't give up my car at gunpoint, I'd floor it or fight or grab the gun or something!"

So the reason I'm posing my silly little hypothetical is to ask who thinks they would stick to their principles and suffer eternal torment, instead of telling a lie just between you and God and go to heaven?

I'm not saying I think that's what the afterlife is like, just to be clear.

Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Jim-Me:
quote:
Originally posted by Joldo:
In such a cosmology, I'd be proud to go to Hell.

In most Christian cosmologies, all who go to hell are. YMMV depending on your definition of "pride".

Jay points out the beggar Lazarus and the rich man as and example of Jesus scaring people with hell, but that's not the point of the parable (IMO). I think it was another reiteration of a constant theme of His: do not judge people by what you see here... what you think you know is not the whole truth and may, in fact, be the exact opposite. The alcoholic homeless beggar may be a saint and the finely dressed family man in church every Wednesday and Sunday may well be headed for flames... so abandon the pretense that you know who is and isn't and simply treat all people as brethren.

^^ What he said, though the beggar Lazerus in that story was not an alcoholic. [Wink] The begger being an alcoholic would sorta dilute the effectiveness of the parable.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert
Member
Member # 3076

 - posted      Profile for Javert   Email Javert         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
To me, that smacks of the same sort of pride that someone might have and say, "I wouldn't give up my car at gunpoint, I'd floor it or fight or grab the gun or something!"

So the reason I'm posing my silly little hypothetical is to ask who thinks they would stick to their principles and suffer eternal torment, instead of telling a lie just between you and God and go to heaven?

I'm not saying I think that's what the afterlife is like, just to be clear.

And I'm saying that the problem is that god, under most people's definitions, couldn't be lied too.

Depending on what heaven consisted of, I might lie, if I could, to get there. I'm not too upright to deny that.

Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert
Member
Member # 3076

 - posted      Profile for Javert   Email Javert         Edit/Delete Post 
For everyone's more or less enjoyment:

A letter out of hell.

Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
Good work Javert!!
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Corwin
Member
Member # 5705

 - posted      Profile for Corwin           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Enigmatic:
quote:
Scuze. "Hypothetical malign thug".
I nominate Lisa for Thread Winnage!
[ROFL]

(I think it's the "Scuze." that really makes the funny.)

--Enigmatic

"Scuze" actually means "excuses" and is used to say "Excuse me."/"Sorry." in Romanian. I was a bit startled to see it. [Big Grin]
Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
suminonA
Member
Member # 8757

 - posted      Profile for suminonA   Email suminonA         Edit/Delete Post 
Corwin, are you sure? Why would Lisa use a Romanian word?

A.

Posts: 1154 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Javert:
For everyone's more or less enjoyment:

A letter out of hell.

Very nice. But isn't zealotry pronounced "ZEH-luh-tree"? Or is that a regional thing?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Corwin:
quote:
Originally posted by Enigmatic:
quote:
Scuze. "Hypothetical malign thug".
I nominate Lisa for Thread Winnage!
[ROFL]

(I think it's the "Scuze." that really makes the funny.)

--Enigmatic

"Scuze" actually means "excuses" and is used to say "Excuse me."/"Sorry." in Romanian. I was a bit startled to see it. [Big Grin]
I doubt it's just Romanian. To be honest, I have no idea where it came from. I say it in real life, too. It's probably just a lazy way of saying "Excuse me".
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Corwin
Member
Member # 5705

 - posted      Profile for Corwin           Edit/Delete Post 
Yeah, me too. But it was the Romanian spelling, so that set of the weird moment. [Smile] By the way, it's not pronounced the same way in Romanian anyway. "u" is the same as in "put", and "e" is the same as in "pet", and the whole word has two syllables, 'scu-ze, with the stress on the first.

Not that anyone wanted to know all that. [Razz]

Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Noemon
Member
Member # 1115

 - posted      Profile for Noemon   Email Noemon         Edit/Delete Post 
Isn't the Italian word for "excuse me" "scusi"? Not that it's particularly surprising to find similaritites between Italian and Romanian, of course.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Corwin
Member
Member # 5705

 - posted      Profile for Corwin           Edit/Delete Post 
Yeah, that's it. In fact, according to the Romanian dictionary, the Romanian word comes directly from Italian.
Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
Isn't it pretty much the same in French, too?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:
Originally posted by Jim-Me:
quote:
Originally posted by Joldo:
In such a cosmology, I'd be proud to go to Hell.

In most Christian cosmologies, all who go to hell are. YMMV depending on your definition of "pride".

Jay points out the beggar Lazarus and the rich man as and example of Jesus scaring people with hell, but that's not the point of the parable (IMO). I think it was another reiteration of a constant theme of His: do not judge people by what you see here... what you think you know is not the whole truth and may, in fact, be the exact opposite. The alcoholic homeless beggar may be a saint and the finely dressed family man in church every Wednesday and Sunday may well be headed for flames... so abandon the pretense that you know who is and isn't and simply treat all people as brethren.

^^ What he said, though the beggar Lazerus in that story was not an alcoholic. [Wink] The begger being an alcoholic would sorta dilute the effectiveness of the parable.
Really? Why? I don't see how.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert
Member
Member # 3076

 - posted      Profile for Javert   Email Javert         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:
Originally posted by Javert:
For everyone's more or less enjoyment:

A letter out of hell.

Very nice. But isn't zealotry pronounced "ZEH-luh-tree"? Or is that a regional thing?
Thanks!

I've only heard it pronounced "zeh-luh-tree" by people with English accents. Since zeal is "zeel" I figured zealotry was pronounced the same.

But I could be wrong.

I was told by my speech professor that harass is pronounced "harris", but I still pronounce it "huh-rass". [Big Grin]

Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
From Webster's dictionary


Main Entry: zeal·ot
Pronunciation: \ˈze-lət\

Main Entry: zeal·ot·ry
Pronunciation: \ˈze-lə-trē\

Main Entry: zeal
Pronunciation: \ˈzēl\

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
Oh, and

Main Entry: ha·rass
Pronunciation: \hə-ˈras; ˈher-əs, ˈha-rəs\

So it looks like Webster's prefers your pronunciation to that of your speech professor all though it does list both.

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Itsame
Member
Member # 9712

 - posted      Profile for Itsame           Edit/Delete Post 
It's pronounced zeh-luh-tree.


Anyway, awesome vid, though that ruined it for me. [Razz]

Posts: 2705 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Corwin
Member
Member # 5705

 - posted      Profile for Corwin           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lisa:
Isn't it pretty much the same in French, too?

It's "excuse" in French. I believe the English word has at some point come from French. (with Latin at the origin)
Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Joldo
Member
Member # 6991

 - posted      Profile for Joldo   Email Joldo         Edit/Delete Post 
I remember, reading Dante, this one guy in Hell who was there for blasphemy. He had claimed he was greater than God, and so was sent to Hell. But he did not acknowledge God's power to punish him. As such, his suffering was far worse, because he had not abandoned his pride. I have never admired a character in literature as much as that man.
Posts: 1735 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
What, never?

Which character do you mean? It's been ten years since I read Inferno, but it would seem to me that refusing to acknowledge God's power to punish (in this setting) would be the height of stupidity. Refusing to acknowledge God's right to punish would be a different story.

Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Glenn Arnold
Member
Member # 3192

 - posted      Profile for Glenn Arnold   Email Glenn Arnold         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
It's probably just a lazy way of saying "Excuse me".
"Scuze me," said the elephant's child, most politely, "but could you please tell me what the crocodile has for dinner?"
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Rakeesh:
What, never?

Which character do you mean? It's been ten years since I read Inferno, but it would seem to me that refusing to acknowledge God's power to punish (in this setting) would be the height of stupidity. Refusing to acknowledge God's right to punish would be a different story.

I liked Inferno. Niven and Pournelle are among my favorite writers. It wasn't as good as Footfall, but it was fun.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rollainm
Member
Member # 8318

 - posted      Profile for rollainm   Email rollainm         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Javert:
For everyone's more or less enjoyment:

A letter out of hell.

It would have been better with a goat in the background - in the silence just as you built up with all that anger. Would have been awesome.

Just sayin'...

Good job, though.

Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Darth Petra
Member
Member # 11464

 - posted      Profile for Darth Petra           Edit/Delete Post 
I watched about two seconds of that and turned it off. It was just one of those things whrere we try to scare Atheists into belief. Good Gravy.
Posts: 20 | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Juxtapose
Member
Member # 8837

 - posted      Profile for Juxtapose   Email Juxtapose         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Rakeesh:
What, never?

Which character do you mean? It's been ten years since I read Inferno, but it would seem to me that refusing to acknowledge God's power to punish (in this setting) would be the height of stupidity. Refusing to acknowledge God's right to punish would be a different story.

Given the kind of entity God is supposed to be, isn't that a nonsensical distinction?
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
quote:
Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:
Originally posted by Jim-Me:
quote:
Originally posted by Joldo:
In such a cosmology, I'd be proud to go to Hell.

In most Christian cosmologies, all who go to hell are. YMMV depending on your definition of "pride".

Jay points out the beggar Lazarus and the rich man as and example of Jesus scaring people with hell, but that's not the point of the parable (IMO). I think it was another reiteration of a constant theme of His: do not judge people by what you see here... what you think you know is not the whole truth and may, in fact, be the exact opposite. The alcoholic homeless beggar may be a saint and the finely dressed family man in church every Wednesday and Sunday may well be headed for flames... so abandon the pretense that you know who is and isn't and simply treat all people as brethren.

^^ What he said, though the beggar Lazerus in that story was not an alcoholic. [Wink] The begger being an alcoholic would sorta dilute the effectiveness of the parable.
Really? Why? I don't see how.
The point of Lazerus getting into heaven was that although he was lowly in station, he is still valuable in God's eyes. I think the point is that Lazerus is still a good and humble servant of God. If Lazerus is an alcoholic then he his cultivating an attribute that is not conducent to being like God. It turns the parable away from the message of, the meek and lowly poor get into heaven before the prideful rich, into "God is willing to look past alcoholism but not an ungiving heart."

I don't think Jesus would touch the subject of just how bad we can be and yet still enter heaven.

Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jim-Me
Member
Member # 6426

 - posted      Profile for Jim-Me   Email Jim-Me         Edit/Delete Post 
There is absolutely nothing in the parable to suggest any particular virtue for Lazarus except that he is, in fact, carried to the Bosom of Abraham.

As for your last comment, Jesus touched that subject directly... most famously in the Passion according to Luke where he assured a criminal, who admitted deserving crucifixion, of heaven.

I would also, though, mention that any discussion of what God is willing to overlook (in a Christian context) is not complete without mentioning Matthew 5:21-22 (NIV here)
quote:
21 "You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, 'Raca,' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. And anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.
All that to say Lazarus would have been valuable in God's eyes, alcoholic or no, and "getting into heaven" is not about any specific behavior, one way or another. More accurate to say it's not about behavior at all.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
I'll have to get to your interesting points tomorrow Jim-Me, 8 hours of school, 5 hours of work, and 2 hours of errands has kicked my butt for the day.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jim-Me
Member
Member # 6426

 - posted      Profile for Jim-Me   Email Jim-Me         Edit/Delete Post 
'scool... believe me, I understand busy [Smile]
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks, Jim.

BB, I think that Lazarus would have been no less valuable or beloved to God if he had been an alcoholic. (I also think that the rich man was just as valuable and beloved by God as Lazarus. The rich man put obstacles in his own way.)

Now. It is possible that what you mean is that using the parable to illustrate two important ideas might have confused the issue. Possible. But I think that both ideas - that earthly status is not an indicator of our value to God and that God loves sinners - are both important Gospel messages.

Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kwea
Member
Member # 2199

 - posted      Profile for Kwea   Email Kwea         Edit/Delete Post 
Resh...wanna hear something funny?

I live in Ocala, FL.
[Big Grin]

Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
All that to say Lazarus would have been valuable in God's eyes, alcoholic or no, and "getting into heaven" is not about any specific behavior, one way or another. More accurate to say it's not about behavior at all.
Then how do you explain this teaching of Jesus.

quote:
Mathew 25: 31-46

"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'

"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'

"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'

"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'

"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'

"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."


Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
Or this teaching of Jesus

quote:
Mathew 7: 21-24
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.


Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jim-Me
Member
Member # 6426

 - posted      Profile for Jim-Me   Email Jim-Me         Edit/Delete Post 
I didn't say it was accurate that it wasn't about behavior... I said that was more accurate than making it all about behavior.

If it's all about behavior, then as the passage I cited makes clear, none of us have a chance.

Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
BB, I think that Lazarus would have been no less valuable or beloved to God if he had been an alcoholic. (I also think that the rich man was just as valuable and beloved by God as Lazarus. The rich man put obstacles in his own way.)
And Lazerus cultivating alcoholism is the same thing as a rich man cultivating his love of riches.

Jin-Me: While carefully trying to avoid a faith v works discussion. My only point was that for the purposes of telling a parable, had Jesus pointed out that Lazerus was an alcoholic and left the rest of the parable intact, we as readers would be forced to examine what Jesus' intent was in pointing that out. A natural conclusion would be that alcoholism is not as bad in God's eyes as being uncharitable.

To me the difference in the rich man and Lazerus is that Lazerus was not in a position to help anyone but himself as he was destitute. The rich man on the other hand had been given so much and had not used it in making others happy, everything else between the men is more or less equal for the purposes of the parable.

The parable becomes needlessly complex by making Lazerus an alcoholic. In addition, Lazerus can't help others and contributes to his own situation by being an alcoholic. He is just as guilty as the rich man who does not help others as much as he could.

Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:

And Lazerus cultivating alcoholism is the same thing as a rich man cultivating his love of riches.


Not the same thing at all, in my opinion.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
The parable becomes needlessly complex by making Lazerus an alcoholic. In addition, Lazerus can't help others and contributes to his own situation by being an alcoholic. He is just as guilty as the rich man who does not help others as much as he could.
Unless of course you view alcoholism as a disease (which many do) rather than a free choice. In your mind, would it change the parable dramatically in Lazarus had leprosy, no legs or was blind?
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pooka
Member
Member # 5003

 - posted      Profile for pooka   Email pooka         Edit/Delete Post 
Whether he is cultivating the alcoholism is a matter of the desires of his heart, which only God is acquainted with. He might loathe himself every time he drinks, while it is unlikely that the rich man loathes his riches- at least in that day and age. Jesus' teachings that rich people are not God's elect were as revolutionary as his teachings to love your enemy.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by The Rabbit:
quote:
The parable becomes needlessly complex by making Lazerus an alcoholic. In addition, Lazerus can't help others and contributes to his own situation by being an alcoholic. He is just as guilty as the rich man who does not help others as much as he could.
Unless of course you view alcoholism as a disease (which many do) rather than a free choice. In your mind, would it change the parable dramatically in Lazarus had leprosy, no legs or was blind?
I see leprosy, no legs, and blindness as akin to poorness in that it merely inhibits the individuals ability and therefore expectation they help others.

Obviously Lazerus could have an addictive personality, and became addicted before he could do much about it, but he also could be a man who enjoyed the occasional drink, knew alcohol is addictive, and indulged too much in it to the point that he is not an alcoholic.

In the latter's case, he is hardly the ideal candidate that Jesus would use in his parable.

Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jim-Me
Member
Member # 6426

 - posted      Profile for Jim-Me   Email Jim-Me         Edit/Delete Post 
I think I see where we are at cross purposes, at least a little.

I am not trying to say it wouldn't make a difference in the parable if Jesus specified alcoholism... I'm trying to say the parable, as it stands, is not affected, one way or another, by the fact of Lazarus's alcoholism *or* lack thereof.

I'm saying that whatever moral failings Lazarus may have had (and there is certainly nothing to indicate he is without them), they are not relevant to the parable. Lazarus, were he real, may have been a remarkably pure soul or he may have bene an average gutter wino. It makes no difference to the parable as told.

Does that make more sense?

Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pooka
Member
Member # 5003

 - posted      Profile for pooka   Email pooka         Edit/Delete Post 
Blackblade, do you know any alcoholics? Just curious.

JM, If it makes no difference in the parable as told, why are we embellishing it with him being drunken?

Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Occasional
Member
Member # 5860

 - posted      Profile for Occasional   Email Occasional         Edit/Delete Post 
I found thiswoman's blog entry rather disturbing. She praises and thanks the "Mormon Lady," but ultimately implied she will go to Hell.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2