Katabasis revisited! I just received a copy of Ehrman’s “Journeys to Heaven and Hell”. About a fourth of the way through it, I’m finding it a bit more technical than his other work on the subject. The new book contains many notes, which makes the reading of it difficult.
As in the former work the book begins with Greek and Roman stories of the underworld (or otherworld) and proceeds though Jewish and early Christian takes on the afterlife. Most horrific of the latter is the Apocalypse of Peter. Read its excerpts without cringing!
Ierrellus,
.
That makes no sense to me. How does one go about accomplishing such a feat? And why would they? Believers take what Christ said in faith.
Do you see this as kind of the same thing as finding out who and what God is NOT before one can discover who he is - kind of like the process of elimination?
Please give me an example if you will - something he said as opposed to what he did not say regarding the same thing/issue.
Jesus. Not being a philosopher, did not say that consent violation is the only problem in existence.
Maybe he walked on water.
That makes the sin even worse.
Then he said that the GREATEST sin is attributing his works to the opposite of god. The ‘devil’.
It sounds demonic to me that he was too scared to say that when people have things happen to them that they don’t want to have happen to them is the only sin in existence …
Why? Because it destroys the narrative of the unquestioned king.
Please avoid posting in mt thread.
This is not a Christian site. This is a philosophy site.
This is not a GOD site, this is a philosophy site.
If you want a site that bans every atheist after one post, you have thousands to choose from for your echo chamber.
The greatest philosophers on earth have been atheists.
Sorry if that bothers you.
Jesus did not say there is eternal conscious torment for sinners. The Apocalypse of Peter lists 21 types of sin and their punishments. Among these is one that states that male adulterers are hanged by their testicles for all eternity. This apocalypse was eventually considered non-canonical.
Have you read the new book?
Jesus talks about hell many times in the NT.
According to the NT, Jesus sees existence in three realms, heaven, earth and hell.
This is ALL canonical.
Jesus then states that heaven and earth shall pass.
He never states that hell will pass.
This is basic logic: all believers in Jesus spirit go to hell forever.
Remember? “those who believe in me shall not perish, but have ever lasting life”
This is all canonical and it’s all basic logic.
Please refrain from posting in mt thread!1! Second request. You said you would not post here. Did you lie? I’d rather have no thread then one with your input. Dan, help please.
Fuck. I thought I made this thread. Memory can be fickle.
I will add that your consent is violated by me posting here. What’s the biggest problem in existence again?
Consent violation.
I’m not doing this intentionally to you.
You fail to acknowledge that Jesus was insane.
If Jesus has walked in water and resurrected and stated, “the biggest problem in life is consent violation.”
The world would be better and god would have been exposed.
You’re posting in here unintentionally? How does that work?
I forgot I didn’t start this thread. My last post was intentional. This one too.
Flannel. Put yourself in my shoes for a moment. I know you’re moderating.
The discussion of consent is in its infancy as a meta topic.
That’s not my fault.
I’m not trying to hurt people.
I see the last age that we’ll ever have as what I call, “the age of discussing consent”
The former age was “the Information Age.”
I didn’t say that as a moderator, there’s no forum rule that states that if the person who started the thread doesn’t want you to post, that you’re not allowed to post. I just don’t understand how you’re saying that not violating consent is the most important thing, and then admit that you’re doing it, and then continue to do it. That’s all.
But there’s no forum rule to stop you.
Let’s be honest. All I have to do is copy every post here and make a new thread of it.
That would still bother the OP.
The OP doesn’t want to be replied to.
Which is different than not posting in their thread.
The OP wants ILP to be a Christian fundamentalist board.
Let’s be honest Flannel.
What do you think Ierrellus would have done if I started a shadow thread?
Anyone here interested in the pseudepigraphic works that influenced early Christianity? Works such as The Book of Enoch: the watchers, The Apocalypse of Peter, the Apocalypse of Paul, the Gospel of Thomas, etc? If so, “Tours of Heaven and Hell” will be worth your reading time. The subtitle of the book is “Tours of the afterlife in the Early Cristian Tradition.” Beginning his book with the stories of afterlife in Homer and Virgil, Ehrman continues the tours with stories from books that might have been considered orthodox in the first to fourth centuries. CE.
Ec, I’m willing to discuss your recent replies & your vid on NT in a new post.
I’m not mature enough to discuss the Apocalypse of Peter’s balls (not Peter’s… ok anyway, I told you).
All are welcome to reply to me here in Ec’s thread, but don’t be a d*** to Ec.
ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.p … 2#p2878012
I just saw this for some reason.
Mine is called Heaven and Hell, a history of the afterlife
Ichthus,
Please court Ecmandu elsewhere.