purpose of eternal hell
- Thread starter n9newunsixx5150
- Start date
I'm not going to argue that, I am a hedonist to an extent. I like to seize the moment when it presents itself and indulge in certain acts(especially sex among others) that will give me emotional and physical gratificatiion. I will also not feel bad about it and allow any guilt to bring me down off the emotional high that I get from those decisions. I live a good life and don't disrupt or interfere with anyone else's unless they intrude into mine. So call it what you want , if my decision doesn't effect you in any way or create any bad from it , what does it matter? I know you can come up some kind of comeback. Feedback welcome , unless my type is not welcome on this forum in that case I'll go elsewhere.
the purpose of eternal hell
was some made up thing that the false churches...
made up to scare people...
they did this so they would keep giving money to the church....
all the lake of fire means in tha bible.. is eternal death....
it just means you're killed.. and die forever.. without ever coming back....
there is not eternal place of torture.. or pain....
if there is it's here on this earth now....
was some made up thing that the false churches...
made up to scare people...
they did this so they would keep giving money to the church....
all the lake of fire means in tha bible.. is eternal death....
it just means you're killed.. and die forever.. without ever coming back....
there is not eternal place of torture.. or pain....
if there is it's here on this earth now....
self (mind, emotions, soul) whatever u want too call it is directly connected too your body.. i dont see how u can distinguish one without the other as both are YOU. Ur mind cant very well function if the body isnt taken care of also..
i asked someone on this board months ago how we were dependent on a god.. that person left the board and never answered.. soo if u would kindly... i dont wake every morning thanking a god that he permited me too live another day. I dont drive too werk on a near empty tank saying "hey god can u uhh.. give me a few gallons of gas"... i dont pay my bills and write scriptures on the envelopes (yet they still get paid) so i would like for you to explain too me how IM dependent of a god.. u said "we" as in us all....
if god gave us the ability too fornicate why did he make it a pleasureable ability??
if god is ever loving why would he promote slavery in the bible??
i asked someone on this board months ago how we were dependent on a god.. that person left the board and never answered.. soo if u would kindly... i dont wake every morning thanking a god that he permited me too live another day. I dont drive too werk on a near empty tank saying "hey god can u uhh.. give me a few gallons of gas"... i dont pay my bills and write scriptures on the envelopes (yet they still get paid) so i would like for you to explain too me how IM dependent of a god.. u said "we" as in us all....
if god gave us the ability too fornicate why did he make it a pleasureable ability??
if god is ever loving why would he promote slavery in the bible??
This is also a theory; that consciousness is produced from the physical brain. I do not agree that it is. I observe that the body is constantly changing, even the brain, and yet the self is always the same. I haven't any faith that the ever-changing physical body produces a sustaining sense of self. Materialists will reason that this sense of self is an illusion but they cannot reason why such an illusion exists.
First of all, how are we not dependent on so many things? You would not have the body you have now if it were not for your parents. So in that way you are dependent on your parents, and their parents, and their parents, on and on and on. Ultimately everything is dependent on God. All abilities you have are given to you.
Because the universe is created for two reasons: a facility for the conditioned souls to enjoy according to their desires, and to give them a chance to return to their pure spiritual constitution. Actually, the universe is not created whimsically by God. God has no need for the existence of an external universe. He does not take such enjoyment. The universe is created for the eternally existing souls who have, at some point, desired to be independent of God. So we are given the illusion of independence. And now here we are talking about it.
From what I understand it isn’t slavery that it promoted in the Bible, it is indentured servitude. Either way, it is really neither here nor there concerning spiritual realization. Anyone can attain the topmost platform of spiritual life. There being certain classes of men who lead society and other classes of men who are the servant (or “slave”) class is based on one’s qualifications in society. Despite one’s material class, anyone can become a devotee of God and transcend all such designations.
First of all, how are we not dependent on so many things? You would not have the body you have now if it were not for your parents. So in that way you are dependent on your parents, and their parents, and their parents, on and on and on. Ultimately everything is dependent on God. All abilities you have are given to you.
Because the universe is created for two reasons: a facility for the conditioned souls to enjoy according to their desires, and to give them a chance to return to their pure spiritual constitution. Actually, the universe is not created whimsically by God. God has no need for the existence of an external universe. He does not take such enjoyment. The universe is created for the eternally existing souls who have, at some point, desired to be independent of God. So we are given the illusion of independence. And now here we are talking about it.
From what I understand it isn’t slavery that it promoted in the Bible, it is indentured servitude. Either way, it is really neither here nor there concerning spiritual realization. Anyone can attain the topmost platform of spiritual life. There being certain classes of men who lead society and other classes of men who are the servant (or “slave”) class is based on one’s qualifications in society. Despite one’s material class, anyone can become a devotee of God and transcend all such designations.
Okay Heresy. One more thing...
Maybe the Bible explains that God creates this universe for His own purpose, but we have to use good sense and logic based upon the theistic premise. For example, God is inexhaustible. Would you not agree that He is? YET, despite this quality, God took a day of "rest" from creation, as per the Bible. We should be intelligent enough to understand that God's pastime of taking rest does not mean He was at all tired. The Bible does not even have to clarify this and I still understand what it means.
Maybe the Bible explains that God creates this universe for His own purpose, but we have to use good sense and logic based upon the theistic premise. For example, God is inexhaustible. Would you not agree that He is? YET, despite this quality, God took a day of "rest" from creation, as per the Bible. We should be intelligent enough to understand that God's pastime of taking rest does not mean He was at all tired. The Bible does not even have to clarify this and I still understand what it means.
It is a direct contradiction because it goes against what is found in biblical scripture. What I believe does not matter.
You cannot seriously assume that God CANNOT gain anything from creating something. Yes God has it all, is all powerful, all knowing etc, and I am not implying that he has a NEED to be met. Would it be wrong to assume God takes pleasure and delight in seeing humans treating each other with love?
Be SPECIFIC on who you are referring to as "god" because all roads do NOT lead to rome. EDJ is arguing from the perspective of the God of the Bible (and what he believes) which is DIFFERENT from your perspective of God (and what you believe.) If you are going to argue from the biblical perspective (take a look at your sin arguement) you should have a concept of the bible and what it teaches.
The concept of "GOD" is illogical to some, so I don't see your point.
Please read my statements towards the start of this post.
God did not take a day of "rest" from creation.
I agree with you.
The bible DOES clarify this, and all you have to do is learn the the HEBREW and GREEK words for "rest" to understand what it means. However, this has NOTHING to do with you stating
You cannot seriously assume that God CANNOT gain anything from creating something. Yes God has it all, is all powerful, all knowing etc, and I am not implying that he has a NEED to be met. Would it be wrong to assume God takes pleasure and delight in seeing humans treating each other with love?
Be SPECIFIC on who you are referring to as "god" because all roads do NOT lead to rome. EDJ is arguing from the perspective of the God of the Bible (and what he believes) which is DIFFERENT from your perspective of God (and what you believe.) If you are going to argue from the biblical perspective (take a look at your sin arguement) you should have a concept of the bible and what it teaches.
The concept of "GOD" is illogical to some, so I don't see your point.
Please read my statements towards the start of this post.
God did not take a day of "rest" from creation.
I agree with you.
The bible DOES clarify this, and all you have to do is learn the the HEBREW and GREEK words for "rest" to understand what it means. However, this has NOTHING to do with you stating
i agree with that.. i believe that our consciousness is not the product of a mere brain signal, however, I dont believe either that it was handed down from us from a gray beared deity in the sky.
i kno im dependent on SOME things but i was refering too your statement on how were related too god in relation too day2day life... i WAS dependent on my parents for creation purposes but when i can walk, talk, eat and wipe my own ass then from that point forward im dependent on merely my "self"..
ok soo im dependent on god because my parents were and there parents were and there parents were etc etc but then u jump too "ultimately everything is dependent on god" when i was looking for the link between my parents parents parents parents etc and god.
do u kno u sound more satanic then u do catholic or christian?? (see underline above)
lets say for arguement sake that god did create the universe... wether "he/she" meant to get something out of it is null when he/she obviously did in the form of religous followers.
can u give me the definition of indentured servitude? i didnt take it as being a vague description on the diffrences of societys impoverished, wealthy or less/more qualified.. why? because it states how u can beat a "slave" and if he lives for more the 24 hours and dies after how you wouldnt be charged with murder. isnt that a direct contradiction to "thou shalt not kill?" guess there was a fine print (*unless ur a slave, then its ok)
i kno im dependent on SOME things but i was refering too your statement on how were related too god in relation too day2day life... i WAS dependent on my parents for creation purposes but when i can walk, talk, eat and wipe my own ass then from that point forward im dependent on merely my "self"..
ok soo im dependent on god because my parents were and there parents were and there parents were etc etc but then u jump too "ultimately everything is dependent on god" when i was looking for the link between my parents parents parents parents etc and god.
do u kno u sound more satanic then u do catholic or christian?? (see underline above)
lets say for arguement sake that god did create the universe... wether "he/she" meant to get something out of it is null when he/she obviously did in the form of religous followers.
can u give me the definition of indentured servitude? i didnt take it as being a vague description on the diffrences of societys impoverished, wealthy or less/more qualified.. why? because it states how u can beat a "slave" and if he lives for more the 24 hours and dies after how you wouldnt be charged with murder. isnt that a direct contradiction to "thou shalt not kill?" guess there was a fine print (*unless ur a slave, then its ok)
What part of what I said contradicts Biblical Scripture?
No. It would not be wrong to assume that God takes pleasure and delight in seeing humans treat each other with love, but it is wrong to assume that doing so is the same as taking pleasure in a created universe. The difference is that unlike this universe, the spirit-souls are not created (or at least, we are not created in the same way one thinks of the material creation; we are of a transcendental nature). God is eternally enjoying. Yet He still desires for His minute souls who have fallen into ignorance to return to His association. This type of desire is purely God's internal potency. It is not anything external. The material universe, which is an infinitesimal flicker of existence, is only God's concern because it is a means for the conditioned souls to return to Him by attaining spontaneous love of God. Even if you don't believe that the souls are not created, you can understand that the souls (at least the ones who get saved) are perpetually existing. Thus God is not taking pleasure in something of an essentially non-existing nature as He would be if He were to take enjoyment from this material manifestation.
That is why I am glad you are here so we can discuss these things. You still insist a "my God" versus "your God", and I still don't see why you think in this way.
We're definitely beyond this. We are basing our understanding on the premise of a supreme absolute truth we call God. Both of us also believe that God is a Person and so we both accept that God has emotions. But my point is that how God feels and for what God feels is of a transcendental nature. Created things, which are fleeting in nature, are only a means to an end for the fallible souls and thus God takes no pleasure in such an inferior nature.
Okay.
Okay, maybe I have read a poor translation. My point was just to show that I understand what it means, despite that I don't have the correct explanation given to me from the Bible.
I'm glad we could agree on something.
Okay. I am no Bible scholar so it is a good thing you are here. Nevertheless, my point, as I stated above, was that despite that I have not seen this explanation in the Bible, I understand what it means.
No. It would not be wrong to assume that God takes pleasure and delight in seeing humans treat each other with love, but it is wrong to assume that doing so is the same as taking pleasure in a created universe. The difference is that unlike this universe, the spirit-souls are not created (or at least, we are not created in the same way one thinks of the material creation; we are of a transcendental nature). God is eternally enjoying. Yet He still desires for His minute souls who have fallen into ignorance to return to His association. This type of desire is purely God's internal potency. It is not anything external. The material universe, which is an infinitesimal flicker of existence, is only God's concern because it is a means for the conditioned souls to return to Him by attaining spontaneous love of God. Even if you don't believe that the souls are not created, you can understand that the souls (at least the ones who get saved) are perpetually existing. Thus God is not taking pleasure in something of an essentially non-existing nature as He would be if He were to take enjoyment from this material manifestation.
That is why I am glad you are here so we can discuss these things. You still insist a "my God" versus "your God", and I still don't see why you think in this way.
We're definitely beyond this. We are basing our understanding on the premise of a supreme absolute truth we call God. Both of us also believe that God is a Person and so we both accept that God has emotions. But my point is that how God feels and for what God feels is of a transcendental nature. Created things, which are fleeting in nature, are only a means to an end for the fallible souls and thus God takes no pleasure in such an inferior nature.
Okay.
Okay, maybe I have read a poor translation. My point was just to show that I understand what it means, despite that I don't have the correct explanation given to me from the Bible.
I'm glad we could agree on something.
Okay. I am no Bible scholar so it is a good thing you are here. Nevertheless, my point, as I stated above, was that despite that I have not seen this explanation in the Bible, I understand what it means.
I also do not believe that conciousness was handed down to us from a gray bearded deity in the sky.
Just because you have the impression of independence from all points forward does not negate the fact that those points are dependent ultimately on God, the supreme absolute truth. If it were God's will, your ability to eat or wipe your own ass could be taken away at this very moment. This so-called independence is an illusion.
My example of being dependent on your family line is just to show how we are dependent on so many things even if we are not accepting of God's control (or existence). But ultimately, we are dependent on the supreme absolute truth. Some people conceive of that Truth as nothing personal at all while others accept it as the Supreme Person based on their faith in revealed Scripture. Either way, the point is that our abilities are a product of material nature, which shows how we are under control and dependent.
If it were not God's intention to fulfill the desires of the living entities then He would not have created this temporal world where we have the capacity for doing such. And if this were the only reason the universe exists then it would seem Satanic. But it is not the only reason. I already explained the other reason. So taking it as a whole, please show me how it appears Satanic.
God uses the universe for the conditioned souls benefit. Thats all. We are eternally related to God and His taking pleasure in us is completely transcendental to taking mundane pleasure in this world. We, as eternal spirit-souls, are God's internal potency. God takes pleasure only out of His internal potency and not out of an external universe. If we cannot make this distinction between external and internal energy then we will consequently think that God takes pleasure in the very same inferior nature that has placed us in such a miserable condition.
I don't recall this verse. I am definitely not the best person to ask when referring to the Bible. I know some, but in this case I couldn't tell you. I particularly remember something I read that stated that slaves were to be given freedom after a certain number of years. That to me sounds more like indentured servitude, which means to be a devoted servant for a certain period of time. Either way we look at it, we are all servants. We cannot curb our capacity to render service. That is our dharma/occupation. So spiritual life means understanding that our service is best when given to God, the supreme absolute truth.
Just because you have the impression of independence from all points forward does not negate the fact that those points are dependent ultimately on God, the supreme absolute truth. If it were God's will, your ability to eat or wipe your own ass could be taken away at this very moment. This so-called independence is an illusion.
My example of being dependent on your family line is just to show how we are dependent on so many things even if we are not accepting of God's control (or existence). But ultimately, we are dependent on the supreme absolute truth. Some people conceive of that Truth as nothing personal at all while others accept it as the Supreme Person based on their faith in revealed Scripture. Either way, the point is that our abilities are a product of material nature, which shows how we are under control and dependent.
If it were not God's intention to fulfill the desires of the living entities then He would not have created this temporal world where we have the capacity for doing such. And if this were the only reason the universe exists then it would seem Satanic. But it is not the only reason. I already explained the other reason. So taking it as a whole, please show me how it appears Satanic.
God uses the universe for the conditioned souls benefit. Thats all. We are eternally related to God and His taking pleasure in us is completely transcendental to taking mundane pleasure in this world. We, as eternal spirit-souls, are God's internal potency. God takes pleasure only out of His internal potency and not out of an external universe. If we cannot make this distinction between external and internal energy then we will consequently think that God takes pleasure in the very same inferior nature that has placed us in such a miserable condition.
I don't recall this verse. I am definitely not the best person to ask when referring to the Bible. I know some, but in this case I couldn't tell you. I particularly remember something I read that stated that slaves were to be given freedom after a certain number of years. That to me sounds more like indentured servitude, which means to be a devoted servant for a certain period of time. Either way we look at it, we are all servants. We cannot curb our capacity to render service. That is our dharma/occupation. So spiritual life means understanding that our service is best when given to God, the supreme absolute truth.
I have quoted it several times now:
Taking pleasure in a created universe (eating skittles and pizza for example) has not been implied. God has no NEED to be filled, and keep that in mind as you read my posts in this thread.
Basically what you are saying is this universe was created for souls that existed and wanted to experience things that were not even invented yet (cars, bikes, sexual gratification, weed, crack, heem etc.) This would also contradict Biblical scriptures especially the verses pertaining to God coming to earth (and eating), angels coming to earth (and eating), angels having sex with humans (creating nephillim and giants) and Jesus being God in the flesh. It would also contradict biblical scriptures that God breath "life" (soul/spirit) into man once the universe was already created. Your ENTIRE concept/dogma/doctrine is in COMPLETE contradiction with biblical scripture. However knowing that your concept is different from biblical scripture I am not attacking YOU or your beliefs. I am not saying they are "wrong" or "right" but simply contradicting biblical scripture. I have to make that clear.
You two are NOT talking about the same "God" my friend. You and I are not talking about the same God.
When did you come to accept that God has emotions? I remember past convos with you and you basically claimed God didnt have emotions. Why the change? BTW imho God is relative in this case because you both have different concepts.
REST = TO CEASE/TO FINISH/TO STOP.
It has NOTHING to do with being tired and needing to rejuvinate the body. It has nothing to do with needing to rest after work.
That is a GOOD thing my friend.
I came across this book a week ago, and when I think of the title again I will run it by you. Do you know anything about Atlantis and the sons of belial?
Taking pleasure in a created universe (eating skittles and pizza for example) has not been implied. God has no NEED to be filled, and keep that in mind as you read my posts in this thread.
Basically what you are saying is this universe was created for souls that existed and wanted to experience things that were not even invented yet (cars, bikes, sexual gratification, weed, crack, heem etc.) This would also contradict Biblical scriptures especially the verses pertaining to God coming to earth (and eating), angels coming to earth (and eating), angels having sex with humans (creating nephillim and giants) and Jesus being God in the flesh. It would also contradict biblical scriptures that God breath "life" (soul/spirit) into man once the universe was already created. Your ENTIRE concept/dogma/doctrine is in COMPLETE contradiction with biblical scripture. However knowing that your concept is different from biblical scripture I am not attacking YOU or your beliefs. I am not saying they are "wrong" or "right" but simply contradicting biblical scripture. I have to make that clear.
You two are NOT talking about the same "God" my friend. You and I are not talking about the same God.
When did you come to accept that God has emotions? I remember past convos with you and you basically claimed God didnt have emotions. Why the change? BTW imho God is relative in this case because you both have different concepts.
REST = TO CEASE/TO FINISH/TO STOP.
It has NOTHING to do with being tired and needing to rejuvinate the body. It has nothing to do with needing to rest after work.
That is a GOOD thing my friend.
I came across this book a week ago, and when I think of the title again I will run it by you. Do you know anything about Atlantis and the sons of belial?
After reading your entire post, I don't think we disagree here. It is just that we are looking at the same concept from different perspectives.
Later you mention how God comes to earth and eats. So why do you say here that eating skittles and pizza has not been implied? What if God decided to come here and eat skittles and pizza? How would that be any different? God comes here for the sake of His devotees. His eating, walking, talking, enjoying are all transcendental and the objects of that enjoyment are also transcendental. We are not dealing with God taking enjoyment of the material nature. When God comes, the spiritual realm descends with Him. So God can appear to take birth like a conditioned soul and He can appear to eat and play, etc, but these activities are not under the jurisdiction of the material nature which creates attraction and aversion for the conditioned souls. We seek enjoyment in the same nature as God, in that way I mean to say that we are also trying to be independent enjoyers. Factually, God is the only independent enjoyer. He can come and appear to enjoy this world, but it is not at all what the conditioned souls are doing. We are influenced by the material modes of nature to seek certain types of enjoyment and to try and dodge suffering. God seeks enjoyment purely out of His own internal potency. Nothing external causes Him to do such. This universe is manifest temporally as a means to an end. If it were the absolute spiritual world then there would be no question of creation or destruction. I think this is a somewhat advanced understanding because on one hand, God does not take pleasure from this world, yet on the other hand, He does appear to take pleasure but it is purely out of His internal potency. This is why I think you and I are slowly coming toward the same understanding. Now, if there were no fallen souls then why would God ever need to create this temporal world? He wouldn't. It makes absolutely no sense. God resides eternally in His spiritual Kingdom, which is full of variegated forms and is much, much greater than a trillion material universes. That God's spiritual kingdom has forms I believe is also explained in the Bible. So my point is that God already has the perfect facility for enjoyment and it is an eternal manifestation of His internal pleasure potency.
I am not saying that the conditioned souls desired to experience cars, bikes, drugs, sex, etc, but that they simply had desires to be independent enjoyers. Those specific things you mentioned came after the fact. I have already explained the nature of God eating, or performing any activity. What angels do is an entirely different conversation. They are angels, not the supreme God. As far as God coming in the flesh, that is not at all comparable to our taking bodies of flesh. We are conditioned souls and despite how it may have appeared with Yeshua's life, He is divine and never influenced by the material modes of nature. That is real faith in Yeshua. And what about God breathing life into man? How does that contradict what I am saying? Are you assuming that before that breath was given, the life/spirit/soul which would soon indwell a particular body did not exist at all? Even in the Vedas it explains that while the universe is unmanifest, the conditioned souls are merged in a singular state and then by the will of the Lord, the universe is manifest again and the conditioned souls are placed in different positions according to their desires and past deeds.
I am not convinced. At least so far in this conversation I don't feel your points contradict mine. We are just coming from different perspectives and a lot of the problems, I think, are how we define certain terms. What constitutes ‘material nature’, as I am using the term, has a very in depth philosophy that I have been attempting to explain.
God is a Person and does have Personal qualities, i.e. emotions. The argument begins when one assumes that God’s emotions are influenced by the material nature. God’s love and God’s enmity are non-different from each other. God can be angry or happy and there really is no difference because He is Absolute and His will is absolute. He displays emotions that should not be mistaken to be on the same level as our materially influenced emotions. That is where I was coming from in those past conversations. It is also where Vyasadeva was coming from as well. The first thing people need to understand is that God is transcendental to the material modes of nature. If we don’t establish that fact then people will fall in thinking that God’s activities and emotions are on the same level as the conditioned souls. When we get mad, we are not happy. God’s being mad is non-different from His being happy. We simply cannot understand how this works. God is eternally in a state of bliss yet He displays anger and wrath, and in doing so He never ceases His transcendental bliss.
Okay.
No. I can’t say I know much about those things. Though I have heard that supposedly Atlantis plays a significant role in the ancient Vedic text, Mahabharata.
Later you mention how God comes to earth and eats. So why do you say here that eating skittles and pizza has not been implied? What if God decided to come here and eat skittles and pizza? How would that be any different? God comes here for the sake of His devotees. His eating, walking, talking, enjoying are all transcendental and the objects of that enjoyment are also transcendental. We are not dealing with God taking enjoyment of the material nature. When God comes, the spiritual realm descends with Him. So God can appear to take birth like a conditioned soul and He can appear to eat and play, etc, but these activities are not under the jurisdiction of the material nature which creates attraction and aversion for the conditioned souls. We seek enjoyment in the same nature as God, in that way I mean to say that we are also trying to be independent enjoyers. Factually, God is the only independent enjoyer. He can come and appear to enjoy this world, but it is not at all what the conditioned souls are doing. We are influenced by the material modes of nature to seek certain types of enjoyment and to try and dodge suffering. God seeks enjoyment purely out of His own internal potency. Nothing external causes Him to do such. This universe is manifest temporally as a means to an end. If it were the absolute spiritual world then there would be no question of creation or destruction. I think this is a somewhat advanced understanding because on one hand, God does not take pleasure from this world, yet on the other hand, He does appear to take pleasure but it is purely out of His internal potency. This is why I think you and I are slowly coming toward the same understanding. Now, if there were no fallen souls then why would God ever need to create this temporal world? He wouldn't. It makes absolutely no sense. God resides eternally in His spiritual Kingdom, which is full of variegated forms and is much, much greater than a trillion material universes. That God's spiritual kingdom has forms I believe is also explained in the Bible. So my point is that God already has the perfect facility for enjoyment and it is an eternal manifestation of His internal pleasure potency.
I am not saying that the conditioned souls desired to experience cars, bikes, drugs, sex, etc, but that they simply had desires to be independent enjoyers. Those specific things you mentioned came after the fact. I have already explained the nature of God eating, or performing any activity. What angels do is an entirely different conversation. They are angels, not the supreme God. As far as God coming in the flesh, that is not at all comparable to our taking bodies of flesh. We are conditioned souls and despite how it may have appeared with Yeshua's life, He is divine and never influenced by the material modes of nature. That is real faith in Yeshua. And what about God breathing life into man? How does that contradict what I am saying? Are you assuming that before that breath was given, the life/spirit/soul which would soon indwell a particular body did not exist at all? Even in the Vedas it explains that while the universe is unmanifest, the conditioned souls are merged in a singular state and then by the will of the Lord, the universe is manifest again and the conditioned souls are placed in different positions according to their desires and past deeds.
I am not convinced. At least so far in this conversation I don't feel your points contradict mine. We are just coming from different perspectives and a lot of the problems, I think, are how we define certain terms. What constitutes ‘material nature’, as I am using the term, has a very in depth philosophy that I have been attempting to explain.
God is a Person and does have Personal qualities, i.e. emotions. The argument begins when one assumes that God’s emotions are influenced by the material nature. God’s love and God’s enmity are non-different from each other. God can be angry or happy and there really is no difference because He is Absolute and His will is absolute. He displays emotions that should not be mistaken to be on the same level as our materially influenced emotions. That is where I was coming from in those past conversations. It is also where Vyasadeva was coming from as well. The first thing people need to understand is that God is transcendental to the material modes of nature. If we don’t establish that fact then people will fall in thinking that God’s activities and emotions are on the same level as the conditioned souls. When we get mad, we are not happy. God’s being mad is non-different from His being happy. We simply cannot understand how this works. God is eternally in a state of bliss yet He displays anger and wrath, and in doing so He never ceases His transcendental bliss.
Okay.
No. I can’t say I know much about those things. Though I have heard that supposedly Atlantis plays a significant role in the ancient Vedic text, Mahabharata.
Heaven is the actual home of the soul and souls indwell all living organisms. The human form of life is special because it gives one the chance to return home. This of course means that there is transmigration of the soul from one body to another (reincarnation). Otherwise most Christians, not believing in reincarnation, reason that only humans have souls, which makes it apparent that such people have no idea what the soul is.