Maybe we get tormented eternally after all. In the book of Mark, Jesus refers to “the fire that will never be quenched”.
Then in the book of Luke, Jesus gives a pretty vivid description of the torments of hell in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus.
Redundant how?
If God’s presence is around now, shouldn’t we be feeling it?
And although I’ve run into three definitions of the unpardonable sin that is supposed to forever withdraw God’s spirit, I’ve done them all (purely in the sake of experiment) and haven’t felt any different.
Perhaps then we can conclude from the biblical verses on hell that god is big on redundancy. Given some other portions of the book, that is hardly surprising…
No. Hell is where “teeth are extracted and bone are ground” and “baked into cakes that get passed around”.
Heaven is where they’re playing your favorite song. They’re playing it again.
Yes, and in that book, Satan tormented Job with God’s permission. If Satan torments people, does he do so with God’s permission or without? If he can torment us without God’s permission, would this not contradict the doctrine that God is omnipotent? If he does have God’s permission, why does God allow him to do his evil work?
Oh, and in this old thread, dougie_monty claimed he had not found in the Bible any connection between the Devil and Hell at all. (It turned into a discussion of the assertion that Lucifer is not one of the Devil’s names. It’s also where I first heard of Mithra, courtesy of Polycarp and Gaudere.)
Justice.
The Book of Job is a comedy, BTW. Sort of the anti-Faust, perhaps?
jab1 wrote:
Yeah, it looks like the devil just gets thrown into Hell and tormented along with everybody else. I don’t know of any passage in the Bible which says that Satan runs the show in H-E-double-toothpicks.
Didn’t Milton or Dante come up with (or at least popularize) the idea of Satan being in charge of Hell?
Well, in the book of Job, you’re told why. G-d says “Look at Job, he’s loyal to me and serves me faithfully” Satan answers “The only reason he’s loyal to you is because you’ve rewarded him for it. If he suffers, he won’t be loyal anymore.” So, it’s a test of Job’s loyalty.
Wow. People had a strange sense of humour back then.
The house Job’s children were partying in collapsing on them had the ancients rolling in the aisles?
Well, the one humerous part of Job friends and I found was counting how many of the things in God’s long poetic challenge to Job people now knew (or knew didn’t exist) or could now do - that was kinda entertaining.
It loses something in the translation.
Ever seen Married with Children? People do laugh at that kind of thing. I think Job’s supporting wive delivers a good punchline after God destroys everything he has:
“Do you still hold fast your integrity? Curse God, and die.”
Funny how God didn’t take away his wife. Get it?
And then Job sitting alone in the ashes doesn’t say a word for seven days and finally delivers a huge rant, which is kind of funny… It’s not “Cats” or anything, or even Shakespeare, but clearly fictional.
There is a bit of a morality play toward the end of course (challenging to get your play in the Bible ya know).
The book of Job is definitely a comedy, and Virginia Heinlein deserves every bit of the royalty she gets from it. Robert did up the ironies implicit in fundamentalist arguments with great skill.
Oh, you were talking about the one in the Bible? Never mind…
Well, if people go stealing all the best material…
Well yeah, because she’s part of his punishment. I guess that is funny…
Oh, no question about it being fictional, but I always thought it was one of the first serious efforts at explaining why evil happens (evil as a test from god) not an ancient “Married with Children” as you put it. 