Hell, or rather my brief experience of it.

[Angrboda]

Funny you should mention patience in this thread, because mine ran out by page 15. I have just used the ignore function for the first time on this, or any other site.

Sympathies, bro. I've never used a technological "ignore" function in probably 30 years of electronic communication. I didn't even use KILL on usenet. I haven't been broken yet, but some people have made me feel sorely tempted. Still, I don't want to tarnish my unblemished record by making someone my first. So I face crises in which I desperately want to ignore someone, balanced by a desperate desire to know I've never resorted to ignore functions. Fortunately, the urge to ignore is usually transitory, and if abstained from, usually results in both a lessening of the need, along with a new found awareness of alternatives to what one had been doing that precipitated the crisis.

---

One final bit, there actually appear to be three hells in the Hebrew scripture. Sheol and two versions of Gehenna. FWIW.

And no, I don't intend to go beyond my wiki scholarship on this, Drich, thanks so much.

It might interest you to know that on my other forum, I go by the tagline, "la belle fleur de la géhenne" (beautiful flower of the pit of hell). If you hadn't been so locked in gaze with the Christ child, you might have seen the tail you were missing out on. See you in your dreams.....

[DeistPaladin]

Given the character of Yahweh which is portrayed in the New Testament especially. I can easily conceive that Yahweh would set up such a place like Hell, which would be unimaginably awful. So if I believed such an entity existed, I would be terrified of it.

However a lot of people who consider themselves Christians, don't believe that their deity is essentially a sadist of that magnatune. Because they have preconceived ideas what such a entity like Yahweh should be, rather than what the bible states about the character of Yahweh. So they need to ask if the entity they believe would create such a place where wrongdoers were punished infinitely.

Modern Christian ideas of their god are closer to Zeus than Yahweh anyway. Just consider how Yahweh never once smites anyone with lightning.

Not that Zeus didn't also have his moral failings but at least the Greeks where honest enough to never claim otherwise.

[Justtristo]

Modern Christian ideas of their god are closer to Zeus than Yahweh anyway. Just consider how Yahweh never once smites anyone with lightning.

Not that Zeus didn't also have his moral failings but at least the Greeks where honest enough to never claim otherwise.

Nah Yahweh smites people with earthquakes and plagues.

[Drich]

LOL, You -can- have a conversation about your beliefs without preaching Drich.

How can I when the term has never been defined by anyone here? I have found the term used from describing a judgement levied on someone like (You are going to Hell) to being identified as anything that refers to God. Or it is used as a last resort that refers to anything a theist says that trumps one of you. Like in this thread, and my arguement involveing General Nazi History. That was considered preaching to I reminded the person I wa speaking about recorded History. So no, I can not have a discussion that involves preaching unless it is well defined, because other wise it becomes a goto for anyone who is in trouble with their arguement.

What kind of conversation are you hoping to extract from "I had a dream once" - followed by a "so what, we all have dreams". Kind of ends there doesn't it?

I don't like siding myself with anything one of you does simply because I fear the person I side with will take it the wrong way or you all will turn on the person in question. (I've seen it happen.) I say that to say I have had the conversations[/quote] I was looking to have. I just not going to list any names.

[Cinjin]

[quote='Rhythm' pid='362366' dateline='1352833204']
LOL, You -can- have a conversation about your beliefs without preaching Drich.

How can I when the term has never been defined by anyone here? I have found the term used from describing a judgement levied on someone like (You are going to Hell) to being identified as anything that refers to God. Or it is used as a last resort that refers to anything a theist says that trumps one of you. Like in this thread, and my arguement involveing General Nazi History. That was considered preaching to I reminded the person I wa speaking about recorded History. So no, I can not have a discussion that involves preaching unless it is well defined, because other wise it becomes a goto for anyone who is in trouble with their arguement.

Please scroll down and read Number 4.

What a surprise, a theist is whining about the No Preaching rule. First of all martyr Drich, it doesn't matter one damn bit if a member accuses you of preaching, it only matters what the staff determines, and you sir, have been defended by this staff more times than any other theist on these forums.
You MIGHT have a leg to stand on if every theist on these forums has received a warning for preaching, but whadayaknow - that's not the case at all is it? Nope, just you and a handful of others.

Preaching is well defined here and the ONLY people who ever bitch about it are the select few who can't seem to practice what their stupid bible tells them do do. Quoth Jesus to his silly sheep: "Judge not mother fuckers, lest ye be a hypocritical douche nozzle." ~ The Bible, Book of Lies and Contradictions, Chapter: Don't Matter, Verse: Who Gives a shit.

[Cyberman]

Modern Christian ideas of their god are closer to Zeus than Yahweh anyway. Just consider how Yahweh never once smites anyone with lightning.

Not that Zeus didn't also have his moral failings but at least the Greeks where honest enough to never claim otherwise.

Nah Yahweh smites people with earthquakes and plagues.

And misses every time, relying on its groupies to pretend otherwise out of embarrassment if nothing else. What a loser. To borrow from Woody Allen, the best that can be said of this god is that it's an under-achiever.

[Drich]

What a surprise, a theist is whining about the No Preaching rule. First of all martyr Drich, it doesn't matter one damn bit if a member accuses you of preaching, it only matters what the staff determines, and you sir, have been defended by this staff more times than any other theist on these forums.
You MIGHT have a leg to stand on if every theist on these forums has received a warning for preaching, but whadayaknow - that's not the case at all is it? Nope, just you and a handful of others.

Preaching is well defined here and the ONLY people who ever bitch about it are the select few who can't seem to practice what their stupid bible tells them do do. Quoth Jesus to his silly sheep: "Judge not mother fuckers, lest ye be a hypocritical douche nozzle." ~ The Bible, Book of Lies and Contradictions, Chapter: Don't Matter, Verse: Who Gives a shit.

I never said I did not ever preach. on the contary. I simply pointed out that I have never been made aware (In all the times I have been repermanded for preaching, and everytime I've asked for someone to define the term for this website) I have gotten no response.

I make no appologies for preaching as if and when it is nessary I will do what i have to do, as I will not compromise my faith for the sake of acceptance. Nor at the same time am I looking to beat you all over the head with what you have deemed preaching. I was pointing out that the term used here (by everyone except the mods appearently) as a catch all or an appeal to the mods to end a topic for them.

I usally let things like that just go, but from time to time I feel it nessary to push back just so you know that i know..

[Darkstar]

I was pointing out that the term used here (by everyone except the mods appearently[and a number of people who's opinion you don't know]) as a catch all or an appeal to the mods to end a topic for them.

Fixed.
I don't believe that. I wouldn't really define what you have done as preaching, poorly constructed as it may be. It is still technically an argument, even if it has more holes than swiss cheese.

[The Grand Nudger]

I was pointing out that the term used here (by everyone except the mods apparently) as a catch all or an appeal to the mods to end a topic for them.

No please, Drich, continue. Hopefully you don't actually think that I've ever appealed to a mod to end a topic for me due to preaching...because I haven't. That shit reminds me of home..lol. Besides, it makes me smile...you have to know that by now....

[festive1]

LOL, You -can- have a conversation about your beliefs without preaching Drich.

How can I when the term has never been defined by anyone here? I have found the term used from describing a judgement levied on someone like (You are going to Hell) to being identified as anything that refers to God. Or it is used as a last resort that refers to anything a theist says that trumps one of you. Like in this thread, and my arguement involveing General Nazi History. That was considered preaching to I reminded the person I wa speaking about recorded History. So no, I can not have a discussion that involves preaching unless it is well defined, because other wise it becomes a goto for anyone who is in trouble with their arguement.

You could try "I statements." For instance, "I feel..." Or "I believe..." Or "In my experience..." When you start stating beliefs as facts, that's where trouble arises. Take ownership of what you say as true for you, but not necessarily true for others.
Posting references helps too. If you read something somewhere, it's okay to summarize and just generally reference the book/article. If it's a website, try to list the site. Practically speaking, no one has everything they've learned on the web filed away for later use and at their fingertips, but you can allude to or just state the site that you found the given info on.
Just trying to be helpful, this is not intended to be condescending