Heaven, Hell, and Sin

Where exactly is “Heaven”?  Where exactly is Hell for that matter?   We are told “Heaven” is “up there” – a place where God dwells, sitting on a throne and surrounded by angels.  We are told by the Bible that God created man in His Image, which leads many to visualize God in human form so Heaven must be tangible and filled with “many mansions” although nothing is said about HOA fees.  But isn’t this unrealistic?  Is the Bible wrong in its description of God, Man, and Heaven?  Isn’t it more logical to see God as pure energy and existing in a dimension not visible or accessible to humans?  If God is pure energy then doesn’t it follow that His image is nothing like a human being but instead it is our “souls” which are pure energy and are in His image.  We cannot see God nor can we see our Souls, but does this mean they don’t exist?  Of course for some – the ubiquitous Atheist -- the answer to that question is “yes” they don’t exist. For these people  Man is an animal evolved from hominids which were descended from pond scum and the origin of all life was a random event.  Nevertheless, if God is energy existing in a place not visible to mankind then it also follows that Heaven is indeed a place where God dwells surrounded by the souls of those not in body.

If Heaven exists not “up there” but in another energetic state or dimension that is without mass, intangible, and invisible, then what about Hell?  Where does Hell exist?  Traditionally Hell ( a state or place known by many names) is “down there” below the surface and in the underground.  I think modern geologic science has pretty much demonstrated that Hell does not exist in some huge underground cavern filled with unquenchable flame and inhabited by Satan and tortured souls.  But then Hell is a very ancient concept predating the Bible and extending far back in Man’s history and across cultures.  It is a place where souls go who have sinned and who are punished for those sins.  But then what is “sin” and given that sin seems universal and omnipresent then how much sin must a person incur in order to be sent to Hell for torture and retraining?

Technically “sin” is a violation of divine law or a violation of the relationship between Man and God.  But does this mean that Atheists cannot sin?  If you don’t believe in God then you are exempt from Hell and Damnation?  The logical response to this is that while the Atheist may not believe in God – God does believe in the Atheist and therefore any human being can – and undoubtedly does – sin.  But where does God draw the line between those destined for Heaven and those destined for Hell?   This is where things get a little murky because according to some Jesus died for mankind’s sins and in the acceptance of Jesus Christ mankind’s sins are forgiven.  But even here there are conditions because according to the Bible “every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.  Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven …”  When you stop and consider sin as described you can see that it isn’t as clear cut as some would have you believe so what condemns you to Hell and precisely where is Hell located – other than down there?

It strikes me that given everyone sins and sins come in various flavors so the punishment for those sins varies as well.  This leads to the logical conclusion that Hell is where we are and that “down there” is actually the Earth.  All of us are in Hell already and struggling to return to Heaven. The idea that Hell is a place of punishment is very old and crosses many cultures but the fire and brimstone Hell is a relatively new concept and one that has been created by man much like all of the others.  But within these there is a kernel of truth because the reality is that Earth is a place of learning – a place where each soul comes to perfect itself, to correct past mistakes, and to balance itself in order to reach a higher level of evolution.

 

 

Sin or No Sin

Do you think about sin?  Probably not – I think very few people do.  In fact many people might be hard pressed to even define sin even in a biblical context.  Essentially within the Judeo-Christian context sin is simply the act of violating God’s will or anything that violates the relationship between an individual and God.  But what is God’s will and what – precisely is the relationship between a person and God?  These are rather vague terms when you examine them, yet the Bible is very specific in what constitutes a sin. 613 commandments.  But all of these sins are in reference to God and those who believe in the Judeo-Christian God.  What about Atheists and those who don’t believe in God – can they sin?  What about the Seven Deadly Sins?  Are they sins of the soul or of the body?  What about the Ten Commandments, these were given to Moses directly from God and are honored by the world’s three great religions do these apply to atheists?  Is the denial of God a sin in itself?

The first commandment “Thou shalt have no other Gods before me” seems clear enough but does that apply to humankind or just to Jews, Christians, and Muslims?  A great many people in the world don’t fall into those categories and do not recognize this as God’s commandment.  Are they all sinners and condemned by a God they do not recognize?  This first of God’s commandments seems to assume that everyone believes in some god, but that they must honor the God described in the Bible and Koran first and above all other gods.  So perhaps it can be concluded that atheism is itself a sin and a violation of God’s commandment.  So the answer must be yes – Atheists can sin.

The second commandment is more interesting because it is rarely expressed in its entirety.  According the King James Bible the second amendment states”
 

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.  Thos shalt not  bow down thyself to them, nor serve them for I the Lord they God am  jealous God, visiting the inequity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me. And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments

 
Normally what you see is just the first phrase and not the entire commandment.  Both Islam and Judaism follow this commandment scrupulously but do Christians?  Is the ubiquitous Cross a graven image?  What of the icons, statues, and various images that abound in Christian Churches?  What about the Catholic Saints – are they gods and graven images?  Of course the claim is that these are not graven images or gods to be prayed to but simply symbols celebrating God and their faith in God – a fine line. But these commandments are from God and violating them would be a sin – if you believe in God and His commandments.  But what if you don’t?  What about the Seven Deadly Sins?
 
These may have their roots in the Bible and have evolved from that but they were first articulated in the fourth century by John Cassian.( http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03404a.htm).  How these are defined has evolved over the years so they may be rooted in religion but today they are more sins of the body than sins against God.   But the question remains – what is sin and can sin be defined outside of a religious reference?  Can a person sin if he does not believe in the existence of God?
 
Of course there is probably no real answer to any of these questions, but it is my opinion that all sins are sins against God’s mandate and those who do not believe in God can not only sin but their disbelief is their first sin and that sin is pride. 

Sin In The Garden Of Science and Philosophy

When was the last time you thought about sin? Probably not recently because I think very few people think about sin on a regular basis and certainly not outside of church. I rather think that few people ever consider sin, theirs or others, much less what the ramifications would be in a world without sin. Of course sin does exist, at least for those people who believe in God, but in case you haven’t noticed, there are a lot of people around who don’t believe in God. These atheists have probably always been around but they seem to be growing in number and influence. Dr. Benjamin Wiker addressed how atheists view humanity and the ramifications of Godlessness in his book “Ten Books That Screwed Up The World”. In this book Dr Wiker deconstructs a total of 16 books which view humanity as animals without moral boundaries and the enormous harm these books have done as a result.

The first book he considers is “The Prince” by Machiavelli, who views those who seek power very objectively and without regard to whether or not his recommended actions are immoral. Machiavelli makes no judgments, he is simply offering a pragmatic description of how to achieve and keep power. But when implemented his actions lead to deceit, duplicity, lies, and even murder. In effect Machiavelli describes a world without any moral boundaries – a world where God is not a consideration. But this leads to the question “Does God Exist?” Descartes and his “Discourse on Method” starts by questioning everything and arrives at his famous conclusion “ I think, therefore I am”. Dr Wiker points out the essential flaw here is that Descartes could just as easily have said “I smell therefore I am”. In effect Descartes has ceased to view himself or man as being in the image of God and through rational analysis he concludes he exists – independently of God.

From this starting point Dr Wiker begins to build his case regarding sin, morality, materialism, and immorality through the writings of Hobbes, Rousseau, Darwin, Hitler, et al. These people all share a common thread, which is the denial of sin through the denial of God or that any moral boundary should constrain their actions. Hobbes and Rousseau build a case for materialism and the natural state of man which they see as unbounded by anything other than pleasure and pain, a world in which good and evil does not exist. If man is simply an animal that through chance happens to be more advanced that other animals, then there are no limits on actions other than those that are self-imposed through self preservation but not through any false concept of right or wrong outside of pain or pleasure. All of these proto-atheists were speaking in philosophical terms, but it was Darwin and his books that moved the discussion onto a pseudo-scientific foundation.

Darwin’s book “Origin of Species” was actually not scientific at all but merely a set of observations and some conclusions that described environmental adaptation from which others have concluded the evolution of species. But it was his companion work “The Descent of Man” that described man as an animal descended from apes. This is the work that describes evolution but it also describes man as being composed of what could be “sub-species” with European Caucasians as being the supreme evolutionary result with other races as inferior. This work of Darwin’s is virtually ignored today and when the Darwinians like Richard Dawkins are challenged regarding Darwin’s “science” the response is a facile “he was a product of his time”. This may well be true but it does not excuse his lack of scientific method or demonstrable proof of what he has concluded. Nevertheless it was Darwin’s junk science that was seized upon by Sanger and Hitler to justify their efforts to improve the human race by eliminating “defectives”.

By the 1920”s it had been well established through belief and repetition that man was an animal, descended from lower animal forms, unbounded by morality but in need of improvement. This improvement would eventually be accomplished via evolution, but with the advances of “science” it was now possible to purge the human race of those deemed sub-species, defectives, or undesirables. This idea was first postulated by Margret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood. It was she who thought parents should be selected and individuals deemed as inferior or undesirable should be sterilized so they could not reproduce. Notice that this is not voluntary but directed by the state and there is no mention of moral boundaries, God, or sin. Her objective is to improve the human race much like you would selectively breed animals. Naturally her position and support of eugenics led inexorably to Hitler’s decision to eliminate all undesirables from the human reproductive chain. That this led to mass murder was not considered by him in moral terms – it was simply applying science to the problem of racial improvement—i.e. moving toward the superior Caucasian as described by Darwin and Nietzsche.

Following the failure of the eugenics movement, the atheists moved in a different direction but still relying on junk science. Alfred Kinsey decided that his views of human behavior were sound and employed an astounding level of junk science to demonstrate that every weird and perverse sexual preference he had was totally normal and since man was an animal there was no moral constraint that could be applied and thus no sin.

Today the atheists continue their assault on morality and sin as they deny the very existence of God. In their eyes man is an animal, descended form lower life forms, with no purpose, no future, and not obligated to recognize any moral constraint or boundary. I think the time has long past for mankind to look critically at the murders and damage done by the atheists and their denial of sin and God.