• Thank you to Carol and Steve Bowman, the forum owners, for our new upgrade!

why no one talk about hell?

R

ronglaoshi

New Member
I'm Chinese,my english is very bad.sorry.
I have read many cases about children reincarnation.some of them mentioned heaven,some of them mentioned God,BUT no one mentioned hell. why ? Maybe if someone go to hell after dead. he can no longer
reborn?
 
That is an interesting observation Alex, one that I could agree with. I never believed in an actual place as depicted in many formal declarations.
 
AlexD said:
I've always thought that Heaven and Hell are real, but they exist inside of us all.
Click to expand...
This is the conclusion I came to, also. It's nice to know I'm not the only one. It's inside us, and we express it into the world until we learn to replace it with healthier beliefs, ideas, expectations, relationships, connections, etc.
 
Hell sort of went out of style when the New Age movement started. So much of the New Age way of thinking is devoted to convincing everyone that there is no judgement, no damnation, no "punishment" for bad acts. You judge yourself, no higher being judges you. (Sometimes I wonder if the men preaching that philosophy aren't all really guilty of something bad, something that fills them with shame. Seriously. And it does seem like it is mostly men who came up with that way of thinking--Raymond Moody, Michael Newton, etc.) Damnation seems senseless, too, since it's eternal. What's the point? Most people I know now think "Hell" exists on Earth, or you create the "Hell" in your life. It's no longer an actual location in the direct opposite direction of "Heaven".:eek:
 
I think, IMHO, that you are either here or "over there" and most people just describe "over there" as Heaven, for lack of a better word. Since it's our "home", it's a common memory to us all and perhaps one we've handed down as a concept of an idealized place and "reward" throughout religious history. I see the concept of hell in much the same light, it's just a created concept for the purposes of illustrating "punishment" for bad behavior. In times where law and order didn't exist, it may have felt satisfying to think that people would eventually get what they deserved one way or the other for their misdeeds.
 
AlexD said:
In my view, Hell is a state of the soul, not really a physical place to be in. This is the concept of Hell even in Christianity, but most Christians seem to forget about it and instead project this state of being into a physical place which exists out of our reality and in some sort of parallel world where we can go only after death, and be forever lost inside of it.
I see it as such: Hell is carried deep within every damned soul, in the spectral world as well as in their physical lives. It never leaves them, until they evolve past this state of damnation, and it follows them wherever they go and wherever they reincarnate. Quite obviously, it also affects the people around them as they can feel this negative state of their being. I've always thought that Heaven and Hell are real, but they exist inside of us all.
Click to expand...
I was going to write exactly as u explained, but I refrain coz not so sure whether we are allowed to discuss other realm or such topic or not.

Anyhow, We perceive what we believe & how strong our mind state could overcome our own destructive emotions & behavior. Our fear will drive us to our mental plane that make ourselves suffer as hell & manifest something that is not real & make us think they we are reborn in such place until we learn to master our mind again.
 
AlexD, your concept of Hell is certainly plausible. I personally believe how you see it is more likely to be true than the New Age beliefs that we're all just actors playing roles on Earth; and no one is really "guilty" of anything bad, since we all chose the roles we play; and everything that happens to us, good or bad, is a terrific learning experience.
 
IMO, life is hell. Who in their right mind wants to live a fleshly reality? We're all here to repay some karmic debt incurred in the previous life.

BTW, recently, I watched a Chinese drama [subbed in ENG] called Three Lives, Three Worlds, where celestials are sent to experience a mortal life because they committed some atrocity while in Heaven. The mortal life is the punishment for the crime committed in the ethereal realm...
 
baro-san said:
That's so sexist, and untrue ...
Click to expand...

From all that I've read, it has been mostly men who have come up with the idea that there is no judgement, and one should not worry about there being any. Maybe you have read different books than the ones I have read. Moreover, the world is filled with individuals who have done some terrible things, or things that have filled them with shame, and they do not want to accept responsibility for what they have done. They want to blame their mothers or whoever, and pretend they are just innocent, hurt children forever; and you can't hold a child responsible for something really bad, can you? Almost all of those I know who think like that are men. Hence, I'm not trying to bash men or be sexist, but am describing what I have seen in life and what I have read. One way of believing one is not responsible for bad things done is to believe that there is no judgment after death. No one will be held responsible.
 
Last edited:
cgaman said:
IMO, life is hell. Who in their right mind wants to live a fleshly reality? We're all here to repay some karmic debt incurred in the previous life.

BTW, recently, I watched a Chinese drama [subbed in ENG] called Three Lives, Three Worlds, where celestials are sent to experience a mortal life because they committed some atrocity while in Heaven. The mortal life is the punishment for the crime committed in the ethereal realm...
Click to expand...

But what about those who think life is wonderful, and see life has a blessing not punishment?

I've read of angels living a life on Earth, so they better understand what humans go though, but am not sure if I believe that or not.
 
autumnleavesnnovember said:
From all that I've read, it has been mostly men who have come up with the idea that there is no judgement, and one should not worry about there being any. Maybe you have read different books than the ones I have read. Moreover, the world is filled with individuals who have done some terrible things, or things that have filled them with shame, and they do not want to accept responsibility for what they have done. They want to blame their mothers or whoever, and pretend they are just innocent, hurt children forever; and you can't hold a child responsible for something really bad, can you? Almost all of those I know who think like that are men. Hence, I'm not trying to bash men or be sexist, but am describing what I have seen in life and what I have read. One way of believing one is not responsible for bad things done is to believe that there is no judgment after death.
Click to expand...

The way I see it: you're too full of anger to see things clearly. You don't see the contradiction between believing in judgement after death, and doing injustice to almost half of the people that live and lived on Earth. You too will be judged for that. Remember: you accumulate karma for thoughts, desires, actions.

We all think we're right, even psychopaths, but we're mostly incorrect in our assessments.
 
baro-san said:
"The way I see it: you're too full of anger to see things clearly. You don't see the contradiction between believing in judgement after death, and doing injustice to almost half of the people that live and lived on Earth. You too will be judged for that. Remember: you accumulate karma for thoughts, desires, actions.We all think we're right, even psychopaths, but we're mostly incorrect in our assessments."


I’m afraid you are imaging that I am angry, and that you amusingly don’t realize that you are the one being self-righteous. I have no idea if there is judgement after death. I’m not God. I also don’t sit around thinking how someone should be judged after death, if there is such a thing as judgment. That’s not my job.

I’m being unjust to half the people on Earth? Oh, please! I’ve stated observations I have made from living life and reading. If you think those observations are condemning all the men on the Earth, you are just wishing that is true so you can make self-righteous comments and “save” all the men out there.

We’re mostly incorrect in our assessments? Yeah, well, I would suggest to those who think that about themselves that they develop their critical thinking skills better, so they don’t have such a low opinion of their own opinions. It’s important to be confident in one’s opinions and observations, without arrogantly thinking one is always right and never needs to reconsider things.
 
Last edited:
baro-san said: "
"I just asked the moderator: 'could you please edit / delete all this back and fore irrelevant dialogue? thanks'"



Why? It's not irrelevant dialogue. We are having an intelligent . . . as well as critical of each other . . . conversation, and there is nothing wrong with that. Trying to get an authority figure to end a discussion you no longer like is detrimental to free speech.

P.S. And, no, I'm not the type to go off on some big rant about free speech. :)
 
AlexD said:
Do you think that non-fleshly reality is better than life on Earth? I'm not sure about that, but I think life here is way more interesting. I don't want to see it only from the negative side, but I suppose that is a personal choice.
Click to expand...

That would make an interesting poll here--do you want to return to lives on Earth or not? When I was a teenager, I would have said no. But now I would agree with AlexD--another lifetime sounds more interesting than just being on the "other side" forever. One reason being no religion or person has come up with an "other side" image that I could imagine being fulfilling forever.

I remember when Michael Newton's first book came out and I was such a fan. Then, one day, I no longer believed anything he said, but felt his in-between world was simply how he wanted it to be. For years, I have pondered why I was such a fan at first. The only thing I have come up with is the idea of alienation. Deep down inside I was alienated from life on Earth, but slowly stopped being so. One thing that made me stop was I stopped reading nothing but metaphysical books, as I had done for years, and started again reading books in other genres.
 
Hi Autumn,

I have also come to wonder about Newton as well. That is primarily because I am broadening the scope of my reading to include what was once cutting edge "alternate spirituality" (to coin a phrase) before the 60s/"New Age" stuff sucked up all the oxygen in the room. What I am referring to here is the revolution generally referred to as "Spiritualism" or "Spiritism" that started in the 1840s and seemed to hold sway in English speaking countries through the 1940s. It had numerous spokesman in the Anglosphere and is referred to as Spiritualism here, whereas on the continent and in South America, Kardec is generally seen as the primary initiator, and it is referred to as "Spiritism". In addition, these two differ in that Spiritualism does not necessarily accept (or even see the need for reincarnation), whereas it is affirmed in Spiritism. I have not found myself overly drawn to Spiritism, but here is a quick link to a discussion of adverse consequences in the spirit world ("hell" or "purgatory") for those who do evil (to show how it can be covered in a "Western" system that also accepts reincarnation):

https://nwspiritism.com/nde-spiritism/hell-what-is-it-like-according-to-spiritism/

I did not even read that all the way through, but I'm generally familiar with the concepts I was seeing. There is, of course, a lot more to be found if you are interested in exploring Spiritism sites. (This is a movement that is, by the way, expanding worldwide whereas more traditional Anglo-American Spiritualism seems to have been in decline for quite a while).

In terms of other differences from the New Age type alternate spirituality that now dominates, what I am calling the older style (though some might dispute that terminology) is far more "Western" in flavor, and believes strongly in communication with spirits (with appropriate safeguards), though they are not nearly as credulous in this regard as they have been portrayed. The New Age folks tend to be more "Eastern" in flavor, and a bit less inclined to "channeled" information, though there is also plenty there as well (and where it exists, the attitude seems even more credulous to me).

Anyhow, just a few thoughts on the matter. BTW--I never read just metaphysical books, so I have avoided that particular rut. However, even with balance there, it is quite possible to fall into a rut in terms of the types of metaphysical/spiritual books you read. I have found this new field to be a refreshing change, and there are plenty of free online books if you know where to look.

Cordially,
S&S
 
S&S, thanks for all the info! I never thought of spiritualism as being "eastern" and "western". I have read many, many books on spiritualism, from Helena Blavatsky to modern day mediums. The most recent book I read was: https://www.amazon.com/Witch-Lime-S...98091015&sr=8-1&keywords=witch+of+lime+street. Lots of old seance room stuff in that book! Another more recent book on the topic was: https://www.amazon.com/Surviving-De...r=8-1&keywords=surviving+death+by+leslie+kean. I was surprised to see so much information about dark room seances in a contemporary book. So, what do you think about those types of seances? Do you think all that happens is "real"? Is any of it "real"?

When reading nothing but metaphysical books, I didn't feel like I was in a rut, until towards the end. Nothing else interested me as much as metaphysical topics. But then the point came where there was nothing new to read, except New Age creations or "old age" topics that couldn't hold my attention for long. I've never intentionally tried to limit the types of spiritual books I've read, but there is a limit for me. If I can't stay interested, it's out as a reading topic. I'm always hoping, though, for a really fascinating new metaphysical book to come out and dazzle me. Something we could talk on and on about at this forum.
 
Hi Autumn,

Actually, Blavatsky had an early interest in Spiritualism, but eventually abandoned it. To this day, Theosophists tend to reject spiritualism and "channeled" information (from anyone but Blavatsky et al.). From another standpoint, part of this may have been because Blavatsky was much more interested in and promoted "eastern" sources and ideas, and also possibly because she did not appreciate competition as she was busy "channeling" information herself from the "Mahatmas". Generally speaking, she is considered to be the fount and source of the "new age" movement, which reflects a lot of her ideas including a definite bias against traditional Western spirituality and religious traditions. (As you can tell, I am not a great fan of Blavatsky, though that doesn't mean that everything "New Age" is without merit).

In terms of the books you mention, the first seems to be a record of a particular popular medium and her run-in with Houdini. It probably would make an interesting read, but I am not usually interested in this type of thing, especially if the medium is of the type that requires a dark room and seeks to elicit bizarre signs of spirit presence. Overall, this type of image has been extremely detrimental to Spiritualism and kept me from looking into it for 50 years (probably as a result of a movie about Harry Houdini and his debunking of certain mediums I saw as a child). There have been plenty of frauds in this area, and some mediums are simply not as skilled as others, but (as some have pointed out) the same can be said about pastors, rabbis, priests, etc.--which doesn't prove that religion is a fraud and sham. The second book seems more on point, but since I am already convinced of the existence of most if not all of the things she is discussing, I am not sure it would add anything.

What I am mostly interested in at this point are writings that can provide additional information about the non-physical world/universe. I'm no longer very interested in getting proof that such a world/universe exists, I've already accepted that. I'm primarily interested in the equivalent of geographies, maps, traveler's tales, and guide books, etc. There is some interesting information of this type coming out from OBE types, but there is also a lot from disembodied spirits who write/dictate this type of thing. The preferred means of reception for most of it is "automatic writing" which is a good deal less spectacular and attention getting than some of the "spooky" and deliberately melodramatic scenes that have been so damaging to the image of Spiritualism (which I mostly think have to do with showmanship, and make me suspicious of con artists).

Cordially,
S&S
 
S&S,

My, you are knowledgeable about the topic! :) Yes, the Houdini/Mina Crandon book is all about dark room seances. If she was a fraud, it is hard to believe how she did the things she did. Houdini struck me as being a bit creepy in the book, too. Oh, automatic writing is one of the few things I have repeatedly tried in the past to "develop my psychic abilities". Nothing came of it, but I still find it fascinating . . . if it's real. The last book on the topic that I read, which I can't remember the title, was written in the early 1900s. A judge died and a woman who knew him dictated a whole book supposedly by him after his departure. It was interesting to see how "the other side" at that time period compared to "the other side" in more contemporary books. Have you tried automatic writing? Anyone else? Any results?
 
Hi Autumn,

No, the only thing I ever tried was a seance type thing as a teen with my sister and a friend of hers. We were home alone after the last day of school, and it seemed like a "cool" thing to do at the time (probably around 1968). We ended up scaring ourselves quite a bit, which doesn't really surprise me. There's lots of unpleasant personalities lurking out there. That's one reason why I have a low opinion of anything that involves a complete trance--I think that it is very risky to give up complete control--though I suppose in the right circumstances it might be OK. However, that brings up my overall attitude to much involved with being a medium--I would not feel qualified to attempt this any more than I would attempt to re-wire my home. Electricity can have dangers and needs to be handled by folks with some expertise, and giving over too much control of your mind and body carries some very real risks as well. Automatic writing is actually one of the least intrusive means of serving as an interface for a disembodied spirit and, interestingly enough, it also seems to be the more productive in terms of producing serious information. However, in terms of psychic abilities, I'd much rather develop some other talents than this one. Plus, there is already a great deal of interesting stuff out there produced during an earlier era by automatic writing, so no shortage of material so far. Please let me know if you remember the name of that book/judge, I'd like to look it up. It's probably available online as most of these earlier accounts are no longer covered by copyright.

Cordially,
S&S

PS--I think you're probably right about Houdini, and I don't mean to insult his memory by saying so, but he does seem more than a bit driven and obsessive. There is a book written about him titled "Houdini: A mind in Chains". It is some type of psychological analysis, and I can't claim to have read it, but the title alone says a lot.
 
Last edited:
Okay, S&S, after a little bit of typing in stuff in a search engine, I have found the book:

https://www.amazon.com/Letters-Afte...rd_wg=AVsmY&psc=1&refRID=F6B07ZXMQS5AZ8JQ4BCH

I don't know if I actually believe there are hostile spirits how there who can do harm to living people. That only is something I've read about or seen on television. I know lots of people who have used Ouija boards, including myself, and no one has encounter evil spirits or even any spirits at all. We did levitations one summer as kids, never having any results . . . until one day we did . . . we levitated someone a couple of feet up in the air. It scared us so much that we just dropped the kid and ran out of our "fort". :D We tried to do it again another day, but never succeeded.

The reason I said Houdini seemed creepy was because he liked to collect pictures of individuals right before they died or were killed. Mina Crandon's brother, which is who she channeled, got crushed by a train and someone took a picture of him in agony during his final moments. I believe Houdini had that picture in his collection.:eek:

What psychic abilities would you like to have S&S, if I may ask.
 
Hi Autumn,

Yes, I have a pdf of the original of that one, but I haven't gotten around to it yet. I'll get to it in due course.

In terms of youthful experimentation, yours certainly beats mine. I'd much rather have been part of a levitation, and that is definitely more spectacular than anything I've ever experienced (in the psychic phenomena department). In my case, we had been experimenting with telepathy, and then decided to try to summon the owner of an antique dining room set that my patents owned. It was certainly a century or more old already, and very dark wood. The day was, likewise, dark, a Florida afternoon in early Summer with abiding thunderstorms--which will bring certain images to mind if you're familiar with Florida thunderstorms. We were in an air-conditioned house with the curtains closed, so it was extra dark, and we put a lit candle in the center of the table and formed a little triangle with hands held. All we got was a foreboding sense of something coming nearer and nearer. Then my sister asked for a sign, and the candle flame abruptly flared up to several times its size. We all spontaneously broke our grips and decided that was ENOUGH. Anyhow, it scared the fool out of me, and I decided not to play around with scary things I knew nothing about thereafter, especially if they involved spooks and things that go bump in the night.

In terms of psychic abilities, for some reason two have been on my mind for quite a while: seeing auras and seeing nature spirits. Why these things in particular?--I have only vague ideas. I just think auras are cool, and it would be nice (and helpful) to see them. In terms of nature spirits, I think I'd like that little extra bit of "magic" in life. Modern science and technology have managed to drain so much of the magic and mystery out. I'd also like to see other spirits as well, but that is a more recent interest. I can sorta see auras from time-to-time, but its so darn erratic I couldn't swear to anything. I'll seem to see . . . something, and then an instant later its gone again. Very frustrating.

Cordially,
S&S

PS--You're right. That stuff about Houdini IS creepy.
 
S&S, it sounds like neither of us were particularly brave children. I think it's ironic, too, that 15 or 20 years later I would be fervently wishing for something paranormal to happen, instead of being terrified of such a thing. Auras were never anything that appealed to me, possibly because I'm just not visually observant at all of even normal things. Sounds catch my attention, especially at night. But then, I'm a born night creature, so that makes sense. I once did a writing exercise where I was suppose to create a short story of what type of bird I was. I did an owl story. Shortly after that, however, I had a strange dream of an odd bird following me around. It was walking, nor flying. It also kept saying "kiwi, kiwi, kiwi". When I woke up, I looked up "kiwi" and found the kiwi bird. It's characteristics sounded a lot like me, much more so than the owl. :) Seeing nature spirits would be lovely, but I've never tried.
 
Oooh, nature spirits. I have a story about trying to connect to those, but maybe we need to start a thread elsewhere... LOL
 
Hi Mere/Autumn:

Ditto on the new thread. Past Pilot started a thread a few years ago about some gargoyle like creatures that I believe also morphed into some things about nature spirits. So, I may link that in at some point, but would welcome a new thread on the matter.

S&S
 
Then when death attacks a man, the mortal portion of him
may be supposed to die, but the immortal retires at the approach of death and
is preserved safe and sound? True. Then, Cebes, beyond question, the soul
is immortal and imperishable, and our souls will truly exist in another world!
I am convinced, Socrates, said Cebes, and have nothing more to object; but
if my friend Simmias, or any one else, has any further objection to make, he
had better speak out, and not keep silence, since I do not know to what other
season he can defer the discussion, if there is anything which he wants to say
or to have said. But I have nothing more to say, replied Simmias; nor can I
see any reason for doubt after what has been said. But I still feel and cannot
help feeling uncertain in my own mind, when I think of the greatness of the
subject and the feebleness of man. Yes, Simmias, replied Socrates, that is well
said: and I may add that first principles, even if they appear certain, should be
carefully considered; and when they are satisfactorily ascertained, then, with
a sort of hesitating confidence in human reason, you may, I think, follow the
course of the argument; and if that be plain and clear, there will be no need
for any further enquiry. Very true. But then, O my friends, he said, if the soul
is really immortal, what care should be taken of her, not only in respect of the
portion of time which is called life, but of eternity! And the danger of neglecting
her from this point of view does indeed appear to be awful. If death had only
been the end of all, the wicked would have had a good bargain in dying, for
they would have been happily quit not only of their body, but of their own evil
together with their souls. But now, inasmuch as the soul is manifestly immortal,
there is no release or salvation from evil except the attainment of the highest
virtue and wisdom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top