Can children go to Hell?

Originally posted by christianpatrick
Many of you are reading things into the Bible that are not there.

We are not required to follow or understand blindly! We are required to think for ourselves and decide for ourselves how to apply Jesus's teachings to our own lives. Or ignore them, if we so choose. Even before Jesus, we had the right to decide for ourselves through use of our Free Will faculty.

Jesus said, 'after I am gone, I shall send my counsellor to guide you to understanding.'

For those of us who do not have access to various writings not included in the established bible translations, we have only the counsellor to guide us as we are largely aware that much of what was not helpful to the established leadership of the day, was omitted.

And ignoring the plain words that are there.

Each person who has faith will tell you that they do not ignore the words but rather understand them in the context of their own experiences and or in fellowship with both other believers and with God.

I cannot identify with anyone who thinks God is 'nice'. But in the context of your quoted 'All have sinned', I think that the word sin can mean more than to break the commandments of God. I think the word sin can also refer to flesh, matter, dust; that each human is imbued with the 'human condition' ie duality that requires we exercise the faculty of free will.

And decide where our priorities lie, with the earthly or spiritual concerns.

Teapot, I am not acquainted with either the greek work "harmatia" or the hebrew word "het", both being interpreted as "sin", referring to dust, and if you can show us where they do, please do so. Though I also am unable to see how, if they do indeed do so, that that is relevant to this thread.
Yes, we know about the counsellor. You mean the Holy Spirit, I take it. It does not say that He is going to let us make up our own minds about what we believe. Christianity is not a liberal arts college and the Holy Spirit is not Socrates. Once again, the biblical message is clear. Believe or be damned. And you have not found a biblically based counter argument to my biblically based argument re "water and the spirit". Baptism, as I have shown, is necessary but not sufficient. Then must come the Spirit and tell us what to believe. Neither one of them is sufficient in itself. I am human. I may be in error, but I am not testifying for Jesus here. If you are wrong, and people believe what you say and go to hell, then they go to hell.

Originally posted by christianpatrick
reply to post by H4W4II4N_PUNCH

 

""Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."
Matthew 19:14"

Are you saying that grownups can't go to heaven?

What Jesus meant is that in order to get into heaven, you have to have the unquestioning faith that a child has. You have to buy the whole bill of goods. You aren't allowed to think about it or ask questions.

Ok, i understand. Im not really the type to go to bible study and discuss these kind of things, and i personally find the bible to be a pretty thick book, and have not read it in its entirety. Thank you for your post, i did not consider that he means child mentally and not literally, and i personally find that don't think/don't ask view to be a little closed-minded and inflexible.

appreciate your reply

*edit*

Is it a sin to think for oneself? There are a few stories in the Bible where the character(s) question the will of God, and it seems to be encouraged and even explained to them. I will have to refer to it later to show an example, and will u2u you when i find a good one

[edit on 22-2-2010 by H4W4II4N_PUNCH]

Originally posted by autowrench

First of all, only those who believe, and give power to, actually goes to Hell. Children do know know how to form religious belief yet at such an early age. Another thing is, you are assigning things in a strict black and white world, and anyone knows this world is various shades of gray. There is no right or wrong here, those are human concepts. Believe it or not, some souls incarnate here just to kill someone and go to prison. I do not pretend to know the ends and outs of the Karmic Code, but I do know it exists, and that it applies to all. So, short answer, no.

EXACTLY, "A state of mind", and if you believe in it, who is to say it isnt real other than yourself. You can only be sure of your own thoughts and experiences that will lead you to believe what you believe, and that is what makes us all different. I am well aware of the many shades between black and white and ultimately what is indeed "black and/or white" falls under the perspective of the observer/individual. Great reply thanx for your post

Originally posted by Arcane Demesne
reply to post by H4W4II4N_PUNCH

 

Everyone who believes in hell will go to hell. 12 gods or no god, if you need to live your life worrying about some non-existent fiery pit in order to behave yourself in this life, you deserve to go to whatever it is you're worried about. Simple as that. Children included.

Such fairy tales are getting more and more common here on ATS. What is with these soft-thought, faith-based question influx on ATS?

Also, this is not "Psychology, Philosophy and Metaphysics". This is a "Conspiracy in Religions" topic.

...Well, maybe if you were open-minded and willing to read a few of the replies and understand my true intention of this thread you would understand why it was placed in the "Psychology, Philosophy and Metaphysics" forum.

"Such fairy tales are getting more and more common here on ATS. What is with these soft-thought, faith-based question influx on ATS?"

It seems that before you even took the time to read the thread, you have already made up your mind of what it is actually about. There is nothing fairy tale about the mistakes that children make and are forced to live with for the rest of their life. I leave the definition of hell to be definable by the person reading the post and never refered to it as a "fiery pit" as i believe there are many different forms of hell. This thread was created and intended for my analysis and was purposely left "open end" to atract many different thinkers/views that would add/broaden my own perspectives of situations i was unaware of, and had not thought of previously, and if the mods feel it should be re-formed i would not mind. I believe you get out what you put in and i have learned so much from the ATS community. And, just how you feel my op is "soft-thought" ironicly thats how i view your post. At least do one the courtesy of reading through the actual thread before you try and shoot them down

so if you still wish to reply, leave it open for an actual discussion... not a hit and run

reply to post by H4W4II4N_PUNCH


Hawain Punch,
I hesitate to share this because it is profound and something not to be taken lightly. Please meditate on my words and think about what I am about to say. First a reference. This is From Romans 7.

6 But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code. 7 What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.” 8 But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead. 9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. 10 The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. 11 For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. 12 So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.

It is the opinion of this Bible scholar that based on this passage babies do not go to Hell. have you ever heard of Bar Mitzvah? This is when a Jewish boy of 13 is officially bound by the law. Specificly the 10 commandments. What did the passage say above?...I was once alive, but then the law came (Bar Mitzvah) and I died. Once you are resposible for the Law you are also subject to punishment. (Hell) So, think and meditate on this truth. If you are not yet at an age to be held accountable for your actions, you do not go to Hell. Just my opinion, but I hope it helps.

Originally posted by trueperspective
It is the opinion of this Bible scholar that based on this passage babies do not go to Hell. have you ever heard of Bar Mitzvah? This is when a Jewish boy of 13 is officially bound by the law. Specificly the 10 commandments. What did the passage say above?...I was once alive, but then the law came (Bar Mitzvah) and I died. Once you are resposible for the Law you are also subject to punishment. (Hell) So, think and meditate on this truth. If you are not yet at an age to be held accountable for your actions, you do not go to Hell. Just my opinion, but I hope it helps.

Thank you, i was unaware of that referance and have heard of a childs Bar Mitzvah, but never really looked into the actual purpose of the ceremony. it is a very interesting analogy and idea, and i understand why you may have been hesatent to share this intell but i am glad you did, i gotta run for the moment but will entertain this idea throughout my day, thanx for sharing it does help.


[edit on 22-2-2010 by H4W4II4N_PUNCH]

reply to post by christianpatrick


christianpatrick, I am not aquainted with ANY Greek or Hebrew words. Nor am I aquainted with Aramaic or any any other language, ancient or modern, that is not English or the original language of the original texts that the established Bible is based on.

You claim to not be testifying for Jesus, yet in a previous post you are keen to interpret His words. I'm not sure I understand your point. You seem adament that anyone who does not blindly follow the words in the Bible, even babies who cannot read, will go to hell.

Yes, I refer to the Holy Spirit. It is through the Holy Spirit that one can enter into a relationship with God. Hell is separation from God.

Baptism; Water and Spirit. Both symbolise cleansing. So if the child about to be baptised is not capable of understanding deep philosophical concepts such as sin but needs to be symbolically cleansed of sin nontheless, then sin refers to matter or flesh, and as I added previously, dust (dead flesh, death). For those baptised in childhood, the choice is not their's. I think that the literal translation or interpretation of 'All who have sinned' being applied to children, and the superstitious notion that if a child dies unbaptised, they are damned, not the Truth of God but rather the misunderstanding of Man.

Spiritual cleansing, as with adult baptism, is something that only the individual can choose for themselves. How each individual experiences the baptism by/in Spirit, is unique to them. I think this is because before accepting Jesus into your life, you must put aside or let go of the Self.

Originally posted by teapot
reply to post by christianpatrick

 

Baptism; Water and Spirit. Both symbolise cleansing. So if the child about to be baptised is not capable of understanding deep philosophical concepts such as sin but needs to be symbolically cleansed of sin nontheless, then sin refers to matter or flesh, and as I added previously, dust (dead flesh, death). For those baptised in childhood, the choice is not their's. I think that the literal translation or interpretation of 'All who have sinned' being applied to children, and the superstitious notion that if a child dies unbaptised, they are damned, not the Truth of God but rather the misunderstanding of Man.

Well said!!!! It is not their actual choice and it are others that decide when the child is ready to participate in what is supposed to be a very meaningful event in their lives, but perhaps they may not have experienced enough within their life to understand the true purpose of a baptisim.

"not the Truth of God but rather the misunderstanding of Man."

Nicely said! We all are equipped with minds, and can interpret for ourselfs what is actually being presented in text. We are all different and very capable of error, yet it are the ones that are willing to listen, understand, and reply respectfully and accordingly, that allows one to expand their own understanding of the situation in its entirety.

I appreciate your posts and your logic thanx

And once again, the words are quite clear. The reason that I posted so many translations of that verse is that I wanted there to be no one who could reasonably claim "That's not what it meant".
I don't write scripture. I only quote it.

Children do not have fully developed frontal lobes, which is the part of the brain that deals with impulse control and abstract notions like morality. This "moral conscious" part of the brain doesn't start to develop until the teenage years. Therefore, all children go to hell.

But that's only if you believe in hell (I don't).

Originally posted by christianpatrick
And once again, the words are quite clear. The reason that I posted so many translations of that verse is that I wanted there to be no one who could reasonably claim "That's not what it meant".
I don't write scripture. I only quote it.

understood, but it will always come down for the individual to determine the meaning of the quote. How you perceive it, may differ from how another views it. You may want others to not be able to claim "That's not what it meant" by quoting several different sources, but they will most likely continue to do so because just as strongly as you believe them to be wrong, they feel the same while opposed to your interpretation of it. I believe critically discussing such topics will either strengthen your original idea, or allow you to re-evaluate and/or start all over again. This is what i believe to be the epitome of learning which is the overall gist of this thread. To think dynamically, and not static.

I would like to thank you for your participation and sharing your thoughts.

thanx

[edit on 22-2-2010 by H4W4II4N_PUNCH]

I cannot see how it could mean anything other than what it says.
What is to interpret?

Originally posted by christianpatrick
I cannot see how it could mean anything other than what it says.
What is to interpret?

hmmm... The translations you quoted are other peoples interpretations of the original quote that was used. They were all similar yet varied a little bit. Imagine that same quote over time to be interpreted, reinterpreted, interpreted in a different language, and reinterpreted back into its original language over the course of x amount of years... can you see where im going with this?

Personally i have learned to question the actual source of the information presented and try to follow the overall spirit of the message rather than trying to understand it from a literal perspective. Now this is just my own personal opinion and i do not force it upon others to understand and conform, but am willing to explain and/or defend my beliefs if necessary. I try my best to listen to anothers opinion "objectfully" and take it into my own consideration and analyze it for myself.

"What is to interpret?"

Google can tell you what it means, but it is up to you to define it for yourself

*edit*

Originally posted by teapot
Each person who has faith will tell you that they do not ignore the words but rather understand them in the context of their own experiences and or in fellowship with both other believers and with God.

[edit on 22-2-2010 by H4W4II4N_PUNCH]

Hermeneutical Exegis of a book that is of another language
even as simple as the Biblical 5,000 (yet super-comprehensive) words
is a precarious cohesion of Translation & Interpretation walking in a progressive corrective
unto Absolute Exegesis
-try asking an arab and it might be a town meeting, but you'll get the answer!
Absolute would be "Complete Equivalence Translation and would need no interpreter.
Until the process is complete (if it is possible with absolute proof) the best you can do is called Literal -or the official version held
because it's the Authors' (and Your) reception.




[edit on 2010/2/22 by YeHUaH ELaHaYNU]

And that is the problem. People read the Bible and then decide that it means what they want it to mean, actual words be damned. So when the Sermon on the Mount tells us to go into a closet and close the door when we pray, that means we have to do it in school and in football stadiums.

Originally posted by prevenge
reply to post by H4W4II4N_PUNCH

 

aside from some eternal fiery fictional 'place'...

..one thing to contemplate is reincarnation...

and it's impact on what we percieve as 'children'...

because if reincarnatino exists.. then Hitler, Stalin, Serial muderers and rapists.. have all reincarnated as ... CHILDREN in their next life.. (that is to say if reincarnation is strictly human-oriented not animal etc..) ..

but if something horrible happens to a child who, in his previousl life was a horrible monster... and never payed for his actions....

how should we react to that?
is that nature applying justice to itself?
if the vital essence of the individul who committed horrible torturous crimes to other people.. never pays for their crime.. then reincarnates their essence into a brand newlyborn child...

and karma takes effect of that child and bad things happen to them...
then can we really judge that as good or bad?
if we prevent that child's suffering are we really preventing the monster they were in their past life from paying their dues?

and these supposed child sacrifices yuou hear of secret societies doing.. (i have zero proof about that and dont' believe one way or the other about those things...) but . IF those actually happen...
what IF those babies are actually the reincarnated terrorizer monstrosity serial rapist killers?

do you still want to stop that from happening?

if nature is "everything' and nature is constantly seeking karmic balance...

and those things happen... who are we to interfere????

i don't believe in your fiery cave hell.. i think that is ridiculous.
i do believe in karmic payback as hell.
a lifetime of mental and emotional anguish far outweigh any fiery cave-pit punishment.

-

in pre modern times half the children died before adulthood.
So you believe children who suffer and die young deserve it, and the poor deserve to be poor, the starving deserve to starve, people deserve to be murdered and raped and tortured.
you believe all evil has a useful karmic purpose
thats why karma doesnt make much sense
its basically just an eastern version of heaven and hell and a vengeful god.
and the buddhists dont believe in a soul.

Originally posted by christianpatrick
And that is the problem. People read the Bible and then decide that it means what they want it to mean, actual words be damned. So when the Sermon on the Mount tells us to go into a closet and close the door when we pray, that means we have to do it in school and in football stadiums.

Well... you don't really have to do anything if you don't agree with it, to simply follow the words blindly without question is robotic and closed/stagnant. I believe the moment you doubt/lie to yourself is the moment you lose your true identity and become lost within the herd of sheep.

ultimately it WILL come for you to decide what you will accept and or deny because your reality is just that, "your own." everything else can be doubted.

It was suggested earlier in this thread that maybe there are answers that cannot be found externally and it is up for the individual to create, find, and live these truths within himself. Hope this helps

I am also interested in your perspective of my signature. within it is a link to my very first thread that would explain my view a bit better, when you have the time i would appreciate your input on the subject.



[edit on 23-2-2010 by H4W4II4N_PUNCH]

christianpatrick,

I guess the problem with understanding from a literal perspective is that the words are fixed and unchangable (left open for interpretation). I veiw it more as a stillshot of the logic and views at that particular time and it should be subject to change just as we (our minds) do. ...Fluid

Have you ever seen one of those guys that follow everything by the book. Eventually, they are faced with the dilemma to either follow thier heart, or follow the code and come to the realization that maybe the book is just a guideline to help one understand for oneself the right path to choose. I think this same logic can be applied.

[edit on 23-2-2010 by H4W4II4N_PUNCH]

Originally posted by H4W4II4N_PUNCH

Agreed! "if the parent has done their job." so now i speak on behalf of the children that may have not had parents that were commited to doing the job right, and the children that had to learn things the hard way. As you know... there are usually always exceptions.

ahh, religion vs. psychology. My fave subjects.

Ok- IMO only- humans have an instinctual idea of "right and wrong". I use quotations because the definitions are varied, but still very similar. Environment plays a huge role, but ignoring that- there is still some sense of morality inherent in our species. Even the smallest mammals have shown protective and nurturing behaviors.

This inherent sense of rightness and wrongness is usually only blocked when there has been a trauma. Attachment disorder, antisocial behavior, psychosis, etc. This is not a natural "born-in" state- it's roots are external. People aren't born sinners, despite what the bible may state.

I think I may have miscommunicated slightly. I think there is a subtle, but definite difference in the definitions of "morality" and "right and wrong". I believe moral constructs are society based, whereas knowing right from wrong is instinctual.

This would explain the variances in societal norms in different cultures. Even if one culture says something is taboo, and another thinks its normal- both will still have some common ground on something that is just plain wrong across the board.

In summary, even were a parent to not do their job correctly, the child will still have an internal compass to define right and wrong. Unless one has been psychologically traumatized- in which case I feel that fact would absolve them of guilt in knowing right from wrong.

Originally posted by cjcord
The child is at fault. If a child of grade school age knows not to hit others, than they certainly have no excuse at 11.

True... yet allow the child to mature into a man. As he developes mentally, maybe he will eventually realize and face the severity of his actions and become truly remorseful. He is haunted by this event and constantly contimplates taking his own life to justify the life he has taken. He lives everyday of his life, knowing that event took place in his childhood and was not a dream, and he knows now (as an adult) that it will never be changed... To me that is hell.

do you agree?

I agree- that IS hell. And karmic principles apply. Perhaps- clarification is needed: I hold no stock in fire and brimstone after death kumbayaing with Satan hell. That is a Bible construct- and to me, man made. I believe the idea of hell is very much as you describe above.

This does not change the fact that even a child of 10 knows not to hurt others, or at least- instinctually know that THEY would not want to be hurt, and can follow that simple logic to realize it would be "wrong" to hurt someone else. They make a choice, despite maturity.

You speak of your children, so you are more than aware of a childs mind that will seek instant gratification and may not think their intentions all the way through. But to make a mistake as big as this one, do you feel they deserve a second chance?

I don't think there is a second chance if we are speaking of an event that ends in the loss of a life. A second chance would mean the ability to go back and make a different choice. Not possible in a death scenario. So..no. I have illustrated above that IMO, a being does not want to be hurt. That is pure animal instinct. A sentient being instinctually knows to protect themselves- so logic dictates that one inherently knows that it is against nature to hurt another. I am not speaking of prey and predator here, I am speaking of injury for injury's sake.

Unless the person has a psychological misconstruction, there is no reason for one to harm another.

I read the article and am a little curious as how you got to this generalization

Apologies. The town this happened in is very close to mine, and I have taken some interest in seeing it through. The group of girls responsible for the worst bullying have not been dealt with- school board bureaucracy has been causing issues here. There was a Facebook memorial page set up for Phoebe, and the girls continued to slander here there, and on their personal pages. A news crew went to the school, and asked a few questions of a student. After they left, one of the bullies went up to the student interviewed and slammed their head into a locker. Nothing was done about that incident either. The group has not been disciplined, and according to their facebook pages - they have continued on with their activities with no word of what has happened, and have had flippant remarks whenever someone brings it up. Bullying in South Hadley High School continues, and no one seems to be able to do anything about it. If you would like links to the info posted here, I would be happy to U2U them to you. It is something I am furious about and trying to change from a few towns away. Those girls knew what they were doing.

what if these actions that appear deliberate to you actually appear as ignorance from another. who decides what qualifies as ignorance, and when does "ignorance" actually become sin?

"Ignorance is not a legal defense". I would claim denial, rather than ignorance. If they would not like it done to them, they know not to do it to others. Any other excuse is just an excuse. Therefore, ignorance never becomes sin. Also interestingly- ignorance means something completely difference than what it appears to mean.

Ignorance in daily use is implied as "not knowing any better"- when looking at the word would seem to imply otherwise. Ignore-ance- the act of ignoring. Not "not knowing", but "knowing but ignoring the implications of".

I refute the idea of beings born as sinners. That is a pointless idea, that makes no logical sense. It is an idea that would have to have been construed as a controlling force. The only way to heaven is through Jesus, who died for our sins, and we are all sinners.

Well if we weren't born sinners, Jesus's death would have been a nonevent- thus toppling any reason for his life, this negating any reason for the church. Placing blame on a days old child is completely non-sensical. It is actions that define us, not our species. A sin is an act, not a bodily function.