Joined: Oct. 2009
|Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Mar. 23 2011,13:25)|
Iain's latest is all about digital hell. A cracking read.
Read his book!
Surface Detail definitely a much more powerful idea of a hell than the rather lame Judeo-Christian version.
On the other hand, the ending left me going WTF?
But back to hell... ("Back into Hell" anyone?)
What's the point? The New Testament lays down the general principles of good government, but contains no code of laws for the punishment of offenders. Punishment proceeds on the principle that there is an eternal distinction between right and wrong, and that this distinction must be maintained for its own sake. It is not primarily intended for the reformation of criminals, nor for the purpose of deterring others from sin. These results may be gained, but crime in itself demands punishment.
If there is an enternal distinction between right and wrong, then what is right and what is wrong?
If we go by the Bible definition, then beating your slaves almost to death is perfectly OK. Yet, no modern, moral person believes it is OK to beat ones slaves (or indeed own slaves).
So are we more moral than the Bible? How can the Bible claim an eternal morality (distinction between right and wrong) if that morality changes based on the culture and the time?
Can anyone meet the requirements of both the Bible and modern society? What about all the other religions? What about purgatory (invented so that Christians could still force people to believe in God to go to heaven, but didn't have to send babies to hell)?
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.