The ideology of ‘Heaven and Hell’ as we all know it, hangs on the back of everyone’s head as a faith-based (albeit unproven) truth.
I am here, not to talk about faith but to debate the accuracy of man’s interpretation of God’s ways. Indeed, this discussion does inevitably relate back to faith but what I am trying to say is that what if, for one moment, we fathom that Heaven is not the land of eternal joy and Hell is not the desolation of fiery damnation? What if Heaven and Hell are not what we perceive them to be? What if really, the Bible is not wrong but our interpretation of it is? Heck people used to think that the Earth was squarish so what gives us the boldness to be so affirmative of the quarters beyond unexplored frontiers?
For all we know maybe ‘Heaven and Hell’ is all but a perception or an ideology. Stops there. Over the history of human civilization we have seen the way many influential individuals communicate false realities to followers for bent purposes and the most infamous one – Adolf Hitler. What if it was some clergy who came up with the idea of Heaven and Hell because he/she only wanted the faithfuls to do good and not evil?
By doing so people would have the tendency to do good because they know that the fruits of Heaven would be their reward. For the baddies, it would be divine persuasion for them to repent and redeem. As for the goodie-two-shoes who can’t do anything about the big baddies who don’t seem to give a damn, it’s a way of relieving oneself of the bottled-up anger by thinking that they will all be cursed to Hell anyway. A very current and apt example would be how the masses curse politicians to Hell because well, that’s the only goddamn thing we can do right now. So if you find it hard to sleep at night thinking that the country is being run by pigs, rest assured, those pigs and swines ain’t going nowhere – Hell awaits. =)
All that being said, I strongly believe that religions actually mean good and they only want to do good. The idea of ‘Heaven and Hell’ does good. It is only the interpretation that separates the fanatics from the staunch and the staunch from people like me.
This is clearly a case of I-am-not-saying-that-you’re-wrong-and-I’m-right-but-hey
-you-may-be-wrong-and-I-may-be-right. Like how I’m not saying modern feminism is wrong and I’m right but hey you modern feminists may be wrong and I may be right. This is an open discussion and may heads roll! There you go Jinn.
F A I