comment: >
  
  I have read your comment but i am not really sure how to respond, i dont clearly see a point you are making. But ill give my best shot.
  
  especially when figuring the philosophical understanding of the time when it originated.
  
  Figuring the philosophical underatanding of the time it originated has made me think in this direction in the first place
  Adding forgiveness to the equasion doesn't change the concept of Heaven and Hell and it doesn't debunk the theory neither because if you created the idea of Heaven and Hell to bring morals to those who lack it you want them to feel guilty if they do sin which leads to them feeling regret and that leads to asking for forgiveness. Also without forgiveness there would be no point of not comminting sins after you commited one since there is no way of undoing it. 
  Also my post is not necessarily about Christianity, its more about the manipulative nature of religions that makes people do certain things, for some its being moral and righteous, for some its dying in battle, for some its not eating too much and living modestly, depending on the conditions the religions were founded in.
context: Do you believe that everyone who is religious is being manipulated, or is it possible that there are some people that truly believe their beliefs to be right? Are there some people in this world religious for positive reasons as opposed to negative ones?
  There are certainly a lot of people manipulated by religion, but to say that everyone is like that is a bit reductive. >
  
  
  everyone who is religious is being manipulated, or is it possible that there are some people that truly believe their beliefs to be right
  
  These aren't mutually exclusive options >
  
  I know it's been used like this sometimes but the concept of heaven and hell within Christianity is almost the exact opposite especially when figuring the philosophical understanding of the time when it originated.
  The concept of sin long predates the idea of heaven and hell, classical Judaism didn't really have all that much of a concept of heaven and hell. The afterlife was just known to be a dark place that wasn't all that nice from what we can tell. Sins were known to offend God and yet every person was in some way a sinner and as a result God would be righteously angry at the sinner and the sinner would need to undergo ritual purifications.
  So you go from that understanding to the understanding that you have an immortal soul and that God will punish that immortal soul for the sins committed in this life with a less than pleasant afterlife (makes sense the afterlife was already thought to not be exactly that nice and God is righteously angry at sin). That sin is so broad that everyone sins (already kind of understood at least on a basic level) and so all have failed to live up to God. But that's okay, everyone is human and bound to fail to live up to the standards of a perfect god (original sin) so God provides a sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (a concept already understood) but instead of a sheep he provides the most precious thing in the universe, a sacrifice of his own son the third person of the Trinity for the eternal forgiveness of sins and a pathway to heaven in the afterlife.
  Viewed through this lens the origins of heaven and hell aren't a guilt trip at all, even from a secular lens if you believe none of it is still building on existent philosophy to tell people (particularly the downtrodden) that they are okay, that their sins are forgiven and that they will go to heaven during a time when the religious higher-ups wouldn't even interact with many of them due to their perceived sinfulness or ritual impurity.
  For reference yes I understand this is all a massive oversimplification, it's a reddit thread.