Hell

[IRQ Conflict]

I was wondering, I listened to that audio clip, if that was really in a place of 2000 degree heat wouldn't we hear the bubbling and moaning of molten rock?

Also I note that the spirits around us that are mentioned in the Bible are not visible to the human eye nor audible to the ear, why is that any different in this supposed recording from hell?

I for one believe that if God say's there is fire and brimstone and offers no Biblical reference to the contrary (yes I know that judgment from God has references to fire, probably because it is linked to the final judgment in hell) then there is fire and brimstone. And whether one chooses to belive otherwise is to that indavidules detriment, if thats where he/she plans to go.

Edit: Oh, and also I was only able to decern 1 or 2 female screams over the babble of what seemed many men. And they have mics able to withstand 2000 degree heat? Disturbing though.

Also the mp3 was found at what seems to me to be a sensationalist site.

[puritan lad]

Reading Lee Strobels "Case for Faith" - it comes up with a good analogy of hell. Because eternal punishment is one of the stumbling blocks for faith as it seems a bit harsh to say the least - this has actually been misunderstood. Hell is a choice that each of us make and not God. We alone choose to reject God and because of that God gives us what we want which is eternal seperation from him. That is Hell - that is why there is gnashing of teeth. There is no fire - Fire is a metaphor for Judgement - all through the bible is used for precisely that - Judgement. So there will not be eternal phyiscal torture - just eternal mental anguish from being seperated from the Holy God Almighty for all of eternity - which is probably worse anyway. Its a case of - we make out bed and lie in it. God just gives us what we desire.

Whew!!! I'm sure that the unbeliever is glad to hear that. So much for fearing God (Matthew 10:28).

Baloney!!! Let's teach the truth of God's Word instead of watering it down to the modern "kinder, gentler, user-friendly gospel" complete with gospel goosebumps and little warm Jesus fuzzies. Hell is real, and it is a place of eternal torment. This is the Bible truth, even it is offends you.

[IRQ Conflict]

Jesus fuzzies

Did some research and found it to be a hoax, although as one site suggested, it is worth listening to the horrible sounds and ponder eternity as one would expect that sounds such as these would not be a far strech of the truth of hell.

[Jac3510]

Haha, awesome. I actually agree with one of PL's posts

I do find the constant dumbing down of Hell a bit of a concern . . . I thoroughly believe in a literal hell with literal fire where people will literally be tortured for eternity. It's a crying shame we water that down.

[Jay_7]

Haha, awesome. I actually agree with one of PL's posts

I do find the constant dumbing down of Hell a bit of a concern . . . I thoroughly believe in a literal hell with literal fire where people will literally be tortured for eternity. It's a crying shame we water that down.

Haha same.

[Silvertusk]

Reading Lee Strobels "Case for Faith" - it comes up with a good analogy of hell. Because eternal punishment is one of the stumbling blocks for faith as it seems a bit harsh to say the least - this has actually been misunderstood. Hell is a choice that each of us make and not God. We alone choose to reject God and because of that God gives us what we want which is eternal seperation from him. That is Hell - that is why there is gnashing of teeth. There is no fire - Fire is a metaphor for Judgement - all through the bible is used for precisely that - Judgement. So there will not be eternal phyiscal torture - just eternal mental anguish from being seperated from the Holy God Almighty for all of eternity - which is probably worse anyway. Its a case of - we make out bed and lie in it. God just gives us what we desire.

Whew!!! I'm sure that the unbeliever is glad to hear that. So much for fearing God (Matthew 10:28).



Baloney!!! Let's teach the truth of God's Word instead of watering it down to the modern "kinder, gentler, user-friendly gospel" complete with gospel goosebumps and little warm Jesus fuzzies. Hell is real, and it is a place of eternal torment. This is the Bible truth, even it is offends you.

This is one interpetation of the bible - my research has led me to another. And it certainly isn't dumbing it down - eternal seperation from God once you have seen his true might and majesty is eternal torment.

[IRQ Conflict]

I'm interested, what does your research tell you the "lake of fire" is?

Or the "smoke of their torment" ascendeth up for ever and ever?

Or "everlasting destruction"?

Or "neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be abhorring unto all flesh"? (sounds to me like some disfigurement going on here).

Or "suffering the vengeance of eternal fire"

[Silvertusk]

I'm interested, what does your research tell you the "lake of fire" is?

Or the "smoke of their torment" ascendeth up for ever and ever?

Or "everlasting destruction"?

Or "neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be abhorring unto all flesh"? (sounds to me like some disfigurement going on here).

Or "suffering the vengeance of eternal fire"

The fire is referring to the judgement. The rest is just saying that it is going to last forever. There is no actual physical burning in the real sense. This is one interpretation I know - but for me it makes sense as it reconciles to the idea of a loving God. Read "A Case for Faith" by Lee Strobel to get what I mean - he is much better at explaining it than I am.

[IRQ Conflict]

Whew!!! I'm sure that the unbeliever is glad to hear that. So much for fearing God (Matthew 10:28).

Baloney!!! Let's teach the truth of God's Word instead of watering it down to the modern "kinder, gentler, user-friendly gospel" complete with gospel goosebumps and little warm Jesus fuzzies. Hell is real, and it is a place of eternal torment. This is the Bible truth, even it is offends you.

PL, are you sure Jesus was talking about the literal destruction of the body and soul?

I mean I read somewhere in a book called 'airy fairy' and the theory of 'fluffy wuffy' that destruction was refering to the act of the spirits disembodiment from the physical temple we know as our body.












Heh J/K Silvertusk, although PL is right. If God wanted us thinking hell was something other than what he said, he would have made it as plain as the nose on your face. I pray you come to realize this.

2Co 2:11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant, of his devices.

God Bless

[Silvertusk]

Whew!!! I'm sure that the unbeliever is glad to hear that. So much for fearing God (Matthew 10:28).

Baloney!!! Let's teach the truth of God's Word instead of watering it down to the modern "kinder, gentler, user-friendly gospel" complete with gospel goosebumps and little warm Jesus fuzzies. Hell is real, and it is a place of eternal torment. This is the Bible truth, even it is offends you.

PL, are you sure Jesus was talking about the literal destruction of the body and soul?

I mean I read somewhere in a book called 'airy fairy' and the theory of 'fluffy wuffy' that destruction was refering to the act of the spirits disembodiment from the physical temple we know as our body.












Heh J/K Silvertusk, although PL is right. If God wanted us thinking hell was something other than what he said, he would have made it as plain as the nose on your face. I pray you come to realize this.

2Co 2:11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant, of his devices.

God Bless

Thanks for the sentiment - but I think I stick with the interpretation I mentioned before. By the way - I in no way take the seperation from God as something to be taken lightly - and since I believe in Jesus - it is kind of a moot point anyway since hopefully I will never see hell.

As for making things plain - well there wouldn't be any forums if God had made everything plain. Some things are clear (thankfully the important things) others are not. But I think God meant it to be that way so we could have these discussions. I have had many "WOW" moments because of this.

God Bless

Silvertusk.

[Jac3510]

Silvertusk,

I've read Strobel's The Case for Faith, and while it has its strong points, it has its weak points as well. The chief of these has to do with the method he uses to interpret Scripture. It's not nearly as sound as The Case for Christ. The former is his quest to try to bring whats-his-name back to the faith, while the latter is a more or less objective look at the evidence surrounding the resurrection and deity of Jesus. As such, one is interpretive of Scripture, while the other is interpretive of historical data.

This motivation has led Strobel, and many like him, to reinterpret Scripture so that it is easier to swallow. I understand it, as I held the same position for a long time. But, in the end, we have to submit our thinking to Scripture. We have to take the texts to mean what they say. It is true that fire is often a reference for judgement, but far from being separated from God for all of eternity, the unbeliever will be tortured in His presence day and night forever and ever (Rev. 14:10). It is not the separation that is the anguish, but it is the torment! I'd prove that by simply asking you to cite me a Scripture where an unbeliever is upset over his separation from God. No, Hell is most certainly punitive. He is being judged. Notice, also, that in the previously mentioned passage, he is being tormented . . . that's a passive verb. That means the action is happening to him. He is not the one doing the action. If Strobel were right, then the text would use an active verb, saying something like, "And will torment himself . . ." due to his separation.

Again, it seems obvious to me that Hell (better, the Lake of Fire) is a place of actual judgment, where the torment is inflicted upon the poor soul by a just and holy God. Cf. Luke 16:18-26.

God bless

[Silvertusk]

Silvertusk,

I've read Strobel's The Case for Faith, and while it has its strong points, it has its weak points as well. The chief of these has to do with the method he uses to interpret Scripture. It's not nearly as sound as The Case for Christ. The former is his quest to try to bring whats-his-name back to the faith, while the latter is a more or less objective look at the evidence surrounding the resurrection and deity of Jesus. As such, one is interpretive of Scripture, while the other is interpretive of historical data.

This motivation has led Strobel, and many like him, to reinterpret Scripture so that it is easier to swallow. I understand it, as I held the same position for a long time. But, in the end, we have to submit our thinking to Scripture. We have to take the texts to mean what they say. It is true that fire is often a reference for judgement, but far from being separated from God for all of eternity, the unbeliever will be tortured in His presence day and night forever and ever (Rev. 14:10). It is not the separation that is the anguish, but it is the torment! I'd prove that by simply asking you to cite me a Scripture where an unbeliever is upset over his separation from God. No, Hell is most certainly punitive. He is being judged. Notice, also, that in the previously mentioned passage, he is being tormented . . . that's a passive verb. That means the action is happening to him. He is not the one doing the action. If Strobel were right, then the text would use an active verb, saying something like, "And will torment himself . . ." due to his separation.

Again, it seems obvious to me that Hell (better, the Lake of Fire) is a place of actual judgment, where the torment is inflicted upon the poor soul by a just and holy God. Cf. Luke 16:18-26.

God bless

You see this is where the whole arguement of a loving God fall apart. If he was - wouldn't it be much more just and loving to just destroy their souls and send them to oblivion. The punishment of Hell is God giving to people what they want. But when they see God they will realise what it is they will be missing and I have no doubt that will be hell.

All this is speculation anyway and no conclusion can be drawn from both interpretations of the scripture.

Maybe my small feeble mind can't comprehend this but nothing is deserving of eternal physical torture. That also goes agains the concept of free will - we will not beleive in Jesus because of his love and grace - it will be because we are terrified of the consequences. There will be no love freely given, but fear and submission. For that we may as well pack up christianity and go and join the muslim camp.

[Jac3510]

I can understand your objection, but the problem is with the Western concept of "a loving God." Does God love? Yup. God is love. But, God is a lot of other things, too, like just, holy, and righteous. He cannot tolerate evil, and it WILL be punished.

Does God love the world? Yes. So does God love the lost soul? Absolutely. And, because of that love, He has offered freely to all the chance to repent. However, when a person rejects that gift, they are calling God a liar and spitting upon the horrible price He paid to offer such a gift. The lost man is not condemned for his sins, but for his unbelief. He is not condemned for his unbelief because it is a sin. He is condemned for his unbelief because it seals him in a state of death. You see, the whole Adamic Race is condemned. Therefore, those who die "in Adam" are condemned. The level of each one's suffering will be different as his works so justify.

Keep in mind that on the Last Day, those who burn will not be "children of God," but they will be enemies of God. And they will be His enemies by choice. In the end, I have to submit my thinking to Scripture. If Hell was simply eternal separation from God, the Bible would have said as much. But Jesus spoke more on the subject of eternal condemnation that anyone else, and more than just about anything else. It is real. God will personally punish for all of eternity those who reject Him in the here and now. To me, that's not a matter of interpretation . . . that's a matter of believing what the Bible says.

God bless

edit: for the record, the reality of hell won't force people to accept salvation out of fear. It isn't logically possible, because salvation isn't based on that. Now, if you hold to a commitment-of-life gospel, like Reformed theologians do, you have a great point. There would be those people who "give themselves to Christ" to avoid Hell. But, that's not what salvation is. I have bad news (or is it good news) for everyone out there . . . there will be many, many people who have genuinely made Jesus Christ the Lord of their lives who will burn in Hell because they didn't believe in His promise to save them if they only trusted. That is salvation . . . belief in the Person and Promise of Jesus Christ. You can't believe something because you are afraid of the alternative. You believe something because it makes sense to you and you accept it as fact. We are saved, in other words, by taking Christ at His word to save us, not by "commiting our life to Him."

[IRQ Conflict]

well said Jac, one thing though, when one believes Christ, the natural reaction to that faith is to "commit your life to Him" You will be known by the fruit.

[Jac3510]

Well, I agree and disagree, IRQ. When you are born again by faith in the person and promise of Christ, there is a new nature within you. That nature, the New Man, desires to please only God. But, the Old Man is still alive and well, and he has no desire whatsoever towards discipleship.

Also, be careful with the fruits verse, because we aren't told we know whether or not we are saved by our works . . . our fruits prove us to be disciples or antichrists. They say very little, if anything, as to our state of regeneration (or lack there of).

Anyway, most of that is just sort of semantics. My concern is that people believe that if you don't commit your life then you aren't saved because your faith isn't "real." We have to realize that committing isn't what saves, but rather trust is.

God bless