Evidence for God from Science

Philip wrote:

Zacchaeus wrote: "They are cast into Hell where they live alone in unquenchable fire, utter darkness, and unmanageable pain for eternity."

Some of the descriptive terms of hell seem contradictory: "utter darkness" and "unquenchable fire." How can it be totally dark and yet filled with flames? Will not the damned have some sort of physical body that allows them to suffer in the flames but yet not be consumed by them? These are mysteries, but they are SCRIPTURAL.

But whatever the reality of what hell will be like, whether partial metaphors or not, it is going to be a place that is unimaginably horrible. And not only would it seem that one would want to avoid it at all costs, one would also think that, as we are ALL offered a choice to embrace our loving God and His promises of eternal hope, love and beauty - OR HELL - well, it's practically inconceivable that anyone would choose hell. But no one who chooses hell ever wants to admit that what they are choosing really exists.

And, yet, I don't know that I've met anyone who became saved through their fear of hell. Most I've known tell of empty, helpless, hopeless lives and of experiencing learning of God/Jesus and His love for them - that they realized what their lives were like without God, juxtapositioned against all that God offered them in contrast. But I'm sure avoidance of hell, at least initially, may motivate some. It must, else why all the warnings in Scripture?

I find that most people these days, do not know how to define sin, or even know what it is. They do however realize the effects of it such as empty, helpless, hopeless lives but still do not grasp what sin is.

Because of this, comes the notion of temporal finite sins and the conception that states - of how dare God punish for eternity those who commit finite sins… oft used to dissuade people from thinking God’s wrath and hell as eternal.

Again this notion comes when ascribing the meaning of one word used in the bible to only mean one thing in all cases and another word is presupposed as impossible to be used like a synonym. Doing so will cause a person to miss the richness of the biblical text on many matters.

Do we use synonyms? If we do, why cannot the bible text for such words as sleep, destruction, ruin, grave, death, die, hell, sheol, pit, prison, hades, death? All these words are used to help describe a place to utterly avoid at all hazards.

Same also applies to words translated as life, breath, spirit, immortality, everlasting life as well too. Please do not miss the richness of how the principle of synonyms works.

So…

What do we think of sin?

Is sin temporal or eternal?

How does a person define sin?

Would be interesting to look into more...

Sin is an illness and must be treated as such, cured as such.
The medicine is faith in God, the curing agent is Christ and God's grace.
Dealing with sin means not only curing but also preventative measures so that it doesn't get worse, like any other illness.

Philip wrote:

Zacchaeus wrote: "They are cast into Hell where they live alone in unquenchable fire, utter darkness, and unmanageable pain for eternity."

Some of the descriptive terms of hell seem contradictory: "utter darkness" and "unquenchable fire." How can it be totally dark and yet filled with flames? Will not the damned have some sort of physical body that allows them to suffer in the flames but yet not be consumed by them? These are mysteries, but they are SCRIPTURAL.

But whatever the reality of what hell will be like, whether partial metaphors or not, it is going to be a place that is unimaginably horrible. And not only would it seem that one would want to avoid it at all costs, one would also think that, as we are ALL offered a choice to embrace our loving God and His promises of eternal hope, love and beauty - OR HELL - well, it's practically inconceivable that anyone would choose hell. But no one who chooses hell ever wants to admit that what they are choosing really exists.

And, yet, I don't know that I've met anyone who became saved through their fear of hell. Most I've known tell of empty, helpless, hopeless lives and of experiencing learning of God/Jesus and His love for them - that they realized what their lives were like without God, juxtapositioned against all that God offered them in contrast. But I'm sure avoidance of hell, at least initially, may motivate some. It must, else why all the warnings in Scripture?

I think I got the answer to that problem. Dark Fire. Check out what this kid says about hell...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAeylqOuNGo

Go to 1:30 to hear him talking describing Dark Fire.

I agree with Dr. JP MORGAN, but not in totality. Contrary to what he said, that hell is not a place of torture. I dont think so, because I have read about hell being a place where people who end up there will face a lot of tribulations and troubles where they are tortured by the leader of the chamber.
That alone I dont support in his submission...I support others.

No account of hell given in speech or written in print or posted on the internet by those claiming to have actually seen it should be accepted out of hand.
I will tell you why. Even putting aside the fact that the scripture does not explicitly teach Hell as modern Christians believe it to be there are also some glaring problems with accepting eye-witness accounts as valid because of two reasons:
1. None, I mean, NONE of the accounts are consistent with each other. No two eye-witness accounts are alike. How can this be? Does hell change for every visitor? That's ridiculous. They should all be the same. And, if you use the argument that we all see things differently depending on our lucidness or psychological state then the whole phenomena immediately loses credibility. I'm sorry but I don't care how reputable or revered the speaker is, even angels are not to be believed just because they say something is so. It must, absolutely MUST, be consistent with the Gospel as preached by Paul. Paul never spoke of eternal torture in Hell even one time. He used the word perish or destruction.

2. Other cultures and religions are filled with so-called eye-witness accounts of visiting the afterlife. Guess what, they all coincide with whatever their belief systems are. Some have seen a Hindu after life, some give a Buddhist version, even some animists have their own versions and atheists have theirs too. Which actually gives credence to the phychological explanation that when we die or mind is in a traumatic state and will conjure up all manner of fanciful hallucinatory experiences based on our conscious belief or even previously buried subconscious teaching we learned as a child.

Even without the second reason, the first would be enough for me to discount unverifiable eye-witness accounts that don't jive with each other and are often dishonest cash grab fabrications.

Goinup wrote:No account of hell given in speech or written in print or posted on the internet by those claiming to have actually seen it should be accepted out of hand.
I will tell you why. Even putting aside the fact that the scripture does not explicitly teach Hell as modern Christians believe it to be there are also some glaring problems with accepting eye-witness accounts as valid because of two reasons:
1. None, I mean, NONE of the accounts are consistent with each other. No two eye-witness accounts are alike. How can this be? Does hell change for every visitor? That's ridiculous. They should all be the same. And, if you use the argument that we all see things differently depending on our lucidness or psychological state then the whole phenomena immediately loses credibility. I'm sorry but I don't care how reputable or revered the speaker is, even angels are not to be believed just because they say something is so. It must, absolutely MUST, be consistent with the Gospel as preached by Paul. Paul never spoke of eternal torture in Hell even one time. He used the word perish or destruction.

2. Other cultures and religions are filled with so-called eye-witness accounts of visiting the afterlife. Guess what, they all coincide with whatever their belief systems are. Some have seen a Hindu after life, some give a Buddhist version, even some animists have their own versions and atheists have theirs too. Which actually gives credence to the phychological explanation that when we die or mind is in a traumatic state and will conjure up all manner of fanciful hallucinatory experiences based on our conscious belief or even previously buried subconscious teaching we learned as a child.

Even without the second reason, the first would be enough for me to discount unverifiable eye-witness accounts that don't jive with each other and are often dishonest cash grab fabrications.

One of the member's of this site has had a hell experience that does a pretty good job of explaining both your 1 and 2.

Well, I had a "hell" experience once: My mother-in-law came and stayed for TEN DAYS!!! Just kidding (well, kind of.) However, the most feared words I can ever hear my wife say, are, "My mother's coming for a visit." Be afraid, be VERY afraid! (No, honey, really, it's just a joke... )

What is hell like.. complete and utter loneliness could be one version. Trust me I've been there, it is the worst feeling imaginable. Now extend that to eternity, not a place I would send the worst person I know, enemy or not.

This guy experiences something similar:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRSjzY0s0SM

On a serious side, yeah, loneliness just burns one's soul, to the point of you just feel depressed and are merely existing.

Philip wrote:On a serious side, yeah, loneliness just burns one's soul, to the point of you just feel depressed and are merely existing.

Yeah my post did take a slightly more solemn tone following on from your more light-hearted comment

Yeah my post did take a slightly more solemn tone following on from your more light-hearted comment

Yeah, well, Stu, it's the first day back to work, school and the real world for many of us, so I just figured discussing hell on the equivalent of a Monday might be just too much for some, haha.

Philip wrote:

Yeah my post did take a slightly more solemn tone following on from your more light-hearted comment

Yeah, well, Stu, it's the first day back to work, school and the real world for many of us, so I just figured discussing hell on the equivalent of a Monday might be just too much for some, haha.

Nah man, you made some valid points