The Reality of Hell

[babylonisfalling]

In previous articles we tried presenting a more spiritual picture of heaven, minus the harps, angel wings and fluffy clouds. This begs the question, could the reality of hell also be different than what many of us grew up with? The classic imagery of fire and brimstone appeals to our bodily senses but is that the reality or is it just a flesh oriented deterrent? There are many who will reject the non literal understanding of hell but for centuries now, the notion of hell being a physical place of fiery torment has been questioned. If heavenly bliss is a spiritual state of existence in sync with God, why could hell not be the exact opposite; a spiritual state of existence against God rather than a place of fire and brimstone? But if hell isn't a place of fire, why does the Bible describe it that way?

Please check out the rest of the article here
The Reality of Hell - Yahoo Voices - voices.yahoo.com

 

[jayem]

It's my understanding that the fire and eternal torment image of hell came largely from Dante.

BTW: It's always intrigued me that the 3 sinners he put in the very lowest region of hell--who are condemned to be eternally chewed in Satan's 3 mouths are Judas Iscariot, Brutus, and Cassius. And they earned such punishment not because of any religious offense. But because they all betrayed a trusting friend.

 

[juvenissun]

In previous articles we tried presenting a more spiritual picture of heaven, minus the harps, angel wings and fluffy clouds. This begs the question, could the reality of hell also be different than what many of us grew up with? The classic imagery of fire and brimstone appeals to our bodily senses but is that the reality or is it just a flesh oriented deterrent? There are many who will reject the non literal understanding of hell but for centuries now, the notion of hell being a physical place of fiery torment has been questioned. If heavenly bliss is a spiritual state of existence in sync with God, why could hell not be the exact opposite; a spiritual state of existence against God rather than a place of fire and brimstone? But if hell isn't a place of fire, why does the Bible describe it that way?

Please check out the rest of the article here
The Reality of Hell - Yahoo Voices - voices.yahoo.com

I believe there should be a place, or places, that (unbelieved) people in there do not see God, but do not see fire either. The hell described in the Bible is simply ONE place, which is the worst and for the worst beings. How worse is the worst? It is not for us to make judgement.

 

[juvenissun]

It's my understanding that the fire and eternal torment image of hell came largely from Dante.

BTW: It's always intrigued me that the 3 sinners he put in the very lowest region of hell--who are condemned to be eternally chewed in Satan's 3 mouths are Judas Iscariot, Brutus, and Cassius. And they earned such punishment not because of any religious offense. But because they all betrayed a trusting friend.

Make sense. If they did not know God/Jesus, then there is no religious offense.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Hell is: a place of restraint, a place of destruction, and a place of punishment. The demons will be restrained and punished. Humans will be destroyed.

 

[Mediaeval]

"It is the nature of God, so terribly pure that it destroys all that is not pure as fire, which demands like purity in our worship. He will have purity. It is not that the fire will burn us if we do not worship thus; but that the fire will burn us until we worship thus; yea, will go on burning within us after all that is foreign to it has yielded to its force, no longer with pain and consuming, but as the highest consciousness of life, the presence of God."
George MacDonald

 

[babylonisfalling]

"It is the nature of God, so terribly pure that it destroys all that is not pure as fire, which demands like purity in our worship. He will have purity. It is not that the fire will burn us if we do not worship thus; but that the fire will burn us until we worship thus; yea, will go on burning within us after all that is foreign to it has yielded to its force, no longer with pain and consuming, but as the highest consciousness of life, the presence of God."
George MacDonald

That sounds a bit like hell is a place of purification.

 

[babylonisfalling]

It's my understanding that the fire and eternal torment image of hell came largely from Dante.

BTW: It's always intrigued me that the 3 sinners he put in the very lowest region of hell--who are condemned to be eternally chewed in Satan's 3 mouths are Judas Iscariot, Brutus, and Cassius. And they earned such punishment not because of any religious offense. But because they all betrayed a trusting friend.

Dante isn't in charge of putting anyone into any particular place in hell.

 

[Redac]

Dante isn't in charge of putting anyone into any particular place in hell.

Well, when it's part of his own story about Hell, he kind of is.

 

[Mediaeval]

That sounds a bit like hell is a place of purification.

That was MacDonald's view, I gather.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

babylonisfalling

In previous articles we tried presenting a more spiritual picture of heaven, minus the harps, angel wings and fluffy clouds. This begs the question, could the reality of hell also be different than what many of us grew up with? The classic imagery of fire and brimstone appeals to our bodily senses but is that the reality or is it just a flesh oriented deterrent? There are many who will reject the non literal understanding of hell but for centuries now, the notion of hell being a physical place of fiery torment has been questioned. If heavenly bliss is a spiritual state of existence in sync with God, why could hell not be the exact opposite; a spiritual state of existence against God rather than a place of fire and brimstone? But if hell isn't a place of fire, why does the Bible describe it that way?

In my estimation, the whole 'fire and brimstone' trope was originally lifted from the very end of the Book of Isaiah. There it is used as a hyperbolic expression of punishment upon the 'disobedient,' but it does not seem to imply an eternal place of torment.

This same trope was later used by Jesus, and the Gospel writer(s) relate that Jesus utilized the trope borrowed from Isaiah in conjunction with the Greek idea of Gehenna. But that in itself doesn't seem to indicate the transformation from a simple idea of 'destruction' to that of 'eternal torment' in fire.

It seems from looking at the historical development of the trope above through Tertullian, Origin, and Cyprian, and others during the first few hundred years of Christianity, the fire and brimstone trope took on a more solidified structure, being interpreted as an eternal hellfire.

Whether 'Hell' is a place of eternal torture--or not--the point to keep in mind is that the penalty is permanent either way.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Regardless as to what hell would be like, if it exists, and I end up there, I have made a vow that I will do everything in my power, to kick satan where it hurts. Or whatever being runs it, whatever, if I am already in hell then, lol, why not?

 

[JGL53]

I'm wondering here about the most famous verse in the bible.

I suppose there could be some mealy-mouthed interpretation that "interprets away" the clear meaning of the phrases "shall not perish" and "have everlasting life".

IF in the original Hebrew, Greek, Latin, or whatever - there were indeed words here that have other meanings - THEN the meanings should have been made clearer when translated into English.

As stated here the "lost" will not have any kind of life after death, everlasting or temporary. They will be dead. That is what the word "perish" means - death. But the reward for the "saved" is everlasting life. Meaning they would be dead but for the grace and salvation formula for which they met the criterion.

So there is no choice here offered called "everlasting punishment in never-ending time" vs. "everlasting bliss in never-ending time" - there is eternal life vs. eternal death. Seems clear to me.

So whence everlasting punishment in an afterlife for the unrepentant sinners? Is that another catholic heresy?

 

[PsychoSarah]

True, I have heard people mention that non believers just end up ceasing. While others assert the eternal punishment idea, there is scriptural support for both ideas, it really isn't clear.

 

[juvenissun]

I'm wondering here about the most famous verse in the bible.

I suppose there could be some mealy-mouthed interpretation that "interprets away" the clear meaning of the phrases "shall not perish" and "have everlasting life".

It is completely understandable in a literal sense.

If I believe and you do not believe, then I go to the Heaven and you do not go to the Heaven. Then I will NEVER see you again in the eternal life. In that sense, is the word perish fully meaningful? Also if seeing God is alive and not seeing God is dead, then unbelievers will be dead forever. Is that also the meaning of perish?

 

[JGL53]

True, I have heard people mention that non believers just end up ceasing. While others assert the eternal punishment idea, there is scriptural support for both ideas, it really isn't clear.

Yes, I understand that.

My specific question to our christian friends of all permutations is Why is the most famous verse in the bible so darned clear on this and yet millions of christians dispute it?

And by "most famous verse" I mean the go-to verse for christians when they are proselytizing others. Many christians point to John 3:16 as the end all and be all of what christianity is all about. It is THE most used verse on posters, bumper stickers and so forth for christians in their attempt to get across to the "unsaved" what christianity promises, and what will happen to you if you don't "repent".

That is why I think this verse is the starting point for examining the issue under question.

If this verse is NOT the most important verse in the bible then why isn't it? What would be a verse more important than it?

This is my point.

 

[juvenissun]

Yes, I understand that.

My specific question to our christian friends of all permutations is Why is the most famous verse in the bible so darned clear on this and yet millions of christians dispute it?

And by "most famous verse" I mean the go-to verse for christians when they are proselytizing others. Many christians point to John 3:16 as the end all and be all of what christianity is all about. It is THE most used verse on posters, bumper stickers and so forth for christians in their attempt to get across to the "unsaved" what christianity promises, and what will happen to you if you don't "repent".

That is why I think this verse is the starting point for examining the issue under question.

If this verse is NOT the most important verse in the bible then why isn't it? What would be a verse more important than it?

This is my point.

It is not hard to understand.

The most famous one is the simplest one and is the most clear one
The simplest one is also the most vague one and is the hardest one.

Another example: E = MC^2.

 

[PsychoSarah]

It is not hard to understand.

The most famous one is the simplest one and is the most clear one
The simplest one is also the most vague one and is the hardest one.

Another example: E = MC^2.

Was there a point to saying "it is famous because it is short and easy to remember, not because it is clear and easy for people to understand" in this manner?

 

[JGL53]

It is completely understandable in a literal sense.

If I believe and you do not believe, then I go to the Heaven and you do not go to the Heaven. Then I will NEVER see you again in the eternal life. In that sense, is the word perish fully meaningful? Also if seeing God is alive and not seeing God is dead, then unbelievers will be dead forever. Is that also the meaning of perish?

Thanks for proving my point. Those christians intent on believing in eternal punishment in never-ending time will interpret the clear meaning of words away to get their way.

Perish means death. Eternal life means eternal life. The opposite of eternal life is eternal death, not eternal punishment.

But if you want hell then you can have it. Apparently the thought of it makes you happy and you will never give it up. The bible WILL say what you wish it to.

OK.

And have a nice day.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Regardless as to what hell would be like, if it exists, and I end up there, I have made a vow that I will do everything in my power, to kick satan where it hurts. Or whatever being runs it, whatever, if I am already in hell then, lol, why not?

Wondering if some people would want there to be a hell just for this? I get sad when I say this and no one acknowledges it.