Is there a Hell?

[ParanoidAndroid]

No the same thing cannot be said for me. I have no agenda. You refuse to take God at His word.

And from where I sit it is you who is refusing to take God at his word (not on purpose, of course). You have no agenda, yet have the audacity to claim that I do?

You can rant on and on about how "petty" that makes God look, but you need to simply give up and believe what the Bible teaches.

I do believe what the Bible teaches. Just because we disagree on this point does not change that.

No they do not support physical destruction, because they are not concerned with physical destruction; that is not even the object the author has in view. The context has to with a spiritual condition. You are trying force that on the text, and you do so with no textual justification.

I read over those passages again, and they only have a spiritual meaning if you read a spiritual meaning into them. To me, they are speaking of very earthly matters, Eternal Life vs Eternal Destruction.

I don't see anywhere in the Bible that condemns to eternal punishment those who have not been granted the gift of eternal life (that's why it's called a "gift").

You dont' see it because you don't want to see it. You simply want to view the Bible through what you are willing to accept, not on the basis of what is actually stated in the text.

I could say the same of you. But you would disagree, just as I disagree with you. You don't see that it is simply "destruction" because you don't want to see it. You want the Bible to fit nice into what you already believe (were taught to believe, or grew up believing, or read for yourself - I don't know your background.... but you get my point). As I said, we disagree.

Suffice it to say, those who believe go to heaven, those that don't believe, do not (ignore for a moment exactly what that opposite is).

That cannot, for one minute be ignored.

I was trying to move to a broader theological outlook and get to the heart of Christianity, you seem intent on keeping things on the minute level.

I don't think it matters whether I am right or you are right, or in fact if neither of us are right.

Are you kidding??? It matters extremely much whether one of us is right or wrong. It speaks to the integrity of the Scriptures for one thing, and if you are not willing to believe what the Bible says on this issue, what else are you willing reject as well???

Are you saying I am not Christian then? I trust in Jesus' saving grace, trust that his death and resurrection are sufficient for my sins. I acknowledge that i am a sinner and try as I might, will continue to sin. I repent of my sins, and bring them before God humbly and seek forgiveness, encouraging myself to work towards not committing sin again. My life is dedicated to pursuing God as best as capable. Through prayer and Bible reading, my relationship with God grows daily. I proclaim Christ crucifixion and resurrection (as taught by the gospels), proclaiming God to all who are willing to listen. I, like Jesus, tell others of the coming Kingdom of God and his eternal Glory. My Faith is in Christ alone, and it is through Grace and not works that I am saved (paraphrased from Ephesians 2:8-9).

And in all of this, I don't believe that God will punish non-believers for all eternity. This one aspect of Christianity, this aspect that no one will really know for sure about until after Christ's return, and you really think it matters a great deal. There are a lot of grey areas in the Bible. Sections that have multiple interpretations - remember, not all Chrisitans all believe the same thing. That doesn't diminish the integrity of the Scriptures. IN the end, there is only one "right" answer, and on these grey areas (which obviously I think the nature of hell is one of them) no one will truly know. But it doesn't matter, because it does not affect the way I live. For argument's sake let us say you are right - does it change anything about my relationship with God? Do my actions change as a result of this? No, because I will still proclaim Christ and rest in Faith in the scriptures.

If we go by your reasoning that any deviation of Christian belief puts into question the integrity of scripture, then what of other controversial topics???? Predestination vs Free will, for one. Christians have argued for centuries over that one, and it's only bee the past 250 years that free will has become the predominant belief (prior to the 18th Century, most Christians ascribed to predestination, though some still argued otherwise). How about the Rapture? This was never even formally stated as a doctrine until after 1830 when a schoolgirl had a vision, so did the early Christian writers just ignore passages sucha s 1 Thessalonians 4, or did they have a different view of the Tribulation? All these "grey areas" do not throw into doubt the integrity of scripture. It throws into doubt our human ability to understand the scriptures, but there is only one Right answer. But these things are irrelevant, since none of them are pertinent to salvation. Which is why I said I do not think it matters.

But I digress. Back to Hell. If it is a place where non-believers are punished for all eternity, my message to non-believers is - have eternal life with God. If it is a place of separation from God for all eternity, my message to non-beleivers is - have eternal life with God. If it is a place where all cease to exist and become no more, my message to non-believers is - have eternal life with God. And that message that I proclaim is the same one proclaimed in the Bible -that Christ died for their sins, the Righteous for the unrighteous, and by Grace God can save them too if they put their Trust in him, confide their sins, Repent and turn and live according to His Divine Will.

You may see a big difference in our theologies, but when it comes down to it, Shiloh - I don't think it matters! We'll find out one day. If I'm right, then we (that is, Christians) are all going to be with God, and if you're right then we (again, Christians) are all going to be with God anyway. Unless it is your view that the nature of Hell is an essential doctrine, in which case you are saying I am not a Christian because I don't believe this, despite believing everything else. So is the nature of Hell an essential or non-essential doctrine?

Sorry for the rant, and I do wish you the best, Shiloh

~ In Christ, Rob (aka Paranoid Android)

[ParanoidAndroid]

As for Man's comments, I understand the meaning. I am not implying he derives "pleasure" from the ideas of non-Chrsitians suffering, but I do get the distinct impression that unless there is a punishment for those who don't believe (and by "punishmetn", I mean physical torture of some kind), his views won't be validated.

Those are not my views......they come straight from the Word.

Strange that I was thinking the same thing about you

"My doctrine" (what I think the Bible teaches)

That's just it............it's what you "think" the bible teaches.

You don't like the idea of eternal punishment, so you take scripture and twist it and mold it to fit into something you can live with.

Somehow I knew you'd pick on the phrase "my doctrine". I was simply conveying that this is how the scriptures have spoken to me. I was not meaning to imply that "my doctrine" is different to God's.

Everything you have said can be turned on its head - it's what you "think" the Bible teaches. You don't like the idea of ceasing to exist because that implies no eternal consequences for sin, so you have taken it and twisted it to fit a view that you can live with.

You see, we can go round and round debating this. We are both claiming the BIble as our authority, but have different opinions. As I said to Shiloh, this is one of those areas where we will have to agree to disagree, unless it is also your view that Hell-as-punishment is an essential doctrine (I don't think it is, btw).

The Blood of Jesus saves those who put their Trust in his name

Saves them from what? From nonexistence?

Yes, from the second death.

Do you not understand that if someone does not exist, they are feeling absolutely nothing. Because they're not there to feel it. If someone doesn't make it into heaven, it's not that big a deal because they will eventually become nothing. So if one was to follow your teachings, there would be no consequence sin. One would simply cease to exist. It wouldn't matter to them if they missed out on eternal life because they wouldn't know.

When someone teaches another person that there is no hell, that there is no eternal punishment, that all those who don't make it into the kingdom simply cease to exist, they are teaching that there is no consequence for sin.

THere is a consequence to sin - death. Some might think that enough (I do). Those who choose to live for themselves will have this life on earth, then they will be Judged and found not in teh Book of Life, and they will lose eternal glory. Those who choose to live for Christ will receive eternal glory. This makes perfect sense to me, and as I said before (though naturally you and others will disagree) is completely compatible with scripture.

So really, unless it is an essential doctrine, I think this is one of those things we'll just have to agree to disagree on, since we both see the Bible supporting our views.

All the best, Man

~ Rob (aka, PA)

[ParanoidAndroid]

"Fate" is a pagan concept. There is no "fate" where one's eternal life is concerned.

Hello again, Shiloh,

Sorry to harp on this, but I was just going back over the thread, and as far as I can tell you didn't answer this question. I asked you what your definition of "fate" is, and never heard a response. It was just one question among many I asked in that post, so maybe you missed it. If you could clarify, I would be most appreciative. Thanks.

[Guest man]

Think on this for a moment: If you are made in His LIKENSS and in his image............we should not to have so wait long after death before we enter into heaven also. WHY? BECAUSE at our death, we are still in his imagine and after his likness.

[Guest shiloh357]

"Fate" is a pagan concept. There is no "fate" where one's eternal life is concerned.

Hello again, Shiloh,

Sorry to harp on this, but I was just going back over the thread, and as far as I can tell you didn't answer this question. I asked you what your definition of "fate" is, and never heard a response. It was just one question among many I asked in that post, so maybe you missed it. If you could clarify, I would be most appreciative. Thanks.

Fate is a inevitably predetermined outcome. It is something that befalls a person outside of their realm of control.

That is why I said that there is no fate where eternal life is concerned. None of us are "fated" to have eternal life. It is a choice we make. Either we accept God's gift or we don't. Hell is not the "fate" of anyone. Hell is the consequence of a person choosing continued separation from God and thus they have elected hell for themselves.

[Guest shiloh357]

Are you saying I am not Christian then?

NO, I am saying that you are wrong and that you are extremely deceived and even a cursory examination of the Greek text of the NT bears that out.

Your basis for rejecting what the Bible says about the eternality of man's conscious state of eternal separation of from God is emotional and based upon ignoring the original language as well as intent of the authors not to mention the natural context of the passages that have been shown to prove that man will spend eternity in an miserable, excruciating existance, conscious separation from God.

I notice that you only respond to certain points, completely ignoring the Greek which only highlights the weakness and fallacious nature of your position.

[ParanoidAndroid]

Fate is a inevitably predetermined outcome. It is something that befalls a person outside of their realm of control.

Hi Shiloh, thanks for the clarification. Unfortunately, I must again disagree with you and say that predestination is not just a "pagan" concept, but existed throughout the history of Christianity. Indeed, the debate of fee will vs predestination has raged for centuries with many of the most important Christian theologians taking both views throughout history. However, it has only been the past 300 years or so (18th Century AD), that the view of "free will" has become the dominant discourse. Before this date, while there would be some malcontents, most viewed God's control of history as divine and therefore unquestionable and therefore, we all had our lives predestined. It wasn't until a group of Deists, Agnostics and Atheists set in motion the time we now call the "Age of Enlightenment" that the concept of "free will" became popularly viewed.

Ironically, it has been my experience that reading other forums, non-Christians are taking more to teh view of predestination based on the "clockwork" nature of the universe. As I said, ironic, since it was the atheists/agnostics/deists who introduced free will to the Christian populace and now Christians are arguing for this more than ever while the atheists/agnostics/deists seem resigned to a fate that was "programmed" for them since their birth. Gotta love how history has switched the roles of belief/unbelief.

That is why I said that there is no fate where eternal life is concerned. None of us are "fated" to have eternal life. It is a choice we make. Either we accept God's gift or we don't. Hell is not the "fate" of anyone. Hell is the consequence of a person choosing continued separation from God and thus they have elected hell for themselves.

Just curious, but what about the sections of scripture that say that man cannot possibly turn to God unless God calls him? If it is "our choice", then even based on Faith (such as Ephesians 2:8-10) we can argue that we "deserve" salvation because we chose to believe. Contrary to this is the view of the Bible that states that man alone cannot find God no matter how hard he seeks - that it is only through God's divine choice that we become citizens of heaven. I could post passage after passage supporting this view, but suffice it to say, that I believe that the Bible supports predestination (ie, it is not just a "pagan view").

Considering it's 6:30am, I won't go into detail at this time (and I know I did leave a lot of unanswered questions) but I don't see it as such a big deal that God controls every part of our lives, including our conversion (whenever we pray for the salvation of a soul, we pray taht God would *and I quote* "open up the person's heart to hear the message"). I'll post in more detail tomorrow or the day after. All the best,

~ PA

[ParanoidAndroid]

Are you saying I am not Christian then?

NO, I am saying that you are wrong and that you are extremely deceived and even a cursory examination of the Greek text of the NT bears that out.

Your basis for rejecting what the Bible says about the eternality of man's conscious state of eternal separation of from God is emotional and based upon ignoring the original language as well as intent of the authors not to mention the natural context of the passages that have been shown to prove that man will spend eternity in an miserable, excruciating existance, conscious separation from God.

I notice that you only respond to certain points, completely ignoring the Greek which only highlights the weakness and fallacious nature of your position.

Thanks for the clarification on this issue, at least we can agree that it is not a matter worthy of importance in regards to salvation (that has been the majority view that I have taken with those who both agree and disagree with me). However, as an aside, since the entire opinion of hell-as-punishment is based on certain pre-requisite beliefs, we could argue that it is not I that am "extremely deceived" but you. Naturally, we hold different views to this - does that inherently make you right and me wrong (or vice versa)? I am commenting on what I think the Bible states, based on study of the scripture. You are doing the same.

Since we both come to different conclusions, we can obviously rule out that "both are right" is not an option. Only one of us is right (or perhaps neither - perhaps there is a view that has not been explored by either of us). We both agree that when it comes to scripture, only one view is right, and that is the view that God intended. I don't think it unpalatable to consider my view of hell (as unpopular as it may be with you and others) as any less relevant than those who hold to your view.

Since we have both agreed it is not a salvation issue, I don't think it is something worth arguing. It may be worth discussing on an intellectual point of view, but since neither you or I have ever died, any interpretation is just that - an interpretation. We both feel justified in our views. In the end, only one of us will be right (or neither, as I said), but it is something that is non-essential to the question of salvation.

Who is our saviour? What did Jesus do, and why did Jesus carry out this act of supreme sacrifce? These are questions of eternal value. While it may be interesting to discuss the different views of "hell", it adds nothing to our lives when it comes to salvation.

With that, I will sign off for the night. As noted in my last post, it's late at night, and I have to be up relatively early. All the best, and I hope I have made some semblance of sense through my discussion here.

All the best,

~ Paranoid Android

[Guest shiloh357]

QUOTE (shiloh357 @ Jul 19 2008, 09:02 PM)

Fate is a inevitably predetermined outcome. It is something that befalls a person outside of their realm of control.

Hi Shiloh, thanks for the clarification. Unfortunately, I must again disagree with you and say that predestination is not just a "pagan" concept, but existed throughout the history of Christianity.

Well you must have me confused with someone else, because I didn't say Predestination is a pagan concept. I said "fate" is. You need to read up on your Greek mythology about "the fates." Fate and Predestination are not the same thing.

Fate is based on impersonal, predetermination of what events will take place and how your life will turn out. For that reason, it has nothing to do with Predestination. You need to read up on the differences. I am not going to comment on the rest of your post as it carries on about Predestination and since it is clear that you have confused the concept of Predestination with fate, there is no reason to elaborate further, and a discussion of Predestination is off topic.

I am commenting on what I think the Bible states, based on study of the scripture. You are doing the same.

No, I am not. I am commenting on what the Bible says. Your's is an emotionally based rejection of the clear teaching of Scripture. I am simply going off what it says, based upon the context of the passages and the words as they are related to issue from the original tongue. You are hanging on to what words mean in our modern English usage. I am deferring to the intent of the authors. So, YOU may commenting on what YOU think the Scriptures say, but I am working off what they actually say based on the intent of the authors who penned it, which is far and away more reliable of a method of undersanding the Bibile. I will never concede to the notion that you and I are operating from equally valid perspectives or methods of understanding. I am applying a far more valid and reliable method than are you, and there is nothing equivalent about our chosen methods understanding the text.

The Bible says of those in hell, who took the mark and followed the Anti-Christ that the smoke of their torment will rise forever. (Rev. 14:11) It could not be more clear. If complete destruction was indicated, hell itself would be unnecessary in the first place. People would simply be destroyed upon their death and their spirits annihilated immediately.

[ParanoidAndroid]

Well you must have me confused with someone else, because I didn't say Predestination is a pagan concept. I said "fate" is. You need to read up on your Greek mythology about "the fates." Fate and Predestination are not the same thing.

My apologies if I didn't see a difference. Though I can see the value in your argument Fate = our life has already been decided. Predestination = our life has already been decided by God. Subtle difference, but I do see the difference. Thanks for clarifying

No, I am not. I am commenting on what the Bible says. Your's is an emotionally based rejection of the clear teaching of Scripture. I am simply going off what it says, based upon the context of the passages and the words as they are related to issue from the original tongue. You are hanging on to what words mean in our modern English usage. I am deferring to the intent of the authors. So, YOU may commenting on what YOU think the Scriptures say, but I am working off what they actually say based on the intent of the authors who penned it, which is far and away more reliable of a method of undersanding the Bibile. I will never concede to the notion that you and I are operating from equally valid perspectives or methods of understanding. I am applying a far more valid and reliable method than are you, and there is nothing equivalent about our chosen methods understanding the text.

The Bible says of those in hell, who took the mark and followed the Anti-Christ that the smoke of their torment will rise forever. (Rev. 14:11) It could not be more clear. If complete destruction was indicated, hell itself would be unnecessary in the first place. People would simply be destroyed upon their death and their spirits annihilated immediately.

I do not wish to continue this discussion if all you are going to say in response is that your view is more valid and therefore you are right and I am wrong. I read the Bible and I see three clear possibilities for the opposite of heaven (I won't call it "hell" since the Bible does not do so). These three interpretations are:

1- eternal punishment in fire and torture

2- eternal sepration from God

3- complete and utter destruction (second death).

After reading the Bible (not based on my own emotional response), I have ruled out the first of these interpretations as not just unbiblical but a complete subversion of scripture. That leaves the 2nd and 3rd options, which both have scriptural support, and hinge on whether you believe the "soul" is eternal naturally, or whether it is only given immortality by God. Considering the views of predestination vs free will, I have looked at the Bible and decided that it supports the third view more than it does the second.

Feel free to disagree with me, I'm not saying you have to agree with everything I say. I'm as human and fallible as anyone else. But the wording of your post is written such to imply that I have not studied the topic, and am arguing from an emotional standpoint and not a biblical one, and therefore it is unreliable. Since this view is not an accurate reflection of my research, I just want it to be known for the record on this board that my view is thoroughly based in textual understanding of the topic.

You may disagree. That is your right. Heck, you might even be right. Just don't try the "moral high road" that many Christians fall back on when faced with different interpretations of text (as you have done here, ie, "my view is distorting scripture and appeals solely to emotion while yours is entirely justified and has nothing to do with your own preconceived notions). I disagree not because of emotional retardation of scripture, but by balanced weighing of the verses. If you disagree with the interpretation, that's fine by me (though I believe you are wrong in doing so, just as you believe I am wrong in believing as I do). I just don't like the condemnation/judgement that is cast upon those of us (such as myself) who hold a slightly different interpretation than what you would consider "mainstream Christianity".

I wish you the best,

~ PA