Amos

That answer sure does not agree with the notion that both "cold and hot" are OK but "lukewarm" is not OK. Lukewarm would be when we have been shown the face of God but did not get an invitation to the royal banquet where we meet God face to face.

excreationist

Sabine Grant:
I know you were replying to Ronin, but here goes anyway...

Oh Ronin...you want conventional answers from conventional christians. The thought that a christian could have a different understanding of "hell" should help you refocus on the individuality behind faith.
Is having a faith that places a lot of importance on the words of the Bible important to you? I guess you'd rather pick and choose which Bible verses you want to take seriously.

I will certainly not enter your circle ( quite vicious I would add) and redefine again and again what I have already explained so many times in various threads. Like it or not Ronin, I have my very own view of "hell".
It seems to ignore a lot of the Bible though... but maybe you've explained why it doesn't lots of times before...

It should not concern you though since you have no desire to even be in God's presence for an instant.
This wouldn't be true of all non-Christians... e.g. in Job 1 and 2, Satan himself went into and out of the presence of God - of his own free will. And in the gospels, Satan met up with Jesus (who is God) to tempt him... just because someone doesn't love someone else (or believes they exist) it doesn't mean that they'd never want to meet that person.
Also, how can you tell people what they shouldn't be concerned about? People are free to worry about what they like.

But it rightfuly concerns me as a believer.... so what iz ze trouble my dearrrrrr?
People can have an interest in things they don't literally believe in - e.g. Star Trek and Star Wars fans who might have arguments about it don't necessarily believe those characters exist.

excreationist

I guess you're talking about
Revelation 3:15-16
"I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm - neither hot nor cold - I am about to spit you out of my mouth."

Amos

Yes I was and it should be plastered on every church in North America and that should shut them all down. Kind of like a warning on cigarette packages except here it deals with not just the body but with the body and the soul.

long winded fool

To keep from being a cosmic rapist, maybe? (I love that term.) Just in case someone doesn't want to spend eternity with Him, God created a place where they don't have to.

Sue Sponte

Sabine:

I respect that you are christian yet still exercise independent judgment for your personal beliefs. Do you view consider yourself more christian than deist? Understanding that others may categorize these things differently than I do, it seems to me that one who believes in God but does not choose to believe all the tenets of a given faith is more on the deist end of the spectrum, although it may be that your quibbles with the text are relatively few.

Which leads me to rephrase the question asked several times on this page. If God exists, must there necessarily be a hell, or might this aspect of the text be seen as a means for creating compliance among the faithful?

long winded fool

For a Christian, eternity away from God would be eternal punishment. Since the Bible probably wasn't written by any atheists, it seems logical that the worst punishment any Christian could possibly endure would be a description of Hell. How could atheists suffer in Hell? How could anyone physically suffer in Hell?

Matthew 10:28
"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."

I would translate both as fear.

Matthew 10:29-31 (the rest of the thought)
"Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father. And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. So don't be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.

This is a commonly quoted chapter by atheists. There are plenty of quotes that seem contradictory when taken out of context. "I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." When one reads the entire chapter in context, the contradictions disappear. "Don't be a coward! Worry about your soul, not your body," is the general message. Because without the body there is no pain or suffering, and no one enters Hell in their body, the eternal pain and suffering mentioned must be symbolic of an eternity away from God, if the Bible is true.

My father wanted me to fear the consequences of misbehavior when I was young. I did, to some extent. (Probably not enough.) Despite my fears of punishment and wrong-doing, I never feared my father. I was young and I didn't understand the purpose of punishment, but I loved him. And I love him all the more now because of the strong conscience he instilled in me through threat of punishment for doing things that were wrong. I was "father-fearing" in the same respect as Christians are admonished to be "God-fearing." Being afraid of God is a bad thing the same as being afraid of your father. Being God-fearing is a good thing the same as being afraid of what your father will think if you steal a stereo.

"Don't be afraid of what your buddies will say if you don't steal that stereo. Be afraid of the guy that's going to ground you for a month if you do." This shows love, not a lack of love. And this shows a caring father worthy of obedience. He doesn't want to ground me, but he does want me to face the consequences of my actions. If I run away from home, he'll do everything in his power to bring me back, but it's ultimately up to me and he won't force me to love him. If I decide I would rather live in the streets and die, then he'll be sad and that's it. If a person would rather go to Hell than Heaven, God will be sad and that's it. Why would a God who doesn't allow people to go to Hell be worthy of worship? How can a loving God not allow for there to be a Hell? Only a selfish God who created human beings solely for his personal pleasure and amusement would do this, and the God of the Bible is selfless. Like my father, only more so.

excreationist

So Hell is only bad for Christians? But no true Christians would be going to hell anyway... so what about evil non-Christians who enjoyed torturing a lot of people in their earthly lives? Do they face the same fate as other non-Christians? BTW, what would people do all day in hell? In the Bible they do things like gnash their teeth and scream? Would they actually lead earth-like lives, except with no God in their lives... (that would be like the life I have now) Or are they bodiless beings that do nothing but think forever... and are incapable of seeing or doing anything at all?

Haven't you heard of the resurrection of the dead?
Revelation 20:4-5, 12-15:
Mark 12:25 - "When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven."

So these resurrected people are different (perhaps like the resurrected Jesus) but they are still quite physical - like how Thomas was able to touch Jesus's wounds.

Anyway, if people can't feel pain in the afterlife, why would they be able to feel pleasure, while in heaven? The Bible talks a lot about the intense pain involved with heaven, but it doesn't really talk about physical pleasure from being in heaven - just awe, etc... well it does talk about people being "rewarded" while in heaven, and there being a feast, etc. I think the idea of annihilation (people getting "burnt up" in the fire) has a lot more Biblical support than the idea that people live forever in a place that isn't physically painful. If the person hates God in the first place I don't see how your version of hell would be uncomfortable at all.

That's different from your example about your father. Heaven is like God's home and going to Hell is like running away from your father's home. You said your father would "do everything in his power to bring me back" if you ran away from home. I don't see the Christian God (assuming he exists) doing anything to prevent me from running away from home (by not surrendering to him and therefore going to hell). I guess people like you are speaking on behalf of God, asking me to come home to God... but your father would have more power in getting someone to stay home than God would... since your father can be clearly seen and heard, etc.
Your father's punishment for your wrong-doing is being grounded - i.e. being made to stay home - with him. On the other hand, God's punishment is to stay away from him (like being thrown out of your house) and his reward is to be with him.

Ronin

I will take this standard bit of xian fluff to mean you will not answer my simple questions directly then...as per your usual display of emotional flippity flop.



Ah, well, I understand the predicament you would have to place yourself in should the blatantly obvious be entertained.

long winded fool

Hell would be eternal punishment for those who love God, just as never seeing my father again would be eternal punishment for me if I love my father. If I don't, then never seeing him again wouldn't be so bad. In either case, my father isn't punishing me, even if I'm enduring the consequences of my actions. My father didn't say, "Son, you can go live on the street if you want to, I don't mind." He told me all the terrible things that happen out there and told me how much better off I am with him. He told me that if I went to live on the streets away from his care, that there'd be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Not really) If I really loved him, the street would be terrible. If I didn't love him, the street wouldn't be so bad. If I hated him, the street might actually be preferable. My point is that Hell isn't a divine institution of punishment just as the threat of living out on the street wasn't my father's way of forcing me to behave through threat. He loved me and He was showing me the consequences of my actions and letting me decide. I may have been angry and said, "Well it doesn't seem like much of a choice!" but that's not His fault. If humans have free will, then God doesn't send them to Hell. He allows them to walk there if that's what they want. Complaining that there is a Hell and that it's Gods fault that people go there is like complaining that it's your father's fault that you didn't love him and ran away to a horrible life on the streets. A God who would hold you against your will is a God not worth worship. And indeed would have no need of worship.

The complaint against Hell has always seemed to me like the complaint of having free will. "Why doesn't God just force me to love him so I don't have to go through all this pain and doubt?! If he really loved me and was worth worship, he'd make me love him and not allow me to get away." This shows an obvious lack of understanding of the definition of love. A God who would do this would not be a God of love. If the Christian religion taught this, I imagine that atheists would be arguing against it and saying that a God worth worship wouldn't force himself on his people.