Which vision of Hell do you currently have? Did you always have this vision? When and how did it change? What began your first Hell vision? Which vision of Hell did you have 1st and which for the longest? Do you think your Hell vision will change?
Currently, I think Hell is eternal mental anguish and regret that we didn't accept Jesus. I know some feel it is torment that eventually ends.
Please share.
Which vision/belief about Hell do you currently hold?
Hell is eternal separation from God without literal fire
Hell is eternal torment in literal fire
Hell is torment in literal fire but not eternal, just enough to burn up your soul to death
Hell is non-existant
Hell is eternal mental anguish
Hell is mental anguish for 1000 years
Hell is complete darkness where demons attack you
Select gender and age to cast your vote:
Please select your age
Which vision/belief about Hell do you currently hold?
My belief is that Hell is a place where the full wrath of God is poured out on the unrepentant wicked. Their only regret is that they were judged, not that they did not accept Jesus. I believe those who die in their sin have darkened hearts and make idols of themselves even whilst facing God's wrath and judgement. They have no remorse over their sins even then, instead they continue to deny God's justice in rebellion.
This belief comes from many things including the psalms where David says "if I make my bed in Sheol (the hebrew word for the underworld/death) you are there." I believe the Bible is clear that God exists even in hell, but I do not believe he himself is burning there. Thus I don't believe it's simple separation from God, rather it is separation from all that is good. God is the source of all good things, as scripture says, he causes the rain to fall on the just and the unjust. In life God's grace allows both the righteous and the wicked to experience God's goodness. In death, the Righteous experience God's love and mercy and holiness while the wicked experience only God's wrath and judgement in holiness. The Bible describes the wicked as having unrepentant hearts and it makes clear that mankind has no power to change the heart but that it must be changed by God. In other words... if someone dies in their sin, they will not repent even after facing God's judgement. This is my belief on what hell is. I know it's a bit different from the way many people view it, even many Christians, but that is besides the point.
here is the truth about hell. hell is NOT eternal. though it is a place of great torment (Luke 16:22-31), but those that are tormented there in will be delivered up at the great white throne judgment (the final judgment for the wicked) then after that they get cast into the lake of fire. THIS is eternal (Revelation 20:11-15)
Though you could argue that the lake of fire is to hell what the new heavens and the new earth will be to the current heaven and earth. I see the lake of fire as hell in its final state rather than being something somehow separate, but I may well be wrong in that.
I voted A, but D is also true for me, because I believe that Hell is not a place that presently exists. Rather, it will be the future wrath of God poured out on the unsaved. Now you say in one place that you believe that Hell is eternal mental anguish & regret, and in another place you say that God is not a psychopath that would have us suffer eternally for finite crimes. So which is it: do you believe in infinite punishment, or are you an Annihilationist like me?
Here is the beginning of Part 1: Heaven and Hell, of chapter IX (9) on my website: www.thezap.net: {The idea of a Hell whereby beings are endlessly tortured, is so monstrous and unpalatable, skeptics use it to justify unbelief and reject Christianity. Therefore I have a radical, sensible alternative. As a Christian I completely reject that absolutely repugnant concept of infinite punishment, yet also thoroughly reject the concept of universal salvation. I provide overwhelming evidence and logic for the doctrine of Annihilation-ism.
Concepts of Hell pervading ancient mythology suggests that this concept is common sense, rather than being fictitious. Rejecting the idea of hell altogether disregards justice, having people sinning limitlessly without ever facing God. Hell is not only the grave; Christian scripture has two hells. Sometimes the Greek word Hades, denoting the grave or departed state, is translated into the English word hell. Other times the Greek word Gehenna is translated "hell." Gehenna was originally a valley where children were burned alive as sacrifices to the idol Moloch. Since this place was abhorred, it later became a garbage dump for dead bodies where fires continually burned to quell the ongoing putrefaction.
Since universalism or denial of punishment in the hereafter is completely foreign to Christian history, I shall discuss it not further. However, besides the majority position of infinite punishment, there is annihilation-ism: the volitionally lost experience hell (Gehenna), and suffer the full punishment of their sins, until they're totally consumed, figuratively incinerated.}
@Hurdleez-Swampede Please work with me on promoting the doctrine of Annihilation-ism, so that the doctrine of infinite punishment gets pushed aside, so as not to be a barrier between unbelievers and their potential ability to connect with our Savior. @mistixs You are right about the translation of those words in question, and it's good that you reject infinite punishment. However, your idea of universalism is foreign to Christianity. It is clearly invalid. Also, those words eternal and for ever are not mistranslations. They are merely the use of hyperbole.
I believe there could be literal fire but not eternal or permanent.
I think Hell is more regret and mental anguish for refusing to get to know God. God will separate sinners from His presence after judgment and yes, unbelief is a sin. Revelation clearly shows so.
I think I will lean more to mental anguish and the fire is more so about the desire to continue in sin but never getting satisfaction that will burn them up inside.
I'm curious if universalism was declared heretical before or after the Bible was translated into phrases that seemed to assert eternal torment (e. g. from "in the age of ages" in the original Greek, to "forever and ever" in later translations). It seems a lot harder to deem heretical if we look at the original Greek phrases.
That means you support the doctrine of Infinite Punishment. It doesn't matter if it is a literal fire or mental. It is an attack point for skeptics to say that our God is a sadist. Please reconsider and read my chapter which supports Annihilation-ism.
@mistixs : Origen was among the chief Christians, but then he went nuts and apparently had a mental breakdown and started spouting nonsense. Those anti-Christian teachings of his were roundly and officially condemned by the Church as heresy. YES, Universalism was ALWAYS deemed heretical. Purchase yourself a copy of: A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs, David W. Bercot, editor, Hendrickson Publishers, from Amazon. com.
It wasn't "always" deemed heretical. It was deemed heretical after the Bible was translated in such a way that does make universalism seem heretical (with the "forever" and "eternal" statements). Early church fathers who supported universal reconciliation included Clement of Alexandria, Didymus the Blind, St Gregory of Nyssa (declared "the father of fathers" by the seventh ecumenical council), Titus, Diodore, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Isaac of Nineveh, & Theodoret the Blessed. Those are just a few. St Jerome wrote "I know that most persons understand by the story of Nineveh and its King, the ultimate forgiveness of the devil and all rational creatures.”
Universalism wasn't "nuts". It's well-supported by many Bible verses, particularly the verses I cited, that included references to "restoration of all things", ALL being saved by Christ, God's will that ALL be saved (and God never fails), etc
@mistixs : All those guys did not support Universalism. The Bible does not support Universalism; never did. It is NOT Christianity; nothing to do with Christianity.
So, if they don't support universal reconciliation, how do you explain the Bible verses about Christ being the savior of the WHOLE world, ALL being made alive in Christ, ALL things being reconciled to God through Christ, ALL things being restored, etc?
The original Greek word for "fire" in reference to hell referred to a purifying fire, and the Greek word used for "torment" actually referred to "testing", & all the words referring to "eternity" in reference to "eternal punishment" actually referred to "age-long" (not actually eternal).
So I believe hell is part of God's "restoration of all things" (Acts 3:21). It is where sinners will be purified to become how God intended to be ("very good" according to Genesis) so they can be allowed in God's perfect new Earth.
God works ALL things according to God's will (Eph 1:11), and God is "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:9). God never fails. Eventually, EVERY knee shall bow to Christ and confess Christ as Lord (Phil 2:10-11), which is the requirement to be saved (Romans 10:9). God doesn't stay angry forever (Psalm 103:9, Isaiah 57:16).
"No one is cast off from the LORD forever. Though he brings grief, he will show compassion, so great is his unfailing love." (Lam 3:31-32)
"[Jesus] is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." ( 1 John 2:2)
As for what hell will be like: it will be a place of great suffering, and the suffering gets greater with the amount of sin you committed. Eventually it will end, but it's still ideal that people accept Christ as Savior today & try to resist sin, so that they don't end up in the purifying but horrifying suffering of hell.
The fact that "eternal" is a mistranslation can be seen even *without* going back to the original Greek. Jude 1:7 said that Sodom served as an example "by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire." Is the city of Sodom still on fire today? The fire lasted until it was done destroying the city. It didn't last forever.
Jonah 2:6 says Jonah was in the belly of the whale "forever." Forever turned out to be 3 days.
@mistixs True. People have some misconceived notion that God is a psychopath who would have us suffer eternally in Hell for finite crimes. Forever in this case could mean 6 hours in Hell.
They use the smoke of their torment will ascend forever and don't understand it is a mistranslation. Bible Flock Box from YouTube channel has a good point on this.
Also, I want to clarify because I know a common argument is that the same word is used to refer to eternal life. But it has to be examined in context: there's no indication that eternal life will end, but there *is* plenty of indication that hell will end:
"For as in Adam all die, so in Christ ***all*** will be made alive." ( 1 Cor 15:22)
"The last enemy to be destroyed is death." ( 1 Cor 15:26)
"19For God was pleased to have all His fullness dwell in Him, 20and through Him to reconcile to Himself ****all things,**** whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through the blood of His cross." ( Col 1)
Just a few examples, in addition to the ones I mentioned in the original comment, regarding the restoration of ALL things (Acts 3:21) etc
You don't understand the Bible as a lesbian nor am I going to take the time to explain nothing to you because you're hard headed as hell.
The Bible is clear hell fire is forever.
Revelation 14:9-11:
Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation.
He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”
Jude 1:5-7:
But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.
And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
@Hispanic-Cool-Guy "as a lesbian." First off, I'm bi, & I've decided not to engage in sexual relations with a woman because I know it's sinful. In fact, I am waiting until marriage even to engage in sexual relations with a man. I am a virgin. how about you? Did you commit any sexual immorality?
"are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." And did the fire last forever? No, it lasted until Sodom was destroyed.
the term translated "forever and ever" actually means "in the age of ages" in the original Greek. Again, you're basing your conclusions off of a mistranslation.
@Hispanic-Cool-Guy Lol you don't want to admit your hypocrisy for saying I'm going to hell for same-sex attraction (despite the fact that I'm a virgin who's keeping my virginity until I enter a heterosexual marriage) whereas you have actively committed fornication, which is just as condemned in the Bible as homosexual activity (1 Cor 10:8, 1 Cor 6:9, Rev 21:8, etc) which I haven't even committed
@Just_a_human Maybe, maybe not. Even Paul, author of many books in the Bible, struggled with temptation to sin (Romans 7:14-25). We just have to keep resisting temptation.
the King James version (the most widely used one). This version was completed in 1611 by 8 members of the Church of England. There were (and still are) NO original texts to translate. The oldest manuscripts available, were written down 100’s of years after the last apostle died. There are more than 8,000 of these old manuscripts with NO TWO ALIKE. The King James translators used none of these anyway! Instead, they edited previous translations to create a version this vane king and his cronies in parliament would approve. So … 21st century Christians believe the so-called ‘Word of God’ is a book compiled and edited in the 17th century, from 16th century translations of 8,000 contradictory copies of 4th century scrolls, that claim to be copies of lost letters written in the 1st century!!! That’s insanity, not faith!
I read a book once that was written by a woman who's soul was lifted from her body by Jesus, who wanted to show her what hell was like, so she could warn others. Jesus carried her soul up into space above Earth. She looked down at Earth, and saw numerous tornado-like vortexes spiriling down into the center of the Earth.
Jesus took her down one of the vortexes, and on the way down, she noticed a really rank smell, and various demons flying out of and down through the vortex. Jesus and the woman landed at the bottom, and there were endless little fire pits, each one holding a tormented soul, who was burning and also being eaten by worms. Demons would walk around at random, occasionally pulling a tormented soul out of the fire for a special beating, raping, whatever, before tossing the soul back into their fire pit. The gross smell was always present
Jesus took that woman there for a day or two, before bringing her back to her own body. This description of hell is something I could visualize, so that's the one I think of as true.
I heard a pastor tell me that women who abort their babies unrependent will suffer rape from demons with mercy because they don't care that the woman sought revenge on the man who raped her. The demons of Hell will inflict torment for the life she destroyed.
This same book I read said that Jesus showed this woman who he took with him several of the tormented souls among various fire pits. One committed murder, but didn't ask forgiveness because he figured he didn't deserve forgiveness. Another was a racist pastor. Another was a woman who was active in a Church, but fooled around with various married men. Another was a 'good' witch who was placed in an arena from time to time, with an audience filled with other condemned souls, who threw garbage and insults at this witch for leading them into hell. Later, this witch would be thrown into a prison cell, and the worms would continue eating him.
There is absolutely no evidence that any God actually exists. In fact, take a very close look at these ancient fables. Not only have they been shown to be a collection of various fables and superstitions from various cultures, but they even have this God "drowning out unbelievers". Like disbelieving in this God is a paramount sin. That should be a huge red flag right there that these religions are man-made hype. They are basically telling you outright that if you don't believe in their fictional God their God will condemn you. And what does that have to do with any morality or supreme intelligence? On the contrary that is a mentality that clearly comes from oppressive fraud. These myths are without a doubt one of the most powerful brainwashing schemes ever created by mankind to be sure. a child dies every 4 seconds from decease and no food israel is killing people every day in gaza a christian president conned the world into murdering over 1 million innocent iraqi civilians and we are continuing the slaughter through out the entire middle east. the vatican hides pediphiles we are still killing our brothers for fossil fuels and we have electric cars. and you guys are worried about what demons aliens and god. look mankind created this shit all by their lonesome no demon no god and no alien involved here just man. we gotta stop blaming invisible people for things mankind is responsible for.
You can't call something invisible unless you can falsify it exist. Otherwise, you must say there is no evidence it exist. You can never say what doesn't exist.
The idea that atheism needs a supporting argument is logically backward. The burden of proof is always on the positive claim (I think X exists) rather than the negative (X does not exist). Why? Because you cannot provide empirical proof for a negative existence, it is actually impossible. Let me give an example - a positive claim could be made that Bigfoot exists, citing evidence from photographs, from eyewitness testimony, etc. The negative response could challenge the validity of those accounts, and could argue that the photographs are fakes, but all you can ever logically do is reject the proofs that that it does exist, and then on that basis alone conclude that the truth is probably the negative. What you cannot logically do is offer proof that Bigfoot does NOT exist. What could that proof be? 'In all of human history no reliable account for its existence has been given'? 'I cut down every forest on Earth and there was no Bigfoot to be seen'? These are not proofs that Bigfoot does not exist, they are again just arguments that there is no proof that it does. There is no such thing as proof something does not exist, other than a lack of proof that it does. There is no 'proof' against fairies existing, against leprechauns, against unicorns, against goblins, against the loch ness monster. We don't believe in these things simply from the lack of evidence that they DO exist. In light of that, what kind of evidence should an atheist offer that god does not exist? It is a logically meaningless request.
There is no reason for you to believe that you have a soul, or that you will have eternal life after death, or that there is a heaven and hell. babbling on about an imaginary God like this is dangerous, if for no other reason than this one. If so many people are this delusional in the area of religion, it makes you wonder where else they harbor equally significant delusions in their thinking. the true horror of religion; it allows otherwise sane people, to believe by the billions, what only lunatics could believe on their own.
Some people just can't handle it, so instead like little children clinging to a comfort blanket hold on to fairy tales. It is the difference between praying while someone is having a heart attack, and doing CPR on them to save their life. One works; one does not (every damn 'believer' will choose to do CPR and call for a paramedic because they're stinking hypocrites who know their god is absent and impotent).
Probably stuck in a time loop where one dies over and over again and the day restarts each time and there's absolutely no way out of it. No matter what you or anybody else does the outcome will always be the same: YOU'LL STILL DIE and then you wake up in the same day all over again, and something will happen that will cause you to DIE and repeat endlessly.
Hell to me is a made up story just like you tell kids who don’t eat their vegetables that there is a monster in their closet. I just don’t believe in a hell.
To me hell is simply dying not knowing if there is anything after this. Everything tells me there is nothing and heaven and hell are just a fantasy. Of course I hope there is a heaven but we live in a fleshy kind of world and when the flesh is gone you rot.
Then why even bother ask a question when you won’t believe what people say are gonna be what they actually think 🤔. Sounds kinda dumb. And just because you believe this man made concept exists doesn’t mean it does. You are making a claim so you should prove it or it remains just that, a claim.
Not to break your bubble but western countries are actually becoming less and less religious, even in the States and it seems like that trend will continue as it has the past decades.
Not sure about studies in third world countries but I’m sure they are much more religious. They often don’t have the same access to neutral education and books like we do. Not to mention they often get indoctrinated and deal with repercussions if they don’t follow their religion.
But the thing is there is no evidence of what you believe in. After thousands of years there is no evidence. If god was an actual phenomenon there would have been proof of it by now. If vampires existed we would have found proof by now. If fairies existed we would have found proof. If Loch Ness... so you are telling me just because there is no proof nor any evidence they can all still exist? Well then I am jesus reincarnated. Worship me. Don’t need proof to make that claim cause religion doesn’t need proof I just need to force it onto people and brainwash them.
You are the one here making claims something exists without any evidence or proof. Thus you are the one having to provide proof and evidence for your claim to be true. The only evidence I could possibly think of you are referring to is the bible, a book written thousands of years ago by who knows. Since then nothing. If you base yourself on one source without any references or being able to fact check its authenticity well in science that research would be dismissed.
You saying I’m giving an ignorant argument. You just dismissed the majority of the poll options that weren’t in your favor. You are ignoring the fact that it is you who makes a claim of something that exists. Again it is you who has to provide proof. If I say I don’t believe thunder exists despise having clear evidence it does it would be up to me to proof my point.
@Shutupman Wrong. I don't play that burden of proof crap. You claimed no afterlife, so you must falsify it or can't claim it is a myth.
In math, when we don't know if something exist or not, we don't assume it does or doesn't. Only in religious type propositions do we hold a default position.
I would if t was proven it existed which it doesn’t. How do I proof mermaids don’t exist? There has never been any factual proof or evidence despite being researched. How do I proof your god doesn’t exist? There has never been any factual proof or evidence despite having been researched. I am telling you I am jesus reincarnated. Proof me wrong.
You can't falsify it so you're holding a dishonest position to claim it is a myth.
In math, when we can't prove or disprove something, we don't hold a default position. What makes religion special that a default position should be accepted?
And we are not saying %100 there is no god more like %99 there's no god. During the youthful period of mankind’s spiritual evolution human fantasy created gods in man’s own image. The desire for guidance, love, and support prompts men to form the social or moral conception of God.
@Hurdleez-Swampede But can you PROVE that Hell exists, or is it simply a part of the Christian 'FAITH' that requires FAITH, and BELIEF? If you cannot PROVE that God exists, and you cannot PROVE that Hell exists, than these are nothing but religious ideals, created by people, mostly men, judgmental, controlling me, to dominate and control the ignorant population at the time the Word was written. Any person, with a reasoning, thinking and educated mind should question all of these 'concepts' as idealistic religious Dogma.
No it isn't. Not being able to prove something, doesn't mean it was made up. There could exist many things we have no concept or idea about.
In math, if we can't prove or disprove something, we don't take a default position. Why should a religious position by default go to the person who hasn't been shown evidence for something?
If you can't falsify something, you can't claim it is fake, a myth or non existent. It is a dishonest position. All you can claim is there is no reason to believe it exists. However, I could claim that there is no reason to believe that nothing happens after death.
Can you prove that nothing happens after death? I don't think so. Therefore, if you can't falsify an afterlife, you can't claim there's no such thing as one.
@Hurdleez-Swampede You are right, in what you say, but if you cannot PROVE that HELL exists, then why does it matter, that I say I don't believe in it? Just because you believe in it, doesn't mean I have to! Why bring up math, and life after death? Just more smoke and mirrors, to your lack of an argument why I cannot say that I DO NOT BELIEVE IN HELL?
You can say you don't think it exists but usually people claim it doesn't. They don't say they don't believe in it. They go on to say it doesn't exist.
Also, if Hell does exist, you'd likely eventually know it.
The math was to show they don't have a default position of needing evidence something exist but not needing evidence it doesn't exist. They are neutral both ways. It isn't like that in religion. In religion, people assume we don't need evidence something can't or doesn't exist. That it is better to withhold belief until evidence is presented for something but not against something.
@Hurdleez-Swampede So you are essentially making my argument true, for me, then, with that! You don't need proof in a 'religion', so when I say I follow a religious Way, and I don't believe in Hell, you cannot prove, or disprove, that I am wrong in that assertion, so what are you really arguing, at this point, Mate?
@Hurdleez-Swampede Dude, I am not crapping on your question, or judging you, in any way, oK? I mean NO OFFENSE, in any way!! The main reason I am on this site is to meet people that think differently, and share ideas, and learn. Tell me what you mean, when you say 'it depends on why you think Hell is non existant', and let's discuss, and maybe realize we are thinking similar things, but talking about them, in different ways!
If people think Hell is fake due to it not making sense but can't establish any reasoning to lead to that conclusion, then they don't have solid basis for holding it.
If they think it doesn't exist because it goes against ultimate moral justice and have an outlier to why it isn't moral to have a Hell, then they have valid reasoning.
I follow a very personal way, but I will not discuss it openly, only privately. My lack of belief in Hell, is that it is not needed, in the Way, I follow.
There is no hell. But earth will be created new and the time before it will be like a sea of fire where all enemies of God will burn until they are exterminated. That is the biblical view.
It is perfectly fine to have a faith, but realize that having this faith does not mean you have evidence for this faith. At no point in our history has a scientific problem been solved by a religious answer. I pity you not only for being brainwashed, but for your inability to find purpose in your life on your own instead of relying on fiction you resort to anecdotes of self-placation (your "blankie", it makes you feel good) and "appeal to ignorance" or "god of the gaps" wherein you say "I don't know, therefore god". You would be far more honest if you said: "I have no factual or evidential basis for my religious belief, there are lots of things I don't understand, and therefore this intellectual security blanket just makes me feel better". No further discussion or debate is required after such a statement simply because you would have honestly stated your position and noted that fact is irrelevant. Science doesn't care about what you believe in. Early uneducated philosophers that were ignorant of science created gods to explain natural phenomena like lightening because there was no other explanation that they knew of. Religion has evolved and developed even more as time has passed. And I'm sorry but that's an idiotic belief. There are no gods, or demons. The fact that people still believe on that shit in 2019 is embarrassing.
is that why you believe because you're scared of going to hell? you are acting like Christianity is the only true religion. Do you know how unlikely that is. There are THOUSANDS of religions on this planet alone all with several different denominations stop acting like you know jesus is the truth because you simply can't. to say you're going to hell because you don't believe what i believe patently ridiculous.
If you adhere to an unfounded viewpoint, one with ZERO evidence, and which is indistinguishable from a thousand other ideologies acknowledged to be myths, then it may ultimately cause sufficient examination to warrant abandonment of an unsupportable and patently ridiculous position. Compare "ridicule" by non-believers of myth-believers in today's first-world age to virtually EVERY method ever employed by religion towards alternative viewpoints: oppression, imprisonment, torture, and murder. Ridicule is downright pleasurable by comparison!
A fiction created to make religious people fallow the religion. especially the most extreme religion's like christianity. It has different names in different religion's.
Most Helpful Opinions