This question is for people who believe in hell, obviously. Are there different degrees of suffering in hell, or is it the same amount of suffering for everyone who goes there? Why I ask is because it seems rather unfair that everyone should face the same punishment. Take murder, for example. Say someone goes to hell for murdering one person in a fit of rage. Should they have the same punishment as say, a Hitler or an Idi Amin (who were responsible for the murders of millions of people) would have?

I think there are different degrees of hell.
I believe it just depends on why you were sent there

I think there is only one degree of hell or one hell. The Bible does say that if one's name isn't written in the Book of Life then they will be thrown into the lake of fire.

Now the murder you mentioned, may or may not go to hell. If he confesses and repents of his sin (basically changes) then the Lord would judge that man's heart and repentance accordingly. He could very well be saved.

The thing is with Hitler, he had long been possessed by Satanic spirit.
He was so far away from the Lord that he wouldn't be able to communicate with God any more.
:cool:

I think we humans make our own heaven or hell right now as we live. I have no clue what happens after we die, but I do know the choices we make on this earth either make us happy or sad and all that is in between. :cool:

Thanks guys, I appreciate the responses. Pumpkin, I was just using murder as an example. I guess my point was, some people are always going to commit worse sins that others, so it doesn't seem fair that both receive the same punishment. But I guess hell is more than just a punishment for sin, it's also the result of rejecting G-d.

I think there might not be different degrees of hell as there might be different degrees of heaven. Everyone can be forgiven of almost everything except the one unforgivable sin. Which I believe is the rejection of God. However I don't think it's fair for someone like Ted Bundy to go to the same heaven as me. Not that I am perfect. If we use our judgement and live a life as close to what God wants, He will decide and we will be judged accordingly. The question for me is what type of sin is bad enough for a different degree of heaven? Isn't cheating just as bad as anything else? Adultery is in the commandments yet so many people don't follow that one. I know the bible talks about different degrees of glory and different kingdoms in I Corinthians, chapter 15. I hope this helps. Take care.

Doesn't the Bible teach us that sin is sin... that no sin is worse or better than another?

This is totally my opinion. I haven't researched anything like this in a long time. I think there might be different degrees of Hell even though God looks at every sin the same.

So if there are different degrees of Hell, wouldn't there be different degrees of Heaven, as well?

I believe in hell Chava, but it may not match the hell other people believe in or exactly what you had in mind but I hope this is okay. If not, stop reading here? :o

The hell I know is here on earth - It was visited a few times against my will (shares a ptsd past with you) and now as a part of what I am routinely asked to do here.

I don't know that this particular hell comes in degrees, or even that its designed to punish anyone - the specific circumstances of it vary greatly. But I do know without question that all human suffering is equal. Pain is pain in any language. And some of the worst pain is self inflicted because its so hard to fathom.

I acquired an understanding one day that we each are ultimately held accountable for our actions (both good and bad). How I come by that is tougher to explain but it is an almost unshakable belief when very few of my beliefs are that solid. This accounting appears to me as absolutely unavoidable so I have long ago let go of any concern that "they are getting away with it". I know they aren't and so therefore neither am I.

Better to concentrate now on making heaven on earth instead too. :)

I believe in hell Chava, but it may not match the hell other people believe in or exactly what you had in mind but I hope this is okay. If not, stop reading here? :o

The hell I know is here on earth - It was visited a few times against my will (shares a ptsd past with you) and now as a part of what I am routinely asked to do here.

I don't know that this particular hell comes in degrees, or even that its designed to punish anyone - the specific circumstances of it vary greatly. But I do know without question that all human suffering is equal. Pain is pain in any language. And some of the worst pain is self inflicted because its so hard to fathom.

I acquired an understanding one day that we each are ultimately held accountable for our actions (both good and bad). How I come by that is tougher to explain but it is an almost unshakable belief when very few of my beliefs are that solid. This accounting appears to me as absolutely unavoidable so I have long ago let go of any concern that "they are getting away with it". I know they aren't and so therefore neither am I.

Better to concentrate now on making heaven on earth instead too. :)
I agree, We have a choice in how we live!:cool:

DrJizzle, yes I think there are differnet degrees in Hevaen also. Well, maybe not degrees but more rankings. Having your rewards in Heaven (good works) weighed with your unconfessed sin on earth. Does that make sense?

Yeah, that makes sense. So is it measured in degrees of happiness? Or just status?

In other words, those who confess ALL sin will have a more enjoyale Eternal Life or will be a more glorified Eternal Life?

Degrees of status. I think all in Heaven will be happy no matter what they are doing. It'll be a totally different state than here on earth.

Hmmmm... that's interesting. I have never actually considered that before. Wouldn't someone be able to say then that God loves me more than He loves you? Because one has a higher status? Or, if not, what would be the possible purpose of having status in Heaven? Is it more in terms of hierarchy?

I think so. But we wouldn't think of it in those terms. I am not sure what the purpose of that would be. It would in terms of hierarchy. I think it would be just like Paul says in the bible that were are different members in one body, and we aren't think of each other as better than the other. The foot wouldn't do the same as the hand. Someone said on another post it may have been you that we really don't know what it would be like in Heaven. Yes, the bible gives us an idea but I don't think we would even be able to comprehend the awesomeness of Heaven. :)

That makes sense! Good analogy.

So on the other hand, would degrees in Hell be on the same level? As a hand is to the foot.. or in that case, would it be more on the terms of more suffering vs less suffering

Are there different degrees of suffering in hell, or is it the same amount of suffering for everyone who goes there? Why I ask is because it seems rather unfair that everyone should face the exact same punishment.


To believe that all the righteous go to heaven, and all the wicked go to hell is to draw a distinct line between everyone and send some to the right and some to the left. Some to destruction and torment, and some to shining glory. This kind of division of juidgement cannot proceed from a God who is superlatively just. It is not just to condemn all the same punishment for different degtrees of wickedness, neither is it just that all will receive equal glory for different degrees of righteousness.

But in the clamor to have some system to point at, men have devised a judicial system redolent of the worst despots and delivered it into the hands and mouth of the mighty Jehovah.

Jesus said unto His disciples, "In my Father's house are many mansions, if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you, and I will come and receive you to myself, that where I am ye may be also."

With the undertanding that it is God and God alone who will pass judgement on all of us, let us turn to consider the scriptures for a moment. The penitent malefactor said Jesus, 'Lord, remember me when Thou comest into Thy kingdom.' And Jesus said unto him, 'Verily I say unto thee, today shalt thou be with me in Paradise.'"

From this statement some have taken it for granted that the thief on the cross received full and complete salvation. Some have taught the murderer in the felon's cell to confess Christ and all would be well with him; and as the hangman drew the bolt and let the culprit swing into eternity, the minister has stood close by and said, "The Lord Jesus receive thy soul."

On the other hand, the poor victim of the assassin has been cut off without time to confess Christ, and the same doctrine which wafts the murderer to the courts of glory consigns the victim to the flames of hell. Is it possible that Christ ever taught such a heinous doctrine? NO!

The question is, where did he go? If not to heaven, then the paradise named and heaven are two different places. Let the Scriptures speak for themselves. Three days after the crucifixion the Savior came forth a resurrected being, and as Mary met Him at the tomb, He said to her, "Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father."

Thus we have from His own lips that He had not ascended to the Father; and if He had not, neither had the thief. If no further light than this could be found in the Bible this would be sufficient to show that the malefactor did not go to heaven, for where Jesus went the thief went, for that was the promise. Where, then, did the Lord go?

Turn to I Peter 3:18-21, and the question is answered: "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but quickened by the Spirit: By which also He went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometimes were disobedient when once the long suffering of God waited in the days of Noah."

This makes it plain that the paradise referred to was the prison house, to which place Jesus went and opened up a dispensation of the Gospel to the dead. The next chapter, 6th verse, says: "For for this cause was the Gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit."

The thief went to a place of confinement to wait until the justice of God was satisfied and mercy stepped in and claimed her own. The difference between the penitent malefactor and the antediluvians was that the former immediately went to a place where Christ would present to him the plan of life, that day, while the latter had waited hundreds of years for that privilege. This shows that repentance brings its blessings even upon the deathbed; but to say that, after a life of sin, the malefactor went straight to the abode of the Father and remained there in glory, is in conflict with the teachings of Christ and Peter.

The statements of Peter relative to the mission of Christ to the spirits in prison throws light upon the saying of the Savior in St. John 5:25, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, the hour is coming and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that hear shall live."

Thus we see the privileges of the penitent malefactor. He went to the prison house and heard the Gospel, but how long he remained there before receiving all the saving benefits of the Gospel, we are not told. One thing is certain—he did not come back with the Messiah, nor have we ever heard of him sitting down with Christ on the right hand of the Father.

The opposite of salvation is damnation, and just as there are varying degrees and kinds of salvation, so there are degrees and kinds of damnation. There is a "greater damnation" (Matt. 23:14) and, thus, obviously, a lesser damnation.

That part of the spirit world inhabited by wicked spirits who are awaiting the eventual day of their resurrection is called hell. But, Hell will have an end. Viewing future events, John saw that "death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works." (Rev. 20:13.)

As we have seen, Jesus taught his disciples: "In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you." (John 14:2) If there were but one heaven, and all who go there would share and share alike, how inconsistent for Jesus to even suggest going to prepare a place for his disciples, and then to add, "In my Father's house are many mansions."

Since, therefore, there are many mansions in his Father's house, it is well that we give consideration to them. The apostle Paul informed us that he knew a man in Christ who was caught up to the third heaven. A careful reading of this scripture will reveal the fact that Paul himself was that man: I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth; such an one caught up to the third heaven. And I knew such a man, whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth; How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. (2 Corinthians 12:2-4.)

It is obvious that there could not be a third heaven unless there is also a first and a second heaven. We therefore have three heavens, paradise, and the hell so often spoken of in the scriptures, making at least five places to which we may go after death. Paul gave a most wonderful description of the resurrection:

"There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory. So also is the resurrection of the dead.. . (1 Corinthians 15:40-42.)

What could be plainer? There is a glory of the sun, or celestial glory; another glory like the moon, or the terrestrial glory; and another glory like the stars, or, as we will learn, the telestial glory; and since "one star differeth from another star in glory," so also "is the resurrection of the dead." From this we learn that the great multitude in the resurrection will be likened unto the stars in heaven; and just as their works have differed in importance and faithfulness here upon the earth, so also shall their condition in the resurrection differ, even as the stars in heaven differ in glory.

The Holy Bible generalizes the future estate of the righteous as heaven, and the opposite as hell, without giving warrant, however, for the belief that but two places or kingdoms are provided, to one or the other of which every soul is to be consigned according to the balance-sheet of his life's account, and perhaps on a very small margin of merit or guilt. Equally unscriptural is the inference that the state of the soul at death determines that soul's place and environment throughout eternity.

When left to his imagination, without the guidance of heaven, man conjures up & heaven and a hell to suit his fancy. Thus, to the mind of the uninspired, heaven is a hunting-ground with game a-plenty; to the carnal, heaven promises perpetual gratification of senses and passions; to the lover of truth and the devotee of righteousness, heaven is the assurance of limitless advancement in wisdom and achievement. And to each of these, hell is the eternal realization of deprivation, loss, disappointment and consequent anguish.

Divine revelation is the only source of sure knowledge as to what awaits man beyond the grave, and from this we learn that at death the spirits of all men pass to an intermediate state, in which they associate with their kind, the good with the good, the wicked with the wicked, and so shall endure in happiness or awful suspense until the time appointed for their resurrection. Paradise is the dwelling place of relatively righteous spirits awaiting the glorious dawn of the resurrection.

The final judgment, at which all men shall appear before the bar of God, is to follow their resurrection from the dead. We shall stand in our resurrected bodies of flesh and bones to receive from Jesus Christ, who shall judge the world, the sentence we individually merit, whether it be "Come ye blessed of my Father" or "Depart from me ye cursed." (See Matt. 25:31-46.)

Until then, we can take hope that the choices are not as stark as some believe them to be, and as they would have us believe them to be.




M:)RGANITE

Morganite -

Thank you for your gifts of knowledge, wisdom and prophecy.

I just wanted to ask whether John 5:25 could represent a Pergatory state?

But also, in Rev.20:12-15, The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
So according to that scripture, I don't see an end to Hell.

Also I had always believed what my aunt said from her years of walking with the Lord and attending services. She always said our loved ones that died in Christ were in Heaven with their soul and spirit. And there's coming a day, when the Lord comes in Glory and we will even be reunited with our bodies in heaven.

I had heard that what I think you refer to as paradise as the 3rd heaven and higher. The Heaven where God and Jesus reside is the 7th heaven.
Paul could very well have had the revelation before or after his conversion.

Even at this present time there is more or less warfare going on in the lower heavenlies. This one of the obstructions to prayer. Sometimes Christians must settle the battle in the heavenlies before intercession can take place. Interferences do take place sometimes, and they must be dealt with, if there's any hope of a positive outcome.

So any remarks about the permanency of Hell? A Pergatory?

So on the other hand, would degrees in Hell be on the same level? As a hand is to the foot.. or in that case, would it be more on the terms of more suffering vs less suffering

I think there might be. I might have to look this up and research it. I know this discussion has caused me to think. What do you think?

What do you think?

Actually, I hadn't thought much about it to form much of an opinion...

I believe that Eternal Damnation to Hell is Eternatal Damnation to Life on Earth. I don't know how familiar you are with this so here's a quick breakdown... (bare with me because it is difficult to explain in just a few words)

I do not believe that our souls live only once. When we die, we are judged. If we are allowed into Heaven, that is it... Eternal Salvation. If we are not, we are to be reborn. If we are to continue to live in sin, we will be eternally damned to Hell (Life on Earth). However, if we repent, we are granted access to Heaven. (Like I said, bare with me... it's a short answer to explain where I am coming from... not to explain why I believe this way)

So, in answer to your question... I do feel there are different degrees of Hell, depending on ones previous existence. A Soul ages just as a Life does. Just like infancy, toddler, teen, adult, etc... as a Life moves through these stages of Life, it takes with it energy learned in the previous stage. The same happens with the rebirth of one's Soul.

So one person's Hell could be just the frustrations of infancy while another's could be the hardships of adulthood.

We are subjested to exactly what we need to be subjected to in order to progress through Life.

One the other hand, I don't think I have an opinion as to degrees of Heaven. As morganite quoted... Jesus said, "In my Father's house are many mansions..." so I am inclined to believe that there must be some sort of separation. However, a hierarchy makes me think there are different levels based on class, which I am not so sure about. The only other way would be that there are just different stages... like Life on Earth. But why would that be the case... what would be the purpose of evolving through stages in Heaven? I don't know... now Im just thinking out loud.

I really never considered it, which is why I am interested in finding out more. I like hearing from everyone here because, though our beliefs may not perfectly in line, there is much to learn from everyone's opinion.

Oh Is see. Is it or at least similar to reincarnation. I don't know a lot about what reincarnation is but I thought I'd ask. Like I stated earlier, we won't know for sure until we get there. If there are rankings in Heaven, It ouwl only be a status thing and not an ego thing if you know what I mean. Reason why I say that is because there won't be any sins so therefore I don't think we would worry about who is where. As far as degrees in Hell, I am interested in seeing what others post. Most so far posters do not believe in a Hell or even a place for punishment.

Just like Christianity, there are many different ideas about reincarnation. I typically don't use the word because there are a lot of negative things associated with it... people typically think that I mean to say they will return as a eggplant or an mosquito or something lol.

Another reason is that by saying that I believe in that, people tend to think that I don't believe in Jesus Christ or God, which again, is untrue.

well I believe in hell but I also believe if someone committed a sin when they weren't controlling the situation and after realized that was wrong and exepts GOD and GOD's way there is still hope for their soul

That's why I asked first. I am learning that things aren't so cut and dry anymore. That was funny about the eggplant.

Just like Christianity, there are many different ideas about reincarnation. I typically dont use the word becuase there are a lot of negative things associated with it... people typically think that i mean to say they will return as a eggplant or an mosquito or something lol.

Another reason is that by saying that I believe in that, people tend to think that I dont believe in Jesus Christ or God, which again, is untrue.


Oh, gimme a break! Take a look @ you previous post. Would you call yourself a born-again Christian ? (except for the part about heaven)

That's got Buddhist written all over it. :cool:

Oh, gimme a break! Take a look @ you previous post. Would you call yourself a born-again Christian ? (except for the part about heaven)

That's got Buddhist written all over it. :cool:

No, I would not call myself a Born-Again Christian. In fact, I was born a Christian... well, as much as one can be. HOwever, I don't claim Christianity or any religion for that matter. Even though, simply by accepting Jesus as my Savior, I am entitled to. However, I am a Man of Faith... I simply Believe. That's all there is to it. Too many people waste time continuing to shove people into little boxes instead of finding the value and insight in their point of views.

Oh, and as a matter of fact, True Buddhists don't believe in a Higher Power at all.

The difference between you and I is really our interpretation of the Bible.

Many people choose to see the Bible as a literal and historic document of things that happened. Well, for the most part. Many "Christians" take everything that they want to take literally and everything that doesn't quite fit right, they blame it on translation, interpritation, OT vs NT, laws, blah, blah, blah...

The Bible does not disprove my belief... nor does it disprove many beliefs in this world, as much as many Christians would like it to.

People stick to created Religions, ideas taught to them of what is right to and what is not. Others attempt to seek it for themselves. Of all the people I have encountered, I would have to say that the ones who have sought the Truth for themselves are far more Spiritually Mature than those who have not.

(BTW, Pumpkin... I really hope that I have not offended you. I also want you to know that you have not offended me. I respect and value your input and insight as it has made an impact on me, as others here have. However, I sense this growing tension from you. Please don't take what I say as a personal attack to you or your beliefs. :) and I don't want this thread to get shut down just yet)

I knew it. You said you were born Christian, but did not indicate that you made a specific commitment to the Lord @ any point. Thus you are not born again?
And I feel it is quite the opposite. Many people don't shove people into boxes. If you know the Truth, you have incredible freedom to use for God's Kingdom. To spread the Word of God's faith and love. Not to complicate it.

Man of faith? Because I believe? What is that ? It's like saying you don't have a last name.

And your philosophy... rhymes with roaring.

I knew it. You said you were born Christian, but did not indicate that you made a specific commitment to the Lord @ any point. Thus you are not born again?
Again, I just don't know where you are going with this... I was born into a Christian family. I attended church every Sunday for the first half of my life. I have made many commitments to the Lord. I have been baptized. I have been a counselor for high school and jr high at Christian camps and field trips. I have been very involved in my Church. I played guitar & piano for the Worship Team. I played piano for the Offertory. My Father is a teacher at the church I was raised in... I was even THE FIRST PERSON TO TURN SOIL AT THE CUNSTRUCTION OF THAT CHURCH AT AGE 5! What do you want from me?

Does ANY of this make me a Christian??

No, I have accepted Jesus Christ as My Lord and Saviour... that is all you need to know. That is what differentiates me from other non-Chrisitians. Do I consider myself a Christian? Not necessarily... not by your standards of what makes a Christian. Is me calling myself a Christian what will get me into Heaven? No. Where are you going with this again?


And I feel it is quite the opposite. Many people don't shove people into boxes.
Many people don't... but many people do. The point is that people attempt to label me and others because of what we believe. Then attempt to pass judgment on us.


If you know the Truth, you have incredible freedom to use for God's Kingdom. To spread the Word of God's faith and love. Not to complicate it.

How many deaf ears will befall those who attempt to spread God's Word with Religion and rules and close-mindedness and one-sidedness and judgment and anger and damnation and hellfire and brimstone and namecalling and snide comments and cheap shots..?


Man of faith? b/c I believe? What is that ? it's like saying you don't have a last name.

So?

Are you trying to attack me here? I don't really understand what you are trying to say.

I am a Man of Faith... meaning I have Faith. Yes, I believe. Do you? Do you really? Have you ever questioned your beliefs far enough to KNOW why you believe what you do? Or are you just following the herd?


And your philosophy.....rhymes with roaring.

Again, is this supposed to be another personal attack? I really don't understand why you are resorting to this. We seemed to always have tollerance for each other before. As I explained before, I do respect you and your insights. If this attitude keeps up, I am afraid this thread will be closed. If you do not wish to discuss what is being discussed, then you do not have to but this is going to force others that wish to participate in this discussion not to be able to.

At any rate, I will always respond if you wish to try to throw anything else my way... I love this stuff...

DrJizzle, I see where you are going with this. You make some interesting points. As afar as I'm concerned, you profess to know Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior so that is enough for me. Who am I to judge your heart? Our doctrine maybe different but that doesn't change who we serve. I can see what you mean by not wanting to label yourself. I go to a Baptist church but don't consider myself a Baptist. I have certain doctrinal differences with what they believe but that might also be from a lack of knowledge. I try not to close myself off to learn more and change. Aslong as I don't compromise my faith. There are certain things though that certain churches may accept that I wouldn't but there may be a reason they accept them. I don't consdier myself intolerant. This is getting abit off subject so I'll stop.

I am finding out that there is a lot of different thoughts about Hell that I wasn't aware of. I asked my brother and he thinks there will be different levels of suffering according to the rewards/intent of sin relationship. The lesser the intent the lesser the punishment. But there will still be a punishment. :)

I agree. Really, its not so much that I don't want to be labeled even... more so that I just don't know of a label for me :) There is no Church that I know of locally that supports the beliefs that I do. So I attend my old church if I to attend church at all.

In a sense, I suppose it is a lot like a Baptist to a Protestant. Or even a Catholic to a Christian. I don't think that Christians believe that Catholics will go to Hell because they worship the same God (I could be wrong here but that is my understanding).

Like I said, it comes down to interpritation of the Bible.

And back on topic... I suppose I would have to agree with your Brother. Even as I once believed in Hell as most Christians do, I suppose I believed it was that way. My Mother used to say that there was a special place in Hell for ___________ (insert whatever sin she was preaching against here lol).

I agree with my brother also but he even says he would have to look at it again to make sure.

[QUOTE=DrJizzle]In a sense, I suppose it is a lot like a Baptist to a Protestant. Or even a Catholic to a Christian. I don't think that Christians believe that Catholics will go to Hell because they worship the same God (I could be wrong here but that is my understanding). QUOTE]


I would have to disagree to a point. There are some "christian" groups and I use that term losely personally, that do nothing but teach that the Catholic Church is the anti christ and that they really worship satan.
There are publishing groups like Chick Publications that do nothing more than publish material on showing christians how groups like catholics, mormons and JW are not christian. On the radio daily on some christian radio stations you will hear that Catholics are doomed to hell for varoius reasons ( not true but they try to say catholics worship Mary, idols and so on.)

And then you have issues where some groups who are very conservative that will say all Penticostals are doomed, since they speak in tounges and other practices that have to be truly of the devil.

Next you have some ( not near all) Penticostals that claim that if you don't speak in tounges you are not truly saved.

And I can go on and on with many of these.

Some of what has been written here is why I consider it a good idea to attend the "school of religious tolerance" first and then the faith of your choice second.

Makes a more fruitful discussion at the very least.

May make a safer world at the incredible most.

VS -

I think a better word for it is religious acceptance. There are some things as a Christian that I won't tolerate. And we are not supposed to. Even at my job, there's a provision that allows for me to be excused from taking care of a particular patient if their faith or religious beliefs conflict with mine.

So I think on our leisure time we can come on a public forum and tell it like it is. Trouble is partly because some religions are so weak, their followers can't take the heat!
:rolleyes:

The following is an actual question given on a University of Liverpool chemistry final exam.
The answer by one student was so "profound" that the professor shared it with colleagues via the Internet, which is why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well.
Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?
Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle’s Law that gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed or some variant.
One student, however, wrote the following:
First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let’s look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Most of these religions state that, if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell.
Since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell. Because Boyle’s Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay constant, the volume of Hell must expand proportionately as souls are added.
This gives two possibilities:
1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.
2. If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.
So which is it?
If we accept the postulate given to me by Sandra during my freshman year, that "it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you," and take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then number 2 must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is endothermic and has already frozen over.
The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more souls and is extinct…leaving only Heaven, thereby proving the existence of a divine being - which explains why, last night, Sandra kept shouting "Oh my God."
THIS STUDENT RECEIVED THE ONLY "A".
____________________________

I just wanted to ask whether John 5:25 could represent a Pergatory state?

So any remarks about the permanency of Hell? A Pergatory?

I would not use the word 'purgatory' to describe the intermediate place of waiting for judgement. Purgatory has a particular meaning in the Roman Catholic Church where it refers to a state in which the souls of those who have died in grace must expiate their sins.

In his Divine Comedy, Dante depicts the doctrine of damnation for unfortunate souls who died without a knowledge of Christ, as that doctrine was taught in the 13th century. According to the story, Dante is lost in the woods where he is met by the Roman poet, Virgil, who promises to show him the punishment of hell and purgatory, and later, he is to have a view of paradise.

He follows the Roman poet through hell and later into Limbo, which - according to the story - is the first circle of hell. Here are confined the souls of those who lived virtuous and honorable lives, but because they were not baptized, these souls merit punishment and are denied forever the blessings of salvation. As Dante looks upon these miserable souls in the upper stratum of hell, and sees, as the story says,

"Many and vast,
Of men, women and infants," he marvels.

His guide asks the question,

"Inquirest thou not what spirits
Are those which thou beholdest?"

Dante, showing a desire to know, the guide continues:

"I would thou know, that these of sin
Were blameless; and if aught they merited,
It profits not, since baptism was not theirs,
The portal of thy faith.
If they before
The Gospel lived, they served not God aright;
And among them such am I.

For these defects,
And for no other evil, we are lost;
Only so far afflicted that we live
Desiring without hope."

In answer to the earnest inquiry of his mortal guest, who desires to know if any thus punished ever had the privilege of coming forth from this sad condition of torment, the spirit-poet declares that the righteous, who had known God from our first parents down to the time of Christ, have been "to bliss exalted," but of these unfortunates who never heard of Christ, he says,

"Be thou assured, no spirit of human kind was ever saved."

Dante was not the author of this unfortunate and erroneous doctrine. It came from an earlier misunderstanding of the true teachings of Jesus Christ. It is a shame that this awful doctrine has been made to ring repeatedly in the ears of earnest souls who have sought the salvation of loved ones who have gone before.

I do not believe that such a doctrine is to be obtained from the Bible. The major reason for my disavowal is that it negates the atonement of Jesus Christ as efficaceous for those in receipt of God's grace. If we have to expiate our own sins, what need is there of a Savior? Each must then save themselves.

The Bible suggests that there is a separation at death - we could call it a partial judgement - between those who have done good and those who have done evil, but that separation is not final and does not determine the eternal state of the soul. Judgement is shown to come after death, even after the resurrection, which is a universal free gift.

It must be after death and before final judgement then that Peter's description of Jesus preaching to the souls in 'prison' so that they could be judged. What purpose could Jesus have for preaching to them if not to save them? He can not have been tormenting them. His preaching was, according to Peter, so they could be judged like men in the flesh, but live according to God in the Spirit. That is as fine a description of conversion and salvation as will be found in all the sacred pages.

John 5:25

25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

The Jews marveled when they heard this. Perhaps they thought he meant those who were "dead in trespasses and sins" should hear his voice. Whatever they thought, they marveled. Jesus perceived their marvelling and said:

"Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."

And Peter tells us that Christ did this very thing:

[I]"For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the long suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."

Why did he preach to these disobedient spirits? Surely not to increase their torments, or to taunt them for not accepting of his truth in the days of the prophets! It cold not have been to tantalize them and make them more miserable because of the blessings they had lost! Jesus is a merciful Redeemer, who suffered as no other man suffered that he might save the children of his Father. He would take no pleasure in the suffering of the wicked.

It was his nature to plead for them, to be an advocate for them before the Father, to entreat his Father for mercy in their behalf. Therefore, whatever his mission was, it was one of mercy and comfort to those prisoners. Peter tells us that the object of his visit was that the gospel might be preached also to the dead,

"that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit."

The visit of Christ to the spirits in prison was not made in a spirit of vengeance, to show them that he had power to triumph over the grave, while they, who died without the remission of their sins, should remain in that condition of punishment forever. No! He took the glorious message of the gospel and proclaimed it to the dead with the promise that they, if they would obey it, should partake of its blessings.

What good reason can be given why the Lord should not forgive sins in the world to come? Why should man suffer throughout the countless ages of eternity for his sins committed here, if those sins are not unto death? There are many good, honorable men who have wilfully wronged no man, have lived to the best of their opportunities, righteously, yet have not received the gospel, for one reason or another. Where would be the justice in condemning them forever in hell, "where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched?"

When a man pays the penalty of his misdeeds and humbly repents, receiving the gospel, his sins are forgiven, he comes out of the prison house, and he is saved. To know that sins are forgiven in the world to come, we need only refer to the words of the Savior:

"All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come."

This shows that some sins will be forgiven in the world to come. We are also informed in First Corinthians that,

[I]"If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." But we have hope in Christ both in this life and in the life to come. This is according to the love, mercy, and justice of God who tempers the flame of justice with the balm of mercy according to his grace.




M:)RGANITE

Even at my job, there's a provision that allows for me to be excused from taking care of a particular patient if their faith or religious beliefs conflict with mine.
I take it you work at a hospital. So do you, or does anyone, exercise this right??


orange agrees: That's interesting... must be solely an American Law, because hospital personnel don't have the right to discriminate here!

Actually, I don't know... I just assumed it was at a hospital. I had not heard of that before and am actually a bit shocked.

No actually based on American law, employees do. The most I have run across is perhaps a J.W. refusing blood products rx'd to them. I have had no problem with their decision. Perhaps it might be more frustrating if that occurs in the E.R. but they handle that there.

It's not discrimination. The employee can go to the supervisor or person in charge and request to switch with another employee, if they are so bent out of shape about their assignment. The way things go at a hospital, it looks like a low level priority to me. :eek:

It's a law that goes both way and in no manner would be allowed to jeopardise someone receiving medical attention. Have a look here at the second paragraph on this link to better understand what Pumpkin is talking about:

Your Rights Against Religious Discrimination (http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/objectID/066F46D6-60DF-4734-B6EBBFC79FE3F80E/104/150/175/ART/)

Don't we make odd bedfellows now, Pumpkin? ;)

It's not discrimination. The employee can go to the supervisor or person in charge and request to switch with another employee, if they are so bent out of shape about their assignment. The way things go at a hospital, it looks like a low level priority to me. :eek:

So, if a Dr walked into the E.R and there was a Hindu lying there bleeding to death, the Dr could request to switch with another Dr because he doesn't believe in Hinduism??




V_S, I see where this article is going but it is beased on the employee/employer relationship... not the Dr/patient relationship

No Jizzle, it's not like that. They have colleagues that are Hindu. It would have to be medically related to even consider. I've not witnessed anything like that. That would be discrimination. I hold that Drs. Have amedical mind and are objective thinkers.

Now, if the Hindu patient has a head injury and won't follow orders to keep the "turban" off. Then nothing will change except that that pt. might have a difficult healing process.


From my experience, we don't carry our religious beliefs to work with us. We are there to exercise skill and competency. Something God already gave us the ability to do. Personal life is kept home.

Maybe you could reiterate.. If that's not what you are talking about then I guess I don't understand this part of your post:



I think a better word for it is religious acceptance. There are some things as a Christian that I won't tolerate. And we are not supposed to. Even at my job, there's a provision that allows for me to be excused from taking care of a particular patient if their faith or religious beliefs conflict with mine.

Morganite -

Noting in your post that Jesus is a merciful redeemer and that He preached to those unsaved after death in "prison"
So, my question after you read this scripture is - Is there a separate place do you think for "the hopeless" in a first death hell, in contrast to a place where those dead might still hear the gospel?

Luke: 19-31 -
(Jesus speaking) "There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.
"The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. In hell (hades) where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. So he called to him. Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.
"But Abraham replied, Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.
"He answered, Then I beg of you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so they will not also come to this place of torment.
"Abraham replied, They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.
"No, father Abraham, he said,'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.'
"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead"

Jizzle I couldn't just comment so I'll trying to clear it up your" understanding."


The whole concept to me is called acceptance.
It something that is subconscious anyway. I don't have some kinds of prejudice because someone is different. I think religious " tolerance" suggests some action has been done to offend someone.


Emotions can be cured. Someone blasted by a bomb can't.

So stop being so sensitive. Gosh, you'll live to talk about it!

31Pumpkin, I think DrJizzle was commenting more on this quote:


Even at my job, there's a provision that allows for me to be excused from taking care of a particular patient if their faith or religious beliefs conflict with mine.

I don't think it is quite clear what you mean here. Please clarify.

Acceptance means that you would simply accept them for who they are and what they believe. There is no need for tolerance.

Tolerance is learning to live with it, even though you don't accept it.

Neither of these qualities have been actively demonstrated over the past couple days. But don't worry... I don't take things personally. I would just it rather stick to a discussion instead of attempted attacks.

As jduke44 said, I was referring to your quote

I think a better word for it is religious acceptance. There are some things as a Christian that I won't tolerate. And we are not supposed to. Even at my job, there's a provision that allows for me to be excused from taking care of a particular patient if their faith or religious beliefs conflict with mine.

Mainly the part that I bolded. You are saying that there are things that you will not tolerate, as a Christian... then you go on to say that even at your job, you do not have to tolerate caring for a patient that does not share your religious beliefs.

To all participants,

At the request of the original asker.
As this thread has gone so far off course from the original question I'm closing it.

Thank you.