How to Discuss Hell with Others?

[PR]

"Don't want to sound disrespectful but many sincere people truly will swear to have been taken up on spaceships and returned."

Maybe I didn't explain my question very well...

On one of the videos, a man who is an Atheist professor at UC Berkley, has a near death experience, finds himself in what he believes as hell, and then returns to life as an on fire witness for Jesus Christ. I too am generally skeptical of such testimonies, and also have problems with some of the programing on TBN. But the fruit that this man is now producing via his testimony I cannot so easily dismiss.

My point is that this man is discussing hell with others based on what he believed to be his experience with much success.

Perhaps God allows occasionally people to have such an experience, not unlike what Paul or a brother had, to warn mankind of what lies ahead. I'm sure some will disagree.

Thanks

Phil

[jriccitelli]

Some people do not want to believe what God has said, and one popular way to say this is "That was the Old Covenant' (Old Testament) it's different in the new!" as if it's a different God.

Not. We still have the same God, same Commands, same Judgments, same principles, same purpose, same conditions, etc. The 'Only' thing that has happened (not changed) is 'Who' paid the penalty of the Law. And if you do 'not' believe He paid the penalty for your sins, you are still in your sins and 'nothing has changed'. The problem is with Belief, people do not 'want' to believe, we do not 'want' to acknowledge the grave (Hades) danger of our sins.

[jriccitelli]

Paidion wrote; "If warning against going to Gehenna (Hell) is an important part of bringing the gospel message to people, then why is it that the great missionary, the apostle Paul, didn't use the word "Gehenna" even once in all 12 of his letters found in the New Testament"
"I question whether people who "accept Christ as their personal Saviour" in order to avoid going to Hell, are actually God's people at all. The scriptures say that it is God's KINDNESS which is meant to lead us to repentance — not fear of Hell"

(Note first; From previous discussion, the 'Refining fire' is not 'burning' fire, it is irresponsible and deceitful to confuse the two)
All words generally come from other words, and since the place of suffering and judgment could not yet be seen it could only be described in terms we may be familiar with here on earth, like burning garbage heaps, furnaces, lakes, and fires. The same with 'Heaven' God can only describe it in terms familiar with us (weddings, banquets, etc).
Are we to assume Heaven is the sky, because the Bible uses the term 'Ouranos' for heaven? The word means basically 'the sky', do we assume that Heaven cannot exist because sky is only sky? Are we to think of heaven as being wet because the root word may stand for water? This is ridiculous, the word is developed by the context.
The context is; "You do not want to go to ________ because _______ is a bad place". No matter what word you put in there the inference is that it is bad, and that it is a place of Judgment.

Paul uses the word Judgment, sin, perish, condemn often enough to get the message across. Jesus rarely uses the word grace, did he not teach grace? (The word forgives implies grace)
The same verse that you quoted Paidion, says in it;

"And we know that the judgment of God rightly falls upon those who practice such things.3 But do you suppose this, O man, when you pass judgment on those who practice such things and do the same yourself, that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? 5 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,6 who will render to each person according to his deeds… For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law;13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves,15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus" (Romans 2:2-6, 12-16)

[steve7150]

Some people do not want to believe what God has said, and one popular way to say this is "That was the Old Covenant' (Old Testament) it's different in the new!" as if it's a different God.

Not. We still have the same God, same Commands, same Judgments,









Yes we have the same God but the Old & New Covenants are different. We don't stone people to death for violating certain Laws of God. The morality is the same but the judgments often are different.
I would be interested to hear other opinions, should law violators be killed? Are the punishments supposed to be the same?

[Singalphile]

I told my dad a couple weeks ago that I thought that the annihilationist view was most likely correct. We were just casually talking and doing some work. I presented my view as "my best guess" (which it is). He wasn't bothered by the idea. (I wasn't actually worried about that though. He's actually turned out to be a lot like me. ) He thinks it might be more like a ruination or something like that (which has been mentioned here). He used the example from the Narnia books where the bad animals cease to be talking animals and run off into Aslan's shadow. I mentioned the UR view too. He thinks it's pretty unlikely, but also not upsetting. His oldest son, my brother, is not a Christian, by the way, so it's not all academic.

But otherwise, I haven't mentioned it (even when quite tempted once among Christian friends). I'm glad I haven't.