How Does Going to Hell Look Like?

reply to post by jmdewey60


JMD, you are entirely correct I think, on the subject of heresies. Here on ATS, where everyone is on their own, with no power structure except the mods, it is worthless to bandy that label around.

jmdewey60
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

You were already, in theory, justified by your profession of faith.

You are using the language of a salvation theory. In the actual Bible, justified means to be made right, as in a process towards righteousness.
Following the Law of Christ is the way to righteousness.
Theoreticians in salvation theology of the Reformationist variety use the word justification in a different way, to describe a hypothetical vicarious righteousness that comes from some sort of pronouncement.

They had to wait until you were sufficiently weakened to make their move to try to steal you away in a demon theft and kidnapping.

I don't know. The physical world event was that this machine that was keeping me alive malfunctioned and someone had to restart the thing. My doctors said that I should be dead and couldn't figure out why I wasn't.

Bear in mind that God works in very mysterious and often subtle ways, while always remaining ahead of the curve, so I still think that he was and is continuing to work a great work through you. In other words, hell was never your destination.

Your testimony is profound, and very effective provided you don't go out and tell everyone else that they're going to hell for the smallest infractions or for failing to live up to an exceptionally high standard of righteousness i.e.: if they're not as righteous as you are or have become. That might undermine or defeat the whole purpose but what do i know I'm not one to make such judgements.

Glad you're still with us!

Best regards, and God Bless,

NAM aka Bob

reply to post by jmdewey60


I was referring more to RevGen's style and approach, even his own in his own relationship to God in/through Christ.

It's possible to worship and honor something and not really love it or be in love with it, especially if it's just a means to an end (avoiding hell).

NewAgeMan
reply to post by OneManArmy

 

It should be interesting to see what he provides to support his strange claim about Jesus' relationship to hell.

There's something "off" about this particular Christian. If I could break his heart to let in the Love of God, I would do it in a heartbeat.

edit on 25-11-2013 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)

Yes, something is very much "off".
He is a hypocrite, he is judgemental, he tells others what the bible says instead of letting them find out for themselves.
And then he calls me a troll because I dont agree with him, he is intolerant of others.
And above all, he is a false prophet, IMO.
Doesnt sound very christian at all if you ask me.
But Im no expert, Im just a human being with a God given intelligence to try and work things out for myself.
A Christian vicar said something very funny on the radio today about "fundamental" christians...
"They are not fun but they are certainly mental"

reply to post by OneManArmy


All I know is that Jesus and his Gospel (Good News) is the love of God. Not a badge, not a weapon, not a means to an end (to avoid hell).

Some Christians when and if they encounter Jesus, are in for a big surprise.

Were they a "pearl in the gate" as a point of attraction for others to make their approach, or something else altogether?

Edit to add: I've found him to be brutal, not loving at all. If this were the Middle Ages, he's the one or the type who would have people on the rack, me included, of course to "save us" from hell.
Although maybe, just maybe, God can plant in his heart of stone a very tiny wedge, where the slightest tap will break it wide open. He needs to cry, as I have, and to repent, also.

His particular method of proselytizing the "Good News" of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the love of God is an absolute outrage and represents the height of hypocrisy.

From what I can tell he's representing not the tree of life, but the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and he's willing to drag people to it kicking and screaming under threat of the worst conceptions of hell, and something tells me that he enjoys it, which is very creepy. He even has Jesus presiding over hell itself.

A lion (of predation), is only appropriate to his avatar, but he'd be well served to realize that at the apex it's not eat or be eaten, but here, eat of me, instead.

And if he refuses to cry now, he will cry the worst kind of tears, then, when the time comes.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


He's in my prayers, for the right reasons, but I am in his, for the wrong ones, because I can easily accept the doctrine, it makes no difference in the import and export or the value of the whole thing, to me. I already love Jesus, and, in spite of my faults and shortcomings, carry his love with me, to others, more often than not without even having to say a word about a doctrine of salvation, because I know that in their face Christ himself may be hidden, in the same way they may see it hidden in mine, when I love them as I am loved.

I live in a major urban area here in Vancouver Canada, and when I see the masses of the people walking around, I don't see future demons in hell, but children of a loving God who are unaware of what's really going on, people absorbed through no fault of their own in modern culture and "civilization". I certainly wouldn't be a real Christian to see them as nothing but hell fodder, because I love people; used to hate them and judge like there's no tomorrow, until I became a real Christian. Now I cannot see them, even the worst among them, without a touch of love and sympathy in my heart for their sorrows, their suffering and and their plight, however necessary or unnecessary it may be.

Who could walk around in today's world, as a Christian of all things, seeing one's fellow man and children of God, as almost exclusively (97.5%) future demons in hell, unless saved according to my own interpretation of doctrine, which if they do not accept, to the letter, are doomed?

And who would take a secret pleasure in that? of being on the inside of such a very small and exclusive club, who alone has been granted the power or I should say "the great commission" simply to save others from hell?!?! WTH?!! And what's to differentiate that kind of person from say one who would oversee torture IN hell? Remember too that RevGen was quick to point out, in spite of evidence showing that, depending on the individual and their constitution there are many different kinds of hell (ie: pure darkness but with awareness, but no real knowledge, and no possibility) that no, be assured, it's the worst kind in every case, including lots of physical torture, and not mere separation from God for rejecting God.

Is his "invitation" not really an invitation and even an encouragement to reject God, sealing the fate of the recipient by removing the possibility of God's love, as a free gift? Under the threat of hell, how is anyone supposed to be able to respond with love in kind, which to BE love MUST be free?

Jesus himself will put to them these types of questions, and more, since they're running around operating as though they are sharing His "Gospel". The ignorant, they can be excused. Those who know, or who ought to know better, cannot be let off so easily.

Thus my prayers for him, in particular (to receive and express the love of God in Jesus Christ, as love, not doctrine), and not necessarily as much the ignorant mindless hoards "of the damned".. because I don't want to see anyone go to hell especially not a brother in Christ and fellow member of the mystical body of Christ. He would hack me off and toss me to hell (if he could, which he can't) without a second's hesitation (and for all the wrong reasons based on nothing but assumptions), and therein lies the problem, because I could never be like that or "believe" like that. It's just not Christian.


"I have only one commandment. Love one another as I have loved you."
~ Jesus


Merry Christmas, to one and all!

Rudolf aka NAM aka Bob

reply to post by NewAgeMan

It's possible to worship and honor something and not really love it or be in love with it, especially if it's just a means to an end (avoiding hell).

Some people have a different way of showing their love.
It kind of goes both ways, if you want to give out criticism you need to take it too.
Who's to say that you aren't both motivated by the same feelings.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Well that's part of it, you're right. No one can take another person's internal heart-level inventory, nor tell them the status of their salvation or their relationship with God or lack thereof. That's a judgement we are not equipped to make and that only God can make, knowing a person's heart.

My oversight, or undersight.

Thanks for pointing that out, but his behavior towards others, especially in regards to this hell business, well someone had to stand up to it and say for the love of God, stop it, it's hurting not helping the cause of Christ.

That said, i'm sorry.


it hurts me, too.

i really love you guys, you RevGen too, heck your my brother, and God willing, and us willing, my future neighbor in heaven and i totally take back what i said before about not wanting to meet you there, as in heading for the mountains and leaving you back on the plain, no i want us all to be there in the mountains, so to speak, and seeing you face to face, and Jesus, face to face, if we dare. Only by his love, only by his love, so he keeps me smiling, even at my own absurdity, and if it brings me sometimes to tears, in regret and shame and bitterness, and fear, fear of life as it is, let alone, heavenly life, so be it because it also wipes away those tears from my eyes leaving only joy and laughter, and brotherly, and, heavenly love.

We may all be in a terrible predicament and a dilemma, but Jesus is the resolution to it, already.

His love scares me in a way, because it's so great on the one hand, and so real, and yet so unknown, like a looming presence in who's light and love we dare not even tread, yet which he simultaneously makes freely available to us anyway, in spite of our irrational and unnecessary fear, of His great love. Like C.S. Lewis points out, it's a weight of (mutual) glory in fellowship, capable of breaking the very back of our pride and arrogance, vanity, stupidity, and all manner of nonsense which might risk separating us from one another in the love of God in Jesus Christ our common Lord and Savior, and true friend if there ever was one.

So on the one hand we may fear it, on the other you can't help but embrace it, and allow it to be what it is, both giving the Lord the space to be the Lord and ourselves the space to really be ourselves and relax in the Lord, and I'm the one, or I'd like to think i could be, who would place his head over on Jesus' breast with a smile on my face while we're all sitting around and enjoying each other's company and you guys would laugh but for all the right reasons.. because we'd be with HIM, the guy, the everlasting guy who's humor and love NEVER ENDS! (and i'm not gay)

oh GOD what are we to do now?!

We run (i swear i just typed fun and had to retype it as run) from it, we all do, that's the only problem, but the remedy to the problem is already made known.

There's nothing any of us can do, really, when push comes to shove, but fall down at the foot of the cross one day, and then happily ever after begin to enter into his glory! it's hilarious i tell you it is, and it's coming, but maybe not in the form of a 5ft 11" guy flying in from nowhere, maybe he also wants to be with us where we are provided we're with him where he is, and never leaves.

That's too awesome, what are we to do BUT laugh along with him, even if we or our prior selves was the brunt of the joke!

So i'm sorry if in any way i've offended or hurt anyone's feelings, my own included. Please forgive me, and i do love you, in the final analysis, you can't not if the love of Jesus is what we're supposed to be about! oh God LOL!

We're screwed, says NAM aka Bob, with tears of joy. there's nothing we can DO! (still crying).

i haven't been to Church in ages, but if you ever saw me there i'm the guy with the spirit on his face and tears in his eyes. it does it to me every time in fact, but sometimes, if i'm really lucky, those same tears become tears of love and laughter and real forgiveness, of the everlasting kind, and that's what is already freely available in the love of Jesus Christ and the Father, as one and two, the beloved and beloved other. No one needs to force me to my knees to go to my knees, laughing, crying.


i love you guys, and i'm sorry for getting nasty, it's not who i really am and now what i'm about.

Friends. In Christ. That's us. i hope..? (you can't leave me here in tears it wouldn't be fair.. unless they're tears of joy and gladness in the heart of the Lord).

Bob

The only way to affect the hearts and minds of others is by setting an example.
An example of kindness, tolerance, self sacrifice, assisting the weak and the poor.
Quoting passages from a book doesnt save anybody.
Before I ever had a positive male role model I was going off the rails, I was ignorant, selfish, bad mannered, rude to my single mother(who had done everything to support me and my sister), I was a criminal.
The positive example that was set by an older friend who I respected turned my life around.
I started to see the benefits of good manners, consideration of others, and trying to do the right thing.
I wasnt taught these things, I saw an example set by a friend. And also saw the benefits that came with kindness and honesty. It was then that I realised what was the right thing to do.

Jesus is simply a role model, he isnt an idol to be worshipped, he isnt the last resort for repentance and a guarantee for heaven. He was a guide, he set the example for all of us, to do the right thing, regardless of the consequences.
That is the greatest lesson of Christ.

There is no greater sacrifice than to lay down your life in the service of your fellow man.

reply to post by OneManArmy


Wow, good post.

So Jesus isn't a bully then I guess it's fair to assume.

NewAgeMan
reply to post by OneManArmy

 

Wow, good post.

So Jesus isn't a bully then I guess it's fair to assume.

Lol, of course not.
But Im not sure the same can be said of the Old Testament version of God.

reply to post by OneManArmy


Maybe he had his reasons. They were an unruly bunch. Not an easy thing to create a prophetic framework through which your true self would be able to step forward.. right on time.

OneManArmy

NewAgeMan
reply to post by OneManArmy

 

Wow, good post.

So Jesus isn't a bully then I guess it's fair to assume.

Lol, of course not.
But Im not sure the same can be said of the Old Testament version of God.

Actually, the "Old Testament version of God" was Jesus. He had not walked a mile in our moccasins yet...

Anyway, He had every right to rant in the OT like the cuckolded Husband that He was.

Lazarus Short

OneManArmy

NewAgeMan
reply to post by OneManArmy

 

Wow, good post.

So Jesus isn't a bully then I guess it's fair to assume.

Lol, of course not.
But Im not sure the same can be said of the Old Testament version of God.

Actually, the "Old Testament version of God" was Jesus. He had not walked a mile in our moccasins yet...

Anyway, He had every right to rant in the OT like the cuckolded Husband that He was.

edit on 27-11-2013 by Lazarus Short because: lah-de-dah

Laz you are really asking for it now...you may as well tell them about mans lack of free will and go for the complete crucifixion...and you are right...no one will hear.You may as well be writing in Southern Martian fortunately it doesn't matter ....only Truth does..keep it up!!

reply to post by Rex282


Rex, I've seen people react to the truth in such a way as if I were saying "--------------------------------------." I so often see my posts go unargued and unacknowledged, and I wonder if it really matters, but then once in a while it clicks. I'm not after the masses anyway. BTW, what would an incomplete crucifixion be?

Thanks for the kind words, they are too few on this forum!

Lazarus Short
OneManArmy
NewAgeMan
reply to post by OneManArmy

newageman
Wow, good post. So Jesus isn't a bully then I guess it's fair to assume.

onemanarmy
Lol, of course not.
But Im not sure the same can be said of the Old Testament version of God.

Lazarus Short
Actually, the "Old Testament version of God" was Jesus. He had not walked a mile in our moccasins yet...
Anyway, He had every right to rant in the OT like the cuckolded Husband that He was.

No I dont think so, as Jesus encarnated well after the Abrahamic Demi-God (ON TRIAL) Yahweh ENKI/ENLIL (ANU the FATHER) 400,000 years before. I could be wrong but these Godisms are not very clear in who or what they were exactly or how they continued incarnation; (WHOS IN CHARGE HERE) other than than (banned/NOT ALLOWED) repeated procreation with the human female? Who started Paganism? Moccasins; would imply the native americans might have the key to the God puzzle (if only they had a written and not oral tradition) (just like the Hebrew Saducce), keep it obtuse. Why, because in the unknowing of whats going on you cover your bases of ignorance by hiding it in implied mystery, complicate your religion to the point of distraction. No one will figure it out, LOTS OF TIME WASTED on nothing (thats the point) keep you busy accomplishing NOTHING. Its called THEOLOGY (a unclear history of religion).

reply to post by vethumanbeing


The natives refer to God as the "first father of creation" or the original ancestor and the spirit of the universe, at the starting point of the circle of the sacred fire dance where it's always clockwise (the dancing), never counter clockwise, which is considered to be insulting to the ancestors, all the way back.

Jesus, in noting the signs, some of which pointed to himself directly, drew the same conclusion and who logically understood that God was all-good, and all-loving even by what can be seen in the divine order of which he Himself was it's highest expression by original intent and by anticipation, even from before the foundation of the world/creation.

Both viewpoints are not really that far apart.

And yes, in the early days of the OT people were getting their Gods confused, and some of it was re-written to bring them all together under monotheism and thus the many faces of God in the OT. Meanwhile, somewhere in the mix, the real God was laying down a prophetic foreshadowing for his own arrival and great work, and I can prove that by something that happened in regards to a certain "two horned ram" synchronistically and serendipitously, caught up in a "thicket", nearby.

Would anyone like to know about this or see the evidence, which proves that the OT foreshadowed the new in the most unbelievably, extraordinary way, and by that I'm referring to a superdeterminism in the divine order pointing to Jesus Himself and His Great Work of all Ages..?

Best Regards,

NAM

Lazarus Short
reply to post by Rex282

 

Rex, I've seen people react to the truth in such a way as if I were saying "--------------------------------------." I so often see my posts go unargued and unacknowledged, and I wonder if it really matters, but then once in a while it clicks. I'm not after the masses anyway. BTW, what would an incomplete crucifixion be?

Thanks for the kind words, they are too few on this forum!

edit on 28-11-2013 by Lazarus Short because: lah-de-dah

Yes and it will continue to be the same.Yahoshua never "taught" anyone anything.Not one person understood what he was "proclaiming" when he did it... not even the disciples.! and he explained the parables to them in detail afterwards.The same thing continues to this day.There is only one way to understand ANY of it...revelation from the Father..period...everything else falls on stone deaf ears.

Yahoshua never said to "teach" anyone he said proclaim the good news...no one heard it even when he proclaimed it!!..however it is ALL in the proclaiming "truth" (that's all that can be done) only God can cause a man to understand the truth and God does that when GOD wants to ...not the man.

as for partial crucifixion.I was being metaphorical...the scourging was a HUGE part of the "crucifying".I've had "many " a religious "brick" thrown at my head and I'm sure will have many more.They feel like foam after a while...but I suggest ducking anyways.... they become boomerangs then....

NewAgeMan
reply to post by vethumanbeing

NewAgeMan
The natives refer to God as the "first father of creation" or the original ancestor and the spirit of the universe, at the starting point of the circle of the sacred fire dance where it's always clockwise (the dancing), never counter clockwise, which is considered to be insulting to the ancestors, all the way back.

Um hum (completely different in form of the whitemans explaination).

NAM
Jesus, in noting the signs, some of which pointed to himself directly, drew the same conclusion and who logically understood that God was all-good, and all-loving even by what can be seen in the divine order of which he Himself was it's highest expression by original intent and by anticipation, even from before the foundation of the world/creation.

Jesus was designed as a fully functional 9 dimentional being, stepped down from the highest to hold the form of the 3D human in place to change the history of this planet PERIOD. God was an afterthought, as this was a busy busy construct IT had to create to destroy the ancient archetypes of fear, trepidation, loss. Divine order was supposed to be restored by the Jesus INSERT (and it worked) much to my surprise as it was one of many tried to regard and test (the occident western) (the other one was Buddhism/Hindu/Shinto) which also succeeded in the orient; 3 worked in what you would call 'modern times' # 4 Islam failed as Mohammed was trying to give the tribal Arabs a common ground (I am sorry). The reason it failed is the same reason the Native Americans failed in getting along, they were tribal and territorial in nature, having the same god ASPECT STILL could not get along, it wasnt the Federal Army so much as themselves not becomeing other that the one that actually fought back and were conquered by the blue coats/progress the Souix Nation(Osage/Ogalla/Lacoata).
The Apache in the southern states of AZ and New Mexico were the last standouts (Cochise/Geronimo) the tribes of the Pima, Yaque, Mescalero, Chirichauha. They believed in a God just not the white mans god (and these were stone age peoples).

NAM
And yes, in the early days of the OT people were getting their Gods confused, and some of it was re-written to bring them all together under monotheism and thus the many faces of God in the OT. Meanwhile, somewhere in the mix, the real God was laying down a prophetic foreshadowing for his own arrival and great work, and I can prove that by something that happened in regards to a certain "two horned ram" synchronistically and serendipitously, caught up in a "thicket", nearby.

Gods confused or not identified? Paganism was just as valid. Monotheism was a way to bring "CULTURES OF DIFFERENT NATURES/CONTINENTS TOGETHER TO AVOID MORE WARFARE" its as simple as that, one god one country, why fight? They couldnt get their politics in order but by worshiping ONE God they could make some concessions and at least agree upon one thing *a singular God aspect*.