may the doctrine of hell tickl men's ears?


I posted that in another forum and am interested to hear your opinions:

As strange as it may sound, eternal damnation may have even an appealing and romantic notion.

It may be appealing for the human ego that man can determine his eternal destiny, eternal damnation is the epitome and the deadly beacon of human free will and emancipation that triumphs over the divine volition and defeats the work of Christ, though for a horrible price.

It may have a romantic notion, for it gives this life eternal importance, any good deed might be of eternal value, it gives you the possibilty to save your beloved ones from eternal perdition and the uttermost doom, how appealing might that be to the human ego to believe to have saved somebody from this doom. It provides the source for tales and legends, novels, comics, movies and videogames; e.g. Dante’s Inferno. It inspires the fantasy of men and satisfies their morbidity and their desire for vengeance; portraits of hell have always been more popular then portraits of paradise.

Some people love danger, and life without the threat of eternal damnation is ultimately a safe life (as one should expect a good father to care for), so the restoration of all things limits the adventurousness of life and the emancipation of man, which some people do not like.



I think you mean’t “The doctrine of UR tickles men’s ears?” That wonderful fable of all rebellious unbelievers who ride into eternity on unicorns after spending an “age” in hell. Pardon me, I have to scratch my ears after hearing this wonderful news… lol. 1% of Christianity believes in UR, yet you and this board claim it to be biblical…hmmmmm.


Good argument for UR, Aaron. Jesus said “narrow is the road” and I’m happy to be part of that “very narrow” road. You should come over to the straight and narrow, Aaron. We all know you’re fascinated w/ UR, so why resist it any longer? Step off the wide road and come over to the narrow one. Be one of the “only a few” that find it.



lol. Jesus said there is only one narrow way that leads to life…the wide and broad way that leads to destruction is not an alternative route to life, my friend. It is amazing how we make the bible say what we want it to say.


You are very observant sven, and quite right it seems to me.

There is something deeply sinister about the appeal of ect to we humans. That there might be men who rejoice in this sort of “triumph” should be deeply troubling to any who seriously contemplate the true character of love as witnessed in The Christ.

As I see the matter, the true believer in the Love of God should stand aghast at the specter of the creator of the Universe allowing such a thing as ect… (we need an emoticon for “shudder”)

Curious on the standard embraced by A37 – that of numbers. By this measure, The crucified Christ was supported by, in His anguish and pain, exactly none. (OK, His mom…) So clearly, by this measure, He must have been mistaken…

Does Not Compute


PS So the doctrine of hell, as traditionally taught, is clearly a figment of sinful mans imagination… feeding his more depraved nature…


I don’t think it’s a figment of the imagination. It’s where men start - it’s what they understand. It’s real to them and thus what guides them. It has nothing to do with traditions held or forgotten.


Can you or anyone else as far as that goes prove biblically that the life in this scripture is eternal life or that destruction is eternal conscious torment.

I see very few people who are really living the abundant life that Jesus promised and I see a whole lot of things being done that destroys our earthly lives.


I agree Nimble - I see very few Christians that make me sit up and think ‘Wow! I wish I had what they have’. I’m more likely to think ‘Phew! thank I don’t have to spend eternity with that person’ :smiley: .

The few that do make me feel there could be something in it are usually branded as heretics by the ‘mainstream’.


I have heard the statement “we make the Bible say anything we want it to say” more times than I can count and its usually from a person who wants to add stuff to scripture. For instance …'the Savior of all, especially those that believe" we’re told that we should insert “potential” in front of Savior and “actual” in front of those that believe.


Aaron how many Jews had the Messiah right. Yet virtually all believed they believed correctly? …hmmmmmmm?


This is a point I’ve been pondering as of late. It seems the there are cycles in the scriptures concerning man in his relationship to God. The Jews read the scriptures in a way which excluded gentiles/pagans from being the people of God. Thus when Jesus begins annihilating the LITERAL approach (such as Aaron37’s) the Jew’s hated him. And why shouldn’t they? He destroyed the very meaning of scripture which says “DONT EAT THE PIG”. As scripture plainly paints for us the pagan is an outcast to God, the Jews rightly (by literal interpretation) followed such thinking.

Now today the church, despite Paul’s clear teaching in Romans 9, believes they have the knowledge and authority to proclaim WHO and WHEN God can have mercy. If they are in hell, God will/can-not save those people. But in fact Romans 9 states clearly to the Jew’s, if God wants to have mercy on gentiles he can; there’s not a flippin thing anyone can do or say about it. Likewise, if God wants to descend to hell to bring the lost out, who will tell him he can’t? The Calvinists think they can refuse God his right. The Arminians think they can refuse God his right. But who are they to talk back to God?

The appeal you raise up is that there is a special feeling we get when we receive that academy award for life. For our glory is shown to the world that we got it right and they did not. All of this leads to an exclusivism which denies that God will go to any lengths to save someone. it forces the Arminian to deny that God is not just offering salvation, but actually in the process of bringing (fishing) them in. It causes men to begin to change scripture from “God has reconciled the world to himself” to “God reconciled himself to the world”. It causes us to say that though “all does not mean all”.

Excellent post Sven.


your sarcasm is out of place here; the majority’s opinion is never an argument for the trueness of their position from a Scriptural point of view.


Hi sven. Rodger Tutt here. Saw you on another forum. Can’t remember which one.

I think that many eternal tormentors have “itching ears” that like to be scratched by listening to sermons that tell them that only people who believe like they do will avoid suffering forever in hell.


The people who want to keep believing that the Bible proves that everyone deserves to suffer forever in hell just because they were born into this world, (Calvinism), or because they don’t make the “right” choice before it’s “too late,” or that God created beings with a will so strong that they can irreversibly choose themselves into a state of eternal torment (Arminianism) - these people will keep believing it because they want to.

But people who want to believe that the Bible nowhere supports such a concept of God can examine the evidence contained in HIS ACHIEVEMENT ARE WE at … index.html

And also here
Information, and frequently asked questions in support of a correctly (literally, not interpretively) translated Bible teaching universal salvation,

And here

and they can learn that the Bible actually teaches universal salvation instead, not even annihilation.

Or, they can go to the search engine at the top of
and type in a key word or phrase from any argument or scripture passage. Ten articles will come up refuting the claim that the Bible teaches eternal torment. Then they may click to the next page and ten more articles will come up, and so on and so on for many pages.

The many entries in my guestbook that is accessed towards the bottom of my front page


and the many entries at
show just how much this information is helping people.

My guest book only holds 150 messages, then the old ones get deleted as new ones are added.

This was the information that enabled me to recover from a twelve year nervous breakdown (1966-78), and it gives me great joy to keep learning every day that it is helping more and more other people too!! I’m 71


Or indeed, any other point of view… Argumentum ad Populum is a logical fallacy.


The early church figure was much higher than 1%, but as others have already noted, majority vote is not an argument.

I think you should do more than appeal to the majority while laughing at people who disagree with you (“lol”) …

But that’s just me

  • Pat