What Is The Hell Of The Future

The concept of “hell” has changed over time. Different writers at different times and cultural settings saw it differently. Since it is a made-up concept, one wonders what will be made up in the future.

There was writing in the Middle Ages that spoke of a hell where the unfortunate sat out for a while and then things were OK.  Then there is the fiery hell.

This latter hell probably is a product of a culture where carrot and stick is convention wisdom. It is incorporated into drug treatment and child rearing. Why not religion?

I would wager very few faculty in Departments of Religion at mainline Protestant or Catholic research universities believe in a literal hell. The culture that gave birth to it centuries ago is evaporating.

Today’s public school students are taught proper behavior is accepting people who are different. The very existence of a hell is about condemning others, not accepting them. That makes me think the next generation will not believe in a literal hell and it will not be mentioned from the pulpit.

This reminds me of the dozens of times comments have warned me of my coming eternity in hell. If there were such a place that would alarm me.

Since whatever hell is or wherever it is keeps changing, I have to conclude seeing me in hell is wishful thinking. I promise I will discontinue this blog when the good information about an actual hell arrives.

The future of a literal hell is bleak.

24 Responses

  1. Sister Lucy of Fatima Describes the Vision of Hell

    At Fatima, the Blessed Virgin Mary told the three child seers that many souls go to hell because they have no one to pray or make sacrifices for them. In her Memoirs, Sister Lucy describes the vision of hell that Our Lady showed the children at Fatima:

    “She opened Her hands once more, as She had done the two previous months. The rays [of light] appeared to penetrate the earth, and we saw, as it were, a vast sea of fire. Plunged in this fire, we saw the demons and the souls [of the damned]. The latter were like transparent burning embers, all blackened or burnished bronze, having human forms. They were floating about in that conflagration, now raised into the air by the flames which issued from within themselves, together with great clouds of smoke. Now they fell back on every side like sparks in huge fires, without weight or equilibrium, amid shrieks and groans of pain and despair, which horrified us and made us tremble with fright (it must have been this sight which caused me to cry out, as people say they heard me). The demons were distinguished [from the souls of the damned] by their terrifying and repellent likeness to frightful and unknown animals, black and transparent like burning coals. That vision only lasted for a moment, thanks to our good Heavenly Mother, Who at the first apparition had promised to take us to Heaven. Without that, I think that we would have died of terror and fear.”

      1. And if Lucia’s mother had said her daughter was a living saint and was telling the truth you would exhort us to believe it?

        The claims were investigated as and deemed worthy of belief.

        30,000 witnessed the miracle of the sun. There are videos and photos. 1917 in Portugal.

        1. Jinx II

          Yea, investigated by the Vatican who claimed them worthy…….they claim all sorts of things if it suits their purpose. Visions, apparitions, miracles, sidewalk crack Jesus, bleeding statues, on and on and on to the point of being ridiculous.

          All religions make these claims, why don’t Hindu’s ever see Jesus or Buddha, why don’t christians ever see Vishna or Buddha. If that ever happened it would be newsworthy.

  2. Jinx II

    fakechristianjuice, you can believe whatever you want but there is no factual basis for any of the Marian or Jesus apparitions, they see what they want to see or they are hallucinations.

  3. Mike

    “If there were such a place that would alarm me”. Wow! Jon, you have said a mouthful in that one small sentence. I think it was Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes who told his Dr. Watson: “You look but do not see”. Of course, that line is a paraphrase of Isaiah 6:9, among other places in the Scriptures. “They are forever looking but not seeing, hearing but not understanding” et al.

    I was watching a movie on NetFlix the other day about an atheist who went about trying to disprove Christianity by using his investigative reporting skills to debunk the Resurrection. He couldn’t, of course, but most people who reviewed this movie on IMDB.com were not convinced. Their position seems odd to me, since most of the evidence the reporter uncovered was based on historical facts, not just the Biblical writings.

    As it relates to your topic, “the existence of hell”, there was one line that really stood out. It was when the reporter had to apologize to a suspect, who was unjustly accused and beaten to a pulp in prison, due to the reporter’s inaccurate “evidence” he dug up that was used to charge the suspect.
    “I missed the truth” was all the reporter could say. To which the innocent man replied: “No, you didn’t want to see the truth”.

    Other favorite lines included “Even in disbelief, you take a leap of faith” and the CS Lewis quote:
    “If Christianity is false, it doesn’t matter. If it’s true, it’s the most important thing in history”. So, to
    borrow another Hollywood reference, the truth is out there. Unlike Mulder and Scully, however who will never resolve that alien conspiracy, the truth I am referring to easy to find and freely available to all. He is called Jesus Christ.

    1. Mike 12:15 Thanks for writing a considerable essay which comes down to what’s known as Pascal’s Wager.

      Your preference is to use propaganda videos or films to establish truth. Mine is to use scholarship. There remains no evidence of a hell or a heaven. The quotes from Jesus in the Bible are all folk lore, passed along and passed down to more wealthy people at a later date who were literate. We can only speculate on why they chose to write these stories down, but if humans have not changed we would guess they stood in some way to gain by doing so. The most common explanation is they wanted power over others.

      So far an anyone actually knows, we have but one life. I choose not to spend mine chasing myths but instead try in some small ways to improve the lives of the living and the generations to come.

      1. The eyewitness accounts of thousands of people is known as evidence.

        The censoring of evidence is known as an act of cowardice and desperation of a beaten man. I accept your admission of defeat.

        Scholarship? Not academic. Can you play football?

        1. Matt 11:48 The censoring of evidence is known as an act of cowardice and desperation of a beaten man. I accept your admission of defeat.

          If you have information from some sources other than propaganda sites I might not delete them.

          Jinx II has a good idea. You should post some Hindus who have seen a vision of Mary.

  4. Your realm of control is this message board. You deleted 2 links to videos documenting the Fatima apparition. You called “proof” “propaganda”.

    Cowardly and desperate aptly describe your actions and attitude.

    I can show you Muslims seeking out Catholic priests for exorcisms.


    1. Matt 1:00 Cowardly and desperate aptly describe your actions and attitude.

      You are correct. I continue to hide behind my notion you should come up with Hindus who have seen Mary.

      Further, I know this is an unreasonable request because only people expecting to see Mary see her. It is impossible for an independent or outsider to experience these visions.

    2. Chuck Z

      Jon’s modus opera is to delete anything that he can’t refute, and to willfully ignore questions that he can’t answer. It’s all part of that “free thinking” thing. Demand proof but never give any.

      Jon, where is your proof that The Bible was written by wealthy goat herders?

      1. Chuck Z 3:57 As I have posted before, when I take down someone’s post it is because I want speed readers to find something they might find interesting. I don’t think that is one liner snarky posts nor propaganda videos.

        Wealthy goat herders? For the most part, we don’t know the individuals who wrote the Bible. We know only the 1% at the time were literate. Wealthy goat herders is a good bet on who was able to write at the time.

        1. Chuck Z

          “good bet”

          I find it amusing how the burden of proof changes depending on who’s presenting it.

          Nobody has to click on a video if they don’t want to. Quit trying to hide behind “speed readers” as your reason for taking it down. We all know that’s not the reason. At least be man enough to admit it.

  5. Mike

    I agree, Matt. What Jon calls propaganda, the rest of us call true life eyewitness experiences. The movie lines I referenced above in my earlier post come from the 2017 docu-drama called: “the Case for Christ”. It is based on the true story of a REAL person.

    It describes the 2 year investigation of Lee Strobel, an award winning legal editor of the Chicago Tribune in the early ’80s. He was an avowed atheist, who came to the Christian faith, because of all the evidence he accumulated during his quest to try, as he might, to dispute the Resurrection.

    1. Mike, Jon is a desperate man. He fights the calling of Jesus daily. As he lives he still has hope. He probably thinks more about Christianity than most Christian’s.

    2. Mike 1:27 because of all the evidence he accumulated during his quest to try, as he might, to dispute the Resurrection.

      I would suggest anyone interested in arguments that dispute the Resurrection read Bart Ehrman’s, How Jesus Became God. I think he makes a powerful case against there never was a “tomb” or cave, the documented practice at the time for common criminals was to hang there for weeks. The point of using a cross was to display the punishment that awaited criminals. And, he found the trail of who saw what in the Bible is convoluted. I know it’s and important this for Christianity to believe this tale but basically impossible to treat as history.

  6. Jinx II

    Bart Ehrman was a solid evangelical christian until a Professor critiiqued a paper he had written with the comment “Perhaps John was wrong.” Ehrman had performed impressive mental gymnastics defending something John had wrote. That question opened his mind and he began to question the veracity of the religion he was defending.

    He went from a literal believer to a skeptic in search of the truth. I have more faith in his methodology than anything the fakechristianjuice and his lemmings have to say.

  7. Mike

    This recent back and forth interplay struck me as another example of the phrase: Circular Logic. Christians who believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God get accused of this constantly, because if the premise is true, then everything in the Bible also must be true. And that is a truly horrifying prospect to the non believer.

    Of course, the non-believer will go to extremes to denigrate the Bible as the Word of God, but I have often noticed their tactics, their line of reasoning, their “evidence”…all seem to amount to the same circular logic. They spend an inordinate amount of time seeking out and looking for books and other materials that support their already pre-existing position.

    It’s no surprise then that we go around and around in circles on a blog like this. It reminds me why
    I quit watching these political pundits and their talk shows. No one is actually trying to listen to the other guy and have an actual give and take debate. They are just waiting for their chance to lay out their “talking points”. Sounds like this blog. Truly circular!

    Jon seems to be well read, and a very intelligent person, as I am sure many atheists are. It’s a shame that they expend so much energy looking for ways to defend their atheist position. If they
    were to ever take off their “atheist sunglasses” just for moment, perhaps the light of truth would shine through.

    1. Jinx II

      Mike, it works both ways…….just replace the word atheist so it reads “believer sunglasses” for a moment and perhaps the light of truth would shine through.

      I am an agnostic, most of us who are lumped into the category “atheist” were born and raised in a religion. Over time we began to question the words and behaviors of the ruling church and we began to objectively investigate its claims and then found them to be dubious or unsubstantiated. It often takes several years to adopt the non believer status.

      I question everything I have ever believed or have been told I should believe. as all of us should.

    2. Mike 5:48 the nonbeliever will go to extremes to denigrate the Bible as the Word of God, but I have often noticed their tactics, …all seem to amount to the same circular logic. The spend an inordinate amount of time–looking for books… the support their already pre-existing position.

      I agree we all are drawn to media and literature that reinforces what we already believe to be the case. I would argue, and I cannot prove I am correct, that those who are skeptical of the Bible are also skeptical of atheist speakers and authors. In my Sunday atheist meetup group arguments break out all the time about which of various atheist authors is best and whether any of them are out for themselves and not trying to help others. Good skeptical reading questions the motives of the writer and the society he/she is living in at the time to see if the society’s values are independent of the writer’s views. That’s what I try to do when I read the Bible or the views of contemporary religious writers.

  8. Mike

    You just proved my point, Jinx II. You could have just let my comments lay there without response. Instead, you felt the need to justify yourself. If you don’t care what other people think, and are comfortable in your agnosticism, why the impulse to parry? Just for comedic entertainment?

    On the other hand, a Christian is obligated to share the good news to others. We don’t consider ourselves smarter or more superior than others. Given every human being’s sinful nature, it would be very easy for us to just let unbelievers rot in their unbelief. After all, we already know we are going to heaven. Why should we even care? It is because God first loved us, and sent his Son,that we care to make these small attempts to evanglize. OK. I will stop posting…for now.

  9. Jinx II

    Mike–Your arrogance is obvious. I proved none of your points and spoke of my experience and discussions with others.

    You could have refrained from posting to my comment for the reason you state.

Comments are closed.