Talk:Lake of Fire
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. | |
| This article falls within the scope of the Interfaith work group. If you are interested in Interfaith-related topics, please visit the project page to see how you can help. If you have any comments regarding the appropriateness or positioning of this template, please let us know at our talk page
|
||
Trying to define what the Lake of Fire is made of is about as productive as trying to define the structure of heaven. We could never construct either with the materials we have at our disposal. They are special places made by God. The important message is who goes where and why they go.
In the last days expect powerfully effective deceptions will pervale the earth, they will be aided by sorcery, the misuse of science (including social science) and medicine should be expected. When I state medicine that includes especially the mental health system. These decievers will have an outer appearance of rightousness, but be raving wolfs underneath. 71.114.161.229
"(note:it clearly state that death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. If hell is the lake of fire then how can it be thrown into itself?)"
- Don't be dumb. Where's your evidence that it's "synonomous with hell"? You just showed that the only time it's mentioned in the Bible, it's something different. CrossEyed7 15:00, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't get it: what keeps this lake of fire burning? For fire, you need oxygen, a fuel source, and heat. There's heat in the center of the Earth, but no oxygen, and rock doesn't make a good fuel source. Furthermore, a lake of fire is practically an oxy moron (no pun intended), since lakes are bodies of water, and water is the opposite of fire. So said the ancient Greeks. If God is omnipotent and omniscient, wouldn't he just automatically punish everyone who he knew would sin or deny him? I don't like Christianity, and a lake of fire is a stupid concept, especially with no oxygen (see, an "oxy moron"). So is a whole book series based on the death of six billion+ non-believers. Besides the point, this article is short and could use some expansion so others like me can laugh at its utter stupidity. Tee hee hee.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.82.93.235 (talk) .
Yeah, because an omnipotent God can't create fire. Do you even understand the concept of the word "supernatural?" And please keep comments on talk pages constructive. If something like this was written on Islam or Scientology, it would be deleted instantly. Besides the point, lakes aren't necessarily bodies of water, and if God automatically sent people who He knew would deny Him to hell, I doubt you'd be too happy about it. CrossEyed7 04:21, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Relevation is full of symbolism, just because Relevation staits "Lake of Fire" doesn't mean there is going to be an actual "Lake of Fire." Through-out the Bible, things of this world are used to describe "things" from heaven (or in this case, hell.) If the Bible described God's "logic" straightforth, we could not understand it, for God's mind is far more complex than ours. This is why Jesus Christ spoke in parables at times, to make humankind understand God's "logic." When Revelation says "Lake of Fire," its probably not going to be an actual lake of fire, but a WHOLE lot worse.
Also, God doesn't automatically damn unbelievers to hell because he loves us (Which is apparent in the fact that he sent his Son to die for us.) God wants people to realize that they sinned and God wants the Holy Spirit to enter their hearts. Unfortunally, many people harden their hearts to the Lord, and in the end, the Lord throws the unbelievers into the lake of fire.
I am a member of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod and am proud of it. Slash's snakepit 01:55, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
If God loved us, why would he create us if he knew beforehand that many of us would deny him and be sent to Hell. You say he sent his son to save some of us, but if he never created mankind in the first place he would have saved all of us. Get a clue people; your religion is bogus.
Contents |
[edit] Reference to Gei' Hinnom
The citation doesn't show the connection between the lake of fire and Gei' Hinnom, so I replaced the term with "the lake of fire." --Hrankowski 05:41, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. Jonathan Tweet 13:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Summary
Someone that I'm in a dispute with on other pages deleted the summary, without which there's no context for the lake of fire, as in, when does it come into play, when are various entities tossed into it, etc. We're left with just the raw verses and no sense of how they fit into the surrounding text. Lima, your other edits demonstrated uncharacteristic restraint, so thanks. Jonathan Tweet 13:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] lead
Please see WP:LEAD. A lead should summarize the topic and make the reader care. Someone has hacked the lead down to almost nothing. Jonathan Tweet 14:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] lake of fire is not the same as hell
Someone wrote "the lake of fire is what is generally called hell." This interpretation needs a source, plus it's false. When do you get thrown into hell? When you die. When do you get thrown into the lake of fire? On Judgment Day. Different, not the same. It is true that the lake of fire is commonly equated with hell, but that doesn't mean that the early Christian concept of the lake of fire in hades is equated with the modern day concept of hell.
This interpretation is an attempt to make various Catholic sources (Revelation, Hippolytus, Fatima) seem to be in harmony. Jonathan Tweet 14:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
- For those not inclined to read WP:LEAD, I offer you the first clause in the guideline for a lead's content: The lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article. Lima, I ask you, could your lead stand alone as a concise overview of the article? Jonathan Tweet 14:29, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Clean up?
Sorry, not an active member, but noticed the page needs cleanup. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.19.86.59 (talk) 06:27, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
