Spectators in Hell

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
At the moment a person becomes a believer in Christ [accepting God's grace gift by faith alone], the Holy Spirit imputes an immaterial human spirit which is the home for eternal life and which makes possible the understanding absolute truths revealed in the Word of God as accurately taught by the believer's pastor/teacher..

You skipped the part where I asked whether it would stand up to my test.

Originally posted by sonship
I would be willing to bet that there are some areas in which God is so consistent and faithful that imperical examination might confirm that something is up. Though how to interpret that may differ with different viewers of the data.

So you feel there may be some scientific tests that might indicate the existence of God or his behavior. I won't argue for or against your 'money' example as one would need to do a scientific study to prove either way. Suffice it to say that my room mate at university claimed a similar thing about Buddhism and some special chant he had learned. If he wanted something, all he had to do was chant for a while.

What about more detailed stuff? Christians and theists generally hold vastly different beliefs about God. Do you think there are scientific methods to figure out which of those beliefs are correct? Do you think there are any non-scientific methods that are effective?
What I am looking for is a method that has consistent results.

Originally posted by twhitehead
So you feel there may be some scientific tests that might indicate the existence of God or his behavior. I won't argue for or against your 'money' example as one would need to do a scientific study to prove either way. Suffice it to say that my room mate at university claimed a similar thing about Buddhism and some special chant he had learned. If he want ...[text shortened]... ific methods that are effective?
What I am looking for is a method that has consistent results.

twhitehead, there is no conflict between correct interpretation of the Word of God in the original languages and correct interpretation of natural phenomena by science. God originates and sustains all laws and phenomena which science has always been seeking to observe and classify. Whenever scientific speculation contradicts the Word of God the scientific speculation is inaccurate. The Word of God predates and is not required to agree with science before or during your days "at university" or today.

-Removed-

The way I read it, hell will be eternal.

As for the numbers, I'm sure there will be a great many.

Again, this is just how I read the scriptures. It has nothing to do with what I want to have happen.

Scripture indicates that God does not want it to happen either.

-Removed-

The issue is suffering and how to prevent it.

If sin brings suffering could God prevent sin? If he did so, there would be no free will. If there was no free will, then love would not exist because love demands one of the two parties has the option not to love another back.

I suppose you think that such suffering could be limited. Perhaps God will just snuff out their consciousness and extinguish them altogether. Is this what you believe?

I believe this is a JW teaching. Do you agree with their teaching?

-Removed-

If hell (along with death) will be destroyed after being cast into the lake of fire, then how does this mean hell will be eternal?

It seems you are incapable of distinguishing between hell and the lake of fire, or maybe it just seems this way. Maybe in fact you know better, but for some reason wish to prolong your 'debate' with this strange line of questioning.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
twhitehead, there is no conflict between correct interpretation of the Word of God in the original languages and correct interpretation of natural phenomena by science. God originates and sustains all laws and phenomena which science has always been seeking to observe and classify. Whenever scientific speculation contradicts the Word of God the scientif ...[text shortened]... s and is not required to agree with science before or during your days "at university" or today.

I am not sure why you are telling me that. Did you actually read my post? I get the feeling you didn't as what you have said has no bearing whatsoever on my post.

-Removed-

It appears that you agree that hell itself is not morally bankrupt.

I did not say hell is eternal, but you've repeatedly reset the argument and claimed I've said it is eternal, so I must assume your wish is to continue arguing this point... which in itself points to a different sort of morally bankruptcy

-Removed-

Does this mean you believe hell is a metaphor, just as you believe the lake of fire is not real but representative of something else?

edit: If you don't want to deal with this here (in this thread) I could start a new thread for examining this question.