Is there really a Heaven and Hell?
Is there right and wrong, good and evil? Is there cause and effect? As surely as there is right and wrong, good and evil, cause and effect, there is a heaven and hell.
Former Atheist, Howard Storm, Recalls His Terrifying Death Experience In Hell Before Being Rescued
"It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."
(Hebrews 10:31)
As Above, So Below
Matthew 6:10
Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
Universal Law of Cause and Effect
Law of Cause and Effect: Many people seem to ask, “Why does God send people to Hell?”
Source is No Respecter of Persons
Law of Gravity: A person who has a high status in society or possesses a high ranking title may make the false claim, based on their perceived lofty position, that they are above the universal laws or the laws of men. Yet, if that person steps off a cliff with his false claim alone, the outcome is certain.
Law of Sow and Reap: Even Nature and Science have confirmed and verified an almost infinite times the Truth of the principle that "One Reaps What One Sows". Anyone who sows wheat seed reaps wheat. Anyone who sows corn seed reaps corn. Anyone who sows rice seed reaps rice. Anyone who sows evil reaps evil.
God does not send anyone to Hell. They send themselves there. The Universal Laws have been set in devine motion. Those who transgress the established Universal Laws, do so to their own peril.
Source is No Respecter of Persons
Law of Gravity: A person who has a high status in society or possesses a high ranking title may make the false claim, based on their perceived lofty position, that they are above the universal laws or the laws of men. Yet, if that person steps off a cliff with his false claim alone, the outcome is certain.
Law of Sow and Reap: Even Nature and Science have confirmed and verified an almost infinite times the Truth of the principle that "One Reaps What One Sows". Anyone who sows wheat seed reaps wheat. Anyone who sows corn seed reaps corn. Anyone who sows rice seed reaps rice. Anyone who sows evil reaps evil.
God does not send anyone to Hell. They send themselves there. The Universal Laws have been set in devine motion. Those who transgress the established Universal Laws, do so to their own peril.
Causality
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Cause and effect)
Causality (also referred to as causation,[1] or cause and effect) is what connects one process (the cause) with another process or state (the effect),[citation needed] where the first is partly responsible for the second, and the second is partly dependent on the first. In general, a process has many causes,[2] which are said to be causal factors for it, and all lie in its past (more precise: none lie in its future). An effect can in turn be a cause of, or causal factor for, many other effects, which all lie in its future. Causality is metaphysically prior to notions of time and space.[3][4]
Causality is an abstraction that indicates how the world progresses,[citation needed] so basic a concept that it is more apt as an explanation of other concepts of progression than as something to be explained by others more basic. The concept is like those of agency and efficacy. For this reason, a leap of intuition may be needed to grasp it.[5] Accordingly, causality is implicit in the logic and structure of ordinary language.[6]
Aristotelian philosophy uses the word "cause" to mean "explanation" or "answer to a why question", including Aristotle's material, formal, efficient, and final "causes"; then the "cause" is the explanans for the explanandum. In this case, failure to recognize that different kinds of "cause" are being considered can lead to futile debate. Of Aristotle's four explanatory modes, the one nearest to the concerns of the present article is the "efficient" one.
The topic of causality remains a staple in contemporary philosophy.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Cause and effect)
Causality (also referred to as causation,[1] or cause and effect) is what connects one process (the cause) with another process or state (the effect),[citation needed] where the first is partly responsible for the second, and the second is partly dependent on the first. In general, a process has many causes,[2] which are said to be causal factors for it, and all lie in its past (more precise: none lie in its future). An effect can in turn be a cause of, or causal factor for, many other effects, which all lie in its future. Causality is metaphysically prior to notions of time and space.[3][4]
Causality is an abstraction that indicates how the world progresses,[citation needed] so basic a concept that it is more apt as an explanation of other concepts of progression than as something to be explained by others more basic. The concept is like those of agency and efficacy. For this reason, a leap of intuition may be needed to grasp it.[5] Accordingly, causality is implicit in the logic and structure of ordinary language.[6]
Aristotelian philosophy uses the word "cause" to mean "explanation" or "answer to a why question", including Aristotle's material, formal, efficient, and final "causes"; then the "cause" is the explanans for the explanandum. In this case, failure to recognize that different kinds of "cause" are being considered can lead to futile debate. Of Aristotle's four explanatory modes, the one nearest to the concerns of the present article is the "efficient" one.
The topic of causality remains a staple in contemporary philosophy.
Fields:
Science
For the scientific investigation of efficient causality, the cause and effect are each best conceived of as temporally transient processes.
Within the conceptual frame of the scientific method, an investigator sets up several distinct and contrasting temporally transient material processes that have the structure of experiments, and records candidate material responses, normally intending to determine causality in the physical world.[41] For instance, one may want to know whether a high intake of carrots causes humans to develop the bubonic plague. The quantity of carrot intake is a process that is varied from occasion to occasion. The occurrence or non-occurrence of subsequent bubonic plague is recorded. To establish causality, the experiment must fulfill certain criteria, only one example of which is mentioned here. For example, instances of the hypothesized cause must be set up to occur at a time when the hypothesized effect is relatively unlikely in the absence of the hypothesized cause; such unlikelihood is to be established by empirical evidence. A mere observation of a correlation is not nearly adequate to establish causality. In nearly all cases, establishment of causality relies on repetition of experiments and probabilistic reasoning. Hardly ever is causality established more firmly than as more or less probable. It is often most convenient for establishment of causality if the contrasting material states of affairs are fully comparable, and differ through only one variable factor, perhaps measured by a real number. Otherwise, experiments are usually difficult or impossible to interpret.
In some sciences, it is very difficult or nearly impossible to set up material states of affairs that closely test hypotheses of causality. Such sciences can in some sense be regarded as "softer".
Physics
Main article: Causality (physics)One has to be careful in the use of the word cause in physics. Properly speaking, the hypothesized cause and the hypothesized effect are each temporally transient processes. For example, force is a useful concept for the explanation of acceleration, but force is not by itself a cause. More is needed. For example, a temporally transient process might be characterized by a definite change of force at a definite time. Such a process can be regarded as a cause. Causality is not inherently implied in equations of motion, but postulated as an additional constraint that needs to be satisfied (i.e. a cause always precedes its effect). This constraint has mathematical implications[42] such as the Kramers-Kronig relations.
Causality is one of the most fundamental and essential notions of physics.[43] Causal efficacy cannot propagate faster than light. Otherwise, reference coordinate systems could be constructed (using the Lorentz transform of special relativity) in which an observer would see an effect precede its cause (i.e. the postulate of causality would be violated).
Causal notions appear in the context of the flow of mass-energy. For example, it is commonplace to argue that causal efficacy can be propagated by waves (such as electromagnetic waves) only if they propagate no faster than light. Wave packets have group velocity and phase velocity. For waves that propagate causal efficacy, both of these must travel no faster than light. Thus light waves often propagate causal efficacy but de Broglie waves often have phase velocity faster than light and consequently cannot be propagating causal efficacy.
Causal notions are important in general relativity to the extent that the existence of an arrow of time demands that the universe's semi-Riemannian manifold be orientable, so that "future" and "past" are globally definable quantities.
Engineering[edit]A causal system is a system with output and internal states that depends only on the current and previous input values. A system that has some dependence on input values from the future (in addition to possible past or current input values) is termed an acausal system, and a system that depends solely on future input values is an anticausal system. Acausal filters, for example, can only exist as postprocessing filters, because these filters can extract future values from a memory buffer or a file.
Biology, medicine and epidemiology[edit]Austin Bradford Hill built upon the work of Hume and Popper and suggested in his paper "The Environment and Disease: Association or Causation?" that aspects of an association such as strength, consistency, specificity and temporality be considered in attempting to distinguish causal from noncausal associations in the epidemiological situation. (See Bradford-Hill criteria.) He did not note however, that temporality is the only necessary criterion among those aspects. Directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) are increasingly used in epidemiology to help enlighten causal thinking.[44]
Psychology
Main article: Causal reasoningPsychologists take an empirical approach to causality, investigating how people and non-human animals detect or infer causation from sensory information, prior experience and innate knowledge.
AttributionAttribution theory is the theory concerning how people explain individual occurrences of causation. Attribution can be external (assigning causality to an outside agent or force—claiming that some outside thing motivated the event) or internal (assigning causality to factors within the person—taking personal responsibility or accountability for one's actions and claiming that the person was directly responsible for the event). Taking causation one step further, the type of attribution a person provides influences their future behavior.
The intention behind the cause or the effect can be covered by the subject of action. See also accident; blame; intent; and responsibility.
Causal powers
Whereas David Hume argued that causes are inferred from non-causal observations, Immanuel Kant claimed that people have innate assumptions about causes. Within psychology, Patricia Cheng (1997)[45] attempted to reconcile the Humean and Kantian views. According to her power PC theory, people filter observations of events through a basic belief that causes have the power to generate (or prevent) their effects, thereby inferring specific cause-effect relations.
Causation and salience
Our view of causation depends on what we consider to be the relevant events. Another way to view the statement, "Lightning causes thunder" is to see both lightning and thunder as two perceptions of the same event, viz., an electric discharge that we perceive first visually and then aurally.
Naming and causality
David Sobel and Alison Gopnik from the Psychology Department of UC Berkeley designed a device known as the blicket detector which would turn on when an object was placed on it. Their research suggests that "even young children will easily and swiftly learn about a new causal power of an object and spontaneously use that information in classifying and naming the object."[46]
Perception of launching events
Some researchers such as Anjan Chatterjee at the University of Pennsylvania and Jonathan Fugelsang at the University of Waterloo are using neuroscience techniques to investigate the neural and psychological underpinnings of causal launching events in which one object causes another object to move. Both temporal and spatial factors can be manipulated.[47]
Statistics and economics
Statistics and economics usually employ pre-existing data or experimental data to infer causality by regression methods. The body of statistical techniques involves substantial use of regression analysis. Typically a linear relationship such as
{\displaystyle y_{i}=a_{0}+a_{1}x_{1,i}+a_{2}x_{2,i}+...+a_{k}x_{k,i}+e_{i}}is postulated, in which {\displaystyle y_{i}} is the ith observation of the dependent variable (hypothesized to be the caused variable), {\displaystyle x_{j,i}} for j=1,...,k is the ith observation on the jth independent variable (hypothesized to be a causative variable), and {\displaystyle e_{i}} is the error term for the ith observation (containing the combined effects of all other causative variables, which must be uncorrelated with the included independent variables). If there is reason to believe that none of the {\displaystyle x_{j}}s is caused by y, then estimates of the coefficients {\displaystyle a_{j}} are obtained. If the null hypothesis that {\displaystyle a_{j}=0} is rejected, then the alternative hypothesis that {\displaystyle a_{j}\neq 0} and equivalently that {\displaystyle x_{j}} causes y cannot be rejected. On the other hand, if the null hypothesis that {\displaystyle a_{j}=0} cannot be rejected, then equivalently the hypothesis of no causal effect of {\displaystyle x_{j}} on y cannot be rejected. Here the notion of causality is one of contributory causality as discussed above: If the true value {\displaystyle a_{j}\neq 0}, then a change in {\displaystyle x_{j}} will result in a change in y unless some other causative variable(s), either included in the regression or implicit in the error term, change in such a way as to exactly offset its effect; thus a change in {\displaystyle x_{j}} is not sufficient to change y. Likewise, a change in {\displaystyle x_{j}} is not necessary to change y, because a change in y could be caused by something implicit in the error term (or by some other causative explanatory variable included in the model).
The above way of testing for causality requires belief that there is no reverse causation, in which y would cause {\displaystyle x_{j}}. This belief can be established in one of several ways. First, the variable {\displaystyle x_{j}} may be a non-economic variable: for example, if rainfall amount {\displaystyle x_{j}} is hypothesized to affect the futures price y of some agricultural commodity, it is impossible that in fact the futures price affects rainfall amount (provided that cloud seeding is never attempted). Second, the instrumental variables technique may be employed to remove any reverse causation by introducing a role for other variables (instruments) that are known to be unaffected by the dependent variable. Third, the principle that effects cannot precede causes can be invoked, by including on the right side of the regression only variables that precede in time the dependent variable; this principle is invoked, for example, in testing for Granger causality and in its multivariate analog, vector autoregression, both of which control for lagged values of the dependent variable while testing for causal effects of lagged independent variables.
Regression analysis controls for other relevant variables by including them as regressors (explanatory variables). This helps to avoid false inferences of causality due to the presence of a third, underlying, variable that influences both the potentially causative variable and the potentially caused variable: its effect on the potentially caused variable is captured by directly including it in the regression, so that effect will not be picked up as an indirect effect through the potentially causative variable of interest.
Given the above procedures, coincidental (as opposed to causal) correlation can be probabilistically rejected if data samples are large and if regression results pass cross-validationtests showing that the correlations hold even for data that were not used in the regression.
Metaphysics
The deterministic world-view holds that the history of the universe can be exhaustively represented as a progression of events following one after as cause and effect[10] The incompatibilist version of this holds that there is no such thing as "free will". Compatibilism, on the other hand, holds that determinism is compatible with, or even necessary for, free will.[48]
Humanities
History[edit]In the discussion of history, events are sometimes considered as if in some way being agents that can then bring about other historical events. Thus, the combination of poor harvests, the hardships of the peasants, high taxes, lack of representation of the people, and kingly ineptitude are among the causes of the French Revolution. This is a somewhat Platonic and Hegelian view that reifies causes as ontological entities. In Aristotelian terminology, this use approximates to the case of the efficient cause.
Some philosophers of history such as Arthur Danto have claimed that "explanations in history and elsewhere" describe "not simply an event—something that happens—but a change".[50] Like many practicing historians, they treat causes as intersecting actions and sets of actions which bring about "larger changes", in Danto's words: to decide "what are the elements which persist through a change" is "rather simple" when treating an individual's "shift in attitude", but "it is considerably more complex and metaphysically challenging when we are interested in such a change as, say, the break-up of feudalism or the emergence of nationalism".[51]
Much of the historical debate about causes has focused on the relationship between communicative and other actions, between singular and repeated ones, and between actions, structures of action or group and institutional contexts and wider sets of conditions.[52] John Gaddis has distinguished between exceptional and general causes (following Marc Bloch) and between "routine" and "distinctive links" in causal relationships: "in accounting for what happened at Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, we attach greater importance to the fact that President Truman ordered the dropping of an atomic bomb than to the decision of the Army Air Force to carry out his orders."[53] He has also pointed to the difference between immediate, intermediate and distant causes.[54] For his part, Christopher Lloyd puts forward four "general concepts of causation" used in history: the "metaphysical idealist concept, which asserts that the phenomena of the universe are products of or emanations from an omnipotent being or such final cause"; "the empiricist (or Humean) regularity concept, which is based on the idea of causation being a matter of constant conjunctions of events"; "the functional/teleological/consequential concept", which is "goal-directed, so that goals are causes"; and the "realist, structurist and dispositional approach, which sees relational structures and internal dispositions as the causes of phenomena".[55]
Law
Main article: Causation (law)According to law and jurisprudence, legal cause must be demonstrated to hold a defendant liable for a crime or a tort (i.e. a civil wrong such as negligence or trespass). It must be proven that causality, or a "sufficient causal link" relates the defendant's actions to the criminal event or damage in question. Causation is also an essential legal element that must be proven to qualify for remedy measures under international trade law.[56]
Theology[edit]Note the concept of omnicausality in Abrahamic theology, which is the belief that God has set in motion all events at the dawn of time; he is the determiner and the cause of all things. It is therefore an attempt to rectify the apparent incompatibility between determinism and the existence of an omnipotent god.[57]
"Cause and Effect: Belief in a strictly materialistic Darwinian Evolution leads one to believe, albeit falsely, that there is no Free Will. And if there is no Free Will, then there is no Right and Wrong and no Moral Law. However, this belief is completely contrary to everything that is practiced and observed in nature, humanity, and the cosmos regarding cause and effect. This line of reasoning is what led to the atrocities of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc and is the hidden underlying ideology / worldview justifying and directing many countries' Social Darwinian based foreign and domestic policies to the present. The Social Darwinian Materialistic Ideology / Worldview (Survival of the Fittest among nations, i.e. the continuous lawless struggle for resource wealth and world rule without regard to human moral / ethical standards or International / U.S. Laws) fabricates false scientific justification for racism and is the Root Cause of modern era World Wars and Perpetual Wars." --- Rod Dacanay
Near-death experience (NDE)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see Near-death experience (disambiguation).
"NDE" redirects here. For other uses, see NDE (disambiguation).
"Near death" redirects here. For the comic book, see Near Death (comics).
A near-death experience (NDE) is a profound personal experience associated with death or impending death which researchers claim share similar characteristics. When positive, such experiences may encompass a variety of sensations including detachment from the body, feelings of levitation, total serenity, security, warmth, the experience of absolute dissolution, and the presence of a light. When negative, such experiences may include sensations of anguish and distress.[1]
Explanations for NDEs vary from scientific to religious. Neuroscience research suggests that an NDE is a subjective phenomenon resulting from "disturbed bodily multisensory integration" that occurs during life-threatening events,[2] while some transcendental and religious beliefs about an afterlife include descriptions similar to NDEs.[1][3][4][5][6]
Etymology[edit]
The equivalent French term expérience de mort imminente (experience of imminent death) was proposed by French psychologist and epistemologist Victor Egger as a result of discussions in the 1890s among philosophers and psychologists concerning climbers' stories of the panoramic life review during falls.[9][10] In 1892 a series of subjective observations by workers falling from scaffolds, war soldiers who suffered injuries, climbers who had fallen from heights or other individuals who had come close to death (near drownings, accidents) was reported by Albert Heim. This was also the first time the phenomenon was described as clinical syndrome.[11] In 1968 Celia Green published an analysis of 400 first-hand accounts of out-of-body experiences.[12] This represented the first attempt to provide a taxonomy of such experiences, viewed simply as anomalous perceptual experiences, or hallucinations. In 1969, Swiss-American psychiatrist and pioneer in near-death studies Elisabeth Kubler-Ross published her book On Death and Dying: What the dying have to teach doctors, nurses, clergy, and their own families. These experiences were also popularized by the work of psychiatrist Raymond Moody, who in 1975 coined the term "near-death experience" as an umbrella term for the different elements (out of body experiences, the "panoramic life review", the Light, the tunnel, or the border).[11] The term "near-death experience" had already been used by John C. Lilly in 1972.[13]
Characteristics[edit]
Common elements[edit]
Researchers have identified the common elements that define near-death experiences.[4] Bruce Greyson argues that the general features of the experience include impressions of being outside one's physical body, visions of deceased relatives and religious figures, and transcendence of egotic and spatiotemporal boundaries.[14] Many common elements have been reported, although the person's interpretation of these events often corresponds with the cultural, philosophical, or religious beliefs of the person experiencing it. For example, in the US, where 46% of the population believes in guardian angels, they will often be identified as angels or deceased loved ones (or will be unidentified), while Hindus will often identify them as messengers of the god of death.[15][16]
Common traits that have been reported by NDErs are as follows:
Stages[edit]
Kenneth Ring (1980) subdivided the NDE on a five-stage continuum. The subdivisions were:[21]
Charlotte Martial, a neuropsychologist from the University of Liège and the University Hospital of Liège who led a team that investigated 154 NDE cases, concluded that there is not a fixed sequence of events.[22]
For other uses, see Near-death experience (disambiguation).
"NDE" redirects here. For other uses, see NDE (disambiguation).
"Near death" redirects here. For the comic book, see Near Death (comics).
A near-death experience (NDE) is a profound personal experience associated with death or impending death which researchers claim share similar characteristics. When positive, such experiences may encompass a variety of sensations including detachment from the body, feelings of levitation, total serenity, security, warmth, the experience of absolute dissolution, and the presence of a light. When negative, such experiences may include sensations of anguish and distress.[1]
Explanations for NDEs vary from scientific to religious. Neuroscience research suggests that an NDE is a subjective phenomenon resulting from "disturbed bodily multisensory integration" that occurs during life-threatening events,[2] while some transcendental and religious beliefs about an afterlife include descriptions similar to NDEs.[1][3][4][5][6]
Etymology[edit]
The equivalent French term expérience de mort imminente (experience of imminent death) was proposed by French psychologist and epistemologist Victor Egger as a result of discussions in the 1890s among philosophers and psychologists concerning climbers' stories of the panoramic life review during falls.[9][10] In 1892 a series of subjective observations by workers falling from scaffolds, war soldiers who suffered injuries, climbers who had fallen from heights or other individuals who had come close to death (near drownings, accidents) was reported by Albert Heim. This was also the first time the phenomenon was described as clinical syndrome.[11] In 1968 Celia Green published an analysis of 400 first-hand accounts of out-of-body experiences.[12] This represented the first attempt to provide a taxonomy of such experiences, viewed simply as anomalous perceptual experiences, or hallucinations. In 1969, Swiss-American psychiatrist and pioneer in near-death studies Elisabeth Kubler-Ross published her book On Death and Dying: What the dying have to teach doctors, nurses, clergy, and their own families. These experiences were also popularized by the work of psychiatrist Raymond Moody, who in 1975 coined the term "near-death experience" as an umbrella term for the different elements (out of body experiences, the "panoramic life review", the Light, the tunnel, or the border).[11] The term "near-death experience" had already been used by John C. Lilly in 1972.[13]
Characteristics[edit]
Common elements[edit]
Researchers have identified the common elements that define near-death experiences.[4] Bruce Greyson argues that the general features of the experience include impressions of being outside one's physical body, visions of deceased relatives and religious figures, and transcendence of egotic and spatiotemporal boundaries.[14] Many common elements have been reported, although the person's interpretation of these events often corresponds with the cultural, philosophical, or religious beliefs of the person experiencing it. For example, in the US, where 46% of the population believes in guardian angels, they will often be identified as angels or deceased loved ones (or will be unidentified), while Hindus will often identify them as messengers of the god of death.[15][16]
Common traits that have been reported by NDErs are as follows:
- A sense/awareness of being dead.[4]
- A sense of peace, well-being and painlessness. Positive emotions. A sense of removal from the world.[4]
- An out-of-body experience. A perception of one's body from an outside position, sometimes observing medical professionals performing resuscitation efforts.[4][17]
- A "tunnel experience" or entering a darkness. A sense of moving up, or through, a passageway or staircase.[4][17]
- A rapid movement toward and/or sudden immersion in a powerful light (or "Being of Light") which communicates with the person.[18]
- An intense feeling of unconditional love and acceptance.[19]
- Encountering "Beings of Light", "Beings dressed in white", or similar. Also, the possibility of being reunited with deceased loved ones.[4][17]
- Receiving a life review, commonly referred to as "seeing one's life flash before one's eyes".[4]
- Approaching a border or a decision by oneself or others to return to one's body, often accompanied by a reluctance to return.[4][17]
- Suddenly finding oneself back inside one's body.[20]
- Connection to the cultural beliefs held by the individual, which seem to dictate some of the phenomena experienced in the NDE and particularly the later interpretation thereof.[15][page needed]
Stages[edit]
Kenneth Ring (1980) subdivided the NDE on a five-stage continuum. The subdivisions were:[21]
- Peace
- Body separation
- Entering darkness
- Seeing the light
- Entering the light
Charlotte Martial, a neuropsychologist from the University of Liège and the University Hospital of Liège who led a team that investigated 154 NDE cases, concluded that there is not a fixed sequence of events.[22]
Is Heaven and Hell Real?
Most human beings believe in life after death. In fact, most people not only believe in a heaven, but also feel sure that they are going there after death. However, very few people believe in a hell, statistically speaking. Moreover, it would be hard to find many people who truly believe they are going to hell.
The Bible teaches that there is a literal heaven and a literal hell. Heaven is the spiritual dwelling place of God, and it is where all true Christians will go after death, provided they remain faithful throughout life. Hell is the place of eternal separation from God, prepared for the devil and his angels. It is a place of eternal torment. Please click on the links below to learn more about heaven and hell.
Most human beings believe in life after death. In fact, most people not only believe in a heaven, but also feel sure that they are going there after death. However, very few people believe in a hell, statistically speaking. Moreover, it would be hard to find many people who truly believe they are going to hell.
The Bible teaches that there is a literal heaven and a literal hell. Heaven is the spiritual dwelling place of God, and it is where all true Christians will go after death, provided they remain faithful throughout life. Hell is the place of eternal separation from God, prepared for the devil and his angels. It is a place of eternal torment. Please click on the links below to learn more about heaven and hell.
Heaven
When you think of heaven, do you imagine fat little angels sitting around on clouds playing harps? If so, you are not alone in this thought. However, with all due respect, you could not be more in error. The Bible does not present heaven as a physical place on the clouds in the sky where people will spend time trying to amuse themselves for all of eternity. Rather, it presents heaven as the spiritual dwelling place of God where Christians will reside for all of eternity, worshipping Him and enjoying the glory and joy of God's presence. Heaven will be the fulfillment of all of the desires and wishes of the heart of man. There will be no pain or suffering, and it will be an eternal morning where Christians bask in the illuminated glory of God.
The images of heaven in the Bible only hint at how wonderful it will be for Christians. Revelation 21:1-4 reads: "Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea. Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from heaven saying, 'Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with them and their God. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.'"
Hell
In the same manner that people imagine heaven as a crowd of harp-players lounging on clouds trying to pass the time, so do many people imagine hell as a little cave where a red man with a tail and horns pokes people in their backs with a pitchfork. This little devil character can sometimes be downright cute. It is sad that the world has popularized this version of hell and Satan, and that it is used to mock the concept of hell.
The Bible clearly teaches that hell is a literal place of eternal torment where all non-Christians go after death. Granted, this biblical teaching on hell is not a popular one, as many people -- even professing Christians -- try to minimize it in many ways. But the Bible is very clear on the existence of hell. Christ described the plight of the wicked in Matthew 25:46 in this manner: "And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
Jesus used different images to describe hell. He used the images of torment (Matthew 25:46), a place of weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matthew 8:12), a place of outer darkness (Matthew 8:12), and a place of fire (Matthew 3:12). Revelation 21:8 describes it as "the lake which burns with fire and brimstone..." To demonstrate that hell is a place of continual, eternal torment, Revelation 14:11 states: "And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name." This is the biblical teaching on hell. Those who try to dilute it are only hurting people; hell is real, and everyone who does not submit to the gospel of Christ will go there.
By Matthew R. Miller.
From Expository Files 7.4; April 2000
First-hand Accounts of Heaven and Hell
Important Note: As with anything in life, not all Near Death Experience (NDE) accounts of heaven and hell are true. Some are true and some are false. Because, as with anything, the Devil can also counterfeit NDE experiences with lies to send people strong delusions. The viewer must "try/test" the spirits, utilizing God's Word and discernment, to see whether they are of God. If the NDE account does not perfectly and completely align with God's word, then it is false. The NDE's below are a sampling and must be tested with God's Word.
1John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
John 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
2Thessalonians 2:11-12 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
1John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
John 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
2Thessalonians 2:11-12 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
John 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
2Thessalonians 2:11-12 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.