Hell in Wikipedia?

[Slopeshoulder]

Wow, the wikipedia entry on hell is really long, but it sucks regarding Christian hell. My wife and I went to 8 seminaries, and in EVERY one hell 101 was basically taken to be a metaphor or maybe a reference to some sort of state defined as or experienced as "separation from God." And it can be here, and it's a mindset and all that. It's despair, nihilism, the demontor's kiss, etc. But wiki hell is still a place with fire and stuff. Wow, just wow. You woulda thought someone might have recieved the memo.

[Miles]

If you reject entirely every aspect of the framework I am engaging, it seems to me very odd and illogical that you would presume to assess my relationship to it and within it.

Not sure what you mean by "every aspect of the framework I am engaging," or what personal assessment you're referring to. When you make unspecified references like this it leaves the issue dead in the water. If you're looking for a response you'll have to be more precise. Sorry.

As I see it, based on the evidence of your post, you take the position that there's no meaningful difference betwen fundamentalists, liberals, and super-liberal seeker types; There's no merit in Christian religious literature or thought at all; and you represent the Dawkins-like, slippery slope it's-all-the-devil school of religious opinion. I label that extremism, and I don't engage extremists as a matter of policy, here or elsewhere.

If that's how you see it then so be it, because there's simply far too much ground in your "as I see it" to bother with. Hope the venting helped.

The small percentage of the population that holds truly beliigerent fuindamentalist or anti-religion views can't be reasoned with or engaged. So I don't. Please let me know if your views moderate. Game over. Too bad though, while it was useless for us, other readers here might have liked engaging the topic. I hope my earlir posts were helpful to them.
And if you want a lesson in "invidious elitism," look no further than your wholesale dimissal of every variation an enormous world tradition.
He said politely...

As with the notion of a flat Earth, no matter how widespread it is or how many variations it may have in the world, if at its core it's an ill-concieved concept then it merits wholesale dismissal. Popularity does not equate with truth.

[myth-one.com]

Wow, the wikipedia entry on hell is really long, but it sucks regarding Christian hell. My wife and I went to 8 seminaries, and in EVERY one hell 101 was basically taken to be a metaphor or maybe a reference to some sort of state defined as or experienced as "separation from God." And it can be here, and it's a mindset and all that. It's despair, nihilism, the demontor's kiss, etc. But wiki hell is still a place with fire and stuff. Wow, just wow. You woulda thought someone might have recieved the memo.

[myth-one.com]

My wife and I went to 8 seminaries, and in EVERY one hell 101 was basically taken to be a metaphor or maybe a reference to some sort of state defined as or experienced as "separation from God."

For Jesus to become mankind's Savior, He had to pay the penalty for the wages of our sin. And if our punishment is some sort of "separation from God," then we have no savior because Jesus is not separated from God! In "Trinity 101" those same seminaries probably teach that Jesus, God the Father, and the Holy Spirit are the same being:

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (I John 5:7)

That being the case, how did those seminaries explain Jesus' separation from God?

But wiki hell is still a place with fire and stuff.

Wikipedia simply plagiarized that from the Bible; but seminaries are not limited by scripture:

And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. (Revelation 20:7-10)