Please nairalanders where do we go when we die?

what do you see death as?

it is not the death it is where you go when you die that scares me?

men heaven is fun but hell, God i don't want to even think of it.

READ :THE DIVINE REVELATION OF HELL AND YOU 'LL SHOUT.

IS THIS THE GENIUE SOUND FROM HELL


"As a communist I don’t believe in heaven or the Bible but as a scientist I now believe in hell," said Dr. Azzacove. "Needless to say we were shocked to make such a discovery. But we know what we saw and we know what we heard. And we are absolutely convinced that we drilled through the gates of hell!"

Dr. Azzacove continued, ". . .the drill suddenly began to rotate wildly, indicating that we had reached a large empty pocket or cavern. Temperature sensors showed a dramatic increase in heat to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit."

"We lowered a microphone, designed to detect the sounds of plate movements down the shaft. But instead of plate movements we heard a human voice screaming in pain! At first we thought the sound was coming from our own equipment."

"But when we made adjustments our worst suspicions were confirmed. The screams weren’t those of a single human, they were the screams of millions of humans!"

http://www.av1611.org/hell.html

you sure that is genuine? I'm not convinced.

Hi ecomog08,

Your efforts in reposting that article and link are well appreciated, I'm sure, by all who would read it. However, there are a few things that I feel compelled to point out as a caution to readers at large. First, let me state unequivocally that I believe in the reality of the other world - including Heaven and Hell. So, please all, whatever you read me say here should not be misconstrued as though I was trying to rubbish the reality of these phenomena: quite to the contrary, I do believe in the reality of Heaven and Hell as enunciated in the Bible.

That said, I find the article quite quizzical to digest. The one question that crosses my mind thereto is whether the whole report is Biblically defensible. After having carefully analysing it several times, I find that it does not measure up to scrutiny of clinical analysis or a balanced view of the Bible itself. Let me explain.

First, here is a very poor critique of the said article: '. . .there is no Ammenusastia newspaper in Finland.' I don't know who posted that critique on the net, but there are quite some vital pieces one may harvest as a guide to query this "sounds in Hell" article.

However, a few things that came to mind when I first read the article are these:

(a) the "scientists" are German geologists; I wonder why German newspapers and media did not carry the story (as far as I know). . . but it had to travel to Finland to be publicized.

(b) something is quite not right with the "microphone" lowered into the hole to capture the screams. In the first instance, at 2000 degrees centrigrade, the microphone would not have survived the heat. Why am I worried about this? because we know that the normal melting tempeartures for metals are below that range. An example:

[list][li]Lead melts at 327.5deg. centrigrade[/li][li]Iron melts at 1535 deg. cent.[/li][li]Nickel at 1453 deg. C.[/li][li]Copper at 1084 deg. C.[/li][li]Gold at 1064 deg. C.[/li][/list]

Now, what material was this microphone made of that it could survive a heat of 2000 deg. centrigrade?

(c) even those websites that are trying to defend this article are getting the whole issue about Hell wrong - if we examine them Biblically. How? Well, on these two premises:

[list][list](i) first hand, Hell is not located at the core of the earth where molten magma spews out to the surface of the earth (anyone familiar with the science of plate techtonics would find this easy to capture:[/list][/list]

[list][list](ii) at present, nobody is in Hell. To assume that people are presently in hell and screaming is a violation of the teaching of Scripture - because the first to be cast into that place are the beast and the false prophet (Rev. 19:20), followed by the Devil himself (Rev. 20:10); then followed by the wicked and unrepentant (Rev. 20:15).[/list][/list]

The English Bibles use the word 'Hell' in various contexts; and we are to distinguish Gehenna from tartarus - these are not the same sphere!


On the whole, I found about 35 issues terribly wrong with that article. Now, I do not have the slightest desire to cause a furor for those who are persuaded that this article reports a real event. My concerns, however, is that if it was a hype that cannot be defended, it only goes to show the sad situation where people just about ferret "anything" (regardless of whether it is false) in order to persuade men to believe in Christ. Sad, I say, because even the Lord Jesus Christ will not tolerate duplicity in the least.

So, where do I stand in all this? Here: my heart knows that God is sovereign - and there are events that can happen in our world which we canot explain. I have seen this in paranormal cases. However, please tread carefully and understand that Biblical truth goes hand-in-hand with integrity.

Thank you and God bless.

Correction:

Kind friends have called my attention to a few slips in my reply just above. Rather than edit them, I rather would like to leave them and acknowledge them as my oversight.

Correct 1: most articles report the scientists as Russian geologists, not German geologists as I had indicated:

pilgrim.1:

(a) the "scientists" are German geologists; I wonder why German newspapers and media did not carry the story (as far as I know). . . but it had to travel to Finland to be publicized.

My bad. I had read the same article in other mirror websites where it read "German geologist", and that was why I did re-check.

Correct 2. the temperature mention was in degrees Farenheit, not Centigrade:

pilgrim.1:

(b) something is quite not right with the "microphone" lowered into the hole to capture the screams. In the first instance, at 2000 degrees centrigrade, the microphone would not have survived the heat.

My bad again. Hence, 2000 degree Farenheit equates to 1093.33 Celsius.

Readers opinions welcome.

@post
when you die your dead, you came from dust so you return to dust. You don't go anywhere. What even makes u even think that you go go somewhere? {apart from to your grave} Do you remember what you were you were or what you were doing 100 years before your parents concieved you? NO coz you didn't have a mind to remember eyes to see ears to hear a nose to smell in other words u didn't exist and your parents didn't even exist too. Whats the difference between a year and a trillion trillion years when u don't exist? The answer is NO difference. Coz you don't have a mind to remember anything ok. So when your dead your dead finito that the end.

manmustwac:

So when your dead your dead finito that the end.

It is not as simplistic as that. There are things which are beyond human explanation - and the reality of the afterlife is one of them.

Any attempt to use scientific means to prove what lies beyond the physical will ultimately fail. Science deals only with the physical and cannot operate in the non-physical realms. You cannot you use a physical microphone to detect a non-physical sound.

People who claim things like these are pseudo scientists, they are not knowledgeable in science, neither are they knowledgeable in spirituality or anything that is non-physical.

Hell is not a physical place. It is not the center of the earth. Scientists are very familiar with the geography and geology of the earth, from the crust to the core. Even in secondary school geography books there are diagrams of the earth. The core of the earth has two layers -- the outer core and the innercore. The outer core is very hot and there no metal can exist in solid form, it is primarily made up of iron, nickel, sulfur and oxygen. However, due to the enormous heat, it remains liquid, even the iron. The innercore is even hotter, but due to the enormous pressure there, the inncore is solid.

There is no part of the earth's core where hell could be.

Hell on earth!!!

You can listen to an mp3 sample here if you have Quick Player.

pilgrim.1:

It is not as simplistic as that. There are things which are beyond human explanation - and the reality of the afterlife is one of them.

The opposite of yes is no, the opposite of right is wrong, the opposite of true is false the opposite of fake is genuine and the opposite of beforelife is afterlife. So if there is an afterlife there must be an beforelife. Now i don't think u can remember where you were 20 years before you were born in the beforelife can you? So how can you tell me where you will be 20 years after you die in the afterlife?

When you die it will just the way it was it the beforelife. You return to dust and thats the end. No mind to think, NO eyes to see NO ears to hear NO nose to breathe, If your very lucky you could get another 5 million to 1 chance to fertilize the egg or life as a form of living bacteria

And your statement dose'nt make sense because first your saying. There are things which are beyond human explanation Then you say the reality of the afterlife is one of them How can you say that something thats beyond explanation is a reality? Theres no logic in your statement.

Hi manmustwac,

Thanks for your comments. It seems that we're both thinking from different logic, but my persuasions are precisely as were stated, and I'll show you why:

manmustwac:

The opposite of yes is no, the opposite of right is wrong, the opposite of true is false the opposite of fake is genuine and the opposite of beforelife is afterlife. So if there is an afterlife there must be an beforelife. Now i don't think u can remember where you were 20 years before you were born in the beforelife can you? So how can you tell me where you will be 20 years after you die in the afterlife?

Lol, thanks for the lesson. . . but again I must remark that you're making very simplistic statements. If the opposite of afterlife is beforelife, then what is the opposite of the present life? You cannot make such collocations about the reality of life on opposite ends, because that will leave your equation seriously in need of reformulating to insert the presentlife.

manmustwac:

When you die it will just the way it was it the beforelife.

And how was it the way it was in the "beforelife"?

manmustwac:

You return to dust and thats the end.

Okay, if that's what you believe.

manmustwac:

No mind to think, NO eyes to see NO ears to hear NO nose to breathe, If your very lucky you could get another 5 million to 1 chance to fertilize the egg or life as a form of living bacteria

Where does luck come into the picture where you have already concluded a finality of "that's it"?

manmustwac:

And your statement dose'nt make sense because first your saying. There are things which are beyond human explanation Then you say the reality of the afterlife is one of them How can you say that something thats beyond explanation is a reality? Theres no logic in your statement.

There's a good logic to state the premise as it is in my quote. It does not mean that the reality of the supernatural does not exist. The problem is that while it may be quite tomfoolery to deny it out of hand, there are dimensions of that reality that are beyond explanation. Let me give you a few examples:

1. the paranormal is one reality that many people cannot logically explain, but yet they cannot deny its existence.

2. there are issues in life far above what many people may try to explain; but the inability to adequately explain them does not negate their existence.

Now posit both logical statements together and you'll find that they are not the same. What is the difference? The difference is simply that many people may "attempt" to explain some phenomena because they know it exists, while the former simply points to the fact that people do not make the attempt at such explanations.

Where does that leave us? Simply here: the attitude of rationalists to deny what they cannot explain. That is a simple philosophical logic - and this is one thing that not many people can handle.

Cheers.

Lol, thanks for the lesson. . . but again I must remark that you're making very simplistic statements. If the opposite of afterlife is beforelife, then what is the opposite of the present life? You cannot make such collocations about the reality of life on opposite ends, because that will leave your equation seriously in need of reformulating to insert the presentlife.

Well to the best of my knowledge the word present like middle and centre dosen't have an opposite. So coming back to my point lets imagine we have a pair of scales that are used to measure weights. Lets say we put 5 pounds in coins on the left scale dish and 5 pounds in coins in the right scale dish, both will not be equally balanced unless there is a centre of gravity {or middle}
Now listen pilgrim1 your here in the present today reading my post right, yesterday was the past and tomorrow which is the opposite to today is the future, or i can say before is the past after is anything you do in the future and now that your reading my post is the present
Now lets imagine we put yesterday on one side of the scales and the opposite word which is tomorrow on the other side of the scales, to make sure everything is well balanced we need today. Because without today you can't have yesterday and tomorrow. Now lets say we decide to put past on one side of the scales and future on the other side of the scales. We need the present because without the present there can't be a past and there can't be a future. Likewise we can put before on side of the scales and after on the other but we need now which is another word for present or today to balance it.
So coming back to your point about the afterlife, if theres an afterlife which is on one side of the scales there must be a beforelife on the other and now in the middle to balance it. So since your convinced that there is an afterlife how can you be so sure when u haven't experienced the opposite which i called the before life?

@manmustwac,

manmustwac:

Well to the best of my knowledge the word present like middle and centre dosen't have an opposite.

Thanks for frankly answering that question. And that was my point - life issues are not as simplistic as many assume.

manmustwac:

So coming back to my point lets imagine we have a pair of scales that are used to measure weights. Lets say we put 5 pounds in coins on the left scale dish and 5 pounds in coins in the right scale dish, both will not be equally balanced unless there is a centre of gravity {or middle}

Good observation.

manmustwac:

Now listen pilgrim1 your here in the present today reading my post right, yesterday was the past and tomorrow which is the opposite to today is the future,

Technically, even scholars make a grave mistake to classify it like that. We all know that in English classes as kids, we were taught that the opposite of tomorrow is yesterday; but I remember asking my teacher back then: "what about the opposite of today?" Embarrassed, he fumbled about for a while and simply shouted me down. I'll never forget that experience, though I chuckled at his blooper.

manmustwac:

or i can say before is the past after is anything you do in the future and now that your reading my post is the present

Okay, good point.

manmustwac:

Now lets imagine we put yesterday on one side of the scales and the opposite word which is tomorrow on the other side of the scales, to make sure everything is well balanced we need today. Because without today you can't have yesterday and tomorrow. Now lets say we decide to put past on one side of the scales and future on the other side of the scales. We need the present because without the present there can't be a past and there can't be a future. Likewise we can put before on side of the scales and after on the other but we need now which is another word for present or today to balance it.

Amazing.

manmustwac:

So coming back to your point about the afterlife, if theres an afterlife which is on one side of the scales there must be a beforelife on the other and now in the middle to balance it. So since your convinced that there is an afterlife how can you be so sure when u haven't experienced the opposite which i called the before life?

Good question. We are experiencing the present life - no doubt about that. The problem here is that the naturalist is stuck in the middle: he wants nothing to do with the questions of pre-existence (the past) or eternity (the future)! Why? Because he only measures issue in life on absolute natural indices. Since the naturalist only thinks of physical/natural events, he has no philosphical approaches to measuring the supernatural - which is why one should not be surprised that he often denies what he cannot explain within his very narrow ideology.

It is this question of the supernatural that highlights the difference between a naturalist understanding of the reality of life and the supernatural realities of our world. To answer your question: I believe in the supernatural world - a reality that I have witnessed for myself in several ways. I cannot explain the underlying mechanism in natural or physical terms, because they are beyond the natural (thus, the "supernatural".

Let me give you an example: I believe in the supernatural promises in the Bible. Why? Because I have witnessed the power of healing through prayer. By extension, if the prayers could produce such supernatural results, it would not be difficult for me to trust that the promises of eternity are real. Life is beyond a mere natural and/or physical descriptive understanding; rather, there is a reality beyond the physical and natural present world - it is a world of supernatural events. True, I have not experienced this supernatural eternity (the future); nor do I know what the pre-existent world (the past) was like. But I do know that the present is a link to both pre-existence and eternity - by the power of supernatural realities that are way beyond explication in naturalistic terms.

THE SOUNDS OF HELL
PEOPLE,PEOPLE,PEOPLE
I dont even want to know what hell sounds like.
Me, I will be the first person to enter heaven when Jesus comes back, or if I die today.
amen to that

pilgrim1:
Hi ecomog08,
-snip-

*slow clap* I'm not Christian, but that hardly matters when it comes to appreciating the way you came at this article. Although I am deeply religious, I believe in using logic & common sense when it comes to things like this.

You...I like you. & I like everyone else in this thread who are being rational & civil. You guys rock!