A side note to something Heath said, I believe that the Bible actually says that the devil currently resides on Earth but after judgement day will be cast into the lake of sulfer and fire (hell). I could be wrong though.

And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire

19   There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
20   And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,
21   And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
22   And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
23   And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
24   And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
25   But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
26   And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
27   Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
28   For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
29   Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30   And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
31   And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Since Jesus was a Jew and never mentioned Hell...

I guess we should begin with an understanding of that word. The first thing we need to know is that the English word hell has no equivalent in either the Greek or the Hebrew. Actually the word is a Saxon word, hell or helle. We also find a similar word in the German, Dutch, Danish, and Swedish languages. I always like to have a definition of any word we study, and so turning to my trusty Webster's dictionary of 1828, I found the following among the definitions of hell:

"The place of the dead, or of souls after death; the lower regions, or the grave; called in the Hebrew Sheol, and by the Greek, Hades. Psalm 16. Jon 2."
And that my friends, seems to be the standard definition of the word. Notice that in the definition while we see that hell is a place of the dead, it also says it is a place for "souls after death." So, on one hand, we have the dead residing in hell, but in saying souls reside there, we have the implication of the doctrine of the immortal soul.

Genesis 37:35:
35 "... all his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort him; but he refused to be comforted; and he said, For I will go down into the grave unto my son mourning. Thus his father wept for him.

What happened was that some 300 years before the Christian era, The Hebrew was translated into the Greek language into what we call the Septuagint, and in making this translation, the translators were not comfortable with leaving well enough alone and leave the Hebrew word Sheol un-translated. No, they had to translate Sheol into the Greek word "Hades." And of the sixty-four instances where Sheol occurs in the Hebrew, it is rendered as Hades in the Greek Septuagint sixty times. The effect of that was, from that time forth, the words became equivalent to one another, and so Sheol became Hades and Hades became Sheol.

But what an injustice to the word of God. If the translators had just left well enough alone, then today, we would only read the word "Sheol," in our Old Testaments, and people would not get Dante's inferno type visions when they see the word Sheol. But, alas we are stuck with the problem, and no amount of teaching on the part of people such as myself is ever going to rectify the situation.

Revelation 20:13-14:
13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

But anyhow, since those delivered out of death and hell are next judged, and since it is also said that "death and hell" are cast into the lake of fire, what are we to conclude? Are we to conclude that the lake of fire is a symbolic expression for judgment? I would think so. And why? Well, because we are dealing with intangible conditions here -- those conditions being death and Hades, and I would ask, how can you cast intangibles into a literal lake, be it a lake of fire or a lake of water? If that be the case, then casting death and hell into the lake of fire would symbolize their destruction since they have been emptied of their last inhabitant. In other words, casting death and hell into the lake of fire is their judgment.

Now if this not be the case, then we have a new problem. If this lake of fire is to be literal, and if people are judged and thrown into it, then the lake of fire becomes hell, and that cannot be because we have just read that death and hell have been destroyed, and if destroyed, then they no longer exist, and if they no longer exist, then people cannot be in them.

Paul confirms this for us in 1 Corinthians 15:26 when he says:


"The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death."

The story of he rich man in hell and Lazarus in Abraham's bosom in Luke 16:19-31 was not told by Christ to show what happens to people when they die, because before He told this story, He had declared in plain language that the wicked would not be cast into the fire until the end of the world (Matt 13:40-42), and that every man would be rewarded at His second coming. Matt. 16:27. This story harmonized with the ideas which the Pharisees had of the hereafter, and was given to rebuke them for their covetousness in teaching that riches are a mark of God's favor, and that poverty is a mark of His curse.

"The conversation between Abraham and the once-rich man is figurative. The lesson to be gathered from it is that every man is given sufficient light for the discharge of the duties required of him. Man's responsibilities are proportionate to his opportunities and privileges. God gives to every one sufficient light and grace to do the work He has given him to do. If man fails to do that which a little light shows to be his duty, greater light would only reveal unfaithfulness, neglect to improve the blessings given. 'He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much; and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.' Luke 16:10. Those who refuse to be enlightened by Moses and the prophets and ask for some wonderful miracle to be performed would not be convinced if their wish were granted."

And we have as we believe, clearly and fully proved, that he used it solely and exclusively to show the effects of the rejection of the gospel of the Jews, and its acceptance by the Gentiles--that it has no allusion to the future state of existence.

When one looks at the first 500 years of Christianity, not one creed even hinted at "Eternal Torment;" not one creed denied "Universal Restoration;" no church council condemned "Universal Restoration" in the first several centuries.

When one looks at the early Church's leaders and at which ones exhibited the nature of Christ's love, one will find that the vast majority embraced the "Salvation of All Mankind." When one looks at the lives of those church leaders who brought the doctrine of "Eternal Torment" into the church, we find a long string of envyings, power plays, persecutions, character assassinations, book burnings, murders, and tortures. They became like the God they created--tormentors! Their story is for another article. They exchanged the truth for a lie and brought darkness to the world--the Dark Ages. Remember them? Idolatry, corruption, rewritten history, inquisitions, crusades, relics (cutting up dead bodies of Saints and making money off of them as good luck charms), indulgences (selling certificates to sin), pogroms, witch hunts, Mary worship, corrupt popes, and torment--much torment--all in the name of Jesus Christ.

The list above is not a list of abuses of the religions of the heathen--it is a much shortened list of the horrible acts and beliefs of the church! The church became so corrupt that it declared it a sin for a believer to have a Bible. For those of you who are not Roman Catholic and feel that the above list does not pertain to your denominational church history, I want to remind you of the fact that the two leading reformators of the Protestant movement, John Calvin and Martin Luther, were great admirers of the "Champion of Eternal Torment," that is, St. Augustine. As a matter of fact, Martin Luther was an Augustinian monk, and John Calvin was the main instrument in bringing back to life the "Predestination Doctrine" of Augustine, which said that God preplanned the majority of mankind to eternal torment and there was nothing a person could do to change his lot!

In the King James in Matthew 25:46 it reads, "And these shall go away into everlasting punishment; but the righteous into life eternal." The same verse in Rotherham's Emphasized Bible reads, "And these shall go away into age-abiding correction, but the righteous into age-abiding life." Although the Rotherham Bible is one of the 26 translations, the publishers, Baker Book House, did not show that Joseph Rotherham's translation radically disagrees with the King James Bible even though that was the very purpose of the book. They did not want the public to know that there were some major doctrinal differences among translations so they just pretended that they were not there. A reader of that book will think that Rotherham agrees with the King James, because the above Rotherham verse was not listed, when just the opposite is true. I know of more than a dozen Bible translations written in the last 200 years that significantly disagree with the King James Bible on this verse.

As a rule I don't buy this "not to be taken litterally" stuff

It says there quite clearly what is going to happen to those who's name is not written in the book of life. 

In fact, here's a site dedicated to this parable and showing why it should be taken figuratively and not literally: http://tentmaker.org/books/Lazarus.html

And you quote Revelations as proof for the literalness of the Bible?????

Paulos typed:
revelations 20:15 typed:
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire


It says there quite clearly what is going to happen to those who's name is not written in the book of life.

Revelations is one of the most figurative language portions of the Bible, talking about dragons and the horsemen of the Apocalypse.  It is almost all allegory and figurative examples to warn the righteous.  So to me it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to quote Revelations as proof of anything "literal" in the Bible.

And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
   And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
   Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
...
And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Matthew 25:46
"And these shall go away into everlasting punishment."

Problem:
This passage is used to prove the eternal torment of the wicked. It is argued, that since the same Greek word, "aionios" is used for the duration of life for the righteous as for the punishment of the wicked, therefore the wicked are subject to eternal torment.

Solution:
The punishment is everlasting, but it is not conscious eternal torment. The punishment will be final and complete cutting off. (Psa. 37:9, 34). Life eternal is reserved for the righteous, but the wicked are to die "the second death" (Rev. 21:8) which in Scriptural terms means to be without thoughts. (Psa. 146:3,4; Eccl. 9:5). The word "everlasting" is used of a result, not a process. Similarly, "eternal judgment" (Heb. 6:2) and "eternal redemption" (Heb. 9:12) do not mean that judgment and redemption will continue throughout eternity, but rather that their results are eternal.

The wicked are to suffer torment at the Judgment Day (Matt. 8:12; 13:30, 40-42, 49-50; Luke 12:47,48), but this is not eternal torment. Other Scriptures either state or imply a termination of the torment. For example:
Speaking of those who "know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ", the Apostle Paul states that they "shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power." (2 Thess. 1:9).
Jesus stated that "if a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned." (John 15:6). To be "cast forth as a branch" and "burned" suggests termination of the burning when that which is burnable is consumed.
"And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake . . . to shame and everlasting contempt." (Dan. 12:2 cf. Jn. 5:29). It is the contempt or damnation which is everlasting, not the conscious torment.

Even if by "everlasting punishment" is meant "everlasting conscious torment", this passage in itself does not prove the eternal torment of the wicked since the Greek word, "aionios", can mean either limited or unlimited duration.1 Although the New Testament nearly always uses "aionios" with the meaning of unlimited duration,2 there are a number of occurrences in the Septuagint3 (where the Hebrew equivalent "olam" is translated "aionios") in which a limited duration is obviously intended. For example:
"The lasting [aionios] hills"; "The eternal God is thy refuge and underneath are the everlasting [aionios] arms." (Deut. 33:15,27). The intended meaning of "aionios" is limited duration in the first reference whereas in the same chapter the second reference is to unlimited duration.
The Aaronic priesthood is termed, "an everlasting [aionios] priesthood throughout their generation." (Exod. 40:15). Limited duration is intended in this reference since the Aaronic priesthood was later to change (Heb. 7:12) when that which "waxed old" was ready to "vanish away". (Heb. 8:13).
See also Gen. 49:26; Exod. 12:17; 21:6; Jonah 2:6; Hab. 3:6 ("perpetual" hills = "aionios" hills).

Many passages in Scripture teach that eternal life is the reward for the righteous (e.g. Luke 20:35,36). There are also many passages which teach that the ungodly and wicked will be destroyed or perish (e.g. 1 Thess. 4:13 cf. John 3:16; 2 Thess. 1:9). It is not therefore, merely an arbitrary decision to choose endless duration for "aionios" life of the righteous and limited duration for "aionios" punishment of the wicked. The decision has been based on the use of the Greek word elsewhere in Scripture and the teaching of other passages on the respective rewards of the righteous and wicked.

The word "punishment" is translated from the Greek word, "kolasis" which means "a pruning". It comes from the verb, "kolazo" which means "to curtail, dock, prune, but usually like Lat., 'castigare' to keep within bounds, check, chastise."4 This denotation is in complete harmony with the Scriptural teaching on the punishment of the wicked. Jesus said that the wicked would be cast like branches into the fire. (John 15:6). The Psalmist said they would be "cut off" (Psa. 37:9) and "shall not be". (Psa. 37:10). Malachi states that the wicked will be burnt like stubble leaving them "neither root nor branch" (Mal. 4:1), like "ashes" to be trodden under foot. (Mal. 4:3). This is not the kind of language one would associate with immortal souls in torment for eternity.

I'm not an atheist, but I'm bored tonight - so I'll bite! ;)

How does not believing in God correlate to not accepting responsibility for your actions?  It is possible to be an atheist and still be a good person.  Some of the nicest people I have known in my life have been atheists - and some have been Christian, as well.  Those people are good people because they accept responsibility for their actions and do not leave their fate in the hands of an invisible divine force.

Isn't doing good for the sake of aiding your fellow beings more selfless then doing good in pursuit of a reward in the afterlife?

An athiest would usually deny compelling evidence, because it would mean they are wrong.

To be an athiest means to deny even remote possibility of God. Why? Why the need to discount it completely?