What is the Biblical view of hell?

[otseng]

The concept of Hell is one of the many unmarketable, embarrassingly unbelievable religious concepts that has been recently swept under the altar in the severely diluted quasi-belief system that passes for Christianity in certain circles.

In fact, I think this is why Christianity invented eternal punishment in hell. They started to realize that just plain dying wouldn't be compelling. So instead they invented the concept of "Everlasting Punishment" for those who refuse to comply.

Questions for debate:
What is the Biblical view of hell?
What concepts do we have of hell that are not in the Bible?

[PinSeeker]

[Replying to William in post #556]

I believe that already is a rule, William (peace to you), under guidelines for preaching:

Do not proclaim where another person is going to go in the afterlife. Do not pronounce that God should judge another person with any sort of punishment.

viewtopic.php?t=22302

Hi Tam

Yes - but it is not just proclamations and pronouncements which should be dealt with - it should also be against the rules to even imply - such as pinseeker did in his/her post :

whether one chooses to fear and tremble at the real-world (not to mention eternal) consequences of rejection of Christendom -- or react at all any other way, which itself is an implicit rejection of it -- is entirely the individual's choice.

post#525

As I said, this comment was only in the sense of repeating what Christ Jesus Himself said, that "the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it" (Matthew 7:13) and "Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven." And I would add to that the following:

• "Whoever is not with Me is against Me..." (Matthew 12:30, Luke 11:23)

Again, the Authority and His "Treatise" is far above that of any mere Christian. And applicable to all, Christian or no.

So again, it's one thing to feel personally attacked, but its quite another entirely to actually be personally attacked, verbally or otherwise. Merely being offended does not constitute a "personal attack" in any shape, form, or fashion.

the implication therein being, that if one rejects Christianity in any way, there will be "eternal consequences" and as we know, Christianity has been spreading the idea of hell and damnation into the real-world situation for too many centuries already as a means of blaming shaming guilting creating fear in people for the purpose of either netting individuals or condemning those who managed to escape said device.

Sure, if one rejects it, but not referring to any one specific person. Therefore, you're take on the implication of my statement is -- no offense intended -- entirely false. Merely pointing to a consequence entirely not of one's making -- and applicable to everyone, even to oneself -- cannot be deemed a "personal attack" by any stretch of the imagination. I understand the desire to paint it as such, but in no way does that make it so. In like manner (as I have said), one merely saying to another, "If one crosses a main thoroughfare when the course is not clear, he/she is likely to be hit by a moving vehicle and injured or killed," it cannot be viewed as a "personal attack." Viewing it as such is absurd.

My point is that since Christians cannot even agree on how to interpret their bible correctly on the subject, it should be ignored as a subject used to argue against non-believers with and any mention of it in argument should be treated in the same manner as wishing someone die a horrible death and saying so....

And so by the same "point," since Americans cannot agree on how to interpret the nation's Constitution on a variety of subjects, it should be ignored in a like manner. What sense does either your "point" here or my parallel "point" make? None. Absolutely none.

Grace and peace to you.

[William]

I am not interested in getting into semantics with you pinseeker - as Admin has pointed out - this is not a thread for the subject you are wanting to pursue with me.

My own comments you quote are a summary of this thread content from an observers POV - someone interested in what Christians are debating and whether any sound conclusion can be drawn from the data.

If Jesus wishes to point the finger at me some time in the future, that is there, not here, and you are not Jesus but simply a "mere Christian" unworthy of judging me and this should be recognized as part of the forum rules, is what I think would be a great step forward.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Difflugia in post #521]

Luke 16:23 is the only place where people can point to to try to support their doctrine that Hades is a place of conscious torment. This section of Scripture has been shown to be METAPHORICAL in nature, and absolutely not literal. Everything else in the account is metaphorical. Why would we know that one drop of water wouldn't really cool anyone's tongue who was in flames, and yet we take as literal the man suffering in Hades? There is far more to that account than what you are saying, that there is literal suffering in Hades. You are stopping way short of grasping Jesus' meaning.

Other references in the KJV to hell-fire are, unfortunately, translated from the word "Gehenna," which is a very different thing from Hades. "Gehenna" is mentioned in Matthew 7 times, and the KJV translates it every time as "hell-fire," or "hell." Very confusing, wouldn't you say? Now, take for example Matthew 5:22b. Jesus says, "...whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire," according to the KJV. Other versions recognize that the words "hell fire" are not accurate. Other versions render the last sentence as: "...whosoever says, 'You fool!' will be liable to the fiery Gehenna." (NWT; NASB, footnote)

Gehenna and Hades = two different things

As stated before, "Gehenna" refers to the burning garbage dump outside Jerusalem where criminals and trash were burned. They were burned up completely, to NOTHING. That is why the reference to "fire" was included at all. It doesn't represent suffering in a fire; it represents complete obliteration.

[PinSeeker]

I am not interested in getting into semantics with you pinseeker - as Admin has pointed out - this is not a thread for the subject you are wanting to pursue with me.

Sure. I'm fine with you bailing, William (as if it matters whether I'm "fine" with it or not...). And the "semantics" thing... that's all you. I would say rather than this not being the thread for "the subject I'm wanting to pursue with you," it's much more so that this is not the sub-forum for the kind of conversation you're wanting to have with me or any other Christian (or non-Christian, for that matter). This is what I've been saying.

My own comments you quote are a summary of this thread content from an observers POV - someone interested in what Christians are debating and whether any sound conclusion can be drawn from the data.

Okay, cool. Again, that's pursuit, though worthwhile, is inappropriate for this sub-forum. You're really challenging the authority of Scripture. I don't have a problem with that, but it belongs on the Christianity and Apologetics sub-forum.

If Jesus wishes to point the finger at me some time in the future, that is there, not here, and you are not Jesus but simply a "mere Christian" unworthy of judging me...

Absolutely. Wholeheartedly agreed. I have never even insinuated otherwise.

...and this should be recognized as part of the forum rules, is what I think would be a great step forward.

Sure. I would have absolutely no problem with that.

Grace and peace to you, William.

[PinSeeker]

Luke 16:23 is the only place where people can point to to try to support their doctrine that Hades is a place of conscious torment

Well no, it's far from the only one. But even if it were, it's quite enough.

Grace and peace to you and Difflugia both.

[William]

[onewithhim]

Luke 16:23 is the only place where people can point to to try to support their doctrine that Hades is a place of conscious torment

Well no, it's far from the only one. But even if it were, it's quite enough.

Grace and peace to you and Difflugia both.

I explained why Luke 16:23 cannot be taken literally. Did you miss that?

There are NONE other places in the Scriptures that speak of literal conscious torment. If you want to know, I'll explain. It takes an inquiring mind.

[PinSeeker]

Luke 16:23 is the only place where people can point to to try to support their doctrine that Hades is a place of conscious torment

Well no, it's far from the only one. But even if it were, it's quite enough.

Grace and peace to you and Difflugia both.

I explained why Luke 16:23 cannot be taken literally. Did you miss that?

Nope, <chuckles> I didn't miss it.

There are NONE other places in the Scriptures that speak of literal conscious torment.

No need.

If you want to know, I'll explain. It takes an inquiring mind.

No thanks. I know very well what Jehovah's Witnesses wrongly believe concerning eschatological matters. Grace and peace to you.

[Difflugia]

Luke 16:23 is the only place where people can point to to try to support their doctrine that Hades is a place of conscious torment. This section of Scripture has been shown to be METAPHORICAL in nature, and absolutely not literal. Everything else in the account is metaphorical. Why would we know that one drop of water wouldn't really cool anyone's tongue who was in flames, and yet we take as literal the man suffering in Hades? There is far more to that account than what you are saying, that there is literal suffering in Hades. You are stopping way short of grasping Jesus' meaning.

You're right that there is "far more to that account," but the account describes "literal suffering in Hades," nonetheless.

Other references in the KJV to hell-fire are, unfortunately, translated from the word "Gehenna," which is a very different thing from Hades. "Gehenna" is mentioned in Matthew 7 times, and the KJV translates it every time as "hell-fire," or "hell." Very confusing, wouldn't you say? Now, take for example Matthew 5:22b. Jesus says, "...whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire," according to the KJV. Other versions recognize that the words "hell fire" are not accurate. Other versions render the last sentence as: "...whosoever says, 'You fool!' will be liable to the fiery Gehenna." (NWT; NASB, footnote)

Gehenna here is a metaphor for the fiery hell. It's METAPHORICAL.

Gehenna and Hades = two different things

Just like Babylon and Rome, "the South" and desert, or feet and genitals. That's often how metaphor works. It's been shown.

As stated before, "Gehenna" refers to the burning garbage dump outside Jerusalem where criminals and trash were burned. They were burned up completely, to NOTHING. That is why the reference to "fire" was included at all. It doesn't represent suffering in a fire; it represents complete obliteration.

Unless God wishes them to burn and stink forever, like he does in the referenced Isaiah verses.

[myth-one.com]

The concept of Hell is one of the many unmarketable, embarrassingly unbelievable religious concepts that has been recently swept under the altar in the severely diluted quasi-belief system that passes for Christianity in certain circles.

In fact, I think this is why Christianity invented eternal punishment in hell. They started to realize that just plain dying wouldn't be compelling. So instead they invented the concept of "Everlasting Punishment" for those who refuse to comply.

Questions for debate:
What is the Biblical view of hell?
What concepts do we have of hell that are not in the Bible?

Hell is going to be the eternal prison of the devil:

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 20:10)

Numerous verses indicate that hell is a real place:

And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. (Matthew 5:30)

But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him. (Luke 12:5)

Hell is in existence presently. The only "inmates" currently are the angels which sinned:

For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; (II Peter 2:4)

Four words were translated from the original scriptures as hell in the King James Version of the Bible. They are:

• Hades and Sheol - The Hebrew word sheol in the Old Testament corresponds to the Greek word Hades in the New Testament.
  
  
• Gehenna - This Greek word referred to the garbage dump in the valley of Hinnon outside of Jerusalem. Fires were maintained constantly in the dump to burn garbage and prevent disease. Thus the association of Gehenna hell with everlasting fire.
  
  
• Tartaroo - This Greek word is found only once in the Bible in 2 Peter 2:4. It means to throw into or imprison in Tartarus. Tartarus was thought of by the Greeks as a subterranean place lower than Hades where divine punishment was administered upon fallen angels:
  
  For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell (Tartaroo), and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; (II Peter 2:4)

If these four words refer to hell, one might assume that in all occurrences they would be translated as hell. That is not the case. Sheol for example, is translated thirty-one times as "hell," thirty-one times as "grave," and three times as "pit" in the King James Version of the Bible. Therefore, it is obvious that the translators allowed their understanding of the context in which the original words were used to sway their word selection in the translated version.

======================================================

The only possible indication of the location of hell in the Bible is that it is in "outer darkness:"

Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 22:13)

And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 25:30)

Terms such as "cast" and "there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth" imply that these verses are references to hell:

And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. (Revelation 20:15)

If these verses do refer to hell, then hell is located in outer darkness. But what does "outer darkness" mean? If the universe is infinite, one can travel from any point in the universe infinitely in any direction and never reach the end of the universe. Consequently, outer and inner have no meaning to mankind as locations within our universe.

"Outer darkness" probably indicates the state of death. That is, the darkest of dark, without any light or cognizance. After all, the dead know not anything:

For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing... (Ecclesiastes 9:5)

Indeed, "outer darkness" is a good description of hell as regards man, since all men cast into hell are quickly burned to death. This is their second death and the end of their existence forever -- thus outer darkness!

=====================================================

SallyF made some good points about the concept of everlasting torment in hell.

How did Christianity get to this point?

We were created in the image of God, but we see decaying animals and know that our bodies end up likewise. We can understand our physical world. The part we do not understand is our personalities, our thinking processes, our emotions, our non-physical processes. These are the processes which many believe separates us from the other animals. We even give it a name, calling it our "soul," and assigning to each soul eternal life.

Preventing nonbelievers from becoming believers is Satan's main goal. He implanted the immortal soul myth in humans through his lie that "Ye shall not surely die" to negate the good news of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The false goal of those believing the immortal soul myth is where one will spend their eternity which is forced upon them as a consequence of being born a human being. If you are forced to live forever, you must live somewhere! Thus believers assign themselves to everlasting blissful life with God in Heaven, while condemning nonbelievers to everlasting torment in the fires of hell.

The actual goal according to the Bible is to obtain eternal life. It is not something you are born with:

That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. (John 3:15)

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. (John 10:27-28)

In general, mankind fears death. We treat our fear of death with the defense mechanism of denial. That is, we deny it. We say we will live forever, thus taking on godly characteristics. We are therefore the perfect victims for Satan's lie of, "Ye shall not surely die."

It is what we want to believe.

And it very effectively seals the Bible from our understanding.

In the traditional Christian concept, man has an immortal soul which neither the first nor second death can kill. Therefore, for these traditional Christian theologians, death must be interpreted to be something other than death!

Thus death is interpreted to mean "spiritual death" or "eternal separation from God."

One false belief leads to another, and the true gospel good news will not be spread to all the nations by mankind!

Untold billions burning alive in hellfire for eternity is definitely not good news.

Thus the Bible prophesies that the Church will fail in it's great commission of spreading the good news to all the nations!