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]

Would there be any point to this nonsense?

Is it not a goal of your own in this life to, for your own purposes, separate the bad from the good? Not regarding people, of course (unless it's regarding the temporary treatment of your children for disciplinary purposes), but, well, ideas (political, professional, and personal), toys (when you were a child), actions (because of the consequences they bring), and many other examples. All these things have a point. Likewise (on an infinitely higher plane), God's permanent separation of the bad from good.

It sounds like putting a recalcitrant pupil in a corner, not for five minutes, but for eternity. It is an exercise in silliness...

It sounds like justice to me.

Will there be irritating music or half cooked bacon?

I merely said the absence of all good, not the presence of the undesired or repugnant. Granted, though, this is difficult to imagine or even fathom. All one can say in the end is, "Whatever it is, I don't want to go there." Right?

At least the prescription of punishment seems to have some point, however harsh.

God's purpose is to glorify Himself. Upholding His justice, even for eternity, is one of the ways in which He does that. That any of us may think there is no point is of no consequence.

[marco]

It sounds like justice to me.

I suppose all religious ideas have their kernel in human perception. What one might expect from a human ruler might be a disappointment were God to offer the same.

All one can say in the end is, "Whatever it is, I don't want to go there." Right?

The old biblical idea of punishment is a good way of getting obedience. It is good to KNOW what we are subscribing to. If heaven is endless litanies with God bowing in recognition of abject service it doesn't sound too attractive. The pictures we are presented with - more of the same on earth but better, thistles and wasps removed and cancer gone completely - that is very attractive and I suppose many subscribe to that just for the heaven of it. Hwever too much of a good thing might become hell.

God's purpose is to glorify Himself.

Then I can find in some book "My purpose is to glorify myself" - God.

I wonder where. Most of the discussion here is speculation on what God might like to do. When Jesus tells us, we've to change his message. When we read: "'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels," we are to suppose duvets will be supplied for the Big Sleep. When is a threat not a threat?

[RightReason]

[Replying to onewithhim]

Not sure how JW’s reconcile these words of Our Lord and His emphasis on the seriousness of sin . . .

Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished. And if thy foot scandalize thee, cut it off. It is better for thee to enter lame into life everlasting, than having two feet, to be cast into the hell of unquenchable fire: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished. And if thy eye scandalize thee, pluck it out. It is better for thee with one eye to enter into the kingdom of God, than having two eyes to be cast into the hell of fire: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished. Mark 9:43-47

It seems annihilationists cannot take the Scripture passages on hell at face value. They need to twist them to fit what they have already decided God would do. But as many observers of annihilationists explain, annihilationists seem to minimize or nullify any of God’s attributes other than His attribute of Love. If people are not careful at this point, they may find themselves worshiping a god other than the God of Scripture. Yes, of course God is love, but He is also Just. Annihilationists teach that human sin is not wicked enough to be punished eternally. Is that up to them to make such a pronouncement?

God alone can tell us what punishment for sin is appropriate, and we can learn this only from His Church (The Catholic Church) who has given the authority to interpret the Scriptures. Let us ask ourselves this question: “Does anyone seriously claim to know how enormous an evil sin is in God’s eyes?� The biblical view teaches that sins against an infinite God do require eternal punishment. To begin with, the argument that something done finitely cannot have infinite consequences is not consistent. The Christian’s finite good works here on earth are graciously rewarded infinitely. Likewise, an unbeliever’s wickedness can be punished infinitely.

http://www.catholic-saints.net/hell/

[William]

@260

marco: Hello William

William: Greetings brother Marco! You help float my boat.

Gratitude

marco:Yes the theory of eternal gnashing in regret dims God's grandeur just a little.

William: What I think what it does is make GOD a teeny bit uneasy...The grandeur is not in dispute...if I were that GOD, I would definitely have placed countermeasures for the unseen events.
Of course, the oxymorons who Writ The Script have made it so I am also supposed to be All Knowing!
Things are just going to have to play themselves out...I will win in the *end* - and fortunately I AM eternal so have "All The Time In The World" to achieve that end...But "Yes it would be boring" if I didn't have other things to do elsewhere as well...

marco: God created humans to live for a few years and then, enraged, let them vegetate for ever. What a fine plan!

William: Such is, for some, granted. They will get to be that GOD in all ways. Is this not Just the very thing to give to them? What they believe to expect?

marco: I don't endorse the Muslim notion that God burns the dead and replaces their skin so he can repeat the fun of burning them,...

William: But what if "he" wasn't really the one doing it? What if the whole while, it was really no more or less the believer who was the creator of what is experienced - the sum total of all their individual beliefs creating their own unique Universes?
How would that sit in relation to "Justified"?
Talking about Muslim beliefs, what if I also allowed for little twists in the outcomes, like with the 70-odd Virgins - they can have them, but as soon as The Virgins are no longer virgins, they disappear.
That would add a but of humor to the program...

marco: ...but it does seem that Jesus had ideas that somewhere in the great afterlife people pay for their badness or get rewards for clothing the naked and giving water to the thirsty.

William: Maybe that is what The Father had shown to him...?

marco: All in all the religious view of the afterlife is bleak and boring, alleviated occasionally by somebody chanting "Alleluia!"

William: Not with all that activity going on. From an observers point of view, the channels would seem endless!
But I hear ya Bro! It would be boring even worse than life on Earth - to be forever on ones face before a grandiose effigy of a puppet-GOD created specifically for that purpose.
Effectively anyone experiencing such, might as well turn the lights off and go to sleep forever.
Surely there MUST be a way in which to save them from their own fateful creations?
GOD knows!
Perhaps speed things up with a bit of humor...like having the effigy sudden up and walking away from his throne, disgustedly declaring he has had enough of this Cow-Patty...

Suddenly - stunned silence...

marco:

William:

[JehovahsWitness]

Figurative death? Yes, we can say that we have killed our kind self by being cruel ...

Emphasis MINE

So would it be fair to say that Jesus could be saying that someone that was literally alive in front of him was in fact "dead" in this figurative sense? If so could not that figuratively dead person be subject (while literally alive and looking at Jesus) to the "agony" that figurative death incurs (as illustrated by the rich man's "death agony") ?


JW


RELATED POSTS

Is the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus one of a "figurative death"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 077#971077

[PinSeeker]

I suppose all religious ideas have their kernel in human perception.

That may be. But Christians take what God has said at face value and regard it as truth.

What one might expect from a human ruler might be a disappointment were God to offer the same.

Nothing takes God by surprise.

The old biblical idea of punishment is a good way of getting obedience.

Warnings are good things, for sure. The prudent heed them.

It is good to KNOW what we are subscribing to.

I don’t disagree, but it’s much better to lean not on our own understanding, but to trust in the LORD with all our heart and in all our ways acknowledge Him (so that He will make our paths straight).

If heaven is endless litanies with God bowing in recognition of abject service it doesn't sound too attractive.

Nah, that’s just what people who aren’t really thinking think.

The pictures we are presented with - more of the same on earth but better, thistles and wasps removed and cancer gone completely - that is very attractive and I suppose many subscribe to that just for the heaven of it.

“For the heaven of it…� Like. <chuckle>

However too much of a good thing might become hell.

To those who are idolatrous and/or selfish, sure. But those are sins, and, thank God, sin will not be possible in heaven.

God's purpose is to glorify Himself.

Then I can find in some book "My purpose is to glorify myself" - God.

Sure can. Very easily.

I wonder where.

No need to wonder; it's throughout the Bible:

• • Why did God create us? For His glory. Isaiah 43:6–7
  
  • Why did God choose a people and make Israel his possession? So that they might be for Him a people, a name, a praise and a glory. (Jeremiah 13:11)
  
  • Why did God rescue them from bondage in Egypt? For his name’s sake that he might make known his mighty power. (Psalm 106:7–8)
  
  • Why did God spare them in the wilderness? He acted for the sake of His name, that it should not be profaned in the sight of the nations in whose sight He had brought them out. (Ezekiel 20:14)
  
  • Why didn’t God cast away his people when they rejected him as king? He does not cast away His people for His great name’s sake. (1 Samuel 12:20–22)
  
  • Why did God bring back his people from exile? Well, for His name’s sake He defers His anger, for the sake of His praise He restrains it… For His own sake He does it… His glory He will not give to another. (Isaiah 48:9, 11) And, it is not for the sake of the house of Israel that He acts, but for the sake of His holy name… He vindicates the holiness of His great name. (Ezekiel 36:22–23, 32)
  
  • Why did the Son of God come to earth and to His hour? Jesus said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify thy Son that the Son may glorify Thee.� A beautiful conspiracy to glorify the Godhead in all the work of redemption! (John 17:1)
  
  • Why will Jesus return in the great day of consummation? “Those who do not obey the gospel will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction and exclusion from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints and to be marveled at in all who have believed…� (2 Thessalonians 1:9–10)

From beginning to end, the purpose of God’s heart is to glorify Himself. Since God is unique as the most glorious of all beings and totally self-sufficient, He must be for Himself if He is to be for us. If He were to abandon the goal of His own self-exaltation, we would be the losers. His aim to bring praise to Himself and His aim to bring pleasure to his people are one aim; they stand or fall together. What could God give us to enjoy that would show Him most loving? There is only one possible answer: Himself. If God would give us that which is best and most satisfying, that is, if He would love us perfectly, He must offer us no less than Himself for our contemplation and fellowship and joy. This is why we have Jesus; this was precisely God’s intention in sending His son and providing for our salvation.

Most of the discussion here is speculation on what God might like to do.

No, for the most part it’s dispute regarding the nature of what God has said He will do. And for those on the wrong side of it, it’s denial with the intent of justifying oneself and an attempt at convincing oneself that what God has said is not really true, which is the sin of Adam in the Garden of Eden repeating itself.

When Jesus tells us, we've to change his message. When we read: "'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels," we are to suppose duvets will be supplied for the Big Sleep.

The foolish are foolish; the leopard will not change his spots, will it?

When is a threat not a threat?

Some see it as a threat, for sure. But those are the ones focused solely on themselves. Others see it as a warning and are thus very thankful.

[tam]

Peace to you,


(I am not a JW, but in response to your question...)

[Replying to onewithhim]

Not sure how JW’s reconcile these words of Our Lord and His emphasis on the seriousness of sin . . .

Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished. And if thy foot scandalize thee, cut it off. It is better for thee to enter lame into life everlasting, than having two feet, to be cast into the hell of unquenchable fire: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished. And if thy eye scandalize thee, pluck it out. It is better for thee with one eye to enter into the kingdom of God, than having two eyes to be cast into the hell of fire: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished. Mark 9:43-47

So then what worm is this that dieth not?


And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh. Isaiah 66:24


CARCASSES; DEAD BODIES.

No person is alive here at all. Just the worms (and what kind of worms do carcasses attract?)


...


Jude also describes what happened to Sodom and Gomorroh as an example on display of those who suffer eternal punishment:

In like manner, Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, who indulged in sexual immorality and pursued strange flesh, are on display as an example of those who sustain the punishment of eternal fire. Jude 1:7


(Note that just because they are on display does not mean that we are phsyically seeing them)





Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[marco]

So would it be fair to say that Jesus could be saying that someone that was literally alive in front of him was in fact "dead" in this figurative sense?

There is nothing wrong with using that metaphor but the words Jesus used do not match this. In literature the appropriateness of a figure of speech may be judged by the choice of correlatives in the imagery. X in the metaphor relates to X in truth, but if there are too many irrelevant factors, then the imagery is bad.

The scenario Christ depicts perfectly mimics a situation where good is rewarded and bad is punished. With your interpretation, too many pieces in Christ's parable have no significance. It would be acceptable to have a few pieces giving the narrative colour but you will find that in the parables almost everything contributes didactically to create a truth and to bring out the moral.

[JehovahsWitness]

So would it be fair to say that Jesus could be saying that someone that was literally alive in front of him was in fact "dead" in this figurative sense?

There is nothing wrong with using that metaphor but the words Jesus used do not match this.

Then why did you say this ...

Figurative death? Yes, we can say that we have killed our kind self by being cruel ...

Emphasis MINE

We're you just mentioning something that could not possibly apply to the subject under discussion?




JW

[PinSeeker]

Not sure if you subscribe to annihilationism or not, but it seeems so from your post. If not, forgive me. If so:

No person is alive here at all. Just the worms (and what kind of worms do carcasses attract?)

Look closer. He says "their worms." 'Their' is a personal, possessive pronoun and thus denotes ownership (the word used there in the Greek does the same thing). Yes, the bodies are decomposing and being eaten by worms. But the worms are symbolic of the torment that the dead are suffering and will never be rid off. We say the same kind of thing even today when we say something like, "This is just eating you up" or, "That's just eating away at me..." we are bothered and even tormented to no end. Such will it be in hell for those who go there; this is the Lord's purpose in relating this metaphor.

Jude also describes what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah as an example on display of those who suffer eternal punishment:

• In like manner, Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, who indulged in sexual immorality and pursued strange flesh, are on display as an example of those who sustain the punishment of eternal fire. Jude 1:7

What is in view here is that the fire still burns, not that the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah are no longer alive. In other words, God's judgment, symbolized by fire, is never-ending and eternal.