God's truth about hell

[Checkpoint]

This thread stems from this short beginning exchange about hell and truth:


Checkpoint wrote:

Hi again, Pinseeker.

What is it that makes them "truths" rather than "untruths", as you see them, in brief ?

What specifically makes them "very hard truths", do you think?

Pinseeker wrote

Hey, Checkpoint.

I guess the only way to answer the first question is, if God says it, it's true.

To the second, I would say "very hard truths" does not mean "very difficult-to-undertand truths." What I mean is, many people do not want to hear about hell, and/or do not want to accept God's truth about hell. It scares them, it offends them, it's obcene to them... etc. Even believers like me just... well, I shudder at it. It... well, it scares the H-E-double-toothpick out of me. But it's important, even vital to our understanding of the Gospel. Take a look at this if you want:

https://www.ligonier.org/learn/series/hell/[/quote]

Checkpoint responded

Ah yes Pinseeker, what you say here raises questions rather than gives answers, in my opinion.

1) Do we really grasp what "God's truth about hell" actually is?

2) In what way is it "important, even vital, to our understanding of the Gospel"?

3) Why is there such strong, even visceral, reaction to "God's truth about hell", so often expressed by both believers and unbelievers?

4) Who, or what, is being questioned here? God, or the Bible, or an interpretation?

Please discuss, debate, and/or give your answer to any of these questions, or just comment or make an observation.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 180 by PinSeeker]


earl wrote:

I know that the synonym for torment is torture. Both words mean the same.Don't you think? IS it just judgement for God to to torture man and angel with fire and brimstone? This torture action would also indicate a payback from God ,don't you think?

Pinseeker wrote:

Earl, I'm sure this will get rebuttals from others, and that's fine, they can do what they want, of course. But I'm going to answer this, and I want to hear from you what you think.

Well now, surprise surprise, Pinseeker!

You will get no rebuttal of your post from me, as I agree with most of it.

Grace and peace to you.

[PinSeeker]

You will get no rebuttal of your post from me, as I agree with most of it.

That's very curious indeed. Makes me quite curious to hear your answer to my query in post 176 and 179:

I would like to hear you expound on what you say here. What do you believe He (Jesus) is teaching in one or both those places:

• Matthew 25:41-46 -- “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.â€�
  
  Luke 16:22-28 -- "The rich man also died and was buried, and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.’ And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house -- for I have five brothers -- so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.’ "

You could also include the following, as they all go hand in hand with those two:

• Daniel 12:2 -- "And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt."
  
  Matthew 7:21-23 -- “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ "
  
  Revelation 14:9-11 -- "And another angel, a third, followed them, saying with a loud voice, 'If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.' �
  
  Revelation 20:9-15 -- "And they marched up over the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, but fire came down from heaven and consumed them, and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire."

They go hand in hand with those passages. I added some emphasis in various places, obviously. How do you reconcile those things?

Grace and peace to you.

[Checkpoint]

Neither Jesus nor the Bible teaches "eternal, conscious confinement" for unrepentant sinners, is also my opinion. It's not even in those two passages.

Okay, yeah so that's your opinion; that's well established. Mine is what it is, and that's well-established. Let's quit calling each other "wrong," at least for now, even though it's crystal clear -- many times over -- that we both think that of each other. Let's get past that.

I would like to hear you expound on what you say here. What do you believe he's teaching in one or both those places?

Fair enough, but one at a time.

In the two relevant verses in Matthew 25, Jesus says:

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

46 Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.�

Not a word anywhere there about "conscious confinement".

Instead, he said, eternal fire, eternal punishment, eternal life.

Grace and peace.

[PinSeeker]

Instead, he said, eternal fire, eternal punishment...

The fire -- the lake of fire -- is figurative; we agree on that. Unless you're changing your mind. At any rate, there is no real distinction between conscious confinement and eternal punishment. Even if that is brushed aside, annihilationism is total denial of Daniel 12:2, Revelation 14:11, and Revelation 20:10 and 15 above.

Taking them one at a time for brevity's sake is fine, but none listed above can be taken in isolation from any of the others.

[Checkpoint]

Instead, he said, eternal fire, eternal punishment...

The fire -- the lake of fire -- is figurative; we agree on that. Unless you're changing your mind. At any rate, there is no real distinction between conscious confinement and eternal punishment. Even if that is brushed aside, annihilationism is total denial of Daniel 12:2, Revelation 14:11, and Revelation 20:10 and 15 above.

Taking them one at a time for brevity's sake is fine, but none listed above can be taken in isolation from any of the others.

What we are dealng with just now is not what you call "annihilationism" but what you call "eternal conscious confinement"

That is obviously distinctly different from "eternal punishment".

You chose that 3 word term.

It is up to you to now illustrate its supposed accuracy found in the verses you cited were needed.

Grace and peace, my brother.

[PinSeeker]

What we are dealing with just now is not what you call "annihilationism" but what you call "eternal conscious confinement." That is obviously distinctly different from "eternal punishment". You chose that 3 word term.

That's very fair, actually. Yes, that three-word description is mine, but not different than the biblical description except in word only. I'm not saying your objection can be dismissed that easily, though, and I'm not doing that. So, a couple of statements, and aside, and then a question for you:

STATEMENT 1: We agree on 'eternal'... that much seems to have always been agreed on. The word is actually used many times in the Bible and applied specifically to the subject we're discussing. You may want to verify, but I'm declaring at least that much -- 'eternal' -- settled.

STATEMENT 2: Regarding the word 'conscious,' even the most superficial of understandings of Jesus's parable in Luke 16 -- though this is a parable and thus fictitious but an illustration and a realistic portrayal of a future event -- would concede that the dead rich man is obviously conscious. And Revelation is very clear in chapters 14 and 20 that the torment experienced by the beast and his angels and all his worshipers in this figurative, symbolic lake of fire "goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night." So it would seem that the fact that they retain consciousness for eternity is indisputable -- unless one just chooses not to believe what God says in His Word.

AN ASIDE: It seems to me from your past few posts that you are actually conceding that hell is a place rather than merely a "judgment decision chosen by God," as you put it way back in post 102. I don't completely disagree with that, actually; God does make that judgment, but it is a "place of torment" (Luke 16:28) that unbelievers "go away into" (Matthew 25:46), that they "depart to" (Matthew 7:23).

QUESTION 1: What if I change that word 'confinement' to 'consignment'? In other words, the unbeliever is consigned -- delivered, relegated -- to this place of torment, rather than confined in it. Is that more palatable to you? I mean, yeah, I guess we could say that the unbeliever, even in hell, remains "free," and thus not "confined," but still unable to enter into or partake in the New Heaven and New Earth. Is that more palatable to you?

It is up to you to now illustrate its supposed accuracy found in the verses you cited were needed.

There seems no need for that for three reasons:

1. We agree on 'eternal.'

2. I have very thoroughly demonstrated for several posts now that the consciousness of unbelievers in eternity is very clearly portrayed and stated in many places in the Bible, most notably in Daniel 12:2, Luke 16:22-28, Revelation 14:11, and Revelation 20:10-15.

3. I don't think there should be any problem with it, but I am perfectly willing to take back my use of the word 'confinement.' As a result of the Judgment, unbelievers are consigned -- delivered to, sent away to, relegated to -- hell. This is their eternal punishment.

Grace and peace, my brother.

All the same to you, brother.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 186 by PinSeeker]


Checkpoint wrote:

What we are dealing with just now is not what you call "annihilationism" but what you call "eternal conscious confinement." That is obviously distinctly different from "eternal punishment". You chose that 3 word term.

That's very fair, actually. Yes, that three-word description is mine, but not different than the biblical description except in word only. I'm not saying your objection can be dismissed that easily, though, and I'm not doing that. So, a couple of statements, and aside, and then a question for you:

STATEMENT 1: We agree on 'eternal'... that much seems to have always been agreed on. The word is actually used many times in the Bible and applied specifically to the subject we're discussing. You may want to verify, but I'm declaring at least that much -- 'eternal' -- settled.

Yes, settled as to duration, but not settled as to specific application when used; for example, eternal fire, eternal punishment, eternal life.

QUESTION 1: What if I change that word 'confinement' to 'consignment'? In other words, the unbeliever is consigned -- delivered, relegated -- to this place of torment, rather than confined in it. Is that more palatable to you? I mean, yeah, I guess we could say that the unbeliever, even in hell, remains "free," and thus not "confined," but still unable to enter into or partake in the New Heaven and New Earth. Is that more palatable to you?

3. I don't think there should be any problem with it, but I am perfectly willing to take back my use of the word 'confinement.' As a result of the Judgment, unbelievers are consigned -- delivered to, sent away to, relegated to -- hell. This is their eternal punishment.

It does not matter to me the word or words used. My objection is to the three words being combined so as to become "the truth about hell".

AN ASIDE: It seems to me from your past few posts that you are actually conceding that hell is a place rather than merely a "judgment decision chosen by God," as you put it way back in post 102.

What did I write that made you think that?

The Lord bless and keep you.

[PinSeeker]

Yes, settled as to duration, but not settled as to specific application when used; for example, eternal fire, eternal punishment, eternal life.

So you would maintain that eternal is a different length of time than eternal life? If so, why? How do you justify that, both logically and using Scripture?

AN ASIDE: It seems to me from your past few posts that you are actually conceding that hell is a place rather than merely a "judgment decision chosen by God," as you put it way back in post 102.

What did I write that made you think that?

Oh, I just thought I was perceiving a change in the tone of your posts. No matter. You can keep that to yourself, whatever the case.

You still haven't answered my question.

In post 182, I asked what you believe Jesus was teaching -- with regard to the subject at hand, hell -- in Matthew 25:41-46 and Luke 16:22-28. You sort of addressed the Matthew 25 passage, albeit very briefly, saying, "Not a word anywhere there about "conscious confinement." Now, you have objected to my assertion of consciousness many times, but what you said seemed to indicate to me a particular aversion to the term 'confinement,' which is why I withdrew my use of that term.

At any rate, just saying "not a word anywhere about conscious confinement" seems to be an avoidance of the question altogether, a non-answer. I didn't ask what you think He was not and is not teaching, but rather what He was and is teaching there... And in Luke 16, and Matthew 7. And of course I would say that what He is saying in those passages meshes seamlessly with what we hear from Daniel in chapter 12 of his prophecy and from John in his Revelation, chapters 14 and 20. You said you wanted to take them one at a time, and you can if you want, but it seems to me much easier to make a general statement about all of them taken together, because they are all so intimately associated.

So again. What do you think... and I'll be more specific this time -- what do you think Jesus is teaching in Matthew 7:21-23, Matthew 25:41-46, and Luke 16:22-28 about the nature of hell with regard to its existence, what it is, and the consciousness of its occupants, and its duration? And how, using Scripture, would you justify that thinking? It seems a pretty straight-forward question.

Grace and peace to you.

[Checkpoint]

Instead, he said, eternal fire, eternal punishment...

The fire -- the lake of fire -- is figurative; we agree on that. Unless you're changing your mind. At any rate, there is no real distinction between conscious confinement and eternal punishment. Even if that is brushed aside, annihilationism is total denial of Daniel 12:2, Revelation 14:11, and Revelation 20:10 and 15 above.

Taking them one at a time for brevity's sake is fine, but none listed above can be taken in isolation from any of the others.

Daniel 12 not only gives no support to "conscious confinement", but in fact gives support to "conditional immortality", and is itself confirmed in John 5:28-29.


Revelation 14:11 adapts and/or mirrors Isaiah 34:8-10, including the smoke.

The smoke going up and the fire that "will not be quenched" mean the judicial decision that anguishes those so judged, is final and will never be changed or reversed, but will stand forever.

The verse says nothing about consciousness or confinement.

Revelation 20:10 and 15 say more than, or less than, or other than, what may have been assumed.

But we do know, we do agree, that the lake of fire is not literal, it is figurative.

Only in Revelation does the lake of fire appear, and only in Revelation does its specific literal meaning, appear, which is "The Second Death".

So, "the lake of fire" that is so often mentioned, is actually a figure of the real and the literal, Second Death.

It's just as real, and just as literal, as our first death.

If "the lake of fire" is not literal, why do we tend to take literally what is said about some who are "cast into" it?

Consider this verse:

14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death.

Grace and peace once again.
What is it, then, to be literally "cast into" it?

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 188 by PinSeeker]


Checkpoint wrote:

Yes, settled as to duration, but not settled as to specific application when used; for example, eternal fire, eternal punishment, eternal life.

So you would maintain that eternal is a different length of time than eternal life? If so, why? How do you justify that, both logically and using Scripture?

Not regarding a different length of time("settled as to duration"); meaning the same length of time as in "eternal life".

By "application" I meant you choose your application of what "eternal" is connected with and, because my choice of that differs, what we conclude or assume, also differs, markedly.

That results in me, as I see it, applying "eternal" to fire, punishment, and life, but, as I see it, your application of "eternal" is to ever-burning fire, punishing, and living.

To you, as you see it, that may well be unfair and unwarranted, and if so I apologize, but whatever, it is what it is.

Grace and peace.