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?

[onewithhim]

P.S. You responded to my post #82 where I said that "Sheol" and "Hades/hell" are the exact same thing (and proved it with two identical Scriptures from both old and new Testaments), by saying that they were NOT the same thing, without giving any solid reason why.

Here's what I said:

My point is hell in the OT (Sheol) is not the same as hell in the NT (Gehenna, Hades, Tartarus).

Yes, I can agree that Sheol is similar to Hades. But, Sheol is not similar to Gehenna or Tartarus.

The problem is the NT uses the same word "hell" for Gehenna, Hades, Tartarus. So, when I said Sheol is not the same as hell in the NT, I use the term in a collective sense of hell having all the attributes of Gehenna, Hades, Tartarus.

Conceptually, Sheol and Hades are similar since they both referred to the underworld where all would go to. However, Sheol is described differently than Gehenna and Tartarus.

Gehenna is described as a place where people could be cast into by God, soul and body is destroyed, and could be damned in. These qualities are not used for Sheol. So, Sheol would not be the same as Gehenna.

Isn't this exactly what I have been saying?

[onewithhim]

P.S. You responded to my post #82 where I said that "Sheol" and "Hades/hell" are the exact same thing (and proved it with two identical Scriptures from both old and new Testaments), by saying that they were NOT the same thing, without giving any solid reason why.

While we're on the subject of soul and body, here is a verse that indicates humans have two separate components: body and soul.

[Mat 10:28 KJV] 28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

People can kill the body, but they cannot kill the soul. Only God can destry both the body and soul. So, this implies the soul lives after the body dies. (Additionally, this verse also implies the soul is not necessarily immortal.)

Tartarus is described as a place where angels that sinned are cast into. Sheol is not described this way, so that's why I say Sheol and Tartarus are not the same thing.

Now, if one assumes Gehenna, Hades, Tartarus, and Sheol are all symbolic terms for death, then one can say they are all the same thing. But, without making that assumption, and just looking at it by simply using what the Bible does describe them as, Sheol and Gehenna/Tartarus are portrayed differently.

Matthew 10:28 does not indicate that the body has a soul that lives on after death. The "soul" of a person is everything about him, which includes his body. Scriptures indicate that the soul eats, it has blood in its veins. It is the COMPLETE person. When the person dies, everything about him is remembered by God, and He will resurrect this person at a future date. The BODY is merely the physical body of the person, which CAN be killed and/or destroyed. The SOUL cannot be destroyed by other humans because God remembers this person, and all of his attributes. He, God, has the ability to bring that person back, and He can decline to bring a person back if He so chooses.

That is why Jesus said to not fear men but only Him who has the power to bring somebody back or not bring them back...whatever He chooses. And you're right, the soul is not immortal.

I agree with what you say about Tartarus. Isn't that what I have also posted? I have posted more than once that Sheol (which is also Hades/Hell) and Gehenna and Tartarus are all different.

Sheol/Hell = mankind's GRAVE

Gehenna = complete destruction

Tartarus = the dark spiritual devastation of the fallen angels



:nerd2:

[onewithhim]

After all, it portrays God as a sadistic beast, torturing people in an agonizing fire from which they can never hope to escape. It is downright blasphemy. God is NOT an ogre that delights in the pain of anyone.

Who said God is an ogre that delights in the pain of humans?
Who said anything about God torturing people?

Now, if you mean punishing, that's different. And as I mentioned, there's only one verse I've found that explicitly refers to everlasting punishment.

[Mat 25:44-46 KJV] 44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did [it] not to one of the least of these, ye did [it] not to me. 46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Note Jesus did not explicitly say "sinners" would be punished forever. He said those that do not minister to the hungry, thirsty, strangers, naked, sick, and prisoners would go into everlasting punishment.

Unfortunately, many people preach this passage out of context. Preachers point to this passage and proclaim the unrepentant would suffer eternal punishment. So, you must believe if you want to escape hell. But, if you take the words of Jesus literally, one must act to escape everlasting punishment.

I agree that one must ACT to avoid everlasting punishment. I'm sure no one would disagree that Jesus was indeed referring to sinners, esp. those who chose not to help his disciples on Earth (which would be working against him).

What did we conclude in one of my last posts? The punishment for unrepentant sinners was DEATH. Not life in a fire somewhere.

I'm wondering what you think the word "punishment" means. I have previously been surprised by others' ideas that it means some discomfort inflicted on a person who is alive. It doesn't necessarily stop there. Funk & Wagnalls' dictionary says this:

"Punishment: A penalty imposed, as for transgression of law; ANY ill suffered in consequence of wrongdoing."

What is the penalty for deliberate sin, according to the Bible? DEATH. Therefore, DEATH imposed as a penalty for wrongdoing is punishment. There is no room in this discussion for a living "soul" to be subjected to being roasted forever. If the wicked person is dead, he cannot be tortured. And death is the penalty imposed by God as punishment.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 126 by Imprecise Interrupt]

I think I remember that "the right thing" included honoring Jesus as Lord and doing what he said to do. That involves some kind of belief in him. He said:

"You are my friends if you do what I am commanding you." (John 15:14)

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 132 by marco]

That throws Jesus himself up on the stage with the Pharisees, then. He taught that there is only one way to God and none other. He clearly expounded that there is only one faith and he and the Father were it. Was he a Pharisee?

[onewithhim]

Jesus talks about hell more than he talks about heaven....

Would you be so kind as to provide evidence to support this statement?

I did, in the very paragraph from which you pulled that part of my quote... Matthew 10, 13 and 25, Mark 9, Luke 16, Revelation 21... He describes it vividly, as I said. Now, Jesus gave us several of what we call "Kingdom Parables," where He talks about its value, its worthiness of our desire, and that kind of thing, but virtually nothing describing what it will actually be like. it's actually very interesting to me how little Jesus himself says about heaven -- at least in its future aspects.

Just where does Jesus talk about "Hell" in Matthew 10, 13 and 25?

Luke 16 is an ALLEGORICAL scenario that Jesus set forth to emphasize the guilt of the Pharisees in not spiritually feeding the people. A depiction of a literal hell-fire is not his intention, any more than a person in Hell could actually speak to a person in Heaven, or any more than a single drop of water could help quench the pain of being in a literal burning fire. (Look up what "allegory" means.) We have talked about Hell and what it means. It is translated from the word "Hades" and means the GRAVE. There is nothing in Luke 16 that is literal, except the hypocritical position of the Pharisees.

In Mark Jesus mentions GEHENNA. That is not the same as Hades/Hell. Gehenna and Hell are two different things, even though the KJV and other versions have translated Gehenna, Hades, and Tartarus all as "hell." That is not correct. Did you bother to read the discussion on these three things? It was covered quite thoroughly. You don't seem to understand the difference between them all.

So, knowing that "Gehenna" and "Tartarus" are definitly NOT HELL, how many times does Jesus mention "Hell"?

Jesus mentioned "Hell" THREE times. Matthew 11:23, Matthew 16:18, and Luke 16:23.

For the sake of interest, he mentioned "Gehenna" 8 times. (Matthew 5:22,29,30; Matt.10:28; Matt.18:9; Matt.23:15,33; Luke 12:5)


So, we see that Jesus mentioned Hell and Gehenna (translated as "hell" by KJV) around ELEVEN times altogether.


What other subject did he mention MORE? THE KINGDOM....53 times.

Whoever told you that little morsel about hell being Jesus' most-visited conversation was lying to you.



www.jw.org

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 140 by PinSeeker]

I don't really understand what your point is about describing Heaven. Jesus didn't describe heaven to any extent because most people aren't going there! Only his co-rulers.

What IS described throughout the Bible are conditions ON EARTH that will be experienced during Jesus' Millennial Reign. It is here on Earth that we will live forever, not heaven. Why should we be given any detail about Heaven? It is a realm of spirit persons, living in "unapproachable light," as Jesus is. (I Timothy 6:16)

The Earth will be like:

Psalm 37:11
Isaiah 11:6-9
Isaiah 35:1,5,6
Isaiah 65:21-25
Micah 4:4

[Imprecise Interrupt]

John of Patmos incorporated into Revelation a great number of references to existing scriptures, not all of which would become canon. Was there any scripture that referred to the ‘second death’ and if so what did it mean?

The second death means the death from which no one wakes up. No resurrection, no more chances. It is for the incorrigibly evil people that will not be good.

I have seen references in other books, but I'll have to get back to you on that. I need to look them up.

A lot of what you posted has already been discussed on this thread. Please go back and take a minute to see what has already been commented on.

I went through the entire thread before posting and again now to make sure I did not miss anything. I saw nothing at all about the phrase 'the second death' having been used in Targum Isaiah or anywhere else prior to Revelation. That was my main point, tying together all the indications of the fate of the unrighteous as being eternal conscious punishment by fire as indicated by John of Patmos by reference to that phrase. Of course I duplicated some quotes from Revelation. It was necessary to connect it all together.

If you have any evidence that there was another meaning to the phrase 'the second death' that was around in the 1st century, I would be glad to see it.

OK, maybe I"m slow on the draw. Did you say what you think the second death is, according to what John wrote? I must have missed it. I'm getting old.

"The second death" as a phrase is not anywhere else other than Revelation, but the meaning is throughout the Scriptures. Someone said that Revelation is constructed of SYMBOLISM. This is true for most of the book. What the SYMBOLS mean is vastly important for us to grasp. I think it has been clearly shown that FIRE is used to illustrate the total obliteration of a wicked person, just as a piece of paper lit on fire will disappear, to be no more.

So, with that knowledge, we can go through the entire Bible and observe what backs that up.

From the beginning we see that the punishment for rebellion against YHWH is returning to the ground. "For out of it you were taken. For dust you are and to dust you will return." (Genesis 3:19) No indication anywhere from God that they would live on in the spirit realm and suffer there.

We can see constant reminders throughout that the wicked will PERISH---not live on--- as in Psalms and Proverbs, for example.

"For evil men will be done away with...The wicked will perish; the enemies of Jehovah will vanish like glorious pastures; they will vanish like smoke." (Psalm 37:9,20)

"When the storm passes by, the wicked one will be no more..." (Proverb 10:25)

Speaking of wicked rulers: "They are dead; they will NOT live. Powerless in death, they will not rise up. For you have turned your attention to them to ANNIHILATE them and destroy all mention of them." (Isaiah 26:14)


Jesus inferred what the wicked ones will experience: "God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, so that everyone exercising faith in him might not be DESTROYED but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

Paul also wrote plainly about what the wicked will experience.....not a literal fire, but destruction:

"The wages sin pays is DEATH..." (Romans 6:23)

"These very ones will undergo the judicial punishment of everlasting destruction..." (2 Thessalonians 1:9)


So it is clear that wicked people will be completely annihilated, therefore the symbolism of Revelation should not throw us off. It backs up the idea that the wicked, along with Satan, will not be alive somewhere, but will be gone forever. "The second death" can be understood to be that destruction that will be forever complete.

Revelation is loaded with references to other scriptures. There was no such thing as a completed canon in those days. Jude explicitly quotes from 1 Enoch and 2 Peter certainly seems to quote 1 Enoch as well. Luke 16 uses images from 1 Enoch. Paul’s third heaven reference in 2 Corinthians 12 fits very well with the third heaven description in 2 Enoch. That these works did not become canonical is irrelevant. They were popular and NT authors used them because the ideas were familiar to their readers. Nowhere is there a reference to the unusual phrase ‘second death’ except in the Targums and it is clear that it was meant to convey the idea of eternal conscious punishment by fire. As can be seen in the quotes from Revelation I provided, that meaning is fully compatible with what John of Patmos is talking about.

Concerning the OT quotes, keep in mind that until Daniel there is no reference to personal resurrection. The focus is on national renewal in this world. There is even in some places a denial of there being any such thing.

As an example of the several references you provided being related to national renewal, look at Psalm 37 in context.

• Psalm 37
  9 For the evildoers shall be cut off,
  but those who wait for the Lord shall inherit the land.
  10 In just a little while, the wicked will be no more;
  though you look carefully at his place, he will not be there.
  11 But the meek shall inherit the land
  and delight themselves in abundant peace.
  …
  20 But the wicked will perish;
  the enemies of the Lord are like the glory of the pastures;
  they vanish—like smoke they vanish away.
  21 The wicked borrows but does not pay back,
  but the righteous is generous and gives;
  22 for those blessed by the Lord shall inherit the land,
  but those cursed by him shall be cut off.

Paul rarely mentions judgment (and presumably resurrection) of the unrighteous. Most people think he never does but that is incorrect.

• Romans 2
  9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. 11 For God shows no partiality.
  …
  16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.

Paul does not describe the nature of the ‘tribulation and distress’ for the evil doer but it would appear to be something involving at least temporary consciousness.

It is instructive to look at 2 Thessalonians 1 in context.

• 2 Thessalonians 1
  5 This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering— 6 since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7 and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels 8 in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, 10 when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed.

Inflicting vengeance with flaming fire. Interesting.

Why is it necessary to say that the destruction is eternal and add that it will be away from the presence of the Lord?

It is also interesting that the Greek noun used for ‘destruction’ (olethron) is derived from a prolonged form of the verb for ‘destroy’ (ollumi). The prolonged form indicates ongoing action. Ref

2 Thessalonians 1 is not necessarily incompatible with everlasting conscious punishment with fire.


Whether you want to label this or that as symbolic, the fact is that the image Revelation is presenting is everlasting conscious punishment with fire and it would be understood that way by his contemporary readers.

[onewithhim]

@157

onewithhim:Please, how am I being unloving because of my position on death?

William: Did I write that you were "being unloving"? Perhaps you can quote the specific words I wrote which gave you that idea.

onewithhim: Isn't it a positive thing that when a person dies he is "asleep" as Jesus said, that is, knowing nothing, until the Resurrection?

William: I don't see why it matters either way. Why would you think it would be a 'negative' thing to be "awake" until the Resurrection?

onewithhim: I would much appreciate you showing me where I "declined to continue witllh " the discussion on Death, at least show me the last post you had addressed to me on the subject (which I declined to answer). I rarely just drop a discussion.

William: Did I write that?
Perhaps you can quote the specific words I wrote which gave you that idea as you ask and answer. I read and write a great deal on this Message Board, and have no interest in going over chunks of data I have written, just to find out exactly what I might have wrote to which you might object to.
Please if you are going to use the quoting option, use it in regard to being specific, as this will help with the process of discussion.

Sir, it was you yourself that brought up the idea that I "declined" to answer any more regarding your posts. Thus, since YOU brought it up, I would say that you have the responsibility to show me exactly the point where I bowed out of the discussion. You were the one objecting, in an off-handed way, to my alleged refusal to continue on discussing anything with you.

[PinSeeker]

Jesus talks about hell more than he talks about heaven....

Would you be so kind as to provide evidence to support this statement?

I did, in the very paragraph from which you pulled that part of my quote... Matthew 10, 13 and 25, Mark 9, Luke 16, Revelation 21... He describes it vividly, as I said. Now, Jesus gave us several of what we call "Kingdom Parables," where He talks about its value, its worthiness of our desire, and that kind of thing, but virtually nothing describing what it will actually be like. it's actually very interesting to me how little Jesus himself says about heaven -- at least in its future aspects.

Just where does Jesus talk about "Hell" in Matthew 10, 13 and 25?

Luke 16 is an ALLEGORICAL scenario that Jesus set forth to emphasize the guilt of the Pharisees in not spiritually feeding the people. A depiction of a literal hell-fire is not his intention, any more than a person in Hell could actually speak to a person in Heaven, or any more than a single drop of water could help quench the pain of being in a literal burning fire. (Look up what "allegory" means.) We have talked about Hell and what it means. It is translated from the word "Hades" and means the GRAVE. There is nothing in Luke 16 that is literal, except the hypocritical position of the Pharisees.

In Mark Jesus mentions GEHENNA. That is not the same as Hades/Hell. Gehenna and Hell are two different things, even though the KJV and other versions have translated Gehenna, Hades, and Tartarus all as "hell." That is not correct. Did you bother to read the discussion on these three things? It was covered quite thoroughly. You don't seem to understand the difference between them all.

So, knowing that "Gehenna" and "Tartarus" are definitly NOT HELL, how many times does Jesus mention "Hell"?

Jesus mentioned "Hell" THREE times. Matthew 11:23, Matthew 16:18, and Luke 16:23.

For the sake of interest, he mentioned "Gehenna" 8 times. (Matthew 5:22,29,30; Matt.10:28; Matt.18:9; Matt.23:15,33; Luke 12:5)


So, we see that Jesus mentioned Hell and Gehenna (translated as "hell" by KJV) around ELEVEN times altogether.

There's a lot in here to this point to refute, but I'll abstain.

What other subject did he mention MORE? THE KINGDOM....53 times.

Yes, I've already agreed multiple times that he mentioned the kingdom more than hell. This would not be news to you, if you'd really been digesting well what I've been saying.

Whoever told you that little morsel about hell being Jesus' most-visited conversation was lying to you.

Well, if that was what somebody had told me -- or what I had ever thought in the first place -- then what you say here would be true...