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?

[JehovahsWitness]

THE WITCH OF ENDOR

.... the Bible does teach survival after a person dies. Here's some verses:

Saul summoned the spirit of Samuel with the witch at Endor.

1Sa 28:15
And Samuel said to Saul, Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me up? And Saul answered, I am sore distressed; for the Philistines make war against me, and God is departed from me, and answereth me no more, neither by prophets, nor by dreams: therefore I have called thee, that thou mayest make known unto me what I shall do.

Emphasis MINE

The Bible does NOT teach survival after a person dies, shnarkle makes some excellent points on the subject, pointing out the following ....

It's against God's commandments to summon familiar spirits, or to inquire from a witch. To think that Samuel would do something like this is ridiculous. To think that Samuel's spirit would be summoned by a witch is even more so.

A familiar spirit is referred to as a familiar spirit because they impersonate those who have died. They seem familiar, but they aren't who they seem to be. The bible points out that Saul has gone to consult with a witch. This should be the first clue that we're not dealing with the actual spirit of Samuel. Samuel would never participate in this nonsense and was never subjected to demonic or occult power. There is no good reason to assume otherwise.

Since the bible is quite clear that the dead are incapable of doing anything at all, it is obvious that whoever was communicating with the spirit medium (the "witch") it was not a dead person. Satan on the other hand is capable of appearing as an angel of light and Jesus identified him (Satan) as a liar and the father of a lie. It is much more reasonable then to conclude that this is an accojnt of a deceptive rebelious angel (a demon) pretending to be a dead person rather than someone dead speakjng from beyond tbe grave.

Those that believe God would communicate or allow any of his loyal servants to commicate with anyone through a spirit medium does well to ask themselves if they are really employing critical thinking when reading scripture

CONCLUSION Readers that take the above account in context will come to the reasonable conclusion that the witch of Endor was communicating, not with a dead person that had continued conscious existence after death, but rather with a demon that was impersonating the dead Prophet Samuel.




RELATED POSTS

Are GHOSTS real?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 992#798992

Why would demons pretend to be dead people?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 472#927472

Is the TRANSFIGURATION an example of dead people communicating with the living?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 023#970023

Can ISAIAH 14:9-11 reasonably be used as proof the bible teaches that the dead can speak?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 412#970412

Go to other posts related to...

HELL, GEHENNA, and ... THE CONDITION OF THE DEAD

[ttruscott]

There are some other terms related to hell, but are not translated as hell - lake of fire, bottomless pit, abyss, and outer darkness.

Please consider
that the outer darkness is an apt description of the place of banishment of all evil to outside of GOD's reality, either dimensionally or physically, including all those things created by necessity to deal with the creation of evil by HIS creation.

[ttruscott]

I wonder at the concept of a dead body being put into a grave being called a retreat...?

So do I. Have you ever come across anyone that suggests the above? JW

IF we are only bodies, and
IF sheol is only the grave,
THEN upon death, the retreat of the wicked to sheol would equal their bodies being retreated into the grave...? No?

[JehovahsWitness]

I wonder at the concept of a dead body being put into a grave being called a retreat...?

So do I. Have you ever come across anyone that suggests the above? JW

IF we are only bodies ....

I have never come across anyone that believes humans (we) are "only dead bodies", but if there was anyone that started from such a bizzare and illogical starting point, then yes they may well come to such a ludicrous and laughable conclusion.

Have you ever met anyone that holds such a peculiar position?

[onewithhim]

I think we can all agree Sheol is not similar to the New Testament concept of hell, whether you believe in the afterlife or not.

People may agree on all or some of the following:
- All people go to Sheol
- There is no judgment of the dead
- There is no punishment of the dead
- Sheol can refer to a physical location (grave, pit), a spiritual location (where all the souls of the dead go to), or used in an idiom (doesn't literally refer to any physical or spiritual location, but is just an expression).

No, we cannot all agree that Sheol is not similar to the NT concept of hell. It is exactly the same as "hell" in the NT.

One proof of this is to compare a mention of Sheol in the OT with the mention of the that identical scripture in the NT.

"For you will not leave me in the Grave [SHEOL]. You will not allow your loyal one to see corruption." (Psalm 16:10)

And then, quoting Psalm 16:10: "Because you will not leave me in the Grave [Hades,or, hell], nor will you allow your loyal one to see corruption." (Acts 2:27)

The word "Sheol" in the Hebrew compares and is interchangeable with, the word "hell [Hades]" in the Greek.

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.

Translations of the Bible make an assumption that all three terms used in the NT refer to the same place, so a single word hell is used for all three. I believe it's a false assumption since Gehenna and Tartarus do not fit the descriptions of Sheol. It makes it too confusing and it's a part of the reason we have such problems today with the concept of hell.

I've given all the references to hell (Gehenna, Hades, Tartarus). If we just look at these passages, it is not the same as the typical modern view of hell. We have added a lot to the concept of hell (even the word hell itself makes things confusing) that are from extra-Biblical sources (other religions, cultures, literature, folklore, etc).

So, we need to first find out what exactly the Bible does say about hell. I've already provided my list. If people have anything to add, please do so. After we agree on what does the Bible say about hell, we'll discuss the concepts of hell that are not in the Bible.

May I ask why you are still asking that question when I just gave an explanation of the three "hells" in my posts 82,83 & 84 above? I brought out already that they are NOT all the same, and slip-shod translators have actually rendered them the same, causing much confusion. Don't my posts clearly address what the Bible actually says about "hell"?

[ttruscott]

I have never come across anyone that believes humans (we) are "only dead bodies", but if there was anyone that started from such a bizzare and illogical starting point, then yes they may well come to such a ludicrous and laughable conclusion.

Have you ever met anyone that holds such a peculiar position?

I'm pretty sure I remember one of the JWs here, who I think was you, claiming that people have no spirits only bodies...there is no part of a human that continues to exist after a person dies...?

Am I wrong or are you playin me?

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 92 by otseng]

I wonder why you just skipped over my posts. I would like to be included in the discussion. (Posts #82, 83, & 84.)

[JehovahsWitness]

I'm pretty sure I remember one of the JWs here, who I think was you, claiming that people have no spirits only bodies...there is no part of a human that continues to exist after a person dies...?

I certainly do believe there is no part of a person that survives death, but if you think I made the statement that {quote} " people have no spirits only bodies" please be so kind to find the post and link me to it.

I for one (and in my experience most of Jehovah's Witnesses) choose my words very carefully. We know what bible words mean (for example we know the difference between the word "soul" and "spirit") and are carefully to use sentences that properly reflect bible truths. For this reason and more I'm pretty sure I would never have typed the six words " people have no spirits only bodies" , not least because I dont know what that means and because I would not have pluralized the word spirit. I do my best to write sentences that are both grammatically and biblically accurate (which the sentence " people have no spirits only bodies" most definitely is not). (I'm certain I have never said or written the sentence, "we are only bodies" either which is why I was puzzled why you were addressing me with a hypothesis based on this premise)

It might be an idea not to try to paraphrase what you think I am saying but simply provide a word for word quotation and seek clarification by asking a clear and understandable question, if you want more detail.


Regards,


JW

[William]

@

JehovahsWitness: CONCLUSION Readers that take the above account in context will come to the reasonable conclusion that the witch of Endor was communicating, not with a dead person that had continued conscious existence after death, but rather with a demon that was impersonating the dead Prophet Samuel.

William: Why would readers have to come to such a conclusion? If it were so, it would have been written the way you believe it to be.
It would not state that Samuel spoke to Saul. It would say that a demon pretending to be Samuel spoke to Saul.
When Paul writes that he had an experience with Jesus, do you believe it was some demon impersonating Jesus?
Why is it you assign such great powers to supposed demons, based upon one story of a desperate king?

Pinning ones beliefs in the doctrine of death on one account which is open to interpretation in relation to many accounts of the Metaphysical Universe interacting with the Physical Universe, is not the wisest of things one can do.

Jesus himself taught the Disciples about the secrets of the Metaphysical Universe, and even spoke of those who's bodies died, how they would then enter that Universe.

I have read the account of Saul and the Medium and there is no reason why it needs to be interpreted that it was not Samuel, but rather some 'demon'.

If Jesus did not want us to be knowledgeable about the Metaphysical Universe, he would not have spent so much time talking about it.

My own arguments in this thread remain unanswered. Perhaps they are too challenging in relation to your beliefs in the doctrine of death.

Jesus spent a great deal of time instructing his Disciples regarding the Secrets of the Kingdom of Heaven. The Metaphysical Universe is knowable and can be experienced to some degree by the individual. It is not that humans are locked out or forbidden entry, but rather that our beliefs shape the way we choose to do things and for many, fear has replaced trust, as certainly as a book has replaced The Word of GOD (Jesus).

All in all though, even with the doctrine of death belief- how is this an argument against hell's existing?

[otseng]

Fair enough, do let us know when you figure something it out.

I'll sometime post my concluding thoughts and summary, but I doubt I'll have figured it out. There are some things we can say with certainty, but there are many things that are just an extrapolation/interpretation.

Because there is little we can say with certainty, there are many views on hell and the afterlife. Of course, each viewpoint believes they are right, but it would be hubris to claim their own interpretation is the absolute truth.

Ultimately though, for Christians, it should not really matter what their view of hell is. No Christian is planning on going there. And God is not going to send someone to hell just because they have the incorrect view of hell.

God is not going to say,
"Because you do not believe in eternal torture for sinners, I'm going to send you to hell forever."
"Because you do not believe in the existence of hell, I'm going to cast you into hell."
"Because you believe in conditional immortality, you belong to hell."

I believe one can still be a Christian (even an orthodox Christian) and hold to any view of hell. Hell could be symbolic and doesn't have a literal existence. Hell could be a place of eternal suffering for the damned. Hell could be a temporary place of punishment. One's salvation is not conditional on having the correct view of hell.