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]

That would be six times.

Right. I can count. Thanks.

You would next need to compare these so-called mentions of "hell" with the number of times Jesus is recorded to have referred to heaven to support your claim. Have you done so?

That would not support my claim.

Yes it would. You said....

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

Or are you suggesting the separate occassions , even though vastly inferior to the number of times Jesus mentioned the heavens, constitutes more total time spent discussing the topic of "hell" than the than he does heaven?

If so you would still have to produce competitive evidence, to support your claim.

To illustrate: If someone said Mohamed Ali spent more time in the ring than Mike Tyson that could indeed be more matches or more hours but in either case, to prove this one would have to refer to the careers of both Ali and Tyson. Speaking of six long fights Ali fought doesn't prove the point, one would also have to mention how much Tyson fought.

To support the claim Jesus talks about hell more than he talks about heaven you would need to mention how much Jesus talks about heaven. Otherwise you haven't proven he talks more, only that he talks.


Regards,



JW

[PinSeeker]

[Replying to post 141 by JehovahsWitness]

You're trying to make the argument into what you want it to be, which is, at best, disingenuous. I have always meant descriptions of hell (literal or figurative) compared to descriptions of heaven (literal or figurative). The ratio is, at best, 6:2, as per my post above. It's really 6:0. My point stands.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 141 by JehovahsWitness]

You're trying to make the argument into what you want it to be, which is, at best, disingenuous. I have always meant descriptions of hell (literal or figurative) compared to descriptions of heaven (literal or figurative). The ratio is, at best, 6:2, as per my post above. It's really 6:0. My point stands.

Jesus talked about many things, but we vary as to just what he did mean, and what he did not mean.

Did he speak in literal language or in metaphors?

Or a mixture of the two?

Those are not the only obvious questions that we should ask.

How well do any of us answer them; how able are we to give viable answers?

(t is easy to make general statements, but difficult to deal with specific details.

"Black and white" seem to mean different things to different posters.

We walk by faith because we do not yet "see face-to-face".

Grace and peace to you.

[2FollowHim]

[Replying to Tcg]

Being sola scriptura, and starting with NT, then OT, first, I did not find eternal punishment but I did find 'an age' punishment for those taking the Mark of the Beast, for Satan, the false prophet.

This all seems to be a religion political system.

The word for 'hell' after death is as many know, HADES which means unseen.

This is bits and pieces and I can be corrected if you find me having wrong scriptures.
Jesus said the GATES of HELL would not prevail against His church.

I suggest then these can OPEN.

Hell, hades would be the holding place for some who died, unsaved.
I could not find the 'torment' concept. Open to hearing about this?

What I do have a little understanding of is the judgement so spirits must be somewhere until then.

Many human doctrines are added but not biblical.

[otseng]

Mark 9:43-48 is considered to support the notion of eternal torment and punishment.

[Mar 9:43-48 KJV] 43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell (Gehenna), into the fire that never shall be quenched: 44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: 48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

A few comments about this passage.

First, it does not explicitly mention torment or torture. One would have to interpret the "worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched" as some sort of everlasting torture in a literal hell. But, it does not directly say this. So, one cannot confidently claim the passage teaches eternal damnation and torment.

Second, how literally should this passage be interpreted? Nobody actually cuts off their hands or feet or gouges out their eyes. So, obviouly people don't take maiming themselves literally. So, why should it be interpreted that people would actually be cast into a literal hell? Would there be a literal worm in hell?

Third, Jesus often used dramatic imagery, hyperbole, and nearby objects to teach. I believe Gehenna or "valley of Hinnom" was within sight when he taught this passage. So, the hearers could actually see the fire from Gehenna while he was teaching.

Fourth, the context of the passage was not about "sinners", but about those that would cause a little one to fall away.

[Mar 9:42 KJV] 42 And whosoever shall offend one of [these] little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.

I have also not heard of a single instance where someone was tied to a millstone and thrown into the sea.

So, I do not believe Jesus was teaching in these passages that sinners would be eternally tortured in the bowels of hell. Rather, he was giving a stark admonition that we should not cause any harm to a child in the faith.

[William]

@

onewithhim: That is the point of the Lake of Fire AND "the fire that is prepared for the devil and his angels." (Matthew 25:41) SYMBOLIC for complete obliteration

otseng: The "lake of fire" is only mentioned in Revelation. My own view is the entire book is to be interpreted symbolically, or at least most of it.

William: We could all dance within the symbolism of it. What does it reveal to the individual but the mirror image of their self they gaze upon.
"A Lake" can be considered "that which can be used to purify".
Fire too, symbolizes purification, the Holy Spirit is said to have used the flame as a symbol.
Water and Fire, both cleansing agents...

onewithhim:The Lake of Fire is the same as the "fire prepared for the devil and his angels," and also Gehenna. They all refer to fire, which SYMBOLIZES the complete obliteration of the wicked. They will exist no more.

otseng: I think the ultimate question is how much of the verses about hell in the Bible are we to interpret literally or symbolically. Depending on this ratio, we'll all come to a different view of hell.

William: Focus on what Jesus is said to have claimed about it, and at least decide from that platform.

Q: Was Jesus being symbolic or literal about the eternal place of the "gnashing of the teeth".

I think that he was warning us that the way we choose to think and act determines whether we create our own hell from that, and how best to avoid this by creating our own heaven.

One of the problem areas I have identified is that, 'different views' are acceptable unless they come with them any form of judgment against other views which one finds unacceptable. The one act of self judgement which makes any sense is to avoid judgment like the plague.

[PinSeeker]

[Replying to post 141 by JehovahsWitness]

You're trying to make the argument into what you want it to be, which is, at best, disingenuous. I have always meant descriptions of hell (literal or figurative) compared to descriptions of heaven (literal or figurative). The ratio is, at best, 6:2, as per my post above. It's really 6:0. My point stands.

Jesus talked about many things, but we vary as to just what he did mean, and what he did not mean.

Did he speak in literal language or in metaphors?

Or a mixture of the two?

Those are not the only obvious questions that we should ask.

How well do any of us answer them; how able are we to give viable answers?

(t is easy to make general statements, but difficult to deal with specific details.

"Black and white" seem to mean different things to different posters.

We walk by faith because we do not yet "see face-to-face".

Grace and peace to you.

I'm tracking right with you, Checkpoint. But whether one says "literal language" or "metaphor" or a "both" -- regardless of the position one takes -- it is indisputable that Jesus goes into at least some detail about what hell will be like but does not give any kind of description at all about what heaven will be like. Ergo, He talks much more about hell than heaven. That's the point I'm making.

And He doesn't have to describe heaven, actually, because we get some glimpses into what it will be like in Genesis 1 and 2, before the Fall. That's, um, free information...

Yes, we walk by faith; thank you for that. But faith itself is not blind.

Grace and peace to you all.

[marco]

The Bible is clear as to what saves a person.

But it is unclear as to WHY a persson needs to be "saved"; and from what? It appears as if threats have been issued and punishments threatened but apart from the poetry in Genesis, there's no supporting reason.

“This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.�—John 17:3

Doesn't this knowledge have to be accurate? Yes, even truthful? Note the verse doesn't say 'taking in knowledge from you' it says 'taking in knowledge of you'. Getting to know God and His Son, what kind of persons they are. What do they like? What do they hate? Do they love just any teaching? The Bible has all the answers.

In dissecting John it is interesting that we apply such scrutiny to a preposition. In classical languages prepositions are often contained in the declined noun, so it would be hard to determine with any precision what the correct preposition was and unwise to give the preposition vast importance. "Know your God" applied as much to Isis and Thor as to Yahweh. Muslims supply Allah with 100 nice names, so they seem to be observing the same procedure. Perhaps not all are permitted to understand biblical arcana, but in what manner do we identify those who have succeeded? By their statements?

[2timothy316]

The Bible is clear as to what saves a person.

But it is unclear as to WHY a persson needs to be "saved"; and from what? It appears as if threats have been issued and punishments threatened but apart from the poetry in Genesis, there's no supporting reason.

"Miserable man that I am! Who will rescue me from the body undergoing this death? Thanks to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!" - Romans 7:24

If a person can't look at themselves and the world around them and figure out what we need to be saved from, then I don't think anyone can help them figure it out.

“This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.�—John 17:3

Doesn't this knowledge have to be accurate? Yes, even truthful? Note the verse doesn't say 'taking in knowledge from you' it says 'taking in knowledge of you'. Getting to know God and His Son, what kind of persons they are. What do they like? What do they hate? Do they love just any teaching? The Bible has all the answers.

In dissecting John it is interesting that we apply such scrutiny to a preposition. In classical languages prepositions are often contained in the declined noun, so it would be hard to determine with any precision what the correct preposition was and unwise to give the preposition vast importance. "Know your God" applied as much to Isis and Thor as to Yahweh. Muslims supply Allah with 100 nice names, so they seem to be observing the same procedure. Perhaps not all are permitted to understand biblical arcana, but in what manner do we identify those who have succeeded? By their statements?

Not by their statements.

"Therefore, become imitators of God." - Ephesians 5:1

"However, become doers of the word and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves with false reasoning. For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, this one is like a man looking at his own face in a mirror. For he looks at himself, and he goes away and immediately forgets what sort of person he is. But the one who peers into the perfect law that belongs to freedom and continues in it has become, not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work; and he will be happy in what he does." - James 1:22-25

Neither of these scriptures can be followed if one doesn't know what they should be imitating or what word they should be doing.

[JehovahsWitness]

I have always meant descriptions of hell (literal or figurative) compared to descriptions of heaven (literal or figurative).

That may have been what you meant, but that was not what you said. Indeed did you mention the word "descriptions" in any of your posts until now?

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

In any case the focus of Jesus message was absolutely not "hell" he mentioned heaven, the heavens and the Kingdom of the heavens literally dozens of times. And if, as the serious bible students in this thread know to do, we distinguise between "the grave" (sheol/hades) and Gehenna (which Jesus associated with punishment), heaven(s) absolutely occupied the major part of his discourse.

In short does not talk more about "hell" than he does about heaven and while he did talk about the ultimate punishment of the incorrigibly wicked (Ghehenna) he spent comparatively very little time doing that than preaching about the heaven(s) as the location for God's kingdom and the ultimate destiny for all born again Christians.

Do have a nice weekend,

JW

As mentioned before, there are multiple Greek words used in the NT that are translated as hell:
- Gehenna 12x
- Hades 11x
- Tartarus 1x

How Many Times Is Heaven Mentioned in the Bible?

The King James version of the Bible mentions the word "heaven" 327 times in the Old Testament and 255 times in the New Testament. Meanwhile, the word appears only 186 times in the New International Version's Old Testament and 236 times in its New Testament. In the New Revised Standard Version, "heaven" appears 246 times in the Old Testament and 248 times in the New Testament.