The Eternality of Hell

[The Brown Brink]

I don't worry about hell at all.
"Good works" show faith.

Hell wins none of my consideration.

 

[CrystalDragon]

I don't worry about hell at all.
"Good works" show faith.

Hell wins none of my consideration.

Non-Christians are just as capable of producing good works as Christians are. Some might argue even more so in some cases.

 

[The Brown Brink]

Non-Christians are just as capable of producing good works as Christians are. Some might argue even more so in some cases.

Yes, and I think Jesus likes people who do good works, no matter who they are...

 

[LadyCrosstalk]

"If we could pay for our own sins, then Christ's death was unnecessary."

I don't think that way. (But we don't have to agree on this--not a salvation issue ) I would say that Christ's Blood is the propitiation--so that I am not required to pay for my sin.

"Yes, there are different levels of punishment in hell, but that does not indicate different lengths of 'time' spent in an 'eternity'. Those terms are mutually exclusive. No time exists in eternity. Where you land, you land. Forever and ever."

If punishment went on forever and ever, I wouldn't say that there is a different level of punishment for anyone. Someone who stole a loaf of bread because he was hungry would be given the same punishment as someone who murdered many people and took sadistic delight in it. An eternity of punishment is after all, an eternity of punishment. I believe that separation from God is permanent for the unsaved, of course. But then, why would anyone want to be eternally with God the Father and God the Son if he/she rejected them in this life? Of course, that is the ultimate punishment--to be away from the only source of life in the universe and therefore to be in eternal death. But not the same as eternal, conscious, painful torment to my mind.

 

[LadyCrosstalk]

Non-Christians are just as capable of producing good works as Christians are. Some might argue even more so in some cases.

Unbelievers are certainly capable of love and good works--no Christian would deny that. But, they do not have the love of the Father in them--His agape love. It is THAT love which comes from God and saves us. "He loved us while we were yet sinners..." and "We love Him because He first loved us." Those who do not love God break one of the Commandments every single day of their lives.

 

[CrystalDragon]

Unbelievers are certainly capable of love and good works--no Christian would deny that. But, they do not have the love of the Father in them--His agape love. It is THAT love which comes from God and saves us. "He loved us while we were yet sinners..." and "We love Him because He first loved us." Those who do not love God break one of the Commandments every single day of their lives.

I wouldn't call hell and much of the Old Testament "loving"...

 

[LadyCrosstalk]

I wouldn't call hell and much of the Old Testament "loving"...

God's justice demands a hell and that ultimately is part of His love. How loving would I be if I, as a judge, insisted that hateful and murderous criminals be let loose on an unsuspecting and law-abiding populace? The Old Testament certainly pronounces wrath and punishment on the enemies of God--those who sin against Him. But what else would you have Him do?

"It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of an angry God..." (and that is in the New Testament Book of Hebrews). He is coming again in judgment (that is the purpose of the declaration of the "woes" of the Book of Revelation).

 

[CrystalDragon]

God's justice demands a hell and that ultimately is part of His love. How loving would I be if I, as a judge, insisted that hateful and murderous criminals be let loose on an unsuspecting and law-abiding populace? The Old Testament certainly pronounces wrath and punishment on the enemies of God--those who sin against Him. But what else would you have Him do?

"It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of an angry God..." (and that is in the New Testament Book of Hebrews). He is coming again in judgment (that is the purpose of the declaration of the "woes" of the Book of Revelation).

There's a difference between jailing people to keep the good members of society safe from them, and torturing the criminals in burning agony, without end, for all eternity.

 

[LadyCrosstalk]

There's a difference between jailing people to keep the good members of society safe from them, and torturing the criminals in burning agony, without end, for all eternity.

I don't think anyone has proved that your last statement is true. The only ones who the Bible mentions as being the subjects of eternal torment are Satan, the Antichrist, the False Prophet and those who take the Mark of the Beast. The rest of the unsaved are said to suffer "the Second Death" (Revelation 2:11, 20:6, 20:14 and 21:8)

 

[Greg Merrill]

1. God knows all and is the Creator of everything. Yes, He does and is.
2. He knew ahead of time that Satan would exist and become the chief fallen angel that he is. Yes, but Satan is not solely responsible for the evil, rebellious heart of Man. Satan doesn't send us to hell. We do that to ourselves.
3. God knew we would all labor under the curse and power of our sinful nature. Yes, He did, which is why He made a way through Christ for all who would be saved to be saved.

Did God, then, purposely plan on having most of humanity suffer the fate of eternal hell? Did He want this to happen? Obviously not. "God is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." If God is perfectly good, which He must be to be God, then, of all the possible worlds He could have made, He made our world which He knew in His omniscience would produce the maximum number of people who would freely choose salvation. I don't see, then, that God was aiming to have the majority of people He made go to hell. That was never His goal. As a good God, His intention was to create a world of free moral agents in which the number of people who would be saved would be maximized. If there had been a possible world that would have done this better, being a good God, He would have created it. It doesn't appear to me, then, that God has done some great evil in creating a world where so many go to hell. That is the consequence of our free moral agency, not some evil intent on God's part. God has done all He could, given our freedom to choose as we like, to maximize the salvation of humanity.

Selah.

Nicely said.

 

[Colter]

So, if God suffers with us in our afflictions wouldn't he suffer with the billions he condemns to eternal torture? And if he knew Satan was going to rebel and mislead the whole world, leading to Gods kids being condemned to this torture, then why allow Satan to work against his purpose? These are just some of the many inconsistencies in the stories of the Holy men.

 

[Foxfyre]

I'm afraid you've taken up a Jesus who is little more than the embodiment of your own moral, and philosophical, and theological preferences. The Jesus you love is not the Jesus revealed in the Bible. You have made Christ just a mirror, a reflection, of who you are (or wish to be). Jesus was an example of tolerance? How so? He called the Pharisees "whitewashed tombs" and "brood of vipers" and "sons of hell." He tossed the moneychangers out of the temple. He told sinners to cease from their sin. He warned of a future divine judgment no one could escape. He said flatly and explicitly that no one could come to God the Father except through himself. This is not the speech and conduct of a tolerant person!

Jesus was compassionate; this is true. Accepting, though? He did not accept the Pharisees; he did not accept the Sadducees; he did not accept religious hypocrisy; he did not accept false teachers; he did not accept false doctrine; he did not accept the temple being made a place of commerce; he did not accept the sin of those he healed; he did not accept that there were alternative routes to God besides himself. And so on.

Jesus was inclusive? See above. Consider also the Sermon on the Mount:

Matthew 5:19-20
19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

This doesn't sound particularly "inclusive" to me... In fact, it sounds rather like he's threatening the exclusion from the kingdom of heaven of any who break the commandments and teach others to follow suit.

Matthew 5:21-22
21 "You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.'
22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, 'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of hell fire.

Whoa! More threats, more exclusion, more condemnation of any who hold hatred in their heart toward another and who call their brother a fool. Jesus isn't sounding at all inclusive here...

Matthew 5:27-29
27 "You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not commit adultery.'
28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
29 If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

Yikes! What's happened to your inclusive Jesus?! He sounds pretty severe, and condemning, and restrictive in his preaching, not inclusive. If a guy even looks on a woman with lust in his heart for her he's an adulterer? This makes most men today guilty of adultery! That's not a very inclusive moral standard for Jesus to establish!

And so it goes. You can read through the Gospels for yourself and see that the Jesus you've imagined in your head or absorbed from popular culture is not the Jesus revealed in the Bible. You seem to have adopted a rather sterile, milksop, fluffy bunny Jesus who is utterly contrary to the real Jesus.

As for Jesus teaching about being the Way - the only Way - to God, well, suggesting that he was vague and open-ended about what he meant is just patently false. He did say, "no man comes to God the Father except through me." That sounds pretty precise and narrow. Jesus also said:

John 3:14-15
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up,
15 that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.

John 10:9
9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.

John 11:25-26
25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live.
26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?"

The apostles who followed in Christ's footsteps and established the Early Church understood Jesus to be preaching a very singular way to God:

Acts 4:10-12
10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole.
11 This is the 'stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.'
12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."

Getting it wrong about Jesus can have eternally devastating consequences. It is only the Jesus of the Bible, the historical Jesus described in Scripture, not the Jesus you prefer to imagine and conform to modern notions of tolerance, relativism and pluralism, who can save. Your Jesus cannot save anyone. But the Saviour revealed to us in the pages of the Bible, the Jesus who is narrow-minded, and restrictive, and critical can "save to the uttermost." I would urge you to think carefully, then, about which Jesus you really want.

Selah.

Again I neither question your faith or your integrity in obeying the Lord. But for me, I think you can't just put up all the stern and scary verses while ignoring the rest and give an accurate representation of who Jesus was and what he showed us of himself and what he taught us.

The Jesus I know condemned sin while loving the sinner. He took a very stern view toward those who demanded of others what they themselves did not do or accused others of what they themselves did. He was intolerant of cheating or preying on the poor or those who presume a superior morality so that they could condemn others.

The Jesus I know was this Jesus:

John 8:7 And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.”

Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that you be not judged.

Matthew 7:12 So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Luke 9:52-56 And he sent messengers ahead of him, who went and entered a village of the Samaritans, to make preparations for him. But the people did not receive him, because his face was set toward Jerusalem. And when his disciples James and John saw it, they said, “Lord, do you want us to tell fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” But he turned and rebuked them. And they went on to another village.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

The Jesus I know went to dinner at the house of Zaccheus, a hated tax collector, and who called another to be one of his 12 disciples also dining in his home with other tax collectors and sinners. And the Jesus who the disciples were surprised to find talking to a lowly woman.

The Jesus who told this story:

25On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

26“What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

27He answered, “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’c ; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’d ”

28“You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”

29But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

30In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.33But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35The next day he took out two denariieand gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

36“Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

37The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”
Luke 10:25-37​

I believe the Lord works in mysterious ways, and the Jesus I know is far more interested in the content of our hearts than any set of rules of how it has to be done in order to be 'legal'.

 

[mmksparbud]

God's justice demands a hell and that ultimately is part of His love. How loving would I be if I, as a judge, insisted that hateful and murderous criminals be let loose on an unsuspecting and law-abiding populace? The Old Testament certainly pronounces wrath and punishment on the enemies of God--those who sin against Him. But what else would you have Him do?

"It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of an angry God..." (and that is in the New Testament Book of Hebrews). He is coming again in judgment (that is the purpose of the declaration of the "woes" of the Book of Revelation).

There is no question there is a hell, and that sin demands punishment. The question is the character of God. He is justice, and eternal punishment is not justice.

 

[aiki]

I don't think anyone has proved that your last statement is true. The only ones who the Bible mentions as being the subjects of eternal torment are Satan, the Antichrist, the False Prophet and those who take the Mark of the Beast. The rest of the unsaved are said to suffer "the Second Death" (Revelation 2:11, 20:6, 20:14 and 21:8)

Matthew 25:46
46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

Christ here offers a parallelism to his audience, a common technique in Jewish thought and literature. He parallels the eternal life of the righteous with the everlasting punishment of the wicked. Implicit in the parallel is that the duration of the everlasting punishment of the wicked is as enduring as the eternal life of the righteous. Just as there will never be an end to the eternal life of the righteous, there will never be an end to the everlasting punishment of the wicked.

Oh, but "punishment" refers to annihilation, not the conscious torment described in Scripture. "Everlasting punishment" just means the annihilation of the wicked is permanent, never to be reversed or undone. But this plays falsely with the term "punishment." One cannot punish a rock or a tree; one cannot make a rubber ball or a broom handle suffer any sort of punishment. No, punishment necessarily entails consciousness. Where there is no consciousness, there can be no punishment. It is false, then, to say that annihilation is everlasting punishment. Annihilation ends punishment; it prevents it. What wicked person, knowing the just end of their wicked deeds is everlasting punishment in hell would not find annihilation a much-preferred alternative? The oblivion of annihilation is the expected end of most of the unrepentant wicked. They don't think of it as punishment but the the common fate of all, good or bad. It is the very fact that annihilation awaits at the end of life rather than the divine wrath and justice of God that godless people are prompted to throw off as many moral constraints as possible and live as selfishly and wickedly as they can! In no sense, then, is annihilation a punishment.

Selah.

 

[LadyCrosstalk]

Matthew 25:46
46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

Frankly, I believe that Jesus was speaking to His Jewish hearers about the end of the Messianic Kingdom in Matthew 24 and 25. At that point, mortal man will have been given EVERY chance to follow Him (Satan will be bound during the Millennial Kingdom--long and blessed life will return. Isaiah tells us that "only the wicked will die at 100"). Jesus' Jewish hearers were very familiar with the concept of the Messianic Kingdom--they were still asking about it in the Book of Acts ( 1:6). Note that in the Acts passage, Jesus gives them a mild rebuke and tells them of the gift of the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, a far greater gift than the Messianic Kingdom, which He knew that they would never be able to keep. Isaiah was the most common scroll in circulation in those days in addition to the scrolls detailing the Law of Moses.

Even with all of those advantages (great knowledge of the Lord, no wars, no hunger, long life, and Satan being bound during all but the last part of the Kingdom Age), the subjects of the Millennial Kingdom will rebel at the end. It is my belief that it is those rebels, who will walk by their own wickedness instead of the righteousness which comes from God alone, who are being spoken of in the Matthew 25:46 passage. Further, I believe that they will know exactly what they are doing and, like those who take the Mark of the Beast, at the end of this present age, they will suffer eternal torment for their absolute hatred of God. They will be like their master, Satan.

Christ here offers a parallelism to his audience, a common technique in Jewish thought and literature. He parallels the eternal life of the righteous with the everlasting punishment of the wicked. Implicit in the parallel is that the duration of the everlasting punishment of the wicked is as enduring as the eternal life of the righteous. Just as there will never be an end to the eternal life of the righteous, there will never be an end to the everlasting punishment of the wicked.

Jesus begged the Father to forgive those who sinned out of their ignorance. "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." Most, in that day--especially the Gentiles--did not understand even what constituted sin because they had little to no learning in the Scriptures.


Oh, but "punishment" refers to annihilation, not the conscious torment described in Scripture. "Everlasting punishment" just means the annihilation of the wicked is permanent, never to be reversed or undone. But this plays falsely with the term "punishment." One cannot punish a rock or a tree; one cannot make a rubber ball or a broom handle suffer any sort of punishment. No, punishment necessarily entails consciousness. Where there is no consciousness, there can be no punishment. It is false, then, to say that annihilation is everlasting punishment. Annihilation ends punishment; it prevents it. What wicked person, knowing the just end of their wicked deeds is everlasting punishment in hell would not find annihilation a much-preferred alternative? The oblivion of annihilation is the expected end of most of the unrepentant wicked. They don't think of it as punishment but the the common fate of all, good or bad. It is the very fact that annihilation awaits at the end of life rather than the divine wrath and justice of God that godless people are prompted to throw off as many moral constraints as possible and live as selfishly and wickedly as they can! In no sense, then, is annihilation a punishment.

Selah.

I don't know about you, but I can't imagine anything worse than annihilation--truthfully, I can't even imagine it. It would be as though that person had never existed. That is why the most horrific judgment for first century people would have been to have a millstone tied around their necks and tossed into the sea. There wouldn't even be a body to bury and mourners to weep over. It was thought that only the most wicked would die in this way--drowned in the depths of the sea. Unconventional theology, I know, but much of our theology in the Church has been caked with dust and could do with a re-examination. God seems to push His people to do that type of work every 500 years or so. We have never really developed a thorough theology of the Holy Spirit, for example. Only One who enjoyed "the Holy Spirit without limit or measure" (John 3:34) would understand what a magnificent gift it is--our deliverance from sin and death. That we are indwelt by Him is our guarantee of eternal life.

 

[aiki]

I don't know about you, but I can't imagine anything worse than annihilation--truthfully, I can't even imagine it.

Are you expecting to live forever with God in His eternal kingdom? I think it is pretty evident that you are. Obviously, in comparison to such an end, annihilation would seem a terrible fate indeed. But the lost who have rejected God, who have adopted a godless, naturalistic view of life, don't share your expectation. As I said, they expect oblivion. When their body dies, that will be the utter end of them. Annihilation, then, isn't thought of by them as a punishment. It is the natural end of every human life however that life is lived. Perhaps if they believed they had a joyful eternity to lose, the prospect of annihilation might be disturbing, but they don't. Besides, what wicked, unrepentant, rebellious sinner would want to spend eternity in the presence of the holy God they've willfully denied and disobeyed or suffer eternally His just wrath? Annihilation would be far more preferable to either of these alternatives. So, again, annihilation isn't the horror for many others that you imagine it to be. What's more, annihilation can't properly serve as punishment since it ends consciousness which is integral to any and all punishment.

Selah.

 

[LadyCrosstalk]

There is no question there is a hell, and that sin demands punishment. The question is the character of God. He is justice, and eternal punishment is not justice.

I'm okay with it either way (what choice do any of us have in the matter?). But I would argue that justice is a feature of the Father's character, ("Vengeance is mine--I will repay..."--indeed the martyred souls in Revelation 6 cry out for God to take vengeance on those who brutalized them). The Apostle Paul counsels believers to "...never take revenge. Leave that to the righteous anger of God." (Romans 12:19)

 

[LadyCrosstalk]

Are you expecting to live forever with God in His eternal kingdom? I think it is pretty evident that you are. Obviously, in comparison to such an end, annihilation would seem a terrible fate indeed. But the lost who have rejected God, who have adopted a godless, naturalistic view of life, don't share your expectation. As I said, they expect oblivion."

Unfortunately, for them, there's a bit of a catch. They must first be punished for their sins in the place of torment (in Hades--and Hades is NOT the same place as Gehenna--"the lake of fire"). It is true that oblivion would be a mercy after their sojourn in Hades. But we serve a merciful God.

When their body dies, that will be the utter end of them. Annihilation, then, isn't thought of by them as a punishment. It is the natural end of every human life however that life is lived. Perhaps if they believed they had a joyful eternity to lose, the prospect of annihilation might be disturbing, but they don't. Besides, what wicked, unrepentant, rebellious sinner would want to spend eternity in the presence of the holy God they've willfully denied and disobeyed or suffer eternally His just wrath? Annihilation would be far more preferable to either of these alternatives. So, again, annihilation isn't the horror for many others that you imagine it to be. What's more, annihilation can't properly serve as punishment since it ends consciousness which is integral to any and all punishment.

Selah.

But, we know that they are in for a surprise. Even though the temporary judgment of Hades, the place of torment, will seem like an eternity--I think "ordinary sinners" like "the rich man" in Luke 16, will have their punishment end in oblivion. That will be part of the torment of the place of torment--knowing that they could have had eternal life except for their own rebellion. In Hades, I think they are still aware of existing in time--the rich man was aware that his brothers still lived. The Millennial Kingdom is for a specified period of time. They will still have the sun and moon to mark the time and seasons--they are still bound by time. Actually, it seems there is going to be an awareness of the passage of time in the Eternal State (see Revelation 22:2) but we will no longer see time as a dreadful boundary.

 

[mmksparbud]

Matthew 25:46
46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

Christ here offers a parallelism to his audience, a common technique in Jewish thought and literature. He parallels the eternal life of the righteous with the everlasting punishment of the wicked. Implicit in the parallel is that the duration of the everlasting punishment of the wicked is as enduring as the eternal life of the righteous. Just as there will never be an end to the eternal life of the righteous, there will never be an end to the everlasting punishment of the wicked.

Oh, but "punishment" refers to annihilation, not the conscious torment described in Scripture. "Everlasting punishment" just means the annihilation of the wicked is permanent, never to be reversed or undone. But this plays falsely with the term "punishment." One cannot punish a rock or a tree; one cannot make a rubber ball or a broom handle suffer any sort of punishment. No, punishment necessarily entails consciousness. Where there is no consciousness, there can be no punishment. It is false, then, to say that annihilation is everlasting punishment. Annihilation ends punishment; it prevents it. What wicked person, knowing the just end of their wicked deeds is everlasting punishment in hell would not find annihilation a much-preferred alternative? The oblivion of annihilation is the expected end of most of the unrepentant wicked. They don't think of it as punishment but the the common fate of all, good or bad. It is the very fact that annihilation awaits at the end of life rather than the divine wrath and justice of God that godless people are prompted to throw off as many moral constraints as possible and live as selfishly and wickedly as they can! In no sense, then, is annihilation a punishment.

Selah.

Everlasting life is the gift of God to the saved, everlasting death is the opposite and is just. What makes you think annihilation is not a punishment? It is what God said would happen if Adam and Eve sinned. He did not say if you eat of the tree you will be punished forever. Again---the Jews were tortured, starved and gassed to death, but because they rejected Christ, now they must be resurrected and be tortured forever---they were better off under Hitler, at least under him, their suffering came to an end.

 

[LadyCrosstalk]

Everlasting life is the gift of God to the saved, everlasting death is the opposite and is just. What makes you think annihilation is not a punishment? It is what God said would happen if Adam and Eve sinned. He did not say if you eat of the tree you will be punished forever. Again---the Jews were tortured, starved and gassed to death, but because they rejected Christ, now they must be resurrected and be tortured forever---they were better off under Hitler, at least under him, their suffering came to an end.

I think the prospect of annihilation, during their temporary judgment in Hades, WILL be a punishment during the many long years of their confinement there.