Conditional Immortality Supports Annihilationion, Refutes Eternal Conscious Torment and Universalism

[Der Alte]

I seriously don't understand what your challenge is supposed to consist of. You asked how God could possibly punish the wicked with death; I answered by agreeing it was an important question and showing you where the Bible both asked and answered it. Job asks it; Psalm 73 both asks and answers.

I think you are confusing me with someone else. I have never doubted or questioned that the wages of sin is death, all have sinned and come short of the glory of God, it is appointed once for man to die, then the judgment.

Your reply seems to doubt that the passage says "sweep away like a dream". I was summarizing the passage, which both tells us that the wicked will be like a dream when one awakens and that they will be swept away. Here's the text. As background, the righteous man was asking God your question: how can the wicked be punished, when all they do is die like everyone else? The answer:

...until I went into the sanctuary of God; then I discerned their end. 18 Truly you set them in slippery places; you make them fall to ruin. 19 How they are destroyed in a moment, swept away utterly by terrors! 20 Like a dream when one awakes, O Lord, when you rouse yourself, you despise them as phantoms.​

It says both that they will be swept away, and that they will be like a dream when one awakens. Your challenge here means nothing to me. Do you have some reason to disbelieve this passage? Why don't you question Job 21, then?

The text is not about man's eternal fate but what happens to them in this world "you set them in slippery places; you make them fall to ruin. How they are destroyed in a moment, swept away utterly by terrors!" Although they are living high, prospering etc. God will be set them in "slippery places" in this world. God will make them "fall to ruin" in this world. etc. Psa 21, the same thing it is not about man's eternal fate but what happens in this world. See e.g. vs. 32.

Job 21:32 They are carried to the grave, and watch is kept over their tombs. ​

And why are you being so nasty and petty about this? I answered your question as asked, and I told you I thought it was a good question. Your response is to dismiss my explanation for reasons... well, I have no idea why you're dismissing it.

How am I being nasty? As far as I know I have not said anything derogatory or insulting about you. Disagreeing with someone's interpretation of scripture is not being nasty.

That's not "my proof text"; it's one verse at the end of the chapter which as a whole gives a coherent answer to your question. And so what if it's past tense? What's your point?

If it is past tense then it is something that already happened in this world, not something in the future, man's eternal fate.

I answered your question sincerely and thoughtfully. My answer gave all the information you needed, and you found precisely the text I was citing. You have no reason to say you're "waiting"; you have my complete answer, and can simply discuss it.

As I have shown the scripture you referred to can be interpreted as referring to what happens to the wicked in this world.

Of course. All Christians agree that conscious awareness in Sheol/Hades will not last forever, and that everlasting life will. The only point on which we disagree is whether people can live forever APART from having everlasting life. I happen to agree with the OP, who says that everlasting life is required in order to live forever.

All Christians do not agree that conscious awareness in Sheol/Hades will not last forever.

/psuche/ is also translated 'life'. And I think you meant to say that only /zoe/ is used to say "eternal life", and that's true. That's because /zoe/ is the only meaning that's appropriate to speak of having duration. The other two mean different aspects of life and are not really appropriate to speak of as having duration.

Not necessarily ζωή/zoe, βίος/bios, and [ψυχή] occasionally seem to be used interchangeably .

Luk 16:25
(25) But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime [ζωή], receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
Rom 8:38
(38) For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, [ζωή] nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
Luk 8:14
(14) And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, [βίος] and bring no fruit to perfection.
1Pe 4:3
(3) For the time past of our life [βίος] may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries:
Mar 3:4
(4) And he saith unto them, Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, [ψυχή] or to kill? But they held their peace.
Luk 12:22
(22) And he said unto his disciples, Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life,[ψυχή] what ye shall eat; neither for the body, what ye shall put on.​

This is the famous and often-quoted statement "whoever finds his own life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will find it." Jesus also said (in the same discourse) that we're to fear not men who claim to destroy our life but can only destroy our body, but rather fear (and obey) God who can destroy both body and psuche/life/soul in gehenna. Clearly, the point is that when men threaten us, we're to keep on obeying Jesus and disobeying them, even when they threaten death -- because we know that if we were to disobey God we'd fall under His condemnation, and we'd permanently lose our life.

I don't know this. I do not believe that the eternal fate of the wicked is to permanently lose their life.

Then Matthew quotes Jesus saying "What will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his psuche? Or what can a man give in exchange for his psuche?" Luke expresses this as "For whoever would save his psuche/life will lose it, but whoever loses his psuche/life for my sake will save it. For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses or forfeits himself?"

ψυχή/psuche can mean simply this life.

The point is that being saved by Christ means you get to live, whereas when not saved by Christ your life will be eventually, and finally, taken from you. If your life is taken, it means you're killed.

.
I have not seen definitive scripture evidence that the wicked will be annihilated.

Then we agree there were other views. But I don't see your point now. Do you disagree with my claim that we have to exegete the Bible, rather than just turning to culture?

Nothing Jesus taught contradicted one of the major beliefs in Judaism that there was a place of eternal fiery punishment for the wicked as I have shown from historical Jewish sources.
And OBTW I have a problem with random quote blocks appearing in my posts and disrupting them. I have reported this but it still occurs.

 

[Chris Date]

Ok thanks, so in my math rebuttal I was attacking a straw man argument...in the sense that I was misrepresenting the other camp's argument?

No, if you replace "between death and resurrection" with "on the cross." But I do think it's a weak argument, because the divine nature of Christ, it seems to me, means he can in fact exhaust an eternity of punitive suffering in the few hours he suffered on the cross. The better argument, it seems to me, is that whereas he died, the doctrine of eternal torment maintains that the wicked will live immortal in hell forever.

Oh look at that we're back to my self defeating math problem, how can you bear the punishment of eternity unless we never heard from Jesus again? You can never 'Complete' or 'Pay For' a sentence of eternity, you can only eternally keep serving the sentence!

What is infinity times in infinity? How long does it take to complete eternity time eternity? Who created God (God is that which always was)? These are all illogical questions. Jesus can't draw a square circle, and he can't COMPLETE a sentence of eternity, it's an illogical contradiction.

This ongoing debate of exegesis is fascinating, but how exactly do we debate in favor of supporting a self defeating illogical position? Do we not use logic to back up our faith? So...a self defeating statement doesn't place a bad taste in your mouth??

I don't accept that it's self-defeating or illogical. I think Christ is indeed of infinite worth, and as such the finite duration of his suffering can substitute for an eternity of suffering if that's what his people deserved. You may disagree, and that's fine, I'm just saying I think my argument is better and more likely to give defenders of eternal torment pause.

 

[stuart lawrence]

And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up on the last day( of this present earth)
John6:39

Who is getting raised up??

 

[Dirk1540]

I don't accept that it's self-defeating or illogical. I think Christ is indeed of infinite worth, and as such the finite duration of his suffering can substitute for an eternity of suffering if that's what his people deserved. You may disagree, and that's fine, I'm just saying I think my argument is better and more likely to give defenders of eternal torment pause.

Let me first get total clarity on the position please so I'm not misquoting anyone, is the claim that 'God bore out our sentence on the cross.' OR is the claim that Jesus is comparable to a judge and 'He PARDONED us from having to serve a sentence of eternity' by his actions on the cross?? This is a big difference! Is Jesus' action on the cross more comparable to a judge signing off on a pardon for a sentence? Or is Jesus' actions on the cross argued to be him literally serving out our sentence himself?

 

[Chris Date]

Let me first get total clarity on the position please so I'm not misquoting anyone, is the claim that 'God bore out our sentence on the cross.' OR is the claim that Jesus is comparable to a judge and 'He PARDONED us from having to serve a sentence of eternity' by his actions on the cross?? This is a big difference! Is Jesus' action on the cross more comparable to a judge signing off on a pardon for a sentence? Or is Jesus' actions on the cross argued to be him literally serving out our sentence himself?

The defender of eternal torment will say that Jesus bore the penalty we deserved. But because he is the God-man, the finite duration during which he suffered is the equivalent of the eternity of suffering otherwise awaiting his people.

I do agree that even in this there's a problem with substitutionary atonement, for Jesus didn't bear what we deserve, but something equivalent to what we deserve. You make a good point there.

But still, I think the more fundamental issue is that the punishment Jesus bore was death, but the doctrine of eternal torment says the punishment we deserved was everlasting immortal life in torment.

 

[William Tanksley Jr]

Because too many Biblical passages show that the suffering shall be eternal in the lake of fire..

Others have challenged you to show those passages, or have shown you passages that clearly say otherwise. I just wanted to make the point that _no_ passage in the entire Bible says that all unrepentant people will, or should, "suffer forever" in gehenna, the lake of fire, or any other place-name used to refer to final punishment; and of course the suffering described "on the Day" or at the "day of wrath" is naturally understood to happen on the indicated finite time, a "day."

In contrast, the only place in the entire Bible where torment forever is mentioned is done to creatures, and for them alone it is NOT called "the second death." Everyone else thrown into the Lake of Fire receive "the second death"; they alone are said to be tormented forever and ever.

Mark's explanation of the "second death" actually needs to be confronted. You cannot merely brush it off -- not when your brush-off is a false statement about the Bible.

 

[William Tanksley Jr]

If non believers die as Christ did for three days. They do not completely cease to exist!

Nobody claims that Christ atoned for us by dying _for three days_. The thing "of first importance" Christ did for us was to die. The fact that He only remained dead for three days is because of something about Him that was different; as Hebrews 7:16 says, "who has become a priest ... by the power of an indestructible life."

There is nothing about sinful man which allows him to emerge from death as Christ did. If we die unprotected by the Spirit of Christ living in us, we die without hope, as Paul says in 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15.

 

[stuart lawrence]

Nobody claims that Christ atoned for us by dying _for three days_. The thing "of first importance" Christ did for us was to die. The fact that He only remained dead for three days is because of something about Him that was different; as Hebrews 7:16 says, "who has become a priest ... by the power of an indestructible life."

There is nothing about sinful man which allows him to emerge from death as Christ did. If we die unprotected by the Spirit of Christ living in us, we die without hope, as Paul says in 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15.

I think we all understand if the Spirit of Christ does not dwell in us we have no hope. But thank you for confirming you also believe that

 

[William Tanksley Jr]

Those who died under the old covenant died a physical death to living on this earth, they did not cease to exist at all!!

You're quoting my post, but you're not responding to any of my arguments. I explained clearly and precisely how the Bible shows that Adam's sentence was to death, which means to not live forever.

My point isn't about them or anyone having ceased to exist; my point is that they were sentenced to death, and it was explained to them all that this death included returning to dust, or uncreation.

You seem to be arguing that their death is nothing more than "a physical death to living on this earth", but although we know that Adam did indeed suffer physical death, there's no Biblical reason to think that this is all God meant when He said man cannot live forever. Nothing in the context nor in any other passages gives a way out of death by escaping to live in another place; on the contrary, passages like Psalm 37 say that the future of the wicked will be cut off, and that although you look in their place they will not be found. In this vision of the future there's no _place_ for the wicked to exist. There's no _time_ for them to endure into the future.

 

[stuart lawrence]

You're quoting my post, but you're not responding to any of my arguments. I explained clearly and precisely how the Bible shows that Adam's sentence was to death, which means to not live forever.

My point isn't about them or anyone having ceased to exist; my point is that they were sentenced to death, and it was explained to them all that this death included returning to dust, or uncreation.

You seem to be arguing that their death is nothing more than "a physical death to living on this earth", but although we know that Adam did indeed suffer physical death, there's no Biblical reason to think that this is all God meant when He said man cannot live forever. Nothing in the context nor in any other passages gives a way out of death by escaping to live in another place; on the contrary, passages like Psalm 37 say that the future of the wicked will be cut off, and that although you look in their place they will not be found. In this vision of the future there's no _place_ for the wicked to exist. There's no _time_ for them to endure into the future.

Do you believe those who die have no consciousness after death?

 

[Dirk1540]

The defender of eternal torment will say that Jesus bore the penalty we deserved. But because he is the God-man, the finite duration during which he suffered is the equivalent of the eternity of suffering otherwise awaiting his people.

Ok thanks for the clarity. Well of course respectful disagreement is nothing new, but this is definitely a spot me and you would part ways on as to the WEIGHT of my objection, you feel that it is a weak one.

I know people's minds are wired differently but I actually see it as an immovable one, it slams into my floor of human logic. The epitome of apologetics is to use OUR HUMAN logic & reason to back our faith. I do understand that people will say "Some God mysteries are beyond human comprehension." And I agree with that position...sometimes.

I've tried to comprehend not having the urge to sin in Heaven, it's a brain teaser that makes my head want to explode but I grant the concept of not being able to comprehend God's wisdom in that scenario. I've tried wrapping my mind around relatively and how a day can be like 1,000 years...again I will yield to the position on not being able to understand the brilliance of God.

But there is another position that "Humans are to love their God with all their mind!" God wants us to use reason. So where do we draw that line? IMHO if I'm NOT gonna draw that line at self defeating statements and illogical MATH equations than where on Earth am I to draw that line?? If I don't draw that line on making statements such as 'Eternity Plus One' i may as well close the book on reason and just tack "We can't understand the mind of God" to the end of any logical puzzle. As far as I know math is the most concrete foundation of human logic. IMO I'm opening the floodgates to an atheist party the day I start saying things like "2 + 2 = 5 and only God understands why!"

The reason that I remain unmoved by you pointing out that Jesus is a God/man is because it is the GOD part that I was referring to, let alone the human part. God can not throw a football infinite yards, the pass would never ever ever ever...be over.

 

[ClementofA]

Here's one verse that points in the direction of God limiting the time He will strive to win people:

NIV Genesis 6:3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years."

The same Hebrew word (OLAM, 5769) used for "forever" appears in Lam.3:31:

For no one is cast off by the Lord forever. (Lam.3:31)

32 For if He causes grief, Then He will have compassion According to His abundant lovingkindness. 33 For He does not afflict willingly Or grieve the sons of men.…

Lamentations 3:31-33 as translated above appears to contradict your interpretation of Genesis 6:3.

Alternate translations from yours, however, solve the puzzle:

JPS Tanakh 1917
And the LORD said: 'My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for that he also is flesh; therefore shall his days be a hundred and twenty years.'

Douay-Rheims Bible
And God said: My spirit shall not remain in man for ever, because he is flesh, and his days shall be a hundred and twenty years.

Young's Literal Translation
And Jehovah saith, 'My Spirit doth not strive in man -- to the age; in their erring they are flesh:' and his days have been an hundred and twenty years.

Concordant Literal Version
And saying is Yahweh Elohim, "Not abide shall My spirit in the human for the eon, in that moreover, he is flesh. And come shall his days to be a hundred and twenty years.

Rotherham Emphasized Bible
And Yahweh said—My spirit shall not rule in man to times age—abiding, for that, he also, is flesh,—Yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years.

Thus far i have addressed your remarks & annihilation theory proof texts in a number of posts, as follows, which have not been answered:

Post # 215...page 11...re Matt.25:46 which is considered a stronghold for the anti-universalism positions, but i've shown is more favorable to universalism

Post # 220...page 11...Phil.3:19 refuted as an alleged annihilation proof text

Post # 221...page 12...apollumi comments of Mark Corbett refuted

Post #225...page 12....a list of annihilation proof texts easily explained away

Post #225...page 12....Dan. 12:2-3 shown as supporting Biblical universalism

Additionally, i have addressed the following with no answers:

Post #294...page 15...Rev. 20:10 shown to be harmonious with universalism

Post #316...page 16...Universalism in 1 Cor.15:22-28 & the book of Revelation

------------------------------------


https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf

1 Jn.2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

"...it doesn't say what most evangelizers of hopelessness want it to say in that regard either."

"It is false, he maintained, to translate that phrase as "everlasting punishment," introducing into the New Testament the concept found in the Islamic Quran that God is going to torture the wicked forever."

Scholar's Corner: The Center for Bible studies in Christian Universalism

 

[stuart lawrence]

Nobody claims that Christ atoned for us by dying _for three days_. The thing "of first importance" Christ did for us was to die. The fact that He only remained dead for three days is because of something about Him that was different; as Hebrews 7:16 says, "who has become a priest ... by the power of an indestructible life."

There is nothing about sinful man which allows him to emerge from death as Christ did. If we die unprotected by the Spirit of Christ living in us, we die without hope, as Paul says in 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15.

BTW
Why have you spent five years studying what happens to non believers when they die?
A lot of evangelicals fear they may not attain to heaven due to imperfections in their lives. I myself was raised pentecostal/ evangelical. I constantly feared hell and the literal lake of fire myself.
But in those days I only had the literal letter of scripture, I had no understanding of the spiritual message the letter contained.
I really do mean this sincerely. I hope you in no way fear you may not attain to heaven. It's an awful place to be in, living with the fear of hell hanging over you. I will never forget those dark days of my youth
God bless

 

[stuart lawrence]

You're quoting my post, but you're not responding to any of my arguments. I explained clearly and precisely how the Bible shows that Adam's sentence was to death, which means to not live forever.

My point isn't about them or anyone having ceased to exist; my point is that they were sentenced to death, and it was explained to them all that this death included returning to dust, or uncreation.

You seem to be arguing that their death is nothing more than "a physical death to living on this earth", but although we know that Adam did indeed suffer physical death, there's no Biblical reason to think that this is all God meant when He said man cannot live forever. Nothing in the context nor in any other passages gives a way out of death by escaping to live in another place; on the contrary, passages like Psalm 37 say that the future of the wicked will be cut off, and that although you look in their place they will not be found. In this vision of the future there's no _place_ for the wicked to exist. There's no _time_ for them to endure into the future.

But in the account of the bush, even Moses showed that the dead rise, for he calls the Lord the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. He is not the God of the dead but the living, FOR TO HIM ALL ARE ALIVE
Luke20:37&38

Have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him: I AM the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. He is not the God of the dead but of the living. You are badly mistaken!
Mark12:26&27

 

[Mark Corbett]

The same Hebrew word (OLAM, 5769) used for "forever" appears in Lam.3:31:

For no one is cast off by the Lord forever. (Lam.3:31)

32 For if He causes grief, Then He will have compassion According to His abundant lovingkindness. 33 For He does not afflict willingly Or grieve the sons of men.…

Lamentations 3:31-33 as translated above appears to contradict your interpretation of Genesis 6:3.

The translation you gave for Lamentations 3:31 is from the NIV. While the NIV is generally a good translation, and I use it extensively, in this case it has added two words which are not in the original Hebrew, nor in the LXX. The two words the NIV has added are "no one". Compare the following translations:

NIV Lamentations 3:31 For no one is cast off by the Lord forever.

ESV Lamentations 3:31 For the Lord will not cast off forever,

NAS Lamentations 3:31 For the Lord will not reject forever,

NKJ Lamentations 3:31 For the Lord will not cast off forever.

NRS Lamentations 3:31 For the Lord will not reject forever.

BGT Lamentations 3:31 ὅτι οὐκ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα ἀπώσεται κύριος

WTT Lamentations 3:31 כִּ֣י לֹ֥א יִזְנַ֛ח לְעוֹלָ֖ם אֲדֹנָֽי׃

BHT Lamentations 3:31 Kî lö´ yiznaH lü`ôläm ´ádönäy

The ESV, NAS, NKJ, NRS (all translations widely used by Christians in many settings, compared to the very unusual translations you often quote in your comments) all correctly leave out "no one". I've included the Greek LXX and the Hebrew with a transliteration of the Hebrew words into English for those who want to verify this. "no one" in not in the original text. Without "no one" this verse does not support your argument.

The context of Lamentation 3:31 indicates that it is talking about a person who humbles themselves and continues to trust God when they experience God's discipline, not about all people who have ever lived. For those interested, here is the context:

Lamentations 3: 25 The LORD is good to those who wait for him, to the soul who seeks him.
26 It is good that one should wait quietly for the salvation of the LORD.
27 It is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth.
28 Let him sit alone in silence when it is laid on him;
29 let him put his mouth in the dust-- there may yet be hope;
30 let him give his cheek to the one who strikes, and let him be filled with insults.
31 For the Lord will not cast off forever,
32 but, though he cause grief, he will have compassion according to the abundance of his steadfast love;
33 for he does not afflict from his heart or grieve the children of men.

 

[Mark Corbett]

A lot of evangelicals fear they may not attain to heaven due to imperfections in their lives. I myself was raised pentecostal/ evangelical. I constantly feared hell and the literal lake of fire myself.
But in those days I only had the literal letter of scripture, I had no understanding of the spiritual message the letter contained.
I really do mean this sincerely. I hope you in no way fear you may not attain to heaven. It's an awful place to be in, living with the fear of hell hanging over you. I will never forget those dark days of my youth
God bless

Stuart, although I only know you a tiny bit through our conversation here, I do care about you as a brother in Christ. You had alluded to the negative experiences you had growing up earlier and earlier today while praying the Lord put it on my heart to pray for you. I'm glad that He has set you free from that fear and that you now appear confident of God's grace given as a free gift to those who trust Christ. I pray that God will continue to heal you and free you from any other negative results of what you indicate was a spiritually unhealthy church setting earlier in your life. Grace and Peace, Mark

 

[stuart lawrence]

Stuart, although I only know you a tiny bit through our conversation here, I do care about you as a brother in Christ. You had alluded to the negative experiences you had growing up earlier and earlier today while praying the Lord put it on my heart to pray for you. I'm glad that He has set you free from that fear and that you now appear confident of God's grace given as a free gift to those who trust Christ. I pray that God will continue to heal you and free you from any other negative results of what you indicate was a spiritually unhealthy church setting earlier in your life. Grace and Peace, Mark

Thank you.
I don't regret a bit of it now. For through it, God opened my eyes to the grace Christ gave Paul to preach. In my view, the greatest message preached since Christ walked this earth.
And I am utterly convinced that any minister who understood that message and fully and forthrightly preached it, would have a church packed out with people. It would always be full
God bless

 

[stuart lawrence]

Stuart, although I only know you a tiny bit through our conversation here, I do care about you as a brother in Christ. You had alluded to the negative experiences you had growing up earlier and earlier today while praying the Lord put it on my heart to pray for you. I'm glad that He has set you free from that fear and that you now appear confident of God's grace given as a free gift to those who trust Christ. I pray that God will continue to heal you and free you from any other negative results of what you indicate was a spiritually unhealthy church setting earlier in your life. Grace and Peace, Mark

BTW
It was far from just me. I know Christian counsellors who spend much time counselling people who have been to such churches and their lives ended up in desperate straits. I feel so much for them, as I am sure you do

 

[William Tanksley Jr]

There is literally a valley near Jerusalem it was the place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch. It was called the "valley of the sons of Hinnom," or "valley of Hinnom" which is Ge Hinnom. "Ge" means valley in Hebrew, Gehenna in Greek. It is south of Jerusalem see Joshua 15:8, 2 Kings 23:10, Jeremiah 2:23, 7:31-32, 19:6, 13-14. The Jews considered the valley to be accursed. So "Gehenna" soon became the name for what Christians call "Hell." Yes some monk in 1200 decided that Gehenna in the NT referred to the valley near Jerusalem and he concocted the idea that the valley had been used for a dump where trash, bodies etc. were burned. So for about 2000 years +/- many Christians have been wrongly taught and believe that "Gehenna" in the NT refers to the valley rather than a place of fiery punishment as the Jews believed.

Your post starts out Biblically solid, and then uses the fact that "some monk in 1200" lied about gehenna to overturn nearly everything the Bible says about gehenna in favor of Jewish myths about torment from non-Biblical sources. The Bible teaches about the valley called "gehenna" in the New Testament and by various names in the Old Testament, that's it's an example of the worst kind of punishment and a prototype of the punishment due to the most wicked people. Almost everywhere it's mentioned and no matter how it's spelled, save for a couple of merely historical mentions, it stands in for final punishment of the worst kind.

And the Bible's description of that punishment is everywhere consistent. Those condemned to gehenna will be killed by the Lord Himself in battle array, with flaming fire; their corpses will be thrown into the valley (often named as "Hinnom", but sometimes unnamed) and condemned, with the righteous said in passing to look on them in abhorrence ("eternal abhorrence" in Dan 12:2, "abhorrence" in Isaiah 66:24). It's said that scavengers like jackals will eat them without anyone to frighten them away, and worms will eat them and not be killed (which would happen if the bodies were properly buried). Furthermore, it's said that the righteous will walk on the ashes of the wicked, and more specifically, the valley containing Hinnom and Topheth is called "the valley of corpses and ashes" and it's predicted that after the Day of the Lord, it will be enclosed in a greatly enlarged Jerusalem wall, and become a monument of sorts, never to be overturned.

Jesus is clearly drawing on this kind of imagery when He quotes Isaiah 66:24 as being gehenna itself (an observation not obvious from Isaiah's own words), or where he speaks of peoples' whole bodies as being thrown in. Even more specifically, in the pair of sayings in Matt 10:28 and Luke 12:5, Jesus says that God will kill and then throw into gehenna, and that He will destroy body and soul there (unlike men, who could not do that even though they threaten to kill).

 

[Der Alte]

Your post starts out Biblically solid, and then uses the fact that "some monk in 1200" lied about gehenna to overturn nearly everything the Bible says about gehenna in favor of Jewish myths about torment from non-Biblical sources. The Bible teaches about the valley called "gehenna" in the New Testament and by various names in the Old Testament, that's it's an example of the worst kind of punishment and a prototype of the punishment due to the most wicked people. Almost everywhere it's mentioned and no matter how it's spelled, save for a couple of merely historical mentions, it stands in for final punishment of the worst kind.
And the Bible's description of that punishment is everywhere consistent. Those condemned to gehenna will be killed by the Lord Himself in battle array, with flaming fire; their corpses will be thrown into the valley (often named as "Hinnom", but sometimes unnamed) and condemned, with the righteous said in passing to look on them in abhorrence ("eternal abhorrence" in Dan 12:2, "abhorrence" in Isaiah 66:24). It's said that scavengers like jackals will eat them without anyone to frighten them away, and worms will eat them and not be killed (which would happen if the bodies were properly buried). Furthermore, it's said that the righteous will walk on the ashes of the wicked, and more specifically, the valley containing Hinnom and Topheth is called "the valley of corpses and ashes" and it's predicted that after the Day of the Lord, it will be enclosed in a greatly enlarged Jerusalem wall, and become a monument of sorts, never to be overturned.
Jesus is clearly drawing on this kind of imagery when He quotes Isaiah 66:24 as being gehenna itself (an observation not obvious from Isaiah's own words), or where he speaks of peoples' whole bodies as being thrown in. Even more specifically, in the pair of sayings in Matt 10:28 and Luke 12:5, Jesus says that God will kill and then throw into gehenna, and that He will destroy body and soul there (unlike men, who could not do that even though they threaten to kill).

I must emphatically disagree with this. I do not see one verse in support of anything you said. I see several isolated scripture references being thrown together to support assumptions and presuppositions. According to the historical evidence I provided, soon after Jewish children were sacrificed to pagan deities the name "Ge Hinnom" became the name of what we call "hell." Evidence which OBTW, except for being dismissed out of hand as Jewish myths, has not been addressed or refuted,