Confused about hell

[Major1]

Could I tell you what I believe, because it will be more accurate, right. I did not learn my view from someone, but by praying to understand more and reading with real listening. I take "perish" to mean simply perish -- it results in death. That this fits with every last verse on hell I know of is necessary though for me to take it that way. I never approach scirpture with the intent to support my view.

Did you hear that? I don't approach scirpture with the aim to support my viewpoint.

Instead I aim to listen and hear. It's humble. We have to be humble, and be the silent listener, and let the scripture be the one talking.

When we do, we continue to learn more, because the word really is living. This is far more valuable than our mere understanding of the moment before we listen.

I understand what you are saying, however my dear friend I must say again to you that the Bible does not define "Perish". YOU are doing that.

It's always very dangerous to give a word a meaning that man attaches to it. The meaning of a word must be discovered from the word itself, and from how it is used. So, what do the words "destruction" and "perish" mean?

In Matthew 10:28 the verb "to destroy" is the same word that is used in Matthew 9:17 where Jesus speaks about the wineskins perishing. He says........
"Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish."

The old wineskins are ruined, but they are not annihilated. They do not cease to exist. Clearly, the word "perish," or "destroy" does not mean annihilation.

In fact, the same verb is used in the parables of Luke 15 where Jesus speaks of the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the lost son. In Luke 15:24 we read:.......
"For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost and is found."

In none of these Scriptures does the verb ever have the meaning of annihilation. The sheep was lost, but it was not annihilated. The coin was lost, but it was not annihilated. The son was lost, but he was not annihilated. Words like "destroy" and "perish" mean "ruined" and "not fit for its original purpose."

The idea that unbelievers will not experience eternal punishment is attractive to many, yet the Bible offers no support for this belief. On the contrary, the Bible offers clear examples that only two alternatives exist upon death—eternity with God in glory or an eternity of suffering and separation from Him in the Lake of Fire.

Revelation 20:12-15:..............
"And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire."

 

[Major1]

Well to be accused of "making up what you want to believe ", that would be a very serious level of sin (deadly I think), as best I understand. I'm innocent of that one, at least to all my awareness. It's a mighty huge accusation. But, I don't have it against the person in my heart, but it's already forgiven from me (by His help, because of aid from praying the Lord's prayer).

I certainly apologize to you. That was not intended to be a personal accusation, only an observation of what you had already said which did not confirm to the Scriptures.

I hope that you come to understand that what you are proposing is very controversial and that Biblically speaking there is NO Scriptural support for it.

 

[Halbhh]

I understand what you are saying, however my dear friend I must say again to you that the Bible does not define "Perish". YOU are doing that.

It's always very dangerous to give a word a meaning that man attaches to it. The meaning of a word must be discovered from the word itself, and from how it is used. So, what do the words "destruction" and "perish" mean?

In Matthew 10:28 the verb "to destroy" is the same word that is used in Matthew 9:17 where Jesus speaks about the wineskins perishing. He says........
"Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish."

The old wineskins are ruined, but they are not annihilated. They do not cease to exist. Clearly, the word "perish," or "destroy" does not mean annihilation.

In fact, the same verb is used in the parables of Luke 15 where Jesus speaks of the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the lost son. In Luke 15:24 we read:.......
"For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost and is found."

In none of these Scriptures does the verb ever have the meaning of annihilation. The sheep was lost, but it was not annihilated. The coin was lost, but it was not annihilated. The son was lost, but he was not annihilated. Words like "destroy" and "perish" mean "ruined" and "not fit for its original purpose."

The idea that unbelievers will not experience eternal punishment is attractive to many, yet the Bible offers no support for this belief. On the contrary, the Bible offers clear examples that only two alternatives exist upon death—eternity with God in glory or an eternity of suffering and separation from Him in the Lake of Fire.

Revelation 20:12-15:..............
"And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire."

To redefine perish to mean something different form the normal meaning, one must have a very good reason from the surrounding text. This is another reason to be reading through (from chapter 1), and not have anything one wants to prove or extract from the scripture, but be truly listening.

I can't see your idea about Matthew 9:17 'perish' compared to John 3:16 -- we are not to be trying to read some extraneous meanings into/onto the text, remember! We are to listen and hear. It's humble. Humbleness is required even for salvation (Mat 18:2-4)

The concept in Matthew ch 9 is clear and direct: the wineskins would be in that case destroyed/ruined. It's not connected to John 3:16 except in this way -- the meaning in Matthew 9 verse 7 is about how our new life in Christ must entirely replace the old life.
John 3:16
Matthew 9:17

 

[Halbhh]

I certainly apologize to you. That was not intended to be a personal accusation, only an observation of what you had already said which did not confirm to the Scriptures.

I hope that you come to understand that what you are proposing is very controversial and that Biblically speaking there is NO Scriptural support for it.

It's a Matthew 7:1-5 situation then.

 

[Major1]

It's a Matthew 7:1-5 situation then.

We all judge what others say my friend.

Whether it involves religion, behavior, or human sexuality, there is a growing anti-Christian sentiment in America and other Western nations. Ultimately, built into this “tolerance” is the concept that truth is determined by each individual, not by God.

This has led many people to conclude that making judgments on anyone (especially coming from Christians) is wrong because the Bible says ”judge not” in Matthew 7:1. Interestingly enough, those who reject the notion of God or the credibility of the Bible often attempt to use God’s Word (e.g., by quoting verses out of context) to excuse their actions when they are presented with the gospel and the plight of sinners for rejecting it.

Some people take offense and say that as believers, we should focus on loving others and not be divisive. We are, however, divisive if we do not correct error. Are we working toward the “unity of the faith” as seen in Ephesians 4:13, or are we compromising God’s Word by allowing for the world’s “wisdom”?

 

[Halbhh]

We all judge what others say my friend.

Whether it involves religion, behavior, or human sexuality, there is a growing anti-Christian sentiment in America and other Western nations. Ultimately, built into this “tolerance” is the concept that truth is determined by each individual, not by God.

This has led many people to conclude that making judgments on anyone (especially coming from Christians) is wrong because the Bible says ”judge not” in Matthew 7:1. Interestingly enough, those who reject the notion of God or the credibility of the Bible often attempt to use God’s Word (e.g., by quoting verses out of context) to excuse their actions when they are presented with the gospel and the plight of sinners for rejecting it.

Some people take offense and say that as believers, we should focus on loving others and not be divisive. We are, however, divisive if we do not correct error. Are we working toward the “unity of the faith” as seen in Ephesians 4:13, or are we compromising God’s Word by allowing for the world’s “wisdom”?

We agree on all you said here I just quoted. Judging is such a fraught and crucial thing, and would deserve it's own thread. We know millions here in the U.S. are estranged from churches exactly because of feeling wrongly judged by some in those churches. The Matthew 7:1-5 means we are not to judge in a condemning way, not judge a person themselves, but only actions can we judge, and that even when we think to correct another person's mistake or error, we should be looking again (and again) for what is blocking our own vision.

Also, it came to mind John 7:24, that we "not judge by appearances", which is such a crucial thing for us all to remember. (I have forgiven that one above though, don't worry)

We are not to guess at others motives, or guess at others wrongs, and go wrong when we do.

 

[Major1]

To redefine perish to mean something different form the normal meaning, one must have a very good reason from the surrounding text. This is another reason to be reading through (from chapter 1), and not have anything one wants to prove or extract from the scripture, but be truly listening.

I can't see your idea about Matthew 9:17 'perish' compared to John 3:16 -- we are not to be trying to read some extraneous meanings into/onto the text, remember! We are to listen and hear. It's humble. Humbleness is required even for salvation (Mat 18:2-4)

The concept in Matthew ch 9 is clear and direct: the wineskins would be in that case destroyed/ruined. It's not connected to John 3:16 except in this way -- the meaning in Matthew 9 verse 7 is about how our new life in Christ must entirely replace the old life.
John 3:16
Matthew 9:17

I do not agree with your exegesis.

You said...............
" we are not to be trying to read some extraneous meanings into/onto the text, remember! We are to listen and hear.'

But isn't that what the believers in Annihaltion have to do?

Isn't it a fact that annihilationism ignores the meaning of the words translated "death" and "die" in Scripture??????

Then isn't it also true that annihilationism denies the substitutionary nature of Christ's death. Scripture clearly teaches that Jesus Christ suffered death (thanatos) in the place of believers:

Acts 2:23-24.........
Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it.

Rom. 5:10............
"For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life."

If annihilation is the punishment of the lost, then Jesus' death on the cross would not be a substitutionary death. He was not annihilated by the wildest stretch of the imagination. If annihilation is God's just punishment for sinners, then Jesus Christ did
not suffer the punishment that sinners deserve and will receive. On this basis alone, annihilationism is Biblically untenable.

However I say again to you that Annihilation is a teaching that is easy to believe, but it does not square with Scripture, nor with the seriousness of sin and its consequences.

 

[Major1]

We agree on all you said here I just quoted. Judging is such a fraught and crucial thing, and would deserve it's own thread. We know millions here in the U.S. are estranged from churches exactly because of feeling wrongly judged by some in those churches. The Matthew 7:1-5 means we are not to judge in a condemning way, not judge a person themselves, but only actions can we judge, and that even when we think to correct another person's mistake or error, we should be looking again (and again) for what is blocking our own vision.

Also, it came to mind John 7:24, that we "not judge by appearances", which is such a crucial thing for us all to remember. (I have forgiven that one above though, don't worry)

We are not to guess at others motives, or guess at others wrongs, and go wrong when we do.

I agree with that and say that what was said to you was due to what you stated and not to you as a person.

I say again is not Biblical. Annilation is just not found in the Scriptures.

The death of the wicked that is spoken of in Scripture is clearly of an unending nature. The Greek word aionos, everlasting, is repeatedly used.

We have, as the foremost evidence against annihilationism, the statement of the Lord Jesus in Matthew 25:46.........
"These [the lost] shall go away into everlasting (aionios) punishment, but the righteous into eternal (aionios) life."

It is inconceivable that God made flesh would use the same word in the same sentence to describe two different states. It would mean that Jesus actually said, "The lost shall go away into punishment that has an immediate and abrupt end, but the righteous into a life that has no end."

 

[Halbhh]

I do not agree with your exegesis.

You said...............
" we are not to be trying to read some extraneous meanings into/onto the text, remember! We are to listen and hear.'

But isn't that what the believers in Annihaltion have to do?

Isn't it a fact that annihilationism ignores the meaning of the words translated "death" and "die" in Scripture??????

Then isn't it also true that annihilationism denies the substitutionary nature of Christ's death. Scripture clearly teaches that Jesus Christ suffered death (thanatos) in the place of believers:

Acts 2:23-24.........
Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it.

Rom. 5:10............
"For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life."

If annihilation is the punishment of the lost, then Jesus' death on the cross would not be a substitutionary death. He was not annihilated by the wildest stretch of the imagination. If annihilation is God's just punishment for sinners, then Jesus Christ did
not suffer the punishment that sinners deserve and will receive. On this basis alone, annihilationism is Biblically untenable.

However I say again to you that Annihilation is a teaching that is easy to believe, but it does not square with Scripture, nor with the seriousness of sin and its consequences.

I had to learn what 'Annihilationism' means in the last year or two in another thread, since it was being referenced.

While it has some overlap to what I have understood, it seems to have a significant mistake right off:

"Annihilationism (also known as extinctionism or destructionism[1]) is a belief that after the final judgment some human beings and all fallen angels (all of the damned) will be totally destroyed so as to not exist, or that their consciousness will be extinguished,[2] rather than suffer everlasting torment in hell (often synonymized with the lake of fire)." -- wiki Annihilationism - Wikipedia

This appears to me to contradict how we are told that the devil and his angels will suffer in the lake of fire forever, the idea (as I understand so far) that they are immortal and would not be destroyed there. So, therefore, if this is accurately what Annihilationism is, then it's not the same as I understand so far. But, next, consider additionally that we are all here also in the realm of some speculation.

I think we should all be cautious though when we are guessing about such things that may have additional aspects not yet revealed.

 

[Major1]

I had to learn what 'Annihilationism' means in the last year or two in another thread, since it was being referenced.

While it has some overlap to what I have understood, it seems to have a significant mistake right off:

"Annihilationism (also known as extinctionism or destructionism[1]) is a belief that after the final judgment some human beings and all fallen angels (all of the damned) will be totally destroyed so as to not exist, or that their consciousness will be extinguished,[2] rather than suffer everlasting torment in hell (often synonymized with the lake of fire)." -- wiki Annihilationism - Wikipedia

This appears to me to contradict how we are told that the devil and his angels will suffer in the lake of fire forever, the idea (as I understand so far) that they are immortal and would not be destroyed there. So, therefore, if this is accurately what Annihilationism is, then it's not the same as I understand so far. But, next, consider additionally that we are all here also in the realm of some speculation.

I think we should all be cautious though when we are guessing about such things that may have additional aspects not yet revealed.

What you posted is what someone else THINKS.

What the Bible says is radically different in Rev. 20:10............
"And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

It is your choice. Someone on a forum or the Word of God.

 

[Halbhh]

What you posted is what someone else THINKS.

What the Bible says is radically different in Rev. 20:10............
"And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

It is your choice. Someone on a forum or the Word of God.

Not a choice at all. We both seem to already know and believe the scripture there. Why think otherwise? Since you mention it though, it's thought that the false prophet would likely be a case of possession. The beast also thought to possibly operate through possession. I don't consider I have to be sure it will be that way, but that is fitting to what we do know in all ways. This is getting what I call 'esoteric' though -- meaning it's not important to know, but is merely of interest only to some.

 

[Major1]

I had to learn what 'Annihilationism' means in the last year or two in another thread, since it was being referenced.

While it has some overlap to what I have understood, it seems to have a significant mistake right off:

"Annihilationism (also known as extinctionism or destructionism[1]) is a belief that after the final judgment some human beings and all fallen angels (all of the damned) will be totally destroyed so as to not exist, or that their consciousness will be extinguished,[2] rather than suffer everlasting torment in hell (often synonymized with the lake of fire)." -- wiki Annihilationism - Wikipedia

This appears to me to contradict how we are told that the devil and his angels will suffer in the lake of fire forever, the idea (as I understand so far) that they are immortal and would not be destroyed there. So, therefore, if this is accurately what Annihilationism is, then it's not the same as I understand so far. But, next, consider additionally that we are all here also in the realm of some speculation.

I think we should all be cautious though when we are guessing about such things that may have additional aspects not yet revealed.

May I say a couple of things to you so as to let you know how I think.

First of all, I do not think that we are all here in a realm of speculation.
According to the Bible we are created in God's image to worship and serve Him.

Secondly, I'm of the opinion that we actually do know what we are supposed to know and that there is no guess work to be done.

 

[Major1]

Not a choice at all. We both seem to already know and believe the scripture there. Why think otherwise? Since you mention it though, let me remind you it's widely thought that the false prophet would likely be a case of possession. The beast also thought to possibly operate through possession. I don't consider I have to be sure it will be that way, but that is fitting to what we do know in all ways. This is getting what I call 'esoteric' though -- meaning it's not important to know, but is merely of interest only to some.

I do not have a problem with that.

Satan has his own body and does not need the body of the Antichrist contrary to what some teach:

I Corinthians 15: 39-40
"All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. 40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another”.

Judas was called the Son of Perdition and only one other person is called that - the Antichrist. Satan used Judas who was demon possessed, but Satan did not invade or use Judas's body. Satan has his own body but will use the Antichrist via demonic possession and the false prophet as well..

 

[Halbhh]

Secondly, I'm of the opinion that we actually do know what we are supposed to know and that there is no guess work to be done.

That much we can agree on. The Apostles' Creed for instance is a very good summary of Christian belief (and used by CF btw).

All that we need to know has been revealed. Of course we'd better stay humble though. Remember what the Lord told us in Isaiah 55 NIV . We cannot claim to know every bit of the future, but only the things revealed to us. One should read scripture with a quiet listening, expecting to learn, and we should not think we already know all that is there for us. The word is living.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

the verse in jeremiah is a command from God for Israel not to imitate a pegan custom of burning children as a sacrifice to molek.

it's not referring to the lake of fire.

 

[Major1]

That much we can agree on. The Apostles' Creed for instance is a very good summary of Christian belief (and used by CF btw).

All that we need to know has been revealed. Of course we'd better stay humble though. Remember what the Lord told us in Isaiah 55 NIV . We cannot claim to know every bit of the future, but only the things revealed to us. One should read scripture with a quiet listening, expecting to learn, and we should not think we already know all that is there for us. The word is living.

Accept the things to which fate binds you, and love the people with whom fate brings you together,but do so with all your heart.

 

[Major1]

Is hell everlasting or does one perish in the flame's.

Which side do I choose?

I suggest that you choose Jesus Christ.

 

[SNERVEL]

Christ uses many powerful metaphors, to get our attention about the high stakes!

Not all is metaphor.

Christ said that God can "destroy both body and soul in hell" (Matthew 10:28).

He said that we can be given eternal life -- i.e. we do not already have it. The wording in John 3:16 is that those not given eternal life "perish".

Those that go into the lake of fire not immortal like the devil and his angels, are going into the "second death".

Many take all of these words to mean just what they sound like. i.e. -- that human souls in the "outer darkness" or "lake of fire, which is the second death" Rev 20:14 -- really will perish, not endure there.

It's how to fit all of the verses together, instead of only some verses. We want to have a view with agrees with all of the verses instead of only some.

Nobody can destroy the soul. It is immortal. Hell is kingdom of the demonic spirits, not place of torment. Gehenna is place where bible said that you can burn in flames. But this is not permanent it is only if you want to go to heaven. And only last 10 minutes maximum. The torment can be in abyss in the dimension of the gods but if you are slave, if you are demonic spirit, there is no torment.

 

[Major1]

Nobody can destroy the soul. It is immortal. Hell is kingdom of the demonic spirits, not place of torment. Gehenna is place where bible said that you can burn in flames. But this is not permanent it is only if you want to go to heaven. And only last 10 minutes maximum. The torment can be in abyss in the dimension of the gods but if you are slave, if you are demonic spirit, there is no torment.

Did you come up with that thought from a "Thor" comic book?

 

[Halbhh]

Nobody can destroy the soul. It is immortal. Hell is kingdom of the demonic spirits, not place of torment. Gehenna is place where bible said that you can burn in flames. But this is not permanent it is only if you want to go to heaven. And only last 10 minutes maximum. The torment cant be in abyss in the dimension of the gods but if you are slave, if you are demonic spirit, there is no torment.

I'm concerned at what you wrote here, because these are the words of Christ Jesus our Savior -- that God can indeed destroy us, both body and soul.

26 “So do not be afraid of them, for there is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. 27 What I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs. 28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. 29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground outside your Father’s care. 30 And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31 So don’t be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows. (Matthew chapter 10)

Young's Literal Translation
'And be not afraid of those killing the body, and are not able to kill the soul, but fear rather Him who is able both soul and body to destroy in gehenna.

Should we fear God?

4“I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. 5But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after your body has been killed, has authority to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him."
(Luke chapter 12)