David Bentley Hart on Hell

[Ceallaigh]

Because you don't think it necessary, loving or worthy of God. . .despite Jesus' revelation regarding it in Mark 9:43-48.

I don't see Jesus talking about Eternal Torment in that passage.

You've chosen the wrong side.

Which side is that? There's lots of different sides that believe different things.

 

[Saint Steven]

Unbelief in one theology leads to believing another theology. Unbelief in Calvin's theology that God predestined most people to Eternal Torment, leads one to Free Will theology.

I think it is slander against God (our loving heavenly Father) to claim that he did with foreknowledge and intent create a plan whereby the majority of humankind would suffer unspeakable torment for all of eternity with no hope of escape. (countless billions) Who would concoct such lies?

 

[Ceallaigh]

Not according to Jesus in John 3:18 and John 3:36, where eternal torment means refusal of the remedy for it.

Neither speaks of an Eternal Torment.

It's not for you to redefine the teaching of Jesus (Mark 9:48).

And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh. Isiah 66:24

 

[Ceallaigh]

I think it is slander against God (our loving heavenly Father) to claim that he did with foreknowledge and intent create a plan whereby the majority of humankind would suffer unspeakable torment for all of eternity with no hope of escape. (countless billions) Who would concoct such lies?

What would the Church Lady say?

 

[Saint Steven]

What would the Church Lady say?

"Extra crispy, original recipe is too good for 'em!" - lol

 

[Clare73]

I think it is slander against God (our loving heavenly Father) to claim that he did with foreknowledge and intent create a plan whereby the majority of humankind would suffer unspeakable torment for all of eternity with no hope of escape. (countless billions) Who would concoct such lies?

Now the word of God is lies. . .

 

[Ceallaigh]

Now the word of God is lies. . .

Lies using the word of God. Or do you believe all doctrines are true?

Tell me a doctrine you don't believe in so that I can start accusing you of saying the word of God is lies.

 

[Saint Steven]

Lies using the word of God. Or do you believe all doctrines are true?

Tell me a doctrine you don't believe in so that I can start accusing you of saying the word of God is lies.

Some people think that an English translation of the Bible (none of which agree) is the "word of God". More slander.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Some people think that an English translation of the Bible (none of which agree) is the "word of God". More slander.

Worse still is thinking man's doctrine based on that is the "word of God".

 

[Shrewd Manager]

Now the word of God is lies. . .

Only when it diverges from your theology Clare.

 

[Clare73]

Only when it diverges from your theology Clare.

Agreed. . .

Which is the clear and plain teaching of Mark 9:48, which has been called concocted lies.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Agreed. . .

Which is the clear and plain teaching of Mark 9:48.

What do you think Isaiah meant by "their worm dieth not" regarding the "carcases"?

 

[Clare73]

What do you think Isaiah meant by their worm dieth not?

It probably means several things figuratively.

In the context of dealing radically with our sin (cut it off, pluck it out) of Mark 9:43-48, it means sin must die, or we must die; that if we are ruled by sin, we will be ruined by sin.
The worm which does not die could be the sinner's own conscience reflecting and reproaching, accusing and condemning itself.
The fire that is not quenched could be the wrath of God focused on a guilty and defiled conscience, with nothing to call upon to quench or mitigate the wrath.

To be noted is that the Jewish Pharisees, of which Paul was one, held that the wicked would be punished with perpetual punishment--to live forever dying, and to be forever in pains and griefs that never cease.

They taught that Isaiah 66:24 indicates that even when Gehenna will be destroyed, they will not be consumed, as it is written in Psalm 49:14: "death will feed on them," which the sages of the time commented on to mean "their forms shall endure even when the grave is no more."

And Jesus confirms this Jewish understanding in
Matthew 25:41 - everlasting fire,
Matthew 25:46 - eternal punishment,
Mark 9:43-48 - fire of hell (Gehenna) not quenched and worm does not die,
Matthew 13:50, 42 - fiery furnace, weeping and gnashing of teeth,

where Jesus sanctions the existing Jewish view of eternal hell, outlined in Matthew 18:6, Matthew 26:4; Luke 10:12.

Mark 9:48 is pretty unequivocal on this.

We get to choose whether to believe Jesus or not.
And we all get to deal with the consequences of our choices.

 

[Ceallaigh]

It probably means several things figuratively.

In the context of dealing radically with our sin (cut it off, pluck it out) of Mark 9:43-48, it means sin must die, or we must die; that if we are ruled by sin, we will be ruined by sin.
The worm which does not die could be the sinner's own conscience reflecting and reproaching, accusing and condemning itself.
The fire that is not quenched could be the wrath of God focused on a guilty and defiled conscience, with nothing to call upon to quench or mitigate the wrath.

To be noted is that the Jewish Pharisees, of which Paul was one, held that the wicked would be punished with perpetual punishment--to live forever dying, and to be forever in pains and griefs that never cease.

Isaiah 66:24 indicates that even when Gehenna will be destroyed, they will not be consumed, as it is written in Psalm 49:14: "death will feed on them," which the sages of the time commented on to mean "their forms shall endure even when the grave is no more."

And Jesus confirms this Jewish understanding in
Matthew 25:41 - everlasting fire,
Matthew 25:46 - eternal punishment,
Mark 9:43-48 - fire of hell (Gehenna) not quenched and worm does not die,
Matthew 13:50, 42 - fiery furnace, weeping and gnashing of teeth,

where Jesus sanctions the existing Jewish view of eternal hell, outlined in Matthew 18:6, Matthew 26:4; Luke 10:12.

Mark 9:48 is pretty unequivocal on this.

We get to choose whether to believe Jesus or not.
And we all get to deal with the consequences of our choices.

It's rather disingenuous to keep accusing people who interpret metaphors differently than you, of calling Jesus a liar. I think if you're that insecure about the subject you should just stay out of it rather than insult fellow believers that way.

 

[Clare73]

It's rather disingenuous to keep accusing people who interpret metaphors differently than you, of calling Jesus a liar. I think if you're that insecure about the subject you should just stay out of it rather than insult fellow believers that way.

I'm not understanding you, what you are talking about.

Is there something in the post you disagree with?

 

[Ceallaigh]

I'm not understanding you, what you are talking about.

Is there something in the post you disagree with?

Your last line: "We get to choose whether to believe Jesus or not.
And we all get to deal with the consequences of our choices."

Having a different interpretation or not agreeing with someone's interpretation, especially in regard to metaphors being used, does not equate to not believing Jesus or the Bible. That's just a taking cheap shot at someone for disagreeing with you.

What it really means is thinking Jesus meant something different than what you think He meant. There's no consequences from God in not choosing to adhere to your interpretation of metaphorical and hyperbolic language used by Jesus and the prophets.

 

[Clare73]

Your last line: "We get to choose whether to believe Jesus or not.
And we all get to deal with the consequences of our choices."

Having a different interpretation or not agreeing with someone's interpretation, especially in regard to metaphors being used, does not equate to not believing Jesus or the Bible. That's just a taking cheap shot at someone for disagreeing with you.

So you're saying the clear and plain words of Mark 9:48 are subject to interpretation?
"Hath God said?" (Genesis 3:1)

If their meaning is not certain, then is anything in the NT certain?

That's not the Holy Spirit talking.

What it really means is thinking Jesus meant something different than what you think He meant. There's no consequences from God in not choosing to adhere to your interpretation of metaphorical and hyperbolic language used by Jesus and the prophets.

 

[Ceallaigh]

So you're saying the clear and plain words of Mark 9:48 are subject to interpretation?

Are you serious here? When I asked you what you thought "their worm dieth not" meant, you said "It probably means several things figuratively." How could clear plain words mean several different things figuratively?

"Hath God said?" (Genesis 3:1)

Now interpretations of what you yourself call figurative, that differ from yours, are from Satan?

If their meaning is not certain, then is anything in the NT certain?

No, of course not, stop being ridiculous. It means that something that "probably means several things figuratively" can have several different meanings.

That's not the Holy Spirit talking.

Yeah, I know, it's you talking.

 

[Clare73]

Are you serious here? When I asked you what you thought "their worm dieth not" meant, you said "It probably means several things figuratively." How could clear plain words mean several different things figuratively?

Much prophecy is figurative. . .you think the worm is the disputed part of Isaiah?

"Unquenchable fire" is not disputable. . .though some like to claim that it is.

And we know what the Jews taught regarding Isaiah 66:24, which Jesus confirmed.

You're wrestling the Scriptures (2 Timothy 3:16).

Now interpretations of what you yourself call figurative, that differ from yours,
are from Satan?

My interpretation is the Jewish interpretation, which Jesus confirmed.

No, of course not, stop being ridiculous. It means that something that "probably means several things figuratively" can have several different meanings.
Yeah, I know, it's you talking.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Much prophecy is figurative. . .you think the worm is the disputed part of Isaiah?

"Unquenchable fire" is not disputable. . .though some like to claim that it is.

Do you know how many times Isaiah and other prophets used similar language regarding their national judgements? Because that's where one needs to start in order to apply hermeneutics.

And we know what the Jews taught regarding Isaiah 66:24, which Jesus confirmed.

My interpretation is the Jewish interpretation, which Jesus confirmed.

Are you forgetting that Jesus condemned the teachings of those scribes? You while know, while they were plotting to kill their Messiah.