Eternality of Hell

[soarchrist]

So, a discussion at work today started with the question: do sinners that go to hell when they die remain there forever? For example, does the inauguration of the new Heavens and new Earth destroy the need, purpose, function, and actual existence of Hell?

If you have answers, please provide some good online reading material and/or scripture verses.

Thanks!

 

[DeaconDean]

To begin with, you should know that there are two different destinations for the unsaved.

From the time a person dies in an unsaved state, they go to hades/hell. There they will remain until the great day of judgement.

After they stand before the Lord, when condemned, they are then thrown alive in the lake of fire. There they will stay forever.

Hell, is only a temporary "holding place."

"And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works." -Rev. 20:13 (KJV)

After death and hell give up those held there, they are done away with:

"And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death." -Rev. 20:14 (KJV)

And whosoever's name is not found written in the Lamb's book of Life, they will be cast into the same place:

"And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." -Rev. 20:15 (KJV)

There they will stay forever, for all eternity:

"The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:" -Rev. 14:10 (KJV)

In Rev. 19, upon Jesus' return, the false prophet and the beast are judged on the spot, no exceptions, no grace, no respite, they are judged instantly and are thrown in the lake of fire:

"And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone." -Rev. 19:20 (KJV)

And in Rev. 20:10, Satan is cast into this same place, there to be:

"...tormented day and night for ever and ever."

If the false prophet, the beast, and Satan are cast alive into this place, there to be tormented day and night forever, we also see the unsaved go to this place also.

Hell, the place Jesus taught about in Luke 16:19-30, is only a temporary place. When the new heavens and new earth are brought to fruition, this will not stop sinners from receiving their just rewards. They will still be in torments, day and night forever and ever, in the presence of the Lamb and the angels in heaven.

That is what scriptures say.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[cubanito]

Also

 

[cubanito]

also remember that there are levels of suffering in hell, just as there are levels of rewards in Heaven.

So those who refuse to believe do not all suffer alike, but they do all suffer, forever.

JR

 

[DeaconDean]

also remember that there are levels of suffering in hell, just as there are levels of rewards in Heaven.

So those who refuse to believe do not all suffer alike, but they do all suffer, forever.

JR

Brother, have you ever read the "The Apocalypse of Peter?"

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[ReformedChapin]

also remember that there are levels of suffering in hell, just as there are levels of rewards in Heaven.

So those who refuse to believe do not all suffer alike, but they do all suffer, forever.

JR

Where are you getting this from?

 

[DeaconDean]

Where are you getting this from?

"And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more." -Lk. 12:47-48 (KJV)

The principle is there, a thief will not be punished the same as a murderer. And likewise, a liar will not be punished the same as a rapest.

This is seem clearly in the New Testament Apocrypha book "The Apocalypse of Peter."

Here is a small sample:

"And over against that place I saw another, squalid, and it was the place of punishment; and those who were punished there and the punishing angels had their raiment dark like the air of the place. And there were certain there hanging by the tongue: and these were the blasphemers of the way of righteousness; and under them lay fire, burning and punishing them. And there was a great lake, full of flaming mire, in which were certain men that pervert righteousness, and tormenting angels afflicted them. And there were also others, women, hanged by their hair over that mire that bubbled up: and these were they who adorned themselves for adultery; and the men who mingled with them in the defilement of adultery, were hanging by the feet and their heads in that mire. And I said: I did not believe that I should come into this place. And I saw the murderers and those who conspired with them, cast into a certain strait place, full of evil snakes, and smitten by those beasts, and thus turning to and fro in that punishment; and worms, as it were clouds of darkness, afflicted them. And the souls of the murdered stood and looked upon the punishment of those murderers and said: O God, thy judgment is just. And near that place I saw another strait place into which the gore and the filth of those who were being punished ran down and became there as it were a lake: and there sat women having the gore up to their necks, and over against them sat many children who were born to them out of due time, crying; and there came forth from them sparks of fire and smote the women in the eyes: and these were the accursed who conceived and caused abortion.

And other men and women were burning up to the middle and were cast into a dark place and were beaten by evil spirits, and their inwards were eaten by restless worms: and these were they who persecuted the righteous and delivered them up. And near those there were again women and men gnawing their own lips, and being punished and receiving a red-hot iron in their eyes: and these were they who blasphemed and slandered the way of righteousness. And over against these again other men and women gnawing their tongues and having flaming fire in their mouths: and these were the false witnesses. And in a certain other place there were pebbles sharper than swords or any spit, red-hot, and women and men in tattered and filthy raiment rolled about on them in punishment: and these were the rich who trusted in their riches and had no pity for orphans and widows, and despised the commandment of God. And in another great lake, full of pitch and blood and mire bubbling up, there stood men and women up to their knees: and these were the usurers and those who take interest on interest."

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/apocalypsepeter-roberts.html

Now before you jump all over me, I know this is NT Apocraphia. But I only wanted to show this so you could see there is support for a possible explanation of different levels of punishment.

To the servant who knew to be aout the masters work and didn't, he will be beaten with many stripes. But he that didn't do it out of ignorance, he will be beaten with few stripes.

The principle is there.

God Bless
Till all are one.

 

[ReformedChapin]

"And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more." -Lk. 12:47-48 (KJV)

The principle is there, a thief will not be punished the same as a murderer. And likewise, a liar will not be punished the same as a rapest.

This is seem clearly in the New Testament Apocrypha book "The Apocalypse of Peter."

Here is a small sample:

"And over against that place I saw another, squalid, and it was the place of punishment; and those who were punished there and the punishing angels had their raiment dark like the air of the place. And there were certain there hanging by the tongue: and these were the blasphemers of the way of righteousness; and under them lay fire, burning and punishing them. And there was a great lake, full of flaming mire, in which were certain men that pervert righteousness, and tormenting angels afflicted them. And there were also others, women, hanged by their hair over that mire that bubbled up: and these were they who adorned themselves for adultery; and the men who mingled with them in the defilement of adultery, were hanging by the feet and their heads in that mire. And I said: I did not believe that I should come into this place. And I saw the murderers and those who conspired with them, cast into a certain strait place, full of evil snakes, and smitten by those beasts, and thus turning to and fro in that punishment; and worms, as it were clouds of darkness, afflicted them. And the souls of the murdered stood and looked upon the punishment of those murderers and said: O God, thy judgment is just. And near that place I saw another strait place into which the gore and the filth of those who were being punished ran down and became there as it were a lake: and there sat women having the gore up to their necks, and over against them sat many children who were born to them out of due time, crying; and there came forth from them sparks of fire and smote the women in the eyes: and these were the accursed who conceived and caused abortion.

And other men and women were burning up to the middle and were cast into a dark place and were beaten by evil spirits, and their inwards were eaten by restless worms: and these were they who persecuted the righteous and delivered them up. And near those there were again women and men gnawing their own lips, and being punished and receiving a red-hot iron in their eyes: and these were they who blasphemed and slandered the way of righteousness. And over against these again other men and women gnawing their tongues and having flaming fire in their mouths: and these were the false witnesses. And in a certain other place there were pebbles sharper than swords or any spit, red-hot, and women and men in tattered and filthy raiment rolled about on them in punishment: and these were the rich who trusted in their riches and had no pity for orphans and widows, and despised the commandment of God. And in another great lake, full of pitch and blood and mire bubbling up, there stood men and women up to their knees: and these were the usurers and those who take interest on interest."

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/apocalypsepeter-roberts.html

Now before you jump all over me, I know this is NT Apocraphia. But I only wanted to show this so you could see there is support for a possible explanation of different levels of punishment.

To the servant who knew to be aout the masters work and didn't, he will be beaten with many stripes. But he that didn't do it out of ignorance, he will be beaten with few stripes.

The principle is there.

God Bless
Till all are one.

Eh, I wouldnt bother with with the catholic deuterocanon.

I dont think the bible speaks about the different levels of suffering in hell.

 

[Beoga]

Matthew 11:22 "Nevertheless I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you.

Matthew 11:24 "Nevertheless I say to you that it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for you."

Matthew 10:15
"Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city.

 

[DeaconDean]

Eh, I wouldnt bother with with the catholic deuterocanon.

I dont think the bible speaks about the different levels of suffering in hell.

I knew there would be a comment somewhere that brought Catholicism into this.

Listen brother, I said it was an apocryphia book.

Take it for what its worth.

But even the most knowledgable learned men, study both sides of an argument.

I'm Calvinist, and I have studied, and have in my collection of books, the works of James Arminus. Does that mean I support him? No, it just means that I have studied him.

You can't know all the facts until you've studied both sides of the coin.

And let me point this out, if it was such a big deal, why do Catholics ignore this book?

If it was such a big deal to Catholicism, why do they reject it, and grasp Purgatory with full enthusiasm?

I work with a CAtholic and his answer is simple, nothing could be worse than to be cut off from the love of God.

If you'll read "outside the box" you will find that there is sufficent reason for us to believe that there will be varying degrees of punishment in eternity.

Have you ever read the 16th century book "Dante's Inferno?" It is a very good book. I'm not saying I advocate that, but it too makes interesting reading.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[heymikey80]

Eh, I wouldnt bother with with the catholic deuterocanon.

I dont think the bible speaks about the different levels of suffering in hell.

Btw, the Apocalypse of Peter is not in the Catholic deuterocanon.

It's an early Christian writing -- way earlier than Roman Catholicism ever had a chance to influence -- that was not included in the canon of Scripture after the Catholic definition in the 400's.

It was included in the Muratorian Fragment canon listing of 180 AD.

Was the Epistle of Barnabas also included there? And Hermas, which was kind of an apocalyptic or ancient allegorical book like "Pligrims Progress" for early Christians.

These are three well-known, and very early, books the early Christians embraced to make sense of their new faith. While not considered inspired, they help alot, much like reading Justin Martyr.

 

[DeaconDean]

Btw, the Apocalypse of Peter is not in the Catholic deuterocanon.

It's an early Christian writing -- way earlier than Roman Catholicism ever had a chance to influence -- that was not included in the canon of Scripture after the Catholic definition in the 400's.

It was included in the Muratorian Fragment canon listing of 180 AD.

Was the Epistle of Barnabas also included there? And Hermas, which was kind of an apocalyptic or ancient allegorical book like "Pligrims Progress" for early Christians.

These are three well-known, and very early, books the early Christians embraced to make sense of their new faith. While not considered inspired, they help alot, much like reading Justin Martyr.

Thank you for making my point.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[xapis]

To the OP... check this out: http://www.enjoyinggodministries.com/article/hell-and-annihilationism

 

[cubanito]

Brother, have you ever read the "The Apocalypse of Peter?"

God Bless

Till all are one.

1-No I've not read it.

2-As pointed out by others, my belief in levels of punishment in Hell, and rewards in Heaven come from what seems to me a very clear reading of the New Testament. I would be unwilling to press the matter towards the compilation of worse sins/better sins, fully acknowleging that even the most minor of sin, if unrepented of, is sufficient for damnation AND the worst of sins, repented of, forgivable (my own interpretation of "the unforgivable sin" is that it is the sin of permanent, willful, final refusal to believe.)

3- Among many (most?) scholars, there is a difference between the "apocryphal" books. which the RC terms "deuterocanonical" and the pseudoepigraphy. The latter means "falsely penned" and refers to the belief that these books, such as various using the name Peter, were not written by the author claimed.

4- While there is some debate among Christians as to the canonical status of the apocrypha (with Protestants and Jews rejecti, while EO and RC accept them), there is almost no argument on the canon of the NT. If memory serves: the Eastern Syrian Church excludes the Apocalypse ("Revelations"), some of the Copts of Egypt and a few others have accepted some of the pseudoepigraphy (but I am not real clear on all the details). The point is that as it currently stands, only very small (though some are ancient) institutions have any differences with the NT as accepted by the RC/EO and Protestants. So whenever a NT book is brought up that is not in your Bible, it is likely to be in nobody's Bible, except MAYBE for some teeny tiny minority out of the middle east somewhere. In still fewer words: the RC, Protestants and EO have the SAME NT.

This is an interesting site for those wishing to explore the NT ccanon: http://www.ntcanon.org/table.shtml

JR

 

[cubanito]

And please, don't confuse the Coptic ZION Ethiopian Church, virtually invented in Jamaica for the purpose of smoking marijuana, and the much older Copts. These are VERY different groups.

JR

 

[ReformedChapin]

I knew there would be a comment somewhere that brought Catholicism into this.

Listen brother, I said it was an apocryphia book.

Take it for what its worth.

But even the most knowledgable learned men, study both sides of an argument.

I'm Calvinist, and I have studied, and have in my collection of books, the works of James Arminus. Does that mean I support him? No, it just means that I have studied him.

You can't know all the facts until you've studied both sides of the coin.

And let me point this out, if it was such a big deal, why do Catholics ignore this book?

If it was such a big deal to Catholicism, why do they reject it, and grasp Purgatory with full enthusiasm?

I work with a CAtholic and his answer is simple, nothing could be worse than to be cut off from the love of God.

If you'll read "outside the box" you will find that there is sufficent reason for us to believe that there will be varying degrees of punishment in eternity.

Have you ever read the 16th century book "Dante's Inferno?" It is a very good book. I'm not saying I advocate that, but it too makes interesting reading.

God Bless

Till all are one.

I like to spread my knowledge through denominational boundries. But when it comes down to compiling theology I dont bother with anything outside of God's holy word.

BTW I am not questioning your reformed status or your character. I was just stating my current position.

 

[DeaconDean]

I like to spread my knowledge through denominational boundries. But when it comes down to compiling theology I dont bother with anything outside of God's holy word.

BTW I am not questioning your reformed status or your character. I was just stating my current position.

I understand that, and I can respect that. But had Augustine not studied as he did, theologians down through the ages would have struggled to get where was some 540 years earlier.

I study the Bible myself, but I do not limit myself to that and that alone.

If you study the Bible in the Greek language, do you rely only on the translators interpretation? No, you get a lexicon and check to see if they are correct.

I have several dozen books on Systematic theology.

in the 16th century, two major discoveries turned the world on its ears. One, the world was not flat. Two, the earth was not the center of the universe.

For centuries, people just accepted these facts. Why? Mostly because no-where in the Bible is this mentioned. So it was just a universal accepted fact that the earth was flat, and the earth was the center of the universe. It took men, who "thought outside the box" to shatter these theories.

My point is, yes, study the Bible, by all means, and never ever forsake that. but why should we limit our study of Theology Proper, Soterology, Eschatology, Hamartiology, Pneumatology, etc., on only the Bible?

Great theologians down through history, have studied the works of other great theologians. And they usually find a nugget of truth from that person, and build upon, rather, explain further the matter. We wouldn't have our present doctine of "predestination" and "election" had not John Calvin studied Augustine.

Did it matter that Augustine was a Catholic? Evidently not. Should it matter that the Apocalypse of Peter is considered non-canonal book? No it shouldn't. I'm not saying that you should accept it as truth, I'm just saying that it should be read purely for informational value.

I tell you another good non-canonal book. Have you ever read 1&2 Clement? They are good books. Clement says a lot of good things. He repeats nearly word for word some of Paul's teachings. Clement taught election, did you know that? The only fault I have found with Clements writting was that he quotes from Greek literature about the Pheonix. (sp?) other than that, its a real good book to read just for informational value.

If you were to study the primative church, would you limit study to only the book of Acts, Paul's epistles, and the general epistles? No, you would study the likes of Clement, Tertulain, and others. And that is the point.

You don't have to accept the Apocalypse of Peter as fact or even truth. But it does lend support for:

"And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more." -Lk. 12:47-48 (KJV)

And the belief in varying degrees of punishment in hell.

That is all I'm saying.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[ReformedChapin]

I understand that, and I can respect that. But had Augustine not studied as he did, theologians down through the ages would have struggled to get where was some 540 years earlier.

I study the Bible myself, but I do not limit myself to that and that alone.

If you study the Bible in the Greek language, do you rely only on the translators interpretation? No, you get a lexicon and check to see if they are correct.

I have several dozen books on Systematic theology.

in the 16th century, two major discoveries turned the world on its ears. One, the world was not flat. Two, the earth was not the center of the universe.

For centuries, people just accepted these facts. Why? Mostly because no-where in the Bible is this mentioned. So it was just a universal accepted fact that the earth was flat, and the earth was the center of the universe. It took men, who "thought outside the box" to shatter these theories.

My point is, yes, study the Bible, by all means, and never ever forsake that. but why should we limit our study of Theology Proper, Soterology, Eschatology, Hamartiology, Pneumatology, etc., on only the Bible?

Great theologians down through history, have studied the works of other great theologians. And they usually find a nugget of truth from that person, and build upon, rather, explain further the matter. We wouldn't have our present doctine of "predestination" and "election" had not John Calvin studied Augustine.

Did it matter that Augustine was a Catholic? Evidently not. Should it matter that the Apocalypse of Peter is considered non-canonal book? No it shouldn't. I'm not saying that you should accept it as truth, I'm just saying that it should be read purely for informational value.

I tell you another good non-canonal book. Have you ever read 1&2 Clement? They are good books. Clement says a lot of good things. He repeats nearly word for word some of Paul's teachings. Clement taught election, did you know that? The only fault I have found with Clements writting was that he quotes from Greek literature about the Pheonix. (sp?) other than that, its a real good book to read just for informational value.

If you were to study the primative church, would you limit study to only the book of Acts, Paul's epistles, and the general epistles? No, you would study the likes of Clement, Tertulain, and others. And that is the point.

You don't have to accept the Apocalypse of Peter as fact or even truth. But it does lend support for:

"And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more." -Lk. 12:47-48 (KJV)

And the belief in varying degrees of punishment in hell.

That is all I'm saying.

God Bless

Till all are one.

You are preaching to the quire brother.

I love reading Saint Augustine, Eusibius, Ambrose, Origen, Luther ,Calvin, Zwingli, Erasmus, Malechethon and many more. My point is that I like reading all kinds of stuff, even greek philosophy but to compile GOOD theology I stick with what the scripture shows.

 

[DocNH]

So, a discussion at work today started with the question: do sinners that go to hell when they die remain there forever? For example, does the inauguration of the new Heavens and new Earth destroy the need, purpose, function, and actual existence of Hell?

If you have answers, please provide some good online reading material and/or scripture verses.

Thanks!

Annihilationism is not a biblical concept. Hell will remain forever. Part and parcel of God being glorified is his judgment of sin (Rom. 9:17). To state that Hell has an ending point would be to in essence state that sin itself has a stopping point. Then that raises the question as to how sinners in Hell ever stop sinning? They have not Christ – the only solution to no sin and they cannot and will not seek God … Besides this they have several other problems with such texts as Mark 9 – “fire that never shall be quenched” and Matthew 25 contrasting everlasting life and everlasting torment – i.e. if one ends in “time” then the other would necessarily end as well.

 

[DeaconDean]

Annihilationism is not a biblical concept. Hell will remain forever. Part and parcel of God being glorified is his judgment of sin (Rom. 9:17). To state that Hell has an ending point would be to in essence state that sin itself has a stopping point. Then that raises the question as to how sinners in Hell ever stop sinning? They have not Christ – the only solution to no sin and they cannot and will not seek God … Besides this they have several other problems with such texts as Mark 9 – “fire that never shall be quenched” and Matthew 25 contrasting everlasting life and everlasting torment – i.e. if one ends in “time” then the other would necessarily end as well.

I can tell that you have not ever debated with some of the more "opinionated" Seventh Day Adventists here on the forums.

Here is a suggestion, go to the General Theology section, start a thread that says "aiwnion" means "eternal" or "everlasting" meaning "forever" and lets see what happens.

Been there, done that, have the tee-shirt.

God Bless

Till all are one.