• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Hell: Eternal suffering or eternal nothingness?

J

jdbear

Guest
Immortality is a quality which is only possessed by God. "...the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords, who only hath immortality..." 1 Tim.6:15-16

Alive_Again
According to Vine's, "immortality" (athanasia), means "deathlessness" (a, negative, thanatos, Gk. for "death"). It is rendered "immortality" in 1 Cor 15:53, 54, of the glorified body of the believer; 1 Tim 6:16, of the nature of God (Vine, W. E., Unger, M. F., & White, W. (1996). Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Nashville, TN: T. Nelson).
People sometimes take single scriptures from their intended meaning (due to the English rendering). This is obvious because the other “witnesses” in the Word of God do not agree. We are safe in comparing these scriptures to other passages in the Bible. This gives us a “multitude of counselors” from our one source of absolute truth.
There are no other scriptures which agree that anyone other than God is immortal. The only reason angels or people (or cattle) live is because God wills it to be so and God may keep them living as long as He likes, or not.
“ And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. Dan 12:1-3
To have a legacy of shame and contempt does not necessitate eternal torture. Do you agree?
It could be said that you could be held in everlasting contempt, like Hitler is to most people without being aware of this. This passage talks about the dead “awaking” to judgment. What’s the point of doing this if their judgment is fleeting?
It sounds like you're only including the unsaved in Daniels prophecy, but Paul said, "Every man's work shall be made manifest for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is." 1 Co.3:13. Maybe the point is that whatever a person sows they also reap. Maybe the point is that if people put their faith in Jesus in this life, the fire that coming in the next life couldn't harm them. Maybe the fire annihilating the wicked is a proof from God that they didn't believe in Him. One question though. If the unsaved dead are burning now, why do they have to wake up to shame and contempt? Aren't they awake to it already?
If they’re already gone and held in contempt by others, what does this accomplish?
I don't think the idea has to be "held in contempt by others." Why does it have to accomplish anything more than believers knowing how much God had contempt for sin?
The “everlasting contempt” is a lasting state of being of which the unrighteous dead attain to.
Do you think someday we might stand at the brink of a great gulf to see who can spit the farthest?

“it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.... it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire. Matt 18:7-9
Everlasting fire… The fire does not go out (is not quenched) or the worm does not die. What is the importance of the worm not dying if you do? Are only the worms eternal?
No, the worms are not eternal. The fire not being quenched and the worms not dying could just be ways of saying they can't be stopped from comsuming the dead bodies. "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." Is.66:24
"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: Matt 25:40-41
Is Jesus teaching us that it is better to enter Gods kingdom than to have our existence extinguished?
The devil has been around for millions of years (at least) and has led countless souls to eternal torment.
The devil hasn't been around any longer than the beginning of creation. "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them." Gen.2:1
His being burned up or “destroyed” as some would interpret it won’t be a fleeting log in the fire. We and those who were deceived by him, will burn in everlasting fire.
People really do read this in to the scriptures, even though they clearly state otherwise. They have much faith in the goodness of God (commendable to be sure), but the reverential fear element should remain because as the Heavenly reward is so extremely and eternally wonderful, the reward in Hell and eventually the lake of fire is also extreme and eternal. That’s part of the deterrent and it should not be minimized. The scriptures are clear.
I think it's because of the goodness of God that the wicked will be destroyed and not suffer eternally. Why is suffering eternally in fire more of a deterrent than having your existence forever extinguished by fire? I ask this, because my point is the unsaved don't care either way. They don't care because they don't believe it, so what difference does it make?
“Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. Matt 25:45-46
This scripture shows that it is our deeds that will be judged. Although we cannot gain entrance into the Kingdom of God by works, our heart condition reveals works. Those guarding their hearts with the issues of life will bear good fruit and those who are of the world and of the evil one, do not give heed to the Word of God and will suffer lasting punishment, while the righteous, eternal life.
Does punishment mean having life taken from us forever?
The punishment is everlasting. If you’re punishment was only for an hour (how long does it take to be destroyed by Hell fire?), it would not be everlasting, even though it would be forever.
Everlasting and forever mean the same thing.
You’re aware that your punishment is everlasting. This is why it is important to hear these warnings and give heed to them, because EVERYONE, believers and non-believers need to obey God. Some thing that just because they got on the holy highway, and become “in Christ” that they will always (by default) abide in His love.
We’re told to abide there and it’s potentially easy to be taken by idols, go back into (and of) the world, become overtaken by covetousness, hate our brothers, become a liar, etc. God will forgive us if we repent, but many take the grace of God for granted and always assume after they’re finished enjoying the pleasures of sin for a season that God will graciously return them to the joys of their salvation. He might be merciful, but we have many examples from scripture, where God is no respecter of persons, and that we (WE) are to pass our time of sojourn here in godly fear.
I don't believe in once saved always saved.
 
Upvote 0
J

jdbear

Guest
“Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power...2 Thess 1:6-10
This seems to indicate that unbelievers will no longer exist, because there is nowhere anyone can go to escape Gods presence. "Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there." Ps.139:7-8
Everlasting destruction - Destruction is an ongoing thing that is everlasting. If you are “being destroyed”, then it is not a one time destruction for ever. It is a state of being destroyed.
So when the Bible teaches, " When the wicked spring as the grass and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish, it is that they shall be destroyed for ever" (Ps.92:7), it really means the wicked will be "being destroyed" forever?
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Jude 1:6-7
Here, eternal fire doesn't mean unending fire. S & G were completely destroyed.
The cities were destroyed, but really it is talking about the people of Sodom and Gomorrha. The cities were destroyed very quickly, yet what we’re talking about here is “eternal fire” as a vengeance.
All I was pointing out is that according to Jude, an example of eternal fire is how S & G were destroyed and the fire that destroyed them is out. I think it is plausible to explain eternal fire with respect to its effects, not necessarily its length.
Those angels, thought to be the ones that joined themselves with the women of early mankind, have been in “everlasting chains”, waiting for judgment. They’re not getting out of their chains. It’s bad for them, not because they’re going to be burned like everyone else, but rather because their fire is everlasting. Their chains, everlasting. It’s going to be bad for them.
A chain can mean lots of things. For instance, God only let Satan go so far with Job. It could be said that God put a chain on the devil, but it doesn't mean the devil was completely powerless to do damage. Does scripture tell us anything more about this obscure reference of angels being chained under darkness? I don't think we even know what that means.

“And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
Mark 9:43-48
A worm that doesn't die and unquenchable fire both completely devour the body.
There is not need for fire that cannot be quenched or worms that don’t die if you are taken out of existence. They don’t die because the one in Hell will always be, in a state of death and separation. Their torment is everlasting, in this case by flame and by worms. Notice the worms are not burned up.
I've noticed, but lets look at it the other way. Lets say the fire got quenched and the worms did die. That would mean the body wasn't totally consumed, right?
Total destruction wouldn't be accomplished by a dying worm or a fire that went out, would it?
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....14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. Rev 20:9-15
If the devil is going to be tormented night and day forever, and if another place, Hell is described as place for the devil and his angels, and that we might go there as disobedient, then this is more than a temporary disposition.
Provided the passage has been correctly interpreted, I agree. The problem for me is that of the hundreds of passages dealing with the fate of the wicked, Rev.20 plus the parable of Lazarus, are the only ones which appear to teach eternal torment and the point about the Lazarus story isn't even about what happens to people after death. People have pretty much taken Rev.20 and interpreted every other passage of scripture (dealing with the fate of the wicked) by it. Even passages which indicate the wicked will no longer exist.

These people were already suffering in Hell. The rich man in the gospels has been judged and was suffering (and is) torments. Those in Hell and “the sea” (demonstrating all “walks of death”) will be “raised” (already aware and suffering) and receive a judgment where they will be consigned to a mutual judgment of horrible fire (not doubt worse that what Hell had been). If their is fire in Hell already, it must be a lot worse in the lake of fire. If people were burned out quickly in the fires of Hell, what gain is their by putting them in the lake where the they would be burned out even more quickly?
Satan is the main perpetrator of all sin. He’s put many in the fire for thousands of years, would it be righteous of God to have him be the “last one in” and be destroyed immediately. How long does it take a body to burn completely?
And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. 25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. 26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
Luke 16:22-26
The rich man in the account of Lazarus has been there for over 2,000 years and it doesn’t take that long to burn or “destroy” someone in Hell fire. Furthermore, although he abode in flames, he still has the presence of mind to think about his family, desire even a drop of water (I don’t think anyone on earth burning is going to think about a single drop of water.) Who has a conversation while you're on fire? It is a lasting fire and he didn't want his family to go there (God help our families!).

The burnings were his punishment. He was supposed to be tormented (not just burned). People who are on fire don’t really have to be concerned about a gulf between the righteous dead and the unrighteous dead. Their was though because this was a “permanent” condition (until there are take to the White Throne Judgment at the end of time, where their punishment will be far worse.
If it's Gods plan for people to suffer forever, there wouldn't be any gain, but maybe when people die they're not conscious of anything. "For the living know that they shall die, but the dead know not any thing..." (Ecc.9:5). Did Solomon know more about the things of God than we do? But the point about the rich man and Lazarus wasn't that the wicked are going to burn forever. Jesus told this story in the hearing of the Pharisees to show them that they didn't really believe Moses and the prophets.
The Word also says that some people’s punishments will be FAR worse than others. Just being rich and ignoring the suffering of Lazarus, however bad, is pretty small potatoes compared to people like Mao, Hitler, Stalin, etc., who murdered millions. Some, for just being the people of God. Just being burned up and “destroyed” as though this destruction were short and merciful (God’s character), would not be a worse punishment.
Their have been those in Hell for much longer than 4,000 years. How fair would that be compared to Hitler?
I agree that it wouldn't be fair to let someone like Hitler have the same penalty as the average person. You make an excellent point and I have no answer for it. I'll have to study it out, but if everyone goes into the lake of fire, isn't everybody who rejects Jesus suffering the same fate no matter what they did?
Jesus equates loving Him by doing what He says. It’s pretty easy to get sidetracked. Thank God He IS merciful, but the things that we do have consequences. If we allow our hearts to harden, we will no longer be people of faith, even though we may “believe” otherwise. The devils believe. We are to have corresponding actions of faith (such as feeding and clothing the needy, visiting those in jail and who are in need. They are admonitions to us so we will be open to His promptings to do these things when they arise and not harden ourselves. We’re supposed to “know” Him intimately. This is a spiritual “knowing”, but it is like a man “knows” his wife. Workers of iniquity (that could be you or I if we’re not careful) will depart from Him. That same God that sent His Son to die for us sends believers and unbelievers alike to Hell for not obeying His Word (not walking in love). Our fruits will tell the tale.
It’s easy to think that people will not spend eternity in Hell when they think that believers because they is “sealed” and “born again” will always go to Heaven for the very actions unbelievers will be eternally punished for. (Jesus points to the fruits equating their judgments.) He didn’t say “Because you weren’t born again”, He says, because you did this, or didn’t do that.
It’s not our own righteous works that will do this, and we MUST be born again to enter into covenant and walk in His Spirit. We will reap that which we sow. We are now given the ability as believers to sow life and reap everlasting life (entirely by grace). We also have the ability (by means of still having a sinful fleshly nature) of doing just the opposite. It is more serious for a believer to go to Hell than an non believer. We should take the warnings of God very seriously, particularly as believers. Not just for a temporary burning up, but because, as the Word teaches, punishment is everlasting and for ever and ever.
I understand what you're saying. but people who don't obey Jesus are unbelievers. I was taught the doctrine of eternal torment my whole life, but I didn't choose to believe in Jesus because I was afraid of going to Hell. What got me saved was the love Jesus has for me. I'm just checking on this doctrine because I want to make absolutely sure I'm not believing something about God that isn't true.
 
Upvote 0
J

jdbear

Guest
Fireinfiolding
You appear to have problems with the scriptures, and must wrest with each one.
The only thing I have a problem with is telling people something about Gods plans that might not be true. I had a teacher once who told me that if you have a hundred pieces of evidence and 2 out of 98 don't match up, you don't throw out the 98 pieces.
 
Upvote 0

Fireinfolding

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2006
27,285
4,084
The South
✟129,061.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The only thing I have a problem with is telling people something about Gods plans that might not be true. I had a teacher once who told me that if you have a hundred pieces of evidence and 2 out of 98 don't match up, you don't throw out the 98 pieces.

Well sorry you felt I myself was speaking at all and had to question me on the verses posted, I find that very odd
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rick Otto
Upvote 0

Fireinfolding

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2006
27,285
4,084
The South
✟129,061.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Lets show it... First post I write them in order


What we learn is that its far better to chop off a limb, or pluck out an eye then the whole body to be cast into Geenna

The whole body from where?

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

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

So death (and hades) goes into whats called the second death, (the lake of fire) and after those in both death and hell are delivered up out of them

And it continues...

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

Second post in comparing wording take it to the bottom, shows I post one before the other in comparing


Here are some verses if they can help the OP, just some comparisons I was making between the book of life and second death (lake of fire) also

Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

Rev 14:10 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 14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

Rev 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

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

Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Rev 3:5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

Phil 4:3 And I intreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life

Rev 2:11 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death.

Rev 3:5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Whereas we know this is the second death

Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death

And likewise here the same

Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death

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

That to show the wording between, and I compare many more ways then what measely little portions I have posted here.

A couple of verses (one before another) changes nothing when you are comparing how something is worded in scripture, I do it all the time.

Show its corruptedness in so doing it, dont just nit pick as you do the scripture, I think it shows the lake of fire shown as second death in all three more clearly.


 
  • Like
Reactions: Rick Otto
Upvote 0
J

jdbear

Guest
Fireinfolding
So death (and hades) goes into whats called the second death, (the lake of fire) and after those in both death and hell are delivered up out of them

And it changes anything how?


For you it doesn't change anything since you believe there is no alternative to eternal torture. But if there really is no eternal torture, it matters alot, because the dead are delivered up out of death and hell before death and hell are cast into the lake of fire (not after, as you have said.) It would be a symbol of them being destroyed forever. There is no reason to throw an empty death and hell into fire, unless you're going to annihilate them.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Fireinfolding

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2006
27,285
4,084
The South
✟129,061.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
For you it doesn't change anything since you believe there is no alternative to eternal torture. But if there really is no eternal torture, it matters alot, because the dead are delivered up out of death and hell before death and hell are cast into the lake of fire (not after, as you have said.) It would be a symbol of them being destroyed forever. There is no reason to throw an empty death and hell into fire, unless you're going to annihilate them.

You dont know what I believe, and I showed the post which shows my order


What we learn is that its far better to chop off a limb, or pluck out an eye then the whole body to be cast into Geenna

The whole body from where?

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

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

So death (and hades) goes into whats called the second death, (the lake of fire) and after those in both death and hell are delivered up out of them

And it continues...

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

I stated they (death and hades) go into the lake of fire only ((AFTER)) those in them are delivered UP OUT OF THEM first.

THEN follow through with the following verse, whosoever likewise was not found in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire (where death and hades was cast in) before

Theres no corrupting it, and its not out of order and its saying the same thing, you are just wrangling with words. I could say the same thing equally saying the dead in death and hades were delievered UP ((BEFORE)) death and hades were cast into the lake of fire and still show whosoever not found in the book of life ((AFTER)) is cast into the lake of fire (following).

It makes no difference, its saying the same thing.

Maybe you like arguing over nothing, I dont know
 
Upvote 0

Alive_Again

Resident Alien
Sep 16, 2010
4,167
231
✟20,491.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Word of Faith
Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power...2 Thess 1:6-10

Everlasting destruction - Destruction is an ongoing thing that is everlasting.
If you are “being destroyed”, then it is not a one time destruction for ever. It is a state of being destroyed.

So when the Bible teaches, " When the wicked spring as the grass and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish, it is that they shall be destroyed for ever" (Ps.92:7), it really means the wicked will be "being destroyed" forever?
You can be destroyed, but that is our typical understanding. If we're destroyed forever, then our destruction never stops.

And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Jude 1:6-7

The cities were destroyed, but really it is talking about the people of Sodom and Gomorrha. The cities were destroyed very quickly, yet what we’re talking about here is “eternal fire” as a vengeance.

All I was pointing out is that according to Jude, an example of eternal fire is how S & G were destroyed and the fire that destroyed them is out. I think it is plausible to explain eternal fire with respect to its effects, not necessarily its length.
The cities were destroyed, but it's really talking about the people of the cities. Chorazain and Bethsaida have a worse judgment coming, yet the cities were not destroyed. The eternal fire describes the punishment. In fact the term "eternal fire" is the clearest picture we have.

A chain can mean lots of things. For instance, God only let Satan go so far with Job. It could be said that God put a chain on the devil, but it doesn't mean the devil was completely powerless to do damage. Does scripture tell us anything more about this obscure reference of angels being chained under darkness? I don't think we even know what that means.
It's not obscure since it clearly says they are being held in everlasting chains. It's not talking about devils that tormented Job. It's talking about angels who went outside of where they were supposed tog o.

“And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
Mark 9:43-48

A worm that doesn't die and unquenchable fire both completely devour the body.

Total destruction wouldn't be accomplished by a dying worm or a fire that went out, would it?


The fire is not quenched (does not go out) and the worm does not die. That's pretty plain. Someone who is burning out isn't too concerned about a worm, I wouldn't think. They're dealing with the pain. They're not concerned about their relatives either. They're not worried about a "place", but if they had a lasting presence of mind, would be worried about a fate. Lazarus had his comfort and the rich man had his torment. He had a conversation with Abraham. Not too many people burning have conversations. The fire and worm are ongong and are torments. The worm makes it worse because the flame does not consume those being tormented, it adds to their torment.

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....14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. Rev 20:9-15

If the devil is going to be tormented night and day forever, and if another place, Hell is described as place for the devil and his angels,
and that we might go there as disobedient, then this is more than a temporary disposition.

Provided the passage has been correctly interpreted, I agree. The problem for me is that of the hundreds of passages dealing with the fate of the wicked, Rev.20 plus the parable of Lazarus, are the only ones which appear to teach eternal torment and the point about the Lazarus story isn't even about what happens to people after death. People have pretty much taken Rev.20 and interpreted every other passage of scripture (dealing with the fate of the wicked) by it. Even passages which indicate the wicked will no longer exist.
In English the rendering might seem to say something else sometimes, but the "eternal" and "everlasting" are qualities spoken of that God possesses. Destruction is not everlasting. Sodom and G, as you pointed out were destroyed and the burning ceased. If it is everlasting, it the destruction is everlasting. Their have been a number of people who have seen Hell and they also testify that it is not a quick and merciful destruction. It is an ongoing, everlasting destruction. That is why we are to consider it for what it is. This keep people from just enjoying the pleasures of sin for a season with the intent, that they'll get back to the joys of their salvation when they are ready. I believe their are many in Heaven who were believers.

His own people can be disobedient and not do His Word. They have the power of choice and they know better than any unsaved person. We have many examples in the Word where God's people, throughout the ages, were disobedient and they incurred His wrath. We probably know more about His wrath in the Word than anything else.

Thank God for His grace!

If it's Gods plan for people to suffer forever, there wouldn't be any gain, but maybe when people die they're not conscious of anything. "For the living know that they shall die, but the dead know not any thing..." (Ecc.9:5). Did Solomon know more about the things of God than we do? But the point about the rich man and Lazarus wasn't that the wicked are going to burn forever. Jesus told this story in the hearing of the Pharisees to show them that they didn't really believe Moses and the prophets.
The dead don't know anything here. The rich man across from Lazarus knew plenty. So did Lazarus. Moses and Elijah knew something when they visited with Jesus. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob knew something (as God is God of the living and not "the dead".

I agree that it wouldn't be fair to let someone like Hitler have the same penalty as the average person. You make an excellent point and I have no answer for it. I'll have to study it out, but if everyone goes into the lake of fire, isn't everybody who rejects Jesus suffering the same fate no matter what they did?
Everyone who rejects the Word of the Lord eventually suffers the lake of fire.

It’s not our own righteous works that will do this, and we MUST be born again to enter into covenant and walk in His Spirit. We will reap that which we sow. We are now given the ability as believers to sow life and reap everlasting life (entirely by grace). We also have the ability (by means of still having a sinful fleshly nature) of doing just the opposite. It is more serious for a believer to go to Hell than an non believer. We should take the warnings of God very seriously, particularly as believers. Not just for a temporary burning up, but because, as the Word teaches, punishment is everlasting and for ever and ever.

I understand what you're saying. but people who don't obey Jesus are unbelievers. I was taught the doctrine of eternal torment my whole life, but I didn't choose to believe in Jesus because I was afraid of going to Hell. What got me saved was the love Jesus has for me. I'm just checking on this doctrine because I want to make absolutely sure I'm not believing something about God that isn't true.
Nowhere does it say they are unbelievers. It might be you or I. I'm a believer! Anyone can be disobedient. Yes, the love of Jesus saves us and will save us, but Jesus said that those who don't do His Words have a great ruin, while those who do are built upon the solid rock. God does allow repentance, but it must be sought out while He may be found (in this world).
 
Upvote 0

Fireinfolding

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2006
27,285
4,084
The South
✟129,061.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I understand what you posted now. Sorry for misunderstanding it when I first read it.

No problem jdbear, and thanks for saying, thats pretty rare around here. Much appreciated

God bless you
 
Upvote 0
J

jdbear

Guest
God bless you also Fireinfolding and everyone you hold dear as well. I was raised Catholic and was always taught God would send unrepentant sinners to a hell where they would be in torture forever. I got saved when a dear sister in Christ told me about Him. This girl was so filled with the love and peace of God that it made me wonder if things I was taught in the Catholic church about Gods punishment were right. I'm not saying God will not let people suffer forever, but when I started looking at everything the Bible says about the fate of unbelievers, there is almost nothing about eternal torment. Revelation 20 and the story Jesus told about Lazarus and the rich man seem to agree with eternal torment. Everything else i've read seems to say the wicked will not exist anymore.
 
Upvote 0

Fireinfolding

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2006
27,285
4,084
The South
✟129,061.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
God bless you also Fireinfolding and everyone you hold dear as well. I was raised Catholic and was always taught God would send unrepentant sinners to a hell where they would be in torture forever. I got saved when a dear sister in Christ told me about Him. This girl was so filled with the love and peace of God that it made me wonder if things I was taught in the Catholic church about Gods punishment were right. I'm not saying God will not let people suffer forever, but when I started looking at everything the Bible says about the fate of unbelievers, there is almost nothing about eternal torment. Revelation 20 and the story Jesus told about Lazarus and the rich man seem to agree with eternal torment. Everything else i've read seems to say the wicked will not exist anymore.

I was raised catholic myself. I am also familiar with various other perspectives since being here for quite some time. I have also explored various angles myself. In fact most of my freinds earlier on were universalists. So I have had freinds on one end of this to the other end and a few somewheres in between on this myself. However, to be quite honest (though I love each of them) I was never convinced of any of them (though one of them had to be the right) because of the way they utilized the scriptures to show from where they derived their angle. I found often someone would take up an angle and then work the scriptures to get there, by observing the way they handled them, and if I can detect a measure of dishonesty in that my ear gets lost to the angle (or at least to that angle as that person is trying to convince me of).

So I dont ascribe to any particular angle myself because I (personally) have a fear of corrupting his words, or erring in this in particular (even as I do with other things) and will not until I can show it perfectly, so I refuse now to profess an angle. I chose rather to put up the scriptures that make mention of the topic on it and try to keep my hands off of it. And I find that has always been helpful in receiving further insight down the road on anything.

I do understand it is a touchy subject and there are various views and within each of those views there is also really shoddy workmanship which just pits the scriptures one against the other, and in the end the hearer is just left doubtful as to the heads and tails of a thing in any of them.

Separated they all can make some sense, but still when examine their ways of comparing or handling of the scriptures I stand in doubt of most of them (personally). So I step back on this one and just present the verses, and let whoever I might present those verses to look to the Lord on clarity in respects to them. Who am I to try and convince another of something I know (in myself) I stand in doubt of? That would be wrong of me to do, I feel its best to present the Lords words and pretty much get me out of the way because its not right of me to present an angle I am not fully equipped to show affirmatively yet. I can only show what it is I have been carefully comparing (for myself) and I continue to do until I am absolutely certain (which I am not) and just hope that some of the comparisons (which are confirming in nature) rather then contradictory in nature can help another grow in their own understanding. Because anyone can pit the scriptures and bring to doubt, rather then use them affirmatively and dissolve those doubts. I find the later more helpful myself.

Until the time I am fully convinced (in my own self) by Him I do try to remain neutral. Reccognizing the scripture pitting that exists (to the voiding out of) one angle in favor of the other (and how that is done) and truly appreciate a more skillful handling of His words with gravity and sincerity which is pretty rare (to me).

I am not really one that can be convinced by emotional appeals though, quite the contrary I stand in doubt of that approach, others are though I do realize this, and I know each one will believe as they are convinced too and its just best to put forth what is spoken on this without touching it and stand back away from emotional appeals and wrangling on it is all.

God bless you and yours as well
 
Upvote 0
J

jdbear

Guest
You can be destroyed, but that is our typical understanding. If we're destroyed forever, then our destruction never stops.
If our typical understanding of "destroy" is to take out of existence, why is it wrong to think that to be "destroyed forever" means to take out of existence forever?
The cities were destroyed, but it's really talking about the people of the cities. Chorazain and Bethsaida have a worse judgment coming, yet the cities were not destroyed. The eternal fire describes the punishment. In fact the term "eternal fire" is the clearest picture we have.
When Jude says, "Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them...are...an example...of eternal fire" (Jude 1:7), it doesn't sound like he's speaking about what happened to the people after they died. It sounds like he's talking about what happened when God rained fire down on them.
It's not obscure since it clearly says they are being held in everlasting chains. It's not talking about devils that tormented Job. It's talking about angels who went outside of where they were supposed tog o.
What fallen angels didn't go outside of where they were supposed to go? Aren't fallen angels demons? And if fallen angels are demons, don't demons do evil things to people? But this place that Jude says the angels were chained is only described as "under darkness." What does that mean?
The fire is not quenched (does not go out) and the worm does not die. That's pretty plain.
Jesus was quoting Isaiah 66:24 where it says people will look at the carcases (dead bodies) of those who transgressed against God. It doesn't seem like the ones who are getting burned and eaten by worms are conscious of anything.
Someone who is burning out isn't too concerned about a worm, I wouldn't think. They're dealing with the pain. They're not concerned about their relatives either. They're not worried about a "place", but if they had a lasting presence of mind, would be worried about a fate. Lazarus had his comfort and the rich man had his torment. He had a conversation with Abraham. Not too many people burning have conversations. The fire and worm are ongong and are torments. The worm makes it worse because the flame does not consume those being tormented, it adds to their torment.
I think Jesus was simply using a story to show something that had nothing to do with eternal torment.

The rich man across from Lazarus knew plenty. So did Lazarus. Moses and Elijah knew something when they visited with Jesus. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob knew something (as God is God of the living and not "the dead".
I wouldn't count the rich man and Lazarus as real people for the reason I already gave. Jesus said what He did about Abraham, Isaac and Jacob because He was speaking to the Saducees who ddn't believe in the resurrection. He meant that they would be raised to life again, because God is the God of the living. Moses and Elijah did appear to Jesus and Peter, James and John, but that might have been just for a specific purpose. Samuel appeared to Saul, but it almost seems like he woke him up. I don't see why Solomon would tell us the dead know nothing if it wasn't true. Solomon knew a lot.
Nowhere does it say they are unbelievers. It might be you or I. I'm a believer! Anyone can be disobedient. Yes, the love of Jesus saves us and will save us, but Jesus said that those who don't do His Words have a great ruin, while those who do are built upon the solid rock. God does allow repentance, but it must be sought out while He may be found (in this world).
I agree.
 
Upvote 0
J

jdbear

Guest
Hi Fireinfolding.
I was raised catholic myself. I am also familiar with various other perspectives since being here for quite some time. I have also explored various angles myself. In fact most of my freinds earlier on were universalists. So I have had freinds on one end of this to the other end and a few somewheres in between on this myself. However, to be quite honest (though I love each of them) I was never convinced of any of them (though one of them had to be the right) because of the way they utilized the scriptures to show from where they derived their angle. I found often someone would take up an angle and then work the scriptures to get there, by observing the way they handled them, and if I can detect a measure of dishonesty in that my ear gets lost to the angle (or at least to that angle as that person is trying to convince me of).
I didn't take up an angle. I just always believed God would send people to hell where they would be tortured because that's what I was told. I never questioned it. I saw the love and joy and peace of God in someone who knows Jesus and I'm sure she would never torture anyone without end. I wonder if the Catholic church invented this doctrine to keep people under their thumb.
So I dont ascribe to any particular angle myself because I (personally) have a fear of corrupting his words, or erring in this in particular (even as I do with other things) and will not until I can show it perfectly, so I refuse now to profess an angle. I chose rather to put up the scriptures that make mention of the topic on it and try to keep my hands off of it. And I find that has always been helpful in receiving further insight down the road on anything.
I do understand it is a touchy subject and there are various views and within each of those views there is also really shoddy workmanship which just pits the scriptures one against the other, and in the end the hearer is just left doubtful as to the heads and tails of a thing in any of them.
Separated they all can make some sense, but still when examine their ways of comparing or handling of the scriptures I stand in doubt of most of them (personally). So I step back on this one and just present the verses, and let whoever I might present those verses to look to the Lord on clarity in respects to them. Who am I to try and convince another of something I know (in myself) I stand in doubt of? That would be wrong of me to do, I feel its best to present the Lords words and pretty much get me out of the way because its not right of me to present an angle I am not fully equipped to show affirmatively yet. I can only show what it is I have been carefully comparing (for myself) and I continue to do until I am absolutely certain (which I am not) and just hope that some of the comparisons (which are confirming in nature) rather then contradictory in nature can help another grow in their own understanding. Because anyone can pit the scriptures and bring to doubt, rather then use them affirmatively and dissolve those doubts. I find the later more helpful myself.
Until the time I am fully convinced (in my own self) by Him I do try to remain neutral. Reccognizing the scripture pitting that exists (to the voiding out of) one angle in favor of the other (and how that is done) and truly appreciate a more skillful handling of His words with gravity and sincerity which is pretty rare (to me).
I am not really one that can be convinced by emotional appeals though, quite the contrary I stand in doubt of that approach, others are though I do realize this, and I know each one will believe as they are convinced too and its just best to put forth what is spoken on this without touching it and stand back away from emotional appeals and wrangling on it is all.
Wise words, although I don't mind pitting the scriptures, because I'm convinced they don't contradict one another. It's only my misunderstanding that gets in the way and that can be for a number of reasons. Well, I'll just keep searching because like you, I don't want to teach something about God that isn't true.
God bless you and yours as well
Thanks sis.
 
Upvote 0

Alive_Again

Resident Alien
Sep 16, 2010
4,167
231
✟20,491.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Word of Faith
When Jude says, "Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them...are...an example...of eternal fire" (Jude 1:7), it doesn't sound like he's speaking about what happened to the people after they died. It sounds like he's talking about what happened when God rained fire down on them.
The whole point of the "eternal" thing is that it is eternal. Jesus points out that the judgment of those cities exceeded what was done on the earth. That is obvious below, but now add the words "eternal fire" to it. We already have the example of the lake of fire and the words day and night for ever and ever. That's pretty convincing really.

And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
Mark 6:11

What fallen angels didn't go outside of where they were supposed to go? Aren't fallen angels demons? And if fallen angels are demons, don't demons do evil things to people? But this place that Jude says the angels were chained is only described as "under darkness." What does that mean?
These angels are awaiting their final judgment in chains. These angels (it is said) were the ones that joined themselves with the daughters of men (written of in Genesis). It's been a long wait for them, as that is over 6,000 years ago.

The fire is not quenched (does not go out) and the worm does not die. That's pretty plain.

Jesus was quoting Isaiah 66:24 where it says people will look at the carcases (dead bodies) of those who transgressed against God. It doesn't seem like the ones who are getting burned and eaten by worms are conscious of anything.

For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain. 23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord. 24 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.
Isaiah 66:22-24 (KJV)

We understand from Jesus that He is talking about Hell.


And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
Mark 9:43-44 (KJV)

(re: Lazarus in Abraham's Bosom and the rich man in Hades)

I think Jesus was simply using a story to show something that had nothing to do with eternal torment.

Jesus tell us of a certain man who was tormented in burning flames having a conversation with Abraham (who had been dead thousands of years).
A burning man was concerned about his family, and he was told that it was his reward. Lazarus was comforted and the rich man was tormented. It's the way God set it up, and its purely by choice.

I wouldn't count the rich man and Lazarus as real people for the reason I already gave. Jesus said what He did about Abraham, Isaac and Jacob because He was speaking to the Saducees who ddn't believe in the resurrection. He meant that they would be raised to life again, because God is the God of the living. Moses and Elijah did appear to Jesus and Peter, James and John, but that might have been just for a specific purpose. Samuel appeared to Saul, but it almost seems like he woke him up. I don't see why Solomon would tell us the dead know nothing if it wasn't true. Solomon knew a lot.

They were real people. Jesus wasn't lying. We are told about Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as living (though physically dead) because God is a God of the living, not the dead.
Solomon spoke in terms of a man knowing nothing of life on earth. For Jesus to say what He did, about them living, actually seeing Elijah and Moses, and then telling us of the afterlife with Lazarus and the rich man, a figure of speech is a poor defense against all of this. (I say this humbly, but truly.)
 
Upvote 0
J

jdbear

Guest
The whole point of the "eternal" thing is that it is eternal. Jesus points out that the judgment of those cities exceeded what was done on the earth. That is obvious below, but now add the words "eternal fire" to it. We already have the example of the lake of fire and the words day and night for ever and ever. That's pretty convincing really.
And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
Mark 6:11
What do you think Jesus meant by "more tolerable?" How will judgement be more tolerable for some unsaved if everyone goes into the lake of fire?
These angels are awaiting their final judgment in chains. These angels (it is said) were the ones that joined themselves with the daughters of men (written of in Genesis). It's been a long wait for them, as that is over 6,000 years ago.
That's a pretty wild story...another thing I'll have to study.

For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain. 23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord. 24 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.
Isaiah 66:22-24 (KJV)
We understand from Jesus that He is talking about Hell.
And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
Mark 9:43-44 (KJV)
I've read those passages. Jesus used the word "Gehenna" (Hell) and that was like a garbage dump outside Jerusalem where the fire burned continually. I read one thing where it said the dead bodies of criminals were thrown there. Are the redeemed going to look at the unsaved burning, being eaten by worms....being tortured forever?
They were real people. Jesus wasn't lying. We are told about Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as living (though physically dead) because God is a God of the living, not the dead. Solomon spoke in terms of a man knowing nothing of life on earth. For Jesus to say what He did, about them living, actually seeing Elijah and Moses, and then telling us of the afterlife with Lazarus and the rich man, a figure of speech is a poor defense against all of this. (I say this humbly, but truly.)
Well, I didn't mean to imply that Jesus was lying or just using a figure of speech. He was telling the teachers of Moses a parable about how they didn't believe Moses. That's the point of the story. The message of the story isn't eternal suffering. "And he said unto him, 'If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." (Lk.16:31)
 
Upvote 0