The Doctrine of Eternal Torture in Hell

[Kenny'sID]

We go from talking about morality which is shifting sand to talking about fair which is also shifting sand when in reality God is stable, solid ground, aka just.

So you are saying God can't be stable and fair at the same time because fair is shifting sand?

If not, what exactly are you saying, if anything?

 

[razzelflabben]

So you are saying God can't be stable and fair at the same time because fair is shifting sand?

If not, what exactly are you saying, if anything?

I used this example previously in a discussion about whether or not God is "fair".

One day we were sitting down to dinner. I had berry pie to eat while the rest of the family had Chicken Parmesan. To my children, that was unfair that I got to eat berry pie while they had to eat Chicken Parmesan. To me it was unfair that they got to eat Chicken Parmesan while I had to eat berry pie. (the issue was allergies) Point being our perspective dictates what is and is not fair. That is shifting sand. God is just, not fair, that is because fair is shifting sand and God is a stable, a consistent, His justice is not relying on perspective but on law and the law we are talking about here is a natural law.

Now, let's apply that to this discussion on ECT. If you listen to the objections of ECT, most are based on the perspective of the one talking not on an objective unchanging truth. IOW's it's about morality and fairness not justice. God on the other hand is just. That changes the whole ball game so to speak when we understand this concept. He is unchanging, He is absolute, He is grace, mercy, compassion, love, etc. Unchanging, how do we know that? Because the law tells us that and that law is not changing, not shifting sand. See, even if we go with the story that hell is punishment or torture, it removes the stability of God. If we want to keep God's nature in tack when we are talking about ECT we must understand and accept that God is a stable, unchanging, the same yesterday, today and forever. He is a constant, the firm foundation by which we can build all of our doctrines, all our understanding, all our faith upon without worry for He is JUST in all that He does. He is NOT a shifting sands kind of God but a firm foundation by which the Church was built and by which we can put all our trust. That is the point. If we make God shifting sand by claiming He is moral or fair, we no longer understand who God is and only understand our version of God.

As always I encourage you to challenge this attribute of God using scripture. I always fear I am missing something important, but so far no one has issued challenge especially on this thread. I would be thrilled for you to be the first, it would be a position of honor in my mind...(no sarcasm, I love challenge it's one of many ways I know if I have my understanding right or wrong)

 

[Der Alte]

I hate that you wasted all that time preparing this. You have 9 sources, I have one, the Bible..,..

I'm sorry that you wasted all this time giving me your uninformed, unsupported opinion! You forget you made a grammatical argument on the meaning of Greek and Hebrew words, aion and olam.

"the word forever is not in the Scriptures. The words in the Scriptures, aion and olam, do not mean eternal." ​

Would you care to show me that argument from your only source "The Bible?" If not then most of this post is nothing but irrelevant bloviation.

Now, despite what your sources say a word cannot have two opposing meanings. if it did it would be usless for it's purpose which is communication. The same word cannot mean both yes and no.

The words in question do not have "two opposing meanings" and certainly not "yes and no."

This sentence is quoted from your post above.

"αιωνιος aionios [166] "describes duration, either undefined but not endless, as in <Rom. 16:25; 2 Tim. 1:9; Titus 1:2>; or undefined because endless as in <Rom. 16:26>, and the other sixty-six places in the NT."​

The first definition is correct, the second is the exact opposite and is therefore incorrect.
As we see from the Biblical evidence presented here aion is used of a finite period of time. That is the first definition listed. The second definition is simply derived from one's theology. Rather than drawing the definition that is allowed by the text, people filter the definition through their theology.

Your uninformed conclusion that "The first definition is correct, the second is the exact opposite and is therefore incorrect" is based on your theological assumptions/presuppositions. You have shown a total lack of knowledge and understanding of how lexicons are compiled. Scholars don't just eenie meenie minie moe pick a definition which suits them as you have done.

Just because a dictionary says a word means something, doesn't mean that is what the word means. Remember the dictionaries are written by men who have theological positions, things they already believe and it is through this belief system that they derive the meanings of word.

Arguments like the one here are "written by men who have theological positions things they already believe and it is through this belief system that they derive the meanings of words." Let us examine one verse.

225 BC LXX Exo 3:15 καὶ εἶπεν ὁ θεὸς πάλιν πρὸς Μωυσῆν Οὕτως ἐρεῖς τοῖς υἱοῖς Ισραηλ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς τῶν πατέρων ὑμῶν, θεὸς Αβρααμ καὶ θεὸς Ισαακ καὶ θεὸς Ιακωβ, ἀπέσταλκέν με πρὸς ὑμᾶς· τοῦτό μού ἐστιν ὄνομα αἰώνιον [aionion] καὶ μνημόσυνον γενεῶν γενεαῖς.
Exo 3:15 ויאמר עוד אלהים אל־משׁה כה־תאמר אל־בני ישׂראל יהוה אלהי אבתיכם אלהי אברהם אלהי יצחק ואלהי יעקב שׁלחני אליכם זה־שׁמי לעלם וזה זכרי לדר דר׃
[לעלם=olam]
1917 JPS Exo 3:15 And God said moreover unto Moses: 'Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you; this is My name for ever, and this is My memorial unto all generations. ​

The Hebrew "olam" in Exo 3:15 was translated "aionion" in the 225 LXX and "for ever" in the JPS-Jewish Publication Society English translation both by Jewish scholars.

 

[Kenny'sID]

I used this example previously in a discussion about whether or not God is "fair".

One day we were sitting down to dinner. I had berry pie to eat while the rest of the family had Chicken Parmesan. To my children, that was unfair that I got to eat berry pie while they had to eat Chicken Parmesan. To me it was unfair that they got to eat Chicken Parmesan while I had to eat berry pie. (the issue was allergies) Point being our perspective dictates what is and is not fair. That is shifting sand. God is just, not fair, that is because fair is shifting sand and God is a stable, a consistent, His justice is not relying on perspective but on law and the law we are talking about here is a natural law.

Now, let's apply that to this discussion on ECT. If you listen to the objections of ECT, most are based on the perspective of the one talking not on an objective unchanging truth. IOW's it's about morality and fairness not justice. God on the other hand is just. That changes the whole ball game so to speak when we understand this concept. He is unchanging, He is absolute, He is grace, mercy, compassion, love, etc. Unchanging, how do we know that? Because the law tells us that and that law is not changing, not shifting sand. See, even if we go with the story that hell is punishment or torture, it removes the stability of God. If we want to keep God's nature in tack when we are talking about ECT we must understand and accept that God is a stable, unchanging, the same yesterday, today and forever. He is a constant, the firm foundation by which we can build all of our doctrines, all our understanding, all our faith upon without worry for He is JUST in all that He does. He is NOT a shifting sands kind of God but a firm foundation by which the Church was built and by which we can put all our trust. That is the point. If we make God shifting sand by claiming He is moral or fair, we no longer understand who God is and only understand our version of God.

As always I encourage you to challenge this attribute of God using scripture. I always fear I am missing something important, but so far no one has issued challenge especially on this thread. I would be thrilled for you to be the first, it would be a position of honor in my mind...(no sarcasm, I love challenge it's one of many ways I know if I have my understanding right or wrong)

First, why are you telling me all that to begin with?

 

[razzelflabben]

First, why are you telling me all that to begin with?

I quoted a post that asked me about what I thought about God being fair...rather than just...or fair and just...as such it is addressing the post I quoted. That is why I am telling you this, if you were the one that made the post I quoted, otherwise I am addressing the one who made the post in your name.

 

[mmksparbud]

Sounds like the airheaded confessions of drunken priests IMO. Thinking one can't be deceived, should be the first clue that YOU just may already BE.

ROM 12:3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly,

1 Corinthians 10:12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

I ignored nothing, show me one, where I did so. And I supported my opinion with scripture in my last post while yours had none...only a repentance side step to avoid saying "I STILL 'SIN, which God hates', and deserve death too". Oh, and it also means you apparently haven't wholly repented either then, doesn't it?



Don't you know the scriptures you hold to say that if God doesn't send the Holy Spirit to convict then you can't repent to begin with?

2TI 2:25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant that they will repent and come to know the truth,

And 'conviction/convincing' from the Holy Spirit is what causes 'repentance'.

JOH 16:8 And when he comes, he will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment:
9 concerning sin, because they do not believe in me;

I'm off to New Mexico for the weekend, so I hope you all play nice and make our Father in heaven happy.

For when you get back:
I've always prayed to never act like this:
Luk 18:11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
Luk 18:12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

 

[rjs330]

We have got to get away from the idea of torture. The idea is punishment for rejecting God and the sacrifice of his son. Torture implies hurting someone for the fun of it or to get information. Calling God a torturer demeans his nature of Justice.

 

[Kenny'sID]

I quoted a post that asked me about what I thought about God being fair...rather than just...or fair and just...as such it is addressing the post I quoted. That is why I am telling you this, if you were the one that made the post I quoted, otherwise I am addressing the one who made the post in your name.

OK, I was involved in that post but trust God is both fair and just. I know you see a difference but to me true justice is almost always a striving for fairness, and there is a such thing is fair. Now if some greedy doofus wants to throw a fit and claim things aren't fair because say for instance, the judge didn't give him all he expected to get/wanted in the divorce settlement, that's fine and it could even be all about the perspective you mention, bit that doesn't mean there wasn't or can't be a fair dividing there. Sure, even our court system drops the ball on fairness, which is justice, sometimes, but again, that doesn't mean there is no such thing as you suggest. Then there are the verdicts whether in the courts or whatever, that are passed down and most everyone says, Well, "I think that was fair"

I have complete confidence God can and will handle that better than anyone we know. He has all the details all the evidence, and a sense of fair play that is unmatched.

FWIW, here is how Merriam-Webster defines justice....they are pretty much, if not identical in meaning:

1 : the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments b : judge c : the administration of law; especially : the establishment or determination of rights according to the rules of law or equity

2 : the quality of being just, impartial, or fair b (1) : the principle or ideal of just dealing or right action (2) : conformity to this principle or ideal : righteousness c : the quality of conforming to law

3 : conformity to truth, fact, or reason : correctness


Seems to me you are saying that if we say justice is fair, though it may be defined that way, that's not really the reality because of this that or the other reason.

But as I see it, thinking it isn't reality, is not the reality. We often make it seem like it's not, because so many of us are the doofuses I mentioned. Or... the definition is fine, the people are not. Your chicken and berry dinner thing could have been solved in a 100% fair manner, by giving you berry pie to them and them giving you their chicken. If their wasn't enough berry pie for those who wanted it, divide it equally among them and if they still didn't get as much as they wanted, that doen't mean it wasn't divided fairly as both justice and the food was served fairly...pun intended.

 

[Kenny'sID]

We have got to get away from the idea of torture. The idea is punishment for rejecting God and the sacrifice of his son. Torture implies hurting someone for the fun of it or to get information. Calling God a torturer demeans his nature of Justice.

I might be able to at least help with why that term is so readily used, or maybe not.

First I'd have to ask Achilles6129 if he was Christian non denominational or non denominational because he is not Christian? Just by the wording in the way the questions were posed in the OP, I'd guess he's not Christian, and remember this is just a guess and I'll reserve seeing it as fact or not till after he answers.

But *IF* it is a fact, this is merely another Atheist trying to destroy faith by attempting to prove how mean God is. Nothing unusual, so you can expect the term torture to be used a lot, and I wouldn't worry about it so much. I doubt they will get away from anything/word or whatever that in their mind drags God down to the level that either makes him not real or one not worthy of worship.

Or in short, the word helps tremendously with the Atheist agenda so they won't be getting away from it but they shouldn't be taken to seriously when they use it either.

 

[Der Alte]

While it is true that chapter and verse numbers are not in the original texts, I believe they were added under the inspiration of God, as well. How so? Well, there are many bread crumbs that they were under the hand of God.

For all numbers in God's Word exist so as to glorify Jesus Christ and His Word.
In fact, Revelation 13:18 tells us (the reader) to count numbers as a part of wisdom.
Revelation 13:18

"Here is wisdom. Let him that hath the understanding count the number

of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his nummber is Six hundred threescore and six."

Rev 13;18 most certainly is not a command to count numbers as part of wisdom.

NET Rev 13:18 This calls for wisdom: Let the one who has insight calculate the beast's number, for it is man's number, and his number is 666.
ISV Rev 13:18 In this case wisdom is needed: Let the person who has understanding calculate the total number of the beast, because it is a human total number, and the sum of the number is 666.
ESV Rev 13:18 This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666. ​

This lines up with Ecclesiastes chapter 7 that tells us about how Solomon set his heart to seek out wisdom and the reason of things (

Ecclesiastes 7:25) whereby he then says he found out the account by counting one by one (Ecclesiastes 7:26).

Ecclesiastes chapter 7 is the 666th chapter in the Bible. Revelation 13 deals with the mark of the beast (666). What are the odds that both chapters talk about the same thing and the number 666 is tied to both? Granted, chapter and verse numbers are not a part of the original text (as you pointed out), but I don't think God would find them useless to his purposes for His people today

because we (beliievers) use them all the time and find them to be very invaluable. For all a believer has to do is say "John 3:16" and most believers will know what passage they are talking about

Saying "John 3:16," or any other chapter and verse, has nothing to do with numerology.

 

[mmksparbud]

well personally I believe in the hell talked about in the bible not the torture chamber hell you describe but my personal beliefs are NOT the topic of this discussion, now are they? so instead of going off onto what I believe why not answer and address the points that my posts present?

I said this because to want to into what you imagine my feelings on the subject are instead of what the scriptures I quoted said.
As for the torture chamber--that is what the verses you cling to on this subject say--that is what has been said described over and over here. Burning forever. Tormented forever. Not anything I believe.
Luk_16:24 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.
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.
Mat 8:12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

apparently not, you don't seem to have read what I said....or the bible. If you had you would be able to respond to the things you quote not go off on tangents about something altogether different.

Altogether different? Like what?? What "tangent is that?" And yes--I already mentioned I have read the bible since I was a little girl---apparently you didn't read what I said.

wow, and yet your don't understand that there are several different versions of ECT doctrine at least 3 or 4 of which are on this thread alone and you refuse to address any of the variations that don't line up with your "anger" issues. Remember, you just admitted to anger issues. Bottom line is that you are not accepting what could be, what God says is, if you refuse to even address the varying doctrines on the matter. Which is all I said and asked you for before you went off on this tangent.

I've heard all the versions of eternal hell that have come up. When presented with the ridiculous idea that God torments people in hell, they come up with the ides that it is not God, but it is our own sins that torment us---but it is still forever. Then it is it is not really torture, they even say it's only being out in darkness--nothing going on--just a black isolation, because God is not there, (which, of course, rejects the verse that says God is everywhere, including in hell), I've heard there is really no hell, it's a place where you learn about God and you are given a chance to change your mind and choose God ---you name it, I've heard it.
I admitted to being angry with God---that changed when I went back to Him, so no--I no longer have an issue with anger. It took a while for me to come to grips with the fact that my father had free will and chose the path he did and that it was not God that caused any of my pain and suffering. He'd been there all the time, I just refused to let Him into my heart. God is patient with us. Sometimes we have to unlearn things that as children we mistakenly believe.
.

yep, the consistency of ECT doctrine. Not sure why the consistent part gives you problems, but okay...

That makes no sense whatsoever in light of what you quoted as the part of my statement you were addressing. You're thinking that I have a problem with the "consistency" of some of your ECT doctrines is also something I do not understand. So far, the only thing consisted about all the theories of hell, is that whatever theory anyone comes up with----it all lasts forever, because our souls are immortal--when you've been given verses that say quite the opposite. That I am somehow afraid to face the fact that hell is a consequence of our own actions is something that is clearly wrong. Of course going to hell is because of our own actions!! I never said it isn't! I said we pay according to our works--that is what the scripture says and have quoted those scriotures so I have no idea why you think I would think otherwise except that you are sooo insistent on your version that our souls can not be destroyed by God that you can't see anything else.
I have given considerstion to all these theories and have rejected that any of the things happen in hell--whatever any of those things people think will happen--GO ON FOREVER. That is the only part that I completely and total disagree with and have given the scriptures for that disagreement, and you are the ones that reject the possibility that God will indeed destroy those souls that end up in hell and that hell itself is destroyed in the lake of fire even when the bible says exactly that.n The tanent is yours---0for this is the point of contention---the immortality of the soul and God's right to destroy the soul that ends up in hell.

 

[razzelflabben]

OK, I was involved in that post but trust God is both fair and just. I know you see a difference but to me true justice is almost always a striving for fairness, and there is a such thing is fair. Now if some greedy doofus wants to throw a fit and claim things aren't fair because say for instance, the judge didn't give him all he expected to get/wanted in the divorce settlement, that's fine and it could even be all about the perspective you mention, bit that doesn't mean there wasn't or can't be a fair dividing there. Sure, even our court system drops the ball on fairness, which is justice, sometimes, but again, that doesn't mean there is no such thing as you suggest. Then there are the verdicts whether in the courts or whatever, that are passed down and most everyone says, Well, "I think that was fair"

I have complete confidence God can and will handle that better than anyone we know. He has all the details all the evidence, and a sense of fair play that is unmatched.

FWIW, here is how Merriam-Webster defines justice....they are pretty much, if not identical in meaning:

1 : the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments b : judge c : the administration of law; especially : the establishment or determination of rights according to the rules of law or equity

2 : the quality of being just, impartial, or fair b (1) : the principle or ideal of just dealing or right action (2) : conformity to this principle or ideal : righteousness c : the quality of conforming to law

3 : conformity to truth, fact, or reason : correctness


Seems to me you are saying that if we say justice is fair, though it may be defined that way, that's not really the reality because of this that or the other reason.

But as I see it, thinking it isn't reality, is not the reality. We often make it seem like it's not, because so many of us are the doofuses I mentioned. Or... the definition is fine, the people are not. Your chicken and berry dinner thing could have been solved in a 100% fair manner, by giving you berry pie to them and them giving you their chicken. If their wasn't enough berry pie for those who wanted it, divide it equally among them and if they still didn't get as much as they wanted, that doen't mean it wasn't divided fairly as both justice and the food was served fairly...pun intended.

wow, you really didn't address my point very well, and this last paragraph is evidence as to why....the reason why the berry pie and chicken was not fair was due to an allergy I have in which I was not able to eat the chicken. To give me the chicken and the kids the pie would have been equally unfair because it would have created an allergic reaction that would have been harmful to me. (as I stated in that post)

So you see, where you posted your opinion you did not address how the analogy was considered fair to both parties. Which was the point I was making in the claim that God is fair. To claim God is fair is basically a meaningless statement that demands a perspective that allows for a lot of the misconceptions we are seeing in this thread. where you explained that you think fairness is not so arbitrary, you failed to show how it is by reason of the analogy given. All you did was argue your view point and then change the analogy to fit your opinion. Which isn't helpful at all.

 

[razzelflabben]

I said this because to want to into what you imagine my feelings on the subject are instead of what the scriptures I quoted said.

actually I said based on the posts you sound like.... not that you are....

As for the torture chamber--that is what the verses you cling to on this subject say--that is what has been said described over and over here. Burning forever. Tormented forever. Not anything I believe.

now, how many times have you been told and shown that torture is not the same thing as torment? Yet still you insist that it is a torture chamber, you know, racks and all. No, according to scripture it is a place of torment created for Satan and his demons. That is a far cry from the "torture chamber" you keep touting and yet you never once have addressed the difference.

Luk_16:24 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.
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.
Mat 8:12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

notice it says tormented not tortured. Many times and people have pointed out the difference between the two words and you refuse to address that, so no, you are not addressing the hell of scripture when you talk about a torture chamber hell....

Altogether different? Like what?? What "tangent is that?" And yes--I already mentioned I have read the bible since I was a little girl---apparently you didn't read what I said.

actually the heart of that quote was that you did not read what I said and respond to it, but that is to deal with what scripture says and you didn't even address what scripture said when you quoted scripture in this post.

I've heard all the versions of eternal hell that have come up. When presented with the ridiculous idea that God torments people in hell, they come up with the ides that it is not God, but it is our own sins that torment us---but it is still forever. Then it is it is not really torture, they even say it's only being out in darkness--nothing going on--just a black isolation, because God is not there, (which, of course, rejects the verse that says God is everywhere, including in hell), I've heard there is really no hell, it's a place where you learn about God and you are given a chance to change your mind and choose God ---you name it, I've heard it.
I admitted to being angry with God---that changed when I went back to Him, so no--I no longer have an issue with anger. It took a while for me to come to grips with the fact that my father had free will and chose the path he did and that it was not God that caused any of my pain and suffering. He'd been there all the time, I just refused to let Him into my heart. God is patient with us. Sometimes we have to unlearn things that as children we mistakenly believe.

well, you didn't really address those versions till just now but I notice you still left out the consequences version...why leave it out?

.


That makes no sense whatsoever in light of what you quoted as the part of my statement you were addressing. You're thinking that I have a problem with the "consistency" of some of your ECT doctrines is also something I do not understand. So far, the only thing consisted about all the theories of hell, is that whatever theory anyone comes up with----it all lasts forever, because our souls are immortal--when you've been given verses that say quite the opposite.

Now, please tell me which version suggests that hell is not eternal? Not suffering, but hell? that was what I was referring to, but you know that already if you actually read my post.

That I am somehow afraid to face the fact that hell is a consequence of our own actions is something that is clearly wrong. Of course going to hell is because of our own actions!! I never said it isn't! I said we pay according to our works--that is what the scripture says and have quoted those scriotures so I have no idea why you think I would think otherwise except that you are sooo insistent on your version that our souls can not be destroyed by God that you can't see anything else.

huh? What inconsistency do you think I have? Tell me plainly and I will show you that you misunderstood or misrepresented me to get to that point of understanding.

I have given considerstion to all these theories and have rejected that any of the things happen in hell--whatever any of those things people think will happen--GO ON FOREVER. That is the only part that I completely and total disagree with and have given the scriptures for that disagreement, and you are the ones that reject the possibility that God will indeed destroy those souls that end up in hell and that hell itself is destroyed in the lake of fire even when the bible says exactly that.n The tanent is yours---0for this is the point of contention---the immortality of the soul and God's right to destroy the soul that ends up in hell.

Wow, I addressed those scriptures even brought them up when I talked about a logical conclusion that would allow all the scripture to stay in tact...where did you address that post of mine? I must have somehow missed it because I kept looking for someone to address it but that response never showed up on my screen...dumb computer....you see, in order to respond to what someone says, you actually have to respond to what they say not just post scriptures and then declare yourself to be right. I presented problems with both theories, looked at passages that support both theories and then showed the only consistent answer I could find and encouraged you all to show other theories that allowed us to keep all of scripture rather than throw out parts we don't like. If you responded to that request my computer hid it from me and since I have not blocked anyone I'm going with either you didn't address it or your post got buried in which case if you point me to it or summarize your rebuttal I would be thrilled and make a public sincere apology for suggesting that you didn't address the things I brought up...you know like consequence, translations, how to reconcile all the passages, etc.

 

[mmksparbud]

tor·ture
[ˈtôrCHər]
abuse · ill-treatment · maltreatment ·
persecution · sadism

• great physical or mental suffering or anxiety:
  "the torture I've gone through because of loving you so"
  synonyms: torment · agony · suffering · pain · anguish ·
  misery · distress · heartbreak · affliction · scourge · trauma · wretchedness · hell · purgatory

tor·ment
NOUN

1. severe physical or mental suffering:
   "their deaths have left both families in torment"
   synonyms: agony · suffering · torture · pain · anguish · misery ·
   distress · affliction · trauma · wretchedness · hell · purgatory
   • a cause of suffering:
     "the journey must have been a torment for them"
     synonyms: ordeal · affliction · scourge · curse · plague · bane ·
     sorrow · tribulation · trouble

VERB

1. cause to experience severe mental or physical suffering:
   "he was tormented by jealousy"
   synonyms: torture · afflict · rack · harrow · plague · haunt · bedevil ·
   distress · agonize
   • annoy or provoke in a deliberately unkind way:
     "every day I have kids tormenting me because they know I live alone"
     synonyms: tease · taunt · bait · harass · provoke · goad ·
     plague · bother · trouble · persecute · needle

• a cause of suffering or anxiety:
  "dances were absolute torture because I was so small"

VERB

1. inflict severe pain on:
   "most of the victims had been brutally tortured"
   synonyms: inflict pain on · ill-treat · abuse · mistreat · maltreat ·
   [more]

What you do not seem to understand is that there is very little difference between torture and torment. Being skinned alive is torture--a dripping faucet can be torment---torment that goes on forever is sheer torture! Having to listen to nothing but a dripping faucet for eternity would become sheer torture. If you have nothing going on around you but an ingrown toenail---by the end of a very short period of time, that agony is all you would feel---an eternity of that pain would be torture. The feel of a feather on your skin with nothing else going on, would drive you insane after a while. Isolate anyone in a soundproof, blackened room--they will go insane after a while---much less for all eternity. Deprive a person of sleep--they go nuts, even animals, a cat who has not been allowed to sleep will be totally insane, howling, screaming, running around, clawing at the walls--it's a horrible sight.
It is all crazy when you consider that it must go on for eternity--and that is the point that you refuse to confront.

 

[razzelflabben]

tor·ture
[ˈtôrCHər]
abuse · ill-treatment · maltreatment ·
persecution · sadism

• great physical or mental suffering or anxiety:
  "the torture I've gone through because of loving you so"
  synonyms: torment · agony · suffering · pain · anguish ·
  misery · distress · heartbreak · affliction · scourge · trauma · wretchedness · hell · purgatory

tor·ment
NOUN

1. severe physical or mental suffering:
   "their deaths have left both families in torment"
   synonyms: agony · suffering · torture · pain · anguish · misery ·
   distress · affliction · trauma · wretchedness · hell · purgatory
   • a cause of suffering:
     "the journey must have been a torment for them"
     synonyms: ordeal · affliction · scourge · curse · plague · bane ·
     sorrow · tribulation · trouble

VERB

1. cause to experience severe mental or physical suffering:
   "he was tormented by jealousy"
   synonyms: torture · afflict · rack · harrow · plague · haunt · bedevil ·
   distress · agonize
   • annoy or provoke in a deliberately unkind way:
     "every day I have kids tormenting me because they know I live alone"
     synonyms: tease · taunt · bait · harass · provoke · goad ·
     plague · bother · trouble · persecute · needle

• a cause of suffering or anxiety:
  "dances were absolute torture because I was so small"

VERB

1. inflict severe pain on:
   "most of the victims had been brutally tortured"
   synonyms: inflict pain on · ill-treat · abuse · mistreat · maltreat ·
   [more]

What you do not seem to understand is that there is very little difference between torture and torment. Being skinned alive is torture--a dripping faucet can be torment---torment that goes on forever is sheer torture! Having to listen to nothing but a dripping faucet for eternity would become sheer torture. If you have nothing going on around you but an ingrown toenail---by the end of a very short period of time, that agony is all you would feel---an eternity of that pain would be torture. The feel of a feather on your skin with nothing else going on, would drive you insane after a while. Isolate anyone in a soundproof, blackened room--they will go insane after a while---much less for all eternity. Deprive a person of sleep--they go nuts, even animals, a cat who has not been allowed to sleep will be totally insane, howling, screaming, running around, clawing at the walls--it's a horrible sight.
It is all crazy when you consider that it must go on for eternity--and that is the point that you refuse to confront.

you still haven't shown a single passage that says that God tortures anyone but you all keep insisting that torture and torment are the same thing and even then you refuse to post a single passage that says that God is torturing anyone...why? Hell is said to be torment, but nothing mentioned about God torturing anyone and yet you base your belief that God tortures people on the bible without a single passage that says He tortures anyone....isn't that odd? You base your belief about God torturing man on the Bible but cannot present a single passage that says that God tortures anyone....where I come from, if you want to claim the Bible says something you have to present at least one passage that can be twisted that way....

and that is if we ignore all the definitions and other things you have been shown about the differences in the words.

 

[razzelflabben]

Bottom line, it's time for some of you all to present arguments that allow us to hold all the scriptures in place and still justify your positions, this on both sides of the issue. As far as I recall I am the only one that looked at both sides of the passages and showed how study allows a consistency of scripture. Someone else may have and I missed it, but we will never come to an agreement as per listening to the HS if we don't allow scripture to say what it does and find the consistency that will tell us that we have found the intent of God on the matter. We have a lot of ignoring and a lot of scripture battling but not much coming to agreement that is consistent with all of scripture. Quite frankly, if I have to dismiss half of God's word to man in order to come to a belief about what God says on any given subject, He isn't God at all but rather just a man made construct that sounds good.

 

[Kenny'sID]

wow, you really didn't address my point very well, and this last paragraph is evidence as to why....the reason why the berry pie and chicken was not fair was due to an allergy I have in which I was not able to eat the chicken. To give me the chicken and the kids the pie would have been equally unfair because it would have created an allergic reaction that would have been harmful to me. (as I stated in that post)

So you see, where you posted your opinion you did not address how the analogy was considered fair to both parties. Which was the point I was making in the claim that God is fair. To claim God is fair is basically a meaningless statement that demands a perspective that allows for a lot of the misconceptions we are seeing in this thread. where you explained that you think fairness is not so arbitrary, you failed to show how it is by reason of the analogy given. All you did was argue your view point and then change the analogy to fit your opinion. Which isn't helpful at all.

Yeah, I think I addressed it just fine, guess it wasn't what you wanted to hear. You throw a minuscule comment in there on allergies in there and I treated it as such, as in not much. No details, no way for me to know or think anymore of it than I did.

What a waste of time.

 

[razzelflabben]

Yeah, I think I addressed it just fine, guess it wasn't what you wanted to hear. You throw a minuscule comment in there on allergies in there and I treated it as such, as in not much. No details, no way for me to know or think anymore of it than I did.

What a waste of time.

wow, so allergies is not big thing even when it is the reason for....wow, not even sure what to make of that. Seriously, most people are very cautious about allergies because they know how dangerous they are. Since the perspective was the point and the allergies were the reason for differing perspectives I would have thought that reading for comprehension would have been enough. Apparently I should have gone into great details as to what reactions it causes and what all I am allergic to? Would that have helped?

 

[Kenny'sID]

wow, so allergies is not big thing even when it is the reason for.

Hello? You aren't paying attention to what I said...I was very clear.

 

[mark kennedy]

I am not denying the "Story of Lazarus & the Rich-man" as a literal story. I believe it is literal, too (And not allegorical).

In Luke 16:19-31, what folks fail to understand is that when the Rich-man went to Torments (Hell or Hades), he was not actually being burned by any flames. In Luke 16:24, when the Rich-man said, "...I am tormented in this flame." the Rich-man was referring to the fact about how he was tormented in the flame that was in front of him that was in the gulf that was between him and Abraham (Sort of like if I said I am happy in this car --- yet the car is in front of me). (Similar language like this can be found with the words "This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman," - Genesis 2:23). Adam was not referring to his own flesh, with the word "this", but he was referring to Eve who was in front of him. In other words, it was the heat of the flame in front of the rich-man that made him uncomfortable or tormented. For although I am open to understanding otherwise according to Scripture, I currently do not believe he was in extreme physical pain or torture. For if the Rich-man was engulfed by entire flames --- he wouldn't be asking for a little water to cool his tongue, he would be asking for a giant barrel of water or lots of buckets of water to lower the flame or to put it out. Also, if a person was being engulfed by flames today in the real world, how likely are they to carry on a conversation with you?

It seemed important to look at the original and it's not complicated declension (nouns) or conjugation (verbs), in is ἐν, a preposition simply meaning in, a flame φλόξ. Here's the interesting part, look how the word for flame is used elsewhere:

• 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. G5395 (Luk 16:24)
  
• And when forty years were expired, there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sina an angel of the Lord in a flame G5395 of fire in a bush. (Act 7:30)
• In flaming G5395 fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: (2Th 1:8)
  
• And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame G5395 of fire. (Heb 1:7)
• His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame G5395 of fire; (Rev 1:14)
• And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame G5395 of fire, and his feet are like fine brass; (Rev 2:18)
  
• His eyes were as a flame G5395 of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. (Rev 19:12)

Strong's G5395 - phlox

Also, hell (hades) is sort of like an island sitting atop of the Lake of Fire. For the Earth's core is like a big fiery hot ball. The great gulf is an opening or crack in Hell's surface letting some of the flame from below (in the Lake of Fire) to show. This was the flame (in the great gulf) that was in front of the rich-man whereby he was being tormented by the heat of such a flame.

It's an interesting way of looking at it.

Deuteronomy 32:22
"For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, [i.e. the Lake of Fire] and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.[i.e. hell]"

The lowest Hell is the Lake of Fire. For the English word Hell can be translated as Gehenna in the Greek within the New Testament, which means Lake of Fire. Revelation 20:14 says hell or hades is cast into the Lake of Fire. So what will happen is that island known as hell will either fall down into the Lake of Fire or the Lake of Fire will overflow the island of hell.

Isaiah 34:14
"The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of the island, [i.e. hell] and the satyr shall cry to his fellow; the screech owl also shall rest there, and find for herself a place of rest."

The wild beasts, the satyr, and the screech owl in this passage are demons. The wild beasts of the island are those demons on the island of Hell.

Perhaps not definitive but consistent at least.

Scriptural evidence please.

That was simply a guess

And he will be tormented in fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. [This is a one time event taking place here - unless of course somebody were to suggest the ridiculous notion that the Lamb and His angels will be present to watch the wicked burn for all eternity or something; Which is pretty sadistic

And the smoke of their torment will rise forever and ever. [This is a similar phrase from Isaiah 34:10; For it says that the smoke of Edom went up forever and ever. Yet, is Edom (the place) burning today? No. So we then realize that this phrase is speaking metaphorically about destruction.]

Day and night there will be no rest for those who worship the beast and its image, or for anyone who receives the mark of its name. [Here is what it says in another translation: "And they have no rest day and night, who are bowing before the beast and his image." (Young's Literal Translation–Revelation 14:11) In other words, this event takes place during the time they are worshiping the beast. Meaning, during the time, they are worshiping the beast they will have no rest.]”

(Revelation 14:10-11)

Clearly the children of perdition described are under an eternal curse. The judgment is ongoing but the Beast and the False Prophet are unceremoniously tossed into the Lake of Fire, as opposed to standing before God on judgment day. They are already judged, convicted and their final punishment decided forever.

Yes, it will be horrible to lose one's whole body to being utterly destroyed in the Lake of Fire versus being in God's Kingdom. Nothing here is mentioned about the pains of the Lake of Fire. Jesus is merely stressing the importance of not missing out on His Kingdom if a person (whether a believer or an unbeliever) were to indulge in the sin of lusting after a woman.

It's related to covetousness, I see, I reach I take, there is a progression here. Jesus is describing the kind of things people do everyday that lead to murder and adultery.

I am glad you brought this verse up. This is talking about fair justice. Jesus says you will not get out of prison until you paid the last penny. Luke 12:48 also confirms God is into fair justice, as well.

"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." (Luke 12:48).​

​

This one looks like it is aimed at fallen ministers and professing believers.

​

Avoiding the issue by mentioning that there is a way of escape does not undo the inhumane concept of Eternal Concious Torment.

I'm still sea sawing over this but beginning to see how suffering forever doesn't make a lot of sense. The fire that burned in the Levitical alter would burn the offering to ashes, the ashes were even sacred having to be disposed of ceremonially. It sounds like total annihilation foreshadowed in the Mosaic Law. Something you might find useful when studying Revelations, the imagery is profoundly Levitical. The Son of Man bears a strong resemblance to the High Priest, the Seven Lamps are most likely the seven pronged Menorah, the Lamb is an obvious allusion to the sacrifice of the peace offering. I said all that to point this out:

And he will be tormented in fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. (Rev. 14:10)​

I think this might be related to what is called a sweet savor offering:

You are to wash the internal organs and the legs with water, and the priest is to burn all of it on the altar. It is a burnt offering, a food offering, an aroma pleasing to the Lord. (Leviticus 1:9)​

Completely burned, the smoke rising up forever is a reference to the sacred fire, that by the way, came from the Holy of Holies. Point being, that fire never went out.

As I mentioned above, I believe the Story of Lazarus and the Rich-man is a literal story. Oh, and yes, it is a horrible place. But it is not a torture chamber whereby the wicked are being burned alive, though. Again, think of how you could carry on a conversation with someone being engulfed in flames.

The proximity to the flames indicates he was in the flames, you seem to favor the notion that Hell is in close proximity to the Lake of Fire. Tormented I might mention can also be translated Sorrow. He is suffering, under judgment currently and pending. There is enough ambiguity in the text here that indicates the flames represent some kind or judgment, the physical details still largely unknown.

Leads to destruction. Destruction is something whereby something is annihiated or destroyed or ruined.

Partial soul sleep I didn't find totally convincing but annihilation in the Lake of Fire sounds right to me. Hell I'm still going to have to think about but I really thought you analogy of an island was interesting, if not insightful. Certainly a thoughtful exposition, one I'll be sure to remember.

Narrow road leads to life. This is eternal life whereby the individual is rewarded with living forever. It would not make any sense if the wicked were also rewarded with eternal life.

Yes, we have to live out our faith. For faith without works is dead (James 2:17).
Oh, and yes. We must forgive others, or we will not be forgiven (Matthew 6:15).
We are told to fear not the one who can destroy the body, but we are told to fear the one who can destroy both body and soul in Gehenna (Matthew 10:28).

May God's love shine upon you.
And please be well.
....

My compliments on a compelling exposition. I would encourage you to explore the Levitical aspects. Gehenna, for example, has a connection to a dark Old Testament image.

Gehenna, the name of a valley on the south and east of Jerusalem (yet apparently beginning on the Winer's Grammar, cf. Joshua 15:8; Pressel in Herzog, under the word), which was so called from the cries of the little children who were thrown into the fiery arms of Moloch (which see), i. e. of an idol having the form of a bull. The Jews so abhorred the place after these horrible sacrifices had been abolished by king Josiah (2 Kings 23:10)
Gehenna G1067​

Grace and peace,
Mark