Why is Hell permanent?

[createdtoworship]

one quote, which by the way, says destruction, not eternal torment in a fiery hell without end. doesnt say that, it says destruction. it would be eternal, because something that is destroyed is destroyed eternally, not hard to understand.its consistent with all other scripture regarding the fate of the wicked., btw, one verse......for something so important, paul indirectly, mind you, mentions it once. gotcha, anything else?

so changing the bars a second time, originally alleged that paul didn't write ONE verse about hell. I found one. Now you want a second one. So thats fine. Changing the bars a second time. Point noted.

Now lets see paul talks about these subjects:

death, punishment, wrath, perishing, destruction, destroy, condemn, condemnation, Judge, Judgement, curse, cursed, anathema

So which do you want to explore?

how about anathema (eternal condemnation)

Galatians 1:8
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed (lit anathema).

1 Corinthians 16:22
KJV(i) 22 If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.

We observe the same zeal in Paul, when he wishes that himself "were accursed from Christ for his brethren the Jews, his kinsmen according to the flesh," (Rom. 9:3) from whom he had suffered many and great indignities.

anathema thayers:

1) a thing set up or laid by in order to be kept
1a) specifically, an offering resulting from a vow, which after being consecrated to a god was hung upon the walls or columns of the temple, or put in some other conspicuous place
2) a thing devoted to God without hope of being redeemed, and if an animal, to be slain; therefore a person or thing doomed to destruction
2a) a curse
2b) a man accursed, devoted to the direst of woes


I pass by my car at the junkyard every day going to work, it's destroyed, but not annihilated.

 

[Sadalmelik]

so changing the bars a second time, originally alleged that paul didn't write ONE verse about hell. I found one. Now you want a second one. So thats fine. Changing the bars a second time. Point noted.

Now lets see paul talks about these subjects:

death, punishment, wrath, perishing, destruction, destroy, condemn, condemnation, Judge, Judgement, curse, cursed, anathema

So which do you want to explore?

how about anathema (eternal condemnation)

Galatians 1:8
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed (lit anathema).

1 Corinthians 16:22
KJV(i) 22 If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.

anathema thayers:

1) a thing set up or laid by in order to be kept
1a) specifically, an offering resulting from a vow, which after being consecrated to a god was hung upon the walls or columns of the temple, or put in some other conspicuous place
2) a thing devoted to God without hope of being redeemed, and if an animal, to be slain; therefore a person or thing doomed to destruction
2a) a curse
2b) a man accursed, devoted to the direst of woes


I pass by my car at the junkyard every day going to work, it's destroyed, but not annihilated.

you can spin all you want, im not falling for it, now your the one who is changing words to conform to what your idea of hell is, im not debating fate here with you, your getting off the subject....the subject at hand was eternal hellfire, which i dont believe in. you do, im asking you to prove it. your not going to prove that to me by pointing out that the fate of the wicked is unpleasant. i agree with that. so your not enlightening me to anything. paul doesnt mention any of the 4 words usuall associated with hell, thru english translations.....are you denying this? if so point it out., otherwise, stop trying to change the subject. im not here to debate that the wicked will not suffer some kind of unpleasant judgement.....im here saying that the orthodox version of hell is incorrect, if you wish to debate something else, im not the one.


(orig posted by gradyll) We observe the same zeal in Paul, when he wishes that himself "were accursed from Christ for his brethren the Jews, his kinsmen according to the flesh," (Rom. 9:3) from whom he had suffered many and great indignities.

and when it comes to this, give me a break, im sure that paul, IF he believed that going to hell meant burning alive in a literal firepit for all eternity without end, and with no hope of repeal, would offer himself to go in the place of the unsaved jews. do you love your brethren as much, if so, lets hear any sane person say he wishes he could go in the place of someone else, to burn in a fire for all eternity., right

 

[BobRyan]

So why would you have any problem with us not believing that God tortures people forever in hell? The bible says that the wicked perish. God is true to his word and not a liar.

Agreed.

Given that in the book of Matthew we are told by Christ that God "destroys BOTH body AND soul in fiery hell" it is pretty hard to stretch that out into "does NOT destroy BOTH bod and soul in fiery hell" the way some would have it.

And if both ARE destroyed in fiery hell (after some time of torment or not depending on how we read the texts) - then there is no way it is "eternal torment".

Luke 12:45-49 says some get FEW stripes and some MANY when it comes to that lake of fire -- fiery hell event.

Pretty hard to turn "infinite torment" into "FEW stripes"

in Christ,

Bob

 

[createdtoworship]

Agreed.

Given that in the book of Matthew we are told by Christ that God "destroys BOTH body AND soul in fiery hell" it is pretty hard to stretch that out into "does NOT destroy BOTH bod and soul in fiery hell" the way some would have it.

And if both ARE destroyed in fiery hell (after some time of torment or not depending on how we read the texts) - then there is no way it is "eternal torment".

Luke 12:45-49 says some get FEW stripes and some MANY when it comes to that lake of fire -- fiery hell event.

Pretty hard to turn "infinite torment" into "FEW stripes"

in Christ,

Bob

eternal destruction is just that, destruction that never ends.

 

[createdtoworship]

you can spin all you want, im not falling for it, now your the one who is changing words to conform to what your idea of hell is, im not debating fate here with you, your getting off the subject....the subject at hand was eternal hellfire, which i dont believe in. you do, im asking you to prove it. your not going to prove that to me by pointing out that the fate of the wicked is unpleasant. i agree with that. so your not enlightening me to anything. paul doesnt mention any of the 4 words usuall associated with hell, thru english translations.....are you denying this? if so point it out., otherwise, stop trying to change the subject. im not here to debate that the wicked will not suffer some kind of unpleasant judgement.....im here saying that the orthodox version of hell is incorrect, if you wish to debate something else, im not the one.

nope, you said Hell, and I posted verses regarding anathema, which thayers said is "doomed to destruction".

and when it comes to this, give me a break, im sure that paul, IF he believed that going to hell meant burning alive in a literal firepit for all eternity without end, and with no hope of repeal, would offer himself to go in the place of the unsaved jews. do you love your brethren as much, if so, lets hear any sane person say he wishes he could go in the place of someone else, to burn in a fire for all eternity., right

thats exactly what paul wanted, He would rather go to hell than to watch His family (the Jews) perish.

 

[Sadalmelik]

Agreed.

Given that in the book of Matthew we are told by Christ that God "destroys BOTH body AND soul in fiery hell" it is pretty hard to stretch that out into "does NOT destroy BOTH bod and soul in fiery hell" the way some would have it.

And if both ARE destroyed in fiery hell (after some time of torment or not depending on how we read the texts) - then there is no way it is "eternal torment".

Luke 12:45-49 says some get FEW stripes and some MANY when it comes to that lake of fire -- fiery hell event.

Pretty hard to turn "infinite torment" into "FEW stripes"

in Christ,

Bob

'the fewer stripes means it will be less hot,
the more stripes one gets means it will be hotter in that part of hell', thats was the orthodox response i got on this. i was also told that hell will be put far away from heaven, so that no one in heaven will feel any heat or any sort of discomfort from the happenings going on in hell.....apparently there are some who feel if God puts hell far enough away, everyone in heaven will just forget about it, (inc.God), and they can all get on with their business of eternal bliss.

 

[Sadalmelik]

eternal destruction is just that, destruction that never ends.

uprovable opinion.

 

[Sadalmelik]

nope, you said Hell, and I posted verses regarding anathema, which thayers said is "doomed to destruction".



thats exactly what paul wanted, He would rather go to hell than to watch His family (the Jews) perish.

like i said, im not disagreeing with you that theyre doomed to destruction, im disagreeing with what you think destruction means.....

and when it comes to paul, your assuming he believed in eternal hellfire, of which you have not proven, so your verse in regards to him taking the place of the jews has nothing to do with it, untill you can prove that he believed in eternal hellfire. i maintain if he had believed that pov, he would not have said what he said, which only reinforces to me that the idea of an eternal hellfire was not in his head.

 

[BobRyan]

Agreed.

Given that in the book of Matthew we are told by Christ that God "destroys BOTH body AND soul in fiery hell" it is pretty hard to stretch that out into "does NOT destroy BOTH bod and soul in fiery hell" the way some would have it.

And if both ARE destroyed in fiery hell (after some time of torment or not depending on how we read the texts) - then there is no way it is "eternal torment".

Luke 12:45-49 says some get FEW stripes and some MANY when it comes to that lake of fire -- fiery hell event.

Pretty hard to turn "infinite torment" into "FEW stripes"

'the fewer stripes means it will be less hot,
the more stripes one gets means it will be hotter

Interesting thoughts - but does not work with the text.

Luke 12:45-49 does not say "just as many stripes - but softer stripes, less brutal stripes but just as many as everyone else".

The text speaks to "fewer stripes" as in the number is less. It does not speak about "softer stripes" or "less intense" but "just as many".

So I understand why those who insist on "the same number -- infinity for all" have no way to accept the "fewer stripes" teaching and need to go instead to the "softer stripes" idea that is not actually in the text.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Sadalmelik]

eternal destruction doesnt denote hell, paul made no reference of hell, eternal destruction is just that, destruction, it doesnt say hell. spin it all you want. for all you guys who love the eng. translation bibles, particularly the kjv, it says eternal destruction....it is not translated as hell.

 

[BobRyan]

Given that in the book of Matthew we are told by Christ that God "destroys BOTH body AND soul in fiery hell" it is pretty hard to stretch that out into "does NOT destroy BOTH bod and soul in fiery hell" the way some would have it.

And if both ARE destroyed in fiery hell (after some time of torment or not depending on how we read the texts) - then there is no way it is "eternal torment".

Luke 12:45-49 says some get FEW stripes and some MANY when it comes to that lake of fire -- fiery hell event.

Pretty hard to turn "infinite torment" into "FEW stripes"

eternal destruction is just that, destruction that never ends.

That is another interesting thought.

But "eternal destruction" like "eternal fire" means that the work that it does -- lasts for ever. It does not mean "never actually destroys". Or "incomplete destruction for ever".

And so because of that - Sodom and Gomorrah are said in the Bible to be given as an example of "undergoing the punishment of eternal fire" - destruction that "reduces them to ashes".

Thus Christ can say in Matt 10:28 that God will "Destroy both body and soul in fiery hell" -- rather than saying "God will never be able to fully destroy both body and soul in fiery hell - even though an eternity is spent trying to do it".

In a war - a battle ship that takes many hits - but still survives is not "destroyed" but rather it "survives".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[createdtoworship]

That is another interesting thought.

But "eternal destruction" like "eternal fire" means that the work that it does -- lasts for ever. It does not mean "never actually destroys". Or "incomplete destruction for ever".

And so because of that - Sodom and Gomorrah are said in the Bible to be given as an example of "undergoing the punishment of eternal fire" - destruction that "reduces them to ashes".

Thus Christ can say in Matt 10:28 that God will "Destroy both body and soul in fiery hell" -- rather than saying "God will never be able to fully destroy both body and soul in fiery hell - even though an eternity is spent trying to do it".


In a war - a battle ship that takes many hits - but still survives is not "destroyed" but rather it "survives".

in Christ,

Bob

well that would contradict the dozens of other verses that show that aion, aionios mean literally eternal fire.

 

[createdtoworship]

eternal destruction doesnt denote hell, paul made no reference of hell, eternal destruction is just that, destruction, it doesnt say hell. spin it all you want. for all you guys who love the eng. translation bibles, particularly the kjv, it says eternal destruction....it is not translated as hell.

your comments are growing weak, are we done here?

 

[Sadalmelik]

Interesting thoughts - but does not work with the text.

Luke 12:45-49 does not say "just as many stripes - but softer stripes, less brutal stripes but just as many as everyone else".

The text speaks to "fewer stripes" as in the number is less. It does not speak about "softer stripes" or "less intense" but "just as many".

So I understand why those who insist on "the same number -- infinity for all" have no way to accept the "fewer stripes" teaching and need to go instead to the "softer stripes" idea that is not actually in the text.

in Christ,

Bob

i understand too, cause as with hundreds of bible verses, the orthodox version of hell doesnt line up with them, therefore, the verses need to be changed, add words, thoughts, ideas, about what it means, instead of just reading it as it was Originally written, they cant concede any discrepency, so they just change its meaning and add words to it, to agree with eternal hellfire. and supposedly 'prove' their pov.

 

[Sadalmelik]

your comments are growing weak, are we done here?

not weak, ive answered the verse, doesnt say hell, it says eternal destruction. do you have some bible that shows this as being translated as hell, if so, provide me with the version, and i will concede your point. if not, then you should concede my point, that there isnt one bible out of over 100 translations, that translate one word out of pauls mouth as being hell. your the one trying to spin and say that paul spoke about hell. he did not.

 

[Sadalmelik]

well that would contradict the dozens of other verses that show that aion, aionios mean literally eternal fire.

well it wouldnt contradict the dozens of other verses where the same words are used that described many different things that have ended, incl. the fire of sodom and gomorah, so what exactly is your point?

 

[createdtoworship]

not weak, ive answered the verse, doesnt say hell, it says eternal destruction. do you have some bible that shows this as being translated as hell, if so, provide me with the version, and i will concede your point. if not, then you should concede my point, that there isnt one bible out of over 100 translations, that translate one word out of pauls mouth as being hell. your the one trying to spin and say that paul spoke about hell. he did not.

so all the places that are translated hell, are just the grave. Then the grave is eternal destruction. You have to keep your side of the story straight. The grave IS Hell. Eternal Destruction = the grave = Hell. See? Otherwise you have a bunch of verses speaking of Hell, and a bunch speaking of the grave, and a bunch speaking of eternal destruction. They are not three rooms in the heart of the earth you know?

 

[Sadalmelik]

......any mention of these words, commonly associated with the term hell, within pauls writings? sheol, hades, tartaroo, or gehenna. im still waiting for a verse denoting anyone of these, associated with pauls writings......btw, these are the only words translated as hell in the english translated bibles. so you have basically, by not posting any, said that paul made no mention of hell..... thankyou.

 

[Sadalmelik]

so all the places that are translated hell, are just the grave. Then the grave is eternal destruction. You have to keep your side of the story straight. The grave IS Hell. Eternal Destruction = the grave = Hell. See? Otherwise you have a bunch of verses speaking of Hell, and a bunch speaking of the grave, and a bunch speaking of eternal destruction. They are not three rooms in the heart of the earth you know?

listen, im not the one who ever said i agree with any of these words being translated into hell in the first place.....did i ever say i agreed with that? answer....no. there is no eternal hellfire. the wicked are sent to the grave (upon mortal death), on judgement day, the wicked will be called out of their grave to face judgement, upon hearing their sentence, they will be sent to their death, demise, destruction, to perish, to be no more......all of these words and more are used. they all denote the same thing, and it isnt being eternally burned in a firepit for all eternity.

so no, theres no confusion on my part, no 3 places. if you wish to refer to the lake of fire as hell, then go ahead. thats where everything wicked will be disposed of, including death, evil, hell, the devil and his angels, etc. the bible confirms all of this, and is very consistent. there is no confusion here.


also, funny you should bring up about being confused with different meanings, etc....thats the whole reason were in the mess that were in, in the first place. the original texts and the meaning of the words sheol, hades, tartaroo, and gehenna, were never used in greek to denote an idea of eternal hell, the translators did this, not me. and they did it unwisely. they obviously had their own agendas in doing so, if you know the history of this, you would know this. so dont use me as the scapegoat for the errors in translating these 4 words into hell in the first place. that is what has confused so many.

 

[BobRyan]

so all the places that are translated hell, are just the grave. Then the grave is eternal destruction. You have to keep your side of the story straight. The grave IS Hell. Eternal Destruction = the grave = Hell. See? Otherwise you have a bunch of verses speaking of Hell, and a bunch speaking of the grave, and a bunch speaking of eternal destruction. They are not three rooms in the heart of the earth you know?

Agreed context is everything.

In Matt 10:28 we are told that God will "destroy both body and soul in fiery hell".

in Luke 12 we find the parallel passage for that same event - as told by Luke.

in Christ,

Bob