The changing perception of hell. - How do you define it?

[Zao is life]

They were imprisoned by death. That verse you're referring to (1 Peter 3), is the resurrection coming to those who had died since the days of Noah. Paul referred to this in 1 Thess 4:15 when he said "According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep".

Those who had fallen asleep (died) are the ones who were resurrected by Jesus' defeat of death. They were the first to move into the new life (be resurrected). The rest of us won't receive it until we leave this current life. 1 Peter 3 is telling us, that even those who died before the cross and before hearing the gospel, are saved by Jesus' sacrifice. And 1 Thess 4 is telling us that they are resurrected first.

Actually Peter wrote that they were disobedient before the flood:

18 For Christ also once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, indeed being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit;
19 in which also He went and preached to the spirits in prison,
20 to disobeying ones, when once the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared (in which a few, that is, eight souls were saved through water);

But it's an interesting statement, "They were imprisoned by death".

 

[marks]

It's figurative in the sense that he's clearly not referring to physical death. He can't be talking to people who are physically dead. Surely you agree with me on that.

What I'm saying is that we need to understand the meanings of words in the Bible in the ways that account for all uses, without simply saying that "this instance" isn't actually what it says, it's figurative, or metaphor.

You say, "physically dead", is there any other kind? I believe there is. These were in fact dead in trespasses and sins. Not physically dead, but dead just the same.

Much love!

 

[Freedm]

Here's more on the subject

This is a rather long, but interesting, citation about the restoration of Sodom and Gomorrah, Ammon and Moab, Elam, Egypt and Edom. The bit about Edom is most interesting. It discusses the use of exaggerated language (to make a point) in biblical literature. Meaning, it is not to be taken literally.

The restoration of Sodom and Gomorrah from "eternal" fire Jude 1:7 In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire. Zephaniah 2:9 Therefore, as surely as I live,” declares the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, “surely Moab will become like Sodom, the Ammonites like Gomorrah— a place of weeds and salt pits, a wasteland forever. The remnant of my people will plunder them; the survivors of my nation will inherit their land.” Ezekiel 16:53 “‘However, I will restore the fortunes of Sodom and her daughters and of Samaria and her daughters, and your fortunes along with them,

The restoration of Ammon and Moab Zephaniah 2:9 Therefore, as surely as I live,” declares the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, “surely Moab will become like Sodom, the Ammonites like Gomorrah— a place of weeds and salt pits, a wasteland forever. The remnant of my people will plunder them; the survivors of my nation will inherit their land.” Jeremiah 25:22, 27 21 Edom, Moab and Ammon; ... 27 “Then tell them, ‘This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says:
Drink, get drunk and vomit, and fall to rise no more because of the sword I will send among you.’ Jeremiah 49:6 “Yet afterward, I will restore the fortunes of the Ammonites,” declares the Lord. Jeremiah 48:4, 47 4 Moab will be broken; her little ones will cry out. 47 “Yet I will restore the fortunes of Moab in days to come,” declares the Lord. Here ends the judgment on Moab.

The restoration of Elam Jeremiah 25:25, 27 25 all the kings of Zimri, Elam and Media; ... 27 “Then tell them, ‘This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: Drink, get drunk and vomit, and fall to rise no more because of the sword I will send among you.’ Jeremiah 49:39 “Yet I will restore the fortunes of Elam in days to come,” declares the Lord.

The restoration of Egypt
Jeremiah 25:19, 27 19 Pharaoh king of Egypt, his attendants, his officials and all his people, ... 27 “Then tell them, ‘This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: Drink, get drunk and vomit, and fall to rise no more because of the sword I will send among you.’ Ezekiel 29:13-14 “‘Yet this is what the Sovereign Lord says: At the end of forty years I will gather the Egyptians from the nations where they were scattered. 14 I will bring them back from captivity and return them to Upper Egypt, the land of their ancestry. There they will be a lowly kingdom.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Edom

Edom was an ancient kingdom in Transjordan located between Moab to the northeast, the Arabah to the west and the Arabian Desert to the south and east. Most of its former territory is now divided between Israel and Jordan.

The destruction of Edom uses the same exaggerated language descriptions as hell in the Bible. Yet none of it lasted forever as it clearly says. And you can certainly pass through it today. For this prophecy to be taken literally it would need to be a smoking tar pit today with a bypass to get around it. Compare verse ten below. (Revelation 14:11)

Isaiah 34:8-11 For the Lord has a day of vengeance, a year of retribution, to uphold Zion’s cause. 9 Edom’s streams will be turned into pitch, her dust into burning sulfur; her land will become blazing pitch! 10 It will not be quenched night or day; its smoke will rise forever. From generation to generation it will lie desolate; no one will ever pass through it again. 11 The desert owl and screech owl will possess it; the great owl and the raven will nest there. God will stretch out over Edom the measuring line of chaos and the plumb line of desolation.

/

Seems like you're making the point that the destruction of these places was not to last forever, and with that I agree. I don't see however how this negates the point I was making, which is that God hated Sodom and Gomorrah and Jerusalem, and that God is capable of hate in general.

 

[Freedm]

Actually Peter wrote that they were disobedient before the flood:

18 For Christ also once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, indeed being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit;
19 in which also He went and preached to the spirits in prison,
20 to disobeying ones, when once the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared (in which a few, that is, eight souls were saved through water);

But it's an interesting statement, "They were imprisoned by death".

We are all disobedient, are we not? Isn't that the reason we would all be sentenced to death, were it not for Jesus' sacrifice?

 

[Freedm]

I do see them as being conscious but I can't say for sure because I've never been there and will not go there because like you say, those who die in Christ remain in Christ.

Remember, my position is that Hades is not a physical place, but a state of being, in the same way that "sleep" is a state of being, not a destination.

 

[Freedm]

What I'm saying is that we need to understand the meanings of words in the Bible in the ways that account for all uses, without simply saying that "this instance" isn't actually what it says, it's figurative, or metaphor.

You say, "physically dead", is there any other kind? I believe there is. These were in fact dead in trespasses and sins. Not physically dead, but dead just the same.

Much love!

o.k. but none of this refutes my point, that the wages of sin is physical death which makes eternal suffering in hell impossible.

 

[St. SteVen]

Seems like you're making the point that the destruction of these places was not to last forever, and with that I agree. I don't see however how this negates the point I was making, which is that God hated Sodom and Gomorrah and Jerusalem, and that God is capable of hate in general.

That's a common position of the church.
To me, the Spirit of God does not manifest in hatred.

Galatians 5:22-23 NIV
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

/

 

[Freedm]

That's a common position of the church.
To me, the Spirit of God does not manifest in hatred.

Galatians 5:22-23 NIV
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

/

We have to accept ALL scriptures, not just the ones that we prefer. The fruit of the spirit is love, yes, but God also is capable of hate. Anyway, if you don't want to accept it, that's fine, but I'm not going to ignore those verses, and you haven't yet convinced me that they don't mean what they say.

 

[Hillsage]

Or is it not correct to say we are being held to a higher standard?

Question, what standard is there besides??? ;

Phil 3 14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God IN CHRISTJesus.

Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness OF CHRIST:

That’s about as high a standard as there is, IMO. ….next question; Do you believe that eternal hell is the final price that a person has to pay, if they never got “saved”?

 

[Zao is life]

Question, what standard is there besides??? ;

Phil 3 14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God IN CHRISTJesus.

Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness OF CHRIST:

That’s about as high a standard as there is, IMO. ….next question; Do you believe that eternal hell is the final price that a person has to pay, if they never got “saved”?

To ask if I "believe" anything about the everlasting destiny of souls who were not in the only Ark of our salvation when judgment day came, is not a correct question, because I don't "believe" anything I do not know, and I do not know how to interpret the scriptures brought up in this thread regarding fire and brimstone etc.

So let's just say that I believe that IF souls are never destroyed, then it will be everlasting torment for any souls knowing that they are forever separated from the LOVE of God. BUT Revelation says stuff I do not fully understand, like Revelation 21:27:

24 And the nations of those who are saved will walk in the light of it; and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it.
25 And its gates may not be shut at all by day, for there shall be no night there.
26 And they shall bring the glory and honor of the nations into it.
27 And there shall in no way enter into it anything that defiles, or any making an abomination or a lie; but only those who are written in the Lamb's Book of Life.

and Revelation 22:15:

14 Blessed are they who do His commandments, that their authority will be over the Tree of Life, and they may enter in by the gates into the city.
15 But outside are the dogs, and the sorcerers, and the fornicators, and the murderers, and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and makes a lie.

So someone being in the group outside will be tormented by the total lack of possibility of another chance being given.

BUT I have no idea how to interpret the above (which appears to be metpahorical) or anything that is written about the eternal destiny of those not in Christ after all is "wrapped up"- and there aren't any plain and direct statements as far as I can see.

Personally I don't see Jesus being too concerned about our being too concerned with "death". He wants us to be concerned with life. He came to give us eternal life and give us the experience of eternal life.

 

[Freedm]

24 And the nations of those who are saved will walk in the light of it; and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it.
25 And its gates may not be shut at all by day, for there shall be no night there.
26 And they shall bring the glory and honor of the nations into it.
27 And there shall in no way enter into it anything that defiles, or any making an abomination or a lie; but only those who are written in the Lamb's Book of Life.

and Revelation 22:15:

14 Blessed are they who do His commandments, that their authority will be over the Tree of Life, and they may enter in by the gates into the city.
15 But outside are the dogs, and the sorcerers, and the fornicators, and the murderers, and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and makes a lie.

I'm not sure exactly what point you're trying to get at here, but this is a description of Christianity, which is the new Jerusalem. Just as the old Jerusalem were members of God's kingdom, by lineage, the new Jerusalem is God's kingdom with members based on faith (aka the Israel of God).

Everyone who is forgiven, is clean in the eyes of the Lord and thereby a citizen of Israel (the new Jerusalem), and the rest are sinners. The new Jerusalem came down from heaven 2000 years ago, and we are citizens of it, so it's not a picture of a future, nor a picture of the difference between heaven and hell, but rather it's a picture of our current reality.

 

[Zao is life]

I'm not sure exactly what point you're trying to get at here, but this is a description of Christianity, which is the new Jerusalem. Just as the old Jerusalem were members of God's kingdom, by lineage, the new Jerusalem is God's kingdom with members based on faith (aka the Israel of God).

Everyone who is forgiven, is clean in the eyes of the Lord and thereby a citizen of Israel (the new Jerusalem), and the rest are sinners.

Well if what you say below is true then I can't argue about the above. It makes too much sense.

The new Jerusalem came down from heaven 2000 years ago, and we are citizens of it, so it's not a picture of a future, nor a picture of the difference between heaven and hell, but rather it's a picture of our current reality.

However, I do not believe that Jesus has returned, or that the great tribulation mentioned in the Olivet Discourse is referring to 70 A.D, nor do I believe that every vision that John saw in the Revelation has been fulfilled. In fact I see most of the Revelation as referring only to one period of time - the 3.5 years before the return of Christ.

But the Revelation is an unveiling that God gave to Christ to give to His churches, so it does not have to all fit into that one time-frame. The messages to the 7 churches being an example of it not all fitting into one time-frame consisting of the 3.5 years I just mentioned.

But what you say above in your post that I just quoted, if true, makes total sense (i.e IF true). It sounds like it cannot be interpreted any other way, it fits so perfectly with the new Jerusalem of the last 2,000 years.

I'd rather be left alone to think about the rest of the Revelation, for now, if that's okay. It's not the subject of this thread, anyway.​

 

[St. SteVen]

To ask if I "believe" anything about the everlasting destiny of souls who were not in the only Ark of our salvation when judgment day came, is not a correct question...

Not sure where this analogy about the Ark comes from. ???
There was room for Noah, his family and the animals. No one else was invited.

/ @Hillsage

 

[Freedm]

Well if what you say below is true then I can't argue about the above. It makes too much sense.

However, I do not believe that Jesus has returned, or that the great tribulation mentioned in the Olivet Discourse is referring to 70 A.D, nor do I believe that every vision that John saw in the Revelation has been fulfilled. In fact I see most of the Revelation as referring only to one period of time - the 3.5 years before the return of Christ.

But the Revelation is an unveiling that God gave to Christ to give to His churches, so it does not have to all fit into that one time-frame. The messages to the 7 churches being an example of it not all fitting into one time-frame consisting of the 3.5 years I just mentioned.

But what you say above in your post that I just quoted, if true, makes total sense (i.e IF true). It sounds like it cannot be interpreted any other way, it fits so perfectly with the new Jerusalem of the last 2,000 years.

I'd rather be left alone to think about the rest of the Revelation, for now, if that's okay. It's not the subject of this thread, anyway.​

If you're interested in this topic, I can point you to some easy to read online books that have opened my eyes and are in my opinion irrefutable (I used to be a futurist). Just send me a DM, but I'll just leave you with this simple thought: Even ignoring the myriad of other evidences for this position, the very first line in the book of Revelation, tells us that all of it is in our distant past. That should be your starting point.

 

[The Learner]

ah, not keeping up

 

[Zao is life]

Not sure where this analogy about the Ark comes from. ???
There was room for Noah, his family and the animals. No one else was invited.

/ @Hillsage

Unlike what God had already purposed 120 years before the flood came, this time around many are called but few are chosen. All are invited into the Ark of salvation, this time around. God had not purposed to destroy all flesh when He gave His only begotten Son so that all who believe in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

It does not mean that all will be found in the Ark, i.e the names of all flesh will not be written in the Lamb's Book of Life.

But I think "Ark of salvation" is a legitimate analogy.

 

[Hillsage]

Unlike what God had already purposed 120 years before the flood came, this time around many are called but few are chosen. All are invited into the Ark of salvation, this time around. God had not purposed to destroy all flesh when He gave His only begotten Son so that all who believe in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

It does not mean that all will be found in the Ark, i.e the names of all flesh will not be written in the Lamb's Book of Life.

But I think "Ark of salvation" is a legitimate analogy.

MAT 22:14 For many are called/kletos, but few are chosen/eklektos.

2822 kletos: invited ie appointed, or (spec) a saint
1588 eklektos: select; by impl. favorite

IOW For many are saints, but few are favorites

2TI 2:20 In a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and earthenware, and some for noble use, some for ignoble. 21 If any one purifies himself from what is ignoble, then he will be a vessel for NOBLE use, IOW "CHOSEN"

 

[St. SteVen]

But I think "Ark of salvation" is a legitimate analogy.

As you wish.
To me, if the source pf an analogy doesn't work, then neither does the extension.
Simply becomes something on the level of a mixed, or mutilated, metaphor. "Power for the course", I suppose. - LOL

/

 

[Freedm]

MAT 22:14 For many are called/kletos, but few are chosen/eklektos.

2822 kletos: invited ie appointed, or (spec) a saint
1588 eklektos: select; by impl. favorite

IOW For many are saints, but few are favorites

2TI 2:20 In a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and earthenware, and some for noble use, some for ignoble. 21 If any one purifies himself from what is ignoble, then he will be a vessel for NOBLE use, IOW "CHOSEN"

That's very interesting, but I'm confused about how this interpretation fits within the context of the parable. Jesus told the parable of the king who had invited all (the gentiles) after his invited guests (the Jews) refused to come to the wedding feast, but one who came was not wearing wedding clothes, so he told his servants to tie him hand and foot and throw him into the darkness, after which he said "For many are saints, but few are favourites". Can you explain how that last line applies to the parable? Was the poorly dressed guest a saint, but not a favourite? Why then was he thrown out?

 

[Hillsage]

That's very interesting, but I'm confused about how this interpretation fits within the context of the parable. Jesus told the parable of the king who had invited all (the gentiles) after his invited guests (the Jews) refused to come to the wedding feast, but one who came was not wearing wedding clothes, so he told his servants to tie him hand and foot and throw him into the darkness, after which he said "For many are saints, but few are favourites". Can you explain how that last line applies to the parable? Was the poorly dressed guest a saint, but not a favourite? Why then was he thrown out?

Sorry, missed being notified. Jesus isn't coming back for all the milk toast, pew warming "Christians". He is coming back for the "overcomers" of every church represented in the Revelation. And he is coming back for His "bride that is without spot or wrinkle". or PERFECT. Those will be seated "ON the throne" with Jesus to rule and reign.

It will be those who brought the "extra oil" or spiritual anointing to fulfill His calling FOR us, and more importantly IN us. The rest will still get their robes of righteousness FROM Jesus, if born again. But they will be standing "BEFORE the throne".

REV 3:5 He who conquers shall be clad thus in white garments, and I will not blot his name out of the book of life; I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels.

Getting your name IN the "book of life" doesn't come from the imaginations of theologians that say there's a book of names of those who get to GO to heaven. The book of life gets your name in it by earning 'crowns of CONQUEST' by CONQUERING or OVERCOMING.
You GET INTO HEAVEN by the crown of INHERITANCE . That's the one we receive which was earned by Jesus and received by us when we become born again children of God.

REV 3:21 He who conquers/overcomes, I will grant him to sit with me ON MY THRONE, as I myself conquered and sat down with my Father ON HIS THRONE.

REV 7:9 After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no man could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and tongues, STANDING BEFORE THE THRONE and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes,

This is a brief summary of a much longer conversation, which I'm not thinking we'll do 'here'. Present crowd is drowning in shallow water, no sense going deeper.