Why is Hell Eternal?

[tim_from_pa]

Dear All,

The lake of fire is almost unimaginable. We can't stand a hot fire for even a second and therefore to imagine burring in a lake of fire fore eternity seems just too harsh for us.

We know God is just and so the question we might want to ask ourselves is "how is the lake of fire just?" What is the crime that fits this terrible punishment? It think when we get that figured out it will really enlighten our understanding of a great many things in God.

So, let me ask you this simple question (yes or no).

The punishment for sin is eternal suffering?

 

[Axehead]

I didn't add Saints, both those texts point to the very same event. The wicked are emcompassing the camp of the Saints, and the city. Revelation 14:10-11 (I only said 14:10 last post, apologies) and Revelation 20:9-10.

God most certainly loves the wicked, God did not want any of them to die. What he does not love, is their wicked acts. He does not love when one knows they are working iniquity, and continue therein, that God does not love. But God is love. You can understand that, by looking out the window every day. God blesses the wicked too, with life, with sunshine, with rain on their crops and flowers. All this is designed to bring their attention to Him. He loves them, and would not like them to die.

About the shadows, that is my point exactly. It was a statute they were told to obersve "forever", which only meant "forever" unitl Christ came. Not literally forever.

Jonah himself, said he was in the depths "forever".

Jonah 2:5-6 The waters compassed me about, even to the soul: the depth closed me round about, the weeds were wrapped about my head. I went down to the bottoms of the mountains; the earth with her bars was about me for ever: yet hast thou brought up my life from corruption, O Lord my God.

Was Jonah literally down there for ever? No, he was not.

That was my point, it's common sense, of course forever was not "for all eternity". That is the point I was trying to make. When reading Revelation quite literally, you take it quite literally to mean "They shall burn for all eternity!" Scripture does not say that.

The purpose of burning is that they must suffer the consequences of their deeds. Simply immediate death would not get rid of divine wrath. They would not have paid for their deeds. They would not have been convinced that they deserve the punishment coming to them, they must see the error of their ways. Before they die, they must understand the reward of the righteous, and the reward of the wicked. It is the same for the Saints, we must behold their reward before we enter into eternity. The entire universe it behold the judgement and condemnation of sin before God. Scripture has said, affliction, that being sin, shall not rise up a second time. This is part of the protection of the Universe so that they sin not. Behold the reward of the wicked. Even we as humans can understand right now, that some people see the death penalty as the "easy way out". The claim is usually, "let them live with that guilt, that is punishment itself". When you are sentenced, you are sentenced for a specific amount of time. However, when the sentence is over, they are not to live. They are to die, it is to be the end of them. This is the second death.

Being hurt with the second death still is the second death. We die once, all of us, naturally (or unnatural, as sin is unnatural). Then we are ressurected. Then the righteous go onto life eternal. Then after 1,000 years the wicked are ressurected, judged before the universe, condemned before the universe, burnt, and then they become ashes. The punishment of the wicked is for us to behold.

Does God love Satan? Does God love Satan's children?

Rom_5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

This verse refers to sinners who have not died, yet. It does not mean that God loves the wicked after they die in their sins and go to be with their father the Devil.

The purpose of burning is that they must suffer the consequences of their deeds. Simply immediate death would not get rid of divine wrath.

Jesus satisfied the wrath of God, Rae. God is only giving the wicked what they chose. They chose to live without Him on earth and that sealed their eternal existence, to be without Him.

They would not have paid for their deeds. They would not have been convinced that they deserve the punishment coming to them, they must see the error of their ways. Before they die, they must understand the reward of the righteous, and the reward of the wicked.

That is ridiculous. Why do you need someone to understand anything if they are going to be obliterated? You speak as if God has to salve His conscious in order to justify to men that His punishment upon them is just. God does not have to justify anything to any man. He does not answer to man. And it makes no sense whatsoever that God wants to make a point with the wicked before He totally wipes them out. That's just strange and you are really grasping for straws to make your theology work in your own mind.

You are inferring that the second death is annihilation when the first death wasn't. Why resurrect anyone to the judgment? Just annihilate them after the first death.

JWs and SDAs (Seventh Day Adventist) hold the total annihilation view and you came out of the SDA but are now in a hybrid form of SDA and you are still holding to the total annihilation view.

'tormented day and night forever and ever' comes up twice in revelation. I believe that this is the strongest argument for the traditional view and to get away from this it is necessary to redefine "forever and ever" as you are doing.

I'm also really curious about the idea that God punishes some people before destroying them. It sounds like you think the purpose of this would be to satisfy justice. I'm wondering why justice wouldn't be satisfied by God destroying them outright without making them suffer beforehand? Since all the wicked will be annihilated in your view, then there is really no one that God needs to make an example of them too.

Why do you think the "fire" that is unquenchable is really FIRE? The fire could be the scourging from being separated from the Love of God. On earth, even wicked men are partakers of good things and every good thing comes down from the Father of Lights. So, in hell, you have NO good things. No warmth, no comfort, no love, no kindness, etc, etc.

We know that the Fire of the Holy Spirit is not real fire but the refining process and purging of the dross in our lives.

The unquenchable fire could very well mean the scourging and the pain that comes from being totally separated from God and all goodness associated with Him. Of course some believe in Ultimate Reconciliation where the Lake of Fire is a purification of the wicked so that they may eventually be restored. I don't believe the Bible teaches Ultimate Reconciliation, but many do. I believe the Bible teaches that there is no repentance or salvation after death. Salvation must occur while in the body, in this life.

There are some Scriptures that sound like annihilation, although one of my problems with annihilationism is that it really doesn't have much support with orthodox Christian teaching, historically. But, I am less concerned with the historical view than the Scriptures themselves and I don't see annihilation of the wicked in the Scripture. I do see how people are arriving at their conclusion but I think they are not being intellectually or spiritually dishonest with the Scriptures. They are inferring quite a bit to support their pre-conceived conclusions.

I have a practical question for you: what do you do with regard to preaching to unbelievers? If you talk about judgment in some way, how do you go about it? Do you tell them that they will ultimately cease to exist? (It's interesting now that I think about it that a lot of unbelievers are expecting to cease to exist after they die, just without being punished first).

Also, I'm curious if you have an answer for the question why do you think God would punish people first before destroying their souls rather than just destroying them immediately? Again, what purpose is served by their being punished first and then destroyed? Who is He making them an example to? Other people that will be destroyed? Does that make sense?

Seems cruel and vindictive to beat someone up before they go to the electric chair. Do you see what I mean?

We cannot place "reason" above revelation, Rae. We may speculate, but if we don't know for sure, we should say that, don't you think?

It is possible, is it not that since hell is also spoken of as a place of darkness, that the fire is not real fire at all. IF there is fire then there isn't total darkness. Fire could very well mean the awful pain of being separated from all GOOD (God).

2Pe_2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

We know that people would not choose hell for their eternal destination, but what they do choose is to live without God. So, by choosing to live without God, that is what they are choosing for eternity and that is what hell is, existence without God.

Then we have this verse:
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.

If the word torment is used or at least implied within a text that is written in symbolic language – what else can it mean but conscious torture? How can torture not be conscious? What “symbolic” meaning could you attach to something that has to be “literal” by definition? The context of Rev_14 is ETERNITY. So, there is no hidden meaning in "Forever and ever". It means FOREVER and EVER!!

And why would Jesus use a parable that gives support to the idea of eternal conscious torment? (Luke_16)
The story of the Rich Man and Lazarus, may have been a parable, but parables contain spiritual truth.

As far as I know the annihilationist has NOT come up with a decent rebuttal to those points.

So, maybe we should concentrate on what we do have in common.
1. Jesus is the only way to God.
2. There will be a judgment of the just and the unjust
3. The unjust will be punished and the just will reap life eternal.

Mat_25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

One believes in total annihilation and the other believes everlasting punishment is well, EVERLASTING.

We should agree to disagree on this one point, I believe.

All the best,
Axehead

 

[Raeneske]

Does God love Satan? Does God love Satan's children?

Rom_5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

This verse refers to sinners who have not died, yet. It does not mean that God loves the wicked after they die in their sins and go to be with their father the Devil.




Jesus satisfied the wrath of God, Rae. God is only giving the wicked what they chose. They chose to live without Him on earth and that sealed their eternal existence, to be without Him.




That is ridiculous. Why do you need someone to understand anything if they are going to be obliterated? You speak as if God has to salve His conscious in order to justify to men that His punishment upon them is just. God does not have to justify anything to any man. He does not answer to man. And it makes no sense whatsoever that God wants to make a point with the wicked before He totally wipes them out. That's just strange and you are really grasping for straws to make your theology work in your own mind.

You are inferring that the second death is annihilation when the first death wasn't. Why resurrect anyone to the judgment? Just annihilate them after the first death.

JWs and SDAs (Seventh Day Adventist) hold the total annihilation view and you came out of the SDA but are now in a hybrid form of SDA and you are still holding to the total annihilation view.

'tormented day and night forever and ever' comes up twice in revelation. I believe that this is the strongest argument for the traditional view and to get away from this it is necessary to redefine "forever and ever" as you are doing.

I'm also really curious about the idea that God punishes some people before destroying them. It sounds like you think the purpose of this would be to satisfy justice. I'm wondering why justice wouldn't be satisfied by God destroying them outright without making them suffer beforehand? Since all the wicked will be annihilated in your view, then there is really no one that God needs to make an example of them too.

Why do you think the "fire" that is unquenchable is really FIRE? The fire could be the scourging from being separated from the Love of God. On earth, even wicked men are partakers of good things and every good thing comes down from the Father of Lights. So, in hell, you have NO good things. No warmth, no comfort, no love, no kindness, etc, etc.

We know that the Fire of the Holy Spirit is not real fire but the refining process and purging of the dross in our lives.

The unquenchable fire could very well mean the scourging and the pain that comes from being totally separated from God and all goodness associated with Him. Of course some believe in Ultimate Reconciliation where the Lake of Fire is a purification of the wicked so that they may eventually be restored. I don't believe the Bible teaches Ultimate Reconciliation, but many do. I believe the Bible teaches that there is no repentance or salvation after death. Salvation must occur while in the body, in this life.

There are some Scriptures that sound like annihilation, although one of my problems with annihilationism is that it really doesn't have much support with orthodox Christian teaching, historically. But, I am less concerned with the historical view than the Scriptures themselves and I don't see annihilation of the wicked in the Scripture. I do see how people are arriving at their conclusion but I think they are not being intellectually or spiritually dishonest with the Scriptures. They are inferring quite a bit to support their pre-conceived conclusions.

I have a practical question for you: what do you do with regard to preaching to unbelievers? If you talk about judgment in some way, how do you go about it? Do you tell them that they will ultimately cease to exist? (It's interesting now that I think about it that a lot of unbelievers are expecting to cease to exist after they die, just without being punished first).

Also, I'm curious if you have an answer for the question why do you think God would punish people first before destroying their souls rather than just destroying them immediately? Again, what purpose is served by their being punished first and then destroyed? Who is He making them an example to? Other people that will be destroyed? Does that make sense?

Seems cruel and vindictive to beat someone up before they go to the electric chair. Do you see what I mean?

We cannot place "reason" above revelation, Rae. We may speculate, but if we don't know for sure, we should say that, don't you think?

It is possible, is it not that since hell is also spoken of as a place of darkness, that the fire is not real fire at all. Fire could very well mean the awful pain of being separating from all GOOD (and God).

2Pe_2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

We know that people would not choose hell for their eternal destination, but what they do choose is to live without God. So, by choosing to live without God, that is what they are choosing for eternity and that is what hell is, existence without God.

Then we have this verse:
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.

If the word torment is used or at least implied within a text that is written in symbolic language – what else can it mean but conscious torture? How can torture not be conscious? What “symbolic” meaning could you attach to something that has to be “literal” by definition?

And why would Jesus use a parable that gives support to the idea of eternal conscious torment? (Luke_16)
The story of the Rich Man and Lazarus, may have been a parable, but parables contain spiritual truth.

As far as I know the annihilationist has NOT come up with a decent rebuttal to those points.

So, maybe we should concentrate on what we do have in common.
1. Jesus is the only way to God.
2. There will be a judgment of the just and the unjust
3. The unjust will be punished and the just will reap life eternal.

Mat_25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

One believes in total annihilation and the other believes everlasting punishment is well, EVERLASTING.

We should agree to disagree on this one point, I believe.

All the best,
Axehead

Jesus satisfied that wrath for those who believe on the Son of God. It is an inifinite satisfaction for any who believe on Him. However, if you choose not the free gift, then you will pay for your own sins.

In order to guard eternity, the righteous Saints, the holy angels, the holy inhabitants of God must see the wrath of God upon wickedness. That and the atonement are the safeguards against sin ever rearing it's ugly head up in God's universe again. They must pay for their deeds, the wicked must see their deeds are evil. That is the purpose of the wicked being judged.

Jude 1:15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

Now as for a preconceived opinions, not even close. I did not grow up with all the beliefs I have now. I am ex-SDA, but I was an SDA, or considered myself one, for mere weeks. As a matter of fact, I only recently started praying and actually studying the Bible. There are many points where we may think scripture contradicts. But there are 4 times which I posted scripture showing they shall cease to exist, and shall become ashes underneath the soles of our feet. If this is not true, then it warrants an explanation. Likewise, it does say forever twice in Revelation. If that is not literally true, it warrants an explanation. I have presented you with the explanation, that for ever does not always appear to be eternal. I have given you 3 examples proving forever is not eternal, but forever was subject to the entire concept. Likewise, forever is subject to the event that is to take place. They are to "for ever" until they die. They do not have rest day nor night, they do not get a 5 minute break. I have also found that scripture names Eternal Fire as Everlasting Fire, Lake of Fire, and Fire and Brimstone. In my studies I have found God to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah with Eternal Fire, and all it's inhabitants. I have also found that the Earth is to burn up with the same fire. Yet both of those instances prove that the fire did not, and will not burn for all eternity. That is inconsistent with modern teaching of eternal fire. It's not that scripture is inconsistent, it's that that fire which is claimed to burn for all eternity, does not burn for all eternity. I have presented the verses which honestly point in the other direction. It was discarded.

Your electric chair example only partially works. You say to beat them up before they go to the electric chair. That's not case. They go straight to the electric chair, they feel the pain, they cease to exist. And such a thing is to prevent others from ever encroaching upon that position again, from ever allowing sin to reign again. It is a safeguard, the wicked are judged, and the righteous are safeguarded. All in the universe will be convinced of the justice of God, and His dealings with sin. The wicked also are convinced of their ungodly course (Jude 1:15). This is not the only reasoning I provide, earlier in my post I still provided.

The view I hold onto is because of what I have found in scripture. Divine revelation has revealed inconsistencies ignored, and unaccounted for in manmade traditions. And as for ultimate reconciliation, that I do not believe in either. Man's reasoning, "But why would God do that!?" vs God's Revelation "To convince all the ungodly of their ungodly deeds". God's Revelation has pointed to two other specific examples of eternal fire. Theses do not burn for eternity. Inconsistency. I already posted all that however.

As for preaching for unbelievers, I cannot say I've had the pleasure of preaching to many, (if we are in fact referring to athesitic unbelievers). But yes, I will tell them the truth if they ask. If you reject the Son of God, you reject the only way to eternal life, and you reject your wicked deeds being paid for.

Jesus also gave a parable with "support" to jewelry, and in the OT a parable in "support" of trees talking, and asking kings to reign over them. But they do not support unbiblical themes, and actions. It is a parable, it is not meant to looked at all completely literally. It does show spiritual truth, but not what the world is implying about eternal life in fire. The Rich man parable shows:

1) How the hungry shall be comforted, and how those who aren't hungry shall be in danger.
2) How if a man be raised from the dead, the Pharisees and Jews would not believe that Jesus is the Son of God. Neither if Lazarus was ressurected, neither Jesus. If their hearts were set to unbelief in that which was written by Moses and Prophets, then they shall not believe in Jesus.
3) That there is a "great gulf" fixed between the living and the dead.
4) How the "dogs" go for the crumbs, much like the Caananite woman went for the crumbs, when Jesus was there "only" to reach out to Israel.

I do believe it is everlasting punishment, but what you believe in the punishment, and what I believe are the punishment are two different things. It seems you believe the punishment is eternal conscious torment in flames, and I believe the everlasting punishment is death. That's the difference. I believe that the fire is HOW they die.

If that is what you wish to do, then we may agree to disagree. I'm always here for questions if need be.

 

[Axehead]

Jesus satisfied that wrath for those who believe on the Son of God. It is an inifinite satisfaction for any who believe on Him. However, if you choose not the free gift, then you will pay for your own sins. Agreed.

In order to guard eternity, the righteous Saints, the holy angels, the holy inhabitants of God must see the wrath of God upon wickedness. That and the atonement are the safeguards against sin ever rearing it's ugly head up in God's universe again. They must pay for their deeds, the wicked must see their deeds are evil. That is the purpose of the wicked being judged.

Jude 1:15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

Do you see the problem here? God does not have to convince the godly. He is convincing the ungodly. Does God the Father have to worry about Jesus rebelling? Neither does He have to worry about those who have been conformed to the image of His Son.

Now as for a preconceived opinions, not even close. I did not grow up with all the beliefs I have now. I am ex-SDA, but I was an SDA, or considered myself one, for mere weeks. As a matter of fact, I only recently started praying and actually studying the Bible. There are many points where we may think scripture contradicts. But there are 4 times which I posted scripture showing they shall cease to exist, and shall become ashes underneath the soles of our feet. If this is not true, then it warrants an explanation. Likewise, it does say forever twice in Revelation. If that is not literally true, it warrants an explanation. I have presented you with the explanation, that for ever does not always appear to be eternal. I have given you 3 examples proving forever is not eternal, but forever was subject to the entire concept. Likewise, forever is subject to the event that is to take place. They are to "for ever" until they die. They do not have rest day nor night, they do not get a 5 minute break. I have also found that scripture names Eternal Fire as Everlasting Fire, Lake of Fire, and Fire and Brimstone. In my studies I have found God to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah with Eternal Fire, and all it's inhabitants. I have also found that the Earth is to burn up with the same fire. Yet both of those instances prove that the fire did not, and will not burn for all eternity. That is inconsistent with modern teaching of eternal fire. It's not that scripture is inconsistent, it's that that fire which is claimed to burn for all eternity, does not burn for all eternity. I have presented the verses which honestly point in the other direction. It was discarded.

Your electric chair example only partially works. You say to beat them up before they go to the electric chair. That's not case. They go straight to the electric chair, they feel the pain, they cease to exist.

Ok, how about Lethal injection?

And such a thing is to prevent others from ever encroaching upon that position again, from ever allowing sin to reign again. It is a safeguard, the wicked are judged, and the righteous are safeguarded. All in the universe will be convinced of the justice of God, and His dealings with sin. The wicked also are convinced of their ungodly course (Jude 1:15). This is not the only reasoning I provide, earlier in my post I still provided.

The view I hold onto is because of what I have found in scripture. Divine revelation has revealed inconsistencies ignored, and unaccounted for in manmade traditions. And as for ultimate reconciliation, that I do not believe in either. Man's reasoning, "But why would God do that!?" vs God's Revelation "To convince all the ungodly of their ungodly deeds". God's Revelation has pointed to two other specific examples of eternal fire. Theses do not burn for eternity. Inconsistency. I already posted all that however.

As for preaching for unbelievers, I cannot say I've had the pleasure of preaching to many, (if we are in fact referring to athesitic unbelievers). But yes, I will tell them the truth if they ask. If you reject the Son of God, you reject the only way to eternal life, and you reject your wicked deeds being paid for.

And what is the penalty/punishment for rejecting the Son of God? What would you tell them?

I do believe it is everlasting punishment, but what you believe in the punishment, and what I believe are the punishment are two different things. It seems you believe the punishment is eternal conscious torment in flames, and I believe the everlasting punishment is death. That's the difference. I believe that the fire is HOW they die.

If that is what you wish to do, then we may agree to disagree. I'm always here for questions if need be.

I admit I don't know what the flames are. Literal or not. I just know that the wicked will be separated from God and anything good, forever and I don't see annihilationism.

We won't agree on that one point and that's ok. You and I really don't know, do we? It is what we think the Scriptures are saying. It's interesting to speculate but not worthwhile to argue about since neither you nor I really do know exactly what is going to happen. We think we know, based on our interpretation, but we really don't know. If annihilation is true, then I could see people not being interested in living the crucifed life and denying one's self in this life and living for God. Eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we are annihilated.

It's been fun and interesting.

All the best,
Axehead

 

[KingJ]

So, let me ask you this simple question (yes or no).

The punishment for sin is eternal suffering?

No

Eternal punishment mentioned by Jesus includes temporal suffering and eternal banishment. Look at our free will fore-runners the fallen angels, Are they suffering now? NO. Are they in punishment? YES. They are out of God's presence.

I want to add though, that this can be a blurry subject and I am not going to say that anyone who believes in eternal '''suffering'' is wrong. It is just that if I can discern with my puny brain that it seems wrong, how much more God who gave me this brain? Scripture says God is good. God is just. I choose to believe it completely. God will not overwrite anyone's free will to reject Him. Hence eternal banishment is guaranteed. If God had to intervene and take people out of hell, He would be removing their free will to reject Him. God will increase our IQ in heaven. He has nothing to hide. He is good. He is just! He chooses to hold Himself to these standards. He will surely do that with those going to hell. I also think that annihilation is removing free will. God still loves the devil! His mercy endureth forever! on the saved and the unsaved!

 

[Justin Mangonel]

Dear Tim,

Definitely yes. Death and hell are cast into the lake of fire where those groups of people are tormented forever.

Revelation 20:13,14
Revelation 14:9,10

 

[IanLC]

Hell may be eternal because God has given mankind ample time to accept Him. Ultimately we do not know why Hell is eternal but God does and I just know that I would not want to be there.

 

[Rex]

If any of you had followed Axehead and Raeneske's debate you would have figured out the answer is not as plain and evident as some tend to express in their post.

I think they agreed that a definitive answer is difficult from scripture, because they both value the testimony of the scriptures they conceded to one another, that is being wise, To review the same information and then dogmatically take a position is not, IMO. The same people that do those things will also be dogmatic when prof of concept can be proven from the word. What does that indicate, that the value people place on the bible plays a great part in the differences of option.

Just something to think about.

 

[Axehead]

If any of you had followed Axehead and Raeneske's debate you would have figured out the answer is not as plain and evident as some tend to express in their post.

I think they agreed that a definitive answer is difficult from scripture, because they both value the testimony of the scriptures they conceded to one another, that is being wise, To review the same information and then dogmatically take a position is not, IMO. The same people that do those things will also be dogmatic when prof of concept can be proven from the word. What does that indicate, that the value people place on the bible plays a great part in the differences of option.

Just something to think about.

Amen Rex. And I can only echo what Alan says, "Whatever Hell is, I don't want to be there." God has told us enough about it that we should want to stay away from it. I just want to be where Jesus is. He is our great reward. (Gen_15:1)

 

[tim_from_pa]

Dear Tim,

Definitely yes. Death and hell are cast into the lake of fire where those groups of people are tormented forever.

Revelation 20:13,14
Revelation 14:9,10

So, I was just wondering why you believe Jesus is in hell forever? I thought He was at the right hand of God?

 

[Justin Mangonel]

Dear T,

No getting you on this one. Remember, He lead captivity captive...out of sheol.

Dear All,

You know...people are wanting to define things down like scientists do when they want to say something proves this or that. The upshot of scientific thinking is that they very rarely say they prove anything...almost nothing, to them, is certain. Yet for all the scientist's uncertainty they still manage to perform science and put it to practical use.

If you wanted to tithe 10% of a bag full of cumin seeds how precise to you need to be? For me, I would weigh out the whole of it then divide that number by ten and then weight out one tenth of that amount. It would be good enough. However, some might say that I had not tithed 10% because I was not sure that it was exactly ten percent. They would say the word clearly says 10%. I would say I have but they would say prove it. I suppose I could use a microscope to select one in every ten seeds and then I could "prove" it to my skeptic. However, what would I do if I had one seed left over? Would I have to divide that seed into ten parts? How would I know they were exactly equal? Could I find the means to measure them fine enough to know I had? I suppose, my skeptic could still say that I had not tithed exactly the amount that God says is proper.

So to with scripture. God tells us there is a hell and it is a very nasty place you do not wish to end up in. From the macro viewpoint it is forever. Skeptics who want to divide and parse the word ad infinitum can never arrive at a delimitative answer. To them their world is uncertainty and very little is ever proved. Yet, with 99% certainly we can say that the Lake of Fire is eternal. Is this not good enough in order to determine that we and everyone else should avoid it at all costs?

According to how I read the word everyone who does not accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior will make the lake of fire their eternal home. It is unimaginable pushishment that God thinks fits the crime of rejecting His son. Why is this that difficult for people who read the same Bible as I do to believe and preach this as fact? It is like people who argue that the number of holocaust victims...they are missing the point...it is not the number it is the fact that it took place and people did suffer unimaginable cruelty. When people try to argue about the actual length of forever they miss the point...it the fact that they will be tormented that makes it worth doing anything to avoid.

The Lake of fire is eternal as far as our natural minds can comprehend. Arguing the fine points about it will not make it go away. The overreaching importance of this doctrine is that we are being saved from it and it is our task to share this good news with the world.

 

[Raeneske]

Dear T,

No getting you on this one. Remember, He lead captivity captive...out of sheol.

Dear All,

You know...people are wanting to define things down like scientists do when they want to say something proves this or that. The upshot of scientific thinking is that they very rarely say they prove anything...almost nothing, to them, is certain. Yet for all the scientist's uncertainty they still manage to perform science and put it to practical use.

If you wanted to tithe 10% of a bag full of cumin seeds how precise to you need to be? For me, I would weigh out the whole of it then divide that number by ten and then weight out one tenth of that amount. It would be good enough. However, some might say that I had not tithed 10% because I was not sure that it was exactly ten percent. They would say the word clearly says 10%. I would say I have but they would say prove it. I suppose I could use a microscope to select one in every ten seeds and then I could "prove" it to my skeptic. However, what would I do if I had one seed left over? Would I have to divide that seed into ten parts? How would I know they were exactly equal? Could I find the means to measure them fine enough to know I had? I suppose, my skeptic could still say that I had not tithed exactly the amount that God says is proper.

So to with scripture. God tells us there is a hell and it is a very nasty place you do not wish to end up in. From the macro viewpoint it is forever. Skeptics who want to divide and parse the word ad infinitum can never arrive at a delimitative answer. To them their world is uncertainty and very little is ever proved. Yet, with 99% certainly we can say that the Lake of Fire is eternal. Is this not good enough in order to determine that we and everyone else should avoid it at all costs?

According to how I read the word everyone who does not accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior will make the lake of fire their eternal home. It is unimaginable pushishment that God thinks fits the crime of rejecting His son. Why is this that difficult for people who read the same Bible as I do to believe and preach this as fact? It is like people who argue that the number of holocaust victims...they are missing the point...it is not the number it is the fact that it took place and people did suffer unimaginable cruelty. When people try to argue about the actual length of forever they miss the point...it the fact that they will be tormented that makes it worth doing anything to avoid.

The Lake of fire is eternal as far as our natural minds can comprehend. Arguing the fine points about it will not make it go away. The overreaching importance of this doctrine is that we are being saved from it and it is our task to share this good news with the world.

The scripture says, they are judged according to their works. I cannot judge how bad a punishment is shall be for rejecting the Son of God. But I can tell you, that for rejecting the Son, 2 very things are made evident:

1) They have rejected eternal life, and thus they shall die.

2) They have rejected payment for their sins, so they must pay for them themselves.

The Lake of fire is not eternal. The reasons given to say it is eternal, all those on this board should see, are inconsistent.

This eternal fire destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah and it's inhabitants, any yet they and it are not still burning. This very same earth is to be burned with the same fire, yet it is not for all eternity. Also, the lake of fire is to take place on this earth, in the presence of the Lord, Holy Angels, and the Saints. Shall this be for all eternity? By the prophets of old, it was predicted that Satan and all the wicked shall become ashes upon the face of this earth, and they shall not exist anymore.

So, what is the purpose of saying, "for ever" they shall burn? The same reason the Lord says, the servant shall be bound to his master (Old Testament) forever. The servant was to serve the master "for ever" until one of the two died. The wicked will pay for their sins; they shall burn "for ever" until they die.

What people are trying to do, is bring to those who hold the doctrine of eternal life in hellfire, back to scripture, where it says, the wicked shall die.

The wages of sin is death.

 

[tim_from_pa]

So, let me ask you this simple question (yes or no).
The punishment for sin is eternal suffering?

Dear Tim,
Definitely yes. Death and hell are cast into the lake of fire where those groups of people are tormented forever.

So, I was just wondering why you believe Jesus is in hell forever? I thought He was at the right hand of God?

Dear T,

No getting you on this one. Remember, He lead captivity captive...out of sheol.

Well, what I'm getting at is this. Jesus paid the price for our sins, no? He may not have been personally guilty, but he took on the penalty as if he was. now.... if the price paid for sin is eternal punishment instead of death, then Jesus must logically still be in hell, otherwise the price of our sins were not paid.

Seriously, in the bible, when it speaks of eternal fire, it's talking about the result, not the continual action. In other words, the fire's destruction is eternal, hence "eternal fire".

One time I destroyed a book I did not like in a fire. I said that I destroyed it in eternal fire, meaning the book will never come back. The fire long ago burned out, but the book is eternally lost. The bible calls one that is lost as "perished" (utter destruction) never to come back for all eternity.

 

[Rex]

Well Tim now that you let the shoe drop.

I expect we won't be having picnics and toasting marshmallows in heaven around the eternal fire side.

On a more serious note I have never heard that perspective before.
It affirms the word in Gen, the day you eat of it you shall surly die.
I really believe it means what it says.

 

[Justin Mangonel]

Dear A,

Maybe it should read...they have rejected eternal life therefore they will receive eternal death.

Dear T,

I see what you are getting at now. However, I really don't believe that. Eternal means forever not a punctiliar event. It is called the second death for a reason.

Why would you not wish to believe the lake of fire is eternal? Do you object to it?

 

[Arnie Manitoba]

I think there is another way we could look at it too.

Hell must be eternal .... otherwise why should anybody fear it

If everything simply "ends" at death (for the unsaved) it would not be a bad thing compared
to a continuing awareness of eternal separation from God (in hell)

 

[Axehead]

Well, what I'm getting at is this. Jesus paid the price for our sins, no? He may not have been personally guilty, but he took on the penalty as if he was. now.... if the price paid for sin is eternal punishment instead of death, then Jesus must logically still be in hell, otherwise the price of our sins were not paid.

Seriously, in the bible, when it speaks of eternal fire, it's talking about the result, not the continual action. In other words, the fire's destruction is eternal, hence "eternal fire".

One time I destroyed a book I did not like in a fire. I said that I destroyed it in eternal fire, meaning the book will never come back. The fire long ago burned out, but the book is eternally lost. The bible calls one that is lost as "perished" (utter destruction) never to come back for all eternity.

Jesus' death is what saves us not His suffering. We were reconciled to God by His death not His "sufferings in hell", which are non-existent. Jesus did not suffer in Hell. By saving us from death, He saves us from sufferings in hell so there was no need for Him to suffer in Hell, only to die on the Cross. We needed His death to reconcile us not any supposed suffering in Hell.
Rom_5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

God came to us in Christ...in a body, because His mission was to die for us, shedding His blood for the remission of our sins. The Bible does not talk about Him suffering in Hell.
Rom 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. (not suffered for us)

That is why Jesus came. Sin took place in the body and that is why salvation must take place in the body, too. But, salvation could only come in the body once an innocent man was slain. No one could do this, so God came Himself, (God was in Christ Jesus reconciling the world unto Himself, 2 Cor 5:19). Jesus was the pure, spotless Lamb of God and it was His death that won the victory for us...and He won it in the body. Now salvation is attainable through Him while we are in the body. And this is why there is no salvation after our body dies. Jesus' death which happened to Him in the body, must be appropriated by man (through faith) while he is in the body. One cannot be spiritually regenerated after one dies. It is impossible. It must take place in the body. You must die with Christ and be raised to newness of life now, in this life. You cannot die (after you have died) and be raised in newness of life in the spiritual world. How will you be perfected in love and conformed to the image of Christ if you have no faith walk to walk. What is there to believe once you are in the spiritual realm and no longer in this physical realm. There is no walk of faith in the next realm. Faith is not needed for what you can see. Of course, in the next realm men who all their life on earth hated God, will plead with Him to save them from hell. But it will be too late. The spiritual operation of regeneration cannot take place once you leave this world. Earth is the battleground. Earth is man's only chance to be saved. This should change the way you preach. May we all have a new urgency to share the good news (great news) of the Gospel.
Heb_9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

So, back to the Lord requiring a body so that He can die for us.
Heb_10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:

Having believed on the Son of God we have been reconciled to God (by His death) and now we are saved by His life and will not taste death. The sting of death has been vanquished for the child of God and we shall be with the Lord when this body dies.
John_5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

We have been justified by the blood that He shed on the cross (not by any mythological suffering in hell). This justification by Him will save us from wrath. Which means those who are not justified will not be saved from wrath.
Rom 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

After He offered His body as a sacrifice for sins (no suffering in hell needed) Jesus was raised from the dead and sat down on the right hand of God forever.
Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

Act_2:27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
According to Mtt 18:28, eternal fire is fatal to the human body; but
apparently doesn't always remove it from existence because at Isa 66:23-24
there's predicted a museum of sorts where the exhibits consist of human
remains kept as perpetual nourishment for a curious species of fireproof
worm.

"All humanity will come to worship me from week to week and from month
to month. And as they go out, they will see the dead bodies of those who
have rebelled against me. For the worms that devour them will never die,
and the fire that burns them will never go out. All who pass by will view
them with utter horror."

I'm guessing it was that very passage in Isaiah that the Lord had in mind
when he issued the caution and warning located at Mrk 9:47-48.

"If your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the
kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into
geena, where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched."

NOTE : the ancient Greek word geena (gheh'-en-nah) refers to a canyon
valley (a.k.a. the valley of the son of Hinnom, Josh 15:8 et al) situated south
of the old city walls of Jerusalem. In the Lord's day, the valley served as the
ancient city's landfill, where fires were kept burning day and night doing the
double duty of incinerating a constant waste stream of urban refuse and the
carcasses of dead animals and low income citizens. Apparently geena was a
local colloquialism for what we traditional Christians today refer to as hell.

What's interesting about geena is that it's purpose was primarily sanitation;
which tells me that at least one of the reasons why the dead depicted at Rev
20:10-15 are destined to be warehoused in the reservoir of liquefied flame is
to prevent the spread of disease.

Buen Camino
/

 

[williemac]

I think there is another way we could look at it too.

Hell must be eternal .... otherwise why should anybody fear it

If everything simply "ends" at death (for the unsaved) it would not be a bad thing compared
to a continuing awareness of eternal separation from God (in hell)

If you've been paying attention to this thread, you will know that everything does not end at death. Not the first time. For those who die, their souls find themselves alive in torment in Hades for at least the next 1000 years, After that there is a great white throne that they face and are judged to be destroyed in the place known as Geena, or Gehenna (see above post). It is actually the Lake of Fire. If everything ends there, why wouldn't one fear it? If the prospect of living forever in eternal bliss is the alternative, then why wouldn't a person be in torment during the thousand years he has to think about what he missed? And why is it that people seem to think that this is not enough of a bad thing? What qualifies any human to make that determination?

As I have shared and will keep on sharing so that maybe just one person will see what I see, living forever is not designated for all, but only for those who partake of Jesus.(John6:50,51).. If no one is going to die forever, then everyone will remain alive forever. This contradicts Jesus' own word in that passage and in John 3:16, where ever-lasting life happens to not all, but only those who receive it from Jesus. Life without end in the Lake of fire is living forever, and having everlasting life. In light of Jesus' own words, how is that possible? This alone should seal the deal, so to speak.

 

[tim_from_pa]

Jesus' death is what saves us not His suffering. We were reconciled to God by His death not His "sufferings in hell", which are non-existent. Jesus did not suffer in Hell. By saving us from death, He saves us from sufferings in hell so there was no need for Him to suffer in Hell, only to die on the Cross. We needed His death to reconcile us not any supposed suffering in Hell.
Rom_5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

God came to us in Christ...in a body, because His mission was to die for us, shedding His blood for the remission of our sins. The Bible does not talk about Him suffering in Hell.
Rom 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. (not suffered for us)

That is why Jesus came. Sin took place in the body and that is why salvation must take place in the body, too. But, salvation could only come in the body once an innocent man was slain. No one could do this, so God came Himself, (God was in Christ Jesus reconciling the world unto Himself, 2 Cor 5:19). Jesus was the pure, spotless Lamb of God and it was His death that won the victory for us...and He won it in the body. Now salvation is attainable through Him while we are in the body. And this is why there is no salvation after our body dies. Jesus' death which happened to Him in the body, must be appropriated by man (through faith) while he is in the body. One cannot be spiritually regenerated after one dies. It is impossible. It must take place in the body. You must die with Christ and be raised to newness of life now, in this life. You cannot die (after you have died) and be raised in newness of life in the spiritual world. How will you be perfected in love and conformed to the image of Christ if you have no faith walk to walk. What is there to believe once you are in the spiritual realm and no longer in this physical realm. There is no walk of faith in the next realm. Faith is not needed for what you can see. Of course, in the next realm men who all their life on earth hated God, will plead with Him to save them from hell. But it will be too late. The spiritual operation of regeneration cannot take place once you leave this world. Earth is the battleground. Earth is man's only chance to be saved. This should change the way you preach. May we all have a new urgency to share the good news (great news) of the Gospel.
Heb_9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

So, back to the Lord requiring a body so that He can die for us.
Heb_10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:

Having believed on the Son of God we have been reconciled to God (by His death) and now we are saved by His life and will not taste death. The sting of death has been vanquished for the child of God and we shall be with the Lord when this body dies.
John_5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

We have been justified by the blood that He shed on the cross (not by any mythological suffering in hell). This justification by Him will save us from wrath. Which means those who are not justified will not be saved from wrath.
Rom 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

After He offered His body as a sacrifice for sins (no suffering in hell needed) Jesus was raised from the dead and sat down on the right hand of God forever.
Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

Act_2:27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Nice theological discourse, except for one thing.... Your first sentence.

Jesus' death is what saves us not His suffering.

The problem is, that those who believe in eternal suffering in hell don't believe that the soul dies. The bible on the other hand definitely states death. When I bring up the point that eternal suffering is a form of eternal life, but with suffering, I am quickly countered that it is indeed "death" and then "death" is conveniently redefined as "separation from God", and torment forever (after all, who wants to consider torment as being a form of life?)

OK.... fine. Then death is not really death, but eternal suffering instead. At least that's what they say for the sinner.

Now.... let's extrapolate. If Christ died for us, then his death would have to be defined the same way .... eternal suffering in hell.

Dear T,

I see what you are getting at now. However, I really don't believe that. Eternal means forever not a punctiliar event. It is called the second death for a reason.

Why would you not wish to believe the lake of fire is eternal? Do you object to it?

Why?

1) It's not the nature of God (unless He is sick in the head)
2) If a person is consciously tormented forever, then they have not perished, nor are they dead, but alive in torment.
3) Where would this fire be? In outer space somewhere? it needs oxygen to burn. Did you ever hear of a fire that burns and don't consume it's fuel? Com'on now. This is the 21st century, not ignorant middle-age nonsense and paganism that did not understand this. In the end, the earth will be burned (renovated) by fire (the lake of fire), and those raised again to physical life but sentenced as wicked will be consumed forever. When the fire burns out, we have a new heavens and new earth created by Yahweh. Everything will be new again, and the old will not be remembered. If there's screaming people in hell, then the old age is still with us, and God reneged on His promise of a new earth.