Eternal Hellfire in the OT?

[Soma-Sight]

Where is this clear cut doctrine in the OT?

The parable of the man in hell and Rev has some creadence in NT but where is this in the OT?

Why was Adam not told his punishment would be a lava enema instead of just "death"???

Or Cain for that matter?

The wages of sin is death vs the wages of sin is eternal life in Hell?

So Eternal Hellfire proponents.... where is the OT evidence?

 

[Solo]

10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Psalm 16:10

8 (For the redemption of their soul is precious, and it ceaseth for ever Psalm 49:8

7 Where can I go to escape Your Spirit? Where can I flee from Your presence? 8 If I go up to heaven, You are there; if I make my bed in Sheol, You are there. Psalm 138:7-8

13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. 14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil. Ecclesiastes 12:13-14

1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. 2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever. Daniel 12:1-3

 

[Soma-Sight]

Solo,

Not one of those verses says anything about everlasting torment in eternal fire!

Not one.

 

[Solo]

Solo,

Not one of those verses says anything about everlasting torment in eternal fire!

Not one.

2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. Daniel 12:2

I would say that some would awake to shame and everlasting contempt speaks of the different eternity for those whose names were not written in the book.

 

[Drew]

Solo,

Not one of those verses says anything about everlasting torment in eternal fire!

Not one.

2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. Daniel 12:2

I would say that some would awake to shame and everlasting contempt speaks of the different eternity for those whose names were not written in the book.

This is a possible interpretation, I suppose. However, such an interpretation requires that the contempt be self-contempt - a contempt towards oneself experienced by the soul in eternal torment. I think that another reading is plausible - that the "eternal contempt" is not self-contempt at all, but "contempt" directed at the unredeemed from another source (God?), a contempt that persists after the unredeemed have been annihilated. The point here being, I could hold Hitler in contempt even though he has long since died.

Given all the other OT texts that suggest destruction of the unredeemed, I would not want to build my entire OT case for eternal torment on this verse. But I guess it is one of the more challenging texts for we annihilationists to deal with.

 

[Solo]

Solo,

Not one of those verses says anything about everlasting torment in eternal fire!

Not one.

2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. Daniel 12:2

I would say that some would awake to shame and everlasting contempt speaks of the different eternity for those whose names were not written in the book.

This is a possible interpretation, I suppose. However, such an interpretation requires that the contempt be self-contempt - a contempt towards oneself experienced by the soul in eternal torment. I think that another reading is plausible - that the "eternal contempt" is not self-contempt at all, but "contempt" directed at the unredeemed from another source (God?), a contempt that persists after the unredeemed have been annihilated. The point here being, I could hold Hitler in contempt even though he has long since died.

Given all the other OT texts that suggest destruction of the unredeemed, I would not want to build my entire OT case for eternal torment on this verse. But I guess it is one of the more challenging texts for we annihilationists to deal with.

Either way, they wake up from death and experience shame and everlasting contempt. The annihilationists will spin it according to their unorthodox doctrinal beliefs, and the traditionalists will hold it as taught for thousands of years.

 

[Soma-Sight]

and the traditionalists will hold it as taught for thousands of years.

Mark 7:9
And he said to them: "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!

The OT shows no reference to an eternal hellfire of conscious torment.

You have to use a few metaphorical terms in the NT for this false doctrine of men.

 

[guibox]

This is a possible interpretation, I suppose. However, such an interpretation requires that the contempt be self-contempt - a contempt towards oneself experienced by the soul in eternal torment. I think that another reading is plausible - that the "eternal contempt" is not self-contempt at all, but "contempt" directed at the unredeemed from another source (God?), a contempt that persists after the unredeemed have been annihilated. The point here being, I could hold Hitler in contempt even though he has long since died.

Yes Drew, and Isaiah 66 further emphasises this "contempt" when the righteous gaze our on the corpses being eat by worms. This is further language denoting eternal destruction and annihilation that the NT borrows from extensively.

Given all the other OT texts that suggest destruction of the unredeemed, I would not want to build my entire OT case for eternal torment on this verse. But I guess it is one of the more challenging texts for we annihilationists to deal with.

On the contrary. This verse completely supports the fact that the wicked are resurrected to be annihilated and not tortured eternally. The Hebrew mindset didn't have the concept of eternal torment. Rather you must read 'eternal torment' into Daniel 12.

Hence, if the Hebrews believed that God's enemies were to be destroyed, then one must interpret Daniel 12 as such. There is no reason why this same ideas can't be brought into the OT and we see that Matthew 5:28,29 reiterates Daniel 12

So we know that Daniel 12 doesn't speak of eternal torment, and yet we are making Matthew mean that it will happen?

Sorry but the Bible must interpret itself and not be interpreted with preconceived notions.

 

[Solo]

This is a possible interpretation, I suppose. However, such an interpretation requires that the contempt be self-contempt - a contempt towards oneself experienced by the soul in eternal torment. I think that another reading is plausible - that the "eternal contempt" is not self-contempt at all, but "contempt" directed at the unredeemed from another source (God?), a contempt that persists after the unredeemed have been annihilated. The point here being, I could hold Hitler in contempt even though he has long since died.

Yes Drew, and Isaiah 66 further emphasises this "contempt" when the righteous gaze our on the corpses being eat by worms. This is further language denoting eternal destruction and annihilation that the NT borrows from extensively.

Given all the other OT texts that suggest destruction of the unredeemed, I would not want to build my entire OT case for eternal torment on this verse. But I guess it is one of the more challenging texts for we annihilationists to deal with.

On the contrary. This verse completely supports the fact that the wicked are resurrected to be annihilated and not tortured eternally. The Hebrew mindset didn't have the concept of eternal torment. Rather you must read 'eternal torment' into Daniel 12.

Hence, if the Hebrews believed that God's enemies were to be destroyed, then one must interpret Daniel 12 as such. There is no reason why this same ideas can't be brought into the OT and we see that Matthew 5:28,29 reiterates Daniel 12

So we know that Daniel 12 doesn't speak of eternal torment, and yet we are making Matthew mean that it will happen?

Sorry but the Bible must interpret itself and not be interpreted with preconceived notions.

An annihilationist must twist Daniel 12 to align with the doctrine that those who wake up will then be forced to be annihilated from existance. No where is that insinuated in the scripture of Daniel. In fact, just the opposite is revealed. Those that are evil will wake up to shame and everlasting contempt. There is no way for an annihilated person to be under contempt for eternity if they do not exist.

Of course, the cultists would argue this point, and they do.

 

[Soma-Sight]

Cultists eh Solo?

Ps 145:20

The Lord preserveth all them that love him: but all the wicked will he destroy

Ps 21:8-9

Thine hand shall find out all thine enemies: thy right hand shall find out those that hate thee. Thou shalt make them as a fiery oven in the time of thine anger: the Lord shall swallow them up in his wrath, and the fire shall devour them

Ps 92:7

When the wicked spring as the grass, and when the workers of iniquity do flourish; it is that they shall be destroyed forever

Isa 1:28

And the destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the Lord shall be consumed

Mal 4:1

For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be as stubble; and the day cometh that shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch

Prov 12:7

The wicked are overthrown, and are not: but the house of the righteous shall stand

Obad 16

For as ye have drunk upon my holy mountain, so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been.

Ps 37:9

For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the Lord, they shall inherit the earth

Ps 59:13

Consume them in wrath, consume them, that they may not be

 

[Solo]

Cultists eh Solo?

Ps 145:20

The Lord preserveth all them that love him: but all the wicked will he destroy

Ps 21:8-9

Thine hand shall find out all thine enemies: thy right hand shall find out those that hate thee. Thou shalt make them as a fiery oven in the time of thine anger: the Lord shall swallow them up in his wrath, and the fire shall devour them

Ps 92:7

When the wicked spring as the grass, and when the workers of iniquity do flourish; it is that they shall be destroyed forever

Isa 1:28

And the destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the Lord shall be consumed

Mal 4:1

For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be as stubble; and the day cometh that shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch

Prov 12:7

The wicked are overthrown, and are not: but the house of the righteous shall stand

Obad 16

For as ye have drunk upon my holy mountain, so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been.

Ps 37:9

For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the Lord, they shall inherit the earth

Ps 59:13

Consume them in wrath, consume them, that they may not be

Yes, cultists like the Jehovah Witnesses and those with like doctrines of devils.

 

[guibox]

Solo, it jsut amazes me when you are faced with clear biblical truth that you still chant your 'cultic doctrine' mantra.

And you accuse us of ignoring the Word. :roll:

If anything, it is the OT even moreso than the NT that preaches the complete, utter destruction and annhilation of God's enemies. And yet, based on a passage that doesn't support eternal torment at all, you would interpret it as such even with the numerous biblical evidence to support it as annihilation.

Your orthodoxy is clouding your reason and logic...never mind your heurmenutics.

Are you that desperate to hang on to your Catholic orthodoxy that you ignore the Word of God and how to properly interpret it and call God 'cultic doctrine' when it stares you right in the face?

Solo, I feel for you, my friend. Let go and let God...

 

[Solo]

Solo, it jsut amazes me when you are faced with clear biblical truth that you still chant your 'cultic doctrine' mantra.

And you accuse us of ignoring the Word. :roll:

If anything, it is the OT even moreso than the NT that preaches the complete, utter destruction and annhilation of God's enemies. And yet, based on a passage that doesn't support eternal torment at all, you would interpret it as such even with the numerous biblical evidence to support it as annihilation.

Your orthodoxy is clouding your reason and logic...never mind your heurmenutics.

Are you that desperate to hang on to your Catholic orthodoxy that you ignore the Word of God and how to properly interpret it and call God 'cultic doctrine' when it stares you right in the face?

Solo, I feel for you, my friend. Let go and let God...

What you see is physical, and your perception is physical. When you can see the spiritual, let me know.

PS Your doctrine is faulty and aligns with the doctrines of the cults such as Jehovah Witness. Let go of the false doctrines friend and trust the Word of God.

 

[stovebolts]

Solo, it jsut amazes me when you are faced with clear biblical truth that you still chant your 'cultic doctrine' mantra.

Listen to your response based on the premise of a logical fallacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy

Recognizing fallacies in everyday arguments may be difficult since arguments are often embedded in rhetorical patterns that obscure the logical connections between statements. Informal fallacies may also exploit the emotions or intellectual or psychological weaknesses of the audience. Having the capability to recognize fallacies in arguments will hopefully reduce the likelihood of such an occurrence.

Body (dust [earth]) + Spirit (breath [God’s]) = Soul (combination of body and spirit)

BTW, I was wrong and I recant a statement I made earlier which I have provided in the quote below.
And to be honest, I don't have the full biblical answer, but in knowing that I don't know, I know that the premise you build your case is way off, thus, your doctrine is off.

Body (dust [earth]) + Spirit (Image [Likeness to God’s Spirit, thought / free will]) + God’s Spirit (Breath) = Complete Soul (combination of dust, human spirit, and God’s Spirit)

If you don't understand what the soul and spirit are, then how can you determin it's fate?

 

[guibox]

Body (dust [earth]) + Spirit (breath [God’s]) = Soul (combination of body and spirit)

Body (dust [earth]) + Spirit (Image [Likeness to God’s Spirit, thought / free will]) + God’s Spirit (Breath) = Complete Soul (combination of dust, human spirit, and God’s Spirit)

If you don't understand what the soul and spirit are, then how can you determin it's fate?

The Bible is quite clear on the fate of man. You are interpreting into the words 'soul' and 'spirit' that which doesn't exist in the biblical language and is not at all explained as you do in its fate. You are imposing Greek and current philosophical views on it that the Bible doesn't hold.

If we believe the Bible, we should get our views on it from the Bible and not from other sources to be interpreted into the Bible, don't you think? Nowhere are the words 'spirit' and 'soul' mean anything thinking or immortal after death.

How did the Hebrews understand 'nephesh', 'ruach' and 'neshamah'? When you understand this then please read:

Genesis 2:7
Job 27:3
Psalms 146:3,4


Then read into what happens when man dies in its context together:

Psalms 146:3,4
Ecclesiastes 12:7 (to all men, not merely believers)
Job 14:10-14

Then link this to man being 'asleep' and then having to 'awake' in their graves (to be awake and hear in the grave means that this occurs within and not from without the grave) And then view it in the proper context of resurrection to life when creation process is reversed by reading:


Daniel 12:1,2
Matthew 5:28,29
Job 14:10-14
1 Corinthians 15:

And the picture is quite clear the temporal fate and eternal destiny of man and when it happens.

The 'thinking, breathing, cogitating part of man' ceases to exist when his spirit leaves him. This 'spirit' is what animates man into a soul. It cannot exist without the body. It doesn't have a personality or thinking part on its own. Man dies and sleeps in the grave until the midnight cry when he hears the voice, his spirit comes back and he hears the voice to resurrect to eternal life for the first time.

It is quite clear, SB.

 

[stovebolts]

The 'thinking, breathing, cogitating part of man' ceases to exist when his spirit leaves him. This 'spirit' is what animates man into a soul. It cannot exist without the body. It doesn't have a personality or thinking part on its own. Man dies and sleeps in the grave until the midnight cry when he hears the voice, his spirit comes back and he hears the voice to resurrect to eternal life for the first time.

It is quite clear, SB.

hmm, so now animals have spirits too? According to your logic, anything with a soul, has to have a spirit or it can't even 'breath' :wink:

 

[Gendou Ikari]

The King James Version does an excellent job of twisting the word Sheol in the Old Testament in order to support the heresy of Eternal Damnation.

Ecclesiastes 9:10 (King James Version) Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave[Sheol], whither thou goest.

Sheol is translated 31 times as hell, I believe, in the KJV. No, Can you honestly tell me that a place that has no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, can be compared to the Christian's hell?

 

[guibox]

The King James Version does an excellent job of twisting the word Sheol in the Old Testament in order to support the heresy of Eternal Damnation.

Ecclesiastes 9:10 (King James Version) Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave[Sheol], whither thou goest.

Sheol is translated 31 times as hell, I believe, in the KJV. No, Can you honestly tell me that a place that has no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, can be compared to the Christian's hell?

Yes. Sheol is the only word for 'hell' in the OT 'gehenna' for the afterlife wasn't even thought of at the time. To the Hebrews and Jews, the Day of the Lord was the final judgement of the wicked (see Iaiah 66:23,24; Malachi 4:1-3) This was a day of destruction after the resurrection where God's enemies were destroyed forever.

This thread of thought runs througout the OT and was especially focused on by David (see Psalms 37:20,28).

They had no concept of an eternal hell.

 

[Solo]

They had no concept of an eternal hell.

And so says guibox.

The heresy of Annihilation is not the only heresy of the Seventh Day Adventists and Jehovah Witnesses. A look into their doctrines is a simple search on google.
Enough said.

 

[Drew]

The heresy of Annihilation is not the only heresy of the Seventh Day Adventists and Jehovah Witnesses. A look into their doctrines is a simple search on google.
Enough said.

Enough said perhaps for those content to construct their position based on dogmatic declarations. For those with a keen and inquiring mind, I suggest that you search the scriptures, read the various threads on this topic (and other sources as well) and form your own view - a view you can take ownership of. One of the reasons why Christianity has such a bad reputation is this tendency to stifle free inquiry. Challenges to the mainstream views are throttled with cries of "Heresy!!", rather than convincing Biblical arguments.

If you (and I direct this to readers in general and not to Solo or anyone in particular) want to build a world view by being spoon-fed dogma, you certainly have that right. Many, many choose that path. It is not a path I would recommend, however.