Is physical pain experienced in hell?

[turnorburn]

For those of you that don't believe hell is a place of eternal pain and suffering what do you say to people when telling them their need to be saved. Haven't you read about the sufferings of our saviour, why i ask you would he have taken the time to go through that.. surely not to save us from some kind of intellectual nightmare.

Scripture teaches us that..

I Corinthians 2:9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

On the other hand eye hath not seen the place God has prepared for the devil and his angels either..

tob

 

[chessman]

For those of you that don't believe hell is a place of eternal pain and suffering what do you say to people when telling them their need to be saved.
tob

The exact same thing any Christian that felt Hell for humans was eternal torture would say except for the only aspect that differs is, there is a 2nd more painful and scary death sentence, versus eternal torture, awaiting their judgment. At the 2nd death(John gives us a clear definition of this in Rev 20), they have the proof they say now that they need staring them in the face as their Judge but it's to late then. They depart into the Lake of Fire which is the 2nd death.

And for the record, Hell is eternal torment for Satan. Satan does not get a 2nd death there as Rev 20 tells us. I simply yield to the Scripture's definition of the Lake of Fire.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

I find it odd that it is those who support the eternal torment view who like to have their ears tickled and proof text like crazy. Though of course only have a couple texts that they really argue with, Revelation 20:10 and Matthew 25:46. You should know you're not consistent with Scripture when you only have 2 texts to fall back on.. and at a closer look they don't even support it, because of presuppositions and faulty hermeneutics such as not looking at the literary genre.

Combine that with the fact that they don't act like an eternal torture chamber awaits certain souls.

Who, in their right mind, would take these people seriously, when not a single one of them acts like it?

 

[chessman]

I think I’ve asked you at least five times how you reconcile the passage that describe the un-saved’s death and destruction with your idea of their treatment. I’ve yet to hear your answer. You keep saying that they are tormented forever (in shame forever, in contempt forever) but you do not seem to address the apparent conflict with their death and destruction (Rev 20 or even Jude, ironically).

I’m honestly interested in how you reconcile this. Not just irking you.

When the Bible speaks of death and destruction, I don't believe it means cease to exist. I believe that it means not being granted eternal life. For example, you can destroy your life by robbing a bank and getting caught, but even though you've destroyed your life, you're still rotting in jail. Take a look at Rev 21:8 But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.†Does it say the fire burns out, no. If these souls ceased to exist what is fueling the fire? Notice it says their portion, meaning their portion of sin I believe that fuels the fire.

Okay. Thanks for answering my question. I feel this type of dialog back/forth is much more productive and useful to me and others reading than arguing back/forth about a postion neither one of us hold (like Hell not being eternal or there's not pain/suffering after the Judgment for the un-saved). Niether of us believe that's what Scripture is teaching.

So to discuss your and my understanding of these Scriptures a little more let me make these points:

1. You could be right and I could be wrong.
2. I think your wrong because of the following reasons:
a. The text says 2nd death. So in some way (in some respect) the 2nd death has to relate to the 1st death, correct? Else why say 2nd, if in some way it didn’t relate to the 1st?

b. It seems to me that the way these two deaths relate is clarified by:

Matthew 10:28 (ESV) And do not fear those who kill the body (1st Death) but cannot kill the soul (2nd Death). Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

and

Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. (Revelation 20:14 ESV)

3. I simply believe the best way to discover God (Theology) and future events is via Scriptural definitions, not our own personal ideas about the way things should be.
Anyway, these two verses (and many others) are why I disagree (Apologetics) with your statement; “When the Bible speaks of death and destruction, I don't believe it means cease to exist. I believe that it means not being granted eternal life.â€
Matt 10:28 (Jesus’ words) and Rev 20:14 (John’s vision of the future) are contrary to your beliefs on this particular subject. Though I fully understand that your belief has been taught for decades if not centuries by the majority of Christian teachers (but not all). I find that very odd.

 

[Guest]

[MENTION=94584]chessman[/MENTION] Then please explain 'everlasting contempt' and what it means in Daniel 12.

 

[chessman]

@chessman Then please explain 'everlasting contempt' and what it means in Daniel 12.

I like the way Jesus explained it:

John 5:
28 Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment

The question is, who's holding this "contempt"? If the judgment/punishment imposed on the un-believers is ultimately death of both their body and their souls (and I, via other Scriptures, say it is) then obvioulsy it's not the un-believers holding "contempt". It could mean God's comtempt for their un-belief is everlasting. It could be Satan's "contempt" for God and/or the true believers is everlasting. It could be a lot of things. But, my point is that just because there's "everlasting contempt" in Hell, it's not a proof text that it's being held by people (who's punishment is declared as a 2nd death of both body and soul) that outweighs all the other Scriptures that describe the un-believer's punishment as death.

 

[Guest]

But, my point is that just because there's "everlasting contempt" in Hell, it's not a proof text that it's being held by people

Come on man, did you not read post #278. Daniel 12 is talking about judgment day in the afterlife for people. Hell is in the afterlife. Chessman, you're making this harder that it really is. Daniel 12:2 2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and EVERLASTING contempt. And many of those who sleep. He's talking about after you die when you're resting in the grave. And many of those who, you and I people; urk and chessman people. Shame and contempt is a condition of existing, along with everlasting life.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Come on man, did you not read post #278. Daniel 12 is talking about judgment day in the afterlife for people. Hell is in the afterlife. Chessman, you're making this harder that it really is. Daniel 12:2 2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and EVERLASTING contempt. And many of those who sleep. He's talking about after you die when you're resting in the grave. And many of those who, you and I people; urk and chessman people. Shame and contempt is a condition of existing, along with everlasting life.

No, this is talking about the physical resurrection and the final judgement. The judgement takes place AFTER the Resurrection of the dead, this has always been the interpretation of the passage even by the Jews of the Second Temple Era who first began to conceptualize an after-life which was ONLY the Resurrection of the dead.

They were sleeping in the dust of the earth, but they then awake. Meaning they were dead (sleeping) but now are alive (awake). There is not one scholarly opinion of either Christians or Jews historically that I can find that agrees with your interpretation besides Gnostic teachings or Sadducees who deny the Resurrection of the dead.

 

[chessman]

Chessman, you're making this harder that it really is. Daniel 12:2 2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and EVERLASTING contempt.

Actually, this is not hard at all. I’m just reading what’s there:
Start at Daniel12:

And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. (Daniel 12:2 ESV)
​

Then Jesus says:

Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment. (John 5:28-29 ESV)
​

So in order to make Scripture non-contradictory with itself:
shame and everlasting contempt must equal (at least in some way) “judgment “
Then John says:

And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.
​

So John (not me) says the “Lake of Fire = “the Second Deathâ€

And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. (Revelation 20:12-15 ESV)
​

So via Daniel, Jesus and John:

“Shame and everlasting contempt†equals “the Lake of Fire†equal “the Second Deathâ€.
​

I have zero problem following this Scripture. The only thing that’s hard is that it’s not the most popular teaching of the current “churchâ€. I understand that. But desegregation and anti-slavery, at one time, was not very popular in the “church†either. It’s not “hard†for me to believe some of the things certain churchs teach are in error.

Plus, I don't think this is an essential issue. It's eschatology.

 

[Guest]

Come on man, did you not read post #278. Daniel 12 is talking about judgment day in the afterlife for people. Hell is in the afterlife. Chessman, you're making this harder that it really is. Daniel 12:2 2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and EVERLASTING contempt. And many of those who sleep. He's talking about after you die when you're resting in the grave. And many of those who, you and I people; urk and chessman people. Shame and contempt is a condition of existing, along with everlasting life.

No, this is talking about the physical resurrection and the final judgement. The judgement takes place AFTER the Resurrection of the dead, this has always been the interpretation of the passage even by the Jews of the Second Temple Era who first began to conceptualize an after-life which was ONLY the Resurrection of the dead.

They were sleeping in the dust of the earth, but they then awake. Meaning they were dead (sleeping) but now are alive (awake).

Uhh, this is what I been saying all along. You obviously haven't been reading my posts.