Question about Hell

[reba]

eternal

e·ter·nal

  <noscript></noscript> /ɪˈtɜr

nl/ Show Spelled[ih-tur-nl] Show IPA
–adjective 1. without beginning or end; lasting forever; always existing ( opposed to temporal): eternal life.

2. perpetual; ceaseless; endless: eternal quarreling; eternal chatter.

3. enduring; immutable: eternal principles.

4. Metaphysics . existing outside all relations of time; not subject to change.


–noun 5. something that is eternal.

6. the Eternal, God.

 

[Alabaster]

No, it states that hell will be "forever". Where does it state that "we" go on forever?

Annihilationism is one step away from Universalism, Nathan. People tend to embrace it because eternal torment is too difficult a concept to grasp.

Annihilationism is the belief that unbelievers will not experience an eternity of suffering in hell, but will instead be “extinguished” after death. For many, annihilationism is an attractive belief because of the awfulness of the idea of people spending eternity in hell. While there are some passages that seem to argue for annihilationism, a comprehensive look at what the Bible says about the destiny of the wicked reveals the fact that punishment in hell is eternal. A belief in annihilationism results from a misunderstanding of one or more of the following doctrines: 1) the consequences of sin, 2) the justice of God, 3) the nature of hell.

In relation to the nature of hell, annihilationists misunderstand the meaning of the lake of fire. Obviously, if a human being were cast into a lake of burning lava, he/she would be almost instantly consumed. However, the lake of fire is both a physical and spiritual realm. It is not simply a human body being cast into the lake of fire; it is a human’s body, soul, and spirit. A spiritual nature cannot be consumed by physical fire. It seems that the unsaved are resurrected with a body prepared for eternity just as the saved are (Revelation 20:13; Acts 24:15). These bodies are prepared for an eternal fate.

Eternity is another aspect which annihilationists fail to fully comprehend. Annihilationists are correct that the Greek word aionion, which is usually translated “eternal,” does not by definition mean “eternal.” It specifically refers to an “age” or “eon,” a specific period of time. However, it is clear that in New Testament, aionion is sometimes used to refer to an eternal length of time. Revelation 20:10 speaks of Satan, the beast, and the false prophet being cast into the lake of fire and being tormented “day and night forever and ever.” It is clear that these three are not “extinguished” by being cast into the lake of fire. Why would the fate of the unsaved be any different (Revelation 20:14-15)? The most convincing evidence for the eternality of hell is Matthew 25:46, “Then they [the unsaved] will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” In this verse, the same Greek word is used to refer to the destiny of the wicked and the righteous. If the wicked are only tormented for an “age,” then the righteous will only experience life in heaven for an “age.” If believers will be in heaven forever, unbelievers will be in hell forever.

Another frequent objection to the eternality of hell by annihilationists is that it would be unjust for God to punish unbelievers in hell for eternity for a finite amount of sin. How could it be fair for God to take a person who lived a sinful, 70-year life, and punish him/her for all of eternity? The answer is that our sin bears an eternal consequence because it is committed against an eternal God. When King David committed the sins of adultery and murder he stated, “Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight…” (Psalm 51:4). David had sinned against Bathsheba and Uriah; how could David claim to have only sinned against God? David understood that all sin is ultimately against God. God is an eternal and infinite Being. As a result, all sin against Him is worthy of an eternal punishment. It is not a matter of the length of time we sin, but the character of the God against whom we sin.


For more: http://www.gotquestions.org/annihilationism.html

 

[Nathan]

Mike, I thought this was in the "General" forum? Probably a simple confussion?


Alabaster, I understand what your saying about this "ism". Which is one of the reasons it drove me to look at the Bible as a whole when considering my position on it. But let me say that while my belief is similar, it is a far cry from the reasons given by that article. I am on my phone so I cannot go into great detail right now, I can only chicken peck letters.

Like I said, this topic brings up a lot of questions. Its roots run deep and ar intertwined around other topics. But it is why I found it fascinating when I studied it. Needless to say, I believe eternal is eternal. And so eternal punishment is just that, and eternal life is just that. Maybe this reference can add a little bit of information to ponder on till I can get to a real keyboard.

through the middle of the street of the city; also, on either side of the river, the tree of life with its twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit each month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

The tree of life will "yield" it's fruit and we will eat of it. Once, twice, always? It will be there, in Paradise, and it will be for us to partake of. Is it the same tree that was in the garden?

 

[Mike]

Mike, I thought this was in the "General" forum? Probably a simple confussion?

Don't mind me. I'm losing it! This has happened to me a few times lately.

 

[theLords]

One good question to ask is if Christ died Spiritually? We know without a doubt that He did physically, but did He Spiritually? Or did the Spirit leave Him, which is why He cried;

Mar 15:34 ..."Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?" which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

I dunno. I have never really contemplated it. But Peter seems to indicate that when He died, and His flesh was in the tomb, He went and preached to the "spirits in prison".

1Pe 3:18-20 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.

I don't think the Holy Spirit left Christ:

Hebrews 13:5 (KJV)
Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.

Deuteronomy 31:6 (KJV)
Be strong and of a good courage, fear not, nor be afraid of them: for the LORD thy God, he it is that doth go with thee; he will not fail thee, nor forsake thee.



I think non-existence would be worse then eternal hellfire, though.

 

[westtexas]

Mat 10:28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

destroy - apollymi

1) to destroy
a) to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin
b) render useless
c) to kill
d) to declare that one must be put to death
e) metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell
f) to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed
2) to destroy
a) to lose

Nathan, this is my belief on this word. I don't believe any of the descriptions above suggest that the soul just vanishes or is annihilated. A few years ago I was in a motorcycle accident and destroyed my bike. It didn't "poof away", but it did become a useless motorcycle.
I believe that the soul is in hell for eternity. When God destroys the soul in hell, in the verse above, I believe it is still a soul. It is just a destroyed, lost, ruined, useless soul.
Not arguing, just my , Westtexas

 

[Mike]

I think non-existence would be worse then eternal hellfire, though.

TL, I'm not sure I understand this comment. To me the difference is similar to either being alert and in pain or asleep and unconscious. I've been in the hospital for knee surgery. The waking hours were brutal. I just wanted to go to sleep and be out of misery for a few hours. On the ultimate grand scale, this is the difference I see between non-existence and eternal torment.

This isn't an argument for or against the truth in either. Just a commentary on which would be worse, IMO. If it were up to me as a condemned soul... annihilate me. Please don't force me to live forever with the spiritual torture of knowing what I was offered and refused.

 

[Nathan]

TL, I'm not sure I understand this comment. To me the difference is similar to either being alert and in pain or asleep and unconscious. I've been in the hospital for knee surgery. The waking hours were brutal. I just wanted to go to sleep and be out of misery for a few hours. On the ultimate grand scale, this is the difference I see between non-existence and eternal torment.

This isn't an argument for or against the truth in either. Just a commentary on which would be worse, IMO. If it were up to me as a condemned soul... annihilate me. Please don't force me to live forever with the spiritual torture of knowing what I was offered and refused.

But I do not think that it would be as simple as "going to sleep". It would be an udder voidness of all. Destruction. But I believe that at the same time, people will suffer punishment in accordance with their sin. Then, when the punishment is over, total destruction.

It may seem like God would be "giving them a break" by "putting them out of their misery", but lets face it; we as humans, may want to "check out" from time to time, 'go to sleep' when hurt sets in, but all in all the sheer underlying desire of us all is life. So me personally, total death is a BIG deal. With pain, or anything, comes "hope". In your case, you wanted to go to sleep, but I bet you did not want the doctor to shoot you in the head...;)

We say there is no hope for those in hell. This is true. At least we do not venture to the side of the line of thinking that its a 'temporary' place of punishment. But the fact is, total death brings with it a sense of unimaginable - yet even more permanent - separation.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

One thing that needs to perhaps be addressed first is whether or not the soul and the person are in fact separate entities.
I know many will differ from my opinion that the soul is not a possession or part of man, but rather the soul is the WHOLE of man mind and body. I believe that the scriptures tell us that in death, the soul of man (his whole person) dies.
So, what we need to 1st establish is whether or not man IS a living soul OR whether man instead HAS a soul.

 

[Nathan]

Nathan, this is my belief on this word. I don't believe any of the descriptions above suggest that the soul just vanishes or is annihilated. A few years ago I was in a motorcycle accident and destroyed my bike. It didn't "poof away", but it did become a useless motorcycle.
I believe that the soul is in hell for eternity. When God destroys the soul in hell, in the verse above, I believe it is still a soul. It is just a destroyed, lost, ruined, useless soul.
Not arguing, just my , Westtexas

I do not think that the soul vanishes or is annihilated either. I think it is destroyed. I do not think that the soul of a non-believer just "poofs" away when he or she dies physically. I believe they undergo the punishment for their sins. And through that process, they are brought to a 'complete' state of death.

You did not destroy your bike. If you wanted to, you could "fix" it back up. Sure, it would be a senseless thing to do, but you could. It would require part after part, probably replacing most of everything about it, but it could be brought back to a 'state' of usefulness.

I do not think anyone here would disagree that the unsaved soul is unable to be brought back, or "fixed". Hell is a place of "permanency". Your bike was broken, wrecked. Not destroyed. A house made of wood and combustible materials can be "destroyed". When you "destroy" a house made of materials that can be destroyed, there is no "fixing" it. It is "gone". It is "no more". The only way it can be "remembered" or "understood" is from pictures and peoples memories of it.

Destruction is indicative of "completeness". We see the "picture" of it in the flood of Noah's day, a "physical" representation of total death. God "completely" wiped out the inhabitants of the earth. To Noah, they were only a memory. There was nothing left of them.

Now we understand that they went on to sheol after their physical body died, but thats not the point. The point is that it is a representation of what "destruction" is. There was nothing of them left here on the earth.

And so that is what the destruction of the soul is. Notice, Jesus states destruction of body and soul. So He specifically states that the soul is destroyed to, not just put into a state of "brokenness" or "worthlessness". Think about this. He states the same destruction that takes place to the body, will take place to the soul. So, does that mean that the physical body will also be in hell? Does that mean that our physical body will be in heaven?

No, so just as we can even see a "picture" of the destruction of our "physical" bodies, we can understand from it the "picture" of a completed destruction of our souls as well.

 

[Nathan]

One thing that needs to perhaps be addressed first is whether or not the soul and the person are in fact separate entities.
I know many will differ from my opinion that the soul is not a possession or part of man, but rather the soul is the WHOLE of man mind and body. I believe that the scriptures tell us that in death, the soul of man (his whole person) dies.
So, what we need to 1st establish is whether or not man IS a living soul OR whether man instead HAS a soul.

Very nice. You are correct. We do not "have" a soul. We "are" a soul. That is sometimes hard to wrap your mind around, but it does indeed lend itself to understanding the nature of destruction better. We see this "fact" in the creation of Adam.

Adam was formed, that is his 'body', then he "became" a living soul when God breathed the breath of life into him. His life came from God. God "created" him. Therefore, anything "created" means it did not "exist" before. Which means that it can likewise, not "exist" again.

 

[Nathan]

I really do not like splitting up a quote, but for the sake of addressing this lengthy one I am going to. I hope it is easy enough to follow along. Let me know if it makes it more complicated.

Annihilationism is one step away from Universalism, Nathan. People tend to embrace it because eternal torment is too difficult a concept to grasp.

I think the exact opposite. lol. I think that its easier to 'grasp' eternal torment than eternal non-existence.

Annihilationism is the belief that unbelievers will not experience an eternity of suffering in hell, but will instead be “extinguished†after death. For many, annihilationism is an attractive belief because of the awfulness of the idea of people spending eternity in hell. While there are some passages that seem to argue for annihilationism, a comprehensive look at what the Bible says about the destiny of the wicked reveals the fact that punishment in hell is eternal. A belief in annihilationism results from a misunderstanding of one or more of the following doctrines: 1) the consequences of sin, 2) the justice of God, 3) the nature of hell.

I think that punishment is eternal. There will be no "end" to it. Once it has been done, there is nothing left. Therefore it goes on "forever". But I understand that there are some who cannot grasp some of these things spoken of about punishment, and therefore find the "easy" way is to say 'annihilation'. While it sounds similar to what I am speaking of, its not the same.

In relation to the nature of hell, annihilationists misunderstand the meaning of the lake of fire. Obviously, if a human being were cast into a lake of burning lava, he/she would be almost instantly consumed. However, the lake of fire is both a physical and spiritual realm. It is not simply a human body being cast into the lake of fire; it is a human’s body, soul, and spirit. A spiritual nature cannot be consumed by physical fire. It seems that the unsaved are resurrected with a body prepared for eternity just as the saved are (Revelation 20:13; Acts 24:15). These bodies are prepared for an eternal fate.

Right, a physical thing cannot consume the spiritual. Or, the "created" thing cannot destroy anything other than what its intended purpose is. So, that is why Satan(created) cannot destroy the soul, but only what he has been given authority over. And likewise, a physical fire cannot destroy the soul, but only the body. However, in the spiritual realm, the 'fire' can destroy the soul, which God has complete control over, and Him alone. It states that hell was "made". It was not in existence before. Therefore, it can be in non-existence again.

Eternity is another aspect which annihilationists fail to fully comprehend. Annihilationists are correct that the Greek word aionion, which is usually translated “eternal,†does not by definition mean “eternal.†It specifically refers to an “age†or “eon,†a specific period of time. However, it is clear that in New Testament, aionion is sometimes used to refer to an eternal length of time. Revelation 20:10 speaks of Satan, the beast, and the false prophet being cast into the lake of fire and being tormented “day and night forever and ever.†It is clear that these three are not “extinguished†by being cast into the lake of fire. Why would the fate of the unsaved be any different (Revelation 20:14-15)? The most convincing evidence for the eternality of hell is Matthew 25:46, “Then they [the unsaved] will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.†In this verse, the same Greek word is used to refer to the destiny of the wicked and the righteous. If the wicked are only tormented for an “age,†then the righteous will only experience life in heaven for an “age.†If believers will be in heaven forever, unbelievers will be in hell forever.

It is an "eternal" length of time. The "length" of time it is is when it has 'accomplished' exactly what it was 'created' for. Once it has accomplished what it was "made" for, then it will have finished its purpose and not be needed, and it will be "eternal" in its design.

Now we do run into a seemingly contradiction. If the same word is used in the same sentence to describe two separate places, then we should conclude that they are 'alike' in nature of their time. And its true. The wicked will be in "eternal" punishment, meaning they can and will never return from there. And the same is true for the righteous, they will go away to eternal life, which will be forever available to them. Its a designation of the two not being able to 'intermixed' with each other. That is the whole context of the passage. The context is "finality".

Another frequent objection to the eternality of hell by annihilationists is that it would be unjust for God to punish unbelievers in hell for eternity for a finite amount of sin. How could it be fair for God to take a person who lived a sinful, 70-year life, and punish him/her for all of eternity? The answer is that our sin bears an eternal consequence because it is committed against an eternal God. When King David committed the sins of adultery and murder he stated, “Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight…†(Psalm 51:4). David had sinned against Bathsheba and Uriah; how could David claim to have only sinned against God? David understood that all sin is ultimately against God. God is an eternal and infinite Being. As a result, all sin against Him is worthy of an eternal punishment. It is not a matter of the length of time we sin, but the character of the God against whom we sin.

This is COMPLETELY not my line of thinking. God does exactly what He wants. I am not in the place of telling Him what is fair or not. The fact, that this article points out, is that ALL sin is against God. He decides what to do with His creation. We cannot begin to understand how sin and Him are unable to dwell together. In other words, we who are still in a sinful creation cannot understand yet the righteousness of God and His total hatred of sin. We understand to a degree, but we cannot come to the same understanding as Him. We, do not have the ability, in and of ourselves. That was the original lie of Satan.

 

[theLords]

TL, I'm not sure I understand this comment. To me the difference is similar to either being alert and in pain or asleep and unconscious. I've been in the hospital for knee surgery. The waking hours were brutal. I just wanted to go to sleep and be out of misery for a few hours. On the ultimate grand scale, this is the difference I see between non-existence and eternal torment.

This isn't an argument for or against the truth in either. Just a commentary on which would be worse, IMO. If it were up to me as a condemned soul... annihilate me. Please don't force me to live forever with the spiritual torture of knowing what I was offered and refused.

I guess I don't personally consider non-existence true not-existence in the dictionary sense of the Word.

For me Life=Jesus Christ. As life is equal to existence; Jesus Christ is equal to existence.

For me, non-existence = complete removal from God.

That thought to me is worse then eternal physical torture. So, to me, hell is a mercy and non-existence is hell.

Does that make better sense?

 

[jodetoad]

I don't know the part about having a body. The part I know something about is that even with a body, spiritual pain is distinct. I think we don't need a body to feel spiritual pain.

As an addict/alcoholic, clean & sober over 30 years, I will never forget the difference. Like most addict/alcoholics, I suffered a variety of physical pain, mental and emotional pain. The pain beneath all of it was spiritual, and was the despair & hopelessness of knowing I was on the wrong road, separated from God, any joy or positiveness, and finally realizing that my own acts and decisions got worse and worse no matter what justifications I used.

Upon getting sober, problems didn't go away instantly, bodily, mental & emotional pain remained. BUT HOPE replaced despair immediately, a sudden spiritual awareness that I was finally going the right direction.

 

[Alabaster]

When the Lord says there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, and are told that the unrighteous are raised from their (physical) graves, we can be assured that they will be judged and punished in their physical bodies.

 

[Nathan]

I guess I don't personally consider non-existence true not-existence in the dictionary sense of the Word.

For me Life=Jesus Christ. As life is equal to existence; Jesus Christ is equal to existence.

For me, non-existence = complete removal from God.

That thought to me is worse then eternal physical torture. So, to me, hell is a mercy and non-existence is hell.

Does that make better sense?

Right. Above all things, we were created for an intimate relationship with God. That is our "purpose". That is why a non-existence is such a unimaginable and quite distressing thought for those of us who have come into that personal relationship with Christ.

Those outside of that relationship have no clue. They are "dead" spiritually. They would 'instinctively' say "oh well, who cares". And it is precisely why most joke around about "going to hell". People without the Spirit of Christ just cannot comprehend things of this nature.

But we were created with a purpose. That purpose was to live, and to be in a relationship. Plants were made to live and die, providing nourishment to other things. Animals have a different purpose. Angels have yet another. Every thing has a purpose.

Hell was "made" for Satan and his angels. It was made to "destroy" them. Will they be punished? Yes. But it was made to destroy also. To ascribe us the same "eternal" condition, apart from complete destruction, to the eternal condition of Satan, is to make us comparable to the type of creation Satan is. We are not that type of creation. We are a separate creation.

But hell, the place of eternal(inability to not accomplish all it is set out to do) punishment, is a place that has a purpose. Its purpose is punishment, and destruction.

 

[Nathan]

When the Lord says there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, we can be assured that the unrighteous have physical bodies.

The exact bodies we have now?

 

[Alabaster]

The exact bodies we have now?

Everyone who must face God needs glorification or die (disintegrate) on the spot. Even Moses was not allowed to see God in his flesh, or die. The unrighteous will need glorification to stand and face Him so they can be judged. They are raised from their graves, not from the spiritual confinement (Hades) where their spirits have been. It will be just like the righteous' resurrection, except they are raised to be condemned, not to the radiant glory of the eternal Kingdom life.

 

[Guap]

When the Lord says there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, and are told that the unrighteous are raised from their (physical) graves, we can be assured that they will be judged and punished in their physical bodies.

Does the bible actually say that they will be in their physical bodies? Or is this just the conclusion you draw from the fact they will be raised from their graves? For me this doesn't bring the conclusion that they will be in their physical bodies.

As for Annihilationism is one step away from Universalism, Nathan. People tend to embrace it because eternal torment is too difficult a concept to grasp.


I believe John Stott believes in Annihilation and not because he can't grasp the concept of eternal torment. I don't think someone such as Stott believes anything other than what he believes the Bible teaches.

 

[Alabaster]

Does the bible actually say that they will be in their physical bodies? Or is this just the conclusion you draw from the fact they will be raised from their graves? For me this doesn't bring the conclusion that they will be in their physical bodies.

As for Annihilationism is one step away from Universalism, Nathan. People tend to embrace it because eternal torment is too difficult a concept to grasp.


I believe John Stott believes in Annihilation and not because he can't grasp the concept of eternal torment. I don't think someone such as Stott believes anything other than what he believes the Bible teaches.

The Bible doesn't teach annihilationism.

Weeping and gnashing of teeth is telling you that there is PHYSICAL torment to very PHYSICAL bodies.