Should Christians rethink Hell?

[poetofparables]

Okay. Seems like an idea for another thread/topic.

But technically there are various mechanisms in the universe that transform energy from one form to another form (solar-power is light to electrical, for example. Incandescent is electrical back to light. Neither is 100% efficient. Thus one of the reasons ALL useable energy will one day run out in the universe. Combustion is chemicals to heat. Etc.).

However, the death of a human is not really an energy transformation process on your worldview. It's just further chemical reactions.

The death of a human, on your materialistic worldview, simply is the continuation of the various chemical reactions that are occuring within that clump of chemicals. Food/energy for other clumps.
Clumps you admit is knowledge factory, BTW, for some odd reason since there is no known mechanism or chemical reaction to produces "knowledge". Brains, sure. Knowledge, no.

My chemicals (and the energy within it) will provide some food (i.e. Chemical energy) for worms and bacteria and some dust (i.e. Fertilizer for plants) when I die. Hardly an efficient process for further knowledge production.

Death doesn't really transform any of my chemical energy (or electrical either) into any other form of energy. And it certainly doesn't transform the knowledge I have to others. It's still all chemicals (dust) so I don't see your point. And I most certainly don't see, on your view, what happens to my knowledge that I produced and still possesed at my death.

But I do see what happens to that knowledge given my worldview and afterlife view.

Way off subject, so I'll just point out this huge, huge gap given your worldview.

That is, If the universe has knowledge production as one of it's goals if not it's primary goal (as you said it did in the other thread, and I agree to some extent), then where does all your knowledge go upon your death?

It becomes something else.

 

[poetofparables]

I know. You're right. And I apologize if that wasn't your implication. But you have said it was wrong in other threads and used our disagreements as one of your reasons for that claim.

Yes, but not here.

 

[poetofparables]

Thanks Poet,
Your post got me thinking of that passage in 2nd Peter, and then I read all of Chapter 3 of Second Peter.

It seems that every day I get more confirmation from the Bible that the doctrine of eternal conscious torment is wrong (possibly even deliberately deceitful).
Here is what I read in 2nd Peter about the second coming of the Lord, and the fate of the wicked (whether it is to be destruction or eternal torture):

"Knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming?"​

Peter is writing about the second coming of Christ

"For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly."​

Peter tells of the fate of the ungodly, they will be judged and destroyed. This is the opposite of what some say, that the ungodly will NOT be destroyed, they will instead be sent to hell where they will be kept alive forever and set on fire, conscious of torment forever.

"The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance."​

It is not the Lord's will that any will perish, but some will perish. Perish is the opposite of living forever in hell being tortured alive.

But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed. Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness,waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set on fire and dissolved, and the heavenly bodies will melt as they burn! But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.​

The old earth and heavens will pass away, and the only ones who will be left are those who dwell in the new earth. Those who have put their faith in Christ for eternal life.

Ok Tim.

 

[chessman]

Yes, but not here.

Okay. So has your knowledge here in this thread (that Christians disagreeing over what the Bible says about the nature of Eternal punishment of the lost providing some evidence that the Bible is unclear) been transformed from what it was over there(that Christians disagreeing over what the Bible says about the nature of Eternal punishment of the lost providing some evidence that the Bible is wrong)? Or are you just avoiding a ToS violation by saying it's "unclear" here versus "wrong" over there?

Either way, though I'm not sure you see my point.

Do you now have the knowledge that it's our unclear interpretations of the Bible that's in disagreement/debate here in the Theology section of CFNet?

People disagree over the square root of 144. That observation DOES NOT provide any evidence whatsoever that the square root of 144 isn't clearly or correctly stated as 12.

You said I had proved the Bible is unclear on this subject. I have not proven that! Anymore than if I told you that the square root of 144 is 11 and Tim said it was 13 proves math is unclear.

I just proved some people's interpretations of the Bible on this subject is unclear.

Other's of course not mine

 

[chessman]

It becomes something else.

Yes. Not knowledge. That's my point.

Poof, all your knowledge becomes "something else" upon your death.

Same for my knowledge. Same for others knowledge.... Right up to the point that we all die and all knowledge along with it.

Now how much of a knowledge factory mechanism is that for the universe to have produced? It actually seems like death/extinction is the destruction of all knowledge on your worldview.

But not on mine! Thank God

 

[poetofparables]

Okay. So has your knowledge here in this thread (that Christians disagreeing over what the Bible says about the nature of Eternal punishment of the lost providing some evidence that the Bible is unclear) been transformed from what it was over there(that Christians disagreeing over what the Bible says about the nature of Eternal punishment of the lost providing some evidence that the Bible is wrong)? Or are you just avoiding a ToS violation by saying it's "unclear" here versus "wrong" over there?

Either way, though I'm not sure you see my point.

Do you now have the knowledge that it's our unclear interpretations of the Bible that's in disagreement/debate here in the Theology section of CFNet?

People disagree over the square root of 144. That observation DOES NOT provide any evidence whatsoever that the square root of 144 isn't clearly or correctly stated as 12.

You said I had proved the Bible is unclear on this subject. I have not proven that! Anymore than if I told you that the square root of 144 is 11 and Tim said it was 13 proves math is unclear.

I just proved some people's interpretations of the Bible on this subject is unclear.

Other's of course not mine

I said over there, I believed Jesus was wrong in a particular belief, I also stated that the cause of all the arguments there was due to the bible. And if I remember I did make the statement "A glass darkly" I said the fault is in or with the bible, just that it's fault is that it is very unclear about some things. I personally don't believe that, but my aim is to simply get christians to think outside the box.

 

[poetofparables]

Yes. Not knowledge. That's my point.

Poof, all your knowledge becomes "something else" upon your death.

Same for my knowledge. Same for others knowledge.... Right up to the point that we all die and all knowledge along with it.

Now how much of a knowledge factory mechanism is that for the universe to have produced? It actually seems like death/extinction is the destruction of all knowledge on your worldview.

But not on mine! Thank God

Ok chessman.

 

[poetofparables]

I think death is the most efficient way to transform one form of energy to another.

Note: Thank to chessman I realise my statement needs to be proven, since I have not attempted to do that yet I won't claim it as fact.

 

[gr8grace3]

I said this:
"A question: did Jesus' physical death pay for our sins? yes or no."

Let's not. Will you answer or not?


Providing irrelevant questions to my question isn't helpful. I think you're dodging. I'm trying to make a point, but it seems you don't want to go there.

Your question is key in this debate.

Did Christ physically die for the payment of sins? NO....His substitutionary spiritual death paid for sin.(Father why have you forsaken me?)

Does one go to the lake of fire for their sins? NO.....Christ paid for ALL sin.

We do not "pay" the penalty for sin.

 

[FreeGrace]

Not alive, no longer alive.

That's all?? I think your definition is rather lacking.

I said this:
"Therefore, His life cannot exist in the "second death". That would be a contradiction."

Speculation, but okay.

How so? You really think God's life, which is eternal can exist in the second death. I'd say that would be speculation.

No. Nobody can "reside" in death.

The Bible plainly tells us that people will be cast into the second death, where there is torment night and day forever and ever. So, yes, people CAN reside or exist in a state that is separate from God. But your definition of death prevents you from understanding what all it means.

Where shall I go from your Spirit?
Or where shall I flee from your presence?
If I ascend to heaven, you are there!
If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there!
Psalm 139:7-8

Nobody can be separated from God's presence, according to Psalm 139

Why do you keep confusing sheol with the lake of fire? They aren't the same.

[Yes, and 1 John 5 says that those without the Son of God do not have life.

Right. They have spiritual death.

James didn't "define" death that way. He commented that the body without the spirit is dead.

That's a definition, but you would rather deny it.

Pretty simple, the Greek word for spirit is the same word as the Greek word for breath. The body that has no breath is dead.

And the reason the body is DEAD is because the spirit/soul/breath LEFT the body. iow, the spirit/soul/breath was separated from the body. Real simple.

I'm glad you asked this question. Yes.

And I'm glad you're glad. But I'm not glad that you are confused on the matter. If His physical death paid for the sins, then He spoke too soon on the cross when He said "it is finished". He would have had to die physically BEFORE He made that claim. btw, when He quoted at least verse 1 of Psa 22, He was noting that He was SEPARATED from the Father. He was in a state of spiritual death when He was paying for our sins.

A question for you. What does the Bible say the wages of sin is? So let me ask you the same question, Did Jesus' death pay for our sins?

The wages of sin is death. And it was Jesus' SPIRITUAL death that paid for our sins. His physical death was immaterial to saving us.

What if the wages of sin is eternal conscious torment in hell? Did Jesus pay the penalty of eternal conscious torment in hell? If so, then Jesus is still in hell paying that penalty for us. The doctrine of eternal conscious torment in hell makes no sense because Jesus did not pay THAT penalty, he paid the penalty of death that we owe, since the wages of sin is death.

All of this is irrelevant and immaterial.

What does Jesus save us from? If unbelievers end up ceasing to exist, how is that a problem for them? No different than animals, it seems to me.

Those who deny ECT render the Savior irrelevant. There is nothing to be saved from. ONLY ECT would be the reason He came to SAVE us.

 

[FreeGrace]

Your question is key in this debate.

Did Christ physically die for the payment of sins? NO....His substitutionary spiritual death paid for sin.(Father why have you forsaken me?)

Does one go to the lake of fire for their sins? NO.....Christ paid for ALL sin.

We do not "pay" the penalty for sin.

 

[Obadiah]

At this point this is a reminder to all members to read and follow these new guidlines. In the future these will be enforced. Thanks.

From Guidelines for Posting in the Apologetics and Theology Forum:

Christian Theology is by definition the study of God through His word, the Bible. Apologetics goes hand in hand with theology as it is the branch of Christian theology which attempts to give a rational defense of the Christian faith. That makes the Apologetics and Theology forum unique from many of our other forums in that this is a place specifically for these types of discussions.

With this in mind, the following guidelines should be followed.

• Original posts should reference specific scripture and what it is the member wants to say or ask about that scripture.
• Subsequent opposing responses should include references to supportive scripture relevant to the thread and offer explanation for the contrary understanding.
• Opinions are plenty and have little value so please do not state positions that have no basis in scripture.
• Do not use phrases such as, “You’re wrong.” This is insulting and inappropriate and there are nicer ways to disagree without being insulting.
• Once you have made a point, refrain from flooding the forum with numerous posts making the same point over and over with nothing new to support it.
• You may ask a member questions as to what they believe on certain topics relative to the subject of the thread, but please keep in mind the member is under no obligation to answer.
• Failing to answer someone’s question doesn’t necessarily amount to an admission of error or surrender but keep in mind that in any debate if you refuse to or can not answer a reasonable question, it may weaken your position.)
  
  (Oh yeah, forgot to mention, this isn't necessarily directed at the above post!)

 

[TimothyW]

Those who deny ECT render the Savior irrelevant. There is nothing to be saved from. ONLY ECT would be the reason He came to SAVE us.

You need to support your declarations with scripture. I disagree with your statements. The Bible says (Romans 6:23) For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Therefore there IS something to be saved from, and it isn't ECT. The Bible says that we are saved from death. We are given eternal life. That doesn't render the Savior irrelevant as you falsely claim. How could it be "irrelevant" to receive eternal life instead of death? It is very relevant.

 

[FreeGrace]

You need to support your declarations with scripture.

I have and will again. Matt 25:46 says that the unsaved will go to everlasting punishment. If they simply cease to exist, how is that punishment. Ceasing to exist means NO punishment, because punishment requires a conscious awareness of such.

The denial of ECT is much like being in a coma. No feelings, no consciousness.

Jesus IS the Savior. So what does He save people from, if not ECT? Those who deny ECT remove anything to be saved from.

I disagree with your statements.

There's a huge difference between disagreement and refutation.

The Bible says (Romans 6:23) For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Therefore there IS something to be saved from, and it isn't ECT. The Bible says that we are saved from death.

OK, now maybe we may be getting somewhere. Since your view is that the unbeliever is simply "no more", which is the only way you view "death", why is that something to be saved from? You haven't addressed that point.

And your view completely ignores Matt 25:46 - “These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” NASB

Who are the "these"? People.

What is "everlasting"? aiōnios
1) without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be
2) without beginning
3) without end, never to cease, everlasting

What is "punishment"? kolasis
1) correction, punishment, penalty

People will be penalized "never to cease". If one simply ceases to be, that contradicts "never to cease".

We are given eternal life. That doesn't render the Savior irrelevant as you falsely claim.

Your view is that unbelievers simply cease to be. How is that anything to be saved from? Please answer.

How could it be "irrelevant" to receive eternal life instead of death? It is very relevant.

Your view removes any idea of penalty/punishment for refusing the free gift of eternal life.

Atheists are totally on board with your view of unbelievers. They believe they will simply cease to exist, which give them no problems at all. They have nothing to fear, believing that they will simply be no more.

iow, there are no consequences for unbelief. Yet, Scripture tells us that unbelievers will suffer eternal (never to cease) punishment or penalty.

One must be conscious in order to be penalized.

 

[TimothyW]

FreeGrace. you don't believe death is someting to be saved from? Please explain and be specific. Use this example, you child is trapped in a burning building. Since death is not something to be saved from, do you just let your child die? After all, according to you death is nothing to worry about. Don't get angry with this example, it is the logical conclusion of your statement.

Also Matthew 25:46 does not prove that there is etenal conscious torment. It doesn't say these go off to eternal torment, it says eternal punishment. It is YOUR claim that death is not a punishment, that simply isn't true. Haven't you ever heard of the death penalty? Death is a punishment, and it is eternal. Therefore it doesn't work to use Matthew 25:46 to prove that the eternal punishment has to be eternal conscious torment. If you had bothered to listed to the podcast, you would have realized this anyway. You haven't done your homework on this topic if you are using Matthew 25:46 to try to prove that the eternal punishment is not death.

You claim that my view removes any idea of penalty/punishment for refusing the gift of eternal life. This just is not true. They perish. It is illogical to say that dying is no punishment, no penalty. It's truly a bizarre argument. How on earth is eternal death just as good as eternal life?

How is death NOT something to be saved from? Please answer.

Another point is the one I made before when you said that death is separation. I pointed out that the Bible says nothing can separate anyone from God. But you, for some reason said "don't confuse Sheol with the lake of fire". That is irrelevant, since neither one can separate a person from God. My point was not that Sheol can't separate anyone from God, but the LOF can. My point was that the Bible says nothing can. Re-read Psalm 137:7-8
Where shall I go from your Spirit?
Or where shall I flee from your presence?
If I ascend to heaven, you are there!
If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there!
Psalm 139:7-8

 

[TimothyW]

Once and for all, Matthew 25:46 is no proof that the eternal punishment is not eternal death. We all agree that those who do not receive eternal life will go off to eternal punishment. We disagree on what that eternal punishment consists of. Does the eternal punishment consist of eternal conscious torment or does the eternal punishment consist of eternal destruction? Every ECT supporter on earth brings up Matthew 25:46 as if it proved something. It proves that there is eternal punishment, it does NOT prove that the punishment is eternal conscious torment. It will continue to NOT support the doctrine of ECT the next time it is brought up. ECT supporters, please do your homework on this topic before you try to refute it. I've had to make this same statement at least two dozen times in talking to ECTists.

 

[TimothyW]

While I am on the topic of overused arguments for the final punishment being eternal conscious torment, another passage that doesn't work is Luke 16:24 "I am in anguish in these flames". This parable is not about the final punishment, since the rich man's brothers are still alive. If this were about the final final judgment, then the man's brothers would be right there with him. The most this parable can say is that there is anguish in the intermediate state between death and the resurrection for judgment, but a more likely explanation for this parable is that it is not describing hell at all.

 

[TimothyW]

The third overused argument for eternal conscious torment is of course Revelation 20:10.

A person only has to read Revelation 20:10 to see that it doesn't say that the wicked go to hell when they die where they will be tormented alive forever.
Here it is: "and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever."

It says the devil, the beast (remember that the beast has seven heads and ten horns, are we forced to take this literally), and the false prophet. I don't think that this verse should be taken literally, BUT EVEN IF IT IS TAKEN LITERALLY, it still doesn't prove that all of the wicked will be tormented alive forever in hell. At most it only proves that the devil, the beast and the false prophet will be. It is not proof of ECT in Hell.

Once Matthew 25:46, Luke 16, and Revelation 20:10 are understood, there is no reason not to believe that the wages of sin really is death, just as the Bible says (Romans 6:23) and no reason to not believe the words of John 3:16 "whoever believes in him shall not PERISH but will have ETERNAL LIFE".

There really is no reason at all to believe in the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment in Hell.

 

[FreeGrace]

FreeGrace. you don't believe death is someting to be saved from? Please explain and be specific.

I've been very specific. Your view is that death is simply ceasing to be. That means no consciousness. How is that any kind of penalty or punishment? It's nothing more than being in a coma. No suffering, no punishment, no experience.

Yet, Scripture tells us very clearly that unbelievers will experience an eternal penalty/punishment.

How can ceasing to exist be "eternal"? You've not explained that. In fact, you cannot for ceasing to exist stops all sense of time or anything "eternal".

Use this example, you child is trapped in a burning building. Since death is not something to be saved from, do you just let your child die?

Look, everyone will die physically. This is NOT the issue. It is eternal death that is the issue, but given your misunderstanding of what the second death means, I don't expect you to follow this.

After all, according to you death is nothing to worry about. Don't get angry with this example, it is the logical conclusion of your statement.

That is so wrong. You've confused physical death with the second death. And you keep dodging the reality of what Matt 25:46 says.

Also Matthew 25:46 does not prove that there is etenal conscious torment. It doesn't say these go off to eternal torment, it says eternal punishment.

But what the difference? Rev 20:10 says there is going to tormenting night and day forever and ever, which parallels Matt 25:46. You're ignoring these facts.

It is YOUR claim that death is not a punishment, that simply isn't true. Haven't you ever heard of the death penalty? Death is a punishment, and it is eternal.

If death is nothing more than ceasing to exist, then all concept of punishment, penalty, or torment vanishes.

There is NO SUCH thing as eternal torment (Rev 20:10) IF one simply ceases to exist.

Therefore it doesn't work to use Matthew 25:46 to prove that the eternal punishment has to be eternal conscious torment.

It sure does. The very meaning of punishment demands a conscious awareness. One who has simply ceased to exist has NO consciousness. And you cannot explain that huge glitch in your view.

If you had bothered to listed to the podcast, you would have realized this anyway. You haven't done your homework on this topic if you are using Matthew 25:46 to try to prove that the eternal punishment is not death.

I never tried to prove that eternal punishment is "not death". In fact, it absolutely IS death, but spiritual death, which you refuse to acknowledge or understand.

[QUOTE3]You claim that my view removes any idea of penalty/punishment for refusing the gift of eternal life. This just is not true.[/QUOTE]
Your denial of what your view denies is an lol. If unbelievers simply will cease to exist, that lines up EXACTLY how atheists view what happens after physical death. There is NO consequence for any behavior if one simply ceases to exist. There is no consciousness if one doesn't exist. So no penalty, no punishment. Yet the Bible says there will be.

They perish. It is illogical to say that dying is no punishment, no penalty. It's truly a bizarre argument. How on earth is eternal death just as good as eternal life?

Your view remains extremely confused. There is physical death, which we will ALL experience. Then there will be the second death for all who don't have eternal life. But you think all death is simply ceasing to exist.

How is death NOT something to be saved from? Please answer.

What Jesus saves people from is the eternal torment/punishment/penalty in the lake of fire night and day forever and ever.

Another point is the one I made before when you said that death is separation. I pointed out that the Bible says nothing can separate anyone from God.

That promise is ONLY for believers; His children. Certainly NOT for the entire human race.

But you, for some reason said "don't confuse Sheol with the lake of fire". That is irrelevant, since neither one can separate a person from God.

First, your confusion between sheol and the lake of fire is inexcusable. They aren't the same. And there is NOTHING in the Bible about unbelievers being promised not to be separated from God.

My point was not that Sheol can't separate anyone from God, but the LOF can. My point was that the Bible says nothing can. Re-read Psalm 137:7-8
Where shall I go from your Spirit?
Or where shall I flee from your presence?
If I ascend to heaven, you are there!
If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there!
Psalm 139:7-8

This verse has ZERO to do with the lake of fire. Please quit confusing the 2.

Furthermore, who wrote Psa 37? David, a believer. What makes you think he was speaking about all of humanity? He wasn't. He was speaking as a believer. The verse does not support your view in the least.

 

[FreeGrace]

Once and for all, Matthew 25:46 is no proof that the eternal punishment is not eternal death.

What it clearly communicates is that unbelievers will experience eternal punishment. How is that possible if one simply ceases to exist? That's what TW cannot explain.

We all agree that those who do not receive eternal life will go off to eternal punishment.

If one simply ceases to exist, it CANNOT be described as "eternal" anything. The word "eternal" means on-going forever.

We disagree on what that eternal punishment consists of. Does the eternal punishment consist of eternal conscious torment or does the eternal punishment consist of eternal destruction?

The Bible is very clear that it consists of eternal torment, per Rev 20:10. Which aligns perfectly with Matt 25:46.

Every ECT supporter on earth brings up Matthew 25:46 as if it proved something.

Because it does. Your claim to the contrary is just amazing.

It proves that there is eternal punishment, it does NOT prove that the punishment is eternal conscious torment.

I'd love to hear your explanation of how any kind of punishment can be experienced when one doesn't exist. One HAS TO EXIST in order to experience punishment. Esp the eternal kind.

It will continue to NOT support the doctrine of ECT the next time it is brought up. ECT supporters, please do your homework on this topic before you try to refute it. I've had to make this same statement at least two dozen times in talking to ECTists.

Actually, your view has been thoroughly refuted. And you've got many questions that you have not answered. Please don't tell those you disagree with to do their homework when you've got lots to do. Esp when answering my questions to you.