The Three Main Views of Hell

[Wayne222]

One must remember there are degrees of punishment at the last judgment. Jesus said it will be more tolerable for Sodom then for the Pharisees. Now if all get put into the lake of fire and cease to exist. Then how would it be more tolerable for some ? I believe people will exist after the judgment. But different punishment. Lake of fire can be used as a picture of God's judgement. They all are cast into God's judgement. 

[Starise]

Probably the most concerning thing about the subject is those who are going there don't realize the gravity of their situation not seeming to care while those who aren't going there study it most.

[TrueFollowerOfChrist]

I have not seen the Youtube video or read the other responses on this thread. My view based on my reading of scripture is that Hell is a literal place of torment where people will consciously suffer for all eternity with no hope of relief. Universalism makes no sense and negates holy living, evangelism, and needing to come to Christ at all. Annihilationism also makes no sense because there is no mention in scripture about Hell being temporary. Scripture seems to indicate that people are eternal, not just the ones in Heaven, but All people. In fact I believe that annihilationism would be unjust because it would allow those who spent their lives rejecting Christ to basically "get away with it". We see in Revelation that Satan, the Beast, and the false prophet are STILL in the lake of fire after 1,000 years. So even if annihilationism were true, it would mean people still suffer for at least 1,000 years.

[Dennis1209]

1 hour ago, Wayne222 said:

One must remember there are degrees of punishment at the last judgment. Jesus said it will be more tolerable for Sodom then for the Pharisees. Now if all get put into the lake of fire and cease to exist. Then how would it be more tolerable for some ? I believe people will exist after the judgment. But different punishment. Lake of fire can be used as a picture of God's judgement. They all are cast into God's judgement. 

Revelation 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. Revelation 13. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

Who, dead men (the unsaved). What, the Great White Throne judgment. How, not being in the Book of life, judged by what they did in their lives (works).

Romans 12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

This is another example that refutes annihilation and favors eternal torment.  

This tells me that the condemned Hitlers, Pol Pot, and Stalin of history will be judged much harsher than the unsaved person who tried to lead a moral life, was charitable and had Biblical values.

Therefore, I assume there are different levels of eternal punishment. A Purgatory is Catholic and not Biblical.

Annihilation (removal of every trace of existence) does not seem to fit at any stage, as some argue.

I believe Jesus talked more about Hell than Heaven or Paradise. Growing up and a young adult, I remember many fervent Hellfire and brimstone messages from the pulpit at various churches we visited and on TV on Sundays. I cannot remember the last one I heard preached; they seem to have been phased out.

2 Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

Turn the TV on Sundays these days, and it is mostly prosperity gospel, purpose-driven life, another gospel, buying books and emergency food preparation items, a watered-down gospel, not teaching the only way to Salvation, etc.

Googling the world’s wealthiest pastors and what they preach is very telling.

30+ Richest Pastors in the World and Their Net Worth 2022 (eafeed.com)

[Dennis1209]

1 hour ago, Starise said:

Probably the most concerning thing about the subject is those who are going there don't realize the gravity of their situation not seeming to care while those who aren't going there study it most.

See my musings above.

Proverbs 9:10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.

I believe this “fear of the Lord” is reverence and respect in most instances. I think two paths lead to Salvation.

·         Love and appreciation for what the Lord Jesus did for us.

·         Fear of going to Hell for all of eternity.

When was the last time you heard a fervent Hellfire and brimstone message from the pulpit or on Sunday morning TV?

[Starise]

1 hour ago, Dennis1209 said:

See my musings above.

Proverbs 9:10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.

I believe this “fear of the Lord” is reverence and respect in most instances. I think two paths lead to Salvation.

·         Love and appreciation for what the Lord Jesus did for us.

·         Fear of going to Hell for all of eternity.

When was the last time you heard a fervent Hellfire and brimstone message from the pulpit or on Sunday morning TV?

Hey Dennis,

I agree people need to hear a well rounded presentation of the gospel. I hear you on that, and for most of my young life I sat under those kinds of sermons in church.

Here are a few of my thoughts for what it's worth.

There are at least several variables in a study on the subject of hell. 

-Finding out what it actually is and what each term in the bible means when we think it refers to hell.In many cases when hell is preached, the passages used are not referring to the place of eternal torment. In some cases it is.

-Viewing the destiny and state of the angels maybe differently than our state. People tend to take an all encompassing view of what happens to unsaved sinners and the angels as if it's all one event, so saying an angel is eternally punished doesn't qualify that we are. I see it as a neutral statement so far as what happens to unsaved MEN and dealt with differently, even if in the end the outcomes are similar or the same, I think we need to have that division or we are placing what happens to one group onto the other group. If the context is discussing angels and I am looking for context of men, I move on.

Further refining WHY men are sent to hell in terms of motive.

Possibilities I have heard others mention:

-God never stopped loving them, however there is no other place for them in the universe, so this is God's dumping ground  where the largest vaccum of Himself is.

-Eternal torment is just suffering for rejecting God's offer of salvation. This place was intentionally made just for torture of people who rejected God. Although in the case of men, they are being thrown into a place originally designed for fallen angels.

Thoughts on works having some influence in hell I have heard from others:

-When the dead are judged according to their works, they are sent to hell at their level. Not to be sarcastic, but what's the best place in hell? How about the lowest level? Is there any bible to back any of it up with specifics? If so I am not aware of it.

-The whole judgement of the lost on their works is mainly to substatiate to them and the rest of creation their qualification to arrive in hell. If there was no judgment, people would always claim they never had a fair shake, but as we know, NOONE'S works will get them out or qualify them without the blood of Christ, so the recourse is to show them WHY they are going there individually. 

Responses to hell

-Weeping and gnashing of teeth

When Stephen was stoned the pharisees gnashed their teeth. Gnashing can be anger or frustration. Nowhere do I read anyone repented, this is either because they know all hope is gone or they are still angry and antagonistic towards God. They could be weeping because they know what's coming and there is no recourse, not necessarily because they are in any way sorry. Gnashing and weeping could also be sheer fear. Noone wants to see this be their final end.

This has to be one of the drearest days in the history of men, to see men dropped into hell one by one after reviewing their lives and seeing their sentence.

Our view of God

Everything we read in the Bible tells us something about God. Many assume because were were made in the image of God we have a decent handle on how God should or might act, and often we will relate everything He does to the way men do things. This is a big mistake IMHO. While we DO see some similarities, as in God getting jealous, God getting angry, God forgiving, I think it is an overreach to assume things about how we think He either will or should react. Since He isn't us, then having these expectations is unrealistic IMHO.

He is Yahweh God and we won't always be able to figure Him out on human terms. This is why I think how we see Him responding to the unsaved might seem excessive to a few, but then none of us knows the whole picture from beginning to end like He does. 

I see God as 100% just. 100% holy, 100% pure and 100% sinless perfection. He won't even LOOK at any sinner not under the blood until they repent. If they don't repent, He acts accordingly to His nature. Heaven and hell are very different binary choices. I don't think any sinner CHOOSES hell, but unsaved sinners all end up there eventually.

My .00002

 

 

 

 

[Vine Abider]

3 hours ago, Starise said:

Probably the most concerning thing about the subject is those who are going there don't realize the gravity of their situation not seeming to care while those who aren't going there study it most.

Like a brother said about some folks badly misbehaving and seemingly in need of judgement - "They can't help it, they're just lost."  In this case, it's people that are unaware, therefore they just don't know what they don't know.  We only know there's something very undesirable (whatever that looks like exactly) because we've been illuminated of His Spirit.

I'm always reminded of a Jesus people cartoon I saw back in the early 70s. It had a group of people blindly marching into a gigantic, roaring fire. In front of them were a few Christians trying to hold them back.  One in the group marching into the fire says, "Man these Christians sure are pushy!"

[Vine Abider]

On 1/3/2023 at 9:52 PM, Tristen said:

 

“Regarding your question above, I think most from the annihilation view say that there is a period before the soul is brought to nothing, and in that time there may be "weeping and gnashing of teeth."”

My first comment would be that I don’t see the concept of “a period before the soul is brought to nothing” clearly articulated in Biblical text. Whereas I do see the concept of a “forever” punishment reinforced in many Biblical passages. So again, for me it comes back to what is clearly stated, and asking myself, ‘Why I would feel the need to move away from what is clearly stated?’. Is it because, in my general reading of the text, I genuinely, objectively see an alternate interpretation, or is it because I’m having a difficult time with the severity of an eternal hell (i.e. because I have a personal agenda to make the Bible say something different)?

I had no personal agenda; I simply read a very detailed book on the subject which examined the 3 views and looked deeply into the meaning of the words and context. This made me aware that there were other, possibly legitimate views rather than the traditional view I always held.

My second response is to wonder why God is being so cruel as to torture people for “a period” when the option of immediately extinguishing their existence is available to Him. I don’t understand the purpose of such torture – since no amount of suffering can pay back what is owed. If personal suffering could pay what is owed, that would be the Catholic concept of purgatory, leading eventually to eternal life, not oblivion. So why the need to torture someone if oblivion is their final destiny anyway?

 Could it be there is some justice/requirement still needing to be met?

“However, I see that there are some pretty good persuasions that perhaps the larger number will face permeant death.  Death in its simplest form means devoid of all life with no ability to respond to anything - nothingness”

I think this is another semantic attempt to work-around any discomfort with the idea of a “forever” punishment.

Since I held this belief - "forever punishment" - I was not really trying to work around it.  Neither is the author of the book I cited in my opening post - just presenting the 3 views that are out there.

On a matter of logical consistency, if there is “a period” after our “death”, but before our “nothingness”, then “death” cannot be defined as “nothingness”.

The Lake of Fire, in which the devil, the beast and false prophet “will be tormented day and night forever and ever” (Rev 20:10), is called the “second death” for rebellious humans (Rev 20:14, 21:8). Rather than being “devoid of all life with no ability to respond to anything - nothingness”, this “second death” explicitly “burns with fire and brimstone” (Rev 21:8). It is therefore not “nothingness”.

Correct.  It would seem to me, from what I understand of the annihilation view, that few humans make it to the lake of fire.  The devil/angels look like they get consciously roasted.

 

“For your consideration, I thought to copy a blog article here, by someone who holds a traditional view of hell, but also sees that there is some merit to be considered regarding the annihilation view too. Let's have some conversation about what he presents, okay . . . are you open to that?  I think it would be a good place to start”

Generally speaking, I am more interested in responding to points you raise, and am somewhat reluctant to provide rebuttals to links for the following reasons:

- I don’t think it is fair for me to make arguments against someone who is not present in the conversation to defend their position.

- It takes a lot more time and effort to formulate a rebuttal argument than it does to paste a link. So, before I put in that time and effort, I prefer to have some sense that the one I am in a conversation with has also put enough effort into the topic to be able to express the point for themselves. Otherwise, it’s only me thinking for myself and putting effort into the conversation, while the other side just pastes links to ready-made arguments they agree with.

- Alternatively, I could just find links that agree with me. But that’s not really a conversation between us – just a regurgitation of what already exists on the internet.

 Understand your preference. I just thought you would appreciate an intelligent piece by someone who still holds the traditional view, but sees that there is legitimate argument for the annihilation side to consider.  I thought he stated this well and agree with almost all he said.

Having said that, I’ll make a few notes on what you pasted.

Firstly, there is a strong, and recurring, insinuation that those who read the argument are inclined to not be fair-minded – to which I would respond, ‘At least give me a chance to consider your arguments before presuming to assess how fair-minded I’m being’. This is posturing, and makes the article feel like a setup – i.e. if you disagree with the argument, the author can claim, ‘See? I told you they’d be closed-minded’. It sounds like someone who is not secure in the quality of their position. And yes, as the author notes, this is a “waste” of the reader’s “time” with an irrelevant “point”.

 Noted

“most of the passages in the NT that talk about the fate of the wicked use language that suggests finality. Here’s just a small sampling:”

This argument takes a very narrow connotation of the words, and then proceeds to ignore any contrary information on the topic.

Just as one example; yes, “destruction” can mean obliteration from existence – into “nothingness”. But “everlasting destruction” (or, if you prefer, “age-long destruction”) speaks to a process of “destruction” occurring over a period (“everlasting”), and not to “finality” and “nothingness”.

When you used the word “permanent” above, I had to read the next sentence to understand what you meant – because “permanent” can mean a sense of “finality”, but it can also speak to an unchanging state. This demonstrates that it’s not good enough to build an argument based on a narrow connotation of a word without considering other aspects of context.

 

“the Bible says that the gift of immortality is only given to believers who are in Christ”

This is very similar to the first argument – where a very narrow understanding of the words “life” and “death” are being applied – and where there are many examples of these words being used in scripture expressing ideas outside of this very narrow understanding.

 

“the language of “eternality” (aionios) doesn’t always (or usually?) convey the idea of never-ending time”

I think I effectively argued against this in an earlier post.

The appeal to the ‘maybes’ and ‘possibilities’. i.e. ‘Sometimes this word can mean something slightly different to how it was translated. Therefore, maybe the verse we are uncomfortable with doesn’t actually mean what it says most clearly’.

Occasionally, this might be a valid approach (though to build doctrine, one would need more supporting arguments beyond ‘this is at-least one possible interpretation’). Nevertheless, on a topic that is so thoroughly addressed in scripture (such as hell), basing conclusions on this approach requires ignoring the preponderance of Biblical evidence reinforcing the idea that hell is a “forever” punishment.

 Allow me a little more time to respond to the above few paragraphs.  On the surface, the "simple reading" if you will, certainly looks like it supports the traditional view.  However, this view was greatly influenced by Augustine and then disseminated far and wide by the RCC, which had a huge influence on thinking - including the King James translators and others.  Therefore the nuances of "hell" get glossed over (hades vs Gehenna for instance) as well as the words denoting the length of time.

As another thought, I think equating the concept of ‘eternity’ and “time” can be a bit tricky. Considering that God created “time” out of eternity (i.e. God’s reality ‘before’ “time” was created) – that means there is a concept of eternity that exists independently of “time”. I’ll have to have a think about how this might impact the concept of hell.

 

Tristen - finally got some quality time for a little better reply, but owe you some more as my last response states.  I put my responses in larger green.

4 hours ago, TrueFollowerOfChrist said:

I have not seen the Youtube video or read the other responses on this thread. My view based on my reading of scripture is that Hell is a literal place of torment where people will consciously suffer for all eternity with no hope of relief. Universalism makes no sense and negates holy living, evangelism, and needing to come to Christ at all. Annihilationism also makes no sense because there is no mention in scripture about Hell being temporary. Scripture seems to indicate that people are eternal, not just the ones in Heaven, but All people. In fact I believe that annihilationism would be unjust because it would allow those who spent their lives rejecting Christ to basically "get away with it". We see in Revelation that Satan, the Beast, and the false prophet are STILL in the lake of fire after 1,000 years. So even if annihilationism were true, it would mean people still suffer for at least 1,000 years.

True follower - I included you on this as I thought you might appreciate the conversation Tristen and I are having.

[Dennis1209]

3 hours ago, Starise said:

Hey Dennis,

I agree people need to hear a well rounded presentation of the gospel. I hear you on that, and for most of my young life I sat under those kinds of sermons in church.

Here are a few of my thoughts for what it's worth.

There are at least several variables in a study on the subject of hell. 

-Finding out what it actually is and what each term in the bible means when we think it refers to hell.In many cases when hell is preached, the passages used are not referring to the place of eternal torment. In some cases it is.

-Viewing the destiny and state of the angels maybe differently than our state. People tend to take an all encompassing view of what happens to unsaved sinners and the angels as if it's all one event, so saying an angel is eternally punished doesn't qualify that we are. I see it as a neutral statement so far as what happens to unsaved MEN and dealt with differently, even if in the end the outcomes are similar or the same, I think we need to have that division or we are placing what happens to one group onto the other group. If the context is discussing angels and I am looking for context of men, I move on.

Further refining WHY men are sent to hell in terms of motive.

Possibilities I have heard others mention:

-God never stopped loving them, however there is no other place for them in the universe, so this is God's dumping ground  where the largest vaccum of Himself is.

-Eternal torment is just suffering for rejecting God's offer of salvation. This place was intentionally made just for torture of people who rejected God. Although in the case of men, they are being thrown into a place originally designed for fallen angels.

Thoughts on works having some influence in hell I have heard from others:

-When the dead are judged according to their works, they are sent to hell at their level. Not to be sarcastic, but what's the best place in hell? How about the lowest level? Is there any bible to back any of it up with specifics? If so I am not aware of it.

-The whole judgement of the lost on their works is mainly to substatiate to them and the rest of creation their qualification to arrive in hell. If there was no judgment, people would always claim they never had a fair shake, but as we know, NOONE'S works will get them out or qualify them without the blood of Christ, so the recourse is to show them WHY they are going there individually. 

Responses to hell

-Weeping and gnashing of teeth

When Stephen was stoned the pharisees gnashed their teeth. Gnashing can be anger or frustration. Nowhere do I read anyone repented, this is either because they know all hope is gone or they are still angry and antagonistic towards God. They could be weeping because they know what's coming and there is no recourse, not necessarily because they are in any way sorry. Gnashing and weeping could also be sheer fear. Noone wants to see this be their final end.

This has to be one of the drearest days in the history of men, to see men dropped into hell one by one after reviewing their lives and seeing their sentence.

Our view of God

Everything we read in the Bible tells us something about God. Many assume because were were made in the image of God we have a decent handle on how God should or might act, and often we will relate everything He does to the way men do things. This is a big mistake IMHO. While we DO see some similarities, as in God getting jealous, God getting angry, God forgiving, I think it is an overreach to assume things about how we think He either will or should react. Since He isn't us, then having these expectations is unrealistic IMHO.

He is Yahweh God and we won't always be able to figure Him out on human terms. This is why I think how we see Him responding to the unsaved might seem excessive to a few, but then none of us knows the whole picture from beginning to end like He does. 

I see God as 100% just. 100% holy, 100% pure and 100% sinless perfection. He won't even LOOK at any sinner not under the blood until they repent. If they don't repent, He acts accordingly to His nature. Heaven and hell are very different binary choices. I don't think any sinner CHOOSES hell, but unsaved sinners all end up there eventually.

My .00002

 

 

 

 

Hi Starise,

I may not have an accurate view of Hell. I cannot comprehend the length, severity, or concept either. Therefore, it is only a view my mind puts together trying to picture it.

De. 32:22; Ps. 86:13; 88:6; 139:15 gives me the impression of different levels of Hell.

If Hell is underfoot in the earth (think about this), the “bottomless pit” can only describe that there is no more bottom in any direction; one can go no further down; there is only up. Sheol and Hades seem to be different places from the BP. Likewise, Gehenna, the Abyss, under the Euphrates River, and in chains under darkness. I do not think they are all synonymous.

I think Hades (or Hell) is comparable to a jail, a holding cell until trial and judgment. Jails restrain and hold captives until trial. They are not pleasant places to be and have punishments with minimal care.

When convicted and judged, next comes prison for a specified period. Hard labor, isolated confinement, tormented, withholding, and corporate punishment is still practiced in prisons today. When a life sentence is handed down, if followed through with, the sentence is over at physical death. What about eternal souls and spiritual beings? I contend the sentence is eternal, with no commuting of sentences ever.

I see the lake of fire as the eternal destination of all unsaved men of all time (bodily), along with Satan and his minions at the close of the millennium.

Revelation 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

[Selah7]

5 hours ago, Dennis1209 said:

Revelation 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. Revelation 13. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

Who, dead men (the unsaved). What, the Great White Throne judgment. How, not being in the Book of life, judged by what they did in their lives (works).

 

@Dennis1209

Revelation 20:13 "And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works."

Hey, Dennis.  Here is my understanding …

Regarding souls being judged "according to their works,” this only happens in the Millennium.  Notice that faith isn’t mentioned during the Millennium. Why?  because faith is not a factor in the great white throne judgment.  The first resurrection, on the other hand, does take faith into account.  That was back on "the Lord's day.”

On the last day of the Millennium, souls are judged by works only.  Why? because “faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” In other words, we don't see Jesus Christ on earth today; we accept Him through faith. Today, Jesus is in heaven; He is not walking on this earth.  But in the millennium, Jesus will be right here on earth.

So let’s consider—God saves all believers who have accepted His Son by faith through repentance without Christ's physical presence here on earth. But for the unsaved during the Millennium, their salvation will be only by their works because faith and grace no longer exist for them.  Why? because in the Millennium, the Lord will be there, so they will be judged by works alone.  In other words, they have seen and experienced Jesus Christ and therefore, they are without excuse.

Revelation 20:14 "And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death."