Is there a Hell?

[ParanoidAndroid]

For the sake of newcomers to this thread (me, to be specific!) is it fair to summarise the argument thus: that Shiloh and ParanoidAndroid are debating whether the eternal state of those who die without Jesus is one of annhilation (which implies an end to consiousness and awareness) or one of everlasting and conscious torment, i.e. a continuous and continuing knowledge of eternal separation from God and all that is good, since God Himself IS good.?

What is the second death, in other words? Assuming ALL men are resurrected for the purpose of judgement, in what form are they resurrected - bodily or spiritually? If bodily, is not the second death just a second physical/bodily death with the spirit remaining a conscious receiver of the knowledge of God and separation from God?

If the second death is a spiritual death, than that would imply total annihilation as though a person had never existed.

This is my limited understanding to date.

I am interested in the ongoing discussion and would like to learn more.

I hope that the debate will continue, guided by the Holy Spirit, as I am eager to be taught.

That's the basic gist of it, though there are some minor differences - before my discussion with shiloh started, there was some talk of hell as a place of eternal separation rather than punishment and pain (I am open to this interpretation of scripture, and see some validity in it - if the soul is immortal, it is simply separated from God, not punished and tortured for eternity).

And some discussion even went to the point that "hell" was torture and pain, but not eternal; the reasoning based on Judgement of the dead, "according to what they had done" (Revelation 20:12) - in other words, a moral person who did not follow God would suffer some punishment but basically be let in to heaven eventually, while the more people sin, and sin without remorse (rapists, murderers, etc), the more punishment is heaped on them and the more they are punished before being granted release/Grace (an interesting view, though not one I think can be biblically supported).

But recent discussion does seem to have revolved primarily around the two views you suggest.

[Guest shiloh357]

I addressed the three words we traditionally translate as "hell" in the New Testament (hades, gehenna, and tartaros), and even though they all refer to different subjects and ideas, the common link many Christians try to make between these three separate and distinct words as all referring to the same thing (they don't), and that all these three words also refer to the Lake of Fire in Revelation 20 (we know "hades" at least is thrown into the Lake of Fire, but by that very nature, hades can not be the same place as the Lake of Fire (yet Christians still see them as such). Suffice it to say, I find it convoluted reasoning to address all four words/phrases and refer to them as if they are speaking of the same thing. In response to this, you didn't think it pertinent to address these four terms, ("irrelevant" was the word I think you used).

They were irrelevant to the evidence I was actually asking you for at the time.

The problem is not in the translation, but in the fact that most people don't really understand why particular words are used.

They are used interchangably because they each communicate a different truth about Hell. For example, when Jesus said, "upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell (hades) shall not prevail against it. Why was hades used instead of Sheol, or Gehenna, or Tartaros? Hades refers to death. Jesus was saying that death itself will not prevail. Jesus uses the term "Gates of Hell (hades)." In this reference, a "gate" is a hebraism for power. It speaks of something formidable and death is formmidable and there is no human defense against it. Jesus is saying that power of death itself will not prevail against the church. Hades simply refers the abode of the dead, thus it speaks of death. It is not a picture of death attacking the church, but of death not being able to hinder or impede the church's advance.

Gehenna reveals a different aspect of hell. The original "gehenna" is a field where the Jews in their pre-exilic days sacrificed their children to moloch. Gehenna tells us what will happen to the unrighteous dead. It was a place, in Jesus day, of perpetual, unending flames and Jesus use a symbol of unending, unquenchable fire as analagous to what hell will be like for the unrighteous.

Tartarus is a term like unto Gehenna in that it speaks of a dark terror filled abode a place of pain and torment.

The never-ending aspect is communicated in the word Gehenna. Basically, you have the words Gehenna, Tartaros, Hades, Sheol, which speak of the same place, but communicate a different aspect of it.

[Guest shiloh357]

If the second death is a spiritual death, than that would imply total annihilation as though a person had never existed.

Not really. We are born spiritually dead by default.

John tells exactly what the second death is:

And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. 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. 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. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

(Revelation 20:11-14)

Everything you see above combined is the second death, according to John. He is not saying that the lake of fire by itself is the second death, but that everything, the condemnation, judgment and the casting of all of these people along with death and hell into the lake of fire. The second death is all of those things taken together.

The term "second death" is a hebraism that John being a Jew would have been familiar with. It refers to a penalty of the law not to extinction. Paul calls it "everlasting" destruction.

[BlindSeeker]

If the second death is a spiritual death, than that would imply total annihilation as though a person had never existed.

Not really. We are born spiritually dead by default.

What life then did Paul have which he was speaking of in these verses?

Ro 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

[Guest shiloh357]

If the second death is a spiritual death, than that would imply total annihilation as though a person had never existed.

Not really. We are born spiritually dead by default.

What life then did Paul have which he was speaking of in these verses?

Ro 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

Paul is speaking of being "alive" in the sense of his innocence prior to coming to a knowledge of the law ("without the law). When he came to a knowledge of God's law, and God's perfect system of justice, he "died" in the sense that he became aware of his spiritually dead condition before God.

[BlindSeeker]

If the second death is a spiritual death, than that would imply total annihilation as though a person had never existed.

Not really. We are born spiritually dead by default.

What life then did Paul have which he was speaking of in these verses?

Ro 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

Paul is speaking of being "alive" in the sense of his innocence prior to coming to a knowledge of the law ("without the law). When he came to a knowledge of God's law, and God's perfect system of justice, he "died" in the sense that he became aware of his spiritually dead condition before God.

Have any scriptures to support that beyond mere opinion?

How about these verses?

Joh 1:4 In Him was life; and the life was the light of men.

9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

Pr 13:9 The light of the righteous rejoiceth: but the lamp of the wicked shall be put out.

Pr 20:27 The spirit of man is the candle of the LORD, searching all the inward parts of the belly.

Job 18:5 Yea, the light of the wicked shall be put out, and the spark of his fire shall not shine.

6 The light shall be dark in his tabernacle, and his candle shall be put out with him.

[PreciousRubi]

If "HELL" is thrown into the lake of fire....where then is that 'eternal place of torment' for all the wicked unbelievers?

Revelation 20:14

And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

[Guest shiloh357]

Have any scriptures to support that beyond mere opinion?

Yes. Rom 7: 9-11. Taken within the context they are presented, I don't think there is too much ambiguity about what Paul is trying to say. It would appear that you have a different opinion about what Paul means.

How about these verses?

Joh 1:4 In Him was life; and the life was the light of men.

9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

Pr 13:9 The light of the righteous rejoiceth: but the lamp of the wicked shall be put out.

Pr 20:27 The spirit of man is the candle of the LORD, searching all the inward parts of the belly.

Job 18:5 Yea, the light of the wicked shall be put out, and the spark of his fire shall not shine.

6 The light shall be dark in his tabernacle, and his candle shall be put out with him.

Yeah, how about those verses?? What is the point you are trying make? What is it you think those verses are saying?

[ParanoidAndroid]

They were irrelevant to the evidence I was actually asking you for at the time.

Fair enough. I still provided the evidence, so you cannot accusing me of not doing so.

The problem is not in the translation, but in the fact that most people don't really understand why particular words are used.

They are used interchangably because they each communicate a different truth about Hell. For example, when Jesus said, "upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell (hades) shall not prevail against it. Why was hades used instead of Sheol, or Gehenna, or Tartaros? Hades refers to death. Jesus was saying that death itself will not prevail. Jesus uses the term "Gates of Hell (hades)." In this reference, a "gate" is a hebraism for power. It speaks of something formidable and death is formmidable and there is no human defense against it. Jesus is saying that power of death itself will not prevail against the church. Hades simply refers the abode of the dead, thus it speaks of death. It is not a picture of death attacking the church, but of death not being able to hinder or impede the church's advance.

Gehenna reveals a different aspect of hell. The original "gehenna" is a field where the Jews in their pre-exilic days sacrificed their children to moloch. Gehenna tells us what will happen to the unrighteous dead. It was a place, in Jesus day, of perpetual, unending flames and Jesus use a symbol of unending, unquenchable fire as analagous to what hell will be like for the unrighteous.

Tartarus is a term like unto Gehenna in that it speaks of a dark terror filled abode a place of pain and torment.

The never-ending aspect is communicated in the word Gehenna. Basically, you have the words Gehenna, Tartaros, Hades, Sheol, which speak of the same place, but communicate a different aspect of it.

"Hades" translates literally as a hole in the ground (the grave). In this sense then, I see no difficulty with your opinion of "gates of hell" (though I'm not so sure that the gate is a "symbol of power", though there certainly symbolism in understanding that death is a path to Judgement, and hence a doorway reference - if you have any references on the "symbol of power", I'd very much like to read it - it'll prove interesting). We all are destined for hades (the grave). Every single one of us will go there. Unless we are cremated of course (ironic, considering that the only way to avoid hades/hell is to be cremated in fire).

"Gehenna" is a Valley outside Jerusalem, a very real and literal place. You can still visit there today. It was a place where people went to burn their garbage, and sometimes if they were poor, they would burn their dead there also (I have not heard of pre-exilic references to sacrifices to Moloch, though - if you could provide some details (a source, or book to read), it might provide some interesting reading. When Jesus spoke of burning in gehenna, he was often speaking of the very real fires of gehenna (go back to page 3 and read post #27 - my response to Man concerning Mark 9, and how gehenna here is not referring to a spiritual/eternal place of fire and torment)

"Tartaros" is a term completely DIFFERENT to gehenna. It is mentioned only once in the entire Bible. This term does refer to pain and suffering, but it is a place destined only for Satan and those angels who followed him. No human is ever described as going to this place, and since it is only mentioned once in the whole Bible, I find scriptural support of it being akin to "gehenna" a bit of a stretch.

Each of the words have their own separate meaning, and only one refers to eternal torment (and that be only for Satan and his Angels). I see it as flawed reasoning to suggest that all speak of the same place but describe different aspects of it.

It sounds like you have taken a preconception of what hell should be like, and then imposed them on these words to fit into that belief. Perhaps it is because I did not grow up in a Christian family, or in the United States hearing preachings of Fire and Brimestone every week, so I had no idea what "hell" was when I first became a Christian (nearly 9 years ago now) - apart from what Hollywood presented to me, and I knew that was wrong. So I studied the Bible. I didn't know what Hell was except that it was a place I would rather not go to and heaven was better by far. As I continued my reading and my study, and found different interpretations of Hell by different people (eg, some said "punishment", while others simply referred to "separation", other more moderate and knowledgeable people said "I don't know, but I know heaven will be better"), I went to the original Greek a few years ago and found (quite to my surprise) that there were different words translated as Hell. Looking through these terms, I found it a bit of a stretch (to say the least) that all three words mean the same thing.

Then I read an article on Dante. Doctrines of Hell as pain and torture were not formalised in Church teachings until after Dante wrote his "Divine Comedy", which detailed 16 levels of Hell. The Roman Catholic Church then adapted Dante's fictional work, and formalised its concept of Hell based on that work (another concept based on Fear to assert its dominance over the largely ignorant and illiterate masses in the Middle Ages). Through careful, considered thought on the history of "hell", along with the textual basis for "hell" in the Bible, I have come to believe that Hell-as-eternal-punishment is a leftover vestige from the RCC. Even though protestants broke off from the RCC centuries ago, there are still some things we do based on RCC tradition and teaching and not on what the Bible says.

In short, I completely disagree with you that they are all describing different aspects of the same place - the only way to come to that conclusion is to have an already held belief in Hell and then fit the Bible into that preconceived notion.

[Guest shiloh357]

If "HELL" is thrown into the lake of fire....where then is that 'eternal place of torment' for all the wicked unbelievers?

Revelation 20:14

And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

It is in the lake of fire. Once again, there is nothing to suggest annihilation. The second death refers to the final and eternal spiritual condtion of those who rejected Christ.