Eternal suffering in hell isn't in the Bible

Faith & Science Conversation
176

Hmmm… I guess my belief would come under the category of CI conditional immortality but I would describe it quite differently. I certainly don’t believe in the immortal mental soul of Plato and the Greeks, but in the spiritual body of Paul as described in 1 Corinthians 15 which is made imperishable by resurrection – a return to an original state of life, meaning it is naturally immortal. I don’t believe it can be destroyed by purely external forces, but I quite agree we only have eternal life in a relationship with God because life is much more than mere existence. The destroyer to be feared is sin not God. There is a proper fear of God, which is not because He a soul destroying monster, but because He cannot be manipulated, appeased, or be expected to make deals with us – something which most of us are used to doing all the time to everyone around us (see thread on “Silver Chair”).

As for ECT, I suppose my position requires another acronym of ETPDC, eternal torment possibly diminishing consciousness and I certainly don’t believe in spiritual euthanasia. But more importantly I think this is something people do to themselves rather than something which is done to them.

1 Like
177

Matthew 10:28 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

28 Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

I guess to me this particular verse seems to indicate he can , and should be feared because of it, destroy both the body and soul in hell ( lake of fire ).

If he does not destroy the body and soul in hell, then it would make no sense really in my eyes to say fear it.

178

Except the person to fear in that regard is not God, and Jesus does not say that it is. The person who can destroy you in hell is yourself and it is yourself which you need to fear most. God is instead the one you need to turn to as your savior. I reject utterly this mob boss god running a protection racket, who requires us to do things in order to save us from Himself. Sounds more like the devil to me, for this whole rule by fear methodology is inherently evil.

The fear of God is something else entirely. God is the most trustworthy and the most loving – a savior and not the big baddie that religion mongers paint in order to change religion into a tool of power and control.

179

I also believe some strong evidence for being destroyed comes from revelation 21:8

“ 8 But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

They say these people will face death a second time. The second death is like the first death. It’s death.

Plus consider that it says hades and death is cast into the lake of fire as well. Since those are not things with personhood, there is no deathly grim reaper holding the power, it would make no sense to say these things are just diminished but still in existence.

At least from that scriptural understanding. How that plays into what it means for humanity to continually evolve and God never wipes us out and all of this is just allegorical still somehow is beyond anything I’ve drawn conclusions on. So for now, my theology is built around at some point God changes everything and all evil is literally destroyed.

1 Like
180

I don’t think it’s a mob mentality.

I think it’s just the way Christ works. It says Christ also calls down fire and destroys the enemies of his father. One of Jesus’s missions is to destroy his fathers enemies.

Those in Christ receive Eternal Life. Those without a Christ does not receive eternal life and instead received destruction. Death of the body and soul.

We, as humans, can choose to reject righteousness and truth and therefore reject Christ. That choice results in us not receive grace and mercy and we face judgement. Those judged are those whose names are not found in the book of life.

God does not put us in this situation. Our free will and own choices do. But we don’t hold power over life and death. Not the soul. God does. Only he can destroy the soul, not us, which is why we don’t fear man when it comes to our soul.

181

All through the Bible there two kinds of life and death. God says A&E will die on the day they eat the fruit and yet they lived? Is God a liar? No. They died spiritually – losing their relationship with God who is the giver of life, so that they and their descendants need resurrection. The second death is the spiritual death, which is why the spiritual body requires resurrection.

Revelation is filled with some pretty wild symbolism and it is not a good place upon which to base too much of your theology. Fire symbolizes truth and the truth destroys fear and death because it brings eternal life in a relationship with God.

No that is YOUR understanding. I read something entirely different from the same scripture.

We certainly have no reason to fear other men when it comes to our soul. It is only ourselves we have to fear. We are the destroyers of our own soul. I will never believe in your soul destroying monster god, let alone your mob boss protection racket. These are the inventions of those who have changed religion into a tool of power so they can threaten people into obedience.

182

Before I answer the other ones I’ll begin with the threat Adam heard.

Genesis 2:16-17 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

16 The Lord God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

One of the key phrases to understanding this verse is , “ surely die” and in Hebrew what it actually says is along the lines of “ dying you will die”. You can tell this by seeing the words in Hebrew “muth”.

They are mōwt and tāmūt.

Then to better understand that we can see God expound on the threat after it happens.

Genesis 3:19
19 By the sweat of your face
You will eat bread,
Till you return to the ground,
Because from it you were taken;
For you are dust,
And to dust you shall return.”

So because Adam ate from the tree he was not suppose to he would die because of it. From the double death phrase earlier, and in the day, we know that means Adam begin to die and would continue to die until he’s dead.

That’s why they were kicked out of the garden. So it’s not actually about spiritual death. They were not even separated from God. God still communicated with them, made them clothes of fig leaves, blessed Eve with Seth, and communicated to Cain. By God blessing Eve with Seth and finding favor we can tell their relationship was repaired, yet they would still physically die because that was the curse.

1 Like
183

The next will be the idea that I’m developing my argument off of the symbolism of revelation. I’m not. I’m basing it off of the interpretation of the symbolism.

This is the common way it was used. I’ll use a more clear form to prove my point first.

Matthew 13:24-30 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Tares among Wheat
24 Jesus presented another parable to them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25 But while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went away. 26 But when the wheat sprouted and bore grain, then the tares became evident also. 27 The slaves of the landowner came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?’ 28 And he said to them, ‘An enemy has done this!’ The slaves *said to him, ‘Do you want us, then, to go and gather them up?’ 29 But he *said, ‘No; for while you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them. 30 Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn.”’

That’s the symbolic example. Then Jesus gives its more literal interpretation.

Matthew 13:36-43 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

The Tares Explained
36 Then He left the crowds and went into the house. And His disciples came to Him and said, “Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field.” 37 And He said, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man, 38 and the field is the world; and as for the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the sons of the evil one; 39 and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are angels. 40 So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness, 42 and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.

I used that also to show what image they view of the lost in hell. Like tares ( a look alike weed until maturity) burned up/destroyed in fire.

So in revelation this is the symbolism.

Satan, death, beasts, and hades is cast into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is then explained to mean a second death.

Additionally, this is the view held throughout scripture. Not merely revelation.

Psalm 1:6
but the way of the ungodly shall perish

Psalm 37:20But the wicked shall perish… they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.

Psalm 92:7
shall be destroyed forever

Matthew 10:28
Rather, fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell

John 3:16whosoever believeth in him should not perish

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death

Philippians 3:19 whose end is “destruction”

2 Thessalonians 1:9
Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction

Hebrews 10:39
But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.

James 4:12
There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy.

There are dozens and dozens of examples.

The one verse also clearly states, fear him ( god ) who can destroy both body and soul. We can’t destroy our soul. Only God can.
I have to study and sleep and so I will continue more in depth tomorrow.

184

That one gets me because I have always used that acronym for Electro-Convulsive Therapy. Makes for interesting reading when used in some contexts.

6 Likes
185

I get use to abbreviating it just because I use it so much in other places.

Eternal Conscious Torment and Conditional Immortality are both fascinating subjects to study out. It’s what lead me to trying to find out how to best harmonize Isaiah 65 with a Revelation 21 and in general the overlap of heaven and restoration of earth. Going to dig into writings by NT Wright and Tim Mackie. Though not necessary to understand the subject at hand it’s connected to it.

186

There is an infinite difference between to suffering of life on earth and eternal conscious torment. It makes me wonder if people who claim to believe in eternal torment really believe it. If it is true that people will suffer eternally, then I would think it would give people pause on the question of having children.

1 Like
188

Well there certainly is a question of WHAT we in particular mean by ECT. For example, I do not believe God has constructed a torture chamber to punish people who dare to disbelieve what some church says. But I do believe that people habitually torment themselves and create a hell for themselves and everyone around them wherever they go. It because I see this on the earth that I believe hell exists and I don’t think death changes things as if it were some solution to people’s problems. I believe it is the logical consequence of the choices people make and the self destructive habits they have fallen into.

A lot of things give people pause on the question of having children and they should. I certainly think it is one of the most arrogant things we do in life. But personally I would have considerably more regret for having children who become victimizers rather than victims – so it is the harm they might do which gives me greater pause then the fact they would be tormented because of it.

When someone jumps off a building do they deserve to die splattered on the ground below? When someone straps a bomb to themselves, do they deserve to get blown to bits? When something is the natural logical consequence of what they are doing, then I don’t see how it cannot be deserved that they suffer the consequences. The only alternative is an imitation life where our actions have no meaning because they don’t affect anything. And I think H.G. Wells was completely right in his portrayal of the results of such a consequence free life in the eloi who behaved more like sheep than people.

189

Matthew 25:45, “ Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” This is a bit hard to get around, for in the original Greek, the same word is used before both punishment and life. So if you try to interpret as “age” or “age long” rather than “eternal,” you have to do it for both, not just for punishment. But there is maybe an out. The word translated as punishment can also mean “correction.”

This is more consistent for me with God’s character and aims as the rest of the Bible seems to reveal. God many times expresses that he does not want the wicked to die, but rather for them to return to him and live. I don’t know what the truth is. I’m highly skeptical of eternal punishment for sins—even the sin of rejecting God completely—and I don’t buy the standard Christian explanation that God is just and so he has to punish those who reject Jesus eternally. I have never heard an argument I can buy for the justness of eternal punishment. I was an atheist for 30 years, and know a lot of atheists. The existence of God, validity of the Bible, these are difficult issues many of us struggle with. I can’t believe that God, who demonstrates so much patience and love in the Bible, does not see that or take it into account.

For me, the issue is what Heaven requires to be Heaven, and that is the absence of sin. To live in Heaven, we have to be without sin. Those who reject God, for whatever reason, cannot be without sin, and thus cannot live in Heaven. And there is a deadline for this, which Jesus explained in Matthew 24:22, “ And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.” Because we are fallen, we are sin-producing machines, and that means we multiply sin in the world, which is to say, we multiply the threats and obstacles to life. The long we exist, the more we multiply. Eventually, we would make life impossible. So there must be a judgement day, and after that day, all those who are not purified will be shut out of Heaven, and where they will live is Hell.

Will they reach the end of their lives and die? Do souls die? Are they reincarnated (the Bible is mum on this except for one statement by Solomon, which I don’t believe can be taken as God’s definitive statement)? I don’t know. But Jesus seems to suggest that they will continue, and that they will undergo correction/punishment.

4 Likes
190

“Eternal” is used for both, but “life” is only used for one. That’s why I think viewing both as different kinds of eternal conscious existence has trouble with verses like this. Eternal punishment and eternal salvation both speak to eternal effects, not how something takes an eternity to happen.

That’s close to my take. I’d qualify it as those who refuse to be purified, not just those who are not purified, and I wouldn’t portray the result of cutting ourselves off from the Author of Life as living.

191

I couldn’t agree more that eternal punishment/correction is contradiction in terms implying a colossal failure. On the other hand, the word “eternal” remains and thus suggests that this should be understood as torment and consequences instead. Furthermore, nothing Jesus says elsewhere supports this idea of hell consisting of a temporary correction – quite the contrary. The whole point of Jesus story about Lazarus and the rich man is that this is not something you can expect relief or escape from. Jesus describes this with the words “a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.”

I am not entirely sure what is meant by this… but I think everything points to both being a very long process not a instantaneous result, whether a destruction that goes forever or a restoration that take a long and painful process. I do not believe in instantaneous magical solutions/transformations.

But this sounds like we are very much on the same page.

192

I don’t buy that argument either, though I can’t always articulate why, but you’ve explained it well. Rejection during a temporary existence hardly seems to translate to eternal punishment, especially for finite humans who can’t even really fathom what “eternity” means. These conversations always make me think of the story of Jonah, and how God chose mercy over punishment.

3 Likes
193

It’s not hard to get around at all. Death is a punishment with eternal consequences. We all face resurrection at the white throne. Wicked and righteous. The saved to eternal life, and the unsaved to the opposite. Eternal death. Never any hope of coming back. It’s he second death and it’s forever. A eternal punishment.

194

Just a quibble, but I see that as part of the setup and not the point (which comes at the end). But then I also think that story has more humour than horror (Abraham managing the afterlife, the conversation over the chasm, Abraham and the rich man calling each other “father” and “child” while Lazarus is the one who gets to live with Abe, the rich man’s polite request for a drop of water which he expects to ease his torment and his later rudeness when Abe doesn’t agree that a message from a dead man would help his brothers, etc.). I don’t think that story is where we should look to see how the afterlife works.

I don’t think it’s a destruction that takes forever, since that seems to be the same as saying the fire never quenches, the punishment is never paid, evil is never defeated, God is never all in all. Finality must come sometime.

Even worse, I think, is the idea that in order to justify ongoing punishment, the lost continue sinning forever in hell, eternally earning more punishment. Some really thoughtful Christians (e.g. D.A. Carson) have been willing to argue that in order to maintain an eternal hell. It seems that they decided that maintaining some traditions about hell is more important than maintaining Christ’s final triumph and the new age without evil or rebellion.

3 Likes
195

If Jesus was saying “eternal death,” then why didn’t he say “eternal death?” Why did he instead use a word that commonly meant to chastise or punish? I don’t think you can get around it that easily.

196

Well, if Jesus was saying “eternal punishing,” then why didn’t he say “eternal punishing”? That argument cuts both ways, since Jesus’ actual words are ambiguous and open to both readings.

Would you read Hebrews 5:9 about the eternal salvation Jesus provides the same way? Must it mean that Jesus will eternally be saving us, or could it be a once and for all salvation that has eternal effects?

1 Like