Hell vs. Lake of Fire

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

And... those who are not born of the Spirit are not His children; for as many as are led by the Spirit, THEY are the sons of God.

God is not an unloving parent administering eternal punishment to His children; they are none of His by volition, etc.

[Longsufferer]

When all that is mentioned in Revelation is assembled altogether concerning this, it seems that the lake of fire, where those that end up there, shall be tormented day and night without rest for ever and ever; and this is hell, and it does not have to be something to further scrutinized.

[the rookie]

In a way hell vs the LOF is comparable with people who are arrested for a crime and put in jail (hell) awaiting their trial (judgement day) and receive their final punishment (LOF).

It's the same way that heaven now is where the spirit of the believer waits until the day of resurrection and our eternal home is ready (New Jerusalem). Hell is to heaven what the Lake of Fire is to the New Jerusalem; this corollary is both glorious and terrifying to me. Hell cannot compare to the torment of the Lake of Fire to come (demons to not suffer in hell, for example). Neither can heaven now compare to the New Jerusalem to come.

Why? Because humans will experience either the Lake of Fire or the New Jerusalem in their resurrected, indestructible, immortal bodies (with soul and spirit as well) - not just in their "spirit man" as they currently experience heaven or hell now, as we wait for the resurrection.

Yikes. Intense subject.

[the rookie]

Part of the reason that we struggle with the concept of eternal torment is that we struggle with the concept of Matthew 7:7-8 - "everyone who asks receives." That isn't limited to believers - it's everyone. Romans 1 is clear - men aren't subject to wrath because God is unloving. Men invite wrath upon themselves (and are fully deserving of it) - pagans (Rom. 1:18-31), moral men (Romans 2:1-16) and religious men (Romans 2:17-29) all deserve 100% what they receive from God because of the consequences of their own choices, made repeatedly, over the course of their lives. God seeks to intervene in mercy - but men refuse to receive His invitation; and refuse it repeatedly, seeking instead to exalt their own foolishness (the pagan), morality (moral man), or good works (religious man) over the mercy and kindness of God.

No one, I repeat, no one, gets a bad deal when this part of the story is all over. No one will call God "unjust" - but neither will they call Him "unkind".

[ProDeo]

ProDeo,

re: “In a way hell vs the LOF is comparable with people who are arrested for a crime and put in jail...awaiting their trial... and receive their final punishment...”

Interesting... you modified my words.

Could their punishment consist of being put to death by lethal injection?

You suggest a Deja Vu all over experience for all those sentenced_to_death_criminals?

Do you have a serious question also?

[ShawnW]

I'm not planning on a trip to either, so I'm not terrible concerned about technical differences.



I believe that "hell" is technically "the place of the unrepentant dead," and the "lake of fire" is a really nasty place into which God throws hell at the end of time. "Hell", if I remember correctly, is the English version of the Greek "hades."

Which hell word are we speaking about? Sheol in the KJV and the NKJV is translated as hell. It merely means grave, the underground, the place where all dead go after death. In the rest of the translations, the translators seen the error in this and corrected it.

In the New Testament there are three words translated into hell. Gehenna (which is what Jesus speaks about), Hades and Tartaroo. Tartaroo is used once in the scriptures. That is only used once in Peter 2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell (Tartaroo - 5020), and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment.

Hades was translated from the word sheol which I previously descibed is the word for grave...underground abode for all dead.

Gehenna is the cursed valley once used for child sacrifice. It is believed it was used by Jews as a trash dump. Jews in that day would have known Gehenna as a purgatory type place. It's what was taught by teachers of that time, and what is taught by Jewish teachers now. If Jesus wanted to confer a place of eternal punishment why would he use a reference that eluded to a temporal one? One used for purification? Wouldn't he want to make such a HUGE consequence known?

Eternal punishment=aionion kolasis which mean corrective punishment of an unknown and unmeasurable length of time. There is a word for punitive punishment or vindictive judgment and that is timoria. Why is it not aionion timoria if we are speaking about punishment that is not corrective and is only there for punishment?

I don't claim to have all the answers on God's judgments. What I do know is there are very good reasons to search out in the original Greek and Hebrew. Search, look for yourself and draw your own conclusions.

[Butch5]

Which hell word are we speaking about? Sheol in the KJV and the NKJV is translated as hell. It merely means grave, the underground, the place where all dead go after death. In the rest of the translations, the translators seen the error in this and corrected it.

In the New Testament there are three words translated into hell. Gehenna (which is what Jesus speaks about), Hades and Tartaroo. Tartaroo is used once in the scriptures. That is only used once in Peter 2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell (Tartaroo - 5020), and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment.

Hades was translated from the word sheol which I previously descibed is the word for grave...underground abode for all dead.

Gehenna is the cursed valley once used for child sacrifice. It is believed it was used by Jews as a trash dump. Jews in that day would have known Gehenna as a purgatory type place. It's what was taught by teachers of that time, and what is taught by Jewish teachers now. If Jesus wanted to confer a place of eternal punishment why would he use a reference that eluded to a temporal one? One used for purification? Wouldn't he want to make such a HUGE consequence known?

Eternal punishment=aionion kolasis which mean corrective punishment of an unknown and unmeasurable length of time. There is a word for punitive punishment or vindictive judgment and that is timoria. Why is it not aionion timoria if we are speaking about punishment that is not corrective and is only there for punishment?

I don't claim to have all the answers on God's judgments. What I do know is there are very good reasons to search out in the original Greek and Hebrew. Search, look for yourself and draw your own conclusions.

Shawn, you asked why Jesus would make a temproal reference. Where do you believe that believers will spend eternity?

[ShawnW]

Shawn, you asked why Jesus would make a temproal reference. Where do you believe that believers will spend eternity?

In heaven with Him. Why would any Christian believe otherwise?

[ShawnW]

I also forgot to get to destruction, perishing etc. Are we talking about earthly references, such as death? Or is this speaking about the death of carnal mankind?

[David Taylor]

Eternal punishment=aionion kolasis which mean corrective punishment of an unknown and unmeasurable length of time.

However, we must also remember: Eternal life= aionion zwhv.

Should we be consistent then, and expect the eternal life of the redeemed with Christ to also be of an unknown and unmeasurable length of time?

If we start mincing and dicing with aionion and anionos to no longer mean 'eternal', 'everlasting', 'forever and ever', etc...so that we can justify or soften eternal punishment to fit with extra-biblical theories; we must remain consistent then....and also limit the 'aionion' of eternal life for the redeemed to also be temporary, not-eternal, and of some unknown, unmeasurable, and limited length of time.

Most Christians surely wouldn't go there; and they would see the need to be consistent with the application of 'aionion' and 'aionos' as the true 'eternal', 'everlasting', and 'forever and ever' language that all the greek studied, esteemed, and educated Greek/English Biblical translators have determined over the centuries.

Annihilationism might want to wiggle and change and modify 'aionion' to fit their own viewpoint; but the translational scholars of all the English bibles have never done that; and I've really never heard any annihilationist take their interpretation and consistently also apply it to the future duration of 'eternal life' of the redeemed with Christ in Heaven.

Those two things along, from an objective perspective, removed from the subjective emotional aspect of eternal punishment, best refutes that arguement, IMO.

[ProjectPeter]

However, we must also remember: Eternal life= aionion zwhv.

Should we be consistent then, and expect the eternal life of the redeemed with Christ to also be of an unknown and unmeasurable length of time?

If we start mincing and dicing with aionion and anionos to no longer mean 'eternal', 'everlasting', 'forever and ever', etc...so that we can justify or soften eternal punishment to fit with extra-biblical theories; we must remain consistent then....and also limit the 'aionion' of eternal life for the redeemed to also be temporary, not-eternal, and of some unknown, unmeasurable, and limited length of time.

Most Christians surely wouldn't go there; and they would see the need to be consistent with the application of 'aionion' and 'aionos' as the true 'eternal', 'everlasting', and 'forever and ever' language that all the greek studied, esteemed, and educated Greek/English Biblical translators have determined over the centuries.

Annihilationism might want to wiggle and change and modify 'aionion' to fit their own viewpoint; but the translational scholars of all the English bibles have never done that; and I've really never heard any annihilationist take their interpretation and consistently also apply it to the future duration of eternal life of the redeemed with Christ in Heaven.

Those two things along, from an objective perspective, removed from the subjective emotional aspect of eternal punishment, best refutes that arguement, IMO.

Right and thus the problem with the logic of Universal Reconcilliation. They apply eternal as eternal when talking eternal life and yet when talking hell... just an age. The inconsistency in interpretation is glaring there.

[David Taylor]

Right and thus the problem with the logic of Universal Reconcilliation. They apply eternal as eternal when talking eternal life and yet when talking hell... just an age. The inconsistency in interpretation is glaring there.

That's why I often say that Universalism and Annihilationism are sister views...and fundamentally both flawed with the same problems.

One avoids eternal punishment for the wicked by giving them all a pass without them having repented during their lives, and the other gives the wicked a pass by snuffing them out of existence.

Neither properly address topic of unrepentant sin of the wicked after death, and the consequences that the Bible tells us await the unrepentent sinner at judgment day.

And both attempt to still allow for the redeemed to have eternal mean eternal when it applies to their destiny in Heaven with Christ.

[the rookie]

In heaven with Him. Why would any Christian believe otherwise?

Probably because that's not how the story ends in Revelation 21-22

The story, as I gather, ends with heaven coming to earth with God the Father to make the earth His "resting place" with men forever. Unless I'm missing something?

[ShawnW]

Part of the reason that we struggle with the concept of eternal torment is that we struggle with the concept of Matthew 7:7-8 - "everyone who asks receives." That isn't limited to believers - it's everyone. Romans 1 is clear - men aren't subject to wrath because God is unloving. Men invite wrath upon themselves (and are fully deserving of it) - pagans (Rom. 1:18-31), moral men (Romans 2:1-16) and religious men (Romans 2:17-29) all deserve 100% what they receive from God because of the consequences of their own choices, made repeatedly, over the course of their lives. God seeks to intervene in mercy - but men refuse to receive His invitation; and refuse it repeatedly, seeking instead to exalt their own foolishness (the pagan), morality (moral man), or good works (religious man) over the mercy and kindness of God.

No one, I repeat, no one, gets a bad deal when this part of the story is all over. No one will call God "unjust" - but neither will they call Him "unkind".

I have heard things like that for years and it always rang untrue...even as a very young Christian. I know we try to reconcile God who we KNOW loves agape (unconditional) with the man's interpretations of some very tough scriptures. I wonder outloud...if the teachers of Jesus' time were considered a den of vipers...binding their congregations...misleading them and living hypocritical lives...what makes us think that man has changed? What makes us believe that what we are being taught is anything more than man made interpretations of Holy Scriptures?

The fact is...we can't know unless we search. We can't know until we forget the things taught to us and start from scratch questioning everything...allowing God to rebuild our faith from the ground up. By praying for the Holy Spirit to guide your studies I think you will be greatly blessed by taking that journey. But, unfortunately it's easy to get comfortable in our pews holding our dusty Bibles. It's so easy to be comfortable not looking up tough passages in the original languages to gain new insights. It's so easy to take what our pastor says at face value...swallow it up and yell out an AMEN!

Unfortunately, what you are selling here doesn't make sense. IMO, Finite sins (no matter how bad) are worthy of an infinite and eternal punishment. A temporal one? Maybe even a horrible one? Surely. But, IMO punishment without end is neither agape, grace, mercy or justice. Is sin worthy of death...absolutely. These I can buy. Do men deserve wrath? Yes. Are we inherently evil...yep. You won't hear me disagree. But, consider this...what men want me to believe is that mankind made in the image of God, created and formed by his hands...who were created and enslaved to sin by no choice of their own...ALL with God's foreknowledge...deck stacked against them...unable to choose anything but evil without the intervention of God are going to suffer in this life, then be burnt eternally in the next. These same people then want to speak about God's agape love for mankind. Do you see the problem here?

I suggest you research the original words for hell, historical context and alternative explanations for the LoF, eternal punishment...then get back with me if you still feel the same way you did before. That search will change you and liberate you. For the first time in my life, I can serve God out of true love...not just a fear of burning. I now know that God is truly what he says he is....not only in my heart but in my head as well. The Bible makes sense to me now...all inconsistancies resolved...and I'm free to abide in the Holy Spirit fire of purification.

Thank you Jesus for freedom in you...liberation of man's doctrines...and ability to truly love you.

[ShawnW]

Probably because that's not how the story ends in Revelation 21-22

The story, as I gather, ends with heaven coming to earth with God the Father to make the earth His "resting place" with men forever. Unless I'm missing something?

I'm not sure of the point. If heaven is on earth, heaven is with Christ...we are with Christ...why the splitting of hairs? If I am with Christ...I don't care if heaven is on mars.