The Fires of Hell Have Gone Out: No Eternal Torment

Hell here is 'Hades', the lake of fire isn't Gehenna. Hades is referenced several times in the Bible. Source

Here we see Hades being a place of torment and flames.This message has been edited by Modulous, Mon, 31-October-2005 07:26 PM

Are you saying that Jesus made up a firey underworld of torment to emphasize a point?

So the people were familiar with a burning world of torment but Jesus was of the opinion that it didn't exist, yet he reinforced this false belief by pretty much discussing its existence in public?

Not really. Using my rationale Lazarus was a good man and was raised by angels. During his time he received evil things but is now comforted. The bosom thing to me just speaks of being comforted by the Father of the Nation.The rich man received good things on earth but is now tormented. I can't see how one can see this in any way that doesn't indicate that good people who put up with a load of suffering on earth will have their rewards in heaven, and those that take their rewards on earth (serving mammon), will be tormented in Hades.AbE: Granted it might be the case that not all good people go to Abraham's Bosom. But I think, biblically, we can agree that Jesus believes that such an entity exists (and thus does exist). Did Jesus then decide to use an entity which does not exist (a flame ridden Hades) just to try and convert people?I don't think the 'but its just a parable' line works here.This message has been edited by Modulous, Tue, 01-November-2005 04:10 PM

Well the parable comes shortly after So one assumes that the rich man doesn't serve God, but mammonThe rich man also says Indicating that they have something to repent for. I agree, the parables lesson is about selfishness, the rich man used his money for his own comfort and neglected Lazarus. The selfless (Good) people who suffer on earth will have their rewards in heaven. The selfish servants of mammon who have their rewards on earth will be tormented in Hades.

I don't have a problem with that, I can easily see they are seperate stories, but I'm sure you are capable of spotting a continuum between them. We are talking about faithfulness. Faithfulness to wives, faithfulness to God, faithfulness to ones self.One of the above is selfish; and lands you in torment. Why would they change their ways? Because they would realize they were sinning? Perhaps not. However, it does say that the rich man's brethren (who the rich man fears will join him (thus whatever they are doing he did)) do not take heed of Moses and the prophets. Taking heed of Moses et al (and subsequently repenting) is the way to avoid the torment. Thus: the rich man and his brethren did not take heed of Moses. This probably makes him a sinner.Still, these points are side points. The rich man still ended up in Hades suffering torment and fire.

So I ask again: Why did Jesus lend strength to something he knew was false?

So you don't think that Jesus, the Mesiah, King of the Jews, Saviour of Man, publically telling a bunch of people that a man went to Hades where there was torment and fire, is lending credence to the concept of Hades where there is torment and fire?Given that we are having this conversation I think the evidence is in favour of my position.

Perhaps you weren't following the debate? I was arguing from Luke 16:19+ where the rich man goes to Hades where there is torment and fire.

quote:

---

And in (Hades) he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom
And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that [would come] from thence.

---

I know very well about the valley of Hinnom, but I am still arguing from Scripture. This confuses me though. The standard meaning of Hades in Greek means the underworld, in its original use it referred to the realm ruled by the god of the same name and protected by the three headed dog Cerberus (or Kerberos if you're Bill Gates). Tartarus, in Greek mythology is either part of Hades, or below Hades depending. It is where the punishments fit the crime, the place where wicked people go (as opposed to Elysium/Heaven).This message has been edited by Modulous, Mon, 08-May-2006 12:07 PM

Was I attempting to negate that? I was merely showing that Hades is presented as a place of fire and torment, as per Revelations which describes it as a lake of fire. This was to show that Gehenna is not the only reference to a post-death fiery end - so the conclusion that the fires of hell have gone out is possibly premature.The rich man burned, not in Gehenna, but in Hades. Right, thet parable was to show that after death you get what's coming. If you suffered in life like Lazarus, you will be comforted. If you were comfortable like the rich man, you will suffer in Hades. As I said before, why would Jesus make up a punishment in this parable rather than just stating what the nature of the post-life suffering will be? It would seem that Jesus is giving credence to a concept that He doesn't believe in. A fine place, filled with fine folk. Plenty of unfine folk here too though This message has been edited by Modulous, Mon, 08-May-2006 04:40 PM

I haven't really addressed whether or not eternal torment exists, just whether or not the fires of hell are still burning. As I said is Message 164, Hades was traditionally split into two parts Tartarus and Elysium. This has been transformed into Hell and Paradise/Heaven. Indeed - which, assuming Revelation is a future event, would indicate two things.1) Hades still exists (and Jesus described it in a fiery way)
2) A lake of fire still exists Personally, I think the concept of a fiery hell was adapted from the imagery at Hinnom. Unfortunately it isn't something which I can demonstrate.

The question is not what the word Hell means in Old English, but what did it mean to Early Modern English readers? I don't see what significance its old English meaning has. Luke 16:23 in Old English (just for fun):

quote:

---

a ahof he his eagan upp a he on am tintregum wæs. and geseah feorran abraham and lazarum on his greadan;

---

If Hell=the Valley of Hinnom, then I agree, it is long extinguished. However, that doesn't mean that there is no fiery underworld for the wicked, since Hades - described as an underworld of torment/flame - still exists unless the Revelation has come to pass. Once revelation comes about, those not in the book of life will be cast into the lake of fire. αδμςHades - it refers to the underworld where the dead go, traditionally divided as previously agreed.