The Fires of Hell Have Gone Out: No Eternal Torment

1. As Modulous has already said, I believe, if the fire devours, why would the rich man be so concerned that his brothers might end up in the same torment he is experiencing? Whenever Jesus used parables, it was so designated in terms somewhat like "Hear you therefore the parable of the sower............Another parable he put forth to them.......Another parable he spoke to them....et al.
Not so with the rich man and Lazarus. He said something like, "there was a certain rich man......" In this account he named Lazarus and Moses, real people.I'm not sure whether this has been mentioned, but Jesus told Judas that it would have been better for him if he had never been born, implicating that death wasn't the end.Also Jesus said that in the judgement some would receive greater punishment than others. If punishment was terminal death, what difference would it make?There are several texts which imply that there are two compartments to Hades, one for the good dead awaiting resurrection and the other where the tormenting fire is. The rich man/Lazarus account is one of them. Also in Acts 2:31 it says Jesus would not be left in Hell/Hades. After his resurrecton is says somewhere that he went to the heart of the earth and "took captivity captive," implying that he would take them out with him at his resurrection. It also says after his death that some in the graves came out. I haven't taken the time to look up the texts, but could do so if someone wants them.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW

quote:

---

As Modulous has already said, I believe, if the fire devours, why would the rich man be so concerned that his brothers might end up in the same torment he is experiencing?

---

Perhaps we can agree that a parable is fictitious containing an analogy between two points. Was Jesus trying to tell us that there is a place of eternal torment vis a vis eternal bliss, or was he making a point regarding the Jews unbelief and their adulterated religion?
The story Jesus improvised was to prove the truth of Abraham's words, "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
And both these men were dead.
Jesus used material extant in His time, so the Jews would make a connection. Abraham and Lazarus were known to them. So was Lazarus' resurrection.
This parable does not indicate eternal hellfire burning. The bible does not support eternal punishing. Sin will be eradicated, the wicked will burn up and turn to ashes, and will never come into remembrance again.
Sheol/Hades = grave
I don't know what else to say to help folks see that God's mercy endures forever and includes how He will deal with sin.
Malachi 4
1 "For, behold, the day comes, it burns as a furnace; and all the proud, and all who work wickedness, will be stubble; and the day that comes will burn them up," says Yahweh of Armies, "that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.2 But to you who fear my name shall the sun of righteousness arise with healing in its wings. You will go out, and leap like calves of the stall.3 You shall tread down the wicked; for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I make," says Yahweh of Armies.The Bible does not contradict itself.

Buzsaw, I agree with you here.If it were better for Judas that he were never born, that means that it would be better for him if he were to not exist. And that means that annhilation would be the better than eternal punishment.The real issue is that God as the Ultimate Governor beyond which, over which, and behind which there is no greater, has the authority to assign the rebel the worst over the better. Annhilation is the better result of rebellion against God. Eternal punishment is the worse.Attempts to make annhilation equal "eternal punishment" are the reaction of the natural mind to allow the created being some form of victory in the creature's rebellion against the ultimate authority of the Creator God.This message has been edited by jaywill, 05-09-2006 12:58 AM

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.

I understand what the word "Hell" has come to mean by tradition. If you notice what I referred to in my OP Revisited in Message 165, I'm looking at what was actually used in the Bible.The King James Version translated Gehenna and Hades into the Old English word “hell”.In the Greek the word translated "hell" is geenna,n {gheh'-en-nah} and in the Latin gehennam. Both of which refer to the proper name of the valley.I can’t find the Greek rendition of Hades, but the Latin is infernum which means lower, under; underground, of the lower regions.As for the Old English word “hell”. It carries the meaning of concealed or buried, to cover. So it is not a good translation for Gehenna. The word “hell” has nothing to do with fire. The Latin equivalent is celare which we see is not the word that was translated from the Latin Bible.Since Hades is the underworld, the word “hell” might have been reasonable to translate Hades, but that would be the overall underworld, not just describing the firey section. Today, my Bible does not translate Hades as hell. The only word in my Bible translated as hell is Gehenna.As I showed in my OP, Gehenna is no longer burning.Hades is the underworld, Gehanna is not. The hell in my Bible is no longer burning.

During the course of this thread revival I found several references stating that our word eternal (without end) or forever and ever are not accurate translations of the Greek aionos phrases.I noticed, as you showed, that is should be translated ages of ages. I hadn't really found any site that actual addressed what that meant in context.This article, "Forever and Ever"--A Poor Translation, brings up a very interesting answer. It does shed new light on the whole punishment and torment thing.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

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.

quote:

---

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.

---

So we are agreed then.
Gehenna is not Hades.
Hades is the underworld with two zones (hot and cold so to speak).
Gehenna, although a continuous fire in its day, is no longer burning.
Where Gehenna is translated as hell does not mention eternal fire.
Gehenna is not used in the Book of Revelation.
Lake of fire is not used by the authors of the synoptics.As I said before, I did not claim that the lake of fire was no longer burning or that the fire in Hades was no longer burning. Neither of those are referred to as Hell in my Bible.Gehenna, which is referred to as Hell in my Bible, is no longer burning.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

"Life" has two different meanings in the Biblical context. When Jesus says He came to give abundant life He meant to people who supposedly ARE living -- but in the true sense aren't. We are "dead in trespasses and sins" -- since the Fall in Eden -- until regenerated or "quickened" (the words imply being brought (back) to life) -- to TRUE life which is eternal life in Christ.

quote:

---

Eph 2:1 And you [hath he quickened], who were dead in trespasses and sins;

​

Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved

​

Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

---

But in the usual sense of the word, we are all "alive" as sentient beings and THIS life -- which is really death in the Biblical sense --will continue for eternity and is quite capable of suffering torment eternally, while the righteous will receive the true life that is in Christ.ABE: Bunch of little errors like repeats and forgetting to disable smilies.This message has been edited by Faith, 05-09-2006 10:50 AM

It makes no sense to me why God would allow unrepenitent folk to live in agony for eternity. Why not just allow them to cease to exist?

Most of the Bible makes no sense to us in our natural state, it seems to me. It takes a lot of spiritual study and experience to begin to understand most of it, and even then we cringe at things like the idea of eternal punishment. Who would ever have realized that we are "dead in sins" as we are anyway? We could only know that through revelation.But whether it makes sense or not, that's what it appears to say, to me and to a great part of Christian tradition, and it worries me when people whitewash it because that just lulls them into complacency when they should be concerned about their own future. This habit people have of imposing our own human fallen feelings and thoughts on the scripture -- insisting that God see things the same way we do -- instead of realizing that God is not like us to that extent, and that we are dealing with a transcendant supernatural revelation, is only going to lead them into misery.This message has been edited by Faith, 05-09-2006 01:54 PM

quote:

---

It does shed new light on the whole punishment and torment thing.

---

The contention is that people will burn and be tormented in hell forever. Fire has the habit of burning things up until they are ashes. Special bodies will have to be created to keep fire from doing its job, or special fire. There are no indications of either. I don't see where God says He has made a special fire. It is a hideous and gruesome thought, and I reject it based on the God is Love theory, which transcends.
I would not wish the wicked to be tormented forever. Am I more compassionate and loving than God? I just doubt it!

quote:

---

It makes no sense to me why God would allow unrepenitent folk to live in agony for eternity. Why not just allow them to cease to exist?

---

Excellent observation. Why not? Who has a stake in such a belief system and who gains from teaching it?
Where did it originate, and who originated it?
Thanks for your input.

Not necessarily so.1.) There could be people who live forever who are not of the class who are sons of God. These, made like Adam before the Fall, could procreate. New Jerusalem is surrounded by nations in eternity which walk in her light. The sons of God are the constituents of New Jerusalem.2.) "Generations" in eternity does not have to mean infinite generations.It could mean a finite number of generations in eternity and then no more. That would still be the "generations" in eternity.3.) The seemingly infinite size of the universe may suggest that it has some use to God in eternity and that known limitations of population growth would not be a problem.This message has been edited by jaywill, 05-09-2006 03:33 PM

quote:

---

Most of the Bible makes no sense to us in our natural state, it seems to me. It takes a lot of spiritual study and experience to begin to understand most of it, and even then we cringe at things like the idea of eternal punishment. Who would ever have realized that we are "dead in sins" as we are anyway? We could only know that through revelation.

---

With this statement, you have removed scripture reading from the everyday person who is searching and who is just beginning a relationship with the Holy Spirit. It must make an impression on the beginner. I am also wondering what 'natural state' is - opposed to unnatural state?
2 Timothy 3:16-17"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto good works."Please notice it states none of your observations. Scripture is for everyone, to read and understand. I did not understand algebra, until I applied myself to understand it.As to whether or not it makes sense? It had better make sense or we're in trouble. As for 'Christian Tradition'?"Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? [Y]e made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. Ye hypocrites."--Jesus Christ
Matthew 15:3, 6, 7Eternal punishing does not exist. There are no people burning in hell right now, nor will there ever be.