Is hell eternal?

The wicked are never said to be "immortal" or said to be given "immortality" in fact the Bible specifically subjects them to "The SECOND DEATH" according to Rev 20.

To twist that around to say "Second death means CAN NOT DIE" is to go where the first error went in Genesis 3.

God claims he "sovled the problem" of the wicked becoming "immortal" so that they 'can not die' so that they "live forever" in sin and rebellin against the Creator.

But the traditions of man say that the wicked "can not die"

In Christ,

Bob

 

So basically this idea of the wicked 'not dying' goes all the way back to the beginning. We come full circle.

 

If death is destroyed before the unbelievers are cast into the lake of fire, how can they die?

 

Your argument is with Scripture.
Philosophy is but a vain man's imagination.
Take up your argument with what the Spirit of God has said through the Apostle Paul:

2 Corinthians 5:1-4 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
3 If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
4 For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.

The "we" that are in this tabernacle, are our spirits which live forever. Paul refers to the body as a tabernacle, a temporary dwelling place that will die and turn to dust. The spirit that dwells within will live on forever. Paul makes this very clear. We (our spirits) are the living ones living in a temporary body.

2 Corinthians 5:6 Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:

The spirit is real. It is alive. It will live forever, either in hell or in heaven. Your argument is with Scripture.

2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]Your argument does no damage to my position and I will explain exactly why this is the case:

I will point out that multiple theories can explain the same set of facts - if you are willing to challenge this general principle, we can discuss it. In this case the "set of facts" are the texts that you have quoted and the "multiple theories" are 2 views of the nature of personhood (and in paritcular view about the nature of the soul / spirit).

I am not claiming that the texts you are providing cannot be seen as supporting your view - they can.

What I am claiming is that they also support my view. For the sake of brevity, I will not try to explain all the details of my view, I will simply address each text and explain how my view is consistent with the text.

My view entails the belief that human beings are wholistic beings, indivisible into "part" like body, soul, spirit. At physical death, the whole person dies, since on my view, we cannot have the phenomenology of soul / spirit without a working body - you are either have it all or you have none of it. However, God retains knowledge of our wholistic constitution in his mind and uses that knowledge to "re-constitute" us at the resurrection. At this point, we are given new bodies, and the phenomenology of soul / spirit re-appears precisely because this is the nature of the human person - there are no divisible parts.

Such a model is entirely consistent with the first of the texts (as is your model, of course). For example the statement "if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God" is entirely consistent with the notion that when we die, we (as subjects of experience) undergo a complete loss of existence (except that we are still "represented" in the mind of God). We are then given a new building (body) at the resurrection.

2 Corinthians 5:6-10 (combination of your last 2 quotes + intervening verses):. This text also coheres well with my view. I have reproduced this text below:

6Therefore we are always confident and know that as long as we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord. 7We live by faith, not by sight. 8We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord. 9So we make it our goal to please him, whether we are at home in the body or away from it. 10For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.

This text can be sensibly understood even without a "separation" of substance between spirit and body. Being "away from the body" is entirely consistent with the state of affairs where knowledge of us is "stored" in God's mind in anticipation of a resurrection in the future. In such a state the essence of who we are truly is "away" from the body. I see no specific necessity to look at this text from such a "technical" perspective that we conclude that statements like "while in body" can be used to conclude that we are a "soul" inhabiting a body.

I have found the case for the non-existence of an immaterial soul to be quite compelling, although it is not something that can be properly dealt with in a "post or two".

 

SECOND DEATH

The second death is eternal damnation in the lake of fire (Re 20:6,14-15). It is not annihilation, but eternal, conscious punishment (Re 20:10; 14:9-11).
Way of Life Encyclopedia

 

God's Word does not contradict itself. A house divided cannot stand.

 

However the resurrection has not taken place yet. Where is Paul? Paul said: "To be absent from the body is to be present from the Lord."
Paul is obviously, by his own words present with the Lord." How? With his spirit. His spirit lives and is in the presence of the Lord. But his body remains in the grave and awaits the resurrection.

The Bible tells of two resurrections, not one. The resurrection of the just and the resurrection of the unjust. They are separated by a thousand years with the resurrection of the just occurring first at that rapture. At the resurrection of the unjust, described in Rev.20:11-15 it tells us specifically that death and Hell shall be cast into the lake of fire. The meaning that all that were previously sent to Hell, and now were joined with their resurrection bodies are now cast into the Lake of fire. This is the final sentencing of the unsaved. Fear Him, "who is able to cast both body and soul into hell."
DHK

 

Amen, DHK!

 

Death is not an "actual animal" though it may seem like one the way you are presenting it.

Death is DESTROYED (as in really destroyed for once) in the Lake of Fire in that there IS NO MORE DEATH once the wicked have been "DESTROYED" both "BODY AND SOUL" as Christ predicted in Matt 10.

Rev 20 does not say "First DEATH is DESTROYED and THEN the wicked are killed".

Rather the wicked are RAISED (the sea and the grave (hades) give up the DEAD that are in them).

They are then subject to "THE SECOND DEATH" Rev 20 "which IS the Lake of Fir"

There is no amount of squirming that can undo that point of both Rev 20 and 21.

The second DEATH IS the Lake of Fire.

Death is destroyed in that lake of fire because with the completion of the second death comes the end of all death for all remaining living humans. (Obviously).

And as Rev 14:10 points out those who are "WITH CHRIST" will have that death (the SECOND DEATH) take place "IN" their very presence!!

So those who have anticipated an "eternity" of being "IN THE PRESENCE" of their tormented lost loved once - will be relieved to know that such and endless torment for the sainst will not be their actual fate.

In Christ,

Bob

 

In Matt 10 Christ goes from the idea of “Kill” to the even MORE complete idea of “Kill and destroy” in the sequence above. This progression is seen clearly as Luke relates the same teaching below.

Rev 20:9 “Fire DEVOURED the wicked”
Rev 11:18 “Destroy those who Destroy the earth”
2Thess 1:9 The wicked pay the “penalty of eternal Destruction”

Ps 21:8-10 “devoured” – “Destroyed”

</font>[/QUOTE]=======================================================

The wicked will “be no more”

 

This text is not at all inconsistent with the position that there is no soul. There is no reason that I am aware of to discount the possibility that Paul is speaking phenomenologically here - making statements about the realm of "felt experience" and not necessarily describing the world in constitutional terms. Under the position that I am espousing, when Paul died, he ceased to be a "subject of experience" and is presently awaiting resurrection. However, from Paul's point of view, he enters into heaven "in the twinkling of an eye", even though thousands of years of "non-existence" have elapsed.

So, for Paul, to be absent from the body is indeed to be present with the Lord.

I think that your argument makes an unwarranted presumption of the existence of the immaterial soul. The proper way for anyone (including myself) to argue this topic is to make the case that our reasoning does not critically depend on assumptions that are subject to counterargument.

 

Revelation 14:10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:

This does not say 'in the presence of their loved ones' as you have implied. It is in the presence of the holy angels and the Lamb.

Abraham told the rich man that Lazarus was comforted. Lazarus could not see the rich man in hell, in torment. Nor will we see our loved ones when they are

who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

I do not see annihilation at all in those scriptures, nor do I see loved ones having to see what the Lamb and the holy angels see

 

Go back and read my post on the previous page. Death is separation. It is defined as separation all throughout the Bible, consistently.

It never says that either Hell or death is destroyed. You are reading into Scripture. Because one thing is thrown into another doesn't destroy it. If I pour one glass of water into a jug of water does the glass of water become "destroyed?" Of course not? It only becomes part of the greater whole. And so it is with Hell. Nothing is destroyed. That is your reading into Scripture things that are not there. Do you believe in purgatory too?

This is your imagination speaking again, or simply your pre-conceived ideas. There has nothing that has been destroyed, and nothing in Scripture to indicate as much. Death does not mean destroyed. It means separation. Those who have previously been separated from God, will once again stand before God and receive their final sentence. The wicked will stand before God and receive their final sentence. This is all at the second resurrection. There is a resurrection of the unjust, where the unsaved will receive their bodies. There are two resurrections: the saved and the unsaved.

No, the second death takes place at the Great White Throne Judgement when all will be cast into the Lake of Fire. The action of which is the second death.
Have you heard of the expression:
"Born once; die twice.
Born twice; die once."
There is a second death.

Death is separation. This will be ultimate separation from God in the Lake of Fire enduring eternal torment forever and ever. The Bible defines death as separation consistently throughout the Scriptures. It never means annihilation. All unsaved mankind from creation to the end of the Millennial Kingdom will be cast into the Lake of Fire to be separated from God for all eternity.

And your point is??
Yes, there will be tears in heaven.
For the Scripture says: God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.
DHK

 

Lazarus is never said to "be in heaven" in Luke 16.

Abraham's lap is where all the saints are in Luke 16.

Curious that only the "Jews" seem to be happy with that "detail" though others say they "want" the parable to be historic fact.

Abraham is prayed to by the dead wicked - (so the dead praying to the dead in this case) - which suited the Jews just fine -

Curious that only the "Jews" seem to be happy with that "detail" though others say they "want" the parable to be historic fact.

This could go on...

 

Some seem to be saying I "don't see destroy" in scrpture when it comes to hell" --

Lets read closely and "see" if we can find the destruction of "both" body AND soul in that case.

In Matt 10 Christ goes from the idea of “Kill” to the even MORE complete idea of “Kill and destroy” in the sequence above. This progression is seen clearly as Luke relates the same teaching below.

Rev 20:9 “Fire DEVOURED the wicked”
Rev 11:18 “Destroy those who Destroy the earth”
2Thess 1:9 The wicked pay the “penalty of eternal Destruction”

Ps 21:8-10 “devoured” – “Destroyed”

</font>[/QUOTE]=======================================================

The wicked will “be no more” [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]

 

When Jesus ascended he took "captivity captive."
He took those in paradise up to heaven with him.
There remains no paradise (as in the picture given in Luke 16) today; only Hell.

 

The N.T. says there are three parts to man: spirit, soul, and body (1Th 5:23). Jesus dismissed His spirit from His body when He died on the cross (Lu 23:46). The Christian is to be holy in body and in spirit (1Co 7:34; 2Co 7:1). Death is separation of the spirit from the body (Jas 2:26).
Way of Life Encyclopedia [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]Agreed.

But notice that in Eccl 12:7 the spirit of both the wicked and the righteous "goes back to God who gave it" -- it is without qualification.

This works because of the 1Thess 4 (and 1Cor 11 and 1Cor 15 and John 11 and ...) fact that the dead are those who are "asleep" as the text in those cases points out.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Very true - those dead in Christ raised in Matt 27 resurrection at the cross were taken with Christ.

That is the only specific event we have to tie it with.

Wouldn't it be great if that statement of yours were an actual Bible text??

Another great "missing Bible text".

But unfortunately for what you are making up there - we DO have TWO references to paradise given after the cross.

One is in 2Cor 12 and the other in Rev 3.

NONE of them say what you say above.

Since there are only THREE references in all of scripture - it is hard to imagine that your own statement is missing all of them.

But as it relates to this thread - "paradise" is not mentioned in Luke 16.

In Christ,

Bob

 

There is a lot of Scripture twisting there Bob.
The Lake of Fire will be destroyed?? You have got to be kidding! Do you really want to contradict Scrtipture like that?

Revelation 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
--It is not destroyed if they are tormented day and night forever and ever. The only thing that is destroyed is your manipulation of Scripture texts.

Revelation 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
--The same fate awaits all of the unsaved.

The rest of your references refer to the body being burned up and, according to the First Law of Thermodynamcs: that matter is neither created nor destroyed, but is simply turned into from of matter (or energy) into another. So when the body is destroyed (completely) it is turned into ashes--another form of matter. But it still remains, and one day will be resurrected. The spirit lives on, whether in Hell or in Heaven.

God is able to destroy both... It doesn't say he does. It speaks to his omnipotence. Neither does it speak of annihiliation.
Nowhere does the Bible speak of annihilation. Death always means separation from God. If the body is "destroyed" so what. The Catholics have been doing that throughout the centuries. There will be a resurrection--in fact two of them.
DHK

 

As per a previous post of mine, I now respond to the second of your three part argument that death always means separation.

I do not understand how one can conclude that "death is always separation" based on this text. All the things that you say are true, its just that they are not a defence for your specific claim that death is separation. In your defence, there is no doubt in my mind that this text describes the overcoming of a "separation" between God and those that are dead in their sins. But this is not sufficient gounds to conclude that death is always separation.

There are at least 2 problems here. The first is that you do not make any kind of case that one can conclude that all uses of "death" have the same connotation as the "overcoming of separation" connotation that I agree is present here. Your argument seems to be of the following form:

"Consider the statement 'I ran the store'. Since the connotation here is clearly that of 'management', we can conclude that the word "ran" always refers to an activity of management".

Now to be fair to you, you likely believe that your first point about death (which I have already expressed an opinion about) adds credibility to this "separation" construal. However, as I have argued, there is no specific necessity that your first point supports separation - other legitimate interpretations are possible.

The second problem is that you seem to discount a different connotation that seems perfectly legitimate to me - namely that being "dead" in our trespasses and sin, while it does indeed have connotations of separation, also has connotations of being in a state of "not being alive". You have pointed out that "quickened" means "made alive". Fair enough. So the contrast between being "made alive" and being "dead" is suggestive of the good old-fashioned "being dead means not being able to do anything - things you could do if you were alive" sense. You seem to provide no reason for us to believe that the "separation" connotation is the only one we can take away from this text.