Is hell eternal?

I admit that I missed your question. I did not ignore it.

In any event, I believe that heaven actually is forever, but that hell is not - the unrepentent are ultimately annihilated.

 

In any event, I believe that heaven actually is forever, but that hell is not - the unrepentent are ultimately annihilated. [end quote]


I thought it would be interesting to see how the the Greek word "anionios" [#166] is used in reference to heaven and hell, so I compiled these verses - although there are a total of 69 times that "anionios" is used in the NT.

According to Strong's, anionios is defined as "without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be; without beginning; without end, never to cease, everlasting"

"aniosios" in English are the words: everlasting and eternal - contained in the following verses:


Mt 18:8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.

Mt 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

Mt 19:29 And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

Mt 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

Mt 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Mr 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:

Mr 10:17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?

Mr 10:30 But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.

2Th 1:9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

2Th 2:16 Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,

Heb 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Jude 1:21 Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

 

Hell is eternal. That is why...

 

Obviously, understanding the meaning of words like "anionios" is part of any debate about this topic. But as I have argued before, arguments based on "word definitions" have some serious limitations unless we have historical reasons to believe that the societal contexts from which the scriptures emerged never employed words in "metaphorical" or somewhat technically imprecise manners. That would seem to be a hard case to make.

However, this kind of "argument from word definition" might (repeat "might", I am not sure of this) backfire on the supporter of the eternal torment view. We all know of Biblical texts that associate death (and not eternal torment) with sin. Perhaps the most well known is Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death".

Question: What would a Strong's based analysis of the original greek in this text say about the connotation of the word "death"? If the original greek for death suggests "extinction" then a "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" argument could be used to point out that Romans 6:23 is at odds with the eternal torment point of view.

I did a little Internet research and believe (though I stand to be corrected - I have not verified the source) that the appropriate Strong's word definition for death is as follows:

"to destroy fully (reflexively, to perish, or lose), literally or figuratively:--destroy, die, lose, mar, perish."

 

Hell is the place of punishment and prison for those who rebel against God. It was created for Satan and the rebellious angels (Mt 25:41). Unsaved men will go there also (Mt 25:41-46).

WHAT IS HELL LIKE?

1. A place of torment. (Luke 16:23; Rev.20:10)
2. A place of consciousness and feeling (Lu 16:23)
3. A place of fire (Lu 16:24; Mt 13:42,50; Mr 9:44-48; Re 20:15; 14:10).
4. A place of no comfort or help or mercy (Lu 16:24-25).
5. A place of unfulfilled desires and unanswered prayers (Lu 16:27-31).
6. A place of isolation (Lu 16:26)
7. A place without hope of escape (Lu 16:26).
8. A place of remembrance and regret (Lu 16:27-28).
9. A place of punishment (Mt 25:46).
10. A place of wailing and gnashing of teeth (Mt 25:30; 24:51).
11. A place of worms (Mr 9:44,46,48; Isa 66:24)
12. A place of banishment (2Th 1:9).
13. A place of darkness (2Pe 2:17; Jude 1:13).

ARE THE WICKED ANNIHILATED IN HELL?

1. Plain Bible passages say the sinner will suffer in Hell eternally (Mt 25:46; Mr 9:43-48; Re 14:10-11; 19:20; 20:10).
2. The Bible says the punishment of the unsaved will be worse than violent death (Mr 9:42). This proves the punishment is not annihilation, but is eternal torment.
3. Jesus said it would have been better if Judas had never been born (Mt 26:24). Jesus' words make no sense if Judas was only going to be annihilated.
Way of Life Encyclopedia of the Bible

If Hell is not eternal, then Jesus lied and died in vain.

 

Linda64, I haven't researched each verse you cited, but are you sure that all of those verse are referring to Hell, and not to hades/sheol? Just curious.

I agree with you that, if Hell is not eternal, then Jesus lied and died in vain.

 

Have gone over all of the verses Linda posted and they indeed refer to Hell. All are referring to a place where one has senses. In the grave, there is no feeling in the lifeless body.

And we know the soul does not stay with the dead body.

 

I am only going to press this point so far, but it appears to me that hardly anyone is engaging seriously the possibility that a proper interpretation of some of these texts involves entertaining the possibility that words are being used metaphorically, as is done at times in english?

Is it possible that there is an unexamined assumption that words must be interpreted as per "dictionary definitions", with an associated unexamined rejection of the possibility of metaphorical usage?

And what about the Romans 6:23 use of "death". Does the greek word for death not mean what I think it means: "to destroy fully (reflexively, to perish, or lose), literally or figuratively:--destroy, die, lose, mar, perish". This would present a challenge for the eternal torment point of view - which is it? death or eternal torment?

I am uncomfortable when people deploy the "if your argument is correct, then Jesus lied" line. It seems to be a rather obviously question-begging position, suggesting that those who do not think as you do are calling Jesus a liar.

 

Points 2 and 3 would indeed damage a position that hell is of zero duration (i.e. that the unrepentent simply slip into nothingness). But these arguments do not hurt a "hell is of limited duration" argument (my present position).

Obviously, even a limited stay in hell could be worse than a violent death (point 2). Same kind of argument re point 3.

 

Eternal means eternal. It does not mean only a short period.

 

Jesus' parable about the rich man and Abraham's bosom disagrees with that. The rich man went to Hades/Sheol, and experienced torment. Then again, it's a parable, meant to address a moral truth, not to explain what happens in Sheol.

 

Your statement, in and of itself, is a lie.

Teaching it as meaning "eternal" is a Catholic lie.

AIWNIOS
by S. S. Craig 1916
Dualism of Eternal life.

The Latin Vulgate translated the Greek adjective aijw>niov to the Latin aeternus in which we get the English word eternal and eternity.

The KJV translators instead of going back to the original Greek and translating the Greek adjective
aijw>niov, went to the Latin Vulgate and translated the Latin aeternus. This is why the word eternal has been misunderstood by the English reader. If they would have gone to the Greek they for sure would have translated it as many translators such as Rotherham and Young, namely, age lasting or life for the age (eijs ton aijw>niov).

It is equally a fact that the theology of the West was not that of the Greek Church but that of Roman Catholicism. It was Latin theology. And just as it is beyond doubt that the revisers, translators, and lexicographers, were chiefly influenced by the Latin language and Latin translations. It is admitted that the theology of Calvin was derived from Saint Augustine, modernized and extended.
“It was absolutely essential to Augustinian theology with its blightening emphasis on the doctrine of predestinarianism to mistranslate the Greek adjective aijw>niov, and put on it a meaning
which the Greek will not for a moment allow in its respective applications to salvation and judgment.

And that was essential to Augustinian theology was equally essential to Latin Christianity from the
days of Augustine to those of Calvin and Luther. And the same exists in the Reformed Theology
from then till the present.

To say nothing of other words, the Calvinist simply cannot, dare not, face an honest and truthful interpretation of the two frequently occurring words with which we are now dealing with, namely “eternal life.”
*****************************************
(My note: New Testament eternity is expressed in the phrase eijs tou<v aijw~nav tw~n aijw>nwn
found in Galatians 1:5 and not in a single Greek word. Translated “unto to the ages of/from the
ages.” Some other examples are found in Philippians 4:20; 1 Timothy 1:17; 2 Timothy 4:18
Hebrews 13:21; 1 Peter 4:11.)

 

"Thanatos" death is a study unto itself.

But, "apollumi", which you seem to be referring has to do with "destroy" or "perishing"; it has to do with destruction of the soul, or life in the age to come. Not with your everlasting salvation.

 

In all candor, do you (and others) not see how this kind of response totally refuses to engage my argument about "metaphorical" usage? If you can make a case that Biblical authors never wrote metaphorically, then please by all means do so. But to simply say that "eternal means eternal" seems like an unworkable argument, given that we know that words (in our culture at least) are sometimes used "loosely" as in "I will love you forever". What if I said "forever means forever" and concluded that the subject of this sentence will live forever? Is that sensible?

I think you have some work to do before that dismissive graphic can be legitimately deployed.

 

JohnV,

.

You said, 'Jesus' parable about the rich man and Abraham's bosom disagrees with that. The rich man went to Hades/Sheol, and experienced torment. Then again, it's a parable, meant to address a moral truth, not to explain what happens in Sheol.'

Berrian, Th.D.