common arguments in favor for endless hell

[sven]

I made a longer essay, especially also for those who never heard of universalism, as there might be many guests here, for you it might be old stuff, but for some maybe new, I know there exist dozens of such articles but I wanted to write my own



The common arguments in favor for endless hell refuted

I will not go in detail at every occasion also it's not my intention in the first place to defend universalism, at some occasions I leave the question just open whether it defends more likely annihilationism or universalism.

The "fiery hell" in the New Testament – where their worm does not die?

Mark 9:43-48

And if your hand offends you, cut it off. For it is profitable for you to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go away into Hell, into the unquenchable fire, where their worm does not die, and the fire is not put out. And if your foot causes you to offend, cut it off, for it is profitable for you to enter into life lame, than having two feet to be thrown into Hell, into the unquenchable fire, where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched. And if your eye offends you, cast it out. For it is profitable for you to enter into the kingdom of God one-eyed, than having two eyes to be thrown into the Hell of fire, "where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched." 49 For everyone will be salted with fire, and every sacrifice will be salted with salt. (Green's Literal)

The phrase in bold type is frequently used to defend the traditional doctrine of hell, for everybody who has no idea which Greek word has been translated with hell, especially the worms create some questions, but the solution is simple if we interpret it literally:

And if thine eye may cause thee to stumble, cast it out; it is better for thee one-eyed to enter into the reign of God, than having two eyes, to be cast to the Gehenna of the fire - where their worm is not dying, and the fire is not being quenched (Young's Literal Translation)

Verse 49 can possibly be interpreted in favor for a purgatorial view of Gehenna (especially as the next verse says salt is good), though I don't share this view personally.

However Gehenna is actually a valley outside Jerusalem which can be proven by both, the Vulgate, an ancient Latin Translation and the Septuagint (LXX), an ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament:

Mark 9:47 (Greek New Testament and Latin Vulgate)

καὶ ἐὰν ὁ ὀφθαλμός σου σκανδαλίζῃσε, ἔκβαλε αὐτόν καλόν σέ ἐστιν μονόφθαλμον εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἢ δύο ὀφθαλμοὺς ἔχοντα βληθῆναι εἰς τὴν Γεενναν του πυρος

QUOD SI OCULUS TUUS SCANDALIZAT TE EICE EUM BONUM EST TIBI LUSCUM INTROIRE IN REGNUM DEI QUAM DUOS OCULOS HABENTEM MITTI IN GEHENNAM IGNIS

Joshua 18:16 (Septuagint and Vulgate)

καὶ καταβήσεται τὰ ὅρια ἐπὶ μέρους τοῦ ὄρους, ὅ ἐστιν κατὰ πρόσωπον νάπης Ονναμ, ὅ ἐστιν ἐκ μέρους Εμεκραφαϊν ἀπὸ βορρᾶ, καὶ καταβήσεται Γαιεννα ἐπὶ νώτου Ιεβουσαι ἀπὸ λιβὸς καὶ καταβήσεται ἐπὶ πηγὴν Ρωγηλ

DESCENDITQUE IN PARTEM MONTIS QUI RESPICIT VALLEM FILIORUM ENNOM ET EST CONTRA SEPTENTRIONALEM PLAGAM IN EXTREMA PARTE VALLIS RAFAIM DESCENDITQUE GEHENNOM ID EST VALLIS ENNOM IUXTA LATUS IEBUSEI AD AUSTRUM ET PERVENIT AD FONTEM ROGEL

Γαιεννα  and Γεεννα are of course the same word, the Septuagint also has Γαιβενενομ [Gaibenenom] in 2Chron. 28:3 and Γαι-βαναι-εννομ [Gai-banai-ennom] in 2Chron. 33:6, these are all Greek transcriptions of Hebrew words meaning the Valley of (the son of) Ennom.

The Valley of Ennom (Gehenna) is several times mentioned in the Old Testament, I'll quote the Douay-Rheims Bible here:

Joshua 15:8 And it goeth up by the valley of the son of Ennom on the side of the Jebusite towards the south, the same is Jerusalem: and thence ascending to the top of the mountain, which is over against Geennom to the west in the end of the valley of Raphaim, northward.

Joshua 18:16 And it goeth down to that part of the mountain that looketh on the valley of the children of Ennom: and is over against the north quarter in the furthermost part of the valley of Raphaim, and it goeth down into Geennom (that is the valley of Ennom) by the side of the Jebusite to the south: and cometh to the fountain of Rogel.

2 Kings 23:10 And he defiled Tophet, which is in the valley of the son of Ennom: that no man should consecrate there his son, or his daughter, through fire, to Moloch.

2 Chron. 28:3 It was he that burnt incense in the valley of Benennom, and consecrated his sons in the fire according to the manner of the nations, which the Lord slew at the coming of the children of Israel.

2 Chron. 33:6 And he made his sons to pass through the fire in the valley of Benennom: he observed dreams, followed divinations, gave himself up to magic arts, had with him magicians, and enchanters: and he wrought many evils before the Lord, to provoke him to anger.

Nehemiah 11:30 And they dwelt from Bersabee unto the valley of Ennom.

Jeremiah 19, the whole chapter speaks a lot about the Valley of Ennom and Tophet

Jeremiah 31:40 might also refer to Gehenna: And the whole valley of dead bodies, and of ashes, and all the country of death, even to the torrent Cedron, and to the corner of the horse gate towards the east, the Holy of the Lord: it shall not be plucked up, and it shall not be destroyed any more for ever.

Jeremiah 32:34,35 And they have set their idols in the house, in which my name is called upon, to defile it. And they have built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Ennom, to consecrate their sons and their daughters to Moloch: which I commanded them not, neither entered it into my heart, that they should do this abomination, and cause Juda to sin.

Also Isaiah 30:33 For Tophet is prepared from yesterday, prepared by the king, deep, and wide. The nourishment thereof is fire and much wood: the breath of the Lord as a torrent of brimstone kindling it.

Well it's spoken here of Tophet (or Gehenna) as a place of fiery judgment as it seems but here is hardly thought of endless infernal punishment beyond the grave or physical death.

I will now examine the most important place in my opinion where Gehenna occurs in the Old Testament:

Jeremiah 7:30-33 (Green's Literal Translation)

For the sons of Judah have done evil in My eyes, says Jehovah. They have set their idols in the house on which is called My name, in order to defile it. They have built the high places of Tophet in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, nor did it come into My heart. So, behold, the days come, declares Jehovah, when it shall no more be called Tophet, or the valley of the son of Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter. For they shall bury in Tophet from lack of a place. And the bodies of this people shall be food for the birds of the heavens, and for the beasts of the earth; and no one shall frighten them away.

3 Points to consider:

- It never came in God's heart to burn these children (LXX and Vulgate support this translation), keep this in mind when I examine the first appearance of Gehenna in the NT
- Jeremiah said that it will be called the "Valley of Slaughter", not the "Valley of everlasting torment" as modern mainstream Christianity suggests
- It mentions human (dead) bodies of men as food for the beasts in Gehenna

Keep this in mind both for Mark 9:43-48 and Isaiah 66:24 which I examine now:

Isaiah 66:24 (KJV)

And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.

Jesus in Mark 9:43-48 most probably quoted this verse; the older manuscripts have the worm that shall not die only in verse 48.

It is quite obvious that Isaiah spoke about corpses, worms do not torment corpses but devour them, the same with fire, fire does not torment dead bodies but consume them, what actually happened in the literal topographic Gehenna.

Isaiah 66:24 presents us a picture of an executed death sentence about transgressors, Jesus when quoting this verse might very likely meant something similar.

THEREFORE DOES MARK 9:43-48 IN NO WAY SUPPORT THE DOCTRINE OF ENDLESS TORMENT BUT RATHER THE IDEA OF LITERAL DESCTRUCTION AND EXTINCTION.

In my opinion Jesus spoke more probably about the literal Gehenna and the threat of a shameful death as a criminal being thrown therein and not a fiery netherworld.

The Greek Text does actually not say that their worm will not die but not come to an end:

...ὅπου ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ καὶ τὸ πῦρ οὐ σβέννυται...
...opou o skōlêx autōn ou teleuta kai to pur ou sbennutai...
...where their worm does not come to an end and their fire is not quenched...

The Septuagint also does not have to die in Isaiah 66:24 but:
σκωληξ αυτων ου τελευτησει [skōlêx autōn ou teleutêsei] not come to an end as above.

Worms that don't come to an end neither life everlastingly and torment living corpses nor do they never come do an end, also does unquenchable fire not burn without any end, but as long as it has food it is unquenchable after this is it goes out from alone, beside this did Isaiah spoke of corpses, dead people; and Jesus obviously quoted this verse and must have had something similar in mind.

Gehenna occurs in the New Testament at first in Chapter 5 of Matthew (3 times, most translations translate it with "hell", some transcript it as Gehenna)

Matthew 5 ends with these words (KJV, v.44-48):

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

See Jeremiah:

And have built the high places of Tophet, That [are] in the valley of the son of Hinnom (Gehenna), to burn their sons and their daughters with fire, which I did not command, nor did it come up on My heart.

Jesus calls those who He threatens with Gehenna God's children (as He calls God their Father), therefore it's very unlikely that He meant with Gehenna a place of endless doom in the context, no honest man might seriously dispute this, especially when we read what is written in Jeremiah.

Gehenna occurs in the New Testament in:

Matthew 5:22, 29, 30
Matthew 10:28
Matthew 18:9
Matthew 23:15, 33
Mark 9:43-48 (3 times)
Luke 12:5
James 3:6

Actually Jesus did NOT mention Gehenna more than at half a dozen occasions, it's not wrong to say that in the rest of the New Testament it does not appear (James 3:6 seems quite slight) – if Gehenna was intended to mean such a terrible fate, why this silence, why do John, Peter, Jude, Paul never mention it? Not to mention the OT where it is nothing but a literal valley.

The translators of the Revised English Version give following explanation for Gehenna, you'll find it there: http://www.stfonline.org/resources/rev.html

Gehenna is the Valley of Hinnom. Gehenna is the Greek word that comes from the Hebrew "Ge," meaning "valley," and "Hinnom," which was a man's name. It occurs in the Bible as the "valley of the sons or Hinnom" because Hinnom's descendents eventually took over and controlled his property. The "GeHinnom," the Valley of Hinnom, is first mentioned as part of the northern boundary of the tribal area assigned to Judah (Josh. 15:8). Thus, the "GeHinnom," ("Valley of Hinnom") was immediately south of the city of Jerusalem. This geographical point is very important because the history of the GeHinnom is closely tied to Jerusalem. In Old Testament times, the Valley of Hinnom became associated with pagan sacrifice and even child sacrifice.

For example, Ahaz, king of Judah, offered his children as human sacrifices there (2 Chron. 28: 1-3). The prophet Jeremiah spoke out against these evils, and foretold that the Valley of Hinnom would be so full of buried bones that there would finally be no more room to bury anyone else (Jer. 7:31, 32). Although Jeremiah speaks of dead bodies and ashes being thrown there, he also mentions that it will one day be clean, which will happen in the Millennial Reign of Christ (Jer. 31:40). The bones made the whole area a place to avoid, because if an Israelite even touched a human bone, that person was unclean for seven days (Num. 19:16). This could be a serious hindrance to worship, especially if someone who came a long way to Jerusalem to worship was "put on hold" for seven days because he or she accidentally touched a bone on the way into the city. Because it was unclean, the Valley of Hinnom came to be used as the garbage dump by the people of Jerusalem. Of course this was very handy because, as anyone who has to take out the garbage knows, it is always nice if you can carry it downhill and not too far.

The inhabitants of Jerusalem would just carry their garbage, including dead animals, bones and other waste, outside the south gate of the city (still to this day called "the dung gate"), down the hill and into the "Valley of Hinnom," into GeHinnom. The waste that was dumped there was then either burned up in the fires that usually burned there, or it rotted away, being eaten by maggots and worms. By the time of Christ, the Valley of Hinnom had been used for centuries by the inhabitants of Jerusalem as their local garbage dump. When the Hebrew words, "GeHinnom" were translated into Greek in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the "GeHinnom" became the "pharagx Hennom," because "pharagx" is the Greek word for "valley." Then, by the time the New Testament was written, the Greek name for the valley had simply become "Gehenna." The Greek word for "valley," pharagx, dropped off and the Hebrew word for valley, "ge," was brought directly from the Hebrew into the Greek even though it did not have a meaning in Greek. Of course, something got lost when that happened, and what got lost was that Gehenna was a real place, the "Valley of Hinnom" and not some otherworldly fiery region.

Christ spoke in Aramaic or Hebrew, so his audiences were never confused about the identity of the place he was speaking of. Christ's audience knew the GeHinnom very well, and a large percentage of them had probably thrown garbage there. They understood perfectly what Jesus was saying and the seriousness of his words: if someone continues in wanton sin, then at the judgment he would not be let into the kingdom, but like the garbage, would be thrown out and destroyed. These are hard words, but they are the truth, and Christ taught them. Christ's audience knew about the valley of Hinnom where the garbage was burned until it was gone, but they would have known nothing about a place where people are burned alive forever.
The Old Testament certainly does not mention such a place. However, when Gehenna is translated "hell," English readers are led to believe that when Christ spoke of GeHinnom he was speaking of a place of eternal torment. He was not. He was speaking of the simple concept that the wicked and unsaved will be destroyed.

The wicked will, like the garbage, be totally consumed into nothingness. Their lives will end in every way. The concept of "burning forever in hell" came into Christianity from the Greeks who believed in an "immortal soul." It is important, however, to realize that the phrase "immortal soul" is not in the Bible. Eternal torment is not the teaching of Scripture. John 3:16, and many other verses, teach the simple truth that each person will either live forever or be destroyed. The fact that the fire could not be put out before it had done its work, coupled with the fact that those people who will be destroyed will not get up to eternal life, is the reason why there are verses that say that the fire is "unquenchable" and that the punishment (not "punishing," as if they were still alive) is eternal. The people whose bodies are burned in the Valley of Hinnom never receive eternal life. They die, and that punishment, their death, lasts forever.

This was an exhaustive comment on Gehenna, but Gehenna is one of the most important terms, as it is the only word still translated hell in more literal and accurate translations than the KJV as for example the Darby Translation or Green's Literal.

[sven]

Hell in the Old Testament and the improper rendering of the King James Bible

For me being German (I curiously prefer to write in English about this topic) the idea that people earnestly believe the KJV is inerrant is a ridiculous and grotesque thought. But I understand that people prefer a certain translation due to church tradition, in Germany it's similar, most people read Luther and see his translation as a kind of authority, but of course nobody claims this translation is inerrant which would be ridiculous, Darby (Elberfelder in Germany) is also a respected translation here. I will prove from the KJV and some other translations that hell (Sheol) in the Old Testament is neither a place of torment nor endless and that there is no such doctrine as "eternal torment" in the Torah and the Prophets.

Jonah 2:2-7 (KJV)

And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the LORD, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voice. For thou hadst cast me into the deep, in the midst of the seas; and the floods compassed me about: all thy billows and thy waves passed over me. Then I said, I am cast out of thy sight; yet I will look again toward thy holy temple. The waters compassed me about, even to the soul: the depth closed me round about, the weeds were wrapped about my head. I went down to the bottoms of the mountains; the earth with her bars was about me for ever: yet hast thou brought up my life from corruption, O LORD my God.

According to the KJV:

Jonah was IN HELL (2:2)
He WAS THERE FOREVER (2:6)
Yet he was DELIVERED AFTER 3 DAYS (2:10, 1:17)

If you claim the KJV is inerrant and believe in the traditional Catholic doctrine of hell, how do you explain that Jonah was forever in hell and yet delivered after 3 days?

Of course Jonah was not in the infernal torture chamber of a fiery netherworld called hell but in Sheol, which is no place of torment according to the Bible.

It would go far to examine all occurrences of Sheol in the Old Testament, there is a page which already did this: http://www.sheol-know.org/

But however some verses I will examine, quoting the KJV, Darby, the Catholic Douay Rheims Translation, the Septuagint, the Vulgate and the Luther Bible from 1545, the old German word for hell is almost the same as in English "Helle", "Hölle" in modern German.

Sheol occurs 7 times in the Torah; however I will look upon three other verses first:

1 Samuel 2:6

The LORD killeth, and maketh alive: he bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up. (KJV)

Jehovah killeth, and maketh alive; he bringeth down to Sheol, and bringeth up. (Darby)

The Lord killeth and maketh alive, he bringeth down to hell, and bringeth back again.
(Douay-Rheims Bible, Catholic)

Κυριος θανατοι και ζωογονει καταγει εις αδου και αναγει (Septuagint)
Kyrios thanatoi kai zōogonei, katagei eis adou (=hades) kai anagei

Der HERR tödtet / vnd macht lebendig / Füret in die Helle vnd wider er aus. (Luther 1545)

DOMINUS MORTIFICAT ET VIVIFICAT DEDUCIT AD INFERNUM ET REDUCIT (Vulgate)

Infernum is the Latin word for hell, Sheol (rendered hell in the KJV), God delivers from this place as shown.

Ecclesiastes 9:10

Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest. (KJV)

Whatever thy hand findeth to do, do with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in Sheol, whither thou goest. (Darby)

Whatsoever thy hand is able to do, do it earnestly: for neither work, nor reason, nor wisdom, nor knowledge shall be in hell, whither thou art hastening. (Douay-Rheims)

παντα οσα αν ευρη η χειρ σου του ποιησαι ως η δυναμις σου ποιησον οτι ουκ εστιν ποιημα και λογισμος και γνωσις και σοφια εν αδη οπου συ πορευη εκει (LXX)
panta osa an eurê ê cheir sou tou poiêsai ōs ê dynamis sou poiêson oti ouk estin poiêma kai logismos kai gnōsis kai sophia en adê (=hades) opou su poreuê ekei

Alles was dir furhanden kompt zu thun / das thu frisch / Denn in der Helle da du hin ferest / ist weder werck / kunst / vernunfft noch weisheit. (Luther 1545)

QUODCUMQUE POTEST MANUS TUA FACERE INSTANTER OPERARE QUIA NEC OPUS NEC RATIO NEC SCIENTIA NEC SAPIENTIA ERUNT APUD INFEROS QUO TU PROPERAS (Vulgate)

The original Luther Bible was much more honest than the KJV was, the modern revised Luther Bible from 1912 is like the KJV, the Luther Bible from 1984 has almost banished hell out of the Old Testament, of course Sheol in this verse is not the type of hell as modern mainstream Christianity teaches, rather a place of rest than of torment or punishment.

Job 14:13

O that thou wouldest hide me in the grave, that thou wouldest keep me secret, until thy wrath be past, that thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me! (KJV)

Oh that thou wouldest hide me in Sheol, that thou wouldest keep me secret until thine anger be past, that thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me (Darby)

Who will grant me this, that thou mayst protect me in hell, and hide me till thy wrath pass, and appoint me a time when thou wilt remember me? (Douay-Rheims)

ει γαρ οφελον εν αδη με εφυλαξας εκρυψας δε με εως αν παυσηται σου η οργη και ταξη μοι χρονον εν ω μνειαν μου ποιηση (Septuagint)
ei gar ophelon en adê (=hades) me ephylaxas ekrypsas de me eōs an paustêtai sou ê orgê kai taxê moi chronon en ō mneian mou poiêsê

AH / das du mich in der Helle verdecktest / vnd verbergest bis dein zorn sich lege / vnd setzest mir ein ziel / das du an mich denckest. (Luther 1545)

QUIS MIHI HOC TRIBUAT UT IN INFERNO PROTEGAS ME UT ABSCONDAS ME DONEC PERTRANSEAT FUROR TUUS ET CONSTITUAS MIHI TEMPUS IN QUO RECORDERIS MEI   (Vulgate)

The idea that Job wanted to go to a place of never-ending torment, what we call hell is ridiculous, Job wanted to rest in Sheol, Hades in Greek.
 
I will now examine Sheol in the Torah; I will only quote the Darby Translation here:

Gen. 37:34,35 And Jacob rent his clothes, and put sackcloth on his loins, and mourned for his son many days. And all his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort him, but he refused to be comforted, and said, For I will go down to my son into Sheol mourning.

Gen. 42:37,38 And Reuben spoke to his father, saying, Slay my two sons if I bring him not back to thee: give him into my hand, and I will bring him to thee again. But he said, My son shall not go down with you, for his brother is dead, and he alone is left; and if mischief should befall him by the way in which ye go, then would ye bring down my grey hairs with sorrow to Sheol.

Gen. 44:29-21 And if ye take this one also from me, and mischief should befall him, ye will bring down my grey hairs with misery to Sheol. And now, when I come to thy servant my father, and the lad is not with us, seeing that his life is bound up with his life, it will come to pass when he sees that the lad is not there, that he will die; and thy servants will bring down the grey hairs of thy servant our father with sorrow to Sheol.

Jacob obviously expected to go to Sheol when he dies, he also expected Joseph to be there. I think the KJV has here always grave, Luther has pit, the Septuagint Hades, the Vulgate Inferno, Douay-Rheims has hell, no one might assume Jacob would went to Hell.

The next two occurrences are Numbers 16:28-33:

And Moses said, Hereby ye shall know that Jehovah has sent me to do all these deeds, for they are not out of my own heart: if these men die as all men die, and are visited with the visitation of all men, Jehovah has not sent me; but if Jehovah make a new thing, and the ground open its mouth, and swallow them up, and all that they have, and they go down alive into Sheol, then ye shall know that these men have despised Jehovah. And it came to pass when he had ended speaking all these words, that the ground clave apart that was under them. And the earth opened its mouth, and swallowed them up, and their households, and all the men that belonged to Korah, and all their property. And they went down, they and all that they had, alive into Sheol, and the earth covered them; and they perished from among the congregation.

The KJV does amazingly translate with pit here, this verse would have been the best to claim Sheol is a kind of hell, however Sheol is four times mentioned before in connection with Jacob. The last occurrence of Sheol in the Torah is Deuteronomy 32:22:

For a fire is kindled in mine anger, And it shall burn into the lowest Sheol, and shall consume the earth and its produce, And set fire to the foundations of the mountains.

It mentions fire but nothing is here said about torment or punishment for the inhabitants of Sheol; it's the first rendering of hell in the KJV after Hebrew sheol was 4x rendered grave in connection with Jacob and 2x pit in connection with Korah.

It is claimed Hades is not Sheol

As we have seen, Sheol can hardly been claimed to be a fiery netherworld, therefore some people admit Sheol is actually no place of torment but claim Hades to be such a place; I've quoted the LXX, so according to the LXX Hades is the rendering of Sheol and therefore the same, but I'll show it from the Scriptures, again the Darby Translation (Darby believed in everlasting punishment, he went also so far to have corrupted the translation of 1Tim. 4:10, therefore no one can call his translation biased in this matter, at least he was far more honest than the translators of the KJV in regarding that matter).

Acts 2:24-32

Whom God has raised up, having loosed the pains of death, inasmuch as it was not possible that he should be held by its power;  for David says as to him, I foresaw the Lord continually before me, because he is at my right hand that I may not be moved. Therefore has my heart rejoiced and my tongue exulted; yea more, my flesh also shall dwell in hope, for thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades, nor wilt thou give thy gracious one to see corruption. Thou hast made known to me [the] paths of life, thou wilt fill me with joy with thy countenance.  Brethren, let it be allowed to speak with freedom to you concerning the patriarch David, that he has both died and been buried, and his monument is amongst us unto this day. Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn to him with an oath, of the fruit of his loins to set upon his throne; he, seeing [it] before, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that neither has he been left in Hades nor his flesh seen corruption. This Jesus has God raised up, whereof all *we* are witnesses.

This is obviously a quote of Psalm 16:10

For thou wilt not leave my soul to Sheol, neither wilt thou allow thy Holy One to see corruption.

So Sheol and Hades are most likely one and the same place and as Sheol is no place of torment according to the Bible, Hades is hardly such place as well, Gehenna is literally the Valley of Hinnom as shown, and everything else is speculation.

Some Jews, most probably the Pharisees and the Essenes maybe believed in netherworld punishment, as this is not taught in the Hebrew Bible I guess they got the concept from the Greek Orphic; the Sadducees seem to have rejected such doctrines as NOT taught in the Torah, it would go to much in detail but Paul warns about Jewish myths; Titus 1:14:

Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;
not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.

The rich man and Lazarus – Luke 16:19-31

Of course you can interpret it either literal or allegorical; you can interpret it allegorical and still defend the doctrine of endless torment using this verse, or you can it interpret it in a way that has nothing to do with an afterlife; I give only a few points to consider:

The rich man was in Hades (Hebrew Sheol), not in Gehenna, Hades is not endless:

Revelation 20:13: And the sea gave up the dead which [were] in it, and death and Hades (Hell in the KJV) gave up the dead which [were] in them; and they were judged each according to their works (Darby Translation)

According to the Bible Hades (hell in the KJV) will deliver its dead, so also the rich man if he was actually there. Reasons why this story is most probably a parable:

-   Abraham's bosom is never mentioned elsewhere in the Bible, but only in extra biblical Jewish sources; Jesus rebuked them for their traditions, see Mark 7:13
-   Sheol/Hades (grave, pit, hell in the KJV) is nowhere else in the Bible described as a place of torment or punishment after death as I showed above
-   dead people carried away by angels is nowhere else in the Bible described
-   Abraham can't send people back to life, the story implies he was able to do it if he had wanted but that he had only refused to do so – not that he was unable to do
-   people in a kind of paradise after death, before Christ 's resurrection, undermines His death and resurrection
-   the story is very symbolic, the other stories in the context before were parables as well

Immortal Soul / Immortal Spirit

There is no such thing as an immortal soul or spirit in the Bible, everybody who claims otherwise has not a single verse to support his doctrine but contradicts Scripture:

1 Timothy 6:15,16 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

Some evangelicals do indeed reject the doctrine of the immortality of the soul as a pagan doctrine, but do however claim men have an immortal spirit, this is quite ridiculous because it's just the same doctrine only with other terms used. I think J. N. Darby did this, he refuted the doctrine of the immortality of the soul as an unbiblical pagan doctrine but hold the opinion the spirit of men is immortal - never to cease, which is exactly the same in my opinion.

[sven]

Eternal punishment / eternal sin / eternal destruction ?

I make this part short, I guess there have dozen of books been written about this matter, books defending the classic Catholic doctrine of hell, others defending annihilation, others universalism. All I will do here regarding this matter is to prove Strong's definition wrong by the Scripture.

αἰωνίος [aiōnios] (Strong number 166); Strong's definition:
1.   without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be
2.   without beginning
3.   without end, never to cease, everlasting

Romans 16:25,26

...κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν μυστηρίου χρόνοις αἰωνίοις σεσιγημένου, 26 φανερωθέντος δὲ νῦν διά τε γραφῶν προφητικῶν κατ᾽ ἐπιταγὴν τοῦ αἰωνίου θεοῦ ...

...kata apokalypsin mysteriou chronois aiōniois sestigêmenou, 26 phanerōthentos de nun dia tegraphōn prophêtikōn kai epitagên tou aiōniou Theou ...

Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel, and the proclaiming of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery having been kept unvoiced during eternal times, 26 but now has been made plain, and by prophetic Scriptures, according to the commandment of the eternal God, made known for obedience of faith to all the nations; (Green's Literal Translation)

The eonian/eternal times obviously had an end:

3.   without end, never to cease, everlasting

Titus 1:2

...on hope of eternal life which the God who does not lie promised before the eternal times...


2 Timothy 1:9,10

...the One having saved us and having called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace given to us in Christ Jesus before eternal times, 10 but now revealed through the appearance of our Savior, Jesus Christ, indeed making death of no effect, bringing life and incorruptibility to light through the gospel,..

Before eternal/eonian times:    

2.   without beginning

If they are the same eternal times from Romans 16:25:

1.   without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be

There is no need to be a Greek scholar a theologian to prove such definitions wrong, again:

αἰωνίος [aiōnios] (Strong number 166); Strong's definition:

1.   without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be
2.   without beginning
3.   without end, never to cease, everlasting

All his definitions are proven wrong by the Bible, eonian times having both beginning and end; there is another interesting verse, though it is not so clear there:

Philemon 15

Τάχα γὰρ διὰ τοῦτο ἐχωρίσθη πρὸς ὥραν, ἵνα αἰώνιον αὐτὸν ἀπέχῃς,
Taga gar dia touto echōristhê pros ōran, ina aiōnion auton apechês,

For perhaps for this he was separated for an hour, that you might receive him eternally; 16 no longer as a slave, but beyond a slave, a beloved brother, especially to me, and how much more to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord.

I think eternally/eonian here refers probably to life time, like in Exodus 21:6 and Deuteronomy 15:17, of course it can also mean that this connection continues in the future life. There is however one verse which might seem problematic:

2. Corinthians 4:18

μὴ σκοπούντων ἡμῶν τὰ βλεπόμενα ἀλλὰ τὰ μὴ βλεπόμενα• τὰ γὰρ βλεπόμενα πρόσκαιρα, τὰ δὲ μὴ βλεπόμενα αἰώνια.
mê skopountōn êmōn ta blepomena alla ta mê blepomena ta gar blepomena proskaira, ta de mê blepomena aiōnia.

...while we look not at the things that are seen, but at the things that are not seen; for the things that are seen [are] for a time, but those that are not seen eternal. (Darby)

For tho thingis that ben seyn, ben but durynge for a schort tyme; but tho thingis that ben not seyn, ben euerlastynge. (Wycliffe Bible)

One might suppose here is contrasted time in general with timeless eternity in a possibly Platonic sense, but that's not 100% correct and I think a forced upon interpretation.

Proskairos is not time itself, this would be chronos, but rather a (shorter) period as far as I know, you can contrast strict opposites or things that are related to each other, you can contrast a lake with a desert and you can contrast a lake with an ocean; many say here is contrasted time with timeless eternity, but you can also contrast something which lasts only a short present period with something that is yet future and will last for ages. I think this verse proofs in no way that aiōnios should be understood as endless, because this verse does not say so. It might be the perfect definition of Hebrew olam which means something like hidden time:    Things that are seen last only for a (short present) period, but things yet future, not seen yet and with an unavowed end, are olam/eonian.   This might be a possible interpretation without any relation to a supposed endlessness or timeless eternity.


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. (KJV)

I openly admit this verse does not work with the doctrine of annihilation taught by Jehovah Witnesses or Seven Day Adventists; however it does not support the doctrine of hell regarding humans! Some claim as the devil will be cast in the lake of fire and be tormented there forever and ever, therefore people casted in the lake fire will suffer the same fate, but the Bible does neither say nor imply this, actually the opposite in my view:

First a look on Revelation 19:19-21

And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army. And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

Here does John emphasize that the beast and the false prophet were cast alive in the lake of fire, but human beings were slain with the sword (humans unlike the devil also killed in 20:9)!

Revelation 20:13-15

And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

When the devil or the beast and the false prophet were thrown in the lake of fire, WE READ NO WORD ABOUT A SECOND DEATH, but HOWEVER WHEN HUMAN BEINGS are thrown in there, it says SECOND DEATH. If we suppose the lake of fire is a literal lake of fire as fundamentalists do, this has a deep logic: The devil or any angelic being would not die by fire I guess, because they are not mortals, however mortal men (men are mortal according to the bible) would surely die if thrown in a literal lake of fire, if not kept alive in a miraculous manner. Also hell (Hades) and death will not be endlessly tormented in the lake of fire, at least I never heard anybody to claim so. In my opinion it's quite logic that the devil receives a harsher punishment than any mortal being, that the devil being no mortal will suffer torment in a lake of fire while mortal beings suffer death there of course, if taken literal.


Will any being actually be tormented forever and ever without any end?

Again Revelation 20:10:

καὶ ὁ διάβολος ὁ πλανῶν αὐτοὺς ἐβλήθη εἰς τὴν λίμνην τοῦ πυρὸς καὶ θείου ὅπου καὶ τὸ θηρίον καὶ ὁ ψευδοπροφήτης, καὶ βασανισθήσονται ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων.

kai o diabolos o planōn autous eblêthê eis tên limnên tou pyros kai theiou opou kai to thêrion kai o pseudoprophêtês kai basanisthêsontai êmeras kai nuktos eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn.

ET DIABOLUS QUI SEDUCEBAT EOS MISSUS EST IN STAGNUM IGNIS ET SULPHURIS UBI ET BESTIA ET PSEUDOPROPHETES ET CRUCIABUNTUR DIE AC NOCTE IN SAECULA SAECULORUM (Vulgate)

where bothe the beeste and fals prophetis schulen be turmentid dai and niyt, in to worldis of worldis. (Wycliffe Bible)

And the devil who deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where [are] both the beast and the false prophet; and they shall be tormented day and night for the ages of ages. (Darby)

And the Devil, who is leading them astray, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where [are] the beast and the false prophet, and they shall be tormented day and night -- to the ages of the ages. (Young's Literal)

And the Devil leading them astray was thrown into the Lake of Fire and Brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet were . And they were tormented day and night to the ages of the ages. (Green's Literal)

And the Devil, who had been leading them astray, was thrown into the Lake of fire and sulphur where the Wild Beast and the false Prophet were, and day and night they will suffer torture until the Ages of the Ages. (Weymouth New Testament)

FOREVER AND EVER IS NOT TRUE TO THE GREEK,
it's literally ages of the ages, ages of ages is most probably a Hebrew idiom, like song of songs, Lord of Lords, day of days etc., there is no hint that it shall mean everlasting without any end.

Many translations have it correct, e.g. the Vulgate (saeculum = age); most German Bibles translate "von Ewigkeit zu Ewigkeit", "from Eternity to Eternity" – which makes literally no sense, neither in German nor in English.

Revelation 14 – tormented day and night?

This is very exhaustive explained here: http://www.jewishnotgreek.com/

[sven]

A question that can never be answered satisfyingly

Why should God everlastingly torment any human being?

Some arguments in favor for it are:

-   a) God's Holiness makes infinite punishment necessary
-   b) Human free will makes it necessary, people choose hell
-   c) The torments of hell are self inflicted
-   d) The Bible teaches it (as they claim), as God is just, everlasting torment is just
-   e) God predestinated men for hell, for His joy and the joy of the righteous to watch this spectacle (maybe according to Augustine, Calvin)
-   f) Men are utterly wicked and deserve it



I will begin to refute them:

a) The Bible doesn't say that God's Holiness makes infinite punishment necessary but actually the opposite; see Psalm 103:9 and Isaiah 57:16. I see no sane reason why God's Holiness would force him to everlastingly torment offenders, everlasting extinction is also an infinite punishment. The classic doctrine of hell says nothing else that God will force sinners to everlastingly exist as sinners and possibly blaspheme Him forever and ever – how would this serve God's Holiness or even justice?

Leviticus 10:1,2 might be an example what happens to people who offend God's Holiness:

And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD, which he commanded them not. And there went out fire from the LORD, and devoured them, and they died before the LORD.

I know that this verse has no eschatological context, but it implies that those who offend
God's Holiness and can't stay in His presence, will rather be literally destroyed than tormented.

b) This a stupid argument, no one can or would choose hell (everlasting torment) if he has the choice, but to have the choice men would need to know for sure that there is both paradise and hell, they would need to know how paradise would be like and how hell would be like, only then would they have a fair choice. On the other hand, if men had a free will, why shouldn't they be allowed to simply choose death?

Deuteronomy 30:19

I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

The Bible does nowhere mention a choice between heaven and hell, but between life and death, death is no miserable everlasting life as it is written: And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as bands (Ecclesiastes 7:26), I can hardly imagine any woman more bitter than an everlasting life in misery.

c) This argument is solely based on the doctrine of immortal soul, it is claimed mortal men can never ever cease to exist, therefore create immortal sinners their own hell in the afterlife; as it is unscriptural philosophy, I see no reason to go into detail her. The Bible says God will judge, not that judgment is self-inflicted – the later I think is kind of New-Age philosophy.

d) If the Bible teaches everlasting torment - is the matter examined here, this argument could only make sense if the Bible would actually teach it and even then it would be an unsatisfying argument.

 
e) This can only be called a lie:

Ezekiel 18:23 + 30

Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?

For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.

If God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, how much less would He have pleasure in the everlasting misery of them? The believers shall be like their Father in heaven (Mt. 5:48).

f) Even if men were so utterly wicked, that they deserve any doom and penalty imaginable, or better to say unimaginable, this is still no reason why God, being Love and good should actually inflict it.

For example if we had the chance to torture Hitler, Stalin or anybody similar for years or decades, they might possibly deserve it, but even if, who of us would actually do it?
I wouldn't do it and I guess very few people would do it, torturing a man like Hitler for decades, wouldn't make this one's worse than Hitler?

After all, men are God's creation and He said it was very good (Genesis 1:31), why should God create a creature so abominable that it deserves everlasting doom or allow His once good creature to become so abominable that He is forced to inflict endless doom on them as an adequate and deserved punishment, this makes absolutely no sense.