What's your view on Hell?

[shag]

Originally Posted by Esaias

1 Corinthians 15:21-23 KJV
For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. [22] For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. [23] But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

He is primarily focusing on Christ and them that are His, not the lost. The lost will perish:

John 3:14-16 KJV
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: [15] That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. [16] For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Revelation 20:15 KJV
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Do you agree w Amanahs post above regarding the two DIFFERENT resurrections, AND the 1 Cor 15 chapter is only speaking of the first resurrection? (found in Rev 20:1-5)
And that John 5:28-29 is speaking of two separate resurrections?
The first being the just raised immortal, and then a 2nd separate resurrection of the unjust being raised mortal?

The way I see it, annihilation is false IF sinners are raised imperishable. Why I was wondering if there’s any other scriptures that might say wvwhat kind of body are sinners resurrected. I have not found any…

I do see annihilation as being right, and it may look like I’m attempting to disprove it, but I am actually doing just the opposite. But if sinners are raised pershishable, then annihilation is false.

Question, Esaias, with what you were talking about the soul earlier, what kind of persons would be able to fulfill this scripture : Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul….


Regarding Matt.10:28
Who are those that can kill the body, but yet can NOT kill the soul?
(If the soul is defined as a living body, while it has the breathe of life.
Maybe I have I misunderstood you.

It does seem pointless for scripture to say to fear Him who is able to destroy both body and soul in hell, if sinners are raised imperishable and canNOT be destroyed in hell. I assume this verse is speaking of Rev. 20:15

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by shag

Do you agree w Amanahs post above regarding the two DIFFERENT resurrections, AND the 1 Cor 15 chapter is only speaking of the first resurrection? (found in Rev 20:1-5)
And that John 5:28-29 is speaking of two separate resurrections?
The first being the just raised immortal, and then a 2nd separate resurrection of the unjust being raised mortal?

I lean toward a premillennial understanding of Revelation 20, so I would say Revelation is speaking of two distinct resurrections separated by the Millennium. However you raise an interesting point about that: How do the saints inherit immortality prior to Judgment Day (which appears to occur after the second, general resurrection)? The standard answer is usually either 1) the saints, having been baptised into Christ's death and resurrection, have already been judged, or 2) Judgement Day (like "The Day of the Lord") is a term that includes everything from the Advent in Rev 19 to the General Judgment in Rev 20 rather than being limited to a singular event. I tend to think option 1 is likely more correct, although both options could work together. Then again perhaps the answer lies elsewhere.

But John 5 definitely teaches two resurrections:

John 5:28-29 KJV
Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, [29] And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

1 Cor 15:23 only mentions Christ's resurrection, then the resurrection of the saints at His coming. Verse 24 says "then cometh the end", which which would include the general resurrection. The time frame between the end of verse 23 and verse 24 is not mentioned there.

The way I see it, annihilation is false IF sinners are raised imperishable. Why I was wondering if there’s any other scriptures that might say wvwhat kind of body are sinners resurrected. I have not found any…

If they were raised imperishable, they would by definition be immortal and the second death would have no power over them - which would mean they were saints who had received the gift of eternal life and not sinners. So the non-saints are not raised imperishable, they can and will experience the second death. But since eternal life is the gift of God, it is not merely a byproduct of being raised from the dead, it is something added to the saints' resurrection which makes it qualitatively different from the non-saints' resurrection. Saints will live forever, not simply because they were resurrected, but because they belong to Christ.

I do see annihilation as being right, and it may look like I’m attempting to disprove it, but I am actually doing just the opposite. But if sinners are raised pershishable, then annihilation is false.

Question, Esaias, with what you were talking about the soul earlier, what kind of persons would be able to fulfill this scripture : Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul….


Regarding Matt.10:28
Who are those that can kill the body, but yet can NOT kill the soul?
(If the soul is defined as a living body, while it has the breathe of life.
Maybe I have I misunderstood you.

It does seem pointless for scripture to say to fear Him who is able to destroy both body and soul in hell, if sinners are raised imperishable and canNOT be destroyed in hell. I assume this verse is speaking of Rev. 20:15

Well, the soul is a living PERSON (not just the living body, although the two go hand in hand), and while humans can destroy or kill the body, only God makes the call on who escapes the second death. So a saint who is killed has not had their hope of eternal life taken away. And you are correct, if a sinner cannot be destroyed then the warning in Matthew 10:28 is pointless and incorrect.

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I lean toward a premillennial understanding of Revelation 20, so I would say Revelation is speaking of two distinct resurrections separated by the Millennium. However you raise an interesting point about that: How do the saints inherit immortality prior to Judgment Day (which appears to occur after the second, general resurrection)? The standard answer is usually either 1) the saints, having been baptised into Christ's death and resurrection, have already been judged, or 2) Judgement Day (like "The Day of the Lord") is a term that includes everything from the Advent in Rev 19 to the General Judgment in Rev 20 rather than being limited to a singular event. I tend to think option 1 is likely more correct, although both options could work together. Then again perhaps the answer lies elsewhere.

But John 5 definitely teaches two resurrections:

John 5:28-29 KJV
Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, [29] And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

1 Cor 15:23 only mentions Christ's resurrection, then the resurrection of the saints at His coming. Verse 24 says "then cometh the end", which which would include the general resurrection. The time frame between the end of verse 23 and verse 24 is not mentioned there.



If they were raised imperishable, they would by definition be immortal and the second death would have no power over them - which would mean they were saints who had received the gift of eternal life and not sinners. So the non-saints are not raised imperishable, they can and will experience the second death. But since eternal life is the gift of God, it is not merely a byproduct of being raised from the dead, it is something added to the saints' resurrection which makes it qualitatively different from the non-saints' resurrection. Saints will live forever, not simply because they were resurrected, but because they belong to Christ.



Well, the soul is a living PERSON (not just the living body, although the two go hand in hand), and while humans can destroy or kill the body, only God makes the call on who escapes the second death. So a saint who is killed has not had their hope of eternal life taken away. And you are correct, if a sinner cannot be destroyed then the warning in Matthew 10:28 is pointless and incorrect.

It sure seems to me that the definition of soul is different depending on where it is used in the Bible. Let me explain.

Exodus 30

[11] And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
[12] When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel after their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul unto the LORD, when thou numberest them; that there be no plague among them, when thou numberest them.
[13] This they shall give, every one that passeth among them that are numbered, half a shekel after the shekel of the sanctuary: (a shekel is twenty gerahs an half shekel shall be the offering of the LORD.
[14] Every one that passeth among them that are numbered, from twenty years old and above, shall give an offering unto the LORD.

In this passage the half shekel offering is referred to as a ransom for the soul, so that there would be no plague among them. It SEEMS to indicate that if there was no half shekel offering given by the men twenty years old and upward, that the man (or men) who failed to give the half shekel would be killed by a plague.

Now if you took a poll of Christians, many would probably define a soul as a person’s spirit. And it is close to the same thing, but there is a difference obviously. A couple scriptures that illustrates this are listed below.

1Cor.15

[45] And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

And . . .

Heb.4

[12] For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Now specifically in Hebrews 4:12 we see that God’s word is so specific that it differentiates between joints and marrow, which are obviously closely related, and it discerns the thoughts and intentions of the heart, which are closely related, but not exactly the same. Also the word of God is able to cleanly divide the soul and spirit, which is so close to the same that I struggle to clearly understand the difference.

In regards to the difference that I perceive in the use of, or definition of, the word soul in the Bible, it may be just a matter of semantics or possibly the nuances of translation from Hebrew in the Old Testament and the Greek in the other, but is is obviously close to the same as spirit, but not exactly the same.

In the Old Testament it appears to be almost another name for life, while in the New Testament and in modern understanding, it seems to refer to everlasting spirit.

I’m still a little fuzzy on all the details.

[Amanah]

I believe that Hebrews 4:12 means

. . . The dividing asunder of soul/psyche (personality) and spirit/pneuma (breath)

Psyche as in psychology
Pneuma as in pneumonia

but waiting on Bro Esaias to comment of course.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

It sure seems to me that the definition of soul is different depending on where it is used in the Bible. Let me explain.

Exodus 30

[11] And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
[12] When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel after their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul unto the LORD, when thou numberest them; that there be no plague among them, when thou numberest them.
[13] This they shall give, every one that passeth among them that are numbered, half a shekel after the shekel of the sanctuary: (a shekel is twenty gerahs an half shekel shall be the offering of the LORD.
[14] Every one that passeth among them that are numbered, from twenty years old and above, shall give an offering unto the LORD.

In this passage the half shekel offering is referred to as a ransom for the soul, so that there would be no plague among them. It SEEMS to indicate that if there was no half shekel offering given by the men twenty years old and upward, that the man (or men) who failed to give the half shekel would be killed by a plague.

Now if you took a poll of Christians, many would probably define a soul as a person’s spirit. And it is close to the same thing, but there is a difference obviously. A couple scriptures that illustrates this are listed below.

1Cor.15

[45] And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

And . . .

Heb.4

[12] For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Now specifically in Hebrews 4:12 we see that God’s word is so specific that it differentiates between joints and marrow, which are obviously closely related, and it discerns the thoughts and intentions of the heart, which are closely related, but not exactly the same. Also the word of God is able to cleanly divide the soul and spirit, which is so close to the same that I struggle to clearly understand the difference.

In regards to the difference that I perceive in the use of, or definition of, the word soul in the Bible, it may be just a matter of semantics or possibly the nuances of translation from Hebrew in the Old Testament and the Greek in the other, but is is obviously close to the same as spirit, but not exactly the same.

In the Old Testament it appears to be almost another name for life, while in the New Testament and in modern understanding, it seems to refer to everlasting spirit.

I’m still a little fuzzy on all the details.

The word usually translated soul in the old testament, "nephesh", is translated a variety of ways. The word nephesh shows up in about 682 verses, sometimes more than once. It is often translated as creature (Gen 1:24), life (Gen 9:4, 9:5), persons (Gen 14:21), mind (Gen 23:8), man (Ex 12:16), lust (Ex 15:9), heart (Ex 23:9), the dead (Lev 9:28 21:1), body (Lev 21:11), beast (Lev 24:18), dead body (Num 9:6, 7, and 10), etc.

It is usually translated as "soul", "person", "life", or "creature/beast". Taking all of its uses together, it seems that nephesh is referring to what is often called animus, the quality of being alive, and by extension anything that is (or once was) alive. So it can mean a person, or an animal (animal, something that has animus, that is, a living being), a person who once was alive but then has died (and thus their "dead body", as when after a battle the battle field is littered with dead bodies - or with dead people). It also seems to be used in reference to desire or intention (Ex 15:9) and thus can be used to refer to "the heart" (as the source or location of the desire or by metonymy the desire or hopes and wants and aspirations of the individual as in Ex 23:9). This seems to be because only living creatures have desire, whereas inanimate objects like rocks etc have no desire, no intention, no sentience, no breath or animated qualities ("animated", stemming from animus) or "that which makes something alive as opposed to non-living or inaninate").

Heb 4:13 is an important verse, as it shows that the majority of Christendom is incorrect when it follows the catholic teaching that "soul" is simply another term for the spirit of a person. Most of Christendom believes in a dichotomous anthropology, the belief that humans are composed to two parts: a physical material body, and a non-physical immaterial spirit or "soul". The Bible however seems to indicate that man has a trichotomous nature, meaning a human has body, soul, and spirit, with soul and spirit being distinct. I think the Biblical data suggests that essentially a human being is a soul with a body and a spirit. Spirit and flesh combine to produce the soul, which is the "person" and all those unique qualities of a human that make them categorised as "alive" as opposed to being inanimate.

There does seem to be a lot of interchange between soul and spirit, for example:

And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.
(1Sa 18:1)

Here, the soul of Jonathan was "knit with" the soul of David, that is, his heart, affections, attitude, mind, etc were joined in affinity with David and David's heart, affections, attitude, mind, etc. So the word soul here refers to the inner man, as it were, the heart, of a person. Now look at this:

For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ.
(Col 2:5)

Here Paul is absent in body (not physically present), yet he is present "in the spirit", not meaning he was astral projecting and invisibly floating around in their meetings from a distance, but that his heart, attitude, and mind were in accord and agreement with and in favor of the Colossians. Very similar to this:

But we, brethren, being taken from you for a short time in presence, not in heart, endeavoured the more abundantly to see your face with great desire.
(1Th 2:17)

In these cases, both soul and spirit seem to be used to refer to "heart", mind, or intention. Soul because heart, mind, and intention are what distinguish living creatures from inanimate objects, and spirit because all living creatures have spirit and spirit is what causes something to be a living creature and to have a heart, mind, intention, etc. So, in common use the terms spirit and soul are used to refer to the same thing (though seen from slightly different perspectives or sources). But a close examination of the Word will reveal there is in fact a distinction between soul and spirit, as the verse in Hebrews suggests.

And, as you pointed out, they are VERY CLOSELY connected, like joints and marrow. Joints are places where two or more bones are joined together. Marrow is the stuff inside the bones themselves. The bones by themselves are inarticulate, they don't move. That requires the presence of joints, for the bones to move against one another or articulate. But marrow is the source of the blood cells, and thus the blood itself, and thus the very life of the person and their bones. Kind of like the spirit is the source of life of the person, and the soul is what enables the person to "move" or animate, that is, engage in life.

"... in the New Testament and in modern understanding, it seems to refer to everlasting spirit."

Not sure where this is coming from. I think that is a leap. I do not see where "everlasting spirit" is described with the word "soul" in Scripture?

BUT... that does raise another interesting question: Even if the soul is mortal, so that the PERSON can in fact be destroyed, what about the human spirit? What exactly is a person's spirit? Is it simply the breath of life (animating energy) from God? Or is a person's spirit unique to the individual, with it's own "dna" as it were? Or does the generic human spirit express itself through the medium of the unique "soul"?

Or perhaps the uniqueness of each individual is the result of a unique combination of both spirit and flesh, giving rise to a unique creation. Although we all have different bodies, yet in another sense they are all the same (all made out of the same stuff, but individually and uniquely arranged by dna). Thus we all have different spirits, yet in another sense they are all the same (all being the breath of life, but individually and uniquely expressed through it's being joined to a unique body, so that in effect the generic body and the generic spirit are tailor made or customised by God during the formation of the individual human, to create a unique individual with unique physical and mental characteristics).

I'm just speculating here, but that seems like a workable way to try to express all this stuff using modern terminology. Maybe?

[Esaias]

One thing I've noticed, is a lot of people try to make a distinction between "eternal life" and "immortality". They will say that all humans are immortal, but only Christians receive eternal life. Thus, eternal life is a quality, whereas immortality is simply a time span. Immortality means to maintain existence forever, whereas eternal life means to not only maintain existence forever but to have a high quality of life forever, to enjoy the life of God forever. So, sinners in hell they say are immortal, but do not have eternal life.

But Paul says something different:

Who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
(Rom 2:6-7)

Here Paul says those who seek for glory, honour, and immortality by patient endurance in well doing are given eternal life. Immortality is something to be sought, along with glorification and divine honour. It is not something everyone already has.

He also said this:

I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession; That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: 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.
(1Ti 6:13-16)

At the appearing of Jesus Christ, He shall show Who only has immortality. Only One has immortality, God as seen in Jesus Christ. This immortality is bestowed on those who believe, we are allowed to partake in the divine nature. Nobody has immortality as a mere consequence of existence, or as an inherent part of their natural essence (or "nature"). Rather, it is the gift of God.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Esaias

One thing I've noticed, is a lot of people try to make a distinction between "eternal life" and "immortality". They will say that all humans are immortal, but only Christians receive eternal life. Thus, eternal life is a quality, whereas immortality is simply a time span. Immortality means to maintain existence forever, whereas eternal life means to not only maintain existence forever but to have a high quality of life forever, to enjoy the life of God forever. So, sinners in hell they say are immortal, but do not have eternal life.

But Paul says something different:

Who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
(Rom 2:6-7)

Here Paul says those who seek for glory, honour, and immortality by patient endurance in well doing are given eternal life. Immortality is something to be sought, along with glorification and divine honour. It is not something everyone already has.

He also said this:

I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession; That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: 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.
(1Ti 6:13-16)

At the appearing of Jesus Christ, He shall show Who only has immortality. Only One has immortality, God as seen in Jesus Christ. This immortality is bestowed on those who believe, we are allowed to partake in the divine nature. Nobody has immortality as a mere consequence of existence, or as an inherent part of their natural essence (or "nature"). Rather, it is the gift of God.

Beautiful!

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Beautiful!

[TJJJ]

My view of hell? Well, when I was down south it seemed like you could see it good! Like the next county over!

[1 God]

You all just did away with hell. Problem is, it will never bring comfort to the devil and his angels. They can only wish that they can create havoc on earth for thousands of years and just dissolve instantly for a punishment.