Never ending torture in hell

  • Thread starter Thread starter CLearthinking04
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
  1. Each person was judged according to what they have done. (Rev 20:12,13)
  2. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. (designated as the second death) (Rev 20:14)
  3. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire. (Rev 20:15)
I see 6 describes 5.All people in 4 are unrighteous.The righteous do not partake of this judgement, and have been resurrected are with the Lord already, as they met Him in the air.
Definitely agree except that I define lake of fire as the process of ultimate death, fire being the consuming symbolism with the terms second death being the confirming text.
Except for the fact of resurrected body, that dies twice. The final annihilation as you suggest can only be once, the first, total death. It is the body that dies twice hence second death. While we may not be familiar what lies beyond, we certainly are familiar with physical death. With resurrection, we can understand a second physical death for those not in the book. On that we all agree.
Unfortunately with many highly symbolic texts if one tries hard enough you can make the text say anything.
Well maybe only several things.

Blessings
 
Your version of hell above is actually more ethical and I would prefer it but aren’t you doing the same thing you accused me of, making hell less hard so it’s easier to accept?
My “version” of Hell, for the most part, comes from the Catholic Church’s teachings, as well as from a great number of visions that many Saints and other holy souls have had over the centuries. Many of which were described in great detail in their writings. The major point being, that there is always an element of “fire” or “burning” involved in all of them.
Your disgust for annihilation as you describe that makes you want to vomit is exactly how I feel when hell is described as a fiery torture chamber that goes on for eternity. It makes God out to be a monster which we both know is not true. Realize that the final death of the incorrigibly wicked in a lake of fire is an act not only of justice, but of mercy on God’s part. To allow them to continue to live on in unrepentant in eternal rebellion would cause themselves and others in heaven (who are supposedly aware of their loved one being tortured) to experience only great sorrow and anguish forever, which is cosmic overkill. A God of love would not put them through that, much less torture them for all eternity in excruciating torment without end.
It sounds as if you think that just because God created Hell as a place of eternal punishment, that God must be a sadistic, vicious and vengeful tyrant, that wants to torture souls for all eternity, just for giggles. What you seem to disregard is that God IS loving and merciful, which always tempers His demand for justice. He never punishes any soul more than they actually deserve, as an individual. His punishments are always metered out according to the number and gravity of their own sins.

Another point that you seem to miss, is that God’s Justice demands satisfaction. That’s why the balance between good and evil must always be maintained, forever. He must always reward goodness and punish evil in equal measures, or there is no Justice. God has to decide what is necessary on both sides of the scale, in order to maintain that perfect balance that His Justice demands. That’s why if the rewards for goodness are eternal, then the punishments for evil must also be eternal. He cannot simply annihilate all evil, because then the sides of the scales would be completely out of balance and Justice would not be served, so that would never be acceptable to God.

Where do you even get those kinds of ideas from, folks like the ones at the Westboro Baptist Church? I noticed that you consistently quote from Protestant sources, like websites and books, even though you claim to be Catholic. I have no idea which version of the Bible you quoted from in some of the passages you posted, but it seems to make everything very vague and wishy-washy. I did see some quotes from the KJV and NIV, which are certainly not Catholic versions. Personally, I like to stick to the DRV to be more consistent.

You most certainly should not be getting ideas like ‘annihilation’ from the Catholic Church. I haven’t even heard any Priest talk about Hell in a very long time. Although, I really wish they would at least mention it, occasionally. Not as a means to scare people with fire and brimstone, but just to remind them that Hell is a very real possibility for any of us, that we seriously need to remember.

I think way too many people believe that just going through the motions, like going to Mass on Sunday, is all they really need to do, to get to Heaven. Even non-Catholics might get the same kinds of ideas about going to their own church services on Sunday. But, unless we at least attempt live a good and holy Christian life, we might all have a very rude awakening when we stand before Jesus, and He asks us what we’ve done in our daily lives to show Him that we really love Him. If we don’t have a good answer, we could all end up in Hell. That’s a fact.
BTW - Accusing me of calling Jesus a liar is without merit. I am questing the interpretation of what is said not who is saying it.
I said, “you already seem to think Jesus was a bit of a liar”. By the way you presented your argument, you were implying that Jesus was not really telling the truth in those passages where He taught the people about the punishment of Hell, for those who do evil. Someone that doesn’t tell the truth is usually referred to as a liar, so that was what you were implying.

Your whole line of thinking concerning Hell, questions God’s Love, His Mercy, as well as His Justice. God is perfect. He is the perfect Judge that never requires any jury to help Him decide what Justice demands, in any case. Human judges can easily make serious mistakes, as we have recently been reminded of, here in the US. But, God can never make any mistake. When you question God’s integrity like you did in this case, it’s a serious insult to Him. Not only is it painful to Him, but it’s also painful to anyone who loves Him, to hear His Name being dragged through the mud like that. So, I might tend to get a bit huffy when I see something like that happening.

Mea culpa.
 
I find it amazing that so many Catholics on here appear to want to “water down” the teachings on the pains of hell. Catholic Answers has an article that you can read here that opens with this paragraph;
The doctrine of hell is so frightening that numerous heretical sects end up denying the reality of an eternal hell. The Unitarian-Universalists, the Seventh-day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Christadelphians, the Christian Scientists, the Religious Scientists, the New Agers, and the Mormons—all have rejected or modified the doctrine of hell so radically that it is no longer a serious threat. In recent decades, this decay has even invaded mainstream Evangelicalism, and a number of major Evangelical figures have advocated the view that there is no eternal hell.
Isn’t this precisely what we constantly read here on threads about hell? I get the sense from reading various posts on this topic, that many on here try to erase, in their own minds at least, the very existence of hell out of Church teachings altogether. Also in the CA article it mentions that Pope John Paul II wrote in Crossing the Threshold of Hope, that too often “preachers, catechists, teachers . . . no longer have the courage to preach the threat of hell.” And that’s a real ***big ***problem. It’s practically non existent. I’m sure there are exceptions, but when was the last time your pastor even mentioned hell in a homily? How often is it touched on in RCIA class? I’m quite sure many on here would answer…“Never!” But let’s be very clear here. Hell surely exists! And if any one of us winds up there, we will experience a pain and anguish that makes any suffering endured here on this earth appear like mere child’s play! I don’t say these things to try to scare anyone. I say these things because the RCC has always been crystal clear in her teachings, that any one of us could end up there if we’re not extremely vigilant!
“I felt a fire in my soul. I cannot see how it is possible to describe it. My bodily sufferings were unendurable. I have undergone most painful sufferings in this life… yet all these were as nothing in comparison with what I felt then, especially when I saw that there would be no intermission, nor any end to them."
~Saint Teresa of Avila~ Doctor of the Church.
A vision of Hell
Peace, Mark
 
I find it amazing that so many Catholics on here appear to want to “water down” the teachings on the pains of hell. Catholic Answers has an article that you can read here that opens with this paragraph;

Isn’t this precisely what we constantly read here on threads about hell? I get the sense from reading various posts on this topic, that many on here try to erase, in their own minds at least, the very existence of hell out of Church teachings altogether. Also in the CA article it mentions that Pope John Paul II wrote in Crossing the Threshold of Hope, that too often “preachers, catechists, teachers . . . no longer have the courage to preach the threat of hell.” And that’s a real ***big ***problem. It’s practically non existent. I’m sure there are exceptions, but when was the last time your pastor even mentioned hell in a homily? How often is it touched on in RCIA class? I’m quite sure many on here would answer…“Never!” But let’s be very clear here. Hell surely exists! And if any one of us winds up there, we will experience a pain and anguish that makes any suffering endured here on this earth appear like mere child’s play! I don’t say these things to try to scare anyone. I say these things because the RCC has always been crystal clear in her teachings, that any one of us could end up there if we’re not extremely vigilant!

Peace, Mark
Pretty good. I have not heard any fire and brimstone preaching lately either.
 
The fire of hell is a simile that is used in scripture to describe the indescribable. We conventionally think of death by fire as the worst of deaths, and there is a kind of totality in the way fire completely consumes the body, as opposed to simply taking an arrow to the torso.

In some fashion, the resurrected (the elect and the damned) will have bodies, so there will be corporal suffering in hell, but it is beyond our present understanding of suffering. Beyond scripture itself, mystics that have witnessed hell likewise see fire. No, mystics are not public revelation, but speaking for myself: when I have 20 different mystics in the Catholic Church that were canonized as saints, and they’re all pointing to hell and saying the same thing, I value their insight far above my own intestines. That’s me. Does the Church canonize confused lunatics that speak nonsense, or worse, people that deliberately lie?
 
I don’t believe God would provide for us a revelation about our existence beyond earthly death unless it were in some way useful to us in the present life. Although there is a risk of a superficiality to the faith by focusing on hell (that is: you have a congregation not so much desiring what is good, and beautiful, and true, so much as merely fleeing from the bad), I don’t think it is a coincidence that those dioceses in the world which are bold in their preaching - including the unsettling doctrine of hell - are those which enjoy a harvest of vocations and a vibrant parish community. It’s pretty much universal that where you find Catholics that are ashamed of their own beliefs, you find parishes that are stagnating or dwindling.
 
I don’t believe God would provide for us a revelation about our existence beyond earthly death unless it were in some way useful to us in the present life. Although there is a risk of a superficiality to the faith by focusing on hell (that is: you have a congregation not so much desiring what is good, and beautiful, and true, so much as merely fleeing from the bad), I don’t think it is a coincidence that those dioceses in the world which are bold in their preaching - including the unsettling doctrine of hell - are those which enjoy a harvest of vocations and a vibrant parish community. It’s pretty much universal that where you find Catholics that are ashamed of their own beliefs, you find parishes that are stagnating or dwindling.
Agreed with the last sentence. 👍

As for the argument in this thread, it is quite needless though not altogether useless.

Really, we cannot say for sure the exact details of what it is like after death in heaven or hell. But this we know, it is an extremely contented pleasant experience in the presence of God in heaven and just the opposite in hell.

Christian’s love of God and thus their belief, is not because they are afraid of hell, yes they need to be really afraid, but more importantly because they fear losing the love of God. All through the ages, this was what the saints spoke about, not wanting to be out of God’s presence and thus wanted to be with God.

If to preach the the much vaunted badness of hell would mean for us to put into lesser importance the infinite goodness of heaven, then we are not putting our belief in right perspective.

God bless.

Reuben
 
My “version” of Hell, for the most part, comes from the Catholic Church’s teachings, as well as from a great number of visions that many Saints and other holy souls have had over the centuries. Many of which were described in great detail in their writings. The major point being, that there is always an element of “fire” or “burning” involved in all of them. (Do you realize that there is symbolic language in the scriptures at all?)

It sounds as if you think that just because God created Hell as a place of eternal punishment, that God must be a sadistic, vicious and vengeful tyrant, that wants to torture souls for all eternity, just for giggles. (You are misrepresenting what I said - Again - I question your interpretation not what Jesus said) What you seem to disregard is that God IS loving and merciful, which always tempers His demand for justice. He never punishes any soul more than they actually deserve, as an individual. His punishments are always metered out according to the number and gravity of their own sins. (No argument here)

Another point that you seem to miss, is that God’s Justice demands satisfaction. That’s why the balance between good and evil must always be maintained, forever. He must always reward goodness and punish evil in equal measures (Why,says who? isn’t he a God of Mercy? There are many examples of God showing mercy and unbalancing the scales? He can do as He pleases.), or there is no Justice. God has to decide what is necessary on both sides of the scale, in order to maintain that perfect balance that His Justice demands. That’s why if the rewards for goodness are eternal, then the punishments for evil must also be eternal.(Where do you get this from? I don’t see it any where in the scriptures.) He cannot simply annihilate all evil, because then the sides of the scales would be completely out of balance and Justice would not be served, so that would never be acceptable to God.** (Why would justice not be served? Because annihilation is too much of a punishment? If so then I can understand your point a little better.)**

Where do you even get those kinds of ideas from, folks like the ones at the Westboro Baptist Church? (That’s not fair, I am not protesting at soldiers graves nor have I condemned anyone as they do) ** I noticed that you consistently quote from Protestant sources, like websites and books, even though you claim to be Catholic.(So Protestants are bad?)** I have no idea which version of the Bible you quoted from in some of the passages you posted, but it seems to make everything very vague and wishy-washy. I did see some quotes from the KJV and NIV, which are certainly not Catholic versions. Personally, I like to stick to the DRV to be more consistent. ** (Douay-Rheims Version is based on the Latin Vulgate which is OK but I prefer to rely on versions that are based on the original text. Either way the meaning is the same from the NIV and KJV for the verses that I cited.)**

You most certainly should not be getting ideas like ‘annihilation’ from the Catholic Church. I haven’t even heard any Priest talk about Hell in a very long time. **(I wonder why, is it perhaps they know in their hearts that hellfire could be wrong? This absence of hellfire form the pulpit in both Catholic and Non-Catholic Christian religions is a recognized problem.) **Although, I really wish they would at least mention it, occasionally. Not as a means to scare people with fire and brimstone, but just to remind them that Hell is a very real possibility for any of us, that we seriously need to remember.

I think way too many people believe that just going through the motions, like going to Mass on Sunday, is all they really need to do, to get to Heaven. Even non-Catholics might get the same kinds of ideas about going to their own church services on Sunday. But, unless we at least attempt live a good and holy Christian life, we might all have a very rude awakening when we stand before Jesus, and He asks us what we’ve done in our daily lives to show Him that we really love Him. If we don’t have a good answer, we could all end up in Hell. That’s a fact.(There might be a little room for mercy here, are we saved by grace or by works?)

I said, “you already seem to think Jesus was a bit of a liar”. By the way you presented your argument, you were implying that Jesus was not really telling the truth in those passages where He taught the people about the punishment of Hell, for those who do evil. (Again, I never said Jesus wasn’t telling the truth and can’t make it any plainer, I just disagree with your meaning on the subject) Someone that doesn’t tell the truth is usually referred to as a liar, so that was what you were implying. **(You really want to unfairly bring me into conflict with the almighty. You should refrain from such accusations. As a Catholic it is OK to correct someone but trying to bring them into conflict with God is wrong.) **

Your whole line of thinking concerning Hell, questions God’s Love, His Mercy, as well as His Justice.(Your opinion) God is perfect. (Agreed) He is the perfect Judge that never requires any jury to help Him decide what Justice demands, in any case. Human judges can easily make serious mistakes, as we have recently been reminded of, here in the US. But, God can never make any mistake.**(Agreed) ** When you question God’s integrity (I’m not) like you did in this case (I didn’t), it’s a serious insult to Him. Not only is it painful to Him, but it’s also painful to anyone who loves Him, to hear His Name being dragged through the mud like that. (You are getting carried away here) So, I might tend to get a bit huffy when I see something like that happening. **(OK your passionate about a perceived insult to God, your heart is in the right place but clearly misguided in this instance). **
 
I provided the scriptural references as the proof you requested. However it is clear that your frame of reference and understanding of the scriptures is vastly different from my frame of reference. Judging by your opening comment we can’t even agree on the context of when passages are speaking to the after life. Even your Daniel 12:2 quote emphasizing “everlasting” as somehow meaning eternal torture, I interpret as referring to death which can still be valid when the eternal punishment is death.
Then you need to explain death as the punishment. Is this “death” another way of saying annihilation? If you mean the second death, what sort of conditions are these souls in that died the second death. Do these souls suffer when they were thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone? Or do these souls actually die so that they don’t experience any pain or suffering at all? That these souls are not immortal?
While I respect your point of view and thank you your time in expressing a more fundamentalist understanding this subject I respectfully disagree. As far as Church teaching, the Catechism reiterates the same language as the scripture which does use symbolism and parable to communicate deep spiritual truths.
Are you saying that the Church teaches a non-torment hell? This is important. If what you claim is true, then many of us are taught wrongly by the Church. Which means the Church taught error. .
To summarize my position - Hell is a place of death which is also eternal. The flames, worms and darkness are metaphors for the process of death. There are levels of punishment that are mentioned in the bible which probably refer to purgatory but I am unsure about the details of this part.
Let stick to hell. Does the Church teaches a non-torment hell? Details, not just extrapolation of symbolism into hell by your goodself. I and many others are taught that hell is an eternal place of torment. Are you are saying that evil doers just end up dead with no torment in hell, all the flames etc are just metaphors? Correct me if that is not your position. I am taught the soul is immortal. In the second death, the soul continues to experience pain and suffering for eternity in the lake of fire and brimstone. Now all you need is to show that the Church teaches your position and not mine.
 
Let stick to hell. Does the Church teaches a non-torment hell? Details, not just extrapolation of symbolism into hell by your goodself. I and many others are taught that hell is an eternal place of torment. Are you are saying that evil doers just end up dead with no torment in hell, all the flames etc are just metaphors? Correct me if that is not your position. I am taught the soul is immortal. In the second death, the soul continues to experience pain and suffering for eternity in the lake of fire and brimstone. Now all you need is to show that the Church teaches your position and not mine.
I can’t find eternal torture by our Loving, Moral and Just God in the Catechism. Below are paraphrases of key points taken from the Cathechism section on Hell.

Catechism of the Catholic Church regarding Hell
  • 1033 (Separation) talks about separation from God. (Isn’t ultimate/second death separation from God? Although not conscious one would not be aware of the separation, but this is not where I see the torment taking place, see below)
  • 1034 (Gehenna) talks about both soul and body are lost. Eternal fire is used (Language clearly taken from the Bible where I interpret fire to be the process of hell).
  • 1035 (Hell is Eternal) Punishments of hell is defined as “eternal fire” (Again using metaphorical language from the Bible, fire appears to be the process of punishment which is death).
  • 1036 (Destruction) this means just what it says.
  • 1037 (God predestines no one go to hell) Talks about God not wanting any one to perish but all to come to repentance. (Perish means just what it says)
Do you feel being destroyed in some metaphorical fire isn’t torment? (Whatever the process of destruction is unknown, fire is probably the best word we can use for a process that may be outside of our reality). Why do we really need to ensure everyone who goes to Hell must suffer to the Max? That’s kind of a human lust for vengeance. But vengeance is the Lords, not ours and my view of the Lord’s actions are more akin to having to put down a rabid animal rather than the divine enjoying torturing one of his created beings in flames while those in heaven watch with delight as some who interpret the Rich Man and Lazarus parable as saying.
 
I can’t find eternal torture by our Loving, Moral and Just God in the Catechism. Below are paraphrases of key points taken from the Cathechism section on Hell.

Catechism of the Catholic Church regarding Hell
  • 1033 (Separation) talks about separation from God. (Isn’t ultimate/second death separation from God? Although not conscious one would not be aware of the separation, but this is not where I see the torment taking place, see below)
  • 1034 (Gehenna) talks about both soul and body are lost. Eternal fire is used (Language clearly taken from the Bible where I interpret fire to be the process of hell).
  • 1035 (Hell is Eternal) Punishments of hell is defined as “eternal fire” (Again using metaphorical language from the Bible, fire appears to be the process of punishment which is death).
  • 1036 (Destruction) this means just what it says.
  • 1037 (God predestines no one go to hell) Talks about God not wanting any one to perish but all to come to repentance. (Perish means just what it says)
Do you feel being destroyed in some metaphorical fire isn’t torment? (Whatever the process of destruction is unknown, fire is probably the best word we can use for a process that may be outside of our reality). Why do we really need to ensure everyone who goes to Hell must suffer to the Max? That’s kind of a human lust for vengeance. But vengeance is the Lords, not ours and my view of the Lord’s actions are more akin to having to put down a rabid animal rather than the divine enjoying torturing one of his created beings in flames while those in heaven watch with delight as some who interpret the Rich Man and Lazarus parable as saying.
Also, when the time for the general judgement comes, all bodies will be resurrected, so that those that are justified and those that are condemned will be in their resurrected bodies, and continue with them.
 
I can’t find eternal torture by our Loving, Moral and Just God in the Catechism. Below are paraphrases of key points taken from the Cathechism section on Hell.
I just need your responses to my previous questions below so that we have a common understanding what your position is. I have seen those Catechisms before. It doesn’t tell me what your position is. It is not right for me to guess. The verses that I quoted previously says eternal punishment, torment, eternal fire etc. Some sort of suffering. None uses the word torture. And you repeatedly market that word as if I quoted them. I did not. You will not find this word torture under the Catechisms on hell. You can interpret words and meanings the way you see fit but that doesn’t guarantee that the meaning you wish to adopt is correct. You quoted the word “destruction”, what does it mean to you? Annihilation of the immortal soul? State your position. You mention eternal punishment leading to death. Death of what? What does this second death mean to you? Does it result in non-existence? If it does, then the punishment won’t be eternal, would it?
Then you need to explain death as the punishment. Is this “death” another way of saying annihilation? If you mean the second death, what sort of conditions are these souls in that died the second death. Do these souls suffer when they were thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone? Or do these souls actually die so that they don’t experience any pain or suffering at all? That these souls are not immortal?
Are you saying that the Church teaches a non-torment hell? This is important. If what you claim is true, then many of us are taught wrongly by the Church. Which means the Church taught error. .
Do you feel being destroyed in some metaphorical fire isn’t torment? (Whatever the process of destruction is unknown, fire is probably the best word we can use for a process that may be outside of our reality). Why do we really need to ensure everyone who goes to Hell must suffer to the Max? That’s kind of a human lust for vengeance. But vengeance is the Lords, not ours and my view of the Lord’s actions are more akin to having to put down a rabid animal rather than the divine enjoying torturing one of his created beings in flames while those in heaven watch with delight as some who interpret the Rich Man and Lazarus parable as saying.
How I feel is not important. I am interested only in knowing whether I am faithful to the Church’s teachings. I have been taught that those in hell suffer eternal torment, the punishment is eternal. I have provided chapter and verses supporting my views. You are saying that it is not, that it is metaphorical or something else other than what I have been taught. I am asking you for a clear and definite response as to what your position is. Is your hell a place of eternal torment/suffering/anguish/nasties or not? Or is your type of hell is just death (whatever that means to you) without suffering or annihilation? Does your hell/lake of fire comes with eternal torment/suffering/pain/anguish/weeping and gnashing of teeth for those condemned souls in hell? Yes or No.
 
I just need your responses to my previous questions below so that we have a common understanding what your position is. I have seen those Catechisms before. It doesn’t tell me what your position is. It is not right for me to guess. The verses that I quoted previously says eternal punishment, torment, eternal fire etc. Some sort of suffering. None uses the word torture. And you repeatedly market that word as if I quoted them. I did not. You will not find this word torture under the Catechisms on hell. You can interpret words and meanings the way you see fit but that doesn’t guarantee that the meaning you wish to adopt is correct. You quoted the word “destruction”, what does it mean to you? Annihilation of the immortal soul? State your position. You mention eternal punishment leading to death. Death of what? What does this second death mean to you? Does it result in non-existence? If it does, then the punishment won’t be eternal, would it?

How I feel is not important. I am interested only in knowing whether I am faithful to the Church’s teachings. I have been taught that those in hell suffer eternal torment, the punishment is eternal. I have provided chapter and verses supporting my views. You are saying that it is not, that it is metaphorical or something else other than what I have been taught. I am asking you for a clear and definite response as to what your position is. Is your hell a place of eternal torment/suffering/anguish/nasties or not? Or is your type of hell is just death (whatever that means to you) without suffering or annihilation? Does your hell/lake of fire comes with eternal torment/suffering/pain/anguish/weeping and gnashing of teeth for those condemned souls in hell? Yes or No.
I used to the word torture when arguing this point because that’s how many people define torment. Actually to be more accurate to the scripture and catechism “torment” should be used, it is less dramatic but is similar. Hell is not intended to be pleasant.

I have outlined my position clearly in other posts but due to the numerous posts it probably got lost in the bantering back and forth with others, but to respond directly to your question and we may not be as far apart in our understanding as you might think when all things are considered. My position is this;
  1. Second death means just that “death”, total annihilation, non-existence.
  2. Fire deals with the process of death. (Now we don’t really know exactly what this process is since it is a metaphor and is intended to teach about a process of destroying souls that are not flesh and blood so it describes something that we cant’ fully understand in our reality. Fire is probably the best way to understand it.)
  3. Darkness or Blackest darkness as described in Jude refers to death. The worms imagery used by Jesus combined with the garbage dump known as Gehenna could easily be understood by people of the day where criminals bodies were dumped is a place where nothing lives.
  4. Weeping and Gnashing of teach refers to how people condemned to hell will feel and react when thrown into hell. (Do they have to be weeping and gnashing their teeth for all eternity? No) There is enough scriptural and Catechism text to support this position.
But it becomes clearer when one considers hell from a common sense point of view. Consider the following regarding hellfire;
  1. How long would one’s mind stay intact if the eternal fire torments one in hell for say a few thousand years (assuming time is still linear). Can you imagine the mental illness that would ensure after only a few hours, let alone days, weeks, years and ultimately forever? There would be nothing left of the mind in a very short period of time.
  2. Wouldn’t some organizing force have to keep them alive, at least mentally and emotionally so they can suffer for an eternal duration? Why would God sustain people just so they can suffer longer for eternity? As I said previously this not only cosmic overkill but totally against the nature of Christ who scripture says does not delight in destroying the wicked. Some say God gives them a resurrected body so they can burn with out dying. Wow, really? OK but the mind won’t last even if that is so.
When I am saying that we are not as far apart as you might think its because the process of destruction as mentioned in scripture for people in hell may be of a certain duration where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth but eventually the mind dies and is no more. Whether there is still a container for the soul I wouldn’t know. So in a very real sense the punishment is eternal. This position is not in conflict then with eternal torment and death as described in both the Catechism and the Bible.
 
I
  1. Second death means just that “death”, total annihilation, non-existence.
Thanks for posting again.

What you propose to me is a second death of the body, but the* first* for however else we exist. It is a first death in that regard.

Why is it better for the son of perdition never to have been born, especially if he is made non existent like all other unrighteous. Why did Jesus single his punishment out ?
Darkness or Blackest darkness as described in Jude refers to death. The worms imagery used by Jesus combined with the garbage dump known as Gehenna could easily be understood by people of the day where criminals bodies were dumped is a place where nothing lives.
Well the worm lives there, gnawing at what is being consumed,forever.
Weeping and Gnashing of teach refers to how people condemned to hell will feel and react when thrown into hell. (Do they have to be weeping and gnashing their teeth for all eternity? No)
It is all assumption to the length of time spent regretting or weeping etc.I would not suggest time heals this either. That only happens now, where hell and heaven, their kingdoms, are intertwined temporarily.
  1. How long would one’s mind stay intact if the eternal fire torments one in hell for say a few thousand years (assuming time is still linear). Can you imagine the mental illness that would ensure after only a few hours, let alone days, weeks, years and ultimately forever? There would be nothing left of the mind in a very short period of time.2. Wouldn’t some organizing force have to keep them alive, at least mentally and emotionally so they can suffer for an eternal duration?
What is a thousand years, as a day? And are we not fearfully and wonderfully made, yet quite deceitful, saying maybe we can take more than we know. Still, good point for we will reap the whirlwind that we sowed into. It also does say insanity denies the existence of God.
but eventually the mind dies and is no more. Whether there is still a container for the soul I wouldn’t know.
I thought the mind and soul are the same, but not sure. And where does spirit fit in? God is a spirit and He made us in His image,spiritual.
 
Why wouldn’t hell be never ending torture? Ultimately IMO people choose to go to hell; however there is a weeping and gnashing of teeth because those who chose to go to hell never foresaw or thought that they would suffer, they never believed that the punishment fit the crime that they have committed. But that is because hell is so completely and utterly devoid of mercy and divine love. God isn’t the one doing the torturing; that’s Satan’s job. We still have recourse to His mercy and can do our lighter penances on this earth… or we can choose not to. If you do not want an afterlife surprise, you might as well do what you gotta do.
 
I used to the word torture when arguing this point because that’s how many people define torment. Actually to be more accurate to the scripture and catechism “torment” should be used, it is less dramatic but is similar. Hell is not intended to be pleasant.

I have outlined my position clearly in other posts but due to the numerous posts it probably got lost in the bantering back and forth with others, but to respond directly to your question and we may not be as far apart in our understanding as you might think when all things are considered. My position is this;
  1. Second death means just that “death”, total annihilation, non-existence.
  2. Fire deals with the process of death. (Now we don’t really know exactly what this process is since it is a metaphor and is intended to teach about a process of destroying souls that are not flesh and blood so it describes something that we cant’ fully understand in our reality. Fire is probably the best way to understand it.)
  3. Darkness or Blackest darkness as described in Jude refers to death. The worms imagery used by Jesus combined with the garbage dump known as Gehenna could easily be understood by people of the day where criminals bodies were dumped is a place where nothing lives.
  4. Weeping and Gnashing of teach refers to how people condemned to hell will feel and react when thrown into hell. (Do they have to be weeping and gnashing their teeth for all eternity? No) There is enough scriptural and Catechism text to support this position.
But it becomes clearer when one considers hell from a common sense point of view. Consider the following regarding hellfire;
  1. How long would one’s mind stay intact if the eternal fire torments one in hell for say a few thousand years (assuming time is still linear). Can you imagine the mental illness that would ensure after only a few hours, let alone days, weeks, years and ultimately forever? There would be nothing left of the mind in a very short period of time.
Now we are getting somewhere with clear positions!

Torture conjures the image of someone causing pain to another directly. God does not do torture. All he did was prepare a place for Satan and his angels and his supporters who willingly chose to go to such a place/state. I can be tormented by something but it need not mean by another being.

Annihilation is not Church teaching. Have you been taught, by someone authorized by the Church, that this is doctrine? Have you been taught that the second death is annihilation for the souls as well as for Satan and his angels? As far as I know annihilationism is subscribed by certain Protestant groups only. Annihilation is at odds with scriptures that prescribes Satan and his angels and evil doers with eternal punishment. If something doesn’t exist, you can’t punish it. It is the simplest of logic. If you can’t punish it, then you can’t have eternal punishment. If you say all in the lake of fire is annihilated to non-existence, then there is no need for eternal fires since there will be no one around eventually. But that is not scripture. Scripture tells us that the punishment is for eternity. Which means hell will never be empty.

What do these punishments feels like? I don’t know what eternal fires feels like, no one has ever came back to tell us. We do not know what deprivation of God feels like, what is the wrath of God.

cont…
 
Wouldn’t some organizing force have to keep them alive, at least mentally and emotionally so they can suffer for an eternal duration? Why would God sustain people just so they can suffer longer for eternity?
When I am saying that we are not as far apart as you might think its because the process of destruction as mentioned in scripture for people in hell may be of a certain duration where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth but eventually the mind dies and is no more. Whether there is still a container for the soul I wouldn’t know. So in a very real sense the punishment is eternal. This position is not in conflict then with eternal torment and death as described in both the Catechism and the Bible
Like in many things that God created or acted, we do not know how he did it. I do not know how long the mind stays intact under punishment of hell fire. There is no sense in the 2 of us arguing whether the minds of people in hell remain intact or not. It doesn’t matter. They are there of their own choosing. And that’s that. What kind of mind does one have in heaven or hell? Earthly mind? Spiritual mind? Hellish/satanic mind? That really is a moot point. My vote (which counts for nothing) goes to satanic mind since that is the company one has chosen. We do not know how the immortal soul react in those conditions. Simple answer would be unpleasant. To what degree, no one knows and no one has a meter calibrated to measure that. You are imposing a human physical reading into it, as if what we experience on earth has some resemblance in hell. I don’t think that is warranted.

You obviously have a number of questions why God do certain things. But to conclude that God couldn’t, shouldn’t have done certain things because we don’t like it and/or we are unable to comprehend his ways, only prove a point. We do not know how he thinks, we do not know what divine justice is, nor divine mercy. Therefore we shouldn’t assume for Him what he meant. We have his revelations about hell, which is in summary form, eternal fire, eternal punishment, eternal separation from God. Based upon his words, hell is eternal torment. Let us just stick with that and not extrapolate novel outcomes of annihilation and non-existence.

God does not delight in the death of any one and yet justice must be done. Vengeance is mine, I will repay,says the Lord Rom 12:19. You can not use common sense in hell. If they have any sense, they wouldn’t be there in the first place.

Whether there is some form of force to keep them alive? I won’t say alive because it depends on your definition of life. Keeping them in existence? Sure. God has been keeping everything in existence. After all he is Existence and omnipotent. There is nothing he can not do. What is eternity? It is not time-based. It is timelessness. There is no longer or shorter time in eternity. It is a division of sheep and goats in eternity. You need to get out of time based thinking in hell or heaven. I used to think what do people do everyday in heaven or hell. Later I came to realise there is no time at either place. Just existence, in bliss or torment.
 
Annihilation is not Church teaching. Have you been taught, by someone authorized by the Church, that this is doctrine?
.
You say this with confidence but there is no official Church teaching against it. I posted the Catechism references earlier and as I said before it uses the same language as the scriptures. Rather than debating the semantics of symbolic language endlessly, how about we just use the portion of the scripture that is direct so I can more clearly understand your meaning on why ultimate annihilation is not a proper understanding of what happens to the fallen in hell.

Matthew 10:28 (DRA)
28 And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell.

So, in the words our our Lord, how do you define destruction of both soul and body in hell? The Lord isn’t using symbolic, hyperbolic and parabolic language here. Does destruction mean something different? Your thoughts?
 
Thanks for posting again.
What you propose to me is a second death of the body, but the* first* for however else we exist. It is a first death in that regard.
I was thinking of the soul here for second death not the physical body we have here on earth. Unless you mean a resurrected body that is thrown into hell?
Why is it better for the son of perdition never to have been born, especially if he is made non existent like all other unrighteous. Why did Jesus single his punishment out ?
I see your point. You are seeing a parallel with pre-nonexistence (before we are born) with annihilation which would appear to make Jesus’s statement void. but I don’t believe so. Torment still exists with the process of annihilation where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Well the worm lives there, gnawing at what is being consumed,forever.
Remember this is metaphorical language. When Jesus’s word are read with an understanding of the geography of ancient Jerusalem, the culture and what was happening at the time the reference to the worms becomes more clear.
I thought the mind and soul are the same, but not sure. And where does spirit fit in? God is a spirit and He made us in His image,spiritual.
I am assuming mind spirit and soul are all part of the same thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top