Written by a Jew who converted to Christianity. Great insight from a Jewish perspective

dermdoc said:

---

And I believe every time Jesus spoke about "hell", it was to a Jewish audience. I think it is very important to understand how His audience would have understood what He was saying.

Here is a glimpse of the book

---

Purgatory?

Turns out he was reformed and now strongly opposes reformed theology. I remember him from One for Israel.

Seems like a combination of purgatory and annihilationism like the seventh day adventists believe.

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

Turns out he was reformed and now strongly opposes reformed theology. I remember him from One for Israel.

Seems like a combination of purgatory and annihilationism like the seventh day adventists believe.

---

There are a lot more than just 7th Day adventists who believe in annihilationism.

dermdoc said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

Turns out he was reformed and now strongly opposes reformed theology. I remember him from One for Israel.

Seems like a combination of purgatory and annihilationism like the seventh day adventists believe.

---

There are a lot more than just 7th Day adventists who believe in annihilationism.

---

I listened to this podcast some years ago:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rethinking-hell/id549641668

It was a perspective I had never considered.

Do you have a good handle on which denominations subscribe to this view of hell?

The original paschal lamb I think I've read was sacrificed not in the temple, but by being shoved into a (seemingly) forever burning trash pit in Jerusalem, Gehenna? The fiery Gehenna in any case is a bit of a biblical mystery/debate, though I think the midrash's/jewish history would support a more orthodox/integrated relationship between body and spirit (in a sacramentalist way) than perhaps modern reformed/protestant theology might allow/agree.

It evolved into eating it (in an unusual way) in honor of the history of (jews/people of Israel) being enslaved, likely.

Quote:

---

A bevy of explanations has been offered for these various biblical rites attached to the paschal lamb and its sacrifice. Some scholars regarded the injunction to have the lamb roasted as a distinction from ancient pagan spring festival rites, when meat was eaten either uncooked or half-broiled. Non-Israelites and uncircumcised ones were precluded from participating in the feast of the paschal lamb because the occasion was one of reaffirming God's covenant with the Israelites. The symbolism of the eating of the paschal lamb with the matzah and bitter herbs was a reminder to the Israelites of an enslaved past.
Interestingly, the smearing of blood on the doorposts did not become a part of the Passover pageantry. Since all paschal lambs were slaughtered in Jerusalem once the Temple was built, the Israelites would have been too far from their homes to smear blood on their doorposts.

Hag HaMatzot: The Feast of Unleavened Bread

The feast of unleavened bread was an agricultural festival that celebrated the beginning of the grain harvest when an offering of the first fruits was made and unleavened bread eaten. This feast coincided with the feast of the paschal lamb. The principal feature of the feast of unleavened bread is stated in the Bible: "Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread." The unleavened bread commemorated the speed with which the Jews had to leave Egypt and thus became symbolic of Israelite redemption.
According to Rabbi Abraham Bloch, the main distinction between the Hag HaPesach and Hag HaMatzot lies in the historical area that each seeks to reflect. The Hag HaPesach reenacts the events of the 14th of Nisan (the pre-exodus period), and the Hag HaMatzot marks the actual departure from Egypt of the Israelites, which was concluded with the crossing of the Red Sea (exodus period). Both are component parts of the same festival, the festival of Passover.

---

It's pretty fascinating history, imho.

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

Turns out he was reformed and now strongly opposes reformed theology. I remember him from One for Israel.

Seems like a combination of purgatory and annihilationism like the seventh day adventists believe.

---

There are a lot more than just 7th Day adventists who believe in annihilationism.

---

I listened to this podcast some years ago:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rethinking-hell/id549641668

It was a perspective I had never considered.

Do you have a good handle on which denominations subscribe to this view of hell?

---

One of the reasons I am non denominational. I do not believe in ECT hell. I believe the Orthodox view that we are all in the presence of God and for those who have been faithful and love Him it is bliss and for those who have rejected Him it is torment.

I lean toward a purifying fire where all things are made right and all people become what God intended them to be.

And this actually glorifies Sovereign God the most in my opinion. He is good and can not be stopped in making all things new.

Edited to add that I know myself and my family are not suffering whatever "hell" is.

I will say this, as someone who has been a Christian for about 58 years, if Christians really believe in ECT hell they sure do not act like it.

It would and should consume them to spend 24/7 trying to do anything to keep anybody from eternal torment. And they don't.

But of course, if ECT hell exists, Jesus, Paul, and others did not spend 24/7 trying to keep people from "hell". The Biblical model of evangelization by Paul is totally different than traditional Western evangelism which frankly, is not in the Bible anywhere to my knowledge.
And as I have posted before, since I have lost the idea of traditional ECT, I am very bold with my faith. Have dramatically increased my Bible reading and prayer time.

But most importantly, my relationship with the Lord has become authentic.

And I want to make clear these are my views and testimony. I understand a lot of Christians will disagree.

nortex97 said:

---

The original paschal lamb I think I've read was sacrificed not in the temple, but by being shoved into a (seemingly) forever burning trash pit in Jerusalem, Gehenna? The fiery Gehenna in any case is a bit of a biblical mystery/debate, though I think the midrash's/jewish history would support a more orthodox/integrated relationship between body and spirit (in a sacramentalist way) than perhaps modern reformed/protestant theology might allow/agree.

It evolved into eating it (in an unusual way) in honor of the history of (jews/people of Israel) being enslaved, likely.

Quote:

---

A bevy of explanations has been offered for these various biblical rites attached to the paschal lamb and its sacrifice. Some scholars regarded the injunction to have the lamb roasted as a distinction from ancient pagan spring festival rites, when meat was eaten either uncooked or half-broiled. Non-Israelites and uncircumcised ones were precluded from participating in the feast of the paschal lamb because the occasion was one of reaffirming God's covenant with the Israelites. The symbolism of the eating of the paschal lamb with the matzah and bitter herbs was a reminder to the Israelites of an enslaved past.
Interestingly, the smearing of blood on the doorposts did not become a part of the Passover pageantry. Since all paschal lambs were slaughtered in Jerusalem once the Temple was built, the Israelites would have been too far from their homes to smear blood on their doorposts.

Hag HaMatzot: The Feast of Unleavened Bread

The feast of unleavened bread was an agricultural festival that celebrated the beginning of the grain harvest when an offering of the first fruits was made and unleavened bread eaten. This feast coincided with the feast of the paschal lamb. The principal feature of the feast of unleavened bread is stated in the Bible: "Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread." The unleavened bread commemorated the speed with which the Jews had to leave Egypt and thus became symbolic of Israelite redemption.
According to Rabbi Abraham Bloch, the main distinction between the Hag HaPesach and Hag HaMatzot lies in the historical area that each seeks to reflect. The Hag HaPesach reenacts the events of the 14th of Nisan (the pre-exodus period), and the Hag HaMatzot marks the actual departure from Egypt of the Israelites, which was concluded with the crossing of the Red Sea (exodus period). Both are component parts of the same festival, the festival of Passover.

---

It's pretty fascinating history, imho.

---

Thanks, will try to check it out.

I belive that the human mind has as much ability to understand Hell as it does quantum entanglement.

Hell is an eternal concept, and we are limited in our understanding of it by our temporal objective brains.

I belive that hell is a bad place to be, and I don't want to be there. Trying to understand much more than that about Hell is likely unproductive mental mastrobation.

BusterAg said:

---

I belive that the human mind has as much ability to understand Hell as it does quantum entanglement.

Hell is an eternal concept, and we are limited in our understanding of it by our temporal objective brains.

I belive that hell is a bad place to be, and I don't want to be there. Trying to understand much more than that about Hell is likely unproductive mental mastrobation.

---

Agree. But when you have theologically trained pastors preaching with assurance that unless you say a sinner's prayer, walk an aisle, etc. that is what you get. That is not Biblical. None of those things are in the Bible.

How often did Jesus talk about "hell"? Paul never did. Peter only talked about it concerning angels in Tartarus which is pagan Greek mythology.

God is so much better than that,

@dermdoc:

How has no longer believing in ECT hell motivated you to be bolder in sharing your faith?

Are you familiar with disciple making movements and discovery Bible studies? These seem to me to be much more in line with how disciples were made historically.

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

@dermdoc:

How has no longer believing in ECT hell motivated you to be bolder in sharing your faith?

Are you familiar with disciple making movements and discovery Bible studies? These seem to me to be much more in line with how disciples were made historically.

---

Because I needed to know that God loved me and everybody, And ECT hell makes God into something I believe He is not.

If you don't agree that is fine,

dermdoc said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

@dermdoc:

How has no longer believing in ECT hell motivated you to be bolder in sharing your faith?

Are you familiar with disciple making movements and discovery Bible studies? These seem to me to be much more in line with how disciples were made historically.

---

Because I needed to know that God loved me and everybody, And ECT hell makes God into something I believe He is not.

If you don't agree that is fine,

---

I was genuinely curious. I think that makes perfect sense. I see merit in both positions and was not trying to debate you. Thanks for your explanation.

You are welcome

Forgive me if this has already been addressed Doc, but when he writes, "the soul gets used to being in a body" does not that sound like Gnosticism wherein the soul is trapped in a body?

PabloSerna said:

---

Forgive me if this has already been addressed Doc, but when he writes, "the soul gets used to being in a body" does not that sound like Gnosticism wherein the soul is trapped in a body?

---

I don't agree with everything he says but believe his general concept of "hell" is correct.

If God creates a human and ultimately does not refine His creation, seems like a non Sovereign God to me.

And I am very impressed by the lack of criticism of my views. I have been guilty of attacking others for theirs but that is in the past.

dermdoc said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

Forgive me if this has already been addressed Doc, but when he writes, "the soul gets used to being in a body" does not that sound like Gnosticism wherein the soul is trapped in a body?

---

I don't agree with everything he says but believe his general concept of "hell" is correct.

If God creates a human and ultimately does not refine His creation, seems like a non Sovereign God to me.

---

If angels are also a creation of God, would He not want to refine them as well? I ask because then certainly He would attempt to refine Satan. Yet, He allows Satan to be separated from Him.

My conception of Heaven/Hell is more "childlike" (Matt 18:3) in that Heaven/Hell are not actual, physical places but rather a state of being. To be in Heaven is to have our soul be eternally in the presence of God. To be in Hell is to be eternally separated from Him. (We Catholics have a 3rd option of purgatory, but I don't want to derail the tread ).

Just imagine a being a child walking in a crowded space; Being in the presence of your Father would give you a sense of love, protection, and peace. Being separated from Him would bring a sense of fear, loneliness, and being lost. It is we who choose to walk with Him or run away from Him. We are separated (find ourselves in Hell) not as a punishment but rather because we chose not to walk with Him. To that final point, Jesus gave several examples:

"20 The young man *said to Him, "All these I have kept; what am I still lacking?" 21 Jesus said to him, "If you want to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me." 22 But when the young man heard this statement, he went away grieving; for he was one who owned much property." -Matt 19: 20-22

"52 Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, "How can this Man give us His flesh to eat?" 53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. 54 The one who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56 The one who eats My flesh and drinks My blood remains in Me, and I in him. 57 Just as the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, the one who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. 58 This is the bread that came down out of heaven, not as the fathers ate and died; the one who eats this bread will live forever."

59 These things He said in the synagogue as He taught in Capernaum.
60 So then many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, "This statement is very unpleasant; who can listen to it?" 61 But Jesus, aware that His disciples were complaining about this, said to them, "Is this offensive to you? 62 What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh provides no benefit; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit, and are life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray Him. 65 And He was saying, "For this reason I have told you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."

66 As a result of this many of His disciples left, and would no longer walk with Him."

-John 6:52-66

Your comment of God wanting to refine us brought to mind my Lenten reflection of this morning on the writings of Josemaria Escriva in his book "The Way":

756
We are blocks of stone that can move and feel, that have a perfectly free will.
God himself is the stone-cutter who works on us, chipping off the rough edges, shaping us as he desires, with blows of the hammer and chisel.
Don't let us try to draw aside, don't let us want to escape his will, for in any case we won't be able to avoid the blows. We will suffer all the more, and uselessly and instead of polished stone, ready for the work of building, we will be a shapeless heap of gravel that people will trample contemptuously under foot.

Text from point 756 of chapter The will of God of Josemara Escriv's book The Way. Link: https://escriva.org/en/camino/756/

FIDO95 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

Forgive me if this has already been addressed Doc, but when he writes, "the soul gets used to being in a body" does not that sound like Gnosticism wherein the soul is trapped in a body?

---

I don't agree with everything he says but believe his general concept of "hell" is correct.

If God creates a human and ultimately does not refine His creation, seems like a non Sovereign God to me.

---

If angels are also a creation of God, would He not want to refine them as well? I ask because then certainly He would attempt to refine Satan. Yet, He allows Satan to be separated from Him.

My conception of Heaven/Hell is more "childlike" (Matt 18:3) in that Heaven/Hell are not actual, physical places but rather a state of being. To be in Heaven is to have our soul be eternally in the presence of God. To be in Hell is to be eternally separated from Him. (We Catholics have a 3rd option of purgatory, but I don't want to derail the tread ).

Just imagine a being a child walking in a crowded space; Being in the presence of your Father would give you a sense of love, protection, and peace. Being separated from Him would bring a sense of fear, loneliness, and being lost. It is we who choose to walk with Him or run away from Him. We are separated (find ourselves in Hell) not as a punishment but rather because we chose not to walk with Him. To that final point, Jesus gave several examples:

"20 The young man *said to Him, "All these I have kept; what am I still lacking?" 21 Jesus said to him, "If you want to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me." 22 But when the young man heard this statement, he went away grieving; for he was one who owned much property." -Matt 19: 20-22

"52 Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, "How can this Man give us His flesh to eat?" 53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. 54 The one who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56 The one who eats My flesh and drinks My blood remains in Me, and I in him. 57 Just as the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, the one who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. 58 This is the bread that came down out of heaven, not as the fathers ate and died; the one who eats this bread will live forever."

59 These things He said in the synagogue as He taught in Capernaum.
60 So then many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, "This statement is very unpleasant; who can listen to it?" 61 But Jesus, aware that His disciples were complaining about this, said to them, "Is this offensive to you? 62 What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh provides no benefit; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit, and are life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray Him. 65 And He was saying, "For this reason I have told you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."

66 As a result of this many of His disciples left, and would no longer walk with Him."

-John 6:52-66

Your comment of God wanting to refine us brought to mind my Lenten reflection of this morning on the writings of Josemaria Escriva in his book "The Way":

756
We are blocks of stone that can move and feel, that have a perfectly free will.
God himself is the stone-cutter who works on us, chipping off the rough edges, shaping us as he desires, with blows of the hammer and chisel.
Don't let us try to draw aside, don't let us want to escape his will, for in any case we won't be able to avoid the blows. We will suffer all the more, and uselessly and instead of polished stone, ready for the work of building, we will be a shapeless heap of gravel that people will trample contemptuously under foot.

Text from point 756 of chapter The will of God of Josemara Escriv's book The Way. Link: https://escriva.org/en/camino/756/

---

That is similar to what CS Lewis thought. Because if free will, we choose the presence of God or the absence of God. So we would send ourselves to "hell".

This is where I am as well. I love the Orthodox understanding of heaven and hell. (btw, this is not Babylon Bee, but the sound theological Orthodox "Be the Bee" account, which is a phrase coming from St. Paisios)

dermdoc said:

---

And I am very impressed by the lack of criticism of my views. I have been guilty of attacking others for theirs but that is in the past.

---

You called? Kidding!

10andBOUNCE said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

And I am very impressed by the lack of criticism of my views. I have been guilty of attacking others for theirs but that is in the past.

---

You called? Kidding!

---

I laughed.

This book has one of the most clear and concise discussion of different atonement views I have read. Worthwhile to read and not laborious.

And I am definitely a Christus Victor believer. And discovered C S Lewis was a Christus Victor guy too.

Derm, I'm just seeing this thread, and I'm a little surprised of your thoughts on this one. Hell is a very difficult topic to digest as I see it from my human eyes. One of the biggest revelations in my walk was a very, very detailed study of the word HOLY. It was a literal eye opener in my walk. Separateness/Apartness. Jesus talked a lot about "hell". It seems to be a literal place. What happens there, I'm not exactly sure. The main thing to me seems to be separate from God/Jesus/Holy Spirit. That would be hell - conscious torment to me. As far a conscious "physical" pain and torment, I'm not sure. I do not believe everyone is refined and made new and now with God. That would seem to make Jesus's death meaningless. I choose to believe that Jesus does not want anyone to spend an eternity in a place called "hell". So I strive to share with others the saving grace of my God.

Agilaw said:

---

Derm, I'm just seeing this thread, and I'm a little surprised of your thoughts on this one. Hell is a very difficult topic to digest as I see it from my human eyes. One of the biggest revelations in my walk was a very, very detailed study of the word HOLY. It was a literal eye opener in my walk. Separateness/Apartness. Jesus talked a lot about "hell". It seems to be a literal place. What happens there, I'm not exactly sure. The main thing to me seems to be separate from God/Jesus/Holy Spirit. That would be hell - conscious torment to me. As far a conscious "physical" pain and torment, I'm not sure. I do not believe everyone is refined and made new and now with God. That would seem to make Jesus's death meaningless. I choose to believe that Jesus does not want anyone to spend an eternity in a place called "hell". So I strive to share with others the saving grace of my God.

---

It is okay to disagree. This is not a salvific topic. And saints have disagreed on these topics.

I think it all comes down to one's view on atonement and why Jesus actually came. To my knowledge, there are no Bible verses saying Jesus came to save us from hell.

As far as atonement, if you are a penal substitutionary guy then you will more than likely believe in ECT hell. And that view of atonement is fairly recent.

Early Church believed in the Christus Vicot or ransom atonement where God allowed Satan to kill Jesus not knowing that Jesus would rise from the dead. So death, sin, and Satan are defeated.

The character of God is vastly different in these two atonement models. There are more atonement views also. Strongly recommend reading the book I linked. If nothing else, just read the atonement discussion. Discusses all the atonement theories in a very easy to read form.

And also discusses the Jewish view of atonement which was eye opening to me. I had been way wrong at looking how the Jews viewed their animal sacrifices.

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Agilaw said:

---

Derm, I'm just seeing this thread, and I'm a little surprised of your thoughts on this one. Hell is a very difficult topic to digest as I see it from my human eyes. One of the biggest revelations in my walk was a very, very detailed study of the word HOLY. It was a literal eye opener in my walk. Separateness/Apartness. Jesus talked a lot about "hell". It seems to be a literal place. What happens there, I'm not exactly sure. The main thing to me seems to be separate from God/Jesus/Holy Spirit. That would be hell - conscious torment to me. As far a conscious "physical" pain and torment, I'm not sure. I do not believe everyone is refined and made new and now with God. That would seem to make Jesus's death meaningless. I choose to believe that Jesus does not want anyone to spend an eternity in a place called "hell". So I strive to share with others the saving grace of my God.

---

It is okay to disagree. This is not a salvific topic. And saints have disagreed on these topics.

I think it all comes down to one's view on atonement and why Jesus actually came. To my knowledge, there are no Bible verses saying Jesus came to save us from hell.

As far as atonement, if you are a penal substitutionary guy then you will more than likely believe in ECT hell. And that view of atonement is fairly recent.

Early Church believed in the Christus Vicot or ransom atonement where God allowed Satan to kill Jesus not knowing that Jesus would rise from the dead. So death, sin, and Satan are defeated.

The character of God is vastly different in these two atonement models. There are more atonement views also. Strongly recommend reading the book I linked. If nothing else, just read the atonement discussion. Discusses all the atonement theories in a very easy to read form.

And also discusses the Jewish view of atonement which was eye opening to me. I had been way wrong at looking how the Jews viewed their animal sacrifices.

---

Jesus came to give us eternal life. That to me means there must be something other than eternal life as an option - hell.

---

I don't believe this necessarily counters a more Orthodox view. I am assuming the disagreement is less on the reality of hell, and more on what actually constitutes "hell". Is it a physical place of eternal torment, or is it a state of being in the presence of God? I believe it is the latter.

PacifistAg said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Agilaw said:

---

Derm, I'm just seeing this thread, and I'm a little surprised of your thoughts on this one. Hell is a very difficult topic to digest as I see it from my human eyes. One of the biggest revelations in my walk was a very, very detailed study of the word HOLY. It was a literal eye opener in my walk. Separateness/Apartness. Jesus talked a lot about "hell". It seems to be a literal place. What happens there, I'm not exactly sure. The main thing to me seems to be separate from God/Jesus/Holy Spirit. That would be hell - conscious torment to me. As far a conscious "physical" pain and torment, I'm not sure. I do not believe everyone is refined and made new and now with God. That would seem to make Jesus's death meaningless. I choose to believe that Jesus does not want anyone to spend an eternity in a place called "hell". So I strive to share with others the saving grace of my God.

---

It is okay to disagree. This is not a salvific topic. And saints have disagreed on these topics.

I think it all comes down to one's view on atonement and why Jesus actually came. To my knowledge, there are no Bible verses saying Jesus came to save us from hell.

As far as atonement, if you are a penal substitutionary guy then you will more than likely believe in ECT hell. And that view of atonement is fairly recent.

Early Church believed in the Christus Vicot or ransom atonement where God allowed Satan to kill Jesus not knowing that Jesus would rise from the dead. So death, sin, and Satan are defeated.

The character of God is vastly different in these two atonement models. There are more atonement views also. Strongly recommend reading the book I linked. If nothing else, just read the atonement discussion. Discusses all the atonement theories in a very easy to read form.

And also discusses the Jewish view of atonement which was eye opening to me. I had been way wrong at looking how the Jews viewed their animal sacrifices.

---

Jesus came to give us eternal life. That to me means there must be something other than eternal life as an option - hell.

---

I don't believe this necessarily counters a more Orthodox view. I am assuming the disagreement is less on the reality of hell, and more on what actually constitutes "hell". Is it a physical place of eternal torment, or is it a state of being in the presence of God? I believe it is the latter.

---

Agree. And I believe God's presence is "Hell" at firsr for those who reject Him but ultimately all will be made new. God wins.

Agreed. After I went to a Wednesday night Presanctified Liturgy, I stopped by the church my family goes to and popped in on the youth group where my wife helps lead. They just so happened to be talking about "hell", and I was able to share this perspective with them. As you said, this just seems more consistent with what we know of the nature of God.

dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Agilaw said:

---

Derm, I'm just seeing this thread, and I'm a little surprised of your thoughts on this one. Hell is a very difficult topic to digest as I see it from my human eyes. One of the biggest revelations in my walk was a very, very detailed study of the word HOLY. It was a literal eye opener in my walk. Separateness/Apartness. Jesus talked a lot about "hell". It seems to be a literal place. What happens there, I'm not exactly sure. The main thing to me seems to be separate from God/Jesus/Holy Spirit. That would be hell - conscious torment to me. As far a conscious "physical" pain and torment, I'm not sure. I do not believe everyone is refined and made new and now with God. That would seem to make Jesus's death meaningless. I choose to believe that Jesus does not want anyone to spend an eternity in a place called "hell". So I strive to share with others the saving grace of my God.

---

It is okay to disagree. This is not a salvific topic. And saints have disagreed on these topics.

I think it all comes down to one's view on atonement and why Jesus actually came. To my knowledge, there are no Bible verses saying Jesus came to save us from hell.

As far as atonement, if you are a penal substitutionary guy then you will more than likely believe in ECT hell. And that view of atonement is fairly recent.

Early Church believed in the Christus Vicot or ransom atonement where God allowed Satan to kill Jesus not knowing that Jesus would rise from the dead. So death, sin, and Satan are defeated.

The character of God is vastly different in these two atonement models. There are more atonement views also. Strongly recommend reading the book I linked. If nothing else, just read the atonement discussion. Discusses all the atonement theories in a very easy to read form.

And also discusses the Jewish view of atonement which was eye opening to me. I had been way wrong at looking how the Jews viewed their animal sacrifices.

---

Jesus came to give us eternal life. That to me means there must be something other than eternal life as an option - hell.

---

I believe when we die, we are in an intermediate state. When Jesus returns, all men will be resurrected and will be judged for what they did in their life.

Believers will bypass the white throne judgement and be judged at the bema seat of the Lord. Their salvation is assured but they will be rewarded for what they did for the Kingdom.

Non believers will be thrown in the lake of fire which I believe is a purifying fire. I believe it will be punishment but corrective punishment. God will make all things right as He is sovereign.

There is the possibility of annihilationism with the fire but as God can not sin, I believe eternal conscious torment is not in His character.

From my reading of Scripture, the fire is eternal not the punishment except for maybe Matthew 25 46. But in that verse kolasis is used not timoria which suggests a refining process rather than punitive punishment.

To be honest, nobody knows with certainty. I believe most Scripture discussing this speaks of eternal fire. The question is whether that is a refining fire, an annihilating fire, or an eternal torment fire.

I do not believe what you believe about "hell" determines your salvation.

I believe we can be assured as believers we do not have to be concerned and concentrate on how we can serve the Lord in this brief life. Love God. Love your neighbor.

I do think the book I linked gives a Jewish aspect of the afterlife that I find interesting because Jesus was a Jew and primarily spoke to Jewish audiences.

Also, in my opinion, the author's summation of the different theories of atonement is very well done and easy to understand.

And this is just what I believe. If we disagree on this topic, I do not believe that means either of us are hell bound.

Gospel means good news. And this is truly good news for all men and needs to be shared.

---

Great post derm.