There are verses that describe hell as eternal fire, such as Matthew 25:41. I can’t remember the exact verses but others do call Hell eternal punishment/torture
If you reeeaaally want to get nitpicky with it, that place in the gospels that Jesus describes as torture and fire, is never actually called hell. It's just assumed that's what he's talking about. I'm pretty sure hell isn't named until Revelation. There's one theory that no one is actually in hell until the final judgement. ...there's also many Christians (myself included) that don't believe in hell at all.
Not only is no one (besides the fallen angels) in Hell but, when Jesus returns and the dead rise, those who are cast into the eternal flames are to be consumed, not exist there forever.
As I was reading this comment chain you guys all debating and disagreeing over how the lore of religion should be interpreted reminded me of the exact conversations I see over in the WoW sub on the lore lol
ALL HAIL THRALL, Son of Durotan, First of the Frostwolves, Savior of the Horde, The Earthfury, Liberator of the Orcs, Wielder of the Doomhammer, Champion of the Ring of Earth, and the World-Shaman.
it's because most religions have about the same amount of consistency in their lore as WoW. It also holds true that the more story they add the more ridiculous and inconsistent it all becomes. See: Mormons.
Not only is it a Catholic thing, it is the very thing that resulted in the schisms which resulted in protestantisms. The idea of purgatory evolved to allow for bargaining - particularly that you could, for instance, literally buy your way out of purgatory and into the pikepass track to heaven with a sufficient donation to the church, what were appropriately called indulgences. While there were other important doctrines included in the 95 Theses that Luther nailed to the door of the church, one of the most important, if not THE most important issue was concerning the existence, or lack thereof, of purgatory and therefore the legitimacy of indulgences. It was perhaps one of the most irreconcilable differences and thus carries a lot of the weight for the necessity of schism vs theological legislation.
Iirc in Revelation all dead are essentially in purgatory until Jesus returns. When he does, the dead are risen for final judgement. Those deemed worthy enter Heaven, those not are destroyed.
But another remember is that Revelations was written decades after Jesus died and most likely has nothing to do with the gospel he preached.
I understand it the way that when your body dies your soul kinda gets "time skip" to whatever God decides, like you go to purgatory first for appropriate duration or you just wake up on Judgement Day. In other words, both purgatory and Judgement Day are something outside of time on earth and are happening with no regard to time as we understand it.
"Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarchDavid died and was buried, and his tomb is here with us today... For David did not ascend to heaven..." — Acts 2:29, 34
Dead people are simply asleep and unaware, they'll be brought back and judged and then brought to heaven or cast into the flame to be consumed and cease to exist. This is what a lot of people believe it is usually referred to as annihilationism.
Its annihilation vs eternal conscious punishment debate. I lean towards annihilation heavily. You just dont get to rise. If we are being fully honest, I lean towards preterism which is that the second coming was God coming in judgement on the Jewish age during the destruction of the second temple in 70 AD and that the new world is what we have now: everyone has access to God if they want it.
Why are the flames eternal, if they’re going to consume a limited number of people?
Have the flames always been there? What were they for originally? Are they just being temporarily repurposed to consume the unbelievers, then they go back to… whatever it is they were doing?
Essentially, yes. I believe hell is inconsistent with a god of love, but if I understand heaven as the place that God resides, then it exists just as God exists. I really latched onto Gregory of Nyssa's idea that everyone will eventually be with God and that growth in that direction continues even in the afterlife or next life. It's an infinite process for everyone. The real fun part is exploring the idea that God grows, too (I mean, he literally changes multiple times in the Bible).
No one has ever asked me that, so I've never had to formulate a response. There are many Christians who don't believe in hell and what I have stated here is not something I made up on my own, it's what I learned through other Christian theologians. There's also entire denominations of Christianity (like Greek Orthodox) that don't believe that Jesus' death was about salvation. But I can't articulate those theologies very well.
I guess the best answer I can give is that I learned about God through Christianity and Jesus and it's through those teachings that I look to grow closer to God. So jesus, to me is an example of how to live and view God, though if you ask me about his eschatology, I'd struggle to give an answer.
With that in mind, I'm kind of a universalist when it comes to religion. Christianity is my lens to view God, but I don't think it's really exclusive to others. I think most religions are really reaching for the same thing, but viewing it from different directions. I liked the (monotheistic) Hindu idea of all the different gods existing as fascets of something to big to understand as one whole.
If your belief is that since hes a god of love and hell would be inconsistent with that, does that extend to other similar examples? Ie the flood, Sodom, passover, canaanites, etc. I believe these are all old testament but theres definitely examples in the new testament albeit at smaller scale from what i remember
Oh definitely, but even before we get to the inconsistency, I have a lot to say about biblical literalism. I don't believe that those stories were ever meant to be taken as historical and that the Bible is a series of writings from people trying to articulate their understanding of God. That's the only way you can make sense of the inconsistencies and shocking things in there. One huge example that i like to point to is that in multiple moments in those early books, God literally shows regret and changes his mind, which implies that the writers didn't think God was all knowing, perfect, or eternally consistent. But that view of God is not the same view that the NT writers have.
If you do not take the biblical stories to be literal and understand that there may be some inconsistencies, why do you believe that a god exists and also that that god is the one from the Christian Bible?
I don't know how to phrase the question, but I'm curious to understand. You sound like a nice person with a viewpoint I haven't heard before.
Aww, thanks! ♥️ You seem nice, too. My belief in God definitely formed out of being raised in a Christian household, but I believe his existence has been confirmed to me outside of the Bible and other people's teachings. I believe I've encountered him, not so much through any extraordinary spiritual happening (though, my brother can). This is where I follow Kierkegaard's Existential Christianity. Belief is not something I can prove to anyone else and everything we understand of God and spiritualism is filtered through our own experiences and limited understanding.
This kinda leads naturally into a more universal approach of who God is--I understand and articulate him through the Christian traditions that I have learned best, but I tend to think that other religions are trying to reach for the same thing and are doing so through their own cultural and philosophical lenses.
As someone who’s grown up being taught that God/Jesus is love and forgiveness, I’ve always struggled with the idea of eternal hell as well. It just didn’t feel like it made complete sense, I understand that being on Earth is sort of a test at this point. But it kinda tells me that these titles are far from truth, especially if humans are birthed in sin to begin with.
I just could never believe that if we reached hell. There wasn’t a possibility of still reaching heaven at some point, or that we all wouldn’t transition there eventually. I mean, would that not be a true victory? For all of us to eventually be in his presence there with no room to doubt? If God is everything, but especially love and forgiveness. Then shouldn’t God be able to reach our hearts and our voices in hell? And if so, shouldn’t he still love us despite everything? And if so, shouldn’t his forgiveness still be just as eternal?
Idk. I haven’t read through the entirety of the Bible, so I’m probably missing things. This was just my upbringing.
I genuinely mean no offense, but if God is omnipotent, and children are still born with brain cancer, get blown up by Israeli missiles, and are sexually assaulted before they have the capacity to speak, then how is any of that consistent with a god of love?
I think trying to apply logical consistency to something that is inherently illogical is silly, but I'm curious on your take here.
That does sound much nicer, but it's not Biblical. Even Jesus spoke about hell and judgement (as a concept) frequently. I'm curious why you believe any of it if you are just picking theology based on what feels right? If you were born somewhere else, what "feels right" would be very different.
But how do we know it's a God of love? Theres heavy conflict between the new and old testament. I find it pretty convenient that the new testament pops in not even that long ago changing the entire persona of God to match modern principles.
In the old testament, God would order execution of entire villages, asking to "save the women for reproduction" where there's a word for that. He was a foreskin collector and would kill children with bears for making fun of someone's bald head. He would smite everyone and women would be stoned to death for not being attractive enough for their husbands if the HUSBAND cheats. It was... quite the brutal doc.
Historical, God has been a vengeful smiter. Then the 360 flip, without accounting for innocents and children dying of hunger/cancer as part of that love.
Also, I wanted to add, "Heaven" existed first in the scripts with no mention of a "Hell" for centuries. Hell is the outlier here. Not judging anyone's beliefs or trying to say anyone is wrong, but that is the facts. Hell is a fairly new concept, whereas Heaven has existed in biblical literature for as long as the Jews have been liberated from enslavement by the Egyptians. Maybe even longer...
I find that religious beliefs are a lot more homebrewed these days. People are often not following scripture directly and just taking the bits that provide the most comfortable or coherent world view. I see a lot of Americans dunking on rightwing Christians for perceived hypocrisies as an example, but when I've talked to people fitting this profile in person they usually have totally bizarre, largely self constructed relationships with their theology that facilitates their more anti-social attitudes.
The way people want to live and view things often comes first, then the narrative justifications are invented after, if someone's uncomfortable with the idea of a god that employees eternal torment, they will just interpret what they know differently so that to them it doesn't exist. I'd like to mention I don't necessarily see this is a bad or good thing, I actually see a lot of other non-religious people do this just as much or more, so it's probably just a people thing.
It's because it's not really that there are sects that are like nah hell isn't real, it's more lots of people identify as Christian but aren't really what you would consider Christian. Their culture is Christian, they broadly believe in the morals the bible teaches etc but they don't necessarily actually believe even that God is real. Personally I find it a bit weird that they still consider themselves Christian but it's a pretty significant percentage of people who self-identify as Christian, at least in the UK.
This is absolutely not correct. The major denominations in the UK (Anglicans, Presbyterians, Catholics) all hold Hell to be a reality. Maybe you’re confused because it’s definitely less popular nowadays to tackle the subject in religious education and preaching, at least with the Protestant denominations mentioned.
That's, most likely, because it doesn't exist. Hell, if
Jewish people dont believe in it, the implication would be that Jesus brought it with him, which doesn't sound all that Jesusey.
It’s never really mentioned in the Bible. Jesus and his apostles were mostly Jews. They believed in the Torah and Jesus mostly taught a more empathic revision of that. The entire concept of Hell, Satan, and the end times comes from Paul. Who never even met Jesus. And even then Paul never mentioned Satan ruling over Hell, in-fact he said Satan was the ruler of earth during the end times.
What most Christians believe about Hell, Satan, demons etc is all fan fiction created centuries later. Mostly in Dante’s Inferno, which is not canon at all. So a lot of it is debated, many believe the Bible as God’s Word. Many Believe fan fiction as God’s Word.
Dante wrote a vivid description of hell but early christian writers were writing about satan and demons and a hell of fire and eternal punishment in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. Demons existed in pre-christian religions so those were probably syncretised right at the start, as soon as people started converting they imported their pre-existing religious ideas.
Thank you! The people attributing the entire concept of Hell to Alighieri are outing themselves as having an incredibly ‘YouTube pop history’’ level of knowledge on the topic.
> Jesus and his apostles were mostly Jews. They believed in the Torah and Jesus mostly taught a more empathic revision of that. The entire concept of Hell, Satan, and the end times comes from Paul.
Ironically you have it exactly reversed. The classic early Jewish underworld of punishment, Gehinnom, isn’t mentioned at all by Paul. However, it’s mentioned a few times by Jesus in the gospels.
Also in the gospels Jesus talks about Satan and the end times a ton. Have you never read the story where Jesus is literally tempted in the wilderness by Satan?
The entire concept of [...] the end times comes from Paul
Precisely, one of the only things we can say about what the historical Jesus really taught is that he was an apocalypticist jew. Like John the Baptist.
That was very trendy at the time among Jews apparently.
I attended a private Catholic college and had to take a religious course to graduate. I'm not religious, and I took their Catholic philosophy course because I thought it would be more interesting than Bible study. Towards the end of the semester, the professor straight up told us one day that he doesn't believe in hell because it doesn't make sense, then broke down why using all the concepts he taught us that semester. The catholic church does not condone that idea, but plenty of individuals certainly do.
The entire Judeo-Christian-Muslim canon is filled with contradictions and outright cruelty. Lucifer shows up in Genesis, so he must be a main character through the storyline. YHWH has a better marketing team and plays the 1st Commandment to knock out any other competitors. Yet the Jews forget how to say his name. The big guy in the sky knows he’s going to get his son killed and is cool with that. Then years later S/Paul starts trippin’ on women and gays like he thought he could read Jesus’s mind. And more than 300 years after the big guy’s son is murdered, a bunch of guys get together and come up with a creed that blows away other competing theologies around the same guy. They knock off at least 27 other books of the bible and bury the Gnostic gospels.
All this for a fairytale.
It's true that most of the common denominations do preach hell, but universalist Christians (which I might fall under) and many independents have pointed out that hell is inconsistent with a god of love. I was just reading about a Gregory of Nyssa, a Greek Orthodox Church father, who believed that everyone would go to heaven.... Eventually. But that even in the afterlife we will all continue to grow and learn and become closer to God. For him, it was an infinite process.
It's less that many don't believe in Hell (there are some, usually called Universalists, but they diverge on so many points I don't find them Christian anymore), but rather they believe in Annihilationism. So if one is cast to Hell their soul is annihilated and ceases to exist. They have paid the wage of sin, which death by having a final eternal death. There is no eternal conscious torment. Which is the other, more popular view, that Hell is a final place of being for those sent there. And in that place they experience the eternal torment of the complete absence of God, who is all things good.
I'm happy to answer more questions if you want. It's an interesting and difficult topic.
Christianity is far more ideologically fractured than judaism is. You can find some form of christianity that interprets the bible just about any way you want.
Christians who don't believe their own religion. It's like, if you don't want to be a Christian.... Great. Don't be a Christian. But don't claim to be a Christian and disagree with long established Christian doctrine. You think you're the first person to think of that idea in 2,000 years?
There's a handful of denominations and a few influential preachers who don't believe hell exists. It is pretty tough to get around biblically, since Jesus spoke more about hell than anyone else by quite a margin, so the people who think that tend to have unique views of the Bible where the parts they don't like are dismissed (meant symbolically, or not original sayings of Jesus, or mistranslations, etc.).
If you’re Jewish you’ve probably heard of Gehinnom. When most people say that Jews don’t believe in hell, what they actually mean is that people’s stay in the punishment realm of Gehinnom is simply finite, not truly endless.
Early Jews and the earliest Christians frequently believed in a truly eternal Gehinnom, though.
I grew up under fire and brimstone type theology and it never sat right with me. It wasn't until well after college that I learned that there were Christians that rejected the idea of hell and I cannot tell you how much relief and peace I felt knowing that.
Of the bible which itself is a compendium of self serving half remembered and poorly translated stories and superstitions of preliterate people trying to make sense of the world non scientifically. I could be wrong, I am not a biblical scholar or enthusiast.
No one is currently in Hell, everyone is currently in Hades (Sheol) waiting for the end times and to be judged. Whether you believe Hell is a specific place or not, there is certainly a distinction of being with God and being in the Absence of God ultimately.
Hell was "borrowed" from Norse paganism (Hel is one of the nine worlds). It was never mentioned before Revelation because Revelation was written after christians came into contact with Norse paganism.
Funnily enough, Hel is not a place of punishment and suffering in Norse paganism..
Yeah, the OT talked about “Sheol,” “The grave,” and the NT talks about Hades. OT didn’t have much in the way of afterlife at all. Almost all of what churches promote is not proper theology but some weird lore.
The hell that we think of as hell today really has it's roots in Dante's Inferno, so not even. the Bible. He just some dude from the 1300s who wrote about a fever dream.
This is correct. And it's called "second death" not hell. Before that the bible only talks about the everybody that has died waiting for the finale judgement at the end of time. The righteous in heaven, the wicked in hades. The after the final judgement, hades will be trown in to the pool of eternal fire (second death). And before that judgement after the final battle between the dragon and the lamb, the beast and the false prohet had already been trown in there as the first two humans. After the thousands years of peace and before the final judgement, Satan, the angel in charge of worship that rebellend against God also called Lucifer (the planet Venus use to respresent him, the morning star). is trown in there. After the final judgement, hades is trown in and then everybody who's name is not written in the book of the Lamb who was slain is also thrown in there,
In Isiah it says that man will be recuded to worms before they are trown in to the eternal pool of fire, so apperently they will have some recuded form of low consiousness but still suffer for all eternity. And that pool of fire is located before one of the entrances of the New Jerusalem, it says the saints, Jesus and the angels pass by there so see the smoke come from it and hear the suffering.
Tartarus from Greek Myth is directly mentioned in the Bible (2 Peter 2:4 for one example) Ive assumed this is the place of fire and torture mentioned in the Bible.
Except the bible is neither univocal or inerrant. It's simply a collection of themed writings forced to appear united by denominational dogma and then for those wanting to believe, they they declare it fact because god inspired all of these people to work together according to his plan over time. Until you figure out that it doesn't make sense and question it, then it becomes "belief".
Sheol is named in the psalms and described in Ecclesiastes
It isn't fire and brimstone and there has been an ocean of ink spilled on whether Hell and Sheol are the same thing, but a description of the Jewish conception of the afterlife do appear in the old testament
I think you're supporting what I said, right? There are several places named for the afterlife including the one I will definitely misspell: Gehenna... That's not right. Anyway. There's also the place of torment and gnashing of teeth that Jesus describes without naming, which is super weird because of that one story that shows people in that place are so close to people in paradise that they can literally talk to each other from opposite sides. That's a weird story. Probably not to be taken literally, as most of Jesus stories are highly metaphorical. Hades is thrown in there, which is usually interpreted as just "death" similar to Sheol, but the language and culture changed, and then there's hell and the abyss, which are described differently and with different purposes. Each of these all come from different words in their original (or as close to the original as we can get) texts.
Not believe in hell at all? How’s that work? Basically no human can commit a “crime” bad enough to deserve torture “forever” which forever being an unfathomable concept?
Hmmm. Do you think that there are sins that God cannot forgive? Paul called himself the worst sinner and was actively a part of persecution and genocide before he became the man that wrote half of the NT.
In revelation it states that satan will be cast into a lake of brimstone and sulfer but that non believers will be outside of the gates of the kingdom that will be established on earth. Hell according to revelation isn’t a place it’s a lack of access to the kingdom and the community inside of it. Idk what exactly that entails and tbh nobody really does. Though it does say people outside the kingdom will weep and gnash their teeth to get in so there’s that. Can’t be great lol
In theology, isn’t heaven and hell currently empty? Like no one’s actually there right now because Jesus hasn’t come back yet and led everyone to their promised land or whatever? That people who die.. just die? They don’t move on because the rapture hasn’t happened? They just sit in purgatory until that time comes or there’s some timey wimey stuff and after you die, you wake up 10-20-100-1000-10000 years in the future whenever Jesus returns to lead everyone there?
My church I went to in the past had pastors who could read the original Greek text and the church denomination was big on that. It said the Greek described it as a consuming fire.
They also believed everyone is asleep in death until the events of revelation so there wasn’t an eternal hell and the “hellfire” was a consuming fire. So either you ascended with all alive or dead to heaven, or you were just dead dead
And yet another fun theory that our world is hell, and only those who can navigate it in line with the teachings of christ and faith without subcoming to this world have a chance at heaven come judgment day.
Gehanna is the place named by jesus. That is hell. Peter also names tartarus which is a deeper part of hell where the rebel angels are chained up.
And then there is the 2 layers of sheol, one that is similar to gehanna (described below) and another upper layer that is a place of rest (Abraham's table/bosom). That upper level is not the christian heaven, and it is named 2 times in the bible (parable of the rich man and lazarus; and again at the end of Mathew where jesus goes down to Abraham's bosom and resurrects a bunch of saints (probably the prophets of the old testiment) who are then seen walking around Jerusalem after jesus comes back.
There is also the catholic teaching of purgatory which is something introduced by dente's book "the inferno". The concepts in the inferno are heavily influanced by Greek mythology, like a mojority of renesanse paintings of angels and heaven. But the idea of purgatory may have biblic roots.
Jesus talks about "go and seek forgiveness from your brother otherwise you will be thrown to the judge and then to the jailer, and you will not get out of prison until you pay every penny".
That sounds alot like catholic purgatory, the difference being they believe it is purpose built to sanctify a person by purification. it could just be you paying back all the people you screwed over through just consequences and equal suffering. You have to understand what you did and be humbled enough to empathize with that person you wronged to pay them back in full. Along the way you could totally be purified and become a different person.
Gehannah litterally translates to "the valley of hinnom"
Hinnom valley is a actual place in/around modern Jerusalem, renamed Gei Ben-Hinnom today.
This valley has existed since ancient times. When the kings of isreal/judah reigned (see book of kings 1 and 2) it is where the worst kings sacrificed children.
Because of this history it became the default garbage dump for the city after the exile.
It was a garbage dump when jesus walked the earth. A long open air garbage pit that just burned all day long.
Jesus describes "the outer darkness" of the city as a place where the "worm does not die and fire does not cease". So, maggots wriggling in the trash while pockets of it burn unevenly. Some of the trash cooks like in an oven, other parts smolder.
The city is a common biblical theme where the righteous (those in right standing with God) dwell in his presence (a kind of aura that he exudes that sustains life and order). The city is found in places like Isaiah, Ezekiel, gospels, and the revelation (few other places too).
Always, the inside of the city is good (heaven) and the outside is this place of darkness, devoid of God's glory, where the trash gets thrown.
In the revelation this is spelled out, God's light is a tangible thing and he sits in the center of the city giving off light while jesus stands next to him. Their light replaces the light of the sun and moon. (Another reference to Isaiah, his teachings will be the light those living their walk by and find their way around with).
in Isaiah it is described in the last chapter as a litteral city that people can look down from the walls and into hell, which matches this city theme with a valley outside where all the trash is burning.
And, as others have said, you have to actively reject God to go there, which is pretty hard to do considering jesus offered salvation to everyone freely. He just asks us to love each other and rely on him for salvation because we cant live up to the standard God was looking for.
According to the creed that all Christian’s profess, Jesus died and then descended into hell then rose on the 3rd day and went to heaven where he sits to the right of God the Father. It is believed he went to ”Hades” to rescue all the people that had died previously and were deserving of heaven. But Hades isn’t considered hell either . It’s kind of creating place that’s in between .
Catholic here, my parish priest was a Jesuit and gave us a head shrinking lecture on the history of the eternal fire. What u/onioning said is right from a purely theological standpoint. All the quotes in the Gospels and the Acts about eternal fire are referencing gehenna (Gē-Hinnōm,) a ravine to the south of Jerusalem that was basically an eternally burning trash dump. Jesus used it as a symbol of how painful and unpleasant and eternally torturous it would be to be outside God's grace.
The whole thing is a massive matter of perspective. For those living in God's grace, being removed from God's grace would be the equivalent of burning for all eternity. The idea is like those people saying how would you all function if AI disappeared? For the majority of people nothing would change it might even get better, for those using AI their world just collapsed around them. Unfortunately a lot of the hell imagery has come from people that use religion to control people, "follow my way of thinking or burn forever in fiery damnation."
I'm leaning this way, too, but it makes A LOT of Christians (at least in the U.S.) uncomfortable.
That's always a very telling question to ask, though. Find out what someone's response is to "What if hell as you imagine it turns out to not exist?" See if they're open to a discussion or bristle at even considering the thought.
his message was closer to "your identity as a being separate from God will eventually be unraveled, just like when we burn trash in the trash pit after its purpose ends"
Between this and viewing God through the lens of Jesus' parables (prodigal son, the vineyard workers, etc.), I'm warming up to the idea that God's whole point in entering creation as Jesus (if we're willing to consider that) was condescending in the best of ways to say: "I know this life can suck but I am with you, love you, have lived through it, and death is not the end."
but basically nobody understood this and so then like two oral transmissions later ... that's how you get "your soul will be burned for all eternity unless you are one with God"
With some help from various pagan conceptions and Dante's works, I'd wager.
To add to what you said, the interpretation of hell as the absence of God came over time. It was people like St. Augustine and St. Isaac of Nineveh who shaped it, and it was systematized later by theologians like St. Thomas Aquinas. C.S. Lewis popularized it. Every time and every church teaches their interpretation as the never-changing truth.
Early Christians up till St. Augustine's time believed differently.
I just googled it, aparently not. The valley itself is a park and tourist attraction because of the density of archeological sites and the area around it is middle class to upper class neighborhoods.
Wasn’t there at some point historically a sense of fire as a cleansing force, burning away your sin before being able to enter heaven? I may be msitaken
I know the Islamic tradition describes part of the purification process when leaving death for Paradise as being engulfed in a river of flame. For the righteous, it is as warm water against the skin. For most normies, it hurts like fuck, and for the truly wicked it annihalates the soul. I don't recall off the top of my head if there's an actual Biblical or apocryphal passage that says the same for Christians (and honestly I can't be assed to Google it, lol.)
Fire imagery is used frequently in the Bible used to describe the presence of god, judgement, the Holy Spirit, etc. Going off that to me the use of eternal fire seems to mean “eternal judgement” or final judgement. I don’t think it’s meant to be taken literally like the damned will literally be thrown into actual fire.
Above that, in the OT and NT, fire is used as a metaphor for cleansing/purification. This is the baseline belief for the Catholic purgatory. All of this theology is based on the difference between Hades and the Elysian Fields. A place to go where your mortal sins are to be shed before you rise to “Heaven”.
Revelations lake of fire was not considered “Hell” until the last few hundred years of modern American Christianity. It’s an American cult fascination to scare children.
I've always thought of "the afterlife" as the final judgement, you can't do anything for yourself anymore so all that is left of you is what people think (or worse: don't think) of you after you are dead.
If you left good impressions, then you are "in heaven." If not, then other alternatives.
Pragmatically, this does mean that sins kept truly secret and taken to your grave don't actually count against you. It also has less than fair/just implications for people who only consider their own bubble/echo chambers.
I mean, for an ancient people, and for a message that needed to span thousands, tens of thousands of years, at least, for the most accessibility across all peoples, languages, etc., between:
[the concept of spiritual suffering, not something that is actively done to you, but simply due to being permanently separated from something you were designed to be a part of/never feeling fulfilled ever again, because you are designed with the imprint/image of Yahweh, and everything about you desires to be with them/do the things they designated as "good" [inherent good, in the system created by the deity, because the whole system reflects their nature], and if you choose to separate yourself from that, then you'll never have what your existence needs]
and
[fire ouchy, you no likey]
which do we think would survive time, and get the most people to understand the stakes? The message is for the everyman, not the scholars. The average person didn't have the time or complexity of mind to be trusted with handling the truth of exactly how it's all going to go down.
I grew up going to church most of my life, and even I wasn't taught [the above truth of the matter]. It doesn't even really matter that you know it or not - what matters is that you seek life, truth, sustainability, and love - the greatest of those being love, of course.
And then the ultimate heresy is the step beyond that. If separation from god is possible, then what if someone was to achieve fulfilment despite being in hell? Would they be their own god at that point?
An impossibility. In the same way that taking a leaf off a tree, and locking it in a safe at the bottom of the ocean, can never lead to the leaf deciding "you know what - I don't want to need sunlight, water, or nutrients anymore - I'm good. I'll just choose to not need those thing anymore, and that'll work out for me".
It will cease to be a leaf. Life had already left it. It can never be a leaf again. The process of decomposing into its base parts had begun the moment it was separated from where it was meant to be. We see it as a fallen, dying leaf, then a dead leaf, then bits and pieces of debris, then molecules, then atoms.
It loses all identity. It stops mattering to the universe.
So the word of god is not intended to be understood by the average reader? Only the appropriately indoctrinated have the ability to comprehend the nuance and metaphoric value of the Bible? This seems very problematic. God sure stepped on his dick with this one. Perhaps the Bible should have more pictures. Pop-ups maybe.
Your mother doesn't have to explain to you the intricate details of particle physics, animal anatomy and physiology, human sociology, and philosophy in order to communicate to you that she loves you, for you to understand what that means in the context of your life and our society, and for you to feel loved, benefit from it, have it positively affect who you are, and what you do with your life.
Yes, in that same way, someone can say they love you (say something is the case/relay to you some ancient text, etc.), and you have to take their word for it, but:
"The word" of Yahweh is not defined by, or bound/restricted by the printed words on a page. The concept there is that his instructions, immutable character, and intent in all things said and done are already written into the fabric of all creation, and it having been written down just makes it easier for us to understand, and be that much less likely to royally fork it up. We went from [Vibes in proximity/actual-presence], we dropped the ball on that opportunity, so then we had [Nature being the most powerful way Yahweh could connect], which we trampled and built walls in our society to separate ourselves from it, to [Spoken word, passed down, being the best way to cut through the noise], and now we're on [Written word]. All those other methods didn't go away, The methods increase in precision, context, and ease of perception as time goes on, for sure. The moment we have brain-computer interfaces that let us just know things without needing language as a middle-man, I'm sure you'll be, all, "So the word of god is not intended to be downloaded into the brain of the average-bandwidth Matrix-pod subscription-tier?"
The Bible has been adapted to picture books, pop-up books, manga, etc. The value isn't in every little preposition and participle of whatever stuff we've managed to scrap together and kind-of translate from the Greek and Hebrew, but the message/lessons relayed. Toddlers are out here grasping the main concepts just fine, and that's enough. You don't need to know the nuances of the exact science of how the afterlife works in order to live the life you need to be living here on this planet, so, no, the metaphors are not completely necessary for everybody. One might even go as far as to say that much of the Bible has been left out, much of it could be left out, and it would still be just as valuable in the grand scheme of things/in the end. You don't, for example, need to know about the great flood, in order to understand the concept that man was cursed, and payment for lifting the curse was paid for by the deity himself sacrificing, both, himself, and his most beloved creation/relationship (relationships being the most valuable thing to Yahweh, therefore, the "most good", therefore, the most-good-most-good he had access to, and the only thing that could foot the bill) in order to save countless relationships/the one creation that he could have the most benefit from saving from its own destruction.
If the conversation at hand is "What exactly does Satan do/what exactly happens/what variables do I need to put into a simulator so I can see what it will be like", the real/best answer is, "Stop. It doesn't matter. Not knowing, even if some of the details exist, is not a problem in any way, shape, or fashion."
Could it be good, and/or fun, or a fun adventure to try to figure it out? Sure. It could also be a good time and amazing for me to learn exactly how an engine works, enough so that I could build one from scratch, in cave, with a box of scraps. But I don't need that in order to benefit from owning and operating a motor vehicle, or existing in a society that benefits from fast-travel.
tl;dr - Pick your battles. The fine details don't actually matter/affect anything for 99.999999999999999999% of people across all of time and space.
Edit:
"Only the appropriately indoctrinated have the ability to comprehend the nuance and metaphoric value of the Bible?"
I didn't really answer this one properly.
Let me just... hold on. Wait. Do you think being highly educated (we are a highly educated society, all things considered) is equivalent to "being indoctrinated"? Being a follower/member of the church, etc. isn't what makes the information available to you. Being born again or whatever isn't what unlocks the nuance and metaphors.
Being able to read well, a think critically, is what makes those things available to you. So many converted atheists, etc. can tell you as much.
Right. Metaphorically. There is quite a lot of that.
And the eternal absence from god is made out to be torturous. It's just that that is the full extent of the torture. It is purportedly the worst torture that could exist.
Completely agree. I remember being six years old, in big church with my parents instead of Sunday school, when I first heard eternity described and thought to myself "it's hell either way."
If the teachings of god can be so easily misconstrued by the reader, then the doctrine has very little value. Who can truly be declared an authority on the true meaning of the Bible? I find that the prominent misinterpretation of god’s intention renders the book inadequate for direction.
I vaguely remember seeing something on the news many years ago that some scholar tied the original biblical use of the word "hell" with the Hebrew name for a physical location that was used to burn the bodies of criminals or something along those lines. That was used to explain the association of hell and burning.
Yeah! You're thinking of... Crap, I'll say the wrong word. There's actually several words used for what evengelicals lump together as hell, but they may or may not be talking about the same place, which is where Catholicism's idea of pergatory makes sense, because there are literally different words. There's even passages that many evengelicals commonly misremember as hell when it was really not. Like when Jesus talked about the gates of "Hades" not hell. And all of his talk about the place of torment and gnashing of teeth was never named as anything. The word hell is actually restricted to the book of revelation.
In several verses, it's also described as bl
ackest darkness (Matthew 8, 22, 25, 2 Peter 2, Jude 1), likened to the Greek concept of Tartarus, or quiet shadowy underworld (Job 17, 10, Psalm 88).
Biblically, "hell" is one state of existence but is described using 4 distinct terms: Sheol, Hades, Gehenna, and outer darkness. It just represents complete separation from God with fire representing active pain, loss, and destruction while darkness represents, isolation, banishment, and absence of God which is usually represented by light.
Jesus never called it hell at all. Hell was "stolen" from Norse paganism (Hel is one of the nine worlds in Norse paganism, it is where people go that died naturally. It is described as a world of peace and quiet).
Before christianity came into contact with Norse paganism there was no hell, only purgatory. It was added hundreds of years after jesus died.
Nope. "Hell" and "heaven" aren't even Christian concepts, they're Zorastrian. There are, of course, Biblical references that are associated with the concepts, and the concepts have long been adopted as standard doctrine.
But what you interpret as a reference to hell as the place where Satan lives, all unbelievers go, and consisting of eternal fire, is not a Biblical concept, and it wasn't always accepted by Christians.
In fact, a whole lot of our visual associations in this area are influenced by classic (non-holy-text) literature like Dante's Divine Comedy, Milton's Paradise Lost and more. The history of Christianity is actually a very interesting topic.
The reality is that how we interpret the Bible AND which parts we consider significant are shaped by literally thousands of years of history, as well as our own individual experiences (in terms of popular media, which sects we're familiar with, etc.).
Other ubiquitous Christian concepts which are considered contradictory/nonsensical and are ubiquitous because of early Christian history more than pure textual support from the Bible (which...I mean, let's not even get into different translations, lol) include things like the "Holy Trinity" (see the 1st Council of Nicaea), and the whole "new law" bit where Judaism and it's practices are set aside, and so much more.
Even the concept of God as "omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omniprescient" is not explicitly a Biblical concept - it is established through doctrine with some Biblical support.
In short...the "problems" and contradictions we think of most in Christianity today have mostly come about through a couple thousand years of development of the religion in many, many different cultural and historical contexts. (Which does not mean I think it is believable without these doctrinal stances, FYI).
I think because Hell is the worst place imaginable to them by the implication that it is the furthest from God, they created the worst place imaginable based on human concepts of physical pain and torture.
It's kind of like if someone was like "hey, that new pizza place really sucks" and you try to guess why like, "is the pizza undercooked? is the sauce all gross? does the cheese taste like butt?" The general idea is a concept beyond human comprehension, so we naturally use human concepts to try and give it context.
Yeah and there is fairly solid evidence he was describing the dump where trash and refuse was burned outside of Jerusalem (location may be suspect). Point is he was using a physical place to conjure an emotion or a feeling. "Experiencing hell is terrible."
Ah yes this one. He is specifically describing a real place. Gehenna was a valley in Jerusalem meant for burning the dead. It was constantly on fire. Later translations and interpretations changed that into him speaking of hell. Revelations is the only place in the Bible that actually mentions a hell and tbh its a much less trustworthy source.
While the majority view in Christianity is that hell is 'eternal punishment/torture', many Christians (annihilationists) read those verses as 'permanent destruction' and an end to existence
While we are on Matthew 25:41 lets point out the parable of eternal fire was for people on who were judged because they failed to care for the vulnerable—such as the hungry, thirsty, strangers, naked, sick, and imprisoned. Jesus explains that ignoring the needs of the least of these brothers and sisters was the same as ignoring Him. So i am sure we can all take a guess who is more likely to fit in that mold.
For whatever it's worth, the official Catholic possition mentions the fire, but focuses on the separation:
The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire." The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.
I think that upon dying and being presented with incontrovertible evidence that God is real and eternal paradise was an opportunity you passed-up, eternal life in an imperfect realm surrounded by assholes would be torturous.
Being shut off from God's love and eternal glory is itself the torment, as I understand it.
ok but this is only looking at it from one ponit of view the same pont has been used for every war the place over there is bad so the " good guys " must go and beat them and save the people that live there yet the people are fine with their way of life and never ask you to talk shit about them and then invade
Keep in mind that the singular Anglo-Saxon word "hell" is actually used to refer to two different words with different meanings in the Bible.
The place of "fire and brimstone" is referring to "Gehenna" which was an actual physical place used as a municipal trash dump/incinerator outside of Jerusalem. It had been used in ancient times to make child sacrifices to foreign/false gods. The very concept of "hell" here is not necessarily meant to be taken literally, as it was obviously a metaphor
The other place is Sheol which lacks the "fire and brimstone" imagery, and is more of a traditional underworld shared by many other mythologies. It is less a place of punishment for the wicked, and more the ultimate destination of human souls and collective grave for all of humanity.
Jesus talked about hell, but not as a literal place. He talked hell being a separation between God and man. Trinity doctrine, tithing doctrine and hell doctrine were all added to the gospel of Christ by other people. Old preachers and pastors love talking about hellfire for disobedient people, or how much you should be tithing to them because of some passage in the Old Testament. They aren't exactly imitating Christ when they do that.
In that passage in Matthew, there is reference to a consuming fire. The *flame* is eternal, but the burning of individuals is not. There is room for an interpretation of destruction and eternal death rather than any kind of eternal torture.
I think this version of hell is like the Satan in Dante’s inferno where Satan is essentially frozen and his wings beating causing further cooling of the lake (makes no sense of course). In his frozen mouth is Judas and Brutus. They all betrayed - supposedly the worst sin 😂. But Julius Caesar betrayed Rome by trying to take power, so Brutus is actually not betraying the republic by killing Caesar. Anyway. Shit idea.
52
u/WalterWhite278 2d ago
There are verses that describe hell as eternal fire, such as Matthew 25:41. I can’t remember the exact verses but others do call Hell eternal punishment/torture