In the New Testament, “hell” is the translator’s word of choice for three different Greek terms: gehenna (Strong’s G1067), tartaroo (Strong’s G5020), and hades (Strong’s G86). It is by means of these words that the Lord God communicates the most sobering and terrifying truth in the Bible. All three terms refer to a place where wicked men go after they die. None of them has a pleasant meaning. Both tartaroo and hades come from Greek origins and refer to a “subterranean region, doleful and dark, regarded by the ancient Greeks as the abode of the wicked dead, where they suffer punishment for their evil deeds” (Strong’s G5020). Gehenna or gehinnom is Jewish, and its meaning is even more horrifying. It “was originally the valley of Hinnom, south of Jerusalem, where the filth and dead animals of the city were cast out and burned” (Strong’s G1067). Gehenna means “valley of lamentation,” so named “from the cries of the little children who were thrown into the fiery arms of Moloch.” After king Josiah, the Israelites so abhorred their child sacrifice that they used the valley as a place to burn refuse and the dead bodies of criminals.
These terms are warnings. Just as the valley of Hinnom was a real and terrible place, so God has prepared a more real and more terrible place to punish the wicked after death. These are the images Jesus intends to evoke when he warns us to “fear him who, after he has killed, has authority to cast into hell” (Luke 12:5).
Unlike many Christians, the fear of Hell did not play a large part in my conversion. But since that gracious day, the gravity of Hell has steadily increased in my mind. In fact, without Hell, the God I have loved would not be loving at all. How could God be just without punishing the crimes that men and women have done against him? How could God be holy without purging his creation, his tabernacle, of the vileness of sin? But most of all, Hell is the reality that Jesus endured on the cross. Oh how horrendous Hell is! But even the tortures of Hell could not keep Jesus from delivering us. Even Hell could not discourage his love. He entered Hell for us, only to exit alive.
For those who hate God, wouldn’t heaven be hell?
I’ve always been baffled by the need for a place designed solely for the torture and punishment of sinners when heaven would be such a place for the unrepentant.
But if hell is intended to destroy those who have rejected God, it serves a purpose heaven cannot.
I’m not sure if heaven would feel like hell to those who hate God. The Bible does not answer that question. As God’s creatures, we have to be very careful not to base our understanding of His revelation on what “seems” reasonable to us. It might seem unreasonable that God would design a place solely for the torture and punishment of sinners. It might seem like heaven would do a fine job at that too. But God himself denies these speculations. Observe:
“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world…Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” (Matthew 25:34, 41 ESV)
We see here:
1) a sharp distinction between the “kingdom” which was designed (“prepared”) for the righteous and the “eternal fire” which was designed (“prepared”) for the cursed,
2) the drastic dichotomy between “come” and “depart”,
3) “eternal fire” which punishes for eternity (as opposed to the common annihilationist position which rejects the obvious meaning of “eternal”).
The same passage ends with the following:
“And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” (Matthew 25:46 ESV)
The two instances of “eternal” here are both from the exact same Greek word (Strong’s G166: without end, never to cease). We can only conclude that the punishment of the wicked lasts equally as long as the glory of the righteous. Both are eternal.
I suppose I’m what you call an “annihilationist” because I don’t believe in the immortality of the soul. I certainly don’t believe men can live forever apart from God, the source of life.
While Strong’s 166 “aiónios” is usually translated “eternal” in English, its Greek root is “aión” (Strong’s 165), which means “an age”. “Aiónios” is the adjective form of the word, meaning “like an age” (or “age-ish”, if you prefer). So the meaning of “eternal” might not be as obvious as it first seems.
Also, the term “eternal punishment” is subject to interpretation. Some might consider extermination to be an eternal punishment because its consequences are eternal, not because the torment itself is unending. There is very little to be found in Scripture regarding torment, and “punishment” is a much more nebulous word, perhaps intentionally so.
You mention the Valley of Hinnom where the residents of Jerusalem burned refuse and, apparently, criminals, and that this very real place was used by Christ to describe the punishment of the wicked. You may note that very few of the criminals originally punished there are still burning. Whether we should infer from this that the suffering of the wicked is similarly brief is difficult to say, but it it reasonable to assume that if Christ intended us to make the leap from the very real, brief punishment inflicted by the Valley of Hinnom to the image of unending punishment (something we do not have a very real example of), He would have made sure to say as much. As it is, we must speculate.
I realize this debate has existed for centuries, so I doubt we’re treading a new ground here. But it never hurt a man to do his homework!
And, when it is eternal punishment on the line, this might just be the most important homework we ever did. Honestly, I’m really glad you are bring up these objections! I would not have been forced to look so intently at this subject if you hadn’t. Here is the result of my study:
When you say you “don’t believe in the immortality of the soul,” I assume you mean that you believe in “conditional immorality.” To my knowledge, SDAs hold to the eternal existence and happiness of those who are saved.
To say that “aión” (Strong’s G165) means “an age” is simplistic. Indeed, it *can* mean “an age”. But, in fact, it has three possible translations (depending on context, http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?strongs=G165):
1) for ever, an unbroken age, eternity
2) the worlds, universe
3) period of time, age
If you tally up how many times each possible translation is used in the New Testament, you get:
1) translated to “for ever” 80 times
2) translated to “worlds” 39 times
3) translated to “age” 3 times
I’m no Greek scholar, but if you want to claim that any random instance of “aión” refers to “age”, then you’ve got less than a 3% chance of being right.
What about “aiōnios”? It appears 71 times and only 3 of them could *possibly* be interpreted to mean something besides “eternal” or “everlasting”.
If odds have anything to do with it, then they are highly in favor of “eternal” meaning exactly what it says.
But this is the least persuasive argument for eternal, conscious punishment. A classic text is Luke 16:19–31 where Dives (the rich man) is clearly experiencing conscious, prolonged torment in hell.
But most of all, to deny eternal hell requires the rejection of all Biblical teaching on the subject of life and death.
Is death merely extermination or ceasing to exist? If so, then God lied when he told Adam and Eve that they would “surely die” on the day that they ate of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (Genesis 2:17). They obviously did *not* die physically. They were not exterminated. They kept on existing, even for hundreds of years. God had a different idea in mind when he said “die.” The New Testament clearly explains that “in Adam all die” (1 Corinthians 15:22). This simply cannot mean extermination. It means separation from God. It means being the enemy of God.
Likewise, “life” in the Bible has a two-fold meaning. The aforementioned Scripture says that “in Christ shall all be made alive.” This cannot refer (only) to physical life. We are already physically alive.
Just as Christ spoke of a second life (or “second birth”, John 3:3), Revelation also speaks of a “second death” (Revelation 21:8, etc.). Amidst the numerous texts referring to eternal, conscious punishment, this doctrine of the “second death” cannot budge! If the meaning of “death” in the “second death” has any connection to the rest of Scripture (which it must), then it can only be referring to an even deeper, more horrible separation from God than the first death (which, we have seen, did not involve extermination).
Is the second death merely extermination? Here are only a few verses:
In the texts already quoted, why would God use the same word “eternal” to describe both “eternal life” and “eternal death” if “eternal” meant something entirely different in each case? To infer that would require significant corroborative evidence since it is not in the slightest communicated by the text itself.
Hebrews 6:2 does not say “eternal death.” It says “eternal judgment.” Does it not intentionally couple these two words? “Judgment” by itself would be sufficient to communicate a temporal action. But it is combined with “eternal” to rid the reader of any notion that the judgment is, in fact, temporal. This is a different kind of judgment than we are used to seeing.
Jude 21 says that Sodom and Gomorrah “serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.” Notice the present tense of “undergoing” (the Greek: “are exhibiting”). Those wicked men are presently being punished as an example to this day.
A very explicit text is 2 Thessalonians 1:9, which says that the wicked “will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might.” Surely the word “eternal” is extraneous if “destruction” means only extermination (since that’s what the word “destruction” already means).
Unless we invent new meanings for old, well-defined words, we cannot construe these texts to mean anything but never-ending, conscious judgment.
And we have not even begun to speak of the eternal aspects of mankind due to his bearing of God’s image, and other deep doctrines that have indirect bearing on this discussion.
From the first death, God provides a way of escape. But from the second death, there is no way of escape.
I appreciate your willingness to sharpen me as well.
I suspect that “aión” is translated according to the beliefs of the translators, whatever they may be.
You’ve obviously done quite a bit of research, while I am rather unfamiliar with the beliefs of mainstream Christianity toward hell. Would you mind clarifying a few things about your doctrine of hell?
1. What is the devil’s role in hell? Is he in charge of the torment of the wicked, or is he too being punished for his wickedness?
2. Was Christ’s intent in these statements to reverse the position of the Jews on death in favor of the the Greek’s philosophy?
3. If men go to heaven or hell upon death, was Christ an exception (see John 20:17)? What about Lazarus and others who were raised from the dead? Did they return to Earth after being elsewhere while dead?
4. When Christ describes the dead Lazarus and the daughter of Jairus as being “asleep”, does He mean it ironically?
5. When Paul says that the dead in Christ will rise first when Christ descends from heaven (1 Thessalonians 4:16), do you believe that the righteous dead return from heaven and rise in their earthly bodies, or is Paul speaking metaphorically?
6. Did the righteous who died before Christ conquered sin go to heaven when they died? If so, were they justified even though atonement for their sins had not yet been paid? (Or did animal sacrifices sufficiently atone for their sin?)
7. If the dead are alive in either heaven or hell, are mediums genuinely able to communicate with them?
These are a few of the questions that come to mind when I question my beliefs about hell and death. Your thoughts are appreciated.
Wow! Those are really good and profound questions. I will have to study some of these questions before I can give even a basic response (i.e. I don’t currently know how to answer some of them). I will do my best to address each of these. If I can’t find a good answer, then I’ll say so.
Would you mind if I addressed some of these in their own blog posts? This website gets virtually no traffic, but there’s still a slight chance someone might find this stuff useful. As usual, your probing comments will be eagerly anticipated.
Glad I could inspire you. I look forward to your thoughts.
Note that #6 is an interesting question even for Adventists in light of Enoch, Elijah, and Moses.