The Lake of Fire

The Lake of Fire (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Christian Doctrine

[Poll]

The Lake of Fire

The man or woman burns in a real, literal, physical fire for eternity.

68% (17)

The fire is symbolic.

24% (6)

The man or woman is destroyed by the fire.

8% (2)

Total Votes : 25

(last vote on : 9/15/2008 6:51:49 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

hunterj1 -> The Lake of Fire (7/10/2008 11:40:55 PM)
When a man or woman is thrown into the Lake of Fire after the judgment, does he or she burn in a real literal physical fire for all eternity or is the fire symbolic, or does he or she just get destroyed and cease to exist?

MyCatSmokey2006 -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/10/2008 11:45:16 PM)
I voted they burn in a physical fire because Jesus makes referrence to people being in "fire and brimstone."

Kath -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/11/2008 12:06:39 AM)
moving from General Faith to Christian Doctrine

MrFribbles -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/11/2008 2:49:10 AM)
Hm... I want to say it's somewhere between A and B. I believe there are degrees to the punishments of hell, just as there are degrees to the rewards of heaven. So, I don't think it'll just be a matter of flames of different temperatures. Is it possible that, just as every detail of heaven is not described, there are aspects of hell that are not fully explained? They are, of course, sufficiently explained for us to know that hell is a terrible place of very real, eternal suffering - but the exact nature of that suffering is not exactly known?

McFatty -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/11/2008 1:56:43 PM)
The Bible makes many references to the unsaved being "as though they never were", and also uses the word "destruction". I voted for choice number three.

MrFribbles -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/11/2008 2:21:57 PM)
quote: The Bible makes many references to the unsaved being "as though they never were" Could you provide a few references for that? quote: and also uses the word "destruction" Just because something is destroyed doesn't mean it ceases to exist. Jerusalem was destroyed in the past, yet it's still around.

McFatty -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/11/2008 2:34:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrFribbles quote: The Bible makes many references to the unsaved being "as though they never were" Could you provide a few references for that? quote: and also uses the word "destruction" Just because something is destroyed doesn't mean it ceases to exist. Jerusalem was destroyed in the past, yet it's still around. No problem on the first part. Obadiah 16, Psalm 37:10,20,35,36, Psalm 104:35, Psalm 59:13. There are many others which say "death", "perish", "destruction", etc, but people have changed the meanings of those words over the years into "eternal conscious torment", so I fear it might be futile for me to quote them here.

JimboFletch -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/11/2008 5:22:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: McFatty Obadiah 16, Psalm 37:10,20,35,36, Psalm 104:35, Psalm 59:13. There are many others which say "death", "perish", "destruction", etc, but people have changed the meanings of those words over the years into "eternal conscious torment", so I fear it might be futile for me to quote them here. You must be using the KJV for that. There was no teaching in the OT about hell. Where you find the word in the OT, it is the word that means the abode of the dead - which includes everyone whose mortal body has died. You have to go to the NT to learn about what we call hell.

McFatty -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/11/2008 5:27:07 PM)
I don't expect everyone to have the same understanding on this subject as I do. We all see things differently. The cool thing is that, for us, this subject really doesn't matter.

JimboFletch -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/11/2008 5:34:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: McFatty I don't expect everyone to have the same understanding on this subject as I do. We all see things differently. The cool thing is that, for us, this subject really doesn't matter. It is not a matter of a different understanding, you are simply wrong about the OT references. You may choose to remain so, but you will not find any Bible scholar to support your erroneous view.

McFatty -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/11/2008 6:16:11 PM)
Assuming something about my view isn't the way to go about it, I don't think. First, I am not using the King James Version. Second, those Old Testament references don't talk about hell, they talk about the wicked dead being "as though they never were". Nothing to do with a place. As far as the New Testament hell, it depends on which hell you're talking about. Are you talking about the Valley of Hinnom, because while that's a desolate place, gehinnom or gehenna isn't quite the horrible existence Dante talked about. It's simply a valley once used as a trash dump for the city of Jerusalem. In the original languages, there was absolutely no connection between the Valley of Hinnom and the lake of fire, though very many modern Christians believe they're the same horrible place.

MrFribbles -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/11/2008 7:51:20 PM)
quote: Obadiah 16 To me, this doesn't speak of an end of existence. It's prophecy, so it's difficult to take anything too literally. For example, it speaks of the nations drinking - is a great drinking binge part of our end-of-life beliefs? quote: Psalm 37:10,20,35,36, Psalm 104:35, Psalm 59:13 These Psalms seems to be addressing the wicked in this life, not in eternity. In your view, how are they speaking of eternity? Also, if hell is not eternal, why is heaven?

McFatty -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/11/2008 8:26:46 PM)
I don't see the relevance of your final question. In fact, I'm not sure I can answer it scripturally. I don't remember scripture telling why heaven was created or why it has certain attributes. You see the psalms as speaking strictly pre-death. I suppose they could be seen that way, but there is this also: so often new testament verses clearly talking about pre-death are used to "prove" the doctrine of eternal conscious torment. Again, I realize this is a very popular doctrine, so my arguing it here is a bit futile, but since we're discussing it civilly, I'll continue, for the time being. I could quote dozens of verses which talk about the destruction, death, and perishing of the wicked. Those words had specific meanings two thousand years ago, just like they do now, unless there's a preconceived idea that they must mean continuous agony for all eternity. As for your last question, I never said hell wasn't eternal, but "hell" is used as a translation of way too many words to generalize what you said. I agree that the final lake of fire is eternal. "Hell" is actually said to be destroyed in the lake of fire, if I remember correctly, thereby it not being eternal.

MrFribbles -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/11/2008 9:55:35 PM)
quote: so often new testament verses clearly talking about pre-death are used to "prove" the doctrine of eternal conscious torment. Which passages are you speaking about here? quote: I don't see the relevance of your final question. The reason I ask is because of Matthew 25:31-46, with particular interest in your take on 46. If the eternal life of heaven is conscious, why do you believe the eternal punishment described here is not? quote: I never said hell wasn't eternal, but "hell" is used as a translation of way too many words to generalize what you said. I agree that the final lake of fire is eternal. "Hell" is actually said to be destroyed in the lake of fire, if I remember correctly, thereby it not being eternal. True enough. I've gotten used to using "hell" to refer to "the place of eternal punishment." When you say that the final lake of fire is eternal, what do you mean?

McFatty -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/11/2008 10:28:24 PM)
Well, in Revelation 19:20-21, the false prophet and the beast are cast alive into the lake of fire. They are specifically mentioned to be alive. In Revelation 20:10, the devil is said to be cast into the lake of fire, specifically to be with them for ever and ever. This makes me think the lake of fire is eternal specifically for these three entities. In Rev. 19:21, which I cited earlier, the "remnant", that which remains of the followers of the false prophet and the beast, are said to be slain. This contrasts greatly from cast alive into the lake of fire to remain for ever and ever. As far as Matthew 21:46, it truly isn't clear to what exactly the term "everlasting punishment" refers, unless you already assume it's referring to eternal conscious torment in the common conception of hell. I'd certainly be willing to completely accept this take if there were other verses which clearly linked "everlasting punishment" to this hell idea, but "eternal death" is also an everlasting punishment. I have to look at what the Bible actually says, rather than what I assume it says.

PeterD -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/12/2008 12:06:26 AM)
Isaiah 66:22-24 Final Judgment and Glory of the LORD 22"For as the new heavens and the new earth that I make shall remain before me, says the LORD, so shall your offspring and your name remain. 23 From new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me,declares the LORD. 24"And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh."

McFatty -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/12/2008 1:24:56 AM)
Peter, I'm well aware of this verse. I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say with it, but I believe the key word is "dead", in verse 24. The bodies aren't alive. Only the saved live eternally.

19ramman85 -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/12/2008 11:54:28 PM)
Form what I have learned - it is a literal we will be alive, if we are in the unfortunate crowd that gets tossed into the lake of fire, with Satan and all his minions. Thats my story, and I'm stickin' to it! lol -charles

McFatty -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/13/2008 2:32:06 AM)
Fair enough. Like I said, for us, it won't be an issue.

JimboFletch -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/14/2008 11:43:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: McFatty Assuming something about my view isn't the way to go about it, I don't think. First, I am not using the King James Version. Second, those Old Testament references don't talk about hell, they talk about the wicked dead being "as though they never were". Nothing to do with a place... Not assuming a thing about you or your position. You're still wrong, regardless of which version you use. The OT simply does not talk about hell in the sense revealed in the NT. In the OT, the best you get is that the wicked die. The state of the deaparted wicked means they are dead as a truck tire and, therefore, are no longer able to harm anyone and, ipso facto, as if they never existed to the living. You cannot develop a rational argument for the extermination of the wicked from the OT. Only the unlearned would hang onto such an untenable position. That kind of faulty foundation prevents anyone with even a basic OT understanding from listening further to your personal philosophy.

JimboFletch -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/14/2008 11:47:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: McFatty Peter, I'm well aware of this verse. I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say with it, but I believe the key word is "dead", in verse 24. The bodies aren't alive. Only the saved live eternally. And that same key word, dead, is used in Revelation 20, "And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works" - to include EVERYBODY no still breathing.

McFatty -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/14/2008 12:42:03 PM)
In other aspects of theology, people cling to small verses in the old testament to prove their point, and they aren't accused of being unlearned or lacking a basic old testament understanding. I realize you disagree with me, which is fine. Again, this portion of theology really doesn't matter all that much to us. If you can't get an idea of what the afterlife for the wicked is like from the old testament, then the verse from Isaiah doesn't matter at all, right? However, in Revelation 20, where the people are judged (and they aren't said to act as witnesses for themselves or being conscious at all at this trial: they may or may not be), the following verse say that after death and hell deliver up the death, they're cast into the lake of fire. Therefore only the lake of fire remains at this point, so "hell" doesn't even exist after some time. The wicked people are then destroyed in the lake of fire in an act known as the second death. Now if I read that without prejudice toward any particular doctrine, what would I gather? Perhaps that they people are destroyed and they die from the existence of even the afterlife. That makes sense from the words written there, to me, at least.

JimboFletch -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/14/2008 12:52:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: McFatty The wicked people are then destroyed in the lake of fire in an act known as the second death. Now if I read that without prejudice toward any particular doctrine, what would I gather? Perhaps that they people are destroyed and they die from the existence of even the afterlife. That makes sense from the words written there, to me, at least. I guess if you jump right in to that verse in Revelation without regard to other scripture like a novice, then I can see where you might get that idea. However, when Jesus related the story of the rich man and Lazarus, the rich man was fully aware, fully in pain, yet not destroyed. The whole concept of soul destruction is philosophy of cults like Jehovah's Witnesses and has consistently been rejected by Christendom.

McFatty -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/14/2008 12:58:07 PM)
I don't know what Jehovah's Witnesses teach. I don't care to know. There's the namecalling again. If you think I'm a novice because we disagree, that's fine. My life will continue regardless. Jesus did teach a parable about the rich man and Lazarus. First, this is way before the second death, and I never rejected torment as punishment UNTIL the second death, though I don't see any other teachings in the Bible about that idea than in this particular parable. Second, a parable is symbolic in nature and not completely allegorical.

JimboFletch -> RE: The Lake of Fire (7/14/2008 1:02:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: McFatty I don't know what Jehovah's Witnesses teach. I don't care to know. There's the namecalling again. If you think I'm a novice because we disagree, that's fine. My life will continue regardless. They believe just like you on the wicked. quote: ORIGINAL: McFatty Jesus did teach a parable about the rich man and Lazarus.... First, where in the world did you get the notion that story is a parable? And, if it were, why dismiss out of hand the obvious point that you dislike.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>