_______________________________________________________________________

In our last lesson, we mentioned how that Jesus was the world's greatest preacher and teacher on hell. I made the statement when we were discussing "Is Hell For Real?" that if hell is not real, then we certainly need to talk about it and tell people, because that is great news for the world! Conversely if hell is for real, then we need to talk about it because people need to know and understand the danger and magnitude of what the Bible teaches about the subject. I want to reiterate what I firmly believe: not talking about hell is the absolutely worst route to take!

In our last lesson we looked at what the scripture had to say about the existence of a place of fiery torment for the unrighteous and we came to the overwhelming conclusion that there is definitely a literal hell of fiery torment in existence. At least, hell is real if the words of Jesus, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Jude, James, Paul, Peter, Daniel, Isaiah, and Job mean anything. Despite the overwhelming evidence for the existence of such a place, there are many teachings around today that still object to such a traditional and literal rendering of the scriptures. Some will say that hell is real, but it is not everlasting but only until the end of time on earth. Others will say that hell is real but only lasts for a moment. Another view that is ever increasing in popularity in churches today is that hell is real, but God will only permit a few of the "worst of the worst" to go there because of His great love.

In this study, we want to take a different tack and look at the claims to modern objections to a traditional hell, and see what the scripture has to say about their theories. To some under the sound of my voice, some of these objections may be new, but in learning about them, you will be able to have a scriptural answer for why they are not valid.

If you do not believe in a traditional, literal hell as we studied in the last lesson, and yet claim to be a Christian, then you must believe in one of the following theories:

1. Soul Sleep -- the belief that after death that there is nothing.

2. Annihilation of the Wicked -- the belief that hell simply destroys and burns up the

unrighteous so that they suffer a brief moment of torment and then cease to exist.

3. Temporary Torment -- the belief that the fiery torment of hell lasts for but a limited

amount of time, usually believed to be the 1,000 years of the Millennial Reign of

Christ.

4. Everybody is eventually saved -- the belief that a loving God would not send anybody

to a place of eternal torment.

If you are hearing these theories for the first time, they may seem very strange, but all of these beliefs are more widely believed than you think. Let's look at what the scripture has to say about these proposed ideas of men.

In our first lesson, "Is Hell for Real?," we thoroughly covered that the Bible teaches in life after death so we will not dwell too long on this subject. We only covered the scriptures that dealt with the eternal fate of the unrighteous but there are almost as many scripture dealing with the eternal future of the righteous. In our text, we quoted what is probably the most famous verse in the Bible:

If people only know one verse of the Bible, then this is usually it! And this most famous verse promises the believer "everlasting life" or life eternal! It's obvious that there is life after death and that death is just the entrance into the reality of the existence of God and eternity.

The "judgment" comes after men die! This concept is so thoroughly assimilated throughout the scriptures that no one can possibly claim to believe in the validity of the Word of God and yet hold on to the man-made theory of eternal "soul sleep." As we learned last week, when people die their spirit and soul goes to a holding place, the sheol, to await their resurrection, but this is only temporary until the judgment. As Daniel so aptly put it, they will all eventually be resurrected "some to everlasting life, and some to everlasting contempt" (Daniel 12:2). Jesus agreed with Daniel and destroyed the doctrine of eternal soul sleep when He said:

Saved or unsaved; righteous or unrighteous; either way, there will eventually be a resurrection of all of the dead.

A traditional view of the Annihilation of the Wicked theory is that the unrighteous are placed into a place of fire and burnt up. In other words, their torment lasts for the brief moment that it takes for them to burn up and then they cease to exist in any meaningful way. Those who hold to the traditional theory, believe that when a person is cast into fiery hell, then their annihilation is consummated at that moment.

Because of the many scriptures about a resurrection of all the dead at the end of time, more often annihilationist believe a "temporary torment" theory that the unrighteous are cast into a fiery hell for the Millennial reign, ie 1,000 years, and then are resurrected in bodily form to stand at the Great White Throne Judgment, and then are cast into the lake of fire upon which they are burnt up and cease to exist. The difference in the two theories is the timing of the final destruction of the wicked. Practically, Jehovah's Witnesses tend to believe a traditional Annihilation of the Wicked, whereas the Evangelicals of the "postmodern" movement tend to believe in the temporary torment theory. Either way they both share that the view that eternal torment is not eternal at all but passes very quickly.

Before we look at scripture that contradicts the annihilation theory, let me point out that there is a difference between hell and the lake of fire. The KJV Bible reads:

The Antichrist and the False Prophet were "cast alive into a lake of fire" that was burning with "brimstone" or "sulphur." Between this scripture and the next chapter, one thousand years pass -- the Millennial Reign of Christ. After which the KJV says:

This is the White Throne Judgment, and after it, verse 14 states that "death and hell were cast into the lake of fire." The word for "hell" here is hades which refers to the holding place of the dead and can mean either the holding place of the righteous or the holding place of the unrighteous depending upon context as we discussed last lesson. In this context, it obviously refers to the "bad side" or unrighteous side of hades. As in those who were on the unrighteous side of hades, the side with fiery torment were cast into the lake of fire. In Luke 16 in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the scriptures say that the rich man was in hades, and yet in fiery torment. So is hell hot? Yes, but not as hot as it is going to be because that fiery place that the rich man was in will be one day cast into the lake of fire that burns with sulphur.

Let me emphasize to you that the main difference between hell, the fiery side of hades, and the lake of fire has to do with the state of the soul that is in it. Taking all of the scriptures about a fiery hell together, we discover the startling revelation that although the rich man could feel a burning sensation and desired for "Father Abraham" to send Lazarus with a drop of water to cool his tongue, he actually did not have a literal, physical body at that time, because at his death, his spirit and soul (mind) were separated from his earthly body and he will not get a literal glorified physical body until the White Throne Judgment. His body was in torment, but he did not have a body -- that's a seeming contradiction in the teaching of the Word of God but I have learned that when it seems that scriptures contradict themselves really what is lacking is my interpretation or understanding, and when we interpret the Bible in a way that it harmonizes with itself, then we have the correct interpretation.

There is a startling possibility that reconciles this contradiction. Although the rich man's body was not actually there, his mind which had lived his entire life attached to his body was present. People who have lost arms and legs in accidents report "ghost sensations" where they feel pain or heat or whatever in their missing limb despite the limb not actually being present, and the reason for this is that the brain is used to having that limb and so it functions as if it exists even when it does not. I believe that the seeming contradiction can be clarified when you realize that the rich man's mind was in torment as if it had a body that was on fire, even though the body did not truly exist. His brain was thinking in the only terms that it had ever functioned before.

So the difference between the fiery torment of hades and the lake of fire, is that in hades, the unrighteous' spirit and soul (mind) that separated from their earthly body at their death has the sensation and the constant pain of burning as if they had a body still attached. They are then resurrected at the Great White Throne Judgment, and given a glorified body that will last for forever, and then they are cast into the lake of fire where their new body literally does burn with everlasting fire and yet exist for forever.

And just to completely blow your brains, technically the devil never goes "to hell." The scriptures record:

The devil is cast into the lake of fire, not the fiery torment of hades. So does the devil finish his existence in a permanent place of fiery torment? Yes, but in the lake of fire and not technically "in hell." And that is a distinction that most people miss because they have never bothered to study the difference between "hell" and the "lake of fire."

Remember that there are two types of annihilationist, those that believe the wicked burn up in the "fires of hell" and those who believe that they survive hell and are resurrected at the White Throne Judgment only to be cast into the lake of fire and annihilated there. We don't have to look far to find scriptures that discuss that people are not annihilated and burnt up into nothing in the fiery side of hades.

Obviously, the rich man in the parable was not annihilated but was able to hold a conversation after reaching his place of torment. Furthermore, all of the scriptures that we have already read in Daniel and the words of Jesus about the unrighteous being resurrected at the White Throne Judgment indicates to us that the fiery side of hades does not annihilate anyone. It is because of these scriptures that many annihilationist have modified their theory to believe that the unrighteous are in torment in hades, but after the White Throne Judgment, they are cast into the lake of fire which then annihilates them. Let's look at some scriptures that refute this theory of temporary torment, and then a final annihilation.

Jesus taught emphatically three times in the 9th chapter of Mark:

The key phrase here is "where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." The fire is not quenched means that it never ceases and is an argument against annihilation itself. If when the unrighteous are cast into the lake of fire, they are annihilated and cease to exist, then for what purpose would the fire burn for forever? If there is no eternal torment then why is there an eternal flame?

The phrase "where their worm dieth not" is a weird one. What does that mean? The phrase is from the Hebrew language of Isaiah where it refers to the process of the decay of the deceased body. Ordinarily, the decay eventually stops as the body is consumed, but in the lake of fire, the "worm will never die." Not that there are literal worms there, but that the process of destruction will never come to an end. The very phrase "the worm dieth not" contradicts the theory of annihilation of the wicked, for if they were annihilated, could it really be truthfully said that the "worm dieth not?"

Another scriptural argument to the false doctrine of annihilation is the many scriptures that refer to "everlasting" or "eternal" torment. But the annihilationist have a theory to explain these away. You may have not noticed but both our texts had one thing in common: they used the term "everlasting." The one scripture that annihilationist must explain away is our text in the 25th chapter of Matthew:

"Everlasting punishment" seems proof enough that an annihilationist view of eternity is not correct, but they have an answer. They will point out that the Greek word for "everlasting" here, aionios ( pronounced ahee-o'-nee-os), can in certain contexts refer to the full duration of a certain period of time. It's the same in modern day English. We can say that "something lasts for forever" and mean eternity. But we can also use it in saying "that class was so boring, it lasted for forever." When in reality it only lasted the full duration of the period. Like so much in Biblical Greek, we must use context to decide if aionios really means eternal, as in for forever. To make their theory fit the Bible, the annihilationist wants "everlasting punishment" to mean "punishment for a certain amount of time." But their theory fails the context test, because -- catch this now -- the word for "eternal" in the same verse for "life eternal" is also aionios! You can't twist scripture for the word to mean two different things in one verse! So if the everlasting punishment is only temporary, then the "life eternal" of the righteous must also be temporary, something even the Jehovah's witnesses and liberal evangelicals don't believe. Therefore their theory proves too much.

Our other text was John 3:16 which said that "whosoever believeth on him shall not perish but have everlasting life." The word "everlasting" is aionios and it is obviously in context referring to a state of eternity, something that lasts for forever and not just a specific amount of time. If we are saved for eternity, then the Bible means eternity. If the righteous have everlasting life that means for forever, then "everlasting punishment" must mean punishment that lasts for forever! The annihilationist theory does not stand up to the measure of the Word of God.

There are several other scriptural methods to prove the annihilationistic theory false. For example, the Bible speaks about there being greater degrees of punishment for certain sins. Jesus told the Pharisees:

And Peter said:

If the wicked are annihilated the moment they enter the lake of fire, then how could there be greater degrees of punishments because they would all have the same retribution!?

In the end, the simplest and yet most profound proof against the theory of annihilation is the example of the antichrist and false prophet. The annihilation believer will try to say that the antichrist and the false prophet are spirits and systems, but the scriptures say that those spirits and systems will be embodied in a literal man, so that the antichrist will physically "stand in the holy place" of the temple and one day declare that he is god (2 Thessalonians 2:4 with Matthew 24:15). We've already read the scriptures of this proof:

Both the antichrist, "the beast," and the false prophet were cast alive into the lake of fire. Then according to Revelation 20:2, a thousand years pass by. And then we find that when the devil is cast into the lake of fire:

Did you catch that? The devil was throne into the lake of fire where a thousand years later the beast and the false prophet "are." Not "were" but even in the original Greek, there is an implied present tense. They were cast into the lake of fire one thousand years before and yet they still are there. If they had been annihilated, then how could they possibly still be there!? Obviously the doctrine of annihilation of the wicked, no matter when they believe that it takes place does not jibe with the true teachings of everlasting torment in the Word of God.

First of all, not everybody will be saved, at least not if you believe scripture. Jesus said in Matthew 25 that the king would say in the day of judgment to those on his left hand "depart from me you workers of sin, I never knew you." For Him to be able to say this, then obviously there will unfortunately have to be some lost souls standing there. Jesus taught in parables of which we have -- depending on how you count -- about 35 recorded in scripture. I did a quick check of all of the parables and found that in 24 of them, there is someone lost, doing evil, not bearing fruit, punished for wrong doing, etc. 24 out of 35!

When people believe that "everybody will eventually be saved" then it means that either one of two things is true in their life:

1. They have a very incomplete understanding of what it takes to be saved.

2. They have had the love of God preached to them to the point of imbalance.

The first in modern day lingo is usually expressed as the wide-spread belief that "good people go to heaven and bad people go to hell." Listen carefully lest I be misunderstood. As shocking as it may seem, the Bible does not teach that "good people go to heaven." Jacob was a deceiver in his life and a cheat and liar; he was not a good person. David was an adulterer and a murderer; he was not a good person all his life. Peter was a foul-mouthed, wishy-washy, fisherman; he was not inherently a good person. Moses killed an Egyptian and had to flee for his life; he was not an inherently good person. Paul persecuted the church in what amounted to mass torture and murder; Paul was not necessarily a good person. Were these people saved? I believe that they were, but not because they were good people, but because they obeyed the commandments of the Word of God and God transformed them and changed their life as they obeyed. The Bible teaches:

If you automatically go to heaven by being a "good person" then there will be no one in heaven because there is none good but God! Good people don't go to heaven, but saved ones do. You may not have begun life as a good person, but if you will ask God for forgiveness, have your sins washed away in Jesus' name, and let His Spirit transform your life, then you can be saved and go into eternal life. It has little to do with your inherent goodness and much to do with His mercy and grace at providing you a way out of judgment! Not only will there be some inherently bad people go to heaven because they obeyed the saving gospel of Jesus Christ, but there will be what to us would seem "inherently good" people that don't make it. A very sobering point of scripture is Jesus' words:

These are people who I would think were good: preachers, cast demons out of people, mighty works in His name? And yet Jesus did not know them! In the very next verse, Jesus, told the story about the wise man building his house on the rock and the foolish man building his house on the sand. The wise man was "he who heareth my words and doeth them." The point is that those who will be saved are those who obey what God has commanded us to do in His Word. We are saved by obedience and not "goodness."

The second misconception can be put in modern-day lingo "why would a loving God send anyone to a hell?" "God is love" they will say, therefore "I don't believe a God who is truly love would send anyone to eternal torment." There are three problems with this attitude and let me quickly point them out:

1. It places the human in the judgment seat of what is "bad enough to go to hell." If you press them hard enough, eventually most people who ask the question "why would a loving God send anyone to hell?" can eventually find someone like Adolph Hitler or a serial killer that they think is bad enough to go to hell. The truth is that they are wanting to be the judge of humanity and that they think that everybody should go to heaven or hell according to their personal standards! The problem is that their personal standards are quite different from God's standards. You might be shocked to know that in outlining the "greater damnations" that the unrighteous would receive, God never said that mass murder was a sin that would get you to a hotter place of torment, but He did say that spiritual hypocrisy -- claiming to outwardly live one thing and secretly being another -- would! Jesus told the Pharisees that religious activity and ceremonies without pureness of heart would lead to a greater degree of torment! Whoa!

People who say "I don't think that a loving God would send anyone to hell" are actually placing themselves on the judgment seat and proclaiming "I don't think that certain sins deserve punishment." God disagrees, and in scripture He is the judge, not you!

2. It mistakenly reduces God's qualities to love only.

Please catch this, so I'm not misquoted or misunderstood. We live in a "love" crazy society that understand very little about real love and preachers today preach that "God is love, God is love" and ignore a whole lot of other scriptures causing people to make the mistake of this faulty logic.

Catch this: God is love, but He is not love only. He also has other characteristics like "holiness" which is probably even more intrinsic to who He is although rarely preached today. "Holiness" refers to God purity and rightness and morality and perfectness and sinlessness. That God is holy, means that He is not unclean or evil. It means that sin cannot enter into His presence and be accepted. It means that He will do what is right, which is to punish evil. People often quote John 3:16 to justify their reasoning of a God of love who does not punish evil. We must take John 3:16 in context with John 3:5 which says that man must do something -- namely be born of the water and the of Spirit -- in order to be saved, and also John 3:36 which states:

Those that do not believe the Son and obey His Word, "the wrath of God abideth on him." They are marked for the anger and judgment of God. And God will bring judgment on unrepented sin because He is holy and a perfect judge.

Think about it this way. God is the judge. A judge is not deemed "good" because he lets off punishment and never gives a verdict, but for a judge to be good, he must do what is right. If a murderer comes before him, and the judge lets him off though he was guilty, that judge is not good but has rather done evil. God is the judge of humanity, if He does not hold men and women to His Word, can we really say that He is a good judge? But He is, and therefore He will punish wrong doing.

3. It asks the wrong question the wrong way. God is love and He is Holy, so in His love He came to earth to die for humanity and to provide a way of salvation from eternal destruction. He is holy and will not let sin pass unpunished, so He came to earth and paid the sacrifice of sin for us and provided a way for that sacrifice to be "imputed" or transferred to our spiritual account, so that we could reap eternal life and miss a fiery place of torment! We do this and are saved by obeying what He has commanded us to do. The question should not be asked "why would a loving God send people to hell?" but rather "why would a people reject the plan of salvation of such a loving God?" If someone is trapped in a burning building and someone comes to save them and the trapped person refuses to use the ladder and the method of salvation that is offered to them and dies in the building, do we blame the would-be savior for their death? No, they caused their own death by choosing not to utilize the salvation available to them, and it is the same way with people going to hell. God does not send anyone to hell, but rather the blame will be on the people themselves for denying the method of salvation and way out that was provided to them!

And the fact that God went to such great extremes to provide a way of salvation, also means that God takes great offense to people who reject His gift of salvation. By realizing that, you can better understand these last two scriptures: