Hell: Fire, Brimstone, or not?/ Annihilation?

[christopher]

"Paul says 'it is appointed once for men to die, and then the judgment'"

Aha! So you too think Paul wrote Hebrews.

One comment on this verse I have is that it's often put to service as a proof text that this life is the only opportunity a person has to be reconciled to God. However, I don't think that fits the context of what the author is talking about. He's making a comparison (and a contrast as well) to emphasize the finished work of Christ, once and for all. If we observe the whole statement:


Heb 9:23-28
23 Therefore it was necessary that the copies of the things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; 25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another-- 26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27 And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, 28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.
NKJV


We see that the author is not making the point that this life is the only time to accept Christ, he's merely making the case for the efficacy of the cross as a sacrifice for atonement.

In our present day paradigm, we usually see the "judgment" here as speaking of the final judgment. But that is not necessarily true. For one, the word "the" preceding judgment, was added by the translators (it's not in the original text). Second, judgment could very possibly be referring to death itself as a judgment of sin. Just like Paul says elsewhere:

Rom 6:22-23
23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
NKJV

There's nothing in this passage that would necessarily preclude the possibility of a person accepting Christ after death.

I was shocked to discover that there is actually very little evidence in the bible to prove that very central (and largely unchallenged) evangelical belief.

[freebirdro]

can we elaborate a little more on the second death definitions?

[Josh]

Yeah, I'm curious on how you would define second death too... and any of you who are Christian universalists.

I've always equated it with the "guilty" verdict at the final judgment- a point of finality or fixedness I suppose.

[rodgertutt]

www.tentmaker.org/books/OriginandHistory.html

www.tentmaker.org/books/Prevailing.html

www.tentmaker.org/articles/savior-of-the-world/index.htm

People who want to keep believing in the doctrine of "endless hell" will not read the following four articles.

But people who don't want to believe that the Bible teaches "endless hell" will read all four of them and will be filled with great joy at finding out the truth!

(If necessary, copy and paste the following urls into your address bar.)

What Jesus really taught about "hell."

www.tentmaker.org/articles/jesusteachingonhell.html

What the Bible really teaches about "hell."

www.tentmaker.org/books/TheBibleHell.html

www.tentmaker.org/books/Aion_lim.html

www.tentmaker.org/articles/savior-of-the-world/hell.htm

Regarding arguments against the Bible teaching universal salvation, see
www.tentmaker.org/books/BibleThreateningsExplained.html

Any hell that anyone will experience the Bible calls "kolasis aionian," which means age-during corrective chastisement.
www.tentmaker.org/books/asw/Chapter11.html

It is limited in duration, and corrective in purpose.
www.tentmaker.org/books/Aion_lim.html

Regarding the most common argument that the same word for "punishment" is also used for "life" see the following:
All three of these articles should be studied with care, especially the third one.

concordant.org/expohtml/TheEons/eon1.html
concordant.org/expohtml/TheEons/eon2.html
concordant.org/expohtml/TheEons/eon3.html

also see:

concordant.org/expohtml/TheEons/aion.html
concordant.org/version/tranprin.html

[rodgertutt]

You might like to be aware of the evidence why some of us think that the Bible teaches universal salvation rather than annihilation.

The book that best shows why we believe the Bible teaches universal salvation rather than annihilation is ALL IN ALL by A.E. Knoch. It specifically examines the biblical evidence supporting both beliefs and shows why we choose the universal salvation position.

There are also several expositions that do the same thing on a less comprehensive scale. They are accessed through the search engine at the top of the front page at www.tentmaker.org

For example, one is
www.tentmaker.org/books/EternalDeath.html

Here is an intro to the book
ALL IN ALL by A.E. Knoch (222 pages)
Concordant Publishing Concern
www.concordant.org/

Introduction:

"The blood of Christ is the basis of all blessing. The purpose of God determines human destiny. It does not depend on our deserts. The plan or process of God during the eons or ages must be distinguished from His purpose which will not be fully accomplished until the eons are past. Herein lies the difference between the teaching of the Scriptures and the accepted creeds of Christendom.
The believer suffers in the current era because of sin, but will be released in the resurrection at the presence of Christ. The unbeliever will have affliction and anguish for his sins in the judgment, but he also becomes reconciled to God at the consummation, through the blood of Christ’s cross. (Col.1-20).
Universal reconciliation is the glorious goal toward which all leads. All of God’s purpose is achieved through Him Who is the Alpha and the Omega (Rev.1:8). “In Him the entire complement delights to dwell, and through Him [God delights] to reconcile all to Him (making peace through the blood of His cross), through him, whether those on the earth or those in the heavens” (Col.1:19,20)
The terms translated “forever” and “everlasting” and “never” are human perversions which could never have deceived us if they had been consistently rendered. They denote definite divisions of time called ages or eons. All together they form a distinct portion of time called eonian times. Much in our common creeds is true if confined within the eons, but it is most malignant error when forced beyond the eons.
Since judgment is not eternal, but eonian, we may accept all the solemn threats of death and condemnation without reservation, while happily exulting in God’s grand goal to which all His labors lead: that God may be All in All (1Cor.15:28)."
From Rodger Tutt in Toronto, Canada

POST SCRIPT:

Regarding the book ALL IN ALL by A.E. Knoch. In spite of the claim that there are contradictions in it, and in spite of “cult-buster” Don Hewey’s other attempts to discredit it, (arguments to which Richard Condon has responded), ALL IN ALL remains, in my opinion, one of the best of all the many books that I have read in support of the Bible teaching universal transformation.
Don Hewey is a believer in the inspiration of the King James Version. When he accuses A.E. Knoch of "contradicting the Bible," in many cases what he really means is that A.E. Knoch contradicts the KJV, because the Concordant Translation does not rely on the Received Text from which the KJV was translated. Don Hewey therefore also attacks the RSV, the NIV, and other modern translations. For this reason much of what Don writes just doesn't make any sense.
As far as Knoch calling the life that Lazarus will be raised to as it being eonian and unending, it is both. Lazarus will have unending life and that life will allow him to live through the oncoming eons which is called '"eonian life."

But even if Don Hewey’s criticisms had any merit, (and Richard Condon proves they don’t), they would still not detract from the fact that this book IMHO, IRREFUTABLY proves that the Bible teaches universal salvation, not eternal torment, or even annihilation.
Richard Condon’s detailed rebuttal of Don Hewey’s criticisms of ALL IN ALL can be read at
gtft.org/Library/condon/QuestionsWithoutAnswers.htm