Why to reject the doctrine of "Hell".
The stuff below is mine, but for more information, see the website: edit link violation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is difficult prove something doesn't exist when somebody imagines it is true. Such a proof is a form of proving a negative, however there are means of proving a negative. To do so, you typically show something isn't there when it should be present, I.e. absence of evidence is evidence of absence. For example, if you don't feel your car keys in your pocket, you have sufficiently proven the negative of the presence of your car keys in your pocket. Some people will however insist that this is insufficient evidence, but I would wonder how they function in life.
Similarly, the doctrine of "hell" is something people imagine is taught in the bible. It isn't. Like many things, it is taught by the churches, but it isn't taught in the bible.
First, notice that "hell" is absent in Genesis 1. Genesis 1 describes a material universe. Everything in Genesis 1 is tangible. There are no netherworld regions in Genesis 1. Genesis 1 describes the sun, moon, earth, etc... as objects, putting Hebrews thousands of years ahead of everybody else and when it spread to the gentiles, it advanced them as well. Genesis 1 describes the creation, including the heavens. Yet there is no "hell" or underworld described or mentioned. This is a serious omission if the doctrine of hell is a true doctrine.
Second, notice that "hell" is absent where it should be present in Genesis 3. This is the passage where Adam is condemned. Adam and Eve are promised a fruitful womb and painful childbirth, conflict between the sexes, work, and last but not least, the condemnation: "from dust you are and to dust you will return". They are not condemned to fiery torment, they are condemned with returning to the dust. The lie of the serpent is that if you sin you will live forever, the truth is that you will die. The doctrine of hell teaches that you will live forever, it is the same lie the serpent told.
Third, notice that the condemnation is consistent through the bible. In Romans 5, Paul notes that by one man sin entered the world and death by sin. Death in the New Testament links back to death in Genesis 3. It does not link back to eternal life in fiery torment. In teaching of the salvation of man, the bible teaches that man is saved from death, not saved from eternal conscious torment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding passages used to support such a monumental doctrine as a redefinition of death are thin. The primary passage is "the rich man and Lazarus" in Luke 16:19-31 (Link). But look closely at the passage, this is a parable by Jesus, not a description of actual events. For example:
And of course, compare the introduction of the parable to the previous parable,
Other than declaring it a parable, he couldn't make it any more obvious that this is a parable.
It can be argued that Jesus did not call it a parable, however only 11 of his 26+ parables in Luke are actually called parables. What the story in Luke 16 is actually about is in verses 14-15 Jesus attacks the Pharisees and materialism, and this materialism is why they killed him. He tells a parable specifically directed to the Pharisees, and for them to understand. Examine the characters and the story:
This parable was given to the Pharisees, not to somebody who has never heard of the God of Israel and his son. This parable isn't for the unknowing, this parable is for those well steeped in the bible. If this is a teaching for all mankind and the lost who have never heard of Jesus Christ, it is very much in the wrong place. It should have been in Genesis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In conclusion, the doctrine of "hell" is Pagan claptrap and should be discarded as a doctrine. The wages of sin is death (not eternal conscious torment), and the gift of God is eternal life.
God's gift is not eternal life in heaven as opposed to hell, God's gift is eternal life (period).
The stuff below is mine, but for more information, see the website: edit link violation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is difficult prove something doesn't exist when somebody imagines it is true. Such a proof is a form of proving a negative, however there are means of proving a negative. To do so, you typically show something isn't there when it should be present, I.e. absence of evidence is evidence of absence. For example, if you don't feel your car keys in your pocket, you have sufficiently proven the negative of the presence of your car keys in your pocket. Some people will however insist that this is insufficient evidence, but I would wonder how they function in life.
Similarly, the doctrine of "hell" is something people imagine is taught in the bible. It isn't. Like many things, it is taught by the churches, but it isn't taught in the bible.
First, notice that "hell" is absent in Genesis 1. Genesis 1 describes a material universe. Everything in Genesis 1 is tangible. There are no netherworld regions in Genesis 1. Genesis 1 describes the sun, moon, earth, etc... as objects, putting Hebrews thousands of years ahead of everybody else and when it spread to the gentiles, it advanced them as well. Genesis 1 describes the creation, including the heavens. Yet there is no "hell" or underworld described or mentioned. This is a serious omission if the doctrine of hell is a true doctrine.
Second, notice that "hell" is absent where it should be present in Genesis 3. This is the passage where Adam is condemned. Adam and Eve are promised a fruitful womb and painful childbirth, conflict between the sexes, work, and last but not least, the condemnation: "from dust you are and to dust you will return". They are not condemned to fiery torment, they are condemned with returning to the dust. The lie of the serpent is that if you sin you will live forever, the truth is that you will die. The doctrine of hell teaches that you will live forever, it is the same lie the serpent told.
Third, notice that the condemnation is consistent through the bible. In Romans 5, Paul notes that by one man sin entered the world and death by sin. Death in the New Testament links back to death in Genesis 3. It does not link back to eternal life in fiery torment. In teaching of the salvation of man, the bible teaches that man is saved from death, not saved from eternal conscious torment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding passages used to support such a monumental doctrine as a redefinition of death are thin. The primary passage is "the rich man and Lazarus" in Luke 16:19-31 (Link). But look closely at the passage, this is a parable by Jesus, not a description of actual events. For example:
- Heaven isn't mentioned in the passage. It speaks of "the bosom of Abraham". This place isn't defined in scripture,
- Likewise, "hades" or "hell" place mentioned in the passage isn't described in scripture either.
- These people are taken bodily. The rich man looks with his eyes, he wants a drop of water from a finger placed upon his tongue. These body parts rot away in the grave, they aren't carried away by angels.
- There is a gulf between Abraham and the rich man, yet the rich man wants Lazarus to come visit him.
- The rich man speaks and has a conversation with Abraham. Not with angels, or whatever else. He speaks to Abraham.
- Abraham is dead and has not received his reward (Heb. 11:8, 13, 39, 40). Abraham isn't in Abraham's bosom.
And of course, compare the introduction of the parable to the previous parable,
Luke 16:1 “There was a rich man whose
Luke 16:19 “There was a rich man who
Other than declaring it a parable, he couldn't make it any more obvious that this is a parable.
It can be argued that Jesus did not call it a parable, however only 11 of his 26+ parables in Luke are actually called parables. What the story in Luke 16 is actually about is in verses 14-15 Jesus attacks the Pharisees and materialism, and this materialism is why they killed him. He tells a parable specifically directed to the Pharisees, and for them to understand. Examine the characters and the story:
- a Rich Man (High Priest Caiphas)
- his Father (Annas) (High priest when Jesus was a child)
- the sons of the Father (Eleazar, Jonathan, Theophilus, Matthias, Ananus) (also high priests)
- who all were wealthy
- were well studied in Moses and the Prophets.
- And his promise to these men was that though one would rise from the dead, they would not repent.
This parable was given to the Pharisees, not to somebody who has never heard of the God of Israel and his son. This parable isn't for the unknowing, this parable is for those well steeped in the bible. If this is a teaching for all mankind and the lost who have never heard of Jesus Christ, it is very much in the wrong place. It should have been in Genesis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In conclusion, the doctrine of "hell" is Pagan claptrap and should be discarded as a doctrine. The wages of sin is death (not eternal conscious torment), and the gift of God is eternal life.
God's gift is not eternal life in heaven as opposed to hell, God's gift is eternal life (period).
Last edited by a moderator:
