The Instigator
frozen_eclipse
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
IFLYHIGH
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

what we commonly believe to be hell is not place of torment

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
IFLYHIGH
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/20/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,241 times Debate No: 22192
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (32)
Votes (1)

 

frozen_eclipse

Pro

we commonly believe that all bad people go to hell....a fiery hell...not true I will be defending this with the bible itself. and it is extremely preferable if my opponent is a Christian( also this debate does not reflect my religious affiliation)

first round is acceptance
second speeches
third rebuttal's and final
IFLYHIGH

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
frozen_eclipse

Pro

I will be defending the resolution and only that.

what is commonly believed to be hell is a place of never ending torment and the only bad people go there. not true

I will break it down from the original words.

It's extremely important for the viewers to read all or you will be lost and severely mind fucked.....

.....................................................................

The word hell in many translations is also refereed originally to as the grave.....or world of the dead.

Sheol- means pit....grave or dwelling place f the dead.(in other words hell)

1. First of all to be tormented would mean that you could feel pain or some sort of mental anguish.

Eccl. 9:5, 10 -The living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all...all that your hand finds to do, do with your very power, for there is no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in sheol, the place for witch you are going.

ps. 146:4 - his spirit goes out, he goes back to his ground;in that day his thoughts do perish.

........if we are conscious of nothing then we obviously don't feel pain or anything else for that matter, and since there's obviously no knowledge, that means we wouldn't be capable of knowing pain. Also thoughts perish witch also supports my claim.


Job 14;13(job was alive at the time and was considered a very good man by god)
Who will grant me this, that thou mayst protect me in hell, and hide me till thy wrath pass, and appoint me a time when thou wilt remember me?

.........this shows that good people go to hell as well it also shows that there is no eternal torture because it doesnt make sense for god to punish a man considered good by god..........also the fact that jesus was in hell.....why would god allow jesus to be tortured or punished hen he was perfect and free of sin?


Now we get to the confusing part......separating the lake of fire from hell(the graveyard)

Rev. 14:9-11

If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of god, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the lamb: and the smoke of their torment ascended up forever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

.....this torture cannot be referring to those that go to hell.....witch are conscious of nothing at all........this lake of fire......and hell are separate.

Revelation 21 :8 says clearly that "the lake witch burneth with fire and brimstone," means the second death.......................so clearly the second death and hell,sheol,or haides are entirely different things.



i have more information but im going to keep it simple unless my opponent brings up my points.........so obviously what we commonly believe to be hell is not a place of torment

IFLYHIGH

Con

Sheol, Gehenna, Hell, all the same thing?

I will rebuttal very little of my opponents arguments because as I will show, they actually support many of my arguments. The only thing I will be disagreeing with is his conclusion which is that Sheol and Hell are one of the same thing. The bible uses three terms to describe the afterlife(besides heaven) which are Sheol, Gehenna, and Hell. Lets go on and define them.

Sheol- noun (in hebrew theology)

1. the abode of the dead or of departed spirits.(1)
Gehenna- Ge·hen·na (g-hn)
n.

1. A place or state of torment or suffering.

2. The abode of condemned souls; hell.(2)

Hell- hell (hl)

n.

1.

a. often Hell The abode of condemned souls and devils in some religions; the place of eternal punishment for the wicked after death, presided over by Satan.

b. A state of separation from God; exclusion from God's presence.

2. The abode of the dead, identified with the Hebrew Sheol and the Greek Hades; the underworld.(3)

As you can see, Hell is both Sheol and Gehenna. It is both the abode of the dead and a place of eternal punishment. So which version of Hell is used in the bible? Both. In the Hebrew Scriptures, Hell always meant Sheol since there was no afterlife in Jewish culture. It is only in the New Testament that Hell gains the new meaning of eternal punishment, or more specifically, Gehenna. All that die now go straight to Sheol as my opponent said, but when the day of second judgment comes, all the wicked will be cast into Gehenna. Gehenna is the lake of fire as used in the bible but is translated as hell in the NRSV. Do the scriptures back up my bold claim? Lets see…

and I have the same hope in God as these men themselves have, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.”-Acts 24:15

What does this mean? That there is clearly going to be a resurrection of ALL the dead in Sheol. But why would there be a resurrection? Lets look at Revelation 20:11-15

And I saw the dead…..and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things…..

And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.”- Revelations 20:11-15

This scripture shows how the resurrected dead will be judged and those not found in “the book of life” would be cast into the lake of fire which is Gehenna or Hell. Gehenna is the second death.

Hell, a place of torture?

My opponent claims that hell is not a place of torture, but what does the bible say? Lets see…

“And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. “ Mark 9:43-48.

And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.”- Revelation 20:10

Please do show how the above does not show hell to be a place of torture. Revelation even goes on to say that they would be tormented day and night.

Why did Jesus and Job go to hell?

1)It is commonly accepted that Jesus died for our sins. So in a since, you could say Jesus took our place in hell.

2) An alternate explanation is that Hell talked about after Jesus death was Sheol.

3) Job is written in the Old Testament which always referred hell as Sheol.

Conclusion

While my opponent is right in his arguments about Sheol, he has really only told half the story. Sheol is a temporary place until the day of the second judgement comes when they will be cast into Gehenna. Hell as commonly believed, is indeed a place of eternal punishment.

(1)http://dictionary.reference.com...

(2) http://www.thefreedictionary.com...

(3) http://www.thefreedictionary.com...

Debate Round No. 2
frozen_eclipse

Pro

I will now rebuttal my opponents case and the go into to the stronger case of this debate being the pro.

First we should not be using the Internet to get our definitions, over time translations of the original words have been misconstrued. So we need to use a more reliable source for definitions being the bible.....specifically mines is......the new world translation of the holy scriptures.

witch I will be using to define the following terms.....by the way all these can be looked up in the back 0f the bible

Sheol-Hebrew word for hell, the graveyard, the pit
Hades-Greek word for hell, the grave
hell-the pit, the graveyard of the dead
Gehenna- is an actual place on earth, the valley of hinnon witch is just outside of the walls of Jerusalem. it was the site of idolaratous worship, child sacrifice etc..... In the first century it was used as an incinerator for "the filth of Jerusalem" Bodies of dead animals ere thrown there. No humans were thrown there at least not alive. so obviously Gehenna is not a place of torment and is not even "commonly believed hell."....gehenna is something separate.( also the lake of fire has eternal torture witch I will further explain latter, but if a live human was tossed into gehenna they would die within 30 minutes at longest.....so obviously its not eternal torture since you would eventually die in the flames)

At Matthew 10:28, Jesus warned his followers to"be in fear of him that can destroy the body and soul in Gehenna." What does it mean? Notice that there is no mention here of torment in the fires of gehenna. by referring to the "soul"(witch the soul and persons life is the same thing) separately, Jesus emphasised that god can destroy a persons life prospects. thus there's no hope for ressurection.So Jesus used gehenna as an analogy to symbolize a permanent cut off

So please lets stick to my biblical definitions............now onto my opponents case(hopefully I have enough characters to finish....lol)

he states; "All that die now go straight to Sheol as my opponent said, but when the day of second judgment comes, all the wicked will be cast into Gehenna. Gehenna is the lake of fire as used in the bible but is translated as hell in the NRSV."

I don't know what the nrsv is but like I said the bible is the only reliable source of evidence here.....about the day of judgement..... as I have clearly defeated and will further defeat my opponents claim of gehenna and the lake of fire being the same thing.

Here's a quote by my opponent

And I saw the dead…..and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things…..

And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.”- Revelations 20:11-15

(I looked these up...and)

at rev 20;13-and the sea gave up those dead in it, and death and Hades gave up those dead etc.....( clearly this shows that only those in Hades are dead,)
rev 14-15
"and death and Hades were hurled into the lake of fire.....furthermore whoever was not found written in the book of life was hurled into the lake of fire.( it says death and Hades(hell) was hurled into the lake of fire....why would hell be thrown into itself????? the context of the sentence and the facts and logic within this sentence further proves that what we commonly believe to be hell is not a place of torture......but is in fact separate from hell......as it states in the bible it is second death.)


another piece of my opponents case....

"Why did Jesus and Job go to hell?

1)It is commonly accepted that Jesus died for our sins. So in a since, you could say Jesus took our place in hell."

absolutely not this logic is extremely flawed.....since my opponent wants to claim that hell is a eternal fiery place of torment witch is absolutely wrong........why is Jesus resurrected if hell is a eternal place of punishment.if hell is the same as gehenna(and its not) witch as I stated earlier if you go there, there is no hope of resurrection. then how would his soul be retrievable to be resurrected?

Now if the viewers and my opponents link everything I've said together I have rebutted my opponents case threw logic, scriptures, and facts. my case stands ineffectively rebutted therefore I should win this debate.

For my opponent to win he needs to effectively awnser my questions and contradict the logic of my position.

Going back to the stronger case of the debate being pro

"what we commonly believe to be hell is not a place of torment"

1. First of all to be tormented would mean that you could feel pain or some sort of mental anguish.

Eccl. 9:5, 10 -The living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all...all that your hand finds to do, do with your very power, for there is no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in sheol, the place for witch you are going.

ps. 146:4 - his spirit goes out, he goes back to his ground;in that day his thoughts do perish.

........if we are conscious of nothing then we obviously don't feel pain or anything else for that matter, and since there's obviously no knowledge, that means we wouldn't be capable of knowing pain. Also thoughts perish witch also supports my claim.

besides my opponent failing to defeat this he also fails to tackle

2. Job 14;13(job was alive at the time and was considered a very good man by god)
Who will grant me this, that thou mayst protect me in hell, and hide me till thy wrath pass, and appoint me a time when thou wilt remember me?

.........this shows that good people go to hell as well it also shows that there is no eternal torture because it doesn't make sense for god to punish a man considered good by god..........also the fact that Jesus was in hell.....why would god allow Jesus to be tortured or punished when he was perfect???

IFLYHIGH

Con

Rebuttals to Con's arguments


My definitions defended.

Con has falsely claimed that his definitions are directly from the bible. This is false for the reason that there is no dictionary in the bible, any words defined in it are solely from a third party. The people who wrote the definitions in the back of Cons bible are not the same people who wrote the bible. If you visit any of my sources, you will see written by the definition is (Christian Religious Writings / Bible) meaning the definitions are backed up by the bible. If Con remains unconvinced that my definitions are reliable, then I will go on and show scriptures that support their definition. Since our first two definitions are virtually the same, I shall only dispute Gehenna and Hell.

Gehenna

Gehenna is given three characteristics

1)It is an unquenchable and eternal fire. Mark 9:43-44

2)It is a place of torment: Mark 9:45, James 3:6, Revelation 20:10

3)The wicked souls would be cast into it. Mark 9:45, Revelation 20:15

As you can see, while Gehenna may have been a burial site outside Jerusalem, it must also be a place of eternal punishment. It makes no sense why the above three characteristics of Gehenna/Hell would apply to a physical grave site.

Side note: If you look up these scriptures, you will find Hell in place of Gehenna. This is because Gehenna is a Greek word used in the original untranslated version of the Bible. When people started to translate the bible into various languages, Gehenna was replaced with Hell.

Gehenna=The Hell of torment=Lake of fire

Hell

Since Hell is just a word that replaces Gehenna, then it safe to assume that Hell is

1)A place of torture with a unquenchable and eternal fire as described above.

2)An abode of the dead where the dead are conscious of nothing. Again, Hell is a word that replaces the Hebrew word, Sheol. This is backed up by all of my opponents original arguments describing a pit filled with the dead that are not conscious. If you want scriptures, then I encourage you to look at his argument in round 1.

It is clear now that Hell has two meanings in the bible. Christian translators simply replaced both the Hebrew word Sheol and the Greek word Gehenna with Hell instead of coming up with two separate words.

Side note- My opponent thinks I am using another source instead of the bible when I talk about NRSV. To clear up confusion, NRSV= New Revised Standard Version Bible.

Hell thrown into Hell?

Going back to my earlier defense of my definitions, you can see that Hell has two meanings- Sheol and Gehenna. After all the dead have been judged, Sheol(the first hell) will be thrown into Gehenna(the second hell). As it is, if Con doesn't accept my explanation, then he creates a paradox in Revelation 20:11-15. Since he was unable to provide an alternate explanation, then my explanation that has been shown to be valid still stands.

Jesus, no hope of being resurrected?

Con claims since the scriptures say there is no hope of resurrection, then Jesus would be in hell eternally and therefore my logic is flawed.

1) I do hope Con isn't claiming God doesn't have the capabilities to resurrect anybody he wants.

2) The scripture is referring to those who have sinned. Jesus went there to redeem mankind of their sinful state so they might have a heavenly hope. Since Jesus was sent down to hell to fulfill a duty for God, then it makes perfect sense that he would be resurrected.

Con ignored my alternate explanation, that being that Jesus went to Sheol instead of Gehenna making that argument still a possible explanation. Take your pick, Jesus went to Gehenna to redeem man of their sin or he went to Sheol, either one works with the present argument.

Are the dead really conscious of nothing?

This is absurd because I have given many scriptures showing that they would be tormented day and night in an eternal fire meaning they must be conscious somehow. I have shown numerous times how the dead being conscious of nothing only applies to the Sheol version of hell, not Gehenna. Again, the dead are conscious of nothing only temporarily until the day of second judgment, when they will be either sent to heaven or hell(Gehenna).

If my opponent still remains unconvinced, then he should look up Matthew 13:42

They will throw them into the blazing furnace where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”- Matthew 13:42

Let me reverse the question on Con, How does the dead weep and gnash their teeth along with being tormented but be conscious of nothing at all?

The only explanation that makes sense is that hell has two meanings. One of temporary death with no consciousness and one with eternal punishment with consciousness.

Recap

Con claims that my definitions are unreliable and not from the bible. But all my definitions came straight from translations of the bible and are supported by actual scriptures, something Con was unable to do.
Con never made a good defense as to why Hell and the Lake of fire are not the same thing. He never made the distinction between the two types of hell and just insisted that I am wrong.

Con creates many paradoxes in the bible by refusing to accept my explanation for Hell. When the bible says on one hand the dead are consciousness of nothing and then on the other hand says they will suffer for all eternity, it creates a confusion as to what to believe. I gave my explanation to this paradox, but Con denied it without offering an alternate explanation.

Most damaging to Con's case though is his outright refusal to acknowledge my scriptures that show Hell to be a place of torment. Never once did he explain or even talk about these scriptures which were my proof that hell is a place of eternal punishment.

Conclusion

Hell is a place of eternal punishment. Maybe if the title had been, “Hell is an abode of the dead”, then Con might have had a strong case. As it is, his title was “What most Christians think of hell is not a place of torment”. I have shown this sentence to be false on numerous occasions and therefore have completed my side of the argument.


Debate Round No. 3
32 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by IFLYHIGH 5 years ago
IFLYHIGH
Problem of Evil
Posted by frozen_eclipse 5 years ago
frozen_eclipse
whats are they debating?
Posted by IFLYHIGH 5 years ago
IFLYHIGH
yeah I don't see that many more people voting :( Everybody is flocking to KRFournier and Microsucks debate which is really good btw.
Posted by Multi_Pyrocytophage 5 years ago
Multi_Pyrocytophage
Hopefully more than 1 person votes on this.
Posted by frozen_eclipse 5 years ago
frozen_eclipse
too Ifly.....darn that sucks....lol
Posted by Multi_Pyrocytophage 5 years ago
Multi_Pyrocytophage
Hmmm... I'll vote this tomorrow.
Posted by ru2religious 5 years ago
ru2religious
Its hard to vote on this because both side I felt didn't make strong arguments.

Hell = manking common grave aka earth. Hell in Greek is translated as Hades which is a Greek mythical God of the underworld. The word Hell also comes from the Goddess of the underworld in Norse religion. Her name was 'Hel'.
Gahenna = was a place located outside of ancient Canaan - it was a place where they took the dead body to be burned and because the bodies keep coming the fire was as a lake - Its a real place not a spiritual place where bad people go.

Sheol = simply means grave ...
Posted by IFLYHIGH 5 years ago
IFLYHIGH
Unfortuntally, these are not the popular debate types. People just really don't give a darn about how one translates the bible. :(
Posted by frozen_eclipse 5 years ago
frozen_eclipse
wow is no one going to vote?......lol
Posted by frozen_eclipse 5 years ago
frozen_eclipse
in response to the nde's i think they feel that way because right before we die your heart stops pumping .we all get a uphoric feeling. but The brain is still alive. So they could be thinking these things.....evident by people saying they saw the light. We all know that theres probroly no light, but psycologically since they believe that, there brain made that image . so when the patient is reawakened, they explain what happended when they thought they were dead........i hope im making sense here.....lol
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Multi_Pyrocytophage 5 years ago
Multi_Pyrocytophage
frozen_eclipseIFLYHIGHTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Both sides presented excellent arguments, and I could not give arguments to other sides. However, I do feel Con deserves the spelling and grammar due to some capitalization faults in Con's rounds. Also, Con gets sources for using sources.