There Is No Hell!

newnature

Registered Senior Member
Paul’s usage of the Greek word for body is “soma.” “Soma” is not something external to a man himself, something he has, it is what he is. Indeed, “soma” is the nearest equivalent to our word personality. To believe in the resurrection of the “soma,” means to believe that my human self, the human being that “I” am, will be restored to life again. I will not be someone different from who I am now, but I will be exclusively myself. God has committed himself to preserving my individuality, personality, and character. The term body “soma” is simply a synonym for “person.” The goal of God’s redemption is not the destruction of his first creation, but its restoration to its original perfection. This is why the Scripture speaks of the resurrection of the body “soma” rather than of the creation of new beings. Both death and resurrection affect the total person “soma.” The resurrected persons “soma” will be the same individuals as those who existed previously on earth.


Being created in the image of God means that we must view ourselves as intrinsically valuable and richly invested with meaning, potentially and responsibilities. We are to be and to do on a finite scale, what God is and does on an infinite scale. By virtue of being created in the image of God, human beings are capable of reflecting his character in their own life; animals possess none of these qualities. What distinguishes people from animals is the fact that human nature inherently has godlike possibilities. Omniscience omnipotence, or omnipresence, none of these other divine attributes have been ascribed to man as part of the image of God. We have been created to reflect God in our thinking and actions, but the physical sustained by God and dependent upon him for our existence in this world and in the world to come. Developing a godly character in this present life, this will be our personal identity in the world to come. It is the character or personality that we have developed in this life, that God preserves in his memory.


Breath of life and the living soul; man’s soul is in his blood and indeed his blood is his soul. He is kept in being [alive] as a living soul by the inhalation of oxygen out of the air. Man’s soul depends on this intake of oxygen and the blood, but the cessation of breathing results in the death of the soul, because the blood, which is equated with the soul, no longer receives the oxygen that is so vital for life. Breathing is seen as a manifestation of the sustaining power of God. Man became a living soul does not mean that at creation his body was endowed with an immortal soul, a separate entity, distinct from the body. Rather, it means that as a result of the divine inbreathing of the “breath of life” into the lifeless body, man became a living, breathing being. The heart began to beat, the blood to circulate, the brain to think, and all the vital signs of life were activated. A living soul means a living being. Not through the implantation of an immaterial, immortal soul into his material, mortal body, but through the animating principle of life “breath of life” conferred on him by God himself.


In the Old Testament, the word “sheol” is the underground depository of the dead. There are no immaterial, immortal souls in sheol, simply because the soul does not survive the death of the body. Nowhere in the Old Testament is the abode of the dead regarded as a place of punishment or torment. The concept of an infernal ‘hell’ developed in Israel only during the Hellenistic period. The condition of the dead in sheol, the realm of the dead, is one of unconsciousness, inactivity, a rest or sleep that will continue until they are resurrected. The prospect that one day a vast number of people will be consigned to the everlasting torment of hell is most disturbing. Traditionalists read “eternal punishment” as “eternal punishing.” When the adjective “aionios” meaning eternal or everlasting, is used in the Greek with nouns of action, it has reference to the result of the action, not the process. The wicked will not be passing through a process of punishment forever, but will be punished once and for all with eternal results. The destruction of the wicked is eternal “aionios,” not because the process of destruction continues forever, but because the results are permanent. “Eternal” often refers to the permanence of the result, rather than the continuation of a process. It is evident that the fire that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah is eternal, not because of its duration, but because of its permanent results.


“And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire” (Jude 23a). The fire to which Jude refers is obviously the same kind of fire that consumed Sodom and Gomorrah. It is evident that the fire that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah is eternal, not because of its duration, but because of its permanent results. It is important to note that the Greek word “aionios” literally means “lasting for an age.” Roman emperors being described as “aionios”; what is meant is that they held their office for life. Unfortunately, the English words “eternal” or “everlasting” do not accurately render the meaning of “aionios”, which literally means “age-lasting.” The notion of the eternal torment of the wicked can only be defended by accepting the Greek view of the immortality and indestructibility of the soul, a concept which is foreign to Scripture. Everlasting torture is intolerable from a moral point of view, because it pictures God acting like a bloodthirsty monster who maintains an everlasting Auschwitz for his enemies, whom he does not even allow to die. Consider the moral implications of the traditional view of hell, which depicts God as a cruel torturer who torments the wicked throughout all eternity. The thought of such a torment being deliberately inflicted by divine decree, is totally incompatible with the idea of God as infinite love.


Many Christians will be sorely disappointed to discover that their beliefs in the afterlife are a delusion. When this happens, it will cause personal crisis to Christians accustom to believing that at death their souls break loose from their bodies and continue to exist either in Heaven or in the torment of Hell. Redemption is the restoration of the whole person, and not the salvation of the soul apart from the body. If at death the soul of the believer goes up immediately to Heaven to be with Jesus, one hardly can have any real sense of expectation for Jesus to come down to raise the dead believers that were in Jesus, and transform the living believers that are in Jesus. Traditionally, evangelical and other religious persuasions teach, that at the resurrection, their material bodies are reunited with their souls, thus intensifying the pleasure of Heaven or the pain of Hell. Why are evangelicals so adamant in refusing to reconsider the Biblical teachings on the restoration of the whole person? To abandon souls being reunited with their bodies, also entails abandoning a whole cluster of doctrines resulting form it. The total impact of dividing humans into body and soul has promoted all sorts of false dichotomies in Scripture. To be an “Evangelical” means to uphold certain fundamental traditional doctrines without questioning. Any one who dares to question the Biblical validity of a traditional doctrine can become suspect as a “heretic.” It is impossible to estimate the far-reaching impact that the doctrine of unending hellfire has had throughout the centuries in justifying religious intolerance, torture, and the burning of “heretics.” The rationale is simple: If God is going to burn heretics in Hell for all eternity, why shouldn’t the church burn them to death now?
 
The problem is that you are obtaining your evidence and basing your conclusions on a book of mythology.

Hell is as likely as heaven, and both are extremely unlikely.
 
Traditionalists read “eternal punishment” as “eternal punishing.” When the adjective “aionios” meaning eternal or everlasting, is used in the Greek with nouns of action, it has reference to the result of the action, not the process. The wicked will not be passing through a process of punishment forever, but will be punished once and for all with eternal results. The destruction of the wicked is eternal “aionios,” not because the process of destruction continues forever, but because the results are permanent. “Eternal” often refers to the permanence of the result, rather than the continuation of a process. It is evident that the fire that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah is eternal, not because of its duration, but because of its permanent results.

The term everlasting and eternal are used correctly, and as you have made clear refers to the strength of the punishment or flames and not on its fuel. Sometimes called "unquenchable fire" the fire continues until "root and branch" is consumed.
The doctrine of an indestructable soul is a mockery of justice and other principles of existance, and is not found in the Authorised Bible. Your whole post is a reflection of what all genuine scholars of scripture agree on. There is no difficulty in understanding if one reads by the rules of plain English. The confusion about this topic in religions is the result of the other prevalent view that runs contrary to what you have said. While it elevates cruelty, it degrades the belief in heaven as well.
 
Paul’s usage of the Greek word for body is “soma.” “Soma” is not something external to a man himself, something he has, it is what he is. Indeed, “soma” is the nearest equivalent to our word personality.

Perhaps you should cite a source for you particular definition of "soma".

so·ma
1. The entire body of an organism, exclusive of the germ cells.
2. See cell body.
3. The body of an individual as contrasted with the mind or psyche.​

It seems you have your definitions completely backwards. Even here it does not mean what you say:

http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/soma.html
 
Perhaps you should cite a source for you particular definition of "soma".

so·ma
1. The entire body of an organism, exclusive of the germ cells.
2. See cell body.
3. The body of an individual as contrasted with the mind or psyche.​

It seems you have your definitions completely backwards. Even here it does not mean what you say:

http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/soma.html

Psyche is not something that is separate from the body, neither does a mind exist without a body. A character is formed within a body, by the senses through the body, and therefore a renewal of life must include the exact blueprint of that consequence, otherwise the identity of the person is compromised, if not wiped out. The term soma includes the body on its own even a corpse, without suggesting the disembodied ghost/psyche theories.
 
Psyche is not something that is separate from the body, neither does a mind exist without a body. ... The term soma includes the body on its own even a corpse, without suggesting the disembodied ghost/psyche theories.

I never said anything about "disembodied ghost/psyche theories", so what are you going on about? "Soma" means body, without any further implications, so the OP conflates his own assumptions with the actual definition to arrive at unfounded conclusions.
 
I never said anything about "disembodied ghost/psyche theories", so what are you going on about? "Soma" means body, without any further implications, so the OP conflates his own assumptions with the actual definition to arrive at unfounded conclusions.

Yes, you are right and I misread your comment.
Strickly by language, soma has no further implications other than a body dead or alive.
But in context of how it is used in scripture, it has a broader meaning that includes, personality, character, influence, spirit or mind etc. It avoids separation of "being" from body by all means and so Newnature's delivery is consistent.
 
Last edited:
no hell

The problem is that you are obtaining your evidence and basing your conclusions on a book of mythology.

Hell is as likely as heaven, and both are extremely unlikely.

interesting how the rational mind processess the word "no". for example, no hell can mean the idea of hell-existance is refuted. Simon Magus had some interesting teachings about "fire" as a primordial concept of early man and modern man has attached it to "burning hell". for me hell would be cold or devoid of concept or consciousness. some tibetan bhuddism texts go into a lot of nihilism "no" and "non" ,using logic to explain reality. eventually one is so confused, the rational mind flips over to intuition and experiences something that cannot be explained.
 
The term everlasting and eternal are used correctly, and as you have made clear refers to the strength of the punishment or flames and not on its fuel. Sometimes called "unquenchable fire" the fire continues until "root and branch" is consumed.
The doctrine of an indestructable soul is a mockery of justice and other principles of existance, and is not found in the Authorised Bible. Your whole post is a reflection of what all genuine scholars of scripture agree on. There is no difficulty in understanding if one reads by the rules of plain English. The confusion about this topic in religions is the result of the other prevalent view that runs contrary to what you have said. While it elevates cruelty, it degrades the belief in heaven as well.

the old testement is all about wars . alien-nefelim used to live on earth. humans were their slaves. they forced humans to fight their petty wars against each other. they were the gods of old. this idea of god has persisted till today. people should know that many old testament stories were borrowed from Sumerian texts and were not the word of God. only after the great flood did nefilim really take an interest in the plight of humans. the nefilim vacated earth in disgust with humans but left us with their idea of Kingship, principalities and powers so we might survive. we have outgrown Kingship and maybe also principalities. the old testement texts were for political gain, one race over another. the nefilim also wrote about heaven but if it is translated properly "heaven" should be sumerian "firmanent" . "firmanent" is the sky, being the abode of their God who was not far away i.e. orbiting the earth and reachable or on a distant planet, also reachable. after that its all fairy tales.
 
the old testement is all about wars . alien-nefelim used to live on earth. humans were their slaves... the nefilim also wrote about heaven but if it is translated properly "heaven" should be sumerian "firmanent" . "firmanent" is the sky, being the abode of their God who was not far away i.e. orbiting the earth and reachable or on a distant planet, also reachable. after that its all fairy tales.

There are numerous legends that reflect what you have put forward, and they included ideas about heaven or the sky, hell and or the underworld. Egypt is a classic example.

The subjects are all related to 'hell' although not strickly on the topic.

I remember a time when I dismissed a lot of myths etc, simply because they sounded too bizarre, but once you discover what they are based on, they're generally not too hard to unravel. I don't accept myths on face value, however they're a record of human thought which is a fact of history.
 
Yes, you are right and I misread your comment.
Strickly by language, soma has no further implications other than a body dead or alive.
But in context of how it is used in scripture, it has a broader meaning that includes, personality, character, influence, spirit or mind etc. It avoids separation of "being" from body by all means and so Newnature's delivery is consistent.

Like I told the OP:
"Perhaps you should cite a source for you particular definition of "soma"."

If you are saying that the scriptural context differs from the definition, please provide the specific verses. Until someone does, we are only discussing opinion that is apparently erroneous on the face of it.
 
Like I told the OP:
please provide the specific verses. Until someone does, we are only discussing opinion that is apparently erroneous on the face of it.

Of about 200, here are a few samples, Genesis 2:7, Matt 6: 22,23, Romans 12:5, 1Corinth 15:40,44, Ephesians 4:4, Colossians 1:18, 1 Thessal 5:23, James 3:6. Authorised version.
 
heaven and hell

There are numerous legends that reflect what you have put forward, and they included ideas about heaven or the sky, hell and or the underworld. Egypt is a classic example.

The subjects are all related to 'hell' although not strickly on the topic.

I remember a time when I dismissed a lot of myths etc, simply because they sounded too bizarre, but once you discover what they are based on, they're generally not too hard to unravel. I don't accept myths on face value, however they're a record of human thought which is a fact of history.

i also dont accept myths on face value, such as the bible. those authors used to write incorrect history on purpose, such as the
apostles when they encountered stonger "prophets" than themselves.jesus did not talk of a burning hell.
 
i tooked up your bible quotes. genesis 2:7...breath of life. matt 6:22,23... body full of light. 1 Corinth... holy sprit. james 3:6... fire of hell. i.e not all the same thing. shows you that translating "soma" means people have no idea what it is or they havent experienced it or there is no equivalent.
 
i tooked up your bible quotes. genesis 2:7...breath of life. matt 6:22,23... body full of light. 1 Corinth... holy sprit. james 3:6... fire of hell. i.e not all the same thing. shows you that translating "soma" means people have no idea what it is or they havent experienced it or there is no equivalent.
 
Back
Top