In article <Apr.13.00.09.04.1993.28448@athos.rutgers.edu> dlecoint@garnet.acns.fsu.edu (Darius_Lecointe) writes: [insert deletion of unnecessary quote]  >Why is it that we have this notion that God takes some sort of pleasure >from punishing people?  The purpose of hell is to destroy the devil and >his angels.  First of all, God does not take any sort of pleasure from punishing people.  He will have mercy on whom he will have mercy and compassion on whom he will have compassion (Ex 33:19).  However, if he enjoyed punishing people and sending them to hell, then why would he send Jesus to "seek and save that which was lost" (Luke 19:10)?  > >To the earlier poster who tried to support the eternal hell theory with >the fact that the fallen angels were not destroyed, remember the Bible >teaches that God has reserved them until the day of judgement.  Their >judgement is soon to come. > >Let me suggest this.  Maybe those who believe in the eternal hell theory >should provide all the biblical evidence they can find for it.  Stay away >from human theories, and only take into account references in the bible. > You asked for it.  2 Peter 2:4-ff talks about how those who are ungodly are punished. Matthew 25:31-46 is also very clear that those who do not righteous in God's eyes will be sent to hell for eternity. 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10 states that those who cause trouble for the disciples "will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord". 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12 talks about those who refuse to love the truth being condemned. Revelation 21:6-8 talks about the difference between those who overcomes and those who do not.  Those who do not, listed in verse 8, will be in the "fiery lake of burning sulfur". Revelation 14:9-12 gives the indication that those who follow the beast "will be tormented with burning sulfur" and there being "no rest day or night" for them because of it. Psalm 9:17:  "The wicked return to the grave, all the nations that forget God."  I think those should be sufficient to prove the point.  >Darius  Joe Fisher  [In the following I'm mostly playing "devil's advocate".  I'm not advocating either position.  My concern is that people understand that it's possible to see these passages in different ways.  It's possible to see eternal destruction as just that -- destruction.  Rev often uses the term "second death".  The most obvious understanding of that would seem to be final extinction.  The problem is that the NT speaks both of eternal punishment and of second death.  I.e. it uses terms that can be understood either way.  My concern here is not to convince you of one view or the other, but to help people understand that there's a wide enough variety of images that it's possible to understand them either way.  As Tom Albrecht commented, the primary point is to do our best to keep people out of the eternal fire, whatever the details.  (To make things more interesting, Luke 20:35 implies that the damned don't get resurrected at all.  Presumably they just stay dead. -- yes I'm aware that it's possible to  understand this passage in a non-literal way.)  2 Peter 2:4-ff is talking about angels, and talks about holding them in hell until the final judgement.  This isn't eternal punishement.  Matthew 25:31-46 talks about sending the cursed into eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.  The fact that the fire is eternal doesn't mean that people will last in its flames forever. Particularly interesting is the comment about the fire having been prepared for the devil and his angels.  Rev 20 and 21 talk about the eternal fire as well.  They say that the beast and the false prophet will be tormented forever in it.  When talking about people being thrown into it (20:13-14), it is referred to as "the second death". This sounds more like extinction than eternal torment.  Is is possible that the fire has different effects on supernatural entities such as the devil, and humans?  2 Thessalonians 1:6-10 similarly, what is "everlasting destruction"? This is not necessarily eternal torment.  This one can clearly be understood either way, but I think it's at least possible to think that everlasting is being used to contrast the kind of destruction that can occur in this life with the final destruction that occurs in eternity.  2 Thessalonians 2:8 again talks about destruction. Revelation 21:6-8: see comment above Revelation 14:9-12 is probably the best of the quotes.  Even there, it doesn't explicitly say that the people suffer forever.  It says that the smoke (and presumably the fire) is eternal, and that  there is no respite from it.  But it doesn't say that the people are tormented forever.  Psalm 9:17:  I don't see that it says anything relevant to this issue.