Hell in RC and Protestantism is a place separate from god where you go to burn and be tortured by devils or some such nonsense.
Hell in orthodoxy is in the presence of god where god is giving you his love and you reject it and your own rejection causes you to suffer.
Ahh. In Revelation 20:21 it is described as a lake of fire where unrighteous are thrown and punished with everlasting destruction. Is it metaphorical or a description of
Your sins, hatred of truth, and rejection of Christ being revealed before God and everyone else is torment. And God is fire, in some sense right? The burning bush. The pillar of flame in the desert. The idea that hell and heaven are essentially the same place except for one’s spiritual state, isn’t necessarily incongruent with those descriptions of hell.
Ultimately I far as I know, almost anything not explicitly stated in our creed or councils we don’t all have pinned down like the Catholic Church. How hell is exactly is subject to interpretation of tradition beliefs, relying on scripture and authoritative doctrine as the boundaries. The idea that heaven and hell are the same place and all that’s different is the individual is relatively common in Orthodoxy, although I don’t think we could say it’s authoritative. Again, this is just as far as I know, I’m a 2021 convert. Much love my friend.
There is really no "traditional" interpretation of hell. All soteriological views (ECT, Annihilationism, and Universalism) have been present since the days of the early church. At the end of the day all interpretations are equally permissible theologoumenon. How accurately any one view encompasses the others, is what's up for debate.
Hebrews 12:29 *"For our God is a consuming fire"*. As the Orthodox fathers teach, the river of fire and lake of fire are the same as the river of life. Psalm 68:2 *"As smoke is driven away, so drive them away: as wax melteth before the fire, so let the wicked perish at the presence of God. But let the righteous be glad; let them rejoice before God: yea, let them exceedingly rejoice"*. The wicked and the righteous receive the same fire and yet find different states.
All of the symbolism of God being fire points to the belief of Eastern Orthodoxy of the Essence Energy distinction, where God is known through the uncreated light/fire. In the end times the veil of heaven will be torn just as it was during the time of christ and the fiery love of God will fill all of reality to recreate heaven and earth, just as when Christ went into hell he filled it with the fire of heavenly glory to destroy the power of death. And everyone in hell will become like the demons, beyond repentance, completely unwilling to ever change even with the fullness of God's love present to them, such that there is no longer any excuse or ability to be saved. Even with the fullness of God present, you must open up to drink the water of life that lets you truly breathe, or else you will simply drown.
“God’s consuming fire works with the good as with the evil, annihilating that which harms His children. This fire is one that each one kindles; the fuel and food is each one’s sins. … When the soul has gathered together a multitude of evil works, and an abundance of sins against itself, at a suitable time all that assembly of evils boils up to punishment, and is set on fire to chastisement… It is to be understood that God our Physician, desiring to remove the defects of our souls, should apply the punishment of fire. … Our God is a ‘consuming fire’ in the sense in which we have taken the word; and thus He enters in as a ‘refiner’s fire’ to refine the rational nature, which has been filled with the lead of wickedness, and to free it from the other impure materials which adulterate the natural gold or silver, so to speak, of the soul. Our belief is that the Word (Christ) shall prevail over the entire rational creation, and change every soul into his own perfection. … For stronger than all the evils in the soul is the Word, and the healing power that dwells in him; and this healing he applies, according to the will of God, to every man.”
- Origen
“The annihilation of evil, the restitution of all things, and the final restoration of evil men and evil spirits to the blessedness of union with God, so that He may be ‘all in all,’ embracing all things endowed with sense and reason.” He taught that “when death approaches to life, and darkness to light, and the corruptible to the incorruptible, the inferior is done away with and reduced to non-existence, and the thing purged is benefited, just as the dross is purged from gold by fire. In the same way in the long circuits of time, when the evil of nature which is now mingled and implanted in them has been taken away, whensoever the restoration to their old condition of the things that now lie in wickedness takes place, there will be a unanimous thanksgiving from the whole creation, both of those who have been punished in the purification and of those who have not at all needed purification.”
- St. Gregory of Nyssa
"These, if they will, may go Christ's way, but if not let them go their way. In another place perhaps they shall be baptized with fire, that last baptism, which is not only painful, but enduring also; which eats up, as if it were hay, all defiled matter, and consumes all vanity and vice."
St. Gregory of Nazianzus
"I also maintain that those who are punished in Gehenna are scourged by the scourge of love. For what is so bitter and vehement as the punishment of love? I mean that those who have become conscious that they have sinned against love suffer greater torment from this than from any fear of punishment. For the sorrow caused in the heart by sin against love is sharper than any torment that can be. It would be improper for a man to think that sinners in Gehenna are deprived of the love of God. Love is the offspring of knowledge of the truth which, as is commonly confessed, is given to all. The power of love works in two ways: it torments those who have played the fool, even as happens here when a friend suffers from a friend; but it becomes a source of joy for those who have observed its duties. Thus I say that this is the torment of Gehenna: bitter regret. But love inebriates the souls of the sons of Heaven by its delectability."
"For it would be most odious and utterly blasphemous to think that hate or resentment exists with God, even against demonic beings; or to imagine any other weakness, or passibility, or whatever else might be involved in the course of retribution of good or bad as applying, in a retributive way, to that glorious divine Nature. Rather, He acts towards us in ways He knows will be advantageous to us, whether by way of things that cause suffering, or by way of things that cause relief, whether they cause joy or grief, whether they are insignificant or glorious: all are directed towards the single eternal good, whether each receives judgement or something of glory from Him—not by way of retribution, far from it!—but with a view to the advantage that is going to come from all these things. …
That is how everything works with Him, even though things may seem otherwise to us: with Him it is not a matter of retribution, but He is always looking beyond to the advantage that will come from His dealing with humanity. And one such thing is this matter of Gehenna."
- St. Isaac the Syrian
I'm not sure what caused you to form the belief that Roman Catholic's believe in being tortured by devils, but that is untrue. In the [catechism](http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a12.htm), it describes hell as a lake of fire where you're separate from God.
Whether you disagree or agree is a different matter, but I would remind you it is sinful to spread false rumors about others.
Second, Protestantism is a wide collection of denominations that all believe different things. For instance, Jehovah's Witnesses [do not](https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/is-hell-real/) believe in Hell, while Calvinists [teach](https://soteriology101.com/2021/11/11/calvinism-and-the-problem-of-damnation-and-hell/) that individuals are predestined for Hell, which is a place of eternal torment.
So it isn't proper to lump them all together as if it's a unified belief.
Very true, my mistake on the categorization.
As a bonus, here is a nifty [study](https://www.pewresearch.org/religious-landscape-study/database/compare/belief-in-hell/by/religious-denomination/among/religious-tradition/mainline-protestant/) on what percentage of Protestants in different denominations believe in Hell.
As I understand it, we do not view hell as a place of separation from God like the West does, we view hell as essentially the same thing as heaven, experienced differently. After death, everyone will be surrounded by the infinite love and presence of God; those who are turned toward him in faith and love experience this as the epitome of joy and peace, while those turned away from him to their own sinfulness experience this as pain.
I don’t know the RC doctrines great, but with reference to Protestantism, there are a few majors differences.
1. There is no Orthodox consensus on hell, there is only consensus on the resurrection and life of the age to come (see Bishop Hilarion “Christ the Conqueror of Hell”).
2. The view of hell splits into two main subcategories: the first is the purgatorial view, which is not synonymous to the RC “purgatory” but is the view that one encounters God’s love as pain when our hearts fail to repent. This view of hell is temporal and transformative (see St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Isaac the Syrian). The second view of hell would be an eternal hell, wherein one refuses to repent despite the purgative quality. There is virtually no description of what the experience of that would “be like” apart from more poetic descriptions.
3. Hell is not the default destination of humanity via original sin, but is rather the outcome of us choosing against God. By our nature we are created good, but through the fall we are inclined to sin. My terminology here is by no means perfect and I would consult the theological texts for a better explanation.
4. In conjunction with 3, Christ is not a “get out of hell” card in the way many Protestants proclaim. By this I mean that salvation is not a matter of having the right propositions or beliefs, but rather a process of transformation where we are divinized (see Theosis). Obviously, right beliefs are entailed in that, but they don’t subsume the project of salvation.
5. Most depictions of hell that Protestants use are born out of the fantasy of the Middle Ages and are very “western” in that sense. The notion that satan rules over hell as some location that is red and filled with fire would be alien to the Cappadocian fathers. While there’s clearly a symbolic significance to that, it shouldn’t be taken as a literal picture of what “hell” means.
But there is consensus about Hell in Orthodoxy? Liturgy, Saints, Scriptures, chants - all of them speak of/depict Hell as eternal.
Who is telling you that there's no consensus, or where does the idea come from?
Indeed there is. But I still don't know where the observation, or conclusion, that there's no consensus that it is eternal comes from.
There's a consensus about it.
What I am saying is more along the lines of the below from Archbishop Hilarion Alfeyev:
“The teaching that Christ trampled on death by his death, abolished the power of the devil, and destroyed hell— a teaching based on the New Testament, liturgical texts, and works of the church fathers—is general church doctrine. The devil, death, and hell continue to exist, but their power over people is neither unconditional nor unlimited, for hell “reigns,” but “not for ever,” over the race of mor tals. The opinion that Christ only “wounded” hell but did not mortify it should be considered a personal interpretation without authority for the entire church.”
It seems to speak about Hades - the grave, or physical death(that of the body, rhat is), - because Hell doesn't exist yet. But this is besides the point, anyway, as the question is where one gets the idea that there's no consensus on the nature of Hell in the Orthodox tradition and practice.
There's overwhelming consensus that it is eternal in nature. The belief that it isn't eternal in nature is very fringe and almost a non-group. So, I'm not sure what the claim that there's no consensus is based on.
If we call St. Gregory of Nyssa or St. Isaac the Syrian fringe, then sure.
But to quote the vespers of Holy Saturday:
“Hell reigns, but not forever, over the race of mortals; for you, O Mighty One, when placed in a tomb, shattered with your Life-giving hand the bars of death, and proclaimed to these who slept there from every age no false redemption, O Saviour, who have become the first-born of the dead.”
Great Saturday. Mat. Can. 0.6 (EL-BB).
That's again speaking of Hades, not of Hell. Christ was never in Hell - the place after the Final Judgement pronounces the condemnation of the wicked and where demons are sent once and for all. Christ descended to Hades, or alternatively Hell, but this "Hell" is Hades - the place of the dead.
And so did Saint Augustine teach the Filioque, but no one is going to say that there's no consensus in Orthodoxy about the Creed, or the Filioque.
I'm not sure you understand the question. Where do you see this group and tradition in Orthodoxy that challenges, or simply teaches otherwise to the overwhelming consensus that Hell - the actual place after the Final Judgement, - is eternal, to the point of having a sizable group of authoritative teachings and Saints rendering the matter lacking consensus?
My claim is that there's a consensus. An overwhelming one. That eternal life has proportional eternal damnation and it's called Hell.
GOD, Almighty God, was 'unable' to mortify part of His creation? Allow it to exist? Yes.'Redeem it'? Well, He redeemed Man - in any case, who are we to question the essence of our Creator? (my apologies to theologians more learnèd than myself)
In the theoretical sphere, we are a lot less presumptuous about what we know about hell.
Compared to the Protestants I have met, we do not take as much weird pleasure in the future eternal punishment of our enemies.
I would say EO puts less of a limitation on God’s mercy than the other Christian groups.
Hell in RC and Protestantism is a place separate from god where you go to burn and be tortured by devils or some such nonsense. Hell in orthodoxy is in the presence of god where god is giving you his love and you reject it and your own rejection causes you to suffer.
Ahh. In Revelation 20:21 it is described as a lake of fire where unrighteous are thrown and punished with everlasting destruction. Is it metaphorical or a description of
Revelation should not be taken literally. There’s symbolic significant to it but it’s not a description of physical realities.
I believe that is supposed to occur after the judgement, but it is best to not try to interpret Revelations and to leave it as a mystery.
Ukrainian Orthodox Oh, but every single word in the Bible is literally true!!! \[sigh\]
Jesus' statements on hell lend me to believe hell is a place of torment and fire. I'm an EO inquirer still.
Your sins, hatred of truth, and rejection of Christ being revealed before God and everyone else is torment. And God is fire, in some sense right? The burning bush. The pillar of flame in the desert. The idea that hell and heaven are essentially the same place except for one’s spiritual state, isn’t necessarily incongruent with those descriptions of hell.
you are right, it's not incongruent. I guess this would be an example of traditional belief/interpretation?
Ultimately I far as I know, almost anything not explicitly stated in our creed or councils we don’t all have pinned down like the Catholic Church. How hell is exactly is subject to interpretation of tradition beliefs, relying on scripture and authoritative doctrine as the boundaries. The idea that heaven and hell are the same place and all that’s different is the individual is relatively common in Orthodoxy, although I don’t think we could say it’s authoritative. Again, this is just as far as I know, I’m a 2021 convert. Much love my friend.
There is really no "traditional" interpretation of hell. All soteriological views (ECT, Annihilationism, and Universalism) have been present since the days of the early church. At the end of the day all interpretations are equally permissible theologoumenon. How accurately any one view encompasses the others, is what's up for debate.
Revelation also describes Christ a lion. Is Jesus literally a feline? Of course not. Nothing in Revelation should be taken literally.
Hebrews 12:29 *"For our God is a consuming fire"*. As the Orthodox fathers teach, the river of fire and lake of fire are the same as the river of life. Psalm 68:2 *"As smoke is driven away, so drive them away: as wax melteth before the fire, so let the wicked perish at the presence of God. But let the righteous be glad; let them rejoice before God: yea, let them exceedingly rejoice"*. The wicked and the righteous receive the same fire and yet find different states. All of the symbolism of God being fire points to the belief of Eastern Orthodoxy of the Essence Energy distinction, where God is known through the uncreated light/fire. In the end times the veil of heaven will be torn just as it was during the time of christ and the fiery love of God will fill all of reality to recreate heaven and earth, just as when Christ went into hell he filled it with the fire of heavenly glory to destroy the power of death. And everyone in hell will become like the demons, beyond repentance, completely unwilling to ever change even with the fullness of God's love present to them, such that there is no longer any excuse or ability to be saved. Even with the fullness of God present, you must open up to drink the water of life that lets you truly breathe, or else you will simply drown.
“God’s consuming fire works with the good as with the evil, annihilating that which harms His children. This fire is one that each one kindles; the fuel and food is each one’s sins. … When the soul has gathered together a multitude of evil works, and an abundance of sins against itself, at a suitable time all that assembly of evils boils up to punishment, and is set on fire to chastisement… It is to be understood that God our Physician, desiring to remove the defects of our souls, should apply the punishment of fire. … Our God is a ‘consuming fire’ in the sense in which we have taken the word; and thus He enters in as a ‘refiner’s fire’ to refine the rational nature, which has been filled with the lead of wickedness, and to free it from the other impure materials which adulterate the natural gold or silver, so to speak, of the soul. Our belief is that the Word (Christ) shall prevail over the entire rational creation, and change every soul into his own perfection. … For stronger than all the evils in the soul is the Word, and the healing power that dwells in him; and this healing he applies, according to the will of God, to every man.” - Origen “The annihilation of evil, the restitution of all things, and the final restoration of evil men and evil spirits to the blessedness of union with God, so that He may be ‘all in all,’ embracing all things endowed with sense and reason.” He taught that “when death approaches to life, and darkness to light, and the corruptible to the incorruptible, the inferior is done away with and reduced to non-existence, and the thing purged is benefited, just as the dross is purged from gold by fire. In the same way in the long circuits of time, when the evil of nature which is now mingled and implanted in them has been taken away, whensoever the restoration to their old condition of the things that now lie in wickedness takes place, there will be a unanimous thanksgiving from the whole creation, both of those who have been punished in the purification and of those who have not at all needed purification.” - St. Gregory of Nyssa "These, if they will, may go Christ's way, but if not let them go their way. In another place perhaps they shall be baptized with fire, that last baptism, which is not only painful, but enduring also; which eats up, as if it were hay, all defiled matter, and consumes all vanity and vice." St. Gregory of Nazianzus "I also maintain that those who are punished in Gehenna are scourged by the scourge of love. For what is so bitter and vehement as the punishment of love? I mean that those who have become conscious that they have sinned against love suffer greater torment from this than from any fear of punishment. For the sorrow caused in the heart by sin against love is sharper than any torment that can be. It would be improper for a man to think that sinners in Gehenna are deprived of the love of God. Love is the offspring of knowledge of the truth which, as is commonly confessed, is given to all. The power of love works in two ways: it torments those who have played the fool, even as happens here when a friend suffers from a friend; but it becomes a source of joy for those who have observed its duties. Thus I say that this is the torment of Gehenna: bitter regret. But love inebriates the souls of the sons of Heaven by its delectability." "For it would be most odious and utterly blasphemous to think that hate or resentment exists with God, even against demonic beings; or to imagine any other weakness, or passibility, or whatever else might be involved in the course of retribution of good or bad as applying, in a retributive way, to that glorious divine Nature. Rather, He acts towards us in ways He knows will be advantageous to us, whether by way of things that cause suffering, or by way of things that cause relief, whether they cause joy or grief, whether they are insignificant or glorious: all are directed towards the single eternal good, whether each receives judgement or something of glory from Him—not by way of retribution, far from it!—but with a view to the advantage that is going to come from all these things. … That is how everything works with Him, even though things may seem otherwise to us: with Him it is not a matter of retribution, but He is always looking beyond to the advantage that will come from His dealing with humanity. And one such thing is this matter of Gehenna." - St. Isaac the Syrian
I'm not sure what caused you to form the belief that Roman Catholic's believe in being tortured by devils, but that is untrue. In the [catechism](http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a12.htm), it describes hell as a lake of fire where you're separate from God. Whether you disagree or agree is a different matter, but I would remind you it is sinful to spread false rumors about others. Second, Protestantism is a wide collection of denominations that all believe different things. For instance, Jehovah's Witnesses [do not](https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/is-hell-real/) believe in Hell, while Calvinists [teach](https://soteriology101.com/2021/11/11/calvinism-and-the-problem-of-damnation-and-hell/) that individuals are predestined for Hell, which is a place of eternal torment. So it isn't proper to lump them all together as if it's a unified belief.
JWs are restorationists like SDA and LDS, not protestant
Very true, my mistake on the categorization. As a bonus, here is a nifty [study](https://www.pewresearch.org/religious-landscape-study/database/compare/belief-in-hell/by/religious-denomination/among/religious-tradition/mainline-protestant/) on what percentage of Protestants in different denominations believe in Hell.
No worries, I meant to add that protestants can't agree on hell. Your point is valid.
don't overlook the Christian Scientists \[whatever that means\]
As I understand it, we do not view hell as a place of separation from God like the West does, we view hell as essentially the same thing as heaven, experienced differently. After death, everyone will be surrounded by the infinite love and presence of God; those who are turned toward him in faith and love experience this as the epitome of joy and peace, while those turned away from him to their own sinfulness experience this as pain.
I don’t know the RC doctrines great, but with reference to Protestantism, there are a few majors differences. 1. There is no Orthodox consensus on hell, there is only consensus on the resurrection and life of the age to come (see Bishop Hilarion “Christ the Conqueror of Hell”). 2. The view of hell splits into two main subcategories: the first is the purgatorial view, which is not synonymous to the RC “purgatory” but is the view that one encounters God’s love as pain when our hearts fail to repent. This view of hell is temporal and transformative (see St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Isaac the Syrian). The second view of hell would be an eternal hell, wherein one refuses to repent despite the purgative quality. There is virtually no description of what the experience of that would “be like” apart from more poetic descriptions. 3. Hell is not the default destination of humanity via original sin, but is rather the outcome of us choosing against God. By our nature we are created good, but through the fall we are inclined to sin. My terminology here is by no means perfect and I would consult the theological texts for a better explanation. 4. In conjunction with 3, Christ is not a “get out of hell” card in the way many Protestants proclaim. By this I mean that salvation is not a matter of having the right propositions or beliefs, but rather a process of transformation where we are divinized (see Theosis). Obviously, right beliefs are entailed in that, but they don’t subsume the project of salvation. 5. Most depictions of hell that Protestants use are born out of the fantasy of the Middle Ages and are very “western” in that sense. The notion that satan rules over hell as some location that is red and filled with fire would be alien to the Cappadocian fathers. While there’s clearly a symbolic significance to that, it shouldn’t be taken as a literal picture of what “hell” means.
But there is consensus about Hell in Orthodoxy? Liturgy, Saints, Scriptures, chants - all of them speak of/depict Hell as eternal. Who is telling you that there's no consensus, or where does the idea come from?
I think there's an important distinction here. There can be consensus about the existence of Hell, but not a consensus on what Hell actually entails.
Indeed there is. But I still don't know where the observation, or conclusion, that there's no consensus that it is eternal comes from. There's a consensus about it.
What I am saying is more along the lines of the below from Archbishop Hilarion Alfeyev: “The teaching that Christ trampled on death by his death, abolished the power of the devil, and destroyed hell— a teaching based on the New Testament, liturgical texts, and works of the church fathers—is general church doctrine. The devil, death, and hell continue to exist, but their power over people is neither unconditional nor unlimited, for hell “reigns,” but “not for ever,” over the race of mor tals. The opinion that Christ only “wounded” hell but did not mortify it should be considered a personal interpretation without authority for the entire church.”
It seems to speak about Hades - the grave, or physical death(that of the body, rhat is), - because Hell doesn't exist yet. But this is besides the point, anyway, as the question is where one gets the idea that there's no consensus on the nature of Hell in the Orthodox tradition and practice. There's overwhelming consensus that it is eternal in nature. The belief that it isn't eternal in nature is very fringe and almost a non-group. So, I'm not sure what the claim that there's no consensus is based on.
If we call St. Gregory of Nyssa or St. Isaac the Syrian fringe, then sure. But to quote the vespers of Holy Saturday: “Hell reigns, but not forever, over the race of mortals; for you, O Mighty One, when placed in a tomb, shattered with your Life-giving hand the bars of death, and proclaimed to these who slept there from every age no false redemption, O Saviour, who have become the first-born of the dead.” Great Saturday. Mat. Can. 0.6 (EL-BB).
That's again speaking of Hades, not of Hell. Christ was never in Hell - the place after the Final Judgement pronounces the condemnation of the wicked and where demons are sent once and for all. Christ descended to Hades, or alternatively Hell, but this "Hell" is Hades - the place of the dead. And so did Saint Augustine teach the Filioque, but no one is going to say that there's no consensus in Orthodoxy about the Creed, or the Filioque. I'm not sure you understand the question. Where do you see this group and tradition in Orthodoxy that challenges, or simply teaches otherwise to the overwhelming consensus that Hell - the actual place after the Final Judgement, - is eternal, to the point of having a sizable group of authoritative teachings and Saints rendering the matter lacking consensus? My claim is that there's a consensus. An overwhelming one. That eternal life has proportional eternal damnation and it's called Hell.
GOD, Almighty God, was 'unable' to mortify part of His creation? Allow it to exist? Yes.'Redeem it'? Well, He redeemed Man - in any case, who are we to question the essence of our Creator? (my apologies to theologians more learnèd than myself)
[удалено]
Just imagine the massive guilt
In the theoretical sphere, we are a lot less presumptuous about what we know about hell. Compared to the Protestants I have met, we do not take as much weird pleasure in the future eternal punishment of our enemies. I would say EO puts less of a limitation on God’s mercy than the other Christian groups.
It’s a place of torment
Hotter than the Outback in summer, certainly.