Evidence for God from Science

ttoews wrote:

B. W wrote:If God makes extinct, annihilates, destroys as you believe and interpret — have not you proved God breaks his own word and commandment — thou shall not murder — cause life to cease? If you are right — you proved God a liar. Is that your position?

by your reasoning the bible makes God a liar as it records Him killing people and directing the killing of people.
Are you suggesting that as the creator of all life God does not have the right to end any life?

Good point, Ttoews. God is under no law, including his own.

Byblos,

You said to ttpews...

Don stated that if something is not explicitly stated that it cannot be considered true.

I have not stated that.

What I have been trying to say is that I have not been able to find anyone in the Bible who says that the alternative to everlasting life in heaven is everlasting life in hell. Apparently no one on this forum has been able to find anyone saying this either.

But I realize that just because the Bible never says "everlasting life in hell" that this doesn't necessarily mean that there is no everlasting life in hell. But I also realize that if I am going to believe something that isn't explicitly stated in the Bible that I should be extra careful to try to make sure that this is what the Bible really says even though it doesn't actually say it.

I am effected not just by what the Bible doesn't say about the alternative to everlasting life. I am also effected by what it does say about it.

And what it does say at Romans 6:23 is that the alternative to everlasting life is death.

And from what it says in Rev. 20:15 I conclude that it is an "everlasting death" that takes place, not in "the second life" but rather in "the second death."

That's the way it looks to me.

Don

Don wrote:What I have been trying to say is that I have not been able to find anyone in the Bible who says that the alternative to everlasting life in heaven is everlasting life in hell. Apparently no one on this forum has been able to find anyone saying this either.

Yeah, you keep saying that even though you keep quoting Romans 6:23. I believe that the soul is immortal and not just an adjective for body. When Adam sinned the penalty was death...spiritual death. Not physical death.

The wages of sin is not physical death. It is spiritual death that eventually leads to the second death in the lake of fire, which is eternal separation from God.

The wages of sin is death (conscious spiritual death separated from God in the lake of fire for all eternity) but the gift of God is eternal life (life with God in His presence in paradise for all eternity). It may be interesting to hear what you believe eternal life is. I have a feeling it is a bit different than what most of us here believe. Maybe on another thread?

So I think your question has been answered numerous times, but because you don't see it in black and white in the bible, you say we are not able to show you something clearly, even though you admit to spiritualizing what you read these things to mean.

It's all so ludicrous.

DonCameron wrote:Byblos,

You said to ttpews...

Don stated that if something is not explicitly stated that it cannot be considered true.

I have not stated that.

What I have been trying to say is that I have not been able to find anyone in the Bible who says that the alternative to everlasting life in heaven is everlasting life in hell. Apparently no one on this forum has been able to find anyone saying this either.

But I realize that just because the Bible never says "everlasting life in hell" that this doesn't necessarily mean that there is no everlasting life in hell. But I also realize that if I am going to believe something that isn't explicitly stated in the Bible that I should be extra careful to try to make sure that this is what the Bible really says even though it doesn't actually say it.

I am effected not just by what the Bible doesn't say about the alternative to everlasting life. I am also effected by what it does say about it.

And what it does say at Romans 6:23 is that the alternative to everlasting life is death.

And from what it says in Rev. 20:15 I conclude that it is an "everlasting death" that takes place, not in "the second life" but rather in "the second death."

That's the way it looks to me.

Don

Why would the term even be used Biblically?

From Genesis, death is promised as a result of sin. It obviously encompasses spiritual death which did not happen instantly.

Life is used in the scripture in many shades of meaning from physical life to the spiritual life found in Christ.

Just as Life in Christ equates to eternity in heaven, and does not cease upon judgment, theres no intuitive reason to believe that because death has the appearance of permanence from our perspective physically that after the resurrection that death by definition must result in annihilation.

Of course the scripture would not use the term "everlasting life in hell." That would be an oxymoron and it is a strawman argument. It doesn't use the term everlasting existence without death in heaven either. Does that mean we may die again? Of course not.

The issue here isn't whether any of us like the terms used or believe we're in a position to suggest how Scripture might have done it better. Just written that sentence made me shudder involuntarily! Scripture is inspired, inerrent in the originals and sufficient for all we need to know for salvation and successful Christian living and to understand what God wants us to know as should be self-evident.

The issue for us to examine the Scriptures on their own merits and to let the scriptures speak for themselves and to submit ourselves to them. The more convuluted gymnastics and appeals to additional passages outside the immediate passage involved in context with related passages identified as having been quoted or understood by the listeners, the more suspect the teaching is in my opinion.

Bart

FFC wrote:I believe that the soul is immortal and not just an adjective for body. When Adam sinned the penalty was death...spiritual death. Not physical death.

actually physical death was also involved. As part of the penalty they were tossed out of Eden and separated from the tree of life which in turn meant that they would physically die.

The wages of sin is not physical death. It is spiritual death that eventually leads to the second death in the lake of fire, which is eternal separation from God.

so the first death is a short term separation and the second death is a permanent separation? Aren't all sinners "dead" in their sins and then some are "made alive" through faith in Christ...which raises the question, if the damned are never made alive, why do they need to die a second death?....is it only to do with permanence?

FFC wrote:

ttoews wrote:

B. W wrote:If God makes extinct, annihilates, destroys as you believe and interpret — have not you proved God breaks his own word and commandment — thou shall not murder — cause life to cease? If you are right — you proved God a liar. Is that your position?

by your reasoning the bible makes God a liar as it records Him killing people and directing the killing of people.
Are you suggesting that as the creator of all life God does not have the right to end any life?

Good point, Ttoews. God is under no law, including his own.

Hmm, dangerous ground too trod - look at these scriptures again: Exodus 19:3-25 and Exodus 20:1-21 state that God spoke all these words and again it is written in Isaiah 55:11, Isaiah 45:23. God will not violate his word, even his own law. To do so is contrary to scripture, Psalms 12:6-7.

Also note, Matthew 22:36-40, John 3:15-16 — God does keep his law — his word is law for God to deny his word is to deny his law. What God says — becomes and God keeps his word and remains true to it. Psalms 33:5-11, Job 34:10-33, Job 37:22-24. For God not act in accordance with his own words would produce lawlessness. Something Satan tried to do with Jesus as recorded in Luke 4:1-14. Use God's word against him. [Beware of the enemy and what you face]

It is dangerous indeed to trod on ground and philosophy that says God does not have to keep his law — his word — spoken!
-
-
-

ttoews wrote:

FFC wrote:I believe that the soul is immortal and not just an adjective for body. When Adam sinned the penalty was death...spiritual death. Not physical death.

actually physical death was also involved. As part of the penalty they were tossed out of Eden and separated from the tree of life which in turn meant that they would physically die.

The wages of sin is not physical death. It is spiritual death that eventually leads to the second death in the lake of fire, which is eternal separation from God.

so the first death is a short term separation and the second death is a permanent separation?

I agree that physical death was involved, Ttoews, you are correct. I just think it was the result of the spiritual death. I believe they were kicked out of the garden so that they wouldn't partake of the tree of life and automatically have eternal life. God had another plan in store.

Ttoews wrote:Aren't all sinners "dead" in their sins and then some are "made alive" through faith in Christ...which raises the question, if the damned are never made alive, why do they need to die a second death?....is it only to do with permanence?

That would be my understanding. Throwing Death and Hell in the lake of fire if anything is symbolic of finality, until the final Judgement these unbelieving dead (if you believe in the immortality of the soul) have to be somewhere until that time. I really want to believe that when that happens all unbeliever will be snuffed out, but the talk of torment and punishment forever causes me to wonder.

DonCameron wrote: B.W., You said...

Therefore, would God break his own commandment — you shall not murder?

The idea of murder is to extinguish life, cause it to cease. God is a God of the living and not the dead, Mark 12:27, John 6:51-69, 2 Corinthians 5:1-5.

Would God deny himself?

Eternal non-existence, violates God own Commandments — now would God break his own word and law?

I don't understand the point you are making here.

Of course you do not understand — I question if you really know God or ever have encountered the Lord of Glory? I suggest you search this matter out yourself about God's word: Exodus 19:3-25 and Exodus 20:1-21 state that God spoke all these words and again it is written in Isaiah 55:11, Isaiah 45:23. God will not violate his word, even his own law. To do so is contrary to scripture, Psalms 12:6-7.

DonCameron wrote: You then asked...

Also, what is destruction without end mean? 2 Thess 1:9

You referred to 2 Thess. 1:9 again when you said...

All the scriptures others have cited to you are sufficient proof that Hell is eternal such as 2 Thess 1:9.

I looked up 2 Thess. 1:9 and noticed that it doesn't say anything about Hell being eternal. In fact what Paul said here seems to agree with what I have been saying rather then what you have been saying...

"The wicked) will undergo the judicial punishment of everlasting destruction from before the Lord and from the glory of his strength."

That's exactly what I believe. The way I understand it is that everlasting punishment of destruction will take place in the everlasting "second death" of Rev. 20:15

Revelations 20:14. “And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.” KJV - This verse is before verse 15 and what two items were tossed into the lake of fire?

Second death? Then there was a first? — Where is it experienced - Hell! If you are looking for a precise meaning and word placement — you will not find it. Hell and death eternal punishment, everlasting destruction, are tied grammatically and synonymously with the description of an eternal hell that exist now and later tossed into the lake of fire. If you refuse to accept this, that is fine. When you die, it will be made clear to you that you are wrong in your interpretation. Nothing will convince you otherwise. This will not keep you out of heaven but it will sure be an eye opener to realize how wrong you are. I speak from experience not philosophy. I am not boasting in this, nor trying to make myself out as something great. Jesus tells the truth about the rich man and Lazarus. Hell does indeed exist. The only thing that will change your mind is seeing what Jesus spoke about yourself, Luke 16:20-31. That day will come for us all.

DonCameron wrote: You said...

So you believe that those without Christ will suffer endless ruin, dying experiences, torments, punishment, and endlessly go through being annihilated continuously, or go through the extinction process eternally?

What I believe as of today is that those who are not found written in the book of like will be destroyed in the second death. - Rev. 20:15

You said...

If God makes extinct, annihilates, destroys as you believe and interpret — have not you proved God breaks his own word and commandment — thou shall not murder — cause life to cease? If you are right — you proved God a liar. Is that your position?

Ecclesiastes 3:11-15, "He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the hearts of men; yet they cannot fathom what God has done from beginning to end. 12 I know that there is nothing better for men than to be happy and do good while they live. 13 That everyone may eat and drink, and find satisfaction in all his toil—this is the gift of God. 14 I know that everything God does will endure forever; nothing can be added to it and nothing taken from it. God does it so that men will revere him. 15 Whatever is has already been, and what will be has been before; and God will call the past to account." NIV

Galatians 6:7 "Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows."

Are you mocking God by declaring that God broke his own commandment in order to annihilate according to your doctrine?

Sorry, but I don't understand the points you are making here. Don

Oh course you do not understand the points the points I made as I am not looking to argue with you but am seriously worried about the state of your soul with great compassion of which you could not possibly understand. I am sorry that my speech is harsh as I cannot help it. It is a righteous indignation that wells up in me when I sense someone is playing games with their own eternal destiny and others. I weep for you and will pray for you that the Lord God will open your ears to hear and understand the state of your eternal destiny.

Now to continue, Genesis declares God made man and woman in his own image and likeness. God placed eternity within our hearts because of this; this is a puzzle you need to figure out on your own. There is a physical death but it serves only as an awakening to a new beginning as Jesus taught in Luke 16:20-31. You can deny this all you want but His words are true on this matter, not yours.

Ecclesiastes 3:14, "I know that everything God does will endure forever; nothing can be added to it and nothing taken from it. God does it so that men will revere him…" NIV

Everything God does endures forever — did he make man? What does this tell you?
-
-
-

B.W.,

I do appreciate your concerns and prayers.

As I have said previously, according to what Paul explained to Timothy, as much as we would like to try to help those who disagree, it ultimately depends of what God does with us that will determine whether or not we can come back to our proper senses in order to know the truth about such things that we have been discussing. - 2 Timothy 2:23-25

Don

Byblos wrote:I may have missed it but what alternate interpretation did you supply for Mat 25:46 "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."?

haven't gotten there yet....so w/o further adieu:
I note Hebrews 13:20 reads:
Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, Jesus our Lord,
and Hebrews 6:2 reads:
...of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment.

I expect that we can agree that in 13:20 the phrase "eternal covenant" does not require an act of covenanting to be ongoing throughout all eternity, but simply requires the covenant to last, unchanged throughout eternity. Correct?
I expect that we can agree that in 6:2 the phrase "eternal judgement" does not require an act of judging to be ongoing throughout all eternity, but simply requires the judgment to last, unchanged throughout eternity. Correct?
Assuming those were both correct, why does the use of the phrase "eternal punishment" require an act of punishing to be ongoing throughout all eternity? ...or is it that the phrase simply requires the punishment to last, unchanged throughout eternity? If so, then Matt 25:46 is not inconsistent with annihilation and therefore not clearly calling for eternal torment.
Did you have any other "clear" passages?

First, clearly there's more than one explicit statement for eternal torment than Rev 20:10. Look no further than Mat 25:46 quoted above, which, by the way, is not symbolic in any way. It unequivocally states 'eternal punishment'. Annihilation puts an end to punishment and is anything but eternal. They are polar opposites.

Second, are you really trying to use my own words against me?....

sorry....I am surprised that you are so adamant that there is "more than one explicit statement for eternal torment than Rev 20:10". It is not that you possess a double standard...it is that you are mistaken wrt the existence of explicit statements

Is this the kind of hair-splitting argumentation required to explain away his or your position?

no...so far your proof texts have been rather easy to dismiss...wouldn't you agree? Rev 20:10 is the only one that gives me any pause for thought.

Third, having said all of that, I'm well cognisant of the fact that issues such as these, while terribly important to us all to dissect and comprehend, may not be so terribly important wrt salvation.

agreed

If you agree that there are degrees of punishment and you further agree that that punishment is eternal (as per Mat 25:46) then by definition annihilation is no longer valid as an option. Do you not see that?

what I don't see is that eternal punishment = eternal punishing ...do you now see that?

ttoews wrote:

Byblos wrote:I may have missed it but what alternate interpretation did you supply for Mat 25:46 "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."?

haven't gotten there yet....so w/o further adieu:
I note Hebrews 13:20 reads:
Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, Jesus our Lord,
and Hebrews 6:2 reads:
...of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment.

I expect that we can agree that in 13:20 the phrase "eternal covenant" does not require an act of covenanting to be ongoing throughout all eternity, but simply requires the covenant to last, unchanged throughout eternity. Correct?

Correct, I can agree on that. But the pronouncement of the covenant is eternal, otherwise the covenant is broken. As you said, the act of making a covenant need not be ongoing but the act of acting under the covenant rules most certainly is (eternal).

ttoews wrote:I expect that we can agree that in 6:2 the phrase "eternal judgement" does not require an act of judging to be ongoing throughout all eternity, but simply requires the judgment to last, unchanged throughout eternity. Correct?

Again, correct. We can agree that the act of judging need not be continuous but the act of executing the letter of the judgment most certainly is (eternal).

ttoews wrote:Assuming those were both correct, why does the use of the phrase "eternal punishment" require an act of punishing to be ongoing throughout all eternity? ...or is it that the phrase simply requires the punishment to last, unchanged throughout eternity? If so, then Matt 25:46 is not inconsistent with annihilation and therefore not clearly calling for eternal torment.

Yet again you are correct that the act of pronouncing the punishment need not be continuous, in fact it is a one time event. But the act of exacting the punishment most certainly is eternal and very consistent with eternal torment.

ttoews wrote:Did you have any other "clear" passages?

No, I think those were enough.

ttoews wrote:

First, clearly there's more than one explicit statement for eternal torment than Rev 20:10. Look no further than Mat 25:46 quoted above, which, by the way, is not symbolic in any way. It unequivocally states 'eternal punishment'. Annihilation puts an end to punishment and is anything but eternal. They are polar opposites.

Second, are you really trying to use my own words against me?....

sorry....I am surprised that you are so adamant that there is "more than one explicit statement for eternal torment than Rev 20:10". It is not that you possess a double standard...it is that you are mistaken wrt the existence of explicit statements

I really don't wish to go into a lexical discussion on what 'believe', sorry 'explicit' means . We'll leave that for another thread.

ttoews wrote:

Is this the kind of hair-splitting argumentation required to explain away his or your position?

no...so far your proof texts have been rather easy to dismiss...wouldn't you agree? Rev 20:10 is the only one that gives me any pause for thought.

They're easy to dismiss only if they're not dealt with properly.

ttoews wrote:

If you agree that there are degrees of punishment and you further agree that that punishment is eternal (as per Mat 25:46) then by definition annihilation is no longer valid as an option. Do you not see that?

what I don't see is that eternal punishment = eternal punishing ...do you now see that?

Well, I think I've shown otherwise but then again, to each his own.

DonCameron wrote:Turgonian,

I had said...

John 3:16 where Jesus gave the alternatives as being everlasting life or perish. ("perish" means "To be destroyed; to pass away; to become nothing."

Then you said...

That's not true.

What's not true? Isn't the above what Jesus said...

"For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, in order that ev every putting faith in him might not perish but have everlasting life."

Or is that not what you were referring to?

Don

No indeed. I proceeded to give evidence of the fact that 'perish' did not mean 'to be destroyed'. Apollumi is used in a much wider sense. We're translating Euripides's Hippolytus in Greek at school, and at one point, Phaedra tells an older woman, 'You have destroyed me!' (from apollumi). Phaedra was still very much alive and physically intact at the time.

Matt. 25:46 talks about 'eternal punishment', and I stick with that. I have a quote from Holding I appreciate:

JP Holding wrote:At the risk of being anachronistic by dealing with English rather than Greek, let me use a comparable word to "punishment" to make a point. Annihilationism would have us believe that "punishment" refers here to a completed process that is eternal in its results. But let us say that, rather than eternal punishment, we were to be sentenced to eternal entertainment. It is a word paired with aionios, we will say, and it is a noun "formed from a verb involving process". Following annihilationism "logic" someone sentenced to "eternal entertainment" would begin eternity by, say, watching a few back episodes of the Three Stooges, then have it turned off from there on. "I thought this was eternal entertainment!" you would cry. "Sure it is!" Gabriel answers. "You can remember what those Stooges episodes were like and laugh about them for the rest of eternity!" Sounds like false or misleading advertising to me -- and that is what the above annihilationism argument regarding the word "punishment" is. It is a twisting of the normal meaning of a word to suit a given position.

DonCameron wrote:B.W.,

I do appreciate your concerns and prayers.

As I have said previously, according to what Paul explained to Timothy, as much as we would like to try to help those who disagree, it ultimately depends of what God does with us that will determine whether or not we can come back to our proper senses in order to know the truth about such things that we have been discussing. - 2 Timothy 2:23-25

Don

Okay, Matthew 25:46 — eternal punishment and eternal life is stated here. You agree that eternal life a metaphor life in Heaven or unending happiness, bliss, etc, or both?

Yet you believe that eternal punishment is not eternal even though it states it clearly in this text. Somehow eternal punishment is fulfilled in annihilation yet annihilation means cessation of life itself. How can non-existence be everlasting punishment in this case non existence and everlasting life mean endless happiness? Punishment is what it means and it is endless. To say one metaphor means one thing here but another thing in the same context is a stretch of scripture twisting. You do not understand the metaphors used. That is evident by your doctrine.

Again, Satan tempted Jesus by using God's own word against him, why? Because he knows God will keep his word and not renege on what he says — God will keep all his words. When you say, it is written this way or not written that way, you are challenging God and his word as it is written — thou shall not murder.

As stated before, when God slays, he slays the physical being so as to bring them into his judgment, Hebrews 9:27 reveals this. He does not extinguish into a state of non-existence as that is reflective of murder in the first degree and violates his own word he will not renege on.

Human beings can and do murder — they extinguish the physical life and can be held accountable because they prematurely send a victim to God's judgment. Thou shalt not murder reflects God's character as he will not extinguish life into non-existence as life continues after death. God is a God of the living and not the dead. In the mortal realm, death is permanent, but not so for God and the spirit realm. Through Christ we have the doctrine called the resurrection of the dead.

For God at that future date to extinguish life into non-existence as your doctrine states is tantamount to murder. Thus God is forced to renege on his word. The very words he states he will keep no matter what. This is something Satan has been trying to do for eons. That is how he got away with rebellion and began evil — knowing God will keep his word no matter what and uses God's own words against God to manipulate God into doing wrong — proving God not perfect and righteous, etc.. He tried it with Jesus. Now here we are casting doubt on God's word about eternal punishment as non-existence. Nothing has changed.

Therefore, to be quiet frank, how can you really be a Christian and mock God's word?

You like to cite 2 Timothy to me but I am not quarreling as the bible also states in Colossians 2:8-23 and we are also called to defend the Faith not cow tow to someone citing 2 Timothy 2:23-25 that is violating God's word.

So — are you stating that God is a murderer eternally sending one off into non-existence in some sort of punishing flames that really do not punish but punish because the flames remain but the person therein does not? — is that your charge?
-
-
-

B.W.,

Okay, Matthew 25:46 — eternal punishment and eternal life is stated here.

OK.

You agree that eternal life a metaphor life in Heaven or unending happiness, bliss, etc, or both?

I understand "eternal life" to be life that lasts forever - i.e. everlasting life.

Yet you believe that eternal punishment is not eternal even though it states it clearly in this text.

I do believe that "eternal punishment" is eternal. What we don't agree on is what that punishment is. I think it is everlasting death in the second death. But you think of it as everlasting life in hell

Somehow eternal punishment is fulfilled in annihilation yet annihilation means cessation of life itself.

I feel that the "eternal punishment" is fulfilled in eternal death. I view the cessation of life is death.

How can non-existence be everlasting punishment in this case non existence and everlasting life mean endless happiness? Punishment is what it means and it is endless.

I feel that everlasting death in the second death is the everlasting punishment that Jesus mentioned in Matthew 25:46..

NOTE: It seems that the word punishment is causing a major problem that blocks us from getting our points to each other. I think you (and most everyone else on this forum) feel that one cannot be punished forever unless they are alive forever in order to feel that punishment.

But I view death that lasts forever in the second death as the everlasting punishment that awaits all those who are not found written in the book of life. - Rev. 20:15 It seems reasonable to me that since the gift of everlasting life will last forever, the punishment of death will also last forever.

Therefore, to be quiet frank, how can you really be a Christian and mock God's word?

I may be misunderstanding God's word but I don't see that as mocking it. And as far as whether or not I am a Christian, all I can do is try and leave it up to Christ Jesus make that decision.

So — are you stating that God is a murderer eternally sending one off into non-existence in some sort of punishing flames that really do not punish but punish because the flames remain but the person therein does not? — is that your charge

I don't think of God as a Murderer. Although I guess it could be said that he is an Executioner. But I definitely don't think of him as a Tormentor and certainly not a Torturer!

Don

Canuckster1127 wrote:Why would the term even be used Biblically?

From Genesis, death is promised as a result of sin. It obviously encompasses spiritual death which did not happen instantly.

Life is used in the scripture in many shades of meaning from physical life to the spiritual life found in Christ.

Just as Life in Christ equates to eternity in heaven, and does not cease upon judgment, theres no intuitive reason to believe that because death has the appearance of permanence from our perspective physically that after the resurrection that death by definition must result in annihilation.

Of course the scripture would not use the term "everlasting life in hell." That would be an oxymoron and it is a strawman argument. It doesn't use the term everlasting existence without death in heaven either. Does that mean we may die again? Of course not.

The issue here isn't whether any of us like the terms used or believe we're in a position to suggest how Scripture might have done it better. Just written that sentence made me shudder involuntarily! Scripture is inspired, inerrent in the originals and sufficient for all we need to know for salvation and successful Christian living and to understand what God wants us to know as should be self-evident.

The issue for us to examine the Scriptures on their own merits and to let the scriptures speak for themselves and to submit ourselves to them. The more convuluted gymnastics and appeals to additional passages outside the immediate passage involved in context with related passages identified as having been quoted or understood by the listeners, the more suspect the teaching is in my opinion.

Quoted for Truth. This needs to be read again.

As an aside, "eternal life" could probably be translated "life into the ages." The idea is life in the eternal kingdom. It would be ridiculous to talk about "eternal life in hell," because the phrase doesn't mean anything. If death just means separation from God (primarily), then the second death is just that - a person dies physically, and then they are separated from God eternally, thus the second death. Furthermore, this separation is in terms of fellowship, not location. God is omnipresent. David even says that God is in the depths of Sheol (Ps. 139:8). There is no reason not to take Rev. 14:8 literally, especially considering Is. 66:24.

Anyway, Don - that last verse, Isaiah, may be very helpful as far as your question concerning the choice of "eternal life in heaven" and "eternal life in hell." Besides this, we also have Daniel 12:2

• Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. (NIV)

The Bible says their shame and contempt is everlasting. I'd say we go with what it says, don't you think?