This document discusses evidence for the biblical reality of hell from both the Old and New Testaments. It notes several Hebrew and Greek words used to describe hell, and provides examples from the Gospels where Jesus speaks of hell. Logically, it argues that if God is perfectly just and good, then evil must ultimately be punished. It also notes that philosophical arguments for God's existence, like the moral argument, imply hell as the destination for unresolved evil. The document advises being prepared to answer objections to the concept of hell, and provides suggestions for tactfully responding to questions about whether hell means non-believers are condemned.

1. Apologetics and the
Reality of Hell
TH363 Apologetics
CCBC-Montebelluna
Instructor: Rick Harrell, M.Div., M.A.

2. Hell&Biblical
Evidence
 Depending on the version you study, “hell” is discussed
in the OT more or less thirty times.
 The word sheol is considered the place of the dead and
carries the idea of separation, exile, punishment,
abandonment, and where the wicked go.
 In the NT, ”hell” is presented as reality through the
Synoptics, Acts, Paul, Hebrews, James, Peter, Jude,
and Revelation.
 Gehenna, sheol, and tartarao are used to represent the
place of separation from all God is, all He values, and all
that makes life good.
 “Hell” is a created place designed for the rebellious
angels and the devil.
 It is reserved as the place for all who are unrighteous
and unredeemed.

3. Hell&Biblical
Evidence
 While the topic of ”hell” is broader than one passage
allows, a good place to gain a picture is found in Jesus’
words in the Gospels:
 Physical discomfort is better than eternal punishment.
(Mt 5:29)
 Attitudes of evil words endanger us to hell – “you fool”
(Mt 5:22)
 Unforgiveness deserve hell. (Mt 6:14)
 Ignoring God’s evidence and presence deserves hell. (Lk.
10:15)
 It is the place of separation, pain, darkness, destruction,
and eternal punishment. (Mt. 10:28, 23:33, Mk 3:29, Lk
16)

4. Hell&Logical
Arguments
 “Hell” is one of the biggest “go to” arguments against
belief in God.
 However, the absence of hell is an argument against
belief in God.
 Imagine the worst possible person– we’ve seen quite a
few in our time. If God is, and is good, should this person
be punished for his or her evil, or welcomed into the
same heaven you or I might be?
 God’s being and nature require a place of punishment.
 The presence of Evil and Death have to be resolved.
Evil in our hearts and death is inevitable.
 In the presence of a completely perfect God, evil has to be
resolved before death.
 Evil unresolved cannot find a place in perfection.
 Hell is reserved for unresolved evil.
 If evil exists apart from punishment, God is not just.

5. Hell&Logical
Arguments
 The reality of “Hell” is supported by philosophical
arguments for God’s existence.
 Moral Argument for God – because there is a universal
understanding that good and evil actions exist, the
ultimate good, or the law-giver must exist.
 Since there is good and evil, for eternity to be real, there
must be “hell” where unresolved evil ends up.
 Consciousness Argument for God – human
consciousness has no explanation apart from God who
exists.
 Conscious good and conscious evil have to be resolved –
conscious evil cannot reside where total conscious good is
– this points to “hell.”

6. Youwillbe
asked
“TheQuestion”
 Koukl speaks of being ask “the Question” – about hell’s
existence and proof there is no God.
 This question can come in different wrappings:
 Won’t everyone go to heaven? At least eventually?
 You can’t believe there is such a place as hell?
 How could a loving God condemn me to a hell’s
punishment just for not believing in Jesus?
 Do you think that just because there is a heaven, there
has to be a hell?
 Or Koukl’s version…

7. Tactics&
”TheQuestion”
 “You’re saying that people who don’t
believe just like you are going to Hell?”
 Meant to demean and disqualify.
 Meant to “end the discussion” by painting you
dark, judgmental, and the worst of
stereotypes: fundamentalist.
 Indirect is better than direct in this case. (You
can choose to be direct, present a “sound byte,
then walk away deflated.)
 It’s not enough to know “hell is real” – you
have to know why “hell is real.”

8. Tactics&
”TheQuestion”
 “You’re saying that people who don’t
believe jut like you are going to Hell?”
 Tell them ”something they know.”
 The most powerful leading questions are the
ones they already know the answers to.
 Help them agree with you.
 Ask questions that give them permission to
“Connect the Dots.”

9. Tactics&
”TheQuestion”
 “You’re saying that people who don’t
believe just like you are going to Hell?”
 Use the ”Leading Question” Tactic
 Redirect toward the goal of truth.
 Should people be punished for breaking the law?
 Have you ever broken a moral law?
 Me, too. We both need a solution. (Bridge)