Skip to content

Study 5: Four "Hell" Words — Advanced Study Answer Key

Sheol, Hades, Gehenna, Tartaroo: Semantic Ranges, LXX Patterns, and Evidence Classification

Evidence Tiers

This series uses a three-tier evidence classification to distinguish what Scripture says from what people claim it teaches:

  1. Explicit (E) — The text directly says this. You can point to a verse and quote it.
  2. Necessary Implication (N) — No single verse says this word-for-word, but it unavoidably follows from what the text does say. No interpretation is needed — every reader, regardless of theological position, must agree.
  3. Inference (I) — Someone claims the Bible teaches this, but no verse says it and no combination of verses forces it. Something must be added beyond what the text contains: a concept, a framework, or a choice between possible readings.

The hierarchy matters: Explicit > Necessary Implication > Inference. An inference cannot override what the text explicitly states.

Section A: Sheol (H7585) — Full Semantic Range

1. Sheol appears approximately 67 times in the OT. The KJV translates it "grave" 31 times, "hell" 27 times, and "pit" 3 times. What does this inconsistency in English translation tell you about the semantic range of the word? Can any single English word capture it?

No single English word captures sheol. The KJV translators themselves could not settle on one rendering — choosing "grave" 31 times and "hell" 27 times for the same word. This tells us sheol's semantic range is broader than either English equivalent. "Grave" is too physical (sheol is not a hole in the ground), and "hell" imports torment associations the Hebrew does not carry. Later translations increasingly retain "Sheol" as a transliteration, recognizing this problem.

2. Examine the following passages where righteous persons go to sheol: Genesis 37:35 (Jacob), Psalm 16:10 (David), Job 14:13 (Job requests sheol as a refuge). Now examine passages where the wicked go to sheol: Psalm 9:17, Numbers 16:33 (Korah). What necessary implication follows about whether sheol is a punishment venue?

If righteous persons (Jacob, David, Christ — Acts 2:27,31) and wicked persons (Ps 9:17, Korah) all go to sheol, then sheol cannot be a punishment venue reserved for the wicked. It is the universal destination of all the dead. This is a necessary implication — no interpretation is required. Jacob fully expects to go there; Job requests it as a place of refuge from God's wrath (Job 14:13). Neither would do so if sheol were a place of torment.

3. Six didactic passages describe sheol's characteristics: Ecclesiastes 9:10 (no work, knowledge, wisdom), Psalm 6:5 (no remembrance), Psalm 115:17 (silence), Psalm 88:10-12 (forgetfulness, darkness), Job 10:21-22 (darkness), Job 17:13-16 (bed in darkness, rest in dust). These come from four different authors. What consistent picture emerges?

The consistent picture across four authors (Solomon, David, Heman, Job) and three books (Ecclesiastes, Psalms, Job) is unconsciousness: no work, no device, no knowledge, no wisdom, no remembrance, no thanksgiving, silence, darkness, forgetfulness, rest. No didactic passage describes sheol as a place of conscious activity. The unanimity across multiple authors strengthens the classification — this is not one author's perspective but a consistent biblical testimony.

4. Sheol is paired with abaddon (destruction) in Proverbs 15:11, Proverbs 27:20, and Job 26:6. What does this pairing suggest about sheol's nature? Is it paired with torment vocabulary or destruction vocabulary?

Sheol is paired with abaddon, which means "destruction" or "place of destruction." It is never paired with torment vocabulary. The natural word-association in the Hebrew mind is sheol-destruction, not sheol-torment. This is significant because Hebrew parallelism pairs synonymous or closely related concepts.

5. Read Psalm 139:8, Amos 9:2, and Job 11:8. In these passages, sheol is used as a spatial extreme opposite heaven. Does this usage support "sheol = punishment" or "sheol = the depth/unseen realm"?

These passages use sheol as a spatial marker — the deepest extreme, opposite heaven. "If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell [sheol], behold, thou art there" (Ps 139:8). The point is comprehensiveness (God is everywhere), not punishment. Sheol here means "the farthest depth" — supporting its meaning as the unseen realm below, not a torture chamber.

6. Sheol is personified as insatiable in Isaiah 5:14, Proverbs 30:16, and Habakkuk 2:5. It "enlarges itself" and "opens its mouth." Does personification tell us about sheol's literal nature, or is it a literary device?

This is literary personification — a common Hebrew device. Sheol does not literally have a mouth or the capacity to enlarge itself any more than the mountains literally "sing" (Isa 55:12) or the trees "clap their hands." Personification tells us about death's insatiable appetite for the living (everyone eventually dies), not about sheol's literal architecture.

Section B: Sheol — Competing Depictions (Didactic vs. Poetic)

7. Read Isaiah 14:9-10. The rephaim (shades) "speak" in sheol. Now read Isaiah 14:4 — the passage is identified as a mashal (taunt-poem). In the same passage, trees "rejoice" (v.8) and sheol is "moved" (v.9). If trees do not literally speak and sheol is not literally a being that can be "moved," what literary device is at work?

Personification, governed by the identified genre: mashal (taunt-poem). The text itself tells us this is a mashal (v.4). Within the same poem, cedars of Lebanon speak (v.8), sheol is "moved" as though it were a conscious being (v.9), and the rephaim deliver a scripted taunt. If we do not read the trees as literally speaking, consistency requires we not read the rephaim's "speech" as literal consciousness either. The genre governs the interpretation.

8. Read Ezekiel 32:21, 27. Warriors "speak" in sheol — but verse 27 describes them lying with swords under their heads (sleep/burial imagery). This passage is prophetic lamentation (qinah). How does identifying the genre affect whether you read the "speaking" as literal consciousness?

The genre is prophetic lamentation — a dirge using vivid imagery. Verse 27 undercuts a literal reading: the warriors lie with swords under their heads, which is burial imagery (weapons placed with the dead). The same passage that has warriors "speaking" also has them lying in the posture of the dead. The lamentation genre uses speech as a literary device, just as the mashal does.

9. Read Luke 16:19-31. The rich man is depicted as conscious in hades. Now consider: (a) Is this passage a parable or a historical account? (b) What is the stated teaching point (v.29-31)? (c) If the rich man's consciousness in hades is literal, how does that reconcile with the six didactic passages describing sheol as unconscious?

(a) The passage appears in a sequence of parables and uses parabolic features (unnamed "certain rich man," named character from a common Jewish folk tradition, Abraham's bosom, dialogue across an afterlife divide). (b) The stated teaching point is "They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them" (v.29) — a call to heed Scripture, not a geography lesson about hades. (c) If taken as literal, it contradicts six didactic passages from four authors. The parable fails Tree 3 Gates 1 (the rich man is a character, not a verified literal person in a didactic statement) and Gate 3 (parabolic genre). Didactic passages govern parabolic depictions — not the reverse.

10. When didactic passages (direct teaching statements) and parabolic/poetic passages describe the same subject differently, which type governs the other's interpretation? How would you resolve the tension between the six unconsciousness passages and the three apparent-consciousness passages?

Didactic passages govern parabolic and poetic passages. The FOR-consciousness evidence consists of: one parable (Luke 16:23), one mashal/taunt-poem with the text itself identifying the genre (Isa 14:4,9-10), and one prophetic lamentation with burial imagery in the same passage (Ezek 32:21,27). The AGAINST-consciousness evidence consists of seven plain didactic statements from four authors across three books. The plain governs the ambiguous. The literary depictions of consciousness are genre-appropriate devices, not theological descriptions of sheol's nature.

Section C: Hades (G86) — LXX Translation Patterns

11. The Septuagint (LXX) translates sheol as hades in 58 of approximately 65 instances. The remaining translations use vocabulary related to descending, death, destruction, and soul — no torment-related word appears. What does this tell you about how pre-Christian Jewish translators understood sheol?

Pre-Christian Jewish translators understood sheol as the realm of the dead — not as a place of torment. They had access to the full range of Greek vocabulary, including words for punishment and torment, but never once used such vocabulary to render sheol. They consistently chose hades (the unseen realm), along with death, destruction, and descending vocabulary. The complete absence of torment vocabulary in 65 LXX translations of sheol is significant negative evidence.

12. Acts 2:27, 31 directly quotes Psalm 16:10, substituting hades for sheol. This is a verified textual connection (direct OT quotation in the NT). What level of certainty does this give for sheol-hades equivalence?

The highest possible level for word equivalence. This is not a scholar's inference or a translational guess — it is an apostle, speaking under inspiration, directly quoting an OT passage and using hades where the Hebrew says sheol. Combined with the LXX's 58/65 consistent translation, sheol-hades equivalence is as well-established as any cross-linguistic identification in Scripture.

"Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell [hades], neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption." — Acts 2:27 (quoting Ps 16:10)

13. Read Revelation 20:13-14. Hades delivers up the dead and is then cast into the lake of fire. What two necessary implications follow?

Two necessary implications: (1) Hades is temporary — it delivers up the dead and is then destroyed. It is a holding state ended by resurrection and judgment, not a permanent destination. (2) Hades and the lake of fire are distinct entities — if A is cast into B, A and B cannot be the same thing. Both implications pass the 3-question N-tier test: both sides accept these textual observations, one meaning exists, and nothing is added.

14. Read Revelation 20:10 and then Revelation 20:15 and 21:8. In verse 10, three subjects (the devil, the beast, the false prophet) are "tormented day and night for ever and ever." In verses 15 and 21:8, human beings enter the lake of fire, and the identifying term is "the second death." Does the text state that what happens to the three named subjects also happens to humans?

No. The text specifies the three subjects of Rev 20:10 (the devil, the beast, the false prophet) and uses "torment" vocabulary for them. When humans enter the same lake of fire (Rev 20:15; 21:8), the text switches to death vocabulary — "the second death." The text does not state that the three subjects' fate extends to human beings. Extending it requires importing the assumption that all who enter the lake of fire experience the same thing as the three named subjects — an inference, not a textual statement.

15. The beast and the false prophet are symbolic entities in Revelation's apocalyptic framework (Rev 19:20), not individual human beings. How does this affect whether Rev 20:10 can be extended to describe the fate of all the wicked?

The three named subjects include one supernatural being (the devil) and two symbolic entities (the beast = a political/religious system; the false prophet = a deceptive system). These are not representative individual humans — they are apocalyptic symbols. Extending what happens to symbolic entities to all individual humans requires a hermeneutical step the text does not make. The text itself, when it describes human fate, uses different vocabulary ("the second death").

Section D: Gehenna (G1067) — Etymology, OT Background, NT Usage

16. Trace the OT history of ge-Hinnom. What are the OT associations — torment of the living or death, slaughter, and corpse disposal?

The OT associations are consistently death, slaughter, and corpse disposal: - Child sacrifice to Molech (2 Ki 23:10; 2 Chr 28:3; 33:6; Jer 7:31; 32:35) — children died there. - Josiah's desecration (2 Ki 23:10) — the site was made unclean. - Jeremiah's renaming as "the valley of slaughter" (Jer 7:32; 19:6) — slaughter = killing, not torment. - Burial "till there be no place" (Jer 7:32) — burial of the dead. - Isaiah 66:24 — worms and fire acting on "carcases" (peger = corpses).

No OT passage describes the Valley of Hinnom as a place of ongoing torment of living beings.

17. A popular claim holds that Gehenna was Jerusalem's perpetually burning garbage dump. This claim first appears in Rabbi David Kimhi (c. 1200 CE) and is absent from all Second Temple sources. What does the absence of this claim from earlier sources suggest about its reliability?

The absence from all Second Temple sources (Josephus, Mishnah, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, Philo) — a gap of over 1,200 years — suggests the garbage dump claim is a medieval invention, not a historical fact. The biblical Valley of Hinnom associations are child sacrifice, desecration, prophetic judgment, and corpse disposal. Building a theology of eternal torment on a claim that first appears in the 13th century CE is building on an unattested foundation.

18. All 12 NT occurrences of gehenna: Jesus uses gehenna 11 times; James uses it once. Does any gehenna passage use basanizo (torment), basanismos (torment/noun), or kolasis (punishment) applied to human beings?

No. This is an observable fact across all 12 occurrences. Jesus consistently uses apollumi (destroy, perish) when describing what happens in gehenna (Matt 10:28; Matt 5:29-30). The vocabulary across all gehenna passages is destruction, not torment. The complete absence of torment vocabulary in 12 occurrences is significant — if gehenna were a place of eternal conscious torment, one might expect at least one instance of torment vocabulary.

19. Read Mark 9:43-48 carefully. Jesus quotes Isaiah 66:24. The Hebrew word peger means dead body/corpse. The Greek skolex (worm/maggot) occurs 3 times in the NT, all quoting this passage. What acts on the dead bodies: agents of torment or agents of decomposition?

Agents of decomposition. The skolex (maggot) is a decomposition organism — it feeds on dead organic matter. The fire acts on peger (corpses). In the OT source that Jesus chose to quote, the subjects are explicitly dead: "they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed." The worm and fire are not torturing living beings — they are consuming dead bodies. Jesus' choice to quote this particular OT text is interpretively significant: He selected a passage about corpses, not about conscious suffering.

"They shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched." — Isaiah 66:24

20. Read Matt 18:9 and Mark 9:43, 45, 47. What is the stated alternative to gehenna?

"Enter into life." The dichotomy is consistently life vs. gehenna — not life vs. torment. "It is better for thee to enter into life halt [maimed], than having two feet to be cast into hell [gehenna]" (Mark 9:45). If gehenna meant ongoing conscious existence in torment, the opposite of "life" would be "torment." But the opposite of "life" is destruction/death — which is exactly what apollumi means.

21. In OT usage, "unquenchable fire" appears in Jeremiah 17:27 and "fire shall not be quenched" in Isaiah 34:10. What does "unquenchable" mean in OT usage?

In Jeremiah 17:27, God says He will "kindle a fire in the gates [of Jerusalem], and it shall not be quenched." Jerusalem's gates are not still burning. In Isaiah 34:10, Edom's smoke "shall go up for ever; from generation to generation it shall lie waste." Edom is not still smoking. "Unquenchable" in OT usage means fire that cannot be extinguished before it completes its work — irresistible, unstoppable destruction — not fire that burns forever. The fire accomplishes its purpose and then ceases.

Section E: Tartaroo (G5020) — Scope and Limitations

22. Tartaroo occurs once in the entire NT (2 Pet 2:4). It is a verb, not a noun. It is applied exclusively to "the angels that sinned." Can any doctrine about human final fate be built on this word?

No. A word used once, applied only to angels, in the form of a verb (to cast into Tartarus) rather than a noun, provides no data about human final fate. Building any doctrine about human destiny on tartaroo would require extending the word's scope beyond its stated subject. The text is explicit: it is about "the angels that sinned."

23. Compare 2 Peter 2:4 with Jude 1:6. Both describe the same event. Is this a final state or a pre-judgment holding?

Pre-judgment holding. Peter says "reserved unto judgment." Jude says "unto the judgment of the great day." Both specify that the angels are waiting for judgment — this is not their final state. Tartaroo describes a temporary imprisonment prior to final adjudication.

24. Jude 1:7 mentions Sodom and Gomorrah "suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." The cities are not still burning. What does "eternal fire" mean in this context?

"Eternal fire" refers to fire whose results are permanent, not fire that burns forever. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire — they are not still burning. Jude even says they are "set forth for an example" — a visible example of completed destruction. If "eternal fire" meant fire that burns forever, the cities would still be burning. The adjective "eternal" modifies the consequence (permanent destruction), not the duration of the burning process.

Section F: The KJV Translation Problem and Cross-Study Integration

25. Construct a summary of what each word actually designates and explain why a single English word fails.

The four words designate three distinct concepts: - Sheol/Hades: The general abode/state of ALL the dead (righteous and wicked). Temporary. Characterized by unconsciousness in didactic passages. Paired with death and destruction. - Gehenna: Eschatological destruction of the wicked. Final. Uses destruction vocabulary (apollumi). Derives from a valley associated with slaughter and corpse disposal. - Tartaroo: Temporary imprisonment of fallen angels. Pre-judgment. Applied exclusively to angels, never to humans.

A single English word ("hell") fails because it imports torment associations into all four words, conflates three distinct concepts into one, obscures the fact that sheol/hades receives the righteous too, hides the destruction vocabulary of gehenna, and erases the angel-only scope of tartaroo. The unified "hell" concept exists only in English translation, not in the source texts.

26. Trace the connection across prior studies.

This study confirms and extends prior findings: - etc6-01b (Matt 10:28, E028): God destroys soul and body in gehenna. This study shows apollumi is consistent across all 12 gehenna passages — not an isolated usage. - etc6-02 (Rom 6:23, wages of sin is death; 2 Thess 1:9, everlasting destruction): Gehenna's destruction vocabulary matches the "destruction" vocabulary found across the broader NT. - etc6-03 (Rev 20:14, second death = lake of fire): This study adds that hades and the lake of fire are distinct (hades is cast INTO the lake of fire) and that when humans enter the lake of fire, the text uses "the second death" — death vocabulary, not torment vocabulary. - etc6-04 (sheol/hades is the common destination; hades is temporary): This study exhaustively examines all four "hell" words and confirms both findings across the full semantic range.

The findings are mutually reinforcing: destruction vocabulary (gehenna), death vocabulary (second death), and unconsciousness descriptions (sheol/hades) form a consistent picture across four studies.

Evidence Classification Exercise — Answers

1. "The LXX translates sheol as hades in 58 of approximately 65 instances." - Explicit (E). This is an observable, verifiable textual fact about the LXX translation. Anyone with access to the LXX can confirm the count.

2. "Sheol/hades is characterized by unconsciousness — no work, knowledge, wisdom, remembrance, or praise." - Necessary Implication (N). Six didactic passages from four authors (Ecc 9:10; Ps 6:5; 115:17; 88:10-12; Job 10:21-22; 17:13-16) each explicitly describe aspects of unconsciousness. The combined testimony that sheol involves no work, no knowledge, no wisdom, no remembrance, silence, darkness, and forgetfulness unavoidably implies that sheol is characterized by unconsciousness. Classified Conditionalist because one side must qualify these statements (e.g., "from an earthly perspective") to maintain their position.

3. "Gehenna is a place of eternal conscious torment for all the wicked." - Inference (I) — specifically I-B (Competing Evidence). FOR: Mark 9:43-48 (unquenchable fire, undying worm). AGAINST: Matt 10:28 (destroy/apollumi), Matt 5:29-30 (perish/apollumi), Luke 12:5 (kills then casts), Isa 66:24 (corpses), and the complete absence of torment vocabulary in all 12 gehenna passages. The FOR evidence cites "unquenchable fire" and "undying worm," but the OT source Jesus quotes (Isa 66:24) describes these acting on corpses. The claim requires reading destruction vocabulary as torment vocabulary and dead bodies as living beings. Resolved Strong toward the Conditionalist reading via SIS.

4. "Jesus uses destruction vocabulary (apollumi), not torment vocabulary (basanizo), in gehenna passages." - Explicit (E). This is an observable fact about the vocabulary Jesus uses. Matt 10:28 uses apollumi; Matt 5:29-30 uses apollumi. No gehenna passage uses basanizo, basanismos, or kolasis applied to human beings. Anyone with a Greek concordance can verify this.

5. "The rich man's conscious experience in hades (Luke 16:23) proves that sheol/hades is a place of conscious existence." - Inference (I) — specifically I-B (Competing Evidence). The passage is a parable (non-didactic genre). The stated teaching point is about heeding Scripture (v.29-31), not about hades' geography. Reading parabolic details as didactic theology conflicts with six didactic passages describing sheol as unconscious. The claim requires treating parabolic imagery as literal and overriding didactic passages. Resolved Strong toward the Conditionalist reading.

6. "Rev 20:10's 'tormented day and night for ever and ever' applies to all human beings cast into the lake of fire." - Inference (I) — specifically I-C (Compatible External). Rev 20:10 names three subjects: the devil, the beast, and the false prophet. When humans enter the lake of fire (Rev 20:15; 21:8), the text uses "the second death," not "torment." The claim imports the assumption that what happens to three named subjects (including two symbolic entities) applies to all unnamed human beings. The text does not make this extension.

7. "The four words translated 'hell' in the KJV describe a single unified concept of eternal conscious torment." - Inference (I) — specifically I-D (Counter-Evidence External). This requires overriding multiple explicit statements and necessary implications: sheol/hades is the abode of ALL the dead (not punishment), gehenna uses destruction vocabulary (not torment), tartaroo applies to angels (not humans), hades is temporary (not eternal). The unified "hell" concept exists only in the English translation, not in the source texts. This is the weakest type of inference because it requires the KJV translation choice to override the original languages.

What CAN Be Said / What CANNOT Be Said — Answers

What CAN be said (Scripture explicitly states or necessarily implies):

  1. Sheol (H7585) and hades (G86) are semantically equivalent. The LXX translates sheol as hades in 58 of ~65 instances, and Acts 2:27,31 directly demonstrates this by quoting Psalm 16:10 (sheol) using hades.

  2. Sheol/hades receives both righteous and wicked — Jacob, David, Christ, the wicked, Korah. It is the universal destination of the dead, not a punishment venue for the wicked alone.

  3. Sheol is characterized by unconsciousness in didactic passages: no work, no knowledge, no wisdom (Ecc 9:10); no remembrance (Ps 6:5); silence (Ps 115:17); darkness (Job 10:21-22); forgetfulness (Ps 88:12); rest (Job 17:13-16). Six didactic passages from four authors describe these characteristics.

  4. Hades is temporary. It delivers up the dead and is cast into the lake of fire (Rev 20:13-14). Hades and the lake of fire are distinct entities.

  5. Gehenna derives from the Valley of Hinnom — a site of child sacrifice, prophetically renamed "the valley of slaughter" (Jer 7:32). Its OT associations are death, slaughter, and corpse disposal.

  6. In gehenna passages, Jesus uses destruction vocabulary (apollumi: destroy, perish), not torment vocabulary. Matt 10:28: God "destroys" both soul and body. No gehenna passage applies basanizo, basanismos, or kolasis to human beings.

  7. Jesus quotes Isaiah 66:24 in Mark 9:43-48. The Isaiah source describes "carcases" (peger = corpses) consumed by worm and fire. The subjects are dead, not living.

  8. Tartaroo (G5020) is used once, as a verb, applied exclusively to fallen angels, describing temporary imprisonment "reserved unto judgment." It has no bearing on human final fate.

What CANNOT be said (not stated or necessarily implied — requires adding something):

  1. It cannot be said that sheol/hades inherently means "place of torment." The word's LXX translation pattern contains no torment vocabulary. It receives the righteous. Didactic passages describe it as unconscious. The one passage depicting conscious torment in hades (Luke 16:23) is a parable.

  2. It cannot be said that gehenna inherently means "place of eternal conscious torment." Its etymology is geographic (Valley of Hinnom). Its OT background involves slaughter and corpse disposal. Its NT vocabulary is destruction (apollumi), not torment. The OT source Jesus quotes describes corpses.

  3. It cannot be said that the four "hell" words describe one unified concept. They have distinct semantic ranges (general abode of all dead; eschatological destruction; angel imprisonment), distinct subjects (all humans; the wicked; angels), and distinct temporal scopes (temporary holding; final; pre-judgment).

  4. It cannot be said that Rev 20:10's torment language applies to human beings. The three named subjects include one supernatural being and two symbolic entities. When humans enter the lake of fire, the text identifies their fate as "the second death," not "torment."

  5. It cannot be said that the "worm that dieth not" and "fire that is not quenched" describe the torment of living, conscious beings. Jesus quotes Isaiah 66:24, where worm and fire act on "carcases" (peger = dead bodies). "Unquenchable fire" in OT usage means fire that cannot be extinguished before completing its work (Jer 17:27; Isa 34:10).

  6. It cannot be said that Isaiah 14:9-10 or Ezekiel 32:21 prove consciousness in sheol. Isaiah 14:4 identifies the passage as a mashal (taunt-poem) with trees rejoicing and sheol being "moved." Ezekiel 32 is prophetic lamentation with burial imagery (swords under heads). These are literary genres employing personification, not didactic descriptions.