Like I said, Jacob, Jesus’ understandings were modeled after a place. The valley of Hinnom was and is a geographical location. Interpreting why Jesus talked about that place should stream from the acknowledgement that he was actually talking about that place. Why would finding oneself in the valley of Hinnom constitute finding oneself in a particular state and relationship to others? If someone says, “If you walk out your front door, you will find yourself outside”, the significance of oneself being outside can only be determined if it is acknowledged that the person was talking about the outdoors (or in the case of the sentence being metaphorical, something similar to the outdoors or the dichotomy between inside and out). “Outside” is not some unknown word; it has a meaning. The sentence does not define the word; the word defines the sentence.

You are taking the English word “hell” with all its modern connotations, detaching it from all meaning so all that is left is an unknown word, then trying to define it based on your understanding of what Jesus is saying. This is not exegesis, in my opinion, but eisegesis.

How is the state you think Jesus is describing a judgment? Taking into the modern day connotations of “hell”, how is the state Jesus is describing one of eternal torment? More specifically, how is the state Jesus describing post-mortem?