There are three takes on hell
1. ECT (eternal conscious torment of the lost)
2. CI (conditional immortality also known as annihilationism. That is, mankind is not eternal - unless one is born again. The rest die in the second death)
3. Universalism - all are, at the end of the day, saved
I used to be an adherent of ECT but am now CI. Frankly, my second choice would be Universalism. I simply can’t put my creator and savior in the ECT. It doesn’t fit their personality.
The challenge is that there is a lot of biblical support for some form if universalism, but plenty that goes directly against it. Meanwhile, the ECT message seems to be made up of, basically, bad translations of the bible and a lack of understanding of the meaning of the plain language as it would have been interpreted by those alive when the Jesus talked of Gehenna.
Best I can tell is that ECT was developed by people wanting to increase the number of people going to, and donating to church, and they didn’t care if people were going out of fear of torture rather than desire for a relationship with their creator.
I can’t believe in a God who would allow eternal torment of His creation, either. I guess I’d be a ‘universalist’.
I think the belief in an actual hell has created far more mental and emotional illness than it has discouraged sin.