Well, as you say, whatever it "feels" like it is something we don't want. That describes an immortal soul that is going to "feel" whatever it really is ...... forever. I have no problem taking the text at face value, unless there is a good reason not to, such as apparently contradicting other scripture, or an obvious parable, or a violation of reason. I am unaware of any contradicting scripture, or parables, or violations of reason in the verses encompassing our discussion.
You are too busy reading literally what's in the Bible. These are allegorical references to heaps of fire of Jerusalem garbage dumps, to burning sulfur lake, to cold and desolate place where the warmth of God never reached (outer space where the temperature approaches absolute zero?), etc. The common thread to all is true and clear: Hell is hell!
But other than the summary quote "darkness is where there is no light", what IS hell? How can there be a clear common thread if all of it is allegory that can be interpreted in a dozen different ways? I listed when I don't take the text literally (there may be other times), and none of those applies here. How do you know when to take the scripture as allegory and when not to? I'll bet it is whenever it disagrees with the consensus patrum, or whenever you just plain disagree with it. :) In these cases, passages in the Bible can be declared as an allegory for absolutely any outcome desired. So when you say "Hell is hell", that could mean absolutely anything. Apparently, men that you trust chose it to mean something not nearly so terrible as the text of the Bible describes.
I think it's really dangerous to just write off the text to allegory and preach that "we just don't know, it's probably pretty bad, but who knows". I am also at a loss to explain the possible motivation behind this. Normally I would think that a "brimstone" approach would help to consolidate power within the clergy and hierarchy. Such is critical to the life of the Church. But here, there appears to be a laissez-faire attitude about what the laity thinks about hell. I am reminded that Orthodoxy has its own definition for sin. It's really not the commission of evil, it's just missing the mark. I think that's the same attitude the Protestant pastors I recently criticized would have.
Do those who die in sin have life? Is life something we have on our own or is it from God. When a partient is maintained on life support systems and is then disconnected from that which keeps him alive, he dies. When we are separated from God, our life support source, we die. How can someone who is dead, separated from Life, be immortal?
Maybe you should ask yourself what does it mean to be dead (mortal).
Well, I will also tell you that life is life even if you don't understand it, FK. How's that?
Do you know what hell is? Do you know what love is? Can you describe, paint, define either?