ETERNAL TORMENT - IMAGE OR REALITY?

[John146]

For one thing, the context has nothing to do with the LOF. It has to do with the trumpet and bowl judgments. That's what they have no rest day or night from. For example, note the following.

Revelation 9:3 And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power.
4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.
5 And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.
6 And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them.
7 And the shapes of the locusts were like unto horses prepared unto battle; and on their heads were as it were crowns like gold, and their faces were as the faces of men.
8 And they had hair as the hair of women, and their teeth were as the teeth of lions.
9 And they had breastplates, as it were breastplates of iron; and the sound of their wings was as the sound of chariots of many horses running to battle.
10 And they had tails like unto scorpions, and there were stings in their tails: and their power was to hurt men five months.

Let's see.. verse 5 and 6 states this...And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man. And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them.

Hmmm...they're being tormented I see...for 5 months even...and it goes on to say..in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them. Really makes you wonder if any of these will be resting anytime day or night? My guess would be that they would have no rest day nor night because they're being tormented. And this is only one of the trumpet judgments. Imagine what it would have to be like day and night for those that worship the beast? How could any of them rest day or night, the fact all these judgments from God, are coming at them left and right? Then there are the earthquakes, the hail, etc.

I think it's a stretch to make a direct connection between Rev 9:3-10 and Rev 14:9-11. Did you carefully compare the two passages? The only thing they have in common is that they both speak of torment. But where does Rev 9:3-10 say anything about anyone being tormented with fire and brimstone as Rev 14:9-11 does? If Rev 9:3-10 was speaking of the torment of living people with fire and brimstone then how would that not kill anyone? That doesn't make sense. There's no basis for relating Rev 9:3-10 directly to Rev 14:9-11. They are not speaking of the same thing.

Why anyone would think Rev 14 has anything to do with the LOF, that has always puzzled me.

It puzzles me why anyone would think Rev 14:9-11 doesn't have anything to do with the LOF if they look at the context and compare it to Rev 20:10-15. The reason why I and others believe Rev 14:9-11 has to do with the LOF is because it speaks of them being tormented with fire and brimstone with no rest day nor night just as the following does regarding the devil:

Rev 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Do you not see any similarity between this verse and Rev 14:9-11?

Rev 14:9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

Don't you find it reasonable to see the description of them being "tormented with fire and brimstone" and having "no rest day nor night" and "the smoke of their torment" rising up "for ever and ever" as being very similar to the description of Satan being "cast into the lake of fire and brimstone" and being "tormented day and night for ever and ever"? Wouldn't the reason that the wicked "have no rest day nor night" be because, like the devil, they will be "tormented day and night for ever and ever"?

[The Beginner]

Eternal punishment - Eternal death
Had it said eternal punishing - then you would have a case for a continuing condition.

I guess "tormented day and night forever and ever (Rev 20:10)" would suffice for a case of continuing condition...

This scripture needs to reconcile with Rom 6:23, Mat 10:28 and John 3:16. Unless you believe that there can be contradictory scriptures...

Joh 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

If you believe the scripture can be broken, then the whole discussion is a moot point.

Simply because someone does not agree with your opinions doesn't mean they "believe scripture can be broken"... When you say that it comes across very arrogant. Anybody can throw that stone at the other camp...
You don't think I am doing justice to the word "death" or "destroy", and I don't think you doing justice to the phrases such as "everlasting" or "tormented forever and ever", but I am also not accusing you of breaking scripture... I think that is just how you see it and we simply disagree

[John 8:32]

I guess "tormented day and night forever and ever (Rev 20:10)" would suffice for a case of continuing condition...



Simply because someone docent agree with your belief doesn't mean they believe scripture can be broken... When you say that it comes across very arrogant. Anybody can use that arrow at the other camp... You don't think I am doing justice to the word "death" or "destroy", I don't think you doing justice to the phrases such as "everlasting" or "tormented forever and ever", but I am also not accusing you of breaking scripture...

Sorry, The Beginner, honestly there was no arrogance intended, that was actually meant as a rhetorical statement. Anyhoo, I see this one way and you see it another. You will not change my mind and I most likely will not change yours, so I suggest we agree to disagree, agreeably.

[John146]

The thing that escapes many is that this isn't a parable. When proper names are used then it must refer to a real event. "There was a certain beggar named Lazarus" means exactly that. Jesus was giving a recount of a real event.

I couldn't agree more. There is no basis for concluding that Hades and Abraham's bosom weren't references to real places. Was Jesus talking about real people in relation to fictional places? How could that make any sense? No, Hades and Abraham's bosom are just as real as the people He mentioned by name.

[John146]

Mat 13:34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:

Seems to be a slight conflict here.

It seems that you think this verse is saying that Jesus never spoke to any multitude of people at any time without speaking to them in parables and therefore you think that means Luke 16:19-31 has to be a parable. Is that really what He was saying there? It's not hard to find out whether that's true or not. All we have to do is look at any occasions when Jesus spoke to a multitude of people and see whether or not He ever spoke to a multitude "without a parable".

Here are instances when He spoke to a multitude without speaking to them with a parable:

Matt 8:18 Now when Jesus saw great multitudes about him, he gave commandment to depart unto the other side.

Matt 11:7 And as they departed, Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind? 8 But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings' houses. 9 But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet. 10 For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. 11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he....

Matt 14:19 And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. 20 And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the fragments that remained twelve baskets full. 21 And they that had eaten were about five thousand men, beside women and children.

Matt 15:10 And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand:11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

And there are more examples besides these.

So, since there clearly were occasions when Jesus spoke to multitudes of people without speaking to them only in parables then Matt 13:34 can't be literally saying that He never at any time spoke a word to a multitude of people without speaking to them in parables as you apparently believe. The context of Matt 13:34 is that He did not speak to that particular multitude of people who were gathered at that particular time (a different multitude than the multitude He spoke to in Luke 16) without speaking in parables.

So, now that you have been shown the real meaning and context of Matt 13:34 and that Jesus did sometimes speak to multitudes without speaking only in parables, I believe you need to reconsider whether or not Luke 16:19-31 is a parable.

[John146]

Lets think about the passage your arguing here...

Mat 25:41 NIV - [41] "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

Now, this "eternal fire" is specifically link to the consequences that the Devil will face... Revelation 20 tells us that the devil will be tormented in fire and brimstone day and night forever and ever?

Rev 20:10 NIV - [10] And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Then later in the passage in Matthew 25, Jesus further clarifies the issue...

Mat 25:46 NIV - [46] "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

Do you believe that eternal life is an ageless experience? How could eternal punishment be anything less. It is found in the same sentence and contrasted with eternal life. They have to be similar in nature or else it makes no sense to contrast the two. If Jesus meant "temporary punishment" or "eventual annihilation" then He could have used a lot better language than "eternal punishment"... How does a individual receive "eternal punishment" temporarily? If they eventual cease to exist, then the punishment would eventually cease to be exist also, which would infact make it not "eternal punishment"...

I agree. There's no basis whatsoever for anyone to conclude that the devil will be tormented forever in the lake of fire but wicked human beings will be annihilated in the lake of fire. No, either both will suffer eternal torment or both will be annihilated. There's no basis for seeing one destiny for the devil and his angels and another destiny for wicked human beings when it's clear that they will all be cast into the same "everlasting fire" or "lake of fire". Since it speaks of the devil suffering everlasting torment there then the "everlasting fire" must truly be everlasting and will never end. That means the "everlasting punishment" must be punishment that never ends as well. There would be no reason for the place of punishment to be everlasting if the punishment itself isn't also everlasting.

[Robert Callow]

I agree. There's no basis whatsoever for anyone to conclude that the devil will be tormented forever in the lake of fire but wicked human beings will be annihilated in the lake of fire.

The warnings God has given us, when viewed in their different contexts can be seen to mean anything ranging from an everlasting punishment of everlasting death for those least knowledgeable, most naive and vulnerable, and least responsible and least evil of the condemned, to an everlasting punishment of everlasting torment for all demonic souls who see and know the meaning of the Spirit of truth and yet still continue in their cravings for pleasure and ecstasy in offending this Spirit. Their endless need to bury the truth and to see the only proven conveyor of truth, abused, tormented and destroyed can only bring endless conflict with the self and with others, and endless conflict means endless torment.



Why do I believe this? Because it makes the most sense by being the most reasonable:



The punishment in the lake of fire will last forever to the satisfaction of the perfect justice of the perfect loving and merciful God of reason, and whilst the ultimate deterrent for evil will serve as part of the ultimate safeguard for good, we must never forget: To cause or allow any more suffering beyond what is necessary for the eternal well-being of "the Spirit of truth" is alien to mercy and reason and to all that is good; to condemn the least knowledgeable and least offensive of the condemned to everlasting torment would do no good whatsoever.



Yes, there is such a thing as everlasting torment, but not for all condemned souls.



Yes, there is such a thing as everlasting death (annihilation), but not for all condemned souls.



I am sorry if you still can't see.

[John146]

The warnings God has given us, when viewed in their different contexts can be seen to mean anything ranging from an everlasting punishment of everlasting death for those least knowledgeable, most naive and vulnerable, and least responsible and least evil of the condemned, to an everlasting punishment of everlasting torment for all demonic souls who see and know the meaning of the Spirit of truth and yet still continue in their cravings for pleasure and ecstasy in offending this Spirit. Their endless need to bury the truth and to see the only proven conveyor of truth, abused, tormented and destroyed can only bring endless conflict with the self and with others, and endless conflict means endless torment.

Why do I believe this? Because it makes the most sense by being the most reasonable:

Maybe to you, but the truth is not necessarily determined on what is most reasonable to the human mind. God's thoughts are not our thoughts and His ways are not our ways (Isaiah 55:8). Prove your doctrine with scripture, not with what you think is most reasonable.

The punishment in the lake of fire will last forever to the satisfaction of the perfect justice of the perfect loving and merciful God of reason, and whilst the ultimate deterrent for evil will serve as part of the ultimate safeguard for good, we must never forget: To cause or allow any more suffering beyond what is necessary for the eternal well-being of "the Spirit of truth" is alien to mercy and reason and to all that is good; to condemn the least knowledgeable and least offensive of the condemned to everlasting torment would do no good whatsoever.

Do you have any scripture to back up what you're saying?

Yes, there is such a thing as everlasting torment, but not for all condemned souls.

Where is that taught in scripture?

Yes, there is such a thing as everlasting death (annihilation), but not for all condemned souls

Again, where is that taught in scripture?

I am sorry if you still can't see.

I can't know how you are coming to your conclusions if you don't post the scripture that your opinions are based on.

[David Taylor]

After one thousand years of the Millenial reign of Christ on the earth. After keeping the Sabbath and the Holydays for one thousand years. After seeing wonderful perfect weather, crops, health, families, business successes that are honest and bless all parties. After seeing utopia for a millenium,

There is no premill perfect utopian perfect age of a thousand years.

In every scripture that Premillennialism wants to interpret as supposedly point to this era, the Earth is still under the curse of sin; and sinners are found throughout the Earth.

Not until Christ returns and removes the curse from creation; and ends sin and death; will there ever be a utopian age of perfection here.

[John 8:32]

There is no premill perfect utopian perfect age of a thousand years.

In every scripture that Premillennialism wants to interpret as supposedly point to this era, the Earth is still under the curse of sin; and sinners are found throughout the Earth.

Not until Christ returns and removes the curse from creation; and ends sin and death; will there ever be a utopian age of perfection here.

What do you think happens for 1000 years after He returns?

[John146]

What do you think happens for 1000 years after He returns?

Do you have any thoughts on what I said in post #200?

[John 8:32]

It seems that you think this verse is saying that Jesus never spoke to any multitude of people at any time without speaking to them in parables and therefore you think that means Luke 16:19-31 has to be a parable. Is that really what He was saying there? It's not hard to find out whether that's true or not. All we have to do is look at any occasions when Jesus spoke to a multitude of people and see whether or not He ever spoke to a multitude "without a parable".

Here are instances when He spoke to a multitude without speaking to them with a parable:

Matt 8:18 Now when Jesus saw great multitudes about him, he gave commandment to depart unto the other side.

Matt 11:7 And as they departed, Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind? 8 But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings' houses. 9 But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet. 10 For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. 11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he....

Matt 14:19 And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. 20 And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the fragments that remained twelve baskets full. 21 And they that had eaten were about five thousand men, beside women and children.

Matt 15:10 And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand:11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

And there are more examples besides these.

So, since there clearly were occasions when Jesus spoke to multitudes of people without speaking to them only in parables then Matt 13:34 can't be literally saying that He never at any time spoke a word to a multitude of people without speaking to them in parables as you apparently believe. The context of Matt 13:34 is that He did not speak to that particular multitude of people who were gathered at that particular time (a different multitude than the multitude He spoke to in Luke 16) without speaking in parables.

So, now that you have been shown the real meaning and context of Matt 13:34 and that Jesus did sometimes speak to multitudes without speaking only in parables, I believe you need to reconsider whether or not Luke 16:19-31 is a parable.

Again if it is straightforward teaching concerning heaven and hell, my question would be what part of Moses should I hear?

Luk 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Lev 11? Clean and unclean meats?

How does this apply?

Lev 15:16 And if any man's seed of copulation go out from him, then he shall wash all his flesh in water, and be unclean until the even.
Lev 15:17 And every garment, and every skin, whereon is the seed of copulation, shall be washed with water, and be unclean until the even.
Lev 15:18 The woman also with whom man shall lie with seed of copulation, they shall both bathe themselves in water, and be unclean until the even.

[John146]

Again if it is straightforward teaching concerning heaven and hell, my question would be what part of Moses should I hear?

Luk 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Lev 11? Clean and unclean meats?

How does this apply?

Lev 15:16 And if any man's seed of copulation go out from him, then he shall wash all his flesh in water, and be unclean until the even.
Lev 15:17 And every garment, and every skin, whereon is the seed of copulation, shall be washed with water, and be unclean until the even.
Lev 15:18 The woman also with whom man shall lie with seed of copulation, they shall both bathe themselves in water, and be unclean until the even.

How does this address what I said in my post? I was addressing what you had said in post #181 regarding Matt 13:34. What were you intending to say in that post? Were you not implying that you believe Matt 13:34 indicates that Jesus never spoke to multitudes of people except in parables which, if that was true (it's not), would mean Luke 16:19-31 would have to be a parable? Can you acknowledge that Matt 13:34 does not prove that Luke 16:19-31 has to be a parable? Please address this first and then I will address what you said in this post.

[John 8:32]

How does this address what I said in my post? I was addressing what you had said in post #181 regarding Matt 13:34. What were you intending to say in that post? Were you not implying that you believe Matt 13:34 indicates that Jesus never spoke to multitudes of people except in parables which, if that was true (it's not), would mean Luke 16:19-31 would have to be a parable? Can you acknowledge that Matt 13:34 does not prove that Luke 16:19-31 has to be a parable? Please address this first and then I will address what you said in this post.

If Luke 16 is not a parable, but rather direct teaching, it is telling us that we should consult Moses and the Prophets. So, assuming this is direct teaching, what part of Moses and the Prophets shall we consult?

[John 8:32]

How does this address what I said in my post? I was addressing what you had said in post #181 regarding Matt 13:34. What were you intending to say in that post? Were you not implying that you believe Matt 13:34 indicates that Jesus never spoke to multitudes of people except in parables which, if that was true (it's not), would mean Luke 16:19-31 would have to be a parable? Can you acknowledge that Matt 13:34 does not prove that Luke 16:19-31 has to be a parable? Please address this first and then I will address what you said in this post.

Can I acknowledge that Mat 13:34 does not mean what it says?

Mat 13:34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:

How would you like to change it? "Some of these things spake Jesus"? "and with a parable spake he to them sometimes"?

Mat 13:34 says what it says.