PDA

View Full Version : So...Hell was created by God right?



haryches
Sep 11th 2007, 10:55 PM
Sorry I know this was already posted beecause I just read up on it, I Just registered today, recently. And I just want to be sure if Hell was created by God or by man, And also, I'd like to know if Hell is an eternal death (meaning forever) or just a quick death. Thanks guys for your support and co-operation.

One more thing. http://h1.ripway.com/Hell/Do_People_Burn_in_Hell_Forever.pdf (http://h1.ripway.com/Hell/Do_People_Burn_in_Hell_Forever.pdf)
(Can anybody find any flaws or false things said in this PDF?)
a. provide me with verses showing otherwise, or b. point out which of the many things in my PDF that you claim the Bible doesn't say. Unless you're using some strange different Bible that is.


There'es this one guy giving me a hard time and he says Hell is a quick death according to his PDF. He says exactly this (his exact words): "What about the death side of things? Those are verses on their own. Can you not answer that either?

But, you're free to believe what you want, but it would seem to me that you haven't been able to reply with a single scripture indicating otherwise. That is sad. Because if you do not base beliefs on scripture, then what does one base them on?

I suggest you do not post further biblical related topics on basil again unless you can either a. provide me with verses showing otherwise, or b. point out which of the many things in my PDF that you claim the Bible doesn't say. Unless you're using some strange different Bible that is. " (What he's trying to find out is if there are any false or wrong things in the link I provided above, and if so he wants me to prove it with other scriptures) Im trying to find out and prove to him that Hell is an eternal death and not a quick one but he just won't budge UNTIL I prove to him with scriptures. >.<

haryches
Sep 11th 2007, 11:08 PM
Does anybody know? :|

enarchay
Sep 12th 2007, 01:01 AM
Sorry I know this was already posted beecause I just read up on it, I Just registered today, recently. And I just want to be sure if Hell was created by God or by man, And also, I'd like to know if Hell is an eternal death (meaning forever) or just a quick death. Thanks guys for your support and co-operation.

God created the lake of fire, if that is what you mean.

StrongVibe
Sep 12th 2007, 03:01 AM
did God create hell after Eve sinned?

enarchay
Sep 12th 2007, 03:28 AM
did God create hell after Eve sinned?

Let us please stop using the word "hell." The word carries connotations the words it translates do not.

In Daniel, a stream of fire comes forth from God's thrown. It seems to be a symbol of judgment. Did and does God create judgment? Yes.

Tanya~
Sep 12th 2007, 03:38 AM
Matt 25:41
"Then He will also say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels


The fire is everlasting, and it was prepared for the devil and his angels. Those who reject God also go to this fire.

The idea of "quick death" is the same as annihilation, but the Bible doesn't teach this. There will be a resurrection of the dead, both of the saved and the unsaved.

Matt 10:28
And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul . But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Rev 20:10
The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Rev 20:12-15
And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. 14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire . This is the second death. 15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire .

anglican-cat
Sep 12th 2007, 04:07 AM
Matt 25:41
"Then He will also say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels


The fire is everlasting, and it was prepared for the devil and his angels. Those who reject God also go to this fire.

The idea of "quick death" is the same as annihilation, but the Bible doesn't teach this. There will be a resurrection of the dead, both of the saved and the unsaved.

Matt 10:28
And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul . But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Rev 20:10
The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Rev 20:12-15
And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. 14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire . This is the second death. 15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire .
Amen, the false teaching of annihilation embraced by so many Neo-Evangelicals is destructive. It almost teaches an easy way out for those who choose to reject Christ. I think Hell is a good catch all term for punishment, I I think it was Spurgeon who said "When Hell is banished from the pulpit it shows up in the congregation. Spurgeon was cool.

ikester7579
Sep 12th 2007, 04:21 AM
Sorry I know this was already posted beecause I just read up on it, I Just registered today, recently. And I just want to be sure if Hell was created by God or by man, And also, I'd like to know if Hell is an eternal death (meaning forever) or just a quick death. Thanks guys for your support and co-operation.

One more thing. http://h1.ripway.com/Hell/Do_People_Burn_in_Hell_Forever.pdf (http://h1.ripway.com/Hell/Do_People_Burn_in_Hell_Forever.pdf)
(Can anybody find any flaws or false things said in this PDF?)
a. provide me with verses showing otherwise, or b. point out which of the many things in my PDF that you claim the Bible doesn't say. Unless you're using some strange different Bible that is.


There'es this one guy giving me a hard time and he says Hell is a quick death according to his PDF. He says exactly this (his exact words): "What about the death side of things? Those are verses on their own. Can you not answer that either?

But, you're free to believe what you want, but it would seem to me that you haven't been able to reply with a single scripture indicating otherwise. That is sad. Because if you do not base beliefs on scripture, then what does one base them on?

I suggest you do not post further biblical related topics on basil again unless you can either a. provide me with verses showing otherwise, or b. point out which of the many things in my PDF that you claim the Bible doesn't say. Unless you're using some strange different Bible that is. " (What he's trying to find out is if there are any false or wrong things in the link I provided above, and if so he wants me to prove it with other scriptures) Im trying to find out and prove to him that Hell is an eternal death and not a quick one but he just won't budge UNTIL I prove to him with scriptures. >.<


Hell was created by the Creator. There is no one else named the Creator in God's word. So everything that needed to be created was created by God.

And this, which is what I believe which may not be the view of this forum ministry. Is the hell is where you stay until judgement. Lake of fire is where eternal judgement will be. This is not because I believe a certain doctrine, like some would imply. This is what I get from reading the difference between the two.

Some believe that there is no difference between hell and the lake of fire. I believe there is because hell will be thrown into the lake of fire. So in the end, only the lake of fire will exist because in the end, only things that are eternal will exist.

Also, I notice the guy is taunting you in a way. Those actually looking for truth do not get prideful about truth. Pride gets in the way of truth. This is why God commands us to be humble. His challenge to you is tempting you to become prideful in your response back to him. Do you think you could prove him wrong? And if you did, do you think he would admit to being wrong? People who are not looking for truth can never be corrected. So if this person rejects verse you present, then he is not looking for truth.

Eternal damnation is eternal period. Also, the words "for ever" means eternity as well.

mk 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.

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.

rev 14:11 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.

justsurfing
Sep 12th 2007, 05:14 AM
Christians are motivated by love to receive and serve Jesus Christ. If God had only threats of punishment in hell to cause us to love and serve Him... what does that say?

Does God win our hearts and rule our hearts based on fear, death, hell... threats, intimidation, domination, and coercive control? Do these things produce loving relationships with God and are they the source of the church's authority and power?

They have nothing to do with my personal relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ.

ikester7579
Sep 12th 2007, 05:47 AM
Christians are motivated by love to receive and serve Jesus Christ. If God had only threats of punishment in hell to cause us to love and serve Him... what does that say?

Does God win our hearts and rule our hearts based on fear, death, hell... threats, intimidation, domination, and coercive control? Do these things produce loving relationships with God and are they the source of the church's authority and power?

They have nothing to do with my personal relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ.

There is a difference between getting us to make the right choice, because we have a choice. Then forcing us to make a choice regardless. One shows us love from keeping us from eternal damnation. The other forces love which is not true love.

Example: In the Garden of Eden. If God would have told Adam and Eve not to eat of the tree of knowledge. And did not tell them why. What good would that have done? If we do not know when to fear an action that may hurt us. Then when do we what to fear, and what not to fear?

Telling Adam and Eve was showing God's wisdom and love. By showing what not to do. Should it cause fear to keep someone doing what is right. Then the fear is the fear of wisdom.

justsurfing
Sep 12th 2007, 06:22 AM
[quote=ikester7579;1378920]There is a difference between getting us to make the right choice, because we have a choice.

Coercion is not free will or choice. Love is the only power... and it's the power of God... that is not coercive. Presenting a choice to someone and saying, "Love me or I'll punish you in hell for all eternity!"... is not love nor is it "free will". It's threat, coercion, and the most extreme emotional blackmail. Hell had nothing to do with my personal decision to love Jesus Christ.


Then forcing us to make a choice regardless.

I see now the force that exists in this doctrine. People say, "God who is love would never force someone to love Him." Yet they believe that God forces people to go to hell because they didn't heed His threat of "Love me or I'll send you to hell for all eternity!"

I don't believe anyone is cast into the lake of fire by their own free will. God can force people against their wills into the lake of fire... but cannot override their fallen wills to have grace on them? Actually, I believe that's what He does in the lake of fire.




There's no such thing as a free will decision for Christ. Only grace and love explains the decision.

Amen.


One shows us love from keeping us from eternal damnation.

Amen.


The other forces love which is not true love.

There is forced punishment. Because punishment is resisted. There is no forced love and grace. Only grace and love explains the decision.


Example: In the Garden of Eden. If God would have told Adam and Eve not to eat of the tree of knowledge. And did not tell them why. What good would that have done? If we do not know when to fear an action that may hurt us. Then when do we what to fear, and what not to fear?


God said they'd die. They ate the fruit anyway. People are warned of hell... and go there anyway. Fear does not motivate people to love God. Only grace and love explain the decision to choose Christ.



Telling Adam and Eve was showing God's wisdom and love. By showing what not to do. Should it cause fear to keep someone doing what is right. Then the fear is the fear of wisdom.

Fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. Fear of punishment is antithetical to grace and love. Perfect love casts out fear. He who fears is not made perfect in love. Jesus destroyed Satan and Satan's control over man through fear of death... fear of punishment.

Since Jesus destroyed fear of punishment... why do we believe fear of punishment death and hell... rather than grace and love... cause people to receive Jesus Christ and serve Jesus Christ?

There is no fear in love. He who fears is not made perfect in love.

ikester7579
Sep 12th 2007, 06:29 AM
Coercion is not free will or choice. Love is the only power... and it's the power of God... that is not coercive. Presenting a choice to someone and saying, "Love me or I'll punish you in hell for all eternity!"... is not love nor is it "free will". It's threat, coercion, and the most extreme emotional blackmail. Hell had nothing to do with my personal decision to love Jesus Christ.



I see now the force that exists in this doctrine. People say, "God who is love would never force someone to love Him." Yet they believe that God forces people to go to hell because they didn't heed His threat of "Love me or I'll send you to hell for all eternity!"

I don't believe anyone is cast into the lake of fire by their own free will. God can force people against their wills into the lake of fire... but cannot override their fallen wills to have grace on them? Actually, I believe that's what He does in the lake of fire.





Amen.



Amen.


There is forced punishment. Because punishment is resisted. There is no forced love and grace. Only grace and love explains the decision.



God said they'd die. They ate the fruit anyway. People are warned of hell... and go there anyway. Fear does not motivate people to love God. Only grace and love explain the decision to choose Christ.




Fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. Fear of punishment is antithetical to grace and love. Perfect love casts out fear. He who fears is not made perfect in love. Jesus destroyed Satan and Satan's control over man through fear of death... fear of punishment.

Since Jesus destroyed fear of punishment... why do we believe fear of punishment death and hell... rather than grace and love... cause people to receive Jesus Christ and serve Jesus Christ?

There is no fear in love. He who fears is not made perfect in love.

If God is all about love only, then why is there a hell?

Steven3
Sep 12th 2007, 07:24 AM
Hello Haryches :)
This appears to be a duplicate thread. Do you have a Youngs or Strongs?

http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1378407&postcount=23
God didn't make hell, either of them. :)

We all go to Hell No.1 (Sheol) when we die, even Jesus, see Acts 2.
Hell No.2 (Gehenna) hasn't happened yet.

God bless :)
Steven

enarchay
Sep 12th 2007, 08:08 PM
Hell No.2 (Gehenna) hasn't happened yet.


Unless you believe Jesus was thinking within the scope of his historical context, and expected geenna to be fulfilled with the events of 66-70 AD when thousands of Jews (the "generation of vipers") were slaughtered, and thrown into the valleys to become food for the animals as Jeremiah described, then, no, it has not yet happened. However, since Jesus was largely concerned with the lost sheep of Israel and the wolves that preyed on them, I think it is more likely that geenna was constrained to a historical context. I think we should forget about geenna, anyway, and say "lake of fire" since that's the only reference to judgment we can say for sure is future and final. Know what I'm saying?

Besides, if you do contend geenna is future, you're basically an annihilationist without realizing it.

Also, can we please ditch the word "hell" altogether? It carries connotations not present in any of the Greek words it translates. Let us remain true to Scripture and talk about hades and post-resurrection judgment.

Steven3
Sep 12th 2007, 08:14 PM
Hi E :)
Unless you believe Jesus was thinking within the scope of his historical context, and expected geenna to be fulfilled with the events of 66-70 AD when thousands of Jews (the "generation of vipers") were slaughtered, and thrown into the valleys to become food for the animals as Jeremiah described, then, no, it has not happened. I think we should forget about geenna as well and say "lake of fire" since that's the only reference to judgment we can say for sure is future and final. Know what I'm saying?

Besides, if you do contend geenna is future, you're basically an annihilationist without realizing it.Well I am a bit of an annihilationist and do realize it...

But otherwise, Ah yes, ;) well you've already (correctly) pulled me up on the above once before and I grant you that I forget quickly. I was just making it simple for the OP. What I meant to say was that Gehenna hasn't happened a third time yet. :) Just like the kingdom coming hasn't happened a third time yet. etc... These type/foreshadow fulfillments make life difficult don't they ;)

Have a good one :)
S

enarchay
Sep 12th 2007, 08:18 PM
Hi E :)Well I am a bit of an annihilationist and do realize it...

But otherwise, Ah yes, ;) well you've already (correctly) pulled me up on the above once before and I grant you that I forget quickly. I was just making it simple for the OP. What I meant to say was that Gehenna hasn't happened a third time yet. :) Just like the kingdom coming hasn't happened a third time yet. etc... These type/foreshadow fulfillments make life difficult don't they ;)

Have a good one :)
S

Kingdom a third time? Well, I guess that depends on your eschatology.

Steven3
Sep 12th 2007, 08:32 PM
Hey E :)
Kingdom a third time? Well, I guess that depends on your eschatology.

Naturally, but even simplistically just divvying up the word "kingdom" in a concordance among past, present & future verbs already gives three kingdoms. The third kingdom is future to the NT.... so that leaves two options: do I think the kingdom came in AD70 and that the thief got his day in paradise when Titus razed Jerusalem? Sorry, no :) there's more to the kingdom than a Roman butchering a city full of Jews.. that just leaves the other idea, namely that Christ is really coming back again. And if he does come back again, then we get the kingdom again, paradise again, Gehenna again. Those are the extras, the byproducts that Christ brings with him, so to speak.
God bless! :)
S.

enarchay
Sep 12th 2007, 08:40 PM
Hey E :)

Naturally, but even simplistically just divvying up the word "kingdom" in a concordance among past, present & future verbs already gives three kingdoms. The third kingdom is future to the NT.... so that leaves two options: do I think the kingdom came in AD70 and that the thief got his day in paradise when Titus razed Jerusalem? Sorry, no :) there's more to the kingdom than a Roman butchering a city full of Jews.. that just leaves the other idea, namely that Christ is really coming back again. And if he does come back again, then we get the kingdom again, paradise again, Gehenna again. Those are the extras, the byproducts that Christ brings with him, so to speak.
God bless! :)
S.

I think we are the Kingdom, the Temple of God, and God dwells among us. I see a future renewal of creation (when paradise descends to Earth), so I guess you could call that a "third" Kingdom.

Steven3
Sep 12th 2007, 08:48 PM
I think we are the Kingdom, the Temple of God, and God dwells among us. I see a future renewal of creation (when paradise descends to Earth), so I guess you could call that a "third" Kingdom.

Yes, yes, yes. Yes (yes), and yes. :) all very scriptural.

On that note, off to the fridge, then bed. Zzzzzzzzzz :D

haryches
Sep 12th 2007, 10:44 PM
Another thing, This guy that says he is a Christian keeps on making me mad and madder everytime he says something that proves or at least he won't give up. This is what he said to this Paragraph:

Yes, your pdf uses jude 7 to claim that hellfire is temporary. but look at what jude 7 says. "they serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire". the verse doesn't say they were burned with fire, as your pdf claims; it says that they suffer eternal fire. which is to say, eternally suffering in HELL. also, all the verses you use to support a lack of hell or eternal sleep are only applicable to pre-Judgement Day. rev 20:15 states that those not found in the book of life are cast into the lake of fire. revelations 2:11 says that those who believe "will not be hurt at all by the second death", implying that the second death is painful and continuous. revelations 21:8 says that "[sinners'] place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur"; the mention of sulfur implying that there will be an unpleasant smell in Hell - yet another sensory experience of everlasting torment. nowhere in revelations does it say that damnation in the lake of fire is temporary. whereas matthew 25:46 says "they will go away to ETERNAL PUNISHMENT". now, i have neither the original texts of the bible nor would i be capable of reading them. but to the same effect, i'm certain the same applies to you as well. we can argue etymology all we want but the meaning of these verses seems pretty clear to me, no matter how human interpretation tries to angle them in a more "merciful" light

His Counters - Your Jude point is understandable. But what about all the rest? We cannot run our lives by what the Bible seems to imply, but rather by what it teaches clearly. What one determines the Bible implies, could differ.

Mark 9:43-46: Unquenchable fire is fire that cannot be put out, but which goes out when it has turned everything to ashes. Jeremiah 17:27 says Jerusalem was to be destroyed with unquenchable fire, and in 2 Chronicles 36:19-21 the Bible says this fire burned the city "to fulfil the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah" and left it desolate. Yet we know this fire went out, because Jerusalem is not burning today.

To quench means to extinguish or put out. No one will be able to put out the fire of hell. That is the strange fire of God. No one will be able to escape from it by extinguishing it. Isaiah says of that fire, "Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor a fire to sit before it" (Isaiah 47:14). After it has accomplished its work of destruction, that fire will go out. No one can deliver themselves from its flame by putting it out, but finally not a coal will be left. So say the Scriptures.

God punished the land of Idumea with fire that would "not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste...the owl and the raven shall dwell in it...thorns shall come up in her palaces" (Is. 34:9-15). Seeing that animals and plants were to exist in the ruined land of Idumea, the language of eternal fire must refer to God's anger and His total destruction of the place, rather than being taken literally.

The Hebrew and Greek phrases which are translated "for ever" mean strictly, "for the age" if you compare words used in those languages.
__________________________________________________

Everyone knows that Revelation contains some symbolism, such as its references to a seven-headed beast, a Babylonian harlot holding a golden cup, and a glistening woman clothed with the sun. Obviously, these aren’t literal. What about the ‘tormented forever’ texts? Could they be symbolic too? Here’s something significant: If you look closely at each ‘tormented forever’ passage, every one is connected to symbolism. Revelation 14:11 and Revelation 20:10 refer to “the beast,” and Revelation 19:3 states, “ her smoke rose up forever.” Whose smoke? The Whore riding the beast. Will a literal Harlot sizzle forever? No. This is symbolism.

Here’s more evidence worth considering: While Revelation 20:10 refers to torment forever, verse 9 says the opposite and contains no symbolism.

Verse 9 - And they [the lost] went up on the breadth of the earth [at the end of the Millennium], and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city [the New Jerusalem], and fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them.

Verse 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 forever and ever.

Verse 9 has no symbolism and says the lost are “devoured.” Verse 10 has symbolism and says they are tormented “forever.” Which is it? The literal truth lies in the text that contains no symbolism: “fire came down… and devoured them.” Beyond this, after “the lake of fire” is again described in verse 15, the next verse says,

“And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away.” (Revelation 21:1)

Revelation 20:9 says the lost are upon “the earth” when God’s fire devours them. Thus “the earth” is the location of “the lake of fire.” Then Revelation 21:1 says the “first earth” passes away which must include the lake of fire! Then there will be “no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain” (Revelation 21:4). Here’s even more proof that “the lake of fire” will disappear.

Again:
10. It shall not be quenched night or day; Its smoke shall ascend forever. From generation to generation it shall lie waste; No one shall pass through it forever and ever. Isaiah 34:10

It is clear that Isaiah was not saying that the smoke would be ascending forever since he also says that the land would then become a waste for generations. He says that it would be a place that only wild animals would inhabit. The animals would take over the land.
__________________________________________________

Think about it. If “the wages of sin” were conscious, unending, never ceasing, eternal torment, then the ONLY WAY that Jesus Christ could experience the full penalty for our sins would be for Him to consciously suffer eternal torment in our behalf.

To say that “the wages of sin” is burning forever, and then to deny that Jesus Christ will burn forever, is to deny that Jesus Christ paid the full penalty for our sins. In that case, He really didn’t. He would only have paid a mini, 3–day discounted price — between Friday and Sunday. And even then, “eternal torment” believers don’t believe that Jesus was consciously suffering from Friday to Sunday anyway. At least I’ve never heard anyone say this.

My question: What would you respond/say to this guy? >.< He doesn't seem to get the point of what the paragraph said above is trying to prove to him. I'd like to know what how you guys would respond to what this person says, Thanks for your cooperation. :)

haryches
Sep 12th 2007, 10:51 PM
[quote=ikester7579;1378866]Hell was created by the Creator. There is no one else named the Creator in God's word. So everything that needed to be created was created by God.

And this, which is what I believe which may not be the view of this forum ministry. Is the hell is where you stay until judgement. Lake of fire is where eternal judgement will be. This is not because I believe a certain doctrine, like some would imply. This is what I get from reading the difference between the two.

Some believe that there is no difference between hell and the lake of fire. I believe there is because hell will be thrown into the lake of fire. So in the end, only the lake of fire will exist because in the end, only things that are eternal will exist.

Oh wow, You are right. Because my other firend helped me out and I responded back to the PDF of his and when i sent it I was feeling good about what I had sent...Which I shouldn't be I think you are right he is taunting me in a way and making me try to feel good about what I say to him. My friend said this: "yes, your pdf uses jude 7 to claim that hellfire is temporary. but look at what jude 7 says. "they serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire". the verse doesn't say they were burned with fire, as your pdf claims; it says that they suffer eternal fire. which is to say, eternally suffering in HELL. also, all the verses you use to support a lack of hell or eternal sleep are only applicable to pre-Judgement Day. rev 20:15 states that those not found in the book of life are cast into the lake of fire. revelations 2:11 says that those who believe "will not be hurt at all by the second death", implying that the second death is painful and continuous. revelations 21:8 says that "[sinners'] place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur"; the mention of sulfur implying that there will be an unpleasant smell in Hell - yet another sensory experience of everlasting torment. nowhere in revelations does it say that damnation in the lake of fire is temporary. whereas matthew 25:46 says "they will go away to ETERNAL PUNISHMENT". now, i have neither the original texts of the bible nor would i be capable of reading them. but to the same effect, i'm certain the same applies to you as well. we can argue etymology all we want but the meaning of these verses seems pretty clear to me, no matter how human interpretation tries to angle them in a more "merciful" light" in response to the guys PDF.

Then what the guy responded back was this:

Your Jude point is understandable. But what about all the rest? We cannot run our lives by what the Bible seems to imply, but rather by what it teaches clearly. What one determines the Bible implies, could differ.

Mark 9:43-46: Unquenchable fire is fire that cannot be put out, but which goes out when it has turned everything to ashes. Jeremiah 17:27 says Jerusalem was to be destroyed with unquenchable fire, and in 2 Chronicles 36:19-21 the Bible says this fire burned the city "to fulfil the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah" and left it desolate. Yet we know this fire went out, because Jerusalem is not burning today.

To quench means to extinguish or put out. No one will be able to put out the fire of hell. That is the strange fire of God. No one will be able to escape from it by extinguishing it. Isaiah says of that fire, "Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor a fire to sit before it" (Isaiah 47:14). After it has accomplished its work of destruction, that fire will go out. No one can deliver themselves from its flame by putting it out, but finally not a coal will be left. So say the Scriptures.

God punished the land of Idumea with fire that would "not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste...the owl and the raven shall dwell in it...thorns shall come up in her palaces" (Is. 34:9-15). Seeing that animals and plants were to exist in the ruined land of Idumea, the language of eternal fire must refer to God's anger and His total destruction of the place, rather than being taken literally.

The Hebrew and Greek phrases which are translated "for ever" mean strictly, "for the age" if you compare words used in those languages.
__________________________________________________

Everyone knows that Revelation contains some symbolism, such as its references to a seven-headed beast, a Babylonian harlot holding a golden cup, and a glistening woman clothed with the sun. Obviously, these aren’t literal. What about the ‘tormented forever’ texts? Could they be symbolic too? Here’s something significant: If you look closely at each ‘tormented forever’ passage, every one is connected to symbolism. Revelation 14:11 and Revelation 20:10 refer to “the beast,” and Revelation 19:3 states, “ her smoke rose up forever.” Whose smoke? The Whore riding the beast. Will a literal Harlot sizzle forever? No. This is symbolism.

Here’s more evidence worth considering: While Revelation 20:10 refers to torment forever, verse 9 says the opposite and contains no symbolism.

Verse 9 - And they [the lost] went up on the breadth of the earth [at the end of the Millennium], and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city [the New Jerusalem], and fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them.

Verse 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 forever and ever.

Verse 9 has no symbolism and says the lost are “devoured.” Verse 10 has symbolism and says they are tormented “forever.” Which is it? The literal truth lies in the text that contains no symbolism: “fire came down… and devoured them.” Beyond this, after “the lake of fire” is again described in verse 15, the next verse says,

“And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away.” (Revelation 21:1)

Revelation 20:9 says the lost are upon “the earth” when God’s fire devours them. Thus “the earth” is the location of “the lake of fire.” Then Revelation 21:1 says the “first earth” passes away which must include the lake of fire! Then there will be “no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain” (Revelation 21:4). Here’s even more proof that “the lake of fire” will disappear.

Again:
10. It shall not be quenched night or day; Its smoke shall ascend forever. From generation to generation it shall lie waste; No one shall pass through it forever and ever. Isaiah 34:10

It is clear that Isaiah was not saying that the smoke would be ascending forever since he also says that the land would then become a waste for generations. He says that it would be a place that only wild animals would inhabit. The animals would take over the land.
__________________________________________________

Think about it. If “the wages of sin” were conscious, unending, never ceasing, eternal torment, then the ONLY WAY that Jesus Christ could experience the full penalty for our sins would be for Him to consciously suffer eternal torment in our behalf.

To say that “the wages of sin” is burning forever, and then to deny that Jesus Christ will burn forever, is to deny that Jesus Christ paid the full penalty for our sins. In that case, He really didn’t. He would only have paid a mini, 3–day discounted price — between Friday and Sunday. And even then, “eternal torment” believers don’t believe that Jesus was consciously suffering from Friday to Sunday anyway. At least I’ve never heard anyone say this.

justsurfing
Sep 12th 2007, 11:21 PM
If God is all about love only, then why is there a hell?

Ah! Good question.

It's so far beyond, really, that "God is all about love only".

God is Love!

Why is there a hell?

(I'll let you answer first.)

ikester7579
Sep 13th 2007, 07:20 AM
Ah! Good question.

It's so far beyond, really, that "God is all about love only".

God is Love!

Why is there a hell?

(I'll let you answer first.)

No, I asked you first. Is there something that would make you want me to answer first?
Side note: Hell is mention in 55 verses (not counting all the variations of it). To say God is all about love, is to omit hell. And to omit 55 verses that mention it's name.

ikester7579
Sep 13th 2007, 08:01 AM
[quote=ikester7579;1378866]Hell was created by the Creator. There is no one else named the Creator in God's word. So everything that needed to be created was created by God.

And this, which is what I believe which may not be the view of this forum ministry. Is the hell is where you stay until judgement. Lake of fire is where eternal judgement will be. This is not because I believe a certain doctrine, like some would imply. This is what I get from reading the difference between the two.

Some believe that there is no difference between hell and the lake of fire. I believe there is because hell will be thrown into the lake of fire. So in the end, only the lake of fire will exist because in the end, only things that are eternal will exist.


Oh wow, You are right. Because my other firend helped me out and I responded back to the PDF of his and when i sent it I was feeling good about what I had sent...Which I shouldn't be I think you are right he is taunting me in a way and making me try to feel good about what I say to him. My friend said this: "yes, your pdf uses jude 7 to claim that hellfire is temporary. but look at what jude 7 says. "they serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire". the verse doesn't say they were burned with fire, as your pdf claims; it says that they suffer eternal fire. which is to say, eternally suffering in HELL. also, all the verses you use to support a lack of hell or eternal sleep are only applicable to pre-Judgement Day. rev 20:15 states that those not found in the book of life are cast into the lake of fire. revelations 2:11 says that those who believe "will not be hurt at all by the second death", implying that the second death is painful and continuous. revelations 21:8 says that "[sinners'] place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur"; the mention of sulfur implying that there will be an unpleasant smell in Hell - yet another sensory experience of everlasting torment. nowhere in revelations does it say that damnation in the lake of fire is temporary. whereas matthew 25:46 says "they will go away to ETERNAL PUNISHMENT". now, i have neither the original texts of the bible nor would i be capable of reading them. but to the same effect, i'm certain the same applies to you as well. we can argue etymology all we want but the meaning of these verses seems pretty clear to me, no matter how human interpretation tries to angle them in a more "merciful" light" in response to the guys PDF.

Then what the guy responded back was this:


Your Jude point is understandable. But what about all the rest? We cannot run our lives by what the Bible seems to imply, but rather by what it teaches clearly. What one determines the Bible implies, could differ.

Mark 9:43-46: Unquenchable fire is fire that cannot be put out, but which goes out when it has turned everything to ashes. Jeremiah 17:27 says Jerusalem was to be destroyed with unquenchable fire, and in 2 Chronicles 36:19-21 the Bible says this fire burned the city "to fulfil the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah" and left it desolate. Yet we know this fire went out, because Jerusalem is not burning today.

To quench means to extinguish or put out. No one will be able to put out the fire of hell. That is the strange fire of God. No one will be able to escape from it by extinguishing it. Isaiah says of that fire, "Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor a fire to sit before it" (Isaiah 47:14). After it has accomplished its work of destruction, that fire will go out. No one can deliver themselves from its flame by putting it out, but finally not a coal will be left. So say the Scriptures.

God punished the land of Idumea with fire that would "not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste...the owl and the raven shall dwell in it...thorns shall come up in her palaces" (Is. 34:9-15). Seeing that animals and plants were to exist in the ruined land of Idumea, the language of eternal fire must refer to God's anger and His total destruction of the place, rather than being taken literally.

The Hebrew and Greek phrases which are translated "for ever" mean strictly, "for the age" if you compare words used in those languages.________________________________________ __________


Everyone knows that Revelation contains some symbolism, such as its references to a seven-headed beast, a Babylonian harlot holding a golden cup, and a glistening woman clothed with the sun. Obviously, these aren’t literal. What about the ‘tormented forever’ texts? Could they be symbolic too? Here’s something significant: If you look closely at each ‘tormented forever’ passage, every one is connected to symbolism. Revelation 14:11 and Revelation 20:10 refer to “the beast,” and Revelation 19:3 states, “ her smoke rose up forever.” Whose smoke? The Whore riding the beast. Will a literal Harlot sizzle forever? No. This is symbolism.

Here’s more evidence worth considering: While Revelation 20:10 refers to torment forever, verse 9 says the opposite and contains no symbolism.

Verse 9 - And they [the lost] went up on the breadth of the earth [at the end of the Millennium], and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city [the New Jerusalem], and fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them.

Verse 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 forever and ever.

Verse 9 has no symbolism and says the lost are “devoured.” Verse 10 has symbolism and says they are tormented “forever.” Which is it? The literal truth lies in the text that contains no symbolism: “fire came down… and devoured them.” Beyond this, after “the lake of fire” is again described in verse 15, the next verse says,

“And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away.” (Revelation 21:1)

Revelation 20:9 says the lost are upon “the earth” when God’s fire devours them. Thus “the earth” is the location of “the lake of fire.” Then Revelation 21:1 says the “first earth” passes away which must include the lake of fire! Then there will be “no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain” (Revelation 21:4). Here’s even more proof that “the lake of fire” will disappear.

Again:
10. It shall not be quenched night or day; Its smoke shall ascend forever. From generation to generation it shall lie waste; No one shall pass through it forever and ever. Isaiah 34:10

It is clear that Isaiah was not saying that the smoke would be ascending forever since he also says that the land would then become a waste for generations. He says that it would be a place that only wild animals would inhabit. The animals would take over the land.
__________________________________________________


Think about it. If “the wages of sin” were conscious, unending, never ceasing, eternal torment, then the ONLY WAY that Jesus Christ could experience the full penalty for our sins would be for Him to consciously suffer eternal torment in our behalf.

To say that “the wages of sin” is burning forever, and then to deny that Jesus Christ will burn forever, is to deny that Jesus Christ paid the full penalty for our sins. In that case, He really didn’t. He would only have paid a mini, 3–day discounted price — between Friday and Sunday. And even then, “eternal torment” believers don’t believe that Jesus was consciously suffering from Friday to Sunday anyway. At least I’ve never heard anyone say this.

I have debated bible scoffers (not calling him one) for so long, that I have learned to disect what people say piece by piece to get the real meaning. What I get from you friend is that regardless of what you say, he already knows the truth on this. And will not change his mind, but he will try and change yours.

Making positive comments before the negative ones is a way to make you bring down your guard. So that what he has to say is more appealing to your heart, in hopes he can change your mind to his way of thinking. I also notice he explains more than he uses scriptures. If what a person believes about God, and the bible is mainly based on explanation, and little scripture. Then what they believe is usually a type of truth they have worked out on their own. One where they have to turn away from the word in order to explain it. God calls this "turning towards the wilderness".

num 24:1 And when Balaam saw that it pleased the LORD to bless Israel, he went not, as at other times, to seek for enchantments, but he set his face toward the wilderness.

You present the word of God to him. He refuses to see this truth that is written in the word. And he uses verses out of context, and refuses to make the word, as a whole, mesh. And would prefer that the contradictions to what he believes to exist, because he would rather ignore them than to address them.

Those who are seeking truth are willing to be corrected by the word of God regardless of who presents it to them. Why? Because if they respect God enough to be humble enough to see truth. Then it does not matter in which whom presents it. This is why pride separates a person from God. Because pride is what is making this person not see the truth in the verses you give him.

Another point about debating a believer on certain beliefs:

jas 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

If God does not want this person to understand this right now, he will not regardless of what you do. Certain knowledge gained to fast can be harmful to one's faith. This is why we grow in steps, and are not given full knowledge upon being saved. The process is for our protection. Because the more we become confused about knowledge we do not understand, the more our faith can be weakened.

How to leave the door open upon cutting off debating this person:

Even though you know that you are probably right, because you use all scriptures about hell. And what you believe supports the scriptures (makes the word mesh). You ask him to pray that you will find truth, and you tell him that you will do the same for him.

Because you have not offended by implying that you were right, and he was wrong. He will leave a door open about the subject to you, and anyone else that might debate him on this subject. Which plants a good seed. But to imply you are right and he is wrong, will make him not want to talk to you. Or if he does, he will remember how it ended the last time. Which means you want make any headway the second time.

Being humble and not prideful all the way through, plants seeds that make them question what they believe. Not doing this makes them put up a wall of protection about what they believe, and the wall will not go down, and is reinforced which each debate. Some times it's a process. Some times it is not. So you have to ask youself if your actions during the debate, were humble enough to make them leave a door open. Or was the door closed?

Being right does not bring in the harvest for the kingdom. Because being right also brings pride. Once you see the person you debate is not listening, or addressing the verses you present you are basically wasting your time. So you humbly bow out, and pray for them. Because were we cannot always get into their heart, God can. But only if God wants this person to learn this knowledge. Because He has to deem they are ready and mature enough in the faith to receive it.

Steven3
Sep 13th 2007, 08:33 AM
Ikester :)
No, I asked you first. Is there something that would make you want me to answer first?
Side note: Hell is mention in 55 verses (not counting all the variations of it). To say God is all about love, is to omit hell. And to omit 55 verses that mention it's name.

Can I ask which concordance or software you used to calculate 55?

God bless :)
Steven

justsurfing
Sep 14th 2007, 12:19 AM
Another thing, This guy that says he is a Christian keeps on making me mad and madder everytime he says something that proves or at least he won't give up. This is what he said to this Paragraph:

Yes, your pdf uses jude 7 to claim that hellfire is temporary. but look at what jude 7 says. "they serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire". the verse doesn't say they were burned with fire, as your pdf claims; it says that they suffer eternal fire. which is to say, eternally suffering in HELL. also, all the verses you use to support a lack of hell or eternal sleep are only applicable to pre-Judgement Day. rev 20:15 states that those not found in the book of life are cast into the lake of fire. revelations 2:11 says that those who believe "will not be hurt at all by the second death", implying that the second death is painful and continuous. revelations 21:8 says that "[sinners'] place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur"; the mention of sulfur implying that there will be an unpleasant smell in Hell - yet another sensory experience of everlasting torment. nowhere in revelations does it say that damnation in the lake of fire is temporary. whereas matthew 25:46 says "they will go away to ETERNAL PUNISHMENT". now, i have neither the original texts of the bible nor would i be capable of reading them. but to the same effect, i'm certain the same applies to you as well. we can argue etymology all we want but the meaning of these verses seems pretty clear to me, no matter how human interpretation tries to angle them in a more "merciful" light

His Counters - Your Jude point is understandable. But what about all the rest? We cannot run our lives by what the Bible seems to imply, but rather by what it teaches clearly. What one determines the Bible implies, could differ.

Mark 9:43-46: Unquenchable fire is fire that cannot be put out, but which goes out when it has turned everything to ashes. Jeremiah 17:27 says Jerusalem was to be destroyed with unquenchable fire, and in 2 Chronicles 36:19-21 the Bible says this fire burned the city "to fulfil the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah" and left it desolate. Yet we know this fire went out, because Jerusalem is not burning today.

To quench means to extinguish or put out. No one will be able to put out the fire of hell. That is the strange fire of God. No one will be able to escape from it by extinguishing it. Isaiah says of that fire, "Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor a fire to sit before it" (Isaiah 47:14). After it has accomplished its work of destruction, that fire will go out. No one can deliver themselves from its flame by putting it out, but finally not a coal will be left. So say the Scriptures.

God punished the land of Idumea with fire that would "not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste...the owl and the raven shall dwell in it...thorns shall come up in her palaces" (Is. 34:9-15). Seeing that animals and plants were to exist in the ruined land of Idumea, the language of eternal fire must refer to God's anger and His total destruction of the place, rather than being taken literally.

The Hebrew and Greek phrases which are translated "for ever" mean strictly, "for the age" if you compare words used in those languages.
__________________________________________________

Everyone knows that Revelation contains some symbolism, such as its references to a seven-headed beast, a Babylonian harlot holding a golden cup, and a glistening woman clothed with the sun. Obviously, these aren’t literal. What about the ‘tormented forever’ texts? Could they be symbolic too? Here’s something significant: If you look closely at each ‘tormented forever’ passage, every one is connected to symbolism. Revelation 14:11 and Revelation 20:10 refer to “the beast,” and Revelation 19:3 states, “ her smoke rose up forever.” Whose smoke? The Whore riding the beast. Will a literal Harlot sizzle forever? No. This is symbolism.

Here’s more evidence worth considering: While Revelation 20:10 refers to torment forever, verse 9 says the opposite and contains no symbolism.

Verse 9 - And they [the lost] went up on the breadth of the earth [at the end of the Millennium], and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city [the New Jerusalem], and fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them.

Verse 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 forever and ever.

Verse 9 has no symbolism and says the lost are “devoured.” Verse 10 has symbolism and says they are tormented “forever.” Which is it? The literal truth lies in the text that contains no symbolism: “fire came down… and devoured them.” Beyond this, after “the lake of fire” is again described in verse 15, the next verse says,

“And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away.” (Revelation 21:1)

Revelation 20:9 says the lost are upon “the earth” when God’s fire devours them. Thus “the earth” is the location of “the lake of fire.” Then Revelation 21:1 says the “first earth” passes away which must include the lake of fire! Then there will be “no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain” (Revelation 21:4). Here’s even more proof that “the lake of fire” will disappear.

Again:
10. It shall not be quenched night or day; Its smoke shall ascend forever. From generation to generation it shall lie waste; No one shall pass through it forever and ever. Isaiah 34:10

It is clear that Isaiah was not saying that the smoke would be ascending forever since he also says that the land would then become a waste for generations. He says that it would be a place that only wild animals would inhabit. The animals would take over the land.
__________________________________________________

Think about it. If “the wages of sin” were conscious, unending, never ceasing, eternal torment, then the ONLY WAY that Jesus Christ could experience the full penalty for our sins would be for Him to consciously suffer eternal torment in our behalf.

To say that “the wages of sin” is burning forever, and then to deny that Jesus Christ will burn forever, is to deny that Jesus Christ paid the full penalty for our sins. In that case, He really didn’t. He would only have paid a mini, 3–day discounted price — between Friday and Sunday. And even then, “eternal torment” believers don’t believe that Jesus was consciously suffering from Friday to Sunday anyway. At least I’ve never heard anyone say this.

My question: What would you respond/say to this guy? >.< He doesn't seem to get the point of what the paragraph said above is trying to prove to him. I'd like to know what how you guys would respond to what this person says, Thanks for your cooperation. :)

Hi...

I think I've understand who is saying what. The other guy is saying that there is not eternal torment in hell... you are saying there is.

Ummmmm... You said you did not have access to the original language:
Matthew 25:46 (Young's Literal Translation)

46And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.'



Young's Literal Translation is on www.biblegateway.com


He may not be willing to change his view at this time. But if you continue to discuss, please keep in mind it's an eschatological view... a non-essential matter... a non-essential to salvation.

:)

God's grace to you.

Love in Christ,

js

justsurfing
Sep 14th 2007, 12:26 AM
No, I asked you first. Is there something that would make you want me to answer first?
Side note: Hell is mention in 55 verses (not counting all the variations of it). To say God is all about love, is to omit hell. And to omit 55 verses that mention it's name.

The thing about hell is this... hell is about the devil. It's not about God and it's not about Love. It's about sin and it's about the devil.

But what will God, who is Love, do with the devil??

God created evil... and God created hell for Satan and his angels. Sin, death, and hell all go together.... and are all of and about the devil... not God.

Satan is created to be destroyed. So is hell.

God bless,

js

haryches
Sep 14th 2007, 02:06 AM
Wow guys, Thanks alot. Praise God! If he says anything further that I cannot answer or have questiosn about, I will post it here and ask for help as I beleive God led me here if I had questions about the BIble or anything. (: Which is reallyl helping me alot!

ikester7579
Sep 14th 2007, 06:12 AM
Ikester :)

Can I ask which concordance or software you used to calculate 55?

God bless :)
Steven

I used the bible data base. At the bottom, when you do a word search, it will give the number of verses listed. And I also did the search in using both the OT and NT.

http://www.yecheadquarters.org/cgi-bin/bible/bible.cgi

ikester7579
Sep 14th 2007, 06:14 AM
The thing about hell is this... hell is about the devil. It's not about God and it's not about Love. It's about sin and it's about the devil.

But what will God, who is Love, do with the devil??

God created evil... and God created hell for Satan and his angels. Sin, death, and hell all go together.... and are all of and about the devil... not God.

Satan is created to be destroyed. So is hell.

God bless,

js

So will there be any human cast into hell through God's judgement? Or do you believe that God is to loving to do that to us?

justsurfing
Sep 14th 2007, 07:02 AM
So will there be any human cast into hell through God's judgement? Or do you believe that God is to loving to do that to us?

God is Love. Man is sinful. God can be charged with no wrongdoing. God is perfectly Just. God is perfectly Holy.

Each of us deserves, completely - totally - and fully, to be cast into hell for all eternity.

I believe that each person who dies apart from saving grace in saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ... becomes what their nature inside of them is: sin, death, and hell.... the very spirit and nature of the devil, their spiritual father - himself... Satan. And there is no variableness within them.

Hell is within them... consumes them... and there is no other place fitting for them in their fallen, sinful, and totally wicked and evil state... separated from God... who is Love.

But I didn't say... hell survives the lake of fire.

Their wickedness, their total and complete just dessert of hell... only highlights and contrasts and glorifies the total, complete, and full sovereign grace God has had on each one of us... exactly their equals by first birth.

Love in Christ,

js

kejonn
Sep 14th 2007, 07:40 AM
Death, what is it? Is it something one experiences over and over, repeatedly, continuously, or is it something that happens and then the life before the death is no more? That is, when I die here on earth, this body, this life will cease to be. I will not "die" over and over again until the day of resurrection. Now consider

Rev 21:8 "But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."

The only ones who will be tormented forever will be the "devil", the beast, and the false prophet

Rev 20:10 And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

kejonn
Sep 14th 2007, 07:46 AM
Ikester :)

Can I ask which concordance or software you used to calculate 55?

God bless :)
Steven
BTW, This is in the KJV Steven. Darby has it 90 times!

Steven3
Sep 14th 2007, 07:55 AM
Hi Ikester :)
I used the bible data base. At the bottom, when you do a word search, it will give the number of verses listed. And I also did the search in using both the OT and NT.

http://www.yecheadquarters.org/cgi-bin/bible/bible.cgi


Not seen that one before, but its a pretty weak engine :). The problem with that search is that it doesn't let you search for the actual words. In this case, where the two words hell No.1 and hell No.2 are practically opposite in meaning an English word count isn't of much use.

Try the Blue Letter Bible website instead:

search KJV for "hell" in English
http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?hr=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tgm.org&icon=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tgm.org%2FTGMCopperLogoNew.g if&bgcolor=purple&textcolor=000000&linkcolor=39398C&vlinkcolor=0000FF&show_strongs=yes&word=hell&anything.x=21&anything.y=17

Click on the word "hell" Hebrew 07585 for meaning
http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H07585&Version=kjv
The corresponding NT word "hell No.1" is Greek 86
http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G86&Version=kjv

Then there's an unrelated word "hell No.2" Greek 1067
http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1067&Version=kjv
This gives you a definition
Hell is the place of the future punishment call "Gehenna" or "Gehenna of fire". This was originally the valley of Hinnom, south of Jerusalem, where the filth and dead animals of the city were cast out and burned; a fit symbol of the wicked and their future destruction.

Then at the bottom of the page you can enter 1067 and turn Strongs into Youngs by doing a Greek-English search (like Youngs) not English-Greek (Strongs)
http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1067&Version=KJV

Or you can go back to the search page and search "Hinnom"
http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?book=&chapter=&verse=&word=hinnom&show_strongs=yes&search_normal.x=28&search_normal.y=15

Now, looking at the results from the searches it should be clear that Sheol/Hades are the grave, Hinnom/Gehenna are the future judgment. Neither of them corresponds to the medieval idea of "hell", inferno, that is a myth.

Of course this blueletterbible.org can be used with all kinds of NT and OT words. This one "hell" is just a particularly bad example because Wycliffe, translating from Latin "inferno" had no access to the Greek and consequently the KJV followed Wycliffe in making both words one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wycliffe

You can search Wycliffe's version for "hell" here
http://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=hell&qs_version=53

God bless :)
Steven

haryches
Sep 14th 2007, 02:08 PM
This is what a Friend told me about the PDF person:

It looks like you got into a drawn-out online argument. I'm sure you realize this, but the guy you've been talking with is an annihilationist, a proponent of a view of hell that is becoming more and more popular these days because of the difficulty people have with eternal, conscious punishment. I've heard some of the arguments for it, but the guy you've been talking with has a very well-reasoned position on it.


I think his best argument is the first one in the discourse that you sent me. I'll grant that in Jeremiah and Isaiah "unquenchable fire" is used as an instrument of destruction, but that those fires surely went out at some point. And Jesus uses this same kind of imagery in Mark 9:43-46 when he says "their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched." But Jesus is not drawing attention so much to the length of the sinners' fates in this passage as he is simply capturing an abhorring image as a motivation for serious discipleship. As such, I don't think it's a very good passage to try to demonstrate the doctrine of eternal punishment.


Among the teachings of Jesus, Matthew 25 is better. In verses 31-46 of this chapter, Jesus places the "sheep," his people who will inherit "eternal life," in direct contrast to the "goats," who "will go away to eternal punishment." A comparison between the two is relied upon so heavily in this chapter that the meaning of "eternal punishment" must be related and directly opposite of "eternal life." True, occasionally "forever" in the Greek and Hebrew can refer to an "age", or a very long period of time, but this is only when context tells us that the present, limited age is being referred to. When the future age to come is in view, as is the case in Matt. 25, the translation "forever" or "everlasting" captures the essence of the Greek exactly. To say that "everlasting punishment" means something less in Matt. 25 that "eternal, conscious punishment" is not only to betray the sense of the greek "aionious" in this context, but it would also have implications for our translation of "eternal life," as if it were something less than a state of everlasting blessedness.


As far as Revelation goes, here is the flow of the passage from 20:9 to 20:10. God ends the final war at the end of the millennial reign of the saints with a decisive blow: "fire came down from heaven and devoured them." Even though fire is involved here, this is obviously not referring to the punishment of hell. Following God's victory in verse 9, God condemns "the beast" (Satan) and the false prophet to hell by throwing them into the lake fire, where they will be tormented forever. The lake of fire is not on earth; this is not found in the passage. And the use of symbolism is not a reason to cop out of the clear teaching of a passage. The passage clearly teaches that hell consists of eternal punishment. There is nothing symbolic in the sentence "They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever."


About Jesus paying the price for our sin--true, he didn't suffer eternal torment, but neither did he suffer for a while in hell and then cease to exist! If this guy wants to interpret "the wages of sin" as the final, second punishment for sin, he needs to be consistent with how he has already defined it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

And what the PDF person wrote back was:

Well, about Jesus paying the price of sin. The soul does cease to exist upon death. Spirit+Body=soul. This is what the verses show. Either way, I don't think we are going to get very far with this. I have shown what the verses indicate, you continue to say that you are sure they are saying things are forever. And while this does not seem all that logical to me, I will therefore continue to differ on that untill I see clearly that the Bible teaches otherwise as a whole. I cannot, with a clear conscience, change my beliefs and have the Bible begin to seemingly contradict itself in how God is loving, yet willing to let people burn and be tortured, this is not the type of God that is taught in the Bible. Nor does it match the teachings of death, as well as the use of the words eternal and forever, which in revelation literally mean from the greek: "unto the age"

Hebrews 5:6 & 6:20 The phrase: eis ton aiona literally means: "unto the age"
Hebrews 13:8 the phrase: eis tous aionas literally means: "unto the ages"
Rev. 14:11 the phrase: eis aionas aionon literally means: "unto ages of ages"
Rev. 20:10 the phrase: eis tous aionas ton anionon literally means: "unto the ages of the ages"

These all seem to indicate that the times are "until" or "unto" a final ending time or "age".

Even Revelation 20 says that the fire "devoured" them. When something is "devoured" it is eaten up and soon is obviously finished being eaten up once there is nothing more, not tortured forever.

Besides, does not the Bible say that only God and those who are eventually saved are given immortality? But then those in hell, if they are tortured forever, also have a type of immortality... More information on it's use: link (http://helltruth.com/QuestionsAnswers/UndyingImmortalSoul/tabid/256/Default.aspx)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Any thoughts, Comments, Answers? Or should I just leave this guy alone as he knows the truth already, As Ikester said, Let him be because He knows the truth and maybe God doesn't want him to know the Knowledge right now? Thanks for your answers/Comments guys I really appreciate em'.

Steven3
Sep 14th 2007, 02:29 PM
Hi Haryches
Any thoughts, Comments, Answers? Or should I just leave this guy alone as he knows the truth already, As Ikester said, Let him be because He knows the truth and maybe God doesn't want him to know the Knowledge right now? Thanks for your answers/Comments guys I really appreciate em'.

What's the difference between knowing the Truth and knowing the knowledge?

I'd keep up with him, and listen to what he's saying since as far as I can see on this issue the PDF person is correct about hell, even if the "unto the age" is debatable, and the other Friend who is advising you against the PDF person is actually the one who is reading the Bible less carefully.

As regards "eternal punishment", annihilation, a death sentence is "eternal punishment". I know the context of the Matthew parable of the sheep and the goats is somewhat apocalyptic, fair enough, but it doesn't mean the souls in a future Gehenna will be in "eternal torment" as some versions have it. It can't do because of this:

2 Thess 1:9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Is there any dodging this verse? There you go, Paul is an annihilationist.

God bless ;)
S.

Steven3
Sep 14th 2007, 02:32 PM
Hi K.
BTW, This is in the KJV Steven. Darby has it 90 times!Wow. That would explain why Plymouth Brethren are so big on "hell". What does Darby translate it as when Jacob says he's going to Hell?
S

Toolman
Sep 14th 2007, 03:14 PM
2 Thess 1:9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Is there any dodging this verse? There you go, Paul is an annihilationist.

God bless ;)
S.

The destruction Paul speaks of can also mean to "ruin or bring to the end of itself/power". Here is the greek word its translated from Olethros (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=3639&version=nas).

Every evil, sinful being will be "destroyed" by God's work of redemption. We, believers, have already experienced this in the "destruction" of our "old man". Unbelievers will experience this thru the second death.

Then all will be redeemed and set right with God.

Romans 5:18 - Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.

1 Cor. 15:22 - As in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.

Philippians 2:9-11 - Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

There you go, Paul is a universalist :D

Steven3
Sep 14th 2007, 06:20 PM
Hi Toolman :)
The destruction Paul speaks of can also mean to "ruin or bring to the end of itself/power". Here is the greek word its translated from Olethros (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=3639&version=nas).Er, I know. So what is it about "ruin or bring to the end of itself/power" which doesn't mean "ruin or bring to the end of itself/power" ? Check the way it is used in the NT http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3639&Version=kjv Or check Proverbs 1:26,27 21:7 and the other 20 Septuagint uses, or check LSJ on Perseus. If destruction doesn't mean destruction then what word should Paul have used instead?

"Eternal destruction" = eternal destruction.


Paul is a universalist :D Let's see:

Acts 24:15 having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust.

Universalist so far, but then what?

Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

So where do they go?

Re your verses:

Romans 5:18 - Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.

I know that people use this verse to say that even Hitler will be saved, but that's easily countered by looking at what John specifically says about the archetypal Hitler figure of the OT, Cain. So what does John say about Cain?

1 Cor. 15:22 - As in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.

Likewise, since when has all mankind been "in Christ"? If Paul says of his relatives in Rome that "they were in Christ before me." this proves that Saul of Tarsus was not "in Christ". What you need is a verse that says "in Adam all will be made alive".

Philippians 2:9-11 - Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Isaiah says "they will not rise" 26:14. So in the OT at least not all of those sleeping under the earth are included. And even if they are there's still a small technicality to pass through between resurrection and the kingdom...

John 5:27 And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. 28 Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.


:hmm:

Toolman
Sep 14th 2007, 06:45 PM
Hi Toolman :)Er, I know. So what is it about "ruin or bring to the end of itself/power" which doesn't mean "ruin or bring to the end of itself/power" ? Check the way it is used in the NT http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3639&Version=kjv Or check Proverbs 1:26,27 21:7 and the other 20 Septuagint uses, or check LSJ on Perseus. If destruction doesn't mean destruction then what word should Paul have used instead?

"Eternal destruction" = eternal destruction.

My point is that "destruction" does not equate to annihilation of the being but a "bringing to an end" the flesh, i.e. that which is contradictory to God.

God does this thru redemption of the being, translating them from dark to light and destroying the flesh.

Just like our "old man" was destroyed and ruined via Christ's work. Yet we were not annihilated but translated.


Let's see:

Acts 24:15 having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust.

Universalist so far, but then what?

Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

Correct, only when one submits to God and places faith in Christ will entrance to the Kingdom occur.


So where do they go?

Re your verses:

Romans 5:18 - Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.

I know that people use this verse to say that even Hitler will be saved, but that's easily countered by looking at what John specifically says about the archetypal Hitler figure of the OT, Cain. So what does John say about Cain?

1 Cor. 15:22 - As in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.

Likewise, since when has all mankind been "in Christ"? If Paul says of his relatives in Rome that "they were in Christ before me." this proves that Saul of Tarsus was not "in Christ". What you need is a verse that says "in Adam all will be made alive".

Note the verse does not say "Those IN CHRIST will all be made alive", it says "IN CHRIST all shall be made alive". Paul obviously is using the same "all" in both parts to show the work of the 1st and 2nd Adams.

As far as where does scripture declare all mankind in Christ?

Colossians 1:15-20 - He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.

All things are created by and for Christ. All things are reconciled by Christ back to God. There is nothing that is not included in this text by the phrase "all things".


Philippians 2:9-11 - Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Isaiah says "they will not rise" 26:14. So in the OT at least not all of those sleeping under the earth are included.

They are not included in the first resurrection. They do not rise with those who believe in the dispensation of the Church.
They rise at another point to God's judgement.

God's judgements never change though (as God does not) and His judgements are curative and to bring about righteousness. He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked.


And even if they are there's still a small technicality to pass through between resurrection and the kingdom...

John 5:27 And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. 28 Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.

:hmm:

The biblical universalist fully agrees that the unbelieving rise to judgement.

It is the judgement that is being examined though. I do not deny the judgement.

The eternal tormentist believes God will judge by tormenting eternally the sinner.

The annihilationist believes that God will judge by annihilating from existence the sinner.

The URist believes that God will judge by driving the sinner to Christ, by judgement, and redeeming the sinner.

God's means and ways do not change. His judgements teach righteousness (Isaiah 26:9)

We note that the "kings of the earth" and "the nations" who were judged by God in the Lake of Fire are seen entering the New Jerusalem AFTER their judgement:

Revelation 21:24 - And the nations shall walk in its light, and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it.

I will post my complete exegesis of this verse in the following post just for reference.

Toolman
Sep 14th 2007, 06:48 PM
The Nations

Revelation 15:2-4 is seen as the post event that occurs following Revelation 14:9-11

Revelation 15:2-4 - And I saw something like a sea of glass mingled with fire, and those who have the victory over the beast, over his image and over his mark and over the number of his name, standing on the sea of glass, having harps of God. They sing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying:

“ Great and marvelous are Your works,
Lord God Almighty!
Just and true are Your ways,
O King of the saints!
Who shall not fear You, O Lord, and glorify Your name?
For You alone are holy.
For all nations shall come and worship before You,
For Your judgments have been manifested.”

In Revelation the saints (the Church) are never identified with the term "the nations" but are always contrasted and distinguished from "the nations" as those "who have been redeemed FROM the nations" (Rev. 5:9, Rev. 7:9).

Yet here we see in Revelation 15:4 the clear statement that "the nations" shall come and worship before God. This is the same "the nations" which is referred to in Revelation 14:8.

And another angel followed, saying, “Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she has made all the nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.”

John does not here, in 15:4, use the term "people FROM all nations" (i.e. the Saints/Church) but uses the term "the nations" (i.e. those opposed to God who suffer His wrath in chapter 14).

The greek word here used for "worship" is "proskuneo" and is always used in Revelation for a voluntary worship of either God or the Beast and to argue for a forced worship is unwarranted by context of the passage or the book.

This claim is further supported by chapters 21-22 of Revelation where we read that after the final judgement, where those whose names are not written in the Lamb's book of Life are cast into the Lake of Fire (20:10-15), "the nations" would walk by the light of the New Jerusalem (21:24), would bring their worship into it (21:26) and will be healed by the fruits of the tree of life (22:2). I will address that a bit more in-depth below.

The Gates of New Jerusalem are left open

Revelation 21:23-27 -The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there. The glory and honor of the nations will be brought into it. Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Here we have the New Jerusalem with both walls and a gate.

The walls, which in ancient culture would have served as protection, no longer serve that purpose but now represent a clear delineation between those within the city (the redeemed) and those outside (those who inhabit the Lake of Fire).
This is supported by Christ's words in 22:14-15:

Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.


There is a wall of seperation clearly presented between redeemed and unredeemed.

But, the gates of the city are NEVER closed. The gates are never closed because there is an access point for those who are outside the city to then enter the city, through the permanently open gates!

Given that those in the city would have no reason to leave for the outside, the gates are left open for the entrance from those outside the walls.

Isaiah 60:10-11 -
"Foreigners will rebuild your walls,
and their kings will serve you.
Though in anger I struck you,
in favor I will show you compassion.

Your gates will always stand open,
they will never be shut, day or night,
so that men may bring you the wealth of the nations—
their kings led in triumphal procession.

Here we see Isaiah's prophetic statements coming into completion in John relevatory vision, the nations, after being judged and brought to the end of themselves, are to enter (New) Jerusalem.

The gate symbolizes not only security but the God who excludes no one from His presence forever.

The Kings of the Earth

To confirm the earlier observations that the nations are indeed the rebellious nations who suffer judgement, we read that they are accompanied into the New Jerusalem by "the kings of the earth".

The "kings of the earth" have committed fornication with the whore-city Babylon (17:2) and she rules over them (17:18).

These "kings of the earth" hide from the wrath of God (6:15).

They join with the Beast to make war on Christ (19:19).

There can be absolutely no doubt whatsoever that these "kings of the earth" find themselves under God's wrath dealt out in the Lake of Fire.

Yet it is the very same "kings of the earth" of whom we read in 21:24 that they enter the New Jerusalem via the open gates in order to bring their splendor into it (a direct contrast with 18:4-19 where they bring their splendor to Babylon).

These "kings of the earth" come not as second class citizens, for nothing defiled may enter but only those written in the Lambs book of Life, but they enter on an equal standing with ALL the redeemed (who have been brought to an end of themselves to be made new in Him).

The ultimate defeat of Christ's enemies (of which all men are at some point) is by reconciling them to Himself conquering sin and death forever through the redemptive, reconciling, salvific work of Jesus Christ.

http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1324766&postcount=50

Steven3
Sep 14th 2007, 07:44 PM
Hi Toolman
My point is that "destruction" does not equate to annihilation of the being but a "bringing to an end" the flesh, i.e. that which is contradictory to God. My point is that it does in the 20 Septuagint uses or in the other 3 NT uses. If it says "destroy the flesh" then yes it is the destruction/bringing to the end of the flesh", if it says "destruction of the X" then it is destruction/end of the X.

I'm afraid I have to ask again, if the word the Bible uses olethrios (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D %2372928) (<- which is a common word in classical texts too, so I've linked to LSJ) for "destruction" doesn't mean destruction, then what alternative word does mean destruction? How can the writers say destruction if there is no word that means destruction in the Greek language?

Now if anyone fails to obey my authority--whether man or woman or something in between--a sentence of death will be decreed for him and by no means whatsoever will he escape destruction by stoning at the people's hands. (Eteocles, in Aeschylus' 'Seven against Thebes', line 197)

And likewise if "perish" doesn't mean perish, what's that business about believing in Jesus in John 3:16?

John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

This doesn't say “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not have a temporary setback but have eternal life immediately, and eventually everyone would believe him and have eternal life." it presents mankind with a choice

Choose life or choose death

Deuteronomy 30:19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live,



Note the verse does not say "Those IN CHRIST will all be made alive", it says "IN CHRIST all shall be made alive". Paul obviously is using the same "all" in both parts to show the work of the 1st and 2nd Adams.I often wonder if there's something about the English language that is counterintuitive. How would you read the Spanish

"Porque así como en Adam todos mueren, así también en Cristo todos serán vivificados."?

As all in America have the right to vote for the President, so all in California have the right to vote for the Governor.

As all in the college wear the school jersey, so all in the football team wear the team uniform.



As far as where does scripture declare all mankind in Christ? I note you didn't answer how Paul's relatives could be "in Christ before him" if all mankind are automatically in Christ. :)

Colossians 1:15-20 - He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.

Okay, the above "all things" references the church. So does "all things" in the above include Hindu temples, Muslim mosques, Zen jinjas, Aztec pyramids? Or does "all things" refer to all things that are in Christ?




Revelation 21:24 - And the nations shall walk in its light, and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it.

I will post my complete exegesis of this verse in the following post just for reference.As you wish, but I believe that Revelation is best kept for personal study and prayer, not for sharing ;) Thanks.
God bless
S.

Toolman
Sep 14th 2007, 08:04 PM
Hi ToolmanMy point is that it does in the 20 Septuagint uses or in the other 3 NT uses. If it says "destroy the flesh" then yes it is the destruction/bringing to the end of the flesh", if it says "destruction of the X" then it is destruction/end of the X.

I'm afraid I have to ask again, if the word the Bible uses olethrios (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D %2372928) (<- which is a common word in classical texts too, so I've linked to LSJ) for "destruction" doesn't mean destruction, then what alternative word does mean destruction? How can the writers say destruction if there is no word that means destruction in the Greek language?

Now if anyone fails to obey my authority--whether man or woman or something in between--a sentence of death will be decreed for him and by no means whatsoever will he escape destruction by stoning at the people's hands. (Eteocles, in Aeschylus' 'Seven against Thebes', line 197)

I'm not denying the destruction as an end to the flesh, i.e. an end to that which is contrary to God.

Just as our 'old man' was destroyed, so will all the wicked that is contrary to God. Didn't equate to annihilation for us though. We were translated. The 'old man' destroyed and the 'new man' made new.


And likewise if "perish" doesn't mean perish, what's that business about believing in Jesus in John 3:16?

John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

This doesn't say “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not have a temporary setback but have eternal life immediately, and eventually everyone would believe him and have eternal life." it presents mankind with a choice

Choose life or choose death

Only those who believe on Christ participate in His life. All others have perished, are perishing and will perish.

That does not mean that God is not able to bring to life those who are dead (as He did with us).

1 Samuel 2:6 - "The LORD brings death and makes alive; he brings down to the grave and raises up.

2 Samuel 14:14 - Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him.

Job 5:17-18 - "Blessed is the man whom God corrects;
so do not despise the discipline of the Almighty.
For he wounds, but he also binds up;
he injures, but his hands also heal

Lamentations 3:31-33 - For men are not cast off
by the Lord forever.
Though he brings grief, he will show compassion,
so great is his unfailing love.
For he does not willingly bring affliction
or grief to the children of men



Deuteronomy 30:19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live,

Yes, only thru faith in Christ shall one participate of the life in Christ.

God will bring all to that faith and every knee will bow and every tongue will confess.

Its called good news :)


I often wonder if there's something about the English language that is counterintuitive. How would you read the Spanish

"Porque así como en Adam todos mueren, así también en Cristo todos serán vivificados."?

As all in America have the right to vote for the President, so all in California have the right to vote for the Governor.

As all in the college wear the school jersey, so all in the football team wear the team uniform.

Paul's contrast is of the same "all". The same "all" that died in Adam is the same "all" that are made alive in Christ. Romans 5 supports this also.

Christ's work of redemption is greater (not lesser) than Adam's work of condemnation. Where sin abounds grace MUCH MORE abounds.

Good news :)


I note you didn't answer how Paul's relatives could be "in Christ before him" if all mankind are automatically in Christ. :)

Sorry, I wasn't quite following you. I think I'm with you now.

From God's perspective we were in Christ before the foundations of the world (Ephesians 1:4)
From our perspective (bound by linear time) a person is not in Christ until faith.

God calls those things that aren't (people in Christ) as though they are.


Colossians 1:15-20 - He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.

Okay, the above "all things" references the church. So does "all things" in the above include Hindu temples, Muslim mosques, Zen jinjas, Aztec pyramids? Or does "all things" refer to all things that are in Christ?

The "all things" refer to all things that were created by Christ, which is everything (Hindu temples, etc.).

All things are reconciled, are being reconciled and will be reconciled back to God through the cross of Christ.

Everything that needs to be "destroyed", redeemed and made new will be so and God will be all in all (1Corinthians 15:28)



As you wish, but I believe that Revelation is best kept for personal study and prayer, not for sharing ;) Thanks.
God bless
S.

Cool.

Steven3
Sep 14th 2007, 08:25 PM
Hi Toolman :)
I'm not denying the destruction as an end to the flesh, i.e. an end to that which is contrary to God.No but you're denying 2Thess1:9 "eternal destruction" where flesh isn't mentioned.

Re 1Sam2:6 hey I don't deny resurrection, I could even live with universal resurrection (and happily discard verses that don't agree like Is26:14, no problem).



Paul's contrast is of the same "all". The same "all" that died in Adam is the same "all" that are made alive in Christ. Romans 5 supports this also. By that logic everyone in America can vote for California's governor. Anyway, my takeaways for tonight:

x = 0, z = 1, therefore x = 1

perish = saved

destroy = slap, you bad boy!

eternal destruction = eternal life

eternal death = eternal life

shall not rise = shall rise to eternal life

resurrection of condemnation = eternal life

:rofl:
sorry!!



The "all things" refer to all things that were created by Christ, which is everything (Hindu temples, etc.). I don't believe that Hindu temples, or the idols in them, were created either by Christ, or in Christ, or through Christ.

Shhhh. Don't let anyone know - there are 2 creations in the Bible
Take care :)
S

Toolman
Sep 14th 2007, 09:00 PM
Hi Toolman :)No but you're denying 2Thess1:9 "eternal destruction" where flesh isn't mentioned.

No denial, perhaps a different understanding but not denial.

The universalist does not deny the judgement of God but understands it in a different light than the annihilationist.


Re 1Sam2:6 hey I don't deny resurrection, I could even live with universal resurrection (and happily discard verses that don't agree like Is26:14, no problem).

Well, I see 2 resurrections is scripture and that is what I believe Isaiah 26 is addressing so I find harmony there.


By that logic everyone in America can vote for California's governor. Anyway, my takeaways for tonight:

The logic to me is more like "in the sinking boat eveyone was in danger of dying but in the rescue boat everyone was saved".

Just depends on the lense you read thru I suppose.


Anyway, my takeaways for tonight:
x = 0, z = 1, therefore x = 1

perish = saved

destroy = slap, you bad boy!

eternal destruction = eternal life

eternal death = eternal life

shall not rise = shall rise to eternal life

resurrection of condemnation = eternal life

:rofl:
sorry!!

I know, God's like that ain't He. I'm thankful for that good news, that He can rescue all the lost from sin, death, destruction and wrath :)
Now, that is something to be thankful for!

Samuel 2:6 - "The LORD brings death and makes alive; he brings down to the grave and raises up.

Lamentations 3:31-33 - For men are not cast off
by the Lord forever.
Though he brings grief, he will show compassion,
so great is his unfailing love.
For he does not willingly bring affliction
or grief to the children of men


I don't believe that Hindu temples, or the idols in them, were created either by Christ, or in Christ, or through Christ.

Shhhh. Don't let anyone know - there are 2 creations in the Bible
Take care :)
S

You too, I've enjoyed the convo and your spirit of sharing your view!

haryches
Sep 14th 2007, 10:48 PM
Friend that was helping me replied as well to what the other guy we are debating with. He said:

Well, unfortunately, this guy just doesn't have it right when it comes to the usage of the greek "eis to aionous" on his side. Yes, the term strictly translates word-for-word to "unto the age" or "unto the ages," but that does not capture the meaning of the term when it is applied to the age to come. In the Bible, it is consistently used to mean "forever."


It can be difficult to reconcile the reality of an eternal hell with the notion that God is also loving, but it is important not to take the text of Scripture on its own terms and allow it to inform what we believe, not vice versa. In any case, I think this is an issue that Christians can agree to disagree on because it isn't necessarily foundational to our faith, as for example Salvation-by-Grace would be. We can all pray that God would lead us personally to the truth on this matter.

Any thoughts or comments? :\ Thanks alot again. REally Appreciate it.

NightWatchman
Sep 15th 2007, 12:13 AM
As regards "eternal punishment", annihilation, a death sentence is "eternal punishment". I know the context of the Matthew parable of the sheep and the goats is somewhat apocalyptic, fair enough, but it doesn't mean the souls in a future Gehenna will be in "eternal torment" as some versions have it. It can't do because of this:

2 Thess 1:9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Is there any dodging this verse? There you go, Paul is an annihilationist.

God bless ;)
S.The Greek word for destruction does not mean annihilation,
which as nonexistence could not be eternal,
but rather the loss of everything worthwhile.

Here and in 1 Tim. 6:9, Paul uses the word to refer to the eternal consequences of sin.

The penalty for sin is not annihilation,
but eternal ruin,
eternal separation from the love of Christ.

Just as endless life belongs to Christians,
endless ruin belongs to those who are opposed to Christ.

And besides, annihilation is what the pagan, sin-intoxicicated wicked world wants when they die.

But in Mark chapter 9, Jesus plainly says that in hell,
"Their worm does not die,
and the fire is not quenched."

We all live forever.

enarchay
Sep 15th 2007, 12:54 AM
Well, unfortunately, this guy just doesn't have it right when it comes to the usage of the greek "eis to aionous" on his side. Yes, the term strictly translates word-for-word to "unto the age" or "unto the ages," but that does not capture the meaning of the term when it is applied to the age to come. In the Bible, it is consistently used to mean "forever." I honestly do not see how this subject came up, but now that it has, I think I will make a few comments.

I don't think your above quoted comment is completely true. While in certain contexts the phrase can be inferred to take on the meaning of eternity (in reference to the length of God's existence, for example), it does not appear that the phrase itself alone takes on the meaning (idiomatic or otherwise) of time without end that extends beyond history, that is, eternity.

Andrew Perriman comments:
"The word aion occurs most frequently in biblical Greek in such phrases as eis ton aiona ('for the age'), eis tous aionas ('for the ages'), or more emphatically eis ton aiona tou aionos ('for the age of the age'). The meaning of the expressions is simply 'forever' – but 'forever' conceived as an unending extension of some particular historical circumstance, not as 'eternity,' which carries with it the clear connotation of time beyond death or beyond history. To give a mundane example: in the law of Moses, if a Hebrew slave chose not to be freed after six years, his master would bore his ear with an awl, and he would serve him eis ton aiona – not for eternity, but for life (Exod. 21:6 LXX)" (Coming of the Son of Man, Perriman 83).
Another example, the images of which John draws upon in his Apocalypse, is seen in Isaiah:
"Nuktos [night] kai [and] emeras [day]; kai [and] ou [it shall not] sbesthesetai [be extinguished] eis [into] ton [the] aiona [age] kronon [of time]. Kai [And] anabesetai [shall ascend] o kapnos autes [her smoke] ano [upward]; eis [unto] geneas [her generations] epemothesetai [she shall be made desolate], kai [and] eis [for] kronon [time] polun [a long] eremothesetai [she shall be made desolate]" (Based on The Apostolic Bible Polyglot, Isaiah 34:10 LXX).
Clearly, Isaiah conceives the situation as historical. For "a long time" (eis kronon polun) the land was to be made desolate. Hence, "into the age of time" (eis ton aiona kronon) is conceived of as a period of time, albeit long, within a historical time frame; but not as a period of time extending beyond all history or death. Obviously, smoke is not ascending up into the air somewhere out in the middle east to this day. The images are of the the process of destruction (brought about by God) and, what is conceived of within a particular historical time frame, the results of the destruction as a permanent and ill-reversible consequence. The process of judgment leaves a sign of its ill-reversible effects, "her smoke," in the same way the smoke ascending from a burning building is a sign of its destruction; nevertheless, once the building (in this case the nation) is utterly destroyed, the smoke will eventually fade. The point Isaiah is making is once God judges Edom, the effects of the judgment will be nearly ill-reversible; the inhabitants of Isaiah's Edom will be scattered forth and away from their land never to return – the empire as they knew it, would never be rebuilt. The nation, however, was certainly not burned for an eternity. God's process of judgment had met its goal in the nation's destruction and now the smoke has faded. From this, John Gill comments on the process of the destruction of Edom, "It will be long burning, and shall not be extinguished until it is utterly consumed."

The author of Jude provides us with a similar image with his interpretation of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah:
"just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal [aioniou] fire" (Jud 1:7 ESV).
Here the adjective form of aion is used. Andrew Comments, "The adjective aionios is used in the same way [as was eis ton aiona in his previous example from Exodus]: it describes something that will last throughout the age, from generation to generation. If, however, there is a sense that we are approaching a boundary between two ages, it is natural to take these expressions as descriptive of 'the age to come'" (Coming of the Son of Man, Perriman 83). So in the author of Jude's passage, the point is not that Sodom and Gomorrah are on fire today, but that the fire they suffered in a particular historical time frame (the aion) had lasting effects: it extended throughout a particular historical period. More importantly is not that Sodom and Gomorrah felt the torment of the aioniou fire (the fire of their age or age-lasting fire) for an unending amount of time that continues to this day, but that the fire achieved its purpose and had ill-reversible results. Sure there was torment in the process of destruction (I'm sure being burned alive is not too fun), but the process had and met a goal: destruction and death.

For another example of the adjective form of aion, following Andrew's example of Exod. 21:6 above, a similar statement appears in the New Testament.
"Tacha gar [Perhaps for] dia [because of] touto [this] echoristhe [he was separated] pros [for] oran [an hour], ina [that] aionion [eonian] auton [you might] apeches [him have] (UBS4, Phm 1:15).
I translated aionion "eonian" in the above because both are adjectives. Rotherham renders it, "For, peradventure, for this cause, was he separated for an hour, that, as an age-abiding possession, thou mightest have him back" (Phm 1:15, Rotherham). Aionion is describing the amount of the time (or the aion) Philemon was to receive his slave back for. Obviously Philemon would not keep the slave under his possession throughout all eternity, but for as long as he lived. The above usage of aionios is very similar to Andrew's example of the usage of eis ton aiona from Exodus.

Another, though more vague, example is found in 2 Chronicles.
"Kai [And] me [do not] sklerunete [harden] tous trachelous [your necks] umon os [as] oi pateres umon [your fathers!] dote [Give] doxan [glory] kurio [to the Lord] to theo [God], kai [and] eiselthete [enter] eis [into] to agiasmaautou [his sanctuary!] o [which] egiasen [he sanctified] eis [into] ton [the] aiona [age]" (Based on The Apostolic Bible Polyglot, 2Ch 30:8a LXX).
Without going into much detail, a similar occurrence is in Jer 17:5 where it is said "this city shall remain forever [eis ton aiona]." Obviously the temple was not sanctified nor did it remain forever, as in, for all eternity, but for a period of time throughout history until its ultimate and final destruction in 70 AD. Now the temple that was once sanctified "into the age" is useless, for we are the temple of God (i.e. 1Co 3:16).

I'm sure I could provide more examples, but I think I provided enough to make the point that, to say the least, aion and its cognates alone do not denote eternity. Even if the word and its various cognates have the potential to denote eternity, which is possible, it would be extremely context dependent. Of course, if you take the stance the words are context dependent, depending on your bias, you will translate the words differently in different places.

Concerning verses talking about the length of God's reign, for example, "into the age/ages/ages of ages/etc." is still a good translation, because despite God's clear immortality, he is revealed throughout time and history. It is fitting to say God reigns into history; and yet by implication, it is clear God reigns beyond and even outside of history and even time.



I think this is an issue that Christians can agree to disagree on because it isn't necessarily foundational to our faith, as for example Salvation-by-Grace would be. We can all pray that God would lead us personally to the truth on this matter.I couldn't have said it better myself :pp!

These "little" issues should not bring a separation between the body of Christ. Eternal torment advocates, universalists, and annihilationists can all agree the lake of fire is a judgment, and whether eternal, a form of torment, resulting in destruction, or resulting in purification, it will not be pretty. Let us move away from the culturally diffused modern day terms like "hell" and move back to the Biblical concept of judgment. If we must talk about the fate of the wicked, let us talk about "judgment," and let each individual decide, based on his own studies, what exactly the results of this "judgment" will be. I don't see, more importantly, in the first place, why judgment should have a place in our proclamation of the gospel to the lost in the first place. Judgment is more of an assurance to those who believe, not those who do not believe, that the righteous will be avenged (whatever that may mean), not a scare tactic to win over converts.

enarchay
Sep 15th 2007, 01:13 AM
But in Mark chapter 9, Jesus plainly says that in hell,
"Their worm does not die,
and the fire is not quenched."

And have you read from where Jesus quotes the above? This, also, is in reference to geenna, not what we call "hell" from a culturally diffused perspective 2000 years later.

enarchay
Sep 15th 2007, 03:31 AM
Concerning olethros, I don't see how a Universalist or an Eternal Torment advocate can twist Paul's verse to fit his opinion. Universalists seem to argue that the evil nature of the wicked is destroyed. However, Paul makes it clear oitives, "who," will suffer the destruction of the age: those he describes in the previous verse who disobey the gospel of Jesus. It's not their evil nature that suffers the destruction or else Paul would have made that clear. In other words, Paul discusses "who" not "what." Likewise, Paul makes it clear they will be destroyed, not suffer eternal torment. More importantly, I'm not sure if we should take this verse beyond its context. Paul may have been thinking quite historically and may have been, for example, referring to the same judgment Jesus constantly warned that was to come upon Jerusalem within a generation (fulfilled in 66-70 AD).

Toolman
Sep 15th 2007, 03:52 AM
Concerning olethros, I don't see how a Universalist or an Eternal Torment advocate can twist Paul's verse to fit his opinion. Universalists seem to argue that the evil nature of the wicked is destroyed. However, Paul makes it clear oitives, "who," will suffer the destruction of the age: those he describes in the previous verse who disobey the gospel of Jesus. It's not their evil nature that suffers the destruction or else Paul would have made that clear. In other words, Paul discusses "who" not "what." Likewise, Paul makes it clear they will be destroyed, not suffer eternal torment. More importantly, I'm not sure if we should take this verse beyond its context. Paul may have been thinking quite historically and may have been, for example, referring to the same judgment Jesus constantly warned that was to come upon Jerusalem within a generation (fulfilled in 66-70 AD).

Many URists do take the verse (and most judgement verses) in a preterist manner (70 AD).

As for the one who takes it as the destruction of the wicked, it is regarded as a "who" not a "what".

Romans 6:8 - Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him.

"Who" died with Christ? We did. Did a "who" actually die? According to scripture.. yep.

NightWatchman
Sep 15th 2007, 04:00 AM
Concerning olethros, I don't see how a Universalist or an Eternal Torment advocate can twist Paul's verse to fit his opinion. Universalists seem to argue that the evil nature of the wicked is destroyed. However, Paul makes it clear oitives, "who," will suffer the destruction of the age: those he describes in the previous verse who disobey the gospel of Jesus. It's not their evil nature that suffers the destruction or else Paul would have made that clear. In other words, Paul discusses "who" not "what." Likewise, Paul makes it clear they will be destroyed, not suffer eternal torment. More importantly, I'm not sure if we should take this verse beyond its context. Paul may have been thinking quite historically and may have been, for example, referring to the same judgment Jesus constantly warned that was to come upon Jerusalem within a generation (fulfilled in 66-70 AD).
While some of our conclusions are different, you have stated your viewpoint very well.

My view of the eternal judgment is one where fire represents judgment.
I agree that preaching eternal torment is not effective for sharing Jesus Christ with people.

I think that those who hate God and reject Jesus as Lord and Savior do so by their own free will. These people couldn't stand to be in the presence of those who are God's children. Therefore the God-haters would hate Heaven.

And at the judgment, they will say to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us!" as it is written in Revelation ch. 6.

enarchay
Sep 15th 2007, 04:03 AM
Many URists do take the verse (and most judgement verses) in a preterist manner (70 AD).

As for the one who takes it as the destruction of the wicked, it is regarded as a "who" not a "what".

Romans 6:8 - Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him.

"Who" died with Christ? We did. Did a "who" actually die? According to scripture.. yep.

But we raise and "live with him." The wicked are destroyed "from [apo]" God's presence.

I can see being a Universalist and maintaining a preterist interpretation of the verse.

justsurfing
Sep 15th 2007, 04:38 AM
I just want to testify about what I see in Jesus Christ... when I look Him square in the eyes.

When Jesus was in the synagogue, He read from this passage of scripture:

Isaiah 61: 2 to proclaim the year of the LORD's favor
and the day of vengeance of our God,
to comfort all who mourn,
3 and provide for those who grieve in Zion—
to bestow on them a crown of beauty
instead of ashes,
the oil of gladness
instead of mourning,
and a garment of praise
instead of a spirit of despair.
They will be called oaks of righteousness,
a planting of the LORD
for the display of his splendor.



He said, "This day is the scripture fulfilled in your ears." Jesus did not come to condemn the world but to save it. The world was already condemned. The ministry of Jesus Christ is that He is the Savior of the world and the Savior of all men.



We cannot limit God, imo, and say that those who are destroyed in judgment becoming mere ashes... cannot be made beauty. Yes, the scripture states, they can. To say they can't be made beauty from ashes, we have to look at the scripture and Jesus Christ. We are wrong, imo, to ever look to man, get all worked up focussed on their sinfulness, and on the basis of that... determine the measure of what God our Savior can and will do.



Also, this is not, the way I look at it, a theoretical discussion of what the Bible says or doesn't say as we interpret it. It's more personal than that. The Bible is Jesus Christ.

Can we picture ourselves standing in the presence of God? Right now? For me, it's so very personal and real... that I think this way. I bring Jesus right onto the scene... and I look at Him. Can we look straight at Jesus Christ - the atoning sacrifice for the sins of all the world - straight in the eyes and say, "You can't do that... make beauty out of ashes." "You can't do that... re-new and restore and re-create those you have destroyed by fire. You're not able. Your blood is not that powerful."... or can we question Him saying, "Well, if you can..."

Jesus says in scripture, "If I can? All things are possible to those who believe."

Can we really believe more easily that the Jesus who died on the cross as the Savior of all men... out of Pure Love.... Divine Love... won't renew and restore all creation and all men?
Mark 9:21-24 (New International Version)


21Jesus asked the boy's father, "How long has he been like this?"
"From childhood," he answered. 22"It has often thrown him into fire or water to kill him. But if you can do anything, take pity on us and help us."
23" 'If you can'?" said Jesus. "Everything is possible for him who believes."
24Immediately the boy's father exclaimed, "I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!"






Luke 4:16-21 (King James Version)


16And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.
17And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
18The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
19To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
20And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
21And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.



This is a character question. We are questioning the very character of the Lord Jesus Christ... the way I see it.

Without faith it is impossible to please Him.

I have my answer. He can. He will. He's able and willing. God is Love. Jesus is the Savior of all men.

Love in Christ,

js

justsurfing
Sep 15th 2007, 05:10 AM
It's not their evil nature that suffers the destruction or else Paul would have made that clear. In other words, Paul discusses "who" not "what."

Hi,

I believe it's very clear in scripture that the sinful evil nature is a who, not a what. We're people. The sinful evil nature is referred to as the old man... a different person from the new man.

We also refer to it as "self". "Self" is a who, the old man is a "who" and not a what. I no longer live but Christ lives in me.

I do believe it's a very simple, but hugely major, revelation to clearly understand that the person we were as sinners is a completely different person than the person we are in Christ. You and I are not the same "who" we were before we became "who" we are in Christ.

Lucifer was a "who". Satan is a "who". They are not the same person... because their "who" nature is completely different. That's why Lucifer, imo, was given an entirely different name when he fell from grace to become Satan.

Also, we will be given new names in Heaven. The old is completely gone and destroyed... all things are made new. New people. The old people completely destroyed by the cross. The destruction of the reprobate is an absolute parallel of the destruction of the cross we've experienced as Christians. It was through the cross that Satan is destroyed... and God moves by His Spirit to recreate.

Same difference, imo. Exact parallel. No difference between those on the right and on the left... in their first birth in Adam... and eventually their second birth through God in Jesus Christ our Lord. We are a completely new creation in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Love in Christ,

js

Steven3
Sep 15th 2007, 10:28 AM
Hi NightWatchman :)
The Greek word for destruction does not mean annihilation, which as nonexistence could not be eternal, but rather the loss of everything worthwhile.Okay, please tell me, if not olethros/olethrios, then what Greek word does = 'destruction'? :hmm:


Here and in 1 Tim. 6:9, Paul uses the word to refer to the eternal consequences of sin. The penalty for sin is not annihilation, but eternal ruin, eternal separation from the love of Christ.Sorry, but says who? "Destruction" means destruction in the Greek OT and classical Greek texts, so why not in the NT?
Just as endless life belongs to Christians, endless ruin belongs to those who are opposed to Christ.Again, sorry but I have to ask, says who? Please show me, where is the Bible evidence of eternal life in Gehenna? :hmm:
And besides, annihilation is what the pagan, sin-intoxicicated wicked world wants when they die.Do they? All the Buddhists, Hindus, animists, New Agers I've met in my life all believe they have an immortal atma. Likewise Muslims believe they have an immortal nafs or ruh, which survives death of the body. The RC church likewise teaches an imortal anima. But all these concepts are totally unscriptural - even Luther recognised that the soul is not immortal.


But in Mark chapter 9, Jesus plainly says that in hell,
"Their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched."
We all live forever.:o, goodness me, don't hear that one much these days :). Sorry, but don't you know where Christ is quoting from? Please look back at the source of the quote (does your Bible have a margin showing the reference? it is Is66:24). Isaiah is describing Armageddon or Hinnom (as Enarchay correctly pointed out above). The "corpses" are piled so high that the worms don't die and the fires don't go out. Neither Isaiah, in the original verse on Armageddon/Hinnom, nor Christ on Gehenna, are the goats transformed into worms, larvae. That is an interpretation that dates from the 6th Century. The "worms" are worms, not souls.

In the Bible "death" = death, "life" = life.
God bless
Steven

Steven3
Sep 15th 2007, 10:32 AM
Hi Laura :)

Sure, all miracles are possible for God, but all the same there are some things that the Bible says are impossible for God:

God cannot die
God cannot lie
God cannot be tempted
(Do you need the verse references?)

It is not limiting God to say "he said this, so he meant it".
God bless
Steven

justsurfing
Sep 15th 2007, 01:04 PM
Hi Laura :)

Sure, all miracles are possible for God, but all the same there are some things that the Bible says are impossible for God:

God cannot die
God cannot lie
God cannot be tempted
(Do you need the verse references?)

It is not limiting God to say "he said this, so he meant it".
God bless
Steven

Hi Steven :)

God cannot lie, die, or be tempted.

Without intention, I'm sure, but rather by misinterpretation, it is slandering the character of God to interpret His Word incorrectly to state He would say He would do something contrary to His character (eternal torment)... or that Jesus would fail to do something consistent with His Character (leaving evil men in annihilation in failure - rather than spiritually resurrecting them in newness of life in re-creation in Christ in living faith in 100% victory).

Jesus Christ is the Savior of all men.

To say He would leave out one in salvation, makes God a liar, makes God less than Life, falsely gives death and annihilation the victory over Jesus' resurrection for all, and... says, "Hast God really said Jesus is the Savior of all men?"... akin to the temptation of fear, doubt, and unbelief of Satan.

Jesus Christ is the Savior of all men.

Are we calling God a liar? When we say He can't... or He won't... is not willing or able? And God didn't really mean "all"? God isn't really of that character... that good... to... everyone? God's grace is not sufficient and fails to meet all our needs?

Jesus Christ cannot die... and His resurrection cannot fail to make Him the 100% successful Savior of all men.

His Word is true. He is the Word.

:)

Love in Christ,

js

justsurfing
Sep 15th 2007, 01:22 PM
The RC church likewise teaches an imortal anima. But all these concepts are totally unscriptural - even Luther recognised that the soul is not immortal.Hi Steven :),

We had a beginning discussion of the "dead soul" vs. the "living soul". The "living soul" of Adam prior to sin, I submit, was immortal. The "dead soul" of Adam post-sin, I submit, is not immortal. I submit that all "living souls" are in Christ prior to salvation just as Adam was in Christ, and all were in Adam in Christ spiritually, prior to sin.

I submit that all who will be re-created anew in Christ in salvation were in Christ in Adam before the foundation of the world... waiting to be born by the Spirit through the flesh of Adam prior to the fall; through the 2nd Adam as a life-giving spirit. This spiritual birth in Christ is made possible in actuality subsequent to, thus by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

That's pre-destination. Our bodies are the destination. And God doesn't even need a body to pre-destine spiritually in Christ.

Matthew 3:9 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=3&verse=9&version=9&context=verse)
And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

That which is born of flesh is flesh. That which is born of Spirit is spirit. We all have an "alter ego"... in Christ. That's where spiritual babies in Christ come from: not the flesh of Adam. (Not through the flesh of Adam since Adam fell... and lost his life: his spiritual state of being in Christ.)

;)

There can be no limit on God in Christ... according to the flesh or sinful nature... of man in Adam. The 2nd Adam has come and is 100% victorious, having all power and authority to destroy all the former and re-create all things anew in Himself. And what did He come to accomplish?

Colossians 1:19-21 (New International Version)
19For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. 21Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior.

What enemies of God, because of their evil behavior, will be reconciled to God through the blood of Jesus Christ? All enemies... or God has lied. How? Re-creation. Second birth. A completely new creation, completely separate from the old. The old fell in Adam. The new has arisen through the Lord Jesus Christ in full resurrection/re-creation... power. There can be no limit on God according to the flesh. No man can limit God. Not in man's life, death, or destruction.

God is Spirit, the Resurrection, and the Life. Jesus is the Word and all things were created through Him.

Love in Christ,

js

Steven3
Sep 15th 2007, 01:40 PM
Hi Laura :)
Hi Steven :),

We had a beginning discussion of the "dead soul" vs. the "living soul". The "living soul" of Adam prior to sin, I submit, was immortal. If Adam was immortal (a) he wouldn't have died, (b) the wages of sin would be immortality, and {c} he wouldn't need Christ. As we saw, the same phrase "Adam became a living soul" (nefesh hayyah) was used for fish, birds and animals and they weren't immortal.

Only God has immortality 1 Timothy 6:16 - "Who alone has immortality"

God bless :)
Steven

Steven3
Sep 15th 2007, 01:43 PM
:)
Are we calling God a liar? When we say He can't... or He won't... is not willing or able?It's certainly not calling God a liar to say that when His word says that he cannot die, cannot lie and cannot be tempted His word is true. Wouldn't the opposite be true, if someone said that he could die/lie/be tempted?
S

justsurfing
Sep 15th 2007, 02:34 PM
Hi Laura :)If Adam was immortal (a) he wouldn't have died, (b) the wages of sin would be immortality, and {c} he wouldn't need Christ. As we saw, the same phrase "Adam became a living soul" (nefesh hayyah) was used for fish, birds and animals and they weren't immortal.

Only God has immortality 1 Timothy 6:16 - "Who alone has immortality"

God bless :)
Steven

Hi Steve, :)

Adam was a son of God... created in the image and likeness of God. I absolutely believe that immortality is spiritual in nature. I don't believe that it's possible for anything that was "in Christ"... to fail to return to God "in Christ". The spirit returns to God who made it. I don't believe Adam's nature "changed". I believe Adam's "divine nature" was "booted" from his core being... but did not cease to exist. I believe it's like returning a book to the library.

;)

I'm going to explore the thought... it "explains to me"... the "big picture". Think about it. As Christians, we have a "divine nature" that battles our old "sinful nature". We are no longer the "sinful nature". Did Adam's "divine nature"... cease to exist? Or did it merely leave his core being? Was there no further conflict between Adam's former "divine nature" and his "sinful nature" produced by the fall?

There are 2 metaphysical spiritual kingdoms... and the aberration of the creation of evil has created something... where 2 natures war for one body... in born-again Christians. I'm thinking clearly in the "spiritual dimensions"... and am hot on the trail... of "big picture" revelation. I want to see it all. The complete and total separation of good and evil spiritually. I'm having a hard time believing that Adam's "divine nature"... ceased to exist... rather than was merely "booted" from his core being.

My sinful nature didn't "cease to exist" when I was born-again, it was booted, and my "divine nature" became my new being. This is why it destruction of the "sinful nature" of the unsaved... doesn't destroy the "divine nature" awaiting in Christ... if 2 alter egos exist in parallel being... fighting over the same body. Rather it results... in manifestation of a pre-destined, thus existent, spiritual reality in Christ before the foundation of the world... when evil is completely annihilated at the end. To the victor go the spoils. Last man standing gets full existence.

Of course hell is not eternal. And, of course, all things are re-created through Christ... if I really see the whole "big picture". I want to see it all.

:)

I want full revelation. I want the anointing produced thereby. :)

God bless,

js

Steven3
Sep 15th 2007, 03:15 PM
Hi Laura :)
Did Adam's "divine nature"... cease to exist? Or did it merely leave his core being? Was there no further conflict between Adam's former "divine nature" and his "sinful nature" produced by the fall?It's probably best to keep it simple and stick to what Genesis says. God made Adam "very good" which doesn't correspond to either "mortal" (after the sin) or "immortal" like the spiritual body Paul wanted to be clothed with.

It's meaningful in the context of Christians post baptism to speak of the "old man" "new man" (as Paul said) or "two natures" (as Bullinger described it), but Adam is a one-off, we can't say he went from the "new man" in Eden to the "old man" out of Eden.
God bless :)
Steven

enarchay
Sep 15th 2007, 10:14 PM
Hi Laura :)If Adam was immortal (a) he wouldn't have died, (b) the wages of sin would be immortality, and {c} he wouldn't need Christ. As we saw, the same phrase "Adam became a living soul" (nefesh hayyah) was used for fish, birds and animals and they weren't immortal.

Only God has immortality 1 Timothy 6:16 - "Who alone has immortality"

God bless :)
Steven

Adam was not immortal prior to the fall. He had not yet eaten from the tree of life. However, by disobeying God, he was kicked out of the garden, and his mortality was finalized. That's how I see it.

ikester7579
Sep 16th 2007, 07:40 AM
God is Love. Man is sinful. God can be charged with no wrongdoing. God is perfectly Just. God is perfectly Holy.

Each of us deserves, completely - totally - and fully, to be cast into hell for all eternity.

I believe that each person who dies apart from saving grace in saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ... becomes what their nature inside of them is: sin, death, and hell.... the very spirit and nature of the devil, their spiritual father - himself... Satan. And there is no variableness within them.

Hell is within them... consumes them... and there is no other place fitting for them in their fallen, sinful, and totally wicked and evil state... separated from God... who is Love.

But I didn't say... hell survives the lake of fire.

Their wickedness, their total and complete just dessert of hell... only highlights and contrasts and glorifies the total, complete, and full sovereign grace God has had on each one of us... exactly their equals by first birth.

Love in Christ,

js

Will anyone go to hell that is on earth? Or is God's love to overwhelming to allow this?

ikester7579
Sep 16th 2007, 07:43 AM
Hi Ikester :)

Not seen that one before, but its a pretty weak engine :). The problem with that search is that it doesn't let you search for the actual words. In this case, where the two words hell No.1 and hell No.2 are practically opposite in meaning an English word count isn't of much use.

Try the Blue Letter Bible website instead:

search KJV for "hell" in English
http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?hr=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tgm.org&icon=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tgm.org%2FTGMCopperLogoNew.g if&bgcolor=purple&textcolor=000000&linkcolor=39398C&vlinkcolor=0000FF&show_strongs=yes&word=hell&anything.x=21&anything.y=17

Click on the word "hell" Hebrew 07585 for meaning
http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H07585&Version=kjv
The corresponding NT word "hell No.1" is Greek 86
http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G86&Version=kjv

Then there's an unrelated word "hell No.2" Greek 1067
http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1067&Version=kjv
This gives you a definition
Hell is the place of the future punishment call "Gehenna" or "Gehenna of fire". This was originally the valley of Hinnom, south of Jerusalem, where the filth and dead animals of the city were cast out and burned; a fit symbol of the wicked and their future destruction.

Then at the bottom of the page you can enter 1067 and turn Strongs into Youngs by doing a Greek-English search (like Youngs) not English-Greek (Strongs)
http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1067&Version=KJV

Or you can go back to the search page and search "Hinnom"
http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?book=&chapter=&verse=&word=hinnom&show_strongs=yes&search_normal.x=28&search_normal.y=15

Now, looking at the results from the searches it should be clear that Sheol/Hades are the grave, Hinnom/Gehenna are the future judgment. Neither of them corresponds to the medieval idea of "hell", inferno, that is a myth.

Of course this blueletterbible.org can be used with all kinds of NT and OT words. This one "hell" is just a particularly bad example because Wycliffe, translating from Latin "inferno" had no access to the Greek and consequently the KJV followed Wycliffe in making both words one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wycliffe

You can search Wycliffe's version for "hell" here
http://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=hell&qs_version=53

God bless :)
Steven

The search engine was written by the owner of this forum, so I would not down it to much if I were you.

Steven3
Sep 16th 2007, 09:04 AM
Ikester
The search engine was written by the owner of this forum, so I would not down it to much if I were you.

Whoops. Er sorry, didn't know, thanks for pointing that out. Yes it's very nice. I just mean for doing word searches on something like Sheol (http://cf.blb.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?strongs=07585) a more powerful tool is needed. A simple KJV search also has its place.
God bless
S.

DIZZY
Sep 16th 2007, 11:06 AM
Will anyone go to hell that is on earth? Or is God's love to overwhelming to allow this?

Hell was created for Satan and his demonds (fallen angels) and all those who follow Satan as their father. Yes they will be thrown into hell and then death and hades (hell) with Satan will be thrown into the lake of fire, which by the way is real.

Revelation 20:14 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=73&chapter=20&verse=14&version=50&context=verse)
Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Revelation 20:15 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=73&chapter=20&verse=15&version=50&context=verse)
And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.

Revelation 20:10 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=73&chapter=20&verse=10&version=50&context=verse)
The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

If God says they will be tormented for ever, then they will be tormented forever.

If you believe and have faith in Jesus Christ and you are obedient unto death then you have nothing to worry about.

God is a loving God but He is also a righteous God who will punish the wicked. Don't believe for one second because God is a God of love He won't punish you.

John 3:16-18
16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.
18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Stay coolhttp://bibleforums.org/images/icons/icon6.gif

Dizzy

Inferius
Sep 17th 2007, 08:03 AM
Hell is not eternal, it says it in the Bible.

Hell and all of its inhabitants will be cast into the lake of fire, where they will burn like something or other...

I don't know the exact verse, I've read it a couple times, but I haven't memorized it.

So Hell is not eternal, it will be cast away and burnt up and destroyed.

Also, the word "Hell" is used as symbolism in the Bible, and actually refers to an area that was outside Jerusalem which was like a landfill or a dump, it had all sorts of nastiness in it. Like excrement and trash.

Toolman
Sep 17th 2007, 02:59 PM
But we raise and "live with him." The wicked are destroyed "from [apo]" God's presence.

I can see being a Universalist and maintaining a preterist interpretation of the verse.

Well, as I've shared there are biblical indications that the destruction brings about translation and that God will, at some point, also raise the destroyed:

Lamentations 3:31-33 - For men are not cast off
by the Lord forever.
Though he brings grief, he will show compassion,
so great is his unfailing love.
For he does not willingly bring affliction
or grief to the children of men

1 Samuel 2:6 - "The LORD brings death and makes alive; he brings down to the grave and raises up.

2 Samuel 14:14 - Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him.

Job 5:17-18 - "Blessed is the man whom God corrects;
so do not despise the discipline of the Almighty.
For he wounds, but he also binds up;
he injures, but his hands also heal


But I can fully understand if others do not share that view of the magnitude of Christ's redemption.

Toolman
Sep 17th 2007, 03:09 PM
God is a loving God but He is also a righteous God who will punish the wicked. Don't believe for one second because God is a God of love He won't punish you.

God punishes us BECAUSE He loves us. His judgements, discipline, punishments and wrath all flow from His being, which is love.

God is Just.

It is impossible for God to do anything that is unjust.

God is Holy.

It is impossible for God to do anything that is unholy.

God is Love.

It is impossible for God to do anything that is unloving.

His attributes are not contrary to one another. They are not in opposition to one another. His Justice is not in a battle with His Love. They all flow in perfect harmony with His being.

So, if God punishes someone, it is because He loves them and has their best interest in mind, though "fire" may be needed to bring the person to the end of themselves.

enarchay
Sep 17th 2007, 06:09 PM
But I can fully understand if others do not share that view of the magnitude of Christ's redemption.


Well if they are destroyed, I do not see them coming back, because sheol is destroyed in the lake of fire. How can God raise the dead out of sheol if it ceases to exist? Just my opinion; I respect yours.

Toolman
Sep 17th 2007, 06:12 PM
Well if they are destroyed, I do not see them coming back, because sheol is destroyed in the lake of fire. How can God raise the dead out of sheol if it ceases to exist? Just my opinion; I respect yours.

That would constitute that sheol is a thing that can be annihilated (which could be the case) and not a power that is brought to an end. If it is a power that is brought under submission then there would be room to see the "destroyed" brought into redemptive life in Christ.

I don't know if you saw my post here (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1381617&postcount=41) but to me it seems that God does that exact thing. HOW... I'm not sure but it is God, so all things are possible.

That is what I see anyhoo and just wanted to make sure you had seen my post of restoration after the LOF.

haryches
Sep 17th 2007, 11:45 PM
Okay guys. The guy responded back. He said:

I hope I never misunderstood what you were intending to say.

Okay, 2 Thessalonains 1:9 - Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; - KJV

Firstly, the destruction is everlasting. It is not saying the fire is everlasting. It's simple. I took the liberty of looking it up in a concordance and here is what is said:

9. Everlasting destruction. Gr. olethros aioµnios. For the meaning of olethros see on 1 Thess. 5:3; for the significance of aioµnios see on Matt. 25:41. The juxtaposition of the two words accurately describes the eventual fate of those who reject the Lord’s mercies. All such will finally be destroyed, not temporarily, with a resurrection later, but with a destruction from which there will be no awakening.

Looking up Matt. 25:41:
The word aionios, translated “everlasting,” or “eternal,” once, “for ever,” means literally, “lasting for an age,” in the sense of being continuous and not subject to capricious change. The ancient Greek papyri contain numerous examples of Roman emperors being described as aionios. The reference is to the continuous nature of their tenure—they held office for life. It is thus clear that the English words “everlasting” and “eternal” do not accurately reflect the meaning of aionios. Aionios, literally, “age lasting,” expresses permanence or perpetuity within limits; “everlasting” and “eternal” imply duration unlimited. The duration signified by aionios must, in each case, be determined by the nature of the person or thing it describes. In the case of Tiberius Caesar, for instance, aionios describes a period of 23 years, that is, the time from his ascent to the throne until his death.

In the NT aionios is used to describe both the fate of the wicked and the future state of the righteous. Following the principle stated above, that the durative quality of aionios is to be determined by the person or thing of which it is used, we find that the reward of the righteous is life to which there is no end; the reward of the wicked is death to which there is no end (John 3:16; Rom. 6:23; etc.). In John 3:16 “everlasting life” is contrasted with “perish.” In 2 Thess 1:9 the wicked are said to be “punished with everlasting destruction.” The expression does not signify a process that goes on forever, but an act whose results are permanent.

As you can see, Paul is merely stating the final result of those who do not follow God and go against Him:
2 Thess. 1:8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ - KJV
He is merely saying that they will eventually be destroyed once and for all.
~~~~~~

Of course, as for souls, that's another whole discussion all together, but as said in the PDF, Genesis 2:7 shows that spirit (literally translated "breath") + body = Soul. Man becomes a living soul when live is given, and at death the spirit (breath) and body (dust eventually) once again separate, and the soul therefore ceases to exist. Ecclesiastes 12:7 (Those are just two of the verses, the rest is in the second half of my PDF)

Once both hell and death are understood the way the Bible teaches them, they both fit together perfectly. After all, if people go to heaven or hell at death, then who is God going to raise at the second coming? Furthermore, is God going to drag the wicked dead out of hell at the second death just to dump them back in hell if it were really everlasting and currently in existence? This just doesn't seem logical. Hell as the Bible teaches can only be 1. A punishment at the second death after the wicked dead are raised. And 2. It would not be an ongoing thing that never ends, because that would be giving a type of immortality to the wicked as well.


IN RESPONSE TO:

What's the difference between knowing the Truth and knowing the knowledge?

As far as I can see on this issue the PDF you are correct about hell, even if the "unto the age" is debatable. As regards "eternal punishment", annihilation, a death sentence is "eternal punishment". I know the context of the Matthew parable of the sheep and the goats is somewhat apocalyptic, fair enough, but it doesn't mean the souls in a future Gehenna will be in "eternal torment" as some versions have it. It can't do because of this:

2 Thess 1:9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Is there any dodging this verse? There you go, Paul is an annihilationist.

God bless

Any thoughts/comments on what I should say next?

Steven3
Sep 18th 2007, 11:40 AM
Hi Haryches
Any thoughts/comments on what I should say next?Depends what it is that you're trying to prove (which I've lost track of, sorry :))

Maybe that he's proved his point from scripture?

I think the aionios thing is a little stretched, but seeing as it is a minor point in his total argument it doesn't invalidate most of that pdf. I could have written some of those lines myself. In fact I intend to plagiarize some of them. ;)
S.

enarchay
Sep 18th 2007, 11:52 AM
I think the aionios thing is a little stretched,

What do you mean stretched?

haryches
Sep 18th 2007, 10:49 PM
We're trying to prove wheather Hell is a quick death or an eternal death basically. And he doesn't understsand why the cities that were said to be burning forever aren't burning today. stuff like that.

ishmael1969
Sep 19th 2007, 12:13 AM
[quote]

Coercion is not free will or choice. Love is the only power... and it's the power of God... that is not coercive. Presenting a choice to someone and saying, "Love me or I'll punish you in hell for all eternity!"... is not love nor is it "free will". It's threat, coercion, and the most extreme emotional blackmail. Hell had nothing to do with my personal decision to love Jesus Christ.



I see now the force that exists in this doctrine. People say, "God who is love would never force someone to love Him." Yet they believe that God forces people to go to hell because they didn't heed His threat of "Love me or I'll send you to hell for all eternity!"

I don't believe anyone is cast into the lake of fire by their own free will. God can force people against their wills into the lake of fire... but cannot override their fallen wills to have grace on them? Actually, I believe that's what He does in the lake of fire.





Amen.



Amen.


There is forced punishment. Because punishment is resisted. There is no forced love and grace. Only grace and love explains the decision.



God said they'd die. They ate the fruit anyway. People are warned of hell... and go there anyway. Fear does not motivate people to love God. Only grace and love explain the decision to choose Christ.




Fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. Fear of punishment is antithetical to grace and love. Perfect love casts out fear. He who fears is not made perfect in love. Jesus destroyed Satan and Satan's control over man through fear of death... fear of punishment.

Since Jesus destroyed fear of punishment... why do we believe fear of punishment death and hell... rather than grace and love... cause people to receive Jesus Christ and serve Jesus Christ?

There is no fear in love. He who fears is not made perfect in love.

Bottem line is this.Hell was not made for humans but for the devil and his angels if we go there we go as trespassors.Go doesn`t want anyone to go to hell.He doesn`t threaten them with it to get their love and obedience.But if we do choose to reject Him then we will be left to stand in front of Him on that day we close our eys for the very last time and He will ask us what right do we have to go into heaven since we have rejected His Son? We have no right at all.We are not up to paying the price for sin that only Christ could pay and did pay.
It is true the fear of hell shouldn`t be our motivator to love Him, our choice to love Himm should be simply because it is love given freely with no strings attached to it at all. I love my children for no other reason then for being my children.I loved them as soon as I saw them born.It is not what they could do for me that caused me to love them but it is because I just simply do.And they can do nothing at all to cause me to stop loving them.No matter they do they will always have my love.And the love they have for me isn`t simply because of threat of punishment I may dish out for them not doing the right thing or is it because of the things I get them. A lot of times I`m not able to get them the things that they want and sometimes I do have to punish them.When I get them things they know it is not a reward for something they have done.Because I do not reward good behavior except thru my pride for them and my praise when they do the right thing simply because it is the right thing.And neither do I punish because I want to and they know it.The last time I had to punish my daughter for something I cried as much as she did if not more because it broke my heart.I did it because I did love her.
But think on this for a minute.Sometimes true love involves letting go of the one you love.Hell is not a punishment per-say but a place people who didn`t want God in their lives get to spend eternity with exactly what they wanted.Eternal seperation from the HaKodesh(the Holy One).And that is hell.Forget about the flames and the torments because that will be secondary compared to His absance.

Toolman
Sep 19th 2007, 12:38 AM
We're trying to prove wheather Hell is a quick death or an eternal death basically. And he doesn't understsand why the cities that were said to be burning forever aren't burning today. stuff like that.

The third option is that "hell" (judgement) is a limited consequence of sin that drives the person to faith in Christ.

Just to have all 3 of the historic Christian positions on "hell" on the table.

enarchay
Sep 19th 2007, 06:11 AM
We're trying to prove wheather Hell is a quick death or an eternal death basically. And he doesn't understsand why the cities that were said to be burning forever aren't burning today. stuff like that.

The cities obviously were not "burning forever." They were burned with aionios fire.

Steven3
Sep 19th 2007, 10:02 AM
Hi E :)

What do you mean stretched?

Because it only works in relation to certain verses where different "aions (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?layout.reflang=greek;layout.refembed=2;layou t.refwordcount=1;layout.refdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A19 99.04.0057;layout.reflookup=ai%29w%2Fn;layout.refc it=entry%3Dai%29w%2Fnios;doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999 .04.0057%3Aentry%3D%232816)", ages are clearly distinguished - so in certain verses there is a legitimate case for considering this option. Obviously given that "job for life" in classical Greek can be an "aionios (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D %232818) position" then the employer does not keep paying the salary after the employee is buried, but generally in classical greek "eternal" "for ever" does mean just that - it's largely a theological decision to determine "for ever doesn't mean for ever in the NT", but how sound is that decision?

I think it's more an issue of the Bible using apocalyptic language in apocalyptic passages, and aionios "for ever" fitting in with that language as meaning "for longer than you can possibly conceive", even when we have verses like 1Co15:24 which suggest distinct future ages.

Basically it is "forever (in that context)" "eternal (in that context)" and so on. Unless it is doubled "to the age of the ages", in which case whatever the context that clearly means 'forever and ever'.


The cities obviously were not "burning forever." They were burned with aionios fire.This is another factor, the Hebrew "forever" (l' olam, to the age) gets translated as "unto the aion" in the Septuagint and that gives NT use of the phrase a different reference than a Greek would use.

In sum I agree with you. But I'd read "forever" as refers to Gehenna burning "forever" is only really "for ever and ever and ever" in the context of an image which is itself apocalyptic with "the devil and his angels" "goats" etc. It's in the nature of this kind of passage to be larger than life. In reality, when we have harder, calmer, cooler passages - then yes, the wicked are extinguished, perish, destroyed. Finito.
God bless
Steven

Toolman
Sep 19th 2007, 02:37 PM
The author of Jude provides us with a similar image with his interpretation of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah:
"just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal [aioniou] fire" (Jud 1:7 ESV).
Here the adjective form of aion is used. Andrew Comments, "The adjective aionios is used in the same way [as was eis ton aiona in his previous example from Exodus]: it describes something that will last throughout the age, from generation to generation. If, however, there is a sense that we are approaching a boundary between two ages, it is natural to take these expressions as descriptive of 'the age to come'" (Coming of the Son of Man, Perriman 83). So in the author of Jude's passage, the point is not that Sodom and Gomorrah are on fire today, but that the fire they suffered in a particular historical time frame (the aion) had lasting effects: it extended throughout a particular historical period. More importantly is not that Sodom and Gomorrah felt the torment of the aioniou fire (the fire of their age or age-lasting fire) for an unending amount of time that continues to this day, but that the fire achieved its purpose and had ill-reversible results. Sure there was torment in the process of destruction (I'm sure being burned alive is not too fun), but the process had and met a goal: destruction and death.

In discussing Sodom's "eternal" destruction the biblical universalist would make note of Ezekiel's prophecy in chapter 16 as evidence that Sodom will be restored after her judgement:

Ezekiel 16:
44 “Indeed everyone who quotes proverbs will use this proverb against you: ‘Like mother, like daughter!’ 45 You are your mother’s daughter, loathing husband and children; and you are the sister of your sisters, who loathed their husbands and children; your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite.
46 “Your elder sister is Samaria, who dwells with her daughters to the north of you; and your younger sister, who dwells to the south of you, is Sodom and her daughters. 47 You did not walk in their ways nor act according to their abominations; but, as if that were too little, you became more corrupt than they in all your ways.
48 “As I live,” says the Lord GOD, “neither your sister Sodom nor her daughters have done as you and your daughters have done. 49 Look, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: She and her daughter had pride, fullness of food, and abundance of idleness; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. 50 And they were haughty and committed abomination before Me; therefore I took them away as I saw fit.
51 “Samaria did not commit half of your sins; but you have multiplied your abominations more than they, and have justified your sisters by all the abominations which you have done. 52 You who judged your sisters, bear your own shame also, because the sins which you committed were more abominable than theirs; they are more righteous than you. Yes, be disgraced also, and bear your own shame, because you justified your sisters.
53 “When I bring back their captives, the captives of Sodom and her daughters, and the captives of Samaria and her daughters, then I will also bring back the captives of your captivity among them, 54 that you may bear your own shame and be disgraced by all that you did when you comforted them. 55 When your sisters, Sodom and her daughters, return to their former state, and Samaria and her daughters return to their former state, then you and your daughters will return to your former state. 56 For your sister Sodom was not a byword in your mouth in the days of your pride, 57 before your wickedness was uncovered. It was like the time of the reproach of the daughters of Syria and all those around her, and of the daughters of the Philistines, who despise you everywhere. 58 You have paid for your lewdness and your abominations,” says the LORD. 59 For thus says the Lord GOD: “I will deal with you as you have done, who despised the oath by breaking the covenant.

60 “Nevertheless I will remember My covenant with you in the days of your youth, and I will establish an everlasting covenant with you. 61 Then you will remember your ways and be ashamed, when you receive your older and your younger sisters; for I will give them to you for daughters, but not because of My covenant with you. 62 And I will establish My covenant with you. Then you shall know that I am the LORD, 63 that you may remember and be ashamed, and never open your mouth anymore because of your shame, when I provide you an atonement for all you have done,” says the Lord GOD.’”



These "little" issues should not bring a separation between the body of Christ. Eternal torment advocates, universalists, and annihilationists can all agree the lake of fire is a judgment, and whether eternal, a form of torment, resulting in destruction, or resulting in purification, it will not be pretty. Let us move away from the culturally diffused modern day terms like "hell" and move back to the Biblical concept of judgment. If we must talk about the fate of the wicked, let us talk about "judgment," and let each individual decide, based on his own studies, what exactly the results of this "judgment" will be.

An excellent point! If we go back to the earliest creeds of the Church we see the same, exact thing:

Apostle's Creed

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
the Creator of heaven and earth,
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:

Who was conceived of the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried.

He descended into hell. (the grave, sheol)

The third day He arose again from the dead.

He ascended into heaven
and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty,
whence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and life everlasting.

Nicene Creed

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, light from light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary
and became truly human.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father [and the Son],
who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.



I don't see, more importantly, in the first place, why judgment should have a place in our proclamation of the gospel to the lost in the first place. Judgment is more of an assurance to those who believe, not those who do not believe, that the righteous will be avenged (whatever that may mean), not a scare tactic to win over converts.

Peter spoke of it when sharing Christ's Gospel with Cornelius:

Acts 10:
34 Then Peter opened his mouth and said: “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. 35 But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him. 36 The word which God sent to the children of Israel, preaching peace through Jesus Christ—He is Lord of all— 37 that word you know, which was proclaimed throughout all Judea, and began from Galilee after the baptism which John preached: 38 how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power, who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him. 39 And we are witnesses of all things which He did both in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem, whom they killed by hanging on a tree. 40 Him God raised up on the third day, and showed Him openly, 41 not to all the people, but to witnesses chosen before by God, even to us who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead. 42 And He commanded us to preach to the people, and to testify that it is He who was ordained by God to be Judge of the living and the dead. 43 To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins.”

Paul did to the Athenians

Acts 17:
Therefore, the One whom you worship without knowing, Him I proclaim to you: 24 God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands. 25 Nor is He worshiped with men’s hands, as though He needed anything, since He gives to all life, breath, and all things. 26 And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, 27 so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also His offspring.’ 29 Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man’s devising. 30 Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, 31 because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead.”

And with Felix:

Acts 24:
24 And after some days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, who was Jewish, he sent for Paul and heard him concerning the faith in Christ. 25 Now as he reasoned about righteousness, self-control, and the judgment to come, Felix was afraid and answered, “Go away for now; when I have a convenient time I will call for you.”


Not to mention Christ's parables and warnings in the Gospels. It does seem to me that part of preaching the Gospel is letting the Law of God perform its task which is to drive the person to Christ because of the judgement that awaits those who sin against God and resist the Spirit.

That's what I see anyhoo.

enarchay
Sep 19th 2007, 11:44 PM
Not to mention Christ's parables and warnings in the Gospels. It does seem to me that part of preaching the Gospel is letting the Law of God perform its task which is to drive the person to Christ because of the judgement that awaits those who sin against God and resist the Spirit.

Let "the Law of God," which was given to the Israelites, "perform its task" on mostly Gentiles? That sounds like something Kirk Cameron would do.

God judging the just and unjust is a good thing, because it means justice will be served; it is not a proclamation to "scare" people into becoming a Christian.

justsurfing
Sep 20th 2007, 01:35 AM
[quote=ishmael1969;1385907][quote=justsurfing;1378933]

Bottem line is this.Hell was not made for humans but for the devil and his angels if we go there we go as trespassors.Go doesn`t want anyone to go to hell.

He doesn`t threaten them with it to get their love and obedience.But if we do choose to reject Him then we will be left to stand in front of Him on that day we close our eys for the very last time and He will ask us what right do we have to go into heaven since we have rejected His Son? We have no right at all.We are not up to paying the price for sin that only Christ could pay and did pay.
It is true the fear of hell shouldn`t be our motivator to love Him, our choice to love Himm should be simply because it is love given freely with no strings attached to it at all.

We love God because He first loved us. Amen.


I love my children for no other reason then for being my children.I loved them as soon as I saw them born.It is not what they could do for me that caused me to love them but it is because I just simply do.And they can do nothing at all to cause me to stop loving them.No matter they do they will always have my love.AAmen.


nd the love they have for me isn`t simply because of threat of punishment I may dish out for them not doing the right thing or is it because of the things I get them. A lot of times I`m not able to get them the things that they want and sometimes I do have to punish them.I can tell you love your children. God said that if we being evil give good gifts to our children because they ask, how much more will He give the Holy Spirit to those who ask. God is, quite basically, as one point of His teaching saying, "Listen, if you who sin and evil are this good of parents... how much more loving and a better Father am I?"

So, I'd ask you to consider something. As a human parent - none of us being on the level of God's goodness and generosity as a Heavenly Father - could you conceivably punish your child, who you love,... forever?

I mean... punishing, well - torturing... , could you be angry with your own child - as a human parent - and punish that child relentlessly throughout all eternity with absolutely no plan, as a parent, to restore them through discipline to reconcile them back into a loving relationship with you?


When I get them things they know it is not a reward for something they have done.Because I do not reward good behavior except thru my pride for them and my praise when they do the right thing simply because it is the right thing.And neither do I punish because I want to and they know it.The last time I had to punish my daughter for something I cried as much as she did if not more because it broke my heart.I did it because I did love her.Yes, that's parental love. God must be even better than we are... when we love our children as is evidenced by your love for your daughter.


But think on this for a minute.Sometimes true love involves letting go of the one you love.Hell is not a punishment per-say but a place people who didn`t want God in their lives get to spend eternity with exactly what they wanted.Eternal seperation from the HaKodesh(the Holy One).And that is hell.Forget about the flames and the torments because that will be secondary compared to His absance.Could you, as a parent, decide to let your child go forever and hand that child over to Satan... to be tormented in hell forever... and then go through eternity... happy??

As a human parent... can you tell me that you could do that... if the person we are talking about... spending eternity in hell... being tormented relentlessly in searing heat and torture beyond anything we could imagine... if this is your daughter we were talking about?

Because of your love for your daughter... and how you say, truly, that you suffer more during her punishment that she does because of your parental love for her... would you be suffering with her, then, throughout eternity were that the case?

Thankfully, God says that He wipes away all tears. No more pain. No more sorrow. Nothing bad anymore. God could not get to that place unless everyone had been restored. God, Himself, as our Father... could not get to that place... if one person was separated from Him and tormented. We could not - as parents.

If my child were in the flames of hell... I would cry out to God to take me instead... and rescue my child out of the flames. I would lay down my life for my child and suffer in my child's place. And it would not satisfy my soul one bit to spend eternity in Heaven with my beloved child... my dear heart... suffering and tormented in hell with no hope ever of being released: eternal flames of judgment.

I'd ask God to put me in hell in my child's place. Wouldn't you?

God has done just that. And come out in victory. That's what Jesus has done... and Heaven is all about, imo.

God bless,

js

Lampstands1383
Sep 20th 2007, 01:41 AM
my view is that the corruptible universe is hell. We live in the universe were God is far far away so to me our entire universe is hell or one big prison.

This is why i cant wait for Jesus to return during the last trumpet. this is the moment when earth is no longer bound to darkens or to hell. Now our earth belongs to our Lord and his anointed. mankind and our earth put on the incorruptible when Jesus returns. we can also tell that our universe is hell because our element are bound to darkness this why fire burn and water quenches a thirst. When Jesus returns our elements change and fire no longer burns and water can go into fire read the end of wisdom 19. so the corruptible universe were fire burns is actually hell.

in heaven there is no darkness and Jesus will soon return to save us from this corruptible universe aka Hell.

justsurfing
Sep 20th 2007, 01:43 AM
Hi HarychesDepends what it is that you're trying to prove (which I've lost track of, sorry :))

Maybe that he's proved his point from scripture?

I think the aionios thing is a little stretched, but seeing as it is a minor point in his total argument it doesn't invalidate most of that pdf. I could have written some of those lines myself. In fact I intend to plagiarize some of them. ;)
S.

Hi Steve :),

I'd just like to clearly understand... where you stand.

Soooooooooo... you.... are an annihilist... and...... a plagiarist???

;)

I knew you were cool.

lol

Love in Christ,

js

justsurfing
Sep 20th 2007, 01:59 AM
We're trying to prove wheather Hell is a quick death or an eternal death basically. And he doesn't understsand why the cities that were said to be burning forever aren't burning today. stuff like that.

Hi,

I do think it is an interesting point. It's a subject that should be studied. One of the "keys", imo, is this: Jesus has the keys.

Revelation 1:18 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=73&chapter=1&verse=18&version=31&context=verse)
I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.

People think of the "white throne Judgment" of God the Father. They see Jesus as the Savior of all mankind and of all the world... and God the Father being the Judge. Who would you rather have the keys of death and hell?

The Savior?
or
The Judge?

What does it mean? What does having those keys, as the Savior, mean? Does a Savior have keys to lock people in hell for eternity... or to unlock the gates of hell and get people out?

Matthew 16:18 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=16&verse=18&version=9&context=verse)
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Where in the Bible does Jesus hand the keys of death and hell over to the God the Father as the Judge so that people are locked in hell for all eternity? Is that what the Savior does? At the very end? What does Jesus hand over to God the Father... at the very end? In the Bible? Not what we think... what the Bible says.

God bless,

js

Toolman
Sep 20th 2007, 02:14 AM
Let "the Law of God," which was given to the Israelites, "perform its task" on mostly Gentiles? That sounds like something Kirk Cameron would do.

The Law of God serves a purpose:

Galatians 3:24-25 - Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

Notice Paul tells the Galatian gentiles:

Galatians 3:23 - But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed.

Notice also that the Law is universal (not limited to Israel) in its condemnation of man's sinfulness.

Romans 3:19 - Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God.


God judging the just and unjust is a good thing, because it means justice will be served; it is not a proclamation to "scare" people into becoming a Christian.

It is a warning of the impending judgement that will come upon those outside of Christ. That will most assuredly bring a godly fear into those outside of Him.

It brought fear into the heart of Felix when Paul shared it with him:

, Felix was afraid and answered, “Go away for now; when I have a convenient time I will call for you.”

Jude encourages that some will be saved thru fear:

Jude 1:21-23 - keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.
And on some have compassion, making a distinction; but others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire,[b] hating even the garment defiled by the flesh.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not a big "fear" guy. I believe it is God's grace and kindness that leads to repentance. I'm even accused, because of my belief in the magnitude of God's grace and His plan to redeem every human back to Himself, that I don't teach the fear of God. I don't agree with the accusation of course, but it is made nonetheless.

But to ignore the fear that comes upon the heart of an unbeliever before the Holy God they have sinned against is to ignore a good portion of scripture IMO.

Faith in Christ and maturity of the believer will remove this fear, because Christ is our Saviour.

justsurfing
Sep 20th 2007, 02:26 AM
my view is that the corruptible universe is hell. We live in the universe were God is far far away so to me our entire universe is hell or one big prison.

This is why i cant wait for Jesus to return during the last trumpet. this is the moment when earth is no longer bound to darkens or to hell. Now our earth belongs to our Lord and his anointed. mankind and our earth put on the incorruptible when Jesus returns. we can also tell that our universe is hell because our element are bound to darkness this why fire burn and water quenches a thirst. When Jesus returns our elements change and fire no longer burns and water can go into fire read the end of wisdom 19. so the corruptible universe were fire burns is actually hell.

in heaven there is no darkness and Jesus will soon return to save us from this corruptible universe aka Hell.


Well, praise the Lord. We're in the world but not of it. I can't say that I've thought about it in quite the same way.

Jesus prays "thy kingdom come thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven."
So, while this earth will surely be destroyed, the kingdom of God is coming on earth through the ministry of the gospel of Jesus Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit... in our lives as citizens of Heaven here on earth.

Jesus said, "Occupy, til I come."

I look forward to the return of Jesus Christ, too!

:)

God bless!

js

Steven3
Sep 20th 2007, 08:22 AM
my view is that the corruptible universe is hell. We live in the universe were God is far far away so to me our entire universe is hell or one big prison.This isn't the main meaning of either Sheol-Hades (which Jacob, Job, Hannah, David, Hezekiah, even our Lord Jesus, went to, to "sleep") or Hinnom-Gehenna (where the priests of Moloch, the "devil and his angels", the goats, will be destroyed in the Last Day).

Job 7:9 (Job speaking) As the cloud fades and vanishes, so he who goes down to Sheol does not come up;

Job 14:13 (Job speaking) Oh that you would hide me in Sheol, that you would conceal me until your wrath be past, that you would appoint me a set time, and remember me!

But Lampstands, you are absolutely right in the following verse:

James 3:6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the entire course of life, and set on fire by Gehenna.

God bless
S

ishmael1969
Sep 26th 2007, 08:33 PM
Yes I would gladly take any punishment for my children but that decision is not mine to make. That is a decision they must face on their own. I can guide them as much as possible to make the right decision but that is all I can do. But we tend to lookk at this matter as most people do. With limited understanding of a totally holy and infinite God.How can the finite understand the infinite? But I`m straying here,that is a totally different subject.But how can a truly just and Godd except a sinner into heaven without that sinner not being covered by the blood of the Son? I may gladly take my child`s place but Christ has already done that and it is up to my child to accept Christ as the substitute for their sin.If I tried to do that for my child they would still be in hell and I would be there with them cause I know that I`m not worthy of taking away anyone`s sins.But to me that statement of me gladly taking my child`s place is a moot point. I know where they stand with the Lord.My point was that hell is not a place creaated for people but for the devila nd his angels and if we go there we go there as trespassors. And the main point of hell is the complete absance of the One who loved us the most. That is the ultimate torment. I have known people who have crossed the line of no return in this life and they are truly miserable. Not because of any torment but because they will not hear the call of the Lord anymore. They have told me this.And that too me is hell.Forget about flames and worms and such because that is nothing compared to not being with Him.


[quote][quote=ishmael1969;1385907]

We love God because He first loved us. Amen.

Amen.

I can tell you love your children. God said that if we being evil give good gifts to our children because they ask, how much more will He give the Holy Spirit to those who ask. God is, quite basically, as one point of His teaching saying, "Listen, if you who sin and evil are this good of parents... how much more loving and a better Father am I?"

So, I'd ask you to consider something. As a human parent - none of us being on the level of God's goodness and generosity as a Heavenly Father - could you conceivably punish your child, who you love,... forever?

I mean... punishing, well - torturing... , could you be angry with your own child - as a human parent - and punish that child relentlessly throughout all eternity with absolutely no plan, as a parent, to restore them through discipline to reconcile them back into a loving relationship with you?

Yes, that's parental love. God must be even better than we are... when we love our children as is evidenced by your love for your daughter.

Could you, as a parent, decide to let your child go forever and hand that child over to Satan... to be tormented in hell forever... and then go through eternity... happy??

As a human parent... can you tell me that you could do that... if the person we are talking about... spending eternity in hell... being tormented relentlessly in searing heat and torture beyond anything we could imagine... if this is your daughter we were talking about?

Because of your love for your daughter... and how you say, truly, that you suffer more during her punishment that she does because of your parental love for her... would you be suffering with her, then, throughout eternity were that the case?

Thankfully, God says that He wipes away all tears. No more pain. No more sorrow. Nothing bad anymore. God could not get to that place unless everyone had been restored. God, Himself, as our Father... could not get to that place... if one person was separated from Him and tormented. We could not - as parents.

If my child were in the flames of hell... I would cry out to God to take me instead... and rescue my child out of the flames. I would lay down my life for my child and suffer in my child's place. And it would not satisfy my soul one bit to spend eternity in Heaven with my beloved child... my dear heart... suffering and tormented in hell with no hope ever of being released: eternal flames of judgment.

I'd ask God to put me in hell in my child's place. Wouldn't you?

God has done just that. And come out in victory. That's what Jesus has done... and Heaven is all about, imo.

God bless,

js