PDA

View Full Version : The Certainty of Hell



The Parson
Sep 23rd 2008, 11:50 PM
Was reading an article lately where Brother Billy Graham some years back had been quoted as saying that Hell wasn't a literal fire. "I think people have a hard time believing God is going to allow people to burn in literal fire forever. I think the fire that is mentioned in the Bible is a burning thirst for God that can never be quenched." This statement made some years back wasn't made very public and for a bit I thought he had been misquoted. Matter of fact it wasn't a misquote. It can be found in the April 10, 1983 Orlando Sentinel newspaper.

And actually I didn't give it too much thought until I read a few of the posts from the past year or two made by some folks on this board that shared this doctrine. I would just like to see if someone may try defend this particular belief with scripture because I can't see it myself.

Mark 9:42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. 9:43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 9:44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 9:45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 9:46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 9:47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: 9:48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

This would only be the beginning of the verses that would deny this position.

Coptichristian
Sep 23rd 2008, 11:59 PM
The Parson,

I'm not sure what it is you would like to debate? Are you arguing that Mark 9:42-48 should be taken literally?

The Parson
Sep 24th 2008, 12:00 AM
The Parson,

I'm not sure what it is you would like to debate? Are you arguing that Mark 9:42-48 should be taken literally?Are you saying it shouldn't? If so, explain why please...

faroutinmt
Sep 24th 2008, 12:42 AM
The fire will be real. I think the problem we have with thinking God would be unkind to send sinners to everlasting fire is that we don't have the same opinion of sin God does. The fact that God believes it deserves eternal fire means that it is much worse than we think.

I really believe that when we see sin as deserving eternal punishment, we will be truly amazed and humbled by the love that God demonstrated in sending Christ to die for our sins. :)

fsuwolf
Sep 24th 2008, 12:44 AM
Read Luke 16:19-31
19"There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21and longing to eat what fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22"The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23In hell,[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2016:19-31;&version=31;#fen-NIV-25636a)] where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.'

SirTanTee
Sep 24th 2008, 01:05 AM
Read Luke 16:19-31
19"There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21and longing to eat what fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22"The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23In hell,[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2016:19-31;&version=31;#fen-NIV-25636a)] where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.'

See, I believe that parts of this as definitely metaphorical. I mean, if you were writhing in agony of flames, would you request that someone dip their finger in water so you could "cool your tongue" with a wee little drop? That seems like something that shouldn't be taken literally word for word.

Coptichristian
Sep 24th 2008, 01:09 AM
Are you saying it shouldn't? If so, explain why please...


For starters, death itself will be cast into the lake of fire. Since death is not a physical entity, it stands to reason that the lake of fire is also non-physical, i.e. a spiritual state.

The Parson
Sep 24th 2008, 01:27 AM
The fire will be real. I think the problem we have with thinking God would be unkind to send sinners to everlasting fire is that we don't have the same opinion of sin God does. The fact that God believes it deserves eternal fire means that it is much worse than we think.

I really believe that when we see sin as deserving eternal punishment, we will be truly amazed and humbled by the love that God demonstrated in sending Christ to die for our sins. :)Hey, I can't argue with that reasoning. I would take it a step further in that: 2nd Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. So I wouldn't say the God is the one who SENDS them there per se, but gives a choice to escape the place we are already condemned to. John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. So the condemnation is already on us. In other words this, because of the curse is where you have to go, but you can make the choice not to.

Teke
Sep 24th 2008, 01:46 AM
Was reading an article lately where Brother Billy Graham some years back had been quoted as saying that Hell wasn't a literal fire. "I think people have a hard time believing God is going to allow people to burn in literal fire forever. I think the fire that is mentioned in the Bible is a burning thirst for God that can never be quenched." This statement made some years back wasn't made very public and for a bit I thought he had been misquoted. Matter of fact it wasn't a misquote. It can be found in the April 10, 1983 Orlando Sentinel newspaper.

And actually I didn't give it too much thought until I read a few of the posts from the past year or two made by some folks on this board that shared this doctrine. I would just like to see if someone may try defend this particular belief with scripture because I can't see it myself.

Mark 9:42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. 9:43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 9:44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 9:45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 9:46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 9:47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: 9:48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

This would only be the beginning of the verses that would deny this position.


ok, I like Billy so I'll defend Billy. :D
God is a consuming fire, Deut. 4:24, 9:3 and Hebrews 12:29, He is also the Creator, so if a hell exists it is "of" Him. And God is Spirit((John 4:24))/Spirit of God (in many verses), so it must be a spiritual fire. ;)
God is eternal (we only get "everlasting" life, which depends on His "eternal" life), matches "that never shall be quenched" in your verses.


"....because of the curse..."

What curse?

The Parson
Sep 24th 2008, 02:13 AM
What curse?The sin curse Teke... What curse? :rolleyes:

Genesis 3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; 3:18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; 3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

And must be a spiritual fire ya'll? Really???
And death must not be an entity? Really???

OK, now we are getting somewhere. Going to the house right now. I'll answer all I can tomorrow folks.

RickH
Sep 24th 2008, 02:44 AM
Not wanting to get into a deep debate, but Jude 1:7 tells us that Sodom and Gomorrah are burning for an eternity, but we know they are not. Could there be some similarities with this passage and others that say the lost will burn eternally?
- RickH

Jude 1:7 (NKJV)
7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

faroutinmt
Sep 24th 2008, 03:34 AM
Not wanting to get into a deep debate, but Jude 1:7 tells us that Sodom and Gomorrah are burning for an eternity, but we know they are not. Could there be some similarities with this passage and others that say the lost will burn eternally?
- RickH

Why would you think they are not when the scripture you just quoted says they are? The folks who inhabited Sodom and Gomorrah are facing the same fire that we will if we do not repent.

divaD
Sep 24th 2008, 04:21 AM
Why would you think they are not when the scripture you just quoted says they are? The folks who inhabited Sodom and Gomorrah are facing the same fire that we will if we do not repent.



Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.



Genesis 19:24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;
25 And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground


Jude 1:7 states they suffered the vengeance of eternal fire. It looks to me as if Genesis 19:24 describes in detail what they suffered. The eternal would be God, since God is eternal, the fire would be the fire that the Lord rained down on them from heaven. This is what they suffered. And this equals the eternal fire. Nothing else to read into this. This is what the text clearly states. Nothing about anyone burning forever and ever. You won't find that in the text anywhere.

jns182
Sep 24th 2008, 06:40 AM
We know hell is not on this physical plane because everything on this physical plane is ever-changing, and therefore not etneral; and we know hell is eternal. So if hell is not on this physical plane why would God use something that is "off this world", in a place "not of this world". That would contradict everything said about the eternal.

Emanate
Sep 24th 2008, 06:56 AM
Are you saying it shouldn't? If so, explain why please...


How do you walk to the computer without feet and how do you type without eyes. Egads, you must be perfect.

RickH
Sep 24th 2008, 12:10 PM
Why would you think they are not when the scripture you just quoted says they are?
The text states that it is the cities and the cities around them, not the people of the cities.

faroutinmt
Sep 24th 2008, 12:14 PM
The text states that it is the cities and the cities around them, not the people of the cities.

I would think that when it said it was the cities, it was just talking about the people which made up the cities, instead of the buildings. I could be wrong.

Teke
Sep 24th 2008, 12:40 PM
The sin curse Teke... What curse? :rolleyes:

[COLOR=DarkGreen]Genesis 3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; 3:18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; 3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

What does that have to do with hell? Man wasn't cursed. And Proverbs says, Pro 26:2 As the bird by wandering, as the swallow by flying, so the curse causeless shall not come.

You posted, "John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. So the condemnation is already on us. In other words this, because of the curse is where you have to go, but you can make the choice not to."

The verse right after 18 says what the condemnation is, and it isn't a curse or hell.


And must be a spiritual fire ya'll? Really???

If you mean something that isn't physical, yeah. An example could be microwaves. Their not physical, but they can burn you up.


And death must not be an entity? Really???


What do you mean by "an entity"?

faroutinmt
Sep 24th 2008, 12:57 PM
What does that have to do with hell? Man wasn't cursed. And Proverbs says, Pro 26:2 As the bird by wandering, as the swallow by flying, so the curse causeless shall not come.



Sin is the cause of the curse. The curse is the judgment, the wrath of God, the adverse consequences of sin.

"Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire..." Matthew 25:41

"Cursed is the man who trusts in man..." Jeremiah 17:5

"Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the Law, to do them...Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us." Galatians 3:10, 13

Teke
Sep 24th 2008, 01:29 PM
Sin is the cause of the curse.

You have to abide in a curse for it to be effective.


The curse is the judgment, the wrath of God, the adverse consequences of sin.

Let's look at these parts of verses you have out of context.



"Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire..." Matthew 25:41

This is a parable.


"Cursed is the man who trusts in man..." Jeremiah 17:5

In reference to turning from the Lord. The "salt land" part is likely a reference to hell fire.


"Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the Law, to do them...Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us." Galatians 3:10, 13


Sounds contradictory doesn't it.
I doubt your understanding this one. Jesus followed the law perfectly. Read on and see why He was considered a curse according to the law. It wasn't because He didn't "continue" in the things of the law. It was because 'self" righteous men condemned Him (ref. the Jeremiah verse, man trusting in man) as a disobedient son according to the law.

The Parson
Sep 24th 2008, 02:46 PM
Just as sure as I'm typing this post, there is a literal, evelasting, burning, eternal Hell and the eventual Lake of fire... Psalms 11:4 The LORD is in his holy temple, the LORD'S throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men. 11:5 The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth. 11:6 Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup. 11:7 For the righteous LORD loveth righteousness; his countenance doth behold the upright.

Matthew 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. And everyone that isn't saved will be in that place you don't want to believe in.

And many will be surprised of it's actual existence. Maybe even some of those that try their best not to believe in it. Isaiah 33:12 And the people shall be as the burnings of lime: as thorns cut up shall they be burned in the fire. 33:13 Hear, ye that are far off, what I have done; and, ye that are near, acknowledge my might. 33:14 The sinners in Zion are afraid; fearfulness hath surprised the hypocrites. Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?

Revelation 14:10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: 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. Those that would scoff and make jokes over this reality are playing with their own folly folks. Hell's hot, Heavens not, and Jesus saves us from that Hell.

Teke
Sep 24th 2008, 02:53 PM
I don't think anyone is denying there is hell. Just different understandings of it.

Mat 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and [with] fire:

Mat 3:12 Whose fan [is] in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

The Parson
Sep 24th 2008, 02:58 PM
My dear dear lady, there is a difference in the fire from God (heaven) that purges and the eternal flames that were prepared for the devil and his angels. Big difference.

Scruffy Kid
Sep 24th 2008, 03:09 PM
:cry: O God, we pray to you for the lost whom you can reach,
:cry: that you who are the Good Shepherd
:cry: may quickly and surely bring them into your fold :cry:


Our capacity to understand is limited
God therefore gives us various ways to grasp His point
Often using parables and symbolic language

God, in the Scriptures, is generally speaking to us of things that exceed our capacity to understand. That does not mean that his words are unintelligible. It does mean, however, that in most cases our understanding is somewhat limited, somewhat partial. We understand, but we do not fully understand. We see, even now, but "as if in a cloudy mirror" (I Cor 13:12).

This is one reason why much of what is written to us is written in parables and symbols. Exact language, by itself, won't fully do the job of conveying to us what God aims to convey to us, because we do not have the capacity for fully and exactly understanding all that God has to say to us. Therefore, He gives us a variety of images, parables, explanations, and so on, and we have to labor to understand as fully as possible what He is saying to us. That labor, by the way, is not just a labor of abstract, or intellectual, understanding -- it does very much involve that (we are to love God with all our mind, as well as in other ways) -- but it's also a struggle to understand with our hearts, our experience, our lived-out obedience, and in other ways.


There are various descriptions of Perdition
(i.e. the fate of those who are lost) in the Bible

:cry: The state of those who are not found in Christ, and with Christ, is described in a variety of ways in Scripture. They are "excluded from the presence of the Lord", they are "wandering stars lost in darkness and lower gloom", they are unable to taste of the banquet God has prepared", they are "bound hand and foot and thrown into the darkness", they are "outside" and unrecognized -- God says to them "I never knew you" -- they are like a house built on sand that collapses in a storm, they are everlastingly destroyed, they are thrown in a garbage pit, where the fire never ceases and the worms do not die, they are thrown into a lake of burning fire, they are tormented in a flame, and separated from the righteous by a great chasm or gulf, they are hungry and thirsty where others are feasting, they are like restless waves tossing up mire and filth, they are devoured by the devil as by a roaring lion, they are in the everlasting flames prepared for the devil and his angels, they will never enter the kingdom of God, they are waterless clouds, and will have eternal death rather than eternal life, they face everlasting shame and contempt, they are judged by God, and condemned, and so on. :cry:


Understanding damnation -- what it is to be lost --
is related to understanding the good God intends for us,
(i.e. the shalom, the wellbeing, the salvation of the righteous

These descriptions of the state of those who are separated from God is of course to be understood partly in comparison to the state of those who God does rescue, and who enter the kingdom of God. They are with God, and know him, are known and commended, have been transferred from darkness to light, have been washed and made pure, they have everlasting joy and everlasting life, from their bellies rivers of water flow, the always see Jesus, they are his sheep, and He knows them and they know Him, and so on. They shine like the sun and are made like him, and go from glory to glory. They plant vines and enjoy them, they build houses and live in them. They are in the skies ("in heaven") rather than in "lower gloom". (I am giving a less full list here.) They see God, and gaze upon Him.

These things are important, because they indicate the nature of the life for which God has made us; and the essential character of the disaster which overtakes those who do not know God is that they are cut off from the good that God intends for us, fellowship with Him (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) and with those in whom he lives and moves, and who live and move and have their being in Him. Any account of what it is to be damned is an account which features the ruination of what it is to be human and in fellowship with God. Thus, the descriptions of damnation are to be understood in relation to the descriptions of the goodness of the life and rescue (salvation) that God has for us.


About the question of the thread

Was reading an article lately where Brother Billy Graham some years back had been quoted as saying that Hell wasn't a literal fire. "I think the fire that is mentioned in the Bible is a burning thirst for God that can never be quenched." ...

I can't see it myself.

Mark 9 ... fire ... worm ... fire is not quenched... fire ... hell fire ... the fire is not quenched.

This would only be the beginning of the verses that ... deny this position.

Christ's Teaching and Our Response

To me it seems obvious that Jesus indicates -- and the other NT writers clearly say the same, and show how the ideas are present in the OT -- that we face a momentous decision in life -- between giving our lives to Christ, that is, letting God into our lives, or surrendering to His will and His ways, etc. -- and not doing so. The consequences of this are far the most important thing in our lives. To follow Christ, to live for God, to put oneself in His hands and believe and obey Him, is to receive health, eternal life, clarity, truth, light, goodness, beauty, peace, fellowship, rescue from our sins, and all that is good. To cut ourselves off from God is eternal death, confusion, staying caught up in what's wrong and ignoble, anger, hatred, pain, destruction, being lost and wandering, and so on. Nothing could be more important.

Particularly, Jesus warns very clearly that the state of those who refuse God, who reject God and remain at emnity with him, is truly horrible, a terrible fate in which they are caught forever. :cry: :cry: :cry:

This should fill us with utter horror, sadness, grief, and move us to let our lives witness more and more to his grace. It should teach us to seek as best we can to proclaim God's gospel and help others to understand it, both by our teaching and our deeds. Those in rebellion against God face a horrible fate. Jesus died to save them, and us, from this fate; and we must bend every effort to live for Him, because of the urgency of rescuing them, as well as out of love for God, and for all that the Lord Jesus has done for us!

In so far as this is the point, or intention, of the OP I'm in solid support.

However, I do not see why, out of the many images used for the fate of those who do not follow God's path, the OP thinks that images such as fire are meant to be uniquely and fully accurate (what he calls "literal") and other images (wandering, darkness, exclusion, hunger) are of lesser importance.

More generally, I don't understand why the OP thinks that we can have a full understanding of what the details of our eternal fate are, rather than acknowledging that these things are things of which the Bible gives us some knowledge, but -- because of our incapacity, or, because of God's good purposes -- not full and total knowledge.

:cry: Holy God, Holy and Mighty, Holy Immortal, have mercy upon us!
:cry: Lord Jesus Christ, son of the Living God, have mercy upon us! :cry:

keck553
Sep 24th 2008, 03:24 PM
If hell is separation from God, who cares about the details?

The Parson
Sep 24th 2008, 03:37 PM
Because the "details" are a picture that God wants painted in our minds. How can one want to be saved if that one doesn't realize what they are being saved from.

fsuwolf
Sep 24th 2008, 03:59 PM
Okay, lets forget that with God all things are possible, and that he created the heavens and earth, so God could not have possibly created hell fire or people burning in real fire in Hell. Because fire would destroy the spirit that God says is indestructible. Elijah was the worlds greatest illusionist, Nanotechnology will play an important role in Revelations and Global warming and pollution will destroy a good portion of the earth. (I am sorry Al Gore)
2 Kings 2:11 A great illusion


As they were walking along and talking together, suddenly a chariot of fire and horses of fire appeared and separated the two of them, and Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind.

Revelations 8:7 Acid rain caused by Big corporate polluters like the U.S, China, Germany , and India.
7The first angel sounded his trumpet, and there came hail and fire mixed with blood, and it was hurled down upon the earth. A third of the earth was burned up, a third of the trees were burned up, and all the green grass was burned up.

Revelations 9:7 Robots created by Microsoft using nanotechnology and mass produced by GM, Ford and Chrysler that have become independent and unstable
7The locusts looked like horses prepared for battle. On their heads they wore something like crowns of gold, and their faces resembled human faces. 8Their hair was like women's hair, and their teeth were like lions' teeth. 9They had breastplates like breastplates of iron, and the sound of their wings was like the thundering of many horses and chariots rushing into battle. 10They had tails and stings like scorpions, and in their tails they had power to torment people for five months. 11They had as king over them the angel of the Abyss, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek, Apollyon.[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelations%209;&version=31;#fen-NIV-30836a)]

Revelations 11: 3-6 Miniature flame throwers developed by Lock-Heed Martin using Nanotechnolgy with the flame thrower mounted on their shoulders.
3And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth." 4These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth. 5If anyone tries to harm them, fire comes from their mouths and devours their enemies. This is how anyone who wants to harm them must die. 6These men have power to shut up the sky so that it will not rain during the time they are prophesying; and they have power to turn the waters into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague as often as they want.

I still working on a scientific solutions to Jesus and the saints appearing on horses in mid air.

So what is my point, I agree the Word of God uses symbols and metaphors to make a point, but Hell and people burning in hell I do not think is one that is symbolic or a metaphor. I believe my God is able to send a Chariot of Fire to pick up Elijah, or create locust like those in Revelations, so why not create hell fire and condemn those who refused to accept the Love of Christ, and proclaim him as their savior. The other thing is- is this even important enough to debate? Thanks I did have fun with this one.

RickH
Sep 24th 2008, 04:22 PM
Okay, I might be unintentionally stirring the pot here, but here is what I am thinking. Please forgive me if I'm out of line. This topic really fascinates me and I don't want to cause strife. If I am out of line, please let me know and I'll just monitor the conversation. Thanks and God bless.

My thoughts: There will obviously be an all consuming fire. 2 Peter 3:7-10 makes this clear. Verse 7 ends with "..the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men".
The word translated "perdition" from the Greek is "apōleia" which means destruction or utter ruin (Barclay Newman Greek Dictionary).
Verses 10 and 11 tell us that everything will be destroyed and dissolved.
Finally let us look at John 3:16:
John 3:16 (NKJV)
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.

If someone is burning for an eternity would that not mean that they have eternal life, albeit a painful and miserable one? If they are burning for an eternity, they are in no way perishing. The word perish (apollymi in the Greek) means to destroy, kill or pass away (Barclay Newman once again).
I submit that yes, there will be a consuming fire that does away with the wicked and that doing away with is eternal, but the process (fire) will not be. God then makes us, the saved, the new Heaven and the New Earth.
God bless, thanks for the conversation.
Rick

Pleroo
Sep 24th 2008, 04:39 PM
Why would you think they are not when the scripture you just quoted says they are? The folks who inhabited Sodom and Gomorrah are facing the same fire that we will if we do not repent.

How then is it that Sodom is going to be restored by God?

Eze. 16: 44." 'Everyone who quotes proverbs will quote this proverb about you: "Like mother, like daughter." 45.You are a true daughter of your mother, who despised her husband and her children; and you are a true sister of your sisters, who despised their husbands and their children. Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite. 46. Your older sister was Samaria, who lived to the north of you with her daughters; and your younger sister, who lived to the south of you with her daughters, was Sodom. 47.You not only walked in their ways and copied their detestable practices, but in all your ways you soon became more depraved than they. 48. As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, your sister Sodom and her daughters never did what you and your daughters have done. 49. " 'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen. 51.Samaria did not commit half the sins you did. You have done more detestable things than they, and have made your sisters seem righteous by all these things you have done. 52. Bear your disgrace, for you have furnished some justification for your sisters. Because your sins were more vile than theirs, they appear more righteous than you. So then, be ashamed and bear your disgrace, for you have made your sisters appear righteous. 53. " 'However, I will restore the fortunes of Sodom and her daughters and of Samaria and her daughters, and your fortunes along with them, 54. so that you may bear your disgrace and be ashamed of all you have done in giving them comfort. 55. And your sisters, Sodom with her daughters and Samaria with her daughters, will return to what they were before; and you and your daughters will return to what you were before. 56. You would not even mention your sister Sodom in the day of your pride, 57.before your wickedness was uncovered. Even so, you are now scorned by the daughters of Edom and all her neighbors and the daughters of the Philistines--all those around you who despise you. 58. You will bear the consequences of your lewdness and your detestable practices, declares the Lord. 59. " 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will deal with you as you deserve, because you have despised my oath by breaking the covenant. 60. Yet I will remember the covenant I made 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 sisters, both those who are older than you and those who are younger. I will give them to you as daughters, but not on the basis of my covenant with you. 62. So I will establish my covenant with you, and you will know that I am the Lord. 63. Then, when I make atonement for you for all you have done, you will remember and be ashamed and never again open your mouth because of your humiliation, declares the Sovereign Lord.' "

faroutinmt
Sep 24th 2008, 04:50 PM
I doubt your understanding this one. Jesus followed the law perfectly. Read on and see why He was considered a curse according to the law. It wasn't because He didn't "continue" in the things of the law. It was because 'self" righteous men condemned Him (ref. the Jeremiah verse, man trusting in man) as a disobedient son according to the law.

If you break the Law by sinning- which we have all done- you get the curse. That's what all those scriptures are saying. Trusting in man is breaking the first commandment of the Law. Those who depart into the everlasting fire were those who had broken God's Law and therefore were called "cursed".

The passage in Galatians is clearly stating that Jesus was made a curse for us. That is, He was not made a curse of any sin which He committed, but He took upon Himself the curse (wrath of God) which we were under, for us. That is how He redeems us from the curse of the Law.

You don't believe that Christ took our sins upon Himself and took the curse for us, so we could be redeemed from the curse of the Law? What do you believe? Are you a gnostic?

Teke
Sep 24th 2008, 05:18 PM
If you break the Law by sinning- which we have all done- you get the curse. That's what all those scriptures are saying. Trusting in man is breaking the first commandment of the Law. Those who depart into the everlasting fire were those who had broken God's Law and therefore were called "cursed".

The passage in Galatians is clearly stating that Jesus was made a curse for us. That is, He was not made a curse of any sin which He committed, but He took upon Himself the curse (wrath of God) which we were under, for us. That is how He redeems us from the curse of the Law.

I posted for you to read what the curse was. It was the laws visible means of displaying a disobedient son (see Deut. 23, from verse 18 on a disobedient son, this was the accusations put to Christ, in that they called Him a glutton and drunkard, because He associated with sinners). "Cursed [is] every one that hangeth on a tree: "


You don't believe that Christ took our sins upon Himself and took the curse for us, so we could be redeemed from the curse of the Law? What do you believe? Are you a gnostic?

We were never under a curse of the law. Christ didn't need to take our sins upon Himself. The only way He took our sins upon Himself was that He submitted Himself to the hands of sinners which did evil with Him. And He voluntarily submitted to the consequences of sin in the flesh, which is death. All of which He overcame for us in the state of humanity/human flesh.
And no, I'm not a gnostic, I'm a Trinitarian.

Act 14:16 Who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways.
Act 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

The works of the law are good, but those "of the works of the law" are cursed because you cannot become righteous by keeping the law. The righteousness of God is above any law.

keck553
Sep 24th 2008, 05:30 PM
Because the "details" are a picture that God wants painted in our minds. How can one want to be saved if that one doesn't realize what they are being saved from.

Understood. And here I thought separation from God was enough punishment. I suppose if one doesn't have a relationship with Him, the details would be important. And since God allowed us a description, certainly He wants us know 'know the details".

I retract my comment.

keck553
Sep 24th 2008, 05:43 PM
The works of the law are good, but those "of the works of the law" are cursed because you cannot become righteous by keeping the law. The righteousness of God is above any law.

Your statement appears to me as contradictory. If God gave the 'law', how can 'the law' not be righteous? Furthermore, Luke reported that Zacharias was both righteous (produced by faith) AND walked blamlessly in all the commandments and requirements (righteousness producing obedience) given by the LORD (at Mt. Sinai). Therefore he was righteous by faiith and blamless by obedience. Obedience to the 'law' certainly did not make Zakarias cursed, did it? God would never give us an unrighteous instructions.

Perhaps it's the condition of the heart you are addressing. By faith we are counted as righteous. Without faith, works mean nothing, even good works. The only righteous works are what God defines as righteous. So faith produces good works. And those works are defined by God, and written in the Bible.

Faith certainly does not produce disobedience or a loathing heart to God's instructions.

Teke
Sep 24th 2008, 06:02 PM
Your statement appears to me as contradictory. If God gave the 'law', how can 'the law' not be righteous? Furthermore, Luke reported that Zacharias was both righteous (produced by faith) AND walked blamlessly in all the commandments and requirements (righteousness producing obedience) given by the LORD (at Mt. Sinai). Therefore he was righteous by faiith and blamless by obedience. Obedience to the 'law' certainly did not make Zakarias cursed, did it? God would never give us an unrighteous instructions.

Perhaps it's the condition of the heart you are addressing. By faith we are counted as righteous. Without faith, works mean nothing, even good works. The only righteous works are what God defines as righteous. So faith produces good works. And those works are defined by God, and written in the Bible.

Faith certainly does not produce disobedience or a loathing heart to God's instructions.

I think you have the jest of it. Faith vs works. "The only righteous works are what God defines as righteous."

Rom 10:3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

Phl 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

faroutinmt
Sep 24th 2008, 11:06 PM
We were never under a curse of the law. Christ didn't need to take our sins upon Himself.

The passage from Galatians clearly says that Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law. This means we were under the curse of the Law. I cannot be any more simple than that.

You need to read through Isaiah 53. It clearly says that Christ bore our sins, that God laid on Him our iniquity, so that we could be justified. If Christ did not bear our sins, there is no way we can be forgiven.

"So Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many." Hebrews 9:28

"But this Man (Christ) after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God." Hebrews 10:14

"For Christ suffered once for sins ( not by sins of others, but for sins), the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God." 1 Peter 3:18

The scripture passages which tell us that Christ bore our sins so that we could be forgiven are numerous.

How do you expect to be forgiven of your sins if you do not believe that Jesus Christ took your sins upon Himself?

Teke
Sep 24th 2008, 11:21 PM
Hebrews is especially about the role of a priest/mediator. That is my understanding.

Scruffy Kid
Sep 24th 2008, 11:54 PM
Dear Parson,
Your post #26 helps me understand your intention in the thread better, I think.

If hell is separation from God, who cares about the details?
Because the "details" are a picture that God wants painted in our minds. How can one want to be saved if that one doesn't realize what they are being saved from. If I am right, your underlying concern is that we teach in a way which helps people to understand the value of salvation. In your view, this goes together with having (and teaching) an accurate understanding of what the Scriptures teach us. These are both concerns that I share!

However, there are two or three points at which I don't particularly follow what you are saying.

(1) It seems to me that what the Scripture teaches, in its details, has a lot of aspects which are worth thinking through carefully, not just the image of fire. I tried, above, to point out a lot of other images that Scripture gives. It seems to me that it would be valuable -- simply in terms of understanding the truth, as the Scriptures present it -- to try to develop an understanding of salvation that makes use of this detailed thinking which Scripture presents us with. Limiting ourselves to saying "fire" repeatedly does not seem to do full justice to the Scriptural teaching.

(2) In so far as the aim is to bring people to Christ, I am skeptical about the idea that motivation for being saved comes only from understanding the detail of what one is being saved from. It seems to me that many on this board have told us that they were saved more by being moved by the love of Christ than by fear of hell, so that what one is being saved to, or for, may be as important, for many, in their conversion.

(3) Even in terms of being saved-from it is not so very obvious that the approach Billy Graham takes is less effective (or less Scriptural) than placing emphasis on trying to convince people that fire is "literal". Lots of people find this rather incredible. I personally do not necessarily find it incredible, but I also don't think that it's the only correct way to read scripture. Roughly, I think it's adiaphora (a matter that it's legitimate to see either way). But for people who do find it incredible, surely the main point it for them to see that hell -- separation from God -- would be inconceivably terrible. If the way to help them see that is to help them see that this involves an unbearable deprivation of God the source of love and the fountain of living waters, and that that is one aspect of what the Scriptures may be saying when they speak of Gehenna, or of fire, I'm not sure why that is troubles you.

Thanks for raising this topic!

Scruff

faroutinmt
Sep 25th 2008, 12:08 AM
Hebrews is especially about the role of a priest/mediator. That is my understanding.

Yes, Hebrews is about Jesus being our High Priest and Mediator. The High Priest was the mediator between God and the people and he offered the animals' blood before God as a symbol of atonement. When he confessed the sins of the people and his own sins over the animals, he was transferring the sins to the animal's so that its blood could provide atonement. The animal was bearing the sins of the people and dying for their sins. Of course, the blood of bulls and goats could not really cover our sins. We needed a Savior.

Jesus became the true High Priest and sacrifice when He bore our sins before the Father and mediated on our behalf. He was the spotless lamb.

"For such a High Priest (Christ) was fitting for us, who is holy, harmless...who does not need to offer up sacrifices, first for his own sins and then for the people's, for this He did once for all when He offered up Himself." Hebrews 7:26,27

"Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. " Hebrews 9:12

tgallison
Sep 25th 2008, 01:55 PM
[quote=Scruffy Kid;1800124]

(2) In so far as the aim is to bring people to Christ, I am skeptical about the idea that motivation for being saved comes only from understanding the detail of what one is being saved from. It seems to me that many on this board have told us that they were saved more by being moved by the love of Christ than by fear of hell, so that what one is being saved to, or for, may be as important, for many, in their conversion.

If not a motivation for salvation, how about a motivation for witnessing?

Herein lies both love and fear. Love for your neighbor, whereby your fear for his wellbeing is of the utmost motivation.

Coptichristian
Sep 25th 2008, 02:33 PM
My dear dear lady, there is a difference in the fire from God (heaven) that purges and the eternal flames that were prepared for the devil and his angels. Big difference.


What's the difference?

The fire of God destroys evil, right?

The Lake of fire destroys evil, right?

tgallison
Sep 25th 2008, 02:46 PM
What's the difference?

The fire of God destroys evil, right?

The Lake of fire destroys evil, right?

Where does it say, the lake of fire destroys evil? I could not find it. One is a consuming fire, the other not.

An example of a non-consuming fire is the burning bush in Exodus 3:2.

petepet
Sep 25th 2008, 03:17 PM
Was reading an article lately where Brother Billy Graham some years back had been quoted as saying that Hell wasn't a literal fire. "I think people have a hard time believing God is going to allow people to burn in literal fire forever. I think the fire that is mentioned in the Bible is a burning thirst for God that can never be quenched." This statement made some years back wasn't made very public and for a bit I thought he had been misquoted. Matter of fact it wasn't a misquote. It can be found in the April 10, 1983 Orlando Sentinel newspaper.

And actually I didn't give it too much thought until I read a few of the posts from the past year or two made by some folks on this board that shared this doctrine. I would just like to see if someone may try defend this particular belief with scripture because I can't see it myself.

Mark 9:42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. 9:43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 9:44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 9:45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 9:46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 9:47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: 9:48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

This would only be the beginning of the verses that would deny this position.

I do love the way that we all speak so dogmatically about things that are 'eternal' and thus beyond our comprehension.

The words used in Mark are cited from Isaiah 66.24 where they are in the context of being in Jerusalem and had in mind the rubbish dump outside Jerusalem where the rubbish was burned in a fire that was never quenched and the maggots ate up the bodies.

But it is of coure there the fire that was never quenched. Those who were thrown on it were 'carcases'. They were already dead. Thus the vividness of the words in Mark come directly from the picture being used to describe it. But did Jesus really believe that Gehenna was literally the same as the rubbish dump outside Jerusalem. Each must decide for himself.

Let us now, however, move on to the lake of fire. That lake is to torment Satan for ever and ever. But Satan is spirit, not flesh. He cannot therefore be burned in a physical fire. Death and Hades are conceptions. They cannot be burned in a physical fire. It is quite clear therefore that, as so often, Revelation is speaking symbolically.

In fact it is noteworthy that Revelation does not see the dead as surviving beyond the grave. While the beast and the false prophet (whatever they represent) are cast alive into the lake of fire, the people are again dead carcases and fed to the birds. So much so that they have to undergo a 'resurrection' in order to be judged. Then they are cast into the lake of fire, not 'alive' but (in contrast to Satan the beast and the false prophet) 'dead'. It is 'the second death', the final death.

The very word used of the fate of the wicked 'destruction' signified the end of existence. Plato in his book on the immortality of the soul (a Greek doctrine not a Hebrew one), when seeking to maintain the continual existence of the soul declared that we must not say that it was 'destroyed' (using the same root word) because to him, if it was destroyed it ceased to be (and he was pretty good at Greek).

And then consider this, those who thing of eternity as being outside time. If this punishment is 'eternal' (and it is that whether they are conscious or unconscious) then it is outside time. It has no beginning or end. So to think of it as 'lasting for ever' is to incorporate into it an idea which contradicts the idea of 'eternal'. Eternal does not mean lasting for ever, it means existing or not existing outside time.

In other words God is trying to express future punishment in earthly terms. Had He used any other we would not have had a clue what He meant. That is why we have what seem like contradictory pictures. 'Outer darkness' (because therown out of the lighted banquetting hall), eternal fire (because of its destructive nature), and so on.

Let us agree that the fate of the unbeliever is decidedly unpleasant, but to be dogmatic about it is to make ourselves ridiculous, and self-contradictory.

Coptichristian
Sep 25th 2008, 03:49 PM
Where does it say, the lake of fire destroys evil? I could not find it. One is a consuming fire, the other not.

See Revelation 20:14. Death and Hades will be destroyed by the lake of fire. The lake of fire consumes evil.


An example of a non-consuming fire is the burning bush in Exodus 3:2.

Though it did not consume the tree, this fire of God is the same fire that consumes sin!

tgallison
Sep 25th 2008, 03:49 PM
Let us agree that the fate of the unbeliever is decidedly unpleasant, but to be dogmatic about it is to make ourselves ridiculous, and self-contradictory.

Job throws more light on this, than perhaps, any other book in the Bible.

It show the death of the body, in contrast to the soul, and it is duplicated for clarity.

Job 33:18 "He keepeth back his soul from the pit, and his life from perishing by the sword."

Job 33:22 "Yea, his soul draweth near unto the grave, and his life to the destroyers."

This scripture clearly states that it is the soul that goes to the pit. The life is destroyed, but the soul goes to the pit.

The distinction, that it is the soul that goes to the pit, makes it clear this is not merely throwing a body into the garbage dump.

Teke
Sep 25th 2008, 03:55 PM
Yes, Hebrews is about Jesus being our High Priest and Mediator. The High Priest was the mediator between God and the people and he offered the animals' blood before God as a symbol of atonement. When he confessed the sins of the people and his own sins over the animals, he was transferring the sins to the animal's so that its blood could provide atonement. The animal was bearing the sins of the people and dying for their sins. Of course, the blood of bulls and goats could not really cover our sins. We needed a Savior.

Jesus became the true High Priest and sacrifice when He bore our sins before the Father and mediated on our behalf. He was the spotless lamb.

"For such a High Priest (Christ) was fitting for us, who is holy, harmless...who does not need to offer up sacrifices, first for his own sins and then for the people's, for this He did once for all when He offered up Himself." Hebrews 7:26,27

"Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. " Hebrews 9:12

Lambs were not sin offerings....
We should not continue on this subject in this thread, it's off topic. If you want to talk about it more start a thread in Contro or pm me.

keck553
Sep 25th 2008, 03:58 PM
Hebrews is especially about the role of a priest/mediator. That is my understanding.

Yes. I think the book also details our increased accountability to God because of the depth of His character revealed through Yeshua. Think about something for a moment. Noah was counted as righteous, but 'in his time'. While his faith and trust in God is what made him righteuos, his actions probably weren't as righteous as our actions are expected to be, considering the additional teachings we have been given by God since Noah. Now, we have access to the Character of God in full as He choose to reveal to us, in addition we have a teacher and a comforter, God's indwelling spirit. Equipped with such blessings, gifts and promises, how much greater is our accountability? I think this is the gist of Hebrews. Now that we have Jesus, how much greater will the consequences be for rejecting Him? I think we have seen some of them manifested in the physical world over the last 2000 years, but that's nothing in comparison to when we stand before God.

Teke
Sep 25th 2008, 04:08 PM
Keck, I absolutely agree with you. If God the Father chose us to reveal His Son, then we are certainly accountable for that. This is THE mission of His Body the Church, the revelation of the Son.

petepet
Sep 25th 2008, 04:18 PM
See Revelation 20:14. Death and Hades will be destroyed by the lake of fire. The lake of fire consumes evil.



Though it did not consume the tree, this fire of God is the same fire that consumes sin!

Hey Coptichristian you are citing words in my name that I did not write. You must beware of imputing to people what they did not say. Please be more careful.

Neither of the quotes that you cite were made by me.

Coptichristian
Sep 25th 2008, 05:20 PM
Sorry petepe! That's the second time I've made that mistake in the past week or so. I really need to be more careful, as you say!

faroutinmt
Sep 25th 2008, 06:17 PM
Lambs were not sin offerings....
We should not continue on this subject in this thread, it's off topic. If you want to talk about it more start a thread in Contro or pm me.

Well, I think you're missing the whole point. Hebrews makes a clear connection between Jesus' blood and the blood of bulls and goats (sacrifices for sin).

The lamb is just another symbol sacrifice from the exodus.

The whole point is: Jesus is the sacrifice which delivers us from the wrath of God (Hell-eternal punishment for sin-original topic).

Teke
Sep 25th 2008, 06:38 PM
Well, I think you're missing the whole point. Hebrews makes a clear connection between Jesus' blood and the blood of bulls and goats (sacrifices for sin).

Only in relation to the office of a priest (as mediator), not transference of sin from one thing to another. There is blood/life in both priest and animal.


The lamb is just another symbol sacrifice from the exodus.

Which was a symbol of peace, not sin. ie. Prince of Peace


The whole point is: Jesus is the sacrifice which delivers us from the wrath of God (Hell-eternal punishment for sin-original topic).

The "Lamb of God" as John puts it, is a symbol of peace, meaning peace between mankind and God.

In our mortal bodies we will either experience peace with God or a hell of our own making in not being at peace with God.

Luk 1:79 To give light to them that sit in darkness and [in] the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace.

Luk 19:38 Saying, Blessed the[B] King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.

Luk 24:36 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace unto you.

Jhn 14:27 [B]Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.

Act 10:36 The word which [God] sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all:)

Rom 2:10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

Rom 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

Rom 8:6 For to be carnally minded [is] death; but to be spiritually minded [is] life and peace.

Rom 10:15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!


To be in sin is to not be at peace with God. IOW a living hell.

The Parson
Sep 25th 2008, 07:42 PM
Not in anyway wanting to change the OP but there is one thing that hasn't been addressed. I want to note that some of you would use the word Hades in place of Hell. ie...
Revelation 20:14. Death and Hades will be destroyed by the lake of fire. The lake of fire consumes evil.and

Death and Hades are conceptionsAnd there seems to me to be a difference that you may not have caught before. In your translations that are influenced or even wholey based on the Alexandrian/Westcott & Hort manuscripts you will find that the translators used the Classic Greek Hades because in the Greek mindset, that is the classic Greek there was no concept of the eternal Gehenna/Hell.

What was Hades to the pagan Greeks? It was a deep cavern where you entered past the three headed dog named Cerberus into the dark path that lead to the river Styx. There, once you crossed the river you would either be sent to the Elysian Fields of bliss or into Oblivion. This definition is totally foriegn to Hebrew term Hell.

And what on earth does hell have to do with ancient Greek mythology? Nothing!!! Hades was a place where the ancient Greeks believed everybody would spend eternity in bliss or torment. On the other hand, Hell is a place of eternal condemnation for the damned. Two different and distinct definitions. Luke:16:22: And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

And as already noted about : geenna, gheh'-en-nah; of Heb. or; valley of (the son of) Hinnom; gehenna (or Ge-Hinnom), a valley of Jerus., used (fig.) as a name for the place (or state) of everlasting punishment:--hell. But when gehenna was mentioned, the last part of the definition was omitted. Lord have mercy, it's no wonder many believe that Hell is temporary or not an actual fire. Do you see what I'm saying here?

Matthew 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Matthew 5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Revelation 1:18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

2nd Peter 2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

James 3:6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell. etc., etc., etc.

Coptichristian
Sep 25th 2008, 08:06 PM
In your translations that are influenced or even wholey based on the Alexandrian/Westcott & Hort manuscripts you will find that the translators used the Classic Greek Hades because in the Greek mindset, that is the classic Greek there was no concept of the eternal Gehenna/Hell.

What was Hades to the pagan Greeks? It was a deep cavern where you entered past the three headed dog named Cerberus into the dark path that lead to the river Styx. There, once you crossed the river you would either be sent to the Elysian Fields of bliss or into Oblivion. This definition is totally foriegn to Hebrew term Hell.

And what on earth does hell have to do with ancient Greek mythology? Nothing!!! Hades was a place where the ancient Greeks believed everybody would spend eternity in bliss or torment. On the other hand, Hell is a place of eternal condemnation for the damned. Two different and distinct definitions. Luke:16:22: And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

And as already noted about : geenna, gheh'-en-nah; of Heb. or; valley of (the son of) Hinnom; gehenna (or Ge-Hinnom), a valley of Jerus., used (fig.) as a name for the place (or state) of everlasting punishment:--hell. But when gehenna was mentioned, the last part of the definition was omitted. Lord have mercy, it's no wonder many believe that Hell is temporary or not an actual fire. Do you see what I'm saying here?

Matthew 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Matthew 5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Revelation 1:18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

2nd Peter 2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

James 3:6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell. etc., etc., etc.


Interesting post. I'm not quite sure what it is exactly that you're trying to say. In hopes of getting some clarification from you, could you answer the following questions?

Do you believe that the Hebrew word sheol, as used in Scripture, is the eqivalent of the Greek word hades, as it is used in Scripture?

Do you believe that Gehenna is the equivalent of the Lake of Fire?

Also, I still haven't seen you give any reasons for believing that "hellfire" is literal fire.

divaD
Sep 26th 2008, 12:30 AM
Job throws more light on this, than perhaps, any other book in the Bible.

It show the death of the body, in contrast to the soul, and it is duplicated for clarity.

Job 33:18 "He keepeth back his soul from the pit, and his life from perishing by the sword."

Job 33:22 "Yea, his soul draweth near unto the grave, and his life to the destroyers."

This scripture clearly states that it is the soul that goes to the pit. The life is destroyed, but the soul goes to the pit.

The distinction, that it is the soul that goes to the pit, makes it clear this is not merely throwing a body into the garbage dump.





Job 33:30 To bring back his soul from the pit, to be enlightened with the light of the living.



I have to wonder if perhaps you also read verse 30? If the pit is as you are suggesting, then why doesn't this verse harmonize with the rest of what you put forth?

Since it's pretty obvious that pit in Job 33 means eternal hell to you, then according to verse 33 using your definition of pit, souls can die, go to the pit of hell, then at that point God is able and willing to bring them literally out of the pit of a literal eternal hell, back to the land of the living.

Honestly now, are you positive you are understanding Job 33 in context? Because verse 30 seems to be foriegn to the idea you set forth, and that being, according to your reasoning, that it's talking about eternal hell in relation to pit. Is it really? I fail to see it.

Try reading verse 29 with verse 30. It's clear that God is not talking about eternal hell here.


Job 33:29 Lo, all these things worketh God oftentimes with man,
30 To bring back his soul from the pit, to be enlightened with the light of the living.

The point is, God does this when man is still alive and breathing, and not after he is already dead.

In case you still miss my point, if pit means eternal hell in verse 18, then it has to have the same meaning in verse 30.

The only reason I even adressed your claim, is because you stated "This scripture clearly states that it is the soul that goes to the pit. The life is destroyed, but the soul goes to the pit.

The distinction, that it is the soul that goes to the pit,"

Perhaps it clearly shows this to you, but the Scriptures themselves do not clearly show this. My conclusion is this. There is no way the context in Job 33 is talking about an eternal hell, in relation to pit.

faroutinmt
Sep 26th 2008, 01:00 AM
Only in relation to the office of a priest (as mediator), not transference of sin from one thing to another. There is blood/life in both priest and animal.


Which was a symbol of peace, not sin. ie. Prince of Peace


The "Lamb of God" as John puts it, is a symbol of peace, meaning peace between mankind and God.

In our mortal bodies we will either experience peace with God or a hell of our own making in not being at peace with God.

Luk 1:79 To give light to them that sit in darkness and [in] the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace.

Luk 19:38 Saying, Blessed the[B] King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.

Luk 24:36 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace unto you.

Jhn 14:27 [B]Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.

Act 10:36 The word which [God] sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all:)

Rom 2:10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

Rom 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

Rom 8:6 For to be carnally minded [is] death; but to be spiritually minded [is] life and peace.

Rom 10:15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!


To be in sin is to not be at peace with God. IOW a living hell.

Well, this is going no where. It's obvious that you don't believe that Jesus Christ bore our sins/ took the punishment of our sins upon Himself so that we could be forgiven.

But, I would still like to know: If you don't believe that Jesus Christ bore our sins, how do you expect to be forgiven of your sins? On what basis? How do you expect to be saved from the wrath of God?

Teke
Sep 26th 2008, 01:43 PM
Well, this is going no where. It's obvious that you don't believe that Jesus Christ bore our sins/ took the punishment of our sins upon Himself so that we could be forgiven.

But, I would still like to know: If you don't believe that Jesus Christ bore our sins, how do you expect to be forgiven of your sins? On what basis? How do you expect to be saved from the wrath of God?

I just don't believe in transference of sin. Christ took the capital punishment of the law, which is death and what we all are condemned to in the flesh since Adam, and overcame it . He is our example to follow as we face the same consequence. Our faith is strengthened by His Resurrection. Giving us something to look forward to.

As for sin, I believe if God forgives us for sin we are forgiven. If not we will face Him at the final judgment of things and be judged for not repenting.
God calls all men to repent.

Rom 5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

Act 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

markedward
Sep 26th 2008, 05:11 PM
Not in anyway wanting to change the OP but there is one thing that hasn't been addressed. I want to note that some of you would use the word Hades in place of Hell. ie...and
And there seems to me to be a difference that you may not have caught before. In your translations that are influenced or even wholey based on the Alexandrian/Westcott & Hort manuscripts you will find that the translators used the Classic Greek Hades because in the Greek mindset, that is the classic Greek there was no concept of the eternal Gehenna/Hell.You seem to be saying that hades is the same thing as gehenna. Jesus never said they were the same thing... He always referenced gehenna as the "unquenchable" fire, and it fit in with His "eternal punishment" mentioned in Matthew 25:46 (I think that's the verse). Hades, on the other hand, Jesus never mentioned to be eternal. I may be misconstruing what you were getting at, but it seems like you're saying that hades and gehenna are the same thing, whereas Jesus' mentionings of them make them entirely distinct from one another.

The Parson
Sep 26th 2008, 08:24 PM
You seem to be saying that hades is the same thing as gehenna. Jesus never said they were the same thing... He always referenced gehenna as the "unquenchable" fire, and it fit in with His "eternal punishment" mentioned in Matthew 25:46 (I think that's the verse). Hades, on the other hand, Jesus never mentioned to be eternal. I may be misconstruing what you were getting at, but it seems like you're saying that hades and gehenna are the same thing, whereas Jesus' mentionings of them make them entirely distinct from one another.Mark, what I was saying is that the Greek term or mythological place named Hades is not the Hebrew Hell... Maybe re-read my post.

petepet
Sep 26th 2008, 09:39 PM
Mark, what I was saying is that the Greek term or mythological place named Hades is not the Hebrew Hell... Maybe re-read my post.

It could not be. There is no Hebrew word for Hell :-)))) The Old Testament Hebrews had no conception of Hell. The nearest they got was the valley of Hinnom outside Jerusalem (Isaiah 66.24) and Daniel 12.2. They saw things in terms of a grave-world for which they used the term sheol (in LXX Hades)

faroutinmt
Sep 26th 2008, 11:15 PM
I just don't believe in transference of sin. Christ took the capital punishment of the law, which is death and what we all are condemned to in the flesh since Adam, and overcame it . He is our example to follow as we face the same consequence. Our faith is strengthened by His Resurrection. Giving us something to look forward to.

As for sin, I believe if God forgives us for sin we are forgiven. If not we will face Him at the final judgment of things and be judged for not repenting.
God calls all men to repent.

Rom 5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

Act 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Listen, while I certainly believe that Jesus Christ did take our sin upon Himself as a substitute, I want to say something:

I am very sorry if, in any way, I have been rude, unkind, or stern in my statements toward you or your responses. I am too often a proud and arrogant individual who is more concerned with being right than displaying the love of Christ. I am sorry if I have expressed myself this way toward you in any way. God is still working on me in this area.

Blessings,

John

Teke
Sep 26th 2008, 11:35 PM
Listen, while I certainly believe that Jesus Christ did take our sin upon Himself as a substitute, I want to say something:

I am very sorry if, in any way, I have been rude, unkind, or stern in my statements toward you or your responses. I am too often a proud and arrogant individual who is more concerned with being right than displaying the love of Christ. I am sorry if I have expressed myself this way toward you in any way. God is still working on me in this area.

Blessings,

John

No worries. I appreciate the sentiment. :hug:
Things can be confusing sometimes when related on a message board, even when we are using the same scriptures.

I would appreciate anyone showing me my error if I'm wrong. I'm not perfect, just a work in progress.

It's not that I have to be right when I point out something that seems wrong to me. It's just my understanding.

While I understand, I would ask you to consider some questions about what you believe. For instance, why would a person need to be baptized if Christ was a substitute for sin. Or why repentance.
Substitution and/or transference of sin are not basic tenets of our faith.

May Christ shine brighter in you. :kiss:

Teke
Sep 26th 2008, 11:39 PM
It could not be. There is no Hebrew word for Hell :-)))) The Old Testament Hebrews had no conception of Hell. The nearest they got was the valley of Hinnom outside Jerusalem (Isaiah 66.24) and Daniel 12.2. They saw things in terms of a grave-world for which they used the term sheol (in LXX Hades)

This is true. :yes::yes: And they still see it this way.

petepet
Sep 26th 2008, 11:45 PM
No worries. I appreciate the sentiment. :hug:
Things can be confusing sometimes when related on a message board, even when we are using the same scriptures.

I would appreciate anyone showing me my error if I'm wrong. I'm not perfect, just a work in progress.

It's not that I have to be right when I point out something that seems wrong to me. It's just my understanding.

While I understand, I would ask you to consider some questions about what you believe. For instance, why would a person need to be baptized if Christ was a substitute for sin. Or why repentance.
Substitution and/or transference of sin are not basic tenets of our faith.

May Christ shine brighter in you. :kiss:

But how can you say that substitutionary atonement is not a basic tenet of our faith when Jesus specifically stated 'The Son of Man came --- to giver His life a ransom in the place of many' (lutron anti pollown) - Mark 10.45. The preposition is strictly substitutionary. Peter adds, 'He suffered once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that He might bring us to God' (1 Peter 3.18). And Paul says, 'He was made sin Who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him' (2 Corinthians 5.21). And again, 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the Law by being made a curse for us' (Galatians 3.13).

The reason that we are baptised is that it is an indication that the Holy Spirit has come on us. But that could not have happened had our sin not been borne by a substitute.

Teke
Sep 27th 2008, 12:06 AM
But how can you say that substitutionary atonement is not a basic tenet of our faith when Jesus specifically stated 'The Son of Man came --- to giver His life a ransom in the place of many' (lutron anti pollown) - Mark 10.45. The preposition is strictly substitutionary. Peter adds, 'He suffered once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that He might bring us to God' (1 Peter 3.18). And Paul says, 'He was made sin Who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him' (2 Corinthians 5.21). And again, 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the Law by being made a curse for us' (Galatians 3.13).

The reason that we are baptised is that it is an indication that the Holy Spirit has come on us. But that could not have happened had our sin not been borne by a substitute.

Sometimes even textual criticism doesn't see the truth. Coming from a student of the critical text, that says a lot.

By the Incarnation He assumed our humanity. No substitute.
The curse is death. He overcame death with Life. No substitute.
The Resurrection is proof for sure.

As the orthodox saint Gregory the Theologian said, "What is not assumed is not healed." Which is why Christ became incarnate of flesh and blood.

When the Father reveals the Son to us the Holy Spirit has come to us. Then we are baptized for remission of sin.
Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

faroutinmt
Sep 27th 2008, 02:09 AM
Sometimes even textual criticism doesn't see the truth. Coming from a student of the critical text, that says a lot.

By the Incarnation He assumed our humanity. No substitute.
The curse is death. He overcame death with Life. No substitute.
The Resurrection is proof for sure.

As the orthodox saint Gregory the Theologian said, "What is not assumed is not healed." Which is why Christ became incarnate of flesh and blood.

When the Father reveals the Son to us the Holy Spirit has come to us. Then we are baptized for remission of sin.
Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Okay. :)

Well, I've already posted some scriptures which clearly, unarguably state that Jesus bore our sins. What do you think those scriptures mean? What does it mean when it says that He bore our sins? What does it mean when it says that Jesus, being the just, suffered for the unjust (us)? What does it mean when it says that Jesus was the propitiation for our sins?

The scriptures clearly teach substitutionary atonement. That is foundational. It sounds like you have been taught wrongly that this is not so. I really recommend you read these scriptures.

God cannot just forgive your sin without punishing it. He would be unjust to do so. Someone must pay the price for your sin. This is what all the sacrificial animals in the Old Testament represented. The priest would both kill the animal and confess over it the sins of the people. That is clearly a substitutionary example. I already showed you that in the epistle to the Hebrews Jesus is portrayed as having fulfilled both the role of High Priest and the role as our substitutionary sacrifice. What do you say about the clear connection it was making there. It said that just as the priest brought the blood of bulls and goats before the Lord, Christ brought His own blood before the Father.

Remember, without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins. Whose blood was shed for the remission of your sins? If Jesus Christ did not take the wrath of God which you deserve, and bear your sins upon Himself, no amount of baptizing or repentance will forgive your sins.

Regarding baptism and repentance: Baptism is a sign of repentance and having been united with Christ. Read Romans 6. Repentance is a condition for forgiveness. Repentance does not earn your forgiveness. Repentance is why you are forgiven. Christ purchased your forgiveness so that you could repent and turn your life over to God.

If God were to forgive you without giving you the just punishment your sins deserve, He would be unjust. But, since Christ has taken that punishment, God can now forgive you without being unjust. The punishment for your sins has fallen on Christ. Consider this most basic of passages: "He has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins." Colossians 1:13,14 Do you see that forgiveness of sins comes through the His blood?

"But He was wounded for our transgressions. He was bruised for our iniquities . The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray, we have turned, every one, to his own way, and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all." Isaiah 53:5,6

"By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, for He shall bear their iniquities." Isaiah 53:11


What do you say to all these scriptures? Surely, it cannot be any clearer. I would encourage you to seriously reconsider what you have been taught.

Jude
Sep 27th 2008, 03:23 AM
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u298/hogndog/cid_D342FC7C036D40298EDCD69A0B859B8.jpg

How can a man in one breath admit that heaven is a place of eternal bliss then with the next deny that hell is a place of eternal torment..

Jude


http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u298/hogndog/twocents.gif

The Parson
Sep 27th 2008, 02:35 PM
How can a man in one breath admit that heaven is a place of eternal bliss then with the next deny that hell is a place of eternal torment..

Jude
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u298/hogndog/twocents.gif
It would be for the most part, that the human mind refuses to accept that not only is God Love but also a God of judgement. It comes to a deep rooted unbelief that there actually is an eternal punishment. It's seems to me its like a rebellion against the sovereignty of God. As Spurgeon said: "There is a suspicion that sin is not, after all, so bad a thing as we have dreamed. There is an apology, or a lurking wish to apologize for sinners, who are looked upon rather as objects of pity than as objects of indignation, and really deserving the condign punishment that they have wilfully brought upon themselves. I am afraid it is the old nature in us putting on the specious garb of charity, which thus leads us to discredit a fact which is as certain as the happiness of believers"

According to the Bible, Hell is a place of fiery, everlasting torment (literal). It's described in Matthew 5 & 18 as "fire", in Matthew 13 a "furnace of fire", Matthew 18 & 25 as “everlasting fire”, Mark 9 as "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched", in Luke 3 as "fire" and Luke 17 as "fire unquenchable". We see it in Jude 7 as "eternal fire" and in Revelation 14, 20, & 21 as "fire and brimstone".

Jesus spoke more about Hell than He did even about Heaven and He always described it as actual torment in fire. It's described as a place where God has no choice but to allow those who rejected His gift of eternal salvation to go to. In otherwords, this is the penalty we are saved and pardoned from.

It's no surprise to me that the literal, hot, desolate, black, unending, Hell is being denied today as it was prophesied long ago that many would give heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. 2nd Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. 2:2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.

I ask your forgiveness folks but I'm done with this OP.