PDA

View Full Version : 'hell fire' and 'lake of fire'?



Partaker of Christ
Sep 24th 2008, 01:52 PM
Sorry but I have some questions going through my head, and I hope some many be able to help answer.

Is 'hell fire' the same fire as the 'lake of fire'?

The wages of sin is death.

Is this death, 'hell fire' (the first death) and/or the 'lake of fire'?

Death and hell will be cast into the lake of fire (the second death)

Will sin automatically send a person into the lake of fire, or shall some escape after the first death? (the wage of sin has been paid)

If the first death automatically means, a person will go into the second death (lake of fire) Then the wages of sin, would be the second death.

Given the above, did Jesus suffer the second death in order to redeem us?

divaD
Sep 24th 2008, 02:04 PM
Sorry but I have some questions going through my head, and I hope some many be able to help answer.

Is 'hell fire' the same fire as the 'lake of fire'?

The wages of sin is death.

Is this death, 'hell fire' (the first death) and/or the 'lake of fire'?

Death and hell will be cast into the lake of fire (the second death)

Will sin automatically send a person into the lake of fire, or shall some escape after the first death? (the wage of sin has been paid)

If the first death automatically means, a person will go into the second death (lake of fire) Then the wages of sin, would be the second death.

Given the above, did Jesus suffer the second death in order to redeem us?


Actually, it's quite simple imo. The wages of sin is death...this applies to the second death, since the second death would be final and absolute. The first death would not be final for some, since some will inherit everlasting life.

Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.


Notice the distinction it makes here. We're seeing that death is everlasting because of sin, as opposed to life being everlasting because of Christ.

petepet
Sep 24th 2008, 02:11 PM
Sorry but I have some questions going through my head, and I hope some many be able to help answer.

Is 'hell fire' the same fire as the 'lake of fire'?

The wages of sin is death.

Is this death, 'hell fire' (the first death) and/or the 'lake of fire'?

Death and hell will be cast into the lake of fire (the second death)

Will sin automatically send a person into the lake of fire, or shall some escape after the first death? (the wage of sin has been paid)

If the first death automatically means, a person will go into the second death (lake of fire) Then the wages of sin, would be the second death.

Given the above, did Jesus suffer the second death in order to redeem us?

The answer to the first qustion must be both yes and no. Lazarus was suffering from the fires of Hades (Hell) but not yet the lake of fire. The lake of fire is of course metaphorical (not literal fire) as it both burns a purely spiritual being (Satan) and burns up 'death and hades'. None of these could be literally burned up.

The wages of sin is death is interpreting God's sentence on those who disobeyed Him. Thus it strictly refers to physical death. It is appointed to all to die (both Christiand and non-Christian - apart from Christians alive at the end. Whether they are seen as 'dying' we are not told).

The first death is probably physical death. Thus true Christians will be raised from that death. And they will certainly not suffer the second death which is 'final death' which will include the lake of fire.

What Jesus suffered in order to redeem us is totally beyond our understanding. It is foolish of us to speculate on precisely what He endured. Any such speculation is pure guesswork, and I would add arrogant, guesswork. Sufficient to say that He bore all that was necessary for our redemption. There comes a limit beyond which putting forward our ideas dogmatically about God and what He experiences becomes little short of blasphemy. We have to recognise that there are limits of knowledge past which we cannot go.

Best wishes

Instrument
Sep 24th 2008, 02:20 PM
Sorry but I have some questions going through my head, and I hope some many be able to help answer.

Is 'hell fire' the same fire as the 'lake of fire'?

The wages of sin is death.

Is this death, 'hell fire' (the first death) and/or the 'lake of fire'?

Death and hell will be cast into the lake of fire (the second death)

Will sin automatically send a person into the lake of fire, or shall some escape after the first death? (the wage of sin has been paid)

If the first death automatically means, a person will go into the second death (lake of fire) Then the wages of sin, would be the second death.

Given the above, did Jesus suffer the second death in order to redeem us?

Every human being suffers the first death. This is, suffers physical death as wages of sin inherited from Adam.

The second death, I think, refers to eternal death.

Blessings.

divaD
Sep 24th 2008, 02:42 PM
Every human being suffers the first death. This is, suffers physical death as wages of sin inherited from Adam.

The second death, I think, refers to eternal death.



Then how do you explain this?


1 Thessalonians 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

Instrument
Sep 24th 2008, 05:23 PM
Then how do you explain this?


1 Thessalonians 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.


I do not understand well the question.


All suffered the first death, but in the new birth back to life. That's why we have the right to the transformation of the body.

The opposite occurs in those who had no resurrection of the soul.


Blessings.

divaD
Sep 24th 2008, 06:30 PM
I do not understand well the question.


All suffered the first death, but in the new birth back to life. That's why we have the right to the transformation of the body.

The opposite occurs in those who had no resurrection of the soul.


Blessings.




Every human being suffers the first death. This is, suffers physical death as wages of sin inherited from Adam.




When you stated this, I simply asked how you explain those that are alive and remain unto the coming Of the Lord, since none of these would experience a physical death. This would also go along with my first post in this thread. The wages of sin is death...this would be in relation to the second death, since not all will physically die, apparent by some still being alive at Christ's return. So, if the wages of sin is death, and if this is referring to the first physical death, then why doesn't everyone physically die. It must then be related to the second and final death.

petepet
Sep 24th 2008, 07:12 PM
When you stated this, I simply asked how you explain those that are alive and remain unto the coming Of the Lord, since none of these would experience a physical death. This would also go along with my first post in this thread. The wages of sin is death...this would be in relation to the second death, since not all will physically die, apparent by some still being alive at Christ's return. So, if the wages of sin is death, and if this is referring to the first physical death, then why doesn't everyone physically die. It must then be related to the second and final death.

But those who are alive and remain enjoy the same experience as those who have died, receving a spiritual body, so in a very real sense their physical bodies too have to 'die' in order to obtain their spiritual bodies.. That is the heart of the Gospel that we have died with Christ and rise with Him. Thus in some way the raptured must die, even if it is instantaneous death and resurrection. (Which of us would dare to say that we understand the experience that happens to the raptured whereby they divest themselves of their old body in order to receive their new body?).

But however that may be, the wages of sin has been death ever since Adam. That is why all died. You really cannot argue from a situation that is beyond our comprehension against what is plainly taught.

Scripture actually says that ALL die in Adam. It also says that it is appointed to man once to die. Thus death is the lot of all men, even those who are raptured.

There are no grounds at all for relating Romans 6.23 to the second death. The very point behind it is that everone dies, with some however then receiving the gift of eternal life which lifts them out of death and brings them through triumphantly.

Instrument
Sep 24th 2008, 09:55 PM
When you stated this, I simply asked how you explain those that are alive and remain unto the coming Of the Lord, since none of these would experience a physical death. This would also go along with my first post in this thread. The wages of sin is death...this would be in relation to the second death, since not all will physically die, apparent by some still being alive at Christ's return. So, if the wages of sin is death, and if this is referring to the first physical death, then why doesn't everyone physically die. It must then be related to the second and final death.

Yes, but the fact that we are living until coming of the Lord, does not mean that we have no body of death or that we do not carry the nature of sin and therefore inherited the death of Adan.


We are born with Concupiscence or sin, and therefore destined to physical death and eternal if Christ if Christ does not change that.

the physical death is related to eternal death, but that is for those who are not reclaimed in his soul for the new birth.
It is clear that the wages of sin is death physically and hence eternal for those who do not receive justice from God.

Sold Out
Sep 24th 2008, 10:13 PM
Sorry but I have some questions going through my head, and I hope some many be able to help answer.

Is 'hell fire' the same fire as the 'lake of fire'?

The wages of sin is death.

Is this death, 'hell fire' (the first death) and/or the 'lake of fire'?

Death and hell will be cast into the lake of fire (the second death)

Will sin automatically send a person into the lake of fire, or shall some escape after the first death? (the wage of sin has been paid)

If the first death automatically means, a person will go into the second death (lake of fire) Then the wages of sin, would be the second death.

Given the above, did Jesus suffer the second death in order to redeem us?

I believe you quoted a portion of Revelation 20? Here is the rest of it:

"14And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."

It states the second death is for those whose names are not written in the book of life (unsaved).

Remember, there are three words translated 'hell' in the NT. Hades, Gehenna & Tartaroo. Hades is like the county jail, where all the unsaved go after dying, to await final judgment. Gehenna is the state penitentiary - final hell. So when it ways that death and hell were cast into the lake of fire, the word for hell used here is Hades. So Hades is cast into Gehenna. The second death has nothing to do with Christians.

Jude
Sep 24th 2008, 11:04 PM
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u298/hogndog/gates_of_hell.jpg

Jesus made it abundantly clear that hell is a place that has no water a place where the flame is agonizing and escape is impossible. Imagine yourself standing at that gate waiting to be ushered in by a grotesque
being. No more chance for reprisal all alone and terrified, you can breath can't catch a full breath of the cool sweet air you were breathing just moments before, without God in the equation all goodness has gone. In your mind because you can think and remember when that crazy neighbor offered you an invitation to heaven, a chance to meet the Jesus that died in your stead. All I can say is thank God he had mercy on me and a chance to tell others that he cares.

Jude


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

Richard H
Sep 24th 2008, 11:06 PM
For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.
I will heap mischiefs upon them; I will spend mine arrows upon them.
They shall be burnt with hunger, and devoured with burning heat, and with bitter destruction: I will also send the teeth of beasts upon them, with the poison of serpents of the dust.
Deu 32:22-24

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
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.
Mat 5:21,22

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:
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
Mar 9:45,46

And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
Jud 1:6

And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
Rev 20:14,15

Looks like hell is a holding place of torment for those destined for the second death.
(God knows whose name is written in the Book of Life).
Dante, if he was correct, imagined deeper levels toward the inferno for those of “greater sin”. probably inspired by "lowest hell" in Deut 32:22-24.

IMO: The lake of fire is total destruction as even death (the first death) is swallowed up
and then hell itself as it will have no further purpose.

Richard

markedward
Sep 24th 2008, 11:07 PM
Is 'hell fire' the same fire as the 'lake of fire'?Yes:

A problem with many English translations is that they translate two different Greek words, hades and gehenna as "hell."

If you were to find a Bible that properly distinguished these two, things would be clearer.

The "hell fire" is more literally rendered as "gehenna fire." Whenever Christ taught about the eternal fire, he spoke of gehenna. Christ never spoke of hades as being eternal.

So...

Christ's Terminology
Hades = temporary
Gehenna fire = the eternal fire

The Revelation's Terminology
Hades = temporary
The lake of fire = the eternal fire

Note that in the Revelation, hades is thrown into the eternal lake of fire.

So...

Gehenna fire/the lake of fire is "the second death."

Hades is not.

divaD
Sep 24th 2008, 11:15 PM
There are no grounds at all for relating Romans 6.23 to the second death. The very point behind it is that everone dies, with
some however then receiving the gift of eternal life which lifts them out of death and brings them through triumphantly.


But this is where you're missing the point. If the wages of sin is death, and is only related to the first death, then what is related to the second death? Wouldn't the wages of sin be the cause of the second death? How could it not be?


Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord


If the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord, wouldn't there then be an opposite to that? Wouldn't the opposite be eternal death? Notice that it says the wages of sin, as in something that is paid out. Do we collect these wages everytime we sin, in which would be death, then when we and if we repent, we are no longer earning the wages of sin which is death? Surely the wages of sin is death, must be talking about the final payment, which would be the second death.

Feel free to show me how the wages of sin is death, is not and cannot be related to the 2nd death, because I believe it has to be, how can it not be??.

faroutinmt
Sep 24th 2008, 11:19 PM
Yes:

A problem with many English translations is that they translate two different Greek words, hades and gehenna as "hell."

If you were to find a Bible that properly distinguished these two, things would be clearer.

The "hell fire" is more literally rendered as "gehenna fire." Whenever Christ taught about the eternal fire, he spoke of gehenna. Christ never spoke of hades as being eternal.

So...

Christ's Terminology
Hades = temporary
Gehenna fire = the eternal fire

The Revelation's Terminology
Hades = temporary
The lake of fire = the eternal fire

Note that in the Revelation, hades is thrown into the eternal lake of fire.

So...

Gehenna fire/the lake of fire is "the second death."

Hades is not.

That is a good distinction. I think we get hung up and confused on the use of the term "hell" which is only an English word used to represent both the temporary place of the dead and the eternal place of punishment. We use the word "hell" because we have not translated it differently.

Richard H
Sep 24th 2008, 11:22 PM
But this is where you're missing the point. If the wages of sin is death, and is only related to the first death, then what is related to the second death? Wouldn't the wages of sin be the cause of the second death? How could it not be?


Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord


If the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord, wouldn't there then be an opposite to that? Wouldn't the opposite be eternal death? Notice that it says the wages of sin, as in something that is paid out. Do we collect these wages everytime we sin, in which would be death, then when we and if we repent, we are no longer earning the wages of sin which is death? Surely the wages of sin is death, must be talking about the final payment, which would be the second death.

Feel free to show me how the wages of sin is death, is not and cannot be related to the 2nd death, because I believe it has to be, how can it not be??.
Agree!

The fall brought forth both deaths, but the wages of sin is the second death.

Jude
Sep 24th 2008, 11:57 PM
Hell isn't debatable many roads lead into hell but none lead out, from my personal experience you had best prepare yourself not argue it, all the arguments in the world won't change it hell is as real as the nightmares you've had about it. The only witnesses I have to my vision of hell are two technicians from the cable company that were in my home installing some equipment the day it happened. I'd rather not make an issue out of it, all I know is what I saw. I found this site where you will get a message from a Preacher that is from the old school not this watered down bologna that gives you that tickle when those lying lips are moving.

Jude


http://www.hellandjustice.com/near_death_experiences.htm




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

petepet
Sep 25th 2008, 04:33 PM
But this is where you're missing the point. If the wages of sin is death, and is only related to the first death, then what is related to the second death? Wouldn't the wages of sin be the cause of the second death? How could it not be?


Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord


If the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord, wouldn't there then be an opposite to that? Wouldn't the opposite be eternal death? Notice that it says the wages of sin, as in something that is paid out. Do we collect these wages everytime we sin, in which would be death, then when we and if we repent, we are no longer earning the wages of sin which is death? Surely the wages of sin is death, must be talking about the final payment, which would be the second death.

Feel free to show me how the wages of sin is death, is not and cannot be related to the 2nd death, because I believe it has to be, how can it not be??.

Well the second death results from the first death if Christ's gift of eternal life is not received. So there is a sense in which both deaths result from sin..

But that was not the question. The question was as to what Paul was specifically referring to in Roman 6,23, and the answer is that he was referring to physical death, the death that he had been constantly talking about in Romans. Read Romans 1-6 and see how many times he refers to death and what he means by it in context.

petepet
Sep 25th 2008, 04:38 PM
Well the second death results from the first death if Christ's gift of eternal life is not received. So there is a sense in which both deaths result from sin..

But that was not the question. The question was as to what Paul was specifically referring to in Roman 6,23, and the answer is that he was referring to physical death, the death that he had been constantly talking about in Romans. Read Romans 1-6 and see how many times he refers to death and what he means by it in context.

P.S. Interestingly Paul never deals with the final fate of the wicked. Reference to Hell is noticeably absent from his letters. That privilege is reserved for Peter in his speeches and letters and John in Revelation (and of course Jesus).

Coptichristian
Sep 25th 2008, 05:23 PM
Remember, there are three words translated 'hell' in the NT. Hades, Gehenna & Tartaroo.

That's an important fact to remember, for sure.


Hades is like the county jail, where all the unsaved go after dying, to await final judgment.

Actually, Hades/Sheol is universal. It is simply the state of the dead, although it certainly is metaphorically applied to the living, as well.


Gehenna is the state penitentiary - final hell. So when it ways that death and hell were cast into the lake of fire, the word for hell used here is Hades. So Hades is cast into Gehenna.

Good observation. Indeed, the destruction of death is a glorious aspect of salvation!

Coptichristian
Sep 25th 2008, 05:25 PM
The fall brought forth both deaths, but the wages of sin is the second death.


I'm not so sure about that. My understanding is that the first death is Adamic death and pertains to the Adamic curse. This death is the wages of sin, IMO.

Richard H
Sep 25th 2008, 05:44 PM
I'm not so sure about that. My understanding is that the first death is Adamic death and pertains to the Adamic curse. This death is the wages of sin, IMO.
You could be right, Copti.
We have no “proof” that Adam and Eve would have lived forever.
Indeed they did not die(1st) the day they ate the fruit, so one might infer that death here means only the 2nd death.

Is that what you were saying?
Richard

Richard H
Sep 25th 2008, 05:47 PM
<snip>
Remember, there are three words translated 'hell' in the NT. Hades, Gehenna & Tartaroo. Hades is like the county jail, where all the unsaved go after dying, to await final judgment. Gehenna is the state penitentiary - final hell. So when it ways that death and hell were cast into the lake of fire, the word for hell used here is Hades. So Hades is cast into Gehenna. The second death has nothing to do with Christians.

What is Tartaroo?

Coptichristian
Sep 25th 2008, 08:10 PM
You could be right, Copti.
We have no “proof” that Adam and Eve would have lived forever.
Indeed they did not die(1st) the day they ate the fruit, so one might infer that death here means only the 2nd death.

Is that what you were saying?


As I recall, the relevant Hebrew text simply says that they would begin dying the day they ate the forbidden fruit.

I am simply saying that the first death is the sort of death wrought in humanity through the first Adam. See Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15.

markedward
Sep 25th 2008, 11:42 PM
What is Tartaroo?Tartarus. Peter, I think, uses it as a term similar to that of a prison for the angels, before their judgment, which we know is the lake of fire. (Peter's description of tartarus appears similar to the perception of the "abyss" that the demons so feared when Jesus cast them into the pigs.) As I have read it, it appears to be as something like this (note: when I refer to "pre-throne" and "post-throne", I'm referring to Revelation 20:11-15)

For Mankind
Pre-Throne: Hades, the general abode of the dead
Post-Christ: The wicked go to the eternal lake of fire (gehenna, as Christ described it), made for Satan and the fallen angels

For Fallen Angels
Pre-Throne: Tartarus, the prison that holds them while they are "reserved for judgment"
Post-Christ: They are cast into the eternal lake of fire, gehenna, which was made for them

Richard H
Sep 26th 2008, 06:28 AM
As I recall, the relevant Hebrew text simply says that they would begin dying the day they ate the forbidden fruit.

I am simply saying that the first death is the sort of death wrought in humanity through the first Adam. See Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15.

That's what I thought you might have been saying. It confuses me still. :hmm:

Where did the second death come from?

Richard

Richard H
Sep 26th 2008, 06:31 AM
Tartarus. Peter, I think, uses it as a term similar to that of a prison for the angels, before their judgment, which we know is the lake of fire. (Peter's description of tartarus appears similar to the perception of the "abyss" that the demons so feared when Jesus cast them into the pigs.) As I have read it, it appears to be as something like this (note: when I refer to "pre-throne" and "post-throne", I'm referring to Revelation 20:11-15)
<snipped to save virtual ink>


Thanks for the explaination, MarkEdward.

Richard

1of7000
Sep 26th 2008, 06:58 AM
Is 'hell fire' the same fire as the 'lake of fire'?




same church different phew!

Jude
Sep 26th 2008, 08:28 AM
http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii218/jpayee/Hell_Planes.jpg

Revelation 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.


Jude


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

Richard H
Sep 26th 2008, 08:39 AM
Revelation 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.



Hi Jude,
'Looks almost 3D when I scroll.

Richard

John146
Sep 26th 2008, 09:05 PM
Actually, it's quite simple imo. The wages of sin is death...this applies to the second death, since the second death would be final and absolute. The first death would not be final for some, since some will inherit everlasting life.

Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.


Notice the distinction it makes here. We're seeing that death is everlasting because of sin, as opposed to life being everlasting because of Christ.I agree. I believe what Paul is really saying Romans 6:23 is that the wages of unrepentant and unforgiven sin is eternal death and this is contrasted with the gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Since the life he mentions is eternal then it only makes sense that the death he mentions is eternal as well. Therefore, he was speaking of the second death and not just physical death.

With that said, I would allow for the possibility that he meant both physical and eternal death, since Adam and Eve not only immediately became spiritually dead (separated from God) but also were destined to die physically as a result of their sin. But since he mentions eternal life I lean towards death being contrasted with eternal life and therefore being eternal death in the lake of fire, which is the second death.

petepet
Sep 26th 2008, 09:16 PM
I agree. I believe what Paul is really saying Romans 6:23 is that the wages of unrepentant and unforgiven sin is eternal death and this is contrasted with the gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Since the life he mentions is eternal then it only makes sense that the death he mentions is eternal as well. Therefore, he was speaking of the second death and not just physical death.

Well, I disagree :-)))). There is no mention of eternal relating to the death mentioned. Paul is simply continuing his theme in chapter 5 that in Adam all die because death is the wages of sin. He is then declaring that some who die will then rise to eternal life. In Paul's writing eternal life is a future blessed hope. Paul in fact never deals with the question of eternal death. He sees death as the enemy of man which has to be defeated. The last enemy who will be destroyed is death. As in Adam all die, so in Christ will all be made alive. This is Paul's continual theme. We should not read into his words what he does not say.

divaD
Sep 26th 2008, 10:46 PM
Paul is simply continuing his theme in
chapter 5 that in Adam all die because death is the wages of sin. He is then declaring that some who die will then rise to
eternal life.



Well I for one am not nor would argue with this, but think for just one moment. What would have had happened to all of mankind if Christ never paid the price in the first place? Wouldn't we all be doomed to the lake of fire? Isn't the lake of fire referred to as the second death? Wouldn't the wages of sin be death..the 2nd death? What do you think would have happened to all of mankind had not Christ paid the price? Would we have just physically died the first death, and that would be all there was to it, since this death would be defined by the wages of sin? Is what happens to those that are not Christ's, do they just die the first death because that is what the wages of sin is, but never really have to face the 2nd death in the lake of fire? Wasn't this the main reason that Christ paid the price in the first place, so that those that believe on Him couldn't be hurt by the 2nd death, causing the 2nd death to have no power over them?


Seriously ask yourself. Did Christ die, in order that you should not perish, in relation to the 1st death, or the 2nd death, which would be eternal death? If you think it was the former, then perhaps you can explain why people still die every minute of the day? Christ died, in order to save us from eternal death. Eternal death is the 2nd death. The wages of sin is death. This is the second death..the eternal death, in which Christ saved us from.

petepet
Sep 26th 2008, 11:29 PM
Well I for one am not nor would argue with this, but think for just one moment. What would have had happened to all of mankind if Christ never paid the price in the first place? Wouldn't we all be doomed to the lake of fire? Isn't the lake of fire referred to as the second death? Wouldn't the wages of sin be death..the 2nd death? What do you think would have happened to all of mankind had not Christ paid the price? Would we have just physically died the first death, and that would be all there was to it, since this death would be defined by the wages of sin? Is what happens to those that are not Christ's, do they just die the first death because that is what the wages of sin is, but never really have to face the 2nd death in the lake of fire? Wasn't this the main reason that Christ paid the price in the first place, so that those that believe on Him couldn't be hurt by the 2nd death, causing the 2nd death to have no power over them?


Seriously ask yourself. Did Christ die, in order that you should not perish, in relation to the 1st death, or the 2nd death, which would be eternal death? If you think it was the former, then perhaps you can explain why people still die every minute of the day? Christ died, in order to save us from eternal death. Eternal death is the 2nd death. The wages of sin is death. This is the second death..the eternal death, in which Christ saved us from.

But that was not the question. The question was what Paul meant to convey in Romans when he spoke of death as the wages of sin. And the whole of Romans 1-6, and especially Romans 5 makes clear that he was referring to the fact of dying as Adam died, that is, left this life.

In fact had Christ not been going to die for sin (a theoretical question of course) there would have been no human race and I do think it quite possible that Adam and Eve would just simply have died, and ceased to be. That was the allotted penalty for their sin. But once God chose to keep them alive a whole new situation kicked in beause sin multiplied. But Paul was talking about the death which some rose from because Christ rose (Romans 6.3 onwards). And that was the first death. No one will ever rise from the second death.

Have you noticed that God's sentence was because ADAM sinned. Eve had sinned, but she was not the lord of the world. She could have been sentenced by Adam. But when Adam sinned it was a whole new ball game. He was not deceived (1 Timothy 2.14). He sinned deliberately. And thus began the history of salvation.

David Taylor
Sep 27th 2008, 01:26 PM
P.S. Interestingly Paul never deals with the final fate of the wicked. Reference to Hell is noticeably absent from his letters. That privilege is reserved for Peter in his speeches and letters and John in Revelation (and of course Jesus).

You missed Paul's letter to Thessalonica, Romans, Hebrews(if Paul wrote Hebrews)...

2 Thess 1:7 "when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord"

Romans 2:5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil"

Romans 13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

Hebrews 6:2 "of eternal judgment. And this will we do, if God permit."

RogerW
Sep 27th 2008, 07:00 PM
I am not at all convinced the following argument has any merit. I’m mostly just thinking aloud. But I have been giving thought to what it means to be cast into the lake of fire, and whether there may be some truth with those who tell us we are burned up in the fire to exist no more? I don’t for one moment believe the fire is for cleansing or purging our sins. But could the lake of fire be the way that God has chosen to rid the world of all sin and those whose sin was not covered by the cross? Since Christ made propitiation for the sins of the whole world, sin is either done away in Christ at the cross, or sin is done away in the lake of fire.

Isa 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?

Here is a devouring fire with everlasting burnings. The fire devours and the fire burns forever, but since it devours can the fearful and hypocrite also be described as burning forever?

Da 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Some awake to everlasting contempt, doesn’t this mean that God’s contempt for them is forever, not necessarily that they burn forever?

Mt 18:8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.

Again, the fire is everlasting, does that mean the one cast in burns forever?

Mt 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

Same here. It tells us that the fire that burns will burn forever, but do the devil and his messengers also burn forever, or are they burned up?

Mt 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

This verse sure seems to say the punishment is forever! But could this simply be telling us those who receive this punishment in the everlasting fire will never again have life? In other words could the punishment be forever, but not necessarily the burning?

Joh 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

Are there any verses that tell us the wrath of God goes on forever?

Joh 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

This tells us those who receive everlasting life have passed from death unto life. Could it be the one condemned never passes from death to life, and this is the everlasting punishment?

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

Doesn’t this tell us the one punished is punished with everlasting destruction, not that they will suffer forever, but that they will be destroyed forever?

Jude 1:6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

Here isn’t it the chains that are everlasting, or the messengers will be reserved in chains until the Day of Judgment?

Heb 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

I wonder is the judgment; i.e. everlasting destruction what is in view here, and not judgment that lasts forever?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Judgment is wrath of God, condemnation, damnation, it‘s also a decision.
Wrath is punishment, anger, indignation, vengeance. Are there any Scriptures telling us that when God pours out His great wrath or judgment upon people, that He will never stop?

Re 11:18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

In His great wrath and judgment, God destroys them which destroy the earth, does that mean He continues to bring this wrath and judgment upon them forever?

Re 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:
Re 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.

Some will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of His messengers, and the Lamb, but isn’t it the smoke of their torment that ascends up forever? Can the smoke last forever and yet they be burned up; destroyed? When Christ says “they have no rest day nor night,” wouldn’t this be speaking of those in life, since day and night equals time, who receive the mark of the beast?

Re 14:19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
Re 14:20 And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.

Just as the wages of sin is death forever, so too the gift of eternal life is forever! Amen!

Many Blessings,
RW

Jude
Sep 27th 2008, 07:21 PM
http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z235/christianttt/lake_of_fire.jpg


II Corinthians 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen:
for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

Making the doctrine of Annihilation mute.

Jude

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

RogerW
Sep 27th 2008, 08:15 PM
II Corinthians 4:[/SIZE]18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen:
for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

Making the doctrine of Annihilation mute.

Jude

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


Greetings Jude,

I hesitate asking, because in all honesty I am not sure an arguement for annihilation can be made. I am simply trying to evaluate both sides. But I must ask, how does this passage disprove dead forever, or alive forever?

Mt 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell [Geenna; everlasting flames].

Why does Christ tell us both body and soul is destroyed in the place of everlasting punishment?

Blessings,
RW

RogerW
Sep 27th 2008, 08:34 PM
Something that I have not considered, I saw in another thread, is the teaching on Lazarus and the rich man. Can this text be used to disprove annihilation? More importantly, can it do so without causing contradiction? I'll have to give this more thought.

Blessings,
RW

Jude
Sep 27th 2008, 08:40 PM
Greetings Jude,

I hesitate asking, because in all honesty I am not sure an arguement for annihilation can be made. I am simply trying to evaluate both sides. But I must ask, how does this passage disprove dead forever, or alive forever?

Mt 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell [Geenna; everlasting flames].

Why does Christ tell us both body and soul is destroyed in the place of everlasting punishment?

Blessings,
RW

We must be careful here that we don't tamper with the attributes of God one of which is "He Is Eternal" he has no beginning and
He has no end, He is the Alpha and the Omega.

We are made in His image making us eternal as well, when your out on the street witnessing to people do you tell them Jesus died and rose again to save them the agony of eternal separation from their creator?

Jude


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

zombieCat
Sep 27th 2008, 10:38 PM
I am not at all convinced the following argument has any merit. I’m mostly just thinking aloud. But I have been giving thought to what it means to be cast into the lake of fire, and whether there may be some truth with those who tell us we are burned up in the fire to exist no more? I don’t for one moment believe the fire is for cleansing or purging our sins. But could the lake of fire be the way that God has chosen to rid the world of all sin and those whose sin was not covered by the cross? Since Christ made propitiation for the sins of the whole world, sin is either done away in Christ at the cross, or sin is done away in the lake of fire. [message truncated for brevity]I tend to believe this is a correct interpretation, including all the non-truncated points you made.


We must be careful here that we don't tamper with the attributes of God one of which is "He Is Eternal" he has no beginning and
He has no end, He is the Alpha and the Omega.

We are made in His image making us eternal as well, when your out on the street witnessing to people do you tell them Jesus died and rose again to save them the agony of eternal separation from their creator?"Made in His image" can mean many things, it doesn't have to mean that we're eternal. In fact, by definition, we are not eternal. We do indeed have a beginning. At best, we can be immortal (having life that never ends, which is not the same thing as being eternal). Immortality is directly attributed to believers, it is never attributed to unbelievers in scripture. In order to be tortured without end, one would have to be immortal.

Jude
Sep 27th 2008, 10:48 PM
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u298/hogndog/2ebzb6e-1.gif

How ever you want to cut it we have a choice and an important choice
"Eternal Life" or "Eternal Judgment" either way they are both eternal.

Jude


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

RogerW
Sep 27th 2008, 10:51 PM
"Made in His image" can mean many things, it doesn't have to mean that we're eternal. In fact, by definition, we are not eternal. We do indeed have a beginning. At best, we can be immortal (having life that never ends, which is not the same thing as being eternal). Immortality is directly attributed to believers, it is never attributed to unbelievers in scripture. In order to be tortured without end, one would have to be immortal.

This is an interesting point I had not considered. Scripture speaks of believers as having to put on immortality (1Co 15). When does the unbeliever put on immortality, since all flesh is mortal?

Blessings,
RW

zombieCat
Sep 27th 2008, 11:14 PM
How ever you want to cut it we have a choice and an important choice
"Eternal Life" or "Eternal Judgment" either way they are both eternal.

JudeI couldn't agree more. Although I'm not so quick to say the details are of no consequence. For a moment, I would ask you to make a concession, merely for the sake of argument. Let's say that the ultimate punishment for unbelievers is a permanent death from which there is no escape , rather than conscious torture that does not end. If that's the case, we have a huge problem if we are telling the world that God does indeed torture people infinitely for finite crimes. Regardless of how one wants to try to justify it, if God is NOT an infinite torturer of souls, and we are saying He is, that is more than a major faux pas. And it unnecessarily drives people away from God--those who cannot reconcile a loving God (no matter how just he may be) being an infinite torturer. So I think it behooves us to find the real answer and proclaim it. Now, if God IS an infinite torturer, He will have no problem with us saying so. I doubt he holds the same stance for the opposite scenario.




This is an interesting point I had not considered. Scripture speaks of believers as having to put on immortality (1Co 15). When does the unbeliever put on immortality, since all flesh is mortal?

Blessings,
RWAt the resurrection, when both believers and unbelievers are brought back to life. Believers are resurrected to immortal life, unbelievers are resurrected to life, judged and sentenced to permanent death by fire, the consequences of which are everlasting. Like you, I'm exploring these ideas, and so far they do not contradict scripture, only a very narrow (and, it's beginning to seem, an incorrect) interpretation of scripture. When you take into account that the whole idea of unending punishment comes from Greek philosophy and mythology, it's not surprising that it worked its way into Christianity, given the Apostles' huge, and rather effective, efforts in evangelizing the Greeks.

Jude
Sep 28th 2008, 12:34 AM
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u298/hogndog/9668scd.jpg

For the sake of no argument I get the feeling that a lot of Christians don't want to believe in everlasting punishment, ever stop to think that's the reason Jesus came, to drink from that cup of his Fathers wrath so the world wouldn't have to? We had best get serious about whats true and whats not, because people are on a collision course with eternity, whether they spend that eternity in heaven or in hell depends on what we say.

Jude


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

zombieCat
Sep 28th 2008, 03:35 AM
For the sake of no argument I get the feeling that a lot of Christians don't want to believe in everlasting punishmentJust as there are a lot of Christians who do want to believe in everlasting punishment. What we want to believe has nothing to do with what is. Regardless, I never said there is no such thing as everlasting punishment--everlasting death is certainly a punishment. Just not the kind of punishment that a lot of Christians lust after.


ever stop to think that's the reason Jesus came, to drink from that cup of his Fathers wrath so the world wouldn't have to?Are you saying that if God's true punishment were to be anything other than everlasting torture, then there is no need for Jesus to have lived, died and resurrected? How do you come to that conclusion?


We had best get serious about whats true and whats not, because people are on a collision course with eternity, whether they spend that eternity in heaven or in hell depends on what we say.That is precisely what I am trying to do, and I'm not letting preconceived notions--likely to have been introduced by Greek philosophy and mythology--get in the way of finding the truth. Apparently others are willing to do so.

legoman
Sep 28th 2008, 03:40 AM
I couldn't agree more. Although I'm not so quick to say the details are of no consequence. For a moment, I would ask you to make a concession, merely for the sake of argument. Let's say that the ultimate punishment for unbelievers is a permanent death from which there is no escape , rather than conscious torture that does not end. If that's the case, we have a huge problem if we are telling the world that God does indeed torture people infinitely for finite crimes. Regardless of how one wants to try to justify it, if God is NOT an infinite torturer of souls, and we are saying He is, that is more than a major faux pas. And it unnecessarily drives people away from God--those who cannot reconcile a loving God (no matter how just he may be) being an infinite torturer. So I think it behooves us to find the real answer and proclaim it. Now, if God IS an infinite torturer, He will have no problem with us saying so. I doubt he holds the same stance for the opposite scenario.



At the resurrection, when both believers and unbelievers are brought back to life. Believers are resurrected to immortal life, unbelievers are resurrected to life, judged and sentenced to permanent death by fire, the consequences of which are everlasting. Like you, I'm exploring these ideas, and so far they do not contradict scripture, only a very narrow (and, it's beginning to seem, an incorrect) interpretation of scripture. When you take into account that the whole idea of unending punishment comes from Greek philosophy and mythology, it's not surprising that it worked its way into Christianity, given the Apostles' huge, and rather effective, efforts in evangelizing the Greeks.

Hi zombieCat,

You raise a good point - one many non-believers will raise.

How can God be love and at the same time torture people infinitely? How is that possibly just? How do we answer that?

Legoman

Jude
Sep 28th 2008, 04:16 AM
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u298/hogndog/2ebzb6e-1.gif

If you want the answer to who Jesus is and why he does the things He does you'll have to ask Him. This thread is about hell fire and the lake of fire these were created for the devil and his angels.

Jude


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

zombieCat
Sep 28th 2008, 04:42 AM
If you want the answer to who Jesus is and why he does the things He does you'll have to ask Him.Since you put forth the idea, I'm asking you to clarify. Or are you suggesting I ask Jesus to clarify what you mean?


This thread is about hell fire and the lake of fire these were created for the devil and his angels.Discussing whether the lake of fire is unending = a discussion about the lake of fire.

threebigrocks
Sep 29th 2008, 03:42 PM
Hi zombieCat,

You raise a good point - one many non-believers will raise.

How can God be love and at the same time torture people infinitely? How is that possibly just? How do we answer that?

Legoman

As believers, we ought to understand that God is both. Fortunately, we as believers escape the wrath. We tell unbelievers that unless they want to remain separated from God as sinners against a just and holy God - they need to repent and let the One who loves them pull them into everlasting mercy.

zombieCat
Sep 29th 2008, 06:45 PM
As believers, we ought to understand that God is both. Fortunately, we as believers escape the wrath. We tell unbelievers that unless they want to remain separated from God as sinners against a just and holy God - they need to repent and let the One who loves them pull them into everlasting mercy.All very true, but this says nothing either for or against the idea of everlasting conscious torture.

Regarding the idea that God is both loving and just (which I agree he is both): how could a God of love infinitely torture one for finite crimes? The standard answer is, even though God is love, He is just, meaning that His love offsets any amount of seemingly heinous degree of justice He could conceivably dole out. As if we take an average of His love and His justice to arrive at a balance between the two. It's a bit like saying, "Put your head in a hot oven and your feet in the freezer, and you'll be just the right temperature." It doesn't work that way with comfort, and I don't think it works that way with God. His love doesn't justify an endless degree of justice, and his justice doesn't justify an endless degree of love--they are diametrically opposed concepts, and some form of compromise must be struck to remain both truly loving and truly just. So justifying infinite torture for finite crimes isn't really answered by saying, "Well, although He is love, He is also just." You're essentially saying He has his head in the oven and his feet in the freezer, so on average, he is warm (or put another way, that one balances out the other).

Partaker of Christ
Sep 29th 2008, 08:40 PM
All very true, but this says nothing either for or against the idea of everlasting conscious torture.

Regarding the idea that God is both loving and just (which I agree he is both): how could a God of love infinitely torture one for finite crimes? The standard answer is, even though God is love, He is just, meaning that His love offsets any amount of seemingly heinous degree of justice He could conceivably dole out. As if we take an average of His love and His justice to arrive at a balance between the two. It's a bit like saying, "Put your head in a hot oven and your feet in the freezer, and you'll be just the right temperature." It doesn't work that way with comfort, and I don't think it works that way with God. His love doesn't justify an endless degree of justice, and his justice doesn't justify an endless degree of love--they are diametrically opposed concepts, and some form of compromise must be struck to remain both truly loving and truly just. So justifying infinite torture for finite crimes isn't really answered by saying, "Well, although He is love, He is also just." You're essentially saying He has his head in the oven and his feet in the freezer, so on average, he is warm.

Hi zombieCat!

If I have understood you correctly, then I would agree.

God is a Just God.
According to the Law, Justice is an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

If one person stole food to live, and another murdered millions of people, is it justice according to God's law, that they should both face the same punishment? I know I am taking two extremes, but we are also told, that if we break the law in one thing, we break the whole.

My view (though not dogmatic) is that the second death is reserved, for those who have had their eyes fully opened (not those blinded) to the truth, and choose rather to follow Satan and his fallen angels.

Rev 16:8 And the fourth angel poured out his vial upon the sun; and power was given unto him to scorch men with fire.
Rev 16:9 And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory.
Rev 16:10 And the fifth angel poured out his vial upon the seat of the beast; and his kingdom was full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues for pain,
Rev 16:11 And blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and repented not of their deeds.

Rev 16:21 And there fell upon men a great hail out of heaven, every stone about the weight of a talent: and men blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail; for the plague thereof was exceeding great.

These men would not blaspheme God, if they did not know of God.