Summing up “the soul of man”

[freewill]

Generally speaking, from the start we are taught what to believe. As we grow older many of us begin to question what we were taught to believe and start believing what we want to believe or need to believe, which is very often different to what we were originally taught to believe.

Just to say then that discussions on the soul of man and the justice of God have been going on for centuries, with various points of view being poured over a seemingly endless repetition of various words in their various sentences and contexts. Many with differing views on this subject have been constantly doing their utmost to convince the world that what they believe is truth; even evangelical Christians who have studied Koine Greek for many years can still be seen fervently disagreeing with each other.

The efforts then, to persuade others what to believe concerning man's soul and the justice of God, look as though they might just continue “until this gospel of the kingdom has been preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations” (which incidentally looks very much like being in our own lifetime) “and then the end will come”. ...and then everyone will come face to face with the truth. I would then like to bring to your attention just two points of view that have been well aired here.

1st
There are some here, myself included, who worship and need to serve the God of love and mercy that will never cause or allow any suffering beyond what is necessary for the eternal safety of creation, whose plan and judgements will ensure a spirit of evil will never arise in creation again. We believe God's written word and the Spirit tell us God will give immortality only to whoever He has decided shall have immortality.
Our faith is the assurance of what we hope for.

2nd
There are some here who feel a need to worship and to serve one who's love and mercy as they call it, would, for no good reason torture the least knowledgeable and least offensive of unsaved souls forever.
Their faith is the assurance of what they hope for.

Let us then not forget, it will be by who and what we believe in (what we hope for) that we shall be exonerated or condemned.

...and if you must still believe in the immortality of every man’s soul like so many Christians down the ages from childhood onwards were taught to believe, then you must still believe that even the least knowledgeable and least offensive of condemned souls, even the most backward or least intelligent of them will be kept alive forever writhing in endless agony and despair in a fire of terror and torment also. But this is something I cannot believe because there isn’t a single good reason to be seen why I should: https://0testsite00.wordpress.com/2016/09/01/immortality-vs-mortality/.

 

[smaller]

Generally speaking, from the start we are taught what to believe. As we grow older many of us begin to question what we were taught to believe and start believing what we want to believe or need to believe, which is very often different to what we were originally taught to believe.

Just to say then that discussions on the soul of man and the justice of God have been going on for centuries, with various points of view being poured over a seemingly endless repetition of various words in their various sentences and contexts. Many with differing views on this subject have been constantly doing their utmost to convince the world that what they believe is truth; even evangelical Christians who have studied Koine Greek for many years can still be seen fervently disagreeing with each other.

The efforts then, to persuade others what to believe concerning man's soul and the justice of God, look as though they might just continue “until this gospel of the kingdom has been preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations” (which incidentally looks very much like being in our own lifetime) “and then the end will come”. ...and then everyone will come face to face with the truth. I would then like to bring to your attention just two points of view that have been well aired here.

1st
There are some here, myself included, who worship and need to serve the God of love and mercy that will never cause or allow any suffering beyond what is necessary for the eternal safety of creation, whose plan and judgements will ensure a spirit of evil will never arise in creation again. We believe God's written word and the Spirit tell us God will give immortality only to whoever He has decided shall have immortality.
Our faith is the assurance of what we hope for.

2nd
There are some here who feel a need to worship and to serve one who's love and mercy as they call it, would, for no good reason torture the least knowledgeable and least offensive of unsaved souls forever.
Their faith is the assurance of what they hope for.

Let us then not forget, it will be by who and what we believe in (what we hope for) that we shall be exonerated or condemned.

...and if you must still believe in the immortality of every man’s soul like so many Christians down the ages from childhood onwards were taught to believe, then you must still believe that even the least knowledgeable and least offensive of condemned souls, even the most backward or least intelligent of them will be kept alive forever writhing in endless agony and despair in a fire of terror and torment also. But this is something I cannot believe because there isn’t a single good reason to be seen why I should: https://0testsite00.wordpress.com/2016/09/01/immortality-vs-mortality/.

And it has been pointed out to your positions, repeatedly, that believing people are eternally annihilated rather than eternally tortured doesn't make your position any better other than you feel better about one position other than the other. It's NOT critical to salvation either way. Therefore your sight is only to make you feel better about God. Some feel just fine with eternal torment, "as it is written."

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

You're beating a dead horse.

 

[Butch5]

The problem with Eternal Conscious Torment is that it impugns the Character of God. It's also not just.

 

[smaller]

The problem with Eternal Conscious Torment is that it impugns the Character of God. It's also not just.

IF you have no problem with Satan being tormented day and night for ever and ever then you are in alignment with Rev. 20:10. I have no problem with that sight.

IF you do not extend that same sight to "all" in the LoF, now you have a double standard to account for. And not one of you has proven an account for the double standard. You all acknowledge that the "soul" of man transcends past death of the flesh to the judgment seat. So that question is answered.

 

[Butch5]

IF you have no problem with Satan being tormented day and night for ever and ever then you are in alignment with Rev. 20:10. I have no problem with that sight.

IF you do not extend that same sight to "all" in the LoF, now you have a double standard to account for. And not one of you has proven an account for the double standard. You all acknowledge that the "soul" of man transcends past death of the flesh to the judgment seat. So that question is answered.

I don't have a double standard. Firstly, "forever and ever" is not an accurate translation. The Greek text literally say, "unto the ages of the ages". The length of that phrase can only be determined if one knows the length of those ages. However, that it's not eternal can be see from Jeremiah's prophecy that one day Gehenna will once again be made holy to the Lord.

35 Thus says the LORD, Who gives the sun for a light by day, The ordinances of the moon and the stars for a light by night, Who disturbs the sea, And its waves roar (The LORD of hosts is His name):
36 "If those ordinances depart From before Me, says the LORD, Then the seed of Israel shall also cease From being a nation before Me forever."
37 Thus says the LORD: "If heaven above can be measured, And the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel For all that they have done, says the LORD.
38 "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, that the city shall be built for the LORD from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate.
39 "The surveyor's line shall again extend straight forward over the hill Gareb; then it shall turn toward Goath.
40 "And the whole valley of the dead bodies and of the ashes, and all the fields as far as the Brook Kidron, to the corner of the Horse Gate toward the east, shall be holy to the LORD. It shall not be plucked up or thrown down anymore forever."

(Jer. 31:35-32:1 NKJ)

However, I don't acknowledge that the "soul" of man transcends death.

 

[smaller]

I don't have a double standard. Firstly, "forever and ever" is not an accurate translation. The Greek text literally say, "unto the ages of the ages".

Common ploy above. Using the standard above we'd have to determine the same thing here, which won't compute:

Revelation 4:9
And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever,

Are we going to terminate him for ever and ever? Your premise doesn't hold.

The length of that phrase can only be determined if one knows the length of those ages. However, that it's not eternal can be see from Jeremiah's prophecy that one day Gehenna will once again be made holy to the Lord.

Gehenna is not the same as the LoF.

However, I don't acknowledge that the "soul" of man transcends death.

Then perhaps you also deny the soul Jesus being resurrected as well?

Matthew 26:38
Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.
[URL='https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+2:31&version=KJV']Acts 2:31
He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.[/URL]

Revelation 20:4
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

 

[Butch5]

Common ploy above. Using the standard above we'd have to determine the same thing here, which won't compute:

Revelation 4:9
And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever,

Are we going to terminate him for ever and ever? Your premise doesn't hold.

That's a common mistake. It means the same thing in both places, "unto the ages of the ages". As I pointed out it depends on the length of the age. An age is different depending on the the context. If your age and my age are likely different lengths of time, yet they are both and age. The word doesn't change meanings based on how long it may or may not be. We have the same thing on the short end of time. If John and Jane both say, "I'll be back in a while", and John returns in 10 minutes, and Jane returns in a while, is one of them lying? How long is a while? It is 10 minutes? Is it 20 minutes? It a short undefined period of time. Both of them can be gone for a while and both be gone for different lengths of time. It' the same thing with an age. Scientists use it of periods of history, stone age, ice age, etc. do those things last forever?

In addition to that both aion and olam are used in the Bible of things that ended. Jesus and Paul both said that the Law ended yet according to English translators it didn't.

8 And the LORD spake unto Aaron, Behold, I also have given thee the charge of mine heave offerings of all the hallowed things of the children of Israel; unto thee have I given them by reason of the anointing, and to thy sons, by an ordinance for ever. (Num. 18:8 KJV)

According to Paul the Aaronic priesthood ended and Jesus said the Law and the Prophets were until John.

Gehenna is not the same as the LoF.

If it's not then you've got a problem. Jesus said the wicked would go into Gehenna and John said the wicked would go into the Lake of Fire.

Then perhaps you also deny the soul Jesus being resurrected as well?

Not at all. However that doesn't address living on after death

Matthew 26:38
Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.
Acts 2:31
He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

Yes, He died and was resurrected.

Revelation 20:4
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Before you can use this passage to support your claim you'll need to explain it. It's a passage that is in a book of symbolism, that is being explained as a vision that John is seeing of the future.

 

[smaller]

That's a common mistake. It means the same thing in both places, "unto the ages of the ages". As I pointed out it depends on the length of the age.

And using that to terminate in one application and not in another thusly terminates God as well.

An age is different depending on the the context. If your age and my age are likely different lengths of time, yet they are both and age. The word doesn't change meanings based on how long it may or may not be. We have the same thing on the short end of time. If John and Jane both say, "I'll be back in a while", and John returns in 10 minutes, and Jane returns in a while, is one of them lying? How long is a while? It is 10 minutes? Is it 20 minutes? It a short undefined period of time. Both of them can be gone for a while and both be gone for different lengths of time. It' the same thing with an age. Scientists use it of periods of history, stone age, ice age, etc. do those things last forever?

As noted, your position is trying to play it both ways.

9 And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever,

Your position is simply two timing the same statement, and obviously that presents termination to God.

In addition to that both aion and olam are used in the Bible of things that ended. Jesus and Paul both said that the Law ended yet according to English translators it didn't.

Uh, no, they didn't.

8 And the LORD spake unto Aaron, Behold, I also have given thee the charge of mine heave offerings of all the hallowed things of the children of Israel; unto thee have I given them by reason of the anointing, and to thy sons, by an ordinance for ever. (Num. 18:8 KJV)

According to Paul the Aaronic priesthood ended and Jesus said the Law and the Prophets were until John.

The obvious observation is that there is a natural application/understanding of law, and a spiritual correlation. Paul demonstrates this in many places, the easiest to observe in 1 Cor. 9:9-10. Paul also tells us that the law is spiritual, Romans 7:14, and deploys spiritual compliance in Romans 13:8-12.

If it's not then you've got a problem.

Or your sight has a problem.

Jesus said the wicked would go into Gehenna and John said the wicked would go into the Lake of Fire.

There is gehenna and there is final judgment in the LoF. Playing one as the other doesn't work. James 3:6 shows the fire of hell/gehenna active in the tongue of those alive in flesh.

Not at all. However that doesn't address living on after death

The citings openly state otherwise. Jesus SOUL exists after His physical death, as well as the souls of others, duly noted prior.

Yes, He died and was resurrected.

With or without His SOUL was the question posed to your position.

Before you can use this passage to support your claim you'll need to explain it. It's a passage that is in a book of symbolism, that is being explained as a vision that John is seeing of the future.

If your claim is that spiritual sights are not real matters, again we would see differently. In Rev. John saw and wrote of things that were, things that are and things that will be. It is not solely future. And those observations are of "real" matters, not just John's fantasies.

 

[Butch5]

And using that to terminate in one application and not in another thusly terminates God as well.

No, it doesn't. The length of the age is different in different situations. Just like scientists bronze age is a different length of time than the iron age etc.

As noted, your position is trying to play it both ways.

9 And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever,

Your position is simply two timing the same statement, and obviously that presents termination to God.

If you understand the definition of an age there is not problem. The point is that aion doesn't mean eternity. An age is a definite period of time. The Bronze Age, wasn't eternal. The Iron Age wasn't eternal.

Uh, no, they didn't.

The obvious observation is that there is a natural application/understanding of law, and a spiritual correlation. Paul demonstrates this in many places, the easiest to observe in 1 Cor. 9:9-10. Paul also tells us that the law is spiritual, Romans 7:14, and deploys spiritual compliance in Romans 13:8-12.

No, the obvious observation is that the translators are wrong

Or your sight has a problem.


There is gehenna and there is final judgment in the LoF. Playing one as the other doesn't work. James 3:6 shows the fire of hell/gehenna active in the tongue of those alive in flesh.

James used a metaphor, we find that a lot in Scripture. However, as I pointed out Jesus said the wicked go into Gehenna, John said the wicked go into the Lake of Fire. If they are not the same please explain the discrepancy.

The citings openly state otherwise. Jesus SOUL exists after His physical death, as well as the souls of others, duly noted prior.

It doesn't. The way the word soul is used in the Scriptures is different than the way it is used by people today. The Scriptures use the word soul of a physical living being, in one sense and in the second it is used of life. Often in the Scriptures the Greek and Hebrews words for soul are translated life. I think this is one reason why the word is so misunderstood. If translators would always translate it soul people would get a better understanding of the word. As you can see His soul died and was resurrected. That shows that it wasn't alive after death. Jesus died for sins. Isaiah says that He gave His soul for our sins. His body went into the grave which is Hades when He died. However, He was not left in the grave, Hades.

With or without His SOUL was the question posed to your position.

The issue was whether the soul continues after death. Life doesn't continue after death so, no His life did not continue after death.

If your claim is that spiritual sights are not real matters, again we would see differently. In Rev. John saw and wrote of things that were, things that are and things that will be. It is not solely future. And those observations are of "real" matters, not just John's fantasies.

From chapter 4 on is the future. I agree that what John saw is real. However, he uses a lot of symbolism to express what he saw. The book is full of symbols. A lot of the book is symbols from the Old Testament. If we're going to making claims from these symbols we need to be able to explain them.

6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth. (Rev. 5:6 KJV)

What is this describing?

 

[smaller]

No, it doesn't. The length of the age is different in different situations.

And it is double dealing the term by doing that.

Just like scientists bronze age is a different length of time than the iron age etc.

You keep dragging up analogies. That doesn't mean the analogies are correct.

Is Satan tormented for ever and ever? Or just for an age or two? Rev. 20:10.

I don't know why forever and ever in that application isn't just as much for ever and ever as the application in Rev. 4:9 or any number of other statements similar with "eternal" conveyances.

 

[Butch5]

And it is double dealing the term by doing that.



You keep dragging up analogies. That doesn't mean the analogies are correct.

Is Satan tormented for ever and ever? Or just for an age or two? Rev. 20:10.

Apparently not since Gehenna will one day be made holy to the Lord.

I don't know why forever and ever in that application isn't just as much for ever and ever as the application in Rev. 4:9 or any number of other statements similar with "eternal" conveyances.

One problem is that these terms are looked at from a 21 century perspective. The phrase, "forever and ever," is translated from "unto the ages of the ages". This phrase comes from the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament, where is was translated from Hebrew. To get a good understanding of the phrase we need to try to understand what the Septuagint translators were trying to portray from the Hebrew text. Often it is the Hebrew word "Olam" that is being translated. Olam was used to indicate both distance and time. It carried the idea of what could be seen to the horizon. If you wanted to indicate a longer distance you could say, olam olam, to the horizon and beyond. It was used the same way for time. A modern equivalent would be, "for the foreseeable future". It was an unknown length of time. but it wasn't unending. The translators of the Septuagint used the phrase "unto the ages of the ages" to translate this concept into Greek. They were trying to convey this idea of what is at the horizon and again. However, the concept was not a eternal unending period of time. For some reason, I suspect theological bias, the translates chose to render this phrase "forever and ever" instead of "to the ages of the ages". However, we have to remember the original concept that is being brought over and not impose a modern understanding on those the words.

Here are a few links that explain olam.

http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/vocabulary_definitions_eternity.html
http://jewishroots.net/library/anti_missionary_objections/how_long_is_forever.html

 

[smaller]

Apparently not since Gehenna will one day be made holy to the Lord.

Already noted, the LoF and gehenna are not the same.

I asked you prior if you have a problem with the devil being tormented eternally or just for an age or two? Rev. 20:10

One problem is that these terms are looked at from a 21 century perspective. The phrase, "forever and ever," is translated from "unto the ages of the ages". This phrase comes from the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament, where is was translated from Hebrew. To get a good understanding of the phrase we need to try to understand what the Septuagint translators were trying to portray from the Hebrew text. Often it is the Hebrew word "Olam" that is being translated. Olam was used to indicate both distance and time. It carried the idea of what could be seen to the horizon. If you wanted to indicate a longer distance you could say, olam olam, to the horizon and beyond. It was used the same way for time. A modern equivalent would be, "for the foreseeable future". It was an unknown length of time. but it wasn't unending. The translators of the Septuagint used the phrase "unto the ages of the ages" to translate this concept into Greek. They were trying to convey this idea of what is at the horizon and again. However, the concept was not a eternal unending period of time. For some reason, I suspect theological bias, the translates chose to render this phrase "forever and ever" instead of "to the ages of the ages". However, we have to remember the original concept that is being brought over and not impose a modern understanding on those the words.

Here are a few links that explain olam.

http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/vocabulary_definitions_eternity.html
http://jewishroots.net/library/anti_missionary_objections/how_long_is_forever.html

You've employed some fancy dancing to get around Rev. 20:10 being "eternal torment" or not. Let's make some simple stakes in terms. Is the torment in Rev. 20:10 eternal or not?

 

[Butch5]

Already noted, the LoF and gehenna are not the same.

An arbitrary statement is not proof. I've asked you to address the discrepancy created by this statement several times now and you haven't. Jesus said the wicked go into Gehenna, John said they go into the Lake of Fire. If they are not the same who is right?

I asked you prior if you have a problem with the devil being tormented eternally or just for an age or two? Rev. 20:10

What I think doesn't matter. I don't care if he's tormented at all. He's going to be destroyed so it doesn't matter.

You've employed some fancy dancing to get around Rev. 20:10 being "eternal torment" or not. Let's make some simple stakes in terms. Is the torment in Rev. 20:10 eternal or not?

I already told you no. Gehenna will be made holy again.

The problem I see is that you're just rejecting the evidence. I've giving you Scripture that shows olam and aion are not eternal. I've given you evidence from external Hebrew resources that olam does not mean eternal. If you're just going to reject any evidence that I present why did you respond to my post in the first place?

 

[smaller]

An arbitrary statement is not proof. I've asked you to address the discrepancy created by this statement several times now and you haven't. Jesus said the wicked go into Gehenna, John said they go into the Lake of Fire. If they are not the same who is right?

Already addressed. There is "interim" holding, and permanent holding, which the LoF addresses. Examples of "interim" holding would be Luke 11:24, the "dry places" that an evil spirit usurped from the 'house' of man experiences.

Another, from the rich man in Luke 16. Interim holding.

In neither case is it the LoF.

Gehenna is also shown active in what you tried to claim as a "non real" metaphor in James 3:6. You and I would disagree on the nature and content of that statement.

What I think doesn't matter. I don't care if he's tormented at all. He's going to be destroyed so it doesn't matter.

The description in Rev 20:10 is abundantly clear. For ever and ever torment. So now if you're tossing the Hillary Clinton version of dialog, "what does it matter," then it doesn't matter if we even discuss it.

To get to the heart of it, that's why I specifically asked you if the torment of the devil in Rev. 20:10 is ongoing and active, or terminated after an age or two.

You know if you say YES, it's as stated, ongoing, then by extension, so it is likewise with "all" therein OR we have to double deal the status of those therein.

The one trick pony that the original poster keeps dragging out, thinking his position of eternal annihilation of people is some how better is a non-starter, once this question is answered.

 

[Butch5]

Already addressed. There is "interim" holding, and permanent holding, which the LoF addresses. Examples of "interim" holding would be Luke 11:24, the "dry places" that an evil spirit usurped from the 'house' of man experiences.

Another, from the rich man in Luke 16. Interim holding.

In neither case is it the LoF.

Gehenna is also shown active in what you tried to claim as a "non real" metaphor in James 3:6. You and I would disagree on the nature and content of that statement.

Sorry but the rich man was in Hades, not Gehenna. Jesus didn't say the wicked would be in Gehenna in holding, He said Gehenna was place of fire where the wicked would be burned. According to John the wicked are burned in the Lake of fire.

However, even apart from that what you present is not evidence. There is nothing in Scripture that states that Gehenna is a holding place for the dead until the are later burned. Your theological position is not evidence.

The description in Rev 20:10 is abundantly clear. For ever and ever torment. So now if you're tossing the Hillary Clinton version of dialog, "what does it matter," then it doesn't matter if we even discuss it.

To get to the heart of it, that's why I specifically asked you if the torment of the devil in Rev. 20:10 is ongoing and active, or terminated after an age or two.['quote]

It was a rhetorical statement. Whether Satan is tormented or not doesn't matter, he will be destroyed

You know if you say YES, it's as stated, ongoing, then by extension, so it is likewise with "all" therein OR we have to double deal the status of those therein.

I've already said no. You're making several assumptions here. One, you're assuming the wicked must suffer the same fate as a spirit. You're assuming that it's possible for the dead to somehow be alive after they are dead? Why are they called the dead if they are not dead? The dead are dead, they don't live on to be tormented in fire for eternity. You're assuming that Satan can live forever? According to the Scriptures the Father alone has immortality. The Scriptures say that the gift of God, eternal life, is giving to the believers. However, from what you're saying it would also have to be given to the wicked and to Satan. Do you believe that the gift of God is given the wicked and Satan?

Another problem with this idea is that no one ever heard of the Lake of Fire until John wrote Revelation. If that's some new place it means that none of the prophets, knew of it. None of the apostles, except John, knew of it. It seems even Jesus didn't know of it, because He's not recorded as saying it. Is it possible that Jesus, who brought the Gospel, left out this extremely important part of the Gospel, if indeed it is as you suggest? What about the Prophets? They all told that the sinner would die. What about the apostles? How is it that they knew nothing of this?

Let me go back to my original post. I said that ETC impugns God's character. God said through the prophet Ezekiel, the soul that sins it shall die. According to ETC this is not the case. The Scriptures say that God cannot lie.

Do you believe that God does not lie?
God said, the soul that sins shall die. Please explain how ETC can be the case when God said the soul that sins shall die.

 

[smaller]

Sorry but the rich man was in Hades, not Gehenna.

I said it was an example of "interim holding" which both gehenna and hades represent. In none of these applications are these states the "final adverse eternal Divine Judgment" that is shown by the LoF, a unique "one and done" matter. Rev. 20:10. Also noted by Jesus in Matt. 25, so YES, it was brought out prior to John in Rev.

Jesus didn't say the wicked would be in Gehenna in holding, He said Gehenna was place of fire where the wicked would be burned. According to John the wicked are burned in the Lake of fire.

As noted above. We can repeat the exercises as needed. Neither gehenna or hades is the LoF.

However, even apart from that what you present is not evidence. There is nothing in Scripture that states that Gehenna is a holding place for the dead until the are later burned. Your theological position is not evidence.

Scriptures present evidence to be examined. Certainly wouldn't say everyone is going to come to the same conclusions.

Gehenna and hades are real matters, present, unseen. I do not in any case see "souls" of man permanently eradicated whatsoever.

The LoF, a yet to transpire event.

Matt. 8:
28 And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way.
29 And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?

This gets particularly problematic to understand, when we try to factor "just a man" as our basis of understanding man or the soul of man, because scriptures do not present 'a man' in the singular sense. Scripture presents two or more parties in man.

Mark 4:15 is the basis or basic of understanding man, and what/who is also in man. It's more complicated than it appears on the surface.

I've already said no. You're making several assumptions here. One, you're assuming the wicked must suffer the same fate as a spirit. You're assuming that it's possible for the dead to somehow be alive after they are dead? Why are they called the dead if they are not dead?

The "dead" are actually quite active. Here we see them performing activity:

Matthew 8:22
But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.

Here, we see ourselves, prior to being saved. Dead, yet still quite active.

Colossians 2:13
And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

The dead are dead,

I'd suggest you aren't paying attention to the details.

 

[Butch5]

I said it was an example of "interim holding" which both gehenna and hades represent. In none of these applications are these states the "final adverse eternal Divine Judgment" that is shown by the LoF, a unique "one and done" matter. Rev. 20:10. Also noted by Jesus in Matt. 25, so YES, it was brought out prior to John in Rev.


As noted above. We can repeat the exercises as needed. Neither gehenna or hades is the LoF.


Scriptures present evidence to be examined. Certainly wouldn't say everyone is going to come to the same conclusions.

Gehenna and hades are real matters, present, unseen. I do not in any case see "souls" of man permanently eradicated whatsoever.

The LoF, a yet to transpire event.

You keep saying that but you've given no evidence. An inference you draw is not evidence. For instance, you present the rich man as evidence of a holding place when nothing is said about it being a holding place, that's you opinion. In addition to that the parable isn't even about the afterlife at all. It describes the destruction of the priesthood, that's why Jesus is telling it the Pharisees.

Matt. 8:
28 And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way.
29 And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?

This gets particularly problematic to understand, when we try to factor "just a man" as our basis of understanding man or the soul of man, because scriptures do not present 'a man' in the singular sense. Scripture presents two or more parties in man.

Mark 4:15 is the basis or basic of understanding man, and what/who is also in man. It's more complicated than it appears on the surface.

The Scriptures do present man as "just a man" in Gen. 2:7, the problem is many don't want to believe it.

The "dead" are actually quite active. Here we see them performing activity:

Matthew 8:22
But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.

Here, we see ourselves, prior to being saved. Dead, yet still quite active.

Colossians 2:13
And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

I'd suggest you aren't paying attention to the details.

Did you read what you wrote here? The dead are quite active? I've never once seen a dead person doing things. I think it pretty obvious that in these two passages we are seeing the use of a metaphor. I've seen many graveyards and have never seen the dead burying anyone. Look at the passage again. Jesus said, 'let the dead bury their dead'. Do dead people die. How does a dead person die. If when they die their life ends what do they lose when they die again? The context of that passages is that the guy wants to go and say goodbye to his family. If they are already dead what need is there to go and say goodbye to them?

You didn't address quite a bit that I asked. I've answered your questions yet you seem to be avoiding mine. Here are several I've asked.

You're making several assumptions here. One, you're assuming the wicked must suffer the same fate as a spirit. You're assuming that it's possible for the dead to somehow be alive after they are dead? Why are they called the dead if they are not dead? The dead are dead, they don't live on to be tormented in fire for eternity. You're assuming that Satan can live forever? According to the Scriptures the Father alone has immortality. The Scriptures say that the gift of God, eternal life, is giving to the believers. However, from what you're saying it would also have to be given to the wicked and to Satan. Do you believe that the gift of God is given the wicked and Satan?

Another problem with this idea is that no one ever heard of the Lake of Fire until John wrote Revelation. If that's some new place it means that none of the prophets, knew of it. None of the apostles, except John, knew of it. It seems even Jesus didn't know of it, because He's not recorded as saying it. Is it possible that Jesus, who brought the Gospel, left out this extremely important part of the Gospel, if indeed it is as you suggest? What about the Prophets? They all told that the sinner would die. What about the apostles? How is it that they knew nothing of this?

Let me go back to my original post. I said that ETC impugns God's character. God said through the prophet Ezekiel, the soul that sins it shall die. According to ETC this is not the case. The Scriptures say that God cannot lie.

Do you believe that God does not lie?
God said, the soul that sins shall die. Please explain how ETC can be the case when God said the soul that sins shall die.

 

[smaller]

You keep saying that but you've given no evidence. An inference you draw is not evidence.

Follow the picture:

Butch: Gehenna is the LoF
me: Uh, no. The LoF sums up and finishes this wicked age/workers of iniquity.

For instance, you present the rich man as evidence of a holding place when nothing is said about it being a holding place, that's you opinion.

The LoF hasn't transpired yet. We've hacked through several posts now and you keep circling back to not being able to pick up on a very simple understanding.

So, yeah. Please see the above. It's quite simple to understand.

In addition to that the parable isn't even about the afterlife at all. It describes the destruction of the priesthood, that's why Jesus is telling it the Pharisees.

I also gave the example of the "unclean spirit" leaving "a man, my house" and walking dry places seeking rest and finding none from Luke 11:24.

Pretty clear that Lazarus and the rich man died and were buried. Don't disagree with the parabolic content. Which we THEN have to compare notes on "how" they are understood i.e. methodology. I employ the methods Jesus gave us in Matt. 4:4, Luke 4:4 and Matt. 4:13-15 for ALL parable/allegory/similitude understandings.

The Scriptures do present man as "just a man" in Gen. 2:7, the problem is many don't want to believe it.

Then we have a rather massive disconnect between us. There are thousands of examples given in the N.T. of Satan and devils inhabiting man. And we know for no uncertain fact that Satan is the Captor, internally, of unbelievers, in Acts 26:18, 2 Cor. 4:4 and Eph. 2:2. Paul himself shows us this fact upon himself as well in 2 Cor. 12:7. We also know that sin is of the devil, 1 John 3:8 and that 'all of us have sin' both present/past. 1 John 1:8, Romans 7:17-21. We also (at least should) know that Satan tempts us "internally" placing Satan where? Uh, yeah. Let's do the simple math here. Man is not just man in scriptural depictions. A single man had a legion of devils in him that were cast out.

So I'd suggest unless we see likewise on that subject we're wasting our time talking about the balance because you only have part of the picture of man, as presented in the scriptures.

I noted prior I have no issues with Satan being tormented for ever and ever, as noted by Rev. 20:10. I would accept "permanently terminated" if the scripture actually said so, but it doesn't.

IF we can move past the dime on the above maybe we can hone in a bit better.

Did you read what you wrote here? The dead are quite active? I've never once seen a dead person doing things.

And that only shows your positions have pretty much zero understanding of the subject matters. I cited you 2 very simple scriptures showing THE DEAD being quite actively ALIVE in the flesh.

Matthew 8:22
But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.

Oh, look, the dead are engaged in BURYING. An activity. Wow.

And here was us, prior to belief:

Ephesians 2:1
And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

Colossians 2:13
And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

And us after salvation:

Colossians 3:3
For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.

I think it pretty obvious that in these two passages we are seeing the use of a metaphor. I've seen many graveyards and have never seen the dead burying anyone.

It's pretty obvious to me at this point Butch, that you really have no appreciations for the finer points of these subject matters, and are having difficulties with some very very basic observations. Stuff that I would consider any believer should have better understandings of.

If we can, you know, get the simple stuff above down, maybe we can move on. Otherwise it's kind of a waste of time.

 

[Butch5]

Follow the picture:

Butch: Gehenna is the LoF
me: Uh, no. The LoF sums up and finishes this wicked age/workers of iniquity.



The LoF hasn't transpired yet. We've hacked through several posts now and you keep circling back to not being able to pick up on a very simple understanding.

So, yeah. Please see the above. It's quite simple to understand.

This is simply your opinion. You've not given anything that shows that there is a holding place. Just because you say a place is a holding place doesn't make it so. Show me where Scriptures says that there is a holding place for the dead who are supposedly alive.

You right that it's simple to understand. Jesus said the wicked go into Gehenna, John said the wicked go into the Lake of Fire. The logical conclusion is Gehenna and the Lake of Fire, which comes from a book of symbolism, are one and the same.

Your holding place is based in a false premise, that dead are alive.

Pretty clear that Lazarus and the rich man died and were buried. Don't disagree with the parabolic content. Which we THEN have to compare notes on "how" they are understood i.e. methodology. I employ the methods Jesus gave us in Matt. 4:4, Luke 4:4 and Matt. 4:13-15 for ALL parable/allegory/similitude understandings.

It's also pretty clear that dead people don't speak. It's pretty clear that it's a parable. A parable is a story that teaches a lesson. In context it's one of several parables that Jesus uses to chastise the Jewish leadership.

What do any of those passages have to do with interpreting parables?

Then we have a rather massive disconnect between us

. There are thousands of examples given in the N.T. of Satan and devils inhabiting man. And we know for no uncertain fact that Satan is the Captor, internally, of unbelievers, in Acts 26:18, 2 Cor. 4:4 and Eph. 2:2. Paul himself shows us this fact upon himself as well in 2 Cor. 12:7. We also know that sin is of the devil, 1 John 3:8 and that 'all of us have sin' both present/past. 1 John 1:8, Romans 7:17-21. We also (at least should) know that Satan tempts us "internally" placing Satan where? Uh, yeah. Let's do the simple math here. Man is not just man in scriptural depictions. A single man had a legion of devils in him that were cast out.

Not sure what this has to do with anything. An evil spirit in a man is not the man.

So I'd suggest unless we see likewise on that subject we're wasting our time talking about the balance because you only have part of the picture of man, as presented in the scriptures.

I noted prior I have no issues with Satan being tormented for ever and ever, as noted by Rev. 20:10. I would accept "permanently terminated" if the scripture actually said so, but it doesn't.

IF we can move past the dime on the above maybe we can hone in a bit better.

Sorry, but an evil spirit in a man is not the man. I'm not even sure what your point is here.

And that only shows your positions have pretty much zero understanding of the subject matters. I cited you 2 very simple scriptures showing THE DEAD being quite actively ALIVE in the flesh.

Matthew 8:22
But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.

Oh, look, the dead are engaged in BURYING. An activity. Wow.

And here was us, prior to belief:

Ephesians 2:1
And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

Colossians 2:13
And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

And us after salvation:

Colossians 3:3
For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.

Yes, and I pointed out that they are metaphors. Tell me, where do you see these dead people burying dead people? If this is the case then why do living people bury the dead? We should be able to just drive up to the grave yard and leave them by the fence. Seriously, how in the world could the dead possible bury someone?

It's pretty obvious to me at this point Butch, that you really have no appreciations for the finer points of these subject matters, and are having difficulties with some very very basic observations. Stuff that I would consider any believer should have better understandings of.

If we can, you know, get the simple stuff above down, maybe we can move on. Otherwise it's kind of a waste of time.

Ad hominems don't help debates. It's pretty easy to give some evidence. Just point me to someplace I can go to and see dead people burying dead people. How does that works? Do the dead people dig themselves out of their own grave first before they bury the other dead person? If so who re-buries them then?

You've still not addressed what I asked.

You're making several assumptions here. One, you're assuming the wicked must suffer the same fate as a spirit. You're assuming that it's possible for the dead to somehow be alive after they are dead? Why are they called the dead if they are not dead? The dead are dead, they don't live on to be tormented in fire for eternity. You're assuming that Satan can live forever? According to the Scriptures the Father alone has immortality. The Scriptures say that the gift of God, eternal life, is giving to the believers. However, from what you're saying it would also have to be given to the wicked and to Satan. Do you believe that the gift of God is given the wicked and Satan?

Another problem with this idea is that no one ever heard of the Lake of Fire until John wrote Revelation. If that's some new place it means that none of the prophets, knew of it. None of the apostles, except John, knew of it. It seems even Jesus didn't know of it, because He's not recorded as saying it. Is it possible that Jesus, who brought the Gospel, left out this extremely important part of the Gospel, if indeed it is as you suggest? What about the Prophets? They all told that the sinner would die. What about the apostles? How is it that they knew nothing of this?

Let me go back to my original post. I said that ETC impugns God's character. God said through the prophet Ezekiel, the soul that sins it shall die. According to ETC this is not the case. The Scriptures say that God cannot lie.

Do you believe that God does not lie?
God said, the soul that sins shall die. Please explain how ETC can be the case when God said the soul that sins shall die.

 

[smaller]

This is simply your opinion. You've not given anything that shows that there is a holding place.

It doesn't sound like you have a grip on the basics Butch, such as devils being 'in and with' mankind. Just where do you think these wicked spirits go when a person dies or they are cast out? It's not the LoF, yet. That was my point. And the citings correspond to that fact.

So we either understand the Divine Principle that's going on with the scriptures or we don't. I honestly don't know how anyone can read the Gospels and NOT see that that the devil and his messengers operate IN MAN.

Surprisingly though, an unfortunate amount of readers miss the most blatantly obvious matter of the N.T. in that regards. Mark 4:15.

You right that it's simple to understand. Jesus said the wicked go into Gehenna, John said the wicked go into the Lake of Fire. The logical conclusion is Gehenna and the Lake of Fire, which comes from a book of symbolism, are one and the same.

The little drill:

Butch: Gehenna is the LoF
me: The LoF comes at the conclusion of this wicked age. Gehenna is prior to the finale.

The LoF has not transpired yet and is EASILY proven not to have transpired yet. Sin still exists in the world, sin is of the devil, 1 John 3:8, therefore the devil is NOT yet in the LoF. Fairly easy to understand.

It's also pretty clear that dead people don't speak. It's pretty clear that it's a parable. A parable is a story that teaches a lesson. In context it's one of several parables that Jesus uses to chastise the Jewish leadership.

It would appear that the entire category of subject matter of "the dead" sailed by you awhile back in this thread.

Moving on. You can have the last word. I don't entertain those who have no interests in understanding other positions. I understand every position you have because I "took the time" to examine them.

Do me a likewise courtesy sometime.

Later.