Annihilationism, do the Wicked Perish?

[Carry_Your_Name]

That one simple change changes a lot. It tells us that the story of Lazarus and the Rich Man is not literal. It tells us that the thief couldn't have been alive somewhere later that day. It tells us that Paradise isn't a place in hades. It tells us that when Scripture says that Jesus was in the tomb for three days, He was in the tomb for three days. All of the issues are resolved with this one simple change in our beliefs.

This is an excellent analysis, but if "paradise" is to be taken literally, there's a problem with the timeline. Indeed, the original Garden of Eden with the Tree of Life will be restored, that's the New Jerusalem, the new heavens and the new earth. That wouldn't take place until the end of the millennium reign. Jesus didn't promise the thief that they'd be together in paradise about 3000 plus years later, he said TODAY. And according to you, dead is dead, then the only possibility is the garden where Jesus was buried - right away before dark. A biblical day started from 6 pm at sundown, not 0 am at midnight. Mary Magdalene didn't just mistake him as gardener, that was literally a garden.

To really change our beliefs and lean on God's wisdom, we have to go back to the Torah, the first five books, which are the foundation of and the guideline for the whole bible. A key verse regarding afterlife is in Gen. 25:8 - "he (Abraham) breathed his last and died in a good old age, an old man and full of years, and was gathered to his people." Likewise, Ishmael (Genesis 25:17), Isaac (Genesis 35:29), Jacob (Genesis 49:33), Aaron (Numbers 20:24), and Moses (Numbers 27:13) were all gathered to their people. That doesn't mean they were literally buried in a family tomb, but in the afterlife, they joined their ancestors. Since Abraham was the ancestor of Jewish people, when a Jewish man passed away, he'd be united with Abraham and other patriarches, hence the term "Abraham's bosom". The takeaway lesson from the story of the Rich man and Lazarus is that not all Jews would go to Abraham's bosom in the afterlife, that's not their birthright, some will be rejected like the Rich man. This is essentially a polemic against the "Jewish privilege" at the time, and that's a consistent narrative in the NT. John the Baptist made a similar remark in Matt. 3:9-10 - "Do not think to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father.' For I say to you that God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones. And even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees. Therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire." The story of the Rich Man and Lazarus is a word picture to demonstrate this judgement.

 

[Alfred Persson]

You didn't answer the question. If God alone has immortality, how can a person who commits eternal sin suffer for eternity? Man doesn't have immortality. To suffer eternally man must somehow obtain immortality. How does that happen?

Its not hard to conclude a person falling from the rooftop, is NOT flying to another location.

So also its not hard to conclude mortal souls can persist for as long as God desires.

If they suffer eternal torment, its because God ordained it so....without making them immortal.

Or don't you agree, God can make the dead alive or preserve the wicked so they reap what they have sown.

Without making them immortal.

 

[Alfred Persson]

You didn't answer the question. If God alone has immortality, how can a person who commits eternal sin suffer for eternity? Man doesn't have immortality. To suffer eternally man must somehow obtain immortality. How does that happen?

How can YOU impose a straight jacket on God?

He alone has immortality NOW. Are you saying He cannot make someone immortal in the future?

And WHY is immortality necessary to existence?

Our present physical bodies aren't immortal, but they "persist" as long as God desires. If He ordained your present physical body would persist for 800 years like before the flood, its still NOT immortal. It only lives as long as God ordains.

So your objections only prove how simple elementary deduction cannot pierce the programming ("brain washing"?) "immortality" is necessary for something to survive death. IT is NOT.

God can command people persist as long as He wants, WITHOUT making them immortal.

 

[Butch5]

This is an excellent analysis, but if "paradise" is to be taken literally, there's a problem with the timeline. Indeed, the original Garden of Eden with the Tree of Life will be restored, that's the New Jerusalem, the new heavens and the new earth. That wouldn't take place until the end of the millennium reign. Jesus didn't promise the thief that they'd be together in paradise about 3000 plus years later, he said TODAY. And according to you, dead is dead, then the only possibility is the garden where Jesus was buried - right away before dark. A biblical day started from 6 pm at sundown, not 0 am at midnight. Mary Magdalene didn't just mistake him as gardener, that was literally a garden.

To really change our beliefs and lean on God's wisdom, we have to go back to the Torah, the first five books, which are the foundation of and the guideline for the whole bible. A key verse regarding afterlife is in Gen. 25:8 - "he (Abraham) breathed his last and died in a good old age, an old man and full of years, and was gathered to his people." Likewise, Ishmael (Genesis 25:17), Isaac (Genesis 35:29), Jacob (Genesis 49:33), Aaron (Numbers 20:24), and Moses (Numbers 27:13) were all gathered to their people. That doesn't mean they were literally buried in a family tomb, but in the afterlife, they joined their ancestors. Since Abraham was the ancestor of Jewish people, when a Jewish man passed away, he'd be united with Abraham and other patriarches, hence the term "Abraham's bosom". The takeaway lesson from the story of the Rich man and Lazarus is that not all Jews would go to Abraham's bosom in the afterlife, that's not their birthright, some will be rejected like the Rich man. This is essentially a polemic against the "Jewish privilege" at the time, and that's a consistent narrative in the NT. John the Baptist made a similar remark in Matt. 3:9-10 - "Do not think to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father.' For I say to you that God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones. And even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees. Therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire." The story of the Rich Man and Lazarus is a word picture to demonstrate this judgement.

Good points. But, what if, as I posited, the dead are dead. What does it mean to be gathered to one's people if the dead are dead? Would that not be a way of saying one is going to die, or one is going to the grave? Where would all of their descendants be? Wouldn't they be in the grave? If we're going to say that there is an afterlife we have to establish that an afterlife is possible. That could be another discussion. Here's a link to an article that gives some understanding of how the ancient Jews understood this subject. Jewish Encyclopedia, Immortality of the Soul.

My point about the thief on the cross is that the comma is in the wrong place. If we place the comma after the word today, then Jesus didn't tell the thief he would be in Paradise today. It could be any day in the future, even 3000 years later. Here's another problem with using this to prove an afterlife. If Jesus did say they would be in paradise that day, He didn't say they would alive in Paradise that day. Just like with the Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man people make an assumption. It's really the fallacy of Circular Reasoning. People believe that man lives on after death, they see the wording that indicates that Jesus and the thief would be in Paradise that day and they "assume" that they will be alive in Paradise that day. Why would they assume Jesus would alive in Paradise that day when the text tells us that Jesus died? It's because they believe He's still alive. It's a circular argument.

I don't think Jesus was referring to where they'd be buried because the garden He was buried in would have no reference to the Kingdom. It seems to me that whatever Paradise is, it must refer to the Kingdom or Jesus never addressed the thief's request. That's why I believe He was referring to the Garden of Eden in the new creation. By Jesus telling the thief he would be with Him in Paradise, Jesus was telling the thief that his sins were forgiven and that he would have eternal life. Jesus didn't make the thief wait until judgment day to see if he would make it into the Kingdom. He rendered His judgment right there on the cross. The thief could then die with the comfort of knowing beyond doubt that he would indeed enter into the Kingdom of God. That's what the thief wanted to know and this explanation fits.

I would submit that the phrase "Abraham's bosom" in the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man is a reference to Jesus being the long promised seed. Abraham's bosom also appears in Genesis.

5 And Sarai said unto Abram, My wrong be upon thee: I have given my maid into thy bosom; and when she saw that she had conceived, I was despised in her eyes: the LORD judge between me and thee. Ge 16:5–Ex 4:6.

Hagar was in Abraham's bosom and she conceived. This suggests to me an intimate embrace. The only other place we see anyone in Abraham's bosom is the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man. In that parable I believe Lazarus represents Jesus. Jesus is being embraced by Abraham as the long promised seed.

8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land pwherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God. Ge 17:8.

11 And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins; Ge 35:11–Dt 29:24.

God also promised that all nations would be blessed through Abraham. The Jews thought they were the "seed" through which the promises would come. However, Paul corrects that erroneous thinking.

16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ Ga 3:16.

Paul said that when God made those promises to Abraham and his seed, He didn't means seeds plural as in the Jews. Rather, God meant seed singular as in Christ. Christ is the promised seed that God was speaking of when He made the promises to Abraham. In the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man we see Abraham embracing (Abraham's bosom) the seed that God had long ago promised him

 

[Butch5]

Its not hard to conclude a person falling from the rooftop, is NOT flying to another location.

So also its not hard to conclude mortal souls can persist for as long as God desires.

If they suffer eternal torment, its because God ordained it so....without making them immortal.

Or don't you agree, God can make the dead alive or preserve the wicked so they reap what they have sown.

Without making them immortal.

No, I don't believe God is a contradiction. immortality is to live forever. Therefore, if one lives forever they are immortal. Whether they are immortal in and of themselves or God gives them life. They live forever, thus they are immortal. Someone can't live forever and not live forever. It doesn't work.

Please establish from Scripture where the wicked, or those who commit eternal sins, are promised Eternal life. Paul said the gift of God is eternal life. John said that God sent His Son so that whoever believes should not perish. God has promised the believer eternal life. If enteral life is only for the believer and not the unbeliever, then someone who commits eternal sins must have immortality in and of himself. The only other option is that he gets it from God. If that's the case then we have to establish that the Gift of God, eternal life, is not only given to the believer but also the wicked who commit eternal sins.

 

[Butch5]

How can YOU impose a straight jacket on God?

He alone has immortality NOW. Are you saying He cannot make someone immortal in the future?

And WHY is immortality necessary to existence?

Our present physical bodies aren't immortal, but they "persist" as long as God desires. If He ordained your present physical body would persist for 800 years like before the flood, its still NOT immortal. It only lives as long as God ordains.

So your objections only prove how simple elementary deduction cannot pierce the programming ("brain washing"?) "immortality" is necessary for something to survive death. IT is NOT.

God can command people persist as long as He wants, WITHOUT making them immortal.

Again, you didn't answer the question.

If God alone has immortality, how can a person who commits eternal sin suffer for eternity? Man doesn't have immortality. To suffer eternally man must somehow obtain immortality. How does that happen?

How does one obtain immortality to suffer eternally?

 

[Alfred Persson]

No, I don't believe God is a contradiction. immortality is to live forever. Therefore, if one lives forever they are immortal. Whether they are immortal in and of themselves or God gives them life. They live forever, thus they are immortal. Someone can't live forever and not live forever. It doesn't work.

Please establish from Scripture where the wicked, or those who commit eternal sins, are promised Eternal life. Paul said the gift of God is eternal life. John said that God sent His Son so that whoever believes should not perish. God has promised the believer eternal life. If enteral life is only for the believer and not the unbeliever, then someone who commits eternal sins must have immortality in and of himself. The only other option is that he gets it from God. If that's the case then we have to establish that the Gift of God, eternal life, is not only given to the believer but also the wicked who commit eternal sins.

Eternal torment is not life, or immortality. I can establish from scripture where the wicked guilty of eternal sins suffer eternally, but you don't believe the scriptures:


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

9 Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, "If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand,
10 "he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
11 "And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name." (Rev. 14:9-11 NKJ)

42 "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.
43 "If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--
44 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'
45 "And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--
46 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'
47 "And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire--
48 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.' (Mk. 9:42-48 NKJ)

"And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." (Matt. 25:46-26:1 NKJ)

 

[Alfred Persson]

Again, you didn't answer the question.

If God alone has immortality, how can a person who commits eternal sin suffer for eternity? Man doesn't have immortality. To suffer eternally man must somehow obtain immortality. How does that happen?

How does one obtain immortality to suffer eternally?

You are making words up. "Immortality" is not defined as "eternal torment."

No dictionary has that meaning, you are making it up.

 

[Butch5]

Eternal torment is not life, or immortality. I can establish from scripture where the wicked guilty of eternal sins suffer eternally, but you don't believe the scriptures:


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

9 Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, "If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand,
10 "he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
11 "And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name." (Rev. 14:9-11 NKJ)

42 "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.
43 "If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--
44 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'
45 "And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--
46 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'
47 "And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire--
48 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.' (Mk. 9:42-48 NKJ)

"And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." (Matt. 25:46-26:1 NKJ)

I didn't' say eternal torment waw immortality. I said, to suffer eternally one must have immortality. Someone who is going to die cannot suffer eternally.

These passages don't support your claim. You misunderstand them.

But, you still haven't answered the question. How does the wicked or the one suffering for eternal sins get immortality?

 

[Alfred Persson]

I didn't' say eternal torment waw immortality. I said, to suffer eternally one must have immortality. Someone who is going to die cannot suffer eternally.

These passages don't support your claim. You misunderstand them.

But, you still haven't answered the question. How does the wicked or the one suffering for eternal sins get immortality?

According to you, God must first reward the wicked with immortality, only then can He punish eternally. Absurd.

These passages establish some are eternally tormented.

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

9 Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, "If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand,
10 "he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
11 "And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name." (Rev. 14:9-11 NKJ)

42 "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.
43 "If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--
44 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'
45 "And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--
46 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'
47 "And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire--
48 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.' (Mk. 9:42-48 NKJ)

"And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." (Matt. 25:46-26:1 NKJ)

As I predicted, you will refuse to heed them:

Your theories are contradicted by scripture.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Good points. But, what if, as I posited, the dead are dead. What does it mean to be gathered to one's people if the dead are dead? Would that not be a way of saying one is going to die, or one is going to the grave? Where would all of their descendants be? Wouldn't they be in the grave? If we're going to say that there is an afterlife we have to establish that an afterlife is possible. That could be another discussion. Here's a link to an article that gives some understanding of how the ancient Jews understood this subject. Jewish Encyclopedia, Immortality of the Soul.

My point about the thief on the cross is that the comma is in the wrong place. If we place the comma after the word today, then Jesus didn't tell the thief he would be in Paradise today. It could be any day in the future, even 3000 years later. Here's another problem with using this to prove an afterlife. If Jesus did say they would be in paradise that day, He didn't say they would alive in Paradise that day. Just like with the Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man people make an assumption. It's really the fallacy of Circular Reasoning. People believe that man lives on after death, they see the wording that indicates that Jesus and the thief would be in Paradise that day and they "assume" that they will be alive in Paradise that day. Why would they assume Jesus would alive in Paradise that day when the text tells us that Jesus died? It's because they believe He's still alive. It's a circular argument.

I don't think Jesus was referring to where they'd be buried because the garden He was buried in would have no reference to the Kingdom. It seems to me that whatever Paradise is, it must refer to the Kingdom or Jesus never addressed the thief's request. That's why I believe He was referring to the Garden of Eden in the new creation. By Jesus telling the thief he would be with Him in Paradise, Jesus was telling the thief that his sins were forgiven and that he would have eternal life. Jesus didn't make the thief wait until judgment day to see if he would make it into the Kingdom. He rendered His judgment right there on the cross. The thief could then die with the comfort of knowing beyond doubt that he would indeed enter into the Kingdom of God. That's what the thief wanted to know and this explanation fits.

It must be "today" because it can not wait. If Jesus died before he could forgive the thief, or the thief died before he could receive forgiveness, that'd be too late. There's another takeaway lesson from the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus - death is the absolute dividing line between the saved and the unsaved. As long as one lives, they always have a chance to repent; but once they kick the bucket, their fate is sealed. The saved remain saved forever, the unsaved remain unsaved forever, they are separated by the "great gulf" between them, neither can come across to the other side even if they want to. In the context of the Crucifixion, there were two men who were also crucified on either side of Jesus, one joined the scoffers and challenged Jesus to save himself, the other confessed and asked for the kingdom; as a result, the former was rebuked, the latter was forgiven. The judgement was already delivered on that day, they didn't have to wait for the white throne at the end of the millennial reign to find out the final verdict.

Generally I agree with you on the placement of the comma, but just a quick reminder, that "verily, verily I say unto you" or "most assuredly I say to you" is a common expression in Jesus's teaching, it was an idiom which emphasizes the certainty of the following statement, no variation, no additional words, and in most translators' minds, Lk. 23:43 should make no exception, it must be the same idiom, "today" belongs to the following statement, not this idiom. Therefore the comma is placed before "today" in most translations not because of the translators' personal belief or assumption, but for the sake of consistency. Think about its modern equivalents, you probably wouldn't say "I solemnly swear today," "trust me today," or "I assure you today". Whatever statement you wanna make next, even if it's a statement about some event that's about to take place on that day, you'd put "today" in that statement, not in your opening expression.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

According to you, God must first reward the wicked with immortality, only then can He punish eternally. Absurd.

These passages establish some are eternally tormented.

The wicked won't receive any inheritance in the millennial kingdom, they'd be bound with Satan. They won't resurrected at the second coming in 1 Thess. 4:16-17 and 1 Cor. 15:51-53, but they will be at the end of the millennial reign, as the word "UNTIL" indicated.

And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. (Rev. 20:4-5)

By then Satan will be released from the bottomless pit, he'll deceive the nations and wage war against Christ and the saints, so it is possible that the wicked will be these nations. They won't be "rewarded" with immortality, because immortality is specifically referring to the resurrected lives for the saints in the millennial kingdom. Since the wicked won't be resurrected during the kingdom period, they won't have it, they'd remain dead.

Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed— in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. (1 Cor. 15:51-53)

Whether you believe they'd cease to exist or simmer forever in the Lake of Fire, that doesn't matter, you can't suffer a second death and be immortal, that's self-contradicting.

 

[Alfred Persson]

...
Whether you believe they'd cease to exist or simmer forever in the Lake of Fire, that doesn't matter, you can't suffer a second death and be immortal, that's self-contradicting.

Not if you define the phrase correctly, first death was a separation from life ---the animating spirit returns to God and the soul becomes a "dead shade" but it still exists.

The Second death is a repeat with a caveat. There was a resurrection for those who died the "first death", not for those who die the "second death".

Therefore, "second death" is the death from which there is no resurrection, but its not a cessation of existence. Its a separation from "life":

These passages establish some are eternally tormented.

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

9 Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, "If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand,
10 "he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
11 "And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name." (Rev. 14:9-11 NKJ)

42 "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.
43 "If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--
44 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'
45 "And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--
46 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'
47 "And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire--
48 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.' (Mk. 9:42-48 NKJ)

"And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." (Matt. 25:46-26:1 NKJ)

 

[Alfred Persson]

...These passages don't support your claim. You misunderstand them.

The foreman ordered his two workers: "take those boxes to the roof."

Worker #1 took boxes to the roof.
Worker #2 took the rest of the boxes to the basement.

The foreman asked Worker #2: "what are you doing?" He replied, "I knew you were being misunderstood".

The foreman then said: "YOU are fired! If I wanted them in the basement I would have said so."

These passages establish some are eternally tormented.

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

9 Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, "If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand,
10 "he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
11 "And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name." (Rev. 14:9-11 NKJ)

42 "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.
43 "If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--
44 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'
45 "And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--
46 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'
47 "And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire--
48 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.' (Mk. 9:42-48 NKJ)

"And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." (Matt. 25:46-26:1 NKJ)

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Not if you define the phrase correctly,

You don’t get to define words, the Bible does. Not just definition, but also reference, and I’ve presented to you the specific reference of “immortality” in 1 Cor. 15:53.

 

[Butch5]

It must be "today" because it can not wait. If Jesus died before he could forgive the thief, or the thief died before he could receive forgiveness, that'd be too late. There's another takeaway lesson from the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus - death is the absolute dividing line between the saved and the unsaved. As long as one lives, they always have a chance to repent; but once they kick the bucket, their fate is sealed. The saved remain saved forever, the unsaved remain unsaved forever, they are separated by the "great gulf" between them, neither can come across to the other side even if they want to. In the context of the Crucifixion, there were two men who were also crucified on either side of Jesus, one joined the scoffers and challenged Jesus to save himself, the other confessed and asked for the kingdom; as a result, the former was rebuked, the latter was forgiven. The judgement was already delivered on that day, they didn't have to wait for the white throne at the end of the millennial reign to find out the final verdict.

Generally I agree with you on the placement of the comma, but just a quick reminder, that "verily, verily I say unto you" or "most assuredly I say to you" is a common expression in Jesus's teaching, it was an idiom which emphasizes the certainty of the following statement, no variation, no additional words, and in most translators' minds, Lk. 23:43 should make no exception, it must be the same idiom, "today" belongs to the following statement, not this idiom. Therefore the comma is placed before "today" in most translations not because of the translators' personal belief or assumption, but for the sake of consistency. Think about its modern equivalents, you probably wouldn't say "I solemnly swear today," "trust me today," or "I assure you today". Whatever statement you wanna make next, even if it's a statement about some event that's about to take place on that day, you'd put "today" in that statement, not in your opening expression.

I agree, the forgiveness was that day. My point was that they could not be in Paradise that day.

I understand the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man as a judgment against Israel. I don't believe it has anything at all to do with an afterlife.

But, It's not what translators believe. It's how people in the first century understood it. I have heard countless times parents say something to the effect, "I'm telling you right now if you don't get in this house..." It was quite common when I was growing up and it's still fairly common today. So, we use that same language even today. But again, how we use it isn't pertinent. Why put the comma in a place where the passage makes no sense rather than put it where it makes perfect sense just for the sake of consistency? If the comma goes with the second clause, it means that Jesus and the thief were in Paradise that day. That raises numerous issues. One, the thief was dead later that day, how could he go to Paradise? Secondly, Paradise is in the restored creation. That hasn't happened yet, how could he be there? The restoration happens at the resurrection. The thief hasn't been resurrected yet. Jesus was in the tomb for three days. When Jesus rose, He told Mary not to touch Him because He had not yet ascended to the Father. How then was He in the Kingdom of God?

If today is placed with the second clause, Jesus was telling him that they would both be in Paradise that day. The thief knew he was dying. He knew what was going to happen. There would be no need for Jesus to tell him what was going to happen later that day. Did the thief think that Jesus was going into His Kingdom while hanging on the cross? That's not likely. I just don't see how that rendering can be reconciled with Scripture.

If, however, it is as I posited, that man is dead, then why would Jesus put the word today with the first clause, "I say to you today." The obvious reason is that they were both dying. So, it's logical for Him to say to the thief, "I say to you today" as opposed to letting the thief die wondering if he would make it into the Kingdom. By saying, "I say to you today," He's announcing that He is pronouncing His judgment at that moment as opposed to judgment day. This rendering fits nicely with the context and the request of the thief. If Paradise is anything other than the Kingdom of God, then Jesus never addressed the thief's question.

 

[Alfred Persson]

You don’t get to define words, the Bible does. Not just definition, but also reference, and I’ve presented to you the specific reference of “immortality” in 1 Cor. 15:53.

It is obvious the "first death" defines the "second death". Otherwise, God would have called it something else.

Remember Worker #2.

 

[Butch5]

The foreman ordered his two workers: "take those boxes to the roof."

Worker #1 took boxes to the roof.
Worker #2 took the rest of the boxes to the basement.

The foreman asked Worker #2: "what are you doing?" He replied, "I knew you were being misunderstood".

The foreman then said: "YOU are fired! If I wanted them in the basement I would have said so."

These passages establish some are eternally tormented.

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

9 Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, "If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand,
10 "he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
11 "And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name." (Rev. 14:9-11 NKJ)

42 "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.
43 "If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--
44 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'
45 "And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--
46 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'
47 "And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire--
48 "where`Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.' (Mk. 9:42-48 NKJ)

"And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." (Matt. 25:46-26:1 NKJ)

We've been through this. These passages don't prove your point. I've shown that aionios doesn't mean eternal or forever. Not to mention that Revelation is a book of symbolism. Any passage you post from Revelation would need to be established as literal and figurative. Then the passage you quote from Mark is speaking of dead bodies burning, not living people. You read into the text what isn't there. The passage says the fire is not quenched. It doesn't say it won't go out. What in the world the worm has to do with whether or not the people are eternal is beyond me.

Even if the fire didn't go out, it doesn't necessitate that people burn forever. a fire burns up its fuel. The fuel doesn't just burn forever.

 

[Alfred Persson]

We've been through this. These passages don't prove your point. I've shown that aionios doesn't mean eternal or forever. Not to mention that Revelation is a book of symbolism. Any passage you post from Revelation would need to be established as literal and figurative. Then the passage you quote from Mark is speaking of dead bodies burning, not living people. You read into the text what isn't there. The passage says the fire is not quenched. It doesn't say it won't go out. What in the world the worm has to do with whether or not the people are eternal is beyond me.

Even if the fire didn't go out, it doesn't necessitate that people burn forever. a fire burns up its fuel. The fuel doesn't just burn forever.

You deny the resurrection of the just and unjust, that explains your inability to see what is in front of your eyes.

"Don't trust your lying eyes! It doesn't say what it says!"

Worker #2 learned the hard way, I hope that's not true for you.

 

[Alfred Persson]

We've been through this. These passages don't prove your point. I've shown that aionios doesn't mean eternal or forever. Not to mention that Revelation is a book of symbolism. Any passage you post from Revelation would need to be established as literal and figurative. Then the passage you quote from Mark is speaking of dead bodies burning, not living people. You read into the text what isn't there. The passage says the fire is not quenched. It doesn't say it won't go out. What in the world the worm has to do with whether or not the people are eternal is beyond me.

Even if the fire didn't go out, it doesn't necessitate that people burn forever. a fire burns up its fuel. The fuel doesn't just burn forever.

As I said, you deny the resurrection, that is why you cannot believe what scripture says about the resurrection body, and the soul imprisoned within it that pays for the sins it committed:

The Watchtower teaches "recreation" instead of "resurrection":

In Is This Life All There Is? the Watchtower says:

"Similar to what happens at the time of conception, at the time of the resurrection or re-creation …Jehovah…is capable of having an accurate record by which to re-create one who has died.

We can have confidence in Jehovah's perfect memory. Why, even imperfect humans, by means of videotape, can preserve and construct visible and audible reproductions of persons. Far greater is God's ability to keep such records, for he calls all the numberless stars by name!-Psalm 147:4

It can be seen, therefore, that resurrection or recreation is possible because the deceased individual lives in God's memory...

'But if a person is thus re-created,' someone may say, 'is he really the same person? Is he not just a copy?' -Is This Life All There Is, Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1974, pp. 173, 172.


Is it a copy or not? Let's illustrate the main idea with this parallel:

God doesn't wait for you "Butch5" to die, He recreates "Butch5" from His perfect memory while YOU are blogging from Moma's basement.

Finding you downstairs "the cloned Butch5" shoots, killing "the intruder".

Did the real "Butch5" die?

"Yes, you did."

Obviously, the WatchTower's community brain cell was in use when they invented the "recreation dogma". For all practical purposes, neither the righteous or unrighteous are raised up, they remain dead, cease to exist. Only copies of them will be in God's kingdom, or the Lake of Fire.

Its a denial of the Bible Teaching there will be are resurrection of the people who were saved or died unsaved, not copies of them from God's memory.