Annihilationism, do the Wicked Perish?

[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.

Butch5
I've shown that aionios doesn't mean eternal or forever.

It can refer to an age that ends, but the phrase "ages of ages" in Revelation 11:15 says Christ's Kingdom is "forever". Therefore, it means "forever" in Revelation 20:10 also.

καὶ βασανισθήσονται ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων. (Rev. 20:10 BYZ)
and they shall be tormented, day and night, unto the ages of ages. (Rev. 20:10 ROT)

Ἐγένετο ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ κόσμου, τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν, καὶ τοῦ χριστοῦ αὐτοῦ, καὶ βασιλεύσει εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων. (Rev. 11:15 BYZ)
The kingdom of the world, hath become [the kingdom] of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign unto the ages of ages. (Rev. 11:15 ROT)

Confirming "forever" is meant, "day and night" means "unceasing" requiring the torment be "forever" or it would "cease."

Butch5
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.

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)

The "lake of fire" is figurative for the "second death" (Rev. 20:14),which means it is the "death from which no resurrection occurs in scripture."

Therefore, anything (Death, Hades) or anyone cast into the "Lake of Fire" will never return.

The Devil, Beast and False Prophet are literal persons, therefore their suffering the "second death" literally means they will never return. They remain conscious of their surroundings because scripture testifies their "torment" is "unceasing", "day and night forever and ever".

The symbolism of being cast into a "Lake of Fire" refers to a torment that is like being submerged in fire.

Butch5
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.

If Gehenna were a place of annihilation, then drowning in the sea would NOT be better.

"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. (Mk. 9:42 NKJ)

Butch5
The passage says the fire is not quenched. It doesn't say it won't go out.

Nothing quenches Gehenna fire, even time won't put it out.

Butch5
What in the world the worm has to do with whether or not the people are eternal is beyond me.

These resurrected bodies of the wicked once conveyed sinful pleasure to wicked souls. Now they convey the torment of being "eaten alive" by undying worms and "burning in unquenchable fire".

Butch5
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.

Just as a stone can burn forever in fire, so also can the wicked burn forever:

20 But the wicked are like the troubled sea, When it cannot rest, Whose waters cast up mire and dirt.
21 "There is no peace," Says my God, "for the wicked. (Isa. 57:20-21 NKJ)

Therefore, your teaching Satan, the False Prophet and the Beast will have eternal peace, is wrong according to the scriptures.


It is written, those who walk in light of their own making, will lie down in torment:

Look, all you who kindle a fire, Who encircle yourselves with sparks: Walk in the light of your fire and in the sparks you have kindled-- This you shall have from My hand: You shall lie down in torment. (Isa. 50:11 NKJ)

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

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

Remember Worker #2.

Nope. First death is death of the body, second death is death of the soul. "Fear not them that kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear Him that is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." (Matt. 10:28)

 

[Alfred Persson]

Nope. First death is death of the body, second death is death of the soul. "Fear not them that kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear Him that is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." (Matt. 10:28)

Incorrect, you left out the body. Christ did not. After the resurrection of the body, the wicked are cast body and soul into Gehenna.

The wicked (who would rejoice if there were no punishment for their evil works, if death resulted in non-existence or annihilation) should FEAR God, because His wrath can be poured out on both body AND soul.

Gehenna is another name for the lake of fire: "This is the second death"

NKJ Rev. 2:11 "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes shall not be hurt by the second death."'
NKJ Rev. 20:6 Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.
NKJ Rev. 20:14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
NKJ Rev. 21:8 "But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part (3313 μέρος meros) in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."

The wicked "shall have their part" (3313 μέρος meros) in the lake, their "destiny" determined by God, according to their deeds:

3313 μέρος meros
Meaning: 1) a part 1a) a part due or assigned to one 1b) lot, destiny.-Strong's Concordance

Origin: from an obsolete but more primary form of meiromai (to get as a section or allotment); TDNT - 4:594,585; n n


13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works.
14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire. (Rev. 20:13-15 NKJ)

That is, if their names aren't in the Book of life. If it is, these being "judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books" (among which is the Book of life), are forgiven their misdeeds and enter life.

11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them.
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. (Rev. 20:11-12 NKJ)

All the rest are cast into the Lake of Fire, the "second death."

The destruction body and soul undergo could be annihilation. The range of ἀπόλλυμι includes destruction that ruins so it no longer is fit for its original purpose, as new wine does to old wineskins:

622 ἀπόλλυμι apollumi
Meaning: 1) to destroy 1a) to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin 1b) render useless 1c) to kill 1d) to declare that one must be put to death 1e) metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell 1f) to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed 2) to destroy 2a) to lose.-Strong's Concordance

"And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy (622 ἀπόλλυμι apollumi) both soul and body in hell. (Matt. 10:28 NKJ)

"And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; or else the new wine will burst the wineskins and be spilled, and the wineskins will be ruined (622 ἀπόλλυμι apollumi). (Lk. 5:37 NKJ)

Corroborating this range of meaning, Death and Hades (which are places, not personifications as both are listed with "the sea") are cast into the Lake of fire never to return, they are destroyed. But Satan, False Prophet and Beast are tormented eternally in the same Lake of fire:

Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. (Rev. 20:14 NKJ)

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)

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

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.

Actually, the underlying issue is not about the placement of a comma or the meaning of "paradise". There're many many questionable translations like this, such as the umbrella term "hell" for both the grave and Gehenna, or Jesus as the "only begotten son", even though God has many other sons (Gen. 6:2, Job 1:6, Ps. 82:6-7). Some are just inaccuracies, some are big errors with huge theological implications, this kind of stuff challenges the bible's infallibility and erodes our trust in its authority. It pokes holes in doctrines and theologies that had been established for centuries.

In case you don't know, the devil had been coming after God's words even before the 66 books of bible were completed, most modern bibles are more or less adulterated, and that's just English ones, foreign language bibles are mostly translated from English version. That's why you've got the KJV and NKJV only crowds, I'm one of them, I only have one NKJV. But if KJV and NKJV are fraught with such errors and inaccuracies which lead to wrong doctrines, and it's the translator's fault, then that's very dangerous and consequential. I've heard many cautionary tales of apostasy and "deconstruction", their defections from faith all started from discrediting the bible. We must not go down that route.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Incorrect, you left out the body. Christ did not. After the resurrection of the body, the wicked are cast body and soul into Gehenna, another name for the lake of fire: "This is the second death"

NKJ Rev. 2:11 "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes shall not be hurt by the second death."'
NKJ Rev. 20:6 Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.
NKJ Rev. 20:14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
NKJ Rev. 21:8 "But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."

The wicked "shall have their part" in the lake, their "destiny" determined by God, according to their deeds:

13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works.
14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire. (Rev. 20:13-15 NKJ)

That is, if their names aren't in the Book of life. If it is, these being "judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books" (among which is the Book of life), are forgiven their misdeeds and enter life.

11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them.
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. (Rev. 20:11-12 NKJ)

All the rest are cast into the Lake of Fire, the "second death."

The destruction body and soul undergo could be annihilation, but with the range of meaning of that ἀπόλλυμι includes destruction that ruins something so it no longer is fit for its original purpose.

622 ἀπόλλυμι apollumi
Meaning: 1) to destroy 1a) to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin 1b) render useless 1c) to kill 1d) to declare that one must be put to death 1e) metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell 1f) to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed 2) to destroy 2a) to lose

"And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy (622 ἀπόλλυμι apollumi) both soul and body in hell. (Matt. 10:28 NKJ)

"And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; or else the new wine will burst the wineskins and be spilled, and the wineskins will be ruined (622 ἀπόλλυμι apollumi). (Lk. 5:37 NKJ)

Corroborating this range of meaning, Death and Hades (which are places, not personifications as both are listed with "the sea") are cast into the Lake of fire never to return, they are destroyed.

But Satan, False Prophet and Beast are tormented eternally in the same Lake of fire:

Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. (Rev. 20:14 NKJ)

Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone. (Rev. 19:20 NKJ)

It's pointless for us to have any further discussion if you keep redefining words. I bid you adieu, good night.

 

[Alfred Persson]

It's pointless for us to have any further discussion if you keep redefining words. I bid you adieu, good night.

I am under no illusions convincing you is possible. I reply so others can enjoy the discussion. What is pointless to you, is point-filled to me. What? Another redefinition? Yes, couldn't resist.

 

[Whatever]

"No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven (Jn. 3:13 NKJ)

I just found something interesting in Matthew Poole's Commentary:
The Lutherans have another notion, ascribing an omnipresence even to the human nature of Christ, because of its personal union with the Divine nature; and so affirm that Christ’s human nature, while it was on earth, was also substantially in heaven; as, on the other side, they are as stiff in maintaining that, although Christ’s human nature be now in heaven, yet it is also on earth, really and essentially present wherever the sacrament of the Lord’s supper is administered; but this is to ascribe a body unto Christ which is indeed no body, according to any notion we have of a body.

1John 3:2 Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.

So, will be also have omnipresent bodies? We would need omniscient minds to control being everywhere all at once.

 

[follower]

Actually, the underlying issue is not about the placement of a comma or the meaning of "paradise". There're many many questionable translations like this, such as the umbrella term "hell" for both the grave and Gehenna, or Jesus as the "only begotten son", even though God has many other sons (Gen. 6:2, Job 1:6, Ps. 82:6-7). Some are just inaccuracies, some are big errors with huge theological implications, this kind of stuff challenges the bible's infallibility and erodes our trust in its authority. It pokes holes in doctrines and theologies that had been established for centuries.

Thus countless arguments on forums are spawned based on what is false yet taught for centuries even as if true.

 

[follower]

But if KJV and NKJV are fraught with such errors and inaccuracies which lead to wrong doctrines, and it's the translator's fault, then that's very dangerous and consequential.

It might not be the translator's fault. Yahweh knows all the details of all the wrong doctrines and so on.

 

[Alfred Persson]

I just found something interesting in Matthew Poole's Commentary:
The Lutherans have another notion, ascribing an omnipresence even to the human nature of Christ, because of its personal union with the Divine nature; and so affirm that Christ’s human nature, while it was on earth, was also substantially in heaven; as, on the other side, they are as stiff in maintaining that, although Christ’s human nature be now in heaven, yet it is also on earth, really and essentially present wherever the sacrament of the Lord’s supper is administered; but this is to ascribe a body unto Christ which is indeed no body, according to any notion we have of a body.

1John 3:2 Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.

So, will be also have omnipresent bodies? We would need omniscient minds to control being everywhere all at once.

I would consider 1 John 3:2 support for referring it to His Divine Nature, His Omnipresent Person and not His body.

But I didn't realize some propose a connection to the LORD's supper, "this is my body" so while Jesus is in heaven, His body also present on earth in the sacrament.

Like Lenski I apply it to His divine nature, His Omnipresent Person.

Though he came down and now speaks to Nicodemus as the Son of man, he remains ὁ ὢν ἐν τῷ οὑρανῷ, “he who is in heaven.” He cannot change his divine nature, cannot lay it aside, cannot cancel even temporarily his divine Sonship, his unity of essence with the Father and the Spirit. This is unthinkable although men have tried to think it. To think such a thing is to make also “the Son of man” an illusion, to say nothing of undoing in thought the very Godhead itself and the Trinity of immutable Persons. This person Who is first ὁ καταβάς and secondly ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου is thirdly ὁ ὢν ἐν τῷ οὑρανῷ. The participle ὤν is substantivized exactly like καταβάς, the article in each case converting the participle into a noun. The first, an aorist, names the person according to one past act, “he that came down”; the second a durative, timeless present, like ὤν in 1:18, names the person according to his enduring condition or being, “he that is, ever and ever is in heaven.” And this designation ὁ ὤν dare not be altered into something else such as mere communion with heaven and thus with God. It denotes being. We may have communion with God, and yet who would dare to express that by saying that we ὄντες, “are,” in heaven.-Lenski, R. C. H. (1961). The interpretation of St. John’s gospel (p. 250). Augsburg Publishing House.

New Bibles delete the phrase but they do so against one of their stated rules about "difficult texts are likely original":

[who is in heaven]. This phrase is found in a few Greek mss., the Latin and some Syriac versions. The textual evidence is not strong, but the phrase is so difficult that it may well have been omitted in the majority of manuscripts to avoid a difficulty. Lagrange, Boismard, and Wikenhauser are among those who accept it. The Son in John remains close to the Father even when he is on earth (1:18).-Brown, R. E. (2008). The Gospel according to John (I–XII): Introduction, translation, and notes (Vol. 29, p. 133). Yale University Press.

Thanks for bringing that to my attention. Just goes to show every phrase in Scripture has been explored for meaning.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

I am under no illusions convincing you is possible. I reply so others can enjoy the discussion. What is pointless to you, is point-filled to me. What? Another redefinition? Yes, couldn't resist.

You know what, man, I'm not Pharoah, my heart ain't stiff like his. Butch5 has convinced me in our discussion on Lk. 23:43, that paradise is the restored garden of Eden, Jesus didn't necessarily go there that day, he just promised the thief that day. I'm also convinced that the parable of the richman and Lazarus is primarily about judgement on apostate Israel instead of afterlife. You convinced me of nothing only because you keep redefining the words.

 

[Alfred Persson]

You know what, man, I'm not Pharoah, my heart ain't stiff like his. Butch5 has convinced me in our discussion on Lk. 23:43, that paradise is the restored garden of Eden, Jesus didn't necessarily go there that day, he just promised the thief that day. I'm also convinced that the parable of the richman and Lazarus is primarily about judgement on apostate Israel instead of afterlife. You convinced me of nothing only because you keep redefining the words.

1)I don't redefine words, I use words as they are meant in the context.

2)When the thief, a Jew who believed in the Messianic Kingdom asked to be remembered in Christ's "Kingdom", he is thinking about well into the future when Christ the Messiah is King.

JESUS changed the wording from "kingdom" to "paradise", and says "Verily" to introduce something the thief wasn't expecting, a "solemn truth".

Therefore, the placement of the comma does not matter, Jesus isn't calling His kingdom paradise. Many Jews in Jesus' day believed "paradise" was "Gan-Eden" in "third heaven"

"Verily with me shalt thou be in Paradise." As both would die that day its implied Jesus meant that very day.

42 And he went on to say--Jesus! remember me, whensoever thou shalt come into thy kingdom.
43 And he said unto him--Verily, I say unto thee this day: With me, shalt thou be in Paradise. (Lk. 23:42-43 ROT)


I interpret the text in context.

As for the Rich Man, it should be obvious its more than a "parable". Lazarus (whom Christ raised up) did indeed rise from the dead and because the Pharisees didn't believe Moses and the Prophets, they conspired to kill Lazarus with Jesus:

9 Now a great many of the Jews knew that He was there; and they came, not for Jesus' sake only, but that they might also see Lazarus, whom He had raised from the dead.
10 But the chief priests plotted to put Lazarus to death also,
11 because on account of him many of the Jews went away and believed in Jesus. (Jn. 12:9-11 NKJ)

That is the context. The Pharisees mocked Jesus. Jesus then warns rejecting Him will result in their ending up in Hades in torments. They thought Abraham wouldn't allow a circumcised Jew descend into Hades:

'In the Hereafter Abraham will sit at the entrance of Gehinnom and will not allow any circumcised Israelite to descend into it.-Abraham Cohen, Everyman's Talmud, (Schocken Books, NY, 1995), pp. 381.

Because they mocked Jesus when He taught to use wealth wisely, the parable centers on their lack of charity to the poor and disabled.

13 "No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon."
14 Now the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, also heard all these things, and they derided Him. (Lk. 16:13-14 NKJ)

So this isn't just a "fable", its a prophetic warning to the Pharisees who would end up in Hades because they rejected the Messiah.

That's interpreting in context, not making it fit the theories of the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Is The Rich Man and Lazarus Story About Hell Prophecy Parable or both? | End Time News

34 All these things Jesus spoke to the multitude in parables; and without a parable He did not speak to them, 35 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying: "I will open My mouth in parables; I will utter things kept secret from the foundation of the world." (Matt. 13:34-35

endtimenews.net

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

1)I don't redefine words, I use words as they are meant in the context.

2)When the thief, a Jew who believed in the Messianic Kingdom asked to be remembered in Christ's "Kingdom", he is thinking about well into the future when Christ the Messiah is King.

JESUS changed the wording from "kingdom" to "paradise", and says "Verily" to introduce something the thief wasn't expecting, a "solemn truth".

Therefore, the placement of the comma does not matter, Jesus isn't calling His kingdom paradise. Many Jews in Jesus' day believed "paradise" was "Gan-Eden" in "third heaven"

"Verily with me shalt thou be in Paradise." As both would die that day its implied Jesus meant that very day.

42 And he went on to say--Jesus! remember me, whensoever thou shalt come into thy kingdom.
43 And he said unto him--Verily, I say unto thee this day: With me, shalt thou be in Paradise. (Lk. 23:42-43 ROT)


I interpret the text in context.

As for the Rich Man, it should be obvious its more than a "parable". Lazarus (whom Christ raised up) did indeed rise from the dead and because the Pharisees didn't believe Moses and the Prophets, they conspired to kill Lazarus with Jesus:

9 Now a great many of the Jews knew that He was there; and they came, not for Jesus' sake only, but that they might also see Lazarus, whom He had raised from the dead.
10 But the chief priests plotted to put Lazarus to death also,
11 because on account of him many of the Jews went away and believed in Jesus. (Jn. 12:9-11 NKJ)

That is the context. The Pharisees mocked Jesus. Jesus then warns rejecting Him will result in their ending up in Hades in torments. They thought Abraham wouldn't allow a circumcised Jew descend into Hades:

'In the Hereafter Abraham will sit at the entrance of Gehinnom and will not allow any circumcised Israelite to descend into it.-Abraham Cohen, Everyman's Talmud, (Schocken Books, NY, 1995), pp. 381.

Because they mocked Jesus when He taught to use wealth wisely, the parable centers on their lack of charity to the poor and disabled.

13 "No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon."
14 Now the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, also heard all these things, and they derided Him. (Lk. 16:13-14 NKJ)

So this isn't just a "fable", its a prophetic warning to the Pharisees who would end up in Hades because they rejected the Messiah.

That's interpreting in context, not making it fit the theories of the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Is The Rich Man and Lazarus Story About Hell Prophecy Parable or both? | End Time News

34 All these things Jesus spoke to the multitude in parables; and without a parable He did not speak to them, 35 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying: "I will open My mouth in parables; I will utter things kept secret from the foundation of the world." (Matt. 13:34-35

endtimenews.net

Throughout the whole bible, the word "paradise" always means garden, and in all other instances it's translated as garden except this one. Whoever left it untranslated must've done it deliberately. If you understand that this "garden" is referring to a restored Garden of Eden, and it's gonna be in the messianic kingdom, then that can't be "third heaven". The thief didn't ask for third heaven, he didn't ask for any heaven, he only asked for the kingdom which will be established on earth. But was it established on that day? The day of crucifixion? Even if you are one of those guys who believe that the kingdom is already here, that would started from the Great Commission where Jesus declared that "all authories in heavens and on earth have been given to me", that was 40 days later when he was about to ascend into heaven. In fact, previously in the trial, Jesus told Pontius Pilate that "my kingdom is not of this world". It makes no sense to shoehorn his kingdom in the crucifixion day in any way, the only possibility and rational explanation is that Jesus actually meant eventually, in the future, the thief will be with him in the restored garden of Eden, but on that day the Lord must go down to Hades to preach to the imprisoned spirits first. Splitting Jesus in two is not a solution.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Throughout the whole bible, the word "paradise" always means garden, and in all other instances it's translated as garden except this one. Whoever left it untranslated must've done it deliberately. If you understand that this "garden" is referring to a restored Garden of Eden, and it's gonna be in the messianic kingdom, then that can't be "third heaven". The thief didn't ask for third heaven, he didn't ask for any heaven, he only asked for the kingdom which will be established on earth. But was it established on that day? The day of crucifixion? Even if you are one of those guys who believe that the kingdom is already here, that would started from the Great Commission where Jesus declared that "all authories in heavens and on earth have been given to me", that was 40 days later when he was about to ascend into heaven. In fact, previously in the trial, Jesus told Pontius Pilate that "my kingdom is not of this world". It makes no sense to shoehorn his kingdom in the crucifixion day in any way, the only possibility and rational explanation is that Jesus actually meant eventually, in the future, the thief will be with him in the restored garden of Eden, but on that day the Lord must go down to Hades to preach to the imprisoned spirits first. Splitting Jesus in two is not a solution.

No, it does not as 2 Corinthians 12:2, 4 proves. Paul indicates its a place in third heaven where one can be "out of the body"

2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago-- whether in the body I do not know, or whether out of the body I do not know, God knows-- such a one was caught up to the third heaven.
3 And I know such a man-- whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows--
4 how he was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. (2 Cor. 12:2-4 NKJ)

In the Jewish Talmud "Paradise" is called "Gan-Eden" and its location is in heaven:

Gan Eden n. Hebrew (GAHN AYE-den) Literally, “Garden of Eden.” 1. The place on Earth where Adam and Eve resided. 2. Paradise; the place of spiritual reward for the souls of the righteous.- The JPS Dictionary of Jewish words (p. 48). Jewish Publication Society.

The popular conception of paradise is expressed by the term “Gan ‘Eden,” in contradistinction to “Gehinnom” = “hell.” Jewish authorities are almost unanimous in maintaining that there is a terrestrial as well as a celestial Gan ‘Eden; that the Garden of Eden in Genesis is a model in miniature of the higher Gan ‘Eden called paradise.-the Jewish Encyclopedia, (Vol. 9, pp. 515–516). Funk & Wagnalls.


Jehovah's Witnesses deny any conscious existence of souls after death and claim "Paradise" is a future earthly paradise Christ will establish in the future. Does placement of the comma change the meaning of Christ's promise?

Although the Jehovah's Witnesses are right to interpret "kingdom" as the Messianic Kingdom Jesus would one day head, JESUS changed the subject from His Messianic "kingdom" to "paradise", and He prefaced this change with an "Amen", saying "Assuredly I say to you" which He often does to discuss something that was unexpected, a "solemn truth".

The phrase "Assuredly I say to you" always indicates the "unexpected" was about to be revealed. We see that everywhere Jesus used the phrase:

BYZ Matt. 5:26 Ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, οὐ μὴ ἐξέλθῃς ἐκεῖθεν, ἕως ἂν ἀποδῷς τὸν ἔσχατον κοδράντην.
BYZ Matt. 26:34 Ἔφη αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Ἀμὴν λέγω σοι ὅτι ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ νυκτί, πρὶν ἀλέκτορα φωνῆσαι, τρὶς ἀπαρνήσῃ με.
BYZ Mk. 14:30 Καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ὅτι σὺ σήμερον ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ ταύτῃ, πρὶν ἢ δὶς ἀλέκτορα φωνῆσαι, τρὶς ἀπαρνήσῃ με.
BYZ Lk. 23:43 Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, σήμερον μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ.
BYZ Jn. 3:3 Ἀπεκρίθη ὁ Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν, οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ.
BYZ Jn. 3:5 Ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς, Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἐξ ὕδατος καὶ πνεύματος, οὐ δύναται εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ.
BYZ Jn. 3:11 Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι ὅτι ὃ οἴδαμεν λαλοῦμεν, καὶ ὃ ἑωράκαμεν μαρτυροῦμεν· καὶ τὴν μαρτυρίαν ἡμῶν οὐ λαμβάνετε.
BYZ Jn. 13:38 Ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Τὴν ψυχήν σου ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ θήσεις; Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, οὐ μὴ ἀλέκτωρ φωνήσῃ ἕως οὗ ἀπαρνήσῃ με τρίς.
BYZ Jn. 21:18 Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ὅτε ἦς νεώτερος, ἐζώννυες σεαυτόν, καὶ περιεπάτεις ὅπου ἤθελες· ὅταν δὲ γηράσῃς, ἐκτενεῖς τὰς χεῖράς σου, καὶ ἄλλος σε ζώσει, καὶ οἴσει ὅπου οὐ θέλεις.


For those who don't read Greek, below is every instance where Jesus said "Assuredly I say to you". Notice how the phrase indicates something unexpected will be revealed, in every occurrence:

25 "Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are on the way with him, lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, the judge hand you over to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.
26 "Assuredly, I say to you, you will by no means get out of there till you have paid the last penny.
(Matt. 5:25-26 NKJ)

33 Peter answered and said to Him, "Even if all are made to stumble because of You, I will never be made to stumble."
34 Jesus said to him, "Assuredly, I say to you that this night, before the rooster crows, you will deny Me three times." (Matt. 26:33-34 NKJ)

29 Peter said to Him, "Even if all are made to stumble, yet I will not be."
30 Jesus said to him, "Assuredly, I say to you that today, even this night, before the rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times." (Mk. 14:29-30 NKJ)

39 Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, "If You are the Christ, save Yourself and us."
40 But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, "Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation?
41 "And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong."
42 Then he said to Jesus, "Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom."
43 And Jesus said to him, "Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise." (Lk. 23:39-43 NKJ)

3 Jesus answered and said to him, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."
4 Nicodemus said to Him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?"
5 Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
6 "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7 "Do not marvel that I said to you,`You must be born again.' (Jn. 3:3-7 NKJ)
9 Nicodemus answered and said to Him, "How can these things be?"
10 Jesus answered and said to him, "Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not know these things?
11 "Most assuredly, I say to you, We speak what We know and testify what We have seen, and you do not receive Our witness.
12 "If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? (Jn. 3:9-12 NKJ)

37 Peter said to Him, "Lord, why can I not follow You now? I will lay down my life for Your sake."
38 Jesus answered him, "Will you lay down your life for My sake? Most assuredly, I say to you, the rooster shall not crow till you have denied Me three times. (Jn. 13:37-14:1 NKJ)

17 He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?" Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, "Do you love Me?" And he said to Him, "Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You." Jesus said to him, "Feed My sheep.
18 "Most assuredly, I say to you, when you were younger, you girded yourself and walked where you wished; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish."
19 This He spoke, signifying by what death he would glorify God. And when He had spoken this, He said to him, "Follow Me."(Jn. 21:17-19 NKJ)

Therefore, whether we put the comma before or after "Today", its still a promise to the Thief "today you will be with me in paradise".


Some object Christ's human soul descended into Hades when He died, so how could the thief be with Him in Paradise? The Son of God has two natures united to His Person, finite human and infinite divine. The Sphere of Infinite Radius that is God the Son in whom all things consist and have their being (Col. 1:16-17; Acts 17:28), was centered in the humanity of Jesus and therefore never ceased to be omnipresent in heaven/paradise even while He was incarnate in human flesh on earth (John 3:13).

"No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven. (Jn. 3:13 NKJ)

Therefore, Jesus could be with the Thief in Paradise that very day after both died, at the same time His human soul was quickened by the Holy Spirit and in His strength He went and preached to the "spirits in prison" in Sheol/Hades (1 Peter 3:18-19; Acts 2:27).

 

[Alfred Persson]

on that day the Lord must go down to Hades to preach to the imprisoned spirits first. Splitting Jesus in two is not a solution.

You deny the union of two natures in Christ, in the One Person of Jesus. I don't split Him into two Jesus'.

JWs do that when they claim the Jesus who died ceased to exist, and His physical body passed away in gases. So what was raised up? They believe God used His perfect memory of Jesus, to recreate a "life giving spirit" who then ascended into heaven. So they in effect have 3 separate Jesus Christs. The first "emptied Himself" and ceased to exist (Phil. 2:7). The second was born of a virgin. The third Jesus recreated on the third day.

So you truck with those who split up Jesus into three separate and distinct individuals. That explains the inability to see what Scripture teaches.

 

[GodsGrace]

Cullman never said that. He said:

"... It is important to see how different the New Testament anthropology is from that of the Greeks. Body and soul are both originally good in so far as they are created by God; they are both bad in so far as the deadly power of the flesh has hold of them. Both can and must be set free by the quickening power of the Holy Spirit.

Here, therefore, deliverance consists not in a release of soul from body but in a release of both from flesh. We are not released from the body; rather the body itself is set free. This is made especially clear in the Pauline Epistles, but it is the interpretation of the whole New Testament. In this connexion one does not find the differences which are present among the various books on other points. Even the much-quoted saying of Jesus in Matthew 10:28 in no way presupposes the Greek conception. ‘Fear not them that kill the body, but cannot kill the soul.’ It might seem to presuppose the view that the soul has no need of the body, but the context of the passage shows that this is not the case. Jesus does not continue: ‘Be afraid of him who kills the soul’ ; rather: ‘Fear him who can slay both soul and body in Gehenna.’ That is, fear God, who is able to give comletely to death; to wit, when He does not resurrect you to life. We shall see, it is true, that the soul is the starting-point of the resurrection, since, as we have said, it can already be possessed by the Holy Spirit in a way quite different from the body. The Holy Spirit already lives in our inner man. ‘By the Holy Spirit who dwells in you (already)’, says Paul in Romans 8:11, ‘God will also quicken your mortal bodies.’ Therefore, those who kill only the body are not to be feared. It can be raised from the dead. Moreover, it must be raised. The soul cannot always remain without a body. And on the other side we hear in Jesus’ saying in Matthew 10:28 that the soul can be killed. The soul is not immortal. There must be resurrection for both; for since the Fall the whole man is ‘sown corruptible’. For the inner man, thanks to the transformation by the quickening power of the Holy Spirit, the resurrection can take place already in this present life: through the ‘renewal from day to day’. The flesh, however, still maintains its seat in our body. The transformation of the body does not take place until the End, when the whole creation will be made new by the Holy Spirit, when there will be no death and no corruption."-Immortality of the Soul or Resurrection of the Dead? Chapter 2. By Oscar Cullmann

And Cullmann misunderstood Christ's warning, the terrible nature of Gehenna. Its a place of PHYSICAL and SOULICAL torment, BOTH are horribly destroyed (622 ἀπόλλυμι apollumi), that is ruined just as wineskins can be destroyed, ruined for use (Mt. 9:17)

622 ἀπόλλυμι apollumi {ap-ol'-loo-mee}
Meaning: 1) to destroy 1a) to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin 1b) render useless 1c) to kill 1d) to declare that one must be put to death 1e) metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell 1f) to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed 2) to destroy 2a) to lose

The abominable Resurrection body and soul of the wicked are "destroyed" in the same way as a "body and soul" in the TV show "The Walking Dead" is a destroyed human being.

The resurrection body of the wicked reeks of corruption, infested with undying worms that literally "eat it alive". The soul is trapped within, the "person" himself is enduring physical pain, and the "person" or "life" within is also suffering spiritual pain from being separated from all that is good.

Unlike the abominations in the "Walking Dead", these resurrected bodies of the wicked are "corpses, dead carcasses" that cannot walk to lesser tormenting regions of Gehenna, or see any light. It is the "outer darkness" far away from anything good from God. The abominations are in Gehenna a garbage dump piled up on top of each other like rubbish, burning in unquenchable fire.

THAT IS WHY we should fear God, Gehenna is FAR FAR worse than annihilation. Far worse than any Cessation of life regardless how horribly it is accomplished. Gehenna is forever:

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)

Unlike the horrible death by millstone hung around the neck like a guillotine and then being tossed into the sea Gehenna, a temporary experience.....Gehenna is far worse.

The worms consuming these bodies never die, which means the bodies never die and the "life" or "person" or "soul" imprisoned within, also has not been killed.

Both are "ruined" as to what God intended, not only is the body not the Temple of God it was designed to be in loving communion with the soul within it, and the body communicating the joys and experiences of life to the soul within. Body and Soul are now destroyed, the abominable resurrection body communicates the Holy Wrath of an offended God, intense physical and spiritual pain to the person (life, soul) imprisoned within.


As I pointed out, Scripture does NOT teach "one size fits all". The penalty of Gehenna doesn't have the same effect on all tossed into it, just as fire consumes hay, but rocks can persist forever.

Scripture does teach many who die unsaved do not merit anything more than annihilation. The symbolism of the Lake of fire shows the wicked receive "their part" or "destiny" "according to their works" in the lake of fire. Some can be utterly destroyed as Death and Hades are, or suffer for a time and then be destroyed, "burnt up". But some can merit eternal torment like the False Prophet, Beast, and Satan do (Rev. 20:10).

How is the body released from the flesh?
Isn't it the same?
Short answer please.
Thanks

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Although the Jehovah's Witnesses are right to interpret "kingdom" as the Messianic Kingdom Jesus would one day head, JESUS changed the subject from His Messianic "kingdom" to "paradise", and He prefaced this change with an "Amen", saying "Assuredly I say to you" which He often does to discuss something that was unexpected, a "solemn truth".

He didn't, you did. You changed it. I didn't bear any false witness against you. There's also no evidence to suggest that Paul was referring to the thief in 2 Corinthians 12:2.

 

[Alfred Persson]

He didn't, you did. You changed it. I didn't bear any false witness against you. There's also no evidence to suggest that Paul was referring to the thief in 2 Corinthians 12:2.

Sophist "straw man" debate tactics are why I am under no illusion you will be persuaded by scripture.

Although Paul denies it, he likely is speaking of himself in the "third person". Elementary deduction even a 2nd grade child can perform, shows Paul puts "paradise" where souls can exist "out of the body" in "third heaven"

NKJ 2 Corinthians 12:1 It is doubtless not profitable for me to boast. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord:
2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago-- whether in the body I do not know, or whether out of the body I do not know, God knows-- such a one was caught up to the third heaven.
3 And I know such a man-- whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows--
4 how he was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.
5 Of such a one I will boast; yet of myself I will not boast, except in my infirmities. (2 Cor. 12:1-5 NKJ)

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Sophist "straw man" debate tactics are why I am under no illusion you will be persuaded by scripture.

Although Paul denies it, he likely is speaking of himself in the "third person". Elementary deduction even a 2nd grade child can perform, shows Paul puts "paradise" where souls can exist "out of the body" in "third heaven"

Oh I can be persuaded by scripture and logical analysis, but I can't be persuaded by baseless assumption such as this silly one you made. Paul didn't identify that man nor specify third heaven, you're under your own illusion.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

You deny the union of two natures in Christ, in the One Person of Jesus. I don't split Him into two Jesus'.

No I don't. I believe in his dual nature as much as you do, it is taught in Rom. 1:1-4, but dual nature is NOT dual beings or dual persons, one goes to God the other goes to Hades. The Scripture is clear: "Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father." (Jn. 20:17)