Annihilationism

[Butch5]

If it is not eternal then what is it?Fire that lasts for 20 minutes?
Matthew 25:41 Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels:

Daniel 12:2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake,
Some to everlasting life,
Some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Hi Kathi.

As Doulos pointed out we have an example of everlasting fire, it is the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. They are not still burning, they burned and were destroyed.

Also, the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament used the word "aionion" of the Aaronic priesthood saying that it is forever. Paul on the other hand says that the Aaronic priesthood ended.

21 "In the tabernacle of meeting, outside the veil which is before the Testimony, Aaron and his sons shall tend it from evening until morning before the LORD. It shall be a statute forever to their generations on behalf of the children of Israel. (Exo 27:21 NKJ)

The translators how translated "aionion" as forever. Is the Aaronic priesthood forever?

11 Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron?
12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. (Heb 7:11-12 NKJ)

There is example after example of this in the Scriptures. I believe this is a classic example of one's theology driving the interpretation and the definition of "aionion"

So, we have to decide who is correct here, the translators who chose to define "aionion" as forever or the apostles Paul who received the Gospel from Jesus.

 

[Kathi]

Even these?


.

You are right.No.I don't think destruction is a good definition for those who do not choose Jesus Christ and go to hell.They will not be destroyed.

 

[Kathi]

What does the "worm that will not die" in Mark 9:48 mean to you?
where
‘Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched

Isaiah 66:24 “And they shall go forth and look
Upon the corpses of the men
Who have transgressed against Me.
For their worm does not die,
And their fire is not quenched.
They shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.”

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Again, just your opinion. Be careful not to grasp at straws.

An opinion is a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on facts or knowledge.

This is not what I presented, which was my interpretation of the passage as it is in it's original Greek, providing a definition not only of the Greek word, but the English word. I then demonstrated from the context what the proper translation and interpretation of the word, which happens to be the one every single NT Greek scholar agrees with. Which is to translate the word "destroy" rather than "ruin."

Have you attempted to demonstrate from the context how it could possibly mean simply to "ruin."

I see you had used two examples of (run). Now use two examples of (destroy).

I did, in that very same post.

Here are two more examples.

The Russians are going to destroy the Ukrainian Army. This denotes the destruction of the individuals of that army (not necessarily a prophecy of events to come lol).

Jimmy is going to destroy Allen's reputation. This denotes more of a "ruin" understanding of the term, where the loss of life or extinguishing of existence is not implied, but the ruining of a reputation.

Same word, different meanings given the context.

Since I am going to (ruin) that man, that man is thus now in (ruin). Just because that man is now (in ruin) doesn't mean he ceases to exist.

Except you have provided no exegetical basis for why this word should mean this given the context of the passage. Nor has any other Greek scholar since they all translate the word "destroy," and then commentators try to twist it to mean something else.

(Cause and effect), but we're discussing scripture and if hell is eternal...not someone running for president or a fitness program.

We're talking about the meaning of the word "destroy" and the concept of Semantic ranges within the meaning of a given word. I used the example of the word "run" to illustrate that the meaning of a word is determined by it's usage in a given context.

The example is relevant.

Evangelists preach with power and passion because the price Jesus paid on the cross was enormous. Dan 12:1-2

The price Jesus paid was for the sins of the world, to redeem fallen humanity, which he did by dying on the Cross.

In the book of acts, how many times do they use the concept of Eternal Conscious Torment in their preaching?

Or do you think the fact that Jesus is the only one to use the word "hell" (as referring to the final punishment) has any significance? Also, that he only used the word "hell" (Gehenna) in the presence of Jews?

There is more to this debate then I think you know.

 

[Butch5]

What does the "worm that will not die" in Mark 9:48 mean to you?
where
‘Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched

Jesus is quoting Isaiah 66, the worm is likely a reference to maggots that feed on the decaying bodies. The fire is not quenched means it is not put out, not that it cannot go out.

 

[Kathi]

Jesus is quoting Isaiah 66, the worm is likely a reference to maggots that feed on the decaying bodies. The fire is not quenched means it is not put out, not that it cannot go out.

Yes,that is in reference to everlasting torment in hell.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

You are right.No.I don't think destruction is a good definition for those who do not choose Jesus Christ and go to hell.They will not be destroyed.

Scripture seems to think it is an excellent way to describe it.

Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things. Philippians 3:19 (ESV)

“Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. Matthew 7:13 (ESV)

And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Matthew 10:28 (ESV) [Every Translation renders this word "to destroy"]

No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Luke 13:3 (ESV) [Same Greek word, term means the same thing.]

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. John 3:16 (ESV) [Same Greek word, term means the same thing.]

There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor? James 4:12 (ESV)

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of truth will be blasphemed. And in their greed they will exploit you with false words. Their condemnation from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep. 2 Peter 2:1-3 (ESV)

I could go on with several other examples, and countless other examples from the Old Testament of texts that seem to indicate the destruction of the wicked, rather than their immortal existence in a tortured state.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Yes,that is in reference to everlasting torment in hell.

Is this an opinion of yours? Can you perhaps tie in the idea of maggots feeding of corpses to torment in hell?

 

[Stan1953]

Hi Stan,
No, Jesus didn't say eternal fire, that is how the translators have translated "aionios". However, it cannot mean eternal as it's used of things that have ended. We've had a dicsussion of this word in the Conditional Immortality thread that Doulos linked to and in the Body, Soul, Spirit, thread.

Hey Butch,

As the majority of Greek scholars have rendered it as "eternal fire", and I know they are credentialed, I'll stick with their translations, five of which can be seen at the following link for this verse.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matt 25:41&version=NIV;NRSV;NET;NASB;MOUNCE

I know the Mounce's and Moo, and they are three of the most preeminent Greek scholars of our day.

No offence, but there are way to many arm chair Greek scholars online, who I don't know.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

I don't know but it makes me carsick if I look at it too long These are subjects that should be discussed.Alot of people believe in it.We need to let people know how wrong it is.Just like universalism and that thread was deleted.

You guys can attempt to tell us how wrong we are, but we'll keep pointing you to read all the Scriptures, not just a couple of proof texts.

 

[chessman]

I just thought I'd hire it for a week and see if it holds out. ... .... .... ... relax! ... there's a thousand posters who think they have God figured out and in a tidy little box. He knows what He's doing, and He does it, and He tells His Own, and they know His voice.
I simply "employed" that text as an answer to "the question" posted "with it".

Like DI, I thought the first part of your response post to my question was entertaining. But the last part, with your explanation of why you posted Ps 135:6, leaves me scratching my head as to how it answers my question about God sustaining people indefinitely after He sentences them to death of the body and soul and sentences them to "departure from Me".

I’m somewhat familiar with Ps 135 and it’s parallel Ps 136. It’s one of those many example sections of Scripture that provides evidence toward the annihilation of the wicked yet zero toward the ECT of the wicked. So I’m surprised you’d even mention it.

Here’s why:
I will not post the whole of Ps 135-136 (although they are not that long to read in their entirety, <5 minutes). You could “employ” the whole of both Psalms and read them in the time it takes for a quick employee work-break. It's worth a read, if you have time.

Ps 135
3 Praise Yah, for Yahweh is good.
Sing praises concerning his name, for it is pleasant.
…
6 All that Yahweh desires, he does,
in heaven and on earth,
in the seas and all the depths.​

[The verse (v.6) you mentioned is a great verse. BTW, I totally agree with it. Yet how it implies God tortures people forever, I’m at a loss to exegete from the passage. But read on, It's tells some of the things that a "good":]

…
8 Who struck the firstborn of Egypt,
both of humans and animals.
​

[In other words, God having “struck” (i.e. killed) the firstborn of Egypt is a “good” thing for God to do. So the very passage you posted actually supports the annihilation of the wicked as a “good desire” for God to have. Annihilation agrees with this, ECT not so much. It’s ECT that stipulates torture is a better good “desire” for God to have toward the wicked’s final punishment. Where’s your supporting passage that God desires to torture the wicked forever? If Psalm 135-136 showed that God’s love endures forever by torturing people in Hell forever, fine. I’d actually agree with that verse. Problem is, it’s non-existent.]

…
10 Who struck many nations

and killed mighty kings—​

[Again, when God’s wrathful anger at people/nations reaches its conclusion, does He torture them or does He put them to death? Answer is, He puts them to death.]

…
Ps 136 Give thanks to Yahweh, for he is good,
for his loyal love endures forever.
​

[Hmm? Will wicked kings endure forever in Hell now that we know God’s anger kills people? If it’s loving and ‘good’ for God to strike down /kill wicked kings, then how about at the second death (post judgment) where in Hell God destroys “both the body and the soul”, Matt 10:28? Still a loving thing for God to do, right? Answer is yes.]

…
10 To him who struck Egypt through their firstborn,
for his loyal love endures forever.…
15 But he tossed Pharaoh and his army into the Red Sea,for his loyal love endures forever.…
17 To him who struck great kings,
for his loyal love endures forever.
18 And he killed mighty kings,
for his loyal love endures forever.
…



25 The one who gives food to all flesh,
for his loyal love endures forever.
Hmm? Who gives “food to flesh” in the afterlife once they depart from God? Ironic we find this here since you brought up a Ps 135 verse supposedly toward an ‘answer’ to the question I posted.
​

Who sustains people indefinitely after they are banished to Hell, if it's God that gives food to all flesh and immortality to all that receive that gift? The answer is no one. Who/what sustains a whirlwind after the computer’s processor and hard-drive containing the whirlwind is destroyed? Answer is, no one. The whirlwind that appears on your computer screen originates as a Graphic Image File (GIF) that you can actually download and store on your hard drive. But to answer your question (which if you think about it you knew already); no, the whirlwind on your laptop does not keep going around and around when your laptop is closed.

Psalm 101:4 A perverse heart will depart from me; I will not know evil.​

Though the events of Egypt’s firstborn destruction and that of Egypt’s army in the Red Sea, Og, Edom, Sodom, etc. were their 1st death, we know Scripturally speaking they also receive a second death. And a banishment from the sustainer.

Matthew 7:23 And then I will say to them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Depart from me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Matthew 25:41 Then he will also say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed ones, into the eternal fire that has been prepared for the devil and his angels!

Rev 21:7-8 7 The one who conquers will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be my son. 8 But as for the cowards and unbelievers and detestable persons and murderers and sexually immoral people and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their share is in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death.​

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Hey Butch,

As the majority of Greek scholars have rendered it as "eternal fire", and I know they are credentialed, I'll stick with their translations, five of which can be seen at the following link for this verse.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matt 25:41&version=NIV;NRSV;NET;NASB;MOUNCE

I think if you build your entire argument on "these smart guys agree with me," then you have built your argument on a logical fallacy. It is important to note that the experts agree on a certain translation, but that doesn't make it infallible. It is just an admission of faith in your part in those who have studied the Greek in depth, rather than looking into it yourself.

I actually agree with you on the matter of translating it "eternal," but I see it as having a qualitative meaning here. The word eternal generally denotes a qualitative meaning, not necessarily referencing a period of time all the time. Make sense?

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Like DI, I thought the first part of your response post to my question was entertaining. But the last part, with your explanation of why you posted Ps 135:6, leaves me scratching my head as to how it answers my question about God sustaining people indefinitely after He sentences them to death of the body and soul and sentences them to "departure from Me".

I’m somewhat familiar with Ps 135 and it’s parallel Ps 136. It’s one of those many example sections of Scripture that provides evidence toward the annihilation of the wicked yet zero toward the ECT of the wicked. So I’m surprised you’d even mention it.

Here’s why:
I will not post the whole of Ps 135-136 (although they are not that long to read in their entirety, <5 minutes). You could “employ” the whole of both Psalms and read them in the time it takes for a quick employee work-break. It's worth a read, if you have time.

Ps 135
3 Praise Yah, for Yahweh is good.
Sing praises concerning his name, for it is pleasant.
…
6 All that Yahweh desires, he does,
in heaven and on earth,
in the seas and all the depths.​

[The verse (v.6) you mentioned is a great verse. BTW, I totally agree with it. Yet how it implies God tortures people forever, I’m at a loss to exegete from the passage. But read on, It's tells some of the things that a "good":]

…
8 Who struck the firstborn of Egypt,
both of humans and animals.
​

[In other words, God having “struck” (i.e. killed) the firstborn of Egypt is a “good” thing for God to do. So the very passage you posted actually supports the annihilation of the wicked as a “good desire” for God to have. Annihilation agrees with this, ECT not so much. It’s ECT that stipulates torture is a better good “desire” for God to have toward the wicked’s final punishment. Where’s your supporting passage that God desires to torture the wicked forever? If Psalm 135-136 showed that God’s love endures forever by torturing people in Hell forever, fine. I’d actually agree with that verse. Problem is, it’s non-existent.]

…
10 Who struck many nations

and killed mighty kings—​

[Again, when God’s wrathful anger at people/nations reaches its conclusion, does He torture them or does He put them to death? Answer is, He puts them to death.]

…
Ps 136 Give thanks to Yahweh, for he is good,
for his loyal love endures forever.
​

[Hmm? Will wicked kings endure forever in Hell now that we know God’s anger kills people? If it’s loving and ‘good’ for God to strike down /kill wicked kings, then how about at the second death (post judgment) where in Hell God destroys “both the body and the soul”, Matt 10:28? Still a loving thing for God to do, right? Answer is yes.]

…
10 To him who struck Egypt through their firstborn,
for his loyal love endures forever.…
15 But he tossed Pharaoh and his army into the Red Sea,for his loyal love endures forever.…
17 To him who struck great kings,
for his loyal love endures forever.
18 And he killed mighty kings,
for his loyal love endures forever.
…



25 The one who gives food to all flesh,
for his loyal love endures forever.
Hmm? Who gives “food to flesh” in the afterlife once they depart from God? Ironic we find this here since you brought up a Ps 135 verse supposedly toward an ‘answer’ to the question I posted.
​

Who sustains people indefinitely after they are banished to Hell, if it's God that gives food to all flesh and immortality to all that receive that gift? The answer is no one. Who/what sustains a whirlwind after the computer’s processor and hard-drive containing the whirlwind is destroyed? Answer is, no one. The whirlwind that appears on your computer screen originates as a Graphic Image File (GIF) that you can actually download and store on your hard drive. But to answer your question (which if you think about it you knew already); no, the whirlwind on your laptop does not keep going around and around when your laptop is closed.

Psalm 101:4 A perverse heart will depart from me; I will not know evil.​

Though the events of Egypt’s firstborn destruction and that of Egypt’s army in the Red Sea, Og, Edom, Sodom, etc. were their 1st death, we know Scripturally speaking they also receive a second death. And a banishment from the sustainer.

Matthew 7:23 And then I will say to them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Depart from me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Matthew 25:41 Then he will also say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed ones, into the eternal fire that has been prepared for the devil and his angels!

Rev 21:7-8 7 The one who conquers will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be my son. 8 But as for the cowards and unbelievers and detestable persons and murderers and sexually immoral people and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their share is in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death.​

I think his post was about how God is going to do what God is going to do, and we are going to scramble around trying to figure it out and speak confidently about what we suppose to know.

Where I have a problem with his point is the fact that God has revealed certain truths to us, even concerning the nature of the final punishment. It is important to study what God has revealed, and when necessary to correct our beliefs when they fall out of alignment with his Word.

If we just say, "God is going to do whatever he pleases," and shrug when it comes to making truth claims about God, then we wouldn't even preach the gospel. "Meh God will save whoever he pleases." Not even Calvinists think like that. :P

 

[His_nee (Jeff)]

You guys can attempt to tell us how wrong we are, but we'll keep pointing you to read all the Scriptures, not just a couple of proof texts.

round and round we go and where we stop nobody know (excpt Yhwh and those HE tells)

 

[Butch5]

Yes,that is in reference to everlasting torment in hell.

It is Gehenna, the Lake of Fire. It's actually in God's kingdom. Notice also that there are bodies burning there. It is not a place of eternal torment because Jeremiah prophesied that this place Gehenna would be restored and made holy to the Lord.

38 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the city shall be built to the LORD from the tower of Hananeel unto the gate of the corner. 39 And the measuring line shall yet go forth over against it upon the hill Gareb, and shall compass about to Goath. 40 And the whole valley of the dead bodies, and of the ashes, and all the fields unto the brook of Kidron, unto the corner of the horse gate toward the east, shall be holy unto the LORD; it shall not be plucked up, nor thrown down any more for ever.
(Jer 31:1 KJV)

Gehenna will burn for a period of time determined by God but it is not eternal as we see that it will be made holy to the Lord.

 

[Stan1953]

Let's exegete the passage in regards to that objection and see if it stands.

And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Matthew 10:28 (ESV)

Jesus' was telling them not to fear those men, the Romans and Jews whom they would be sent to, but rather to fear God. Why was this? They were not to fear man, because of his inability to kill the soul. They were then told to fear God because of what he had the ability to do.

Now, would it make any sense for Jesus to tell them to fear God for something that he would never do? Or rather was he describing what happens in hell, which namely is the destruction of body and soul. This seems to me the only rational way to look at this text. Why wouldn't he tell them to fear God who can torture body and soul in hell, since that is your position?

Also, no where in the text in Matthew 25:41 does it say they will spend an eternity with the devil in the lake of fire. Let's look at what it actually says, then move on to demonstrate what it means.

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels." Matthew 25:41 (ESV)

From this text we learn the following:
1. That those Jesus rejected were told to depart and to go into the "eternal fire"
2. That the eternal fire was prepared for the devil and his angels.

Now, the primary description we have for the punishment being given is "eternal fire." Let's look to the only other instance where this punishment is used.

just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire. Jude 1:7 (ESV)

Jude says that the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah underwent the punishment of "eternal fire," which resulted in their total destruction, not torment.

Also, are these cities still burning? Still undergoing punishment? No, so how are we to understand what "eternal fire" means. Let's look to Genesis to search for some possible clues.

Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the LORD out of heaven. Genesis 19:24 (ESV)

The Fire was from the Lord, out of heaven. This to me is the definition of "eternal fire," the fire from the Lord (he is described in Hebrews as a consuming fire) that utterly consumes.

Sorry but alluding to your sense of common sense is not exegesis.

Revelation defines the lake of fire, which obviously is symbolic, given spirits can't be tortured by actual fire.
It clearly show in Rev 20:10 that this is a place of torment, day and night, for ever and ever.
Matt 25:41 shows all unsaved will join them in that same place. As it is a place of torment for ALL spirits, the torment, which is not destructive nor physical, will be the same for all there. Eternal punishment/torment is not destructive, as that would make it a one time act and not an eternal one.
It's quite simple, as everything Jesus taught was.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

round and round we go and where we stop nobody know (excpt Yhwh and those HE tells)

Are you inferring that it is impossible to change someone's mind on the matter?

There are many people who post here who have had their minds changed (mine included) over time, also many people who only read this forum who might find the discussion interesting.

I think the truth matters on this topic, and I don't mind discussing it. If this is the kind of post you want to contribute to the thread, then I think it would be better to find a discussion you would rather engage in.

Regards,
DI

 

[Stan1953]

I think if you build your entire argument on "these smart guys agree with me," then you have built your argument on a logical fallacy. It is important to note that the experts agree on a certain translation, but that doesn't make it infallible. It is just an admission of faith in your part in those who have studied the Greek in depth, rather than looking into it yourself.
I actually agree with you on the matter of translating it "eternal," but I see it as having a qualitative meaning here. The word eternal generally denotes a qualitative meaning, not necessarily referencing a period of time all the time. Make sense?

I would suggest you reacquaint yourself with what a straw man is... I did not present a straw man argument.
No one is infallible, especially those that have no credentials yet try to refute those that do. If you don't accept their rendering, then contact them and argue with the. Meanwhile we who recognize and accept our personal limitations, will accept the rendering of ALL English versions thus far.
The word eternal connotes what it does, endless time forward.

 

[Butch5]

Hey Butch,

As the majority of Greek scholars have rendered it as "eternal fire", and I know they are credentialed, I'll stick with their translations, five of which can be seen at the following link for this verse.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matt 25:41&version=NIV;NRSV;NET;NASB;MOUNCE

I know the Mounce's and Moo, and they are three of the most preeminent Greek scholars of our day.

No offence, but there are way to many arm chair Greek scholars online, who I don't know.

Hi Stan,

We don't need to look at armchair scholars, we can look at the Scriptures themselves.

As Doulos pointed out we have an example of everlasting fire, it is the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. They are not still burning, they burned and were destroyed.

Also, the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament used the word "aionion" of the Aaronic priesthood saying that it is forever. Paul on the other hand says that the Aaronic priesthood ended.

21 "In the tabernacle of meeting, outside the veil which is before the Testimony, Aaron and his sons shall tend it from evening until morning before the LORD. It shall be a statute forever to their generations on behalf of the children of Israel. (Exo 27:21 NKJ)

The translators how translated "aionion" as forever. Is the Aaronic priesthood forever?

11 Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron?
12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. (Heb 7:11-12 NKJ)

There is example after example of this in the Scriptures. I believe this is a classic example of one's theology driving the interpretation and the definition of "aionion"

So, we have to decide who is correct here, the translators who chose to define "aionion" as forever or the apostles Paul who received the Gospel from Jesus.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Sorry but alluding to your sense of common sense is not exegesis.

No, alluding to the context, which is the first part of the sentence is exegesis. Defining the word by it's usage, which is made clear by his comparison to man who can only kill the body, but God can destroy (stronger word) both body and soul in hell. Definitely denotes the word "to destroy" which means not to ruin, but to extinguish the life.

Revelation defines the lake of fire, which obviously is symbolic, given spirits can't be tortured by actual fire.

It does actually define it. What does it say?

This is the second death, the lake of fire. Revelation 20:14b (ESV)

The lake of fire is the second death.

It clearly show in Rev 20:10 that this is a place of torment, day and night, for ever and ever.

I've addressed this text so many times.

Please see here, where I talk about Revelation's usage of this terminology.
http://christianforums.net/Fellowship/index.php?threads/conditional-immortality.53795/
See Post #7

Matt 25:41 shows all unsaved will join them in that same place. As it is a place of torment for ALL spirits, the torment, which is not destructive nor physical, will be the same for all there. Eternal punishment/torment is not destructive, as that would make it a one time act and not an eternal one.

As I have already noted in this thread.

Post #36

It's quite simple, as everything Jesus taught was.

I guess if you proof text a couple texts, without looking to the rest of Scripture it is simple, but with the history behind this issue it's not so much.