Did Jesus Teach Everlasting Torment for Unbelievers?

[Lyric's Dad]

As we look at the passage more clearly we can see that it is merely creedal christians that have developed a theology out of thin air.

It says the smoke rises forever, not they are tormented forever.

It also says they have no rest day or night. It does not say foreve. In fact it does not tell us how many days or nights.

Completely within the age of ages truth.

 

[antitox]

As we look at the passage more clearly we can see that it is merely creedal christians that have developed a theology out of thin air.

It says the smoke rises forever, not they are tormented forever.

Ok, so if you prefer smoke with no fire, and no torment in "the smoke of their torment" then it is a clear case of denial.
Personally, I would never want to attempt to make scripture say something that is so far off-center.

It also says they have no rest day or night. It does not say foreve. In fact it does not tell us how many days or nights.

Completely within the age of ages truth.

The bible is clear. "No rest day or night" is quite indicative of there not being a moment's rest.

 

[Drew]

1. It is entirely plausible that smoke can rise forever and ever without the burning that produced it also carrying on forever.

Smoke rises from burning, and torment means torment.

You have simply not given any reason for readers to doubt my claim. As anyone can see, smoke can continue to exist after a fire has been extinguished.

Having argued as I have, I have severe doubts about the whole approach of reading these texts using a "plain reading of the words".

If you appraoch scripture from that standpoint, you will err considerably.

Your assertion seems so obviously incorrect, I am probably misunderstanding you. There are so many examples of where a "plain reading" is obviously wrong, that I hardly know where to begin. As illustrated above, Jude 7 suggests that S+G are experiencing the vengeance of eternal fire. This is demonstrably not the case. These cities are not burning today.

 

[antitox]

1. It is entirely plausible that smoke can rise forever and ever without the burning that produced it also carrying on forever.

Smoke rises from burning, and torment means torment.

You have simply not given any reason for readers to doubt my claim. As anyone can see, smoke can continue to exist after a fire has been extinguished.

Having argued as I have, I have severe doubts about the whole approach of reading these texts using a "plain reading of the words".

God does not lead us to believe something contrary to the direct manner Jesus spoke to us.

If you appraoch scripture from that standpoint, you will err considerably.

Your assertion seems so obviously incorrect, I am probably misunderstanding you. There are so many examples of where a "plain reading" is obviously wrong, that I hardly know where to begin. As illustrated above, Jude 7 suggests that S+G are experiencing the vengeance of eternal fire. This is demonstrably not the case. These cities are not burning today.

Why in the world would you even assume that I would infer that anything on earth is eternal?
Secondly, you think that might be hellfire after having been smoked here on earth? Wait a minute, I forgot, you don't believe in hell.

 

[Relic]

As we look at the passage more clearly we can see that it is merely creedal christians that have developed a theology out of thin air.

It says the smoke rises forever, not they are tormented forever.

Ok, so if you prefer smoke with no fire, and no torment in "the smoke of their torment" then it is a clear case of denial.
Personally, I would never want to attempt to make scripture say something that is so far off-center.

It also says they have no rest day or night. It does not say foreve. In fact it does not tell us how many days or nights.

Completely within the age of ages truth.

The bible is clear. "No rest day or night" is quite indicative of there not being a moment's rest.

I agree with you antitox, it is clearly evident they are picking straws out of a bag with no substance. They are in huge denial of what is written in scripture.


The analogy I gave in another post, in regards to Lyric's Dad attempt at using the flashlight example to prove his point, doesn't disprove the fact that where there smoke there is fire. Not one bit of a difference in what was explained in that example. The two are of the same principle. THe truth presented in both examples is this: Without change, the fact of it remains.



One cannot deny the fact that where there is smoke there is fire.

There is no where in scritpure that states that smoke ceases to ascend up.

For ever IS for ever.

no rest, means no rest.

I've done all I can do here.

There is no sense in debating with them any further.


.

 

[Drew]

One cannot deny the fact that where there is smoke there is fire.

Simply, demonstrably, and obviously untrue. Please do not insult the intelligence of the readers. There is no sense in debating with those who would deny something that so manifestly obvious. When you put out a fire, the smoke produced earlier by that fire simply does not disappear into oblivion.

If this were so, then all we would need to do to get rid of smog from our cars would be to agree to turn them all off for one day. By Relic's argument, since no car is presently burning fuel, there can be no car-generated smog in our environment.

 

[Lyric's Dad]

I see no point in further debating with people who refuse to step outside their creed boxes.

Go ahead and think everyone is heading to hell. I could really care less. It changes nothing of the truth of God.

Enjoy!

 

[Relic]

One cannot deny the fact that where there is smoke there is fire.

Simply, demonstrably, and obviously untrue. Please do not insult the intelligence of the readers. There is no sense in debating with those who would deny something that so manifestly obvious. When you put out a fire, the smoke produced earlier by that fire simply does not disappear into oblivion.

If this were so, then all we would need to do to get rid of smog from our cars would be to agree to turn them all off for one day. By Relic's argument, since no car is presently burning fuel, there can be no car-generated smog in our environment.

Sorry Drew, but you have taken the arguement out of context.

The smoke that is being referred to here is the smoke that is ascendeth for ever and ever.

No, it is not written as being temporary or for a moment, nor does read as being ever-lasting, nor does it imply that it was turned off for a day, it says "for ever and ever".

• Revelation 14:11
  And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

.

 

[Relic]

I see no point in further debating with people who refuse to step outside their creed boxes.

Go ahead and think everyone is heading to hell. I could really care less. It changes nothing of the truth of God.

Enjoy!

Who said everyone? :o


.

 

[Lyric's Dad]

I see no point in further debating with people who refuse to step outside their creed boxes.

Go ahead and think everyone is heading to hell. I could really care less. It changes nothing of the truth of God.

Enjoy!

Who said everyone? :o


.

My mistake.

Everyone except those who believe as you do.

 

[lovely]

I want to first apologize for such a long post, this is not my norm, but I wanted to support, with Scripture, my belief on this topic, and also cover guibox’s references.

First of all, thanks for your responses guibox, and Drew. Guibox, I read over your verses, and compared the meanings of a few key words like you asked. I will get to that further down in my post, and then I wanted to share a few things. I will say right off, that I do not agree with annihilation, nor a finite Hell, based on what I have found. I believe that the idea that consequences of Sin being inconsistant with a loving God is a man-centered idea. The Bible does not support annihilation, or a finite Hell, no matter how much my mind would like it to.

On the subject of Hell

First let me give a summary on what I saw in Revelation. Scripture describes the Great Tribulation (Revelation 6:1 - 18:24), the return of the King (Revelation 19:1-21), the Millennium (Revelation 20:1-10), the Judgement (Revelation 20:11-15), and finally the Eternal state. (Revelation 21:1 - 22:21)

Revelation 19:20 - The beast, and the anti-christ are cast alive into the Lake of Fire and brimstone. Brimstone is a yellowish, sulfuric rock that produces steam, and suffocating gases when ignited.

Revelation 19:21 - The rest (those who worshiped the anti-christ) were killed with the sword which proceeded from Christ’s mouth...and the birds ate their flesh. (This was their first death.)

Revelation 20:1 - The deceiver is bound for a thousand years while Christ reigns with those who were martyred in the tribulation - the rest of the dead (unbelievers) did not live again until the thousand years finished. (This was when they were resurrected to stand before God at the White Throne of Judgement)

Revelation 20:6 - Blessed and Holy is he who has part in the first resurrection...the second death has no power over him...this is referring to the martyrs who died during the Tribulation and were resurrected after their physical death to reign with Christ for a 1,000 years.

Revelation 20:9 - Satan is released to deceive once again, and he succeeds in deceiving all of the nations to rise up against Christ, and the saints, reigning in Jerusalem. God sends a fire out of Heaven to destroy, and devour them. This is the finality of their first death. Guibox this was among your scriptures that depicted the finality of death, but put in context...it is the first death. These unbelievers who were deceived into attacking Christ will be resurrected again at the Throne of judgement.

Revelation 20:10 - After this “battle†the Devil is cast into the Lake of Fire and brimstone. NOTE: The same Lake of Fire and brimstone where 1,000 years earlier the beast, and the anti-christ are. NOTE: The two of them are still burning 1,000 years later. And this scripture does say that they are tormented day and night forever and ever. Those words mean exactly what they appear to mean.

Revelation 20:12 - The dead (unbelievers) stand before God and are judged according to their works.

Revelation 20:13 - Seas, death, and Hades give up the dead.

Revelation 20:14 - death, and Hades, are also cast into the Lake of Fire.

Revelation 20:15 - Anyone not found in the Book of Life is cast into the Lake of Fire. I believe this is the same Lake of Fire that is mentioned in the earlier chapters.

Revelation 21 All things are made new - Heaven and Earth

Revelation 21:4 all tears are wiped, no pain, and no sorrow

Revelation 21:6 It is done

Revelation 21:7-8 He who overcomes...but the cowardly, unbelievers, abominable, murders, 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.

guibox,
Revelation 20:8 you cited, but I believe you meant Revelation 20:9 guibox. It does mean consumed in the fire as you said, but it refers to the first death...not the judgement.

Mark 9:43 - does speak of corpses...who’s worm dies not, and a fire that shall never be quenched. This is a picture of the dead (unbelievers) continually dying in a fire that is unquenched.

Jeremiah 17:27 - This speaks of King Nebuchadnezzer overwhelming the land like a sweeping fire devouring green trees and dry trees alike...the trees shall be devoured, and the fire is unquenchable. He was being used as a judgement from God...it is a picture of the future, as well as a temporal event.

Isaiah 66:24 - this refers to the corpses enduring everlasting torment...the death of the dead (unbelievers). Jesus refers to this verse and likens it to the Valley of Hinnom...Gehenna, which refers to a continually burning trash heap.

Revelation 14: 10,11-13
Those who worship the beast will drink of the wind of the wrath of God...poured out in full strength in to the cup of His indignation. They are tormented in the presence of holy angels and the Lamb. The smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day and night. NOTE: it is in comparison the fate of the saints. The saints...those who kept the commands of God, and the faith of Jesus...blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on...that they may rest from their labors and their works follow them.

Isaiah 34:10 - this entire passage is a judgement of the nations from God though Isaiah. It was a literal judgement of the nations represented by Edom, but the it was also prophetic of what was to come...referring to Daniel’s prophecy.

Psalm 37 - This entire Psalm is referring to the heritage...inheritance of the righteous, and how the unrighteous will be “cut off†from that inheritance. NOTE: there is a finality here...they will never obtain that inheritance, but that finality is not referring to their judgement...what the will get, but rather what they will not receive. The reference to plants, meadows, and trees is a metaphor for God being the source of the living water...salvation, and how they will be cut off from it.

I Samuel 1:22, 28 - These verses are referring to Hannah, and her desiring to wean Samuel before take him to appear before the Lord...because he was to remain there forever, given back to God.

2 Peter 3:10-15 - Heaven and Earth will be consumed...â€Âboth the earth and the works therein†NOTE: yes, all of it will be consumed, but those who may be on earth will be consumed in that they will die their first death, but the will be called from the grave to stand before the white throne of judgement. Then, they are cast into the Lake of Fire.

I see nothing in these verses that teaches annihilation, or a finite judgement. I think both ideas are man-centered because we can not conceive of God, and know His view of all things. We see very little, yet we presume to know more about justice that He. I think it is a matter of faith, and trust in His Word, and the humility to know that we do not know much. I think as great as His love is, is as great as mercy is, and is as great as His punishment for those who reject Him will be. I can not conceive of a love that tears a Sovereign from Heaven, that comes in humility, and then sheds His blood for my sin...while I am yet a sinner. The Scripture clearly presents the second death as eternal, and of which none who enter there will leave. I can not see a reason for Christ's redemptive blood shed on the cross otherwise. The Lord bless you.

Destiny...a note for you...I understood what you were doing, but I thought you were defending me, even though you did not agree. Sorry if I mixed it up. :-D

 

[Drew]

Sorry Drew, but you have taken the arguement out of context.

The smoke that is being referred to here is the smoke that is ascendeth for ever and ever.

No, it is not written as being temporary or for a moment, nor does read as being ever-lasting, nor does it imply that it was turned off for a day, it says "for ever and ever".

Hello Relic:

I have never said that the verse in question rules out the position you hold. All I have even claimed is that the verse is also consistent with an annihilationist perspective. And the case for this is sound.

You seem to be operating from the position that "for ever and ever" means what it seems to mean - an unending duration of time. Fine, let's go with that.

It is obviously true that smoke can rise after the fire that produced it has been extinguished. Therefore, while the verse does not say that the fire was "turned off", it does not rule it out, either.

There is nothing in this text that rules out annihiliationism. If our world were one where smoke cannot exist without active fire, then the text would be problematic for an annihilationist that argued that "for ever and ever" means what its plain meaning connotes.

But ours is not such a world.

 

[antitox]

Lovely,

That was an accurate account you gave on those Revelation scriptures. Seems irrefutable to me.

 

[SputnikBoy]

Lovely,

That was an accurate account you gave on those Revelation scriptures. Seems irrefutable to me.

No, no. It was a LITERAL account based on an appalling ignorance of the real symbolic meaning of these scriptures. One cannot see the metaphorical forest from the traditionally inspired trees. Until this is acknowledged, understood, and rectified we'll never move beyond these glaring fallacies that are taught as fact in mainstream Christian circles.

Having said that, I'll grab a post that I recently placed on the guibox 'hell-fire' thread on Apologetics since it applies to this same issue. I'd like a response it that's possible.

Annihilation. I can understand that concept and, right now anyway, I agree with it 100%. It makes logical sense and aligns nicely with scripture. I'm really curious, however, about the 'everlasting torment' theology of mainstream Christianity and I require more information before I can even consider it. Those who promote 'eternal torment' go so far and then quit. I hate being left hanging. What EXACTLY happens to these people who are suffering 'eternal torment'? I mean, is hell some humongous pit where people simply moan and scream and writh in agony? Do they have opportunities to accomplish anything with their 'fiery' lives? Do they study, do they eat, do they drink, do they converse, do they sleep, etc? What fuels the fire ...something supernatural?

What about the 'saved'? Do they have ring-side seats watching their friends and loved ones being tortured? Do they laugh and point their finger and say, "Serves you right for not believing!" Do they weep for their friends and their loved ones and wish they could do something about it? Are the ''saved' even aware that their friends and loved ones who 'didn't make it' are currently being roasted in hell and in agony? How do they feel about this? How do they feel about God? Come on, enlighten me.

Do the wicked suffer according to the size of their sins while on earth? Would this therefore necessitate the use of different racks such as an oven? Do we picture those with less serious sins on the upper rack further away from the flames? ...the more serious sinners on the lower rack closer to the flames? ...always on the verge of death but God never allowing the torment to end for them, never letting them mercifully die?

Are the wicked like steaks ...rare, medium rare, well-done? I mean, if I'm to change my belief on this serious issue I need something more than the horrendous fairy stories that are taught by mainstream Christianity. I sometimes think that mainstrean theology is more based on Chic comic-book 'theology' than on the Bible. Please help me believe what you believe. Until you do I have no other alternative than to call the literal 'eternal torment' concept a lot of scorched baloney.

 

[destiny]

Lovely,

That was an accurate account you gave on those Revelation scriptures. Seems irrefutable to me.

No, no. It was a LITERAL account based on an appalling ignorance of the real symbolic meaning of these scriptures. One cannot see the metaphorical forest from the traditionally inspired trees. Until this is acknowledged, understood, and rectified we'll never move beyond these glaring fallacies that are taught as fact in mainstream Christian circles.

Having said that, I'll grab a post that I recently placed on the guibox 'hell-fire' thread on Apologetics since it applies to this same issue. I'd like a response it that's possible.

Annihilation. I can understand that concept and, right now anyway, I agree with it 100%. It makes logical sense and aligns nicely with scripture. I'm really curious, however, about the 'everlasting torment' theology of mainstream Christianity and I require more information before I can even consider it. Those who promote 'eternal torment' go so far and then quit. I being left hanging. What EXACTLY happens to these people who are suffering 'eternal torment'? I mean, is hell some humongous pit where people simply moan and scream and writh in agony? Do they have opportunities to accomplish anything with their 'fiery' lives? Do they study, do they eat, do they drink, do they converse, do they sleep, etc? What fuels the fire ...something supernatural?

What about the 'saved'? Do they have ring-side seats watching their friends and loved ones being d? Do they laugh and point their finger and say, "Serves you right for not believing!" Do they weep for their friends and their loved ones and wish they could do something about it? Are the ''saved' even aware that their friends and loved ones who 'didn't make it' are currently being roasted in hell and in agony? How do they feel about this? How do they feel about God? Come on, enlighten me.

Do the wicked suffer according to the size of their sins while on earth? Would this therefore necessitate the use of different racks such as an oven? Do we picture those with less serious sins on the upper rack further away from the flames? ...the more serious sinners on the lower rack closer to the flames? ...always on the verge of but God never allowing the torment to end for them, never letting them mercifully die?

Are the wicked like steaks ...rare, medium rare, well-done? I mean, if I'm to change my belief on this serious issue I need something more than the horrendous fairy stories that are taught by mainstream Christianity. I sometimes think that mainstrean theology is more based on Chic comic-book 'theology' than on the Bible. Please help me believe what you believe. Until you do I have no other alternative than to call the literal 'eternal torment' concept a lot of scorched baloney.

No offense sputnick, but your post proves nothing except that you don't seem to realize theres a ((supernatural)) aspect of God.
You have to know God in spirit and in truth, otherwise you will have to change His word and holy character to fit your human understanding. We are only required to believe Gods simple word, not re-invent it or try to figure out His supernatural abilities.

 

[Drew]

You have to know God in spirit and in truth, otherwise you will have to change His word and holy character to fit your human understanding.

The problem with this statement is that it applies to us all, to both those who believe in an everlasting hell and those who are annihilationists. For some reason, some Christians think that their understanding of the Scriptures is unmediated by their human mental apparatus. An interesting idea, but the weight of evidence is strongly against it.

Please do not expect these kinds of rejoinders to be taken seriously. If you want to enter the debate, please make an actual argument, do not invoke the tired and over-used "you are relying on your human understanding" argument unless you are prepared to explain why you do not suffer from this malady also.

 

[destiny]

Please do not expect these kinds of rejoinders to be taken seriously. If you want to enter the debate, please make an actual argument

Why would I post the same things again that others have posted to no avail? I can post what (I) know in my own heart as truth.
Like I said there is a supernatural aspect of God that man will never figure out in his human reasoning no matter how he tries.
This applies to all of us in one area or another, but my reason for posting that in this thread is because some people need to know how God is going to punish the wicked, instead of just believing his word at face value.
No man can know 'how' God will create eternal things.
It's impossible to know.
It seems as good as I am at sometimes complicating the simple things, I can't for the life of me intellectualize such a big vast God because He won't go in my box...nor yours.

 

[guibox]

A few comments:

1) First,

Relic, you said this:

There is no where in scritpure that states that smoke ceases to ascend up.

For ever IS for ever.

no rest, means no rest

I again refer you to Isaiah 34:10 where it talks about the smoke of Edom ascending up forever. You ignore the metaphorical and finite meaning of this passage.

2) Second,

lovely, I appreciate your effort. You are the only person who actually tried to make a case for your verses and refute mine instead of just regurgitating them verbatim like the rest here.

However, your arguments fail in some regard.

For one thing, you are trying to make a dual application of Isaiah, Jeremiah and Samuel to future events which the context does not ask or imply to do. You are removing them from their cultural application (a judgement on the literal city of Edom, a judgement on Jerusalem).

Number two, even if these were dual applicable, you are trying to take the same language and make them mean two different things (temporal and finite for Edom and Jerusalem, eternal in duration for the wicked at the end).

This ignores the inherent meaning of these terms and is not proper exegesis. These texts explain the meanings of these terms in application to the subject. They are terms of annihilation.

What has changed at the end? The wicked are still sinful and do not have immortality. Why would these terms of OT annihilation now mean eternity in torment when it is the EXACT SAME terms used in the OT??

Second,

You are trying to make the texts in Malachi, 2 Peter and Revelation 20:9 as separate judgements of the wicked then the lake of fire. There is no support for this. Instead, we see that they are all final judgements of the cleansing fire of the wicked. 2 Peter 3:10 makes it clear that this is the final fire that wipes out EVERYTHING. There is nothing to even judge the wicked on! This not only parallels Revelation 20 in occurence of events, but also occurs in the same bandwidth as Revelation 21 where after God destroys the earth with fire and 'all the works therein are burnt up', He 'creates a new heaven and new earth, for the former things have passed away'. The OT prophecies about the wicked are the final judgements of the wicked.

Also, you assume that the wicked are all alive over this 1000 year period. The Bible makes it plain that the wicked are 1) Destroyed by the brightness of Christ's coming, 2) Resurrected at the end from the graves to be judged.

Hence, to make what you are saying true is to have 2 resurrections of the dead and three deaths.

Third, you cannot take terms like 'second death' (Why 'second'? That should tell you something), 'destruction' (A state not a process), 'perishing' and 'consume' and make them mean 'eternal life in hell',. The Greek doesn't support these terms as ongoing, conscious punishment in relation to the wicked's final state.

3) Third,

SputnikBoy made good statements about where the concept of hell is not (yet should be) taken. None of you really seem to think about what 'hell' entails but give a knee-jerk reaction and derogatory retort in answer (as was done by one member and then pointed out by Drew). This is the illogical aspect of the concept of hell. When we really look at it as SB laid it out, we see the caricature, Midieval origins of the traditional view of hell.

And it just doesn't stand up to logical scrutiny, divine love and justice or even common sense.

 

[Relic]

A few comments:

1) First,

Relic, you said this:

There is no where in scritpure that states that smoke ceases to ascend up.

For ever IS for ever.

no rest, means no rest

I again refer you to Isaiah 34:10 where it talks about the smoke of Edom ascending up forever. You ignore the metaphorical and finite meaning of this passage.

The metaphorical analogy cannot contradict the spiritual force that is being relayed through scripture. That would be faulty analogy to do such a thing, because you cannot separate them one from the other in order to create contradiction of terms. In doing so you contradict the word of God, and there is no contradiction in the word of God.
So sorry, metaphoric analogy, if it is to create contradiction, doesn't speak truth. It only creates deception, perversion of truth, to suite man's view.


Mans eye's only see the here and now, in the material, not through the infinite eye of God which includes all things spiritual past, present, and future. Be them dead or alive, the imprint of it remains adinfinitum, even still after the fact that God burns it up in the flames of fire. Even so, the smoke of it is remnant of what was. A re-minder, an imprint of what was and is always there, adinfinitum. God is too big to not know what was past, God is too big to not have the past written in his book of records. He wipes our sins clean with his mercy, but that doesn't eliminate the imprint they left behind.

These scriptures in Revelation 14:11 cannot be contradicted, the definition of "for ever and ever" is adinfinitum. Yes, even the smoke of it, the thing which was, is, and will always be. Spiritual perspective is not like that of man's.

You can't change or stop that spiritual force which is a principle rule of order in the time-frame according to God.
God's principles stand true from all perspectives, they do not contradict. The metaphorical and the spiritual sense cannot be in contradiction. God's word does not work that way, because there is no contradiction in His Holy Word, None.

And if we write in ways in which others find contradiction, then we are in error, not God. If I am in error I hope to be corrected. But in this case, I have not been shown that "for ever and ever" is even close to being considered as a finite term.

I don't know about you but when I read the words "for ever and forever" and the words "no rest" and I don't find any scripture that cancels out the truth of it.

No one can change His rule of order.[/b] I don't know how we can change the truth in the meaning of the term "for ever and ever".

It is all in accordance to "God's time, God's timing" "God's time-frame" , not man's.



For ever IS for ever.

no rest, means no rest

Done deal, no compromise!
No one can stop the "for ever and ever" of it from beng in there.


.

 

[Drew]

Hi Relic:

I confess that I find your most recent post very hard to understand. I cannot take issue with it or agree with it, since I cannot follow it.

To me, the Isaiah 34 passage strikes a fatal blow against the position that "for ever is for ever". The argument goes as follows:

1. Assertion: Edom is / was a real physical place.
2. Fact: The text of Isaiah 34:10 says that the smoke of Edom will rise "forever"
3. Fact: We see no smoke rising from Edom today.

Conclusion: "forever" cannot mean an infinite duration because the fact 3 contradicts such an interpretation.

To show that I am a sporting chap, I would suggest the following possible counter-argument to my 3 step argument: Perhaps a case can be made that the overall contexts warrants interpreting Edom as a symbol for "lost mankind". If that interpretation is made, then fact 3 does not strike a fatal blow against your position.

Any takers on either making this interpretation or arguing agin it?