How does C.I and E.C.T affect the Gospel?

[jeff77]

And the appropriate continuation to your statement above is; "Can I get an Amen on that brothers?"

Amen Brother. Excellent point. I agree. That's true.
And the irony is, I don't know of a single Annihilationist that I suspect would disagree with your point either.

Maybe it’s worth posting and considering these points at this time. I’ll start with the modern and work backwards in history.
1. CFNet’s required member SoF reads:

We believe that heaven is a real place where the saved will dwell forever, and that hell is a literal place of torment where unbelievers will be punished.
​

Nothing about annihilationism or ECT conflicts with this statement.

2. My denomination’s SoF (Baptist Faith and Message):

The unrighteous will be consigned to Hell, the place of everlasting punishment. The righteous in their resurrected and glorified bodies will receive their reward and will dwell forever in Heaven with the Lord.​

Nothing about annihilationism conflicts with this statement. In fact it points out that the righteous receive their reward of glorified bodies, and implies the unrighteous do not (if you ask me). Many Baptist seminary professors directly teach/taught it (including Dale Moody and many other well-known Baptist Theologians/Scholars)

3. There is nothing in any of the Ecumenical Creeds (widely considered to bound what it means to be a ‘Christian’ (just generally speaking of course) that conflicts with annihilationism either.

4. The following Early Church Fathers (1st/2nd Century) directly taught annihilationism (or at least CI):

First Clement
Ignatius of Antioch
Author of Epistle of Barnabas
Irenaeus of Lyons​

I cannot speak for other’s motivations and feelings, obviously, but I can for my personal history. As of just a few years ago (less than three) I would have 100% confindently thought annihilationism a false doctrine. However, the more I’ve studied this issue, the more I realize I was wrong about that opinion of mine as been changed. And I can assure you (and more importantly myself) that it was not changed based on anything other than a study of God's Word. I fought against annihilationishm pretty hard. I'm still open to a good argument against it, in fact.

Not that I would expect any of you other members reading to find that as evidence one way or the other (I wouldn't if I were you).

But my points 1-4 are at least some evidences that the debate (which doctrine is false and which is true, ECT or CI) is not as clear as you might think it is.

This is the approach I use telling others about the fate of a believer/non believer. I think if we just stick to scripture and not add something extra like "hell is like burning alive forever" then it makes more sense to the non-believers. At the same time if you believe in Annihilation, you could just point out these scriptures and not go in depth about not being conscious/aware of the everlasting punishment. Just teach God's love and let the people decide for themselves what the everlasting punishment really is. I haven't always taught this way though.

 

[JLB]

I had several Sunday School teachers and a youth minister when I was growing up teach in this way. It is not helpful and doesn't make sense given that God wants us to choose him and not be scared into believing/following.

It is an epidemic, it infiltrates nearly every Sunday School and youth ministry out there.

I wish that what I presented was just a caricature, but people actually teach it like that.

The Gospel Message is good news, because God has provided a way of escape from everlasting destruction for all of mankind.

You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.

For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. 18 He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. John 3:17-18

Watering down the Truth will not get people to know the Truth.

 

[chessman]

This is the approach I use telling others about the fate of a believer/non believer. I think if we just stick to scripture and not add something extra like "hell is like burning alive forever"

Me too. I recognize that my online image might be that this topic is constantly on my mind. But it's not. Honestly.

 

[jeff77]

The Gospel Message is good news, because God has provided a way of escape from everlasting destruction for all of mankind.

You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.

For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. 18 He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. John 3:17-18

Watering down the Truth will not get people to know the Truth.

Amen JLB!

 

[Doulos Iesou]

The Gospel Message is good news, because God has provided a way of escape from everlasting destruction for all of mankind.

Really? I've never seen it presented that way in Scripture.

The gospel isn't "God isn't going to burn you forever anymore (conditional that you believe)." Rather the love and goodness of God has been revealed in the coming of God's kingdom which has burst forth through Jesus Christ's death burial and resurrection, through which he is forgiving our sins and reconciling all who believe to be a part of his New Creation which he will one day fully restore!

You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.

The truth about what? Eternal conscious torment? This belief if fully embraced has the capacity to utterly enslave a person in fear, it is emotionally untenable.

Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees in this passage, and it was about knowing the truth about who Jesus is and how that can then set us free from the bondage of sin.

For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. 18 He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. John 3:17-18

Don't forget v.16, where it says that those who believe will not perish (which means to die), not be eternally tormented in hell.

Watering down the Truth will not get people to know the Truth.

Who said anything about watering down the truth? I'm all about presenting the truth of the gospel, and I don't see how mixing in such teachings as eternal conscious torment could do anything except 1) put a stumbling block in front of the gospel, or 2) make a false convert out of fear. Yes, God can save despite the preaching given on this topic.

 

[jeff77]

Me too. I recognize that my online image might be that this topic is constantly on my mind. But it's not. Honestly.

It's interesting because I think my online image might show that too. It's not constantly on my mind either and I look at it as more of a side study compared to stuff that is more important. The curiosity of the subject has led me to study and understand many other parts of the Bible since the discussions can often bring up scripture about things that I might not have noticed otherwise.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Me too. I recognize that my online image might be that this topic is constantly on my mind. But it's not. Honestly.

Yeah I don't discuss it at all outside of this forum.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

It's interesting because I think my online image might show that too. It's not constantly on my mind either and I look at it as more of a side study compared to stuff that is more important. The curiosity of the subject has led me to study and understand many other parts of the Bible since the discussions can often bring up scripture about things that I might not have noticed otherwise.

Yeah, that is an aspect I enjoy about these kinds of debates, they are interrelated to all sorts of other doctrines, and it can drive you to certain texts you may have not given much though to before.

 

[Butch5]

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. Romans 1:16

In light of this statement by Paul I think we should be as sure as possible that it is the gospel of Jesus Christ that we preach and not the teachings of men.

 

[jeff77]

I read a book recently called "God's Smuggler" about Brother Andrew who was a missionary that smuggled Bibles in communist countries. He was from Holland but learned to speak several different languages so he could communicate with the people he was delivering these Bibles to. There was a country he went to one time that he did not know the language of yet, but he did have the Bible translation of that language. So to communicate with them they each had their Bibles say in Dutch (KJV) and German (KJV) and one would ask a question or make a statement by pointing to the chapter and verse and then the other would answer by pointing to another chapter and verse. I can't remember exactly but I think the conversation started out as small talk but later became more meaningful as they were discussing the awful persecution Christians were going through at the time.

When I read this part of the book I thought how helpful it might be if we just answered scripture with scripture kind of like they did. Since most of us all agree with what scripture says that would take the teachings of men out of it altogether.

 

[Butch5]

I think part of the problem is, we as Christians assume that everyone wants eternal life. I don't know that everyone does.

 

[chessman]

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. Romans 1:16


JLB

Romans 1:17 For the righteousness of God is revealed in it from faith to faith, just as it is written, “But the one who is righteous by faith will live.” ​

Oh the irony.

 

[Stan1953]

I've been wanting to start this thread for a while as it seems like most of us have debated Conditional Immortality(Annihilationism) and Eternal Conscious Torment long enough to know that we disagree. So I am interested in how yall think this affects the Gospel. I have heard the C.I side say that the idea of a God who tortures the unsaved for eternity causes people to reject Christianity because it doesn't make sense that the Bible claims God to be "just" and at the same time do this. I believe E.C.T to be true but I believe that what ever the torture or punishment is, is not necessarily burning alive like many claim. I think the most important part of it to be understood is that the unsaved will be conscious of their separation from God. I have heard from the E.C.T side say that Annihilation makes hell sound "not so bad after all" and when people hear this they might decide they would rather enjoy their time here on earth doing what they want instead of giving their life to the Lord. My view on this as of right now is that neither Annihilation or E.C.T will ultimately cause a person to accept or reject Christ. It will be their desire to live according to their own will and not God's. I think this makes sense considering God does not want us to be autonomous. Anyway I don't know of any scripture right off hand that would support this, so any help would be greatly appreciated. Something interesting that I have noticed on this website is that their are doctrines that are only allowed to be discussed in the Other Religions section and apparently this is not one of them.

Sadly some think their perception of what is good, or right or proper about who God can or cannot be, justifies their POV. There is little doubt that according to scripture, eternal damnation is a fact. It may seem barbaric or cruel or just down right unloving to some, but that doesn't negate God. Many non-Christians don't follow God for the very same reasons of how barbaric he appears to them in the OT or that He appears to hate gays, when most of Christianity knows this is NOT true.
Romans 1:18-32 holds true, regardless of what people think. As Christians, we should all know that. People get saved every day because they are faced with the reality of who Jesus IS, not what happens to unbelievers in the end. All dogmas are started by Christians, not unbelievers, so this issue does NOT effect how many people will or won't confess Christ as their savior.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Sadly some think their perception of what is good, or right or proper about who God can or cannot be, justifies their POV.

From the basis of Scripture and reason that is. It is not consistent with his Word or character.

There is little doubt that according to scripture, eternal damnation is a fact.

From your POV there is little doubt, from the POV of others here there is a massive amount of doubt.

It may seem barbaric or cruel or just down right unloving to some, but that doesn't negate God.

It is barbaric and cruel. Torturing his own creations, created in his image for whom he had his Son die.. for eternity. I don't know how someone could rationally connect the ECT view with the idea that God is good. It paints God as this glory fiend who has to torture beings forever to get across the idea that he is Holy and Just, all the while perverting the idea of justice into a sick torture movie that never ends.

My language against the matter is strong, because my zeal for the character and goodness of God is passionate.

Many non-Christians don't follow God for the very same reasons of how barbaric he appears to them in the OT or that He appears to hate gays, when most of Christianity knows this is NOT true.

Yet no where in the OT did God torture beings for the purpose of punishment, he destroyed them, as death alone was promised for those who sinned.

Romans 1:18-32 holds true, regardless of what people think.

Indeed it does, but what does the text seem to indicate?

Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. Romans 1:32 (ESV)

According to God's righteous decree, those who practice the sins listed deserve what? Eternal Conscious Torment? No. They deserve to die!

Scripture is very clear indeed.

As Christians, we should all know that. People get saved every day because they are faced with the reality of who Jesus IS, not what happens to unbelievers in the end.

And unfortunately people think they are saved every day because they said they didn't want to go to hell when a preacher asked them. I have never seen any positive fruit from the preaching of hell, except fear mongering, and manipulating children into believing in Jesus as fire insurance.

 

[Stan1953]

From the basis of Scripture and reason that is. It is not consistent with his Word or character.

That you have not corroborated.

From your POV there is little doubt, from the POV of others here there is a massive amount of doubt.

I said scripture, NOT my POV. If you dispute that then support your POV with scripture.

It is barbaric and cruel. Torturing his own creations, created in his image for whom he had his Son die.. for eternity. I don't know how someone could rationally connect the ECT view with the idea that God is good. It paints God as this glory fiend who has to torture beings forever to get across the idea that he is Holy and Just, all the while perverting the idea of justice into a sick torture movie that never ends.

That would be your opinion and not supported in scripture. Torture happens to the body, not the soul. Torment is self inflicted and cause by 20/20 hindsight. Rational has nothing to do with belief and acceptance of God. Atheists use the same kind a rational for not believing in God.

My language against the matter is strong, because my zeal for the character and goodness of God is passionate.

Zeal is for zealots, and they never believed in Jesus either in the NT. They all failed to see who the real Jesus was meant to be and why he came. It's not a matter of picking what part of God we like and support, it's about accepting ALL of who God is regardless of our personal morals. God is all the morality there is.

Yet no where in the OT did God torture beings for the purpose of punishment, he destroyed them, as death alone was promised for those who sinned.

Yes, death alone, not obliteration. Death relates ONLY to the body, not the spirit/soul.

Indeed it does, but what does the text seem to indicate?
Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. Romans 1:32 (ESV)
According to God's righteous decree, those who practice the sins listed deserve what? Eternal Conscious Torment? No. They deserve to die! Scripture is very clear indeed.

Yes and DIE relates only to that lack of animation of the human body, never to our spirit/soul. That is what is clear in ALL scripture.
Matthew 25:41 NIV and Rev 20:10 NIV.

And unfortunately people think they are saved every day because they said they didn't want to go to hell when a preacher asked them. I have never seen any positive fruit from the preaching of hell, except fear mongering, and manipulating children into believing in Jesus as fire insurance.

Well a healthy does of fear is good for us. The Bible teaches that we should fear our God. Fear of hell does not make one confess Jesus in faith. It may cause them pause to be concerned and think about it but our faith is what saves us, not our fear.
Luke 12:4-5 ESV
“I tell you, my friends, do not fear those who kill the body, and after that have nothing more that they can do. But I will warn you whom to fear: fear him who, after he has killed, has authority to cast into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him!

 

[jeff77]

Sadly some think their perception of what is good, or right or proper about who God can or cannot be, justifies their POV. There is little doubt that according to scripture, eternal damnation is a fact. It may seem barbaric or cruel or just down right unloving to some, but that doesn't negate God. Many non-Christians don't follow God for the very same reasons of how barbaric he appears to them in the OT or that He appears to hate gays, when most of Christianity knows this is NOT true.
Romans 1:18-32 holds true, regardless of what people think. As Christians, we should all know that. People get saved every day because they are faced with the reality of who Jesus IS, not what happens to unbelievers in the end. All dogmas are started by Christians, not unbelievers, so this issue does NOT effect how many people will or won't confess Christ as their savior.

I think it's important to take a close look at how God is just. Justice usually means a punishment that fits the crime. Going by this definition I don't see how peoples flesh burning alive for eternity would fit God's character, as a lot of people say that it does and their explanation is that "His ways are not like our ways". In the end though I don't think anyone will be able to say they rejected Christ because of how barbaric some people make him sound.

 

[Stan1953]

I think it's important to take a close look at how God is just. Justice usually means a punishment that fits the crime. Going by this definition I don't see how peoples flesh burning alive for eternity would fit God's character, as a lot of people say that it does and their explanation is that "His ways are not like our ways". In the end though I don't think anyone will be able to say they rejected Christ because of how barbaric some people make him sound.

The point is that eternal torment is NOT in the flesh, it is in the spirit, and nobody's flesh burns forever. Torment is not burning flesh.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

That you have not corroborated.

I have done so countless times on this forum.

I said scripture, NOT my POV. If you dispute that then support your POV with scripture.

Your POV as it relates to Scripture, or do you suppose to have an infallible interpretation of this doctrine?

That would be your opinion and not supported in scripture.

Yes, in this thread we are giving our opinion of how these doctrines effect the gospel. Here I stated my opinion, if you wish to simply ignore all reason and just believe whatever you want then be my guest.

There can be no rational defense for ECT, people must turn to the same old four proof texts for that.

Torture happens to the body, not the soul.

Tell me, in your POV do spirits feel pain? If so, then they are capable of experiencing torture. Immense pain whether physical or mental that is the result of punishment.

Torment is self inflicted and cause by 20/20 hindsight.

Is it? If we literally interpret the passages in Revelation (as you ECTers love to do) what do we come up with?

he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. Revelation 14:10 (ESV)

Is he tormented by his 20/20 hindsight, or is he tormented with fire and sulfur? Note that even a metaphorical view of the fire and sulfur directly relates to punishment. They are tormented as a result of their punishment, which is torture. Torment and torture and distinctly related words you know.

Rational has nothing to do with belief and acceptance of God. Atheists use the same kind a rational for not believing in God.

Well this is a part of the your response that directly relates to this subject. People disbelieve on account of their rationally examining the ECT view?

Seems you support the idea that it is a stumbling block to the gospel by this response, or am I mistaken?

Zeal is for zealots, and they never believed in Jesus either in the NT.

You know there is one reference to a Zealot in the NT, and it was Simon the Zealot who was a disciple. Hmmmm

Also, I was referring to the word "zeal" which has no real relationship to a Zealot, but thanks for trying to poison the well.

Jesus quoted David and said, "Zeal for your house will consume me," referring of course to Jesus. Is Jesus usage of that same word inapplicable?

Or how about Paul's statement here.

"Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit, serve the Lord." Romans 12:11 (ESV)

Nevermind that Paul, I'll leave Zeal for the unbelieving Zealots!...

They all failed to see who the real Jesus was meant to be and why he came.

Simon the Zealot would like an apology.

It's not a matter of picking what part of God we like and support, it's about accepting ALL of who God is regardless of our personal morals. God is all the morality there is.

I accept God as who he has revealed himself to be.

For his anger is but for a moment, and his favor is for a lifetime. Weeping may tarry for the night, but joy comes with the morning. Psalm 30:5 (ESV)

How does this statement about God's character apply to your doctrine? Suppose David was mistaken?

Yes, death alone, not obliteration. Death relates ONLY to the body, not the spirit/soul.

Except Jesus says that both body and soul will be destroyed in hell. This idea also presupposes the immortality of the soul. Care to show us the text that teaches that?

Yes and DIE relates only to that lack of animation of the human body, never to our spirit/soul. That is what is clear in ALL scripture.
Matthew 25:41 NIV and Rev 20:10 NIV.

In All Scripture! (then proceeds to quote only 2 Scriptures)

Well a healthy does of fear is good for us.

Yes a healthy dose. ECT is an unswallowable pill. Even those who preach it don't fully believe it, because they cannot fathom the scale of suffering (from what they believe to be true) that is held over them and every other human being. It is emotionally untenable, you would be saved from suicide only out of fear of hell.

Fear of hell does not make one confess Jesus in faith.

Yet so many innocent children are threatened with hell unless they embrace Jesus. "You wouldn't want to be separated from mummy and daddy and be in hell tormented forever would you?" This is how ECT is used, or else it is hardly ever spoken about. People talk about God being a God of love, but the elephant in the room is ECT, and the unbelievers know it.

It may cause them pause to be concerned and think about it but our faith is what saves us, not our fear.
Luke 12:4-5 ESV
“I tell you, my friends, do not fear those who kill the body, and after that have nothing more that they can do. But I will warn you whom to fear: fear him who, after he has killed, has authority to cast into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him!

I believe Matthew 10:28 (ESV) has a more detailed account of this warning. He doesn't tell them to be afraid of God who will destroy body and torment soul in hell, but rather that God can destroy both body and soul in hell. But Jesus is just warning about what God can do, not what God will do.

I find the "can" versus "will" argument to be quite silly, as if Jesus said "will" it would mean that the disciples destruction was assured. That would have been scary. lol

 

[Stan1953]

I have done so countless times on this forum.

Then you should have no problem putting it down in writing on this thread.

Your POV as it relates to Scripture, or do you suppose to have an infallible interpretation of this doctrine?

No, just me quoting scripture. So far I haven't see any from you.

Yes, in this thread we are giving our opinion of how these doctrines effect the gospel. Here I stated my opinion, if you wish to simply ignore all reason and just believe whatever you want then be my guest.

Christian forums rely on scripture to arbitrate and support opinions. As you have NOT supplied any then it holds not validity. You also have not even tried to address the scripture that has been quoted.

There can be no rational defense for ECT, people must turn to the same old four proof texts for that.

So far, all the defense I see has been rational and scriptural.

Tell me, in your POV do spirits feel pain? If so, then they are capable of experiencing torture. Immense pain whether physical or mental that is the result of punishment.

No spirit do NOT feel pain as the body does. They can experience guilt, remorse and regret as it is us that is the spirit, but not pain in the same sense as the physical.
Paul explains this very well in Rom 8...you should read it.

Is it? If we literally interpret the passages in Revelation (as you ECTers love to do) what do we come up with?
he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. Revelation 14:10 (ESV)

This is symbolic and again does NOT refer to a physical body. Sulphur and fire does NOT exist in the spiritual realm. Regardless of what it is in the meta-physical realm, God decrees it and who are you oh man to judge God?

Is he tormented by his 20/20 hindsight, or is he tormented with fire and sulfur? Note that even a metaphorical view of the fire and sulfur directly relates to punishment. They are tormented as a result of their punishment, which is torture. Torment and torture and distinctly related words you know.

He is tormented by the knowledge of what he could have done to receive Eternal Life, and didn't.
Yes, torment refers to our meta-physical self and torture relates to the physical self. One is self inflicted and one is inflicted by sadistic people with a goal of soliciting compliance and knowledge. Neither of which God needs.

Well this is a part of the your response that directly relates to this subject. People disbelieve on account of their rationally examining the ECT view?

Please don't project your reasons and rational on me. I believe what I do based on what scripture shows. I don't make judgments on the validity of God's decrees.

Seems you support the idea that it is a stumbling block to the gospel by this response, or am I mistaken?

Jesus is the stumbling block for people, not hell or God's justice. That is just their excuse and Paul teaches we have NO excuse.

You know there is one reference to a Zealot in the NT, and it was Simon the Zealot who was a disciple.
Also, I was referring to the word "zeal" which has no real relationship to a Zealot, but thanks for trying to poison the well.
Jesus quoted David and said, "Zeal for your house will consume me," referring of course to Jesus. Is Jesus usage of that same word inapplicable?
Or how about Paul's statement here.
"Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit, serve the Lord." Romans 12:11 (ESV)
Nevermind that Paul, I'll leave Zeal for the unbelieving Zealots!...

I would suggest you study up on Simon Zelotes to see what he was all about. His name was NOT reflective of his walk with Jesus, but it may have been reflective of his Jewish walk beforehand.
Zeal is not the same as zealot and I am not a mind reader. Nothing wrong with having zeal for the things of God, which are CLEARLY spelled out in His Word. You are mistaken, I am trying to eliminate the poison of God being viewed as unacceptable in His justice.

I accept God as who he has revealed himself to be.
For his anger is but for a moment, and his favor is for a lifetime. Weeping may tarry for the night, but joy comes with the morning. Psalm 30:5 (ESV)
How does this statement about God's character apply to your doctrine? Suppose David was mistaken?

Well apparently only as far as your rational mind will go. You assume then that God will be angry for eternity
after he throws those unbelievers into the lake of fire, when in fact they will never enter His mind again. God does not regret his just actions, nor does He doubt Himself or His actions. That would be human emotion that views God like that.

Except Jesus says that both body and soul will be destroyed in hell. This idea also presupposes the immortality of the soul. Care to show us the text that teaches that?

Really? Where? Jesus says fear Him who CAN, not will. Do you doubt God can do all this. Do you have scripture that shows He WILL?

In All Scripture! (then proceeds to quote only 2 Scriptures)

I gave the two scriptures to show what Jesus will do and they relate to each other. Unlike your MO I do not cut down quotes. I deal with them in full.

Yes a healthy dose. ECT is an unswallowable pill. Even those who preach it don't fully believe it, because they cannot fathom the scale of suffering (from what they believe to be true) that is held over them and every other human being. It is emotionally untenable, you would be saved from suicide only out of fear of hell.

Only for those who won't swallow like my kids did when they were really young and didn't want to take their medicine.

Yet so many innocent children are threatened with hell unless they embrace Jesus. "You wouldn't want to be separated from mummy and daddy and be in hell tormented forever would you?" This is how ECT is used, or else it is hardly ever spoken about. People talk about God being a God of love, but the elephant in the room is ECT, and the unbelievers know it.

No innocent child go to hell. This another flawed view of God's justice. Not surprising it accompanies those who don't believe in an eternal lake of fire.
The elephant in the room is only seen by those that want to make an issue out of it. To me and all the people that are saved, it never was. Was it for you? Did it keep you from salvation?

I believe Matthew 10:28 (ESV) has a more detailed account of this warning. He doesn't tell them to be afraid of God who will destroy body and torment soul in hell, but rather that God can destroy both body and soul in hell. But Jesus is just warning about what God can do, not what God will do.
I find the "can" versus "will" argument to be quite silly, as if Jesus said "will" it would mean that the disciples destruction was assured. That would have been scary. lol

You do sound contradictory here, but I'm sure you were trying to make some kind of point. Bottom line is if you only accept verses that seem to support your dogma and don't accept all scripture that deals with any issue, then you are bound to not understand God's will on that issue.
What is silly is to base your dogma on ONE verse. Sad you find that funny.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Then you should have no problem putting it down in writing on this thread.

I've told you this several times now, I don't think it would be worth my time.

I'd be more than happy to cut and paste my previous conversations on the topic for you to read, (Edited, insulting, Tos 2.4. Obadiah)

No, just me quoting scripture. So far I haven't see any from you.

Yes because this thread isn't a debate about the validity of each view as it pertains to Scripture, but how each view may influence the gospel and how it is received by an unbeliever.

I can copy and paste my arguments for you if you'd like, I assure you I have addressed just about every verse relevant to the discussion on this forum.

Christian forums rely on scripture to arbitrate and support opinions. As you have NOT supplied any then it holds not validity. You also have not even tried to address the scripture that has been quoted.

Addressed it elsewhere.

Want to read?

So far, all the defense I see has been rational and scriptural.

Please provide a rational defense for ECT, beyond appealing to mystery.

No spirit do NOT feel pain as the body does. They can experience guilt, remorse and regret as it is us that is the spirit, but not pain in the same sense as the physical.
Paul explains this very well in Rom 8...you should read it.

You mean the Spirit groaning within us, longing for the restoration of the creation and our bodies? Not sure how that relates.

You do understand that pain can be mental or physical, I suggest consulting a dictionary. Your semantic argument doesn't stand up.

This is symbolic and again does NOT refer to a physical body. Sulphur and fire does NOT exist in the spiritual realm. Regardless of what it is in the meta-physical realm, God decrees it and who are you oh man to judge God?

I don't judge God, I disagree with you about his character. Also, what is the Sulphur and fire symbolic of exactly? Do you have a textual basis for it's origin coming from within the person. Every other reference in Scripture refers to judgment and punishment, something someone does to you, rather than something you do to yourself.

Please don't project your reasons and rational on me. I believe what I do based on what scripture shows. I don't make judgments on the validity of God's decrees.

It is wrong to apply logic to your statements? How else am I to deal with them?

Jesus is the stumbling block for people, not hell or God's justice. That is just their excuse and Paul teaches we have NO excuse.

According to Paul, it is the crucified Messiah who is a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Gentiles. Not sure if stumbling block is applicable to all people. Especially when Paul says we ought not to put any stumbling block in people's way.

I would suggest you study up on Simon Zelotes to see what he was all about.

Do you have some hidden knowledge on the subject, very little is known about him beyond speculative tradition.

His name was NOT reflective of his walk with Jesus, but it may have been reflective of his Jewish walk beforehand.

Point is moot, he was a Zealot who believed in Jesus, (Edited, ToS 2.4, insulting comment. Obadiah)

Zeal is not the same as zealot and I am not a mind reader. Nothing wrong with having zeal for the things of God, which are CLEARLY spelled out in His Word. You are mistaken, I am trying to eliminate the poison of God being viewed as unacceptable in His justice.

You said "zeal is for zealots," sounded like a universal ascription to me. Are you retracting this claim?

Well apparently only as far as your rational mind will go. You assume then that God will be angry for eternity
after he throws those unbelievers into the lake of fire, when in fact they will never enter His mind again. God does not regret his just actions, nor does He doubt Himself or His actions. That would be human emotion that views God like that.

Did you also skip over the part where it talks about being in the presence of his Holy Angels and the Lamb? Or wait, is it away from his presence as 1 Thessalonians says. Just one example of the contradictions ECT makes of Scripture.

Really? Where? Jesus says fear Him who CAN, not will. Do you doubt God can do all this. Do you have scripture that shows He WILL?

Already addressed this bankrupt semantic argument of CAN and WILL.

I gave the two scriptures to show what Jesus will do and they relate to each other. Unlike your MO I do not cut down quotes. I deal with them in full.

Remember, I try to use as little time as possible when responding to your posts. (Edited, ToS 2.4. personal attack. Obadiah)

No innocent child go to hell. This another flawed view of God's justice. Not surprising it accompanies those who don't believe in an eternal lake of fire.

What? Perhaps you should read up some more about what I believe. I made an entire thread about God having mercy upon unbelieving children who die.

I suppose you should be surprised by this.

The elephant in the room is only seen by those that want to make an issue out of it. To me and all the people that are saved, it never was. Was it for you? Did it keep you from salvation?

When I was an atheist, it was one of my go to argument against Christians to try and dissuade them from believing in God. Or to keep others from believing.

Was an easy target.

You do sound contradictory here, but I'm sure you were trying to make some kind of point.

I was presenting a little caricature of the irrelevant semantic argument employed by some to address the issue of "can" and "will," ignore the flow of the discourse. The ol' mistake of looking to Scripture as some kind of list of proof texts to learn systematic theology from.

Bottom line is if you only accept verses that seem to support your dogma and don't accept all scripture that deals with any issue, then you are bound to not understand God's will on that issue.

Which is why I have addressed all the famous proof texts that ECTers use several times on this forum. I accept all that Scripture says on the subject, I just disagree with you as to the meaning of the passages.

What is silly is to base your dogma on ONE verse. Sad you find that funny.

Who said I base my dogma on one verse? My dogma is formed by all of Scripture, not just the one's relevant to the topic directly, but the one's about God's plan for humanity and his character.

(Edited, ToS 2.4, insulting. Obadiah)