Reasons to believe hellfire is real.

[Webb]

THETHINKINGREBEL my suggestion that the subject of hell be discussed on the on-on-one was not and is not directed solely to you but to any who adhere to your doctrine. You seemed the most dominate in that position.

 

[reba]

Joh 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
Joh 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

 

[thethinkingrebel]

Joh 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
Joh 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Its interesting the terminology used such as "damnation". You immediately think of hell (ECT). But had we not had the middle ages when the RCC pushed the torment idea to the extremes with all the torture chamber imagery. And had Luther gone with conditionalisn during the reformation (its said that Calvin put pressure on him). Damnation would have simply meant what it means in capital punishment..judged or condemned to death. Also remember that many bible translators tend to believe in ECT and this influences what comes out of it:

Rotherhams emphasized bible

*[[Joh 5:29]] EBR* and shall come forth,––they who, the good things, have done, unto a resurrection, of life; but, they who the corrupt things, have practised, unto a resurrection, of judgment.

Strongs says for the word:

Original: κ ρ ι ́σ ι ς - Transliteration: Krisis - Phonetic: kree'-sis - Definition: 1. a separating, sundering, separation a. a trial, contest 2. selection 3. judgment a. opinion or decision given concerning anything 1. esp. concerning justice and injustice, right or wrong b. sentence of condemnation, damnatory judgment, condemnation and punishment 4. the college of judges (a tribunal of seven men in the several cities of Palestine; as distinguished from the Sanhedrin, which had its seat at Jerusalem) 5. right, justice - Origin: perhaps a primitive word.

So damnation does not immediately mean hell!

 

[Hitch]

Its interesting the terminology used such as "damnation". You immediately think of hell (ECT). But had we not had the middle ages when the RCC pushed the torment idea to the extremes with all the torture chamber imagery. And had Luther gone with conditionalisn during the reformation (its said that Calvin put pressure on him). Damnation would have simply meant what it means in capital punishment..judged or condemned to death. Also remember that many bible translators tend to believe in ECT and this influences what comes out of it:

Rotherhams emphasized bible

*[[Joh 5:29]] EBR* and shall come forth,––they who, the good things, have done, unto a resurrection, of life; but, they who the corrupt things, have practised, unto a resurrection, of judgment.

Strongs says for the word:

Original: κ ρ ι ́σ ι ς - Transliteration: Krisis - Phonetic: kree'-sis - Definition: 1. a separating, sundering, separation a. a trial, contest 2. selection 3. judgment a. opinion or decision given concerning anything 1. esp. concerning justice and injustice, right or wrong b. sentence of condemnation, damnatory judgment, condemnation and punishment 4. the college of judges (a tribunal of seven men in the several cities of Palestine; as distinguished from the Sanhedrin, which had its seat at Jerusalem) 5. right, justice - Origin: perhaps a primitive word.

So damnation does not immediately mean hell!

:toofunny:toofunny:toofunny

 

[Vic C.]

:toofunny:toofunny:toofunny

You can do better than that. I know you can! Counter with words. :yes

 

[thethinkingrebel]

I do not mean to offend anyone with my views, I simply want the truth to be known.

*[[Joh 8:31-32]] WEB* Jesus therefore said to those Jews who had believed him, “If you remain in my word, then you are truly my disciples. You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”

 

[Webb]

You do not offend me, what offends me is doctrinal error. I can only speak for myself however.

 

[thethinkingrebel]

You do not offend me, what offends me is doctrinal error. I can only speak for myself however.

I would suggest reading The Fire that Consumes by Edward Fudge. It goes into more detail than I can produce here. That is of course if you are interested.

 

[Webb]

I prefer the scriptures.

 

[reba]

So damnation does not immediately mean hell!

My mind was going off topic with those verses ......

 

[Hitch]

I prefer the scriptures.

Just remember not to read it (Fudge) on Saturday.

 

[Hitch]

I prefer the scriptures.

Obviously you dont need this Webb but someone else might find it useful;

Fudge also avoids the clear teaching of Scripture by setting up a linguistic smokescreen. He says that the Greek word aionios,usually translated as “eternal” or “everlasting,” would be better rendered “aionic” or “new-age” (p. 15; Robert Brinsmead also adopts this line of thinking in Present Truth,April, 1976, p. 26, footnote 6). So when “aionic” is connected with “destruction,” “damnation,” and “fire,” Fudge says “we can identify with the nouns. But again the adjective ‘aionic’ or ‘new-age’ warns us not to think that our present experiences can really provide a framework for comprehending the quality of each phrase when applied to the post-judgment of the wicked” (p.15). But the New Testament has more to say on this than he has allowed. In Rev. 20:10, the Greek phrase eis tous aionas ton aionon [“for ever and ever”] is used with reference to the “lake of fire and brimstone” where there is “torment day and night.” This intensive phrase does in fact indicate that the quality of the “lake of fire” is unending, eternal, and everlasting. Why? Because the same phrase, eis tous aionas ton aionon [“for ever and ever”], is used in Rev. 22:5 to describe the unending reign of Christ’s servants in the New Heaven and New Earth. Would anyone say that aionic “life” ever ends?Of course not. Why, then, do so many wish to water down the fact that the aionic “torments” of the wicked are also described as unending?The phrase used in both Rev. 20:10 and 22:5 — “for ever and ever” — rules out the idea that the wicked are “annihilated,” that is, that they cease to consciously exist in the “age to come.

http://the-highway.com/hell_Zens.html

 

[Classik]

Well, not just from one source. Many people have given testimonies saying they saw hellfire. All their testimonies are exactly the same, having something in common. I wouldn't argue with them.

Theyre exactly the same because they come from the same source. Satan, the great deceiver.

This is quite interesting. I nearly missed it completely. But, one question is: If the devil is involved, why would he use something advantageous (possibly) to deceive Christians? Looks like a credit to Christians and unbelievers who would run away from sin in order to escape the punishment.

 

[Webb]

The rich man in Luke 16 is the only one I am aware of who experienced anything like hades and he didn't come back nor was he destroyed into nothingness.

 

[Drew]

We need to be careful in just how sure each of us is about our positions. I think it is more complicated than most realize, especially when one's views on the soul and just who is resurrected immortal are considered, as well as the nuances in the meanings of "life" and "death".

I am working on a response but I am not sure when it will be done.

I certainly agree. Take the word "soul". A westerner, steeped in Greek ideas, will almost invariably construe this term as denoting "disembodied human consciousness". My argument is that this is not the meaning attributed to this word by the people who wrote the Bible. So we need to read the scriptures through the eyes of those wrote them, not through the eyes of Plato et al.

I also agree about "death". We cannot simply assume a certain meaning for this term. From my position, I see many Christians who simply assume that this term denotes "continued conscious existence after the destruction of the body". I see no evidence at all for this in the scriptures.

Granted, I suspect somewhat parallel critiques could be laid at my feet. Again, I would say the best approach to resolving this entails the following:

1. Understanding the cultural matrix of the writers of the Scriptures - we need to know what they thought these terms meant, not what 21st century western culture, or Greek culture for that matter, thinks these terms mean.

2. Coherence: we need to pick a meaning that makes "global" sense in the broader scripture picture. There is little value in arguing that meaning A makes sense in passage X, if that same meaning cannot be used sensibly in passages Y, W, and Z.

 

[Drew]

I prefer the scriptures.

This is the problem! I politely suggest that you are ignoring the necessity of understanding the broader culture in which the scriptures were written. And that invariably means appealing to non-Biblical sources as well.

In short, if you want to know what Jesus means by "soul", it is really important to understand the culture and language of first century Palestine. To restrict yourself to the Bible to lose an important body of contextual data that will help you understand what the Bible really means.

 

[Webb]

I'm persuaded that an understanding of what the konie Greek meant is sufficient.

 

[Drew]

I'm persuaded that an understanding of what the konie Greek meant is sufficient.

Meant to whom?

A Greek?

or a Hebrew?

I suggest the historical evidence suggests that Hebrews had no concept of a consciousness-bearing immaterial entity that might be term a "soul". This is what matters, no what people who did not write the Bible mean when they use the term "soul".

 

[Webb]

The koine meant in that day what it means today.

 

[thethinkingrebel]

The koine meant in that day what it means today.

Not at all, we now have 2000 years of cultural baggage added on! The meaning of the Greek has not changed...however our perceived meaning of it has changed.

Whats the big problem anyway? In conditionalism:

*The resurrection has meaning
*The constant use of death and destruction in reference to God's judgment has meaning
*Sheol/Hades/Gehenna have their correct places
*God tortures no one, theres no need to say ridiculous things like "You send yourself to hell". In conditionalism God really does destroy you..therefore God's wrath has its place.
*Heaven and Hell are out of the picture..as completely unscriptural contrivances. The New Jerusalem has its place restored as the final home of the saved...on a New Earth. Plus instead of us floating off to Heaven...God's dwelling is with us!
Suddenly the wicked take a backseat..they're gone!
*The cross holds the same significance in both doctrines.

Thats the truth.