Summing up “the soul of man”

[GodsGrace]

They turn away from lack of understanding and from believing a a false Gospel as that which you have framed above.
Go will not turn away anyone who makes the slightest attempt to know Him.
The notion that anyone, in at least the western world, has not had access to the Gospel is indefensible.

The major problem is: “And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil." Jhn 3:19

It is also of disgrace to the church that the Gospel is not being preached by the ACTIONS of those who call themselves believers in accordance with Jesus' command: “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven." (Mat 5:16) Perhaps if the western church was not so focused on discouraging good works, more people would be saved. It worked for the 6th century Irish missionaries and for St Francis of Assisi who said, "Preach the Gospel at all times. If necessary, use words."

What you have presented is an excuse for not tasting and seeing that the Lord is good ( Psa 34:8) rather than a valid reason to reject God's grace.

We know that God is love and that He does not force anyone to love Him. So if someone through ignorance chooses not to have fellowship with God then God allows him to have his choice. He who rejects God's love will, by his own choice, be separated from God in this life and in the next. That is hell. That it is unbearable torture in flames for all eternity for even the slightest infraction of God's will is complete speculation. God is merciful and just, not a monster.

If anyone really wants to know God, they will pursue that knowledge.
If they just want an excuse to reject God, they will pursue that excuse.



Iakov the fool

Hi Jim
You and Chopper have made excellent posts, as usual.
I just read this one page and would like to clarify for those that might be reading along.

As you might remember, when I came to know Jesus I was in the RCC.
Are you saying, and chopper, that if I had just gone to church, confession, Mass, done my best to observe Jesus' commands, this would not have been sufficient?

I know you can't mean this, but it sounds like Knowledge saves (like the gnostics?).

Please clarify.

 

[Chopper]

Hello again wondering. I'll attempt to help you understand what you asked....

Are you saying, and chopper, that if I had just gone to church, confession, Mass, done my best to observe Jesus' commands, this would not have been sufficient?

The problem with being attached to the RCC is that organization is "another gospel". The Catholic Church has a sordid history behind them. The church murdered some of the finest Christian men and women just because they wanted the public to have the Bible in their own language. Their murderous background, if understood by modern Catholics, they would empty every church. I have studied the inquisitions and that made me come to tears because of the innocent followers of Jesus who opposed the RCC, and had Bibles and supported great men who simply wanted men and women to own copies of holy writings.

You ask, "would not have been sufficient?" I believe it would have been questionable. I have witnessed to Catholics exlaining the false beliefs of their theology and with the help of the Holy Spirit, brought them to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. They were re-baptized (not that they were really Baptized) by immersion.

As a result, by their own testimony, they knew for certain that what they had in Christ was a totally new relationship with Jesus and His Father. My own Wife is an example.

Now, I have known of Catholics that are just as saved as I am. For one reason or another, they stay in that church. The point is, they believe solely on the sacrifice of Jesus alone and not on anything the church offers.

I hope this helps. Any other questions?

Love You,
Chopper

 

[IncredibleTransformation]

Hello again wondering. I'll attempt to help you understand what you asked....

The problem with being attached to the RCC is that organization is "another gospel". The Catholic Church has a sordid history behind them. The church murdered some of the finest Christian men and women just because they wanted the public to have the Bible in their own language. Their murderous background, if understood by modern Catholics, they would empty every church. I have studied the inquisitions and that made me come to tears because of the innocent followers of Jesus who opposed the RCC, and had Bibles and supported great men who simply wanted men and women to own copies of holy writings.

You ask, "would not have been sufficient?" I believe it would have been questionable. I have witnessed to Catholics exlaining the false beliefs of their theology and with the help of the Holy Spirit, brought them to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. They were re-baptized (not that they were really Baptized) by immersion.

As a result, by their own testimony, they knew for certain that what they had in Christ was a totally new relationship with Jesus and His Father. My own Wife is an example.

Now, I have known of Catholics that are just as saved as I am. For one reason or another, they stay in that church. The point is, they believe solely on the sacrifice of Jesus alone and not on anything the church offers.

I hope this helps. Any other questions?

Love You,
Chopper

I was a Catholic for awhile when I was a very young Christian just to please my husband. I liked some of the ceremony around the Catholic mass, like they say the Nicenian Creed every week and they say the Lords prayer every week. I liked taking communion every week, but when they explained the whole transubstation (sp) thing to me I got the meaning of it that they were crucifying Christ all over again. The Catholic Church as a very sorted past and some very strange beliefs. They still aren't very welcoming of spirit filled people. The priest that was in the church I went to was spirit filled. It as in Phoenix, AZ and the church was one of the biggest churches in the U.S. I think only one other Catholic Church that was bigger and it was in New York. This church had nine services on the weekends and one on Thursday to accommodate all the people that came. I believe it was because people were staving for the Holy Spirit and this man was the only one in the church that filled that need.

He didn't last long however and that was God's will. I was in the church one Sunday morning and the Lord told me that He no longer wanted this priest in the Catholic Church. He had different plans for him. I started to pray and sure enough he got excommunicated from the Catholic Church. He stared another church and took about half of the congregation with him. It is a wonderful church with a wonderful spirit. When I am in the Phoenix area I always attend.

The Catholics aren't that only ones that have done bad things. Protestants in America killed millions and enslaved many more to build this country. I didn't like the Catholic Church but I don't like many of the things Protestants do either.

 

[Free]

...and what is more, there isn't a single good reason (biblical or moral) why we should believe in the idea that man was born with an immortal soul. Neither then is there a good reason to believe the least knowledgeable and least offensive of condemned souls, even the most backward or least intelligent of them who were also born to die in ignorance, will be made to live in endless terror and torment in a lake of fire forever. Such ideas are unbiblical and a slander on the name of God.



If however you still feel a need to have faith in and worship one who's actions you claim are motivated by love, mercy and righteous justice, and will then go on to torture all of the least knowledgeable and least offensive of unsaved souls forever, then do please remember this: your faith is the assurance of what you hope for (Hebrews 11:1) and by what you hope for you shall be exonerated or condemned.

...and nowhere in Scripture does God tell us every man was born with an immortal soul and that every condemned soul will be kept alive and conscious in a lake of fire forever.

Something to consider, taken from an article in my Bible, written by J. P. Moreland and titled "Does the Bible Teach Annihilationism?":

" The moral argument fails as well. Fro one thing, the severity of a crime is not a function of the time it takes to commit it. Thus rejection of the mercy of an infinite God could appropriately warrant and unending, conscious separation from God. Further, everlasting hell is morally superior to annihilation. That becomes evident from the following consideration.
Regarding the end of life, sanctity-of-life advocates reject active euthanasia (the intentional killing of a patient), while the quality-of-life advocates embrace it. In the sanctity-of-life view, one gets one's value, not from the quality of one's life, but from the sheer fact that one exists in God's image. The quality-of-life advocates see the value of human life in its quality; life is not inherently valuable. Thus the sanctity-of-life position has a higher, not a lower, moral regard for the dignity of human life.
The traditional and annihilationist views about hell are expressions, respectively, of the sanctity-of-life and quality-of-life ethical standpoints. After all, the grounds that God would have for annihilating someone would be the low quality of life in hell. If a person will not receive salvation, and if God will not extinguish one made in His image because He values life, then God's alternative is quarantine, and hell is certainly that. Thus the tradition view, being a sanctity-of-life and not a quality-of-life position, is morally superior to annihilationism." (The Apologetics Study Bible, p. 1292)

I think that is a sound, strong argument.

Your argument that God will "torture all of the least knowledgeable and least offensive of unsaved souls forever," is a straw man. That all unbelievers will end up in hell is without question; that is a very clear teaching of Scripture. Regarding any physical punishment in hell, look at what Jesus says:

Luk 12:45 But if that servant says to himself, 'My master is delayed in coming,' and begins to beat the male and female servants, and to eat and drink and get drunk,
Luk 12:46 the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will cut him in pieces and put him with the unfaithful.
Luk 12:47 And that servant who knew his master's will but did not get ready or act according to his will, will receive a severe beating.
Luk 12:48 But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating. Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more. (ESV)

As to how long they will be alive in hell:

Dan 12:2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. (ESV)

Mat 25:41 "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.
...
Mat 25:46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." (ESV)

There is no escaping that the length of time in hell is the same as that of eternal life.

 

[Mike]

Thank you, Free, for getting this discussion back on track. Let's all try to stay on point with the subject of the thread. Thanks.

 

[atpollard]

Romans 1:18-32
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Romans 1:18-32 points out what people are like in the progressive degeneration as God withdraws his hand of restraint and allows sinful men to wallow in their depravity of heart and mind. If this is what man is capable of in the span of a single human lifetime, the thought of the depths to which he can sink when faced with an eternity apart from God and with all moral restraints removed is terrifying. Yet that God-hating, insolent, arrogant, boastful creature, completely devoid of understanding, fidelity, love, or mercy is exactly what every fallen man is destined to become and has chosen in their rejection of the Christ. Remember they stand condemned already because they have not believed (John 3:18).

There are no "only a little evil" people in hell. Those who are only a little evil in life have enjoyed the mercy of the God that they have rejected. There is no evil which the human heart is incapable of (Genesis 6:5) apart from God. In eternal separation, that evil will be realized.

The issue is not that none deserve hell, the issue is that none deserve mercy (Romans 3:10-18). I stand in awe that God should choose to pardon any at such a high personal cost.

 

[freewill]

Something to consider, taken from an article in my Bible, written by J. P. Moreland and titled "Does the Bible Teach Annihilationism?":

" The moral argument fails as well. Fro one thing, the severity of a crime is not a function of the time it takes to commit it. Thus rejection of the mercy of an infinite God could appropriately warrant and unending, conscious separation from God. Further, everlasting hell is morally superior to annihilation. That becomes evident from the following consideration.
Regarding the end of life, sanctity-of-life advocates reject active euthanasia (the intentional killing of a patient), while the quality-of-life advocates embrace it. In the sanctity-of-life view, one gets one's value, not from the quality of one's life, but from the sheer fact that one exists in God's image. The quality-of-life advocates see the value of human life in its quality; life is not inherently valuable. Thus the sanctity-of-life position has a higher, not a lower, moral regard for the dignity of human life.
The traditional and annihilationist views about hell are expressions, respectively, of the sanctity-of-life and quality-of-life ethical standpoints. After all, the grounds that God would have for annihilating someone would be the low quality of life in hell. If a person will not receive salvation, and if God will not extinguish one made in His image because He values life, then God's alternative is quarantine, and hell is certainly that. Thus the tradition view, being a sanctity-of-life and not a quality-of-life position, is morally superior to annihilationism." (The Apologetics Study Bible, p. 1292)

I think that is a sound, strong argument.

I believe this is infinitely better: Causing or allowing any suffering beyond what is necessary for the eternal safety of creation would be as offensive to the God of love and reason as it would be alien to reason and love.


I see you are using Luke 12:45-48 ESV as part of your evidence to prove there will be everlasting torment for all of the condemned.

Luke 12:35-48 KJV explains in part what will happen when Jesus Christ returns as Judge of all mankind…

Verse 47-48: “And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes”. If then all of the condemned were to be punished with everlasting torment, then those who did not know God’s will at His return would need to experience “many” or an infinite number of beatings. But we are told “he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes” and the word “few” cannot possibly mean an infinite number. Neither then can it mean “everlasting torment”.
It should however be noted that in Luke 12:48 ESV, it is worded: “But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating.” That being said, to describe living forever in an inferno of constant torment where there is wailing and gnashing of teeth, and despair, horror and hatred all around as “a light beating” would be grossly inaccurate and absurd.


Continued...

 

[freewill]

...Continued from previous page

...and I also see you are using Daniel 12:2 ESV as part of your evidence to prove there will be everlasting torment for all of the condemned.
“And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt”. However, the word “shame” here can be seen simply describing the shame of those being judged and condemned. At the same time the words “everlasting contempt” can also be seen describing the contempt that will be forever shown for all who are condemned to everlasting punishment, be it a punishment of an everlasting literal death or be it one of everlasting torment. But I see nothing here to say those words can only mean everlasting torment.

I also see you using Matthew 25: 41 and 46 ESV as part of your evidence to prove there will be everlasting torment for all of the condemned. Here we are told, 41“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.”
46“And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”.

I have often seen others also quoting this like it was sound evidence serving to prove that every condemned soul will suffer everlasting torment. I agree the word “punishment” in this context should be understood to be a punishment lasting forever, but I also see the words “eternal punishment” can be seen to mean an everlasting punishment of everlasting “death” i.e. an everlasting cessation of life, just as easily as they can be seen to mean an everlasting punishment of everlasting torment. I have though also seen others who will not accept the original Greek word for punishment (kolasis) in Matthew 25:46 is being used to describe merely punishment, they argue instead that it’s meaning should be more correctly translated as “torment”. However, the meaning of this word “kolasis” has been expounded well by Dr. Spiros Zodhiates who is recognised by many evangelical Christians as an authority in the Koine Greek language. His mother tongue was Greek and it is worth seeing a brief history of his life and work presented here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiros_Zodhiates in order to see why I believe his understanding of this word “kolasis” should not be ignored.

Zodhiates informs us that this word “kolasis”, from “kolazo”, does in fact mean, to punish; punishment, when viewed in the context of Matthew 25:46. Whilst at the same time in 1 John 4:18 he tells us that the word “kolasis” used there, can be seen to mean “torment” conveying the notion of “punishment for the correction and bettering of the offender”. He then goes on to explain that Matthew 25:46 however does not refer to temporary corrective punishment and discipline, but has more the meaning of “timoria”, found in Hebrews 10:29 (a noun meaning punishment, satisfying the inflicter’s sense of outraged justice, as defending his own honor or that of a violated law). So according to Zodhiates, with this word “kolasis” when it is found in these two contexts there can be seen two different meanings being applied to it even though they are related. Also, the KJV, NKJV, ASV, NASB, ESV and NIV are regarded by many as probably the best translations we have from the Koine Greek and in Matthew 25:46 these versions all use the same word to explain the original meaning in this verse and that word chosen is “punishment” not “torment”.

I still cannot see then a good reason why the meaning of “kolasis” in Matthew 25:46 should not be seen as meaning “punishment”, or as another commentator puts it, “punishment that “fits” (matches) the one punished”. Neither then can I see a good reason why the original words, “aionios kolasis” in this verse, should not also be seen as anything other than a description of everlasting punishment – Anything ranging from everlasting death as in the literal meaning of the word to everlasting torment, depending on the gravity of the offence caused by each condemned soul and on how little or how great their understanding of God and His goodness was.

Despite what many learned Christians might say about this verse then, the fact remains that death (as meaning a cessation of life) is also a punishment, and everlasting death therefore would be an everlasting punishment. According to Scripture men’s souls can die and do die, and although we are told they will all be made to live again (for glory or for the judgement) a soul can also be completely destroyed by God in Gehenna (the final place of punishment of the ungodly), if or when God so wills, Matthew 10:28.

God alone is immortal, not man or his soul or his worldly spirit but God alone is immortal 1 Timothy 6:15-16 ESV and He alone decides who else shall become immortal.

There is no escaping that the length of time in hell is the same as that of eternal life.

There is no escaping the fact that nowhere in Scripture does God tell us every man was born with an immortal soul and that every condemned soul will be kept alive and conscious in a lake of fire forever.

 

[Nathan]

I think what we forget is that immortality cannot be imputed on someone. It can't be separated from itself. Believers are said to have eternal life, but that life can only come through Christ who is immortal. For someone to "become" immortal would be the same as them "becoming" like God. That's impossible. Immortality is a part of who God is. You cannot separate immortality from God.

So the question is, how can God give immortality, a part of Himself, to beings that will forever be separated from Him?

Immortality is "deathlessness". How can you have "deathlessness" in eternal death?

 

[Free]

God alone is immortal, not man or his soul or his worldly spirit but God alone is immortal 1 Timothy 6:15-16 ESV and He alone decides who else shall become immortal.


There is no escaping the fact that nowhere in Scripture does God tell us every man was born with an immortal soul and that every condemned soul will be kept alive and conscious in a lake of fire forever.

So what happens to the soul when we die? Do we cease to exist?

 

[Nathan]

Matthew 10:28
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.

I am FAR from a student of the eternal state of an unbeliever, however when I read this passage above it all becomes quite clear to me.

I don't know what happens immediately after death - its all speculation on my part. But what I do know is God can destroy the soul. When and if He chooses to do that is up to Him. But there is nothing saying He cannot or wont do it.

To destroy something is not to keep it around somewhere. It is to make it become like it never even existed.

 

[freewill]

Romans 1:18-32
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Romans 1:18-32 points out what people are like in the progressive degeneration as God withdraws his hand of restraint and allows sinful men to wallow in their depravity of heart and mind. If this is what man is capable of in the span of a single human lifetime, the thought of the depths to which he can sink when faced with an eternity apart from God and with all moral restraints removed is terrifying. Yet that God-hating, insolent, arrogant, boastful creature, completely devoid of understanding, fidelity, love, or mercy is exactly what every fallen man is destined to become and has chosen in their rejection of the Christ. Remember they stand condemned already because they have not believed (John 3:18).

There are no "only a little evil" people in hell. Those who are only a little evil in life have enjoyed the mercy of the God that they have rejected. There is no evil which the human heart is incapable of (Genesis 6:5) apart from God. In eternal separation, that evil will be realized.

The issue is not that none deserve hell, the issue is that none deserve mercy (Romans 3:10-18). I stand in awe that God should choose to pardon any at such a high personal cost.

Please read the message referring to Romans 1:19-20 KJV, posted here Feb 20, 2017 #57 and then think on the extreme cases where those who will be judged incapable of becoming trusted servants of God and creation who from their birth were deceived and indoctrinated, seduced, threatened or beaten into continually ignoring and offending the good they never experienced or rightly understood, and then also consider this: Anyone born to live and die that way and then face the judgement cannot be justly held responsible for offending what they never understood or believed existed.

Even though they die an offence to God and creation, to condemn such as these to be tortured forever would be like condemning dangerous and hopeless wild animals to suffer in the same way: it would do no good and would be eternally seen as an act of unnecessary and unjustified extreme cruelty to say the least.

...and nowhere in Scripture does God tell us every man was born with an immortal soul and that every condemned soul will be kept alive and conscious in a lake of fire forever.

 

[freewill]

So what happens to the soul when we die?

That depends on what God decides.

Do we cease to exist?

I can only say that I believe those who are saved and who know God well will be made conscious again immediately or soon after they die, but not necessarily all of the saved. Many others might well remain unconscious until the second coming. Like I said, it depends on what God decides will be best for us all.

As for those who do not know God, I believe that many will remain unconscious (dead) until the judgement. The parable of the rich man and Lazarus however, does seem to imply there will be a resurrection immediately or very soon after death for the most evil of souls who know God well and have complete contempt for Him...and hate Him with a passion.

Sorry I can't be more definite but from what I have read in Scripture that is the best I can do for now.

 

[Free]

I believe this is infinitely better: Causing or allowing any suffering beyond what is necessary for the eternal safety of creation would be as offensive to the God of love and reason as it would be alien to reason and love.

What do you mean by "the eternal safety of creation"? And you didn't really address Moreland's argument.

I see you are using Luke 12:45-48 ESV as part of your evidence to prove there will be everlasting torment for all of the condemned.

Luke 12:35-48 KJV explains in part what will happen when Jesus Christ returns as Judge of all mankind…

Verse 47-48: “And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes”. If then all of the condemned were to be punished with everlasting torment, then those who did not know God’s will at His return would need to experience “many” or an infinite number of beatings. But we are told “he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes” and the word “few” cannot possibly mean an infinite number. Neither then can it mean “everlasting torment”.
It should however be noted that in Luke 12:48 ESV, it is worded: “But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating.” That being said, to describe living forever in an inferno of constant torment where there is wailing and gnashing of teeth, and despair, horror and hatred all around as “a light beating” would be grossly inaccurate and absurd.

The meaning of the texts is the same in both the ESV and KJV. It seems as though you didn't read my post quite close enough. The passage in Luke 12 was to support my assertion that "Regarding any physical punishment in hell, look at what Jesus says". That is, any physical punishment will be in proportion to knowledge of God's will and will not be infinite for anyone. Hence why I said, 'Your argument that God will "torture all of the least knowledgeable and least offensive of unsaved souls forever," is a straw man.'

Torment is not necessarily physical. It can be emotional and mental anguish. In this case, I suggest that while any physical punishment will be temporary, either severe or light or anything in between, there will be mental anguish that will last forever--knowing what is and what could have been.

Note that it seems we have levels of punishment for unbelievers and levels of reward for believers, according to Paul in 1 Cor. 3:11-15.

 

[Free]

...and I also see you are using Daniel 12:2 ESV as part of your evidence to prove there will be everlasting torment for all of the condemned.
“And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt”. However, the word “shame” here can be seen simply describing the shame of those being judged and condemned. At the same time the words “everlasting contempt” can also be seen describing the contempt that will be forever shown for all who are condemned to everlasting punishment, be it a punishment of an everlasting literal death or be it one of everlasting torment. But I see nothing here to say those words can only mean everlasting torment.

I also see you using Matthew 25: 41 and 46 ESV as part of your evidence to prove there will be everlasting torment for all of the condemned. Here we are told, 41“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.”
46“And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”.

I have often seen others also quoting this like it was sound evidence serving to prove that every condemned soul will suffer everlasting torment. I agree the word “punishment” in this context should be understood to be a punishment lasting forever, but I also see the words “eternal punishment” can be seen to mean an everlasting punishment of everlasting “death” i.e. an everlasting cessation of life, just as easily as they can be seen to mean an everlasting punishment of everlasting torment. I have though also seen others who will not accept the original Greek word for punishment (kolasis) in Matthew 25:46 is being used to describe merely punishment, they argue instead that it’s meaning should be more correctly translated as “torment”. However, the meaning of this word “kolasis” has been expounded well by Dr. Spiros Zodhiates who is recognised by many evangelical Christians as an authority in the Koine Greek language. His mother tongue was Greek and it is worth seeing a brief history of his life and work presented here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiros_Zodhiates in order to see why I believe his understanding of this word “kolasis” should not be ignored.

Zodhiates informs us that this word “kolasis”, from “kolazo”, does in fact mean, to punish; punishment, when viewed in the context of Matthew 25:46. Whilst at the same time in 1 John 4:18 he tells us that the word “kolasis” used there, can be seen to mean “torment” conveying the notion of “punishment for the correction and bettering of the offender”. He then goes on to explain that Matthew 25:46 however does not refer to temporary corrective punishment and discipline, but has more the meaning of “timoria”, found in Hebrews 10:29 (a noun meaning punishment, satisfying the inflicter’s sense of outraged justice, as defending his own honor or that of a violated law). So according to Zodhiates, with this word “kolasis” when it is found in these two contexts there can be seen two different meanings being applied to it even though they are related. Also, the KJV, NKJV, ASV, NASB, ESV and NIV are regarded by many as probably the best translations we have from the Koine Greek and in Matthew 25:46 these versions all use the same word to explain the original meaning in this verse and that word chosen is “punishment” not “torment”.

I still cannot see then a good reason why the meaning of “kolasis” in Matthew 25:46 should not be seen as meaning “punishment”, or as another commentator puts it, “punishment that “fits” (matches) the one punished”. Neither then can I see a good reason why the original words, “aionios kolasis” in this verse, should not also be seen as anything other than a description of everlasting punishment – Anything ranging from everlasting death as in the literal meaning of the word to everlasting torment, depending on the gravity of the offence caused by each condemned soul and on how little or how great their understanding of God and His goodness was.

Despite what many learned Christians might say about this verse then, the fact remains that death (as meaning a cessation of life) is also a punishment, and everlasting death therefore would be an everlasting punishment. According to Scripture men’s souls can die and do die, and although we are told they will all be made to live again (for glory or for the judgement) a soul can also be completely destroyed by God in Gehenna (the final place of punishment of the ungodly), if or when God so wills, Matthew 10:28.

Again, you need to read my post a little more closely. My only point with those passages was, "As to how long they will be alive in hell".

And this is why I asked you what you believe happens to the soul when we die; it creates a problem for your position. If unbelievers simply cease to exist or experience "soul sleep" until Christ's return, then when does any sort of punishment take place? We know that Jesus differentiated between those who knew God's will and those who didn't, stating that they would experience different levels of punishment. But if all the condemned simply cease to exist, then they all experience the same punishment, which contradicts what Jesus said.

If punishment happens after we die, then it would indicate an immortal soul. But then you have the problem of some not experiencing proportionate punishment, punishment that fits the crime. If punishment happens when cast into the lake of fire, then the lake of fire clearly does not result in immediate death, and therefore those in it are possibly immortal.

God alone is immortal, not man or his soul or his worldly spirit but God alone is immortal 1 Timothy 6:15-16 ESV and He alone decides who else shall become immortal.

There is no escaping the fact that nowhere in Scripture does God tell us every man was born with an immortal soul and that every condemned soul will be kept alive and conscious in a lake of fire forever.

Was every man born with an immortal soul? It seems like a possibility:

Luk 12:4 "I tell you, my friends, do not fear those who kill the body, and after that have nothing more that they can do.
Luk 12:5 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! (ESV)

Notice that man can do no more than killing the body, yet God can cast into hell, after killing the body. Just what is it that God is casting into hell? And if it's just a cessation of existence, what is there to fear? Why so many dire warnings by Jesus regarding hell if nothing happens other than ceasing to exist?

 

[Mike]

Torment is not necessarily physical. It can be emotional and mental anguish.

I'm happy to see these sentiments. I've long believed the fires and physical torture to be a metaphor for the utter despair that the condemned will exist with for eternity, being fully separated from the Lord. It is inconceivable to anyone to be wholly separated from His love and presence. I can only speculate that this place will be so void of relief, it will be as bad or worse than being physically tortured.

 

[freewill]

What do you mean by "the eternal safety of creation"?

If evil came into existence once when a free and perfect angel through pride – a high or inordinate opinion of one’s own dignity, importance, merit, or superiority, decided he no longer cared to live for truth and love, then with no remedial action such a rebellion could, over the course of eternity, just as easily happen again, and again ad infinitum. With no remedial action there would be a very real eternal threat to creation. Deterrents do work and the ultimate deterrent for evil therefore will serve as the ultimate safeguard for good:

After the great tribulation when the contagious and deadly spirit of evil has been allowed by God to run a course of lies, corruption, terror and misery and to reach it’s climax on earth, and after the final judgement when every condemned soul has been seen to be justly cast into the lake of fire, then all creation will forever know where the subtle way of pride can lead. No free and perfect mind of reason then, like the fallen angels once had, will ever again admire the wild and exciting spirit of rebellion and dare to venture into Satan’s reckless state of valuing the self above God and truth.

Never again will evil threaten to destroy creation.

But to cause or allow any suffering beyond what is necessary for the eternal safety of creation would be as offensive to the God of love and reason as it would be alien to reason and love.

And you didn't really address Moreland's argument.

Let me address it now. I didn't see a single good reason why Mooreland should write what he did. Basically all I saw were feeble excuses for believing God will keep the least offensive and least knowledgeable condemned souls alive in torment in the lake of fire forever.

 

[WIP]

I'm happy to see these sentiments. I've long believed the fires and physical torture to be a metaphor for the utter despair that the condemned will exist with for eternity, being fully separated from the Lord. It is inconceivable to anyone to be wholly separated from His love and presence. I can only speculate that this place will be so void of relief, it will be as bad or worse than being physically tortured.

My thoughts exactly. The total, complete, and utter separation from God would be without question anquish beyond understanding.

 

[Bick]

If you want to make the argument that a certain translation should be the final word, then it must be the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, not an English translation. If you are making the argument that the Bible should be the final word, then I'm sure all would agree.


There were three different levels of judgment being discussed, the last of which was divine judgement which resulted in being thrown into hell.

Here I believe that Butch5 and atpollard are correct--Gehenna was a metaphor that Jesus used for the lake of fire. Jesus speaks of Gehenna as the final destination for the unbeliever and John uses the lake of fire for the final destination of the unbeliever. Both final destinations of the unbeliever, both burning with fire. The logical conclusion is that they are one and the same place.


Just how do each of these verses support anything you have said? Posting references, even the verses themselves, tells us nothing about how you think they support your position. I am willing to discuss any of them, especially since I think most of them prove your position to be in error--in particular Matt.10:28; 18:9; 23:15; Mark 9:43,45,47; Luke 12:5.

Bick
Concerning translations and the originals:
Shouldn't we use the most literal translations, such as
Young's Literal or Rotherham's Emphasized?
When you say "The Bible", which version are you referring to?
Young's and Rotherham's are Bibles.
I am willing to discuss all these verses using proper rules of interpretation.
Take the word "Gehenna". It appears in the Greek Scriptures twelve times (Mat.5:22,29,30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15,33; Mark 9:43,45,47; Luke 12:5; James 3:6). None of these passages has reference to the so called
"final state." The Lord explicitly identified Gehenna with
Isa.66:24 by speaking of it as a place where the "worm does not die and the fire is unextinguished;" and from the context in Isaiah it would be during the time of Israel's restoration.
And that's not the end of those bodies destroyed in Gehenna, they must be raised to be judged at the great white throne, and then be cast into the lake of fire.

 

[Free]

Bick
Concerning translations and the originals:
Shouldn't we use the most literal translations, such as
Young's Literal or Rotherham's Emphasized?
When you say "The Bible", which version are you referring to?
Young's and Rotherham's are Bibles.
I am willing to discuss all these verses using proper rules of interpretation.

When I say the Bible, I mean any version which has the true Gospel, which is a lot of versions. Being more "literal" really doesn't mean anything. The best is to reference several different versions. But as I stated, if you want to argue to just one version, it should be the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, not an English translation.

Take the word "Gehenna". It appears in the Greek Scriptures twelve times (Mat.5:22,29,30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15,33; Mark 9:43,45,47; Luke 12:5; James 3:6). None of these passages has reference to the so called
"final state."

On the contrary:

Mat 18:8 And if your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life crippled or lame than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into the eternal fire.
Mat 18:9 And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into the hell of fire. (ESV)

Notice that Jesus contrasts entering life with being "thrown into the hell of fire. That is, Jesus is stating that it is better to enter eternal life maimed than to be thrown into gehenna, so we know that he is referring to the final destination of the unbeliever. But we also know that the final destination of the unbeliever is the lake of fire, so we can then safely conclude that gehenna and the lake of fire are one and the same.

This goes for the verses in Mark as well:

Mar 9:43 And if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than with two hands to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire.
Mar 9:45 And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame than with two feet to be thrown into hell.
Mar 9:47 And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell,
Mar 9:48 'where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.' (ESV)

This is Mark's version of the same in Matthew 18, with added emphasis at the end of verse 43 and in verse 48 that only make sense if gehenna is referring to the final destination of the unbeliever.

The Lord explicitly identified Gehenna with
Isa.66:24 by speaking of it as a place where the "worm does not die and the fire is unextinguished;" and from the context in Isaiah it would be during the time of Israel's restoration.

I see no reason why the passage in Isaiah is not referring to the final judgement, hence Christ's reference to it. But even if it isn't a reference to the final judgement, there would be no reason to think that Jesus was referring only to an event in Isaiah and not the final judgement. The context strongly suggests Jesus is referring to the final destination of believers and unbelievers, regardless of what Isaiah is referring to.

And that's not the end of those bodies destroyed in Gehenna, they must be raised to be judged at the great white throne, and then be cast into the lake of fire.

But where are they raised from? From gehenna?

Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. (ESV)

No mention of gehenna giving up the dead in it because the lake of fire is gehenna.