If your argument really is "that the Bible means what it says," then you really need to take into account all that the Bible actually says. Firstly, "can" is quite different then "will."
Free, I feel like I’d be butting in too much, to a one-on-one discussion, to reply to any more from your above post than just this one little point. Plus, I agree with much, if not all of the rest you said in that post, except the part where you say “ceasing to exist is NOT punishment”. I suppose that is simply a matter of opinion or perspective. I don’t even hold to the position that the lost will simply “cease to exist”. But if I did, it sounds like punishment to me (versus the alternative, “existing”. Not to mention that those are your words, not mine or TimothyW’s so I don’t see the benefit of debating that point. Especially since the Scriptures do not say “cease to exist” either.
But your first point was one I feel lead to reply to since we never competed our previous discussion concerning Matt 10:28 before the thread was locked. Not that I’m even trying to convince you or anybody else, one way or the other. Rather, I’m replying in a request for clarification, because maybe I have overlooked something here that you’ve figured out and I’ve simply missed. Your point about “can” is quite different than “will” is the very position/belief that I held myself for several years concerning this passage. It once seemed to me, pretty much the only way to reconcile Matt 10:28 with my traditional view of Hell. However, I’ve now come to re-evaluate my previous stance, precisely because of a systematic approach to studying the entirety of Scripture, that you are 100% right to point out as so vitally important. The view (can is not will) is technically accurate for that one versus.
What do you do systematically with the “will” in Ezekiel 18:4? (NASB)
4 Behold, all souls are Mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is Mine. The soul who sins will die.
Matthew 10:28 Amplified Bible (AMP)
28 And do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; but rather be afraid of Him who can destroy both soul and body in hell (Gehenna).
Another member here once said to me that this verse was NOT rightly understood by the disciples to which Jesus was speaking to be a warning to them of actual/real events to come. But rather Jesus was simply making a statement on the power of God (to kill/destroy both soul and body). i.e. “can is not will”
And you have actually said to me about this passage in a locked thread, so I cannot post the quote; “
That actually makes it sound like God is threatening them. Clearly God was not going to destroy the apostles in hell, so it does lean more towards my position in that God is to be feared because he is so powerful that he could destroy souls if he so chose to do so.“
I found that both of these points to be untrue for the following systematic reasons:
1. Luke’s parallel account is Luke 12:5
But I will warn you whom to fear: fear the One who, after He has killed, has authority to cast into hell; yes, I tell you, fear Him!
Clearly, this was a warning
to the disciples and He meant for THEM to be warned and afraid. Yet still, I agree, I suppose, that just because Jesus “warned” them that God was capable of killing both the body and the soul, and to be afraid of that power, that in and of itself doesn’t necessarily mean that He actually
will in the future.
My point is that the passage
is a warning (that’s how Luke records it), not
just a statement of the power that God has.
2. First, again, I think you have a good point about how the Bible speaks elsewhere concerning “death” being not necessarily “annihilated” and/or “ceasing to exist”. For just one example (in addition to Matt 10:28 itself) that says both soul
AND body (i.e. two different things) there’s this passage: Genesis 35:18
It came about as her soul was departing (for she died), that she named him Ben-oni; but his father called him Benjamin.
Okay, cool. The soul is distinct from the body and “to die” can (and does scripturally) mean the departing of the soul=died, not necessarily “ceasing to exist”. I’m not arguing for that view. I get that. However, what does that have to do with “2nd death” that’s post resurrection, post judgment? Technically, nothing. I am personally not arguing that God doesn’t have the power/capability to sustain the ‘souls’ of the lost as they await their resurrection. I find ample evidence there and that this view does allow for “dgrees of punishment” as these souls await their final punishment. I do find much Scriptural support for that view. But it’s frankly off topic to this OP (the Fate of the un-saved) and more importantly it’s off topic to Matt 10:28. Matt 10:28 is about BOTH the body and the soul being destroyed/killed, not just the body.
So here’s my question repeated: We have Matt 10:28 (to which you say it says “can” not “will”. Fine you’re right. Systematically, what do you do with: Ez 18:4 where there it says the soul WILL die, not can? How do you take this passage into account?
Systematically, this whole discussion about “the fate of the un-saved” seems way more convoluted than it has to be what with all the references to parables, and torment prior to the resurrection and torment of demons, etc..
Why not just go first to the Scriptures that answer this question directly?
What is the fate of the un-saved? I’ve heard that question before asked and answered in the Bible. Where?
1 Peter4:17 … what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? 18 And
“If the righteous is scarcely saved,
what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?”
This is a reference to Prov 11:31. So, go look at what Prov 11:30 says.
The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life,
Humm? Actually, I don’t really
directly find the answer I thought might be there. But, I can infer what Peter meant by the reference to that passage. No access to the “
tree of life” clearly implies no life, right? Either way, I certainly do not infer eternal conscious torment into Peter’s answer to this OP question. Yet I noticed you voted for option #1.
But Peter clarifies:
19 Therefore let those who suffer according to God's will entrust their souls to a faithful Creator ….
I think the inspired Peter is fully aware of the entirety of Scriptures including Ez 18:4 where there it says the soul [of the sinner] WILL die, not can die but will die? And I think Peter wrote further on this question with with a more direct answer to it:
2 Peter 2:6 if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly;
Humm? Sodom and Gomorrah’s 'extinction' example CANNOT be ignored as an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly, right? I mean, that's a pretty clearl passage, right? To do so, is to ignore this Scripture. What do you think about this passage? Are these cites still around being eternally tormented or rather were they "extinct"?
I noticed you voted for option #1 and said:
1. It undermines most of what Jesus says about hell,
I know you are very busy and it's not your role/responsibilty to do my work/study for me or anything, but can you please point me to where Jesus said anything about Hell that would lead you to vote for #1?
I see Jesus saying 1) that God can (not will but can) "kill the body and the soul in Hell", Matt 10:28. (i.e. that's evidence to vote for #2 to me).
And 2) Rev 21:8 "
their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” Again, that's more evidence to vote for #2, not #1 (espcially considering Matt 10:28 and Ez 18:4).
And 3) Peter's examples.
I'm leaning more toward voting for #1 but willing to be convienced to vote #2.
I don't really buy the passages about Satan and his demons being evidence to vote for #1 since we are not talking about fallen angels. Nor the passages about pre-ressurection.
