The Wages of Sin is ..... Eternal Life in Hell!

[Oscar3]

I have to say that I am enjoying the spirit and civility of these conversations much better lately. I hope and pray that oscar will continue to do so as he did on the other thread so I don't have to go on a vendetta to oust him. :

I don't understand why we can't continue to dialogue normally and even agree to disagree provided that it is based on solid biblical argument as I have been seeing as of late from jg.

Please keep it up gentlemen. I'm actually starting to like you instead of dreading reading your awful replies I have seen before. 8-)

jg, I will look in my concordance on the words 'slee'. However, I believe that the term used in 1 Thesslonians 4 is meant to mean the same as it is used throughout the OT in describing the dead. I also believe that the traditionalist does not see the ramifications on WHY the Hebrews and NT Christians used the term they did.

Even though it may not be a literal sleep as we see on this earth, it's metaphorical usage and close proximity to what we physically experience cannot and should not be disregarded so easily to make it mean 'my soul is alive in heaven'.

To me this is a contradiction of the whole context of the term

Did I hear my name??????? :-D :-D :-D

 

[Drew]

Drew. are you still with me. I know it's much to digest. Take another sip of milk with those cookies and chips. Lets continue.

The Bible does not teach that the soul sleeps at the time of death. The rich man and Lazarus were both conscious in death (Luke 16:19–31). When the believer dies, he is “present with the Lord†(2 Cor. 5:8). To die is to “be with Christ,†a position which Paul speaks of as “gain†and as being “far better†(Phil. 1:21, 23). This would scarcely be true if the soul were sleeping!

I am still here eating my cookies and waiting for a valid argument.

We have already been through the Luke 16 material. The argument that this is a parable that has nothing to do with the afterlife has been made. I find it to be compelling. There would be no point in re-stating that argument.

However, your claim about 2 Cor 5:8 and Phil 1:21,23 is simply not correct. And now it is my turn to teach a lesson. The subject of the lesson is that one plausible interpretation of a text does not rule out other plausible interpretations. So the mere plausibility of interpretation A does not succeed in showing it to be the correct interpretation. Other plausible interpretations need to be ruled out.

In this case, let's call your interpretation of these texts as interpretation A - that these texts describe the world in what I will call a "technical, third person" sense. Thus you can indeed claim that the texts could mean that death for the believer is followed by immediate entry into the kingdom of heaven.

However, my interpretation (interpretation B) is that these texts are really describing the world from a "phenomenological, first person perspective" - the perspective of the person undergoing the experience of death. Here is the key point - from the point of view of the person whose indivisible oneness indeed "sleeps" at death only to be raised to life at some future resurrection event, this transition seems to be instantaneous. Therefore these texts are entirely consistent with the view that believers (as wholistic beings) "sleep" until we are raised at the time of the general resurrection.

There is a precise analogy with physical sleep. One falls asleep and "the next thing one knows" it is 8 hours later. Phenomenologically, the transition has been instantaneous, although "technically" there has been an eight hour delay.

Are you prepared to show, without circular reasoning, that this other intepretation of these texts is incorrect?

Until then, I shall reach for some more cookies.

 

[Oscar3]

I am still here eating my cookies and waiting for a valid argument.

We have already been through the Luke 16 material. The argument that this is a parable that has nothing to do with the afterlife has been made. I find it to be compelling. There would be no point in re-stating that argument.

However, your claim about 2 Cor 5:8 and Phil 1:21,23 is simply not correct. And now it is my turn to teach a lesson. The subject of the lesson is that one plausible interpretation of a text does not rule out other plausible interpretations. So the mere plausibility of interpretation A does not succeed in showing it to be the correct interpretation. Other plausible interpretations need to be ruled out.

In this case, let's call your interpretation of these texts as interpretation A - that these texts describe the world in what I will call a "technical, third person" sense. Thus you can indeed claim that the texts could mean that death for the believer is followed by immediate entry into the kingdom of heaven.

However, my interpretation (interpretation B) is that these texts are really describing the world from a "phenomenological, first person perspective" - the perspective of the person undergoing the experience of death. Here is the key point - from the point of view of the person whose indivisible oneness indeed "sleeps" at death only to be raised to life at some future resurrection event, this transition seems to be instantaneous. Therefore these texts are entirely consistent with the view that believers (as wholistic beings) "sleep" until we are raised at the time of the general resurrection.

There is a precise analogy with physical sleep. One falls asleep and "the next thing one knows" it is 8 hours later. Phenomenologically, the transition has been instantaneous, although "technically" there has been an eight hour delay.

Are you prepared to show, without circular reasoning, that this other intepretation of these texts is incorrect?

Until then, I shall reach for some more cookies.

Sorry drew but your wrong.

5:8 After the parenthetical thought of v. 7, Paul resumes where he left off in v. 6. He was not only confident (v. 6) that he was going to be with the Lord, he was pleased that he would be with the Lord after his death. This is one of the passages in the New Testament that indicates where believers will go immediately after their death; they will be with Jesus in heaven (see also Phil. 1:23). Jesus promise to the repentant criminal on the cross next to Him indicates this: "Today you will be with Me in Paradise" (Luke 23:43).

BY PASTOR CHUCK SMITH

 

[CP_Mike]

God's Word is clear, and you have taken up residency with a teaching that is foreign to God's Word. Jesus is clear and plain on his teaching of the soul being a separate portion of a person, just as he is the second person of the Godhead.

Your position is suspect when you take a no-name psychologist who wrote a treatise on the soul with an unbiblical perspective, against that of the truth of Jesus Christ as delivered and interpreted by the Holy Spirit.

You would do yourself a much needed favor if you would submit to the Lordship of Jesus Christ, and come into the covenant of grace by which there is no distinction between Jew and non-Jew.

Solo,
Your arrogance is overwhelming when you suggest I am not a Chrisitian.

I would say your position is suspect when you completely ignore what God teaches about Nepesh.

One thing you must be careful with. You can not make a doctrine based on one verse when the broader biblical background teaches otherwise.

 

[CP_Mike]

CP Its time for the ole KUDEGRA

CP
First lets take a look at Num 23:10 Lets look at the context of this event even though I have explained it to u once before. For the sake of the whole counsel of God, lets Go. Before we get into the study of what this part of scripture says and teaches lets look at these words your hung up on. Then my hope is that you will see that those single words do not make up a scripture.

The Hebrew word for “soul†(nephesh) means “living being.†However, this Hebrew word is a rich one, carrying various nuances of meaning in different contexts. A fundamental mistake beginning Hebrew and Greek students sometimes make is to assume that, if a Hebrew or Greek word is used in a particular way in one verse, it must mean the same thing in all its other uses. But this is simply wrong. The fact is, Hebrew and Greek words can have different nuances of meaning in different contexts. The word nephesh is an example. While the word means “living being†in Genesis 2:7, the word refers to a soul or spirit as distinct from the body in Genesis 35:18. These are two other verses I know you are hung up on, so I saved me the work and fit them into my study here.
OK, when we examine what the whole of Scripture teaches about the soul, it is clear that the Jehovah’s Witnesses, 7th Day Adv, Mormons, UR, position is wrong. For example, Revelation 6:9–10 refers to disembodied souls under God’s altar (it would be nonsense to interpret the reference to “soul†in this verse as “living beingâ€Ââ€â€Ã¢â‚¬Å“I saw underneath the altar the living beings of those who had been slainâ€Âgive me a break:roll: ). First Thessalonians 4:13–17 says Christ will bring with him the souls and spirits of those who are now with him in heaven and will reunite their spirits to resurrection bodies. In Philippians 1:21–23 Paul says it’s better to depart and be with Christ. In 2 Corinthians 5:6–8 Paul says that to be absent from the body is to be at home with the Lord. Clearly, the whole of Scripture teaches that each person has a soul that survives death. There is no way around this my friend.

I have already pointed the same out that 'Nephesh' has various meanings and listed them accordingly. Numbers 23:10 clearly states his Nephesh will die. All your points fall flat on their face, because the Hebrews never believed in body soul dualism, rather they believed the were a 'whollistic' unity.

Now lets look at the definition of this word your hung up on.
New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries : Updated Edition: 5315 נֶפֶשׁ (nephesh)
5315. נֶפֶשׁ nephesh (659b); from an unused word; a soul, living being, life, self, person, desire, passion, appetite, emotion : any(1), anyone(2), anyone*(1), appetite(7), being(1), beings(3), body(1), breath(1), corpse(2), creature(6), creatures(3), dead(1), dead person(2), deadly(1), death(1), defenseless*(1), desire(12), desire*(2), discontented*(1), endure*(1), feelings(1), fierce*(2), greedy*(1), heart(5), heart’s(2), herself(12), Himself(4), himself(19), human(1), human being(1), hunger(1), life(146), life*(1), lifeblood*(2), lives(34), living creature(1), longing*(1), man(4), man’s(1), men*(2), mind(2), Myself(3), myself(2), number(1), ones(1), others(1), ourselves(3), own(1), passion*(1), people(2), people*(1), perfume*(1), person(68), person*(1), persons(19), slave(1), some(1), soul(238), soul’s(1), souls(12), strength(1), themselves(6), thirst(1), throat(2), will(1), wish(1), wishes(1), yourself(11), yourselves(13).

So as you can see as I stated above it has allot of meanings, which is why Context is king.

Lets continue looking at this word a little bit deeper.
Enhanced Strong's Lexicon: 5315 נֶפֶשׁ
5315 נֶפֶשׁ [nephesh /neh·fesh/] n f. From 5314; TWOT 1395a; GK 5883; 753 occurrences; AV translates as “soul†475 times, “life†117 times, “person†29 times, “mind†15 times, “heart†15 times, “creature†nine times, “body†eight times, “himself†eight times, “yourselves†six times, “dead†five times, “will†four times, “desire†four times, “man†three times, “themselves†three times, “any†three times, “appetite†twice, and translated miscellaneously 47 times. 1 soul, self, life, creature, person, appetite, mind, living being, desire, emotion, passion. 1a that which breathes, the breathing substance or being, soul, the inner being of man. 1b living being. 1c living being (with life in the blood). 1d the man himself, self, person or individual. 1e seat of the appetites. 1f seat of emotions and passions. 1g activity of mind. 1g1 dubious. 1h activity of the will. 1h1 dubious. 1i activity of the character. 1i1 dubious.

So now lets take a look at the scriptures you used in proper context.


Num 23:1 Then Balaam said to Balak, "Build seven altars for me here, and prepare for me here seven bulls and seven rams."
2 And Balak did just as Balaam had spoken, and Balak and Balaam offered a bull and a ram on each altar. 3 Then Balaam said to Balak, "Stand by your burnt offering, and I will go; perhaps the Lord will come to meet me, and whatever He shows me I will tell you." So he went to a desolate height. 4 And God met Balaam, and he said to Him, "I have prepared the seven altars, and I have offered on each altar a bull and a ram."
5 Then the Lord put a word in Balaam's mouth, and said, "Return to Balak, and thus you shall speak." 6 So he returned to him, and there he was, standing by his burnt offering, he and all the princes of Moab.
7 And he took up his oracle and said: "Balak the king of Moab has brought me from Aram, From the mountains of the east. Come, curse Jacob for me,
And come, denounce Israel!
8 "How shall I curse whom God has not cursed? And how shall I denounce whom the Lord has not denounced?
9 For from the top of the rocks I see him,
And from the hills I behold him; There! A people dwelling alone, Not reckoning itself among the nations.
10 "Who can count the dust of Jacob, Or number one-fourth of Israel?
Let me die the death of the righteous, And let my end be like his!"
11 Then Balak said to Balaam, "What have you done to me? I took you to curse my enemies, and look, you have blessed them bountifully!"
12 So he answered and said, "Must I not take heed to speak what the Lord has put in my mouth?"

Now lets take a look at what this means.
Balak took Balaam into a high mountain where he would look down over the tents of Israel. Later, from this same mountain, Moses would take his only look at the Promised Land, and then die (Deut. 34:1, 5). This chapter and the next chapter contain four memorable utterances by Balaam concerning Israel. The first three were preceded by the offering of seven bulls and seven rams as burnt offerings. The first oracle expressed Balaam’s inability to curse a people whom God had not cursed. It predicted for Israel a life of separation from the Gentile nations and a numberless posterity. It pictured Israel as a righteous nation whose eventual destiny was something to be coveted. Balak’s protest against this blessing availed nothing. The prophet had to speak the word of the Lord.
Balak then took Balaam to a different vantage point in hopes that the prophet would see them in a less favorable light
OK, The second oracle assured Balak that God’s original blessing on Israel was unchanged. The first part of verse 21 describes the nation’s position, not its practice. The people were reckoned righteous through faith. So believers today stand before God in all the perfections of His beloved Son. The Lord was with Israel, and the people could shout because He reigned as King in their midst. He had delivered them from Egypt and given them strength. No evil pronouncement against them would come to pass. Instead, the victories Israel would soon win would cause the nations to say, “Oh, what God has done!†. Since Balaam refused to curse the people, Balak ordered him not to bless them either , but the prophet protested that he could only do what the Lord said.
A third time Balak tried to wring a curse out of Balaam, this time from the top of Mount Peor.
Realizing that God was determined to bless Israel, Balaam did not seek to get a message of cursing. He simply looked down over the camp of Israel, and the Spirit of God came upon him, causing him to say things beyond his own wisdom and will.
now I will beging work on EZE.18:4 but I suspect it will be much of the same.

Nice intepretation of the whole story, but the point is that in Numbers 23:10 states his Nepesh (His physical life) will die.

'Soul' in the bible has an altogether different meaning than the meaning you have. Just look at how 'Nephesh' is interpreted and translated.

I don't see the words 'disembodied person' there.

 

[Drew]

Sorry drew but your wrong.

5:8 After the parenthetical thought of v. 7, Paul resumes where he left off in v. 6. He was not only confident (v. 6) that he was going to be with the Lord, he was pleased that he would be with the Lord after his death. This is one of the passages in the New Testament that indicates where believers will go immediately after their death; they will be with Jesus in heaven (see also Phil. 1:23). Jesus promise to the repentant criminal on the cross next to Him indicates this: "Today you will be with Me in Paradise" (Luke 23:43).

BY PASTOR CHUCK SMITH

The above does absolutely nothing to damage the plausibility of my assertion that the texts are describing the world from a phenomenological perspective - from the perspective of one who is experiencing death and then "the next thing they know" they are in the presence of God, even if thousands of years have passed.

What you are doing is simply re-stating your position and not showing how mine is incorrect. Both positions are plausible. You cannot (legitimately anyway) simply re-state your position as if it disproves mine.

Let me be more specific. If my hypothesis is correct that sometimes the world is described phenomenologically, then Jesus words on the cross in Luke 23 could really mean "The next thing you know (it will seem like today for you), you will be with me in paradise, even though this will not actually happen for thousands of years". This is an entirely plausible way to read this material.

 

[Drew]

All your points fall flat on their face, because the Hebrews never believed in body soul dualism, rather they believed the were a 'whollistic' unity.

I think that this whole issue turns critically on this. As I see things, proponents of this dualism have assumed it to be true and not offered any defense (except obviously circular ones). With this assumption held as unassailable, they are naturally mystified at why "we" don't see the case for an eternal hell.

I believe that, by contrast, the case for wholistic unity has been competently defended, both through an appeal to historical knowledge about the Hebrew culture as well as through an "in-context" Biblical analysis where it is shown that certain Biblical texts simply do not make sense unless the human person is seen as wholistic.

My challenge to those who believe in an immaterial immortal soul: Please defend this view without using any hidden assumptions that it is true - this would constitute a circular argument.

 

[jgredline]

Fellas
Incase you have not noticed the OLE KUDEGRA has been applied.
You guys have clearly lost the debate according the Holy Scriptures.

You can keep playing this game of ignorance that you guys are on and you can discuss it while your in line before you take the seat at the great white thrown judgment seat and choose lotts as to who will be the first to go, while the rest of us watch. Remember, he who is first will also be the first to get annahalated after 6 trillion or so years, so going ahead of your partner has some benefit according to what you believe.





Ok. Lets take a look at Revelation for a minute. We will start with the judgment for the non believer. Revelation 20:10-15
10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. 11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, Rev. 19:5 small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. 14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.




The Judgment of Satan and All Unbelievers
The devil himself is cast into the lake of fire to join the beast and the false prophet. It may seem surprising that Satan would be able to assemble an army of unbelievers at the end of the Millennium. However, it should be remembered that all children born during Christ Reign will be born in sin and will need to be saved. Not all will accept Him as rightful King, and these will scatter throughout the earth, trying to get as far away from Jerusalem as possible.

Note: that the beast and the false prophet are still in hell after one thousand years. This disproves the doctrine of annihilation, as does the statement, And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Next we are introduced to the great white throne judgment. It is great because of the issues involved and white because of the perfection and purity of the decisions handed down. The Lord Jesus is sitting as Judge ( John 5:22 , 27). The expression from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away indicates that this judgment takes place in eternity, after the destruction of the present creation (2 Pet. 3:10).

The dead, small and great, stand before God. These are the unbelievers of all ages. Two sets of books are opened. The Book of Life contains the names of all who have been redeemed by the precious blood of Christ. The other books contain a detailed record of the works of the unsaved. No one who appears at this judgment is registered in the Book of Life . The fact that his name is missing condemns him, but the record of his evil works determines the degree of his punishment.

The sea will yield up the bodies of those who have been buried in it. The graves, here represented by Death, will deliver up the bodies of all the unsaved who have been interred. Hades will give up the souls of all who died in unbelief. The bodies and souls will be reunited to stand before the Judge. Just as there will be degrees of reward in heaven, so there will be degrees of punishment in hell. This will be based on their works.

When we read that Death and Hades are cast into the lake of fire, it means the complete persons: spirit, soul, and body. The text explains that this is the second death, and the New King James Version margin adds, the lake of fire.

There is a difference between Hades and hell. For the unconverted who have died, Hades is a disembodied state of conscious punishment. It is a sort of holding tank, an intermediate condition where they await the Judgment of the Great White Throne.

For believers who have died, Hades is a state of disembodied blessedness in heaven, awaiting the resurrection and glorification of the body. When Jesus died, He went to Paradise ( Luke 23:43 ), which Paul equates with the third heaven (2 Cor. 12:2, 4), the dwelling place of God. In Acts 2:27 the Lords disembodied state is called Hades. God did not leave His soul in Hades, but clothed it with a glorified body.

Hell is the final prison of the wicked dead. It is the same as the lake of fire, Gehenna, and the second death.

The deciding factor at this judgment is whether ones name is written in the Book of Life. Actually if a persons name had been inscribed there, he would have already been a part of the first resurrection. So this verse applies only to those who stand before the Great WhiteThrone.

Its important to note, that once you are condemned to Hell for all eternity, this means for ever and ever. There is no such doctrine as annihilation. There is no verse in the entire bible that teaches annihilation.. If there was such a doctrine, then surely it would be in the bible, but it is not. There are plenty of verses that speak of an everlasting Hell.

 

[Drew]

There is no verse in the entire bible that teaches annihilation..

At the risk of eliciting possible disagreement from guibox, I will heartily agree with this assertion - there is no single verse that teaches annihilation.

It is your expectation that the scriptures are constructed so that there would be such a verse, if annihilation were correct, that is deeply indicative of what I think is an incorrect method for evaluating what the scriptures really say.

 

[jgredline]

At the risk of eliciting possible disagreement from guibox, I will heartily agree with this assertion - there is no single verse that teaches annihilation.

It is your expectation that the scriptures are constructed so that there would be such a verse, if annihilation were correct, that is deeply indicative of what I think is an incorrect method for evaluating what the scriptures really say.

Yes.
And this is the reason why you don't understand the scriptures.
You and your posey are trying to learn and are feeding of each other instead of the scriptures.. You make your self out to be wise, but infact you look foolish..You your self have stated that there is no such verse to support your theory on annahalation. Would you like me to copy and paste it here?

Avoid Worldly Wisdom
1 cor 3:18-21
18 Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you seems to be wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, "He catches the wise in their own craftiness"; 20 and again, "The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile." 21 Therefore let no one boast in men.




9 But as it is written:

"Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,

Nor have entered into the heart of man

The things which God has prepared for those who love Him."

10 But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.

13 These things we also speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is rightly judged by no one. 16 For "who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct Him?" But we have the mind of Christ.

 

[jgredline]

I am reposting this here, because quite frankly I thought it was cool. 8-)


LOL, Give me a break. If Jesus was speaking of annihalation and temporary fire, don't you think he would have just said it plainly? Perhaps something like this.

'' Listen fellas, Seeing that you chose Hell instead of me, I am going to send you to the lake of fire, but don't worry, you will only be tortured and tormented for 6 trillion years and that point I will annahilate you. How does that sound?''

 

[Solo]

Solo,
Your arrogance is overwhelming when you suggest I am not a Chrisitian.

I would say your position is suspect when you completely ignore what God teaches about Nepesh.

One thing you must be careful with. You can not make a doctrine based on one verse when the broader biblical background teaches otherwise.

Where did I say that you were not a Christian? It may be that you are not, but I did not say you were not a Christian. I said that you would be better off coming under the Lordship of Jesus Christ than a false teacher, and that your position is suspect as denying the grace covenant while wandering amongst the legalistic teachings of the Jews. You deny, and ignore the teachings of Jesus in order to eatup the false teachings that you propagate. Paul was concerned of the same thing concerning the Galatians. My arrogance is not the problem with the teachings that you are propagating on this board.

 

[Drew]

You your self have stated that there is no such verse to support your theory on annahalation.

It borders on the unbelievable that you actually think that my statement that there may be no single verse supporting annihilation (this is a provisional statement on my part, but let's go with it for now) is an admission of the weakness of my position.

You have, on several occasions, been caught in making unsupported claims or providing a bad argument, and yet you mysteriously hold these up to the rest of the posters as signs of victory.

Frankly, I wouldn't have the nerve.

 

[guibox]

The devil himself is cast into the lake of fire to join the beast and the false prophet. It may seem surprising that Satan would be able to assemble an army of unbelievers at the end of the Millennium. However, it should be remembered that all children born during Christ Reign will be born in sin and will need to be saved. Not all will accept Him as rightful King, and these will scatter throughout the earth, trying to get as far away from Jerusalem as possible.

And the biblical support that there will be life going on as normal for the wicked on earth during the 1000 years is...?

Note: that the beast and the false prophet are still in hell after one thousand years. This disproves the doctrine of annihilation, as does the statement, And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

The assumption here and in Revelation 20 is that Revelation can be taken in exact chronological order. I see Revelation concerned about events, not time factor. Revelation 14 is dealing with the beast and false prophet's doom. You are assuming that this occcurs before the 1000 years. If you want to take things chronologically, you would have to assume that Revelation 20:5 is speaking about the wicked's resurrection in verses 3-4 and that this occurs before Satan gathers them up. Obviously this isn't the case.

Just because Satan is thrown in the lake of fire 'where the beast and false prophet are' doesn't mean that they've been burning for a 1000 years. You must be careful when trying to make Revelation exactly chronological in time.

How fair or logical is it for the beast and false prophet to receive their reward before Satan himself?

The Lord Jesus is sitting as Judge ( John 5:22 , 27). The expression from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away indicates that this judgment takes place in eternity, after the destruction of the present creation (2 Pet. 3:10).

No it isn't because John 5 is speaking about the second coming of Christ where the initial judgment occurs. (see also Revelation 22:12). The executive judgment in Revelation 20 and Malachi 4 is the 'Day of the Lord' the punishment of the wicked which is the lake of fire and when all the earth and everything is burnt up and destroyed from God's creation.

The fact that his name is missing condemns him, but the record of his evil works determines the degree of his punishment....Just as there will be degrees of reward in heaven, so there will be degrees of punishment in hell. This will be based on their works.

Really. Please show the support for the different degrees of punishment in hell. How can their be degrees of the same thing? So because I robbed a little old lady, I get to have my fire a few degrees hotter than you who merely took a piece of candy from the store?

Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?

Isn't the crime rejecting an eternal God? So do not all sinners receive the same punishment? So you are saying that outside of this 'common crime' God now discerns different sins? Funny. I was raised to be told that a murderer is no better than myself if I have not accepted Christ and that sin was sin.

The sea will yield up the bodies of those who have been buried in it. The graves, here represented by Death, will deliver up the bodies of all the unsaved who have been interred. Hades will give up the souls of all who died in unbelief. The bodies and souls will be reunited to stand before the Judge.

And your fundamental problem is separating 'death and the grave' from 'Hades'. There is no 'soul/body' reunification at all in the Bible. This is an assumption not supported by one iota of scriptures. The wicked are raised as whole mortals (as the righteous were raised as whole immortals) to face the final judgment to show why they are where they are and why they are facing judgment. Then they are burnt up.

When we read that Death and Hades are cast into the lake of fire, it means the complete persons: spirit, soul, and body. The text explains that this is the second death, and the New King James Version margin adds, the lake of fire.

And the next fundamental problem is interpreting the 'second death' as being 'eternal torment'. The second death is the lake of fire' in that the lake of fire is what brings it on. The lake of fire is not the second death. In that 'death's' meaning is derived from the nature of the lake of fire. It is the other way around.

It is called the SECOND death for a reason. It is comparable to the first death which is cessation of existence on this earth. The second death is cessation of existence in the new earth. Existence in any form is 'life'. 'Life' is not an attribute of the wicked. The Bible makes this quite clear.

There is a difference between Hades and hell. For the unconverted who have died, Hades is a disembodied state of conscious punishment. It is a sort of holding tank, an intermediate condition where they await the Judgment of the Great White Throne.

NOTHING (not even Luke 16 for that matter) says that Hades is a place of punishment. However, this is the ONLY verse that would give one this impression. Hades is Sheol, the OT equivalent. There is no punishment but awaiting of judgment.

Why in the world have a judgment when the wicked are already knowingly, consciously experiencing their reward at their physical death? Talk about redundancy!

For believers who have died, Hades is a state of disembodied blessedness in heaven, awaiting the resurrection and glorification of the body. When Jesus died, He went to Paradise ( Luke 23:43 ), which Paul equates with the third heaven (2 Cor. 12:2, 4), the dwelling place of God. In Acts 2:27 the Lords disembodied state is called Hades. God did not leave His soul in Hades, but clothed it with a glorified body.

Unbelievable how much Greek and pagan philosophy you just inserted here to counteract the clear teaching that Christ was in the grave (Hades) and would have stayed there had God not resurrected Him from it. Paradise is in heaven, not some netherworld and Christ didn't go to heaven in ANY form (even in this 'spirit that goes back to God who gave it' form) until AFTER the resurrection.

If Jesus' 'spirit' was His immortal essence, then Jesus did NOT experience the second death but went through death unscathed. The whole purpose of death then resurrection is to conquer it THROUGH resurrection.

I can't deal with this anymore. The illogic inconsistencies is making my head hurt...

 

[Solo]

It borders on the unbelievable that you actually think that my statement that there may be no single verse supporting annihilation (this is a provisional statement on my part, but let's go with it for now) is an admission of the weakness of my position.

You have, on several occasions, been caught in making unsupported claims or providing a bad argument, and yet you mysteriously hold these up to the rest of the posters as signs of victory.

Frankly, I wouldn't have the nerve.

Those who stand of the truth of God's Word have the nerve to face the Goliath's of the world, so facing the smaller things in life matter little.

 

[CP_Mike]

Where did I say that you were not a Christian?

This part

You would do yourself a much needed favor if you would submit to the Lordship of Jesus Christ,

It may be that you are not, but I did not say you were not a Christian. I said that you would be better off coming under the Lordship of Jesus Christ than a false teacher, and that your position is suspect as denying the grace covenant while wandering amongst the legalistic teachings of the Jews. You deny, and ignore the teachings of Jesus in order to eatup the false teachings that you propagate. Paul was concerned of the same thing concerning the Galatians. My arrogance is not the problem with the teachings that you are propagating on this board.[/quote]

The false teachings are coming through the early church's interaction with pagan greek philosophy.

Here is the proof:

What Does the Bible Say About the "Immortal Soul"?
Many people think the Bible says we have an immortal soul destined, at death, for heaven, hell or purgatory. What does the Bible say?
by Gary Petty
What happens to us after we die? Where are our loved ones who have passed on? Will we ever see them again?

Everyone needs to know that life has purpose, that death isn't the permanent end of our existence. The most common Christian belief regarding the afterlife is that people possess souls and at death their consciousness in the form of that soul departs from the body and heads for heaven or hell.

Most religions teach some form of life after death. The ancient Egyptians, for example, practiced elaborate ceremonies to prepare the pharaohs for their next life. They constructed massive pyramids and other elaborate tombs filled with luxuries the deceased were assumed to need in the hereafter.

In some civilizations when a ruler died others who had accompanied and served him in his life were put to death so they could immediately serve him in the afterlife. Wives and other relatives, servants, sometimes even household pets joined him in death and a supposed entrance into a new life on the other side.

Belief in the immortality of the soul was an important aspect of ancient thought espoused by the Greek philosophers Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. Plato, in Phaedo, presents Socrates' explanation of death: "Is it not the separation of soul and body? And to be dead is the completion of this; when the soul exists in herself, and is released from the body and body is released from the soul, what is this but death?" (Five Great Dialogues, Classics Club edition, 1969, p. 93).

Socrates explained that the immortal soul, once freed from the body, is rewarded according to good deeds or punished for evil. Socrates lived ca. 470-399 B.C., so his view of the soul predated Christianity.

Plato (ca. 428-348 B.C.) saw man's existence as divided into the material and spiritual, or "Ideal," realms. "Plato reasoned that the soul, being eternal, must have had a pre-existence in the ideal world where it learned about the eternal Ideals" (William S. Sahakian, History of Philosophy, 1968, p. 56). In Plato's reasoning, man is meant to attain goodness and return to the Ideal through the experiences of the transmigration of the soul. Thus secular philosophies sanction the idea of the immortal soul, even though the Bible does not. Believe it or not, God's Word teaches something entirely different.

History of a Controversial Teaching
The doctrine of the immortal soul caused much controversy in the early Catholic Church.

Origen (ca. 185-254) was the first person to attempt to organize Christian doctrine into a systematic theology. He was an admirer of Plato and believed in the immortality of the soul and that it would depart to an everlasting reward or everlasting punishment at death.

In Origen De Principiis he wrote: "... The soul, having a substance and life of its own, shall after its departure from the world, be rewarded according to its deserts, being destined to obtain either an inheritance of eternal life and blessedness, if its actions shall have procured this for it, or to be delivered up to eternal fire and punishments, if the guilt of its crimes shall have brought it down to this ..." (Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, 1995, p. 240).

Origen taught that human souls existed before the body but are imprisoned in the physical world as a form of punishment. Physical life, he reasoned, is a purification process to return humans to a spiritual state.

Later Augustine (354-430) tackled the problem of the immortality of the soul and death. For Augustine death meant the destruction of the body, but the conscious soul would continue to live in either a blissful state with God or an agonizing state of separation from God.

In The City of God he wrote that the soul "is therefore called immortal, because in a sense, it does not cease to live and to feel; while the body is called mortal because it can be forsaken of all life, and cannot by itself live at all. The death, then, of the soul, takes place when God forsakes it, as the death of the body when the soul forsakes it" (Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 2, 1995, p. 245.)

The influences of pagan Platonic philosophy on Origen and Augustine are profound. Richard Tarnas, in his best-seller The Passion of the Western Mind, points to this influence: "... It was Augustine's formulation of Christian Platonism that was to permeate virtually all of medieval Christian thought in the West. So enthusiastic was the Christian integration of the Greek spirit that Socrates and Plato were frequently regarded as divinely inspired pre-Christian saints ..." (1991, p. 103).

Centuries later Thomas Aquinas (ca. 1225-1274) crystallized the doctrine of the immortal soul in The Summa Theologica. He taught that the soul is a conscious intellect and will and cannot be destroyed.

A few centuries later the leaders of the Protestant Reformation generally accepted these traditional views, so they became entrenched in traditional Protestant teaching.

The immortality of the soul is foundational in Western thought, both philosophical and religious. Belief in going to heaven or hell depends on it. But does the Bible teach that death is the separation of body and soul or that the soul is immortal?

Hebrew Understanding of the SoulThe Hebrew word translated "soul" in the Old Testament is nephesh, which simply means "a breathing creature." Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words defines nephesh as "the essence of life, the act of breathing, taking breath ... The problem with the English term 'soul' is that no actual equivalent of the term or the idea behind it is represented in the Hebrew language. The Hebrew system of thought does not include the combination or opposition of the 'body' and 'soul' which are really Greek and Latin in origin" (1985, p. 237-238, emphasis added).

The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible makes this comment on nephesh: "The word 'soul' in English, though it has to some extent naturalized the Hebrew idiom, frequently carries with it overtones, ultimately coming from philosophical Greek (Platonism) and from Orphism and Gnosticism which are absent in 'nephesh.' In the OT it never means the immortal soul, but it is essentially the life principle, or the living being, or the self as the subject of appetite, and emotion, occasionally of volition" (Vol. 4, 1962, "Soul," emphasis added).

That nephesh doesn't refer to an immortal soul can be seen in the way the word is used in the Old Testament. It is translated "soul" or "being" in reference to man in Genesis 2:7, but also to animals by being translated "creature" in Genesis 1:24. Nephesh is translated "body" in Leviticus 21:11 in reference to a human corpse.

The Hebrew Scriptures state plainly that, rather than possess immortality, the soul can and does die. "The soul [nephesh] who sins shall die" (Ezekiel 18:4, 20).

The Old Testament describes the dead as going to sheol, translated into English as "hell," "pit" or "grave." Ecclesiastes 9:5-6 describes sheol as a place of unconsciousness: "For the living know that they will die; but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward, for the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, their hatred, and their envy have now perished ..."

King David laments that death extinguishes a relationship with God. "For in death there is no remembrance of You; in the grave who will give You thanks?" (Psalm 6:5).

The immortal-soul concept isn't part of the Old Testament, but it began to make inroads into Jewish thought as Jews came in contact with Greek culture. In the first century the Jewish philosopher Philo taught a Platonic concept: "... The death of a man is the separation of his soul from his body ..." (The Works of Philo, translated by C.D. Yonge, 1993, p. 37). Philo followed the Hellenistic view that the soul is freed upon death to an everlasting life of virtue or evil.

The Apostles' View
In the New Testament the Greek word translated "soul" is psuche, which is also translated "life."

In Psalm 16:10 David uses nephesh ("soul") to claim that the "Holy One," or Messiah, wouldn't be left in sheol, the grave. Peter quotes this verse in Acts 2:27, using the Greek psuche for the Hebrew nephesh (notice verses 25-31).

Like nephesh, psuche refers to human "souls" (Acts 2:41) and for animals (it is translated "life" in the King James Version of Revelation 8:9 and 16:3). Jesus declared that God can destroy man's psuche, or "soul" (Matthew 10:28).

If the Old Testament describes death as an unconscious state, how does the New Testament describe it?

No one wrote more about this subject than the apostle Paul. He describes death as "sleep" (1 Corinthians 15:51-58; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18).

Many people are surprised to find that the term immortal soul appears nowhere in the Bible. However, though the Scriptures do not speak of the soul as being immortal, they have much to say about immortality. For example: "You know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him" (1 John 3:15).

Paul told the members of the congregation in Rome to "seek" immortality (Romans 2:5-7). He taught Christians at Corinth that they must be changed and "put on" immortality (1 Corinthians 15:51-55). Paul proclaimed that only God and His Son possess immortality (1 Timothy 6:12-16) and that eternal life is a "gift" from God (Romans 6:23).

The most powerful words come from Jesus Himself: "And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day" (John 6:40).

True Origin of Immortal-soul Teaching
We've seen in this brief look at the supposedly immortal soul that the Bible teaches no such concept. The idea filtered into Western thought through Greek philosophy. Its origins are older than Athens, in fact as old as man.

The concept of the immortal soul was introduced into man's thinking at the earliest beginnings of human history. God told the first human beings, Adam and Eve, that if they sinned they would die and return to the dust from which He had created them (Genesis 2:17; 3:19). Satan, the embodiment of evil, the powerful entity who opposes God, assured them they wouldn't die (verses 1-5).

Satan slyly injected into Eve's consciousness the notion that God was lying and that she and her husband would not die, thus ingraining the unscriptural teaching of the immortality of the soul into human thought. Satan has since deceived the world on this important understanding as well as many other biblical truths (Revelation 12:9). Much of the world, including millions of people in religions outside of traditional Christianity, are convinced they haveâ€â€or areâ€â€immortal souls and hope they will go to a happy place or state of being immediately after they die.


There are plenty of references..

 

[CP_Mike]

And another one for you to pivck the bones out of


Christendom Admits "Immortal Soul" UnBiblical,
and Based On Greek Philosophy

When we turn to works of reference by the learned expositors of the immortal soul theory, we see how this "believing a lie" works out quite naturally. Most of them make no attempt to conceal the fact that scriptural teaching and popular theology are very different regarding the meaning of "soul." They are in fact, proud that they have developed many "improvements" upon what they consider the partial and hazy conceptions voiced by the "Holy men of God who spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:21).

We soon find that we are forced to choose between Scripture teaching and orthodox Christianity. It is very fortunate for us that the issue is so clearcut, and that the leading exponents of the immortal soul theory are so frank in admission of its non-Biblical origin. Webster's Dictionary says:

"The Christian conception of the soul derives from the Greek, especially as modified by the mystery cults, as well as from the Bible...

"The more exact determination of the Christian conception was reserved for the Church Fathers, especially Saint Augustine, who taught that it is simple, immaterial and spiritual, devoid of quality and spatial extension. He argued its immortality from the fact that it is the repository of imperishable truth."

Funk & Wagnall Dictionary is even more to the point:

"Among the ancient Hebrews 'soul' was the equivalent of the principle of life as embodied in living creatures, and this meaning is continued throughout the Bible...

"It was Augustine especially who, in part on religious grounds and in part as the disciple of the later Greek Philosophy, taught the simple, immaterial and spiritual nature of the human soul--a view which has remained that of the scholastic philosophy and of Christian theologians down to the present time."

Hasting's well-known Bible Dictionary freely admits:

"Soul is throughout a great part of the Bible simply the equivalent of 'life' embodied in living creature. In the earlier usage of the Old Testament it has no reference to the later philosophical meaning--the animating principle--still less to the idea of an 'immaterial nature' which will survive the body."

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says:

"Soul has various shades of meaning in the Old Testament, which may be summarized as follows: Soul, living being, life, self, person, desire, appetite, emotion and passion.

"Nephesh or soul, can only denote the individual life with a material organization or body.

"In the New Testament 'psuche' appears under more or less similar conditions as in the Old Testament."

Young's Concordance defines both nephesh and psuche as "animal soul."

Strong's Concordance defines nephesh as, "A breathing creature, an animal; or, abstractly vitality." Psuche it likewise defines as "The animal, sentient principle."

The noted lexicographer Parkhurst (himself a believer in immortal soulism) says:

"As a noun nephesh hath been supposed to signify the spiritual part of man, or what we commonly call his soul. I must for myself confess that I can find no passages where it hath undoubtedly this meaning.

"Gen. 35:18, 1 Kings 17:21-22 and Psalms 16:10 seem fairest for this signification. But may not nephesh in the three former passages be most properly rendered 'breath,' and in the last, 'a breathing or animal frame'?"

These quotations show clearly that the immortal soul doctrine is generally admitted by its supporters to be entirely different from the BIBLE meaning of soul, and based mainly upon GREEK PHILOSOPHY.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Is God's Word A Final, Infallible Authority?

The issue then is this: is the Word of God to be our final authority, or is religious truth something to be gradually developed by man's speculation on the basis of pagan Greek philosophy?

For nearly 2,000 years, the bulk of Christendom, beginning with the Church Fathers, have favored the latter, but there have always been a few who have regarded the Bible as wholly inspired by God, consistent from beginning to end, and the only possible source of true knowledge of such things as life, death and the nature and destiny of man.

A Bible that is anything less than this is NO BIBLE AT ALL. And the Bible itself leaves no room for compromise. It takes a bold and unequivocal stand throughout as the direct Word of God in every part [Isa. 8:20; Jer. 36:1-4; 1 Cor. 2:9-13; Gal. 1:11-12; 2 Tim. 3:16-17; Heb. 1:1-2; 2 Peter 1:19-21; Rev. 1:1-2]. We must accept it as that, or else throw it away entirely as the most brazen and blasphemous of falsehoods.

Those who take the middle ground are the Bible's greatest enemies, and this unfortunately includes the vast majority of professing Christians. They dare not openly deny its divinity, because it is so obviously divine, but they seek to rob it of all power by spinning an endless web of theories around it that confuse the mind and distract the attention, and obscure its plain, clear teaching.

It is impossible in any one consideration to fully examine the Biblical use and meaning of "soul." But it is possible to lay the foundation by demonstrating that popular theology on the subject is admittedly derived from other sources than the Bible, and is at direct variance with it.

The Bible meaning of "soul" (which modern writers mention briefly in passing), is regarded by them as a rather amusing phase of ancient Hebrew speculation, hardly worthy of serious attention, and which no one laying claim to "modern" learning would dare allow his name to be associated with.

The following brief outline of the BIBLICAL use of the term is for those few to whom the Bible is still the one unique Book among millions--the wholly inspired divine message to man--one verse of which is worth more than countless volumes of the cloudy, inconclusive speculations of human philosophy and "modern wisdom." [1 Cor. 1:17; 2:16; 3:18-20].



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The Original Words Translated "Soul"

In the Old Testament Hebrew, the original word for soul is nephesh. In the New Testament Greek it is psuche. Both mean the same thing and are used interchangeably. One is used to translate the other.

Nephesh occurs about 750 times. About 500 times it is translated "soul" in the Authorized Version. The other 250 times it is translated by over 40 different English words, as shown on the chart.

Psuehe occurs about 100 times, and is translated similarly.

It is quite obvious at the outset that a word of such broad application, including all the animal kingdom, all its bodily [and] physical aspects, CANNOT POSSIBLY indicate some immortal essence in man distinguishing him from the lower creation.

It is clear from the words used to translate it that it is related throughout to ANIMAL BODIES, including man, and this will become more and more clear as we consider some of the passages in which it is used.

It can be readily seen, too, that with such a range of meaning the translators could do much to color the various passages by their choice of English words--using one set of terms when used of animals and another when of man.

On the other hand, it is evident that in an article of this kind, it is impossible to quote sufficient of the 850 occurrences to fully illustrate the word, and that by choosing obscure, borderline passages, a very distorted picture could be drawn.

Therefore, only a careful, individual investigation, seeking divine guidance, can bring solid, durable conviction and enlightenment. THERE IS NO SHORT CUT TO THE ENLIGHTENED FAITH THAT LEADS TO SALVATION.

For instance, soul is used in relation to God. He says: "My servant in whom MY SOUL delighteth" (Isa. 42:1). But examination will show that this is a very exceptional, isolated use, and is a figure of speech that has no bearing on the literal meaning of soul. The expression "my soul" is often used simply as an emphatic term meaning "myself," because of its undeniable animal basis. Clearly it is in this secondary sense of emphasis only [that] it is used of God.

That should be enough to prove the Greek pagan influence on our faith.

 

[Solo]

Where did I say that you were not a Christian?

This part

You would do yourself a much needed favor if you would submit to the Lordship of Jesus Christ,

My answer to your false witness of my characterizing you as a non-christian was:

It may be that you are not, but I did not say you were not a Christian. I said that you would be better off coming under the Lordship of Jesus Christ than a false teacher, and that your position is suspect as denying the grace covenant while wandering amongst the legalistic teachings of the Jews. You deny, and ignore the teachings of Jesus in order to eatup the false teachings that you propagate. Paul was concerned of the same thing concerning the Galatians. My arrogance is not the problem with the teachings that you are propagating on this board.

You have made Dr. Tory Hoff your Lord of what is true, over what Jesus Christ teaches in the scriptures. Like the Jews who rejected Jesus Christ as Lord, you also reject his teachings. Your being born again is suspect; however, in that you refuse to accept the truth of the Word of God over the word of an unknown psychologist who has absolutely no inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Your comment below shows that you object to God's manner of hellenizing the world prior to disseminating His Word to the non-Jewish nations.

The false teachings are coming through the early church's interaction with pagan greek philosophy.

Jesus teaches that the body and the soul are two separate entities of an individual. Include that with the spirit of man, and you have the image of God in which man was created.

 

[Drew]

You have made Dr. Tory Hoff your Lord of what is true, over what Jesus Christ teaches in the scriptures. Like the Jews who rejected Jesus Christ as Lord, you also reject his teachings. Your being born again is suspect; however, in that you refuse to accept the truth of the Word of God over the word of an unknown psychologist who has absolutely no inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Your comment below shows that you object to God's manner of hellenizing the world prior to disseminating His Word to the non-Jewish nations

How is respecting of Tory Hoff any different than all the respect and authority that is being heaped onto Chuck Smith?

You are indeed a person with fascinating abilities that I, for one, do not have. I really wish that I had the ability to know what is going on in people's hearts as you do when you claim knowledge of the absence of Holy Spirit inspiration in the life of Tory Hoff.

Being of lesser abilities, I am forced to judge people on their actual behavior. I trust the irony is clear......

 

[guibox]

"You know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him" (1 John 3:15).

Paul told the members of the congregation in Rome to "seek" immortality (Romans 2:5-7). He taught Christians at Corinth that they must be changed and "put on" immortality (1 Corinthians 15:51-55). Paul proclaimed that only God and His Son possess immortality (1 Timothy 6:12-16) and that eternal life is a "gift" from God (Romans 6:23).

The most powerful words come from Jesus Himself: "And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day" (John 6:40).

If 1 John 3:15 isn't a slap in the face then I don't have a clue what it will take to understand the concept that immortality is only a gift for the righteous.

No ambiguity here. No excuses. No bible texts to contradict.

The insistence to ignore or gloss over such clear teaching is the belief that 'immortality' 'everlasting' and 'eternal' are qualitative. (i.e., that when it says 'everlasting life' or 'immortality' in applying to the righteous, it means a 'happy existence' but when it speaks of 'death' for the wicked it means ' a miserable existence'. Hence they can be 'alive' but not truly 'alive' like the righteous.

Such a rendering is based on gratuitous assumptions and a complete ignorance of the usage of these words throughout the entire Bible.

However, it is a necessary view that the traditionalist MUST take to somehow explain away the clear teaching that the wicked do not receive any life period

Once this mental barrier is broken down and left behind for the closed minded steel door of untruth that it is, the bible is so clear.

It is difficult to do so and so many want to believe what they want simply because that is the way they were raised.

God has a much clearer path for you than orthodox traditions. Why don't you follow His word and leave your assumptions behind.

The truth shall indeed set you free.

Thank Christ for the resurrection to eternal life!