Where is the justice?????????

[francisdesales]

I need to interject because something said here is directly related to something I read last night.

http://sites.silaspartners.com/partner/ ... 42,00.html

It's a bit long but well worth the time. It has to do with properly interpreting scripture. It deals primarily with understanding apocalyptic literature, but relates so well with understanding Scripture in general. It stresses the importance of not reading "into" the text any preconceived beliefs. It confirms the belief that scripture does interpret scripture and that the Bibles does indeed interpret itself.

It stresses one more very important concept and that is; take the time to understand what the writers were trying to tell their immediate audience. No way should we always assume what it meant to a first century reader is what it means to a 20th. or 21st. century person. Many times it's impossible to bridge the 2,000 year gap without "going back in time".

Excerpt from first paragraph of link:

That is, instead of reading what is there, in its context, what the words say in the original languages and culture, we read in our theological ideas, frameworks, and presumptions, and thus totality miss what God is actually saying to us!

Good rules of thumb, Vic. However, within this sound advice, one finds implicitly one of the reasons why Christ instituted a Church, rather than hand out bibles - MOST people are not going to be able to completely come to the Scriptures without reading into it their own ideas, experiences, and so forth (this is good for spirituality, but not for theology), nor are most people in the position to be scholars on first century Palestine or Judaism of the period, or other such esoteric subjects that very few are relatively well versed in. The vast majority of Christians, thus, can take Christ's advice - go to the Church when two or more Christians disagree on theology.

Just something to keep in mind. Jesus WANTS us to come to the Truth. We don't have to guess.

Regards

 

[Vic C.]

Just something to keep in mind. Jesus WANTS us to come to the Truth. We don't have to guess.

Hi Joe! Take the time to read the link. That quote of yours above was a common theme over and over in the article. God's word is HIS revelation to us.

 

[MarkT]

Nope. Eternal punishment is not the opposite of eternal life. You're making punishment and life opposites. Of course death is the opposite of life. Then you are substituting death for punishment.

The comparison is very simple if you read the context. The wages of sin is death...BUT (in other words..a second alternative), the gift of God is eternal life. If the two are not being compared for the wicked and the righteous, then the statement is redundant. We see elsewhere that this same comparison is used in other ways as in Matthew 25:46, John 5:28-29 and John 3:16. It is ludicrous to think that eternal life is being compared to three different things that have no similar applicability. This is a gross abuse of hermeneutics.

Again not true. You're just picking out two words; death and life. But Paul isn't talking about the eternal punishment. He is talking about sin, death, and eternal life. He is talking about the physical body when he says, 'the wages of sin is death.' He often refers to 'this body of sin', and 'sinful flesh'. So when he talks about the wages of sin being death, he is talking about this life; the life we all have in our mortal bodies.

[quote:cifbqqbk]To say this applies to only our physical death makes no sense. The gift of eternal life is opposite that of death. Whether righteous or wicked, all will die once (unless Christ comes back first). The gift of God for the righteous is to show our eternal destiny, not our physical one. Those who are free from sin will not experience the death wages of sin. If this is in fact speaking of our physical death, then the point is mute. Second, the wicked who do not accept Christ would still experience the wages of sin which is death. Yet, we see that they are resurrected at the end of time and did not remain dead. Hence, this verse is speaking of the two opposite destinies, not our physical death.

[/quote:cifbqqbk]

In this case Paul is talking about the law, sin, and death. He isn't discussing anything beyond what we can understand in human terms. In fact he says, 'I am speaking in human terms because of your natural limitations.' 6:19 You're getting ahead of yourself. When he says, 'sin came into the world through one man and death through sin', 5:12, and 'death reigned from Adam to Moses', 5:14, he is not talking about the second death. The condemnation is that all men die a physical death. He says, 'for if many died through one man's trespass' 5:15, and, 'for the judgment following one man's trespass brought condemnation' 5:16. So he is talking about death, the law and sin; how sin killed him, how sin was working death in him. He even calls his physical body, 'this body of death.' 7:24

 

[MarkT]

Your explanation hinges on assumptions that cannot be supported by the Bible.

1) That Christ preached to the 'spirits' in prison means that Christ went in spirit form after His physical death. Look closely at the text again

1 Peter 3:18-20
18 For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit; 19 in which he went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water.

2) That the wicked have immortal souls to be kept alive. This is nowhere supported in the Bible and the language doesn't support it one iota.

1Peter 4:6 For this is why the gospel was preached even to the dead, that though judged in the flesh like men, they might live in the spirit like God

3) That the 'spirit' is the 'soul'. Again, the biblical language doesn't support your interpretation of these terms

I believe the soul is the spiritual body that we inhabit; by which we can see and hear the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, through which we can understand and seek the knowledge of God. It is the spirit that understands. The soul is spirit. Perhaps it cannot die. Jesus said, 'If a man loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.' John 14:23 Anyone who is born of the Spirit knows God is in his soul.

Bottom line is Jesus said their worm does not die in the hell of fire, and there they will weep and gnash their teeth. Of course if the soul dies, then there would be no punishment or torment or gnashing of teeth.

And that the fact that God CAN kill the soul, means that it is not immortal inherently.

Interestingly enough, Jesus doesn't say 'kill'. He says 'destroy'.

 

[MarkT]

The second death is called the 'second' because it follows the first. If the second is nothing like the first, then it is not 'death' and shouldn't be called the 'second' but something entirely different. Notice the admonishment 'Blessed is he who takes part in the first resurrection, as such the second death has no power over him'. Notice the comparison of 'resurrection' to 'death having no power'. When we are resurrected immortal, 'death has no sting' 'O grave where is they victory?' (1 Cor 15).

The second death has no power because the righteous are immortal, the cannot die.

Death is death. To make it mean 'conscious eternal torment' is absolutely ludicrous especially when it is clearly contrasted to 'eternal life'.

I thought so. I agree, the same word is being used; a stumbling block for you. If the second death has no power, then it is unlike the first death. So order is not necessarily implied.

 

[guibox]

In this case Paul is talking about the law, sin, and death. He isn't discussing anything beyond what we can understand in human terms. In fact he says, 'I am speaking in human terms because of your natural limitations.' 6:19 You're getting ahead of yourself. When he says, 'sin came into the world through one man and death through sin', 5:12, and 'death reigned from Adam to Moses', 5:14, he is not talking about the second death. The condemnation is that all men die a physical death. He says, 'for if many died through one man's trespass' 5:15, and, 'for the judgment following one man's trespass brought condemnation' 5:16. So he is talking about death, the law and sin; how sin killed him, how sin was working death in him. He even calls his physical body, 'this body of death.' 7:24

You are missing the forest through the trees, Mark. All these verses bring out important truths that DO speak of the eternal at least in indirect terms. Follow this closely. From these verses we see this:

1) Sin brought death
2) Death is only conquered through the death and resurrection of Christ
3) Mankind was destined to die. Christ saved us from this death
4) Death is only conquered for those who believeth on Him (John 3:16; Romans 6:23)

Here is the logical progression of these premises...

a. Man's punishment for sin was not eternal torment.
b. Eternal torment was not created by God to punish man knowing that He would sin.
c. Christ didn't come to save us from eternal torment that He created. He came to save us from the death that sin brought.
d. Those that do not accept the gift of salvation from Christ still suffer the wages of sin while the righteous will experience eternal life. "He who hath the Son hath life, He who does not have the Son, hath not life'. Neither in this life or the next. They are dead because of sin. They are dead spiritually and will die physically. They do not continue to live on after their physical death. Death is death. Spiritual death does not become spiritual life in eternity. Physical death doesn't bring on spiritual life. Why is that so hard for you to accept?

It is death and life Mark, not eternal torment and life. Sin brings death, Christ brings life.

1 Peter 3:18-20
18 For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit; 19 in which he went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water.

You are assuming an immortal, conscious spirit that survives the afterlife in this verse. This is not the focus of the verse at all. First of all, this verse doesn’t say anything about Christ going to Sheol/Hades at all. What about these “spirits in prison� When you look at all the verses together and not just vs 19), you will see that this is not talking about the afterlife at all but the power of the Spirit given to Christ.

For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit - 1 Peter 3:18

The Holy Spirit raised Christ up from the dead. What else did this spirit allow Christ to do?

By which (the Spirit) also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison - vs 19

This verse does not tell us WHEN Christ preached to the spirits in prison, nor what nature this preaching occurred, or what is meant by "in prison". To assume that it was when Christ died is a gratuitous assumption that you cannot find in the text..

Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water - vs 20

There we go. The preaching to the lost "souls" or people, was Christ (who existed long before he was on this earth) through Noah, pleading with the hearts of the people who were in their sins and who ignored Noah and God's pleading to be saved from the flood. It was by the Holy Spirit that raised Christ that this preaching occurred for the anti-deluvians. There is no mention of Christ going to "hell" to preach to people.

1Peter 4:6 For this is why the gospel was preached even to the dead, that though judged in the flesh like men, they might live in the spirit like God

Why do you assume that this is talking about physically dead people and living spirits in the afterlife? Preaching and decisions are only effective in this life, Mark. Are you preaching a second chance theology after death? That is exactly what you are making this verse say. Everyone has a second chance to accept Christ as He will preach to them in Hades. Good grief. Where is the biblical support for this? "It is appointed man to die once, afteward, the judgement'. (Hebrews 9:27) There is no netherworld preaching, Mark. This is a complete misguided interpretation to bolster the already biblically weak immortality of the soul doctrine.

The people being spoken of here are “dead†in their iniquity. They have not received the gift of Christ’s sacrifice, nor God’s Holy Spiritâ€â€the “earnest†or down payment of salvation. Christ’s statement to a young man, “Let the dead bury their dead…†(Luke 9:60), was a direct reference to those who could not understand spiritual mattersâ€â€those still under the death penalty. The apostle Paul further explains that they are “…dad in trespasses and sins†(Eph. 2:1).

The Bible exposition commentary also makes the same argument.

 

[MarkT]

In this case Paul is talking about the law, sin, and death. He isn't discussing anything beyond what we can understand in human terms. In fact he says, 'I am speaking in human terms because of your natural limitations.' 6:19 You're getting ahead of yourself. When he says, 'sin came into the world through one man and death through sin', 5:12, and 'death reigned from Adam to Moses', 5:14, he is not talking about the second death. The condemnation is that all men die a physical death. He says, 'for if many died through one man's trespass' 5:15, and, 'for the judgment following one man's trespass brought condemnation' 5:16. So he is talking about death, the law and sin; how sin killed him, how sin was working death in him. He even calls his physical body, 'this body of death.' 7:24

You are missing the forest through the trees, Mark. All these verses bring out important truths that DO speak of the eternal at least in indirect terms. Follow this closely. From these verses we see this:

1) Sin brought death
2) Death is only conquered through the death and resurrection of Christ
3) Mankind was destined to die. Christ saved us from this death
4) Death is only conquered for those who believeth on Him (John 3:16; Romans 6:23)

Here is the logical progression of these premises...

a. Man's punishment for sin was not eternal torment.
b. Eternal torment was not created by God to punish man knowing that He would sin.
c. Christ didn't come to save us from eternal torment that He created. He came to save us from the death that sin brought.
d. Those that do not accept the gift of salvation from Christ still suffer the wages of sin while the righteous will experience eternal life. "He who hath the Son hath life, He who does not have the Son, hath not life'. Neither in this life or the next. They are dead because of sin. They are dead spiritually and will die physically. They do not continue to live on after their physical death. Death is death. Spiritual death does not become spiritual life in eternity. Physical death doesn't bring on spiritual life. Why is that so hard for you to accept?

It is death and life Mark, not eternal torment and life. Sin brings death, Christ brings life.

You're applying your theology to the Bible, and your logic to your theology. Sorry. I've heard some say 'spiritually dead' before but these words come from ignorance, and they have no meaning for me. Paul said, 'But if Christ is in you, although your bodies are dead because of sin, your spirits are alive because of righteousness.' Romans 8:10 Don't just apply your theology to everything. Read what Paul is saying - 'although your bodies are dead because of sin.' He's talking about sin, death and the physical body.

1 Peter 3:18-20
18 For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit; 19 in which he went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water.

You are assuming an immortal, conscious spirit that survives the afterlife in this verse. This is not the focus of the verse at all. First of all, this verse doesn’t say anything about Christ going to Sheol/Hades at all. What about these “spirits in prison� When you look at all the verses together and not just vs 19), you will see that this is not talking about the afterlife at all but the power of the Spirit given to Christ.

Jesus said the Son of man would be 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth. Mt. 12:40 You don't understand because of your disbelief. Jesus was killed. He went down to Hades in spirit, and he preached the good news to the spirits in prison.

Eph 4:9
(In saying, "He ascended," what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower parts of the earth?

Eph 4:10
He who descended is he who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.)

Consider the people who died during the flood. Before Jesus, men died without hope, never having heard the good news. They were cast into prison/Hades for their sins. Think of Hades as being like a holding tank or a county jail where prisoners wait for their trial to begin. Now it was for this reason, to bring the prisoners the good news, that whosoever would believe in Jesus would be saved, that Jesus descended into the heart of the earth. Think of this. The LORD had mercy on them, even the dead. And he was just. At the final resurrection, 'Death and Hades gave up the dead in them.' Rev. 20:14 How can Hades give up the dead in Hades if the dead are not in Hades?

The Bible exposition commentary also makes the same argument.

My understanding comes by the Holy Spirit. Yes, the same Spirit you keep talking about. But your theology has made you blind.

I bear witness that every theologian I have ever seen or heard is a liar. Of course I can only speak of the ones I've seen on TV. Every commentary I have ever read is BS. Nevertheless, don't quote your teachers to me. They will undoubtedly give you an 'A' for your work. I will not.

 

[guibox]

Interesting method of bible study you have...

Read text...ignore text...believe whatever I want no matter how unbiblically supported it is, because every other preacher believes it.

People will hold on to whatever doctrine they grew up with is right no matter how ridiculous it is, no matter how much the bible contradicts it, no matter how weak the support is, and in the case of eternal torment, no matter how inconsistently gross a picture it paints of God. I have used the Bible to clearly show the alternative. I have used the Bible to show your texts don't hold water under scrutiny. You continue to ignore it to continue to harp on your mantra that immortal souls will be tortured with fire for all eternity despite the strong evidence against it.

Oh well. I will believe the Bible, Mark. You can continue believing in Greek theology and Catholic invention. If that makes you happy and smug, then by all means, continue to believe it.

No sense arguing with you anymore on this one. Tradition dies hard I guess.

 

[francisdesales]

Interesting method of bible study you have...

Read text...ignore text...believe whatever I want no matter how unbiblically supported it is, because every other preacher believes it.

Are you talking about Sola Scriptura? Look to the lumber in your own eye, first.

Oh well. I will believe the Bible, Mark. You can continue believing in Greek theology and Catholic invention. If that makes you happy and smug, then by all means, continue to believe it.

There seems to be a need to make underhanded remarks about Catholics around here, even when they are not in the conversation...

Does this make you feel good? Just wondering.

Regards

 

[guibox]

Hey francis. No, it doesn't make me feel good...but it is the truth.

I am not anti-Catholic. My heritage is French Catholic and that's what I grew up as. Many of my relatives are still Catholic. It doesn't change the fact that the promotion of hell as we know it was due to the Catholic Church over the past millenia.

Augustine made eternal torment famous and it was propogated during the midieval times to the umpteenth degree giving us the skewed, erroneous interpretation of hell so many believe today. It was nothing short of gross biblical misinterpretation forced upon an ignorant and superstitious people.

Scholars from all faiths, commentaries, and bible dictionaries show that the current view of the 'soul' and afterlife as believed by many Christians are Greek in origin and not Hebrew or Christian. Eternal torment is being abandoned for the erroneous doctrine that it is (and has by many over the centuries) by many top scholars today because it just doesn't measure up to biblical exegetical scrutiny.

I tried to do some of this exegesis and biblical self-interpretation but Mark and dad want no part of it. They'd rather hang on to their own interpretation no matter how many holes and illogical inconsistencies it has. I have tried to show just a small amount and am met with ridicule and closeminded rhetoric because the facts don't support the conclusions they want to come to.

So, in light of Christian charity before it gets ugly, I will refrain from debating with them.

 

[francisdesales]

Hey francis. No, it doesn't make me feel good...but it is the truth.

I am not anti-Catholic. My heritage is French Catholic and that's what I grew up as. Many of my relatives are still Catholic. It doesn't change the fact that the promotion of hell as we know it was due to the Catholic Church over the past millenia.

The days that people believe the Church was swayed by Greek philosophy to the point of deviation is gone. Those days of Arnold Harnack's theories on dogma are done. It can be more accurately said that Christianity effected Hellenism, not vice versus... The writings of the Apologists (such as Justin the Martyr) clearly point out the difference between Plato and Christianity.

As far as hell is concerned, I would like to know if you have any quote from a Church Father, those closest to the time Scriptures were actually written, that details that hell was NOT eternal. Seems I can only find some ideas from Origen on this concept - which the Church did not accept. Whether you like it or not, it seems that the Church, the Body of Christ, did not have any such idea that hell was temporary, OR that man was destroyed upon death.

Now, has hell been "promoted"? I will grant that the faith will receive different emphasis, depending upon the culture of the time. Some eras concentrate on certain aspects of the faith without proper balancing the other aspects. The Medieval Ages were notorious for concentrating on the lowliness of man and his lot in life. Given the life people of those days went through, it is not surprising that the Church would emphasize the NEXT life to come and to remain hopeful of what is promised to those who love God.

Augustine made eternal torment famous and it was propogated during the midieval times to the umpteenth degree giving us the skewed, erroneous interpretation of hell so many believe today. It was nothing short of gross biblical misinterpretation forced upon an ignorant and superstitious people.

This view of hell is not a gross biblical misinterpretation. It is the realization that God is a God of Love. PASSIONATE love. Vengeance is God's, and the Apocalypse of John makes that clear - that God will condemn those who offend and reject Him, despite the Love He offers. Perhaps you are offended that God would "maintain" a punishment for eternity, but know that eternity is not a passage of time, but a state of now. I believe you are transposing our time into what will happen in the next world. I think it is safe to say we cannot fully comprehend time in the next life...

Scholars from all faiths, commentaries, and bible dictionaries show that the current view of the 'soul' and afterlife as believed by many Christians are Greek in origin and not Hebrew or Christian. Eternal torment is being abandoned for the erroneous doctrine that it is (and has by many over the centuries) by many top scholars today because it just doesn't measure up to biblical exegetical scrutiny.

Not exactly. The Old Testament also talks about the afterlife and its existence. Or do you consider that heaven is also a "Greek" concept?

I tried to do some of this exegesis and biblical self-interpretation but Mark and dad want no part of it. They'd rather hang on to their own interpretation no matter how many holes and illogical inconsistencies it has. I have tried to show just a small amount and am met with ridicule and closeminded rhetoric because the facts don't support the conclusions they want to come to.

Well, because they have not convinced you is probably not a warrant for open season on them. However, I have done this as well, so I also am addressing myself...

So, in light of Christian charity before it gets ugly, I will refrain from debating with them.

I am just providing a bit of Christian correction regarding the last post. I have found that reading the Scriptures can be confusing and difficult. None of us are supreme experts... I do know, however, that the first Christians appeared to believe in eternal punishments, not elimination for the wicked. It seems to me that changing one's view on this is a deviation from the faith "once given".

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Just something to keep in mind. Jesus WANTS us to come to the Truth. We don't have to guess

Hi Joe! Take the time to read the link. That quote of yours above was a common theme over and over in the article. God's word is HIS revelation to us.

Yes, and the Apostles make the claim that they are giving God's Revelation, such as in Galatians One. We take this on faith that the Apostles were indeed preaching the Word of God - and we continue (at least Catholics) that God's Word is taught by those who were successors of these apostles, the bishops / overseers. Thus, we believe that ALL of what the Apostles taught was from God, and not limited to only what they wrote. Among these teachings would be the interpretation of the words of their letters on difficult subjects.

Regards

 

[guibox]

As far as hell is concerned, I would like to know if you have any quote from a Church Father, those closest to the time Scriptures were actually written, that details that hell was NOT eternal. Seems I can only find some ideas from Origen on this concept - which the Church did not accept. Whether you like it or not, it seems that the Church, the Body of Christ, did not have any such idea that hell was temporary, OR that man was destroyed upon death.

Much of Justin Martyr's treatises on the punishment specify that the righteous have immortality and doesn't say that the wicked will be tormented eternally. He mentions 'eternal fire' and 'punishment' but it is in the same breath as the righteous having immortality. This jives with the bible that 'eternal' can describe results. Or even if it describes the 'fire' that is eternal, it is assumption that cannot be proven from the bible that what is thrown in the fire is eternal. On the contrary, we see that the end result of the wicked is 'death', 'ashes', 'consuming', being 'devoured', 'consuming away into smoke', 'extinction'.

Here are others:

177 AD Athenagoras "[W]e [Christians] are persuaded that when we are removed from this present life we shall live another life, better than the present one . . . Then we shall abide near God and with God, changeless and free from suffering in the soul . . . or if we fall with the rest [of mankind], a worse one and in fire; for God has not made us as sheep or beasts of burden, a mere incidental work, that we should perish and be annihilated" (Plea for the Christians 31).

181 AD Theophilus of Antioch "[God] will examine everything and will judge justly, granting recompense to each according to merit. To those who seek immortality by the patient exercise of good works, he will give everlasting life, joy, peace, rest, and all good things. For the unbelievers and for the contemptuous, and for those who do not submit to the truth but assent to iniquity, when they have been involved in adulteries, and fornications, and homosexualities, and avarice, and in lawless idolatries, there will be wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish; and in the end, such men as these will be detained in everlasting fire"

Again we see that the duration of those kept in the fire is not mentioned. We see that only those who seek immortality will have everlasting life. Hence, according to the scriptures, those who are cast into the fire do not have immortality or eternal life.

Tatian (died 185 AD)

"The soul is not in itself immortal, O Greeks, but mortal. Yet it is possible for it not to die" (Oratio to the Greeks)

Theophilus supported conditional immortality (died 183-185? AD)

Arnobeius (died 330 AD) - He also supported annihilation

"The soul is not immortal by nature, but capable of putting on immortality as a grace" - Seven Books Against the Heathens - book II 14-62

Clement of Alexandria, St. Iraeaneus and Martyr didn't believe that the soul was inherently immortal by nature.

St. John of Damascus says that even angels are immortal not by nature, but only by grace.

Athenagoras of Athens

"God gave independent being and life neither to the nature of the soul by itself, nor to the nature of the body separately, but rather to men, composed of soul and body, so that with these same parts of which they are composed, when they are born and live, they should attain after the termination of this life their common end; soul and body compose in man one living entity."

 

[francisdesales]

Much of Justin Martyr's treatises on the punishment specify that the righteous have immortality and doesn't say that the wicked will be tormented eternally. He mentions 'eternal fire' and 'punishment' but it is in the same breath as the righteous having immortality. This jives with the bible that 'eternal' can describe results. Or even if it describes the 'fire' that is eternal, it is assumption that cannot be proven from the bible that what is thrown in the fire is eternal. On the contrary, we see that the end result of the wicked is 'death', 'ashes', 'consuming', being 'devoured', 'consuming away into smoke', 'extinction'.

Thanks for your quotes. The Scriptures can just as easily be utilized to indicate continuous punishment as well as continuous rewards in heaven, since Jesus himself uses such concepts when discussing the "worm that never dies", and so forth. What use would there be for a "worm that never dies" if hell was also not endless?

It doesn't follow that "death", "ashes" or "consuming" MUST mean an end of complete existence, since we ALL die physically but continue to exist... Scriptures use a variety of words to describe the result of the two ways we choose, as per Psalm 1. The OT especially speaks about how men are "destroyed" by disobeying God - but this invariably is not speaking of the afterlife. I am not sure how much stock we can put on the poetic or symbolic useage of words and draw out doctrines from them.

With that said, IF Jesus IS life itself, then separation from Him means "death". One without life (as in an occupant of hell) is experiencing endless death, just as those in heaven will experience endless heaven. "Death" in the NT is not the end of existence, but man without Christ, which is an apt description of hell.

Here are others:

177 AD Athenagoras "[W]e [Christians] are persuaded that when we are removed from this present life we shall live another life, better than the present one . . . Then we shall abide near God and with God, changeless and free from suffering in the soul . . . or if we fall with the rest [of mankind], a worse one and in fire; for God has not made us as sheep or beasts of burden, a mere incidental work, that we should perish and be annihilated" (Plea for the Christians 31).

Not sure if we can take "annihilated" as "end of existence" here or not. Notice he mentions a worse fate, one in fire. How long does this fire last? Does God keep people in existence in hell to destroy them later? Again, this concept of time in the next life makes these things difficult to ascertain.

181 AD Theophilus of Antioch "[God] will examine everything and will judge justly, granting recompense to each according to merit. To those who seek immortality by the patient exercise of good works, he will give everlasting life, joy, peace, rest, and all good things. For the unbelievers and for the contemptuous, and for those who do not submit to the truth but assent to iniquity, when they have been involved in adulteries, and fornications, and homosexualities, and avarice, and in lawless idolatries, there will be wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish; and in the end, such men as these will be detained in everlasting fire"

Again we see that the duration of those kept in the fire is not mentioned. We see that only those who seek immortality will have everlasting life. Hence, according to the scriptures, those who are cast into the fire do not have immortality or eternal life.

Detained in everlasting fire is analogous to everlasting heaven, no? Certainly, everlasting heaven will not end, so we'd assume that everlasting fire is also not going to end.

Tatian (died 185 AD) "The soul is not in itself immortal, O Greeks, but mortal. Yet it is possible for it not to die" (Oratio to the Greeks)

Yea, he said a lot of strange things! It is a different way of saying some of the below quotes...

"The soul is not immortal by nature, but capable of putting on immortality as a grace" - Seven Books Against the Heathens - book II 14-62

Clement of Alexandria, St. Iraeaneus and Martyr didn't believe that the soul was inherently immortal by nature.

That is Catholic teaching even today. That the soul is INHERENTLY immortal is from Plato, which Justin said was false, it was God's gift that made man's soul immortal. Funny, I just read that today.

St. John of Damascus says that even angels are immortal not by nature, but only by grace.

Same as above.

Athenagoras of Athens

"God gave independent being and life neither to the nature of the soul by itself, nor to the nature of the body separately, but rather to men, composed of soul and body, so that with these same parts of which they are composed, when they are born and live, they should attain after the termination of this life their common end; soul and body compose in man one living entity."

Agreed. Our soul is immortal because of God, not our own nature. This is one reason why most believe hell is also eternal, since the soul does not die after death (because of God)

Regards

 

[MarkT]

guibox

I read the Greek myths before I read the Bible. In strange and mysterious ways our lives were decreed. So then reading the Bible, I found familiar concepts. And, believe it or not, so did the Greeks who heard Paul. Why do you suppose God sent Paul to the Greeks? Were they not believers? There were atheists in ancient Greece who laughed at the Greek myths and the ones who believed them as there are atheists who laugh at us today. Did God give the Greeks a spirit so that they would not know him? No. They believed Paul. It's interesting that they recognized the word of God when it came to them at the appointed time.

Let me ask you this. You're arguing God wouldn't sentence man to an eternal torment. I said the eternal torment is for the devil and his angels. Do you think the devil and his children deserve eternal torment for leading men away from eternal life? If the devil snatched you away from the hand of God, and you lost your eternal life, what would you say the devil deserved?

 

[francisdesales]

I read the Greek myths before I read the Bible. In strange and mysterious ways our lives were decreed. So then reading the Bible, I found familiar concepts. And, believe it or not, so did the Greeks who heard Paul. Why do you suppose God sent Paul to the Greeks? Were they not believers? There were atheists in ancient Greece who laughed at the Greek myths and the ones who believed them as there are atheists who laugh at us today. Did God give the Greeks a spirit so that they would not know him? No. They believed Paul. It's interesting that they recognized the word of God when it came to them at the appointed time.

I agree with this, Mark. Many of the first Christians, such as Justin the Martyr, called the Greek philospher teachings a "pre-evangelization", a preparation for the Gospel. Many of their ideas and concepts of God were shared by the Jews, such as God's eternity and oneness... I believe the Greeks could see a lot of points of contact with what Paul taught and what their own philosphers had already said (not all, of course).

Regards

 

[guibox]

The Scriptures can just as easily be utilized to indicate continuous punishment as well as continuous rewards in heaven, since Jesus himself uses such concepts when discussing the "worm that never dies", and so forth. What use would there be for a "worm that never dies" if hell was also not endless?

The majority of texts used to denote eternal torment are taken from symbolic books and language used that is obviously metaphorical. 'immortal worms' are a prime example. This language must be analyzed carefully. I have shown that this language is used elsewhere in the Bible to show complete destruction and annihilation. Take for example, the 'worm dieth not'. What is it signifying? Mark 9 takes this directly from Isaiah 66:24:

And they shall go forth and look upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against me. For their worm shall not die, netierh shall their fire be quenched and they shall be an abohorring unto all flesh.

We must be very careful to go off half cocked and take all this literally. Do you really believe that the righteous will be able to go and look into hell to see all the punishment? Notice also that this scene shows that they are looking at the CARCASSES (CORPSES) of men where the worms are feeding. These are not disembodied souls, they are not living, conscious things. These people are DEAD as 'worms' signify DECAY. A worm that doesn't die shows the extreme of decay. It will do its work uniterrupted and cannot be killed outwardly. This is metaphorical to show the completeness and thoroughness of the work. The same with unquenchable fire. I showed through Jeremiah 17:27 that unquenchable fire means that it cannot be QUENCHED. It cannot be PUT OUT by human hands. However, when the worms and fire have done their job and there is nothing left to eat or burn, they will go out.

Whether in annihilation or eternal torment, none of the language here can really be logically taken literally. Worms and fire are used to denote complete and utter destruction, not conscious eternal torment. Hence when we interpret Mark 9:44-45, we must take this language into account.

It doesn't follow that "death", "ashes" or "consuming" MUST mean an end of complete existence, since we ALL die physically but continue to exist

Again this cannot be proven by the scriptures. The bible preaches resurrection to life, not immortality of the soul. Even if you could prove that for the righteous, the bible is clear that eternal life/immortality is NEVER a gift to the wicked.

The OT especially speaks about how men are "destroyed" by disobeying God - but this invariably is not speaking of the afterlife.

Much of the language of the destruction of the wicked is used to show the final end of time when Yahweh takes ultimate control and puts all the enemies of God under His feet. The Hebrews did NOT have a concept of eternally burning hell. They believed in a resurrection and a final 'Day of the Lord' where God's enemies would be destroyed by the fire of His wrath. It was pretty black and white to them. Psalms 37 throughout shows the final eradication of God's enemies as 'consuming away into smoke'. Malachi 4:1 also shows this end time day of the Lord as complete destruction and finality in the new world. Isaiah 66:24 could be considered the results of this. 2 Peter 2:6 and 2 Peter 3:9-10 support this view clearly. I have TONS of bible texts from the OT that show the wicked are 'chaff' to be burned up, 'destroyed completely' etc, etc.

I will share them with you if you'd like.

With that said, IF Jesus IS life itself, then separation from Him means "death". One without life (as in an occupant of hell) is experiencing endless death, just as those in heaven will experience endless heaven. "Death" in the NT is not the end of existence, but man without Christ, which is an apt description of hell.

Francis, this is a gratuitous assumption that is read a priori into the scriptures. The Bible doesn't associate 'death' as 'life'. Rather we see that 'death' is the OPPOSITE of life. Thanatos doesn't mean 'eternal conscious existence'. Death is for the wicked, life is for the righteous. God is the life giver. Separation from God in sin doesn't mean 'continous life in sin'. If that were the case, then sin would be more powerful than the life Giver. Separation from God in the garden of Eden brought a slow dying that would result in death. Christ came to give mankind life...eternal life as a free gift for all who would accept Him. Those who do not, would still suffer the wages of Adam's sin. They would die and stay dead. However, Revelation 20:5 shows that they will be resurrected to be judged and ultimately 'devoured' by fire. Consumed. Revelation 14:10-11 shows the process of this happening using language that is used elsewhere in the Bible to denote complete annihilation.

That is Catholic teaching even today. That the soul is INHERENTLY immortal is from Plato, which Justin said was false, it was God's gift that made man's soul immortal. Funny, I just read that today.

Francis, there are MANY Christians who believe that the soul is inherently immortal. Hence, the reason why the wicked 'souls' can be tormented at death. All people whether good or bad have immortal souls. This is an error that is still taught widely today. Believing that it is Christ that gives us immortality is a step in the right direction, but education still needs to happen.

The next question is: If the soul is not inherently immortal and God gives immortality to the wicked to be tormented, then we must hold God accountable for the reality of hell. We have the equivalent of God taking the death sentence passed to man to make him mortal, being changed to immortality in a hell that He created for no other purpose but to torment and torture sinners that He came to die for in the first place.

 

[francisdesales]

The majority of texts used to denote eternal torment are taken from symbolic books and language used that is obviously metaphorical. 'immortal worms' are a prime example. This language must be analyzed carefully. I have shown that this language is used elsewhere in the Bible to show complete destruction and annihilation.

Whether Jesus is speaking symbolically about a worm or not, He certainly appears to be telling us that hell is not temporary...

And if thy hand causes thee to fall, cut it off; it is better for thee to enter into life maimed than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that can never be quenched, where their worm does not die, and the fire is never quenched Mark 9:43-44

And if THIS is symbolic, how about when Jesus compares heaven and hell in the same breath using the same language?

Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did [it] not to one of the least of my brothers, ye did [it] not to me. And they shall go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life. Matthew 25:46

If hell is not "eternal", but merely a symbolic period of time, then so is heaven, according to how Jesus uses it in this sentence. Heaven and hell share the same "eternity" as to duration - whatever eternity means. It is not something I can define by using our mode of thinking. As such, those in heaven will also not be in heaven "eternally".

We must be very careful to go off half cocked and take all this literally. Do you really believe that the righteous will be able to go and look into hell to see all the punishment?

It is a human way, an anthropomorphism of the idea that the righteous will "know" that God will judge justly those who rejected Him. The righteous will "see" the result of God's justice through punishment. People in heaven will not literally see those in hell.

Notice also that this scene shows that they are looking at the CARCASSES (CORPSES) of men where the worms are feeding. These are not disembodied souls, they are not living, conscious things. These people are DEAD as 'worms' signify DECAY.

Death can refer to spiritual death, as well as physical death.


A worm that doesn't die shows the extreme of decay. It will do its work uniterrupted and cannot be killed outwardly. This is metaphorical to show the completeness and thoroughness of the work. The same with unquenchable fire. I showed through Jeremiah 17:27 that unquenchable fire means that it cannot be QUENCHED. It cannot be PUT OUT by human hands. However, when the worms and fire have done their job and there is nothing left to eat or burn, they will go out.[/quote]

Says you. I don't see one must take that stance from what we have in Scriptures. It is based upon your a priori decision that God "couldn't punish people forever, He loves people."

Ask the angels of the devil that... Why are they still suffering, from one sin, from so long ago?

Again this cannot be proven by the scriptures. The bible preaches resurrection to life, not immortality of the soul.

The Bible teaches that man will be judged AFTER death. Thus, the bible clearly teaches that even the wicked continue to live on, in some manner, after their body dies, available for punishment in the next world. That is at the heart of the righteous' plea for God to provide JUSTICE! How is it the wicked in this world are also the rich and "successful"? The righteous knows that God will provide Justice in the next life. If the soul is not immortal, then there is no justice, as ALL men die, whether righteous or not. Judgment after death implies the existence of souls after physical death.

Even if you could prove that for the righteous, the bible is clear that eternal life/immortality is NEVER a gift to the wicked.

Eternal punishment is clearly not a gift...

Much of the language of the destruction of the wicked is used to show the final end of time when Yahweh takes ultimate control and puts all the enemies of God under His feet. The Hebrews did NOT have a concept of eternally burning hell.

They also didn't have a concept of a Messiah dying on the cross for the sake of ALL men... And yet, Christ claims that His death was proclaimed by Scriptures. The Jews also had a concept that evil only befalls those who deserve it. Jesus proved that was an incorrect interpretation of Scriptures. Jesus says Hell is forever, and I'll leave it at that.

Regards

 

[guibox]

Whether Jesus is speaking symbolically about a worm or not, He certainly appears to be telling us that hell is not temporary...

And if thy hand causes thee to fall, cut it off; it is better for thee to enter into life maimed than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that can never be quenched, where their worm does not die, and the fire is never quenched Mark 9:43-44

These terms are already explained in Isaiah. I'm not sure what circular reasoning you are trying to use here. Unquenchable fire and worms not dying show the totality of destruction, not the continual prolonging of it. Isaiah is clear about this.

And if THIS is symbolic, how about when Jesus compares heaven and hell in the same breath using the same language?

Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did [it] not to one of the least of my brothers, ye did [it] not to me. And they shall go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life. Matthew 25:46

That the punishment is literal is not the issue, but the descriptive nature of it that is metaphorical.

If hell is not "eternal", but merely a symbolic period of time, then so is heaven, according to how Jesus uses it in this sentence. Heaven and hell share the same "eternity" as to duration - whatever eternity means. It is not something I can define by using our mode of thinking. As such, those in heaven will also not be in heaven "eternally".

Not necessarily. The word for 'eternal' is 'aonios' and means 'age lasting' and is relative to what it is describing. Even if the punishment was eternal torment, because the wicked are mortal, this punishment would indeed merely be 'age lasting' or 'as long as their life lasts'. Whereas, the righteous were raised with immortality and have eternal life. Therefore, their life would indeed be 'eternal' for all eternity, not because of the terms 'eternal-aoinios', but because of their nature.

However, we see that the punishment for the wicked is not 'eternal torment' but death. The lake of fire brings on the second death which is the punishment that last forever. Not the torture.

Notice also that this scene shows that they are looking at the CARCASSES (CORPSES) of men where the worms are feeding. These are not disembodied souls, they are not living, conscious things. These people are DEAD as 'worms' signify DECAY.

Death can refer to spiritual death, as well as physical death.

I'm not sure what you are referring to here. The description in Isaiah is speaking of the afterlife, just as the language taken straight from it in Mark 9 is speaking of the afterlife. You can't start picking and choosing which words in the bible mean what you want them to some place and then put a different meaning on them. That's like saying, when the OT says 'The sky is blue', and the NT uses the terms 'The sky is blue', it really is supposed to mean that 'The sky is red'.

From guibox.
A worm that doesn't die shows the extreme of decay. It will do its work uniterrupted and cannot be killed outwardly. This is metaphorical to show the completeness and thoroughness of the work. The same with unquenchable fire. I showed through Jeremiah 17:27 that unquenchable fire means that it cannot be QUENCHED. It cannot be PUT OUT by human hands. However, when the worms and fire have done their job and there is nothing left to eat or burn, they will go out.

Says you. I don't see one must take that stance from what we have in Scriptures. It is based upon your a priori decision that God "couldn't punish people forever, He loves people."

So you don't believe the Bible? Explain the use of unquenchable fire in Jeremiah 17:27 then. Why should this same term be used to mean something different in the NT? This is not proper biblical hermeutics! Either we follow the word of God or we don't. We need to stop making God's word fit what we want when it lays out what it means by the terms it uses.

Ask the angels of the devil that... Why are they still suffering, from one sin, from so long ago?

Please tell me where the devil and the angels are 'suffering'? The Bible says that Satan is 'like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour'. Revelation 14 and 20 show clearly that Satan gets his just rewards at the end of time in the lake of fire, not right now. 2 Peter 2:4 uses the term 'tartaros' for hell. This is the ONLY place in the Bible this term is used. It is not 'hell fire' and it is not torment. It is a spiritual dimension that we cannot see.

If Satan and the angels are not suffering 'hell fire', then why does it make any sense that sinners are experiencing it at their physical death? How is this fair in the least?

The Bible teaches that man will be judged AFTER death. Thus, the bible clearly teaches that even the wicked continue to live on, in some manner, after their body dies, available for punishment in the next world. That is at the heart of the righteous' plea for God to provide JUSTICE!

Yes it does. However the judgment doesn't occur IMMEDIATELY after death. This is an assumption the bible doesn't support. Rather we see this from the scriptures:

The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished. - 2 Peter 2:9

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

See also Revelation 20 for further support of this judgment.

As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. - Matthew 13:40-42

Rewards and punishments occur at the resurrections, not at our physical death. The Bible is crystal clear on this.

 

[MarkT]

I read the Greek myths before I read the Bible. In strange and mysterious ways our lives were decreed. So then reading the Bible, I found familiar concepts. And, believe it or not, so did the Greeks who heard Paul. Why do you suppose God sent Paul to the Greeks? Were they not believers? There were atheists in ancient Greece who laughed at the Greek myths and the ones who believed them as there are atheists who laugh at us today. Did God give the Greeks a spirit so that they would not know him? No. They believed Paul. It's interesting that they recognized the word of God when it came to them at the appointed time.

I agree with this, Mark. Many of the first Christians, such as Justin the Martyr, called the Greek philospher teachings a "pre-evangelization", a preparation for the Gospel. Many of their ideas and concepts of God were shared by the Jews, such as God's eternity and oneness... I believe the Greeks could see a lot of points of contact with what Paul taught and what their own philosphers had already said (not all, of course).

Regards

God bless you francis. You're a man after my own heart.