LAKE OF FIRE (eternal pain)

[Steve Petersen]

One would think that the "Son of God," as He self identified, would know and teach the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

He didn't know the time of his return. Nuff said. See post 54, then Philippians 2.

 

[Der Alte]

…
That is not the truth. Again, i tell you, I have provided a mountain of info in this thread in addition to YLT. As anyone with eyes to read can see the vast majority of it has been left unchallenged.

Oh you mean like copy/pastes from anonymous writers on city-data.forum, an anonymous blog, a biased translation by one person of unknown qualifications that you have posted? Do you have any idea what credible, verifiable, historical or lexical evidence is?

Der Alter said: Someone expressing a different translation is not proof that the 1917 Jewish Publication Society [JPS] translation of the OT is wrong. Such evidence would consist of detailed studies of individual words which show they do not and cannot mean what the native Hebrew speaking Jewish scholars who translated the JPS say they mean.

That's funny. You never even provided a direct reference to the article & page number of your alleged JPS translation. Does it even exist? Then you say that to prove it wrong (if it exists, of course) would require "detailed studies of individual words" blah blah blah. Will you hold the JPS to the same standard of proving their translation is better than others? Will you provide their evidence for their translation, if & when you ever provide an exact reference to their alleged translation? That is, if they have any to provide. Also, what are their theological biases? Do all scholars translate as they do? Obviously not.

I provided this evidence in my post #41 above.

Der Alter said: Here are quotes and links to ECF earlier than Origen who describe unending punishment.

Irrelevant. Those biased errant translations don't address the topic of what they thought the translation of Exodus 15:18 or Revelation 14:11 should be. The translation & meaning of those verses is the subject. Please try to stay on topic. BTW i already posted re the church fathers in the other thread:
http://www.christianforums.com/threads/eternal-suffering.7950108/page-29

The topic is “Lake of Fire (eternal pain).” Can you provide evidence which conclusively shows that only Origen and any ECF you choose to quote is correctly translated? What is irrelevant is any comment which says “biased errant translations” without evidence showing conclusively that they are biased. That is the typical heterodox mechanical reaction to anything which proves their assumptions/presuppositions false.

 

[Der Alte]

He didn't know the time of his return. Nuff said. See post 54, then Philippians 2.

I have read post 54 and Philippians 2 they do not show that Jesus did not know the difference between false myths, legends etc. and the truth.

 

[Steve Petersen]

I have read post 54 and Philippians 2 they do not show that Jesus did not know the difference between false myths, legends etc. and the truth.

Now you're just being pedantic. If he didn't know the day of his return, what makes you think he knew whether heaven and hell were real or not?

 

[Der Alte]

well, i dont think it's irrelevant...
Der Alter is correct when he says that some of the early church did teach eternal torment... but he is wrong when he says that it was the majority view. the majority view before Tertullian was universal reconciliation. Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and Polycarp were all conditionalists, while Clement of Alexandria was the first one to outrightly teach that the "soul of a man" was inherently immortal...

Saying “the majority view before Tertullian was universal reconciliation” does not make it so. Proving this assertion would require quotes from ECF prior to Tertullian showing which believed in UR and which believed that sinners would be punished eternally.

and to answer the question, is the lake of fire eternal pain.. not it is not.
for it to be eternal pain, that implies the wicked receive the gift of God without Christ, a notio that directly contradicts a host of many scriptures...
the wicked do not live forever, so the lake of fire is not "eternal pain"...
it is eternal destruction... destructION, not "destroying", as traditionalists try to make it...

You are forcing a distinction between the word “destruction” and "destroying” which does not exist in Greek.

and FWIW, Matthew 25:46, the term "eternal" shouldnt be the focus, even though some conditionalists try to make it out to be that... the word "punishment" should be the focus, because the word "punishment" refers to the end result of the act, not the duration of the act. "eternal" already tells us the duration... "punishment" is a noun of action, not a verb.

Hebrews 9:12 uses the same kind of word, and uses the term "eternal" as well, "eternal redemption"... when you study both greek suffixes for both words, (punishment = kolasis / redemption = lutrosis), they both uses the same suffix.

Can this argument be supported from any Greek grammar or lexicon?

if punishment refers to the duration of the act, then that standard must be used for Hebrews 9:12 as well, which would mean that our redemption would be an ongoing process in eternity...
the only reason we would have to be continually redeemed in eternity is if we were continually sinning in eternity, becue we are redeemed from the penalty of sin: death.
no, this is not right one bit... the greek suffix "sis" cannot be talking about the duration, because that creates a disgusting heresy.

Another pseudo grammatical argument with no support from any Greek grammar or lexicon.

in eternity, though, we are eternally redeemed... meaning, once we are redeemed ion full upon Christ's return, it is eternal, never to be undone, never to be changed.
now, if we take THAT definition, and apply it to Matthew 25:46, there is no contradiction in scripture... the punishment for sin has always been death, Romans 6:23. the punishment that Matthew 25:46 refers to is not living forever in torment, but death... so when it says "eternal punishment", it is referring to the end result of being thrown into the lake of fire... death. a death that cannot be undone nor changed.

If αἰωνίαν λύτρωσιν/aionian lutrosin [Heb 9:12] means “eternally redeemed” then κόλασιν αἰώνιον/kolasin aionion [Matt 25:46 means “eternally punished!” Jesus used the word “death” 18 times, the word “die” 10 times, the word “dieth” 3 times, the word “died” 2 times. Why would Jesus use the word “punishment” only one time to refer to death? The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, they knew that everybody died, young, old, rich, poor, etc. that is was permanent and that punishment had nothing to do with. When Jesus said ‘eternal punishment” it would have meant something more than death to the Sadducees.

with the first death, our physical death, there is hope in seeing life again, through Jesus Christ, and through Jesus Christ alone.
with the second death, there is no second chance.
once you're thrown in there, you will not be resurrected again.
you will stay dead.

Where does scripture say that the penalty for sin is “second death?” While the lake of fire [LOF] is called “the second death” twice in revelation, not one verse in Revelation says anyone or anything is cast into the LOF then they die.
The devil, false prophet, who is a person, and the beast are cast into the LOF but they don’t die they are tormented day and night for ever and ever. Neither of them have died a first death so they cannot die a second death. Death and hell are also cast into the LOF. Death is the point in time end of life. It has no physical properties and cannot be cast anywhere. Hell could refer to the grave or the place of punishment. Neither death nor hell could die a first death so they cannot die a second death.

 

[Der Alte]

Now you're just being pedantic. If he didn't know the day of his return, what makes you think he knew whether heaven and hell were real or not?

Jesus knew what He stated as fact or He was lying. I don't believe that Jesus was lying.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Jesus knew what He stated as fact

How do you know that?

or He was lying. I don't believe that Jesus was lying.

As if this were the only other alternative!

 

[Der Alte]

How do you know that?
As if this were the only other alternative!

So what is your explanation for Jesus stating things as fact that, according to you, He did not know were factual or not? See e.g. Joh 14:2.

John 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. ​

 

[Steve Petersen]

So what is your explanation for Jesus stating things as fact that, according to you, He did not know were factual or not? See e.g. Joh 14:2.

John 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. ​

In his incarnation, he was just as human as you and I. He left his Godhood behind when he incarnated. That is the entire point of Philippians 2.

 

[Der Alte]

In his incarnation, he was just as human as you and I. He left his Godhood behind when he incarnated. That is the entire point of Philippians 2.

I don't know any humans who can walk on water, calm a storm, heal the sick, raise the dead, feed several thousand people with a few fish and loaves of bread, know what people are thinking, know what people are doing although they can't see them, etc.

 

[Steve Petersen]

I don't know any humans who can walk on water, calm a storm, heal the sick, raise the dead, feed several thousand people with a few fish and loaves of bread, know what people are thinking, know what people are doing although they can't see them, etc.

If Jesus wasn't completely human and capable of failure, the Temptation in the Wilderness was meaningless.

 

[Der Alte]

If Jesus wasn't completely human and capable of failure, the Temptation in the Wilderness was meaningless.

I agree but this doesn't really address my post does it?
Psalms 49:7-9

 

[Steve Petersen]

I agree but this doesn't really address my post does it?
Psalm 49:7-9

If he was capable of failure, he could believed and taught about the lake of fire, but been wrong. That doesn't make him a liar. He was teaching from his cultural paradigm. A paradigm that adopted the lake of fire from other pagan cultures around it.

 

[Steve Petersen]

dp

 

[Der Alte]

If he was capable of failure, he could believed and taught about the lake of fire, but been wrong. As a human, his beliefs carry no more weight than anyone else's.

The OT prophets were human and capable of error, should we believe their words?

 

[Steve Petersen]

The OT prophets were human and capable of error, should we believe their words?

Nope. There is no such thing as a prophet, that is, there is no evidence that anyone has ever predicted the future accurately anywhere in the world throughout history.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Nope. There is no such thing as a prophet, that is, there is no evidence that anyone has ever predicted the future accurately anywhere in the world throughout history.
If you decide you want to post some proofs from the Bible, you need to show evidence that those prophecies were written BEFORE the events. That will be a problem because you won't find extant manuscripts of those prophecies that predate the events they predict.

 

[Der Alte]

If he was capable of failure, he could believed and taught about the lake of fire, but been wrong. That doesn't make him a liar. He was teaching from his cultural paradigm. A paradigm that adopted the lake of fire from other pagan cultures around it.

So you think Jesus believed and taught false pagan beliefs, leading people astray? Maybe you have some insight that nobody has ever had before and you can tell us how much of the Bible is derived from false pagan cultures? And, of course, if you do do you also have credible, verifiable historical evidence because I know of many people who have made substantially the same claim e.g.; Joseph Smith, Charles Russell, Herbert Armstrong, John Thomas, Ellen White, L Ron Hubbard, Jim Jones Vernon Howell.

 

[Steve Petersen]

So you think Jesus believed and taught false pagan beliefs, leading people astray?

He taught what his culture believed. What don't you get? It doesn't make him a deceiver. He would only be deceiving people if he knew that the lake of fire was from paganism.

 

[Der Alte]

Nope. There is no such thing as a prophet, that is, there is no evidence that anyone has ever predicted the future accurately anywhere in the world throughout history.
If you decide you want to post some proofs from the Bible, you need to show evidence that those prophecies were written BEFORE the events. That will be a problem because you won't find extant manuscripts of those prophecies that predate the events they predict.

So what is your opinion of the Bible and Jesus? Is the Bible the word of God? Is Jesus the Son of God? I'm not interested in talking to atheists, agnostics and skeptics?