- Aug 21, 2003
- 28,581
- 6,065
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
...
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I didn't inject anything into Jopsephus I quoted from his War of the Jews verbatim. Had you bothered to actually read my post you would know that.Josephus was referred to re the use of a word to prove many ECT advocates wrong in their understanding of it in Mark 9.
===
Der Alter replied: Which you failed to do!
When the idea of endlessness is injected into "unquenchable" just because many ECTers think the word looks like it's saying that, then the person making that claim is wrong. Now if you have some proof that in Mark 9 it must refer to endlessness, based on other considerations, then that is another matter completely.
You rarely comment on what your quotes or links are supposed to show, just "Read this.""Read that.""Go to this link." etc. Here is the pertinent part of my quote from Josephus, highlighted just as it was in the previous post.And as for your Josephus' quote, you didn't comment on what it has to do with the word "unquenchable", also translated as 'not quenched', 'unextinguished' etc.
Der Alter replied: Had you bothered to actually read my post Josephus stated what it had to do with "not quenched", "unextinguished." And no amount of tirades about "biased translations" can refute it.
======
Please do not lecture me about "just an English translation not the original" when you have never quoted the original Greek or a Greek lexicon. And even if you did post the Greek you very likely cannot read it. My previous quote from Josphus was from the same work you referred to, War of the Jews. Here is a quote from Josephus'It doesn't even mention "unquenchable". Also, it's just an English translation, not the original, inspite of any excathedra proclamations to the contrary re its perfection, whether papal Protestant or other. BTW, what are the original words rendered "eternal punishment". Do you have any idea?
Please refrain from quoting 2-3 words from my posts and demanding an answer. Quote what I say in-context, then I will address it. If you have questions about any of my previous posts, go to that post, quote it by using the quote function at the lower right of each post and I will address your questions. That is the correct way to have a discussion.I see the quote also makes reference to "punishments and rewards in Hades". In the book of Revelation the dead get out of Hades. Also you recently quoted a Jewish source that said Hades/Sheol would be destroyed, in which case it is not a place of "eternal punishment", to use the words from your above quote.
More complaints about my posts. When all you do is copy/paste from tentmaker or some other website or post link and tell me to read. When you start explaining your quotes then you might have some grounds to demand that of me.it seems strange to quote something & make bold claims about it and then refuse to explain your point in quoting it, what it has to do with the topic, or how it supports your bold claim. I wonder if anyone else has any idea what your point is.
I didn't inject anything into Jopsephus I quoted from his War of the Jews verbatim. Had you bothered to actually read my post you would know that.
You completely missed the point. My comment was about Mark 9 & "unquenchable", not your Josephus quote which did not even use the word.
You missed my post immediately above yours where Josephus used "unquenchable fire" and said it was "without end." Unlike you I quoted from the primary source, the writings of Josephus, and provided a link to that source.
"Discourse To The Greeks Concerning Hades"
Just is thy judgment; the rejoinder to which will bring a just sentence upon both parties, by giving justly to those that have done well an everlasting fruition; but allotting to the lovers of wicked works eternal punishment. To these belong the unquenchable fire, and that without end, and a certain fiery worm, never dying, and not destroying the body, but continuing its eruption out of the body with never-ceasing grief: neither will sleep give ease to these men, nor will the night afford them comfort; death will not free them from their punishment, nor will the interceding prayers of their kindred profit them; for the just are no longer seen by them, nor are they thought worthy of remembrance.
http://sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/war-5.htm
I saw that while reading your post, though it was not pertinent to my point.
I don't consider a single English translation the primary source but merely an opinion of it. With Bible versions i can compare dozens of translations & easily find the words used in the original.
Extremely significant differences between Josephus' comments in your quote & the passages of Scriptures with the word "unquenchable" are that the latter never once use qualifiers such as "never-ceasing", "without end", etc, that Josephus does.
It would be interesting to see what the original language words are for "without end". "never-ceasing", "eternal punishment", "destroying" etc, & if they are ever used in the Scriptures &, if so, in what context.
Jud_1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Is the fire still burning???
Got a big laugh about this. You didn't say anything about "original language" or "qualifiers" when you quoted "Josephus unquenchable fire temple" in your post #92. When something appears to support you false assumptions/presuppositions you accept it without question but when I quote the same source and it contradicts your doctrine then you start objecting. Lot of hypocrisy going on here.I saw that while reading your post, though it was not pertinent to my point.
I don't consider a single English translation the primary source but merely an opinion of it. With Bible versions i can compare dozens of translations & easily find the words used in the original.
Extremely significant differences between Josephus' comments in your quote & the passages of Scriptures with the word "unquenchable" are that the latter never once use qualifiers such as "never-ceasing", "without end", etc, that Josephus does.
Was it necessary for Josephus to use such qualifiers because there were those, Scripture believing Jews and/or Christians, who held the view that passages where "unquenchable" occurs in Scripture do not support ECT?
It would be interesting to see what the original language words are for "without end". "never-ceasing", "eternal punishment", "destroying" etc, & if they are ever used in the Scriptures &, if so, in what context.
The point is--eternal fire is not burning eternally--it is, however, eternal destruction.
The point is--eternal fire is not burning eternally--it is, however, eternal destruction.
I assume this is addressed to me since it immediately follows my post. I will extend you the same discourtesy and ignore all the out-of-context scriptures you posted....
Now, before you start on the usual the spirit is immortal thing---please state the verse that says that---
This is what God said "way back when."It matters not what men from way back when decided death meant --
Here you are substituting your likes/dislikes, sense of right and wrong, etc. for God's. Was God just when He rained down fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah, burning all the inhabitants, men, women, young, old, children, infants to death? Was God just when He commanded Israel to invade Bashan and kill all the men, women, young, old, children, infants. Deuteronomy 2:34what does God Himself say?--That God will take a 14 year old sinner who has stolen $5.00 and burn him forever, right next to a man that has raped, tortured and murdered 24 children---and neither of whom will ever pay as long as Cain who supposedly has been burning longer than anyone--is ridiculous! God is just and we must look to His character when things seem contradictory. The lost are not given immortality so they can burn forever--0they will be punished according to what they have done and destroyed and there will be no more sin---as long as there are sinners, there is sin---they will be destroyed.
I assume this is addressed to me since it immediately follows my post. I will extend you the same discourtesy and ignore all the out-of-context scriptures you posted.
This is what God said "way back when."
הנפשׁ החטאת היא תמות בן לא־ישׂא בעון האב ואב לא ישׂא בעון הבן צדקת הצדיק עליו תהיה ורשׁעת רשׁע עליו תהיה׃What does God Himself say here? God did not speak English. Someone who understands and reads these languages must translate what they mean. So yes, we do need to know what men said way back when. Not how people today try to reinterpret the words to make them line up with their assumptions/presuppositions.
ἡ δὲ ψυχὴ ἡ ἁμαρτάνουσα ἀποθανεῖται· ὁ δὲ υἱὸς οὐ λήμψεται τὴν ἀδικίαν τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ, οὐδὲ ὁ πατὴρ λήμψεται τὴν ἀδικίαν τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ· δικαιοσύνη δικαίου ἐπ᾿ αὐτὸν ἔσται, καὶ ἀνομία ἀνόμου ἐπ᾿ αὐτὸν ἔσται.
Here you are substituting your likes/dislikes, sense of right and wrong, etc. for God's. Was God just when He rained down fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah, burning all the inhabitants, men, women, young, old, children, infants to death? Was God just when He commanded Israel to invade Bashan and kill all the men, women, young, old, children, infants. Deuteronomy 2:34
.....Three passages which show the wicked dead in hades and sheol moving, speaking etc. Isaiah 14:9-11, Ezekiel 32:21-23, Ezekiel 32:31-32, Luke 16:19-31
Got a big laugh about this. You didn't say anything about "original language" or "qualifiers" when you quoted "Josephus unquenchable fire temple" in your post #92. When something appears to support you false assumptions/presuppositions you accept it without question but when I quote the same source and it contradicts your doctrine then you start objecting. Lot of hypocrisy going on here.
As for "the original language words are for "without end". "never-ceasing", "eternal punishment", "destroying" etc, & if they are ever used in the Scriptures &, if so, in what context." I did this before and you ignored it. I'll be waiting for you to prove that the Jews did not know how to correctly translate their Hebrew scriptures.
If you expect me to thoroughly address your posts then start by extending me the same courtesy.Taken out of context??--support what you say---I can say the same thing about what verses you posted---and did and backed it up with many verses that state the truth. Hebrew and Greek are the original languages--and that is what needs to be studied--God did not speak King James English--
There was no Catholic church with a pope in Rome, with preconceived ideas, in charge until 1075. This is the same copout every false sect uses, "Everybody for 2000 years was wrong until my little group. We're the only ones with the real truth and blame it all on the Catholics."These writings of ST. this or St. that were written by Catholics who were bent on interpreting the word of God according to their preconceived ideas.
That's exactly what I did and you evidently don't have a clue how to read the original languages.It is best to go back to the original language and try to understand what the original meaning was, not what some priest in 300 AD thought.
You totally ignored my post now you want to dictate to me to address everything you said. I don't think so amigo. Why don't you go through that list of verses and explain what you think they prove.You want to dismiss all those verses for your few that you bend to your own preconceived ideas, go right ahead. Take those verses and prove they are not what is clearly stated.
You seem to be hung up on some imaginary 14 year old boy. Guess you have never read Romans 4 and 5. About the middle of each chapter. I think you should be able to figure out what I'm talking about. Why don't you discuss something real? Did God destroy innocent children and infants in Sodom and Gomorrah and in the cities He commanded Israel to attack? A simple yes or no will suffice. I don't need a long dissertation.God is just in whatever He does. Yes, He wiped out villages with women and children and animals-He wiped out a whole world by flood---and? That in no way means He is judging that 14 year old boy to the same forever punishment as Hitler--everlasting torment. Those other verses say no such thing. His very character says no such thing.
Accept it without question? Are you attempting mind reading again? In pointing out the weaknesses of your positions, don't assume for a second that i am not aware of those of my own when the same weaknesses apply.
Only in your dreams has anything I said went down in flames. This is your usual copout when you are unable to address my posts. My post did exactly what you asked for. I showed you how Hebrew speaking Jewish scholars translated Olam in the LXX, "aionion," and the 1917 JPS English translation, "for ever and ever." And I am quite sure that Hebrew speaking Jewish scholars know more about Hebrew than anonymous people on a forum who couldn't locate a Hebrew verb or parse a Greek verb if their life depended on it.All i'm seeing here is deflection onto another topic, already addressed BTW, when your position goes down in flames & you have no retort on the original subject. It's the equivalent of me posting the following now: