Why an eternal hell?

[Kormagh]

You seem to be reading more into those verses than is actually there. Nothing in there about eternal torment.

Remember, the debate it's not about whether hell exists, but about what happens to people condemned to it.

What would you call eternity in the lake of fire? I call it torment.

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

 

[Timothew]

What would you call eternity in the lake of fire? I call it torment.

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

John of Patmos called it the Second Death. Death is the condition of not being alive.

 

[dies-l]

What would you call eternity in the lake of fire? I call it torment.

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

If I'm dead while in said lake, I'd call it being dead. And since the Bible calls it death, I will go with that. One need be alive to be tormented, and one who is dead is by definition not alive.

 

[Kormagh]

If I'm dead while in said lake, I'd call it being dead. And since the Bible calls it death, I will go with that. One need be alive to be tormented, and one who is dead is by definition not alive.

Unbelievable!

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

 

[dies-l]

Unbelievable!

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

Believing scripture instead of tradition is unbelievable? I suppose, but there are a few of us who still try.

 

[Kormagh]

Believing scripture instead of tradition is unbelievable? I suppose, but there are a few of us who still try.

Unbelievable that people take scripture in such a wooden literal sense instead of how it is intended and come up with such illogical conclusions that don't make any sense when taken with scripture as whole.
I wasn't using tradition, I was using scripture.
You interpret the doctrine of hell like some people interpret the doctrine of the trinity- the word trinity isn't in scripture, therefore it doesn't exist.
Unbelievable!

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

 

[dies-l]

Unbelievable that people take scripture in such a wooden literal sense instead of how it is intended and come up with such illogical conclusions that don't make any sense when taken with scripture as whole.
I wasn't using tradition, I was using scripture.
You interpret the doctrine of hell like some people interpret the doctrine of the trinity- the word trinity isn't in scripture, therefore it doesn't exist.
Unbelievable!

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

So believing what Scripture says instead of what I want it to say is illogical? The conclusions that Scripture less to on the topic are more consistent with logic and common sense than the traditions that you cling to.

 

[Kormagh]

So believing what Scripture says instead of what I want it to say is illogical? The conclusions that Scripture less to on the topic are more consistent with logic and common sense than the traditions that you cling to.

I don't quite understand what that means. I thought you were wanting scripture to say what it literally says and forming conclusions from that (wooden literal sense) instead of reading scripture in the sense it was intended (exegetical).
What traditions do you believe I am holding to?

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

 

[dies-l]

I don't quite understand what that means. I thought you were wanting scripture to say what it literally says and forming conclusions from that (wooden literal sense) instead of reading scripture in the sense it was intended (exegetical).
What traditions do you believe I am holding to?

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

I am basing my conclusions on what Scripture seems to be saying. Generally, the best interpretation is the one that flows most logically from the text. In this case that would be the "wooden literal sense". The "eternal torment" would never be gleaned from the text if not for hundreds of years of manmade traditions that have shaped the Christian understanding of Hell.

 

[Kormagh]

I am basing my conclusions on what Scripture seems to be saying. Generally, the best interpretation is the one that flows most logically from the text. In this case that would be the "wooden literal sense". The "eternal torment" would never be gleaned from the text if not for hundreds of years of manmade traditions that have shaped the Christian understanding of Hell.

So, you believe in annihilationism?

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

 

[createdtoworship]

I sincerely do not understand your point. I have not disagreed with you as to whether hell is eternal. Where I disagree is that I do not believe that any human being will be tormented eternally in hell. Hell may very well endure forever (although Timothew does make a good point about the distinction between a fire than cannot be quenched and a fire that will never go out), but that does not mean that those who are sent there will be eternally conscious or that they will not ultimately be destroyed completely.

If hellfire does exist forever, it does not necessarily follow that (a) the fire is fueled by human beings or (b) that said human beings are conscious. If the humans in hell are destroyed or if their consciousness is taken from them, then there is no eternal torment. I see Scripture as denying the first premise (i.e., teaching that unredeemed humans are ultimately destroyed), but either premise would discontinue the link between your arguments and your conclusion, if you are in fact concluding that hell is a place of eternal conscious torment. If you are not making that argument, then perhaps we do not disagree.

well maybe this discussion is over then, I am unsure how to repeatedly explain basic things to you and yet they go right over your head.

 

[dies-l]

well maybe this discussion is over then, I am unsure how to repeatedly explain basic things to you and yet they go right over your head.

Great deflection!!!

The thing is that I understand what you are trying to say, but it is a fatally flawed argument. What I do have trouble understanding is why you cannot see the lack of any logical nexus between your arguments and your conclusions.

 

[dies-l]

So, you believe in annihilationism?

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

If you must apply a label, that is probably a fairly close approximation. I believe in what I read in Scripture. I had never even heard the term annihilationism until years after I became aware of the proper biblical understanding of Hell.

 

[Kormagh]

If you must apply a label, that is probably a fairly close approximation. I believe in what I read in Scripture. I had never even heard the term annihilationism until years after I became aware of the proper biblical understanding of Hell.

Then we will have to agree to disagree.

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

 

[Timothew]

Then we will have to agree to disagree.

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

Why? What has dies-l said that wasn't true? Do you reject what he says simply because he comes from a different denomination than you come from? Actually, I think he and I come from the same denomination as you, but we've read the bible for what IT says, not for what we want it to say.

 

[Kormagh]

Why? What has dies-l said that wasn't true? Do you reject what he says simply because he comes from a different denomination than you come from? Actually, I think he and I come from the same denomination as you, but we've read the bible for what IT says, not for what we want it to say.

Annihilationism is not an orthodox view of the doctrine of hell, to the best of my knowledge. You are accusing me of isogesis (sp). I have no idea what denomination you all are from because I'm using my smart phone app.
I said we will have to agree to disagree because neither of us will be swayed from what we believe based on our own interpretation of scripture.

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

 

[createdtoworship]

Great deflection!!!

The thing is that I understand what you are trying to say, but it is a fatally flawed argument. What I do have trouble understanding is why you cannot see the lack of any logical nexus between your arguments and your conclusions.

big words don't cover up for bad arguments, nice try.

 

[Timothew]

Annihilationism is not an orthodox view of the doctrine of hell, to the best of my knowledge. You are accusing me of isogesis (sp). I have no idea what denomination you all are from because I'm using my smart phone app.
I said we will have to agree to disagree because neither of us will be swayed from what we believe based on our own interpretation of scripture.

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF

True, annihilationism is not the orthodox view. I'm not accusing you of eisegesis, I just think that you are overly influenced by the traditional view. Read the bible to see if it supports the trad view or not.

Dies-l and I both have a cross symbol indicating "christian" without specifying a particular denomination. I see you have the "book" symbol indicating that you worship God in a Baptist Church. That's why I said you and I are from the same denomination. I worship God in a Baptist Church as well.

 

[Martyrs44]

"Where I disagree is that I do not believe that any human being will be tormented eternally in hell."

Unbelievable!

My very word after posting the scripture that establishes and eternal conscious existence of sinners in hell & the lake of fire and then reading his response.

Wow. No one likes the doctrine of hell fire...but it's undeniably a part of scripture in so many places:

Lu 16:24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

Re 14:10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:

Re 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Mt 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

If a person still does not believe in the doctrine of torment for sinners in hell after reading those verses then they are in deliberate denial.

I appreciated your stand. Stay in there for the Lord.

 

[Kormagh]

a real good sermon on the doctrine of hell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIr7JXoZ110&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Sent from my dumb smart phone using CF