Why an eternal hell? (2)

[Armistead14]

This is a pretty big thread...perhaps it's going to run eternally!

It's circular now, that's when I drop out.

But I enjoyed debating with you, you have my respect forever. I may add something later, but this moving will also take forever. It has caused some stress between my wife and I, good thing long ago she said she would love me forever. Now if I could find my son, he was supposed to be cleaning the back yard, he said it would take him forever, but I can't find him, when I do, there will be some torture involved for him.

 

[dies-l]

That is because the over-arching theme of the bible is faith, grace, hope and love. God is looking for us to come to salvation, not hell, therefore He mentions it only briefly.

May God Richly Bless you!

Still, you'd think that with something that important, he would say something along the lines of "if you don't accept salvation through my Son Jesus as Lord and Savior, you will be tormented for all eternity in Hell" and that the message would be conveyed clearly and unequivocally. The fact is that that doctrine is pieced together using several seemingly unrelated Scriptures that never actually say that nonbelievers face eternal torment. Regardless of how one might feel about a loving God imposing such a punishment for sin and disbelief, can you really believe that a loving God would do so without providing any unequivocal warning about it? I sure don't think so, especially where the passages that are clear and unequivocal speak of death, destruction, and not inheriting eternal life (which would seem to suggest against eternal torment).

 

[dies-l]

It's circular now, that's when I drop out.

Perhaps, I should take the same cue.

 

[Blessedj01]

It's circular now, that's when I drop out.

But I enjoyed debating with you, you have my respect forever. I may add something later, but this moving will also take forever. It has caused some stress between my wife and I, good thing long ago she said she would love me forever. Now if I could find my son, he was supposed to be cleaning the back yard, he said it would take him forever, but I can't find him, when I do, there will be some torture involved for him.

LOL...I could laugh forever (and a day).

 

[holo]

Ok, Jesus is part of the trinity of God right? Which means His sacrifice would therefore have paid an infinite price. He had to become flesh to pay that price, but He was always infinite. He took the wrath of God, and buried it in the grave for those who will follow Him.

I fail to see how it follows that because God is infinite, sin against him must also be infinite. I don't think the bible says that either. It seems to contradict what is said in the bible about scapegoats and the sacrifice of Christ. Suppose you're right that, for some reason, God's infinity requires that he punishes a sin infinitely - how does that fit in with animal sacrifices or God simply forgiving people? He has forgiven people a lot, is there a particular reason there are certain sins, or certain people, he can't forgive?

 

[holo]

Yes, an absence of life with God. Death in the spiritual sense does not equal death in the physical sense.

May God Richly Bless you!

True, but that presupposes that the soul can't die to begin with.

 

[holo]

Being in in anguish under fair judgment forever (which is the only sense that there could be agreement of a meaning of being punished infinitely) is not to say they are punished infintely more than is deserved, that is using words to argue against a position not being posted, a straw man argument.

Unless you sin for an eternity, it's not fair to be punished for eternity.

It is unending according to what is said in the Bible, even by Christ.

I think we can at least agree that it's not unreasonable to interpret the bible both ways regarding that, especially considering the imprecise translation of aion. What statement from Jesus did you have in mind?

Perfect justice with the goodness of God comes with this as fair judgment

But it isn't fair judgment. It's not perfect justice. It's not justice in any way. It's brutal, cruel, doesn't fit the crime. It's something the devil would do.

All sin must be payed for according to true justice.

Not sure about that. The bible says God simply forgives people, too.

I don't think God is subject to some sort of cosmic law that demands he must punish sin, and certainly not a law that forces him to torment his own creation endlessly.

 

[holo]

It's circular now, that's when I drop out.

But I enjoyed debating with you, you have my respect forever. I may add something later, but this moving will also take forever. It has caused some stress between my wife and I, good thing long ago she said she would love me forever. Now if I could find my son, he was supposed to be cleaning the back yard, he said it would take him forever, but I can't find him, when I do, there will be some torture involved for him.

 

[Metal Minister]

It's circular now, that's when I drop out.

But I enjoyed debating with you, you have my respect forever. I may add something later, but this moving will also take forever. It has caused some stress between my wife and I, good thing long ago she said she would love me forever. Now if I could find my son, he was supposed to be cleaning the back yard, he said it would take him forever, but I can't find him, when I do, there will be some torture involved for him.

Lol, well played sir.

May God Richly Bless you!

 

[Metal Minister]

I fail to see how it follows that because God is infinite, sin against him must also be infinite. I don't think the bible says that either. It seems to contradict what is said in the bible about scapegoats and the sacrifice of Christ. Suppose you're right that, for some reason, God's infinity requires that he punishes a sin infinitely - how does that fit in with animal sacrifices or God simply forgiving people? He has forgiven people a lot, is there a particular reason there are certain sins, or certain people, he can't forgive?

Ah, but with that single blood sacrifice, it wiped away that one sin that one time. The scapegoat, was a stand in for what Christ would do later. One sacrifice for all. The problem we have is the minimizing of sin. Literally our sin makes us guilty of the murder of Jesus, the infinite Son of God. Without our sin, He does not need to die. I would love to continue our discussion, but I'm currently trying to help a young woman in a very bad position, and it will require a lot of my attention. If this thread is still active when I get back, I will gladly resume our talk. Until then may God keep you safe!

May God Richly Bless you!

 

[Blessedj01]

God's wrath is another thing people minimize. I know it's scary, but God's wrath will last for an infinite time against those that are his enemies. For this reason we actually should be afraid of God because that is the beginning of wisdom. When we understand what he actually wants to spare us from, we'll better understand how much He loves us. If our sin is so grave - how can anyone forgive it? Only God has that kind of love.

But don't be fooled into thinking he doesn't have that kind of wrath either.

 

[holo]

I know it's scary, but God's wrath will last for an infinite time against those that are his enemies.

Why?

Does the bible actually say that?

When we understand what he actually wants to spare us from

And what he wants to spare us from is, in reality and effect, Himself... :/

God compares himself to a parent. I try to picture my daughter doing something bad, and me - for some reason - being forced to punish her for it. But, it's not too important that I punish the one who did something wrong, what really matters is that someone, somewhere, is punished. So I punish, say, the dog, in her stead. After having tortured the dog to death because my daugther stole a candy bar, I offer her to accept or reject my offer of grace. If she accepts, hooray. If she doesn't, I have no choice but torture her for ever and ever.

That should make her understand how much I love her.

 

[FredVB]

Originally Posted by Fred V B

Being in in anguish under fair judgment forever (which is the only sense that there could be agreement of a meaning of being punished infinitely) is not to say they are punished infintely more than is deserved, that is using words to argue against a position not being posted, a straw man argument.
​

Unless you sin for an eternity, it's not fair to be punished for eternity.

Sin is never fully paid for by what suffering there is by our fallen limited selves. Only Christ could pay for it, and it for us, if we do not reject him. Whatever it is for those going into eternity without Christ will be fair, that is foundational.

Originally Posted by Fred V B

It is unending according to what is said in the Bible, even by Christ.
​

I think we can at least agree that it's not unreasonable to interpret the bible both ways regarding that, especially considering the imprecise translation of aion. What statement from Jesus did you have in mind?

Matthew 25.

Originally Posted by Fred V B

Perfect justice with the goodness of God comes with this as fair judgment
​

But it isn't fair judgment. It's not perfect justice. It's not justice in any way. It's brutal, cruel, doesn't fit the crime. It's something the devil would do..

That is according to your words, but I can read the Bible without that as a basis.

Originally Posted by Fred V B

All sin must be payed for according to true justice.
​

God cannot look on any sin, this means he will necessarily deal with it.

 

[createdtoworship]

I have been saying that for at least the last 50 pages of this thread. The implication that you are making here is just plain dishonest.



Once again, consider the following example: "If you kill someone, you will go to prison, where you will stay until you die" followed a few sentences later by "If you break into someone's home and steal their belongings, you will go to prison." By your reasoning, the above statements would mean that the penalty for burglary is the same as the penalty for murder: life in prison. But, that is not a reasonable inference from the above sentences. In fact, the difference between those two sentences would suggest that the most reasonable inference is that there is distinction between the penalty for murder and the penalty for burglary.

Now, lets' turn to Revelation 20:

10 And the devil, who deceived them,(AE) was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur,(AF) where the beast(AG) and the false prophet(AH) had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.(AI)

So, the Bible says that the punishment set aside for the devil, the beast, and the false prophet is (a) to be thrown into the lake of burning sulfur and (b) to be tormented day and night forever and ever.

15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life(AX) was thrown into the lake of fire.


And, the punishment set aside for those who names are not found written in the book of life is being thrown into the lake of fire.

This is not just a matter of the two passages "read differently." This is a material difference that shows that the two passages point to two different types of punishments. Their proximity, combined with their material differences, emphasizes that fact, and in no way diminishes it.

It would be a very bizarre rule of textual interpretation to say that to two passages, written in very similar language and in close proximity to each, but with a pronounced a very material omission in the second of the two passages, must mean exactly the same thing the material omission notwithstanding. When two passages read very similarly, but where one of the passages is different in some material way, the proper rule of textual interpretation would lead a reasonable person to believe that the omission was intentional and points to a material difference in meaning.

I fail to see your line of logic. Both destinations are the lake of fire. There is no implications of anyone ever leaving the lake of fire. This is your wishful thinking again. And I am pleased by your strawman arguments of saying I am dishonest. Just more ammunition against you. Your arguments are emotionally based and not based on logic. Beyond all reason you hope that God would never torment eternally, and therefore every verse in the Bible follows suit to your view. But this is part of the deception the Bible says will follow the last days.

 

[dies-l]

I fail to see your line of logic.

I have been as clear as I possibly can be, even going to the extent of applying the same interpretative principles to another analogous example (which I can't help noticing that you have consistently ignored). I don't know how else to explain such a basic principle of textual interpretation to you.

Both destinations are the lake of fire.

That is not technically correct. Verse 10 speaks of "the lake of burning sulfur", "the lake of fire and brimstone", or "the lake of fire and sulfur", depending on your translation (That was NIV, NASB, and ESV, for your edification). But, that is missing the point.

Even if they did say the exact same thing, the omission of "they will be tormented day and night forever and ever" (ESV) in verse 15 indicates a very different fate. Either that or John and the Holy Spirit were just sloppy in their writing. I would go with the former conclusion rather than the latter.

There is no implications of anyone ever leaving the lake of fire. This is your wishful thinking again.

I never said anything of the sort. I believe in annihilation, not universalism. This is yet another example of that dishonest argumentation that you are using. (By the way, this is what we call a strawman -- see my next comment).

And I am pleased by your strawman arguments of saying I am dishonest.

It would appear from that statement that you are confused as to the definition of a straw man. A strawman is where person A states person B's opinion in a deliberately dishonest manner so that person A can appear to disprove person B's opinion, while in reality they are only disproving a false misstatement of it. For someone who is so adept at using this technique, I am surprised that you don't know better what it is.

Just more ammunition against you.

I didn't realize that we were at war. No wonder you choose to ignore anything I say and anything the Bible says that doesn't suit your fancy. You are not interested in learning more about biblical exegesis or about Truth; your concern is for tearing down your brothers and sisters in Christ.

Your arguments are emotionally based and not based on logic.

Strange. I seem to recall being falsely accused of saying that very thing about another poster earlier on in this discussion, even after I apologized for the offense and deleted the offensive post. This after I merely made what I thought was a self-evident observation (albeit worded in a careless way) that one's life experiences necessarily shape one's view of God. I also seem to recall that you were the one who falsely accused me. Very interesting!

And, no, my arguments are not emotionally based. You might disagree with them, and I will even give you the benefit of the doubt that you have a logical reason to do so, but after the nonsense that you pulled earlier in this thread, I wouldn't go there if I were you.

Beyond all reason you hope that God would never torment eternally

Personally, I don't have a horse in the race. I am a follower of Christ, and therefore my outcome is the same regardless. I am just interested in what Scripture has to say. And, when I share Jesus with my unsaved friends and family, I don't want to be caught making up pretend horror stories to try to coerce them into faith. That type of evangelism is never effective in making fully devoted followers of Jesus Christ.

And, I am not going to be baited into returning the personal attacks in kind. Our Lord has taught us better than that.

and therefore every verse in the Bible follows suit to your view.

Here's another possibility that you see quite unwilling to even consider: that my view is what it is because of what I read in Scripture, not the other way around. Like you said earlier, for you this is about collecting "ammunition against" those who disagree with you. So, it doesn't surprise me that you think of Scripture as a tool to be used at your leisure to show off your mighty intellect and to win petty arguments. I don't see you as an enemy to be defeated, but rather a brother in Christ to teach and to learn from. I prefer to see Scripture as a source of authoritative truth, and I will be the first to admit that when I meed our Lord face to face, I will learn that, in my human imperfection, I misunderstood some of it. Can you admit the same for yourself?

 

[tankerG]

God's wrath is another thing people minimize. I know it's scary, but God's wrath will last for an infinite time against those that are his enemies. For this reason we actually should be afraid of God because that is the beginning of wisdom. When we understand what he actually wants to spare us from, we'll better understand how much He loves us. If our sin is so grave - how can anyone forgive it? Only God has that kind of love.

But don't be fooled into thinking he doesn't have that kind of wrath either.

Thanks for posting this! I just realized how much I've been minimizing God's wrath.

 

[createdtoworship]

That is not technically correct. Verse 10 speaks of "the lake of burning sulfur", "the lake of fire and brimstone", or "the lake of fire and sulfur", depending on your translation (That was NIV, NASB, and ESV, for your edification). But, that is missing the point.

Even if they did say the exact same thing, the omission of "they will be tormented day and night forever and ever" (ESV) in verse 15 indicates a very different fate. Either that or John and the Holy Spirit were just sloppy in their writing. I would go with the former conclusion rather than the latter.

first you seem to think that a lake burning with sulfur is different than a lake burning with fire. Just because one verse suggests more detail does not mean they are different lakes!

secondly,
you seem to think me and dollars bill are purposefully lying to deceive. And this is simply not true. Even if we are wrong, we are not lying. We believe what we say to be in the Bible and what the Bible says. I have never accused you of lying. Yet you accuse us of deceiving. And specifically of omitting text from the Bible and deceiving as a result.

It would be a very bizarre rule of textual interpretation to say that to two passages, written in very similar language and in close proximity to each, but with a pronounced a very material omission in the second of the two passages, must mean exactly the same thing the material omission notwithstanding. When two passages read very similarly, but where one of the passages is different in some material way, the proper rule of textual interpretation would lead a reasonable person to believe that the omission was intentional and points to a material difference in meaning.

again I have purposefully not tried to deceive and am reading the Bible truthfully, this is a strawman. You however are trying to say that there are two lakes of fire, (if I understand your argument) and this is simply not the correct viewpoint. For one these are mentioned within five verses of each other, do you think God would want us to be confused about where the wicked will spend eternity. The plain meaning makes sense, so seek no other sense. This is a basic law of hermeneutics.

you can, with a clean conscience, accuse me of making a weak argument?

you can't help but accuse can you?

Of course I have a clean conscience regarding my arguments, you have provided no logical support for your view. You try to fog up your arguments with big words and fancy writing, but you really have no support at all. I am not accusing you of a bad conscience however, this is where we are much different.

 

[dies-l]

first you seem to think that a lake burning with sulfur is different than a lake burning with fire. Just because one verse suggests more detail does not mean they are different lakes!

secondly,
you seem to think me and dollars bill are purposefully lying to deceive. And this is simply not true. Even if we are wrong, we are not lying. We believe what we say to be in the Bible and what the Bible says. I have never accused you of lying. Yet you accuse us of deceiving. And specifically of omitting text from the Bible and deceiving as a result.



again I have purposefully not tried to deceive and am reading the Bible truthfully, this is a strawman. You however are trying to say that there are two lakes of fire, (if I understand your argument) and this is simply not the correct viewpoint. For one these are mentioned within five verses of each other, do you think God would want us to be confused about where the wicked will spend eternity. The plain meaning makes sense, so seek no other sense. This is a basic law of hermeneutics.



you can't help but accuse can you?

Of course I have a clean conscience regarding my arguments, you have provided no logical support for your view. You try to fog up your arguments with big words and fancy writing, but you really have no support at all. I am not accusing you of a bad conscience however, this is where we are much different.

What's with the personal attacks, bro? Do you really think that your conduct on this thread has been honoring to our Lord? When I crossed the line, I sucked it up, apologized, and deleted the offending posts. And, I was still falsely accused by you of doing the very thing that you are brazenly doing here.

You've now openly admitted that your purpose in this thread is to collect "ammunition against" me. Is that what Jesus calls you to -- to collect ammunition against people who disagree with you? To twist and contort what they say until they point out how utterly dishonest your responses are, and then to turn around and act all surprised at being accused of behaving dishonestly? To falsely accuse other posters of mistreating others and then turn around and do to them the very thing that you falsely accused them of? If you believe that your Lord would tolerate such an approach, then you have bigger issues to deal with in your spiritual walk than the whole ET/Annihilation debate.

Like I said, when I was wrong, I admitted, I apologized, and I deleted the posts that caused the offense, including the parts of them that were not at all off base. Are you going to man up and do the same? Or is this conversation over?

Personally, I think that if you could stay civil, make an honest attempt to understand the positions of those who disagree with you, and abstain from personal attacks and false allegations, this could be a very interesting discussion. But, until then, it's really not a God honoring endeavor.

FTR, I am unsubscribing to this thread. If you're willing to man up and apologize for your last couple posts, PM me.

 

[holo]

Sin is never fully paid for by what suffering there is by our fallen limited selves.

How is that? Why can't the offender pay the full consequences for his own actions? Is it impossible to punish you enough?

Only Christ could pay for it, and it for us, if we do not reject him.

This may be for another thread, but I'm not so sure about the traditional view that the cross was merely a way for God to punish all the sin in the world. There are many records in the bible of God simply forgiving transgressors. But again, another topic.

Whatever it is for those going into eternity without Christ will be fair, that is foundational.

On that we agree, and God's fair judgment is the point from which I read all other bible verses.

It is unending according to what is said in the Bible, even by Christ.

Matthew 25.

I think Armistead14 has provided some good insights into that, so I'll quote him. I'm not educated enough to determine exactly how correct he is, but it makes sense. The highlights are mine:

Aion is an adjective and biblically can mean either nonending or for a period of time, adjectives agree with the nouns they modify. Strong's give the typical english version. Still in slang we use the word "aion" correctly, like when my son says it will take him forever to clean his room.

Aion comes from the the Hebrew word olam, which usually meant enduring or in the "far distance." This word is frequently translated as eternal in the english language as non ending time, but in Hebrew it simply meant "beyond the horizon" a very distant time.

[SNIP]

Matthew 25:46. " that the word "eternal" punishment might mean "temporary" then by that logic "eternal life" would mean the same thing." implying aion must mean the same thing, that is incorrect, it's meaning again comes from the noun it modifies.The greek word for punishment is the key, which is " kolassin" defined more as to prune a tree to insure more growth or to correct. The greeks had a strong word for punishment "timoria" not used here or other places we want to infer God's torture. If the greek had a need to promote torture, certainly they would've use "timoria." On the other hand the noun 'life' is not a noun of action, but a noun expressing a state. Thus the life itself is eternal, life is opposite of death.

God cannot look on any sin, this means he will necessarily deal with it.

Maybe, but I don't see why eternal suffering for the sinner must be the only possible way to do it.

 

[dollarsbill]

I fail to see how it follows that because God is infinite, sin against him must also be infinite.

Revelation 22:11 (NASB)
11 "Let the one who does wrong, still do wrong; and the one who is filthy, still be filthy;"