Annihilationism

[Der Alte]

What are you saying is untrue? Are you claiming that the chaff is NOT burnt up? I never said that the chaff is a separate plant.

Please do not make false claims that what I am saying is not true, deliberate or otherwise. You know much better than that.

Inedible chaff, which is an inherent part of each individual wheat grain, being burned up while the edible wheat grain, from the same plant, is stored, does not equate to one person going to paradise and another distinct person not going to paradise.
..<Staff Edit>

The traditionalists actually do claim that there is eternal conscious torment in hell. It is disingenuous of you to accuse me of lying when I point out that "Conscious" people are "alive". Honestly, I believe you would say anything to defend your view, regardless of whether you think it is accurate.

.<Staff Edit>

Thirdly, Romans 6:23 does in fact state what the wages of sin is, and it is death. It also says that the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. This positively proves that the wages of sin is NOT eternal conscious torment in hell.
Throughout the Bible, the message is clear that there will be a resurrection, there will be a judgment and there will be eternal life for believers and a second death for the wicked. I don't care if you don't believe that. The Bible is clear, and you can either accept it or reject it.

How many times in this thread alone have I addressed Romans 6:23 where I also quote Romans 3:23 and Hebrews 9:27? How many times have I made this argument specifically to you "Rom 6:23 does say that the wages of sin is death, Rom 3:23 says "all have sinned and come short of the glory of God" and Heb 9:27 says, "it is appointed unto man once to die after that the judgment?" These two vss., Rom 3:23 and Heb 9:27, fulfill Rom 6:23. But these verses do not say that the wages of sin is death, resurrection, judgment then a second death?
.....The lake of fire [LOF] is called the second death twice in Revelation but nowhere in the entire book does it say anyone/anything is cast into the LOF then they/it dies. In fact, the devil, the beast and the false prophet are cast into the LOF but they don't die, they are tormented day and night for ever and ever. Therefore being cast into the LOF is not synonymous with death.
.....Also death and hell are cast into the LOF. Death is the point in time end of life it has no physical properties and cannot be cast anywhere but neither can or have died a first death so they cannot die a second death.

 

[hedrick]

.<Staff Edit>

Now let’s look at this a bit more

.....The second deliberate, blatant falsehood you claim that traditionalists say the wages of sin is eternal life in hell. I have never read where anyone ever said anything like that. I know you have repeatedly accused me of saying Romans 6:23 does not say "the wages of sin is death." This despite the fact that I have told you numerous times that the wages of sin is, in fact, death but Romans 3:23 says "all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;" and Hebrews 9:27 "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:" Your proof text in context all, 100%, of mankind has sinned and all, 100%, of mankind has died or will die and will face judgment. The verses fulfill your proof text Rom 6:23.
.....What your proof text does not say is the wages of sin is death, resurrection, judgment then a second death.

This seems like a questionable exegesis. If the death of everyone, repentant or not, is the death referred to in Rom 6:23, then just where does any extra punishment come from, whether torment or destruction?

Rom 6:20-23 is contrasting Christians with others. The wages of sin are death but for Christians we have eternal life. While it’s logically possible that eternal life is in addition to death, it doesn’t seem rhetorically possible, i.e. it doesn’t fit with the kind of argument Paul is making. It would be extremely odd for him to contrast sinners and Christians, giving the full results for Christians, but omitting the most horrifying result for sinners. Further, in vs 21, “end” (telos) suggests final result, at least according to Dunn’s commentary and my understanding of the definition.

When juxtaposed with Rom 5:12 ff this would seem to imply that the fall resulted only in physical death, which I think is a pretty weird view for traditional theology (though it’s a possibility I might be willing to explore in a different discussion).

I would think the better interpretation for you would be that “death” is being used non-literally, and includes eternal torment. There’s no way any attempt to harmonize all the passages can avoid taking some passages non-literally.

 

[Der Alte]

These are regarded as miracles. Surely God can preserve people from destruction in a fire. But are you seriously suggesting that God intentionally protects people from what would normally happen just so they can suffer more?

I am seriously suggesting that "if the plain sense, of scripture, makes good sense it is nonsense to seek another sense." Have you read my discussion of the Jewish belief in hell which Jesus did not contradict and which I have posted 4 times in this thread? [link]

A better argument would be that the first in those two stories are literal and deal with bodies, whereas the fires in the Revelation and symbolic and are dealing with spiritual beings. Whether this argument is convincing is another case.

All of the ECF who quoted/referred to the account of Lazarus and the rich man considered it to be literal.

 

[hedrick]

I am seriously suggesting that "if the plain sense, of scripture, makes good sense it is nonsense to seek another sense." Have you read my discussion of the Jewish belief in hell which Jesus did not contradict and which I have posted 4 times in this thread? [link]



All of the ECF who quoted/referred to the account of Lazarus and the rich man considered it to be literal.

But your understanding of the plain sense does not make sense. And your reference to the article in the Jewish encyclopedia omits the later portion of the article, which says that Gehenna doesn't last forever for most people.

 

[hedrick]

I have to say that the results of this discussion have tended to increase my confidence in some kind of destruction, whether complete annihilation or the kind of semi-destruction that NT Wright suggested. The arguments against it seem to be based on a supposedly literal reading of a large number of passages, that is not sufficiently self-aware of just what kinds of exegetical compromises are being made.

I don't want to accuse anyone of dishonesty, because I'm sure everyone is sincere in their positions. But there's another problem that results from failing to face up to the limitations of one's argument.

 

[Der Alte]

It is not irrelevant. The fact that God protects his people even in the flames is not proof that God torments his enemies in flames.

Didn't say it was. It is proof that not everything subjected to fire burns up.

Even if you can show some flames that do not destroy, this does not prove that flames never destroy.

Didn't say it did. But conversely it is proof that flames do not always destroy.

God is capable of making a rock so large that even he can't lift it. That doesn't mean that he is going to.

Irrelevant digression. I never stated nor implied anything like this. "Eternal punishment" is a fairly clear statement for something worse than death.

The Bible says that the wicked will perish, the wicked will be destroyed, and the wicked will be no more. Should I ignore all of that, just because Shadrach and his friends survived the furnace?

No not because of Shadrach and friends but because of the words of Jesus

• "Eternal punishment, Mt 25:46"
• "the fire of hell where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die, Mark 9:43-48" and
• "cast into a fiery furnace where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth,” Matthew 13:42, Matthew 13:50
• “better for him [a person who offends a little one] that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Mt 18:6
• “it had been good for him [the one who betrays Jesus] if he had not been born.” Mat 26:24​

These teachings reaffirmed and sanctioned the existing Jewish view of eternal hell. In Matthew 18:6, Matthew 26:24, see above, Jesus teaches that there is a fate worse than death or nonexistence.

I haven't ignored it. I've told you time and time again to look at the context, but time and time again you refuse to.

Saying "look at the context" is meaningless without saying how the "context" mitigates against one interpretation in favor of another interpretation

Matthew 10:28 PEOPLE can't kill the soul, GOD CAN.

Answered many times! What God created He most certainly can destroy but this proof text does not say that God has or will destroy any soul in hell.

John 3:16 (Same word, different form) Either people have eternal life or they perish. Perish is the opposite of having eternal life. The CONTEXT shows that apollumi means destroy. The CONTEXT shows that apoletai means perish.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish [ἀπόληται/apolitai], but have everlasting life. ​

ἀπόληται/apolitai is the second aorist, middle, subjunctive of ἀπόλλυμι/apollumi. And I have already addressed apollumi more than once. 83% of the occurrences in the NT do not mean the destruction which occurs at the final judgment. It can mean simply death, such as drowning, killed by snakes, dying by the sword, dying of hunger, etc.

 

[Der Alte]

But your understanding of the plain sense does not make sense.

How so? That a posted interpretation contradicts ones assumptions/presuppositions does not mean it doesn't make sense.

And your reference to the article in the Jewish encyclopedia omits the later portion of the article, which says that Gehenna doesn't last forever for most people.

That view has been argued here many times by others. I saw no need to repeat it. My point is that many Jews in Jesus' audience believed in hell. What Jesus taught about hell did not contradict the Jewish belief but reinforced it. If the final fate of the unrepentant is annihilation why did Jesus not make that clear to His Jewish audience? The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, they knew that everyone dies old, young, rich, poor and for them death was eternal, no resurrection. When Jesus taught about "eternal punishment,""hell where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched" etc. they would have understood is as something worse than mere death.
.....In two verses Jesus taught about a fate worse than death.
• “better for him [a person who offends a little one] that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Matthew 18:6
• “it had been good for him [the one who betrays Jesus] if he had not been born.” Matthew 26:24

 

[Luke17:37]

Surely I do not need to repeat what has been posted before about Rev 20, Rev 14 and Luke 16. Do I?
Are you prepared to overturn the rest of scripture based on one or two verses from the Apocalypse?
If you read those verses, they don't even say that it is humans who are tormented, or that the torment lasts forever. (The SMOKE rises forever, not the torment)

The parable in Luke isn't even talking about the final state of the unrepentant. It is disheartening to have to repeat the same answers to the same objections over and over. Couldn't you have read through the thread and seen that your objections have already been answered? The rich man's brothers are still alive. How could this parable be talking about the final state of the unrepentant, if some people are still alive at the time?

I read enough of it. Mostly it's people agreeing with you. You don't have to reply but I don't agree with you. And there's a reason why your thread is in Controversial Christianity.

In the parable, the rich man dying before his brothers is irrelevant. His request that someone come back from the dead to warn them not to come to this place of torment was rebuffed. He was told that if they won't listen to Moses and the prophets, they won't listen even if someone comes back from the dead. After that, Jesus came back from the dead (and He and his disciples raised the dead) but many still did not believe.

And does your theology REALLY require eternal torment, followed by resurrection and a second round of eternal torment? And do you REALLY want to take the parable literally? The Rich Man's crime was having a lot of money. How much money do you have? You had better give it all away or you risk burning alive in hell without any water for your tongue.

Come on now, you know having a lot of money isn't a sin. But it contrasts how some people can appear to be successful while being hell-bound, and others can be failures in the world's eyes but be in God's kingdom.

The point is that once a person dies, if they are outside of Christ, they will be in a place of torment with no hope of getting relief. The rich man went to Hades, and the people in Hades are resurrected to be judged and thrown into the Lake of Fire after the millennium. It doesn't make any sense that the Lake of Fire will incinerate people (ending their pain) when the agony in Hades (or Sheol) before the judgment is torturous and continuous. Yes, I take what Jesus said about Hades literally.

I'm sorry, but the Bible simply does not say what you are claiming. Go to the Bible and search. Find me even ONE verse that says "Every child who is born alive is born spiritually dead."
Are you prepared to state that infants will also burn alive in hell forever? That is the implication, since you claim that they are born spiritually dead.

No, I don't believe infants who die will be in hell; God alone knows when a person is old enough to be accountable for his or her rejection of the gospel. But even little children can seek God and respond to the gospel (e.g., 3-year-olds), and also children can be enemies of God. It may depend on the child and what he or she has been exposed to, but we are to share the gospel with anyone, even children.

We are all born with a sin nature (Psalms 51:5, Psalms 58:3, Romans 5:12).

We also start out spiritually dead.

Ephesians 2:4-7
4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.

John 3:18
18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

This is not true. It is urgent to share the gospel, since those who perish without the gospel will not have eternal life.

It depends how you look at it. Eternal life with the Lord is going to be great. But if you think people will be burned up and cease to exist, that's not nearly as bad as being burned and continuing to exist.

This is not true, as I consider DESTRUCTION to be a very BAD thing.
Do you consider eternal life with Christ such a worthless thing that unless you are threatened with eternal torture you would fall away? As much as you Traditionalists argue for it, being completely destroyed IS NOT A GOOD THING.
Do you honestly expect me to believe that being destroyed is just as good as having eternal life?

No, eternal life with Christ is not such a worthless thing. I agree that being completely destroyed isn't a good thing but it has an end whereas the Bible depicts unending pain and grief for those who die apart from Christ. God prepared the Lake of Fire for Satan and his angels.

Notice what these demons said to Jesus:

Matthew 8:28-29
28 When He had come to the other side, to the country of the Gergesenes, there met Him two demon-possessed men, coming out of the tombs, exceedingly fierce, so that no one could pass that way. 29 And suddenly they cried out, saying, “What have we to do with You, Jesus, You Son of God? Have You come here to torment us before the time?”

They know they are going to be tormented. And Jesus says men will go there too, if they continue in their rejection of Him.

It doesn't look like you are open to changing your mind. I won't either. Goodbye.

 

[Luke17:37]

No, that's torment, not torture. Torture relates only to the physical.

That's splitting hairs. In the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, the rich man, having already died, is in agony in a fire and he wishes for a drop of water to slightly ease his profound discomfort. The dead are raised, either to the resurrection of life (with Christ) or the resurrection of condemnation. Those of us who are in Christ will get immortal bodies (1 Cor 15). Jesus had an immortal physical body. And many verses suggest that the wicked will feel physical pain after they die physically on this earth.

 

[ewq1938]

All human souls are immortal.

Prove that with scripture please.

Mark 9:47-49
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell, 48 where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched. 49 For every one will be salted with fire. rsv

The worm and fire is immortal. It does not say the wicked person is immortal.


​

The second death is the lake of fire.

Revelation 20:14
Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire; 15 and if any one’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. rsv
​

Spiritual life and spiritual death. Spiritual death is the loss of eternal life with God.

No it isn't nor did the wicked ever have eternal life in order to lose it. There are only two options. You get eternal life or you get eternal death by being destroyed. There is no third group who is unsaved yet lives forever.

Eternal life with God or eternal death with Satan. Both states are forever.

Except you redefine death into a non-death immortal life which is nonsensical.

Jesus said the rich man was being tormented by a flame in Hades. We know it is hell because Jesus said that he could never leave there. Please note that the rich man's soul/spirit was not annihilated by the flames.

He clearly was in Hades not the lake of fire. He is thirsty not screaming because he is being burned alive.

​

 

[hedrick]

If the final fate of the unrepentant is annihilation why did Jesus not make that clear to His Jewish audience? The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, they knew that everyone dies old, young, rich, poor and for them death was eternal, no resurrection. When Jesus taught about "eternal punishment,""hell where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched" etc. they would have understood is as something worse than mere death.
.....In two verses Jesus taught about a fate worse than death.
• “better for him [a person who offends a little one] that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Matthew 18:6
• “it had been good for him [the one who betrays Jesus] if he had not been born.” Matthew 26:24

I think Jesus did make it clear. The language of Mat 18:6 is so close to Is 66:24 that it’s hard to believe it wasn’t an allusion. In that passage the worms and fire were consuming dead bodies. They were not tormenting anyone, because the people involved were dead. I think the most straightforward understanding of death is death, nor everlasting punishment.

Another pretty explicit statement in Mat 3:12. Chaff burns up instantly. Trees also burn up though not so instantly (Mat 3:10). I think Jesus has given pretty good indications that his eternal fire doesn’t mean torment forever, but rather consumes.

You’re reading your preconceptions into the texts.

Incidentally, I think Timothew is right about Luke 16:23. That’s one of the most commonly cited passages for eternal torment. But it’s quite clear that Jesus envisions it as happening now, since he wants to send a message to people currently living. So this can’t be where he goes after the last judgement. That’s also suggested by using the term Hades rather than Gehenna.

Now, about fate worse than death. Jesus says that it would be better for certain people if they hadn’t been born. First, that language isn’t necessarily referring to punishment at all. Even someone who doesn’t expect a judgement at all could agree that it would be better for certain people if they hadn’t been born. He doesn’t actually speak of a fate that’s worse than death but of a life that would have been better off not happening.

Furthermore, I would argue that someone who spends his life abusing others, then spends time in agony himself, and finally vanishes as if he had never been, would have been better off not to have been born.

The problem with your literal reading is that you’re using words to mean what you mean, and not considering the possibility that Jesus might have meant something different.

 

[ewq1938]

I understand where you are coming from but this line of argument gets you into a bad spot.

If the worm eats forever, it must have an infinite food supply.

But there is clearly not an infinite number of people in hell - only a finite number of persons will have lived.

So you cannot make the argument you are making - the food supply argument - to support the notion that the worm has something to eat forever and ever.

Besides, I am inclined to agree with Timothew - this an image of the fate of corpses, not living beings.

Yes but it has a dual meaning which conveys the impossibility of the wickeds fate to change...a permanent destruction. Worms destroy a body, fire destroys a body....the idea is destruction lasting forever. I know you agree, just wanting to mention this to everyone.

 

[ewq1938]

No, that's torment, not torture. Torture relates only to the physical.

That's your own personal opinion not supported by an actual dictionary. torment and torture are synonyms meaning they have the same meaning and application.

 

[StanJ]

That's your own personal opinion not supported by an actual dictionary. torment and torture are synonyms meaning they have the same meaning and application.

.<Staff Edit> I've already showed it as such besides English dictionaries didn't appear until around 1000 AD, well after the Bible was written and put together. The Bible defines itself, it is not defined by outside sources.

 

[ewq1938]

Heb_12:29 For our God is a consuming fire.

G2654
?ata?a??´s??
katanalisko¯
kat-an-al-is'-ko
From G2596 and G355; to consume utterly: - consume.

compare that to this:


Mat 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

G622
a?p?´???µ?
apollumi
ap-ol'-loo-mee
From G575 and the base of G3639; to destroy fully (reflexively to perish, or lose), literally or figuratively: - destroy, die, lose, mar, perish.


Both speak about fire which can fully destroy/consume something...the fire of a star is very hot, but that man can recreate the same temperatures in welding makes me think the fire of "hell" is something far stronger/hotter.




Fire represents a destructive force. This lake of fire won't be normal fire as we can create ourselves. I believe it to be God himself since God is a consuming fire. So God can create something, and can uncreate something as well. I believe the lake of fire is simply an uncreating process described in a way simple so people could understand it's basic function- destruction.



There was a time none of us existed. God has decided that the bad, wicked, evil etc etc of us should return to that non-existence. There is a fire which is unlike any fire man knows which will be used to destroy souls which essentially and definitively uncreates them.

Psalms 37:20 But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.




There is only one kind of eternal life, and that is with God as overcomers judged to life. Those judged to death on judgment day, which is called the second death, will not have eternal life in hell or torment. Their punishment is death and that punishment will last for all eternity. They shall not live eternally in agony because they shall not have eternal life of any kind.




Rev 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.

Don't assume “day and night forever and ever” is literal:

Isa 34:8 For it is the day of the LORD'S vengeance, and the year of recompences for the controversy of Zion.
Isa 34:9 And the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch.
Isa 34:10 It shall not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever.

Isaiah uses similar language concerning Edom and Edom is not still burning. This is an intentional exaggeration and should be understood in that way just as Rev 20:10 should be.

Another example:

Exo 21:6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.


Not literally forever of course. It simply means "a long time", ie: the rest of his life, an intentional exaggeration.

Jude 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.

Sodom and Gomorrha are not still burning therefore this eternal fire does not imply the target burns forever but this fire exists eternally whether it has something to burn or not and since God is a consuming fire it makes sense that it is eternal because God is eternal. Remember that this fire isn't actual fire. The word fire is used because it's the closest way for us to have any chance to understand the destructive nature and result of this "fire".



And look at how many scriptures refute the idea of eternal life in hell fire:



"The soul that sinneth, it shall die." Ezekiel 18:4.

"He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death." Revelation 2:11

"And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." Revelation 20:14,15.

"The earth and all the inhabitants thereof are dissolved." Psalm 75:3.

"Let the sinners be consumed out of the earth, and let the wicked be no more." Psalm 104:35.

"Consume them in wrath, consume them, that they may not be." Psalm 59:13.

"The Lord preserveth all them that love him: but all the wicked will he destroy." Psalm 145:20

"When the wicked spring as the grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish; it is that they shall be destroyed for ever: Psalm 92:7

"For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be as stubble; and the day cometh that shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch." Malachi 4:1

"And the destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the LORD shall be consumed." Isaiah 1:28

"Enter ye in at the straight gate: for wide is the fate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat." Matthew 7:13

"But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away." Psalms 37:20

Judgment is a decision to reward or punish someone. The judgement/punishment for sin is death (Romans 6:23), which is also called the second death (Rev 21:8), and that judgement/punishment is written to be eternal/everlasting (Mark 3:29, Hebrews 6:2). So, eternal punishment is an eternal death.



Two things happen to the wicked. First they will die the second death which means soul and body dies and then their soul and body shall be destroyed.


Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.


Here we have death of the soul likened to destruction of the soul. One cannot be destroyed without dying so the two go hand in hand. While the Greek word here can mean several things, we know from other scriptures esp. the OT which has only one meaning for "destruction" being literal destruction, that this word here means:

apollumi
Thayer Definition:
1)to destroy
1a)to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin
1)to destroy
1b)render useless
1c)to kill
1d)to declare that one must be put to death
1e) metaphorically to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell
1f) to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed
2) to destroy
2a) to lose
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G575 and the base of G3639
Citing in TDNT: 1:394, 67





Psalms 37:20 But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.


This also relates the death of the wicked to their complete destruction/consumation as well as death.




Psalms 145:20 The LORD preserveth all them that love him: but all the wicked will he destroy.


H8045
????
sha^mad
BDB Definition:
1) to destroy, exterminate, be destroyed, be exterminated
1a) (Niphal)
1a1) to be annihilated, be exterminated
1a2) to be destroyed, be devastated
1b) (Hiphil)
1b1) to annihilate, exterminate
1b2) to destroy
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root
Same Word by TWOT Number: 2406






Lets use the same logic some apply. We know that our preservation by the Lord shall be eternal, known as salvation or eternal life then the opposite for the wicked would be eternal death and destruction right? Not to be preserved to suffer eternal torture!



Isaiah 1:27 Zion shall be redeemed with judgment, and her converts with righteousness.
Isaiah 1:28 And the destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the LORD shall be consumed.



Here the same concept. All sinners judged and consumed at the same time which cannot be anything other than the final judgement.




The punishment for sin is death (Romans 6:23), which is also called the second death (Rev 20, 21), and that judgement/decision (also called damnation) is written to be eternal/everlasting (Mark 3:29, Hebrews 6:2).


Psalms 92:7 When the wicked spring as the grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish; it is that they shall be destroyed for ever:



Some teach that God will not do as he says.


Psalms 37:16 A little that a righteous man hath is better than the riches of many wicked.
Psalms 37:17 For the arms of the wicked shall be broken: but the LORD upholdeth the righteous.
Psalms 37:18 The LORD knoweth the days of the upright: and their inheritance shall be for ever.
Psalms 37:19 They shall not be ashamed in the evil time: and in the days of famine they shall be satisfied.
Psalms 37:20 But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.

Do they perish, consumed away in smoke or do they live forever in torture?? Scripture is clear!


Psalms 145:20 The LORD preserveth all them that love him: but all the wicked will he destroy.


Psalms 104:35 Let the sinners be consumed out of the earth, and let the wicked be no more. Bless thou the LORD, O my soul. Praise ye the LORD.


Isaiah 1:27 Zion shall be redeemed with judgment, and her converts with righteousness.
Isaiah 1:28 And the destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the LORD shall be consumed.

Isaiah 1:29 For they shall be ashamed of the oaks which ye have desired, and ye shall be confounded for the gardens that ye have chosen.
Isaiah 1:30 For ye shall be as an oak whose leaf fadeth, and as a garden that hath no water.
Isaiah 1:31 And the strong shall be as tow, and the maker of it as a spark, and they shall both burn together, and none shall quench them.



2 Peter 2:12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;



Hebrews 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
Hebrews 10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
Hebrews 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
Hebrews 10:30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
Hebrews 10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.


Jeremiah 6:27 I have set thee for a tower and a fortress among my people, that thou mayest know and try their way.
Jeremiah 6:28 They are all grievous revolters, walking with slanders: they are brass and iron; they are all corrupters.
Jeremiah 6:29 The bellows are burned, the lead is consumed of the fire; the founder melteth in vain: for the wicked are not plucked away.
Jeremiah 6:30 Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the LORD hath rejected them.

Why are they wicked?

Jeremiah 6:27 I have set thee for a tower and a fortress among my people, that thou mayest know and try their way.
Jeremiah 6:28 They are all grievous revolters, walking with slanders: they are brass and iron; they are all corrupters.
Jeremiah 6:29 The bellows are burned, the lead is consumed of the fire; the founder melteth in vain: for the wicked are not plucked away.
Jeremiah 6:30 Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the LORD hath rejected them.





They are corrupt and God has rejected them.





Psalms 37:16 A little that a righteous man hath is better than the riches of many wicked.
Psalms 37:17 For the arms of the wicked shall be broken: but the LORD upholdeth the righteous.
Psalms 37:18 The LORD knoweth the days of the upright: and their inheritance shall be for ever.
Psalms 37:19 They shall not be ashamed in the evil time: and in the days of famine they shall be satisfied.
Psalms 37:20 But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.



The righteous ones will be saved but those unrighteous will be consumed away.


2 Thessalonians 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
2 Thessalonians 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
2 Thessalonians 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

They wouldn't receive the truth to be saved so they shall be destroyed!

2 Thessalonians 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2 Thessalonians 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.



Those that had pleasure in unrighteousness and received not the truth shall perish and be damned.






Matthew 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G2851&t=KJV

1) correction, punishment, penalty

The lexicon there says the word punishment in this verse means "correction, punishment, penalty" not firery torment. As I have been saying, the kind of "correction, punishment, penalty" inflicted is unnamed in this verse but is given many places elsewhere as both death and destruction.



The righteous are not sinless but they repent and love God and believe upon Christ and that is counted righteous and though all are wicked in some sense, it is only those who love unrighteousness, who do not love God, who don't repent and don't follow Christ that shall be destroyed.


Matthew 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Matthew 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.



The way to destruction is wide and many will be destroyed. FEW will find the way to life. Read it more than once if you don't believe this. Christ said it and it is true.

 

[ewq1938]

.<Staff Edit>

besides English dictionaries didn't appear until around 1000 AD, well after the Bible was written and put together. The Bible defines itself, it is not defined by outside sources.

Then why did you tell me torment did not mean torture and to look it up in a dictionary? I did exactly as you suggested and continued to show you in error. Basically what you do it deny you were proven wrong when you are proven wrong. You simply refuse true correction. You've done it repeatedly in this thread.

 

[StanJ]

http://www.letusreason.org/Doct12.htm

βασανίζω (basanizō) Torment

βάσανος (basanos) Torment

ὀχλέω (ochleō) Tormented

κολαφίζω (kolaphizō) Torment

βασανισμός (basanismos) Torture

βασανιστής (basanistēs) Torture

τυμπανίζω (tympanizō) Tortured

Now I know for certain that none of the conditionalists here are Greek Scholars, or know very little about Greek, so I just wanted to take the time for others to understand the Greek words that ALL Bible translators Torment or Torture. Just because two words look the same in English or even look the same in Greek does not mean that they connote the same thing. There are only so many letters in the Greek and English alphabet and as such we will have words that appear to be similar but do not mean the same thing. Clearly this is the case with torment and torture and if they meant the same thing then the credentialed scholars that do the translation would use the same words, but they don't. Anybody who tries to assert that torment and torture mean the same thing are sadly lacking in any formal training or even grade-school understanding of definitions.

 

[hedrick]

That's your own personal opinion not supported by an actual dictionary. torment and torture are synonyms meaning they have the same meaning and application.

I think torture is a loaded term, in that in current use it normally refers to something that is morally unacceptable. I agree that in denotation they are largely the same.

 

[expos4ever]

The Bible defines itself, it is not defined by outside sources.

The writers of scripture obviously used words in accordance with the meaning ascribed to those words in their particular culture. So one cannot disentangle the meaning of scripture from the cultural / linguistic context in which it was written. So, for example, if a word like "destroy" appears in scripture, we need to read it as understood in that time and place. Of course, it is always possible that the broad scriptural narrative will justify changes in how we read such terms. But that case actually needs to be made - it cannot simply be assumed that words like "destroy" mean something other than what they would have meant in the cultural / linguistic context in which the word was penned.

 

[Der Alte]

I think Jesus did make it clear. The language of Mat 18:6 is so close to Is 66:24 that it’s hard to believe it wasn’t an allusion. In that passage the worms and fire were consuming dead bodies. They were not tormenting anyone, because the people involved were dead. I think the most straightforward understanding of death is death, nor everlasting punishment.

As I quoted from the Jewish Encyclopedia and the Talmud a significant number of Jews believed e.g. "hell shall pass away, but they shall not pass away" “The Lord, the Almighty, will punish them on the Day of Judgment by putting fire and worms into their flesh, so that they cry out with pain unto all eternity””The sinners in Gehenna will be filled with pain when God puts back the souls into the dead bodies on the Day of Judgment.” Would they have understood Jesus to be saying eternal punishment is death?

Another pretty explicit statement in Mat 3:12. Chaff burns up instantly. Trees also burn up though not so instantly (Mat 3:10). I think Jesus has given pretty good indications that his eternal fire doesn’t mean torment forever, but rather consumes.

A proof text which does not support the argument that the righteous go to paradise and the wicked are destroyed. Chaff is an integral part of wheat not a separate plant. The inedible chaff is separated from the wheat grain, thrown away or burned and the grain stored. Also see above response.

You’re reading your preconceptions into the texts.

No, I have been supporting my arguments with historical evidence, which has been largely ignored.

Incidentally, I think Timothew is right about Luke 16:23. That’s one of the most commonly cited passages for eternal torment. But it’s quite clear that Jesus envisions it as happening now, since he wants to send a message to people currently living. So this can’t be where he goes after the last judgement. That’s also suggested by using the term Hades rather than Gehenna.

Jesus also envisioned His existing prior to Abraham as happening now. Paul indicated that while the final judgment is future to the living it may not be future to God.

2 Corinthians 5:8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
Philippians 1:23 For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better:
​

Now, about fate worse than death. Jesus says that it would be better for certain people if they hadn’t been born. First, that language isn’t necessarily referring to punishment at all. Even someone who doesn’t expect a judgement at all could agree that it would be better for certain people if they hadn’t been born. He doesn’t actually speak of a fate that’s worse than death but of a life that would have been better off not happening.

You only addressed one of the three verses I quoted showing a fate worse than death. In Matt 18:6 Jesus said that death is better than the fate of someone who offends one of His little ones.

Matthew 18:6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. ​

Heb 10:29 speaks of a worse punishment than death.

Hebrews 10:28-30
(28) He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
(29) How much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
(30) For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.​

Furthermore, I would argue that someone who spends his life abusing others, then spends time in agony himself, and finally vanishes as if he had never been, would have been better off not to have been born.

The dead know nothing. Someone who is dead is not aware of being better or worse off than others.

The problem with your literal reading is that you’re using words to mean what you mean, and not considering the possibility that Jesus might have meant something different.

I read both Biblical languages and I have Greek and Hebrew lexicons and grammars. If there is a better translation please provide it with evidence. I also consult historical evidence. For example, every early church father who quotes or refers to the story of Lazarus and the rich man considered it literal.