Have you been decieved by your Bible translation?

[Doug Melven]

The Bible does indeed use the term "eternal fire":

Everlasting is used in the KJV.
Matthew 18:8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.
Matthew 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:
Matthew 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Everlasting is used in the KJV.
Matthew 18:8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.
Matthew 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:
Matthew 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

So , then, yes to the title question ? !

 

[Doug Melven]

So , then, yes to the title question ? !

I said in an earlier post that Jesus used the term "everlasting fire".
Mark Corbett said no, Jesus said "eternal fire"
So, I cited the verses where Jesus said "everlasting fire".

 

[ClementofA]

This thread is mostly focused on the issue of the nature of final punishment (I believe in Conditional Immortality and I'm arguing against Universalism). More narrowly, I'm arguing that all the widely used English translations of the Bible are CORRECT when they translate aionios as "eternal".

There is a broader implication of Universalist arguments that say all our widely used English translations are leading people astray. If that is true, then of course they should point it out. But if it is not true, there is a very serious, if perhaps unintended, negative side effect.

Many millions of English speaking Christians read, meditate on, study, and try to live their lives based on the Bibles they own. I am convinced these Christians are right to do so. Knowledge of Greek and Hebrew is helpful, but most Christians don't have that specialized training. Praise God, we are blessed with many excellent translations. There is a risk that universalist arguments that these translations are all wrong and leading people astray will undermine confidence in the Bibles that so many Christians seek to live by. If the universalists are wrong on this issue, and I'm convinced they are wrong, their arguments could do damage that goes well beyond the narrow issue of the meaning of aionios and the nature of Hell.

Mark, that demonstrates your heart is in the right place.

Yet, IMO, anyone who is slightly informed about Bible translations already realizes there are significant differences between them.

They would also be aware that different churches (EO, RC, OO, Baptist, etc) have differing canons of the Scriptures & doctrines about many things.

I am not ashamed of the truth, for Jesus said the truth shall make you free.

Men following the Douay & KJV traditions of men of "the church" of the Inquisitions, Crusades & dark ages have been caught in a deception (Jer.8:8-9):

Considering, then, that the Greek word aionios has a range of meanings, biased men should not have rendered the word in Mt.25:46 by their theological opinions as "everlasting". Thus they did not translate the word, but interpreted it. OTOH the versions with age-lasting, eonian & the like gave faithful translations & left the interpreting up to the readers as to what specific meaning within the "range of meanings" the word holds in any specific context. What biased scholars after the Douay & KJV traditions of the dark ages "church" have done is change the words of Scriptures to their own opinions, which is shameful.

Jeremiah 8:8 "How can you say, 'We are wise, And the law of the LORD is with us'? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes Has made it into a lie.
9 "The wise men are put to shame, They are dismayed and caught; Behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD..."

"After all, not only Walvoord, Buis, and Inge, but all intelligent students acknowledge that olam and aiõn sometimes refer to limited duration. Here is my point: The supposed special reference or usage of a word is not the province of the translator but of the interpreter. Since these authors themselves plainly indicate that the usage of a word is a matter of interpretation, it follows (1) that it is not a matter of translation, and (2) that it is wrong for any translation effectually to decide that which must necessarily remain a matter of interpretation concerning these words in question. Therefore, olam and aiõn should never be translated by the thought of “endlessness,” but only by that of indefinite duration (as in the anglicized transliteration “eon” which appears in the Concordant Version)."

Eon As Indefinte Duration, Part Three

"The Third Law of Theology: For every theologian there is an equal and opposite theologian."

Believers and Supporters of Christian Universalism:
>Believers and Supporters of Christian Universalism

 

[Hillsage]

You don't think "Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;" would be hell?

No I don't think that, and I've explained why, in every post. Often with 'points' which you never address. And actually that annoyed me enough, that I was going to say 'quit cherry picking' the only arguments you can write , and deal with my whole post'. But, in all honesty Doug, I couldn't say that because you've been pretty non combative and I appreciate that 'Christian' attitude. It's an attitude found so rarely here, especially with this particular doctrinal difference. Plus, our posts are way longer than I like. One screen shot of reading is about all that most can absorb or even realistically think about.

Hell is a place of torment.
And even if you disregard "destruction", you still have to deal with "everlasting" and "from the presence of the Lord".
Destruction is a prolonged form of the word destroy.

I have not disregarded I have disagreed and proven why....I dealt with it, and you've disagreed with those posts. "Destruction" is coming "FROM the presence of the Lord." Not His absence, as I supported with scripture way back somewhere. I'm not going back to look for it again either.

Destroying is not a word.

Excuse me. READ what you just 'wrote'.

You believe "Destroying" is not a word" because it comes from the word 'destroy'. But you also tell us 'ETERNITY is a word' which comes from the Greek word for an 'AGE'. Oh consistency, thou art a jewel to be sought for. Our use is consistent.

Jesus used "everlasting fire" twice. Matthew 18:8 and Matthew 25:41

MAT 18:8 'And if thy hand or thy foot doth cause thee to stumble, cut them off and cast from thee; it is good for thee to enter into the life lame or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet, to be cast to the fire the age-during.

MAT 25:41 Then shall he say also to those on the left hand, Go ye from me, the cursed, to the fire, the age-during, that hath been prepared for the Devil and his messengers;

Question, do yo believe that God is omniscient (knowing ALL)? I do. How could He have created eternal hell for the Devil and his angels....and NOT KNOWN most of His beloved creation was going to eternally end up in that orthodox HELL? Makes no sense to me. At least, not until you realize that the fire of Hell is simply the tool of the devil to deal 'temporal judgment' for your 'temporal sins' in whatever 'age' of God we are found to be in. That, is a 'point' far beyond the thinking caps of most, including Universalists....I think.

Paul doesn't even use "hell", at least not in the KJV.

He doesn't use it in any translation I know of. Do your research and prove me wrong. And if he WAS going to use the word HELL it would most likely have been in the HELLISH KJV translation. That translation has the word HELL in it more than any other translation known. Following are the number of times the word HELL is found in the following 5 popular translations.

1 Authorized King James Version 54x
2 New King James Version 32x
3 American Standard Version 13x
4 New American Standard Bible 13x
5 Revised Standard Version 12x

6 Young's Literal Trans 0x
7 Rotherham's 0x
8 Weymouth's 0x
9 Concordant Literal NT (1983) 0x

Can you tell me where in hell, did hell go to, from the time of the KJV until the TRANSLATING/INTERPRETING of those other 5 above? I'm going to assume you can't, and that's one reason why you believe in it and we don't. Do you know there are over 25 translations without the word HELL in them AT ALL?

And you assume that "everlasting destruction" means something else it does not say.

You're right, KINDA. The life I used to live up until the night I got saved has been DESTROYED by being in the presence of GOD and His son Jesus, and by being convicted of my sins by the Holy Spirit....Praise be to His name. And all of 'my life' that was DESTROYED, was DESTROYED in THIS AION/AGE that I was "called, drawn, chosen and predestined to believe" and be living in.

What about all these translations saying "eternal destruction" on Biblehub.
2 Thessalonians 1:9 They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might
In YLT it says "age-during" and you think this means "during an age".

I know it means 'during the age', or as other 'scholarly' translations say; "age-lasting" "to the age".

I think it means the age will last, that particular age has no end. It is eternal.

Your side thinks alike. We all agree the Greek word aion, from which the English word 'eon' is derived mean an 'age'. And an 'eon' can be a 'long time', but in no way is it ever to be confused with 'eternity'.

 

[Hillsage]

Bob Steel or Steal ;

The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. (Jn.10:10)

I'm of the opinion that he signed it correctly. And the substance of his quote backs everything we as 'Ultimate Reonciliationists'/'CHRISTIAN Universalists' stand like steel for.

I honestly don't understand your apparent 'put down' of him/his quote. Please elaborate.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I said in an earlier post that Jesus used the term "everlasting fire".
Mark Corbett said no, Jesus said "eternal fire"
So, I cited the verses where Jesus said "everlasting fire".

No worries there in quoting Scripture , if used properly. (as written of TORAH).

The thing to look into, if one cares, is how often "everlasting" , "eternal", "forever", "without end", and so on is in Scripture
and if it means anything different than expected. (which surprises most people, btw, if they ever find out).

 

[Doug Melven]

No I don't think that, and I've explained why, in every post

You misunderstand what I mean when I said "Everlasting destruction would be hell.
Have you ever heard the phrase "hurts like hell"?
It means something really hurts. I have even heard atheists using that phrase.
We should also look at where "gehenna" comes from.
Gehenna Definition and Meaning - Bible Dictionary
Gehenna [N]

(originally Ge bene Hinnom; i.e., "the valley of the sons of Hinnom"), a deep, narrow glen to the south of Jerusalem, where the idolatrous Jews offered their children in sacrifice to Molech ( 2 Chronicles 28:3 ; 33:6 ; Jeremiah 7:31 ;19:2-6 ). This valley afterwards became the common receptacle for all the refuse of the city. Here the dead bodies of animals and of criminals, and all kinds of filth, were cast and consumed by fire kept always burning. It thus in process of time became the image of the place of everlasting destruction. In this sense it is used by our Lord inMatthew 5:22 Matthew 5:29 Matthew 5:30 ; 10:28 ; 18:9 ; Matthew 23:15 Matthew 23:33 ; Mark 9:43 Mark 9:45Mark 9:47 ; Luke 12:5 . In these passages, and also in James 3:6 , the word is uniformly rendered "hell," the Revised Version placing "Gehenna" in the margin. (See HELL; HINNOM .)

I have not disregarded I have disagreed and proven why....I dealt with it, and you've disagreed with those posts. "Destruction" is coming "FROM the presence of the Lord." Not His absence, as I supported with scripture way back somewhere. I'm not going back to look for it again either.

Whether the everlasting destruction is coming from God's Presence or they are being put out of God's Presence as Cain went out from the Presence of the LORD. It is still everlasting destruction.

At least, not until you realize that the fire of Hell is simply the tool of the devil to deal 'temporal judgment' for your 'temporal sins' in whatever 'age' of God we are found to be in. That, is a 'point' far beyond the thinking caps of most, including Universalists....I think.

Now are you saying the devil is going to administer punishment? I thought he was going to be punished himself?
This point is far beyond anybody's thinking caps.

I know it means 'during the age', or as other 'scholarly' translations say; "age-lasting" "to the age".

"Age-during" cannot mean "during the age".
It looks like age-lasting is better as in the age will last.

our side thinks alike. We all agree the Greek word aion, from which the English word 'eon' is derived mean an 'age'. And an 'eon' can be a 'long time', but in no way is it ever to be confused with 'eternity'.

I never said it did. I always thought eon meant a billion years or a super long time. Eternity will never end. I guess you could say "eternity is eternal".

 

[Der Alte]

Begin quote

. . . We should also look at where "gehenna" comes from.
Gehenna Definition and Meaning - Bible Dictionary
Gehenna [N]
(originally Ge bene Hinnom; i.e., "the valley of the sons of Hinnom"), a deep, narrow glen to the south of Jerusalem, where the idolatrous Jews offered their children in sacrifice to Molech ( 2 Chronicles 28:3 ; 33:6 ; Jeremiah 7:31 ;19:2-6 ). This valley afterwards became the common receptacle for all the refuse of the city. Here the dead bodies of animals and of criminals, and all kinds of filth, were cast and consumed by fire kept always burning. It thus in process of time became the image of the place of everlasting destruction. In this sense it is used by our Lord inMatthew 5:22 Matthew 5:29 Matthew 5:30 ; 10:28 ; 18:9 ; Matthew 23:15 Matthew 23:33 ; Mark 9:43 Mark 9:45Mark 9:47 ; Luke 12:5 . In these passages, and also in James 3:6 , the word is uniformly rendered "hell," the Revised Version placing "Gehenna" in the margin. (See HELL; HINNOM .) . . .

End quote

This Bible dictionary entry refers to old information which has been debunked.

The traditional explanation that a burning rubbish heap in the Valley of Hinnom south of Jerusalem gave rise to the idea of a fiery Gehenna of judgment is attributed to Rabbi David Kimhi's commentary on Psalm 27:13 (ca. A.D. 1200). He maintained that in this loathsome valley fires were kept burning perpetually to consume the filth and cadavers thrown into it. However, Strack and Billerbeck state that there is neither archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources (Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud and Midrasch, 5 vols. [Munich: Beck, 1922-56], 4:2:1030). Also a more recent author holds a similar view (Lloyd R. Bailey, "Gehenna: The Topography of Hell," Biblical Archeologist 49 [1986]: 189.
Source, Bibliotheca Sacra / July–September 1992
http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted...Articles/BSac-NT/Scharen-GenenaSyn-Pt1-BS.htm​

Note there is no “archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, [that Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump] in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources” If Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump there should be broken pottery, tools, utensils, bones, etc. but there is no such evidence.

“Gehenna is presented as diametrically opposed to ‘life’: it is better to enter life than to go to Gehenna. . .It is common practice, both in scholarly and less technical works, to associate the description of Gehenna with the supposedly contemporary garbage dump in the valley of Hinnom. This association often leads scholars to emphasize the destructive aspects of the judgment here depicted: fire burns until the object is completely consumed. Two particular problems may be noted in connection with this approach. First, there is no convincing evidence in the primary sources for the existence of a fiery rubbish dump in this location (in any case, a thorough investigation would be appreciated). Secondly, the significant background to this passage more probably lies in Jesus’ allusion to Isaiah 66:24.”
(“The Duration of Divine Judgment in the New Testament” in

The Reader Must Understand edited by K. Brower and M. W. Ellion, p. 223, emphasis mine)
G. R. Beasley-Murray in Jesus and the Kingdom of God:
“Ge-Hinnom (Aramaic Ge-hinnam, hence the Greek Geenna), ‘The Valley of Hinnom,’ lay south of Jerusalem, immediately outside its walls. The notion, still referred to by some commentators, that the city’s rubbish was burned in this valley, has no further basis than a statement by the Jewish scholar Kimchi (sic) made about A.D. 1200; it is not attested in any ancient source.” (p. 376n.92)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20113-the-burning-garbage-dump-of-gehenna-is-a-myth/​

 

[Doug Melven]

Burning garbage dump or not, it is still referred to in Jeremiah as a place of fire that people would make children go through.
Jeremiah 32:35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

So then, if and when it is actually understood as God means it, what then ?

 

[Hillsage]

You misunderstand what I mean when I said "Everlasting destruction would be hell.
Have you ever heard the phrase "hurts like hell"?
It means something really hurts. I have even heard atheists using that phrase.

Yes, I've heard those terms. AND I've heard many a believer shed tears of remorse over the sins they've committed in their past. And their 'torment' and 'suffering' concerning those sins, is no worse than the many times that the Greek word translated torment amounts to.

The word “torment”, so often used here describing a 'torture' 'the likes of which none of us feel we could ever bear', certainly needs further study. In the New Testament that same Greek word 'basanizo' is used 12 times, but only translated 'torment' 8 times, but what of the other 4?

Once it speaks of one “sick of the palsy, grievously tormented" (Matt. 8:6). OK, that's bad, but certainly nothing like Dante's Inferno or Edwards "Sinners in the hand of an angry God" sermon.
The word is used of the disciples' ship in Galilee, and is translated “tossed with waves” (Matt. 14:24). Hey, I could not only 'handle' that torment, I'd have signed up for it to float the Grand Canyon in my younger years if I'd had the money.
It is also translated as the word “toiling” in Mark 6:48 when the apostles were rowing a boat.

It is translated by the word “vexed'” in speaking of Lot's righteous soul looking at sin. (2Pet.2:8). So I guess it's 'Hell on earth for righteous Lot then'?....NOT!

My last verse using this Greek word translated "torment" is translated as the word that means “birth-pains” (Rev 12:2) OK, now I watched my wife, yeah that 'hurt like hell'....as you said earlier. But she signed up for another round, and it wasn't me pushing in either case.

Whether the everlasting destruction is coming from God's Presence or they are being put out of God's Presence as Cain went out from the Presence of the LORD. It is still everlasting destruction.

But, orthodoxy said man left the presence of God when he got kicked out of the Garden right? So much for 'that' theology too. Cain was never even in the Garden.

Now are you saying the devil is going to administer punishment? I thought he was going to be punished himself?
This point is far beyond anybody's thinking caps.

I'm probably in the loner camp here, but yes the Satan is just a tool of God. That's why he appeared with the other 'son's of God and got his marching orders for what he could AND could not do, to Job. 'Touch everything Job had, but don't touch Job.' Then when Satan came back a second time, God told Satan he could touch Job but not kill him. God never told him 'what to do to torment' Job, but He certainly sets the limits of Satan's temptations....for Job and for us.

1CO 10:13 No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength,

"Age-during" cannot mean "during the age".
It looks like age-lasting is better as in the age will last.

I'd disagree and think I like "age-during" best of all. And here is a 'brief' gammar lesson why.

Once we understand that "aionios" is the ADJECTIVE FORM of the NOUN "aion", a simple little sixth-grade grammar lesson should once and for all establish the exact meaning of "aionios". A noun is a word that tells what you are talking about. A noun is a word that names something; a person, place, thing, quality, etc. For example, a boy, water, tree, age (period of
time).

An adjective is a word that is used with a noun to describe it. It is a word that tells you what kind, what color, etc. If you wanted to tell about the hat a woman was wearing you would describe the hat in some way. You might say that it was a large hat, an atrocious hat, or a red hat. These are adjectives, words that describe what kind, or what color of hat it is. Anyone with even an elementary knowledge of grammar (English or Greek) knows that the meaning of a noun and the meaning of the same
word in its adjective form MUST CORRESPOND! It cannot have one meaning as a noun and an exactly OPPOSITE meaning as an adjective!

Let me illustrate. If we say, "John is in college," the word college is a noun. But if we say, "John has sixteen college credits," college is an adjective, modifying the word credits - telling what kind of credits. Now we all know what a college is, so we understand what kind of institution John is attending in the first sentence. Since we know the meaning of college, when we come to the second sentence we have no difficulty understanding what kind of credits John has - college credits. No one in his right mind is going to read that and conclude that John has just finished kindergarten, or that he has a diploma showing he finished sixteen lessons in leathercraft at the YMCA, or that he has $16.00 worth of credit at a department store! College as a noun and college as an adjective cannot have altogether different meanings. They mean the same in both cases!

And yet men who should know better tell us that the Greek noun "aion" means an age, or ages which is TIME, and then proceed to explain how the adjective form of the same word, "aionios", means exactly the opposite - unending, everlasting, ETERNAL! A child of ten should be able to understand that that is not so. The adjective "aionios" modifies two nouns in Mat. 25:46: punishment and life. It tells what kind of punishment and what kind of life Jesus is talking about. It is ages-lasting punishment and ages-lasting life, or the LIFE OF THE AGES. Now I can hear someone protesting, "But isn't the life we have received from God ETERNAL LIFE?" Certainly God's life is eternal life. But we have received that life injected into TIME, so that the inworking of that life through the processings of God is experienced in relation to TIME rather than ETERNITY.

I never said it did. I always thought eon meant a billion years or a super long time. Eternity will never end. I guess you could say "eternity is eternal".

YES, one could certainly say 'that'. One might also say to an old friend; "Man, I haven't seen you in eons."

So sorry for the length. Especially after you did such a great job of shortening your last post. I promise I'll do better.

G-nite I'm all in.

 

[Doug Melven]

Yes, I've heard those terms. AND I've heard many a believer shed tears of remorse over the sins they've committed in their past. And their 'torment' and 'suffering' concerning those sins, is no worse than the many times that the Greek word translated torment amounts to.

The word in Luke 16 is different "banasos" It is translated to torture, torment
23 and in the hades having lifted up his eyes, being in torments, he doth see Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom, 24 and having cried, he said, Father Abraham, deal kindly with me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and may cool my tongue, because I am distressed in this flame.

But, orthodoxy said man left the presence of God when he got kicked out of the Garden right? So much for 'that' theology too. Cain was never even in the Garden.

I was only pointing out that phrase. Of course Cain was never in the Garden, where did you get the idea I said he was? God kicked man out of the Garden. I really don't care what Orthodoxy believes. Don't make a debate with them and say I said what they said.

I'm probably in the loner camp here, but yes the Satan is just a tool of God. That's why he appeared with the other 'son's of God and got his marching orders for what he could AND could not do, to Job. 'Touch everything Job had, but don't touch Job.' Then when Satan came back a second time, God told Satan he could touch Job but not kill him. God never told him 'what to do to torment' Job, but He certainly sets the limits of Satan's temptations....for Job and for us.

This is just plain wrong.
Satan is in rebellion to God. Satan's heart is lifted up with pride, therefore God is resisting him.
The only way God uses Satan is to use his own tactics against him.

YES, one could certainly say 'that'. One might also say to an old friend; "Man, I haven't seen you in eons."

A little confused, are you agreeing with me?

 

[Der Alte]

Burning garbage dump or not, it is still referred to in Jeremiah as a place of fire that people would make children go through.
Jeremiah 32:35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

That is correct but the point is when Jesus said γέεννα/gehenna where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die he was not referring to an ever burning garbage dump outside Jerusalem.

 

[Hillsage]

The word in Luke 16 is different "banasos" It is translated to torture, torment
23 and in the hades having lifted up his eyes, being in torments, he doth see Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom, 24 and having cried, he said, Father Abraham, deal kindly with me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and may cool my tongue, because I am distressed in this flame.

Did you ever wonder why the rich man wasn't crying out to GOD? Why was this appeal to Abraham? Is HELL/HADES under God's authority or Abraham's?

Also, does it make you wonder how someone could 'experience your idea of HELLISH TORMENT/basanos while here on earth....AND JESUS DELIVERED THEM FROM those TORMENTS? TORMENTS of the devil just like we all face NOW.

MAT 4:24 And his fame went throughout all Syria: and they brought unto him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments/basanos, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatick, and those that had the palsy; and he healed them.

Like I said in my last post; The Johnathan Edwards and Dantes 'unbelievable HELL' which you want US to believe in 'for the future', is apparently being experience right here now on earth, according to the bible. And it really doesn't appear 'that bad' IMO.

Satan is in rebellion to God. Satan's heart is lifted up with pride, therefore God is resisting him.
The only way God uses Satan is to use his own tactics against him.

Back your opinion with scripture, if you can. I did in my last post, and I'll add more now.

1CO 5:5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

1TI 1:20 among them Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.

Sounds to me like Satan's being used as the 'wrath of God unto righteousness' instead of ORTHODOXY's "wrath of man which worketh not the righteousness of God." I'm glad I'm lined up with God's type of wrath.

A little confused, are you agreeing with me?

I suppose I'm agreeing if you agree that 'the day of the locomotive' was more like a hundred years. IOW an eon is also a 'relative' term IMO. It could mean different lengths of time to different people or different situations. There is no 'GOD definition', and therefore speculation is simply that.....speculation.

PS
JER 32:35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

As far as ETERNALLY throwing kids into the fire, have you ever wonder why GOD would ever decide that HE "should do this abomination" to "sons and daughters" he has created? Do you think it "came to His mind" cause He got the idea from devil worshipers? Not consistent with the God I know. But I do know what 'god' might put it in the minds of men.

 

[Doug Melven]

That is correct but the point is when Jesus said γέεννα/gehenna where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die he was not referring to an ever burning garbage dump outside Jerusalem.

I think everybody gets so focused on the garbage burning dump, and then when that is disproven they completely forget about the fire of Gehenna as mentioned in Jeremiah.

 

[Doug Melven]

Like I said in my last post; The Johnathan Edwards and Dantes 'unbelievable HELL' which you want US to believe in 'for the future', is apparently being experience right here now on earth, according to the bible.

Where did I ever say anything about Dante's Inferno or Johnathan Edwards Hell? Your debate is with me, not with something somebody else said. I don't know and don't care what these others believe.
What you are attempting to do is "telling me what I believe and then proving that wrong".
Don't do this, it doesn't look good for you.
You don't like it if others do it to you. Please don't do it to me.

Back your opinion with scripture, if you can. I did in my last post, and I'll add more now.

From isaiah
14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

This Scripture is not referring to Adam, he was never in Heaven before he fell.

I suppose I'm agreeing if you agree that 'the day of the locomotive' was more like a hundred years. IOW an eon is also a 'relative' term IMO. It could mean different lengths of time to different people or different situations. There is no 'GOD definition', and therefore speculation is simply that.....speculation.

I said before that my definition of "eon" is either a billion years or a super long time. Eon does not equal eternity, as eon is finite.

 

[Hillsage]

Where did I ever say anything about Dante's Inferno or Johnathan Edwards Hell? Your debate is with me, not with something somebody else said. I don't know and don't care what these others believe.
What you are attempting to do is "telling me what I believe and then proving that wrong".
Don't do this, it doesn't look good for you.
You don't like it if others do it to you. Please don't do it to me.

Since we're talking about our side vs your side it was a logical assumption on my part. Then tell me what your definition of the FOUR DIFFERENT WORDS which all get translated HELL are, depending upon whatever disagreeing translation of the infallible bible you read. Those words are Sheol, Hades, Gehenna, Tartaro.

From isaiah
14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

This Scripture is not referring to Adam, he was never in Heaven before he fell.

Not Adam you say? Maybe yes and maybe no. But let me humor your stance and say this. How did Lucifer obviously "ascend into heaven" in order for Jesus to say He SAW Satan FALL FROM HEAVEN" in Luke 18, when the apostles exercised heavenly authority and cast out demons?

This verse still doesn't say 'anywhere' that this was in rebellion to God. That is purely your assumption and I disagree based on my presented scriptureS. This verse does nothing but simply prove that Lucifer did what God intended when 'in His foreknowledge' (a term you like concerning US believers), GOD CREATED HIM. And that view of this scripture lines up with the other THREE scriptures I gave that disagree with you. So, if you can't come up with anything else refuting my take of Isaiah, you need to go back and refute what my THREE scriptures proved. I'll also add one more now to support your error of this Isaiah verse too.

ISA 54:16 Behold, I have created the smith who blows the fire of coals, and produces a weapon for its purpose. I have also created the ravager to destroy;

He also created Satan, the devil, Lucifer, 'knowing' their end from the beginning because HE IS OMNISCIENT GOD.

BTW, since these are getting shorter (thank you), maybe you can go back and finish dealing with the RECONCILIATION verses you never addressed at all. And you can tell me how 'the price for sin can be eternal hell if Jesus isn't 'there' paying the price of 'eternal hell' for our sins. This is a big rock in the cogs of ORTHODOXY. And I've never had anyone grind it up either.

I said before that my definition of "eon" is either a billion years or a super long time. Eon does not equal eternity, as eon is finite.

Neither of which is a biblical definition. No more than my comment of people saying; "Wow it's been eons since I last saw you." So, are you saying you don't believe in ETERNAL HELL? I ask because your posts, and whatever you really believe, are becoming a bit nebulous for me.

 

[Doug Melven]

Sheol, Hades

This would be the "abode of the dead",
Could be the grave, or something more.
OT
Psalm 16:10 Thou wilt not leave my soul in sheol.
Proverbs 23:14 Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.
Obviously, Jesus didn't stay in the grave.
And I am fairly certain no matter how many times you "beat him with a rod" he is still going to the grave.
NT
Act 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
Luke 16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

Gehenna

This would be a place of torment.
12:5 But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.
43 `And if thy hand may cause thee to stumble, cut it off; it is better for thee maimed to enter into the life, than having the two hands, to go away to the gehenna, to the fire--the unquenchable-- 44 where their worm is not dying, and the fire is not being quenched.

tartaro.

This is only found in 2 Peter 2:4.
Strongs says it is the deepest hades/sheol.

Not Adam you say? Maybe yes and maybe no. But let me humor your stance and say this. How did Lucifer "ascend into heaven" in order for Jesus to say He SAW Satan FALL FROM HEAVEN" when the apostles exercised heavenly authority and cast out demons?

Adam was never in Heaven before his sin. Also, in looking at the Genealogies in Genesis 5 and 1 Chronicles 1 we see his name is Adam, not Lucifer.
Lucifer/Satan was in Heaven.
When Lucifer fell, he bace Satan.
54:15 Behold, they shall surely gather together, but not by me: whosoever shall gather together against thee shall fall for thy sake.
54:16 Behold, I have created the smith that bloweth the coals in the fire, and that bringeth forth an instrument for his work; and I have created the waster to destroy.
54:17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness is of me, saith the LORD.

God created these people and of there own freewill they were going to gather against Israel, but not by the LORD.
And He told them no weapon formed against them would prosper.
When the verse is seen in it's context it tells a whole different story.

OK, this verse doesn't say anywhere that this was in rebellion to God.

Pride is not rebellion against God?
In these 2 verses, note how many times he says "I will".
14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

This verse does nothing but simply prove that Lucifer did what God intended when 'in His foreknowledge'

Of course God knew Satan was going to rebel against Him. And He uses Satan's own tactics against him.
1 Corinthians 2:6-8

And that view of this scripture lines up with the THREE scriptures I gave that disagree with you.

You are going to have to show me these three Scriptures again because I cannot find them.

BTW, since these are getting shorter (thank you), maybe you can go back and finish dealing with the RECONCILIATION verses you never addressed at all.

I am in thorough agreement that God reconciled the world to Himself.
And after that He committed the ministry of reconciliation to us.
2 Cor. 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
Colossians 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;
1:24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church:
1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

What was lacking in the afflictions of Christ. He needed us to preach the Gospel to others so they could be saved.

1 Cor. 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

They that are Christ's are the "all made alive".
Jesus said He was the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father but through Him Jn 14:6

And you can tell me how 'the price for sin can be eternal hell if Jesus isn't 'there' paying the price of 'eternal hell' for our sins. This is a big rock in the cogs of ORTHODOXY. And I've never had anyone grind it up either.

Jesus was God, His blood was more than efficacious for all.
God set the price for sin: Death
God Himself said Jesus' sacrifice was sufficient after 3 days.
For us to do the same thing Jesus did is impossible as we are spotted by sin.
If you check out the OT sacrifices, only the spotless ones could be used.
For us to pay for our sin as Jesus did an eternity in flames would be insufficient as we are spotted by sin to begin with.
That is why we must accept Jesus' sacrifice.

 

[Hillsage]

This would be the "abode of the dead",
Could be the grave, or something more.

In other words Christians and non Christians go to "hell/hades" according to 'bibles'?

This would be a place of torment.
12:5 But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.
43 `And if thy hand may cause thee to stumble, cut it off; it is better for thee maimed to enter into the life, than having the two hands, to go away to the gehenna, to the fire--the unquenchable-- 44 where their worm is not dying, and the fire is not being quenched.

In other words, gehenna/hell is where the body and soul are dealt death, but the spirit is not present?

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/gehenna.

This is only found in 2 Peter 2:4.
Strongs says it is the deepest hades/sheol.

In other words, tartaro/hell is where the fallen angels/spirits in the supposed rebellion with Satan, were cast down to? Wouldn't that be earth? And wouldn't they be the demons we now find to be our spiritual adversaries? Or did God create more spirits and send them to earth while he kept the rebelling 1/3 along with Satan? Oh wait HE must have let Satan out so he could run with the new spirits He created for us to deal with. I'm going to stop with my 'supposition' unlike Orthodoxy did with their extrapolation of scripture which never existed.

Adam was never in Heaven before his sin. Also, in looking at the Genealogies in Genesis 5 and 1 Chronicles 1 we see his name is Adam, not Lucifer.
Lucifer/Satan was in Heaven.
When Lucifer fell, he bace Satan.

Or it was never Adam to begin with. But let's just start with your got to physically have been in heaven' error.

"And thou Capernaum, which art exalted to HEAVEN, shall be thrust down to hell [hades/death/the grave]" (Luke 10:15).

Sinful Capernaum was never exalted to GOD’S heaven, but to their OWN HEAVEN, the heaven of their own minds. Their city never left the surface of the earth, but IN THEIR MINDS they thought they had reached "heaven." Now then, with this in mind, let us move ahead and see how these Scriptures tie in and harmonize together. The king of Babylon had a dream, and in the dream his kingdom was likened to a tree:

"The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached into HEAVEN…" (Dan. 4:11).

No Lucifer isn't Satan, and he isn't Adam. He was the king of Babylon, the same place they thought they'd build a tower unto the heavens. Orthodoxy dumbly believes they meant to build a literal brick and mortar building. The Babylonians weren't that stupid. This tower of Babel was none other than an observatory tower which was part of the false religion of astrology, where men would plot their lives according to their zodiac sign and not depend upon God. The tower of Dendera in Egypt was a very similar type structure.