Annihilationism Is Actually...Biblical

[Der Alte]

Seriously? Look Jesus said the Law and prophets were until John. Moses records things in the Mosaic Law as being olam. The translators translate it as forever. Either it's forever or it's not. Jesus indicated that the Law ended. Thus olam cannot mean forever. This isn't hard. It's actually really if we're not pushing an agenda.

Where did Jesus say the law ended?

Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.​

 

[Butch5]

Where did Jesus say the law ended?

Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.​

Did Jesus fulfill the Law?

16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. (Lk. 16:16 KJV)

 

[Der Alte]

It's an appeal to authority because it's been proven wrong. Despite the fact that it's been shown that the word olam cannot mean eternity, you continue to appeal to the lexicon, authority, as though this over rides the proof already established.

Amateurish agenda driven arguments are not proof! So nothing has been proven wrong. The lexicon still is the only credible evidence provided.

Yet again you present an begging the question argument. If olam means age or ages then the olam disgrace will last for an or ages and not be forgotten.

Nonsense! Please show me the words "last for an age or ages?" Here you have to add words to make it say what you want it to. Read it again "the olam disgrace" NOT "disgrace that lasts for an olam."

Also, an olam covenant can last an age or ages and be remembered after it ends. Just because it isn't forgotten doesn't mean the covenant goes on forever.

Once again adding words, "can last," to make it say what you want it to. Does God bind His people to himself only for an age or ages?

Jeremiah 50:5
(5) They will ask the way to Zion and turn their faces toward it. They will come and bind themselves to the LORD in an everlasting [עולם/olam] covenant that will not be forgotten.​

An olam dominion or an age enduring dominion the will never end can also be interpreted as never ending during that age.

Twisting and adding words. It does not say "never end during the age."

You see, all of these can easily be understood using the word age or ages. The reason your argument is begging the question is because you assuming that "will not be forgotten" means for eternity. You assuming that "will not pass away" and "will not be destroyed" mean eternity. However, it could also mean for that age. Thus you're reading eternity into these phrases and then back into the word olam in your comparison.

Nonsense! Can you really not see how absurd this argument is?

Daniel 7:14
(14) He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting [ עולם/olam] dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.​

Is God's dominion ever going to end? What happens then? Is God's kingdom some day going to be destroyed? Who is going to destroy God's kingdom? Another ridiculous argument shot down

Jeremiah 23:40
(40) I will bring on you everlasting disgrace [ עולם/olam]—everlasting shame [עולם/olam] that will not be forgotten." ​

Will the the disgrace and shame of these people some day end? Where is the scripture which say that?

 

[Der Alte]

Did Jesus fulfill the Law?
16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. (Lk. 16:16 KJV)

Dancing around the question. You claimed that Jesus said the law had ended. Where did Jesus say the law had ended?

Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled​

All the law had not been fulfilled when Jesus said this. Might want to do some reading in the OT to find out what has yet to be fulfilled.

 

[Butch5]

Amateurish agenda driven arguments are not proof! So nothing has been proven wrong. The lexicon still is the only credible evidence provided.

Of course. The only credible source is whatever agrees with you.

Nonsense! Please show me the words "last for an age or ages?" Here you have to add words to make it say what you want it to. Read it again the olam disgrace

No it's not. Olam is translated with aion in the Septugint and age is a definition of aion. I haven't added anything. It's just upsetting because once again you've been shown wrong.

Once again adding words, "can last," to make it say what you want it to. Does God bind His people to himself only for an age or ages?

Jeremiah 50:5
(5) They will ask the way to Zion and turn their faces toward it. They will come and bind themselves to the LORD in an everlasting [עולם/olam] covenant that will not be forgotten.​

I've already explained this.​

Twisting and adding words. It does not say "never end during the age."

It's you that's dancing not me. I simply explained how the passages can be understood in a way other than what you're presenting. Since they can be understood another way it shows that your way doesn't prove your case.

Can you really not see how absurd this argument is?

Daniel 7:14
(14) He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting [ עולם/olam] dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.​

Is God's dominion ever going to end? What happens then? Is God's kingdom some day going to be destroyed? Who is going to destroy God's kingdom? Another ridiculous argument shot down

Jeremiah 23:40
(40) I will bring on you everlasting disgrace [ עולם/olam]—everlasting shame [עולם/olam] that will not be forgotten." ​

Will the the disgrace and shame of these people some day end? Where is the scripture which say that?

The argument isn't absurd. What's absurd is the extent that you're going to to try to try to hold on to a position that is clearly untenable. Anybody with two eyes can see that Jesus said the Law and the prophets were until John. Therefore all of the tenets of the Law that were said to be olam cannot be forever. It's really, really simple. This is so easy a child can grasp it. Just let go of your pride man.

 

[Butch5]

Dancing around the question. You claimed that Jesus said the law had ended. Where did Jesus say the law had ended?

Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled​

All the law had not been fulfilled when Jesus said this. Might want to do some reading in the OT to find out what has yet to be fulfilled.

I'm the one dancing? Really? You asked a question and I answered it by posting the passage in question. However, when I asked you a question you didn't answer it. It seems to me that it's you who is dancing. Pride isn't worth it man.

16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. (Lk. 16:16 KJV)

 

[Oseas]

[QUOTE ClementofA, post # 457]
I'd opine the chains in Jude 6 are eternal, so AIDIOS is eternal there. What is not eternal is how long they are said to be kept in those chains, which is until the day of judgement. Whether or not they are kept in chains thereafter is not addressed.[/QUOTE]

Oh "whether or not they are kept in chains thereafter is not addressed". But, why?
Firstly, we can see in Jude v.6 that the angels are bound for some millennia without any Judgment. The punishment of the angels was determined for after the Judgment of them all, of course, so it has been determined a Day or pre-setted a "date" by God for their Judgment, right? And this would happen only after a few millennia , as we can see by the Word of God. They are in prison yet to be Judged. We are talking about mystery, so the subject is not so superficial to talk about or to comment.

As is written (vs.6-7), the angels which kept not their FIRST ESTATE (their heavenly state), but left their own habitation (their celestial nature), giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, in like manner, for better understanding, of Sodom and Gomorrha and neighbouring cities, so the Most High God hath reserved them in everlasting chains under darkness unto the Judgment of this Great Day, and this Great Day has already arrived and they will suffer the vengeance of eternal fire in this present time.

The question is: Who are these fallen angels? The Lord JESUS gives us a clue.
Jesus said to the Jews: Matthew 23:33-36
33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel (who was killed by Cain) unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. (Yes, how can they escape the damnation of hell?)

Who is Cain's father? Adam; and Cain was the first son, he is the firstborn of Adam. Cain was of the Devil (1John 3:v,12), because he was born of the Devil. So Satan seized the creation of God in the own garden of God and have developed his own seed on earth umtil this day, using the creation of God as an Usurper he is.

But wait, but wait, what do the Jews have to do with the shed blood of Abel as Jesus said? Humm?
Was Cain a Jew, or a Jewish man? Yes. In accord what JESUS have said, the Jews are a native generation of the Garden of Eden, and upon them "may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel (who was killed by Cain) unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom they slew between the temple and the altar".

See the dialogue between JESUS and the Jews: John 8:37to,
37 JESUS said to the Jews: I know you are the seed of Avraham. Yet you are out to kill me, because what I am saying makes no headway in you.
38 I say what my Father has shown me; you do what your father has told you!”
39 They answered him, “Our father is Avraham.” Yeshua replied, “If you are children of Avraham, then do the things Avraham did! 40 As it is, you are out to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Avraham did nothing like that! 41 You are doing the things your father does.” “We’re not illegitimate children!” they said to him. “We have only one Father — God!” 42 Yeshua replied to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me; because I came out from God; and now I have arrived here. I did not come on my own; he sent me. 43 Why don’t you understand what I’m saying? Because you can’t bear to listen to my message. 44 You belong to your father, Satan, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. From the start he was a murderer, and he has never stood by the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he tells a lie, he is speaking in character; because he is a liar — indeed, the inventor of the lie! 45 But as for me, because I tell the truth you don’t believe me. 46 Which one of you can show me where I’m wrong? If I’m telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47 Whoever belongs to God listens to what God says; the reason you don’t listen is that you don’t belong to God.”
The punishment of the fallen angels will be now, and upon them "will come all the blood shed upon the earth from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom they slew between the temple and the altar".
And God will fulfil the punishment of the Jewish people in this end of the time, as it is written in 2Kings 14:26-27:26 For Adonai saw how bitterly Isra’el had suffered, with no one left, either slave or free, and no one coming to Isra’el’s aid. 27 And Adonai did not threaten YET to blot out the name of Isra’el from under heaven.

 

[ClementofA]

If the punishment for sin was eternal conscious torment, Jesus must still be dead. Or else his tiny sacrifice of simply death must be meaningless in the face of God’s eternal anger.

If the punishment for sin was endless death, Jesus must still be dead.

The abolishing of death (1 Cor.15:25-26) means an end to the death of those in the second death, which means their resurrection "in Christ" as per 1 Cor.15:22-28.

"Just as surely as the abolition of slavery entails freedom for those formerly enslaved, the abolition of death entails life for those formerly dead."

And the seventh messenger did sound, and there came great voices in the heaven, saying, 'The kingdoms of the world did become those of our Lord and of His Christ, and he shall reign into the ages of the ages!' (Rev.11:15)

3 No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be within the city, and His servants will worship Him. 4 They will see His face, and His name will be on their foreheads. 5 And night shall not be any more, and no need of a lamp, and light of the sun; for the Lord God shall shine upon them, and they shall reign into the ages of ages. (Rev.22:3-5)

The verses above indicate Christ & the saints shall be reigning "into the ages of the ages", including the millenial age & the age when the lake of fire (= the 2nd death) is abolished. But 1 Cor.15:25 says Christ's reign is UNTIL He has put all enemies under His feet. Since He is still reigning at the time of Revelation 20-22, all enemies are not yet under His feet. So neither can God yet be "All in all" (1 Cor.15:28) nor death [e.g. 2nd death] abolished.

So death is not abolished (1 Cor.15:26), since that is associated with the end of Christ's reign (v.25) & will not happen till He quits reigning. Also those humans who died a second death in the lake of fire, which is the second death, are still dead, so death is not yet abolished (v.26). As long as the second death remains & is not abolished, death is not abolished as per v.26.

Neither is "all rule and authority and power" yet nullified (1 Cor.15:24) by Revelation 21-22. There are still kings in the earth (Rev.21:24). There is still the throne of the Lamb & the saints reigning (22:3,5). So neither is death abolished or God "all in all" (1 Cor.15:28).

God cannot be "all in all" (1 Cor.15:28) while there are still those in the second death & those being tormented in the lake of fire (Rev.14:9-11; 19:20; 20:10).

In Revelation 22:2 we also have leaves that are for the healing of the nations. Who at this time would need healing? Those in the lake of fire.

Rev.15:4 Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name? for thou only art holy: for all nations shall come and worship before thee; for thy judgments are made manifest.

This sounds like just payback, not endless annihilation or tortures:

Rev.18:6 Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double.

"The Prophets are full of similar teaching. Note Isaiah connecting the words of comfort and pardon to Israel with her having received 'double for all her sins' (Isa 40:1-2). So it is said, 'Zion shall be redeemed with judgment' (Isa 1:27)...this connection of judgment and salvation runs through the Bible....So in Ezekiel 24:13-14, it is said of Israel, 'You shall not be purged of your filthiness any more, till I have satisfied my fury upon you.'"

Christ Triumphant, Part Three: Universalism Asserted on the Authority of Scripture

Rev.21:5 He who was seated on the throne said, “I am making all new!” All is not yet new while there are still those dead or suffering in the lake of fire.

This includes everyone in the universe, including the dead and demons:

Rev.5:13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.

John speaks of "every creature" & to emphasize this again he repeats "and all that are in them":

Rev.5:13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.

This worship (v.13) uses the same worshipful words as the redeemed of vs 9-10 use in v.12:

12 Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.

All this being in the context of salvation - "the Lamb that was slain" (v.12 & 13).

In the Book of Revelation, the phrase "kings of the earth" appears 7 times in Rev 6:15; 17:2,18; 18:3,9; 19:19; 21:24. In all but the last citation the kings of the earth are portrayed in Revelation as aligned with Mystery Babylon and are the enemies of God. Yet, in 21:24 we find that the "kings of the earth" will one day bring their splendor into the New Jerusalem. One must therefore ask how or why are the kings of the earth who are consistently and without exception portrayed in Revelation as evil and unrepentant, allowed into the New Jerusalem where "nothing unclean will ever enter it, nor anyone who does what is detestable or false, but only those who are written in the Lamb's book of life" (21:27). I cannot find any scriptural evidence that these kings of the earth are any different than the previous references. Therefore the only conclusion I can arrive at is it that appears that even the kings of the earth after having spent some unknown time in the lake of fire will one day repent and be allowed to enter into the New Jerusalem.

That recalls some passages in the OT about kings:

Psalm 72:11
Yea, all kings shall fall down before him: all nations shall serve him.

Psalm 102:15
So the nations will fear the name of the LORD And all the kings of the earth Your glory.

Psalm 138:4
All the kings of the earth will give thanks to You, O LORD, When they have heard the words of Your mouth.

Isaiah 60
2"For behold, darkness will cover the earth And deep darkness the peoples; But the LORD will rise upon you And His glory will appear upon you. 3"Nations will come to your light, And kings to the brightness of your rising.

Isaiah 62:2
The nations will see your righteousness, And all kings your glory; And you will be called by a new name Which the mouth of the LORD will designate.

Revelation 21:24
By its light the nations will walk, and into it the kings of the earth will bring their glory.

For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

 

[ClementofA]

6. “And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever." - Revelation 20:10; 14-15

This is talking about the Beast, Devil, and False Prophet. Not humans.

A Primer on Revelation 20:10

Doesn't that make God sadistic if they are tormented forever and ever?

If endless conscious torments were true, is God a monster?

 

[ClementofA]

It does until you or some other uni can show me where Paul told the Christians in Corinth, Galatia and Ephesus that all those groups Paul said would not inherit the kingdom of God would inherit the kingdom after death.

Again you are evading answering the question with a simple yes or no:

Do you think 1 Cor.6:9-11 refutes universalism?

Either you think it is a proof text against universalism or you don't.

If you don't think it refutes universalism, why keep posting it? What's the point if it's irrelevant to the discussion.

Ditto for the parallel passages you posted: Eph.5:5 & Gal.5:19-21 along with 1 Cor.6:9-11.

Evidently you do not understand the significance of the tense of verbs. I was [past tense] an unrepentant sinner, I am [present tense] no longer an unrepentant sinner. Many people are [present tense] unrepentant sinners.

How does this support your position?

I do know that you try to prove several passages, in Paul, which clearly state that certain people will not inherit the kingdom of God don't really mean that because of something Paul said to a different church.
.....Please spare me the repetitious links I do not read them.ything that Paul wrote to other churches. Without that the only reasonable conclusion is when Paul told churches that certain people would not inherit the kingdom of God that is exactly what they would have understood and Paul did not tell them otherwise. point, set, match.

Note the tenses of the verbs "Were" past tense. "Are, present tense.

The words of anonymous "commentators" with no demonstrated or stated qualification, are irrelevant.

Please show me any verse(s) which state that all those groups that Paul mentioned will be cleansed?

No they are not! What did the Corinthians, Galatians and Ephesians understand when Paul said all those groups would not inherit the kingdom of God? There is no record that they were ever told anything different.

Romans 5:17-19
(17) For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!
(18) Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.
(19) For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.
Who are the many in this vs "those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness" vs. 17.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
(9) Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men
(10) nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
Galatians 5:19-21
(19) The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery;
(20) idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions
(21) and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Ephesians 5:5
(5) For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person—such a person is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
How did the Corinthians, Galatians, and Ephesians to whom Paul was writing understand the words "shall not inherit the kingdom of God?" Wait I know they just flipped open the letter to the Romans, which they probably had never seen, and knew that many meant all would be made righteous. I'm sure you can detect the sarcasm.

I already have. Your only response is "I'm right and you're wrong! Am too! Nuh huh!" and "the passages you quoted are perfectly harmonious
with universal salvation." Where does Paul tell the Corinthians, Galatians and Ephesians that all the groups he said would not inherit the kingdom of God, will ultimately inherit the kingdom
of God?
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
(9) Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men
(10) nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
Galatians 5:19-21
(19) The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery;
(20) idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions
(21) and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Ephesians 5:5
(5) For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person—such a person is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf

 

[DavidPT]

Doesn't that make God sadistic if they are tormented forever and ever?

If endless conscious torments were true, is God a monster?

It does seem to suggest it makes Him sadistic to do that to them forever, yet that's what the text clearly states though---- and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.


If the text in Revelation 20 said this about humans as well, there wouldn't be a debate as far as I'm concerned.

Since you seem to adhere to universalism, how do you make the following fit with that position?

Matthew 12:31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.


Mark 3:28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:
30 Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit.

 

[Jordan Henshaw]

Since you seem to adhere to universalism, how do you make the following fit with position?

Matthew 12:31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.


Mark 3:28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:
30 Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit.

I'm not a Universalist, but these passages don't work.

How many people do you think have blasphemed against God? How many do you think ended up becoming saved?

 

[DavidPT]

I'm not a Universalist, but these passages don't work.

How many people do you think have blasphemed against God? How many do you think ended up becoming saved?

Matthew 12:31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

If it shall not be forgiven him in this world, which I take to mean this present age, let alone it will not be forgiven him in the age to come, how then could a person doing this possibly get saved in this age if they can't even be forgiven in this age? The text indicates it is only whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him. I would think this easily debunks universalism.

 

[Der Alte]

Of course. The only credible source is whatever agrees with you.

What, if any, sources have you provided other than your own amateurish opinions. I quoted from Brown, Driver, Briggs Hebrew Lexicon.

No it's not. Olam is translated with aion in the Septugint and age is a definition of aion. I haven't added anything. It's just upsetting because once again you've been shown wrong.

What other word could the LXX translators use to express eternal? Where is that Greek word which unequivocally means eternal?

It's you that's dancing not me. I simply explained how the passages can be understood in a way other than what you're presenting. Since they can be understood another way it shows that your way doesn't prove your case.

Absolutely wrong! What you must do is prove that the word can only ever be translated as you want to translate it.
What does "olam" mean in these verses?

Daniel 7:14
(14) He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting [ עולם/olam] dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.​

Here is what this verse is saying an “olam dominion” “that will not pass away” and “never be destroyed.” and “olam dominion”that will never be destroyed." Trying to make this verse say "a finite. ages long, dominion that will not pass away""a finite. ages long, dominion that will never be destroyed" is absolutely absurd.

Jeremiah 23:40
(40) I will bring on you everlasting disgrace [ עולם/olam]—everlasting shame [ עולם/olam] that will not be forgotten." ​

You would have us believe that this verse really say "finite, ages long, disgrace that will not be forgotten." and "finite, ages long, shame that will not be forgotten" When will this olam shame and disgrace be forgotten? It has been about 3000 years and it has not been forgotten yet. As long as God's word exists it will not be forgotten. As long as God exists it will not be forgotten.
Jeremiah 50:5

(5) They will ask the way to Zion and turn their faces toward it. They will come and bind themselves to the LORD in an everlasting [עולם/olam] covenant that will not be forgotten.​

You would have us believe that this verse says they will come and bind themselves to the LORD in a finite, ages long covenant that will end and will be forgotten.

The argument isn't absurd. What's absurd is the extent that you're going to to try to try to hold on to a position that is clearly untenable. Anybody with two eyes can see that Jesus said the Law and the prophets were until John. Therefore all of the tenets of the Law that were said to be olam cannot be forever. It's really, really simple. This is so easy a child can grasp it. Just let go of your pride man.

Yes Jesus did say "the Law and the prophets were until John" but Jesus also said "not one jot or one tittle will pass from the law until all be fulfilled" I asked you a question which you ignored. How many of the prophecies in the OT have yet to be fulfilled? Here are a few, has the Messiah returned in the clouds? Have all eyes seen the one they pierced and mourned for him. Has the foot of the returning Messiah touched down on the mount of Olives and has it split north and south? Last warning about insults.

 

[Jordan Henshaw]

What other word could the LXX translators use to express eternal? Where is that Greek word which unequivocally means eternal?

Exactly.

 

[DavidPT]

What does "olam" mean in these verses?[/SIZE][/FONT]

Daniel 7:14
(14) He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting [ עולם/olam] dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.​

Here is what this verse is saying an “olam dominion” “that will not pass away” and “never be destroyed.” and “olam dominion”that will never be destroyed." Trying to make this verse say "a finite. ages long, dominion that will not pass away""a finite. ages long, dominion that will never be destroyed" is absolutely absurd.

What does it mean to never be destroyed? Once you figure that out, and I'm guessing you already easily have, that means the opposite has to be true of something that can be destroyed, because if it's not the opposite, it is the exact same thing as never being destroyed, such as in the passage used above.

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.

The above is plainly what the text states. Apparently the following is what you claim it states instead---And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to NEVER destroy both soul and body in hell.

 

[Der Alte]

What does it mean to never be destroyed? Once you figure that out, and I'm guessing you already easily have, that means the opposite has to be true of something that can be destroyed, because if it's not the opposite, it is the exact same thing as never being destroyed, such as in the passage used above.
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.
The above is plainly what the text states. Apparently the following is what you claim it states instead---And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to NEVER destroy both soul and body in hell.

In my post which you quoted, I quoted Daniel 7:14. I did not quote or say anything about Matt 10:28. So I don't know what in the world you are talking about.

 

[Jordan Henshaw]

Of course. The only credible source is whatever agrees with you.



No it's not. Olam is translated with aion in the Septugint and age is a definition of aion. I haven't added anything. It's just upsetting because once again you've been shown wrong.

I've already explained this.​

It's you that's dancing not me. I simply explained how the passages can be understood in a way other than what you're presenting. Since they can be understood another way it shows that your way doesn't prove your case.



The argument isn't absurd. What's absurd is the extent that you're going to to try to try to hold on to a position that is clearly untenable. Anybody with two eyes can see that Jesus said the Law and the prophets were until John. Therefore all of the tenets of the Law that were said to be olam cannot be forever. It's really, really simple. This is so easy a child can grasp it. Just let go of your pride man.

There are obviously multiple way of interpreting olam, aidiois, and ainoios. None of them mean true eternity every time.

Therefore, anyone who tries to use any of these three words to prove whether or not something is truly eternal or not is chasing after the wind.

So acknowledge that you can't win or lose ANYTHING by arguing about any of these three words.

They can all be EASILY interpreted BOTH ways.

 

[DavidPT]

In my post which you quoted, I quoted Daniel 7:14. I did not quote or say anything about Matt 10:28. So I don't know what in the world you are talking about.

The reason I brought up Matthew 10:28 is because that verse says God is able to destroy both body and soul in hell, and not instead never destroy both body and soul in hell. That passage you brought up in Daniel is referring to something that will never be destroyed, as in will exist forever, though not related to Matthew 10:28, therefore I'm only using that passage to try and illustrate a point. Jesus wasn't meaning that in Matthew 10:28 though. He wasn't meaning the body and soul will never be destroyed in hell, because if He was meaning that He would have said never, the same way the text in Daniel says never.

Imagine if someone interpreted that passage in Daniel like such instead.

Daniel 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.


No one would take 'never' out of that verse since it drastically changes the meaning. Why then would someone add 'never' to what is stated in Matthew 10:28, since that, too, would obviously drastically change the meaning? Once again, the text says---but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell---and not instead---but rather fear him which is able to never destroy both soul and body in hell.

 

[Der Alte]

The reason I brought up Matthew 10:28 is because that verse says God is able to destroy both body and soul in hell, and not instead never destroy both body and soul in hell. That passage you brought up in Daniel is referring to something that will never be destroyed, as in will exist forever, though not related to Matthew 10:28, therefore I'm only using that passage to try and illustrate a point. Jesus wasn't meaning that in Matthew 10:28 though. He wasn't meaning the body and soul will never be destroyed in hell, because if He was meaning that He would have said never, the same way the text in Daniel says never.

Imagine if someone interpreted that passage in Daniel like such instead.

Daniel 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

No one would take 'never' out of that verse since it drastically changes the meaning. Why then would someone add 'never' to what is stated in Matthew 10:28, since that, too, would obviously drastically change the meaning? Once again, the text says---but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell---and not instead---but rather fear him which is able to never destroy both soul and body in hell.

Matthew says "fear him that is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." What God has created He most certainly can destroy. But neither Matthew nor any other scripture says that God has actually destroyed or will actually destroy any souls in hell. Here is how Luke records that.

Luke 12:4-5
(4) And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.
(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.​