Why would God have to punish the wicked for eternity?

[timothyu]

You just told me death means annihilation. Now you say it means unenlightened.

Yes in context that is what He meant

 

[BurningBush84]

Yes in context that is what He meant

So death doesn't always mean annihilation??

 

[timothyu]

So death doesn't always mean annihilation??

dead doesn't always mean physically kaput

 

[Butch5]

No they don't agree. All those different Bibles were made by different scholars with different beliefs. Yet I only see 1 version that has the word "age" in Matthew 25:46.

Using your own reasoning then, you'd have to say that only the New World Translation got John 1:1 correctly. So you believe Jesus was a god. Do you use the NWT ?

Your reasoning is flawed. Technically "a God" is a possible translation. It's not a good one, but it possible. But that's not the point I was making. My point is that Just because a majority may claim something, it doesn't necessitate that's its true.

If you look at your old testment, you'll find passage after passage after passage that say the ordinances of the Mosaic Law are forever. Are they? Are Christians supposed to follow the Mosiac Law? Are they forever? Paul said the Law ended with Christ. Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law? Did He? If He did, then why would it be necessary for Christians to observe the Mosaic Law. So, that leaves us with a dilemma. Paul said the Law ended. Jesus fulfilled the Law. Yet, our translators say that the Law is forever. If the God said through the prophets that the Law was forever, why did he have the temple destroyed? The Jews couldn't perform the ordinances without the temple. So why would God say something is forever when He knew He was going to destroy the temple and the ordinances wouldn't be forever? Someone has to be wrong. It can't have ended and be forever, the two are mutually exclusive. So we have to decide who we think is correct. I know who I'm going with.

 

[BurningBush84]

Your reasoning is flawed. Technically "a God" is a possible translation. It's not a good one, but it possible. But that's not the point I was making. My point is that Just because a majority may claim something, it doesn't necessitate that's its true.

If you look at your old testment, you'll find passage after passage after passage that say the ordinances of the Mosaic Law are forever. Are they? Are Christians supposed to follow the Mosiac Law? Are they forever? Paul said the Law ended with Christ. Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law? Did He? If He did, then why would it be necessary for Christians to observe the Mosaic Law. So, that leaves us with a dilemma. Paul said the Law ended. Jesus fulfilled the Law. Yet, our translators say that the Law is forever. If the God said through the prophets that the Law was forever, why did he have the temple destroyed? The Jews couldn't perform the ordinances without the temple. So why would God say something is forever when He knew He was going to destroy the temple and the ordinances wouldn't be forever? Someone has to be wrong. It can't have ended and be forever, the two are mutually exclusive. So we have to decide who we think is correct. I know who I'm going with.

Teaching that Jesus was a god instead of God is a huge catastrophic mistake. I consider the 10 commandments part of the Mosaic Law. And I believe we are to obey the 10 commandments.

 

[BurningBush84]

dead doesn't always mean physically kaput

Does Butch5 agree ??

 

[timothyu]

And I believe we are to obey the 10 commandments.

Of course. At no point were we to stop obeying the will of God. Doing so got us kicked out of the Garden in the first place. The Lord's prayer says His will will be done in earth as it is in Heaven, especially when His kingdom comes.

 

[BurningBush84]

If annihilation was a punishment people would never commit suicide .

 

[Butch5]

So death doesn't always mean annihilation??

Sometimes it's use figuratively.

 

[Butch5]

If annihilation was a punishment people would never commit suicide .

That's just an opinion

 

[Butch5]

Does Butch5 agree ??

death always means death. Sometimes it's meant literally and sometimes figuratively.

 

[Butch5]

Teaching that Jesus was a god instead of God is a huge catastrophic mistake. I consider the 10 commandments part of the Mosaic Law. And I believe we are to obey the 10 commandments.

As I said, it's not a good translation. The 10 commandments aren't the ordinances of the Mosaic Law. Should Christians go to the temple and offer sacrifices? How could they, there is no longer a temple in Jerusalem. Should Christians follow all of the dietary laws in the Mosaic Law? There are about 613 Laws in the Mosaic covenant. Should Christians follow them. Many of them are said by English translators to be "forever". As I pointed out, Paul said the Law ended and Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law. If Jesus and Paul are correct then those English translations "MUST" be incorrect. That presents us with a dilemma. We've go translations that says a lot of things the ended are forever. By the very definition of forever, it cannot end. So, we have to ask ourselves, who is wrong?

 

[Der Alte]

Not at all. You just don't understand what He's saying.

No! You!, don't understand what Jesus is saying. And I have 2000 yrs +/- Greek scholarship on my side.

EOB Matthew:25:46 When he will answer them, saying: ‘Amen, I tell you: as much as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ 46 These [ones on the left vs. 41] will go away into eternal [αἰώνιος/aionios] punishment, [κόλασις/kolasis] but the righteous into eternal [αἰώνιος/aionios] life.”[EOB, p. 96]​

…..Greek has been the language of the Eastern Greek Orthodox church since its inception, 2000 years ago +/-. Note, the native Greek speaking Eastern Orthodox Greek scholars, translators of the EOB, linked below, translated “aionios,” in Matt 25:46, as “eternal,” NOT “age.”
…..I doubt there is anyone better qualified than the team of native Greek speaking scholars, translators of the Eastern Greek Orthodox Bible [EOB], quoted above and below, to know the correct translation of the Greek in the N.T.
Link to EOB online:

The New Testament ( The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Bible) : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

The New Testament (The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Bible)

archive.org

…..The Greek word “kolasis” occurs only twice in the N.T., 1st occurrence Matt 25:46, above, and 2nd occurrence 1 John 4:18., below.

EOB 1 John 4:18 There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear, because fear is connected with punishment.[κόλασις/kolasis] But the one who fears is not yet perfect in love.[EOB, p. 518]​

In the EOB the Greek word “kolasis” is translated “punishment” in both Matt 25:46 and 1 John 4:18.
…..Some badly informed folks claim “kolasis” really means “prune” or “correct.”
Sorry, that is impossible, both “prune” and “correct” are verbs. “Kolasis” is a noun. A noun cannot be translated as a verb.
Also according to the EOB Greek scholars “kolasis” means “punishment.”
Note: in 1 John 4:18 there is no correction, the one with “kolasis” is not made perfect. Thus “kolasis” does not/cannot mean “correction.”
The word “correction” occurs one time in the N.T.
2 Timothy 3:16 ἐπανόρθωσις/epanorthosis. It looks nothing like kolasis.
…..It is acknowledged that modern Greek differs from koine Greek but I am confident that the native Greek speaking EOB scholars, supported by 2000 yrs +/- of uninterrupted Greek scholarship, are more than competent enough to know the correct translation of obsolete Greek words which may have changed in meaning or are no longer in use and to translate them correctly. Much as English speaking scholars today know the meaning of obsolete English words which occur in, e.g. the 1611 KJV and can define them correctly.

 

[Der Alte]

As I said, it's not a good translation. The 10 commandments aren't the ordinances of the Mosaic Law. Should Christians go to the temple and offer sacrifices? How could they, there is no longer a temple in Jerusalem. Should Christians follow all of the dietary laws in the Mosaic Law? There are about 613 Laws in the Mosaic covenant. Should Christians follow them. Many of them are said by English translators to be "forever". As I pointed out, Paul said the Law ended and Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law. If Jesus and Paul are correct then those English translations "MUST" be incorrect. That presents us with a dilemma. We've go translations that says a lot of things the ended are forever. By the very definition of forever, it cannot end. So, we have to ask ourselves, who is wrong?

They are wrong who refuse to understand that words are sometimes used figuratively in the Bible. I did a study of every occurrence of "olam" in the OT, I found that it is defined/described as eternal/for ever/everlasting 68 times. Here are 5 vss. from the 1906 Jewish Publication Society OT.

1) Jeremiah 51:39​

(39) In their heat I will make their feasts, and I will make them drunken, that they may rejoice, and sleep a perpetual [olam] sleep, and not wake, saith the LORD.​

2) Jeremiah 50:5​

(5) They shall ask the way to Zion with their faces thitherward, saying, Come, and let us join ourselves to the LORD in a perpetual [olam] covenant that shall not be forgotten.​

3) Jeremiah 23:40​

(40) And I will bring an everlasting [olam] reproach upon you, and a perpetual shame, which shall not be forgotten.​

4) Isaiah 56:5​

(5) Even unto them will I give in My house and within My walls a monument and a memorial better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting [olam] memorial, that shall not be cut off.​

5) Isaiah 55:13​

(13) Instead of the thorn shall come up the cypress, and instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle; and it shall be to the LORD for a memorial, for an everlasting [olam] sign that shall not be cut off.​

 

[Der Alte]

Your question is based on opinion. Since there is no such things as eternal torment, I would answer the greater savior is the one who saves from annihilation.
God said through Ezekiel, 'the soul that sins shall die'. He didn't say the soul that sins shall suffer eternally torment.
Paul said, 'the wages of sin is death'. He didn't say the wages of sin is eternal torment.

The words of Paul or any other Bible writer cannot supersede the words of Jesus, Himself.
Matthew 7:21-23, 25:46

 

[BurningBush84]

Sometimes it's use figuratively.

You showed me how words might not always mean what they say. Like in Luke 9:60. The annihilated cannot bury the dead. You said the wages of sin is death. But babies die all the time.

We have more than just Matthew 25:46.

We have Matthew 18:8. It's says self mutilation is better than being thrown in eternal fire. And I obviously agree.

Matthew 18:8 proves Hell is thee exact opposite of Revelation 21:4.

But people who commit suicide do it because they want to end their sadness and pain. They want the unique benefits of Revelation 21:4.

Revelation 21:4 proves annihilation is a unique gracious blessing. Almost as good as heaven. But Matthew 18:8 says the exact opposite of Revelation 21:4.

Your interpretation of Matthew 18:8 says self mutilation is better then feeling no more sadness or pain. Try telling a suicidal person that self mutilation would be better than feeling no more sadness or pain .

 

[Butch5]

You showed me how words might not always mean what they say. Like in Luke 9:60. The annihilated cannot bury the dead. You said the wages of sin is death. But babies die all the time.

We have more than just Matthew 25:46.

We have Matthew 18:8. It's says self mutilation is better than being thrown in eternal fire. And I obviously agree.

Matthew 18:8 proves Hell is thee exact opposite of Revelation 21:4.

But people who commit suicide do it because they want to end their sadness and pain. They want the unique benefits of Revelation 21:4.

Revelation 21:4 proves annihilation is a unique gracious blessing. Almost as good as heaven. But Matthew 18:8 says the exact opposite of Revelation 21:4.

Your interpretation of Matthew 18:8 says self mutilation is better then feeling no more sadness or pain. Try telling a suicidal person that self mutilation would be better than feeling no more sadness or pain .

You make a lot of assumptions. Death is being used as a metaphor in Luke 9:60. The fact that the dead can't bury other dead people tells us it's a metaphor, a figure of speech. It's just like in Ephesians 2 when Paul said they were dead in their sins. Surely you don't believe they were corpses, walking around sinnig, correct? It's a metaphor.

We have the same issue in Mathew 18:8. Aionios is translated incorrectly. Again, are Christians supposed to adhere to the Law of Moses? Should they go to the temple and offer sacrifices? If not, then aion is wrongly translated. It doesn't mean eternal. Paul said the Law ended and Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law. I asked you who is right, Jesus and Paul or modern translators. Who is it?

 

[BurningBush84]

You make a lot of assumptions. Death is being used as a metaphor in Luke 9:60. The fact that the dead can't bury other dead people tells us it's a metaphor, a figure of speech. It's just like in Ephesians 2 when Paul said they were dead in their sins. Surely you don't believe they were corpses, walking around sinnig, correct? It's a metaphor.

We have the same issue in Mathew 18:8. Aionios is translated incorrectly. Again, are Christians supposed to adhere to the Law of Moses? Should they go to the temple and offer sacrifices? If not, then aion is wrongly translated. It doesn't mean eternal. Paul said the Law ended and Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law. I asked you who is right, Jesus and Paul or modern translators. Who is it?

Your using the same reasoning JW's use when they defend the New World Translation of John 1:1. They say 99% of all the other versions/translations got John 1:1 wrong. But the fact is, all those other different versions/translations were made by different scholars with different beliefs,(which prevents bias) yet 99% of those different Bibles all say basically the same thing in John 1:1 and Matthew 25:46. But you and the JW's are talking just like how the Serpent did in Genesis 3:1. "Did God really say that ?".

 

[BurningBush84]

You make a lot of assumptions. Death is being used as a metaphor in Luke 9:60. The fact that the dead can't bury other dead people tells us it's a metaphor, a figure of speech. It's just like in Ephesians 2 when Paul said they were dead in their sins. Surely you don't believe they were corpses, walking around sinnig, correct? It's a metaphor.

We have the same issue in Mathew 18:8. Aionios is translated incorrectly. Again, are Christians supposed to adhere to the Law of Moses? Should they go to the temple and offer sacrifices? If not, then aion is wrongly translated. It doesn't mean eternal. Paul said the Law ended and Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law. I asked you who is right, Jesus and Paul or modern translators. Who is it?

To say the 10 commandments were never a part of the Mosaic Law is absurd. Revelation 21:4 proves your interpretation of Matthew 18:8 is wrong.

 

[Butch5]

Your using the same reasoning JW's use when they defend the New World Translation of John 1:1. They say 99% of all the other versions/translations got John 1:1 wrong. But the fact is, all those other different versions/translations were made by different scholars with different beliefs,(which prevents bias) yet 99% of those different Bibles all say basically the same thing in John 1:1 and Matthew 25:46. But you and the JW's are talking just like how the Serpent did in Genesis 3:1. "Did God really say that ?".

Don't ever think bias is eliminated, it's not. I've already explained this. I asked you how something eternal can end? You didn't answer. Can something that is eternal end? If not, then aion cannot mean eternal because Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles all talk about the end of the aion.

So, what we have is translators saying the aion does not end and Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles, saying it does end. You just have to decide who you're going to believe. Do you believe that modern translators better understand koine Greek than Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles, who actually spoke the language every day? If so, then go on believing it means eternal. However, if you choose to believe, Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles then you're going to have to believe it doesn't mean eternal and figure how to reconcile the different passages. As for me, I believe Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles, had a much better understanding of the language than any scholar today.