About hell

[JamesAH]

Yes, it does not matter what the Church Fathers, Christians, Saints, teachers, or anyone says. They are mere humans and capable of error.

We listen to Paul and the apostles.


My father told me that Paul and the apostles were 100% Holy Spirit filled while men like John Calvin and Martin Luther were 80% and the 20% came from their thoughts.

You cannot put your confidence in the Church Fathers since the Church Fathers were not 100% Holy Spirit filled.

You can't be filled with the Spirit 80%,70%,etc you are either filled with the Holy Spirit 100% or you're not filled with the Spirit at all no in betweens.

 

[ParanoidAndroid]

Eonian chastisement has a purpose; "eternal destruction" means nothing. What is eternal destruction since you believe the english translation to be the perfect one? What is the difference between eternal destruction and destruction? If you believe that destruction is final- what is the point of it carrying the adjective "aionios" with it?

This is where objectivity is thrown out huh? What will you come up with to defend your position? Even if you can prove that "destruction" is final- you have shot yourself in the foot by saying that the term "eternal" describes it in this verse. Was the speaker being overly dramatic and redundant to prove a point? Perhaps you will say that. eonian destruction- is the destruction of a person for a time period. This accurately corresponds with UR since the last enemy to be abolished is death and all shall be made alive and reconciled to God after the second death is abolished. How is death made null- by making all alive! it fits perfectly- and you don't have to avoid any verses or juxtapose man-made definitions to make it work....

Hi agape

Granted, I am no expert in the Greek language. I rely on Greek and Hebrew scholars to inform my understanding of the text. And my Greek dictionary concerning the word translated into English as "eternal" states:

aiōnios - perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well): - eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

This is Strong's Dictionary, and if it is wrong, please show me how (providing sources, where available). But going by this, it seems that the author intended "eternal" to actually be eternal. Why did the author use "eternal destruction" rather than simply "destruction" (that's one of the big questions you ask), I would perhaps say to AVOID the claims of UR, and ensure that the reader was in no way confused as to the length of time this destruction was - if no time is specified, one could try and argue that it was only temporary.

As an aside, you suggest I am avoiding verses and juxtaposing man-made definitions to my view - could you please elborate on this one for me?

~ PA

 

[ParanoidAndroid]

On your essay you sent me...I agree on most points. On page three I think you lean more to a form of annihilation. Is this correct?

You mention the verse the strait and narrow gate. One thing I remember in bible college was the correct perspective that was taught. Most Pastors fail, because they aren't aware of the customs and traditions of the period and how they relate to scripture.

Anoter verse brings the narrow gate into perspective.

The question was asked by some one (Luke 13:23 and Matt. 7:13,14): "Lord, are there few that be saved? and he answered: "Strive to enter in at the strait gate for many will seek to enter in and shall not be able. When once the master of the house is risen up and has shut the door and you begin to stand without and to knock saying Lord open unto us, then he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not. Then shall you begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in your presence and you have taught in our streets. But he shall say, I tell you I don't know you. Depart from me you workers of iniquity! There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth when you shall see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God and you yourselves thrust out."

There is some obvious symbolic language used in this verse and it's clear that the language is entirely confined to the present. "Lord, are there few that be 'saved'?" The literal rendering is: Are those being saved few? or are there few that are now being saved?

The question relates entirely to the number accepting Christianity at that time. The key to understanding scripture is CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT. Much of what Jesus had to say dealt with the coming fall of Jerusalem and the entire Jewish system in 70 AD and the expansion of the Kingdom to include the Gentiles. The church so fails as it takes so many verses on of context for this period. Jesus himself shows that the application was confined to those to whom he was speaking.
"Lord" (they say) "we have eaten and drunk in your presence and you have taught in our streets." and "There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth when you shall see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God and you yourselves thrust out."

It is amazing how often we can read scripture and not see what is in plain sight. The words apply entirely to those who had heard him speak in their streets, namely the Jews. The Jew's advantages were about to be taken away and given to the Gentiles. The Gentiles were to enter the kingdom by faith with faithful Abraham while the Jews were thrust out.

The weeping and gnashing of teeth represents their rage which was aggravated by their dislike of the Gentiles.
Mat 8:12 - "but the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."

Bible commentator Gill sheds some light on the Jewish term "outer darkness" - "The allusion in the text is to the customs of the ancients at their feasts and entertainments which were commonly held in the evening. The hall or dining room in which they sat was brightly illuminated with lamps and torches. Outside in the streets was complete darkness. It was common to hear nothing but the cries of the poor for something to be given to them. One would hear persons that were turned out as unworthy guests. There was the gnashing of their teeth resulting from the cold winter nights or due to indignation at their being left out."

The fall of Jerusalem in 70AD and how the many statements and prophecies of Jesus and other New Testament writers relate to it is a lost teaching in this day and age. The history of the fall of Jerusalem proves beyond doubt that those that rejected Christ, those that took the "wide gate" of conformity to the status quo, suffered horribly and they did.

Thanks Armistead,

You've basically got the gist of what my essay was saying (a form of annihilation [I may actually edit it to include that word, I like it, lol]).

I'll think on what you've written here. I can't guarantee I'll respond any time soon since you've brought so many issues up, but I'll have a look at the verses you discussed and see what I come up with. Best wishes, eh

~ Regards,

 

[Armistead14]

It's such a sad disgrace to prophecy that traditional churches teach and use verses like destruction and perish towards an eternal hell, when they were clearly referring to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. What sad is I went to Southwestern, bascially a fundie baptist college and even they taught all these verses correctly, yet so many baptist and fundies still try to apply them to end times, when it was about the fall of Jerusalem.

Here is another.

BUT WHAT ABOUT YOU SHALL ALL LIKEWISE PERISH?
"I tell you this - except you repent you shall all likewise perish." Luke 13:3, 5.

Most are taught that the word perish always relates to the immortal soul and that the presence of the word "perish" always means to suffer torment without end in eternal fires of hell.

Again, it's CONTEXT, you have to apply the verse to the subject being discussed. Watch how correct CONTEXT and understanding of original language Jesus was'nt referring to eternal burnings.

"Do you suppose that these Galileans were sinners above all the Galileans because they suffered such things? I tell you, no. But except you repent, you ( not everyone, you) shall all likewise perish."

That is, perish in a manner similar to their death, NOT ETERNAL PERISH. "Except you repent you shall all perish as they died." The 'you' in this verse is the people Jesus was talking to, jews. How did the people referred to perish? There were "some who told him of the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices and of a certain eighteen upon whom the tower of Siloam fell and killed." This is critical to understand and study



"Do you think they were sinners above all men that dwell in Jerusalem? I tell you, no. But except you repent you shall all likewise perish."

That is, be slain as they were.

A better explanation than I can give, so forgive me. Says Dr. Clarke: "you shall all likewise perish meaning in a similar way, in the same manner. This prediction of our lord was literally fulfilled. Blood was mingled with sacrifices and people were killed by falling stones. Again we are talking of the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. When the city was taken by the Romans, multitudes of the priests and people were in the process of worship and sacrifice when they were slain. Their blood was violently mingled with the blood of the sacrifices .. Just as Pilate mingled blood before, their blood was mingled again during the fall of Jerusalem.

The prophecy is fulfilled, they perished in exactly the same way.

It's such an injustice to God's word how we take all these perish, destruction verses and imply them to the eternal soul, when they refer to a fulfilled prophecy.

Last, but certainly not least, the word 'perish' in Luke 13: 3, 5 is 'appollumi' and is defined in many dictionaries as "to destroy utterly." ...How we love to use English words.

If you think this makes a case for eternal burnings or eternal separation from God, you need to know the exact same word 'appollumi' is translated 'lost' in these verses: Mat. 10:6, Mat. 15:24, Mat. 18:11, Luke 15:4, Luke 15:6, Luke 15:9, Luke 15:24, Luke 15:32, Luke 19:10, John 17:12 twice, John 18:9.

You will find these verses refer to the prodigal son and sinners in general and ALWAYS in the context that which was lost was not eternally lost. Jesus certainly was well spoken, yet, this is the word Jesus used for the word 'perish.' The word 'perish' or 'lost' does NOT equate to eternal burnings or separation from God at all.

 

[Armistead14]

Thanks Armistead,

You've basically got the gist of what my essay was saying (a form of annihilation [I may actually edit it to include that word, I like it, lol]).

I'll think on what you've written here. I can't guarantee I'll respond any time soon since you've brought so many issues up, but I'll have a look at the verses you discussed and see what I come up with. Best wishes, eh

~ Regards,

I'll respond to it. They're are certainly groups that believe in annihilation, but I believe it's a gross misunderstanding. It's sort of the group in between. They don't see eternal hell, but can't accept God would let those that haven't accepted the gospel into heaven. However, it's almost an impossible view to defend, because again people are taking the words perish, destruction, death, far out of context. As I've shown in a few, most of these imply to the fall of Jerusalem. I almost took this path, even though I knew it was biblically impossible to defend, but that was the baptist in me.

It took me a few years to embrace Universal Salvation. In fact through history you have many Pastors that why they teach hell, believe it's possible. Even Luther admitted it possible. Billy Graham no doubt believed in in. Even my former Baptist Pastor believes that it's possible. Once you accept Universal Salvation all the themes of the bible finally come together. You don't have to guess or try to defend impossible themes, like how does God send so many to hell that have never heard the gospel, Indians, Africans, ect...It removes all the false made up gospels of man such as age of accountability insuring Christ is the only way.

The good news today is that it is one of the fastest growing accepted doctrines. Mostly due to the more recent revised bibles that have come out that correctly translate many of these words. In the past Universal Salvation was pushed off to be more of a New Age movement. No doubt a lot of New Agers believed all would go to heaven, but all their beliefs were of the Occult, they didn't accept Christ. Most UR believers now are fundemental Christians that still hold to most fundemental doctrine, but have dropped a belief in torture.

It's so much easier to love God and serve him freely once you drop the doctrine of fear.

I wrote an essay years ago on Dante's influence. He really brought forth all the pagan concepts of torture into the church with effect...Just another man peod at a woman and life in general and pulled out every evil option he could to deal with them.

 

[agape101]

Hi agape

Granted, I am no expert in the Greek language. I rely on Greek and Hebrew scholars to inform my understanding of the text. And my Greek dictionary concerning the word translated into English as "eternal" states:

aiōnios - perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well): - eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

This is Strong's Dictionary, and if it is wrong, please show me how (providing sources, where available). But going by this, it seems that the author intended "eternal" to actually be eternal. Why did the author use "eternal destruction" rather than simply "destruction" (that's one of the big questions you ask), I would perhaps say to AVOID the claims of UR, and ensure that the reader was in no way confused as to the length of time this destruction was - if no time is specified, one could try and argue that it was only temporary.

As an aside, you suggest I am avoiding verses and juxtaposing man-made definitions to my view - could you please elborate on this one for me?

~ PA

Sorry- I was saying "you" as a collective- with regards to this subject of Eternal, not you particulairly.

There are many rescources that will attempt to justify the juxtapositioning of definitions of aion/aionios. the main problem I have with our main english renderings is that there is no literal, consistent and sound translating sometimes. I will make my case:

Aionios- is the adjective form of aion.
Aion- literally means "undefined period of time" the equivalent of our "eon" easy to see the relationship.... Aion- is translated into age several times in all of our english versions. It is also suggested to mean "eternity" depending on context. By extension "aionios" is translated everlasting by our main english texts. Aionios means "pertaining to the Aion." Not only is it counterintuitive to suggest that a term Aion means eon- but also can mean eternity, it is not permissible in any rules of any language to have a term that carries opposing meanings.

Exhibit 1

Titus 1:2 says Partial "for hope of aionios life, which God, who does not lie, promises before aionion times." (zoe aionios) and (pro cronon aionion).

In the first part of the verse you have Zoe (life) and Aionios - (pertaining to aion).In the second part of this verse you have the phrase Pro (before) cronon (times) aionion (eonian).

This verse is commonly rendered "for hope of life eternal, which God, who does not lie, promises before the ages began." or "long ages ago."

A student's dilemma: Why does Aionios mean "eternal" in the first part of the verse, and mean "age abiding" in the second part? If they rendered consistently they would have been forced to come up with:

"FOR LIFE ETERNAL, WHICH GOD, WHO DOES NOT LIE, PROMISES BEFORE ETERNAL TIMES."

I'm sure you can understand that there is no such thing as "before eternal times." WHy didn't they translate consistently and literally? Especially when the promise is for aionios life "eonian life" that means "life pertaining to the age(s)"

another evidence: the reason aion cannot carry the meaning of eternity is because it shows up several times in its plural form; (aionon). If aion means eternity then they would be forced to render aionon into (eternities) and once again, there is no such thing.

example of this in scripture: in revelation there is a verse that uses the phrase "aionon ton aionon" this is rendered by king james and others as "for ever and ever" the problem is it has Aion(on) 2 times in that verse. It has the plural form twice in the very same verse. It literally means "for the ages of the ages" There is no such term as "ever" in this verse.

Further analysis of this verse: the term "aion" is translated into "ever" by kjv and others- this is done to be able to make aionios mean eternal. However, this verse destroys that premise because it culls out "ever" in singular form blatantly. It cannot be used. If aion is to mean "ever" than what is the plural form we see here in this verse? again- are there such thing as "evers?" is there such thing as for the "evers of the evers?"or the "everlasting of the everlasting?"

More evidence: Clearly there was a beginning of the aionon (ages) as referenced in Titus 1:2 above. Paul speaks of the end or consummation of the "aionon (ages)" in 1st corinthians. If aion is to mean "everlasting" then paul has both spoken of a begining of the eternities, multiple eternities, and an end to the eternities. This is not possible.

Another evidence: The definition of eternal is irrespective of time- without beginning or end. However the life you and I are promised has a beginning.

This is important. There are ages (aionon). There is a space before the beginning of the ages that is referenced in the bible. There is an end to the ages as also referenced in the bible. Everything pertaining to one or more of these ages can carry the adjective aionios.

Aionios life, aionios death, aionios chastisement, aionios destruction. Eternal can never work here because all of these things have a beginning and therefore are NOT irrespective of time but abide by it.

eonian life is the life promised to you while there will be some in eonian death (the second death). But when the aionon (ages) are through, nothing can carry the adjective aionios anymore.

Eternal punishment is eonian chastisement- and when the aionon are ended- death is abolished (made null) and everything is reconciled to God.

btw- rev says that the "lord shall reign for "ever" (aion)" however 1st cor 15 says he "shall reign UNTIL..." ALL ENEMIES ARE PUT UNDER HIS FEET.
Jesus will not reign forever- but for an age- because after the age is over and he has put all enemies under his feet THERE IS NO MORE NEED TO REIGN. the ultimate end: God will be all in all- with all things reconciled back to him.

also- I have shown you that aion meaning "eternity" cannot always fit- yet i am claiming that aion meaning "age" always fits. You can try this out for yourself. translate "eon/age" wherever you find aion and "eonian" wherever you see aionios and "ages" wherever you see aionon, or you could just get a concordant literal translation of the bible and it would make it easier.

Test me on this.


your brother in Christ.

 

[Jpark]

You can't be filled with the Spirit 80%,70%,etc you are either filled with the Holy Spirit 100% or you're not filled with the Spirit at all no in betweens.

I meant 80% of their teachings were from God.

 

[brinny]

YouTube - Hell - What is it? Ravi Zacharias explains

 

[Evergreen48]

*snip*. . . . . They're are certainly groups that believe in annihilation, but I believe it's a gross misunderstanding. It's sort of the group in between. They don't see eternal hell, but can't accept God would let those that haven't accepted the gospel into heaven. However, it's almost an impossible view to defend, because again people are taking the words perish, destruction, death, far out of context. As I've shown in a few, most of these imply to the fall of Jerusalem. I almost took this path, even though I knew it was biblically impossible to defend, but that was the baptist in me.

I am an annihilationist who is not a part of, nor under the influence of any particular group. Upon my own independent bible study I have not found scriptures to support 'Dante's hell' or any hell at all. And as far as 'not accepting that God would not let those that haven't accepted the gospel into heaven', that does not enter my mind so far as reasoning that God allows wicked people to simply dissolve back into the dust of the earth when they die. I believe that He has a purpose for every human life that He allows to come into being, and that each human life, whether is of a good nature or bad, throughout its earthly tenure, will have the effect that He intends it to have on His over all plan for bringing those out of the human race who love and obey Him, into a state of immortality. And I do not believe that He would have any reason to torture, even for a little while, those who have served their purpose in this respect, but do not meet His criteria for entering into the immortal state with Him.
　
I do not believe that it is a question of whether or not anyone accepts the good news of the kingdom of heaven, for merely accepting this, never has, nor will it ever, 'save' anyone. For the good news or the gospel of the kingdom of heaven only brings life and immortality to light, and the acceptance thereof has not one thing to do with whether or not one gains that life and immortality (2 Tim. 1:10). For if this is the case then all those who died before Christ are doomed and have no hope.

The premise that God is going to resurrect evil, wicked people and then put them through some sort of cleansing or purification process has no scriptural support whatsoever. In fact there are scriptures which plainly deny this.

Psalms 1:1. Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
2. But his delight is in the law of the Lord; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
3. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.
4. The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
5. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
6. For the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.
　
Job 24: 19. Drought and heat consume the snow waters: so doth the grave those which have sinned.
20. The womb shall forget him; the worm shall feed sweetly on him; he shall be no more remembered; and wickedness shall be broken as a tree.

I would appreciate a reply to these comments as it seems that whenever I bring this particular point into view I am usually ignored.

 

[Armistead14]

Just saw your post and will address it soon. Really two OT verses that deal with an old covenant addressed to the Jew.

The ungodly according to law were not allowed in the congregation. If they were found of sin they were punished, often with death according to the provision of the law. Upon death, like all flesh they were eaten by worms. Their ways will perish, but not their soul.

I see nothing in Job that even reflects, maybe you can tell me what you see. Once someone dies, they are basically remember no more.

 

[Evergreen48]

Just saw your post and will address it soon. Really two OT verses that deal with an old covenant addressed to the Jew.

The ungodly according to law were not allowed in the congregation. If they were found of sin they were punished, often with death according to the provision of the law.

The Psalmist prophesies with respect to the congregation being a shadow or a type of the congregation of His people at their resurrection.

Upon death, like all flesh they were eaten by worms.

I view that as being a bit too simplistic. For the author of the book of Job was not a simple man who would waste words in such a manner as this. He was a wise and inspired man, not simple minded. Besides, this particular passage of scriptures (Psalms, chapter 1) says nothing about their being eaten by worms - he says that they are like the chaff which is blown away by the wind, which would be the equivalent of existing no more, the same as being dissolved back into the earth from which they came would be the same as existing no more.

Their ways will perish, but not their soul.
I see nothing in Job that even reflects, maybe you can tell me what you see. Once someone dies, they are basically remember no more.

If the individual who is resurrected is the same individual that died, his evil ways will be resurrected with him. Jesus is the resurrection and the life (John 11:25). No one will be resurrected except that it be through Him. No evil thing or impurity will ever be resurrected through Him. Yet the theory is advanced by Universalists that even the most awful, evil persons that could ever be imagined are going to be resurrected and then purified after that resurrection. This is not scriptural!

Once someone dies they are not forgotten by the living, e.g. such people as Hitler (if he was as wicked as history records him as being), Jeffrey Dahmmer, John Wayne Gacey, and other infamous torturers and criminals of our time; notwithstanding wicked kings and tyrants who are recorded of biblical times, are not forgotten, nor shall they ever be forgotten by the living. So, when he says "they shall be remembered no more", obviously he would mean that it is God who remembers them no more.

 

[ShermanN]

The premise that God is going to resurrect evil, wicked people and then put them through some sort of cleansing or purification process has no scriptural support whatsoever. In fact there are scriptures which plainly deny this.

Psalms 1:1. Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
2. But his delight is in the law of the Lord; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
3. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.
4. The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
5. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
6. For the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.
　
Job 24: 19. Drought and heat consume the snow waters: so doth the grave those which have sinned.
20. The womb shall forget him; the worm shall feed sweetly on him; he shall be no more remembered; and wickedness shall be broken as a tree.

I would appreciate a reply to these comments as it seems that whenever I bring this particular point into view I am usually ignored.

I'll gladly share some of the scriptural evidence that has inspired me to believe that punishment in afterlife is of a remedial nature. And let me share that if not for the passages in the NT that speak of the ressurection of all humanity, and the salvation of Christ of and for all humanity, and the evidence that punishment in the afterlife is of a remedial nature, I too would be an annihilationist - for there is little, if any, scriptural evidence that supports the concept of "conscious unending torment", as in "Hell".

Concerning the passages above, both of them speak of the lives of the wicked coming to an end; their influence on others coming to an end; and them even being forgotten. Neither speaks of what or if anything happens after death.

Concerning scriptural evidence that speaks of remedial punishment in the afterlife:

1) Jesus' use of Gehenna. To the 1st Century Jew, Gehenna was used as a theological metaphor of punishment in the afterlife, punishment that for all, except possibly the most wicked, resulted in the purification/healing of their souls and subseqent rising to Ga Eden (Paradise).

Rabbis debated over who they considered to be too wicked for even Gehenna to purify, and whether or not those especially wicked would be consumed (annihilated) or continue to suffer indefinitely. For most people though, especially loved ones, Gehenna was a place of remedial punishment. In fact, the Jews' mourning practices were based on this belief; they would only mourn a loved one 11 months, believing that their loved one surely had been purified and gone on to Ga Eden by then.

The Jews also practiced prayers, alms, and even baptism for the dead as a means of some how encouraging and possibly lessening a loved one's suffering in Gehenna. And it's very significant to note that Paul speaks in the affirmative of the practice of baptisms for the dead. 1 Cor. 15:29 "Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?"

I'll share more later.

Blessings,
Sherman

 

[consigliere31]

The Psalmist prophesies with respect to the congregation being a shadow or a type of the congregation of His people at their resurrection.

I view that as being a bit too simplistic. For the author of the book of Job was not a simple man who would waste words in such a manner as this. He was a wise and inspired man, not simple minded. Besides, this particular passage of scriptures (Psalms, chapter 1) says nothing about their being eaten by worms - he says that they are like the chaff which is blown away by the wind, which would be the equivalent of existing no more, the same as being dissolved back into the earth from which they came would be the same as existing no more.

If the individual who is resurrected is the same individual that died, his evil ways will be resurrected with him. Jesus is the resurrection and the life (John 11:25). No one will be resurrected except that it be through Him. No evil thing or impurity will ever be resurrected through Him. Yet the theory is advanced by Universalists that even the most awful, evil persons that could ever be imagined are going to be resurrected and then purified after that resurrection. This is not scriptural!

Once someone dies they are not forgotten by the living, e.g. such people as Hitler (if he was as wicked as history records him as being), Jeffrey Dahmmer, John Wayne Gacey, and other infamous torturers and criminals of our time; notwithstanding wicked kings and tyrants who are recorded of biblical times, are not forgotten, nor shall they ever be forgotten by the living. So, when he says "they shall be remembered no more", obviously he would mean that it is God who remembers them no more.

Evergreen

because Jesus tasted death for every man, and all men are wicked and cursed with death, His victory over death applies to all mankind.

He tells the apostles that they will indeed be baptized into His death, whether they are able to accept it or not. The apostles experienced this baptism into His death in this earthly realm of life, and all who have been resurrected in this earthly life have also been baptized into His death.

The most wicked of men that you have listed, act accordingly to the curse of death that controls them within their spirit, as it does with all mankind Some men may seem more wicked than others, but the foundation of the wickedness in all mankind is motivated by the reality that there is a curse of death in operation upon all men...and it is this death curse that motivates all men to whatever wicked extremes they pursue.

But to say that all men are intentionally and willfully motivated by our own choice, of this curse that is part of the inate makeup of humanity in general, is not exactly true. Paul did the things he hated to do, because this same death curse was inwardly working within him. Every wicked act is motivated by the foundation within mankind that stems out of this death curse within.

The truth is that Jesus has been given the victory over this death curse, by and through being cursed with death Himself. His death destroys the death brought upon all mankind through Adam's sin. And any judgment that Christ makes can only result in HIm demonstrating the victory over death that He possesses and has been given the power to subdue all mankind with. If Jesus cannot destroy the death curse in every man, then He is not the victor over death at all. But that is not the case, He is the Victor over death, some( a remnant) are privy to His demonstration of His power over death, and this demonstration is through experience of the resurrection to life from death.

If you have experienced this resurrection from darkness to light and from death to life, then you will understand how Christ has the power over death personally. If you haven't experienced this, then what makes you think that you will experience it in the afterlife at a point of judgment through Christ? Why would you recieve this afterlife resurrection, yet not everyone else? I think this is where you need to examine the foundation of your faith..,because if you consider any individual merit with yourself towards a reason why Christ should resurrect you and not someone else, then your foundation of theological belief is not in grace but in human merit.

Scripures are subject to incorrect understanding, unless the correct foundation is laid in Christ to begin with. When a foundation is in Christ's grace and not in works or merits of the individual person's abilities and achievments, then the scriptures can be correctly understood.

But in all the debating I have done with people, I have found that scriptures mean different things for different people, and it allways amounts to the foundation and theological belief that rules within us that determines our ability to understand the scriptures.

 

[Armistead14]

The Psalmist prophesies with respect to the congregation being a shadow or a type of the congregation of His people at their resurrection.

I view that as being a bit too simplistic. For the author of the book of Job was not a simple man who would waste words in such a manner as this. He was a wise and inspired man, not simple minded. Besides, this particular passage of scriptures (Psalms, chapter 1) says nothing about their being eaten by worms - he says that they are like the chaff which is blown away by the wind, which would be the equivalent of existing no more, the same as being dissolved back into the earth from which they came would be the same as existing no more.

If the individual who is resurrected is the same individual that died, his evil ways will be resurrected with him. Jesus is the resurrection and the life (John 11:25). No one will be resurrected except that it be through Him. No evil thing or impurity will ever be resurrected through Him. Yet the theory is advanced by Universalists that even the most awful, evil persons that could ever be imagined are going to be resurrected and then purified after that resurrection. This is not scriptural!

Once someone dies they are not forgotten by the living, e.g. such people as Hitler (if he was as wicked as history records him as being), Jeffrey Dahmmer, John Wayne Gacey, and other infamous torturers and criminals of our time; notwithstanding wicked kings and tyrants who are recorded of biblical times, are not forgotten, nor shall they ever be forgotten by the living. So, when he says "they shall be remembered no more", obviously he would mean that it is God who remembers them no more.

I'll get into detail more, but a better understanding of how the Jews viewed the afterlife and the grave is needed. No, in the OT they didn't believe in any form of hell, just the grave. Most certainly in all context any form of destruction they spoke of means death and the grave, but we can't just leave it there taking other verses into context. Like anything you have to look at the complete picture. I could pull a few verses that would imply people be reincarnated out of context. Talk to any Jewish Orthodox believer that is skilled in hebrew and greek and you will find they don't view these verses at all as you imply.
It becomes difficult to use OT laws and culture in a present context, certainly without bringing reference to the new covenant we lived under of which I will discuss more later.

 

[ShermanN]

The premise that God is going to resurrect evil, wicked people and then put them through some sort of cleansing or purification process has no scriptural support whatsoever. .........
I would appreciate a reply to these comments as it seems that whenever I bring this particular point into view I am usually ignored.

Hi Evergreen48,

To continue my response as to the evidence I see in scripture that supports the concept of purification in the afterlife. My previous post notes that Gehenna was understood by 1st Century Jews to be a place/event of purification for loved ones after they died and before they rose to, were admitted to, Ga Eden (Paradise).

In this post I'd like to review 1 Peter 3:18 - 4:6

18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. 21 There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him.

1 Therefore, since Christ suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves also with the same mind, for he who has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin, 2 that he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh for the lusts of men, but for the will of God. 3 For we have spent enough of our past lifetime in doing the will of the Gentiles—when we walked in lewdness, lusts, drunkenness, revelries, drinking parties, and abominable idolatries. 4 In regard to these, they think it strange that you do not run with them in the same flood of dissipation, speaking evil of you. 5 They will give an account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. 6 For this reason the gospel was preached also to those who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

This scipture not only speaks of people being held in some form of prison after death, but apparently Jesus went and preached to the "spirits in prison", even those who died during the flood having rejected the Word and salvation of God as revealed through Noah (3:19-20). And the reason that he preached the gospel (the Good News) to them was so that they could be judged according to what they did while alive (in the flesh), and come to live by God in the spirit. The NLT actually translates 4:6 as, "That is why the Good News was preached to those who are now dead —so although they were destined to die like all people, they now live forever with God in the Spirit."

Notice that such salvation is accomplished fully by the atonement of Christ, His having "suffered once for sins". The salvation of Christ is truly "Good News", even for those who die without knowing Christ, even for the most wicked of all humanity, those who lived during the most evil and wicked time in all of history thus far, even for those who rejected the Word and Salvation of God during the time of Noah!

So yes, there is life after death for all of humanity. Yes, we all face judgment where our selfish works and selfish attitudes will be burnt up. And yes, God will bring us all into perfect relationship with Him - what we were created for from the beginning!

 

[ShermanN]

Hi Evergreen48,

To continue my response as to the evidence I see in scripture that supports the concept of purification in the afterlife. My previous postx noted that Gehenna was understood by 1st Century Jews to be a place/event of purification for loved ones after they died and before they rose to, were admitted to, Ga Eden (Paradise), and that 1 Pet. 4:6 actually says that the Gospel was preached to the dead, the spirits in prison, as a means of judging their flesh but giving them life in the Spirit.

Concerning one's interpretation of the Lake of Fire and Brimstone:

One's interpretation of the lake of fire is very dependent upon what perspective one interprets Revelation from. Each view -- Preterist, Historical, Metaphorical, and Furturist -- interprets Revelation's metaphors differently, and there are even different interpretations from various people within each of these groups. Prophetic literature like John's Revelation is by its very nature the most widely interpretive of all styles of literature in Scripture; it is thus best to not rely heavily, much less solely, upon such for doctrinal distinctives.

So, what would the metaphor of the Lake of Fire have meant or implied to the 1st Century Christian? Let's look at a couple of facts.

1) Note that the first scene of someone being tormented in fire and brimstone in Revelation is in 14:10 where it says such happens in the very presence of the Lamb and His Angels - the revelation of the sacrifice of Christ (the Lamb) and the benevolent supernatural provision of God (His angels)!

2) Note that in Revelation fire is used to both purify and destroy; even the Lord is said to have eyes of fire. The Lord even encourages the church in Laodicea to buy from him gold refined by fire. The horse and riders depicting God's judgment were said to have fire, smoke, and brimstone that comes from their mouths. Etc.

3) Note that brimstone, theon, means divine (theo) fire, fire not created by man but its source is God such as Volcanic lava, lightening and other types of natural fire. These often give off the smell of burning sulfur, ergo sulfur was known as brimstone also. And it is significant to note that sulfur was burnt as incense for spiritual purification in Greco-Roman worship of idols. Sulfur was also burnt as incense medicinally and rubbed in flesh wounds for healing. Even today, many drugs for healing are sulfur based.

When one considers these facts, if one is interpreting futuristically the lake of fire and brimstone is simply a metaphor of God's judgment where his presence destroys evil, purifies that which is good, and heals the souls of men, one can understand the Lake of Fire as "The Volcanic Lake of God's Presence that burns up what is worthless, purifies what is valuable (gold), and even brings healing to the dis-eased".

Thus, to me even the Lake of Fire and Brimstone speaks to me of purification and healing in the presence of the Jesus and through the revelation of His sacrifice! Instead of the Lake of Fire being a metaphor of Hell (endless conscious torment), it's a metaphor of Hell (the evil) being burnt out of us!

 

[Yab Yum]

What would you call a God who creates billions of human beings, foreknowing that they are destined to exist in the most horrible torture chamber imaginable for ever and ever?

"Sadistic" does not even begin to describe such a God.

 

[Glorthac]

I'll gladly share some of the scriptural evidence that has inspired me to believe that punishment in afterlife is of a remedial nature.

You do know that's what is called Purgatory, right? You are taking the Scriptures which support Purgatory and applying them falsely to Hell.

 

[Evergreen48]

In this post I'd like to review 1 Peter 3:18 - 4:6

18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. 21 There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him.

1 Therefore, since Christ suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves also with the same mind, for he who has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin, 2 that he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh for the lusts of men, but for the will of God. 3 For we have spent enough of our past lifetime in doing the will of the Gentiles—when we walked in lewdness, lusts, drunkenness, revelries, drinking parties, and abominable idolatries. 4 In regard to these, they think it strange that you do not run with them in the same flood of dissipation, speaking evil of you. 5 They will give an account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. 6 For this reason the gospel was preached also to those who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

This scipture not only speaks of people being held in some form of prison after death, but apparently Jesus went and preached to the "spirits in prison", even those who died during the flood having rejected the Word and salvation of God as revealed through Noah (3:19-20). And the reason that he preached the gospel (the Good News) to them was so that they could be judged according to what they did while alive (in the flesh), and come to live by God in the spirit. The NLT actually translates 4:6 as, "That is why the Good News was preached to those who are now dead —so although they were destined to die like all people, they now live forever with God in the Spirit."

　
Hi ShermanN.

Thanks for taking the time to share with me. I believe your intentions are good, and I do appreciate the time you have spent. However, I do not agree that 1 Peter 3:18-22 & 4:1-5 are to be taken to the effect that anyone is held in any form of prison after death. I believe that the people to whom Noah preached were very much alive when Noah preached to them by the Spirit of the eternal Christ, and that they were 'held in prison' for a period of time is figurative speech. That His Spirit strove with man (Gen. 6:3. "And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years." ) would bring a picture of His judgement on those disobedient ones being reserved, or held unto judgement in the same way that those disobedient ones of His people were reserved unto His judgement which took place in 70 A.D.. The good news of what would be the result of their repentance was also preached unto them for approximately 40 years, He, being not willing that any of them should perish either, but that all would come to repentance.
( 2 Peter, Chap. 3.)

The Jews also practiced prayers, alms, and even baptism for the dead as a means of some how encouraging and possibly lessening a loved one's suffering in Gehenna. And it's very significant to note that Paul speaks in the affirmative of the practice of baptisms for the dead. 1 Cor. 15:29 "Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?"

It is customary, and I dare say especially in this case, necessary to give the reference for material of this type. IOW, I would need to know where you found this information about practices of Jews; 'prayers, alms, and especially the 'baptism for the dead' as a means of somehow encouraging and possibly lessening a loved one's suffering in Gehenna.

To me, 1 Cor. 15:29 is simply another reference to being baptised into the death of Christ as the apostle speaks of the same in Rom. 6: 3. " Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4. Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6. Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin."

I would never be convinced that the apostle was condoning such a practice as this even if it were in practice among the Jews of that day, as the Jews of that day had many practices and beliefs for which they had no scriptural foundation at all. My father once gave me a good measuring stick to use concerning this very thing: He said, "Be wary of any New Testament doctrine purported of man which cannot be found in the Old Testament." I believe that anyone would do well to abide by that rule.
　
Since the scriptures in 1 Peter 3& 4, and 1 Cor. 15:29 are the only scriptures that I saw that you addressed as pertaining to your doctrine of universal salvation, they are the only ones that I have addressed also. Thanks again for your time invested.

Peace be with you.

 

[ShermanN]

You do know that's what is called Purgatory, right? You are taking the Scriptures which support Purgatory and applying them falsely to Hell.

I believe that the scriptures that are traditionally interpreted (misinterpreted) to speak of Hell actually speak of Remedial Punishment (Purgatory) in the Afterlife, and do not speak of conscious unending torment (Hell).