Annihilationism Is Actually...Biblical

[DavidPT]

So is everybody who dies being punished eternally?

I couldn't have possibly meant that since that would deny there is a resurrection in the future. So get real then. There are two ages, this age and the age to come. This age has an end, the next age doesn't. When someone is executed in this age, that punishment is everlasting in this age. Once that person has been executed, it can't be reversed in this age.

The way those who hold to ECT reason things, one has to be fully conscious at all times in order to be punished. Try telling that to anyone in this age on deathrow. Most convicted murderers likely prefer a life sentence over a death sentence. Not all convicted murderers might believe in God or an afterlife of some kind. So why would they prefer a life sentence over a death sentence?

In the next age if the sentence is death, it, too, doesn't require one has to be fully conscious at all times, meaning once they have died again. And yes, some clearly die again. Why do you think it's called the 2nd death? Because they live again instead? How does that make sense? They do live again though, that being via the resurrection. But they also die again after having lived again. Both can't be the same then. When they die again it has to be different from living again, otherwise they would have no reason to die again. The 2nd death is not the resurrection of the dead. The 2nd death is after they have been raised from the dead. That means they have to die again. How long that might take, that I have no idea.

Ezekiel 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.


Obviously everyone sins. Obviously everyone dies. This would be a moot point in the above verse if this is applying universally to everyone. So it has to mean something else then, IOW a deeper meaning. The text indicates it is the soul that dies. Factor that in with what Jesus said in Matthew 10:28, and that the book of Revelation tells us there is a 2nd death, plus Romans 6:23, to name a few, and it shouldn't take a rocket scientist at that point in order to figure out what all of that might add up to.

the soul that sinneth, it shall die.(Ezekiel 18:4)
For the wages of sin is death(Romans 6:23)
is able to destroy both soul and body in hell(Matthew 10:28)
This is the second death(Revelation 20:14)

And those that wrongly teach the soul is immortal, and assuming that is a fact, why is Ezekiel 18:4 contradicting that? How can an immortal soul possibly die? Do some not grasp what immortal means? It means unable to die, period. The translators obviously knew it was meaning ones soul after death in this age, the fact they translated it as 'it' rather than 'he'----the soul that sinneth, it shall die----rather than---the soul that sinneth, he shall die.

 

[Der Alte]

Wow. This is sad. It seems you don't know how to read.
"He will send fire and worms into their flesh, and they will weep forever with the pain." - Judith
"for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched" - Isaiah
"where ‘their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched'" - Mark

I quoted the complete verse in each case, you truncated the verses to make it appear that your argument is correct.. Once again I ask the question "where does Isaiah mention hell" as Jesus did?

Let's ask a class of Kindergartners which two are most similar.
"OK class, which of these three statement are most similar?" Class, "Isaiah and Mark!" Me, "Good job, class!

How about you ask you fictional kindergarten class which quote was more honest?

 

[Der Alte]

The inflection of a language does not mean the order of words doesn't matter. It doesn't mean a preposition at the beginning can magically point to a noun at the end. It means that the spelling of each individual word is not catered to the context.

If you presume to lecture me on Greek grammar then quote one.

Not time? Huh. I guess that means you can't use it to prove eternal conscious torment.

Well I guess I wasn't trying to prove ECT when I was discussing ekei was I? I suggest you get your facts straight. Have you even bothered to read the definition from BAGD which I posted? If you do please show mere where there is any mention of time?

So you're "Judith" is or isn't part of the Jewish Encyclopedia?

It isn't "my" "Judith". It is an inter-testamental book considered authoritative by the Jews. No Judith is not part of the Jewish Encyclopedia but it is quoted in the JE.

You don't seem to realize that Judgment day and Hell are essentially the same thing, as far as this is concerned.

You don't seem to realize that hell follows judgement day they are not essentially the same. Now back to my question where does Isaiah 66:24 mention hell? Jesus said thrown into hell where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.
My post [#10] this thread, quoting the Jewish Encyclopedia.
My post [#564] this thread quoting the definition of ἐκεῖ/ekei from BAGD.

 

[DavidPT]

I'm 60 years old right now. I was raised a Baptist. I grew up believing in ECT. Probably for at least 25-30 years anyway. That was until I began searching the Scriptures for myself, thus doing my own own thinking rather than letting others do my thinking for me. This was before I ever had a computer. The reason I mention that is to show that I wasn't being influenced by outside sources at the time. And at the time I wasn't aware that anyone concluded something else besides ECT. I basically thought everyone concluded ECT.

So I started searching the Scriptures myself and eventually came to a different conclusion altogether. Then years later, once I got a computer, then got on the internet, I discovered that there were many others who also conclude something besides ECT. Many were concluding, just like I did, that one dies eventually in the LOF rather than living forever in it instead.

This of course doesn't prove my position is correct, yet what are the chances of me coming to the same conclusions many others are coming to, but at the time I didn't even realize anyone else even came to a conclusion that wasn't ECT? There has to be a reason why? Just a coincidence? Or perhaps something else? Maybe we could say that the devil convinced me at the time to conclude what I did. Yet I was praying to God at the time for guidance and understanding. Why would I get satan's understanding instead? That assuming the understanding I was getting, that it was incorrect?

 

[Oseas]

I couldn't have possibly meant that since that would deny there is a resurrection in the future. So get real then. There are two ages, this age and the age to come. This age has an end, the next age doesn't. When someone is executed in this age, that punishment is everlasting in this age. Once that person has been executed, it can't be reversed in this age.

The way those who hold to ECT reason things, one has to be fully conscious at all times in order to be punished. Try telling that to anyone in this age on deathrow. Most convicted murderers likely prefer a life sentence over a death sentence. Not all convicted murderers might believe in God or an afterlife of some kind. So why would they prefer a life sentence over a death sentence?

In the next age if the sentence is death, it, too, doesn't require one has to be fully conscious at all times, meaning once they have died again. And yes, some clearly die again. Why do you think it's called the 2nd death? Because they live again instead? How does that make sense? They do live again though, that being via the resurrection. But they also die again after having lived again. Both can't be the same then. When they die again it has to be different from living again, otherwise they would have no reason to die again. The 2nd death is not the resurrection of the dead. The 2nd death is after they have been raised from the dead. That means they have to die again. How long that might take, that I have no idea.

Ezekiel 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.


Obviously everyone sins. Obviously everyone dies. This would be a moot point in the above verse if this is applying universally to everyone. So it has to mean something else then, IOW a deeper meaning. The text indicates it is the soul that dies. Factor that in with what Jesus said in Matthew 10:28, and that the book of Revelation tells us there is a 2nd death, plus Romans 6:23, to name a few, and it shouldn't take a rocket scientist at that point in order to figure out what all of that might add up to.

the soul that sinneth, it shall die.(Ezekiel 18:4)
For the wages of sin is death(Romans 6:23)
is able to destroy both soul and body in hell(Matthew 10:28)
This is the second death(Revelation 20:14)

And those that wrongly teach the soul is immortal, and assuming that is a fact, why is Ezekiel 18:4 contradicting that? How can an immortal soul possibly die? Do some not grasp what immortal means? It means unable to die, period. The translators obviously knew it was meaning ones soul after death in this age, the fact they translated it as 'it' rather than 'he'----the soul that sinneth, it shall die----rather than---the soul that sinneth, he shall die.

Ezekiel 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

The fullness of Gentiles just arrived. Whoever did believe in Jesus as Scriptures say, will surely be saved if he remains to the end.

JESUS said: If I had not come and spoken unto world, they would not had sin: but now they have no excuse for their sin.

The multitudes of Gentiles that believed not in JESUS as Scriptures say, they are already condemned because they believed not in JESUS as Scriptures say. JESUS left very clear: Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. You will be my friends, if you do whatsoever I command you. If the WORLD hate you, you know that it HATED me before it hated you. He that hates me hates my Father also.
If I had not come and spoken unto world, they would not had sin: but now they have no excuse for their sin.

Furthermore, from now on Israel will have to settle accounts with its Creator by all the evils that they practiced and for all the righteous blood they 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. Verily I say unto you, all these things will come upon this generation.

Therefore thus will I do unto thee, O Israel: and because I will do this unto thee, prepare to meet thy God, O Israel.

 

[DavidPT]

The fullness of Gentiles just arrived. Whoever did believe in Jesus as Scriptures say, will surely be saved if he remains to the end.

JESUS said: If I had not come and spoken unto world, they would not had sin: but now they have no excuse for their sin.

The multitudes of Gentiles that believed not in JESUS as Scriptures say, they are already condemned because they believed not in JESUS as Scriptures say. JESUS left very clear: Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. You will be my friends, if you do whatsoever I command you. If the WORLD hate you, you know that it HATED me before it hated you. He that hates me hates my Father also.
If I had not come and spoken unto world, they would not had sin: but now they have no excuse for their sin.

Furthermore, from now on Israel will have to settle accounts with its Creator by all the evils that they practiced and for all the righteous blood they 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. Verily I say unto you, all these things will come upon this generation.

Therefore thus will I do unto thee, O Israel: and because I will do this unto thee, prepare to meet thy God, O Israel.

Whenever you reply to some of these posts, are you on planet earth at the time? It's almost as if I have entered the twilight zone here, trying to figure out how what you are posting has any relevance to what I'm posting.

 

[Der Alte]

I couldn't have possibly meant that since that would deny there is a resurrection in the future. So get real then. There are two ages, this age and the age to come. This age has an end, the next age doesn't. When someone is executed in this age, that punishment is everlasting in this age. Once that person has been executed, it can't be reversed in this age.

"Everlasting" does not mean until some other event.

The way those who hold to ECT reason things, one has to be fully conscious at all times in order to be punished. Try telling that to anyone in this age on deathrow. Most convicted murderers likely prefer a life sentence over a death sentence. Not all convicted murderers might believe in God or an afterlife of some kind. So why would they prefer a life sentence over a death sentence?

Irrelevant. Supposition what someone might /might not think while in prison or on death row.

In the next age if the sentence is death, it, too, doesn't require one has to be fully conscious at all times, meaning once they have died again. And yes, some clearly die again. Why do you think it's called the 2nd death? Because they live again instead? How does that make sense? They do live again though, that being via the resurrection. But they also die again after having lived again. Both can't be the same then. When they die again it has to be different from living again, otherwise they would have no reason to die again. The 2nd death is not the resurrection of the dead. The 2nd death is after they have been raised from the dead. That means they have to die again. How long that might take, that I have no idea.

Please show me where anyone/anything is thrown into the lake of fire then they die? Not everything thrown into the LOF dies or can die.

Revelation 20:14
(14) Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death.​

Death and hell re not alive they cannot die, they have not died a first death so they can't die a second death

Revelation 20:10
(10) And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.​

Three living beings, one, the false prophet is a human being, are thrown into the LOF but they do not die they are tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Ezekiel 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

"Soul" in this verse means person.

Ezekiel 18:4-13
(4) Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.
(5) But if a man be just, and do that which is lawful and right,
(6) And hath not eaten upon the mountains, neither hath lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, neither hath defiled his neighbour's wife, neither hath come near to a menstruous woman,
(7) And hath not oppressed any, but hath restored to the debtor his pledge, hath spoiled none by violence, hath given his bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment;
(8) He that hath not given forth upon usury, neither hath taken any increase, that hath withdrawn his hand from iniquity, hath executed true judgment between man and man,
(9) Hath walked in my statutes, and hath kept my judgments, to deal truly; he is just, he shall surely live, saith the Lord GOD.
(10) If he beget a son that is a robber, a shedder of blood, and that doeth the like to any one of these things,
(11) And that doeth not any of those duties, but even hath eaten upon the mountains, and defiled his neighbour's wife,
(12) Hath oppressed the poor and needy, hath spoiled by violence, hath not restored the pledge, and hath lifted up his eyes to the idols, hath committed abomination,
(13) Hath given forth upon usury, and hath taken increase: shall he then live? he shall not live: he hath done all these abominations; he shall surely die; his blood shall be upon him.​

Obviously everyone sins. Obviously everyone dies. This would be a moot point in the above verse if this is applying universally to everyone. So it has to mean something else then, IOW a deeper meaning. The text indicates it is the soul that dies. Factor that in with what Jesus said in Matthew 10:28, and that the book of Revelation tells us there is a 2nd death, plus Romans 6:23, to name a few, and it shouldn't take a rocket scientist at that point in order to figure out what all of that might add up to.

the soul that sinneth, it shall die.(Ezekiel 18:4)
For the wages of sin is death(Romans 6:23)
is able to destroy both soul and body in hell(Matthew 10:28)
This is the second death(Revelation 20:14)

Romans 6:23 does not say the wages of sin is death, resurrection, judgment then the second death.

And those that wrongly teach the soul is immortal, and assuming that is a fact, why is Ezekiel 18:4 contradicting that? How can an immortal soul possibly die? Do some not grasp what immortal means? It means unable to die, period. The translators obviously knew it was meaning ones soul after death in this age, the fact they translated it as 'it' rather than 'he'----the soul that sinneth, it shall die----rather than---the soul that sinneth, he shall die

In Isa 14 there is a long passage about the king of Babylon dying, according to many the dead know nothing. They are supposedly annihilated, destroyed, pfft, gone! But God, Himself, speaking, these dead people in שאול/sheol, know something, they move, meet the dead coming to sheol, stir up, raise up, speak and say, etc.

Isa 14:9-11 (KJV)
9) Hell [שאול ] from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations.
10) All they shall speak and say unto thee, Art thou also become weak as we? art thou become like unto us?
11) Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, [שאול] and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.
[ . . . ]
22) For I will rise up against them, saith the LORD of hosts, and cut off from Babylon the name, and remnant, and son, and nephew, saith the LORD.​

In this passage God, himself is speaking, and I see a whole lot of shaking going on, moving, rising up, and speaking in . These dead people seem to know something, about something. We know that verses 11 through 14 describe actual historical events, the death of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.
Some will try to argue that this passage is figurative because fir trees don’t literally rejoice, vs. 8. They will try to argue that the passage must be figurative since God told Israel “take up this proverb against the king of Babylon.” vs. 4. The occurrence of one figurative expression in a passage does not prove that anything else in the passage is figurative. The Hebrew word שאול/mashal translated “proverb” does not necessarily mean something is fictional. For example, Israel did not become fictional when God made them a mashal/proverb in 2 Chronicles 7:20, Psalms 44:14, and Jeremiah 24:9.
Here is another passage where God Himself is speaking and people who are dead in sheol, speaking, being ashamed, comforted, etc.

Ezekiel 32:18-22, 30-31 (KJV)
18) Son of man, [Ezekiel] wail for the multitude of Egypt, and cast them down, even her, and the daughters of the famous nations, unto the nether parts of the earth, with them that go down into the pit.
19) Whom dost thou pass in beauty? go down, and be thou laid with the uncircumcised.
20) They shall fall in the midst of them that are slain by the sword: she is delivered to the sword: draw her and all her multitudes.
21) The strong among the mighty shall speak to him out of the midst of hell [שאול] with them that help him: they are gone down, they lie uncircumcised, slain by the sword.
22) Asshur is there and all her company: his graves are about him: all of them slain, fallen by the sword::[ . . . ]
Ezekiel 32:30-31
(30) There be the princes of the north, all of them, and all the Zidonians, which are gone down with the slain; with their terror they are ashamed of their might; and they lie uncircumcised with them that be slain by the sword, and bear their shame with them that go down to the pit.
(31) Pharaoh shall see them, and shall be comforted over all his multitude, even Pharaoh and all his army slain by the sword, saith the Lord GOD.​

 

[Jordan Henshaw]

How about you ask you fictional kindergarten class which quote was more honest?

They all three are DIRECT QUOTES. The quote from the OT is EXTREMELY similar to the quote from the NT. You seem to think that somehow, by some work of magic, the quote from Judith is more like the one from the NT, but that couldn't POSSIBLY, by ANY stretch of the imagination be further from the truth! A Kindergartner could tell you that.

 

[Oseas]

[QUOTE ClementofA, post #337]

Where does that, or any other Scripture, say anyone will be annihilated forever or suffer endless tortures?
1. Scripture teaches all those who are reconciled shall be saved in His life (Rom.5:10)
and

2. Scripture also teaches the world is reconciled, (Rom.5:10; 11:15; 2 Cor.5:19)
therefore

3. It follows that the world shall be saved in His life.
True or false?[/QUOTE]


Unfortunatelly, by chance only now I saw your message #337 adressed to me. I do not know how it escaped of my observation. God knows.

In response to your question, I must say that your conclusion according to item 3 is false.

Firstly, we must consider that the first condition the world be saved, it was established by God through the sacrifice of Jesus to all generations. By the way, it was the last sacrifice that God could offer for the salvation of the world, since then there was not and is in fact no more any sacrifice for this purpose, that is the salvation of the world, and this since the beginning, be Jews and Gentiles, for there is no respect of persons with God.

Second, we must consider also that though the sacrifice of JESUS had been for all mankind in all generations, this did not mean or do not mean absolutely that the WORLD will generically be saved as you say in your conclusion. It is not true, but false. In fact, the world will not be saved. JESUS was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. JESUS was a Jewish, particularly, He came unto His own, and His own received Him not, and it until the present time, except some of them.

God Father sent JESUS, in other words, the Word was made flesh, not to condemn the world; but that the world through Him might be saved. But it does not mean the whole world will be saved, as you presume and preach in accord your presumptions.

The question is: He that has believed in the person of JESUS (as say Scriptures) is not condemned, but he that has believed not is condemned already, condemned to eternal perdition, because there is not more any chance to salvation after this Judgment, the Judgment Seat of Christ.

JESUS in His pray to the Father, said: (John 17:2-3&9&15-17&25-26)
2 As thou hast given Him power over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given Him.
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy Word is truth. (The Word is God)

25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me.
26 And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.


So, your conclusion in according item 3 is false completelly.

 

[Der Alte]

So you do not believe in Scriptures in that which they say is satanic. This explains the why you believe also in demons like Judith. Satan cited Psalms 91:v.11 to JESUS in the temptation. Satan thought that once speaking the Truth to JESUS, certainly JESUS would fall in his trap, going in the way of his evil purpose.
You, by the contrary, you have fall in the trap of Devil believing in what he have said by his satanic message through the demon Judith.
You strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. Oh do you say that Judith is considered authoritative by the Jews? Well, JESUS is a Jewish too, He came unto His own, and His own received Him not. Why? Do you know the why? Its because, as said JESUS, they are serpents, generation of vipers, how can they escape the damnation of hell?
Furthermore, JESUS said to the JewsJohn 8:44-45) Ye are of your father the Devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the Truth, because there is no Truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. 45 And because I tell you the Truth, ye believe me not.
There is no greater authority than that of JESUS.
You are saying that because you have not the mind of Christ. Mark and Isaiah, they both are of the Lord and they will be in the Kingdom of God, but Judith is of the Dev il and will be cast into the lake of fire for ever. The Most High God and Almighty promised to show the difference among who which serves Him and them which serves not Him.
I have already explained in another post above on what JESUS was refferring when He said the worm dieth not.
You should be focused in what JESUS says to YOU by His word, that is, if your eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for YOU to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast both body and soul into the hell's fire, do you understand? Where your worm (both body and soul-Job 25:v.5-6), dieth not, and the fire is not quenched, of course. Every one, both body and soul, shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt. Salt is good, yes, but if the salt have lost his saltness, wherewith will ye season it?
Can that which is unsavoury be eaten without salt? or is there any taste in the white of an egg?

All I see is a lot of unsupported personal opinion, nothing which addresses my post in any meaningful way or refutes anything I posted. Repeating that something is satanic over and over does not make it so. Evidence? Substantiation? Documentation?

 

[Der Alte]

....So I started searching the Scriptures myself and eventually came to a different conclusion altogether. Then years later, once I got a computer, then got on the internet, I discovered that there were many others who also conclude something besides ECT. Many were concluding, just like I did, that one dies eventually in the LOF rather than living forever in it instead.

The number of adherents does not prove that a particular belief is true.

...Yet I was praying to God at the time for guidance and understanding. Why would I get satan's understanding instead? That assuming the understanding I was getting, that it was incorrect?

There are many contentious unscriptural later theological systems around, LDS, JW, OP UPCI, WWCG, INC etc. which claim that they pray and God supposedly tells them their doctrine is correct and all others wrong.

 

[Oseas]

Just saying something is satanic does not make it so. Please provide evidence that Judith is satanic? Judith was and is considered authoritative by the Jews. When Jesus said "thrown into hell, where "'the worms that eat them do not die, and the fire is not quenched." Mark 9:47-48, it is closer to what is written in Judith 16;17 than Isaiah 66:24.

You are being judged and condemned by the Word of God, yea, by the Word of God. There is not word more powerful than the Word of God. See, the Word of God is alive and quick to judge the inner reflections and attitudes of the heart, yea, the Word is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. There is not any creature that is not manifest in His sight, but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of Him with whom we must render an account.

Moreover, I tell you this: on this Day of Judgment, the Judgment Seat of Christ, people will have to give account for every idle word they have spoken, for by your own words you will be acquitted or justified, and by your own words you will be condemned. Once condemned after this Judgment, follows itiself the punishment or chastising.

 

[ClementofA]

I have never stated my opinion.

Look here:

That scholars have a different interpretation than I do does not prove that I am wrong. That is a logical fallacy, argument from silence.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

My comment was a statement of facts, not a logical argument, so logical fallacy doesn't apply & is irrelevant.

Now there is a logical fallacy an argument from silence. I must be wrong because you don't know of any source which disagrees with me. Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack.

No such argument was stated saying you "must be wrong", though what are the odds that you are right when you cannot produce a single lexicon, church father, commentator or any other source supporting your view? We've both read many of these sources over several decades & i've never seen your argument presented by anyone, even in many forum debates re the words aion & aionion. Lexicons disagree with your view. And if you were aware of any source supporting your view, you'ld have posted it. All of this evidence combined together speaks volumes. In a court of law it would be a slam dunk. Your chance of winning would be like winning a 50 million dollar lottery.

Who agrees with you that when Scripture repeatedly speaks of the "end of the age" (e.g. Mt. 24:3) it is not a literal use of aion and is being used as hyperbole (an exaggerated statement not meant to be taken literally) like references to Herod being a fox or Peter a stone? No lexicon, church father, commentator or forum poster in the past 2000 years has been cited in support of your theory. Except you, yourself & you. It is Der Alter against the world & history of 2000 years. Does anyone agree with your ridiculous theory?

The Scriptural references to the "end of the age"[aion] prove that aion literally is used of, & can mean, a finite period of time that ends, an age, eon, a duration of time, an epoch. As i defined the word (and lexicons agree):

"Aion literally means age, eon. It refers to a duration of time, often an epoch."

Which you said was wrong.

When some duration of time has an "end" it is not endless, but finite. So when aion is in apposition to "end", it is therefore opposed to being endless & cannot mean eternal.

So your view that olam & aion & aionios mean eternal everywhere in the Scriptures (except when used in hyperbole) is proven to be wrong.

Those words often literally refer to, mean & are defined as a finite duration of time, whether of an age, eon, epoch, lifetime, etc. Both lexicons and Scriptural usage concur.

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

Your hyperbolic & aion/ios definition theories was refuted in the following thread. See post #'s 201, 190, 172 @

What is the 2nd Death? (Annihilationsim vs. Eternal Torment)

 

[Der Alte]

Look here:
My comment was a statement of facts, not a logical argument, so logical fallacy doesn't apply & is irrelevant.
No such argument was stated saying you "must be wrong", though what are the odds that you are right when you cannot produce a single lexicon, church father, commentator or any other source supporting your view? We've both read many of these sources over several decades & i've never seen your argument presented by anyone, even in many forum debates re the words aion & aionion. Lexicons disagree with your view. And if you were aware of any source supporting your view, you'ld have posted it. All of this evidence combined together speaks volumes. In a court of law it would be a slam dunk. Your chance of winning would be like winning a 50 million dollar lottery.
Who agrees with you that when Scripture repeatedly speaks of the "end of the age" (e.g. Mt. 24:3) it is not a literal use of aion and is being used as hyperbole (an exaggerated statement not meant to be taken literally) like references to Herod being a fox or Peter a stone? No lexicon, church father, commentator or forum poster in the past 2000 years has been cited in support of your theory. Except you, yourself & you. It is Der Alter against the world & history of 2000 years. Does anyone agree with your ridiculous theory?

The Scriptural references to the "end of the age"[aion] prove that aion literally is used of, & can mean, a finite period of time that ends, an age, eon, a duration of time, an epoch. As i defined the word (and lexicons agree):

"Aion literally means age, eon. It refers to a duration of time, often an epoch."

You continue to disingenuously omit where the same lexicons also include eternal, eternity, everlasting etc. in their definitions.

Which you said was wrong.
When some duration of time has an "end" it is not endless, but finite. So when aion is in apposition to "end", it is therefore opposed to being endless & cannot mean eternal.
So your view that olam & aion & aionios mean eternal everywhere in the Scriptures (except when used in hyperbole) is proven to be wrong.
Those words often literally refer to, mean & are defined as a finite duration of time, whether of an age, eon, epoch, lifetime, etc. Both lexicons and Scriptural usage concur.
Your hyperbolic & aion/ios definition theories was refuted in the following thread. See post #'s 201, 190, 172 @...

And in reply to this specious argument I guess "the whole world" and "all the world" cannot literally mean the entire planet earth because the phrases are used several times to refer to something which could not be "the whole world" or "all the world."

Matthew 16:26
(26) For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? [Matthew 26:13, Mark 8:36, Luke 9:25]​

Can a man literally, actually inherit the whole world.

Romans 1:8
(8) First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.​

Was the faith of the Romans literally, actually spoken of throughout the entire planet?

1 John 5:19
(19) And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.​

Did the entire planet literally, actually lie in wickedness?

Luke 2:1
(1) And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.​

Did Caesar literally, actually tax the entire planet?

Acts of the Apostles 19:27
(27) So that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at nought; but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worshippeth.​

Did the entire planet literally, actually, worship the goddess Diana?

Revelation 13:3
(3) And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.​

Did the entire planet actually, literally wonder after the beast? As I said using your faulty reasoning "the whole world" and "all the world" cannot mean the entire planet. I have posted this a few times before but for some reason it has been ignored.

 

[DavidPT]

The number of adherents does not prove that a particular belief is true.

There are many contentious unscriptural later theological systems around, LDS, JW, OP UPCI, WWCG, INC etc. which claim that they pray and God supposedly tells them their doctrine is correct and all others wrong.

I do seem to recall saying in that post that this of course doesn't prove my position is correct. So what you are basically suggesting then, even though I am not a part of a cultish group, such as JW, nor would I ever be in a million years, and that they and I apparently come to the same conclusions about some of these things, that when I prayed to God for understanding during those days, the understanding I received, it wasn't from God, it was from the devil instead. Why? Because the same has to apply to a group such as JW, and that they are cultish, therefore no cultish group could ever hope to come to the correct understanding about anything. BTW, I of course am just speculating on what you are likely thinking here. I bet I'm not too far off though.

As to the understanding I eventually came to, it didn't happen over night. A lot of time and searching the Scriptures were involved. And this wasn't easy back in those days. I actually had to use a physical Bible, unlike these days where one can use a software Bible, thus easily do word searches, phrase searches, so on and so on.

 

[Jordan Henshaw]

Look here:



My comment was a statement of facts, not a logical argument, so logical fallacy doesn't apply & is irrelevant.



No such argument was stated saying you "must be wrong", though what are the odds that you are right when you cannot produce a single lexicon, church father, commentator or any other source supporting your view? We've both read many of these sources over several decades & i've never seen your argument presented by anyone, even in many forum debates re the words aion & aionion. Lexicons disagree with your view. And if you were aware of any source supporting your view, you'ld have posted it. All of this evidence combined together speaks volumes. In a court of law it would be a slam dunk. Your chance of winning would be like winning a 50 million dollar lottery.

Who agrees with you that when Scripture repeatedly speaks of the "end of the age" (e.g. Mt. 24:3) it is not a literal use of aion and is being used as hyperbole (an exaggerated statement not meant to be taken literally) like references to Herod being a fox or Peter a stone? No lexicon, church father, commentator or forum poster in the past 2000 years has been cited in support of your theory. Except you, yourself & you. It is Der Alter against the world & history of 2000 years. Does anyone agree with your ridiculous theory?

The Scriptural references to the "end of the age"[aion] prove that aion literally is used of, & can mean, a finite period of time that ends, an age, eon, a duration of time, an epoch. As i defined the word (and lexicons agree):

"Aion literally means age, eon. It refers to a duration of time, often an epoch."

Which you said was wrong.

When some duration of time has an "end" it is not endless, but finite. So when aion is in apposition to "end", it is therefore opposed to being endless & cannot mean eternal.

So your view that olam & aion & aionios mean eternal everywhere in the Scriptures (except when used in hyperbole) is proven to be wrong.

Those words often literally refer to, mean & are defined as a finite duration of time, whether of an age, eon, epoch, lifetime, etc. Both lexicons and Scriptural usage concur.

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

Your hyperbolic & aion/ios definition theories was refuted in the following thread. See post #'s 201, 190, 172 @

What is the 2nd Death? (Annihilationsim vs. Eternal Torment)

You can debate the meaning of aion all day, but if you can't show me a verse that talks about purgatory, life after the Lake of Fire, a second resurrection, or second chance after death on this earth, then you are dead wrong every day of the week.

Because the Bible literally says absolutely NOTHING about these made-up fantasies.

These made-up fantasies are at the very core of what you seem to believe, and there is ZERO evidence that these fantasies have an ounce of grounding in reality.

So either show me some verses that talk about these imaginative stories, or try to read the bible in the way it was actually written, rather than in the way you imagine it.

 

[Jordan Henshaw]

You continue to disingenuously omit where the same lexicons also include eternal, eternity, everlasting etc. in their definitions.

This is quite frustrating.

 

[ClementofA]

You can debate the meaning of aion all day, but if you can't show me a verse that talks about purgatory, life after the Lake of Fire, a second resurrection, or second chance after death on this earth, then you are dead wrong every day of the week.

Firstly, that's a logical fallacy. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Secondly. By the same score, if you can't show me a verse that denies the possibility of the unsaved being saved postmortem, then "you are dead wrong every day of the week".

Thirdly, arguments in favor of such things have been presented in this thread & been, for the most part, ignored.

Fourthly, in addition to the evidence of point 3 above, all the passages of Scripture that support universalism necessarily imply postmortem salvation. See, for example:

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

 

[ClementofA]

Premise 1: God desires all be saved.... 1 Timothy 2:4: "[God] who desires(THELO) all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."

Premise 2: God does all He desires(THELO, Strongs #2709) (Isa.55:11; Psa.115:3; 135:6).

Conclusion: All will be saved

True or false?

Supporting verses:

Our God is in the heavens; he does all that he pleases(THELO) (Psalm 115:3).

Whatever the LORD pleases(THELO), He does, In heaven and in earth, in the seas and in all deeps (Psalm 135:6).

"So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire(THELO), And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it." (Isaiah 55:11).

1 Timothy 2:4 + God does all He desires = all will be saved?

 

[Jordan Henshaw]

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

No one is going to read a 250 page long book because you posted it on a forum. If you would like to quote from it, by all means, go ahead. But you can't just link to the entire thing.

Firstly, that's a logical fallacy. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Allow me to clarify: The idea that purgatory, life after the Lake of Fire, a second resurrection, or second chance after death on this earth is scriptural is dead wrong every day of the week.

Also, because the vast, vast, vast majority of people disagree with you means that the burden of proof is on you.

Secondly. By the same score, if you can't show me a verse that denies the possibility of the unsaved being saved postmortem, then "you are dead wrong every day of the week".

So what you are saying is that you read the Bible and add to it a story of dead wicked people coming back to life, having a second, third, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth chance to surrender to God and just keeping coming back to life over and over again for as long as they remain stubborn until every last one of them are saved?

And then you somehow think that you can debate the validity of this fantastical yarn on a Christian, bible-based forum? Have you tried this forum? https://www.fanfiction.net/forums/general/0/

Are you going to write a book about this incredible tale that will one day be the 28th book of the New Testament that will go after Revelation and be called, "Clementians"?