If the character of how we receive immortality is not congruent with who God is, how can you be sure of the God you are trusting? You yourself may be annihilated when you are no longer useful.
So I have to challenge you: how do you explain all of these passages, considering both God's willingness to talk about making angels die, and the parallel passages not being interpretable as talking about angels never dying? Do you think my interpretation of Luke is weak?
Scripture is written to give you KNOWLEDGE. KNOWLEDGE.
When I say, angels are spirits, and spirits never die, that is a true fact.
And you best hope that is true, since it is God who quickens your own spirit, that shall NEVER Die.
TO GOD, ie ACCORDING TO GOD, BY HIS SPIRITUAL UNDERSTANDING, GOD ACCOUNTS THEM AS DEAD TO HIM.
IF an angel, IF a man IS NOT WITH HIM, they are AGAINST HIM, and accounted BY HIM as DEAD TO HIM, whether or not they are living.
That was a long and unscriptural lecture, and I don't understand why you're using bold underline; it looks like yelling, which doesn't seem right for you to do to me. You and I were discussing the Scripture's teaching about angels which the Bible says will die and you say will not die. It almost sounds like you think I'm unregenerate, and I don't think I've done anything to deserve that.
No, that's not "a true fact;" it is your summary of what you believe the Scripture teaches. I respect what you believe, but I'm engaging you at the level of what the Scripture teaches, not at the level of what you believe.
What are you trying to quote here? Our hope is never stated to be that God will quicken our spirit that will never die; it's that the Spirit who raised up Christ will also raise up our mortal bodies so that we will never die (1 Cor 15, Rom 8).
I don't understand why this is so important to you that it's worth all-uppercase; it wasn't important enough for the Bible to ever say.
Ok, perhaps this is true, but the Bible also says that God will kill the wicked, and that He will kill at least the guardian cherub we talked about. Surely you don't think "God will kill" means "God will reckon them dead even though they're actually alive"?
but you can be offended and I'll apologize for attempting to give you what didn't interest you.
Sorry Bro but the Angels are in heaven and since no man has yet ascended unto heaven but Christ, you are barking up the wrong tree. I also quoted Nehemiah 9:6 to show that God created all things, including all the host of beings. As well as Isaiah 45:18 and Revelation 4:11. 1 Tinothy 6:16 is about God, who only hath immortality, whom no man has ever seen. Good bye to the theory of it being Christ or anyone. And don't forget Isaiah 54:16 God created the destroyer to destroy and that means God controls all.Given your quotation of Luke 20, I think I understand why you disagree. Let me show you what I meant, though; and what I should have said to express my meaning clearly. you quote Luke, of course, you bring up a good point, because both of us know the Bible can't contradict itself. How do we resolve this tension, then?
The first thing to notice is that Luke 20 doesn't say "angels never die."
Mark 12:25 - "For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven."
So I have to challenge you: how do you explain all of these passages, considering both God's willingness to talk about making angels die, and the parallel passages not being interpretable as talking about angels never dying? Do you think my interpretation of Luke is weak?
Other than that, most of what we are saying is remote guesswork.
Sorry Bro but the Angels are in heaven and since no man has yet ascended unto heaven but Christ, you are barking up the wrong tree.
1 Corinthians 15:28 and 1 Corinthians 11:3 says Christ will be subject to God and God will be all in all. 1 Peter 3:22 says all Angels are subject to Christ and 1 Corinthians 3:23 says God is the head of Christ as does Ephesians 5:23, so Luke 20 means God only has immortality.I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you're trying to correct me on. I did not say that angels aren't in heaven, nor did I say that anyone aside from Jesus ascended to heaven. None of that has anything to do with what I was discussing, which is the fact that it seems that God promises that some angels will die and be no more.
1 Corinthians 15:28 and 1 Corinthians 11:3 says Christ will be subject to God and God will be all in all. 1 Peter 3:22 says all Angels are subject to Christ and 1 Corinthians 3:23 says God is the head of Christ as does Ephesians 5:23, so Luke 20 means God only has immortality.
According to the beattitudes, The Father of Jesus is kind to those who are evil to him. So what manner of god would just annihilate? Not the Father of Jesus, but a being like that would annihilate you.Brother, with all respect, how does this fit as a reaction to what Mark's told you from the Bible? When did he suggest that God annihilates those who were useful but become un-useful?
I am SO impressed with what you've done here I couldn't just click "like", I have to reply. Thank you. I completely agree, and in fact, I don't see how this basic, clear teaching has become so seldom noticed in the history of the church! We see it taught clearly in Sts. Irenaeus and Aphrahat, and of course it's represented in every age from which we have documentation... except that it become very rare after Greek was largely lost and after the Romans began killing people for disagreeing with them. Only in the Reformation does it again surface -- against a background of the superstition that all humans are immortal so that even God can't kill them. Luther questioned that superstition, but didn't follow it through to the Biblical teaching, and Calvin's vitriolic writing on the subject was able to shut him down where the Pope's anathema had not been able. But in England through the 1600s on it caught on like wildfire, even briefly spreading to America (although there it was quenched by the spiritism of the 1800s revivals).
You said:With that said, I'm in almost complete agreement... I just want to caution you about your first post. The Biblical word "eternal" or "everlasting" is sometimes ambiguous and can mean "lasting an unknown amount of time" or "lasting beyond our knowledge." But this isn't an argument I would lead with, because in fact it's not always true. And almost always, when it says "forever" it means that -- the phrases translated "forever" are different from the ones translated "eternal" and "everlasting", and have much less ambiguity.
In fact, I believe why most hold to ECT (Eternal Conscious Torment) is because they do not understand that the word "forever" does not always mean "forever" in the Bible.
Take Revelation 14:11 as an example.
Should the English words "for ever" (or "forever") be read literally meaning an endless state?
Well, I heard a pastor once say that the best way to interpret the Bible is to let the Bible do the interpreting for you. What I am I talking about? Well, the Bible tells us that the phrase "smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever" is a metaphorical phrase from Isaiah 34:10 which says that the smoke of Edom went up forever and ever. Yet is the city of Edom burning today? No, of course not. So we then realize that this phrase is speaking metaphorically.
In other words,, the word "forever" (and it's related words) does not always mean forever in the Bible. “Forever” can be talking about "forever" here on this Earth (as long as someone lives) or in having a sense of "completeness" or "totality" for a specific thing). For what do you make of the following verses below that say that "forever" (or it's related words) is not forever?
• In Genesis 13:15 the land of Canaan is given to Israel “forever”.
• The Law is to be a statute “forever” (Exodus 12:24; Exodus 27:21; Exodus 28:43).
• Sodom's fiery judgment is "eternal" (Jude 1:7) until -- God "will restore the fortunes of Sodom" (Ezekiel 16:53-55).
• Israel's "affliction is incurable" (Jeremiah 30:12) until -- the Lord "will restore health" and heal her wounds (Jeremiah 30:17).
• The sin of Samaria "is incurable" (Micah 1:9) until -- Lord "will restore ... the fortunes of Samaria." (Ezekiel 16:53).
• Ammon is to become a "wasteland forever" and "rise no more" (Zephaniah 2:9, Jeremiah 25:27 until -- the Lord will "restore the fortunes of the Ammonites" (Jeremiah 49:6).
• An Ammonite or Moabite is forbidden to enter the Lord's congregation "forever" until -- the tenth generation (Deuteronomy 23:3):
• Habakkuk tells us of mountains that were "everlasting" until -- they "were shattered" Habakkuk 3:6).
• The Aaronic Priesthood was to be an "everlasting" priesthood (Exodus 40:15), that is-until-it was superceded by the Melchizedek Priesthood (Hebrews 7:14-18).
• Many translations of the Bible inform us that God would dwell in Solomon's Temple "forever" (1 Kings 8:13), until -- the Temple was destroyed.
• The children of Israel were to "observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant" (Exodus 31:16)-until -- Paul states there remains "another day" of Sabbath rest for the people of God (Hebrews 4:8-9).
• The Law of Moses was to be an "everlasting covenant" (Leviticus 24:8) yet we read in the New Covenant the first was "done away" and "abolished" (2 Corinthians 3:11-13), and God "made the first old" (Hebrews 8:13).
• The fire for Israel's sin offering (of a ram without blemish) is never to be put out. It shall be a "perpetual" until -- Christ, the Lamb of God, dies for our sins.
Hell. We now have a better covenant established on better promises (Leviticus 6:12-13, Hebrews 8:6-13).
• God's waves of wrath roll over Jonah "forever" until--the Lord delivers him from the large fish's belly on the third day (Jonah 2:6-10; Jonah 1:17); Egypt and Elam will "rise no more" (Jeremiah 25:27) until -- the Lord will "restore the fortunes of Egypt" (Ezekiel 29:14) and "restore the fortunes of Elam" (Jeremiah 49:39).
• "Moab is destroyed" (Jeremiah 48:4, Jeremiah 48:42) until--the Lord "will restore the fortunes of Moab" (Jeremiah 48:47).
• Israel's judgment lasts "forever" until -- the Spirit is poured out and God restores it (Isaiah 32:13-15).
• The King James Bible, as well as many others, tells us that a bond slave was to serve his master "forever" (Exodus 21:6), until -- his death.
• “Eternal” (Greek aionia, αιονια) is sometimes used of a limited (not endless) period of time. But the most common use is illustrated in 2 Corinthians 4:18 where it is contrasted with “temporal” and in Philemon 1:15 where it is contrasted with “for a while.”
Anyways, in conclusion, I have discovered that the word "forever" as used in the Bible is true. It does mean "forever" but it is talking in "forever" under the context of within either a temporary Covenant, or here upon this Earth (which is temporal), or within the Lake of Fire (Which is also a temporary place).
Here is the source for list above for the Scriptural examples used on the word "forever":
http://www.apttoteach.org/attjom/index.php
According to the beattitudes, The Father of Jesus is kind to those who are evil to him. So what manner of god would just annihilate? Not the Father of Jesus, but a being like that would annihilate you.
much of what Jesus taught supported a belief in hell as understood by many Christians.
Nothing I quoted contradicts or is contradicted by anything in the JE article I quoted from. There were different beliefs. For example, the school of Hillel had one belief, the contemporary school of Shammai had a different belief. One does not disprove the other.
Wrong. Go to the link and see the title of the site "History:Ancient Jewish History." The site quotes from the Encyclopedia Judaica.
Link: Gehinnom
You are wrong about the Talmud. Please show me how anything is this quote contradicts or is contradicted by anything else.
Talmud -Tractate Rosh Hashanah Chapter 1.
The school of Hillel says: . . . but as for Minim, [follower of Jesus] informers and disbelievers, who deny the Torah, or Resurrection, or separate themselves from the congregation, or who inspire their fellowmen with dread of them, or who sin and cause others to sin, as did Jeroboam the son of Nebat and his followers, they all descend to Gehenna, and are judged there from generation to generation, as it is said [Isa. lxvi. 24]: "And they shall go forth and look upon the carcases of the men who have transgressed against Me; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched." Even when Gehenna will be destroyed, they will not be consumed, as it is written [Psalms, xlix. 15]: "And their forms wasteth away in the nether world," which the sages comment upon to mean that their forms shall endure even when the grave is no more. Concerning them Hannah says [I Sam. ii. 10]: "The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces."
Talmud Link:Tract Rosh Hashana: Chapter I.
Most lexicons disagree with the notion that the Hebrew & Greek words OLAM & AION mean "forever" according to how you appear to understand it. They indicate that the word has various meanings according to context, not one single basic meaning unless used in hyperbole. The hyperbole theory has been recently refuted in the other thread started by Mark that has been getting activity on this forum recently.
Lamentations 3:22 and 3:31-33, The steadfast love of the Lord never ceases, his mercies never come to an end. . . .
Lam.3:31 For the Lord will not cast off FOR EVER:
32 For if He causes grief, Then He will have compassion According to His abundant lovingkindness. 33 For He does not afflict willingly Or grieve the SONS OF MEN.
Which opposes the theory of endless annihilationism, as do many other passages of the Scriptures.
The context in which /olam/ does mean "forever" is the phrase /l'olam/, and the context in which /aion/ means "forever" is the phrase /eis ton aiona/. You've implied that "most lexicons disagree", but this isn't true; lexicons that list stock phrases such as /eis ton aiona/ all list its translation as "forever". Examples include LSJ and BDAG. (The lexicons that don't list this are simply incomplete and misleading.)
The word /olam/ in isolation can mean other things -- but not the phrase.
There's so much wrong about this I don't know where to start.
Conditional immortality is not "the theory of endless annihilationism." It's simply the fact that God says man's life is limited. If we waste it seeking our own life, we will lose our life. There's no endlessness to the punishing of the wicked; God doesn't keep on keeping people annihilated. Once their life is destroyed, that's it for them.
However, read the passage you've quoted, in context. This is not about people in general, but about God's faithful among the covenant-breakers. The faithful and unfaithful alike were being punished, but the faithful knew that God would remember them. The unfaithful did not know that.
I wrote out of a concern that generally doesn't apply to you. Blessings.The Father is indeed kind to all; He describes His kindness in many places. He provides life, food, rain... What He _also_ consistently says is that it is not good that fallen man would live forever (Gen 3:22). It's good that he lives -- it's not good that he live forever.
For this reason, God says that the unrepentant, who die in their sins, must die; not because He likes the idea (contrary to your claim), but because this is the meaning of the finite gift of life God has given.
I did not tell you I wasn't interested, and you shouldn't tell me what my interests are. I'd rather you discuss the Scripture behind what you said rather than just all-upper-casing me and telling me I need to get Spirit-filled so I can agree with you.
I can see from your other posts you're keenly interested in what the Bible says, so I have reason to expect more from you.
Can we discuss the passage of scripture we were both talking about, Luke 20? Failing that, can we stick to Scripture?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?