Eternal Conscious Hell Fire is completely Justified

[Tinker Grey]

Again, it is not God that is confused on the issue!

Well, he sure failed to communicate clearly.

 

[cvanwey]

Again, it is not God that is confused on the issue! He knows exactly how long hell will last! It is man's interpretation that do not take into account the character of |God and want to prove their theory instead of reveal the love and justice of God!
Rev_20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Rev_20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
They pay a length of time according to their works---each one as his record states, as the love and justice of God determines. There is no dictated length of time but it is not forever for that is neither just nor love!

Just as this thread is taking forever to come to an end, just as waiting at the DMV takes forever, just as being on terminal hold on the phone takes forever---forever can be just a figure of speach.

I understand 'forever' can have more than one meaning. But I sincerely doubt the Bible is speaking some sort of slang. And I also doubt it is doing so when speaking about Heaven. So why ASSUME it is doing so for hell?

 

[mmksparbud]

Well, he sure failed to communicate clearly.

I view it as we sure failed to understand clearly!

 

[Tinker Grey]

I view it as we sure failed to understand clearly!

Does your omniscient god not know how to make himself understood? Does your omnipotent god lack the power to make it happen? Does your omnibenevolent god not want to?

 

[mmksparbud]

I understand 'forever' can have more than one meaning. But I sincerely doubt the Bible is speaking some sort of slang. And I also doubt it is doing so when speaking about Heaven. So why ASSUME it is doing so for hell?

Because it adds up to every other scripture azbput it and about other subjects. There are several places where people use the word forever in just that way--Hanna gave her son to serve in the temple--forever.
A servant who chose to stay with his master was to be such---forever--0bviously it was only until they died.

 

[mmksparbud]

Does your omniscient god not know how to make himself understood? Does your omnipotent god lack the power to make it happen? Does your omnibenevolent god not want to?

Yes---He spoke through men who spoke in their language in their culture at that time. Modern man does not always take those things into account.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Yes---He spoke through men who spoke in their language in their culture at that time. Modern man does not always take those things into account.

Sounds to me as if your answer is "No, he was not able to make himself understood."

Sometimes, it really is the teacher's fault.

 

[mmksparbud]

Sounds to me as if your answer is "No, he was not able to make himself understood."

Sometimes, it really is the teacher's fault.

There again--you are the one misunderstanding--not me---and just as often---it is the students fault. You an atheist--we are not going to agree!

 

[Tinker Grey]

An omnipotent, omniscient teacher has know excuse for failure to make itself understood. Even the teacher's pets cannot agree.

 

[createdtoworship]

I understand 'forever' can have more than one meaning. But I sincerely doubt the Bible is speaking some sort of slang. And I also doubt it is doing so when speaking about Heaven. So why ASSUME it is doing so for hell?

this is a very good point, sir. I commend you on it. That is why I say the bible is very clear that eternal hell is the same exact eternity that heaven is. Many people wish to have eternal life, but then they read about eternal damnation and all of a sudden they say the word means temporary. But its the same exact word both times.

 

[cvanwey]

this is a very good point, sir. I commend you on it. That is why I say the bible is very clear that eternal hell is the same exact eternity that heaven is. Many people wish to have eternal life, but then they read about eternal damnation and all of a sudden they say the word means temporary. But its the same exact word both times.

I get both sides quite frankly. This is why I submit, God appears to be the author of confusion. Yes, of course God is not confused. But His message to His pupils appears to be. And yet, God makes no effort to amend/correct this over-generalization. He lets it stand.

 

[Tone]

@Tone

here is my argument for eternal hell, (one of them )

1. Matthew 25:46
   
   "And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal."
   
   Augustine raised the argument that since Aionios in Matthew 25:46 refers to both life and punishment , it had to carry the same duration in both cases.
   
   Annihilationists are stuck to believe the duration is relative to whom it is given.
   
2. secondly the soul has to be eternal because satan and angels are eternal and it is them that share the experience of Hell with the wicked. Again annihilationists are stuck to believe that the duration is relative to whom it is given.
   
3. thirdly, the beast and the false prophet are in hell a thousand years in the Revelation. They will be tossed in before the millennium and abide until the end of the 1000 years when Satan is thrown in.
   
   Revelation 14:11
   
   "And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name."
   
   that verse proves that whoever worships the beast or his image or receives the mark will have the same destination as the beast and the false prophet.
   
   Revelation 19:20 Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone.
   
   
   
   Now we need to know how long the beast and the false prophet and those who worship the beast are in hell, do they self destruct after so long or are they in there for eternity like it says?
   
   Now remember what it says in revelation 20, satan is bound after this for a 1000 years. Revelation 20:1-3, and simultaneously the saints reign with Christ for 1000 years verses 4-6. Then after that satan is released to tempt those who were born in the millenium (verse 7-9), that never knew what temptation was and free will to sin due to Jesus ruling and "reigning with an iron rod" as the Bible says. Some will rebel at this time, and join satan, then after this happens the rebellion is crushed by God verse 9, and then what I want you to see here is this. Remember the beast and the false prophet, throne in the fire, before this thousand years? Well Satan is thrown in there, and they are still there! Read this verse...
   
   Rev 20:10
   
   "And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."
   
   notice it states that they currently ARE there in revelation 20:10, placed in prior to the millenium, and still there 1000 years later!
   
   This not part of the three arguments for eternal hell, but it is a separate argument that likens the fire from Sodom and Gomorrah to literal hell.
   
   
   
   Luke 17:29 But on the day Lot left Sodom, fire and brimstone rained down from heaven and destroyed them all.
   
   
   
   
   
   Jude 1:7 In like manner, Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, who indulged in sexual immorality and pursued strange flesh, are on display as an example of those who sustain the punishment of eternal fire.
   
   
   
   
   
   Are you suggesting they are right now suffering in eternal fire? Or that the fire destroyed them for eternity?
   
   2 Peter 2:4 For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them deep into hell, placing them in chains of darkness to be held for judgment;
   
   
   
   
   
   Or are you suggesting God did not put them in chains of dense darkness, but is instead punishing them before judgment has been passed?
   
   
   
   
   
   Chains of darkness - death - to there await the resurrection and judgement.
   
   
   
   
   
   Because "hell" the grave - is likened to sleep, where there exists no knowledge - no anything.
   
   
   
   
   
   Ecclesiastes 9:10 Whatever you find to do with your hands, do it with all your might, for in Sheol, where you are going, there is no work or planning or knowledge or wisdom.
   
   
   
   
   Hebrew Sheol, Greek Gehenna.
   
   SHEOL - JewishEncyclopedia.com
   
   
   
   So as it was for Sodom and Gomorrah who instead of being hurled into the lake of fire - had the lake of fire hurled onto them. And will never exist for eternity. The punishment is everlasting and the punishment is eternal death, the opposite of eternal life. And since no resurrection will be possible, it will be an eternal punishment. They will indeep weep and gnash their teeth for however long their mortal bodies can survive - as those at Sodom and Gomorrah wept and gnashed their teeth before being destroyed.
   
   
   
   
   
   
   no, when Revelation 20:10 happens, they will be there, hence the "are" in verse 10. And as I said before, they were placed in before the tribulation, and there 1000 years later, still. Burning.
   
   
   In in conclusion: here is one more verse:
   
   Mark 14:21
   
   but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had never been born.
   
   
   this verse should be confusing to an annihilationist, as if someone dies, it's not anything more than turning someone's soul off for eternity. Judas hung himself, and died. Very little pain involved. So why would Jesus say that it would be good for that man if he was never born?
   
   
   I await your responses.

I don't have any problem with your view.

*Either way it is an eternal separation from life and love...

 

[createdtoworship]

I get both sides quite frankly. This is why I submit, God appears to be the author of confusion. Yes, of course God is not confused. But His message to His pupils appears to be. And yet, God makes no effort to amend/correct this over-generalization. He lets it stand.

in a way I can see what you are saying. But God seems to hide truth from people who's heart are not perfect toward Him (Ez 17:2, Matt 13:15). Heresy is labelled as a work of the flesh (Gal 5:19-21), normally when someone is into heresy it's because of other life sins that enable them to lose faith in that area. It's not an issue with God it's an issue with man. It takes faith to believe the Bible as God's written word, I don't have a problem having faith, because 99% of facts are not even scientifically proven and accepted by faith. So faith is mans default operating system, as I have explained numerous times. Most christians who believe in evolution or annihilation are lacking faith in this and in other areas as well, that makes them gullible and lack the resilience it takes to be a correct Christian.

2 Peter 2:1 (NKJ): “But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.”

 

[cvanwey]

in a way I can see what you are saying. But God seems to hide truth from people who's heart are not perfect toward Him (Ez 17:2, Matt 13:15). Heresy is labelled as a work of the flesh (Gal 5:19-21), normally when someone is into heresy it's because of other life sins that enable them to lose faith in that area. It's not an issue with God it's an issue with man. It takes faith to believe the Bible as God's written word, I don't have a problem having faith, because 99% of facts are not even scientifically proven and accepted by faith. So faith is mans default operating system, as I have explained numerous times.

I think we can just leave this much alone. No need to squabble over minutiae.

Most christians who believe in evolution or annihilation are lacking faith in this and in other areas as well, that makes them gullible and lack the resilience it takes to be a correct Christian.

2 Peter 2:1 (NKJ): “But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.”

I have to ask... If evolution by natural selection was demonstrated correct, in a way in which was irrefutable to (you), would you have no choice but to give up Christianity? The reason I ask is because you seem 'threatened' by this long standing scientific endeavor. Do you bring this one up, in particular, because it may appear to impose a direct threat upon your religious faith? Just wondering, as I do not see you going after germ theory, atomic theory, cell theory, etc....

 

[createdtoworship]

I think we can just leave this much alone. No need to squabble over minutiae.




I have to ask... If evolution by natural selection was demonstrated correct, in a way in which was irrefutable to (you),

Sir I have asked for evidence of evolution since 2004. I have debated biologists, astronomers and you name it. They have absolutely not one instance of proof of macro evolution. It's all assumptions, even in their dating methods they utilize bias and assumptions. So if you can actually prove a transition form between two different animals (different genra), then you would do something that many cannot. But I don't think you will even try. Because you are committing the same fallacy as many others and relying on consensus. Which is a form of laziness. But the band wagon fallacy is very common among evolutionists, because they can't actually defend the position themselves, or quote the actual alleged science behind it, they just have faith in evolutionary biology.

would you have no choice but to give up Christianity?

no. There is such a thing as theistic evolutionists, but it's a cop out. And many of those who are into such viewpoints, don't hold a literal view of innerency. I debate them too.

The reason I ask is because you seem 'threatened' by this long standing scientific endeavor.

um, no. I am not threatened by something with no evidence.

Do you bring this one up, in particular, because it may appear to impose a direct threat upon your religious faith?

at this point I can't help but seem to think, me mentioning it is scaring you for some reason. Because you keep repeating yourself nervously.

Just wondering, as I do not see you going after germ theory, atomic theory, cell theory, etc....

I don't have a problem with observable science, evolution is not observable and thus is not science.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

You have again side stepped my observation. There appears to be no debate about the length of time in Heaven. Again, this is concluded by reading out of the very same book. Thus, why is the conclusion about the length of time in hell debatable?

Who said it is debatable ?
I said it is not permitted by the RULES OF THIS SITE (look them up)
to say that there is no unending judgment.

 

[createdtoworship]

Who said it is debatable ?
I said it is not permitted by the RULES OF THIS SITE (look them up)
to say that there is no unending judgment.

I believe non believers can question all areas of christianity in this subforum (apologetics). That is why I posted it here, to give atheists an opportunity to voice their concerns. But in the other subforums it is not permissible, you are correct.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Pigeon chess comes to mind.

 

[cvanwey]

Sir I have asked for evidence of evolution since 2004. I have debated biologists, astronomers and you name it. They have absolutely not one instance of proof of macro evolution. It's all assumptions, even in their dating methods they utilize bias and assumptions. So if you can actually prove a transition form between two different animals (different genra), then you would do something that many cannot. But I don't think you will even try. Because you are committing the same fallacy as many others and relying on consensus. Which is a form of laziness. But the band wagon fallacy is very common among evolutionists, because they can't actually defend the position themselves, or quote the actual alleged science behind it, they just have faith in evolutionary biology.


no. There is such a thing as theistic evolutionists, but it's a cop out. And many of those who are into such viewpoints, don't hold a literal view of innerency. I debate them too.
um, no. I am not threatened by something with no evidence.

at this point I can't help but seem to think, me mentioning it is scaring you for some reason. Because you keep repeating yourself nervously.

I don't have a problem with observable science, evolution is not observable and thus is not science.

I would love to dive into much of what you just said, but it is so off topic, I'll let it die here. I was just curious, as you seem to bring up evolution from time to time.

However, me 'believing' or not believing evolutionary theory is true has not relevance or bearing on my separate belief, or lack-there-of, in the sciences.

On a side note, I'm no biologist, but your response leads me to think you may not have a clear understanding of what evolutionary biology proposes.

 

[cvanwey]

duplicate