Hell

[dumpsterdiver45]

Please conjure up an explanation for this if you think it is a metaphor: Ps 21:9 Thou shalt make them as a fiery oven in the time of thine anger: the LORD shall swallow them up in his wrath, and the fire shall devour them.

Mat 3:12 Whose fan is in His hand, and He will throughly purge His floor, and gather His wheat into the garner; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. So you admit there will be a second death? That must mean no more torture or tears either?

The 19th century Young's Literal Translation and Rotherham's Emphasized Bible both try to be as literal a translation as possible and do not use the word Hell at all, keeping the words Hades and Gehenna untranslated. Annihilationists understand Gehenna to be a place where sinners are eventually utterly destroyed, not tormented forever.

Earlier in the 20th century, some theologians at the University of Cambridge including Basil Atkinson supported the belief. 20th-century English theologians who favour annihilation include Bishop Charles Gore (1916),[4] William Temple, 98th Archbishop of Canterbury (1924);[5] Oliver Chase Quick, Chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury (1933),[6] Ulrich Ernst Simon (1964),[7] and Caird G. B., The Revelation of St John the Divine London: A. and C. Black., 1966, pp. 186f., 260.

Additionally, the Church of England's Doctrine Commission reported in 1995 that "[h]ell is not eternal torment", but "non-being". Some Protestant and Anglican writers have also proposed annihilationist doctrines.

The ancient Aramaic paraphrase-translations of the Hebrew Bible supply the term "Gehinnom" frequently to verses touching upon resurrection, judgment, and the fate of the wicked. This may also include addition of the phrase "second death", as in the final chapter of the Book of Isaiah, where the Hebrew version does not mention either Gehinnom or the Second Death, whereas the Targums add both. In this the Targums are parallel to the Gospel of Mark addition of "Gehenna" to the quotation of the Isaiah verses describing the corpses "where their worm does not die"
McNamara, Targums and Testament, ISBN 978-0716506195

There is evidence however that the southwest shoulder of this valley (Ketef Hinnom) was a burial location with numerous burial chambers that were reused by generations of families from as early as the seventh until the fifth century BCE. The use of this area for tombs continued into the first centuries BCE and CE.

By 70 CE, the area was not only a burial site but also a place for cremation of the dead with the arrival of the Tenth Roman Legion, who were the only group known to practice cremation in this region.
Gabriel Barkay, "The Riches of Ketef Hinnom." Biblical Archaeological Review 35:4-5 (2005): 22–35, 122–26.

In the synoptic gospels Jesus uses the word Gehenna 11 times to describe the opposite to life in the Kingdom (Mark 9:43-48).[29] It is a place where both soul and body could be destroyed (Matthew 10:28: "....rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in, 'Gehenna.'".

αποτομη, ης, η a cutting off: & αποτομια, ας, η, seveity: fr. αποτομος, ο, η, abrupt, cut or broken off ; by metaph. severe: Hence, αποτομως, adv. severely, precisely
Page 79 English and Greek Lexicon Page 22 Cutting, τομη, τομηα: by cutting, off, αποτομη

The word "severity" now suggests sometimes the idea of harshness, or even of cruelty. (Webster.) But nothing of this kind is conveyed in the original word here. It properly denotes "cutting off," αποτομίαν apotomian from αποτέμνω apotemnō, to cut off; and is commonly applied to the act of the gardener or vine-dresser in trimming trees or vines, and cutting off the decayed or useless branches.

Here it refers to the act of God in cutting off or rejecting the useless branches; and conveys no idea of injustice, cruelty, or harshness. It was a just act, and consistent with all the perfections of God. It indicated a purpose to do what was right, though the inflictions might seem to be severe, and though they must involve them in many heavy calamities.
G5114 Swords of the Soul and Spirit – Scribd tomōteros tom-o'-ter-os Compound of a derivative of the primary word τεμνω temnō (to cut; more comprehensive or decisive than G2875

The term severity αποτομια [Strong's G663], from απο [Strong's G575], from, and τεμνω, to cut off, properly denotes excision, cutting off, as the gardener cuts off, with a pruning knife, dead boughs, or luxuriant stems.
Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Commentary on the Bible, Adam Clarke “but it was severity, αποτομια, an act of excision, Rom 11:1;
Deu 7:10 And repayeth them that hate him to their face, to destroy [אבד ] them: he will not be slack to him that hateth him, he will repay him to his face.
Spec, a) Of things, to destroy, to lay waste, 2 K. 19, 18. Num. 33, 52. Deut. 12, 2. ) to waste one's substance, Prov. 29, 3. b) Of men, to destroy, to kill, to put to death,
Esth. 3, 9. 13. 2 K. 11, 1. 13, 7. to destroy, to cut off, as men and nations, Deut. 7, 10. 8, 20 ; Lev. 23, 30 ; Deut. 7, 24 ; also of a land, to lay waste, Zeph. 2, 5 ;

It is God who controls life and excision from life:
destroying angel 2 Sam. 24. 16, and the destroyer Ex. 12, 23, i. e. the angel of God who inflicts calamities and death upon men;
comp.1 Chr. 21, 12. Jer. 51, 1 Page 1053

Job 14, 19. Very rarely the quiescent X in 1 pers. fut. is dropped, as in Jer. 46, 8.
Deriv. Chald. fut. to perish. Jer. 10, 11. Aph. to destroy, to cut off, Dan. 2, 12. 18^ 24.
after the Heb. minner, Dan. 7, li.Participial noun, destruction, Num. 24, 20. 24. See Lehrg. p. 488.
2. place of destruction, abyss, i. e. Sheol, Hades, Prov. 27, 20 Chethibh. "m. 1. destruction, Job 31, 12. 2. place of destruction, abyss, nearly synon. with Job 26, 6. 28, 22. Prov. 15, 11
m. verbal of Piel for without Dag. lene in destruction, slaughter, Esth. 9, 5. id. destruction death, Esth. 8, 6. Page 3. 4

Job 42:11 Then came there unto him all his brethren, and all his sisters, and all they that had been of his acquaintance before, and did eat bread with him in his house: and they bemoaned him, and comforted him over all the evil that the LORD had brought upon him:

2Th 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
2Th 1:8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
2Th 1:9 Who shall pay the penalty with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power

You and Da are cut and paste kings. Read my last post to you. You're doing exactly the same thing again...like the time before...and the time before...and the time before...

 

[createdtoworship]

Because eternal suffering does not match the degree of sin committed—including those of Hitler, Stalin and all other known bad guys—it is logically considered to be torture

Torture: The deliberate, systematic, or wanton infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons on another.

a few things here, I take it you don't believe in eternal hell fire and believe it to be torture. However how can you say the punishment doesn't fit the crime if you haven't seen the crime? In otherwords, have you listened to every curse word, watched every raping, or molestation; or heard every lie? More than this, lets take it to the next step. Have you felt every act of pride? Have you listened to every single negative thought? Have you seen every occasion of lusting for things that are not their own? How indeed, can you say the punishment doesn't fit the crime? Have you mind read every selfish thought? God has.

Secondly, your posts reak of fallacy. Mainly ad hominems. Telling other posters that their posts are a waste of space, or belittling them because they don't have your same view. I encourage you to keep the conversation only on the premises and not focused on ad hominem fallacy.
Ad Hominem Examples

• A lawyer attacking a defendant’s character rather than addressing or questioning based on the case, e.g., in a case of theft pointing out the defendant’s level of poverty.
• A politician degrading another politician during a political campaign when asked about a specific policy, e.g. “Well, I think we need to look at the other candidate’s failures regarding this topic.”
• Responding in any debate with an attack on one’s personal beliefs.
• Using someone’s known background or beliefs to respond in a way such as “Of course you would say that, because you believe _____.”
• Stating that someone’s argument is incorrect because of her religious beliefs, such as, “Perhaps if you weren’t part of the religious group that you are, you would see this quite differently.”
• Demeaning a teacher’s decision on grading by insulting her intelligence, e.g., “Well, it’s not like you graduated from the best school, so I can see why you wouldn’t know how to properly grade a writing assignment.”
• Using racial slurs to demean a person of another race in an argument about a crime involving people of different racial backgrounds, such as, “People like you don’t understand what it’s like to be of my race so you blatantly have no right to make an argument about this situation.”
• Generalizing views of a political party as an insulting argument to an individual who is a member of a different party, e.g., “Well, it’s pretty obvious that your political party doesn’t know how to be fiscally responsible, so I wouldn’t expect you to, either.”
• Stating that one’s age precludes him from being able to make an intelligent or meaningful argument, such as, “You are clearly just too young to understand.”
• Asserting that someone’s geographical location prevents him from being able to make a clear judgment, such as, “You’ve only ever lived in an urban environment. The issues of those in other areas is clearly beyond you.”
• Using gender as a means to devalue an argument from an opposing gender, e.g., “This is a female issue. As a man, how can you have an opinion about this?”
• Stating that the ethnicity of the opposing individual keeps him from formulating a valuable opinion, e.g., “You are from the United States, so you could never understand what it’s like to live in a country like that.”
• Using someone’s educational level as a means to exploit and degrade the opposer’s argument, such as, “You didn’t even finish high school - how could you possibly know about this?”
• Relying on socioeconomic status as a means to undermine an opposing individual’s opinion, such as, “You wouldn’t understand since you have never had to struggle."

above examples from :
Ad Hominem Examples

do you recognize any of these fallacies?:

You're a waste of time DA.

This is a complete waste of space DA.

Do you actually have anything intelligent to add to the topic?

you might consider keeping silent and stop embarrassing yourself.

and those were adhominems found only in the last 24hours, I bet I could find more if I tried hard enough.

 

[dumpsterdiver45]

your posts reak of fallacy.

Thanks for your observations. A fallacy is a misconception resulting from incorrect reasoning. Those expressions you posted of mine were various attempts to either elicit introspection by fellow posters I consider unwilling to think outside a closed mind or dialog honestly or in some cases to provoke my zealous correspondents to actually read what is posted and think it through instead of remaining in attack mode long after he/she/it should have quit, arguing apparently just for the sake of making noise.

I think if you'll take time to consider all posts in context you'll see that none of these deter from the soundness of my arguments.

Also, you might try to come up with a better list of ad hominems....some of those you posted are laughable for their obvious political correctness and are rarely or never used in theological discussions.

Question: to what degree might you have targeted my "ad hominems" because of my "heretical" theology?

A second question: is this.....

how can you say the punishment doesn't fit the crime if you haven't seen the crime? In otherwords, have you listened to every curse word, watched every raping, or molestation; or heard every lie? More than this, lets take it to the next step. Have you felt every act of pride? Have you listened to every single negative thought? Have you seen every occasion of lusting for things that are not their own? How indeed, can you say the punishment doesn't fit the crime? Have you mind read every selfish thought? God has.

...a proper rebuttal to calling eternal torment "torture"? I haven't a clue why you think not being omniscient like God is somehow a proper ground for overthrowing the distinction made between punishment and torture in my posts to Dr Love.

All the same thanks for your advice, the tone of the thread gets quite robust at times and your heart is doubtless in the right place....right?

 

[Der Alte]

I've presented considerable logical and Biblical evidence here for my position.

You have not presented any Biblical evidence only supposed allegories.

Both interpretations and the doctrines they establish are expected to stand up to established truth criteria. You have no interest in judging according to truth criteria, only according to your doctrine. Like the atheist position, yours is circular. You're a waste of time DA.

You have no truth criteria. All you have are a bunch of contrived allegories which cannot be proven. My arguments are not circular they are based on proveable fact. Circular arguments are argumemts like yours which must be true because you say they are.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

Nor did I all those years I blindly accepted the concept without realizing its logical absurdity.

And we have yet to hear what is absurd, just an opinion/claim that it is so.

Punishment: Something (e.g. imprisonment or paying a fine) someone is made to do to compensate for a wrongdoing, especially for crime.

But that is the only part we can agree on, and the definition highlights a point I made which apparently those who approach this superficially cannot not appreciate. It is IMPOSSIBLE for a human to compensate God for a sin against Him, which is exactly why it is ABSURD to speak of equality and fairness in talking about what punishment is owed an Infinite God that we have offended.

Universalists see the logical fallacy in the attempts by traditionalists to retain the concept of punishment in their doctrine by applying it eternally. The concept of eternal torment exceeds the definition of punishment. Pay attention to this--it's at this point your entire argument becomes specious and crumbles.

The only thing that one could possibly imagine in that definition of punishment that is "exceeded" by an eternal Hell is just like I suggested already, one's view of God is not big enough. In making Him more like us, one imagines what we would consider "fair" punishment for an offense against us. There is no such "balance" possible when speaking of God and our offending Him.

The idea that a eternity on the rack does not fit the crime, but a limited period on the SAME rack would or could fit the crime does not alter what the punishment is. It is still a rack. So if one insists the rack is torture, it does not matter if it lasts forever or 10 seconds, it is still torture. Are we really going to imagine it logical to suggest the person batting a thousand on getting people to confess and renounce their sins on a the rack is not a torturer but the guy who never gets any confessions is????

One cannot have both ways just because one thinks in doing so an imagined problem God has with allowing suffering to exist is solved..

Here's where you fall. Godly fire is understood by Christians to be punishment for sin. As explained above, eternal torment fails the definition of punishment and takes on the appearance of torture for torture's sake.

So one keeps saying. So please go on then and explain how the SAME punishment DOES NOT take on the "appearance" of torture simply because one claims it ends and the person is saved. What keeps one from addressing the point?

The God who can fix broken humans but instead chooses not to fix them so they can suffer for endless eternity with no chance of remediation is insane.

As humans our fallen state has us born broken and in need of "fixing". The Plan God spoke of while He walked here says we can be fixed during this life and clearly indicated once this life is over, that offer to fix us ends. He speaks of no extended or other offerings after death. And when speaking to those who ALREADY held a belief that some people would be suffering in punishment for what they did IN THIS LIFE for all eternity, HE NEVER CORRECTED THAT BELIEF!!! In fact what He did say reinforced that belief.
That God gives everyone a chance does not mean He fails or is insane if people reject the offer.

At least the Annihilationist's God puts those He chooses not to fix out of their misery. Their view resolves one of Eternal Torment's tensions.

What tension would that be, that there is suffering eternally??? Again if that creates a problem for God then He has a problem right now with the suffering we see around us everyday. The "tension" regarding suffering is imagined and certainly not God's problem.

But this is where you continue to embarrass yourself Doc. How can you in good conscience look at the concepts of eternal suffering and eternal salvation and say the difference between the two is irrelevant?

Ahh the whole twist their words ploy when one is unable to present logical retorts.
We have not been comparing eternal suffering with eternal salvation. We have been comparing eternal suffering with the idea that the same suffering if limited and resulting in a second judgement where God says they have had enough and they gain Heaven. And this ploy backfires because it demostrates perfectly that one understands the same punishment one wants to call torture becomes ok for God to do as long as it ends evenutally and the person is "saved" because of it. The end justifies the means, so one overlook that the same means one has already label torture (if it goes "too far")

If God had a plan to save the damned, He certainly did not share it while He was here. And from what He did say about the only two possible fates He mentioned, I would not bank on there being a back-up plan. One life, one judgement. Not one life, a judgement and then a later judgement for those who did not make the first cut.

Again with the "only difference" thing?

Give it up. That ploy is already blown as soon as one tries to suggest I compare Hell to gaining Heaven when asking how an eternity in Hell makes God a torturer but a limited time roasting in Hell makes Him a swell guy.

Repeated attempts to make the case that there is no difference between God’s acts in:
A) committing a sinner to an eternal state of suffering with no hope of termination
B) committing a sinner to a temporary state of suffering in order that he may be saved for all eternity
...shows an appalling lack of understanding of the issue itself, the standards of rational judgment or both, Doc Love.

First of all, my understanding of what many theologians say about a Judgement of a human life, the person who is damned commits themselves. When mankind fell everything changed, including the "hope" that we could ever fully be what we were intended to be IN THIS LIFE, our purpose for existing. The hope that was then restored is that He made it possible, contingent on the individuals cooperation, that by His Grace we could be FULLY restored IN THE NEXT LIFE. While we can achieve BY HIS GRACE, temporay glimpses of that in this life (after Baptism for example), we are not able to remain in that state during this life.

If one is so certain there is a backup plan for the damned, please show us where Jesus spoke of the "hope" of the damned. Please show us where He said not to worry about those gnashing teeth in a place where THEIR worm never dies and THEIR fire never stops buring because eventually it will all stop and they get judged worthy then to move on, everyone will be fine, we are all OK.

I must of missed those quotes, but presenting those would be an example of a logical rebuttal to the points I have made. Instead all we have are claims and opinions about the points I made.

 

[createdtoworship]

Thanks for your observations. A fallacy is a misconception resulting from incorrect reasoning. Those expressions you posted of mine were various attempts to either elicit introspection by fellow posters I consider unwilling to think outside a closed mind or dialog honestly or in some cases to provoke my zealous correspondents to actually read what is posted and think it through instead of remaining in attack mode long after he/she/it should have quit, arguing apparently just for the sake of making noise.

I think if you'll take time to consider all posts in context you'll see that none of these deter from the soundness of my arguments.

Also, you might try to come up with a better list of ad hominems....some of those you posted are laughable for their obvious political correctness and are rarely or never used in theological discussions.

Question: to what degree might you have targeted my "ad hominems" because of my "heretical" theology?

A second question: is this.....

...a proper rebuttal to calling eternal torment "torture"? I haven't a clue why you think not being omniscient like God is somehow a proper ground for overthrowing the distinction made between punishment and torture in my posts to Dr Love.

All the same thanks for your advice, the tone of the thread gets quite robust at times and your heart is doubtless in the right place....right?

thanks for the comment, however I wouldn't say that "A fallacy is a misconception resulting from incorrect reasoning." as much as I would say it was simply incorrect reasoning itself. And your belittling of other posters is in fact fallacious. Again some examples:

Do you actually have anything intelligent to add to the topic?

you might consider keeping silent and stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[createdtoworship]

The allegoric structure of the Bible arises as a logical, coherent organization of meaning from Scripture and establishes its own rules of interpretation. More accurately, God has woven into His word the proper rules by which He intends the Bible to be understood. This structure is automatically inimical to the literalist, whose mind is set on standards for interpretation that are applied by man to the Scriptures. This is not to say man has no grasp of truth to apply to interpreting the Bible, but that the move over the centuries away from trying to understand the symbolism of God's word in favor of the establishment of secular rules of interpretation necessarily keeps us from the deeper truths of Scripture.

God orchestrated the Bible such that this allegoric structure is applied congruously across its breadth and width, from OT to New. Once understood, it leads us to where and how the allegoric may be applied in such a way that tensions are resolved--as opposed to the human regulations for interpretation in the literal, which leads us only to meaning allowed within the confines of its rules.

Literalists of various persuasions seem largely unaware--or stubbornly indifferent--to the tensions their doctrines create. Have you ever noticed that Eternal Torment, Annihilationism and Universalism can all three find a sufficient basis or starting point for making an interpretive argument? But each, carried out according to popular literalist interpretive standards, is unable to seal the deal.

The removal of tensions can never be arrived at in any of the three using the primarily literal reading of the Bible. The Annihilationist will ignore universalist and eternal torment passages, universalist will ignore their opponents and so on for the ETer.

I'll try to condense into an example why the allegorical is the superior interpretive standard.

Most arguments between the three rest on passages that are clearly metaphoric. in nature. This automatically focuses Jesus' teachings, which are pretty much all symbolic, as are the prophets, Revelation, Song of Solomon, Job, etc. but the structure applies to at least portions of other books as well.

Jesus is speaking figuratively when He teaches about sheep and goats in Mat 25. Taken as an isolated example, it seems logical to apply this to individuals. But it's not isolated. There are wheat and tares in Mat 13 along with seed sown and good and bad ground, good figs and rotten figs in Jer 24, the cutting off of righteous from unrighteous in Ezek 21, the removal of bad branches from the vine row in Jer 5, distinction between green tree and dry tree in Ezek 17 and Luke 23, the separation, parts cut off and remaining parts brought through the fire of refinement in Zech 13, and many more throughout the Bible sufficient to suggest the legitimacy of the principle that evil is separated and destroyed from the individual.

The distinction of separation by various forms of destruction of the unrighteous and salvation of the righteous is established many times throughout the Bible. Now turn to the principle established in Gen 18 where God shows in symbolic form the supervising principle of His justice: God will not destroy a whole in which some good exists. Note the same underlying structure, the separation of righteous from unrighteous.

Also, the allegoric structure is well known and understood: literal elements--people, places, circumstances and the human actions and reactions that take place in it--are arranged in ways that point to higher meaning. Even though the basic organization is unquestionable, literalists on theology boards refuse to even discuss its relevance as a literary method. I suggest this is because literalism has been a cancer in the intellectual operation of religious man since forever. Many literalists fear that if they concede that this structure exists, it will weaken their own position--which brings to bear the question of intellectual honesty.

In exerting its harsh rules, the literal doesn't allow the literalist to "see" this obvious and coherent allegoric structure--much less acknowledge its obvious supporting tenets. This bears a striking resemblance to the loathing the atheist has for the supernatural, this enmity exhibited in their "hiding" in matter to avoid the light of prescriptive truth.

In this system, it becomes apparent (meaning the concept shows it is coherent, bears unity with the rest of the structure, is harmonious and does not contradict) that God's wrath can on its highest level be read as applying fragmentally to bad elements within each person, already established in dozens of passages throughout Scripture as noted above, while His decrees of blessing apply to the whole individual. This is a congruous part of the overarching allegoric pattern.

Hence, instead of interpreting everything literally--as applying to individuals, which is shown to violate the perfection of God's justice in Gen 18--the Bible as a spiritual book has to be interpreted according to the right admixture of its literal and allegoric meaning. Take your Psa 1:4-6 example, where the sinners who will not stand in the congregation of the righteous, when allegoric and literal are properly joined, translates into the understanding that the stain of sin will be removed from the soul of the individual, who will stand in the righteousness of perfection. This is in accordance with Paul's distinction of the same all (interpreted literally as whole individuals)who die in Adam as the same all who will be made alive in Christ. It coheres with the glory and honor of the nations (whole individuals of all nations made pure and true) admitted into the holy city distinct from all things unclean (false portions annihilated from their souls) denied entrance to it (Rev. 21:26-27). It's simultaneously harmonious that smoke of the torment of sinners--the residue of falsity from the human soul burned up as kindling by Godly fire--is what goes up forever and ever. A parallel presentation is in Mal 4:2-3: "But for you who fear My name the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its wings; and you will go forth and skip about like calves from the stall. And you will tread down the wicked, for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day which I am preparing," says the LORD of hosts.", in which the individual restored to a true state (perfection) is likened to the skipping calf treading over the ashes of his former falsity, burned out of his soul by the same Godly fire which establishes righteousness in time in sanctification of believers as that which becomes a roaring lake of fire to false elements of unbelief in individuals who refused to conform in time.


The problem defending this position is that theology board antagonists of Biblical universalism continually use their doctrine--i.e., their literal interpretation--as "proof" that universalism is wrong. Assigning the certitude of truth to a doctrine containing many tensions is a corruption. To judge an interpretation using one's own interpretation as the very standard of truth against which all competing explication is automatically wrong is circular and demeans proper, logical argument. Each should be considered on its own merits and judged by how it stands according to proper criteria for truth instead of whether it measures up to my view.


The Annihilationist does come halfway to the truth and is able to overcome the Torturer of traditional salvation, but still denies God the perfection of His justice by having Him destroy individuals in whom some good yet exists. Only the salvation of all by the methods noted above is able to wholly overcome this tension.

your comment, "the Bible must be allegory"

shall we interpret that statement as allegory?

Or take you for your word, and why?

 

[he-man]

You and Da are cut and paste kings. Read my last post to you. You're doing exactly the same thing again...like the time before...and the time before...and the time before...

Just love it when people refuse to give scripture to confirm their faith.

2 Thessalonians 2:9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of the aversaries, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, (10) and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. (11) And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, (12) that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

 

[BukiRob]

The Hebrew word Sheol is translated as "Hades" in the LXX. While Hades can mean grave, the first century Jews that Jesus taught and debated with believed in a place of eternal, unending, everlasting punishment for the unrighteous, they called it both Gehinnom/Gehenna and Sheol. When Jesus taught about "Eternal punishment, Mt 25:46""the fire of hell where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die, Mk 9:43-48" and "cast into a fiery furnace where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth,” Mt 13:42, 50, that supported and validated the existing view of eternal hell. Jesus was born into and grew to maturity in that culture. He knew what His countrymen, the Jews, believed about hell. If the Jews were wrong Jesus would have corrected them. He did not correct them, thus their teaching on hell was correct.

The historical evidence for the above is in my [post=5877433]Post #4[/post] in this thread.

This is pure rubbish. THERE IS NO PART OF MAN THAT IS IMMORTAL!

Eternal life ONLY, ONLY, ONLY comes from G-d and is the GIFT to the BELIEVER.

Or do you propose to make G-d a liar? Yeshua himself tells us to NOT fear man who can only kill the body but to fear G-d who can kill both body and soul.

In Revelation 20:12-18 12 And I saw the dead, both great and small, standing in front of the throne. Books were opened; and another book was opened, the Book of Life; and the dead were judged from what was written in the books, according to what they had done. 13 The sea gave up the dead in it; and Death and Sh’ol gave up the dead in them; and they were judged, each according to what he had done. 14 Then Death and Sh’ol were hurled into the lake of fire. This is the second death — the lake of fire. 15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the Book of Life was hurled into the lake of fire.

If something is DEAD it has no life. It has no animation, no consciousness.. it is DEAD.

To argue that man does not die is to make G-d a liar and to side with Satan's lie to Eve.

No man can live eternally apart from putting in immortality. We are told by Paul that the dead in Christ will rise first and put on incorruptible bodies and be clothed in immortality. The fact that risen believers take on NEW glorified bodies and are clothed in immortality makes it crystal clear and PLAIN to see that they are not a part of what G-d initially created in us... therefore it is IMPOSSIBLE for the pagan concept taught regarding an eternal torment of Hell to be consistent with scripture.

If you are an unbeliever who has rejected Yeshua, you are cast into the lake of fire where you body and soul is consumed until NOTHING remains. You are eternally dead and thats it.

 

[BukiRob]

You apparently don't understand the implications of the universalist doctrine when compared to your own. Universalism--and to a lesser degree, Annihilationism--reduces the torturing aspect tradition places God in via the endless torment of a finite human being, to a God who rightly punishes--not tortures--individuals for sin.

Your reasoning is defective. There, that's a softer term.

You strive to argue that any part of man is eternal and has eternal life apart from Yeshua? This argument reduces Yeshua's work on the cross to being nearly meaningless.

Man is MORTAL. NO part of him by creation is IMMORTAL. No where in scripture will you find a single, solitary scriptural verse that teaches that ANY part of man is immortal APART from the Immortality the BELIEVER puts on at the resurrection upon Yeshua's triumph return.

If you have rejected Yeshua a mortal man/woman who will die twice. One at your physical death and again after you are resurrected to the white throne judgement. If your name is not found in the lambs book of life (straight out of Rev 20) you are cast into the Lake of Fire where you are utterly consumed. Rev specifically calls this THE SECOND DEATH.

Get back to me when you can show me any, any, any example anywhere where something that is dead is animated and has conscious awareness. If G-d calls it the second death then its DEAD.

 

[dumpsterdiver45]

You have no truth criteria. All you have are a bunch of contrived allegories which cannot be proven. My arguments are not circular they are based on proveable fact. Circular arguments are argumemts like yours which must be true because you say they are.

Posted by Der Alter:

I do indeed post with a high degree of intellectual honesty.

 

[dumpsterdiver45]

But that is the only part we can agree on, and the definition highlights a point I made which apparently those who approach this superficially cannot not appreciate. It is IMPOSSIBLE for a human to compensate God for a sin against Him, which is exactly why it is ABSURD to speak of equality and fairness in talking about what punishment is owed an Infinite God that we have offended.

DocBubba, what in the name of all that is good are you even talking about? Your reasoning abilities just took another turn for the worse. As a Christian you should be at least vaguely aware that Jesus died on the cross to pay for sin. I have never said "punishment is owed" to God. Where do you get this ridiculous stuff? Your posts are nearly incomprehensible.

What point are you trying to make?

The idea that a eternity on the rack does not fit the crime, but a limited period on the SAME rack would or could fit the crime does not alter what the punishment is. It is still a rack.

I've already pointed out the lack of rational approach you're using here in my last several posts. All you do is repost the same defective reasons over and over. We're finished here.

 

[Der Alte]

You strive to argue that any part of man is eternal and has eternal life apart from Yeshua? This argument reduces Yeshua's work on the cross to being nearly meaningless.

Man is MORTAL. NO part of him by creation is IMMORTAL. No where in scripture will you find a single, solitary scriptural verse that teaches that ANY part of man is immortal APART from the Immortality the BELIEVER puts on at the resurrection upon Yeshua's triumph return.

If you have rejected Yeshua a mortal man/woman who will die twice. One at your physical death and again after you are resurrected to the white throne judgement. If your name is not found in the lambs book of life (straight out of Rev 20) you are cast into the Lake of Fire where you are utterly consumed. Rev specifically calls this THE SECOND DEATH.

Get back to me when you can show me any, any, any example anywhere where something that is dead is animated and has conscious awareness. If G-d calls it the second death then its DEAD.

Show you something that is dead is animated? Gladly. In Isaiah 14 there is a long passage about the king of Babylon dying, and according to many the dead know nothing. They are supposedly annihilated, destroyed, gone! But God, Himself, speaking, these dead people in [size=+1]שאול[/size]/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 [[size=+1]שאול][/size] 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, [[size=+1]שאול][/size] 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 Babble-on.

Here is another passage where God himself is speaking and people who are dead in sheol, speaking, being ashamed, comforted, etc.

Ezek 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 [[size=+1]שאול][/size] 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::[ . . . ]
Eze 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.​

Jesus speaking about a dead man in Hades had eyes, had a tongue, was in torment, saw Abraham, “cried and said,” asked for water, begged Abraham, etc.

Luk 16:22-28
(22) And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
(23) And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
(24) And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
(25) But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
(26) And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
(27) Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
(28) For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.​

 

[BukiRob]

Show you something that is dead is animated? Gladly. In Isaiah 14 there is a long passage about the king of Babylon dying, and according to many the dead know nothing. They are supposedly annihilated, destroyed, gone! But God, Himself, speaking, these dead people in [size=+1]שאול[/size]/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 [[size=+1]שאול][/size] 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, [[size=+1]שאול][/size] 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 Babble-on.

Here is another passage where God himself is speaking and people who are dead in sheol, speaking, being ashamed, comforted, etc.

Ezek 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 [[size=+1]שאול][/size] 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::[ . . . ]
Eze 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.​

Jesus speaking about a dead man in Hades had eyes, had a tongue, was in torment, saw Abraham, “cried and said,” asked for water, begged Abraham, etc.

Luk 16:22-28
(22) And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
(23) And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
(24) And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
(25) But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
(26) And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
(27) Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
(28) For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.​

The dead man you speak of is a PARABLE. AKA as an allegory

I will say this again because you COMPLETELY ignored it. There is NO PART of man that is IMMORTAL. No where in scripture does it teach that man is immortal...frankly, it teaches the exact opposite.

 

[dumpsterdiver45]

I wouldn't say that "A fallacy is a misconception resulting from incorrect reasoning as much as I would say it was simply incorrect reasoning itself."

The definition posted came from a dictionary, so your disagreement with it is moot.

And your belittling of other posters is in fact fallacious.

Funny how when others here belittle it's okay as long as they belong to the 'good ole boy' club. And according to your personal definition of fallacy as incorrect reasoning, what evidence do you show that those of my comments you deem fallacies or ad hominems were incorrect? Thanks for sharing your opinion, but if you accuse someone of something with no proof, why should you be believed?

And last but not least....

your comment, "the Bible must be allegory"

shall we interpret that statement as allegory?

Or take you for your word, and why?

...please direct me to where I said "the Bible must be allegory". I don't recall posting this and see no reason why I would have.

Oh, and thanks for the smart alek comment, too. These are always warmly appreciated, especially from those who have no clue what my actual belief system consists of.

As to taking anyone's word for their position, you apparently come into the thread late demanding I post support for my view which is already out there. Go find it yourself. Unless, like certain others here, you have no intention of engaging in an honest, forward-moving discussion but just want to mindlessly rip and tear at concepts you don't understand. In that case, welcome to the crowd.

 

[dumpsterdiver45]

Just love it when people refuse to give scripture to confirm their faith.

He-man, He-man, He-man. What am I going to do with you?

What I explained to gradyll holds for you, too. In this thread and one or more of the 'is hell eternal' threads I've posted significant amounts of Scripture and logical proof for my position. You have the same access to it as anyone who has an honest desire to understand what I contend for. I haven't yet figured out how to post links to former posts here or I would, sorry.

I've used an analogy of William James' in the past, that [I'm paraphrasing James' writing] paint in a paint shop is only so much saleable matter. But spread on a canvas along with other paints in certain configurations, what emerges (the picture) is a spiritual thing.

Every time I try to get you to look at the picture and explain its relationship to reason using accepted truth criteria, you keep bringing the conversation back to the paints. As long as you insist truth exists only in the paints without consideration of the picture, we're at a standstill.

"...God...made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter, but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life." (2Cor 3:5-6)

Paints are letters. Letters gathered together form words and sentences which paint linguistic pictures. As long as you only argue individual paints without a willingness to examine the pictures they produce, we have no basis for discussion.

 

[Der Alte]

The Hebrew word Sheol is translated as "Hades" in the LXX. While Hades can mean grave, the first century Jews that Jesus taught and debated with believed in a place of eternal, unending, everlasting punishment for the unrighteous, they called it both Gehinnom/Gehenna and Sheol. When Jesus taught about "Eternal punishment, Mt 25:46""the fire of hell where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die, Mk 9:43-48" and "cast into a fiery furnace where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth,” Mt 13:42, 50, that supported and validated the existing view of eternal hell. Jesus was born into and grew to maturity in that culture. He knew what His countrymen, the Jews, believed about hell. If the Jews were wrong Jesus would have corrected them. He did not correct them, thus their teaching on hell was correct.

The historical evidence for the above is in my [post=5877433]Post #4[/post] in this thread.

This is pure rubbish. THERE IS NO PART OF MAN THAT IS IMMORTAL!

Eternal life ONLY, ONLY, ONLY comes from G-d and is the GIFT to the BELIEVER.

You ignored my post and immediately called it rubbish. I quoted scripture which part of that is rubbish?

Or do you propose to make G-d a liar? Yeshua himself tells us to NOT fear man who can only kill the body but to fear G-d who can kill both body and soul.

In Revelation 20:12-18 12 And I saw the dead, both great and small, standing in front of the throne. Books were opened; and another book was opened, the Book of Life; and the dead were judged from what was written in the books, according to what they had done. 13 The sea gave up the dead in it; and Death and Sh’ol gave up the dead in them; and they were judged, each according to what he had done. 14 Then Death and Sh’ol were hurled into the lake of fire. This is the second death — the lake of fire. 15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the Book of Life was hurled into the lake of fire.

You say Death and Sh'ol were hurled into the lake of fire [LOF]. The NT was written in Greek and the Hebrew word Sheol does not occur in the NT!

Hades/Hell can be the grave or the place of punishment and could conceivably be hurled somewhere. But death cannot be seen, touched felt, etc. it has no physical existence and cannot be literally hurled anywhere. However there is a Death and Hell in Revelation which can be hurled into the LOF.

Rev 6:8 And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.​

The angel of death is followed by another being, Hell, and they are given power to kill 1/4 of the earth. These two beings are cast into the LOF, Rev 20;14 and their power to kill ended.

The LOF is called the second death, the converse is the second death is the lake of fire. Scripture does not record where anyone is cast into the LOF then they die. In fact just the opposite.

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.​

Three living beings are cast into the LOF, one which is a person, the false prophet, but the do not die they tormented day and night for ever and ever. Therfore the LOF is not synonymous with death or annihilation.

If something is DEAD it has no life. It has no animation, no consciousness.. it is DEAD.

To argue that man does not die is to make G-d a liar and to side with Satan's lie to Eve.

No man can live eternally apart from putting in immortality. We are told by Paul that the dead in Christ will rise first and put on incorruptible bodies and be clothed in immortality. The fact that risen believers take on NEW glorified bodies and are clothed in immortality makes it crystal clear and PLAIN to see that they are not a part of what G-d initially created in us... therefore it is IMPOSSIBLE for the pagan concept taught regarding an eternal torment of Hell to be consistent with scripture.

If you are an unbeliever who has rejected Yeshua, you are cast into the lake of fire where you body and soul is consumed until NOTHING remains. You are eternally dead and thats it.

Please see my previous post quoting Isaiah 14:9-11, Ezek 32:18-22, 30-31, and Luke 16:19-32. Here is the post you did not read.

Based on historical evidence below the Hell:No! view being presented in this forum is not Biblical. The Jews, in Israel before and during the time of Jesus believed in a place of eternal, unending, fiery torment and they called it both Gehinnom/Gehenna and Sheol. When Jesus taught about "Eternal punishment, Mt 25:46""the fire of hell where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die, Mk 9:43-48" and "cast into a fiery furnace where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth,” Mt 13:42, 50 that supported and validated the existing view of eternal hell. Jesus was born in and grew to maturity in Israel. He knew what His countrymen, the Jews, believed about hell. If the Jews were wrong Jesus would have corrected them. He did not correct them, thus their teaching on hell was correct. Here is historical evidence to support this.

Jewish Encyclopedia, Gehenna

The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch was originally in the "valley of the son of Hinnom," to the south of Jerusalem (Josh. xv. 8, passim; II Kings xxiii. 10; Jer. ii. 23; vii. 31-32; xix. 6, 13-14). For this reason the valley was deemed to be accursed, and "Gehenna" therefore soon became a figurative equivalent for "hell." Hell, like paradise, was created by God (Sotah 22a); [Note, this is according to the ancient Jews, long before the Christian era, NOT the bias of Christian translators.]

It is assumed in general that sinners go to hell immediately after their death. The famous teacher Johanan b. Zakkai wept before his death because he did not know whether he would go to paradise or to hell (Ber. 28b). The pious go to paradise, and sinners to hell (B.M. 83b).

But as regards the heretics, etc., and Jeroboam, Nebat's son, hell shall pass away, but they shall not pass away" (R. H. 17a; comp. Shab. 33b). All that descend into Gehenna shall come up again, with the exception of three classes of men: those who have committed adultery, or shamed their neighbors, or vilified them (B. M. 58b).[/i]

As mentioned above, heretics and the Roman oppressors go to Gehenna, and the same fate awaits the Persians, the oppressors of the Babylonian Jews (Ber. 8b). When Nebuchadnezzar descended into hell, [Sheol] all its inhabitants were afraid that he was coming to rule over them (Shab. 149a; comp. Isa. xiv. 9-10). The Book of Enoch also says that it is chiefly the heathen who are to be cast into the fiery pool on the Day of Judgment (x. 6, xci. 9, et al). "The Lord, the Almighty, will punish them on the Day of Judgment by putting fire and worms into their flesh, so that they cry out with pain unto all eternity" (Judith xvi. 17). The sinners in Gehenna will be filled with pain when God puts back the souls into the dead bodies on the Day of Judgment, according to Isa. xxxiii. 11 (Sanh. 108b).


Jewish Encyclopedia Online
====================================================================
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."

Tract Rosh Hashana: Chapter I.​

The traditional explanation that a burning rubbish heap in the Valley of Hinnom south of Jerusalem gave rise to the idea of a fiery Gehenna of judgment is attributed to Rabbi David Kimhi's commentary on Psalm 27:13 (ca. A.D. 1200). He maintained that in this loathsome valley fires were kept burning perpetually to consume the filth and cadavers thrown into it. However, Strack and Billerbeck state that there is neither archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources (Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud and Midrasch, 5 vols. [Munich: Beck, 1922-56], 4:2:1030). Also a more recent author holds a similar view (Lloyd R. Bailey, "Gehenna: The Topography of Hell," Biblical Archeologist 49 [1986]: 189.

Source, Bibliotheca Sacra / July–September 1992

Scharen: Gehenna in the Synoptics Pt. 1​

Note there is no “archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, [that Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump] in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources” If Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump there should be broken pottery, tools, utensils, bones, etc. but there is no such evidence.

“Gehenna is presented as diametrically opposed to ‘life’: it is better to enter life than to go to Gehenna. . .It is common practice, both in scholarly and less technical works, to associate the description of Gehenna with the supposedly contemporary garbage dump in the valley of Hinnom. This association often leads scholars to emphasize the destructive aspects of the judgment here depicted: fire burns until the object is completely consumed. Two particular problems may be noted in connection with this approach. First, there is no convincing evidence in the primary sources for the existence of a fiery rubbish dump in this location (in any case, a thorough investigation would be appreciated). Secondly, the significant background to this passage more probably lies in Jesus’ allusion to Isaiah 66:24.” (“The Duration of Divine Judgment in the New Testament” in The Reader Must Understand edited by K. Brower and M. W. Ellion, p. 223, emphasis mine)

G. R. Beasley-Murray in Jesus and the Kingdom of God:

“Ge-Hinnom (Aramaic Ge-hinnam, hence the Greek Geenna), ‘The Valley of Hinnom,’ lay south of Jerusalem, immediately outside its walls. The notion, still referred to by some commentators, that the city’s rubbish was burned in this valley, has no further basis than a statement by the Jewish scholar Kimchi (sic) made about A.D. 1200; it is not attested in any ancient source.” (p. 376n.92)

The Burning Garbage Dump of Gehenna is a myth - Archaeology, Biblical History & Textual Criticism - Bible Truth Discussion Forum​

 

[Der Alte]

The dead man you speak of is a PARABLE. AKA as an allegory

I will say this again because you COMPLETELY ignored it. There is NO PART of man that is IMMORTAL. No where in scripture does it teach that man is immortal...frankly, it teaches the exact opposite.

You saying allegory and parable does not make it so! In Isaiah 14:9-11 and Ezek 32:18-22, 30-31 God Himself is speaking. God does not indicate that the passages are allegory/parable. No writer in the entire Bible indentifies the passages as allegory/parable! So saying allegory/parable is a cop-out because scripture contradicts some pet doctrine.

 

[BukiRob]

You saying allegory and parable does not make it so! In Isaiah 14:9-11 and Ezek 32:18-22, 30-31 God Himself is speaking. God does not indicate that the passages are allegory/parable. No writer in the entire Bible indentifies the passages as allegory/parable! So saying allegory/parable is a cop-out because scripture contradicts some pet doctrine.

I wasnt speaking about Isaiah and YOU know it.

Again and for the last time, there is NO PART of man that is IMMORTAL. We must put on immortality and eternal life is granted ONLY to the believer.

Scripture teaches that upon Yeshua's return in the clouds with the angles in heaven with the last trump, that the dead in Christ will rise from the dead and and be transformed with their glorified bodies. Those believers who are alive at this time, will be caught up in the clouds and transformed in the twinkle of an eye.

Those unbelievers who have died ARE STILL IN THE GRAVE and will remain there until the white throne judgement. THey will then be resurrected and judged. Those whose names are NOT in the book of life will be thrown into the Lake of Fire.... Now stay, with me because Revelation calls this THE SECOND DEATH.

When their resurrected bodies of FLESH are cast into the LOF they will be completely and utterly consumed BODY AND SOUL... they will be DEAD... you know DEATH=DEAD. Death DOES NOT = Life.

 

[Der Alte]

I wasnt speaking about Isaiah and YOU know it.

Again and for the last time, there is NO PART of man that is IMMORTAL. We must put on immortality and eternal life is granted ONLY to the believer.

Scripture teaches that upon Yeshua's return in the clouds with the angles in heaven with the last trump, that the dead in Christ will rise from the dead and and be transformed with their glorified bodies. Those believers who are alive at this time, will be caught up in the clouds and transformed in the twinkle of an eye.

Those unbelievers who have died ARE STILL IN THE GRAVE and will remain there until the white throne judgement. THey will then be resurrected and judged. Those whose names are NOT in the book of life will be thrown into the Lake of Fire.... Now stay, with me because Revelation calls this THE SECOND DEATH.

When their resurrected bodies of FLESH are cast into the LOF they will be completely and utterly consumed BODY AND SOUL... they will be DEAD... you know DEATH=DEAD. Death DOES NOT = Life.

Ignoring everything I posted and repeating the same scripturally unsupported argument over and over and SHOUTING does not make it so. I already addressed the Lake of fire in the Revelation. The scripture does not say what you claim it does.