Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
But quite simply, do you think Jesus would say that people have experiences after death that may be torment, to the crowds of simple people, but not MEAN that?I agree. You are stating exactly what the parable says. I think what we're discussing is what it means.
I disagree. Thing is, I'm arguing that parable is not at all about the afterlife. Just as the parable of the sower is not about farming, and the parable about the lost coin is not about money. Like both of those, it is a parable about something else. And that something else is covered at the end.I'm go
You are missing the point. Your hermeneutic approach is based on gut instinct or what you want the scripture to say. You are constructing a Biblical narrative based on your own imagination. The text is the text. It says what it says. You have been given a direct challenge to your use of the text AND you were given a challenge to show where Jesus used some kind of fantasy in a parable. If Jesus did tell a parable about the afterlife it would have been a major deviation from His pattern to use a fantastic setting that was not based in reality. You have failed to address these issues which are valid and serious flaws in your approach.
Anastasia opened this thread specifically so that we could discuss this.Please stop commenting on posts that ask for the Orthodox view.
I heard about him when discussing the book "Four views of hell", where apologists for each position were allowed to state their cases, with rebuttals. https://www.amazon.com/Four-Views-Hell-William-Crockett/dp/0310212685Not bad. I don't know who Ed Fudge is, but Scripture calls God a consuming fire.
We would not disagree. The issue we have is in saying the condemned cease to exist.
If you are saved and have been born of the spirit, that is true. The unsaved soul is not much more resilient than the "God breathed" soul of any other animal. I see the soul as the "you" that occupies this body that Paul calls a tent. The software (mind) that runs on the hardware called the brain. That soul is not immortal. The born again spirit is immortal. It's a protective covering that could, maybe, be likened to the cleansing blood of the lamb. But I'm being VERY metaphorical here and just thinking out loud.It is my understanding that the consuming fire of God consumes sin, not the God breathed soul.
Depends on who you talk to. The Saducees, for example, did not believe in life after death at all. The viewpoint was definitely different from the Christian viewpoint which enjoys the understanding brought by the teaching of Jesus and His disciples.What is difference in the “Jewish, nor the Christian version of eternity”?
One is saved by belief in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ or they are not there are no alternative eternities.
Yes. The fire is not quenched. What happens to the organic material thrown into it?Mark 9:43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:
48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
What does the phrase “the fire is not quenched” mean to you? I take it literally.
I read the book Hell on Trial: The Case for Eternal Punishment by Robert Peterson. He makes a solid argument. Would recommend it. He includes this quote from Augustine's City of God,Those that accept Jesus free gift go on to eternity with Him. Those that refuse His free gift are destroyed. Gone. Like they never existed. I see it as the Ecclesiastes thing. They live their lives like animals, finding what happiness they can, and then, like animals, they die. Except their soul is killed in the Second Death. Hence the use of the word, "death".
Yes. The fire is not quenched. What happens to the organic material thrown into it?
And can an unquenchable fire go out? Yep! You just can't put it out. It has to run out of fuel. When the fire department comes to a fire that is just too big to put out, they don't even try to quench it. They just hose down the stuff around it until it goes out on its own.
Did you read any of the scriptures in that big list I supplied?
Re: the soul was created to exist eternallyI don't know if we would even say that it consumes sin. Is sin removed from that person? Frankly we have no such sure teaching either way, and cannot have, because it was not given to us in the deposit of faith.
What we believe is that the soul was created to exist eternally. Further, God LOVES those souls. They cannot bear His presence or His love and reject it, however.
So as long as they exist in the condition of being opposed to God their "worm dieth not" and the "smoke of their torment ascends forever".
Almost none of the accepted parables are stated to be parables. The lost sheep, the great banquet, etc. It is accepted that they are partly because it is clear that they are and partly because it says clearly in matthew that that is how he taught lessons to the crowds. If Jesus is in the act of teaching in his verbiage to a crowd, it is a parable. You can bank on it. It is what the bible says he did.When scripture plainly states it is a parable case closed. When it does not it would be wise not to assume it is. IMHO
No, I don't. Again, I must invoke the "through a glass darkly" rule, but I can see the souls of the lost being cast into a lake of fire, outer darkness, whatever metaphor we want to use, and as they are cast there, it is kinda like being thrown off a cliff. Would you not weep in sadness (seeing all of those who were not thrown off the cliff going on to eternal bliss while you are quickly approaching the rocks below) or grand your teeth in anger at being powerless to control your destiny, facing the rocks below no matter what you try to do?But quite simply, do you think Jesus would say that people have experiences after death that may be torment, to the crowds of simple people, but not MEAN that?
This begins to make God a liar, a deceiver.
No, Jesus used simple and true things to express truths.
Did you read any of the scriptures in that big list I supplied?
It's really so simple. Before we can intelligently discuss it, we must ask what IS the punishment being spoken of. And the bible is pretty clear. The punishment is death. It was first brought up in Genesis 3, and is a common and thick thread throughout the 66 books in the bible. The condition is eternal. One goes to eternal life and "stays alive". The other goes to death and "stays dead". Both conditions are eternal, but only one is conscious, for only one is alive. This is why the bible juxtaposes the two so often.I read the book Hell on Trial: The Case for Eternal Punishment by Robert Peterson. He makes a solid argument. Would recommend it. He includes this quote from Augustine's City of God,
what a fond fancy is it to suppose that eternal punishment means long continued punishment, while eternal life means life without end, since Christ in the very same passage spoke of both in similar terms in one and the same sentence, "These shall go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into life eternal!" Matthew 25:46 If both destinies are "eternal," then we must either understand both as long-continued but at last terminating, or both as endless. For they are correlative — on the one hand, punishment eternal, on the other hand, life eternal. And to say in one and the same sense, life eternal shall be endless, punishment eternal shall come to an end, is the height of absurdity. Wherefore, as the eternal life of the saints shall be endless, so too the eternal punishment of those who are doomed to it shall have no end.
You are correct that Adam's sin changed things but in the case you mention, it changed the physical aspect. Adam's sin is the reason bodies die and must be resurrected incorruptible (never to physically die again).Re: the soul was created to exist eternally
I think that may be true, but Adam's sin changed that. I think it CAN exist eternally, which is why Christ died and was resurrected, but since I am not a universalist, I do not believe that they all do. Those that accept Christ's free gift I do believe will exist eternally.
i.e. I do not believe all souls are eternal, but eternal life is what we are offered if we accept His free gift. Otherwise, death.
BTW, the worm and smoke thing is a reference to Isaiah and is actually talking about destroying dead corpses. What Does Jesus Mean by 'Their Worm Does Not Die' (Mark 9:44, 46, 48)?
Well, I try not to take Revelation too literally.If I understand you correctly, some of your beliefs on the scriptures you posted do not allow you to take other scriptures literally on the topic of hell. Just food for thought, what if those scriptures I take literally on hell don’t support your view on the scriptures you think nullifies them? Anyway we are going to disagree on this, but I do appreciate the civil discourse.
I believe the doctrine of soul sleep or the wicked ceasing to exist is not scriptural. You and I both can list our “proof” scriptures but there has to be a way to make them all harmonize, there can be no contradictions. I choose not to nullify the words of Jesus .
I recall some Orthodox posting in the past that some Orthodox hold out hope for ultimate reconciliation with the exception if some don't repent. Kindly confirm if this is an Orthodox teaching.I don't know if we would even say that it consumes sin. Is sin removed from that person? Frankly we have no such sure teaching either way, and cannot have, because it was not given to us in the deposit of faith.
What we believe is that the soul was created to exist eternally. Further, God LOVES those souls. They cannot bear His presence or His love and reject it, however.
So as long as they exist in the condition of being opposed to God their "worm dieth not" and the "smoke of their torment ascends forever".
Since the soul is God breathed (and there is scripture on this) I tend to believe that which God sent out will not come back to him void/empty/unfulfilled.If you are saved and have been born of the spirit, that is true. The unsaved soul is not much more resilient than the "God breathed" soul of any other animal. I see the soul as the "you" that occupies this body that Paul calls a tent. The software (mind) that runs on the hardware called the brain. That soul is not immortal. The born again spirit is immortal. It's a protective covering that could, maybe, be likened to the cleansing blood of the lamb. But I'm being VERY metaphorical here and just thinking out loud.
We don't really know the particulars. The bible explanations are almost like trying to explain the color red to a blind man.
Sure would like to know what the seven thunders said.
Poverty can be a great blessing in terms of enriching one with treasure in heaven, where material wealth/riches is very often a great curse, being such and obstacle as it usually is in the narrow way that leads to entry into the kingdom of God. This is one of the things that Jesus was showing. It even says so: "But Abraham answered, ‘Child, remember that during your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things. But now he is comforted here, while you are left to suffer." (Luke 16:25)Since none of us were there, we can only speculate. One of those speculations I've heard is that it was actually based on a popular story at the time. What is kind of interesting is that it is clearly not talking about eternity since it does not describe either the Jewish, nor the Christian version of eternity. And it doesn't describe the time between the death of the body and the GWTJ in Jewish nor Christian viewpoints.
And it seems to be about the 5 brothers and, key, the "not believing even if someone is raised from the dead". It appears to be Jesus talking to the descendants of Joseph and looking forward to their impending disbelief even after Jesus' resurrection.
And there is no information about the rich man to suggest that he did anything warranting eternal torture. In fact, there is a chart on the site I linked to that demonstrates that the actual actions of the two men do not warrant either of their conditions, unless one would argue that poverty is, at its core, a virtue of some sort, and being rich, at it's core, is a sin. I'm buying neither of those ideas.
I just came across this site a few months ago. It covers that very, VERY well:You are correct that Adam's sin changed things but in the case you mention, it changed the physical aspect. Adam's sin is the reason bodies die and must be resurrected incorruptible (never to physically die again).
The problem we run into - as is common when discussing things in this way - is that one passage from the Bible can be interpreted this way, and another might seem to say the opposite. Of course that cannot be. The truth must be understood to encompass all of them.
I see your reasoning in other posts likening man's spirit to that of an animal, but it just isn't so. Man was created to be special from the animals, in the very image and likeness of God. We die as a result of Adams sin, but Christ has effectively reversed that with His resurrection. Our souls are still distinct from those of animals.
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?