Jesus said Eternal Damnation. Mark 3:29

[Cockcrow]

Annihilationists, no Hellers, and other people who deny the reality of hell, like to falsely claim that Jesus never taught Eternal Conscious Torment in hell. but this is false, Jesus said in Mark 3:29 "But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation." the phrase "eternal damnation" literally means the opposite of annihilation. and Jesus also said "Everlasting punishment" why do people still believe or teach that Jesus never taught Eternal Conscious torment in hell? People choose to reject the reality of hell, it is sad, but realizing the reality of hell is what motivates us to preach the gospel to the lost, grace through faith salvation, because we know the reality of hell that Jesus told us about, and we warn the lost of the eternal conscious torment awaiting the unsaved, works salvationists. Mark 3:29 is a go to verse when no hellers annilationists hit you with the "Jesus never taught hell was eternal" or "hell is temporary" but this verse destroys the no hellers and annihlationist theory.

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

Annihilationists, no Hellers, and other people who deny the reality of hell, like to falsely claim that Jesus never taught Eternal Conscious Torment in hell. but this is false, Jesus said in Mark 3:29 "But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation." the phrase "eternal damnation" literally means the opposite of annihilation. and Jesus also said "Everlasting punishment" why do people still believe or teach that Jesus never taught Eternal Conscious torment in hell? People choose to reject the reality of hell, it is sad, but realizing the reality of hell is what motivates us to preach the gospel to the lost, grace through faith salvation, because we know the reality of hell that Jesus told us about, and we warn the lost of the eternal conscious torment awaiting the unsaved, works salvationists. Mark 3:29 is a go to verse when no hellers annilationists hit you with the "Jesus never taught hell was eternal" or "hell is temporary" but this verse destroys the no hellers and annihlationist theory.

I am not an “Annihilationist but Mark 3:29 does not prove conscious eternal torment. See all these translations of Mark 3:29:

Mark 3:29 - Bible Gateway

www.biblegateway.com

Also, everlasting punishment does not prove everlasting conscious torment because the punishment is death. The everlasting punishment does not bother an annihilationist at all. They will tell you the wages of sin is death and then they will tell you death is the opposite of consciousness. Romans declares the wages of sin is death, not eternal consciousness in a lake of fire. The gift of God is eternal life. But, the annihilationist will tell you that the wages of sin is eternal death in hell. It is contrasted with eternal life. Eternal life as opposed to eternal death. The punishment is everlasting, they will admit, but what is everlasting is the death (punishment) of the person. I used to be an annihilationist and the two quotes you make will bounce off the annihilationist like BB's off the hull off the hull of a battleship.

Luke 16 is often called a parable or a word picture by the annihilationists and they do have a point against it, but Jesus obviously believed in Hades and in his lifetime on earth Hades was thought to be a place of eternal torment for the wicked, See Josephus's Discourse on Hades:

Josephus's Discourse to the Greeks concerning Hades - The Complete Works of Flavius Josephus

Josephus's Discourse to the Greeks concerning Hades - The Complete Works of Flavius Josephus - by William Whiston

erenow.org

The one point the annihilationists have against Luke 16 is if the rich man was really in Hades and burning alive he would not be able to carry on a conversation with Abraham who was separated from the rich man by a great gulf. This is a good point they make but Jesus referred to hell fire in his most well known sermon, the Sermon on the Mount.

 

[Cockcrow]

I am not an “Annihilationist but Mark 3:29 does not prove conscious eternal torment. See all these translations of Mark 3:29:

Mark 3:29 - Bible Gateway

www.biblegateway.com

Also, everlasting punishment does not prove everlasting conscious torment because the punishment is death. The everlasting punishment does not bother an annihilationist at all. They will tell you the wages of sin is death and then they will tell you death is the opposite of consciousness. Romans declares the wages of sin is death, not eternal consciousness in a lake of fire. The gift of God is eternal life. But, the annihilationist will tell you that the wages of sin is eternal death in hell. It is contrasted with eternal life. Eternal life as opposed to eternal death. The punishment is everlasting, they will admit, but what is everlasting is the death (punishment) of the person. I used to be an annihilationist and the two quotes you make will bounce off the annihilationist like BB's off the hull off the hull of a battleship.

Luke 16 is often called a parable or a word picture by the annihilationists and they do have a point against it, but Jesus obviously believed in Hades and in his lifetime on earth Hades was thought to be a place of eternal torment for the wicked, See Josephus's Discourse on Hades:

Josephus's Discourse to the Greeks concerning Hades - The Complete Works of Flavius Josephus

Josephus's Discourse to the Greeks concerning Hades - The Complete Works of Flavius Josephus - by William Whiston

erenow.org

The one point the annihilationists have against Luke 16 is if the rich man was really in Hades and burning alive he would not be able to carry on a conversation with Abraham who was separated from the rich man by a great gulf. This is a good point they make but Jesus referred to hell fire in his most known sermon, the Sermon on the Mount.

Jesus said eternal damnation. not annihaltion. and everlasting punishment, doesn't mean one time burn up that's it

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

Jesus said eternal damnation. not annihaltion. and everlasting punishment, doesn't mean one time burn up that's it

The punishment is death. It is eternal punishment. Annihilation is the punishment. It is everlasting. No hope of a resurrection. The wages of sin is death, not everlasting punishment in conscious torment. The gift of God is eternal life. Eternal Life is a gift of God, but some want to believe eternal life is not a gift, but man's default condition. See, an annihilationist will not be effected by your arguments as they have easy answers for your claims. Jesus taught the existence of hell in the Sermon on the Mount. Stick with those arguments that will work, not the ones who won't.

 

[Cockcrow]

The punishment is death. It is eternal punishment. Annihilation is the punishment. It is everlasting. No hope of a resurrection. The wages of sin is death, not everlasting punishment in conscious torment. The gift of God is eternal life. Eternal Life is a gift of God, but some want to believe eternal life is not a gift, but man's default condition. See, an annihilationist will not be effected by your arguments as they have easy answers for your claims. Jesus taught the existence of hell in the Sermon on the Mount. Stick with those arguments that will work, not the ones who won't.

the rich man in Luke 16 didn't get annihilated. no he was tormented in flaming fire, begging for a drop of water to cool his tongue

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

Jesus said eternal damnation. not annihaltion. and everlasting punishment, doesn't mean one time burn up that's it

Damnation does not mean torment exclusively. It CAN mean that but that is not the only meaning of damnation.

Topical Bible: Damnation

What Does Damnation Mean? Bible Definition and References

What is Damnation in the Bible? Study the meaning with multiple Bible Dictionaries and Encyclopedias and find scripture references of Damnation throughout the Bible.

www.biblestudytools.com

https://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Lexicon.show/ID/G2917/krima.htm

You can't use certain arguments against an annihilationist, because they are inoculated against certain arguments which they encounter throughout the time of their stay in their belief. You need to be prepared when you encounter an annihilationist on Christian Forums. I will try to help you.

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

the rich man in Luke 16 didn't get annihilated. no he was tormented in flaming fire, begging for a drop of water to cool his tongue

Yes, and you ignored my rebuttal. I am not your enemy. I am trying to tell you what an annihilationist will tell you when you use that argument. The annihilationist will probably just laugh inside when they hear you say what you said above. They believe Lazarus and the Rich man is a parable, or a word picture. It can't be real literally, because if you are burning, engulfed in flames, you can not engage another person in a conversation, even across a great gulf. Try to avoid the stereotypical arguments against annihilationists, they will either just laugh inside or feel sorry for you.

Remember Lazarus and the Rich Man is a parable, or a word picture. But that doesn't mean Hades doesn't exist. Josephus wrote a book about it and he clearly believed in Hades.

Over my lifetime I have heard of descriptions of people who were burned alive, either in a house, or by an incendiary bomb or whatever. They all agree the people that are dying that way are screaming all the time. They are totally unable to carry on conversations with people once the flames reach them.

Also, this comment in your original post:

Annihilationists, no Hellers, and other people who deny the reality of hell, like to falsely claim that Jesus never taught Eternal Conscious Torment in hell.

This is itself is a lie. Annihilationists genuinely believe that what they teach is true. I know, I was once one of them and all my friends really believed that annihilationiism was true. They all agreed when they first learned about annihilationism how happy they were to know there was no everlasting hell fire. I am trying to help you. You are going to have to change your perspective that anyone who disagrees with you is a liar.

 

[Der Alte]

the rich man in Luke 16 didn't get annihilated. no he was tormented in flaming fire, begging for a drop of water to cool his tongue

...And he could not leave the place he was in.

 

[Der Alte]

They believe Lazarus and the Rich man is a parable, or a word picture. It can't be real literally, because if you are burning, engulfed in flames, you can not engage another person in a conversation, even across a great gulf.

A parable has a specific form. Something not known or not understood is explained by comparison with something known/understood. The story of Lazarus and the rich man does not have such a comparison.

Over my lifetime I have heard of descriptions of people who were burned alive, either in a house, or by an incendiary bomb or whatever. They all agree the people that are dying that way are screaming all the time. They are totally unable to carry on conversations with people once the flames reach them.

And you believe that God is so impotent that He can't make that happen?

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

...And he could not leave the place he was in.

So? It was a word picture, It wasn't real. You cannot carry on a conversation with someone if you are burning alive. It wasn't real. I'm not saying Hades isn't real, I am saying the story of Lazarus and the Rich man isn't real. It's meant to illustrate a point. You cannot carry on a conversation with another person if you are burning alive, especially if that person is a long ways off,

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

A parable has a specific form. Something not known or not understood is explained by comparison with something known/understood. The story of Lazarus and the rich man does not have such a comparison.


And you believe that God is so impotent that He can't make that happen?

Why would God make this happen? When someone is burning alive how often does God intervene and save the person? The story of Lazarus and the Rich man is just that - a story, People cannot carry on conversations when they are burning alive. Where is your evidence that Yahweh would intefere with the Rich Man to ease his pain and suffering so he could carry on a conversation with Abraham? Do you believe God is so impotent that he can't save the Rich Man from hell and send an angel to his brothers? By your logic since Yahweh didn't do that then he is impotent.

 

[sparow]

Annihilationists, no Hellers, and other people who deny the reality of hell, like to falsely claim that Jesus never taught Eternal Conscious Torment in hell. but this is false, Jesus said in Mark 3:29 "But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation." the phrase "eternal damnation" literally means the opposite of annihilation. and Jesus also said "Everlasting punishment" why do people still believe or teach that Jesus never taught Eternal Conscious torment in hell? People choose to reject the reality of hell, it is sad, but realizing the reality of hell is what motivates us to preach the gospel to the lost, grace through faith salvation, because we know the reality of hell that Jesus told us about, and we warn the lost of the eternal conscious torment awaiting the unsaved, works salvationists. Mark 3:29 is a go to verse when no hellers annilationists hit you with the "Jesus never taught hell was eternal" or "hell is temporary" but this verse destroys the no hellers and annihlationist theory.

What do you mean "hell", are you talking about a six foot hole in the ground or something nonbiblical? Never forgiven is what Jesus said, damnation is a word choice of a translator with preconceived ideas.

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

...And he could not leave the place he was in.

According to your logic then God is impotent to make it happen. That is your logic. Premise 1: God did not make the Rich Man able to carry on a conversation, Therefore, God is impotent to make it happen. Premise 2: God did not allow the Rich Man to leave Hades, Therefore, God is impotent to make that happen.

That is your reasoning in a nutshell.

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

What do you mean "hell", are you talking about a six foot hole in the ground or something nonbiblical? Never forgiven is what Jesus said, damnation is a word choice of a translator with preconceived ideas.

Yes,, Sparrow, Cockcrow is obsessed with the word "damnation" and fixated on it. He seems to believe "damnation" is equivalent to torment". It CAN mean torment but not always. If Yahwweh condemned someone to be thrown into the lake of fire where they were consumed and annihilated Cockcrow would argue with God that their annihilation was not "damnation" and therefore Yahweh is a liar. Cockcrow cannot comprehend that damnation does not necessarily mean ongoing torment. If he tried to use these arguments with a genuine annihilationist they would have him for breakfast.

Damnation in the Bible:

Topical Bible: Damnation

I am a former annihilalationist (or a former believer in soul sleep) and I believe that there are places in the Bible that convince me there is torment in Hades. But as a former annihilationist I can counter much of Cockcrow's arguments easily.

 

[Der Alte]

According to your logic then God is impotent to make it happen. That is your logic. Premise 1: God did not make the Rich Man able to carry on a conversation, Therefore, God is impotent to make it happen. Premise 2: God did not allow the Rich Man to leave Hades, Therefore, God is impotent to make that happen.
That is your reasoning in a nutshell.

Since you have deliberately misrepresented what I said do not expect any further responses from me.

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

Since you have deliberately misrepresented what I said do not expect any further responses from me.

I did not deliberately misrepresent what you meant. So, if you feel I did, could you be kind enough to point out to me where I misrepresented you? If you are correct that I misrepresented you, I will offer an apology and try to answer whatever point you were making.

 

[Der Alte]

Why would God make this happen? When someone is burning alive how often does God intervene and save the person?

How many times must something be written in scripture to make it valid? I say one time.

The story of Lazarus and the Rich man is just that - a story, People cannot carry on conversations when they are burning alive.

Unless God makes it happen to teach something. Several ECF quoted the Lazarus/rich man story considered it factual. See above.

Where is your evidence that Yahweh would intefere with the Rich Man to ease his pain and suffering so he could carry on a conversation with Abraham? Do you believe God is so impotent that he can't save the Rich Man from hell and send an angel to his brothers? By your logic since Yahweh didn't do that then he is impotent.

Who put the rich man in flames? There is a big difference in God choosing to do/not do something and being impotent. You implied that the rich man could not do something Jesus said he did do. Abraham said the rich man could not leave the place he was in. I assume God informed him of that. As for the rich man asking for a drop of water vs. a large drink. I wonder if someone in the rich man's situation would be thinking and speaking logically?

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

How many times must something be written in scripture to make it valid? I say one time.

Unless God makes it happen to teach something. Several ECF quoted the Lazarus/rich man story considered it factual. See above.

SABER TRUTH TIGER
Yes, of course! IF Yahweh makes it happen, certainly! But where is your proof that Yahweh made it happen as opposed to a parable? The fact that the rich man is carrying on a conversation with Abraham is ample proof to most anyone Jesus is not referring to an actual conversation. But no worries! God can do anything so God made it happen this one time! Problem is, where is your proof that Yahweh made it happen? Anyone can take a unlikely story and claim that Yahweh made it happen because common sense tells you such a thing cannot happen!

Who put the rich man in flames? There is a big difference in God choosing to do/not do something and being impotent. You implied that the rich man could not do something Jesus said he did do.

Just because Jesus said in a story that a man said X, Y, and Z does not mean it really happened! You are claiming the unlikely story of a man carrying on a conversation with Abraham, burning alive as he did so, actually happened, so the burden of proof is on you to establish it happened as you claimed it did. And please spare me the Christian posturing "Jesus said he did it, so that means he did!" Jesus often made claims about people doing things that they didn't. Like the Prodigal Son eating the food that was fed to the pigs. If you wanted to make a point the story actually happened as Jesus told it, the burden of proof is on you. Jesus was not only a prophet, but he was a rabbi and a teacher and often spoke in parables and word pictures. That was common for rabbis and teachers to do in those days.

Abraham said the rich man could not leave the place he was in. I assume God informed him of that.

SABER TRUTH TIGER
Der Alte, it is a story! So God didn't inform Abraham of anything. You are the one claiming this unlikely tale actually happened as related by the rabbi, a man burning alive carrying on a chit-chat with Abraham, and across a great chasm at that. I need your proof that this story actually happened and all you can do is say "Well, God made it happen!" That doesn't make what you are claiming true.

As for the rich man asking for a drop of water vs. a large drink. I wonder if someone in the rich man's situation would be thinking and speaking logically?

SABER TRUTH TIGER
The fact that the story has the ridiculous quote of the rich man, engulfed in flames, asks Abraham for just a drop of water instead of gallons and gallons to put the fire engulfing him is a clue this is a word picture. Why would a man, burning alive, carrying on a conversation with a man a far way away, ask for only a drop of water to cool his tongue? The story doesn't make sense because it never happened. It is an illustration. That was a common thing for rabbis and teachers for the Jews did a lot in Jesus' time on earth. It's not a crime against God to make a parable or a word picture or an illustration.

The story didn't happen. It's just a story. Common sense will tell you it is a story. The story is very implausible but it makes an illustration. There are a lot of opinions of what the story was illustrating and I am not sure what it means. But common sense tells me it is a story and if you try to reach the heart of an annihilationist with your take on Lazarus and the Rich Man they're just going to feel sorry for you.

 

[jmz]

Like how molinism answered the issue of sovereignty and free will. And so many other multi-dimensional verses. is it possible that both are true?

Thought experiment, if i threw you towards a blackhole (assuming blackholes are legit things), you would likely experience a very quick death about a tenth of a second, while to everyone else observing it would be an eternity as you slowly approach the event horizon, taking an infinite time to reach it. In this sense your death is both eternal and instant.

I'm not suggesting eternal damnation is a blackhole though it would be pretty dark! (and maybe light at the same time if you got hit by a bright beam bending around the gravity well) but im saying that often disagreements over scripture have down the road been answered either by better philosophy or better understanding of the world/universe/history etc and are no longer disagreement.

Its terribly philosophic and greek but sometimes its a good idea to keep the Option A, Option B and.....maybe Option AB (and of course there is always Option C...the unknown answer)

 

[sparow]

Like how molinism answered the issue of sovereignty and free will. And so many other multi-dimensional verses. is it possible that both are true?

Thought experiment, if i threw you towards a blackhole (assuming blackholes are legit things), you would likely experience a very quick death about a tenth of a second, while to everyone else observing it would be an eternity as you slowly approach the event horizon, taking an infinite time to reach it. In this sense your death is both eternal and instant.

I'm not suggesting eternal damnation is a blackhole though it would be pretty dark! (and maybe light at the same time if you got hit by a bright beam bending around the gravity well) but im saying that often disagreements over scripture have down the road been answered either by better philosophy or better understanding of the world/universe/history etc and are no longer disagreement.

Its terribly philosophic and greek but sometimes its a good idea to keep the Option A, Option B and.....maybe Option AB (and of course there is always Option C...the unknown answer)

Molinism is to follow one particular persons opinion or teaching, it is a concoction that should not be entertained within the sanctuary of God. In the context of dismissing false doctrine, it is important to note the difference between eternal punishment and eternal punishing. When one dies the second death there is nothing left to punish. Eternal punishing would require eternal life.