Jesus said Eternal Damnation. Mark 3:29

[Der Alte]

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.

Is there also a difference between "eternal living" and "eternal life?" While the lake of fire [LOF] is called "the second death" twice Rev 21:8, 21:10

Revelation 21:4
(4) And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
Revelation 21:8
(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.​

No vs. in the Bible says anyone/anything is thrown into the LOF then they/it dies. In fact, Rev 20:10 says three living beings, one the false prophet, is a person, are thrown into the LOF but do not die they are tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Revelation 20:10
(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.​

Note Rev 21:4 says "no more death" which means that the 8 groups of sinners thrown into the LOF Rev 21:8 do not die.
Last chapter no more death, no more salvation.

Revelation 22:11
(11) He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.​

Where are these unjust and filthy?

Revelation 22:15
(15) For without [outside the new Jerusalem] are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.​

 

[sparow]

Is there also a difference between "eternal living" and "eternal life?" While the lake of fire [LOF] is called "the second death" twice Rev 21:8, 21:10

Revelation 21:4​

(4) And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.​

Revelation 21:8​

(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.​

No vs. in the Bible says anyone/anything is thrown into the LOF then they/it dies. In fact, Rev 20:10 says three living beings, one the false prophet, is a person, are thrown into the LOF but do not die they are tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Revelation 20:10​

(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.​

Note Rev 21:4 says "no more death" which means that the 8 groups of sinners thrown into the LOF Rev 21:8 do not die.
Last chapter no more death, no more salvation.

Revelation 22:11​

(11) He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.​

Where are these unjust and filthy?

Revelation 22:15​

(15) For without [outside the new Jerusalem] are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.​

The lake of fire is symbolic. The difference between the first death and the second death is the possibility to be resurrected from the first death but not from the second death.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

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 believe in a real fiery place of hell called "torments“ that will torment the wicked temporarily until the Lake of Fire. After the one Judgment, I believe the Bible teaches that the wicked will eventually be annihilated in the Lake of Fire because that is what Isaiah 66:24 and Revelation 21:4-5 paints in its final picture of the end. Isaiah 66:24 has the saints looking upon the carcases of the wicked. Carcases are empty lifeless husks and not living. So the saints will view the remains of the wicked on the New Earth. In Revelation 21:4-5, Jesus says there will be no more death, or crying, or suffering, etcetera. He says He will make all things new. 1 Corinthians 15:26 says that the last enemy to be destroyed is death. This presupposes that there are other enemies of God that will be destroyed, as well. So what of Mark 3:29? Well, it is the same as verses like Hebrews 6:2 that mentions, eternal judgment. What this means is that God is not going to be eternally judging all of mankind for all eternity. In short, Mark 3:29 is talking about the consequences as being eternal, just as God’s one-time judgment can have everlasting results. In other words, one has encountered eternal damnation if they are destroyed in the Lake of Fire. It is also important to point out that the most influential English Bible is written in archaic 1600s English and it has influenced other English Translations. This is not an error by any means. It just means that things are spoken in a way that we would not speak. So when studying this issue, we have to take into account that the King James Bible uses language that is unique and it is not always the same exact English we would use. So looking at the whole counsel of God’s Word on this matter is what one has to do in order to discover the truth on this topic.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

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.

Check out my thread here: A Defense of Dualistic Conditional Immortality

 

[jmz]

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.

wow....its just a name given to identify a theory or interpretation... So you are actual wrong here. Feel free to label it with whatever you want. No-one really cares about the label. The simplest thing is to either give it a name that summarizes its general theme or attach it to the name of the person who made it popular. Take Newtonian physics, is it any less or more because it has "Newton" in front of it? . Of course not. People who lean towards Newtonian physics arent following a persons opinion because of person, they are leaning towards the logic behind what that person made popular (there couldve been other physicists before Newton but didnt make it popular).

Its not following a person its following an interpretation. A philosophical idea. The application of logic to understanding complex ideas. Ironically you do this ALL the time, even when you read scripture you are applying reason...which will come from your childhood and growth over the age, if you didnt you would be a mad/insane person. Mentally depraved. So ironically you too are brining "Sparrow'ism" to your reading and understanding of scripture/life.

Please try and engage with strong philosophical undersatnding The content is what is important. Molinism (or really its just sovereignty ) does not have any issues in scripture. In fact it is backed by scripture. It is a philosophical understanding of what often appears contradictory in scripture. If you want to prove it wrong i would happily ask you to do so. But have yet to hear anyone do so.... no wonder because it is philosophical sound and does not agress against scripture.

So far you havent engaged with the content at all. Please do better.

The point i brought up is that both can theoretically exist depending on the observer.

God hardened Pharaoh's heart. Pharaoh hardened his own heart. In rabbinical tradition there is no contradiction here. In classic west (greek) thinking there is...until we have better more deeper understanding....

 

[Der Alte]

The lake of fire is symbolic. The difference between the first death and the second death is the possibility to be resurrected from the first death but not from the second death.

Possibly but unfortunately no scripture to support this. As I said no vs. says that the unrighteous in the lake of fire die. I agree the second death is symbolic not actual.

 

[sparow]

wow....its just a name given to identify a theory or interpretation... So you are actual wrong here. Feel free to label it with whatever you want. No-one really cares about the label. The simplest thing is to either give it a name that summarizes its general theme or attach it to the name of the person who made it popular. Take Newtonian physics, is it any less or more because it has "Newton" in front of it? . Of course not. People who lean towards Newtonian physics arent following a persons opinion because of person, they are leaning towards the logic behind what that person made popular (there couldve been other physicists before Newton but didnt make it popular).

Its not following a person its following an interpretation. A philosophical idea. The application of logic to understanding complex ideas. Ironically you do this ALL the time, even when you read scripture you are applying reason...which will come from your childhood and growth over the age, if you didnt you would be a mad/insane person. Mentally depraved. So ironically you too are brining "Sparrow'ism" to your reading and understanding of scripture/life.

Please try and engage with strong philosophical undersatnding The content is what is important. Molinism (or really its just sovereignty ) does not have any issues in scripture. In fact it is backed by scripture. It is a philosophical understanding of what often appears contradictory in scripture. If you want to prove it wrong i would happily ask you to do so. But have yet to hear anyone do so.... no wonder because it is philosophical sound and does not agress against scripture.

So far you havent engaged with the content at all. Please do better.

The point i brought up is that both can theoretically exist depending on the observer.

God hardened Pharaoh's heart. Pharaoh hardened his own heart. In rabbinical tradition there is no contradiction here. In classic west (greek) thinking there is...until we have better more deeper understanding....

I use logic, reason and wisdom, in as far as I am able. Philosophy, I do not know the discipline; I do not use men as authorities.

I refrain from engaging in your game.

 

[Der Alte]

I believe in a real fiery place of hell called "torments“ that will torment the wicked temporarily until the Lake of Fire. After the one Judgment, I believe the Bible teaches that the wicked will eventually be annihilated in the Lake of Fire because that is what Isaiah 66:24 and Revelation 21:4-5 paints in its final picture of the end. Isaiah 66:24 has the saints looking upon the carcases of the wicked. Carcases are empty lifeless husks and not living. So the saints will view the remains of the wicked on the New Earth. In Revelation 21:4-5, Jesus says there will be no more death, or crying, or suffering, etcetera. He says He will make all things new. 1 Corinthians 15:26 says that the last enemy to be destroyed is death. This presupposes that there are other enemies of God that will be destroyed, as well. So what of Mark 3:29? Well, it is the same as verses like Hebrews 6:2 that mentions, eternal judgment. What this means is that God is not going to be eternally judging all of mankind for all eternity. In short, Mark 3:29 is talking about the consequences as being eternal, just as God’s one-time judgment can have everlasting results. In other words, one has encountered eternal damnation if they are destroyed in the Lake of Fire. It is also important to point out that the most influential English Bible is written in archaic 1600s English and it has influenced other English Translations. This is not an error by any means. It just means that things are spoken in a way that we would not speak. So when studying this issue, we have to take into account that the King James Bible uses language that is unique and it is not always the same exact English we would use. So looking at the whole counsel of God’s Word on this matter is what one has to do in order to discover the truth on this topic.

I once was flying from Calif. to Va. for training. The man, wearing a suit, in the seat beside me was reading the Bible. To start a conversation I said, "I see you are reading the Bible. I like how it ends." Then I said "You are a military aviator." He said, "Do I have a sign on my forehead."I said "No, the glasses and the haircut." I had the same glasses and once had the haircut.
Having said that let's look at the end of the Bible.

Revelation 20:10
(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.​

Although the lake of fire is called "the second death" these three living beings, one the false prophet, is a person, do not die but are tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Revelation 21:4
(4) And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
Revelation 21:8
(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.​

If there is no more death after vs. 21:4, these 8 groups of people in the LOF do not die.
The last book, last chapter in the Bible, no more salvation, no more death

Revelation 22:11
(11) He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.​

Where are these unjust and filthy?

Revelation 22:15
(15) For without [outside the new Jerusalem vs. 21:10] are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.​

Twelve more vss. the end.

 

[jmz]

I use logic, reason and wisdom, in as far as I am able. Philosophy, I do not know the discipline; I do not use men as authorities.

I refrain from engaging in your game.

theres no game here.

Philosophy === logic. Its the same thing. Replace any of the words where i used philosphy with the word logic. If you use logic, reason and wisdom then please tell me why its wrong? My point was that both can theoretically exist in the example i gave logically speaking (i removed the word philosophy for you.

So if indeed you say you want to use logic and reason and wisdom then you should be able to engage on this and rebut using logic.

 

[jmz]

I use logic, reason and wisdom, in as far as I am able. Philosophy, I do not know the discipline; I do not use men as authorities.

I refrain from engaging in your game.

i gotta say this is getting a little worrying and i am seeing this kindve behaviour more and more especially in the west. The opposition to the use of logic and the rational engagement of concepts and interpretations around complex topics. People would rather just not engage, stick fingers in their ears and move on.

 

[Saber Truth Tiger]

I once was flying from Calif. to Va. for training. The man, wearing a suit, in the seat beside me was reading the Bible. To start a conversation I said, "I see you are reading the Bible. I like how it ends." Then I said "You are a military aviator." He said, "Do I have a sign on my forehead."I said "No, the glasses and the haircut." I had the same glasses and once had the haircut.
Having said that let's look at the end of the Bible.

Revelation 20:10​

(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.​

Although the lake of fire is called "the second death" these three living beings, one the false prophet, is a person, do not die but are tormented day and night for ever and ever.

SABER TRUTH TIGER
I remember when I was an annihilationist studying under the leadership of Herbert W. Armstrong he told us that the correct word in the greek was in the past tense. He claimed it should be rendered "where the beast and false prophet WERE". Years later, I did my own research (literally) and discovered he had lied to us. That is why I am no longer an annihilationist although there remain verses in the Bible that I still interpret as though I am still an anihilationist.

Revelation 21:4​

(4) And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.​

Revelation 21:8​

(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.​

If there is no more death after vs. 21:4, these 8 groups of people in the LOF do not die.
The last book, last chapter in the Bible, no more salvation, no more death

Revelation 22:11​

(11) He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.​

Where are these unjust and filthy?

Revelation 22:15​

(15) For without [outside the new Jerusalem vs. 21:10] are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.​

Twelve more vss. the end.

 

[sparow]

Possibly but unfortunately no scripture to support this. As I said no vs. says that the unrighteous in the lake of fire die. I agree the second death is symbolic not actual.

Revelation 20:14 King James Version 14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

What does second death mean if it does not mean die? It is a different death to the first death.

Rev 2:11
Rev 20:15
Rev 21:8
1 John 5:4

 

[sparow]

theres no game here.

Philosophy === logic. Its the same thing. Replace any of the words where i used philosphy with the word logic. If you use logic, reason and wisdom then please tell me why its wrong? My point was that both can theoretically exist in the example i gave logically speaking (i removed the word philosophy for you.

So if indeed you say you want to use logic and reason and wisdom then you should be able to engage on this and rebut using logic.

Logic is to do with brain function; Philosophy is a peculiar training and manmade rules. You want to reconcile the Sovereignty of God with the free will of man. To my mind this is an oxymoron, unless to enter into the covenant is meant, where man's free will is to be one with God. Typically man has abrogated the covenant.

 

[sparow]

i gotta say this is getting a little worrying and i am seeing this kindve behaviour more and more especially in the west. The opposition to the use of logic and the rational engagement of concepts and interpretations around complex topics. People would rather just not engage, stick fingers in their ears and move on.

You in the east go off topic all the time.

 

[jmz]

You in the east go off topic all the time.

I live in the west. I was more alluding to the unfortunate effects of the triggered left who tend to shy away from logical debate, which is what i am seeing more and mroe amongst christians unforutnately. Even in this thread.
You so far havent given a single logical rebuttal.. When A and B can be reconciled in a way that A doesnt contradict B then why fight with A != B? If you cannot give reason?

The fact remains that depending on the observation point an eternity and an instant can both exist simultaneously.

 

[jmz]

Al

Logic is to do with brain function; Philosophy is a peculiar training and manmade rules. You want to reconcile the Sovereignty of God with the free will of man. To my mind this is an oxymoron, unless to enter into the covenant is meant, where man's free will is to be one with God. Typically man has abrogated the covenant.

Also if you dont uderstand the concepts being put forward, theres no harm in asking . Just in case that is a potential reason why you arent engaging. With pride put aside a discussion is always a win win!

 

[Ceallaigh]

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.

Annilation isn't temporary. It's eternal. It's an everlasting punishment from which no reprieve is possible.

 

[Ceallaigh]

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

Eternal punishment equals eternal life.

 

[Ceallaigh]

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

Judgment Day hasn't taken place yet.

 

[sparow]

i gotta say this is getting a little worrying and i am seeing this kindve behaviour more and more especially in the west. The opposition to the use of logic and the rational engagement of concepts and interpretations around complex topics. People would rather just not engage, stick fingers in their ears and move on.

You in the east go off topic all the time.

I live in the west. I was more alluding to the unfortunate effects of the triggered left who tend to shy away from logical debate, which is what i am seeing more and mroe amongst christians unforutnately. Even in this thread.
You so far havent given a single logical rebuttal.. When A and B can be reconciled in a way that A doesnt contradict B then why fight with A != B? If you cannot give reason?

The fact remains that depending on the observation point an eternity and an instant can both exist simultaneously.

Lets look at this las statement, fit the statement to be true, for an instant to equal eternity, the observer would have to be travelling at maximum speed, like the speed of light multiplied by 10 raised to the power of infinity.