Irrelevant. Those biased errant translations don't address the topic of what they thought the translation of Exodus 15:18 or Revelation 14:11 should be. The translation & meaning of those verses is the subject. Please try to stay on topic. BTW i already posted re the church fathers in the other thread:
http://www.christianforums.com/threads/eternal-suffering.7950108/page-29
well, i dont think it's irrelevant...
Der Alter is correct when he says that some of the early church did teach eternal torment... but he is wrong when he says that it was the majority view. the majority view before Tertullian was universal reconciliation. Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and Polycarp were all conditionalists, while Clement of Alexandria was the first one to outrightly teach that the "soul of a man" was inherently immortal...
now, I dont hold to that particular doctrine. UR teaches that ALL of mankind will be saved, and ALL will receive eternal life, regardless of whether that turned to Christ or not.
the Bible says the exact opposite in many different places, such as John 3:16, John 14:6, and Malachi 4:1-3 just to name a few... only the righteous will inherit the earth. only those who are in Christ will receive that gift, eternal life.
the wicked do not receive that gift, because they never went through Christ to receive it... if they never went through Christ, then they are not going to live forever.
that's why i think Universal Reconciliation, or "Christian universalism", is no different than Unitarian Universalism...
unitarian universalism = it doesn't matter if you believe in Jesus or not, you're gonna get saved
christian universalism = it doesn't matter if you believe in Jesus or not, you're gonna get saved
and to answer the question, is the lake of fire eternal pain.. not it is not.
for it to be eternal pain, that implies the wicked receive the gift of God without Christ, a notio that directly contradicts a host of many scriptures...
the wicked do not live forever, so the lake of fire is not "eternal pain"...
it
is eternal destruction... destruct
ION, not "destroying", as traditionalists try to make it...
and FWIW, Matthew 25:46, the term "eternal" shouldnt be the focus, even though some conditionalists try to make it out to be that... the word "punishment" should be the focus, because the word "punishment" refers to the end result of the act, not the duration of the act. "eternal" already tells us the duration... "punishment" is a noun of action, not a verb.
Hebrews 9:12 uses the same kind of word, and uses the term "eternal" as well, "eternal redemption"... when you study both greek suffixes for both words, (punishment = kolasis / redemption = lutrosis), they both uses the same suffix.
if punishment refers to the duration of the act, then that standard must be used for Hebrews 9:12 as well, which would mean that our redemption would be an ongoing process in eternity...
the only reason we would have to be continually redeemed in eternity is if we were continually sinning in eternity, becue we are redeemed from the penalty of sin: death.
no, this is not right one bit... the greek suffix "sis" cannot be talking about the duration, because that creates a disgusting heresy.
in eternity, though, we are eternally redeemed... meaning, once we are redeemed ion full upon Christ's return, it is eternal, never to be undone, never to be changed.
now, if we take THAT definition, and apply it to Matthew 25:46, there is no contradiction in scripture... the punishment for sin has always been death, Romans 6:23. the punishment that Matthew 25:46 refers to is not living forever in torment, but death... so when it says "eternal punishment", it is referring to the end result of being thrown into the lake of fire... death. a death that cannot be undone nor changed.
with the first death, our physical death, there is hope in seeing life again, through Jesus Christ, and through Jesus Christ alone.
with the second death, there is no second chance.
once you're thrown in there, you will not be resurrected again.
you will stay dead.