Lake of Fire

[timothyu]

because only the merciful do, the ones who lay their lives down, and nobody can do these things unless they have the love of God in them, because they will stop once they start, they will not have only charity in the heart, which does all out of kindness, and is not self seeking

Long live the counter-culture of the Kingdom, contrary to the ways of man.

 

[prophecy_uk]

Tim: "Long live the counter-culture of the Kingdom, contrary to the ways of man."


Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Ephesians 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved
6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

 

[Der Alte]

If there was only one passage that showed a
Olam as finite it would prove my point. As logic goes one negative can out way any number of positives. If someone claims all cars are red, all I need is one blue car to disprove that statement.

This is nonsensical.

It's funny that you bring up figures of speech because that's what forever and ever is. As has been shown clearly neither olam nor aion mean eternal.

Wrong! Claiming that something has been shown is not showing it. Just because olam is used for something that is not eternal a few times does not prove the meaning.

As has been shown, your juxtaposing passages does not prove that olam or aion mean eternal. That was seen in Luke where Jesus is said to reign aion. That was juxtaposed with the Kingdom that shall not end. However, as has been shown from Scripture Jesus doesn't reign forever, thus showing, not only does aion not mean forever, but also that juxtaposing it with, shall not end, doesn't prove it means forever.

Rubbish. Wrong about Jesus reign.

Revelation 22:3-5
3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
4 And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they [the lamb and God] shall reign for ever and ever.​

You can't simply ignore the passages that show olam as a finite period of time

Wrong! That olam is used a few times to refer to something which is not/cannot be eternal does not determine the meaning when the majority shows it to mean eternal.
.....In the 1917 Jewish Publication Society [JPS] translation of the OT “olam”
olam” occurs 414 times. It is translated eternal 2 times, everlasting 59 times, always 2 times and for ever 263 times, by native Hebrew speaking Jewish scholars. Total 326 times. That means 88 times out of 414 it is not translated eternal, everlasting etc.
How many times is olam used to refer to something that is not/cannot be eternal? Do you have any idea? 88 times.
And OBTW "forever and ever" Is a figure of speech it emphasizes eternity.
Look up E.W. Bullinger's "Figures of Speech Used in the Bible."

284 FIGURES OF SPEECH.
in A.V. and R.V. this is rendered, “The Lord your God is God of Gods, and Lord of Lords, a great God” etc.
1 Kings V111. 27.- The heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee”: i.e., the highest heaven.”
Ecc. i. L etc. Vanity of vanities”: i.e., the greatest vanity.
Song Sol. i. I.—” The song of songs,” i.e., the most beautiful or excellent song.
Dan. ii. 37. Ezek. xxvi. 17.—” A king of kings”: i.e.. the most mighty king.
Dan. ii. 47.—” God of gods.: i.e.. the great, living, or true God. The most mighty God.
Dan. viii. 25..—” The Prince or princes”: i.e., the most powerful Prince.
Hos. x. 15. So shall Bethel do unto you because of your great wickedness.’. The figure is here translated. and given in the margin “Hebrew, the evil of your evil.”
Micah ii. 4.—” A 1amentation of 1amentations,. i.e., a great lamentation. See above, page 278.
Phil. 1ii. . “.A Hebrew or the Hebrews," i.e., a thorough Hebrew. See this verse under Asyndeton.
I Tim. vi. 15.—.”The King or kings, and Lord of lords." Compare Rev. xvi. 14 and iz. 16.
Rev. i. 6.—” The ages of the ages.. i.e., to the remotest age, for ever and ever.​

 

[Davy]

Satan had (past tense at this point) a "celestial body", as opposed to our own type of "terrestrial body" (I Cor. 15:40). This "celestial" flesh of Satan's was capable of being turned into ashes by the fire of God in Ezekiel 28:18-19, after which Satan the "anointed cherub" would not exist anymore.

This difference between the type of "celestial" flesh which the angels had, compared to our human "terrestrial" flesh, is made apparent when the disobedient angels went after "OTHER flesh" in Jude 6-7.

I don't think you really understand that word 'celestial'. That word points to the stars and planets in the universe, i.e., heavenly bodies out away from our planet earth. All that is still... in this earthly material dimension.

So no... Satan doesn't have, and never had, a celestial flesh body. That would mean a literal material body. What Satan has, as all the angels do, is a spiritual body, which just so happens to be what Apostle Paul and Lord Jesus showed the resurrection body is like (Mark 12:25).

The idea of Satan being turned to ashes per the parable in Ezekiel 28 is an expression. It does not mean Satan has a fleshy material body. He is a an angel, specifically a cherub, which is a heavenly being in that other... dimension we cannot see (unless God allows it, like He did with His prophets).

It is written in Jude 1 that the angels that rebelled left their habitation and first estate. That means they left the spiritual dimension and co-habitated with woman. Don't ask me how that was possible, God knows. But it's no reason to go speculating that they have fleshy bodies.

 

[chad kincham]

That's an argument from ignorance.

I'm more concerned about those who have joined the church out of fear of hell. Those whom the Lord may very well say, "I never knew you..."

That’s contradictory.

If universalism was right it makes no difference whether Jesus knows them or not, and BTW those He casts into hell in that passage, are “workers of iniquity”.

Those people were in a church, but were deceived by OSAS into thinking they could live a sinful lifestyle as Christians, and per Ezekiel, God forgets a righteous man who turns sinful again was ever righteous - as in Jesus forgetting he ever knew those “workers of iniquity” in the church, who once cast out demons and did miracles in His name.

 

[prophecy_uk]

Even the devil goes into the lake of fire, do you wonder then why the devil tries to take us with him into it..


Revelation 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.



This is how to not go to the same place as the devil..


1 Peter 5:5 Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.
6 Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time:
7 Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you.
8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
9 Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world.

2 Thessalonians 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
10 But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you.

 

[Saint Steven]

That’s contradictory.

If universalism was right it makes no difference whether Jesus knows them or not, and BTW those He casts into hell in that passage, are “workers of iniquity”.

Those people were in a church, but were deceived by OSAS into thinking they could live a sinful lifestyle as Christians, and per Ezekiel, God forgets a righteous man who turns sinful again was ever righteous - as in Jesus forgetting he ever knew those “workers of iniquity” in the church, who once cast out demons and did miracles in His name.

Christian Universalism makes no such claim. Salvation is through Jesus Christ.

Without OSAS you have no security for the afterlife. On what basis will you be saved. And how is that measured? Did you do enough to be saved? (who knows?) Could you have done more? (of course) Did you do enough? (who knows?)

Better to base your salvation on the work of Jesus Christ on our behalf. That is easily measured. Paid in full.

 

[prophecy_uk]

Steven: "Without OSAS you have no security for the afterlife. On what basis will you be saved. And how is that measured? Did you do enough to be saved? (who knows?) Could you have done more? (of course) Did you do enough? (who knows?)

Better to base your salvation on the work of Jesus Christ on our behalf. That is easily measured. Paid in full."




saved by doing as taught, in the Gospel, try remembering it and discussing it...


Luke 14:7 And he put forth a parable to those which were bidden, when he marked how they chose out the chief rooms; saying unto them.
8 When thou art bidden of any man to a wedding, sit not down in the highest room; lest a more honourable man than thou be bidden of him;
9 And he that bade thee and him come and say to thee, Give this man place; and thou begin with shame to take the lowest room.
10 But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room; that when he that bade thee cometh, he may say unto thee, Friend, go up higher: then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee.
11 For whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

Matthew 18:4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

Luke 9:48 And said unto them, Whosoever shall receive this child in my name receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me receiveth him that sent me: for he that is least among you all, the same shall be great.

Matthew 20:16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.

 

[3 Resurrections]

I don't think you really understand that word 'celestial'. That word points to the stars and planets in the universe, i.e., heavenly bodies out away from our planet earth. All that is still... in this earthly material dimension.

That description of the sun, moon, and stars is in the next sentence following the one about celestial bodies compared to terrestrial bodies. Paul had moved on to another category of differences between things.

I used to believe as you do that the "celestial bodies" (somata) term referred to sun, moon, and stars, but not any more since I have done a study of the particular sin the sons of God committed with earthly women, producing hybrid angel/human progeny that corrupted the genetic pool almost completely in Noah's day, and which had to be eradicated by the flood. "ALL flesh (of different kinds) had corrupted its way upon the earth" before God in those days. I hope someone will correct me if I am wrong about the Greek, but I don't think the term "somata" for "bodies" was ever used in reference to the sun, moon, or stars.

The sin of the angels was in "going after OTHER FLESH", meaning terrestrial flesh that was not like their own celestial flesh; a sort of tangible form, but with different composition and capabilities than our own. Another "species" of a different type of flesh, but one that was NOT intended to procreate, as our race was commanded to do. And yes, the angelic celestial type of flesh was one that could be destroyed by God's consuming fire and reduced to ashes. Whether you believe that described a granular physical substance or not, it most certainly was intended to reveal to us that Satan was going to be completely eradicated and "never exist any more" after he was consumed.

 

[Davy]

That description of the sun, moon, and stars is in the next sentence following the one about celestial bodies compared to terrestrial bodies. Paul had moved on to another category of differences between things.

I recognize that Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 was going deeper into the difference between flesh things and spiritual things. Nowhere in that did he say that the "spiritual body" was a celestial type body. He was only making comparison between celestial orbs like the sun, moon, and stars as being in a different category than the earth. It still means all those things are of the same material dimension though. It's like both bears and birds are animals, but their flesh is different. Likewise in the celestial, which points to the sun, moon, planets, and stars. That's why another name for star charts is 'celestial chart'.


Surely you know what a magnet is. So is the magnetic field around the magnet of a different dimension, because we cannot see it with the naked eye? No, that field is still of this earthly material dimension. The Heavenly dimension where God dwells, is a whole other TYPE of dimension altogether. It is not of material matter at all. It is made up of spirit. And like Lord Jesus said in John 3, that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. That is two totally separate and distinct dimensions. Jesus compared the spirit to wind blowing, because we can't actually see air, but we know it's there, and can see its effects.

I used to believe as you do that the "celestial bodies" (somata) term referred to sun, moon, and stars, but not any more since I have done a study of the particular sin the sons of God committed with earthly women, producing hybrid angel/human progeny that corrupted the genetic pool almost completely in Noah's day, and which had to be eradicated by the flood. "ALL flesh (of different kinds) had corrupted its way upon the earth" before God in those days. I hope someone will correct me if I am wrong about the Greek, but I don't think the term "somata" for "bodies" was ever used in reference to the sun, moon, or stars.

Oh how many times have I heard that statement, "I used to believe as you do..."? Thousands probably. You don't have a clue as to what I believe. I say that because you would first have to understand about the two different dimensions of existence written of in God's Word that I've been talking about. You can't stay on that topic because you obviously don't understand it!

 

[3 Resurrections]

I recognize that Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 was going deeper into the difference between flesh things and spiritual things. Nowhere in that did he say that the "spiritual body" was a celestial type body.

Of course, I am not familiar with your viewpoint, I'm not that presumptuous, since I'm a newbie on this site. I'm simply trying to go by the words I'm looking at with your name on it. My argument is not that a "spiritual body" was a celestial type body.

Paul was going down a list of different fleshly types; (men compared to beasts, fish, and birds); then Paul compared celestial flesh (angelic) compared to terrestrial flesh (human), then Paul compared the glory of the sun compared to the glory of the moon and different stars. Paul was trying to clarify for the Corinthians what the surpassing glory of their resurrected bodies would be like when they received it.

The very same "IT" body that went into the ground would be the same "IT" body which would be raised in a changed condition, so that the glory IT had once had before death would be eclipsed by the glory which IT would have in ITS resurrected, glorified condition. Same body elements subsumed into the glorified, resurrected body form which could stand in God's presence, when before resurrection, it could not do so.

It is the Full Preterist viewpoint that would like to dismiss the elements which make our original body form while in this life. They regard it as disposable. God does not, since He purchased it with Christ's blood. To trash the purchased human bodies of the saints after death would not say much for the value of Christ's blood sacrifice.

 

[Butch5]

This is nonsensical.

Wrong! Claiming that something has been shown is not showing it. Just because olam is used for something that is not eternal a few times does not prove the meaning.

Rubbish. Wrong about Jesus reign.

Revelation 22:3-5
3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
4 And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they [the lamb and God] shall reign for ever and ever.​

Wrong! That olam is used a few times to refer to something which is not/cannot be eternal does not determine the meaning when the majority shows it to mean eternal.
.....In the 1917 Jewish Publication Society [JPS] translation of the OT “olam”
olam” occurs 414 times. It is translated eternal 2 times, everlasting 59 times, always 2 times and for ever 263 times, by native Hebrew speaking Jewish scholars. Total 326 times. That means 88 times out of 414 it is not translated eternal, everlasting etc.
How many times is olam used to refer to something that is not/cannot be eternal? Do you have any idea? 88 times.
And OBTW "forever and ever" Is a figure of speech it emphasizes eternity.
Look up E.W. Bullinger's "Figures of Speech Used in the Bible."

284 FIGURES OF SPEECH.
in A.V. and R.V. this is rendered, “The Lord your God is God of Gods, and Lord of Lords, a great God” etc.
1 Kings V111. 27.- The heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee”: i.e., the highest heaven.”
Ecc. i. L etc. Vanity of vanities”: i.e., the greatest vanity.
Song Sol. i. I.—” The song of songs,” i.e., the most beautiful or excellent song.
Dan. ii. 37. Ezek. xxvi. 17.—” A king of kings”: i.e.. the most mighty king.
Dan. ii. 47.—” God of gods.: i.e.. the great, living, or true God. The most mighty God.
Dan. viii. 25..—” The Prince or princes”: i.e., the most powerful Prince.
Hos. x. 15. So shall Bethel do unto you because of your great wickedness.’. The figure is here translated. and given in the margin “Hebrew, the evil of your evil.”
Micah ii. 4.—” A 1amentation of 1amentations,. i.e., a great lamentation. See above, page 278.
Phil. 1ii. . “.A Hebrew or the Hebrews," i.e., a thorough Hebrew. See this verse under Asyndeton.
I Tim. vi. 15.—.”The King or kings, and Lord of lords." Compare Rev. xvi. 14 and iz. 16.
Rev. i. 6.—” The ages of the ages.. i.e., to the remotest age, for ever and ever.​

You've rejected logic and reason. And, you ignore the uses of olam that are finite.

 

[Der Alte]

You've rejected logic and reason. And, you ignore the uses of olam that are finite.

Nonsense. YOu evidently know nothing about language, You hang onto your heterodox assumptions/presuppositions with a death grip.
.....I ignore nothing I have shown from several verses where "olam" and "ad" are defined as "eternal." You do understand the words "define" and "describe" don't you?
You simply ignore what I say because you think when "olam" is used a few times 21% of the time figuratively as hyperbole that controls the meaning.
As in English if someone says e.g. "That person is as big as a house." does that mean houses are the same size as people or is it hyperbole?
Let me illustrate using a different word. The word "kosmos" in Greek means "world" there is no question about it. But...

[1-3]Matthew 16:26
(26) What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? [Mark 8:36, Luke 9:25]​

Can a person literally inherit the "whole world?"

[4]1 John 5:19
(19) We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one.​

Was "the whole world" literally under the control of the evil one?

[5]Revelation 12:9
(9) The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.​

Did Satan literally lead "the whole world" astray?

[6]Revelation 13:3
(3) One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was filled with wonder and followed the beast.​

Did "the whole world" literally follow the beast?

[7]Acts 17:6 But when they did not find them, they dragged Jason and some other believers before the city officials, shouting: "These men who have caused trouble all over the world have now come here,​

Did the disciples literally cause trouble "all over the world?"

[8]Acts 19:35 The city clerk quieted the crowd and said: "Fellow Ephesians, doesn't all the world know that the city of Ephesus is the guardian of the temple of the great Artemis and of her image, which fell from heaven?​

Did "all the world" literally know that Ephesus was the guardian of the pagan deity Artemis?

[9]Acts 24:5 "We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect.​

Was Paul literally stirring up riots "all over the world?"

[10]Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.​

Did Caesar literally tax "all the world?"

[11]Acts 19:27 So that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at nought; but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worshippeth​

Did "all the world" literally worship the goddess Diana?

[12]Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.​

Was the faith of the Romans literally spoken of throughout "the whole world?"

[13]John 12:19 The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? behold, the world is gone after him.​

Did the whole world literally go after Jesus?

[14]1 Corinthians 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.​

Did the “ends of the world” literally come upon the Israelite who disobeyed God at Sinai?

[15]James 3:6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.​

Is the tongue literally a world?
…..Let us use the fallacious aion/aionios argument on these verses. The word "world" cannot literally mean the entire planet earth because it refers to/describe things that are not literally "the whole world" and "all the world."
This same thing happens with the use of the word "olam" in the OT. I have shown where it is defined/described as eternal.
Here are some of the verses you have ignored.

[10]Ecc 3:14
(14) I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: [עולם] nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him.​

In this vs. “olam” is paralleled with “nothing can be added or taken away from it [God’s acts.]” “age(s),“ a finite period, does not equate to “nothing can be added or taken away from God acts,” “eternal” does.
Did God lie when He said nothing could be added to or taken away from His acts?

[11]Isa 51:6
(6) Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, [עולם] and my righteousness shall not be abolished.​

In this vs. “olam” is paralleled with “shall not be abolished” and juxtaposed to "they shall die", “age(s),” a finite period, does not equate to “shall not be abolished,” “eternal” does.
Did God lie, will His righteous be abolished?

[12]Isa 51:8
(8) For the moth shall eat them up like a garment, and the worm shall eat them like wool: but my righteousness shall be for ever, [עולם] and my salvation from generation to generation.​

In this vs. “olam” is paralleled with “generation to generation,”age(s),” and juxtaposed with "eat them like wool" A finite period, does not equate to “generation to generation,” “eternal” does.

 

[Butch5]

Nonsense. YOu evidently know nothing about language, You hang onto your heterodox assumptions/presuppositions with a death grip.
.....I ignore nothing I have shown from several verses where "olam" and "ad" are defined as "eternal." You do understand the words "define" and "describe" don't you?
You simply ignore what I say because you think when "olam" is used a few times 21% of the time figuratively as hyperbole that controls the meaning.
As in English if someone says e.g. "That person is as big as a house." does that mean houses are the same size as people or is it hyperbole?
Let me illustrate using a different word. The word "kosmos" in Greek means "world" there is no question about it. But...

[1-3]Matthew 16:26
(26) What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? [Mark 8:36, Luke 9:25]​

Can a person literally inherit the "whole world?"

[4]1 John 5:19
(19) We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one.​

Was "the whole world" literally under the control of the evil one?

[5]Revelation 12:9
(9) The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.​

Did Satan literally lead "the whole world" astray?

[6]Revelation 13:3
(3) One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was filled with wonder and followed the beast.​

Did "the whole world" literally follow the beast?

[7]Acts 17:6 But when they did not find them, they dragged Jason and some other believers before the city officials, shouting: "These men who have caused trouble all over the world have now come here,​

Did the disciples literally cause trouble "all over the world?"

[8]Acts 19:35 The city clerk quieted the crowd and said: "Fellow Ephesians, doesn't all the world know that the city of Ephesus is the guardian of the temple of the great Artemis and of her image, which fell from heaven?​

Did "all the world" literally know that Ephesus was the guardian of the pagan deity Artemis?

[9]Acts 24:5 "We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect.​

Was Paul literally stirring up riots "all over the world?"

[10]Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.​

Did Caesar literally tax "all the world?"

[11]Acts 19:27 So that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at nought; but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worshippeth​

Did "all the world" literally worship the goddess Diana?

[12]Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.​

Was the faith of the Romans literally spoken of throughout "the whole world?"

[13]John 12:19 The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? behold, the world is gone after him.​

Did the whole world literally go after Jesus?

[14]1 Corinthians 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.​

Did the “ends of the world” literally come upon the Israelite who disobeyed God at Sinai?

[15]James 3:6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.​

Is the tongue literally a world?
…..Let us use the fallacious aion/aionios argument on these verses. The word "world" cannot literally mean the entire planet earth because it refers to/describe things that are not literally "the whole world" and "all the world."
This same thing happens with the use of the word "olam" in the OT. I have shown where it is defined/described as eternal.
Here are some of the verses you have ignored.

[10]Ecc 3:14
(14) I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: [עולם] nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him.​

In this vs. “olam” is paralleled with “nothing can be added or taken away from it [God’s acts.]” “age(s),“ a finite period, does not equate to “nothing can be added or taken away from God acts,” “eternal” does.
Did God lie when He said nothing could be added to or taken away from His acts?

[11]Isa 51:6
(6) Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, [עולם] and my righteousness shall not be abolished.​

In this vs. “olam” is paralleled with “shall not be abolished” and juxtaposed to "they shall die", “age(s),” a finite period, does not equate to “shall not be abolished,” “eternal” does.
Did God lie, will His righteous be abolished?

[12]Isa 51:8
(8) For the moth shall eat them up like a garment, and the worm shall eat them like wool: but my righteousness shall be for ever, [עולם] and my salvation from generation to generation.​

In this vs. “olam” is paralleled with “generation to generation,”age(s),” and juxtaposed with "eat them like wool" A finite period, does not equate to “generation to generation,” “eternal” does.

Very nice, however you still haven't addressed the finite uses of olam and aion. To claim they're hyperbole without explanation is ignoring them.

When Jesus speaks of the end if the aion, how is that hyperbole? When He speaks if the aion to come, how is that hyperbole? When Moses speaks of the Aaronic priesthood as being olam, how is that hyperbole? Did the Aronic priesthood end? Yes it did. So, how then is it hyperbole. It's not!

You see, I've given you an explanation of how we can understand both olam and aion as unknown periods of time. You on the other hand have a death grip on the words meaning eternal when we can see clearly that they are used of finite periods and it's not hyperbole. You've rejected logic and reason and claim the finite use of olam and aion is hyperbole without any explanation of why. Once one rejects logic and reason they can believe anything is true.

 

[Der Alte]

Very nice, however you still haven't addressed the finite uses of olam and aion. To claim they're hyperbole without explanation is ignoring them.
When Jesus speaks of the end if the aion, how is that hyperbole?

Simple. Can you tell me when does any "aion" or has ended?"
Once again since you can't get get it.

John 3:15-16
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.​

This is logic, Jesus used the phrase "should not perish, but have eternal life," twice.
If believers in Jesus ever perish then that statement is a lie.
If believers in Jesus never perish then "aionios" means eternal.
Should not perish equals eternal life. And eternal life equals should not perish. Unless Jesus lied any other use which refers to something which is not/cannot be eternal must be figurative.
Here you have given me only two examples while ignoring the 26 examples I gave all of which define/describe "aionios" eternal, everlasting etc. is that logic?

 

[Butch5]

Simple. Can you tell me when does any "aion" or has ended?"
Once again since you can't get get it.

John 3:15-16
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.​

This is logic, Jesus used the phrase "should not perish, but have eternal life," twice.
If believers in Jesus ever perish then that statement is a lie.
If believers in Jesus never perish then "aionios" means eternal.
Should not perish equals eternal life. And eternal life equals should not perish. Unless Jesus lied any other use which refers to something which is not/cannot be eternal must be figurative.
Here you have given me only two examples while ignoring the 26 examples I gave all of which define/describe "aionios" eternal, everlasting etc. is that logic?

I already addressed that. While, aion and olam can incorporate the idea of eternal, that is not their meaning. Again, you present a logic fallacy, a false dichotomy. It's not either or. The definition I gave can incorporate either a finite or erternal period of time. The definition you gave cannot, thus it is wrong.

Your statement, that Jesus contrasts, shall not perish, with aion, proves aion means eternal is simply wrong. I've shown that numerous times. In the passages you posted Jesus reigning aion was contrasted with the Kingdom shall not end. However, we have clear Scripture that tells us Jesus doesn't reign forever, therefore your conclusion is wrong. Again, olam is what is beyond the horizon. It's a time whose length isn't know. Likewise, aion is a time who length isn't known.

But again, you havent explained the figure that you claim these words are. Jesus said the aion would end. Please explain how that is a hyperbole.

Jesus spoke of the aion to come. Please explain how that is hyperbole.

Moses wrote that the Aaronic priesthood was olam. It's translated forever. Paul said it ended. Please explain how that is hyperbole.

 

[Der Alte]

I already addressed that. While, aion and olam can incorporate the idea of eternal, that is not their meaning. Again, you present a logic fallacy, a false dichotomy. It's not either or. The definition I gave can incorporate either a finite or eternal period of time. The definition you gave cannot, thus it is wrong.

Wrong! All you are doing is giving me and vainly trying to explain your assumptions/presuppositions. If "aion" does not inherently mean eternity, how can it incorporate an eternal period of time? Tell me me how that works? Please show me from an accredited grammar or lexicon.
If your definition can incorporate either a finite or eternal period of time how does that work? Is it finite only when it supports your assumptions/presuppositions?

Your statement, that Jesus contrasts, shall not perish, with aion, proves aion means eternal is simply wrong. I've shown that numerous times. In the passages you posted Jesus reigning aion was contrasted with the Kingdom shall not end. However, we have clear Scripture that tells us Jesus doesn't reign forever, therefore your conclusion is wrong. Again, olam is what is beyond the horizon. It's a time whose length isn't know. Likewise, aion is a time who length isn't known.

Wrong! I didn't say Jesus contrasts aionios, not aion, with kingdom shall not end. I said parallels.
Revelation says that the Lamb and God will reign forever. And there is a very simple explanation for your misunderstanding. In 1 Corinthians 15

Revelation 22:3-5​

3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
4 And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they [God and lamb vs. 3]shall reign for ever and ever.
Does the reign of God and the lamb end, sometime? When?

But again, you havent explained the figure that you claim these words are. Jesus said the aion would end. Please explain how that is a hyperbole.
Jesus spoke of the aion to come. Please explain how that is hyperbole.
Moses wrote that the Aaronic priesthood was olam. It's translated forever. Paul said it ended. Please explain how that is hyperbole.

Simple, Jesus used the word "aion" not "aionios" to refer to something which was finite. But Jesus never defined "aionios" or "aion" as a period less than eternal.
FYI Herod was not actually/literally a fox when Jesus called him that.
Simon was not actually/literally a stone when Jesus called him "petros" a stone.
James and John were not actually sons of thunder when Jesus called them that.
OBTW "aion" is a noun, "aionios" the word I was discussing is an adjective.
I think I gave you some examples where "whole world" was used to refer to something that was not the entire planet. Hyperbole.
It is very common in the Bible. Try E.W. Bullinger "Figures of Speech Used in the Bible."

 

[Butch5]

Wrong! All you are doing is giving me and vainly trying to explain your assumptions/presuppositions. If "aion" does not inherently mean eternity, how can it incorporate an eternal period of time? Tell me me how that works? Please show me from an accredited grammar or lexicon.
If your definition can incorporate either a finite or eternal period of time how does that work? Is it finite only when it supports your assumptions/presuppositions?

Wrong! I didn't say Jesus contrasts aionios, not aion, with kingdom shall not end. I said parallels.
Revelation says that the Lamb and God will reign forever. And there is a very simple explanation for your misunderstanding. In 1 Corinthians 15

Revelation 22:3-5​

3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
4 And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they [God and lamb vs. 3]shall reign for ever and ever.
Does the reign of God and the lamb end, sometime? When?

Simple, Jesus used the word "aion" not "aionios" to refer to something which was finite. But Jesus never defined "aionios" or "aion" as a period less than eternal.
FYI Herod was not actually/literally a fox when Jesus called him that.
Simon was not actually/literally a stone when Jesus called him "petros" a stone.
James and John were not actually sons of thunder when Jesus called them that.
OBTW "aion" is a noun, "aionios" the word I was discussing is an adjective.
I think I gave you some examples where "whole world" was used to refer to something that was not the entire planet. Hyperbole.
It is very common in the Bible. Try E.W. Bullinger "Figures of Speech Used in the Bible."

You really should stop embarrassing yourself now. I've explained it. Others have gotten it. All I can do is explain it for you. I can't understand it for you too.

 

[Der Alte]

You really should stop embarrassing yourself now. I've explained it. Others have gotten it. All I can do is explain it for you. I can't understand it for you too.

You are the one who should be embarassed. You think that 1-2 uses defines the meaning of the word and ignore several verses where the person who used the word in effect defines it.
And FYI several of the ECF also effectively define "aionios."
Since according to you in Joh 3:15-16 Jesus lied when He said those who believe in Him have "aionios" life and shall not perish interpretation.
Here is another verse which you ignore.

Romans 16:26
(26) But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting [aionios] God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:​

In Rom 1:20 Paul refers to God’s power and Godhead as “aidios.” Scholars agree “aidios,” without question, means eternal, everlasting, unending etc. In Rom 16:26, Paul, the same writer, in the same writing, refers to God as “aionios” synonymous with “aidios.” In this verse by definition “aionios” means eternal, everlasting.

 

[Davy]

Of course, I am not familiar with your viewpoint, I'm not that presumptuous, since I'm a newbie on this site. I'm simply trying to go by the words I'm looking at with your name on it. My argument is not that a "spiritual body" was a celestial type body.

You shouldn't make rude statements like the above in bold. I'm trying to show you something written in God's Word. I have no political or religious agenda here. And if you're going to respond to this topic you ought to at least be familiar with the two different dimensions of existence written of in God's Word...

1 Cor 15:48-50
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
KJV

John 3:6
6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
KJV