layers

[Timothew]

I know you didnt come out and blatently state that but if I remember correctly it is what you support, regardless of the label.

Oh, OK.

Yes, it is true that I wholeheartedly believe what the bible says. You can check for yourself that the wages of sin is death by reading Romans 6:23.

 

[Robs07M6S]

Oh, OK.

Yes, it is true that I wholeheartedly believe what the bible says. You can check for yourself that the wages of sin is death by reading Romans 6:23.

You do not believe that the unbeliever suffers eternal torments in the fires of Hell so you do not believe what the Bible says regardless of how many different ways you try to twist it. You believe in annihilation/cease to exist no more pain no more suffering/false gospel.

Your cute little cartoon photo of Hell shows what you believe.

 

[Timothew]

You do not believe that the unbeliever suffers eternal torments in the fires of Hell so you do not believe what the Bible says regardless of how many different ways you try to twist it. You believe in annihilation/cease to exist no more pain no more suffering/false gospel.

Your cute little photo in your profile is mocking of Hell.

What you should have said is "You do not believe that the unbeliever suffers eternal torments in the fires of Hell because you believe what the bible says."

The bible says that the wages of sin is death, regardless of how many different ways you try to twist it. For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son that whoever believes in him shall not perish but will have eternal life. Any so-called gospel that denies this is no gospel at all.

 

[Robs07M6S]

What you should have said is "You do not believe that the unbeliever suffers eternal torments in the fires of Hell because you believe what the bible says.

The way that I said it is correct and I will leave it at that. If you want to down play the place that Jesus warns us the most about then that will be on you and everyone else who believes this false doctrine of annihilation, good luck with that.

 

[Timothew]

The way that I said it is correct and I will leave it at that. If you want to down play the place that Jesus warns us the most about then that will be on you and everyone else who believes this false doctrine of annihilation, good luck with that.

Read John 3:16, Romans 6:23, 2 Thess 1:9. Ezekiel 18:4, Genesis 2:17, Psalm 1:6, Isaiah 66:16, James 1:15...

 

[OzSpen]

I believe the Bible teaches that degrees of sin exist only in the life (i.e., a lie is does not bear the same earthly consequences as murder). But in hell, the only people there are those who did not trust in Christ as their Savior and Lord and punishment fits the sin, given the evidence presented us in this life.

God bless

This seems a simplistic answer. What about those who have never heard the Gospel of of Jesus Christ the Saviour? According to Wycliffe, there are 340 million people in the world who do not have a Bible translated in their own language.

Then we have the added problem of illiteracy. The World Illiteracy Map states that:

World literacy statistics show that Africa has the largest number of countries with 60% of illiterate people…. Most of North America, Europe and Australia fall into the category of less than 5% adult illiteracy. Third world literacy figures show that in the developing countries, most of the population is illiterate. Highest illiteracy rates are observed in developing countries such as South Asian, Arab and Sub-Saharan countries. In developed countries the illiteracy rate is low. For instance, illiteracy in America cannot be compared with the functional illiteracy rates of the third world. US illiteracy is a meager 2.8 million in a country of more than 300 million people

How are these people going to hear the Gospel so that they can reject the Saviour? I see some significant issues in your position.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

What you should have said is "You do not believe that the unbeliever suffers eternal torments in the fires of Hell because you believe what the bible says."

The bible says that the wages of sin is death, regardless of how many different ways you try to twist it. For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son that whoever believes in him shall not perish but will have eternal life. Any so-called gospel that denies this is no gospel at all.

What about the language of “destruction” in the New Testament?[1]

If we took some isolated Scriptures, it may be possible to take these passages to mean annihilation. I’m thinking of the word, “destroy”, in Matt. 10:28, “And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell [Greek: Gehenna]” (ESV). Even with passages such as Matt. 7:13-14 where the broad road leads to destruction and John 3:16, “Whoever believes in him shall not perish” could be pressed to try to get the meaning of annihilation. Even if we took the following passages alone without consideration of other passages, there is a possibility that extermination/extinction of the wicked could be an interpretation: John 10:28; 17:12; Romans 2:12; 9:22; Philippians 1:28; 3:19; 1 Thessalonians 5:3; Hebrews 10:39; James 4:12 and 2 Peter 3:7, 9. However, there’s a big barrier to this kind of interpretation….

There are verses that are impossible to square with destruction meaning annihilation. Second Thessalonians 1:9 is one of those barriers. It reads, “They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might” (ESV). Who are “they”? They are “those who do not know God” and “do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus” (2 Thess. 1:8). This is referring to unbelievers. The words from 1 Thess. 1:9, “everlasting destruction”, could hardly mean “everlasting annihilation”. This verse creates the added problem against annihilation that the ungodly will be “away from the presence of the Lord”, which indicates that their existence is continuing but they will be shut out from being in God’s presence. If one were to speak of being “destroyed” from the presence of the Lord, it would imply non-existence. Scot McKnight put it this way:

“Paul has in mind an irreversible verdict of eternal nonfellowship with God. A person exists but remains excluded from God’s good presence”.[2]

In Revelation 17:8, 11, “destruction” is prophesied of “the beast”, but in Revelation 19 the Beast and False Prophet “were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur” (19:20). We know that they are still alive when this is happening because they are there 1,000 years later (Rev. 20:7,10). It cannot mean what Fudge says it means, “The lake of fire stands for utter, absolute, irreversible annihilation”.[3]

Sincerely, Oz

Notes:
[1] Some of this section is based on Robert A. Peterson 1995. Hell on Trial: The Case for Eternal Punishment. Phillipsburg, New Jersey: P&R Publishing.
[2] In ibid., p. 163.
[6] In ibid., p. 164.

 

[WinBySurrender]

This seems a simplistic answer.

Thanks. I'll try to live up to your expectations of complexity in the future. Sorry, that's sarcastic, which is no more acceptable than criticizing the level or complexity of someone's post. Can we just stick to the subject matter without expressing invalid opinions about people we really don't know other than through an Internet skin?

What about those who have never heard the Gospel of of Jesus Christ the Saviour?

Romans 2

12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law;
13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.
14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves,
15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,
16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

Note, Paul writes of "the work of the Law written in their hearts," and what is the work of the Law? To point us to the need of a Savior. Abraham did not know Jesus' name or His exact nature beyond God's promise that He would set things aright between Him and man. For his belief, the Father reckoned Abraham as righteous. He does the same for all who have not had opportunity to know the truth.

Let that not be an excuse, however. If a man or woman has heard the gospel, has had opportunity to avail themselves of the truth, but never does so, that man or woman is condemned.

God leaves no man in limbo, particularly those who through no fault of their own have never been able to hear the gospel preached. While God wants us to take the message of Christ to every corner of the globe, He also knows we will not accomplish that to the perfect extent that every human will hear the Good News.

 

[OzSpen]

Thanks. I'll try to live up to your expectations of complexity in the future. Sorry, that's sarcastic, which is no more acceptable than criticizing the level or complexity of someone's post. Can we just stick to the subject matter without expressing invalid opinions about people we really don't know other than through an Internet skin?Romans 2

12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law;
13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.
14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves,
15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,
16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

Note, Paul writes of "the work of the Law written in their hearts," and what is the work of the Law? To point us to the need of a Savior. Abraham did not know Jesus' name or His exact nature beyond God's promise that He would set things aright between Him and man. For his belief, the Father reckoned Abraham as righteous. He does the same for all who have not had opportunity to know the truth.

Let that not be an excuse, however. If a man or woman has heard the gospel, has had opportunity to avail themselves of the truth, but never does so, that man or woman is condemned.

God leaves no man in limbo, particularly those who through no fault of their own have never been able to hear the gospel preached. While God wants us to take the message of Christ to every corner of the globe, He also knows we will not accomplish that to the perfect extent that every human will hear the Good News.

I apologise that you have been offended by my use of the word "simplistic" in relation to your post. There was NOTHING sarcastic in what I stated. What you wrote sounded simplistic to me. Perhaps I should have asked, "Have you considered these matters?" and referred to those who have not heard of Christ because they have no Scriptures and the large illiteracy rates in some parts of the world.

I am sticking to the topic and raising possible objections to your view. As for the "Internet skin", aren't you relying on that by participating on this Internet Forum? Are you doubting Wycliffe Bible Translators statement that there are 340 million people who do not have the Bible in their own language and of the high levels of illiteracy around the world from the World Illiteracy Map? Do you have better figures than these from your hard copy research?

Your reference to Romans 2 is an excellent one to show that those who have sinned without a knowledge of the Scriptures (the Law) will be judged by God on that basis.

I would add Romans 1:18-20 with God's judgment that "they are without excuse" (ESV) since they 'suppress the truth' through their unrighteousness since 'what can be known about God is plain to them'.

In Christ, Oz

 

[Timothew]

What about the language of “destruction” in the New Testament?[1]

If we took some isolated Scriptures, it may be possible to take these passages to mean annihilation. I’m thinking of the word, “destroy”, in Matt. 10:28, “And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell [Greek: Gehenna]” (ESV). Even with passages such as Matt. 7:13-14 where the broad road leads to destruction and John 3:16, “Whoever believes in him shall not perish” could be pressed to try to get the meaning of annihilation. Even if we took the following passages alone without consideration of other passages, there is a possibility that extermination/extinction of the wicked could be an interpretation: John 10:28; 17:12; Romans 2:12; 9:22; Philippians 1:28; 3:19; 1 Thessalonians 5:3; Hebrews 10:39; James 4:12 and 2 Peter 3:7, 9. However, there’s a big barrier to this kind of interpretation….

There are verses that are impossible to square with destruction meaning annihilation. Second Thessalonians 1:9 is one of those barriers. It reads, “They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might” (ESV). Who are “they”? They are “those who do not know God” and “do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus” (2 Thess. 1:8). This is referring to unbelievers. The words from 1 Thess. 1:9, “everlasting destruction”, could hardly mean “everlasting annihilation”. This verse creates the added problem against annihilation that the ungodly will be “away from the presence of the Lord”, which indicates that their existence is continuing but they will be shut out from being in God’s presence. If one were to speak of being “destroyed” from the presence of the Lord, it would imply non-existence. Scot McKnight put it this way:
In Revelation 17:8, 11, “destruction” is prophesied of “the beast”, but in Revelation 19 the Beast and False Prophet “were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur” (19:20). We know that they are still alive when this is happening because they are there 1,000 years later (Rev. 20:7,10). It cannot mean what Fudge says it means, “The lake of fire stands for utter, absolute, irreversible annihilation”.[3]

Sincerely, Oz

Notes:
[1] Some of this section is based on Robert A. Peterson 1995. Hell on Trial: The Case for Eternal Punishment. Phillipsburg, New Jersey: P&R Publishing.
[2] In ibid., p. 163.
[6] In ibid., p. 164.

All Peterson really says is destruction doesn't mean destruction. But he never makes that case. Destruction away from the presence of God means destruction - away from God's presence. Destruction in the presence of God means destuction - in God's presence. Destruction doesn't mean "Not Destroyed" as Peterson claims because "Not Destroyed" is the opposite of "Destroyed", no matter if the destruction occurs in or out of God's presence.

 

[OzSpen]

All Peterson really says is destruction doesn't mean destruction. But he never makes that case. Destruction away from the presence of God means destruction - away from God's presence. Destruction in the presence of God means destuction - in God's presence. Destruction doesn't mean "Not Destroyed" as Peterson claims because "Not Destroyed" is the opposite of "Destroyed", no matter if the destruction occurs in or out of God's presence.

I have shown from the other Scriptures (see towards the end of my post) that destruction CANNOT mean annihilation.

Oz

 

[Timothew]

I have shown from the other Scriptures (see towards the end of my post) that destruction CANNOT mean annihilation.

Oz

Destruction CANNOT mean Not Destroyed.

 

[ashout]

perhaps destruction merely implies that they are unhappy and uncomftorble to extreme levels. they could still be conscious, and yet be destroyed. in fact, I would deduce that they are concious, becuase it says they weep.

 

[OzSpen]

Destruction CANNOT mean Not Destroyed.

You are engaging in avoidance and a failure to acknowledge what the Scriptures state about the nature of destruction.

I have a full article that refutes destruction = annihilation on my homepage, but it off air for another week as my son moves house (my homepage is on his server).

Your understanding of "destruction", although promoted by the SDAs and others in support of annihilation, cannot be supported from the entirety of Scripture, especially when we know from other Scriptures that there is continuation of existence after death for both the redeemed and unredeemed.

However, you don't seem to be open to this NT exegesis.

Oz

 

[Timothew]

You are engaging in avoidance and a failure to acknowledge what the Scriptures state about the nature of destruction.

I have a full article that refutes destruction = annihilation on my homepage, but it off air for another week as my son moves house (my homepage is on his server).

Your understanding of "destruction", although promoted by the SDAs and others in support of annihilation, cannot be supported from the entirety of Scripture, especially when we know from other Scriptures that there is continuation of existence after death for both the redeemed and unredeemed.

However, you don't seem to be open to this NT exegesis.

Oz

You're telling me that destruction = NonDestruction AND you're telling me that I'M engaging in avoidance and a failure to acknowledge what the scriptures state? Nice try. Why don't you read what 2 Thessalonians 1:9 actually says. "These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power,"

 

[WinBySurrender]

I apologise that you have been offended by my use of the word "simplistic" in relation to your post. There was NOTHING sarcastic in what I stated. What you wrote sounded simplistic to me. Perhaps I should have asked, "Have you considered these matters?" and referred to those who have not heard of Christ because they have no Scriptures and the large illiteracy rates in some parts of the world.

I am sticking to the topic and raising possible objections to your view. As for the "Internet skin", aren't you relying on that by participating on this Internet Forum? Are you doubting Wycliffe Bible Translators statement that there are 340 million people who do not have the Bible in their own language and of the high levels of illiteracy around the world from the World Illiteracy Map? Do you have better figures than these from your hard copy research?

Your reference to Romans 2 is an excellent one to show that those who have sinned without a knowledge of the Scriptures (the Law) will be judged by God on that basis.

I would add Romans 1:18-20 with God's judgment that "they are without excuse" (ESV) since they 'suppress the truth' through their unrighteousness since 'what can be known about God is plain to them'.
In Christ, Oz

None of which addresses my refutation of your statements. You will note Romans 1:18-20 have had the truth revealed to them, unlike those in Romans 2:12-16 who have not heard the gospel, as I originally pointed out.

None of which, I fear, will be considered. Sobe it

 

[WinBySurrender]

I apologise that you have been offended by my use of the word "simplistic" in relation to your post. There was NOTHING sarcastic in what I stated. What you wrote sounded simplistic to me. Perhaps I should have asked, "Have you considered these matters?" and referred to those who have not heard of Christ because they have no Scriptures and the large illiteracy rates in some parts of the world.

I am sticking to the topic and raising possible objections to your view. As for the "Internet skin", aren't you relying on that by participating on this Internet Forum? Are you doubting Wycliffe Bible Translators statement that there are 340 million people who do not have the Bible in their own language and of the high levels of illiteracy around the world from the World Illiteracy Map? Do you have better figures than these from your hard copy research?

Your reference to Romans 2 is an excellent one to show that those who have sinned without a knowledge of the Scriptures (the Law) will be judged by God on that basis.

I would add Romans 1:18-20 with God's judgment that "they are without excuse" (ESV) since they 'suppress the truth' through their unrighteousness since 'what can be known about God is plain to them'.
In Christ, Oz

None of which addresses my refutation of your statements. You will note those referenced in Romans 1:18-20 have had the truth revealed to them, unlike those in Romans 2:12-16 who have not heard the gospel, as I originally pointed out.

None of which, I fear, will be considered. So be it

 

[OzSpen]

You're telling me that destruction = NonDestruction AND you're telling me that I'M engaging in avoidance and a failure to acknowledge what the scriptures state? Nice try. Why don't you read what 2 Thessalonians 1:9 actually says. "These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power,"

Please provide your exegesis of the Greek word, olethros (destruction), 2 Thess 1:9, so that I know clearly what you understand by 'destruction'. My Victa motor mower was destroyed and was no longer useful for mowing my lawn. However, it was not annihilated. So, what is your understanding of olethros?

Oz

 

[Timothew]

My dog was destroyed by a lawn mower so I buried him.
Olethros: from ollumi (to destroy).

I've noticed in this entire exchange that you are the one saying annihilated. I never did. I say destruction means destruction and death means death. Words seem to mean nothing to you. Whatever you want them to mean. Somehow destruction means "to remain undestroyed and in torment in hell" to you.

de·stroy (d

-stroi

)
v. de·stroyed, de·stroy·ing, de·stroys
v.tr. 1. To ruin completely; spoil: The ancient manuscripts were destroyed by fire.
2. To tear down or break up; demolish. See Synonyms at ruin.
3. To do away with; put an end to: "In crowded populations, poverty destroys the possibility of cleanliness" (George Bernard Shaw).
4. To kill: destroy a rabid dog.
5. To subdue or defeat completely; crush: The rebel forces were destroyed in battle.
6. To render useless or ineffective: destroyed the testimony of the prosecution's chief witness.

v.intr. To be destructive; cause destruction: "Too much money destroys as surely as too little" (John Simon).

Since words have NO meaning for you, I will just let you go your own way, undeterred by the constraints of language.

 

[OzSpen]

My dog was destroyed by a lawn mower so I buried him.
Olethros: from ollumi (to destroy).

I've noticed in this entire exchange that you are the one saying annihilated. I never did. I say destruction means destruction and death means death. Words seem to mean nothing to you. Whatever you want them to mean. Somehow destruction means "to remain undestroyed and in torment in hell" to you.

de·stroy (d

-stroi

)
v. de·stroyed, de·stroy·ing, de·stroys
v.tr. 1. To ruin completely; spoil: The ancient manuscripts were destroyed by fire.
2. To tear down or break up; demolish. See Synonyms at ruin.
3. To do away with; put an end to: "In crowded populations, poverty destroys the possibility of cleanliness" (George Bernard Shaw).
4. To kill: destroy a rabid dog.
5. To subdue or defeat completely; crush: The rebel forces were destroyed in battle.
6. To render useless or ineffective: destroyed the testimony of the prosecution's chief witness.

v.intr. To be destructive; cause destruction: "Too much money destroys as surely as too little" (John Simon).

Since words have NO meaning for you, I will just let you go your own way, undeterred by the constraints of language.

Why don't you reference your English definition of "destroy"? You have provided an English explanation, based on a dictionary definition, like the one provided in the free online dictionary.

I asked for Greek exegesis. Don't you know how to do this and provide an exegetical, contextual interpretation of 2 Thess 1:9 as it relates to the meaning of "destruction"? A definition of "destroy" from an English dictionary does not provide a meaning of the Greek word.

This statement from you about me is absolute nonsense:

Since words have NO meaning for you

Oz