Only Three Are Tormented Eternally

[trophy33]

Similarly, the Queen of the South came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon while she was alive on earth, not after her death.

How is this supposed to be producing salvation, in the Christian meaning - the belief in Jesus Christ, in His death and in His resurrection?

All the Old Testament people actually had to believe after their deaths. I see no reason why this can not be the case also for people living outside the reach of the gospel, dying too young etc.

 

[David Lamb]

How is this supposed to be producing salvation, in the Christian meaning - the belief in Jesus Christ, in His death and in His resurrection?

All the Old Testament people actually had to believe after their deaths. I see no reason why this can not be the case also for people living outside the reach of the gospel, dying too young etc.

I don't know that the Queen of the South actually became a believer in God - we are not told, as far as I know. I would say that Old Testament believers were saved in the same way as New Testament believers, though they did not understand it as well, because the Messiah was still in the future for them. Dr Robert Cara put it like this:

"They were saved by faith—they were saved the same way: by faith, faith in God, and more specifically, as they understood God, not not as well as the New Testament does, but understood in some kind of divine Messiah. From their perspective, that’s faith in God and looking toward some divine Messiah. Now, the merit of their salvation? Exactly the same: the work of Christ. The work of Christ, his life, death, and we look back in faith to that. They looked forward in faith, even though they didn’t understand it as well."

An example of this is found in the New Testament, but well before the death and resurrection of Jesus. Elderly Simeon took the baby Jesus in his arms and said:

“"Lord, now You are letting Your servant depart in peace, According to Your word; For my eyes have seen Your salvation Which You have prepared before the face of all peoples, A light to bring revelation to the Gentiles, And the glory of Your people Israel."” (Lu 2:29-32 NKJV)

 

[trophy33]

I don't know that the Queen of the South actually became a believer in God...

"They were saved by faith—they were saved the same way: by faith, faith in God...

Just believing in God is not salvific.

and more specifically, as they understood God, not not as well as the New Testament does, but understood in some kind of divine Messiah.

I am also not sure whether the belief that the Messiah will be "some kind of divine" is salvific.

An example of this is found in the New Testament, but well before the death and resurrection of Jesus. Elderly Simeon took the baby Jesus in his arms and said:

“"Lord, now You are letting Your servant depart in peace, According to Your word; For my eyes have seen Your salvation Which You have prepared before the face of all peoples, A light to bring revelation to the Gentiles, And the glory of Your people Israel."” (Lu 2:29-32 NKJV)

Why is this supposed to be salvific?

 

[David Lamb]

Just believing in God is not salvific.

No, but believing in the Messiah, in the sense of trusting Him, not merely believing in His existence, is salvific.

I am also not sure whether the belief that the Messiah will be "some kind of divine" is salvific.

I was confused by this as I didn't remember typing that, then I realised it cam from my quote from Dr Robert Cara. I am sure if I had access to his whole work on the matter, and if I was able to cut and paste the whole work, he would probably explain more fully what he meant by "understood in some kind of divine Messiah. From their perspective, that’s faith in God and looking toward some divine Messiah."

Why is this supposed to be salvific?

Because with God had promised him that he would not die until he had seen the Messiah:

“And it had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not see death before he had seen the Lord’s Christ.” (Lu 2:26 NKJV)

Holding Christ in his arms, Simeon said that he had seen God's salvation, in that Baby.

 

[CoreyD]

What are you talking about ?

Am I losing you? I'm talking about the beast of Revelation.
Revelation 13:1-5, and Revelation 17 are not describing a man - a human being, nor an animal.

In the Bible, beasts are used to symbolize kingdoms - not one king.
In the book of Daniel for example, at Daniel 7:17, 23, 24, we see how beasts and horns are described.

First, Daniel says, "These great beasts, which are four in number, are four kings who will arise from the earth."
However, he then says, "The fourth beast will be a fourth kingdom on the earth, which will be different from all the other kingdoms".

So, although referring to the beasts as "kings", they are in fact kingdoms.
Why am I telling you this though. This does not mean anything to you, does it, because despite the angel explaining the symbolism, your beliefs and interpretations evidently are more important to you.

Not at all, but how can a physical, inanimate, place suffer ?

How can an inanimate immaterial existence be thrown into literal fire, is the question you need to address, and you haven't done so.
Death and Hades are not objects that can be thrown into literal fire.

A lake of fire, is a lake of fire.
What description are you using ?

The angel's... and he told us... and I said it to you more than once... and you read it... perhaps.

The reason is Matt 25:45-46, and Jude 1:7.

Aren't Matt 25:45-46, and Jude 1:7, biblical ?

These scriptures are in fact Biblical.
However, your interpretation is not.

Revelation 17:8 reads... “The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and go to destruction. And those who live on the earth, whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will wonder when they see the beast, that he was, and is not, and will come.

A Biblical text says the beast will go to destruction.
Was it to you I defined the word destruction, or someone else?
So you have it straight from the Bible that the beast is destroyed in the lake of fire, but you aren't agreeing, because the word torment must be literal since you believe it to be so.

You have no valid basis for believing the lake of fire, and torment is literal... No scriptural basis, that is.

Please quote what the angel said, and say where that was at.

You read my posts where I did that, and you had nothing of substance to say.
Why do you ask me to repeat it?

 

[CoreyD]

But the men of Nineveh were not given the opportunity to repent after death;

Exactly the point of the scripture.
They will be given the opportunity to learn the Christ on judgment day.

Jesus said that they repented at the preaching of Jonah."

Yes, but repented from what?

Similarly, the Queen of the South came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon while she was alive on earth, not after her death.

The wisdom of Solomon. Not the wisdom of the greater Solomon... which Jesus referred to.
"something greater than Solomon is here." Matthew 12:42

What did the Queen of Sheba know about faith in Jesus Christ? Nothing at all.
Is that not the requirements for salvation from death? John 3:16

What about those in Sodom and Gomorrah?
When did they repent of their sins, and put faith in Christ?
Matthew 11:20-24
20 Then He began to rebuke the cities in which most of His mighty works had been done, because they did not repent: 21 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22 But I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you. 23 And you, Capernaum, who are exalted to heaven, will be brought down to Hades; for if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. 24 But I say to you that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment than for you.”

 

[CoreyD]

I don't know that the Queen of the South actually became a believer in God - we are not told, as far as I know. I would say that Old Testament believers were saved in the same way as New Testament believers, though they did not understand it as well, because the Messiah was still in the future for them. Dr Robert Cara put it like this:

"They were saved by faith—they were saved the same way: by faith, faith in God, and more specifically, as they understood God, not not as well as the New Testament does, but understood in some kind of divine Messiah. From their perspective, that’s faith in God and looking toward some divine Messiah. Now, the merit of their salvation? Exactly the same: the work of Christ. The work of Christ, his life, death, and we look back in faith to that. They looked forward in faith, even though they didn’t understand it as well."

Is it safer to go with an assumption, or let the Bible be your guide.
Paul said there will be a resurrection of both the righteous (just), and unrighteous (unjust). Acts 24:15
Can you please define unrighteous, as detailed, and concise as possible, and supply scriptural support for that definition.

An example of this is found in the New Testament, but well before the death and resurrection of Jesus. Elderly Simeon took the baby Jesus in his arms and said:

“"Lord, now You are letting Your servant depart in peace, According to Your word; For my eyes have seen Your salvation Which You have prepared before the face of all peoples, A light to bring revelation to the Gentiles, And the glory of Your people Israel."” (Lu 2:29-32 NKJV)

I'm not following what you are saying this scripture supports.
Can you please clarify?

Both Simeon and Anna were dedicated Jews, belonging to a dedicated nation. Luke 2:25
Are you comparing them to people of the nations who were not in a dedicated relationship with God?

 

[trophy33]

No, but believing in the Messiah, in the sense of trusting Him, not merely believing in His existence, is salvific.

I was confused by this as I didn't remember typing that, then I realised it cam from my quote from Dr Robert Cara. I am sure if I had access to his whole work on the matter, and if I was able to cut and paste the whole work, he would probably explain more fully what he meant by "understood in some kind of divine Messiah. From their perspective, that’s faith in God and looking toward some divine Messiah."

Because with God had promised him that he would not die until he had seen the Messiah:

“And it had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not see death before he had seen the Lord’s Christ.” (Lu 2:26 NKJV)

Holding Christ in his arms, Simeon said that he had seen God's salvation, in that Baby.

But none of this corresponds to the NT teaching of how to reach salvation. Holding baby Jesus in his arms and saying nice things is cool and such, but to be saved, one must believe in their hearts that Jesus died for our sins and that He rose again.

According to some texts, Jesus also mentioned baptism as a required condition.

These things were not revealed before they happened, so...the knowledge of these things and the responsive faith and consequential salvation had to come to the people when they were already in sheol.

 

[Hoping2]

Many people died young, as children, after birth etc.

If their deaths preceded their ability to choose which course they will walk, there is no reason to fear the lake of fire.

Many people did not get the opportunity, like people living outside of Christian nations.

God does not hide His gifts from anyone, regardless of where thy live.
If a man wants to know God, God makes Himself available.
No one will be condemned without a reason.

And many people simply did not obtain everything needed for being saved, like a new heart or the gift of faith.

All they had to do was repent of sin, and all of God's gifts would have been available to them.
Nobody will have an excuse for their unrighteousness.

 

[Hoping2]

Jesus said...

The men of Nineveh will stand up with this generation at the judgment, and will condemn it because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and behold, something greater than Jonah is here.​

The Queen of the South will rise up with this generation at the judgment and will condemn it, because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and behold, something greater than Solomon is here.​

Matthew 12:41, 42

How will persons be raised up, and condemn others if they are not given opportunity to repent?

They won't be able to.
Those mentioned in the Matt. verses you supplied, used their chance to turn from wickedness, and repented.

 

[Hoping2]

Am I losing you?

Yes, you have lost me.

I'm talking about the beast of Revelation.
Revelation 13:1-5, and Revelation 17 are not describing a man - a human being, nor an animal.
In the Bible, beasts are used to symbolize kingdoms - not one king.
In the book of Daniel for example, at Daniel 7:17, 23, 24, we see how beasts and horns are described.
First, Daniel says, "These great beasts, which are four in number, are four kings who will arise from the earth."
However, he then says, "The fourth beast will be a fourth kingdom on the earth, which will be different from all the other kingdoms".

Not every use of the word "beast" refers to a kingdom.
It is written..."And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live." (Rev 13:14)
How does one make an image of a kingdom ?

So, although referring to the beasts as "kings", they are in fact kingdoms.
Why am I telling you this though. This does not mean anything to you, does it, because despite the angel explaining the symbolism, your beliefs and interpretations evidently are more important to you.

Not every use of the word "beast" refers to a kingdom.
It is written..."And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed." (Rev 13:15)
How does one make an image of a kingdom ?

How can an inanimate immaterial existence be thrown into literal fire, is the question you need to address, and you haven't done so.
Death and Hades are not objects that can be thrown into literal fire.

I will defer to God's word which says it can...It is written..."And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." (Rev 20:14-15)

The angel's... and he told us... and I said it to you more than once... and you read it... perhaps.

I have found no such description by an angel.
What do you refer to ?

These scriptures are in fact Biblical.
However, your interpretation is not.

don't need to interpret it.
It is spelled out in print.

Revelation 17:8 reads... “The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and go to destruction. And those who live on the earth, whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will wonder when they see the beast, that he was, and is not, and will come.

A Biblical text says the beast will go to destruction.
Was it to you I defined the word destruction, or someone else?
So you have it straight from the Bible that the beast is destroyed in the lake of fire, but you aren't agreeing, because the word torment must be literal since you believe it to be so.

You have no valid basis for believing the lake of fire, and torment is literal... No scriptural basis, that is.

You read my posts where I did that, and you had nothing of substance to say.
Why do you ask me to repeat it?

Though your POV is interesting, I see no reason to pursue it.
Jesus' words are clear to me that the damned will suffer eternally.
It is written..."Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.
46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” (Matt 25:45-46)

 

[CoreyD]

I will defer to God's word which says it can...It is written..."And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

You say it, but you don't accept it.
Thanks for the reference though. I'll end on that note.
It is indeed the second death. it's not a literal lake of fire, as you keep asserting.

 

[Hoping2]

You say it, but you don't accept it.
Thanks for the reference though. I'll end on that note.
It is indeed the second death. it's not a literal lake of fire, as you keep asserting.

The second death is the lake of fire.
All the rebellious will end up there, forever.

 

[trophy33]

If their deaths preceded their ability to choose which course they will walk, there is no reason to fear the lake of fire.

The "ability to choose" even in adulthood is controversial in the Christian theology (Arminianism vs Calvinism, for example). Anyway, I am glad you do not go with the "I was conceived in sin" theology, the original guilt even in children etc.

God does not hide His gifts from anyone, regardless of where thy live.
If a man wants to know God, God makes Himself available.
No one will be condemned without a reason.

These statements seem to be quite unrelated. Not sure if you have some motive to put them together like this. Knowing God (from the natural theology) is salvific? Or do you just want to say that all will be tortured forever anyway, no matter how they tried and what they learned, because some reason/imperfection will be found in everybody?

All they had to do was repent of sin, and all of God's gifts would have been available to them.
Nobody will have an excuse for their unrighteousness.

1. The repentance is a gift from God.
2. Without believing in Christ, nobody will be saved. Good works/repentance are not enough.

It seems to me you are walking around the issue - the salvation is in Christ. Not in knowing God, not in repentance, not in good works, not in choosing etc. Therefore, you have few options:
a) all who did not hear specifically about Christ and could not then believe in Him, will be tortured forever, both good (those who tried, who did their best etc.) and bad people
b) there is some kind of chance to believe in Christ after death
c) there is no eternal torture

 

[CoreyD]

The second death is the lake of fire.
All the rebellious will end up there, forever.

Why did you alter the text? Would that not be twisting it?

The Bible says, the lake of fire is the second death (Revelation 20:14).
So, would a person that claims the lake of fire is literal, and at the same time, does not claim the woman, the beast she sits on, and the waters she sits on, literal, be demonstrating harmony, honesty, and humility?
Or would they be inconsistent, and unwilling to adjust to what the scriptures say?
It's the later, isn't it.

The reason for that is, The same angel that said,
the woman is (οὗτος - refers to) that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth, also said
the waters are (οὗτος - refers to) peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues, and
the beast is (οὗτος - refers to) an eighth king, is the same angel that said...
the lake of fire is (οὗτος - refers to) the second death

So, are you saying, what the Bible says, or are you presenting your own ideas, and twisting what the text actually says?
The lake of fire is the symbolic representation of the second death. The second death is the reality.

I would not twist the text to make the second death the symbol, and the lake of fire the explanation (reality) of the symbol.
It would not be honest of me to do so, would it.

The symbolism is followed by the explanation.
Symbolism

Revelation 17:1-5​

1 Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and talked with me, saying to me, “Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters, 2 with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth were made drunk with the wine of her fornication.”​

​

3 So he carried me away in the Spirit into the wilderness. And I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast which was full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. 4 The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the filthiness of her fornication. 5 And on her forehead a name was written:​

Explanation

7 “Why are you so amazed?” said the angel. “I will tell you the mystery of the woman and of the beast that carries her, which has the seven heads and ten horns. ...​

Symbolism

Revelation 20:14​

Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire.​

Explanation

This is the second death - the lake of fire.​

The allegory should not be taken as the actual thing it represents.

 

[BelieveItOarKnot]

Not at all, as 1 John 3:10 says that those to be tossed into the lake of fire are the children of the devil.

Interesting. So they change from children of God to children of the devil?

Are people devils? Just exploring where your position is at.

I don't believe any other party but God's Spirit are in the children of God.
How is that a detriment to others ?

So, in your view all temptation is strictly external, never internal via the tempter? Will try to open this can O worms once you commit to a position. Nothing personal mind you. Just curiosity

Every man will be judged for his actions.

Obviously if only the Spirit of God dwells in a child of God, what is there to judge? And what is the action by God of adverse judgments?

As no evil can exist in the children of God, your point is moot.
If evil did exist, that child is not God's child.

See your own position. Using your measure here there is no judgment to any child of God, which can quite easily be countered by many scriptures for believers and unbelievers alike. God is no respector of persons, believer or unbeliever.

They may indeed, but the battles are not with anything within us.
They are with the external forces of the evil one.

So, an invisible agent talks to you externally, presumably only in and from other people, the tempter?

 

[Dan Perez]

Interesting. So they change from children of God to children of the devil?

Are people devils? Just exploring where your position is at.

So, in your view all temptation is strictly external, never internal via the tempter? Will try to open this can O worms once you commit to a position. Nothing personal mind you. Just curiosity


Obviously if only the Spirit of God dwells in a child of God, what is there to judge? And what is the action by God of adverse judgments?


See your own position. Using your measure here there is no judgment to any child of God, which can quite easily be countered by many scriptures for believers and unbelievers alike. God is no respector of persons, believer or unbeliever.


So, an invisible agent talks to you externally, presumably only in and from other people, the tempter?

And , you have NOT heared of The JUDGEMENT SEAT // In THE GREEK CALLED , BEMA SEAT ,

Better read 1 Cor 11;10--15 and verse 15 says , IF THE WORKS , of Anyone which he BUILDS UP , EMAINS , he will

receive a REWARD .

But verse 15 says , IF the WORK of ANYONE be CONSUMED by FIRE , he will SUFFER A LOSS , , but he himself

will be SAVED , yet so as THROUGH FIRE ,

dan p

 

[BelieveItOarKnot]

And , you have NOT heared of The JUDGEMENT SEAT // In THE GREEK CALLED , BEMA SEAT ,

Better read 1 Cor 11;10--15 and verse 15 says , IF THE WORKS , of Anyone which he BUILDS UP , EMAINS , he will

receive a REWARD .

But verse 15 says , IF the WORK of ANYONE be CONSUMED by FIRE , he will SUFFER A LOSS , , but he himself

will be SAVED , yet so as THROUGH FIRE ,

Not a problem above

Maybe your response should have been to the other poster if you were following the reasoning?

 

[Hoping2]

The "ability to choose" even in adulthood is controversial in the Christian theology (Arminianism vs Calvinism, for example).

It is always best to just go by what is written; and with the gift of the Holy Ghost, how can one interpret incorrectly ?

Anyway, I am glad you do not go with the "I was conceived in sin" theology, the original guilt even in children etc.

Thanks...

These statements seem to be quite unrelated. Not sure if you have some motive to put them together like this. Knowing God (from the natural theology) is salvific? Or do you just want to say that all will be tortured forever anyway, no matter how they tried and what they learned, because some reason/imperfection will be found in everybody?

It was just my response to "Many did not get the opportunity...".

1. The repentance is a gift from God.
2. Without believing in Christ, nobody will be saved. Good works/repentance are not enough.

I agree, as I am also "non-faith alone", in my beliefs.
We have our part to play in our own salvation.

It seems to me you are walking around the issue - the salvation is in Christ.

I was not aware that was an issue.

Not in knowing God, not in repentance, not in good works, not in choosing etc. Therefore, you have few options:
a) all who did not hear specifically about Christ and could not then believe in Him, will be tortured forever, both good (those who tried, who did their best etc.) and bad people

That is not an option to me.
Babies have no chance to choose, but remain sinless until they determine for themselves to commit a sin.
Those who never hear of Jesus will be judged by their consciences. (Rom 2:14-16)

b) there is some kind of chance to believe in Christ after death

Also not an option.
Life, then judgment.
That is all.

c) there is no eternal torture

Not an option, as Jesus said..."Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal." (Matt 25:45-46)

Option d) All men will be judged fairly, and every man will get what he deserves.

 

[Hoping2]

Why did you alter the text? Would that not be twisting it?
The Bible says, the lake of fire is the second death (Revelation 20:14).

If the second death is a lake of fire, so too, a lake of fire is the second death.

So, would a person that claims the lake of fire is literal, and at the same time, does not claim the woman, the beast she sits on, and the waters she sits on, literal, be demonstrating harmony, honesty, and humility?
Or would they be inconsistent, and unwilling to adjust to what the scriptures say?
It's the later, isn't it.

All the above will end up in the lake of fire.

The reason for that is, The same angel that said,
the woman is (οὗτος - refers to) that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth, also said
the waters are (οὗτος - refers to) peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues, and
the beast is (οὗτος - refers to) an eighth king, is the same angel that said...
the lake of fire is (οὗτος - refers to) the second death

So, are you saying, what the Bible says, or are you presenting your own ideas, and twisting what the text actually says?
The lake of fire is the symbolic representation of the second death. The second death is the reality.

The second death really is a lake of fire.
It will be there for the rebellious forever.

I would not twist the text to make the second death the symbol, and the lake of fire the explanation (reality) of the symbol.
It would not be honest of me to do so, would it.
The symbolism is followed by the explanation.
Symbolism

Revelation 17:1-5​

1 Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and talked with me, saying to me, “Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters, 2 with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth were made drunk with the wine of her fornication.”​

3 So he carried me away in the Spirit into the wilderness. And I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast which was full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. 4 The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the filthiness of her fornication. 5 And on her forehead a name was written:​

Explanation

7 “Why are you so amazed?” said the angel. “I will tell you the mystery of the woman and of the beast that carries her, which has the seven heads and ten horns. ...​

Symbolism

Revelation 20:14​

Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire.​

Explanation

This is the second death - the lake of fire.​

The allegory should not be taken as the actual thing it represents.

Are not all the allegories men, or groups of men ?
The wicked will suffer forever, whether they are depicted as beasts, or waters, or whatever.