Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
actually the believer should be growing in the HS and His power thus sinning less and less as He matures in Christ. It is a fallacy to believe that the believer can just keep sinning without restraint or change and still get a get out of hell free card. This would fall under the sheep and goats analogyTo me it sounds unfair that "Christians" get their 'get out of eternal hell card' and then sin like hell til they die and go to heaven. You do still sin right? I know I do. And I know that, but for the grace of God, he ought to destroy those sins with you/I too. Thank God He doesn't think like us, but forgave ALL from the cross.
well, first off one way to reconcile the original thought experiment is to allow scripture to inform us. You see, hell is the consequence of sin not the punishment for sin. Thus, hell can be real and eternal and man conscious of it while God remains good and loving. It's really not that hard to figure this out...in fact, the reason Christ came was to save man from his fate (Hell) so not a stretch at all.Well, that is the problem, isn't it? I can't!! It isn't fair, it isn't justice!
Now, just for fun--why not pretend that God is good and loving and merciful---
but He hates sin, and punishes sinners---how do you reconcile a loving God, punishing the nonbelievers for a period of time according to the sins they have done, and then they cease to exist so that sin is destroyed with them? I can wrap my head around that and say---that sounds fair.
You can submit that all you like, my friend. But I do not believe there are any errors in the KJV. The word "forever" can be used as a colorful expression of strong emotion for the totality of an allotted time. It is a strong expression of emotion of totality. Sort of like how a man might say to his wife in love, "I am your husband forever." He is speaking in this life how he will be her wife "forever" and not for all time past death. For he knows he won't be her husband for all eternity because he knows death will separate them as husband and wife at some point.
In fact, we see the word "forever" clearly used in a temporal sense in Philemon 1:15. For it says,
"For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever;"
(Philemon 1:15 KJV).
This is talking about Onesimus. Here is what it says in the New Living Translation,
15 "It seems you lost Onesimus for a little while so that you could have him back forever.
16 He is no longer like a slave to you. He is more than a slave, for he is a beloved brother, especially to me. Now he will mean much more to you, both as a man and as a brother in the Lord."
(Philemon 1:15-16 NLT).
In other words, Onesimus did not return to his master for all eternity here upon this Earth. Onesimus is not still alive. He is not an immortal or anything of that nature. He was mortal and he died. So to assume that the word "forever" and it's related words always means forever does not work. Meaning, one has to re-examine what they believe the word "forever" means in relation to the Greek word "Gehenna", i.e. the Lake of Fire (Which is translated in the English as "hell").
...
this is to assume that God is unable to be anything else. The very premise of the annihilationist and the torture chamber ECT ists is that God can be wrong but is still good. IOW's I don't think it really answers the question to just say, God can't be wrong, we must know why it isn't wrong.First, I think both ECT and annihilationism are supremely misguided, both philosophically and theologically. However, I see nothing that needs reconciling in this thought experiment. God is good, not because of what God does, but because God is God. Therefore, God condemning the whole of humanity, both believers and non-believers, to an eternal existence of divinely-inflicted torture does not alter the immutable fact of God's goodness.
But justice needs a law in order to exist, right? where I agree with you that God is just because He is God, we know He is just because there is a law that tells us what is and is not just. It goes back to the idea that God is NOT a favor of persons, iow's God doesn't play favorites. How do we know that? Because the law says X will happen if you do or don't do Y and God insists that is true for everyone. God is just because He does not play favorites with the law.How so? Such a statement suggests that a standard exists external to both God and God's actions regarding the universe by which the actions of God will be judged. However, such is not the case. God is not "just" because God does "X" and "Y", but not "Z", as if God's actions have to align with a standard of justice external to God whereby an obligation to behave in a particular way can be imposed upon God. Such is an absurd notion.
No, God is just because God is God. God cannot be other than just, as justice proceeds in being intelligible on the basis of that which God does, not in how God's actions align with another standard of behavior.
but biblical ECT doctrine does not include God torturing anyone so you are then believing some foreign man made concept of hell which I have a serious problem with personally. I mean you can believe whatever you want but why would we take man's word over God's when God is the one we are "judging"?Exactly---and that is why God will not be tormenting anyone forever. His character will not allow it.
In this thread I will suggest that the doctrine of eternal torture in hell is a real doctrine and is actually taught in the Bible. I will also suggest that it is totally just and that those that go away into eternal torture are actually getting what they deserve. I will suggest that opponents of this doctrine (such as universalists and annihilationists) trivialize the evil of those that disobey the commands of God and hence arrive at a picture of reality that is in fact false.
...
Discuss.
There is a fault in your argument. Remember what Jesus said about the workers? Some,worked all day and got the same pay as the ones who didn't? And Paul says our works are tried and burned up but still we get saved in the end? How is that just? How is it just that the guy can reject God all his life even after being told about Christ and yet accept him shortly before he dies and he still gets eternal life while another person serves Christ all their life and they both get eternity in heaven? By your standard of justice, some should,get eternity in heaven because of all the great work they've done while others would only get a while in heaven because they didn't do as much good.There is still hell for the wicked unbeliever and outer darkness for the unprofible servant. Both are still real places that are horrible. They are just not torture chambers of insane amounts of pain. For ECT would be inhumane treatment even by the world's standards. Nobody is going to get away with anything. They will be judged and punished fairly. For I am not against the idea that some of the wicked may be punished for a set amount of time longer than others who are less wicked in the Lake of Fire before they are eventually destroyed or erased from existence. For it will still be painful to be thrown into the Lake of Fire and being burned up. But eternal torture in fire is not justice. It is overkill. It is anti-justice whereby it makes God into being vindictive and hateful.
...
I totally agree the believer 'should be growing'. But I also know 'unsaved' people who are more 'Christ like' all their lives than a lot of "Christians" I knew at their death. So, if the fires of Hell are purgative and purifying then its work accomplishes God's ultimate 'will' for 'ALL'. But it is false doctrine IMO that wants to set our "due time" limits of God's "predestining/drawing/calling/ordaining to believe" for initial salvation, to the 'time' of 'this age' only.actually the believer should be growing in the HS and His power thus sinning less and less as He matures in Christ.
I do think there is a OSAS salvation for our spirit upon new birth But there is also a progressive salvation of our soul (mind, will, emotions) where we "work out your salvation with fear and trembling" until the day we die. But soul salvation doesn't get you INTO heaven, spirit salvation does. Soul salvation gets heaven INTO you here and now. And that salvation will determine your rewards for how obedient you were in obtaining the goal of 'that' salvation's potential. Which is "the image of the stature of the fullness of Christ". A goal, which if reached, will overcome the last enemy of physical death...or mortality here and now. But that's off topic.It is a fallacy to believe that the believer can just keep sinning without restraint or change and still get a get out of hell free card. This would fall under the sheep and goats analogy
Well, let me ask you a question. If you KNEW that you were going to get your tongue cut off if you told a lie, would that be a suficient deterent to not tell a lie? Concern over punishment is a valid reason to do or not to into,something. But first a person has to believe it.I trust you realize how odd this question will appear to at least some readers. More specifically, to ask this question seems to disclose that you ascribe to the principle that the only motive for human beings to do good is the avoidance of punishment.
That's all man is. He is a physical being, not a spiritual being. The "spirit" that returns to God is the breath (spirit) of life that He gives to man. Gen 2:7 tells us how God created man. He created man from the elements of the earth and then breathed into him the breath or spirit of life and the man "became" a living soul. This shows us that a soul consists of two things, the man, a flesh being, and the breath or spirit of life. When a man dies that breath or spirit of life returns to God and the man, the physical flesh, returns to dust just as God said it would.
19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. (Gen. 3:19 KJV)
God told Adam, dust you are. He didn't tell Adam he was a spirit, He said he is dust. Thus neither Lazarus nor the rich man could communicate, feel, sense, etc, while in Hades, which is the grave. Notice also where Lazarus and the rich man are, they are in the grave. Where did God tell Adam he would return to? The dust. So, the dead return to the dust of the earth and Lazarus and the rich man in the parable are in the dust of the earth.
Firstly your example of husband and wife is called hyperbole. It is a figure of speech which is exaggerated to emphasize a point. It's like saying I'm so hungry I could eat a horse. Obviously I couldn't actually eat a horse. The expression is exaggerated to make the point that I'm really hungry. Likewise the husband saying he would love his wife forever.
On to the Scriptures. The word forever is not in the Scriptures. Typically we find olam in the Hebrew and aion in the Greek and neither of these two words mean forever or eternal.
I think you missed the point of my post. It was not to say the word forever always means forever. The point was to say that olam and aion "DON'T" mean forever.
not sure what you point is on some of this as it applies to what was said and the discussion thereof but I will say this, there is the story of the sheep and the goats and as I said before, much of what you say here sounds like the sheep and goats.I totally agree the believer 'should be growing'. But I also know 'unsaved' people who are more 'Christ like' all their lives than a lot of "Christians" I knew at their death. So, if the fires of Hell are purgative and purifying then its work accomplishes God's ultimate 'will' for 'ALL'. But it is false doctrine IMO that wants to set our "due time" limits of God's "predestining/drawing/calling/ordaining to believe" for initial salvation, to the 'time' of 'this age' only.
1TI 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
I do think there is a OSAS salvation for our spirit upon new birth But there is also a progressive salvation of our soul (mind, will, emotions) where we "work out your salvation with fear and trembling" until the day we die. But soul salvation doesn't get you INTO heaven, spirit salvation does. Soul salvation gets heaven INTO you here and now. And that salvation will determine your rewards for how obedient you were in obtaining the goal of 'that' salvation's potential. Which is "the image of the stature of the fullness of Christ". A goal, which if reached, will overcome the last enemy of physical death...or mortality.
I would be interested in this list and how it justifies throwing out the list of those that say they are consciousYeah, there are just waaaaay too many verses to suggest that the wicked and the saints are not conscious after they die physically. I will have to a compile a list of verses for you.
BTW ~ Squirrels are still cool creatures created by God.
...
There is a fault in your argument. Remember what Jesus said about the workers? Some,worked all day and got the same pay as the ones who didn't? And Paul says our works are tried and burned up but still we get saved in the end? How is that just? How is it just that the guy can reject God all his life even after being told about Christ and yet accept him shortly before he dies and he still gets eternal life while another person serves Christ all their life and they both get eternity in heaven? By your standard of justice, some should,get eternity in heaven because of all the great work they've done while others would only get a while in heaven because they didn't do as much good.
If it is acceptable for God to bless his followers with eternity in heaven and it's glorious rewards regardless of how long they served,or how well, then it is equally just to toss the sinner into hell for eternity as well.
I trust you realize how odd this question will appear to at least some readers. More specifically, to ask this question seems to disclose that you ascribe to the principle that the only motive for human beings to do good is the avoidance of punishment.
Please show me in Luke 16:19-31 where Jesus identifies the Pharisees? Where does scripture state that the Pharisees, or anyone else, understood "exactly what Jesus meant by this parable" of Lazarus and the rich man? That is a supposition that some folks so they can make the story say what they want it to.I don't mean to be rude--but I get my truth from the bible. It says we are mortal and are given immortality. The story of Lazarus itself says what it is about, it is for the Pharisees who had been giving changes to the words of God which God had never said and allowing divorce for other than adultery. It was an example to them of how callous their hearts were for:
"If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
They knew exactly what Jesus meant by this parable. This is no more a parable to explain life after death then the parable of the sower is about agriculture.
huh? I asked you for a thought experiment, not something you are telling me to believe...it isn't that hard to produce a thought experiment especially without all the false accusations you start out with here.
It is obvious from your posts that hell angers you to the point that you are almost venomous with anyone who challenges your preconceived notions about it, but I am not asking you to change your preconceived notions, I am asking you to think things through for a moment and see what other possibles exist than the one you have convinced yourself of.
As I said, I have no fear in exploring other ideas and notions and beliefs. If you present a thought experiment I will be more than happy to participate even though you refuse to do the one I present. The problem is that you present nothing for us to examine, all you are doing is giving a scenario and telling us how to feel about it. That explores nothing but your own unwillingness to think about things differently then you have convinced yourself to think.
Let me see if I can fix your bias into a thought experiment....we assume in the experiment that God is a good Father who wants what is best for His children. One day His child stands before Him and is guilty of stealing $5.00 what would that Father do?
My answer, the Father would correct the child so that he did not repeat the behavior that might lead him to a life of crime and end him up in jail. Maybe even guilty of armed robbery in which the son accidentally shot someone and killed them.
Now look at Proverbs 23:14... Punish them with the rod and save them from death.
According to this passage, God's punishment, that is corrections are for the purpose of keeping us out of hell (second death) Like in the thought experiment, God isn't about punishing us with hell but about keeping us out of hell, that is why He died in the first place, so that we don't have to die.
Lay another thought experiment on us if you want...that is the best I could do to fix the one you gave.
Please show me in Luke 16:19-31 where Jesus identifies the Pharisees? Where does scripture state that the Pharisees, or anyone else, understood "exactly what Jesus meant by this parable" of Lazarus and the rich man? That is a supposition that some folks so they can make the story say what they want it to.
.....Jesus was not talking to the Pharisees, He was talking to His disciples, Luke 16:1, but the Pharisees happened to overhear what He said, Luke 16:14, and in Luke 17:1 Jesus is still talking to His disciples.
.....If Lk 16:19-31 is a parable about the Pharisees why did it take about 2000 years for anyone to realize that? As I said the early church understood it to be factual. And I have not seen any evidence which proves them wrong.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?