the fallacy of eternal torment and related issues

[Soul Searcher]

Universalism is an excuse to live anyway one chooses and believe anything one desires and do whatever one wishes, because GOD will excuse everything anyway.

One could say the same about mainstream christianity, Do as you will just remember to repent.

Both are against the teachings of the bible, but that is not to say that universalism is not correct. When the time comes there will be penance to be paid for all who do wrong and it does not matter what they believe, nothing will change. We either do right or we do not do right it is really that simple.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Daneel,
First, allow me to thank you for staying on track in a mature discussion devoid of spurious infantile responses and character assassinations so prevalent on messageboards as topics such as these so easily seem to evoke.

I see a "new age" as occurring after this heaven and earth have passed away. When other ages have existed and went into non-existence are another matter for another conjecture.

I've also come to see the lake of fire as Peter's great fire destroying heaven and earth and everything in it making way for a new heaven and a new earth with nothing of the old and evil to pollute the newly created.

While God would like to see none perish it just doesn't look like it's gonna happen. While Jesus offered everlasting life to everyone He did not promise life everlasting to everyone. Those that accept his offer will not perish. Those that did/do not, as with everything else in the natural order of creation, will die and return to nothingness.

Jesus never promised everlasting burning torment to us. He came only promising lift everlasting, life everlasting after death, ie physical death would have no effect on un su. So those that do not accept Him when they die they die and God's breath of life returns to God, the body returns to dust and their sentience, ie their memories, are simply forgotten, per Scripture.

Now those alive at the end will be judged just before Peter's (lake of) fire consumes everything and those in Christ will be quickly plucked out. Those not saved will be instantly burnt to nothingness, especially, the false prophet and those that followed him and (with) the beast (ie the system) and Satan, then Peter's fire ungulfs and consumes everything.

Satan, having been created the second most powerful being in creation and presumably cannot die is another conjecture hinging on whether, with reference to him, 'for ever and ever' refers to this age or the next; I cannot at this time see the cause of all evil to live suffering for ever into and through all of the endless next creation thus carrying all that evil into the new heaven and earth and, being present for all to witness ad infinitum I fail to see how we can forget it all when we are told all things will be passed away and forgotten to be remembered no more.

When the (Peter's) fire has burned everything up and the fuel spent and there is nada in creation ie no creation and no heavens then God will create a new heaven and a new earth.

I share with you what I sense in your last post a feeling that we've gone about as far as we can with this without stepping out of the figurative "beating our heads together" into the literal and, seeing how our private little sandbox has been invaded it looks like it best we close this discussion for the time being.

Thank you and I look forward to our next discussion.

Blessings,
Pilgrim 33

 

[gort]

Many years ago in high school, I got a job at a big grocery store. The assistant manager was a real nice guy..... The first couple days. After that, after watching me load the bread on the bottom of sacks and then the heavy stuff on top, I began to notice a change in him. He started chappin my hide almost on a daily basis. It moved into other areas of the grocery business, matter of fact, all facets of it. After a while, seeing past my distaste and avoidance of him, I started to realize what he was doing. He was teaching me the biz the right way. I started listening to him more and more.

God does that to us in the refiners fire. It burns away the dross. Along the way, one begins to see things from God's perspective, and our perspective of "how it should be" somehow, one day, is no longer there. It's an amazing thing. Yet it's not an easy thing, and as a brother at work told me, we'll be doin it for the rest of our days in this world.

As for me, I find Der Alter to have a wealth of understanding of the Scriptures. Much much more than I, and have learned, since my grocery boxboy days, to listen and ask questions. I might learn something.

fwiw

<><

 

[Pilgrim 33]

After my previous post I realized I have had this upside down, backward, discussion

You came into my house and attacked my faith .

Well, as much as it behooves me to enlighten you as you are still upside down and backwards with respect to the true facts of the matter as it is you who came into my house and attacked my faith as this is my thread in my little corner of world. If you have any doubts about this I strongly suggest you contact Admin with respect as to exactly why this thread is exactly where it is. And, no, sir, you do NOT have the right to character assassinate anyone and you do not have the right to cut down anyone's personal beliefs which means you are way out of line regardless of where you are be it Timbuktu or Nevius' historically demonized China. Should you wish to change your holier than thou know it all condemnating attitude and come down to earth for a mature discussion I'll be interested but not before.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Problems Facing Universalist Theology

Despite the urgings of universalists, a systematic look through the Bible in its entirety reveals that there is not one verse that shows:
1) The sins of the wicked being forgiven in the after life.

I agree, it is not possible.

2) The wicked repenting in the after life.

I agree, it is not possible.

3) The wicked accepting Jesus Christ in the after life.

I agree, it is not possible.

4) The wicked avoiding judgment in the after life.

I agree, it is not possible.

5) The wicked having sin "conditioned" out of them in the after life.

I agree, it is not possible.

6) The wicked getting out of the lake of fire.

I agree, it is not possible.

7) The wicked getting their names written back into the book of life.

I agree, it is not possible.

8) Nor can we find anywhere that God repents of His judgment on the wicked in the afterlife or that His judgment is anything short of final and fixed for all eternity.

I agree, it is not possible.

* * *
Sadly, the universalist misses the point of Jesus telling the parable

You need a much better understanding of the parables; try reading them as one complete unit.

Based on the above affirmations you owe me an apology for your character assassinations, calling/inferring me a cultist, and insinuating I am a Universalist.

Given the possibility that

• you have overlooked my entire purpose and intent for this thread and have jumped to ill-founded conclusions and
• on the off-beat chance you are sincere in seeking out The Truth contained within the inviolable Word of God regardless where it may lead and, especially, even if it goes against everything you have previously learned and come to believe and
• that you are not interested in just buttressing preconceived beliefs and understandings and
• if you are desirous of pursuing the thread on these stated conditions then by all means please respond in the affirmative; otherwise, don't bother.

As to the apology, I'm waiting.

Thank you.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

an excuse to live anyway one chooses and believe anything one desires and do whatever one wishes

That's Nimrod's humanism.

because GOD will excuse everything anyway.

To humanist's, "god" is anyone and anything they wish to call god; with six billion dead and six billion alive that gives you a minimal idea of how many 'gods' they believe exist.

Colossians 2:8, "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."

 

[God_of_Mercy]

You seem a very strong supporter of the doctrine of eternal punishment Der Alter. I currently rereading the NT and studying it. I would like to finish my study before I enter a debate like this but I would like to point out a few things. I consider Universal recoinciliation a valid possiblilty BTW.

Jesus said they shall not enter the Kingdom of God/Heaven. Jesus never stated, nor implied, that the unrighteous would be able to enter His kingdom after some indeterminate “age” of punishment.

Im afraid you dont know what the Kingdom of God/Heaven means. When the bible says this its not refering to heaven but " the reign of God that he brings about through Jesus Christ, the establishment of God's rule in the hearts and lives of his people, the overcoming of all forces of evil, the removal from the world of all the consequences of sin-- including death and all that dimishes life-- and the creation of a new order of righteousness and peace."

And thats from an NIV study bible so its not bias.

*
*** Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, 21nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you."

These verses obviously show it does not refer to heaven.

Mar 9:43 If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out.
45 And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell.
47 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell,
48 where "their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.' (Isa 66:24)

Here Jesus is talking to his disciples about the importance of repentance and making the nessesary sacrifices to live a Christian life. The word translated as hell in these passages is Gehenna. I dont know if you know anything about this word but I don't think it was nessesary to translate, much less be translated as hell. Gehenna is only found in passages addressed to the Jews and was a widely known local among them. Heres a few facts about the word:

1. Gehenna was a well-known locality near Jerusalem. see Josh. xv:8; II Kings xvii:10; II Chron. xxviii:3;Jer. vii:31-32; xix:2.
2.Gehenna is never employed in the Old Testament to mean anything else than the locality with which every Jew was familiar.
3. The French Bible, the Emphatic Diaglott, Improved Version, Wakefield's Translation, and Newcomb's retain the proper noun, Gehenna, the name of the well-known place.
4. Gehenna is never mentioned in the Apocrypha as a place of future punishment, as it would have been, had such been its meaning before and at the time of Christ.
5. No Jewish writer contemporary with Christ, such as Josephus, or Philo, ever uses it as the name of a place of future punishment, as would have been done had such then been its meaning.
6. No classic Greek author ever alludes to it, and therefore, it was a Jewish locality, purely.
7. The first Jewish writer who ever names it as a place of future punishment is Johnathan Ben Uzziel; who wrote, according to various authorities, from the second to the eighth century, A.D.
8. The first Christian writer who calls Hell Gehenna, is Justin Martyr, who wrote about A.D. 150.
9. Neither Christ nor his apostles ever named it to Gentiles, but only to Jews, which proves it a locality only known to Jews, whereas, if it were a place of punishment after death for sinners, it would have been preached to Gentiles as well as Jews.
10. If Gehenna is the name of Hell then men's bodies are burned there as well as their souls. Matt.v:29; xviii:9
11. Jesus never warned unbelievers against it but once in all his ministry, (Matt. xxii:33) and he immediately explained it as about to come in this life.

If Gehenna really did mean hell as in a future place of punishment why was it only used when talking to Jews? Its obvious that it meant something else and the Jews would have known what he was referring to as it was a well known place. So as we look at passages containing Gehenna we can see Jesus was talking about the Jews of their coming judgement if they did not repent, the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D, where they were literally cast into Gehenna.

Source: Tentmaker.org
I will address the rest of your post later.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

To recap, briefly, my purpose for initiating this thread, a few things that have happened in its course and what I expect to derive from it.
The current handed down perception of the doctrine of hell and eternal torment is fast losing my support as it is also fast losing support of many within the evangelical ranks, particularly, these past few decades and, presumably, due, among other things, to an influx of new and varied translations and, also, with the prophesied increase of knowledge we currently attribute to the computer and technological age.

Granted, cultic beliefs are an issue but, at best, they are just a side issue as the thread's purpose does not entail those beliefs the cultists hold that first and foremost are the reasons for their being regarded cultic; i.e., the specifc issues regarding salvation, those and nothing more are what call us to regard them outside mainstream Christianity. If the tenets of salvation were agreed upon we would think them a little odd for a few quirky beliefs but we could not regard them as outside the "in Christ" zone. Even in the gospel of salvation's most simplistic form,

John 3:16, "...that whosoever believeth in him...should...have everlasting life."

So, even at that minimal level of belief, we should be cautioned in calling another that "believes in Him" not of Christ, indeed, we are cautioned with, "Who art thou that judgest another man's servant?"

But, then, this is not the purpose of the thread either for the thread has to do, not with the tenets and elements of salvation but, rather, just the opposite, the validity behind what has been handed down and become the modernly held perception of hell and the viability of the concept of eternal torment. Yes, unfortunately, some of the cults DO have a better understanding of the matter for in refusing the early Catholic views, their historical supporters and the Middle Ages' authors', painters' and poets' colorful renditions of "angels and mankind suffering in everlasting flames of torture" for the cultists appear to have been better prepared in that they did not have Christendom's preconceived colorized versions distorting their (albeit, granted) sincere desire to seek out The Truth. Then, that does not mean that I subscribe to other of their belifs or thinking. If me questioning the validity of a nonsalvation issue makes me a cultist then there is a very large part of Christendom today that have suddenly become cultists inside churches of every denomination for the very same reason, questioning eternal torment.

Many questions were asked early on in the thread that conventional biblical understanding cannot answer without convoluted reasoning and avoidant tactical responses alluding to the unknowing mysteries and purposes of God. And, yet, on the other hand, views like Conditional Immortality, while not answering all of the questions either, do answer a lot more questions and much more simply than the (if I may) "traditionally modern" view.

To date, those questions have yet to be answered and generally are silently ignored as they are, imo, genuinely seen to be unanswerable by current viewpoints of hell and eternal torment advocates even though the questions themselves are far too simple not to have equally simple answers.

This thread originally started over in the General Theology section; oddly, mainstream believers when stripped of their out of context proof-texting tools always become antagonistic when faced with simple questions they cannot pick and choose even the smallest of phrases to create and on the spot theology to buttress any current understanding into a belief. So, understandably, the thread, apparently after enough crying, was moved here to the bottom of the cult bucket.

In the course of the thread so far it has not been the intent to prove the doctrine of hell and eternal torment wrong but, rather, there simply is not the necessary and required body of evidence to support it and that is an altogether different approach. Nor is it approached lightly after almost fifty years as a Christian, with the majority of it from a Southern Baptist background with a few varied years in other denominations; yes, I attended college and bible college and mission work and yes, very much of every day has always been devoted to The Lord, His Word and His work. No two people learn the same thing in the same way in the same times and the only thng for sure in this respect is that the further we move beyond the simplistic to whosoever believeth the more it treacherously becomes to whomsoever much is given. But then that is another matter, another judgment entirely, isn't it, as it no longer is an issue "IF" one is saved but, instead, has become one of that believer's rewards and retributions based on how he lived his faith be it with the most simplistic or the most learned understanding.

The original and still intent for my initiating this thread are contained, for the most part, within the following questions and their, still, unfound answers; I trust those interested know the corresponding verses the following questions speak to...

1. How can the unsaved be resurrected to life since resurrected life is only possible through Jesus?
2. Eternal life in hell is still eternal life, so how can the unsaved have eternal life without having accepted Jesus?
3. If death and hell are cast into the Lake of Fire and destroyed how can there be anyone in eternal torment?
4. If all things are created new how can there be any unsaved people living eternally in eternal torment in the new creation?
5. How can there be any evil left over from the old creation in the new creation if all the old creation and all the old creation's evil are destroyed and burnt up to nothingness and, later, all things are created anew?
6. Scripture affirms that hell will be destroyed so it cannot be everlasting.
7. Scripture affirms that the very elements of the whole of creation will melt away (presumably) in the lake of fire and that all things will be created anew so, again, "hell" cannot be everlasting.
8. Since the remains of the unregenerate are dust and forgotten memories and all the dust and creation's elements are melted and burnt to nothingness before a new creation can be created then, being absent the breath of life, there is no soul to torture everlasting in an everlasting torture chamber that does not exist.
9. God's everlasting torture chamber--the very concept is antithetical to the justice and mercy of an all powerful God and since all power has been given to Jesus this is an even greater affront to the very love and sacrifice of Jesus.
10. For God to take dust that no longer exists and add memories that are forgotten and no longer exist and to, once again, add His breath of life just so His breath of life and non-existent dust and forgotten memories can be tortured forever in God's personal torture chamber--the very concept of God torturing His very breath of life throughout all eternity is even ludicrous for without His breath of life there can be no soul anymore than non-existent dust and forgotten memories alone could have a conscious state to be tortured forever in.

Blessings

Pilgrim 33

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Simply put, is there eternal life apart from Christ? If not (as we Christians believe), then how are the unsaved supposed to live eternally (for how else are we to interpret endless hell unless the victim is alive somehow)?

ICor 2: speaks of the natural man being unable to receive the things of God. Natural meaning according to nature. All things begin in this life after the manner of nature, plants, animals, man. All begin according to their reproductive nature. Only if they could be (as man can) be reborn in another manner could they escape the end consequence of their nature: death.

Now then, the conclusion of this is that the natural man dies according to the nature of his nature because he has not been reborn. Christ told this to Nicodemus when he said a man had to be reborn. Annihilationism solves another problem; the age old question of why a holy, loving, merciful God would take pleasure in inflicting endless torment to the unsaved.

Revelation speaks to the devil, the beast and the false prophet being thrown into the lake of fire to be tormented forever. That makes sense, for two reasons. First, they are not natural as is natural man and, consequently, cannot die as natural man can, a point that raises the question as to whether or not anything granted eternal status (at least in the case of the devil who was before iniquity was found in him Ezek 28:12) can be put to death. Then, too, their presence in the eternal lake of fire could serve the purpose of what happens when you challenge God, Is 14:12.

So, does natural man die dead dead or is he granted eternal life? As far as being convicted in absentia, the unsaved are convicted long before they became absent inasmuch as they were never known before the foundation of the world was laid, Eph 1:4 and were never foreknown as Romans 8:29-30 refers to us. (Without question, Romans 8 is one of the most profound doctrinal works in the bible).

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Lately, I've noticed that words like "eternal", "everlasting", "for ever" and "for ever and ever" seem to simplify when the lake of fire and Peter's fire are viewed as one and the same.

2 Peter 3:10, "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up."

2 Peter 3:12, "Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?"

 

[Flynmonkie]

Many questions were asked early on in the thread that conventional biblical understanding cannot answer without convoluted reasoning and avoidant tactical responses alluding to the unknowing mysteries and purposes of God. And, yet, on the other hand, views like Conditional Immortality, while not answering all of the questions either, do answer a lot more questions and much more simply than the (if I may) "traditionally modern" view.

To date, those questions have yet to be answered and generally are silently ignored as they are, imo, genuinely seen to be unanswerable by current viewpoints of hell and eternal torment advocates even though the questions themselves are far too simple not to have equally simple answers.

This thread originally started over in the General Theology section; oddly, mainstream believers when stripped of their out of context proof-texting tools always become antagonistic when faced with simple questions they cannot pick and choose even the smallest of phrases to create and on the spot theology to buttress any current understanding into a belief. So, understandably, the thread, apparently after enough crying, was moved here to the bottom of the cult bucket.

In the course of the thread so far it has not been the intent to prove the doctrine of hell and eternal torment wrong but, rather, there simply is not the necessary and required body of evidence to support it and that is an altogether different approach.

I am just wondering when they will implement a REAL study format instead of all this nonsense "game" here? Everyone seems to have a forum to bicker and argue. And everyone whom wants to stay away from the "cooties" too. But I have yet to see one serious study forum, where likeminded in the idea of true investigation and study can share, study and compare notes.

In total agreement with you on this Still lurking...

 

[gort]

1.How can the unsaved be resurrected to life since resurrected life is only possible through Jesus?

The unsaved are ressurrected at judgement time. They die the second death. The second death has no power over the saved. Death has power over the unsaved.

Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed to men once to die, but after this the judgment,


Natural man means carnal man.

 

[gort]

I am just wondering when they will implement a REAL study format instead of all this nonsense "game" here? Everyone seems to have a forum to bicker and argue. And everyone whom wants to stay away from the "cooties" too. But I have yet to see one serious study forum, where likeminded in the idea of true investigation and study can share, study and compare notes.

In total agreement with you on this Still lurking...

Am I to assume the words "everyone" and "they" and "game" is an all inclusive term here?

(insert neutral smilie here)

<><

addendum: Or perhaps I've misread again the intention of your post. In this modern day of space age internet chit chat, I find is still no different than the B.C. charachter chiseling on his stone tablet and sending it floating to the other side of the big pond....

If so, then I apologize.

<><

 

[Pilgrim 33]

1.How can the unsaved be resurrected to life since resurrected life is only possible through Jesus?

The unsaved are ressurrected at judgement time.

Jesus IS the (ONLY) Resurrection...and that resurrection is (ONLY) for those that "believeth in me"

John 11:25, "Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:"

Additionally, any life "in the beyond" is only possible through Jesus for only He IS "the life", and His life is only possible for those "in" Him and His life is only possible through His resurrection of those "in" Him.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Resurrection of the unsaved is the issue here, not judgment, iow, the unsaved must be resurrected before they can stand before God in judgment. But, how can they if resurrection is only by Jesus and only for the saved?

 

[gort]

But, how can they if resurrection is only by Jesus and only for the saved?

In Rev 20:6 it speaks of the first resurrection. In Christ

In v.20 the dead stand before God and the books are opened. They have been "raised up" again to be judged from the books. (raised up/resurrected)

Act 24:15 And I have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.


<><

 

[Flynmonkie]

There are no scriptures that plainly advocate the doctrine
of annihilation. Rather, they plainly advocate the persistent
nature of the spirit and the universal resurrection of the
physical body as is plainly indicated by the following
references:

Job 14:14 Yet in my flesh shall I see God
Isa 26:19 Let Your dead revive! let corpses arise!
Mat 27:52 Graves were opened and many bodies arose.
Luk 24:39 A spirit has not flesh and bones as you see me have.
Jhn 5:29 The resurrections of life and damnation.
Act 24:15 Resurrections of just and unjust.
1Th 4:16 Dead in Christ shall rise first (note that this
implies some will be rising after, namely the unjust).
Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he who takes part in the first
resurrection (again this implies a second resurrection).
http://www.cybcon.com/~kurtn/anihil.txt

I wanted to drop this off..... more verses and a link with thoughts....interesting ...

 

[Pilgrim 33]

In Rev 20:6 it speaks of the first resurrection. In Christ

Revelation 20:4-5, "And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection."

This is not apropos to the resurrection of the unsaved. This tells me the martyrs are resurrected; it also tells me that the rest of the believers (ie all except the martyrs) are resurrected a thousand years later when Satan is loosed from his prison (v 7). Yes, all this is the first resurrection. And, it speaks only to the saved, not the unsaved.

In v.20 the dead stand before God and the books are opened. They have been "raised up" again to be judged from the books. (raised up/resurrected)

Again, this deals with judgment and is not apropos to the discussion of the resurrection of the unsaved. We can't sell tickets to a judgment if we can't wake anybody up.

Act 24:15 And I have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.

Please, throwing out every verse that contains the word resurrection will not change the fact that resurrection is only possible through Jesus and is available only to those in Him.

John 11:25, "Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:"

1Th 4:16 Dead in Christ shall rise first (note that this
implies some will be rising after, namely the unjust).

Nope, not in the least, we must take the entire sentence and thought:

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord."

Here I see the second half of the first resurrection spoken of in Rev 20:4-5 (above verse just discussed): "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished" which, again, speaks to the resurrection of the saved.



But, what of the resurrection of the unsaved?

 

[gort]

Please, throwing out every verse that contains the word resurrection will not change the fact that resurrection is only possible through Jesus and is available only to those in Him.

Your statement is incorrect in this regards to only being able to be raised up in Jesus only.
How will the dead stand before God in the judgement? if they are not raised up from the sea? from hell? from death?

The verse from Acts shows a raising up of the just , and a raising up of the unjust.

2 raising ups. Some to life in Jesus. Others raised up to judgement without Jesus.

Regarding posting Rev 20:6 was only to show of it as the "first res."

v. 20 was only to show the other "raising up".

All these verses are in context of the question:

But, how can they if resurrection is only by Jesus and only for the saved?

resurrection:

G386
&#945;&#787;&#957;&#945;&#769;&#963;&#964;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#962;
anastasis
an-as'-tas-is
From G450; a standing up again, that is, (literally) a resurrection from death (individual, general or by implication (its author)), or (figuratively) a (moral) recovery (of spiritual truth): - raised to life again, resurrection, rise from the dead, that should rise, rising again.


<><

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Jhn 5:29 The resurrections of life and damnation.

John 5:28-29, "Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."

(off-track comment: Are Christians perfect and unable to sin and commit evil? The word "damnation" as used here needs deeper study)

John 10:27-28, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."

Now, don't marvel at this but only the saved can hear His voice.

Once, again, the issue is not judgment, nor is it life or damnation, neither is it of the resurrection of the saved. The issue is the judgment of the unsaved.