• 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.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Why do some people think Hell isn't real?

Status
Not open for further replies.

SilenceInMotion

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2012
1,240
40
Virginia, USA
✟1,646.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I would like to interject one point- No matter what anyone thinks of the Catholic church(and I have no personal problems with it), when it comes to the bible it's a catholic anthology, put together by catholics for the promotion of catholicism; they ought to know what they meant by it. There is an old saying; don't try to teach your grandmother how to suck eggs.

Your statement would mean something if not for the fact that the RCC is the historical, biblical, real Church of Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Timothew

Conditionalist
Aug 24, 2009
9,659
844
✟36,554.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I would like to interject one point- No matter what anyone thinks of the Catholic church(and I have no personal problems with it), when it comes to the bible it's a catholic anthology, put together by catholics for the promotion of catholicism; they ought to know what they meant by it. There is an old saying; don't try to teach your grandmother how to suck eggs.
The bible was put together by Christians. Saying it was put together by Catholics is misleading at best. And even if it was (and it wasn't) saying that Catholics TODAY know it best because OTHER people put the book together is illogical. It us a Christian Book, put together by Christians. By your logic, I should know the book best of all, since I am a Christian.
 
Upvote 0

Soulgazer

Christian Gnostic
Feb 24, 2011
3,748
90
Visit site
✟26,903.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The bible was put together by Christians. Saying it was put together by Catholics is misleading at best. And even if it was (and it wasn't) saying that Catholics TODAY know it best because OTHER people put the book together is illogical. It us a Christian Book, put together by Christians. By your logic, I should know the book best of all, since I am a Christian.
Tim; you should know better. I in no way implied catholics were not Christians. They are the historical victors of the squabble between sects. You wouldn't expect them to produce a book that promoted Marcionism? Of course not. Historically, the Marcionites were Christians too, and produced a book to promote their brand of Christianity. No Church that uses the bible would even exist today without the RCC--- They put it together, selected the scriptures, developed the doctine and put up the monies to first have it published and bound. If you belong to a protestant church, in reality, your doctrines can only be traced back to the sixteenth century. The RCC goes back to the fourth..

Let me give you a for instance.... The group that the epistles of John came out of were Christian, right? They used the Gospel of Peter. No church today, that I am aware of, uses that Gospel. Yet, if that group had had a bible, it would have included that Gospel.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Soulgazer

Christian Gnostic
Feb 24, 2011
3,748
90
Visit site
✟26,903.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Your statement would mean something if not for the fact that the RCC is the historical, biblical, real Church of Christ.
I would not expect you to be a member of the RCC if you did not believe that. My statement only means what it says, no more, no less. Try some decaff...We are all trying to be friends here.
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,528
145
✟32,889.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hello Timothew, I will slow down on the size of the posts (responses) in hopes they will be answered more directly.

2 Peter 3:7-9
But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.
8But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. 9The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.
Peter tells what will happent to ungodly men, they will be judged and then destroyed. All ungodly men will perish unless they repent.


First, there is nothing in this particular quote that speaks of ungodly men.

Secondly, when he does speak of ungodly men and their fate...


2 Peter 2

King James Version (KJV)

9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:


...annihilation is not implied.


2849. kolazo kol-ad'-zo from kolos (dwarf); properly, to curtail, i.e. (figuratively) to chastise (or reserve for infliction):--punish.


Now notice the eternailty of this punishment which is not destruction as the annihilationist wants it to be:


10 But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.


It is clear that this is a reference to the wicked among men. They are contrasted with Holy Angels, who do not, despite their greater power, presume to judge:


11 Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord.


The context of this passage, wrested by those that teach loss of salvation, refers to false teachers (contrasted themselves with the false prophets in Israel's earlier history).

We see they are unregenerate in the next verse:



12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;


The leopard truly cannot change his spots, though he might disguise them that he might run with the lions. A dog is stil a dog, a pig is still a pig, despite a bath and a bow (v.22).

The annihilationist is immediately drawn to "and shall utterly perish in their own corruption" just as readily as the loss of salvationist focuses on the destruction itself, wrongly applying salvation to these natural brute beasts that are false teachers.

These are not born again believers, they remain part of the cursed creation.

Now lets see what will happen to the unregenerate:


13 And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you;


All men will be rewarded according to their works, saved and unsaved alike. Here, there is promised a reward of unrghteousness, and the writer gives example of their unrighteousness:



14 Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children:

15 Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;

16 But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man's voice forbad the madness of the prophet.


Peter seems to believe a donkey talked. I mention that for those that do not believe God could bring about such an amazing event.

As a side-note to Balaam, we see him in a couple of other places in the New Testament. First, in a paralllel passage in Jude:



Jude 1:11

King James Version (KJV)


11 Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.



One of the difficult points to get across to the annihilationist is that we see men perishing in the Old Testament physically, and they have, temporally...perished. Here both Cora and Balaam are said to have gone "in the same way," and few would argue that both have perished.

But...though they have perished, no-one would reasonably suggest that either were annihilated. Most cede the fact that though they died (perished) physically, they did not cease a conscious existence, but were consigned to sheol to await judgment...again.

It is not considered that they can perish without ceasing to exist here, which sets the precedent for their perishing in the judgment of the Great White Throne and still not ceasing to exist.

They seem to forget this, that the wicked perish physically, and spiritually. They seem to forget that though being physically alive...they are dead.

They do not seem to comprehend that spiritual separation from God is equivalent to...death. And it does not necessitate cessation of existence. And it does not negate the Lord's clear teaching to the contrary.

"Where their worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched" is turned into "Their worm will die and the fire will end."

Fire represents judgment...and the judgment they receive does not end.


Now consider:


17 These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever.



When I said that the passages that show an enduring eternal judgment are ignored, this is one oof them. I did a post that spoke of this passage as well as Jude. No reply was ever given.

Is it the "reservation" that is eternal here? Or the mist of darkness?


God bless.
 
Upvote 0

Timothew

Conditionalist
Aug 24, 2009
9,659
844
✟36,554.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Hello Timothew, I will slow down on the size of the posts (responses) in hopes they will be answered more directly.




First, there is nothing in this particular quote that speaks of ungodly men.
What? Yes, it does! Truly it does! It does indeed! I'm getting used to you saying that destruction doesn't mean destruction. Now you are saying "ungodly men" doesn't speak of "ungodly men"? So what, in your opinion does "ungodly men" speak of? Godly men? Ungodly women? Ungodly gods? I just don't understand. Have you gotten so used to denying, that you just deny anything?


"But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men."
 
Upvote 0

Timothew

Conditionalist
Aug 24, 2009
9,659
844
✟36,554.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
First, there is nothing in this particular quote that speaks of ungodly men.

Secondly, when he does speak of ungodly men and their fate...
Well? Which is it? He doesn't speak of ungodly men, but he does speak of ungodly men?

This why I don't want to discuss this with you. Words don't seem to have any meaning at all. The bible means only what you tell it to mean, and nothing else.
 
Upvote 0

Timothew

Conditionalist
Aug 24, 2009
9,659
844
✟36,554.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
2 Peter 2

King James Version (KJV)

9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:


...annihilation is not implied.

It says they perish. "Not wishing for any to PERISH". The punishment consists of perishing. Eternal Conscious Torment is not implied.
 
Upvote 0

Timothew

Conditionalist
Aug 24, 2009
9,659
844
✟36,554.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
2849. kolazo kol-ad'-zo from kolos (dwarf); properly, to curtail, i.e. (figuratively) to chastise (or reserve for infliction):--punish.


Now notice the eternailty of this punishment which is not destruction as the annihilationist wants it to be:

You are not listening. I am saying the punishment is eternal. It is eternal destruction just as the bible says. It also says that right in the definition that you posted. I'm assuming that you agree with the definition you posted: "to curtail". To curtail someone's life means to end it. This is a punishment. It is eternal. Perishing and being dead forever is not NOT a punishment, as the tormentists want it to NOT to be. Being destroyed and ceasing to exist definitely IS a punishment, and it is definitely eternal. It doesn't end.
 
Upvote 0

Timothew

Conditionalist
Aug 24, 2009
9,659
844
✟36,554.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;


The leopard truly cannot change his spots, though he might disguise them that he might run with the lions. A dog is stil a dog, a pig is still a pig, despite a bath and a bow (v.22).

The annihilationist is immediately drawn to "and shall utterly perish in their own corruption" just as readily as the loss of salvationist focuses on the destruction itself, wrongly applying salvation to these natural brute beasts that are false teachers.

These are not born again believers, they remain part of the cursed creation.

Thsi verse says straight out that they perish. Why can't you see this? Why do you deny the very words of the bible?
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,528
145
✟32,889.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
2 Thessalonians 1:9
These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power,
Destruction, not eternal living torment. The greek word is olethron: destruction.
From a primary ollumi (to destroy; a prolonged form); ruin, i.e. Death, punishment -- destruction.














And this verse is speaking of eternal judgment, as opposed to the many that were supplied that spoke of the judgment upon the temporal wicked during the Tribulation.

You have ignored that point, and have not ceded you misapplied the passage, trying to make it eternal, rather than temporal judgment. I will not let this point go, as it is one of the foundational errors of the annihilationist.

Here, the Tribulation is on view, as it speaks of the Lord's return at the end of the Tribulation. However, unlike the reference tot he wheat and tares, for example, we can give this an eternal context rather than the temporal nature of the parable of the wheat and the tares, which speaks of this age.


2 Thessalonians 1

King James Version (KJV)



7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,

8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.



Again we see judgment described with terminology using fire, and we see everlasting destruction "from the presence of the Lord."


1 Timothy 6

King James Version (KJV)

9 But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.


Here we see men immersed in "destruction" in this life. That which will be visited upon the wicked in eternal judgment will be...eternal.

"Perdition" is also seen here:


2 Thessalonians 2

King James Version (KJV)



3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;



His fate is marked long ago. His damnation slumbereth not. His judgment is seen here:


Revelation 20:10

King James Version (KJV)


10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.



Here Satan is cast into the Lake of Fire. We see that the beast and the false prophet are here also. We see that Satan will be without question "tormented day and night...for ever and ever.

What is implied is eternality of torment, the word here being...


928. basanizo bas-an-id'-zo from 931; to torture:--pain, toil, torment, toss, vex.


The straw man (men) provided by the annihilationist to fortify his position is that those that adhere to the position that eternal judgment is an enduring judgment some relish this fate for the wicked.

This is just not the case. It is because there is a strong desire to see men saved and avoid this punishment that we warn them of it. Sugarcoating the word of God is something that is done by many. Some teach a grace that is so far to the extreme that the fact that God has, and will, judge men for their sin and hold them accountable...becomes a "You teach a monster that also relishes torturing people." It is bad enough when this has to be dealt with among atheist apologists, but it is disheartening to see it among those we feel are likely brethren.

"God will not torture people for eternity," they say. Well...I agree. Just as a scorpion does not torment it's victim during the period that the sting exacts pain, neither does God torment those that are eternally separaated.

Just as in Luke 16, whrere we see the rich man in torment, we do not see God actually tormenting him. The torment that will probably be the worst will be the memory of hearing the Gospel...and rejecting it. This rejection comes in many forms: there are those that by disinterest reject it; those that actively reject it, though they play a neutral part like our first example; and those tha reject it and do what they can to oppose the Gospel, such as we can see in atheist activism.

But the straw men are torn down by examining the basis for their doctrine, and by expounding on what scripture has to say about Hell.

God bless.
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,528
145
✟32,889.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What? Yes, it does! Truly it does! It does indeed! I'm getting used to you saying that destruction doesn't mean destruction. Now you are saying "ungodly men" doesn't speak of "ungodly men"? So what, in your opinion does "ungodly men" speak of? Godly men? Ungodly women? Ungodly gods? I just don't understand. Have you gotten so used to denying, that you just deny anything?


"But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men."

Sorry, poorly worded.

In view the focus is on the creation.

Well? Which is it? He doesn't speak of ungodly men, but he does speak of ungodly men?

This why I don't want to discuss this with you. Words don't seem to have any meaning at all. The bible means only what you tell it to mean, and nothing else.


And you will see that in your next response:


2 Peter 2

King James Version (KJV)

9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:


...annihilation is not implied.

It says they perish. "Not wishing for any to PERISH". The punishment consists of perishing. Eternal Conscious Torment is not implied.

And what does the punishment mean? Can you imply death? Can you imply annihilation?

God bless.
 
Upvote 0

Timothew

Conditionalist
Aug 24, 2009
9,659
844
✟36,554.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Sorry, poorly worded.

In view the focus is on the creation.




And you will see that in your next response:




And what does the punishment mean? Can you imply death? Can you imply annihilation?

God bless.
The punishment is eternal destruction. This means destruction, not eternally not destroyed and tormented. If someone is kept alive in hell forever, then they have NOT been destroyed.

Can I imply death!? I don't need to imply death, the bible says it straight out. The wages of sin is death.
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,528
145
✟32,889.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well? Which is it? He doesn't speak of ungodly men, but he does speak of ungodly men?

This why I don't want to discuss this with you. Words don't seem to have any meaning at all. The bible means only what you tell it to mean, and nothing else.

Okay, so show me one verse, one word that means the wicked are annihilated.

I keep trying to get across that destruction does not carry that connotation, so it is not I that gives words meanings that they do not have.


2 Peter 2

King James Version (KJV)

9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:


...annihilation is not implied.

It says they perish. "Not wishing for any to PERISH". The punishment consists of perishing. Eternal Conscious Torment is not implied.


No one is arguing that. But where...does it say that the perishing is annihilation?

Men perish physically, but continue to exist.

When they perish in the second death, they will continue to exist. Would it be nonsensical for the Lord to resurrect the wicked...only to then blink them out of existence?

You posts are still too long.
Cut it down to one point and we will discuss that point.
Otherwise it gets confusing. Or is that the intention?


Well, we have been focusing on only a couple: 1) what it means to perish; 2) what it means to have LIFE; 3) what it means to be...dead.

I would choose #3 myself, for this is another foundational error of the annihilationist.

Understanding that we are born dead, meaning, we do not have the life the Lord came to give men except we be in Him and He in us...is foundational to this issue.

2849. kolazo kol-ad'-zo from kolos (dwarf); properly, to curtail, i.e. (figuratively) to chastise (or reserve for infliction):--punish.




You are not listening. I am saying the punishment is eternal. It is eternal destruction just as the bible says. It also says that right in the definition that you posted. I'm assuming that you agree with the definition you posted: "to curtail". To curtail someone's life means to end it. This is a punishment. It is eternal. Perishing and being dead forever is not NOT a punishment, as the tormentists want it to NOT to be. Being destroyed and ceasing to exist definitely IS a punishment, and it is definitely eternal. It doesn't end.


I understand your view, really, this is not the first time I have discussed the doctrine of annihilation. I have heard, I believe, every defense there is to give, and look forward, if I have not, to those that will come.


Concerning "curtail," you are choosing an english definition and making that the standard when what is necessary is to balance all that scripture has to say on the subject. And at no time is the scriptural evidence that implicitly states this punishment will be eternal...negated.

Used twice in scripture, we see it also here:

Acts 4:21

King James Version (KJV)


21 So when they had further threatened them, they let them go, finding nothing how they might punish them, because of the people: for all men glorified God for that which was done.



Now put a death context into this.

It will have to be inserted.


To curtail someone's life means to end it. This is a punishment.

Go tell someone in prison they neither have torment nor are they experiencing judgment.

See how well you can convince them.

I honestly cannot see how punishment has to mean death and cessation of existance.


Thsi verse says straight out that they perish. Why can't you see this? Why do you deny the very words of the bible?

Again, making statements like this is unworthy of sincere discussion. Because you say this does not make it true.

But that's okay, I am used to such tactics. They usually arise when one cannot bring a valid argument to the table to support thier belief.

God bless.
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,528
145
✟32,889.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The punishment is eternal destruction.

I am not arguing against that, yet it is tirelessly repeated as though I am.

What is in contention is what form does that destruction take?

Israel was destroyed. Yet they still existed.

They existed, but had no life...this was the form of their destruction. And it centers around separation from God.


This means destruction, not eternally not destroyed and tormented.

Then there really wasn't an Israel for the Lord to come to? For the disciples to witness to?

They were destroyed but still existed.

I will reiterate this for as long as it takes to get this point across. To make destruction and death mean cessation of life is is as erroneous as making "curtail" to mean death.

If someone is kept alive in hell forever, then they have NOT been destroyed.


Wrong.

But what is missed, what is overlooked, is that their destruction precedes this judgment.

Those of Israel that were lost, destroyed, were in fact...lost and destroyed. They still lived, they still breathed, but no amount of insistence will deny that they existed in their destruction.

They have died once already, and were destroyed. And when the wicked are resurrected they will die and be again...in a state of destruction. A state of being destroyed.

Can I imply death!? I don't need to imply death, the bible says it straight out. The wages of sin is death.

I am still waiting for a verse or passage that speaks of annihilation.

And again the difference between temporal and eternal death is missed.

When does one become guilty of sin, and when will, in the life of that person, they be held accountable for their sin?

Is man, in your opinion, born free from sin, and then when he grows up and then commits sin, at that point held accountable?

Or do you believe that man is born with a sin nature and despite his efforts, is born already accountable?

Did man die in Adam or does his spiritual deadness begin at conception, making him needful of the sacrifice of Christ to pay that penalty?

All of these questions affect how one concludes concerning death, destruction, and judgment. We can't say man is spiritually alive, for if he were, he would not need to be born again.

God bless.
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,528
145
✟32,889.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well, if "ungodly men" does not mean "ungodly men" why should "perish" mean "perish"? ;)

Well, in trying to field so much there are bound to be times when I err in the point I am trying to get across.

I would encourage you to take a look and see if I do not think ungodly men does not mean ungodly men, or if this is simply a result of haste.

I would also like to know your take on whether, as it is insisted, I do not think perishing means perishing, but rather that perishing (as well as destruction) does not necessitate cessation of existence, such as in the case of the bottle and the ointment.

Do you see the point being made? Do you see that the Lord came upon the "lost" sheep of Israel, that they were in a state of destruction which gives a broader application to destruction itself?

God bless.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.