Love, Hell and the nature of God.

kelly1 · 30-11-2007 1:31pm

Jimi,

at this point in the debate do you still doubt the existence of eternal punishment in Hell/Gehenna or is you question more about the reason for eternal punishment?

God bless,
Noel.

JimiTime · 30-11-2007 1:54pm

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Hades, Sheol, Tartarus ,Hell, Purgatory and Gahenna or what ever you want to call them all boils down to one thing and that is eternal separation from the Living God.

Did I mention purgatory? What was the point of including that? Very silly statement. Anyway, if hell is a bad translation, it may have contextual impact. If it was included after such a doctrine was already in circulation, then you are still left asking, what was the origin of both the word and the doctrine. You can switch off, and just accept you've been told the truth, something that you seem to hold against the catholics you diss frequently, or you can ask yourself why. Its up to you to have the desire to root out possible falsehoods.

JimiTime · 30-11-2007 2:03pm

kelly1 wrote: »

Jimi,

at this point in the debate do you still doubt the existence of eternal punishment in Hell/Gehenna

Based on the reasonings of discussions I've had with various folk including on here. Also on reading the scriptures and getting to know God, and with prayer and meditation I have not the slightest doubt that such a doctrine is wrong. So its not about doubt. Don't get me wrong, I'm always open to having my mind changed. If I'm shown a valid reason that is.

or is you question more about the reason for eternal punishment?

Purpose is what its about Noel. Its purpose. No chastisement or disciplining takes place. Just endless pain and suffering. The point has been raised that the debt of sin can never be paid, so what is the purpose?

Run_to_da_hills · 30-11-2007 2:22pm

JimiTime wrote: »

Did I mention purgatory? What was the point of including that? Very silly statement. Anyway, if hell is a bad translation, it may have contextual impact. If it was included after such a doctrine was already in circulation, then you are still left asking, what was the origin of both the word and the doctrine. You can switch off, and just accept you've been told the truth, something that you seem to hold against the catholics you diss frequently, or you can ask yourself why. Its up to you to have the desire to root out possible falsehoods.

I mentioned Purgatory because it has absolutly no place for scripture, It spits at Christ in the face and is just a "white washed" name for hell. I threw Purgatory in with the rest of the words you mentioned because they all mean one thing and that is eternal seperation from God. I mentioned again and again on my posts that I have nothing against Catholics, nearly all my family, relatives, friends and workmates are all from the RC. Its their docterine and also the claim that they are the "true church" considering all the autracities that have been covered up that I have an issue with.

kelly1 · 30-11-2007 2:58pm

JimiTime wrote: »

Based on the reasonings of discussions I've had with various folk including on here. Also on reading the scriptures and getting to know God, and with prayer and meditation I have not the slightest doubt that such a doctrine is wrong. So its not about doubt. Don't get me wrong, I'm always open to having my mind changed. If I'm shown a valid reason that is.

I'm getting repetitive now but why do you doubt your Saviour's words in Mt 25?

41 Then he shall say to them also that shall be on his left hand: Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels.

46 And these shall go into everlasting punishment: but the just, into life everlasting.

From which bible did you get "age-long pruning" as oppposed to "eternal punishment"?

If you "have not the slightest doubt" that Hell doesn't exist, then you have fallen into a trap of the devil. As I said before, you can't pick and choose from God's word and choose to believe some things and not others.

JimiTime wrote: »

Purpose is what its about Noel. Its purpose. No chastisement or disciplining takes place. Just endless pain and suffering. The point has been raised that the debt of sin can never be paid, so what is the purpose?

This is a harder question to answer but I'm sure it because of God's justice and the infinite offence caused by sin.

I need to research this a bit more.

God bless,
Noel.

JimiTime · 30-11-2007 3:17pm

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I mentioned Purgatory because it has absolutly no place for scripture, It spits at Christ in the face and is just a "white washed" name for hell. I threw Purgatory in with the rest of the words you mentioned because they all mean one thing and that is eternal seperation from God.

Well purgatory is completely irrelevant because it doesn't appear in scripture so I'd leave purgatory out completely, as it just confuses things. Also, have a look at all the references to where the hebrew word 'sheol' is used in the old testiment, and then tell me if you still believe that all those incidents mean eternal seperation from God.

I mentioned again and again on my posts that I have nothing against Catholics, nearly all my family, relatives, friends and workmates are all from the RC. Its their docterine and also the claim that they are the "true church" considering all the autracities that have been covered up that I have an issue with.

i'm not saying you do, you have issue with their doctrine and papal authority etc. My point is, is that if you diss catholic doctrine on papal authority, then just believe someone else instead, there is not really a big difference. You believing the KJ bible is flawless is you doing just that. Anyway, i don't really want to get into all that. Back on topic.

JimiTime · 30-11-2007 4:43pm

kelly1 wrote: »

I'm getting repetitive now but why do you doubt your Saviour's words in Mt 25?

I don't doubt Christ at all.

From which bible did you get "age-long pruning" as oppposed to "eternal punishment"?

What I said, was that there is some debate about the correct rendering, so that it doesn't necessarily translate as 'eternal' and 'punishment'. 'Aion' and 'Kolazo' are the greek words. Aion signifying, an age, and Kolazo signifying 'cutting off' or 'pruning'. However, even everlasting fire or everlasting punishment can be interpretted as something that will not be undone. Even when some cite the illustation of the rich man and lazarus, it is obviously illustration for it raises a few questions. Namely, can those in hell talk to those in heaven? or, can one drop of water on ones tongue relieve someone who is burning? It makes absolutely no sense that everlasting punishment is factual. As i said, it has no purpose.

If you "have not the slightest doubt" that Hell doesn't exist, then you have fallen into a trap of the devil.

Coming from someone who believes the RCC are christs church, i find that highly laughable TBH. You say it with such certainty Noel, and I don't think you even see how bad it is to say such a thing to me. Luckily, scaremongering does not inhibit my ability to reason and discern. God builds me up, and my faith is secure in him. He knows my honesty and knows my weaknesses. He knows my heart, and thats why I'm not afraid of such rhetoric.

As I said before, you can't pick and choose from God's word and choose to believe some things and not others.

I don't.

This is a harder question to answer but I'm sure it because of God's justice and the infinite offence caused by sin.

I need to research this a bit more.

God bless,
Noel.

looking forward to hearing the results of your findings.

gillyfromlyre · 01-12-2007 12:03am

Eternal punishment is ridiculous, what god would get pleasure from torturing people,I mean, if some sicko got a blowtorch to someones feet you'd say they are really disgusting,come on hell is a metaphor, hell is living negatively, hurting people, being spiteful, revenge, anger etc

wolfsbane · 01-12-2007 8:13pm

JimiTime said:

This in no way indicates immortality. Everlasting life is not immortality.

The difference is? See: http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=immortality&version1=50&searchtype=all&bookset=2

So the purpose of hell is to inflict suffering forever. Its a punishment for the sake of punishment. Its purpose is to inflict pain. No chastisement or discipline, just inflict endless pain. No lessons to be learnt etc, just endless pain.

Yes. The time for rebuke, chastisement,etc. are over. Hell is not a place for rehabilitation.

In fairness, I never said punishment was a problem. Punishment is absolutely necessary, and is Loving and purposeful.

You mistake punishment and chastisement. The latter is punishment with a view to reformation.

However, giving the wicked 'everlasting life' just so that they can suffer forever, well thats a different kettle of fish now isn't it.

The wicked are given everlasting shame and contempt - not everlasting life. But your point is that they are eternally existing, which you suggest is not a part of being a human spirit. Whether or not man is necessarily eternal, The Bible shows he will be that way, in bliss or shame.

Whether we view sin in a certain way or not, there is no sign of a purpose to the doctrine of fiery hell. Saying that God views Sin with so much more contempt etc, is fair enough, but it still doesn't give the doctrine of hell any purpose.

If God views sin as gravely as the Bible tells us, then eternal punishment is with the purpose of adequately rewarding it.

So you think it is Just, and deserved that a wicked man, who can never pay off his debt of sin, will be tortured endlessly for eternity? Again, for what purpose is such a thing happening for? other than to inflict endless pain?

To justly recompense his sin. You agree that sin must be punished, so it is your assessment of its gravity that makes you think eternal punishment is an unjust response.

If I saw purpose, i'd see why this punishment is there. However, its only purpose is pain and suffering. It has no end product. Its of no use to God, unless the pain and suffering of the wicked is the end result?

Exactly, them being rewarded for their sin is the end result - a vindication of God's holiness and justise.

Quote:
2. Can you account for the Bible passages that appear to teach the unending punishment of the wicked?

yes i can. would It satisfy someone who is firm in their religion and its dogma, probably not. For me, religion is the worst thing that ever happened to Christs Gospel.

It would be helpful for you to set forth your exegesis of those texts, so that you and us can clearly see what you are thinking.

Quote:
It is unfortunate that some of the English translations give hell for different Hebrew and Greek words, especially where those terms mean different places.

That would prompt me to ask. Why were they translated so in the first place?

I'm not sure. There may have been an agenda, as with bishop, but I can't think of one. Maybe as one of the other guys said, they weren't sure of the differences, and thought it best not to be too precise. For example, sheol can mean both the physical grave and the place of the departed spirit. Context helps, but even then..

Quote:
The wicked dead are in Hades.

Alive? As they are immortal according to your doctrine are they not?

By wicked dead I meant wicked physically dead, not spiritually non-existent. They are conscious in Hades. See Luke 16.

Quote:
They will be in Gehenna.

The place the Jews burnt their waste, and the place that was a place of shame because of the human sacrifices to the fasle god Molech? Where the fire was kept burning etc. The symbol of destruction?

The earthly place is the symbol of the terrible spiritual place. Both are not symbols - symbols point to realities.

Quote:
The second death is not a symbol. It is a state, just like the first death is a state.

So what is the first state of death like?

The body rots until it is gone. In the second death, the spirit rots - but as it is eternal, it just keeps on rotting:
Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.

I won't be able to respond till the holidays as my Christmas overtime starts Sunday night. But I look forward to reading your response and that of the other friends.

Grace & Peace

BrianCalgary · 02-12-2007 3:44pm

gillyfromlyre wrote: »

Eternal punishment is ridiculous, what god would get pleasure from torturing people,I mean, if some sicko got a blowtorch to someones feet you'd say they are really disgusting,come on hell is a metaphor, hell is living negatively, hurting people, being spiteful, revenge, anger etc

Who ever said that God gets pleasure from it?

You're making that up.

JimiTime · 03-12-2007 2:20am

BrianCalgary wrote: »

Who ever said that God gets pleasure from it?

You're making that up.

The thing is Brian, that no-one has really been able to answer what it is God actually does get from it?

JimiTime · 03-12-2007 3:29am

wolfsbane wrote: »

The difference is?

Well, Immortality means that it is 'impossible' to be destroyed. Eternal life may have conditions. Adam had eternal life, but he certainly wasn't immortal. There was the condition of if he ate of the tree he would surely die. There is a huge diference.

Yes. The time for rebuke, chastisement,etc. are over. Hell is not a place for rehabilitation.
You mistake punishment and chastisement. The latter is punishment with a view to reformation.

I made no mistake, i'm well aware of the meaning of punishment and chastisement. What I'm saying is, God has purpose in all he does. If he punishes with no ends, then punishment is the ends. So its got no purpose but to inflict pain and suffering, which is not loving.

The wicked are given everlasting shame and contempt - not everlasting life.

This is just playing with words in fairness. Its like using the cliche, 'well its hardly living'. The thing is, it is living. Self aware, concious etc. It is eternal life, just a very painful one.

Whether or not man is necessarily eternal, The Bible shows he will be that way, in bliss or shame.

I'd beg to differ.

If God views sin as gravely as the Bible tells us, then eternal punishment is with the purpose of adequately rewarding it.

But thats just it. its not adequate by what your saying, is it? What your doctrine of hell is saying, is that nothing is will ever be adequate, so there is no purpose in the suffering, as its still inadequate.

To justly recompense his sin. You agree that sin must be punished, so it is your assessment of its gravity that makes you think eternal punishment is an unjust response.

Not even unjust, purposeless. If there was purpose, then it would be just.

Exactly, them being rewarded for their sin is the end result - a vindication of God's holiness and justise.

just makes no sense

You are saying that pain and suffering for all eternity is the wages of sin. It can never be adequately paid, so lets just keep em alive and make them suffer. Why? So that they suffer. It just makes no sense??? Is there evidence of God working this way in any other circumstance?

It would be helpful for you to set forth your exegesis of those texts, so that you and us can clearly see what you are thinking.

First I would like to have a satisfactory answer to my question of the purpose of hell. As i said, otherwise its just interpretation here and there and arguements over what you and i think this and that means. The key is reconsiling the doctrine with God, something that has not been done IMO. Reading through this thread; there seems to be much confusion, and even ignorance to the doctrine. There sems to be alot of acceptance of the doctrine without too much knowledge concerning it. Everyone seems to have a different take on it. Be it that its just a metephor for seperation from god, to it being a place in the centre of the earth. What that tells me, is that its just accepted without question.

I'm not sure. There may have been an agenda, as with bishop, but I can't think of one. Maybe as one of the other guys said, they weren't sure of the differences, and thought it best not to be too precise. For example, sheol can mean both the physical grave and the place of the departed spirit. Context helps, but even then..

Would it not have you inquire why?

By wicked dead I meant wicked physically dead, not spiritually non-existent. They are conscious in Hades. See Luke 16.

So there is a heaven, a hell, and a remand centre called hades?

The earthly place is the symbol of the terrible spiritual place. Both are not symbols - symbols point to realities.

He used the earthly place, 'Gahenna', which was a place just outside Jeruselem, where the fire constantly raged to burn the waste etc, where there was much shame due to the human sacrifces to false gods. It was a place that to a Jew, would be of utmost shame if he was to be cast into it. It would be well known, that anything that was put into gahenna was consumed by its fire. He used this place of destruction as a symbol of the second death. A punishment that was everlasting, i.e. There would be no resurrection from it. This also ties into what John said in revelation, when he also used fire to indicate final destruction, 'the second death from which there is no resurrection'. As our first death we can be saved through Christ, the second death is everlasting. An everlasting punishment, unlike the punishment we inherited through Adam. Jesus defeated that one. He conquered 'death'. There is no conquering the second death.

The body rots until it is gone. In the second death, the spirit rots - but as it is eternal, it just keeps on rotting:
Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.

Again, if fire is the symbol of destruction, then this makes perfect sense. The punishment is everlasting. I.E. There's no chance of resurection.Eternal death. I.E. the wages of sin is 'death'. not everlasting torture.

Again, thank you wolfsbane for taking the time. Enjoy your holidays. Was actually in your neck of the woods last week in Co. Down, a wedding in 'The Olde Inn', Crawfordsburn. Lovely spot.
J.

kelly1 · 06-12-2007 9:31pm

Another passage supporting eternal punishment:

2 Thes 1:8 In a flame of fire, giving vengeance to them who know not God, and who obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 Who shall suffer eternal punishment in destruction, from the face of the Lord, and from the glory of his power:

There also have probably already been quoted but a bit of repetition might be useful:

Mark 9:44 And if thy foot scandalize thee, cut it off. It is better for thee to enter lame into life everlasting, than having two feet, to be cast into the hell of unquenchable fire: 45 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished.

Mt 18:8 And if thy hand, or thy foot scandalize thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee. It is better for thee to go into life maimed or lame, than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into everlasting fire.

Mt 13:42 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. .... 50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Jimi, eternal punishment is *very* explicit in the bible. Just because you can't fathom the idea doesn't mean it's not real. God is merciful and God is just and the time for mercy ends when we die. We must accept the existence of Hell as being true because it's the Word of God.

Why do you reject the Gospel of Christ and still claim He is your Lord and Saviour (if not your God).

I just read this on the reason why Hell is eternal:

Q. Why must hell be eternal?
A. Since grave sin is an outrage against God, a Divine Person of infinite dignity and majesty, man incurs thereby an infinite debt of punishment. And since finite man cannot be punished in a way that is infinite in intensity, he must be punished in a way that is infinite in duration.

God bless,
Noel.

JimiTime · 07-12-2007 3:12pm

kelly1 wrote: »

Another passage supporting eternal punishment:

2 Thes 1:8 In a flame of fire, giving vengeance to them who know not God, and who obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 Who shall suffer eternal punishment in destruction, from the face of the Lord, and from the glory of his power:

Again Noel, it is a punishment that will last for eternity. He even says, 'eternal punishment in destruction'. I.E. As John explains, 'a death from which there is no resurrection.' Everlasting destruction. When Adam sinned, Man was punished. How? 'Through sin 'death' entered the world'. However, through Christ we were redeemed which is why it is said 'he conquered death'. So this punishment was not everlasting. However, the next punishment will be. For those who are judged wicked, there will be no resurrection, no redemption. They will be cut off and death will hold them forever. The fire being symbolic of everlasting destruction. This is why in revelation it is said, "Death and Hades" are to be cast into the symbolic fire. Death is to be no more, just like the wicked.

Mark 9:44 And if thy foot scandalize thee, cut it off. It is better for thee to enter lame into life everlasting, than having two feet, to be cast into the hell of unquenchable fire: 45 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished.

Again, an everlasting destruction, The fire is used as a symbol of destruction. Its why Christ uses Gahenna in his symbolism. It is a symbol of both destruction, and shame. 'Unquenchable fire' i.e. everlasting destruction.

Mt 13:42 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. .... 50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.[/B]

Same as above. Symbol of everlasting destruction. They shall be aware that this destruction is upon them when they are judged.

Jimi, eternal punishment is *very* explicit in the bible. Just because you can't fathom the idea doesn't mean it's not real.

Well I wholly disagree with your indoctrinated interpretation. Also, Paganism had this doctrine long before christianity did. I would also say that the bible *very*explicitly states that "the lake of fire is 'the second 'death' from which there is no resurrection". That Gahenna symbolises destruction and shame. And that the unquenchable everlasting fire is a punishment from which there is no coming back from i.e. everlasting punishment. You believe in hell, as do most people who do, because you have been told that it is a fundamental belief. That it is 'explicitly' preached by Christ himself etc. You have been given the commentary on what was meant when Yeshua said this and that. The fact is, he used symbolism when referencing Gahenna, that much is obvious. However, when Gahenna is replaced by the word 'hell', you think you are just reading a matter of fact literal statement. It means you do not know what Gahenna was, or why he used the place in reference to what would happen to the wicked.

Why do you reject the Gospel of Christ and still claim He is your Lord and Saviour (if not your God).

What is the gospel of Christ Noel?

Overall though, your view has been regarding hell:
It seems harsh.
you don't understand it,
You don't know what the purpose of torturing someone forever is.
but its in the bible so its true.

There are some things that we don't understand, and not understanding something is no basis for denying its truth. That I agree with. However, If I don't understand something that I do wish to understand, I will do my homework on it. Based on my knowledge of God, as revealed to me in scripture, and based on my 'homework', and various conversations with people of various denominations, I safely conclude that the doctrine of hell fire torturing forever is a false one. This conclusion is certainly not based on ignorance. Its also not based on haughtiness, as suggested by PDN on another thread.

kelly1 · 08-12-2007 12:46am

Acts 24:15 Having hope in God, which these also themselves look for, that there shall be a resurrection of the just and unjust.

Explain that one!

JimiTime · 08-12-2007 12:55pm

kelly1 wrote: »

Acts 24:15 Having hope in God, which these also themselves look for, that there shall be a resurrection of the just and unjust.

Explain that one!

First of all, I'm not here to fight and argue. The above post seems to suggest i'm just here to annoy you or something

Its like 'ha, i got you now'. I hope thats not the case. Anyway. To answer your question.

Yes, there is to be a resurrection of both the saved and the wicked. Then there will be a judgement. Some will enter into everlasting life, and others to everlasting destruction.

it raises aother question though Noel. You have said that you believe that the moment you die, you go to heaven or hell. Now if that is the case, that if your 'immortal soul' never dies, and its that very soul that goes to heaven or hell, then what is it that is resurrected? Also, your previous post threw an accusation at me in the form of 'why don't you follow the gospel of Christ?'.

I have in turn asked you, 'what is the gospel of Christ?'. Any chance of an answer?

kelly1 · 09-12-2007 11:36pm

No, I'm not hear to fight with you but I do enjoy a good debate.

JimiTime wrote: »

Yes, there is to be a resurrection of both the saved and the wicked. Then there will be a judgement. Some will enter into everlasting life, and others to everlasting destruction.

Do you believe in one general judgment or a particular (individual) judgment and a general?

I would also question how destruction can be ever-lasting? If something is destroyed, it can't be ever-lasting.

JimiTime wrote: »

it raises aother question though Noel. You have said that you believe that the moment you die, you go to heaven or hell. Now if that is the case, that if your 'immortal soul' never dies, and its that very soul that goes to heaven or hell, then what is it that is resurrected?

Our bodies are resurrected just a Christ's body was resurrected. I know bodies decay but God of course has the power to give us new/glorified bodies.

JimiTime wrote: »

I have in turn asked you, 'what is the gospel of Christ?'. Any chance of an answer?

The books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. What did you have in mind?

God bless,
Noel.

SubjectSean · 09-12-2007 11:48pm

JimiTime wrote: »

The thing is Brian, that no-one has really been able to answer what it is God actually does get from it?

It is feeding off the purest ones, they are the most juicy

JimiTime · 10-12-2007 2:00am

kelly1 wrote: »

No, I'm not hear to fight with you but I do enjoy a good debate.

Great. I didn't say that i thought you were here to fight though. i said it looked like you think that I am. Hopefully thats not the case. Anyway.

Do you believe in one general judgment or a particular (individual) judgment and a general?

I don't know what you mean by this? What is a 'general' judgement?

I would also question how destruction can be ever-lasting? If something is destroyed, it can't be ever-lasting.

Were the people of the flood and Sodom and Gomorrah destroyed? Yes. Was their destruction everlasting? No. They will be raised to be judged on Gods appointed day. When the wicked are destroyed on judgement day, their destruction will be everlasting i.e. they will not be resurrected again.

Our bodies are resurrected just a Christ's body was resurrected. I know bodies decay but God of course has the power to give us new/glorified bodies.

So you believe all of those that are in heaven, (as you believe when you die you go straight there if worthy), will be sent back to earth to inherit a fleshly body again? Will they then go back to heaven with this fleshly body, or will they then live on earth again?
Also, if you believe all are judged the moment you die, then what is the purpose of judgement day?

The books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. What did you have in mind?

God bless,
Noel.

I think that 'gospel' has become a bit of a cliche actually. Gospel means 'Good news' or 'Good message'. So the Gospel of Christ, is the message of Christ. Its actually inaccurate to call the books of Matthew ,Mark, Luke and John, 'The Gospels', though that is what they are known as usually. They are in fact books 'containing' the gospel (good news) of Christ. So what I'm asking is, what is Christs message? What is his Gospel? If you were just asking do I believe the accounts written by the Matthew Mark Luke and John, the answer is yes. I'd like to know in light of the above though, what you thing the message of Christ is?

StormWarrior · 10-12-2007 6:05pm

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Commission of sin brings about eternal guilt, a guilt that is not expunged by the passing of time. If you murder someone, it doesn't matter if you go the rest of your life without murdering again. You are still a murderer, because the act was eternal.

So how does the whole redemption thing work? If you're still a murderer why bother changing your ways and living a christian life once you have "seen the light"?

kelly1 · 11-12-2007 2:46pm

StormWarrior wrote: »

Originally Posted by Run_to_da_hills View Post
Commission of sin brings about eternal guilt, a guilt that is not expunged by the passing of time. If you murder someone, it doesn't matter if you go the rest of your life without murdering again. You are still a murderer, because the act was eternal.

So how does the whole redemption thing work? If you're still a murderer why bother changing your ways and living a christian life once you have "seen the light"?
__________________So how does the whole redemption thing work? If you're still a murderer why bother changing your ways and living a christian life once you have "seen the light"?

Steady on there RTDH. Don't you believe in the forgiveness of sins which wipes away the guilt of sin?

Run_to_da_hills · 11-12-2007 2:57pm

kelly1 wrote: »

Steady on there RTDH. Don't you believe in the forgiveness of sins which wipes away the guilt of sin?

According to 1 John 1:9, "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanses us from all unrighteousness.

wolfsbane · 04-01-2008 10:10pm

JimiTime said:

Well, Immortality means that it is 'impossible' to be destroyed. Eternal life may have conditions. Adam had eternal life, but he certainly wasn't immortal. There was the condition of if he ate of the tree he would surely die. There is a huge diference.

Yes, I see your point. True.

I made no mistake, i'm well aware of the meaning of punishment and chastisement. What I'm saying is, God has purpose in all he does. If he punishes with no ends, then punishment is the ends. So its got no purpose but to inflict pain and suffering, which is not loving.

The objection you make distills to this: punishment with no hope of rehabilition or end is unloving. But who said it must be loving? Is God obliged to love Satan, the rest of the fallen angels, or sinful man? No. There is nothing about His loving nature that requires Him to extend that love to the wicked. That He does so to mankind, in sending them rain and sunshine, etc. is His common grace. He would be just if He sent fire instead of rain. Supremely, that He grants repentance and faith to the elect among them, forgiving their sins - indeed bearing their sins in His own body on the tree - is amazing grace.

But He gives no such help to the fallen angels. Is He lacking in love? Never. Why then must He limit His wrath against evil to a finite timespan?

God's love and His holiness are both characteristics. His goodness toward us is a manifestation of the former, His severity toward the wicked a manifestation of the latter.

Quote:
The wicked are given everlasting shame and contempt - not everlasting life.

This is just playing with words in fairness. Its like using the cliche, 'well its hardly living'. The thing is, it is living. Self aware, concious etc. It is eternal life, just a very painful one.

Yes, but only if one defines life like that - the Scripture makes the distinction when it comes to eternal things. And as you point out, that sort of 'eternal life' - existing in everlasting shame and contempt - is the opposite of what God means when He uses the term.

Quote:
Whether or not man is necessarily eternal, The Bible shows he will be that way, in bliss or shame.

I'd beg to differ.

How does one experience everlasting shame and contempt then, if one is annihilated or rehabilitated? Others may have contempt for us, but the shame is experienced by the offender.

Quote:
If God views sin as gravely as the Bible tells us, then eternal punishment is with the purpose of adequately rewarding it.

But thats just it. its not adequate by what your saying, is it? What your doctrine of hell is saying, is that nothing is will ever be adequate, so there is no purpose in the suffering, as its still inadequate.

Eternal punishment is adequate - it is always present. That is one of the usual objections to it - that it is too severe.

Quote:
To justly recompense his sin. You agree that sin must be punished, so it is your assessment of its gravity that makes you think eternal punishment is an unjust response.

Not even unjust, purposeless. If there was purpose, then it would be just.

The purpose is the vindication of God's holiness - that evil receives its due reward. Your objection must then be that it is too severe. But who are you or I to question God's assessment of the offence given by sin?

Quote:
Exactly, them being rewarded for their sin is the end result - a vindication of God's holiness and justise.

just makes no sense You are saying that pain and suffering for all eternity is the wages of sin. It can never be adequately paid, so lets just keep em alive and make them suffer. Why? So that they suffer. It just makes no sense??? Is there evidence of God working this way in any other circumstance?

It is a unique circumstance - the final reward of the wicked. Their suffering, as pointed out above - is a vindication of God's holiness and an indication of just how sinful sin is.

Quote:
It would be helpful for you to set forth your exegesis of those texts, so that you and us can clearly see what you are thinking.

First I would like to have a satisfactory answer to my question of the purpose of hell.

See above.

As i said, otherwise its just interpretation here and there and arguements over what you and i think this and that means. The key is reconsiling the doctrine with God, something that has not been done IMO. Reading through this thread; there seems to be much confusion, and even ignorance to the doctrine. There sems to be alot of acceptance of the doctrine without too much knowledge concerning it. Everyone seems to have a different take on it. Be it that its just a metephor for seperation from god, to it being a place in the centre of the earth. What that tells me, is that its just accepted without question.

I've given you the purpose. You may agree or not - but you must give an alternative explanation of the texts that deal with eternal punishment if you are to continue to deny it. Whether one sees the flames as literal heat or metaphorical for mental/spiritual pain, the eternal nature of suffering them still stands. If you can't refute what appears to be the plain meaning of the texts, then you must accept them as they stand.

Quote:
I'm not sure. There may have been an agenda, as with bishop, but I can't think of one. Maybe as one of the other guys said, they weren't sure of the differences, and thought it best not to be too precise. For example, sheol can mean both the physical grave and the place of the departed spirit. Context helps, but even then..

Would it not have you inquire why?

I'm not really interested. The issue is what does the Scripture teach, not whether in one particular instance the physical grave is meant as opposed to another where the abode of the soul is included. The total context of all the Scripture has to say on the eternal state is what really counts.

Quote:
By wicked dead I meant wicked physically dead, not spiritually non-existent. They are conscious in Hades. See Luke 16.

So there is a heaven, a hell, and a remand centre called hades?

For the moment, yes.

Quote:
The earthly place is the symbol of the terrible spiritual place. Both are not symbols - symbols point to realities.

He used the earthly place, 'Gahenna', which was a place just outside Jeruselem, where the fire constantly raged to burn the waste etc, where there was much shame due to the human sacrifces to false gods. It was a place that to a Jew, would be of utmost shame if he was to be cast into it. It would be well known, that anything that was put into gahenna was consumed by its fire. He used this place of destruction as a symbol of the second death. A punishment that was everlasting, i.e. There would be no resurrection from it. This also ties into what John said in revelation, when he also used fire to indicate final destruction, 'the second death from which there is no resurrection'. As our first death we can be saved through Christ, the second death is everlasting. An everlasting punishment, unlike the punishment we inherited through Adam. Jesus defeated that one. He conquered 'death'. There is no conquering the second death.

If that was all that Scripture said about it, one could suppose either way. But it goes on to speak of eternal torment, not just eternal death.

Quote:
The body rots until it is gone. In the second death, the spirit rots - but as it is eternal, it just keeps on rotting:
Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.

Again, if fire is the symbol of destruction, then this makes perfect sense. The punishment is everlasting. I.E. There's no chance of resurection.Eternal death. I.E. the wages of sin is 'death'. not everlasting torture.

What does the Scripture say? Revelation 14:9 Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10 he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”

Again, thank you wolfsbane for taking the time. Enjoy your holidays. Was actually in your neck of the woods last week in Co. Down, a wedding in 'The Olde Inn', Crawfordsburn. Lovely spot.

Glad to have this time with you, speaking of spiritual things. I'm also glad your trip wasn't last night or today - the whole of north Down was at a stand-still with the snow.

Every Blessing for 2008

wolfsbane · 04-01-2008 10:31pm

StormWarrior wrote: »

So how does the whole redemption thing work? If you're still a murderer why bother changing your ways and living a christian life once you have "seen the light"?

Good question!

The answer is the nature of what it means to become a Christian, what it means to be born again. We are saved when God grants us repentance (a genuine change of heart toward God and His laws) and faith (the certain sure knowledge in our heart that God is real and all that He tells us is true).

You will see from that that the true Christian cannot want to continue in his old way of life. The fact that we are not yet perfect and do fall into sin at times, is a BIG cause of sorrow for us. We live daily with the internal struggle of of new natures with our old. We are no longer slaves to the old, but it is a strong enemy. Repentance is therefore a necessary aspect of every Christians' life, no matter how godly we have become.

Romans 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? 3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, 6 knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. 7 For he who has died has been freed from sin. 8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, 9 knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. 10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

Love, Hell and the nature of God.

Comments