What Would You Have Asked Lazarus?

[FFC]

Hi ttoews,

You said...

I note that death and Hades (after they have been emptied) are thrown into the lake of fire. Death and Hades are not persons and so I don't believe that these two things are actually thrown into the lake of fire.

I note death is to be destroyed (1 Cor 15:26) and so I believe that Rev 20:14 speaks of the destruction of death and Hades.

I further note that the destination of death, Hades and the wicked is the lake of fire which is called the second death (20:14 and 21:8 ). I believe that the fate of death and Hades in the lake of fire is destruction and wonder why I should believe that the wicked suffer a different fate (especially when John stresses that the lake of fire is the second death.)

Sounds right to me!

Don

Hebrews 10:28 Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. (29) How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?

Don, if all the wicked suffer the same anihilation then how do you explain the degrees of suffering that are inferred in these verses?

or these?

Luk 12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not [himself], neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many [stripes].


Luk 12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few [stripes]. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

[DonCameron]

FFC,

You asked me...

If all the wicked suffer the same annihilation then how do you explain the degrees of suffering that are inferred in these verses?

I don't have an explanation.

But since all those who are not found written in the book of life are thrown into the exact same place then I assume they all receive the exact same punishment. - Revelation 20:15

Don

[FFC]

FFC,

You asked me...

If all the wicked suffer the same annihilation then how do you explain the degrees of suffering that are inferred in these verses?

I don't have an explanation.

But since all those who are not found written in the book of life are thrown into the exact same place then I assume they all receive the exact same punishment. - Revelation 20:15

Don

But how does that jive with the different degrees of suffering mentioned elswhere? Byblos and I would dearly love to know.

[B. W.]

Hi again B.W.

One of the things you asked was...

Where does one want to spend eternity? Heaven? Hell? Non-existence (everlasting death)?

So far I have not been able to find where the Bible ever mentions the alternatives of Heaven or Hell.

What I have found is are the alternatives of everlasting life or death.

For example Romans 6:23 where Paul stated that, "The wages of sin is death but the gift God gives is everlasting life."

For another example: John 3:16 where Jesus gave the alternatives as being everlasting life or perish. ("perish" means "To be destroyed; to pass away; to become nothing."

Where have you found that the alternatives are everlasting life in heaven or everlasting life in hell?

Don

Greetings Don,

Here is your answer:

If you have everlasting life — where will you live?

Read: John 14:1-3, Deuteronomy 4:39, Psalms 14:2, Matthew 3:2, Matthew 3:17, Matthew 5:10-16, Matthew 7:21, Revelation 5:3. These are just a few scriptures way too numerous that describe where those called to everlasting life will reside.

Question: Where will you reside?

Now on to the analysis of annihilationism: For God to cast into non-existence is apropos to murder. Would God break his own commandment? LowlyOne stated the best answer:

Now the traditional and annihilationist views about hell are expressions, respectively, of the sanctity and quality of life ethical standpoints. After all, the only grounds God would have for annihilating someone would be the low quality of life in hell. If a person will not get saved and if God will not extinguish one made in His image, then God's only alternative is quarantine and that is what hell is. Thus, the traditional view, being sanctity and not a quality of life position, is morally superior to annihilationism. In conclusion, I find that the traditional view of hell most accurately reflects biblical, moral and logical considerations.

Therefore, would God break his own commandment — you shall not murder?

The idea of murder is to extinguish life, cause it to cease. God is a God of the living and not the dead, Mark 12:24-27, John 6:51-69, 2 Corinthians 5:1-5.

Would God deny himself by annihilating life?

Romans 11:29, "For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance." KJV
-
-
-

[DonCameron]

Hello B.W. again,

I had asked...

Where have you found that the alternatives are everlasting life in heaven or everlasting life in hell?

You then said...

i]Here is your answer:

Read: John 14:1-3, Deuteronomy 4:39, Psalms 14:2, Matthew 3:2, Matthew 3:17, Matthew 5:10-16, Matthew 7:21, Revelation 5:3. These are just a few scriptures way too numerous that describe where those called to everlasting life will reside.[/i]

What I meant was that I have not found any discussions in the Bible where everlasting life in hell is mentioned as the alternative to everlasting life in heaven (or even "everlasting life). None of the verses you mentioned do so.

If the alternative to everlasting life in hell is in fact the alternative to everlasting life in heaven then I would expect to find this stated somewhere in the Bible. For example, Romans 6:23. But it does not say the following...

For the Wages sin pays is everlasting life in hell, but the gift God gives is everlasting life in heaven.

Although Paul didn't say this, isn't this what you and most everyone else on this forum believe?

If Paul or any other Bible writer had said such a thing then that's what I would believe too. But Paul didn't say this here or anywhere else. And again, so far I haven't found anyone else in the Bible who has said such a thing.

Don

[Byblos]

For the Wages sin pays is everlasting life in hell, but the gift God gives is everlasting life in heaven.

Although Paul didn't say this, isn't this what you and most everyone else on this forum believe?

If Paul or any other Bible writer had said such a thing then that's what I would believe too. But Paul didn't say this here or anywhere else. And again, so far I haven't found anyone else in the Bible who has said such a thing.

Don,

Do you believe in the trinity? If you don't, then in my view this whole discussion is moot. But if you do, please show me where in the bible the trinity is explicitly mentioned.

[DonCameron]

Byblos,

I had asked where the Bible states that the alternative to everlasting life in heaven is everlasting life in hell.

You responded by asking...

Do you believe in the trinity?

I believe in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

But what does that have to do with whether or not the bible says that the alternative to everlasting life in heaven is everlasting life in hell?

Does this mean that you haven't been able to find the above alternatives stated in the Bible either?

Don

[Byblos]

Byblos,

I had asked where the Bible states that the alternative to everlasting life in heaven is everlasting life in hell.

You responded by asking...

Do you believe in the trinity?

I believe in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

But what does that have to do with whether or not the bible says that the alternative to everlasting life in heaven is everlasting life in hell?

Does this mean that you haven't been able to find the above alternatives stated in the Bible either?

Don

You believe 'everlasting life in hell' cannot be true because you say it is not explicitly stated (even though we've shown multiple verses where the meaning is all too clear). By extension, I am simply asking how you can believe in the trinity even though it is not explicitly stated in scripture. Why the double standard?

[DonCameron]

Byblos,

You said...

You believe 'everlasting life in hell' cannot be true because you say it is not explicitly stated.

What I have said is that I have not been able to find such a statement in the Bible. Apparently you you haven't been able to find it either.

You reasoned...

By extension, I am simply asking how you can believe in the trinity even though it is not explicitly stated in scripture. Why the double standard?

I didn't say I believe in "the Trinity." I said I believe in "the Father, Son and Holy Spirit." I believe this because this is "specifically stated in Scripture" at Matthew 28:19.

Don

[B. W.]

Hello B.W. again,

I had asked...

Where have you found that the alternatives are everlasting life in heaven or everlasting life in hell?

You then said...

i]Here is your answer:

Read: John 14:1-3, Deuteronomy 4:39, Psalms 14:2, Matthew 3:2, Matthew 3:17, Matthew 5:10-16, Matthew 7:21, Revelation 5:3. These are just a few scriptures way too numerous that describe where those called to everlasting life will reside.[/i]

What I meant was that I have not found any discussions in the Bible where everlasting life in hell is mentioned as the alternative to everlasting life in heaven (or even "everlasting life). None of the verses you mentioned do so.

If the alternative to everlasting life in hell is in fact the alternative to everlasting life in heaven then I would expect to find this stated somewhere in the Bible. For example, Romans 6:23. But it does not say the following...

For the Wages sin pays is everlasting life in hell, but the gift God gives is everlasting life in heaven.

Although Paul didn't say this, isn't this what you and most everyone else on this forum believe?

If Paul or any other Bible writer had said such a thing then that's what I would believe too. But Paul didn't say this here or anywhere else. And again, so far I haven't found anyone else in the Bible who has said such a thing.

Don

Yes I did but you have not answered the question that leads to it:

Therefore, would God break his own commandment — you shall not murder?

The idea of murder is to extinguish life, cause it to cease. God is a God of the living and not the dead, Mark 12:27, John 6:51-69, 2 Corinthians 5:1-5.

Would God deny himself?

Eternal non-existence, violates God own Commandments — now would God break his own word and law?

Also, what is destruction without end mean? 2 Thess 1:9

Greek words translated destruction means ruin, death, as well as denotes a wide array of meanings concerning destruction, ruin, torments, punishment etc and etc.

So you believe that those without Christ will suffer endless ruin, dying experiences, torments, punishment, and endlessly go through being annihilated continuously, or go through the extinction process eternally? Sound's like Hell to me.

All the scriptures others have cited to you are sufficient proof that Hell is eternal such as 2 Thess 1:9.

If God makes extinct, annihilates, destroys as you believe and interpret — have not you proved God breaks his own word and commandment — thou shall not murder — cause life to cease? If you are right — you proved God a liar. Is that your position?

Ecclesiastes 3:11-15, "He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the hearts of men; yet they cannot fathom what God has done from beginning to end. 12 I know that there is nothing better for men than to be happy and do good while they live. 13 That everyone may eat and drink, and find satisfaction in all his toil—this is the gift of God. 14 I know that everything God does will endure forever; nothing can be added to it and nothing taken from it. God does it so that men will revere him. 15 Whatever is has already been, and what will be has been before; and God will call the past to account." NIV

Galatians 6:7, "Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows."

Are you mocking God by declaring that God broke his own commandment in order to annihilate according to your doctrine?
-
-

[ttoews]

,



You believe 'everlasting life in hell' cannot be true because you say it is not explicitly stated (even though we've shown multiple verses where the meaning is all too clear).

are those the same verses for which I am supplying alternate interpretations? ...if so when will I get to the clear ones?

By extension, I am simply asking how you can believe in the trinity even though it is not explicitly stated in scripture. Why the double standard?

ironically I was going to suggest you held to a double standard...you have requested explicit statements regarding 1)annihilation and 2) that the annihilation need not be immediate yet there is only one explicit statement for eternal torment (Rev 20:10) and that passage is highly symbolic and so it is hardly clear that a literal interpretation is appropriate.

Wrt item #2, if annihilation is the end result, and if the scriptures talk of a time of anguish for the damned and of degrees of punishment (and I believe we agree on that at least) then it would seem that if I establish that annihilation is the end result, then it necessarily follows that the annihilation will not be immediate. (which is the kind of reasoning that sees the concept of the Trinity as being derived from scriptures)

[ttoews]

If God makes extinct, annihilates, destroys as you believe and interpret — have not you proved God breaks his own word and commandment — thou shall not murder — cause life to cease? If you are right — you proved God a liar. Is that your position?

by your reasoning the bible makes God a liar as it records Him killing people and directing the killing of people.
Are you suggesting that as the creator of all life God does not have the right to end any life?

[B. W.]

If God makes extinct, annihilates, destroys as you believe and interpret — have not you proved God breaks his own word and commandment — thou shall not murder — cause life to cease? If you are right — you proved God a liar. Is that your position?

by your reasoning the bible makes God a liar as it records Him killing people and directing the killing of people.
Are you suggesting that as the creator of all life God does not have the right to end any life?

Note - I do not want to be misunderstood on this matter what I am about to write. Nor do I want it to be misused to suggest some point of view contrary to scripture. This is one of those deep things about God people fail to note and here goes:

God foreknows everything about a person. If a person will love God or reject God, this God knows before time. Thus he can place these people where he so chooses and do with them as he pleases. He can and has formed nations out of these, in times, eras, and epochs of history as a form of containment.

When God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah or commanded ancient Israel to slay an entire population — these people were irredeemable and placed together as a form of containment. By the act of slaying — these people were committed unto Gods final eternal judgment. Hence they died physically but did not die spiritually. They were instead spiritually condemned eternally because their acts were exceedingly wicked. Therefore, they were not Murdered in the form of ceasing their eternal life. God placed eternity in the human heart. Also note that 2 Timothy 5:24 and Hebrews 9:27 teach this concept. Therefore, God does not Murder — He is sending them to receive Final Eternal Judgment because they are and were and will always be irredeemable. God does not violate his own Law if these continue to live eternally.

The idea of capital punishment — the death penalty for Murder in the First degree — is to send the criminal offender for final judgment to God, where they'll face eternity before the ultimate Judge.

After working in the Criminal Justice Field for Eight Years now, I can assure you that there are certain people who are totally irredeemable and can never be released back into society and these people are not mentally ill either, but cold, calculating, manipulative, dominating, charming, slick talkers, and pure evil. Its best to send them to God for finally judgment than have them hang around manipulating the legal system as they do seeking every chance to escape to go back and do their crimes.
-
-
-

[DonCameron]

B.W.,

You said...

Therefore, would God break his own commandment — you shall not murder?

The idea of murder is to extinguish life, cause it to cease. God is a God of the living and not the dead, Mark 12:27, John 6:51-69, 2 Corinthians 5:1-5.

Would God deny himself?

Eternal non-existence, violates God own Commandments — now would God break his own word and law?

I don't understand the point you are making here.

You then asked...

Also, what is destruction without end mean? 2 Thess 1:9

You referred to 2 Thess. 1:9 again when you said...

All the scriptures others have cited to you are sufficient proof that Hell is eternal such as 2 Thess 1:9.

I looked up 2 Thess. 1:9 and noticed that it doesn't say anything about Hell being eternal. In fact what Paul said here seems to agree with what I have been saying rather then what you have been saying...

"The wicked) will undergo the judicial punishment of everlasting destruction from before the Lord and from the glory of his strength."

That's exactly what I believe. The way I understand it is that that everlasting punishment of destruction will take place in the everlasting "second death" of Rev. 20:15

You said...

So you believe that those without Christ will suffer endless ruin, dying experiences, torments, punishment, and endlessly go through being annihilated continuously, or go through the extinction process eternally?

What I believe as of today is that those who are not found written in the book of like will be be destroyed in the second death. - Rev. 20:15

You said...

If God makes extinct, annihilates, destroys as you believe and interpret — have not you proved God breaks his own word and commandment — thou shall not murder — cause life to cease? If you are right — you proved God a liar. Is that your position?

Ecclesiastes 3:11-15, "He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the hearts of men; yet they cannot fathom what God has done from beginning to end. 12 I know that there is nothing better for men than to be happy and do good while they live. 13 That everyone may eat and drink, and find satisfaction in all his toil—this is the gift of God. 14 I know that everything God does will endure forever; nothing can be added to it and nothing taken from it. God does it so that men will revere him. 15 Whatever is has already been, and what will be has been before; and God will call the past to account." NIV

Galatians 6:7, "Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows."

Are you mocking God by declaring that God broke his own commandment in order to annihilate according to your doctrine?

Sorry, but I don't understand the points you are making here.

Don

[Byblos]

You believe 'everlasting life in hell' cannot be true because you say it is not explicitly stated (even though we've shown multiple verses where the meaning is all too clear).

are those the same verses for which I am supplying alternate interpretations? ...if so when will I get to the clear ones?

I may have missed it but what alternate interpretation did you supply for Mat 25:46 "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."?

By extension, I am simply asking how you can believe in the trinity even though it is not explicitly stated in scripture. Why the double standard?

ironically I was going to suggest you held to a double standard...you have requested explicit statements regarding 1)annihilation and 2) that the annihilation need not be immediate yet there is only one explicit statement for eternal torment (Rev 20:10) and that passage is highly symbolic and so it is hardly clear that a literal interpretation is appropriate.

First, clearly there's more than one explicit statement for eternal torment than Rev 20:10. Look no further than Mat 25:46 quoted above, which, by the way, is not symbolic in any way. It unequivocally states 'eternal punishment'. Annihilation puts an end to punishment and is anything but eternal. They are polar opposites.

Second, are you really trying to use my own words against me? I don't think so. Don stated that if something is not explicitly stated that it cannot be considered true. He made that claim, I didn't. I fully acknowledge there are some things inferred. I asked if Don believed in the trinity, to which he replied that he believed in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. When I called him on the double standard, he sidestepped it by saying he didn't say he believed in the trinity, as if there's a difference (and if there is, you or he please explain it to me). Is this the kind of hair-splitting argumentation required to explain away his or your position?

Third, having said all of that, I'm well cognisant of the fact that issues such as these, while terribly important to us all to dissect and comprehend, may not be so terribly important wrt salvation.

Wrt item #2, if annihilation is the end result, and if the scriptures talk of a time of anguish for the damned and of degrees of punishment (and I believe we agree on that at least) then it would seem that if I establish that annihilation is the end result, then it necessarily follows that the annihilation will not be immediate. (which is the kind of reasoning that sees the concept of the Trinity as being derived from scriptures)

If you agree that there are degrees of punishment and you further agree that that punishment is eternal (as per Mat 25:46) then by definition annihilation is no longer valid as an option. Do you not see that?