Evidence for God from Science

J.Davis wrote:God should leave the people alive on earth as they burn for all eternity? How can anyone not get this?

Sudsy wrote:And how can you believe this and be wasting your time here posting on this forum when millions upon millions will end up in such a place, according to your interpretation ? How can you not get this J. Davis and others who claim to believe this?

Galatians 1:6-10

6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel;

7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.

8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!

9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

10 For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a bond-servant of Christ.

It can’t be helped...Annihilationist may say the same but I do have the traditional belief (the truth) and Annihilationist say that if Jesus will do what it sounds like he’s saying then he is evil. I would never say such a thing, no matter what he said. If I felt God’s judgment was bad than that’s on me and I would keep it to myself because I don’t understand. But Annihilationist say God is evil if he does not think as they do. Making God’s true intentions appear unjust.

I believed I answered your question…I told you, There are many people involved here, not just us. Our post can not only influence the reader but those the reader speaks to as well as everyone that is connected to those spoken to.

I don’t push the hell message often but there is no way I will let other’s corrupt the message I felt lead to give. It’s conditional, if the message is challenged than I defend it. If not or It can be proven wrong than I leave it alone.

J.Davis wrote:God uses good judgment, providing a punishment so severe that even the hardest of hearts will consider listening to his voice

Sudsy wrote:And yet did you not say, or was it B.W., it is not your 'style' of evangelism to warn people of such an end ?

I said no such thing, that is Annihilationist thinking. I said I use wisdom and seek God’s guidance, I don’t push the message on the truly unsaved until I feel lead to do it, when they know more. And everyone should know about hell. Not telling them about it would be unfair and wrong..

J.Davis wrote:It is not good to strip God of the full magnitude of his Love

Sudsy wrote:Agreed. So stop doing it.

The Annihilationist rob God of his wisdom and full power. There is absolutely no way that their reasoning is of God when they base their belief on the fact that, if God would do something they do not approve of, then he is wicked. It’s bad fruit…very bad. And they are pushing a lie that can blind them and… if used in reverse…it will deceive many. It is not the truth, at all…

Sudsy wrote:Sorry you take this as a 'snide remark'. I have tried to get you to see what one fellow once put into words when he said that if he believed in this eternal torment as some Christians say they do, he would crawl across England on his hands and knees over cut glass to save a single soul. I'm just trying to say that I agree with what he is saying would be the case for anyone who truly believed this. Obviously you do not agree that this is how one would be impacted to live with such a belief. You are not alone, most believers state this belief as fact but live otherwise, IMO.

Matthew 7:1-5, "Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. 3 And why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove the speck from your eye'; and look, a plank is in your own eye? 5 Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye...."

Again you are forgiven...

And you wonder why I sought out if you were saved or not? hmmmm.... How many broken bottles have you tossed at me so far?

Again - you are forgiven...
-
-
-

Sudsy,

Annihilationist cite: For God's eternal wrath and punishment to be eternal - never ending - would be unjust, serving no purpose - by whose/what standards do you base this on?

Next as for Matthew 25:41,46, "...Then I'll say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels... 46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

In verse 46, the words ‘eternal punishment’ and ‘eternal life’ the word eternal is the same Greek word used twice and both used in the same Greek tenses and identical forms; therefore, if you claim ‘eternal punishment’ only last a few ages while ‘eternal life’ is everlasting as in never ending then that proves a big contradiction.

Because if ‘eternal punishment’ is temporal then ‘eternal life’ would likewise be temporal. Annihilationist, Universalist of all stripes cannot butcher the grammar to that degree because what applies to eternal life applies equally to eternal punishment as well. That is why Jesus said it that way as it was recorded.

Mark 3:29, “but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin…”

Guilty of an eternal sin??? -- hmmm - Is this sin temporal???

Mark 9:47-48 - "If your eye causes you to stumble, throw it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, than, having two eyes, to be cast into hell, 48 where THEIR WORM DOES NOT DIE, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED.” NASB

Note that Jesus states that the fire of hell is NOT QUENCHED and the worms that feast upon decay will not cease feeding upon those there – DOES NOT DIE.

Imagery is startling – the Fire of God’s wrath is not quenched and the worm – demonic host feeding and gnawing on one tossed into hell, that person together with their personal feeding host do not die...
-
-
-
P. S. -- 2 Sa 14:14 - "For we will surely die and become like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again. Yet God does not take away a life; but He devises means, so that His banished ones are not expelled from Him..." NKJV

The means God devises in order to restore a banished one is explained in Romans 5:9, 10. Note it says Banished one – not non-existing ones...

Byblos wrote:

BavarianWheels wrote:

Byblos wrote:It is correct to say that Jesus according to his human nature was born and died but he was uncreated. It is also correct to say Jesus according to his divine nature did not die. It is further correct to say that Jesus is fully divine and fully man, and he is one.

This quote is from the Thomas Aquinas thread in this forum. Sorry Byblos to hijack a point. Maybe you could enlighten me/us exactly how this may or may not fit here.

No problem Bav, I'll try but I'm not sure I will be able to help (might make matters worse, in fact).

BavarianWheels wrote:I think it fits quite exactly in the conversation here and in light of the topic here, again I must ask, Did Christ truly die for our sins and thus pay exactly the price God demands of sinners to pay apart from Him? If God is Judge and He must be just, is there any other way to see this? What I mean to say is does God play legal "tricks and twists" on Himself to pay the price or is the price truly and legally paid?

Byblos wrote:Jesus taking on our sins and dying for us does not in any way make him a sinner, if that's what you mean. It is in fact the exact opposite, he was (is) the perfect, unblemished lamb, otherwise he would not have been fit to be the last passover lamb and would not have fulfilled the prophesies. He took the punishment for our sins upon himself but was not a sinner himself.

LOL...no. I hardly meant Christ is/was a sinner, but simply He paid the exact price demanded of God that a sinner pay. If He didn't, we are unsaved through His death as He has not, then, paid the sin price.

Byblos wrote:I am trying, however, to relate this to the topic itself and I'm not seeing the connection Bav. Are you saying that Jesus would have had to suffer precisely a sinner's death (a total separation from God) albeit for the 3 days before his resurrection? Well, we know from scripture (1 Pet. 3:19) that Jesus did preach to the dead in prison. But he descended there as a Savior proclaiming the Good news and to open the gates of heaven, not as a sinner.

No, definitely not a sinner. You're all missing the point. May I make it clear that what I am saying is not that Christ was a sinner nor made a sinner, but simply sin was placed upon Him. Nothing more. So then if sin was placed upon Him, He, Christ, had to pay the price for sin. We know he became fully man and was fully divine also. As you put it, Byblos, Christ the divine God cannot die, however it is a mystery to me and one I believe we may never understand this side of salvation is how God died and thus was just in His payment for sin yet was made alive again. I attribute this to His divine nature and can simply say his divine nature didn't die, but his human nature did. The wages of sin is death and Christ had to die to pay for our sins placed on Him. God cannot play parlor tricks on His own demands. Christ died. Full stop.

About preaching to the saints in "prison"...is, I believe, a metaphor for His death having meaning and power to all those that died with a faith in a coming Messiah. Their deaths were vindicated and their faith was made real. Christ's death preached that they did not die in vain or in an empty promise. If Christ didn't die, He hasn't paid the wages of sin.

With the exception of a handful of people including Enoch, Moses, and Elijah, there are no other people in heaven right now. Every human that has died is in the grave either for Christ's call at the last trump.
.
.

BavarianWheels wrote:

Byblos wrote:I am trying, however, to relate this to the topic itself and I'm not seeing the connection Bav. Are you saying that Jesus would have had to suffer precisely a sinner's death (a total separation from God) albeit for the 3 days before his resurrection? Well, we know from scripture (1 Pet. 3:19) that Jesus did preach to the dead in prison. But he descended there as a Savior proclaiming the Good news and to open the gates of heaven, not as a sinner.

No, definitely not a sinner. You're all missing the point. May I make it clear that what I am saying is not that Christ was a sinner nor made a sinner, but simply sin was placed upon Him. Nothing more. So then if sin was placed upon Him, He, Christ, had to pay the price for sin. We know he became fully man and was fully divine also. As you put it, Byblos, Christ the divine God cannot die, however it is a mystery to me and one I believe we may never understand this side of salvation is how God died and thus was just in His payment for sin yet was made alive again. I attribute this to His divine nature and can simply say his divine nature didn't die, but his human nature did. The wages of sin is death and Christ had to die to pay for our sins placed on Him. God cannot play parlor tricks on His own demands. Christ died. Full stop.

I understand what you're saying and I had meant to qualify my comments by saying 'I know you don't believe that Jesus was a sinner' but forgot.

I don't disagree much with what you stated above, yes Christ died, full stop. What I think you are failing to see is that, unlike any other, Christ has 2 natures while remaining one person. And as I said above, Jesus according to his human nature died, full stop. Jesus according to his divine nature did not die, full stop. Those two statement are not contradictory given Jesus' 2 natures. The problem that arises when saying that Christ died and meaning his divine nature as well is that an eternal being can cease to exit. This either leads to the heresy of nestorianism or to a logical contradiction, take your pick which one you would prefer.

BavarianWheels wrote:About preaching to the saints in "prison"...is, I believe, a metaphor for His death having meaning and power to all those that died with a faith in a coming Messiah. Their deaths were vindicated and their faith was made real. Christ's death preached that they did not die in vain or in an empty promise. If Christ didn't die, He hasn't paid the wages of sin.

You are perfectly entitled to read metaphor in it but there is no basis for it in the text. It's just a simple statement that after death he preached to the departed. The way I see it is that Christ's death and subsequent resurrection had conquered death (past tense) and opened up the gates of heaven for all, including the OT saints. Both interpretations are equally as valid in the absence of an authoritative interpretation.

BavarianWheels wrote:With the exception of a handful of people including Enoch, Moses, and Elijah, there are no other people in heaven right now. Every human that has died is in the grave either for Christ's call at the last trump.

Oh I believe there are a few more than a handful. I know you meant to include Jesus as well but I bet you at least forgot Mary .

.
.
Thx Byblos.
.
.

Thanks bart for pointing out that there 'is not an "official" doctrine with regard to hell stated on the home page and statement of faith of the board.' I hadn't yet noticed that this site had these and I appreciate you pointing this out.

I realize that the annihilationst view is not a majority view within Christianity, at least not yet.

To J.Davis - Firstly you shared a text regarding 'another Gospel'. Surely you are not implying that an annihiliationist point of view is preaching another gospel, right ? For brevity, I'll refer to the annihilationist view as a the 'A' view and the traditional view as the 'T' view.

You claim that some 'A' view folk are implying Jesus is evil if He is saying what the 'T' view people understand Him to say. Is it not true that some 'T' view folk are implying that God is not true to Himself if He acts out the 'A' view ? So one is calling God evil while the other is calling God a liar. We are all striving to find an understanding of God and what He will do with our understandings of who He is. 'A' views suggest God is infinitely loving and merciful and to punish forever and ever does not reflect the character of God. 'T' viewers say that God must act this way as finite sins are against an infinite God and therefore deserve infinite punishment.

There are many people involved here, not just us. Our post can not only influence the reader but those the reader speaks to as well as everyone that is connected to those spoken to.

And I would not think it wise to not give all sides of the issue. Many are turned off with Christianity due to the traditional view of eternal torment. I think it is good for them to know that not all born again Christians, believe this 'T' view is absolute truth and that the 'A' view does have lots of supporting scripture to back it up.

Regarding what you did say regarding your style -

the hell message is not my style and I do not do it often at all

Now you say -

And everyone should know about hell. Not telling them about it would be unfair and wrong..

So which is it ? If you do not do it often at all because it is not your style, then it sounds like you are calling yourself unfair and wrong.

The Annihilationist rob God of his wisdom and full power.

Really, my, my. Whatever it takes to throw stones at those Christians with annihilationist views.

To B.W. -

You keep forgiving me for things you are taking as insults when they are statements made to make a point regarding how one should act with a 'T' view belief. But if you must, then keep forgiving until you reach 70 X 7.

And you wonder why I sought out if you were saved or not? hmmmm.... How many broken bottles have you tossed at me so far?

Again - you are forgiven...

Whoops, I think you just entered the realm of passing judgment, no ? I think you take things quite personally and perhaps to avoid facing up to the point being made. And that is an observation, not passing of judgment.

B.W., is this how you deal with people who disagree with your theology, you challenge if they are really saved or not ? Hmmm, sounds pretty dogmatic to me. I guess now I clear my slate and post 'Again - you are forgiven'.

Well, needling aside, I would suggest you look closer at the annihilationist possible interpretations on Matthew 25:41-46. You say 'what applies to eternal life applies equally to eternal punishment as well.' This is not necessarily true but you have chosen to see it one way only.

And yes the worm does not die and nothing puts out the fire until all is destroyed as Jesus pointed out in other verses. See how we keep going in circles.

Anyway, we both probably need to lighten up and I think I hear an 'amen' or two from other forum readers. I agree with this site in not making any single view of the nature of hell a statement of faith. Hell will be a terrible place to be and I think we agree on that.

This thread got me thinking about something that occurred recently in our local fellowship. A fellow came back from a YEC museum and was quite pumped and preached a sermon on how necessary it was to take the creation account in a literal 6 day sense or if we do not, we couldn't trust anything scripture had to say. I challenged him on this view that having a different view of creation means the scriptures are untrustworthy. All scripture is trustworthy but our interpretations are sometimes flawed.

I find this topic of eternal torment, at times, seems to take on a similar approach. If you do not accept the traditional, eternal torment view, then you are wrong and perhaps not even a believer. Some even think that way about other end time events.

When scripture speaks of another gospel, I think we need to be very careful that we are not adding to the real Gospel and recreating another gospel that includes the need to believe these secondary doctrines. Agree or not ?

i see what your saying but it does make a difference when you interpret Hell since it does talk about Gods perfect justice in the mean time how God created the universe really doesn't talk about his character, it's just how he created things.

Sudsy wrote:To J.Davis - Firstly you shared a text regarding 'another Gospel'. Surely you are not implying that an annihiliationist point of view is preaching another gospel, right ?

Well...

Annihilationist can not use full scriptures to prove their claim and must cutout only what fits their ideas, have a belief that God could be unjust if he does not fit their idea, has to write a book to get a meaning that fits one scripture, misinterprets scriptures such as the Sodom and Gomorrah scripture (and others). Assumes that an example of an eternal punishment on Earth is to be taken literally, justifies their beliefs by getting several people to side with them, can not consider that the way they give people out of hell interfaces with God’s way, changes the meaning of eternal into a metaphor (harming the integrity of the bible) as well as changing obvious and clear scripture into metaphors and because of their tampering, the entire word of God is weakened etc etc etc.

There are many, many beliefs in the world but only one God, one true word of God, one true interpretation of scripture (even if one scripture has many elements, each element has one truth) and one way out of hell. And there is no way in the world that it is the Annihilationist way.

Sudsy wrote:You claim that some 'A' view folk are implying Jesus is evil if He is saying what the 'T' view people understand Him to say. Is it not true that some 'T' view folk are implying that God is not true to Himself if He acts out the 'A' view ? So one is calling God evil while the other is calling God a liar.

No, you misunderstood…If God wanted to do as Annihilationist say than I am 100% fine with that. If God wanted to do what the bible say’s he will do, and that is have never ending torment for the unsaved. Than I am ok with that because I trust his ways. It does not matter to me…people misinterpret the bible all the time. But It is right to love God for what we perceive as both the good or bad. The authors of the Annihilationist link you posted say if God was to have never ending torment for the unsaved, then he is unjust, inhumane ..etc. And the main author uses the statements to justify his Annihilationist belief. No, God (I am/Jesus) is good and just no matter what…You want to use the Annihilationist argument with another God, then that is fine by me.

J.Davis wrote: There are many people involved here, not just us. Our post can not only influence the reader but those the reader speaks to as well as everyone that is connected to those spoken to.

Sudsy wrote: And I would not think it wise to not give all sides of the issue. Many are turned off with Christianity due to the traditional view of eternal torment. I think it is good for them to know that not all born again Christians, believe this 'T' view is absolute truth and that the 'A' view does have lots of supporting scripture to back it up.

No, because the Annihilationist view is a lie and leaves the door open for one to adjust the bible to fit their needs. In doing so they cause confusion against the truth, making it so people will question the bible (because of the misunderstood belief that the bible can contradict) and create followers that spread lies. Annihilationist believe that some may be scared away from the gospel so they take the fear out of it and create a group of people that love God on their terms because (as you said) they are turned off otherwise. So the followers never have the opportunity to love God thorough this thing that is difficult for them to accept. God love’s no matter what, if you accept him he will accept you. But Annihilationist are turned off and reject God for what they perceive as his immoral nature (accuse) but God love’s them even with all their evil. Nothing can be so bad to turn him away form them. But they misunderstand and want God on their terms…Because after all, it’s to much of a risk to be involved with God…If you are unsure if you’re saved…best to make his wrath gentle…

But it won’t change anything…God’s wrath is serious and the torment last for eternity.

edit...

Sudsy wrote:This thread got me thinking about something that occurred recently in our local fellowship. A fellow came back from a YEC museum and was quite pumped and preached a sermon on how necessary it was to take the creation account in a literal 6 day sense or if we do not, we couldn't trust anything scripture had to say. I challenged him on this view that having a different view of creation means the scriptures are untrustworthy. All scripture is trustworthy but our interpretations are sometimes flawed.

I find this topic of eternal torment, at times, seems to take on a similar approach. If you do not accept the traditional, eternal torment view, then you are wrong and perhaps not even a believer. Some even think that way about other end time events.

When scripture speaks of another gospel, I think we need to be very careful that we are not adding to the real Gospel and recreating another gospel that includes the need to believe these secondary doctrines. Agree or not ?

The manner in which to determine if doctrine is true is to compare it with the Lord's character and attributes in the bible. This works with OWEC and YEC as well - hint: God's wisdom... (This thread is not for discussing YEC or OEC)

As so stated before:

…God will not violate who he is nor cause him deny himself (his name) – in this you uncover truth about doctrine and cheerfully toss out the bad, through Truth: truth about the Lord… Comparing spiritual matters as 1 Corinthians 2:13 gave clue too. The spiritual is God himself who is Spirit, who abides in truth that is substantiated upon who he is as he reveals himself within the bible…

Does one's doctrine cause God to cancel out any of his attributes?

If so, no matter how flattering it is - it needs tossed out...


Sudsy, You have not tried this with your doctrine of annihilationism - So I ask ... Why?


I simply asked you and others too:

…Take your time and roll these around in your mind and ask the Lord questions about these - compare and try to justify to doctrine and see if any goes against these stated principles about God. This will lead to more questions, gain more insight, find more answers not anticipated, during this time you can throw out the bad and comprehend the good. This will take time and often much wrestling with God is involved. However, You'll develop a deeper living loving relationship with God and gaze in awe concerning the mysteries of Himself that He slowly reveals...

So let's review: Note these truths about God’s character:

Numbers 23:19, "God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He said, and will He not do? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?” NKJV

Hebrews 6:18, “…that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we might have strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us.”

Now again as I stated before

…By causing the life God placed in man to cease into a non-being state, would be contrary to who God is as this would indict God as being not the living God and unable to keep the eternity placed in ones heart forever...

Note these truths about God:

Ecclesiastes 3:14, “I know that whatever God does, It shall be forever. Nothing can be added to it, And nothing taken from it. God does it, that men should fear before Him.” NKJV

Ecclesiastes 3:11, “He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end….” NKJV

Bible also teaches God as The Living God - God even spoke of himself that way within the OT as well as in the New:

Luke 20:38, "For He is not the God of the dead but of the living, for all live to Him."

Hebrews 10:31, "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."

Isaiah 46:10 "Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things that are not yet done, Saying, 'My counsel shall stand, And I will do all My pleasure..."

Isaiah 14:27, "For the LORD of hosts has purposed, And who will annul it? His hand is stretched out, And who will turn it back?"


...The principle spoken about God revealed 2 Sa 14:14 is profound: "For we will surely die and become like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again. Yet God does not take away a life; but He devises means, so that His banished ones are not expelled from Him..."

The means God devises in order to restore a banished one is explained in Romans 5:9, 10. Note it says Banished one – not non-existing ones. Why? - yes we die, but God does not take away life… Lines up with what God does endures forever and placing eternity in the heart as well as being a God of the Living in the fullest sense of the word. If this was not so – then explain how Satan managed to rebel in treason without being zapped into non-being by leading one third of the angels in rebellious treason against God?

FACT: God does not take away life i.e. spirit returns to God who gave it to face Judgment -Hebrews 9:27

WHY: HE is a living God – God whom remains true himself and his ways

Now look at this verse:

2 Timothy 2:13, "If we are faithless, He remains faithful; He cannot deny Himself."

FACT: God cannot deny himself

Question: Does Annihilationism doctrine cause God to deny himself, deny any of his promises, deny how he made us, when it states that God will annihilate into non-being?

Would annihilating into non-being cause God to deny himself as the living God, cause him to lie, deny how he fashioned humanity with 'what' in our hearts? Is God eternal? in whose eternal image was humanity fashioned after?

...would it – Yes or No – does it - Sudsy


Next,

Deuteronomy 10:17, “For the LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality nor takes a bribe.”

God favoring one group with eternity in the heart and another group disfavored by denying them the same by blasting such off into non-being does not this then prove absolutely that God indeed shows partiality?

How can God be truly impartial by sending one off into oblivion of non-being and another not, and remain true to his word, gifts (givings) and promises?


Now again:

Nahum 1:3 - "The LORD is slow to anger and great in power, And will not at all acquit the wicked..."NKJV

Isaiah 57:21 - "There is no peace," Says my God, "for the wicked."NKJV

Isaiah 3:11 - "Woe unto the wicked! it shall be ill with him; for the work of his hands shall be done to him." JPS

Isa 3:11 JPS states - it will be ill with him - meaing sickness, ruin, decay, destruction - as he meted out it is meted back...

Everlasting Perishing, Ruin, Everlasting Destruction, means recompense, not non-existence. Non-existence implies the peace of nothingness…

Peace – is it not a cessation and rest from hostility…trails, torments?

Since God stated these things, by granting the wicked rest-peace, a cessation from hostility into an non-being state would not this prove that God indeed denies himself - his word - his promises - givings?

Back to the question: How can God be truly impartial by sending one off into oblivion of non-being, remain true to his word, gifts (givings) and promises?

Answer clue: Both have to be made with eternity in their hearts with both given equal opportunity to decide where each wants to spend that eternality: That is Just/ justice…


The principles found in the bible that reveal that God placed eternity in our hearts, gives life, reneges on no gifts, does not take away life, such things as this he does endures forever, substantiates that He designed human beings and angelic beings with an eternal nature with a definite beginning. Because God alone always had immortality – he shares it as he so ever wills.

Sudsy, please answer the questions above and this one below:

Annihilationist cite: For God's eternal wrath and punishment to be eternal - never ending - would be unjust, serving no purpose - by whose /what standards do you base this on?

You have not answered any of these questions nor begun to reconcile annihilationist doctrine to what God reveals about himself within the bible…

For doctrine to be correct it must do so by not violating any principles, truths, etc declared about God found in the bible....

You have not answered any of these questions, nor have you begun to... Why???

God is high and lifted up - far above us - does annihilationism cause God submission to man's will/desires?
-
-
-

I would like to clarify something....

I made the statement: The Annihilationist rob God of his wisdom and full power. There is absolutely no way that their reasoning is of God when they base their belief on the fact that, if God would do something they do not approve of, then he is wicked.

I was speaking specifically about people who dismiss a possible (way more likely then not) truth of God’s character on the grounds that he is a good God and anything they perceive as Bad concerning what God said, is to be rejected.

The people on the Annihilationist link (because of their misunderstanding and/or need to rebel) made it clear to me that they believe as they do for the reason stated above.

But that is completely different from someone who reads the scriptures, puts together their understanding of the facts and draws a logical conclusion despite what they feel. In short (after reading Rich’s page) my comments concerning how the Annihilationist reasoning is not of God was in no way, whatsoever, directed at Rich. He was just using his understanding of the scriptures and applying logical reasoning ...

So he is in no way being ungodly....We just understand the scripture differently. I will see what else I can dig up. But it should be noted that Rich’s conclusion is based on a belief that when the bible speaks of destruction, it means and end to existence. So he does not leave room to play with the word eternal thus keeping the integrity of the bible mostly intact.

But that is not what Annihilationist say at all. They know that just using the word destruction is not going to cut it because destruction does not end existence, it only changes the form of whatever is being destroyed. Smash a brick, it’s still there, it’s just not a brick anymore. it’s brick dust....

Annihilationist point out this fact here...

Some may question our use of "annihilation" for the destiny of the wicked, because the first law of thermodynamics says that nothing is destroyed but changed into something else. When corpses are burned, their smoke and ashes remain. This is true, but what remains is no longer human life. From a Biblical perspective, the fire that consumes the wicked annihilates them as human beings.

They say....From a Biblical perspective, the fire that consumes the wicked annihilates them as human beings.

Ok....first, were is the scripture that say’s those in the lake of fire will no longer be human? Second, that does not matter one bit. Whatever is left can still be burnt and it can still have a human spirit in it. As I said, destruction just means deterioration. So, to get around this, the Annihilationist play with the word eternity.

This is completely different from what Rich mean’s. Rich assumes that a possible conclusion could be an end to existence due to the belief that the Geeks may have meant an end to existence when they used the word destruction and suggesting that this destruction will come after the lake of fire...

However, as B.W and I pointed out...

Scripture suggest existence after being thrown into the lake of fire...

Revelation 20:14-15 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

Mark 9:47 If your eye causes you to stumble, throw it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, than, having two eyes, to be cast into hell, 48 where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.

Revelation 14:11 “And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”

Daniel 12:2 "Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt (abhorrence, hatred, detestation, great aversion).”

Along with other metaphors...

These events happen after being thrown into the lake of fire...So no, the unsaved will not cease to exist.

But yeah, Rich is not in the same boat as Annihilationist as he has not modify words and scripture, he just gives a few possibilities based off his interpretation of scripture…

More to come….

J.Davis wrote:There are many, many beliefs in the world but only one God, one true word of God, one true interpretation of scripture (even if one scripture has many elements, each element has one truth) and one way out of hell. And there is no way in the world that it is the Annihilationist way.

I am curious how you can prove your interpretation is the correct one and no other.

I'm interested too, how one can as a blanket statement assert that every element of scripture has only one truth. That's contraindicated on its face by the common belief that certain prophecies have both an immediate short term understanding contemporary to the original hearers and yet serve as well as a type of Christ or a longer term prophecy.

It seems to me that this assertion of one and only one element runs a risk of elevating the interpretive framework over Scripture itself. It also runs the risk of confusing one's interpretation with scripture itself. I think that a common thing in many elements of YEC that I observe for instance. I have to also admit that by the same token OEC can do the same thing.

The idea of a one to one correlation with every element of scripture is one rooted in greco-Roman philosophy. It certainly was not common to the Hebrew mindframe and culture. The examples of how the NT interprets the OT stands against this. The history of Judaism and the interpretation of scripture through the Talmud and Mishnah, stands against this.

Perhaps this explains (not directing this personally to anyone) the unyielding and unwavering dogmatism that leads to schisms within the body of Christ, especially in the protestant western world.