Re: Infinite punishment for finite sins
Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 3:03 pm
I especially hope readers took a look at this site in their study - http://www.hell-know.net/
"The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands." (Psalm 19:1)
https://discussions.godandscience.org/
Then came a lot of scriptures, proof and logic based on the bible and God’s character. The evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the traditional view (eternal torment in hell). And that is why it’s the traditional/truth view. Pastors, prophets, theologians, Christians etc have gone over this matter front to back covering every detail and the traditional view is the result and has been forever. Annihilationist can make whatever claims they wish but the bible is 100% clear that hell is so bad that you should do whatever it takes to stay out of it. I have said before that stripping God of the full force of his love is wrong. Many will hear or read what Annihilationist have to say and they will be deceived. There are those who will believe that burning until they die is something that they can handle. Also, many on earth have endured extreme pain and many are extremely burdened with pain, depression and they feel completely hopeless. And they just want the pain to stop. They would do anything, even kill themselves, (it happens everyday)....anything to escape the pain. And they would gladly endure a period of temporary burning if they could be free of the pain. The annihilationist link in this thread teaches that the unsaved sleep when they die (not go to Hades) and then everyone will wakeup for the day of judgment. So… according to the annihilationist link, the unsaved wakeup on the day of judgment, have God yell at them for a bit and then he burns them and it’s all over. But it’s a lie...They will awake to never ending pain. Annihilationist claim that there is another way out of hell besides the one Jesus provided, that alone should raise a few caution flags.J.Davis wrote:No one knows (well, maybe B.W ) how bad the lake of fire will be (Jesus said to do whatever it takes to stay out of it/it‘s really bad). But It’s not like people don’t have a choice, no one has to go to hell.
There are several definitions for the word destruction as it is used in the bible, same with death and just about every word in the bible. It’s all about context, knowing Jesus, being guided by Jesus etc. The scriptures above are not man’s interpretation, even with no interpretation at all, as B.W said:B. W. wrote:Annihilationist seem to pay no heed how these words, like destroy/destruction (622 st) are used elsewhere in the bible to describe ruined wineskins (Matt 9:17), lost sheep (Matt 15:24), spoiled food (John 6:27), destruction of flesh (1 Co 5:5), ruining a brother over food (1 Co 8:11), World destroyed by the flood (2 Pet 3:5, 6) but note the earth is still here - it was ruined-then renewed.
For example 2 Thessalonians 1:9 uses same word translated destruction as does 1 Corinthians 5:5 which refers to an individual being turned over to the devil for the destruction of the flesh so that his spirit will be saved in the day of the Lord. So, let’s apply annihilationist definition to what Paul writes in 1 Co 5:5 - “I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the (utter annihilation destruction into non-existence) of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” By using bible software and looking at around 95 occurrences that the same word 'apollumi' (including all tense forms) is used in 86 verses in the New Testament, this word has more to do about being brought into a state ruin, chaos, debasement, than it does extinction. One definition used for so many words to mean only one thing (extinction) in selected texts should cause the eyebrows to rise.
No matter what Annihilationist say, that fact remains...B. W. wrote:2 Thessalonians 1:9 uses same word translated destruction as does 1 Corinthians 5:5
If the unsaved go to hell because they did not accept Jesus (or, for those who do not know his name and what the bible says, accept his way). Then being spiritually severed from God is the cause of death, bringing with it corruption, sin just acts as scissors, the instrument of destruction, the severed (from God) condition is what causes one to live in a state of torment, void of spiritual well-being and holiness (living dead).J.Davis wrote:destruction, as it is used in the bible, in relation to sinners who live or die in sin and reject God (Jesus), laws and ways is a metaphor for those who suffer pain and corruption as a natural result of severing the bound humans were meant to have with God. And hell/The lake of fire is a physical manifestation of the effects involved with that severed state. Not the effects of the eternal fire because that would destroy the purity and truth of why the unsaved go to hell, change the meaning of numerous scripture, pervert God’s perfect good and just nature and have Him tormenting (or annihilating for all you annihilationist) people out of nothing but spite.
I know you believe you have the truth figured out J. Davis but sticking with tradition no matter what is what some might call a dangerous way to believe. If the 'T' view holds water, it should be able to stand up to challenges. To disallow an alternative view to be presented sounds like brainwashing to me. Some kind of control tactic.But annihilationism is a dangerous belief and no one should spread it.
I think this is one of the major arguments that few find compelling to believe as truth. This is some twist in logic coming from the error that man is made immortal and God, in love, will not destroy him. It is also suggested that if man desires to have eternal torment, God will lovingly give him what he wants. Is that what we do with our children. If you know your child wants to harm themself would you let them ?I have said before that stripping God of the full force of his love is wrong.
Perhaps this is an area we can explore. What scriptures would you use in support of that?Sudsy wrote:It will have an end for each person after the wrath of God is satisfied for their sinning.
Again notice how many words are used to promote what is best for man within this one Link Sudsy so kindly provided that do not stand on what is best for God. A lot of wasted words which reminds me of what Clark Pinnock desires: "It is such a longing, I believe, that is encouraging theologians today to revise the traditional view of hell and to propose alternative interpretations of the scriptural data."Sudsy wrote: I especially hope readers took a look at this site in their study - http://www.hell-know.net/
Hebrews 1:2, 2, "… in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. 3 And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high…" NASB[color=#800000]From the Combine Summary of God’s Character, Nature, attributes from the bible compiled earlier on this thread[/color] wrote:
God does not lie, makes no mistakes, does not change his mind and He always keeps his word. When God makes a promise, He keeps it, it is impossible for Him to lie so we can feel safe in the fact that we will have what he promised. God does not change, he is a strong and stable foundation, his work is perfect, he is fair in all thing, and never unjust. God is not evil or unjust, we get fair punishment or reward according to what we have done. God will never act in an evil way, he will always do what is fair (and he will never change his law).
God’s ways and understanding is far above ours and what he wants done will be done. There are no other God’s, just one (I Am/Jesus) he tells the course of events to come (the future) before they befall He always warns. What he has set in place will stand…he will do what he wishes. God has all power and authority above all, he will judge all justly and fair no matter who you are. God holds one to account: God will bring every work into judgment. He repays man according to his work, and makes man to find a reward according to his own ways. God gives every man according to his ways and according to the fruit of his doings.
God gives life to man (Gen 2:7 –eternal image, Job 33:4, Acts 17:25 life to all). He placed his eternity in the human heart as he purposed it. What God does endures forever. God does not take away life (2 Sam 14:14). God provides means by which the lost can be reconciled back to him. God's gifts and calling are irrevocable (Rom 11:29). God shows no Partiality. All His judgment are with equity.
God is good to all. God hates every evil path, iniquity, sin. God hates. God loves. God shows mercy. God takes vengeance. God jealously protects. He is a God of perfect judgment. God is perfect/blameless in all his ways. God is Holy, His work is perfect; for all His ways are justice, A God of truth and without injustice; Righteous and upright is He. God is all mighty and awesome and there is no unrighteousness in Him. God is the Living eternal God – sovereign – absolutely mighty, absolutely wise, all knowing.
I think it's a good post. I would agree with you for the most part however if I'm understanding you correctly I find exception with this:Katabole wrote:I believe my answer is theologically correct and Biblically sound.
However this is not an issue with the subject at hand and can be taken up elsewhere...not that I want to though.Katabole wrote:So after those thousand years are ended, God's children will be tested one last time. After that the judgment. For those who passed the test, judgment day is reward day. For those who didn't it is punishment day.
I tend to side with your interpretation, however am still looking forward to B.W.'s interpretation on the word judgment.Katabole wrote:Bavarian, I noticed you were looking for the deinition of the word judgment.
I'm certain Brian will have a field day with this one.So after those thousand years are ended, God's children will be tested one last time. After that the judgment. For those who passed the test, judgment day is reward day. For those who didn't it is punishment day.
I don't think that's what he said. It may be what you interpret or hope he said, but I suppose it best to wait for him/her? to make that point.jlay wrote:Wow. Trying to equate God being described as a consuming fire, which obviously describes his nature, to him being the actual lake of fire mentioned in revelation.???
The context is Israel's liberation...certainly a "first fruits" if you will, of the liberation of God's people (Church...if you want) at the final judgment.jlay wrote:Deuteronomy 9:3 Understand therefore this day, that the LORD thy God is he which goeth over before thee; as a consuming fire he shall destroy them, and he shall bring them down before thy face: so shalt thou drive them out, and destroy them quickly, as the LORD hath said unto thee.
The context of this has NOTHING to do with the point you are attempting to make. This clearly has to do with God's judgment upon those people's physical lives here on the earth. This was about Israel moving into the promised land. Not the final judgment.
Which word from Hebrew and Greek - one specific one or all of them?BavarianWheels wrote:.
.
B.W. - You have yet to post an interpretation of judgment.
That’s funny because I was sure I said....Sudsy wrote:I know you believe you have the truth figured out J. Davis but sticking with tradition no matter what is what some might call a dangerous way to believe. If the 'T' view holds water, it should be able to stand up to challenges. To disallow an alternative view to be presented sounds like brainwashing to me. Some kind of control tactic.
It has nothing to do with tradition. It is simply the truth as a result of study, fellowship with God, knowing God’s character etc. Tradition is just a word I am using to keep this debate simple. And it is the word you chose so please do not try to use it now as a word to discredit the truth. I am well aware of how people use the word tradition to discredit truths about the bible. And I know how men manipulate the bible and use it to control and manipulate men. I made sure to say the traditional/truth view several times because I know how people play with the word tradition. The word tradition is applied to the eternal suffering in hell in the same way it is applied to the fact that God exist and Jesus is the son of God, they are facts of the bible and only tradition because they are true.J.Davis wrote:The evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the traditional view (eternal torment in hell). And that is why it’s the traditional/truth view. Pastors, prophets, theologians, Christians etc have gone over this matter front to back covering every detail and the traditional view is the result and has been forever.
From the link you provided on page 6..Sudsy wrote:What I notice is this attempt by you to minimize the 'A' view seriousness on hell as a way of putting it down. You put it 'So… according to the annihilationist link, the unsaved wakeup on the day of judgment, have God yell at them for a bit and then he burns them and it’s all over.' If you can find one instance where this is stated as such, show us. If you can't provide the truth about this, why should anyone think you have the truth about eternal punishing.
I have no reason to lie sudsy...Regarding sheol, our study of the word in chapter 5 shows that none of the texts supports the view of sheol as the place of punishment for the ungodly. The word denotes the realm of the dead where there is unconsciousness, inactivity, and sleep.
The first death is a temporary sleep because it is followed by the resurrection. The second death is permanent and irreversible extinction because there is no awakening.
J.Davis wrote:I have said before that stripping God of the full force of his love is wrong. Many will hear or read what Annihilationist have to say and they will be deceived. There are those who will believe that burning until they die is something that they can handle.
Ok....In response to the Annihilationist claim that God would be unjust, inhumane and immoral if he would allow eternal torment, in short.Sudsy wrote:It is also suggested that if man desires to have eternal torment, God will lovingly give him what he wants. Is that what we do with our children. If you know your child wants to harm themself would you let them ?
I think most people with common sense raise their eyebrows at the thought that man chooses to go to non-ending torment. To be fair and just no one would send anyone to such a destiny without making it absolutely clear what the two destinies of choice are before they made any choice. And God is much more fair and just than any of us could ever be.
Now, concerning God’s wrath (I have been over it). God is clear that the unsaved will suffer the consequences of their sin, and so they will, God will make things even, his judgment will be fair to all involved.Sudsy wrote:Punishment is not an act of love but rather one of wrath. Even most 'T' viewers that I know, see it as an act of righteous wrath for sinning against a holy God. Many of us were raised with this understanding. And the 'A' view folk would agree. The issue is not whether God is acting in love or wrath but rather how much wrath will there be and how long will it last. You suggest that the 'A' view indicates that it would be for the amount of time it takes to burn up our current bodies. Again, where did that idea come from ?
You seem to think the 'A' view makes hell appealing and therefore does not serve as a threat to people.
J.Davis wrote:There are those who will believe that burning until they die is something that they can handle.
I do not believe I have repeated myself very much. I repeated a few things I said in my first post on this page but only because I was away from the discussion for a bit. Mostly, any repetition I have is a result of your repetition. But it is not my intention to repeat at all, and I certainly have no intention of brain washing, just trying to help.Sudsy wrote:Suggestion - can we quit using repetition to bolster our arguments.
J. Davis, how about you, will you agree to make only one more post on this thread and let all this information on the subject stand ? I asked B.W. the same.But I am sure that there is more than enough info to consider now.