Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment biblical or not?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by godrulz View Post
    I predict you will not last long here. I also predict that you are probably in your 20s and don't realize that you don't know it all.
    48

    And apparently, I know more than you.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Timotheos View Post
      Well, I suppose if we were to take the highly symbolic Book of Revelation completely literally that would be three. The Devil, The Beast, and The False Prophet.

      Can you find any verses that say "The wicked will go to Hell when they die where they will be tormented alive forever while they are dead"? That's really what I'm looking for.

      Here's something to think about when you read the Book of Revelation. The BOR was written in the "Apocalyptic Style" which is characterized by an abundant use of symbolism. It might not be the best idea to grab a doctrine from the BOR and then use it to interpret all of the rest of scripture. A sound hermeneutical principle is to interpret less clear passages in the light of more clear passages. Don't start in Revelation and work backwards from there.

      Actually, that's just a friendly suggestion. You can do whatever you want. Bless you brother!
      Lazaruz was in torment and very conscious.
      One lavished upon in the Beloved
      sigpic

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Totton Linnet View Post
        Lazaruz was in torment and very conscious.
        Lazarus was not in torment.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Totton Linnet View Post
          Lazaruz was in torment and very conscious.
          The rich man, not Lazarus

          Comment


          • According to the Bible, the soul who sins will die. Ezekiel 18:4
            Fear the one who can destroy both body and soul in Gehenna. Matt 10:28
            According to Jesus, Both body and soul will be destroyed in Gehenna.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Timotheos View Post
              Lazarus was not in torment.
              Some things to think about. If the parable of Lazarus and the rich man is literal (i.e. it happened as stated word for word), doesn't that mean that punishment for "deeds done in the flesh" begins before judgment of those deeds takes place (which is at the final judgement)?

              Jesus used actual people (i.e. Abraham) in this story. But people who’ve lived before can be used in parables as a point of reference. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the story being told is an actual historical event. And that Jesus tells this story in order to get a particular message across is indicative of a parable. Further, the message derived from this story coincidentally parallels the same message found in the four preceding parables (lost sheep, lost coin, lost son, shrewd manager): God’s compassion for the lost and rebuke of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by tomlapalm View Post
                The rich man, not Lazarus
                I am very proud of my memory...but it is USELESS, of course it is Dives not Lazarus
                One lavished upon in the Beloved
                sigpic

                Comment


                • The account of the rich man and Lazarus is not a literal description of heaven and "hell". If it was a literal account, you would have people in "Abraham's bosom" wanting to go to the "other side" of suffering where the rich man was, and the need for a huge gulf to prevent them from doing it. The "great gulf" reminds me of the "wall of separation" that Paul spoke about in Ephesians 2:14. Like Surrender said, this story is a parable about the exclusivist attitude that many of the Jews had. Judah had 5 brothers, he was the kingly tribe (purple robe), and had all the advantages in the things of God. Lazarus was poor and the parable seems to portray him as a Gentile. I say that because there is the mention of suffering, crumbs of bread falling from the table and dogs. The only other accounts that have these same elements are found in Matt. 15:27 and Mark 7:28, which both describe a Gentile woman asking Jesus to help her suffering daughter. I have always found it strange that none of the chain reference or study bibles I have looked at ever have a cross reference between Luke 16:21 and Matthew 15:27 or Mark 7:28, but they are filled with other cross-references that have a lot less in common than these do. Maybe because they want to hold on to this as a literal account and discourage people from seeing the rich man and Lazarus as a parable?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by godrulz View Post
                    In principle, death is separation. Adam died, yet was alive, when he sinned, for e.g. You beg the question by assuming your definition of death as cessation is right. Different contexts also talk about physical, spiritual, eternal death (some of your verses just show that those who die physically do not know the news stories on earth in the after life).
                    this
                    Using your logic, the triune God is not trinity because some verses only mention Father or Son, but do not say 'God is trinity'.

                    You argue like a JW on the issue of hell. Shame.
                    Timotheos, He is not breaking any rules, but you are being a pest, reporting a member's opinion.
                    So, what?

                    believe it!

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Ktoyou View Post
                      Timotheos, He is not breaking any rules, but you are being a pest, reporting a member's opinion.
                      It had to be done. People don't like their deeds exposed. But I am trying to have a civilized conversation.

                      I'm sorry if you feel am am a pest. You are welcome to ignore this thread, or participate if you want to. I enjoy intelligent conversation with people like you. I hope you are blessed by this conversation.

                      Peace!

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by BigBoof1959 View Post
                        The account of the rich man and Lazarus is not a literal description of heaven and "hell". If it was a literal account, you would have people in "Abraham's bosom" wanting to go to the "other side" of suffering where the rich man was, and the need for a huge gulf to prevent them from doing it. The "great gulf" reminds me of the "wall of separation" that Paul spoke about in Ephesians 2:14. Like Surrender said, this story is a parable about the exclusivist attitude that many of the Jews had. Judah had 5 brothers, he was the kingly tribe (purple robe), and had all the advantages in the things of God. Lazarus was poor and the parable seems to portray him as a Gentile. I say that because there is the mention of suffering, crumbs of bread falling from the table and dogs. The only other accounts that have these same elements are found in Matt. 15:27 and Mark 7:28, which both describe a Gentile woman asking Jesus to help her suffering daughter. I have always found it strange that none of the chain reference or study bibles I have looked at ever have a cross reference between Luke 16:21 and Matthew 15:27 or Mark 7:28, but they are filled with other cross-references that have a lot less in common than these do. Maybe because they want to hold on to this as a literal account and discourage people from seeing the rich man and Lazarus as a parable?
                        Parables were used by our Lord to establish truth not fiction
                        One lavished upon in the Beloved
                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Timotheos View Post
                          It had to be done. People don't like their deeds exposed. But I am trying to have a civilized conversation.

                          I'm sorry if you feel am am a pest. You are welcome to ignore this thread, or participate if you want to. I enjoy intelligent conversation with people like you. I hope you are blessed by this conversation.

                          Peace!
                          Your reporting rulz was crybaby, his opinion was creditable.
                          One lavished upon in the Beloved
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by BigBoof1959 View Post
                            The account of the rich man and Lazarus is not a literal description of heaven and "hell". If it was a literal account, you would have people in "Abraham's bosom" wanting to go to the "other side" of suffering where the rich man was, and the need for a huge gulf to prevent them from doing it. The "great gulf" reminds me of the "wall of separation" that Paul spoke about in Ephesians 2:14. Like Surrender said, this story is a parable about the exclusivist attitude that many of the Jews had. Judah had 5 brothers, he was the kingly tribe (purple robe), and had all the advantages in the things of God. Lazarus was poor and the parable seems to portray him as a Gentile. I say that because there is the mention of suffering, crumbs of bread falling from the table and dogs. The only other accounts that have these same elements are found in Matt. 15:27 and Mark 7:28, which both describe a Gentile woman asking Jesus to help her suffering daughter. I have always found it strange that none of the chain reference or study bibles I have looked at ever have a cross reference between Luke 16:21 and Matthew 15:27 or Mark 7:28, but they are filled with other cross-references that have a lot less in common than these do. Maybe because they want to hold on to this as a literal account and discourage people from seeing the rich man and Lazarus as a parable?
                            Do you think it was figurative of something that you think doesn't exist?

                            It reflected Paradise, the destination of the righteous before the Cross when they were allowed into God's presence .The great gulf wad between the righteous and unrighteous dead.

                            Real commonly know names are not used in figurative parables. This Lazarus was a well know beggar who asked at prominent public places.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Totton Linnet View Post
                              Your reporting rulz was crybaby, his opinion was creditable.
                              I'm sorry, I'm rather new. I didn't know reporting bad behavior was against the rules. Usually people who want to get away with stuff don't like it when you report them. It wasn't crybaby at all. Name calling (ie crybaby) just shows that you can't defend your position using logic and scripture. I'm sure that you are too mature to engage in childish namecalling.

                              Comment


                              • Oh no we like to report Real bad behaviour . You haven't seen it yet..

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X