Is the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment biblical or not?

[Aimiel]

Saying death is the end of one's torment for being a sinner is as much Scriptural nonsense as saying: "Judas hanged himself," and then combining it with: "Go thou, and do likewise." It's completely disingenuous. Eternal conscious torment is described by many passages and cannot be denied by simply ignoring the Truths of The Holy Scriptures.

 

[Timotheos]

Saying death is the end of one's torment for being a sinner is as much Scriptural nonsense as saying: "Judas hanged himself," and then combining it with: "Go thou, and do likewise." It's completely disingenuous. Eternal conscious torment is described by many passages and cannot be denied by simply ignoring the Truths of The Holy Scriptures.

I'm sorry, but the BIBLE says that the wages of sin is death. You are ASSUMING that the wages of sin is torment.

Eternal conscious torment is not described by "many passages" of scripture. There is not even one verse in scripture that says that the wicked go to hell when they die where they are conscious of torment forever. I do not deny the truth of scripture. I deny that scripture says what you claim it says.

According to John 3:16 and many other scriptures, the penalty for sin is to perish. Whoever believes in Him will not PERISH but will have eternal life. This cannot be denied by simply ignoring the Truths of The Holy Scriptures.

There is not one verse in all of scripture that backs up what you claim, that the wicked will go to hell when they die where they will be tormented alive for all eternity, so please do not try to claim that I am ignoring scripture..

You are ignoring scripture. Scripture plainly states that the wages of sin is death. You can't change this by ignoring it. You can't deny it, it is written in Romans 6:23. Believe the Bible rather than your false tradition.

 

[Timotheos]

Saying death is the end of one's torment for being a sinner is as much Scriptural nonsense as saying: "Judas hanged himself," and then combining it with: "Go thou, and do likewise." It's completely disingenuous. Eternal conscious torment is described by many passages and cannot be denied by simply ignoring the Truths of The Holy Scriptures.

Saying that the bible says that the wages of sin is eternal conscious torment is as much nonsense as saying "Judas went away and lived happily ever after."

The complete destruction of the wicked is described by many Bible passages, and can't be denied by simply ignoring the Bible.

 

[Aimiel]

I don't buy it, since a cursory reading of Scripture shows the Truth: eternal conscious torment is quite obvious.

 

[andrewh]

Jesus believed this and trusted the Father. Hundreds of millions of godly believers affirm this truth, the biblical, historical, orthodox view for 2000 years.

Do you think its possible for God to choose another fate for the lost? While I believe the Scriptures teach annihilation of the lost, I could only imagine one condition where I could rationally embrace the eternal torment position. And that is if, for some reason, God has no choice but to consign the lost to eternal torment.

Now unlike many, I do not believe on the omnipotence of God as such omnipotence is generally understood (i.e. the Sunday School sense that God can do whatever He wants). So I am at least open to the possibility that God has no choice but to send the lost to eternal torment.

I think that if you believe otherwise - that is, that God has a choice about this - you really are in a bind. More specifically, you are faced with the challenge that the same God who instructs us to embrace restorative justice, and to love our enemies, also sends people to an eternity of torment, when He could have done otherwise.

To many, myself included, that seems absurd. And I politely suggest that the only "out" for the person who believes that God freely sends people to eternal torment is to invoke a concept of holiness and justice that somehow "demands" eternal suffering for the lost.

Well, where does that concept come from? It seems awfully contrived and hard to reconcile with other things we are taught in the scriptures. And it seems awfully easy to see it as a contrivance specifically aimed at controlling people.

 

[andrewh]

Saying death is the end of one's torment for being a sinner is as much Scriptural nonsense as saying: "Judas hanged himself," and then combining it with: "Go thou, and do likewise." It's completely disingenuous. Eternal conscious torment is described by many passages and cannot be denied by simply ignoring the Truths of The Holy Scriptures.

I think there is a real problem with your reasoning here. You see texts that certainly appear to suggest eternal torment. Fine - there are indeed such texts. But then you have to deal with "the wages of sin is death" texts. Your strategy appears to be "Well, we have texts that say the lost suffer forever, so we have to re-define 'death', as used in texts like Romans 6:23 to mean a state of eternal conscious awareness"

Death denotes a state of continual life? That is simply too much of a stretch, and it should be a red flag. Although I do not have the time to make the case right now, I suggest that it is much more exegetically legitimate to see the "eternal torment" passages as either (1)implementing the use of exaggeration (and there is Biblical precedent for such use, as per an earlier post of mine); or (2) based on a questionable rendering of the original greek word as denoting a specifically eternal time period.

My point is that I believe I (and others) can or have made Biblical arguments about why its legitimate to read these eternal torment passages differently from their superficial sense. You are free to critique those arguments. But, I will bet that nowhere in this thread have you (or others) made a Biblical argument that "death" can mean "eternal conscious life".

 

[godrulz]

Some are working from a secular, evolutionary understanding of death vs a biblical/theological one. Saying death means death is begging the question if death is separation, not cessation.

 

[Krsto]

Is a Judge a monster for putting someone like Hitler or Charles Manson in prison?!

That's not your argument. You are trying to justify God putting someone in eternal conscious torment for one single sin since you believe any sin at all, no matter how trivial, like you stealing a cookie from the cookie jar when you were 5, will disqualify a person from eternal life, assuming he was born with it to begin with (nobody is, btw).

Steal a cookie, get hard time for eternity. THAT'S your argument. Do try to follow along.

God is a responsible Moral Governor of the universe. His love and holiness are not divorced from each other. He is not a monster for dealing justly with monsters after they reject His mercy.:loser:

Exactly, and why I don't believe in ECT. ECT does not follow from what you just said here, it's polar opposite.

 

[Krsto]

Some are working from a secular, evolutionary understanding of death vs a biblical/theological one. Saying death means death is begging the question if death is separation, not cessation.

Some of us are working from the scriptures alone, seeing what God has to say about justice and concluding ECT does not follow God's instructions regarding justice, in fact, contradict his instructions to us.

 

[godrulz]

Every individual with moral/mental capacity is far more guilty than stealing a cookie. Man lives forever, like it or not (God does not destroy moral, personal creation in His image nor angels/demons). This necessitates two destinies: those who love and obey and worship God and those who persist in rebellion against Him. Minimally, there is separation. People live on earth separated from God relationally. This perpetuates in eternity. Others are reconciled to God and this also continues (death seals destiny).

You think you know more than God/Jesus/Bible. It is like those who think God is a tyrant because of His OT dealings. We are wrong, not Him.

 

[godrulz]

Some of us are working from the scriptures alone, seeing what God has to say about justice and concluding ECT does not follow God's instructions regarding justice, in fact, contradict his instructions to us.

These are your finite musings. Scripture reveals two destinies/places with a heaven to gain and a hell to shun.

You also cannot see the trinity, Deity of Christ, etc. despite biblical revelation.

You are relying on your fallen reasoning and coming to the wrong conclusions on doctrinal matters.

 

[andrewh]

Some are working from a secular, evolutionary understanding of death vs a biblical/theological one. Saying death means death is begging the question if death is separation, not cessation.

This line of reasoning seems to beg the question at issue. How, without engaging in circular reasoning, do you conclude that a writer of Scripture would use the term "death" to denote a state of eternal conscious torment?

I trust you agree that we should be suspicious if someone claimed that "Biblically" the word "cat" actually means "dog". We need an exceedingly compelling argument to believe that a word like "death" actually denotes something that is the opposite of "death", as normally understood.

As stated, those of us who believe in annihilation have the challenge of dealing with the texts that suggest eternal torment. In this respect, I have already shown examples of texts from the Old Testament where we know the word "forever" does not really denote forever. So there is at least a case for not taking the "forever" texts literally. We need a case for the remarkable move of transforming "death" into "eternal life in torment".

So where is the case? What Biblical arguments can you mount that you do not rely solely on appealing to the "eternal torment" passages? I am sure an observant reader would see the problem with simply appealing to such passages as a justification for reading "death" as "life in torment" - one could just as easily work it the other way around, taking "death" to mean "death" and seeing "eternal life passages" as denoting annihilation.

In other words, we both need to provide arguments that appeal to other things. And I have provided at least one - texts from the Old Testament where the word "forever" clearly denotes a limited time period. Notice a key property of that argument: it does not involve arguing that "death means death".

 

[Krsto]

I think there is a real problem with your reasoning here. You see texts that certainly appear to suggest eternal torment. Fine - there are indeed such texts. But then you have to deal with "the wages of sin is death" texts. Your strategy appears to be "Well, we have texts that say the lost suffer forever, so we have to re-define 'death', as used in texts like Romans 6:23 to mean a state of eternal conscious awareness"

Death denotes a state of continual life? That is simply too much of a stretch, and it should be a red flag. Although I do not have the time to make the case right now, I suggest that it is much more exegetically legitimate to see the "eternal torment" passages as either (1)implementing the use of exaggeration (and there is Biblical precedent for such use, as per an earlier post of mine); or (2) based on a questionable rendering of the original greek word as denoting a specifically eternal time period.

My point is that I believe I (and others) can or have made Biblical arguments about why its legitimate to read these eternal torment passages differently from their superficial sense. You are free to critique those arguments. But, I will bet that nowhere in this thread have you (or others) made a Biblical argument that "death" can mean "eternal conscious life".

Neither has anyone made a biblical argument for justice means one sin, no matter how trivial, must of necessity cause you to be punished with eternal suffering.

Would one of you ECT proponents please define "justice", biblically, and don't forget the verse that says, "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

 

[Krsto]

These are your finite musings. Scripture reveals two destinies/places with a heaven to gain and a hell to shun.

You also cannot see the trinity, Deity of Christ, etc. despite biblical revelation.

You are relying on your fallen reasoning and coming to the wrong conclusions on doctrinal matters.

Nice ad hominem grulz. You will always pull that one out when you can't refute my exegesis. You are aware there are plenty of Christians who believe everything you do except ECT, correct? And they use the exact same arguments I do. Are they using their "fallen reasoning"?

Your ad hominem is telling. Tells me you have no scriptural argument to make.

 

[Krsto]

These are your finite musings. Scripture reveals two destinies/places with a heaven to gain and a hell to shun.

You also cannot see the trinity, Deity of Christ, etc. despite biblical revelation.

You are relying on your fallen reasoning and coming to the wrong conclusions on doctrinal matters.

Actually, we all go to hell. Do a word study on hades and sheol and you'll see what I mean.

 

[godrulz]

Nice ad hominem grulz. You will always pull that one out when you can't refute my exegesis. You are aware there are plenty of Christians who believe everything you do except ECT, correct? And they use the exact same arguments I do. Are they using their "fallen reasoning"?

Your ad hominem is telling. Tells me you have no scriptural argument to make.

I am aware that trinitarians/Christians also reject traditional hell views. My point to you is that hell is peripheral, while the Deity of Christ is essential/salvific.

I think you are using the same unbiblical rationalizations in your rejection of these truths. I would say Christians who reject hell are also on the wrong track, but still true believers. Your rejection of the Deity of Christ and hell puts you in JW camp, not Christian camp. Christians who reject hell are not in JW camp on more important issues.

Countless books have been written defending traditional views and refuting your popular heresy. Have at er....

 

[godrulz]

Actually, we all go to hell. Do a word study on hades and sheol and you'll see what I mean.

JWs are partly correct to say these can refer to the common grave of man where the body goes. They are wrong to fail to recognize the semantical range of meaning that also includes the place of the departed spirit-soul (temporary before lake of fire or heaven in OT).

Likewise, they are also wrong to think soul is a temporal vs everlasting thing. The word can mean the whole person (many souls drowned at sea) or the immaterial personality of man.

Are you guilty of the same rookie mistake?

 

[Krsto]

I am aware that trinitarians/Christians also reject traditional hell views. My point to you is that hell is peripheral, while the Deity of Christ is essential/salvific.

I think you are using the same unbiblical rationalizations in your rejection of these truths. I would say Christians who reject hell are also on the wrong track, but still true believers. Your rejection of the Deity of Christ and hell puts you in JW camp, not Christian camp. Christians who reject hell are not in JW camp on more important issues.

Countless books have been written defending traditional views and refuting your popular heresy. Have at er....

I've read enough of that already. They are all wrong.

So, what "unbiblical rationalizations" are you speaking of, regarding ECT? You sure like to give broad generalizations without backing up what you say, don't you?

 

[Krsto]

Grulz, how can you say all are born with an eternal soul when immortality is only granted to Christians? The idea all are born with an immortal soul came from Plato, not the bible.

 

[Lazy afternoon]

JWs are partly correct to say these can refer to the common grave of man where the body goes. They are wrong to fail to recognize the semantical range of meaning that also includes the place of the departed spirit-soul (temporary before lake of fire or heaven in OT).

Likewise, they are also wrong to think soul is a temporal vs everlasting thing. The word can mean the whole person (many souls drowned at sea) or the immaterial personality of man.

Are you guilty of the same rookie mistake?

The point is that scripture gives it that men are unconscious when asleep, when dead, and when in the lake of fire (consumed).

Heb 12:29 For our God is a consuming fire.

The only ones who can live in the consuming fire of God are the ones given immortality-

1Ti 6:14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:
1Ti 6:15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
1Ti 6:16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

Men can not see God this side of immortality because their eyes would burn out.

God is not invisible, He is full of light.

Those who are not immortal would perish very quickly in the presence of the creator God as the fire that He is.

The Holy Spirit is but the light which eminates from Him, not another person.

If you want to follow your extra biblical books you will never know the truth.

LA