Is the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment biblical or not?

[freelight]

Understanding 'aion' is KEY.........

Understanding 'aion' is KEY.........

Try "everlasting" and see what you come up with. If that does work maybe try "Forever and forever".

You apparently did not read my post or the resource articles/view the videos which show that -

THE GREEK WORD

AIÓN -- AIÓNIOS,

TRANSLATED

Everlasting -- Eternal

IN THE

HOLY BIBLE,

ARE SHOWN TO DENOTE LIMITED DURATION.

I challenge you to read the above article with includes ample evidence to show 'aionios' does not mean 'never ending' or 'everlasting' but pertains to an 'age'. Understand the original language of the scriptures, not English distortions. Besides grammatical evidence, the heinous doctrine of ECT can be thoroughly rejected on moral/ethical grounds alone. From a variety of contexts, this doctrine fails in its logic.

While we've shown so far much biblical proof for 'conditional immortality', per Tim's request....I also have Universalist leanings since I come from an eclectic perspective and more liberally philosophical approach, including other religious traditions and schools of thought. I go by what my own conscience, reason, intelligence and spiritual guidance allows, and remain open to progressive revelation, as any student of truth is apt to do.

[video]https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=72eJeryrQeI[/video]

Please also note that in the context of conditional immortality, there is perfect justice according to universal law and opportunity, in the individual sovereignty of each soul to choose and determine their own destiny.

:thumb:

 

[freelight]

Part 2 of 2 What Does the Bible Say About Hell? / Do People Really Burn Forever

Part 2 of 2 What Does the Bible Say About Hell? / Do People Really Burn Forever

[video]https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=C7cplP-g2v8[/video]

 

[Cross Reference]

You apparently did not read my post or the resource articles/view the videos which show that -

THE GREEK WORD

AIÓN -- AIÓNIOS,

TRANSLATED

Everlasting -- Eternal

IN THE

HOLY BIBLE,

ARE SHOWN TO DENOTE LIMITED DURATION.

I challenge you to read the above article with includes ample evidence to show 'aionios' does not mean 'never ending' or 'everlasting' but pertains to an 'age'. Understand the original language of the scriptures, not English distortions. Besides grammatical evidence, the heinous doctrine of ECT can be thoroughly rejected on moral/ethical grounds alone. From a variety of contexts, this doctrine fails in its logic.

While we've shown so far much biblical proof for 'conditional immortality', per Tim's request....I also have Universalist leanings since I come from an eclectic perspective and more liberally philosophical approach, including other religious traditions and schools of thought. I go by what my own conscience, reason, intelligence and spiritual guidance allows, and remain open to progressive revelation, as any student of truth is apt to do.

[video]https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=72eJeryrQeI[/video]

Please also note that in the context of conditional immortality, there is perfect justice according to universal law and opportunity, in the individual sovereignty of each soul to choose and determine their own destiny.

:thumb:

Get a new resource book, one that is not subjective in its opinion. Try an ordinary dictionary for the meaning of "unquenchable".

 

[marke]

No, you are mistaken. Jesus did not preface every parable with "this is a parable." There's two examples on preceding place in Luke 16 if you had a mind to read context, such as, Luke 16:1 "There was a certain rich man, which had a steward..." and Luke 15: 11 "A certain man had two sons..."

Luke 15:10-12 KJV
(10) Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.
(11) And he said, A certain man had two sons:
(12) And the younger of them said to his father, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me. And he divided unto them his living.


First question: Are you trying to tell me that "The Parable of the Prodigal Son" is not a Parable?"

I do not believe the Bible says the story of the prodigal son is a parable, which leaves open the possibility that it was a fact of history. It may have been a parable, but I will not say every or any story Jesus tells is just a parable and not based on real people unless the Bible specifically says the story is a parable.

Isaiah 66:22-24 KJV
(22) For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
(23) And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.
(24) And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.
Second question: Did you miss that Mark 9 is quotation from Isaiah 66, and refers to physical destruction of corpses, not torment of living souls? Carcasses are dead people, not living and aware folk.

If we find references to fiery burning of flesh in both the OT and the NT and if some of the wording matches should we feel confident the references are limited to the one event only? No, hell is mentioned many times in many contexts which cannot all be referring to the months-long cleanup after the Battle of Armageddon. Jesus says the fires of hell will not be quenched and the worms will not die. Never. The reference in Isiah 66 does not refer to an everlasting event. It probably refers to the 7 month burial period also referenced in Jer. 7:32 and Ezekiel 39:12.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Neither of us are under any obligation to agree with each other, but we are all under an obligation to agree with God. I believe hell is real for many reasons based upon several scriptures and I don't find your arguments for your position persuasive.

Seems to me that 'agreeing with God' is pat for 'agreeing with interpreted doctrine' most of the time. Frankly, I don't have that much time for someone who thinks it's 'worthwhile' to have kids when they believe that some of them may well end up in their particular doctrinal version of "hell" as long as others make it to "Heaven".

Have a nice day.

lain:

 

[marhig]

In way of answering your question for reasons I hope will bring you a greater understanding of the issues, please permit me to ask you to explain what you believe the result would be to the following questions and then lets discuss them as they relate to Jesus Christ:

1. Can one have a relationship with another without intimacy?
2. Can one be married to another without intimacy?

Yes and yes.

But not with God, with God intimacy is essential. Because if we are living by the spirit, then how can we not be intimate with God? If we're not intimate with God, then we don't know him and his spirit isn't in us.

Naturally, we have to be intimate with our husbands to have a child. Without the seed there is no birth, so it is in God, we must be intimate with God to receive his seed which is Christ in the heart. And once his word sinks into our hearts then it starts grow, being fed by the indwelling spirit. Then just like we suffer naturally in childbirth to bring forth a living child. So we suffer for God to bring forth Gods son, Christ Jesus, and by the spirit working within us, through us others may see him in our lives and hear his word and come to him.

Without intimacy, then there's no indwelling spirit, no Christ living in us, and no new birth. Without breath a natural child can't live, without the breath of life, which is the holy spirit, we can't live in God.

Intimacy with God is essential, without being intimate with God, we're still dead in our sins!

 

[marke]

Seems to me that 'agreeing with God' is pat for 'agreeing with interpreted doctrine' most of the time. Frankly, I don't have that much time for someone who thinks it's 'worthwhile' to have kids when they believe that some of them may well end up in their particular doctrinal version of "hell" as long as others make it to "Heaven".
Have a nice day.
lain:

I was working with a man years ago whose only son worked for the same company with us. He found out my wife was pregnant with our fifth child and he was angered by that. He asked me how I was ever going to afford to send them to college. I said that didn't matter to me. I had to work to pay my own way, although I never finished. I asked him if his son ever went to college and he said that did not matter either. I knew his son had not been to college which made his whole argument silly.

I made a mistake the other day when I said I had 25 or 26 grandkids. The correct number is 27.

 

[Rosenritter]

Get a new resource book, one that is not subjective in its opinion. Try an ordinary dictionary for the meaning of "unquenchable".

Cross, did you try a dictionary here? The local Alliance church burnt down some years ago. They were not able to quench the flame. It was unquenchable.

It is not still burning.

Dictionary?

 

[Rosenritter]

I do not believe the Bible says the story of the prodigal son is a parable, which leaves open the possibility that it was a fact of history. It may have been a parable, but I will not say every or any story Jesus tells is just a parable and not based on real people unless the Bible specifically says the story is a parable.



If we find references to fiery burning of flesh in both the OT and the NT and if some of the wording matches should we feel confident the references are limited to the one event only? No, hell is mentioned many times in many contexts which cannot all be referring to the months-long cleanup after the Battle of Armageddon. Jesus says the fires of hell will not be quenched and the worms will not die. Never. The reference in Isiah 66 does not refer to an everlasting event. It probably refers to the 7 month burial period also referenced in Jer. 7:32 and Ezekiel 39:12.

You are using circular reasoning. You are starting with your preconceived idea and then either forcing them into your idea or completely bypassing the scriptures that contradict it outright.

Mark 4:34 KJV
But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.

Jesus spoke to the multitude, thus it was in parable. There is no wiggle room for it to be a maybe here. Multitude present? Parable. No multitude and just disciples? Maybe not parable.

Matthew 13:34-35 KJV
All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: [35] That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.

Haven't even started in on the flat out contradictions that your interpretation would cause on fact, let alone the moral aspects.

That you started your argument stating that souls were immortal and could not die or be destroyed... Whereas it took a couple seconds to prove the opposite... Shouldn't that be enough for you to be willing to start over and be willing to hear what God really said, which might be different from what you were told?

 

[marke]

You are using circular reasoning. You are starting with your preconceived idea and then either forcing them into your idea or completely bypassing the scriptures that contradict it outright.

Mark 4:34 KJV
But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.

Jesus spoke to the multitude, thus it was in parable. There is no wiggle room for it to be a maybe here. Multitude present? Parable. No multitude and just disciples? Maybe not parable.

Matthew 13:34-35 KJV
All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: [35] That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.

Haven't even started in on the flat out contradictions that your interpretation would cause on fact, let alone the moral aspects.

I cannot assume Jesus never drew from real life accounts when teaching lessons about life. That is an assumption which is not irrefutably supported by Scripture, especially when one of the main characters in the Luke 16 account has Abraham talking to the rich man across the divide. Are we to assume the Abraham was not real or did not really say the thing Jesus said he said? No, I don't think so.

 

[freelight]

Let's get back to aionios........

Let's get back to aionios........

Get a new resource book, one that is not subjective in its opinion. Try an ordinary dictionary for the meaning of "unquenchable".

You're still operating from ignorance of the information I've provided concerning the original language meaning of 'aion' and it's adjectival form 'aionios', info. essential in rightly interpreting the passages concerned.

You're referral to the word 'unquenchable' proves nothing either, except a fire made to incinerate or consume something will remain unquenchable until it's destroyed or transformed its subject.

Another good dialogue about the concept of 'aion' and 'aionios' is here with Eric (traditionalist) and Tony (Universalist). It's important to know that 'aionios' is an adjective meaning that which pertains to an age (a dispensation, epoch, period of time).....aions (eons) have beginnings and endings, therefore the terms of 'aionios punishment' and 'aionios life' pertain to an 'age'...this is a duration of time, a particular dispensation....it does not mean 'unending' since ages are periods of time.

Punishments or sufferings are only commensurate to the sins committed, and therefore limited thereby, while the reward of the righteous is an age-lasting enjoyment of life and blessing (as in those who will live with Jesus on earth in the Millennium). Other ages will arise in the unfolding of the cosmic plan, to which soul's can choose life or death.

Ultimately, only those mortals that actually "put on immortality"....become immortal (these share in the very nature of Deity)...and live forever since they cannot die. It is immortality that we aspire towards in the highest sense, not just 'aionios life' (which is the reward of life for a given age or dispensation). It is only when we put on immortality, that we become partakers of the divine nature in the fullest sense (truly godlike).

 

[Rosenritter]

I cannot assume Jesus never drew from real life accounts when teaching lessons about life. That is an assumption which is not irrefutably supported by Scripture, especially when one of the main characters in the Luke 16 account has Abraham talking to the rich man across the divide. Are we to assume the Abraham was not real or did not really say the thing Jesus said he said? No, I don't think so.

Actually we can. Abraham is dead. We are told the dead know nothing. No love, hatred, envy, or knowledge that they are dead. Unless you would break the Holy Scripture for your purposes, the Abraham in that story is a figure in a parable story. Either admit you believe the whole Bible or confess that you will not.

Hebrews 11:39-40 KJV
And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: [40] God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

Paul tells us that Abraham died in faith and received not the promises. Not just Abraham but all the saints he names.

If you read the parable and consider that Jesus typically refers to scripture with almost every breath, the characters are identified and the parable makes sense. What is Lazarus, and who is the unnamed rich man? Can you read Christ's words, use it like an open book test and take a guess?

Pretend you are a Jewish Pharisee even. What would those elements symbolize to you?

 

[intojoy]

You're still operating from ignorance of the information I've provided concerning the original language meaning of 'aion' and it's adjectival form 'aionios', info. essential in rightly interpreting the passages concerned.

You're referral to the word 'unquenchable' proves nothing either, except a fire made to incinerate or consume something will remain unquenchable until it's destroyed or transformed its subject.

Another good dialogue about the concept of 'aion' and 'aionios' is here with Eric (traditionalist) and Tony (Universalist). It's important to know that 'aionios' is an adjective meaning that which pertains to an age (a dispensation, epoch, period of time).....aions (eons) have beginnings and endings, therefore the terms of 'aionios punishment' and 'aionios life' pertain to an 'age'...this is a duration of time, a particular dispensation....it does not mean 'unending' since ages are periods of time.

Punishments or sufferings are only commensurate to the sins committed, and therefore limited thereby, while the reward of the righteous is an age-lasting enjoyment of life and blessing (as in those who will live with Jesus on earth in the Millennium). Other ages will arise in the unfolding of the cosmic plan, to which soul's can choose life or death.

Ultimately, only those mortals that actually "put on immortality"....become immortal (these share in the very nature of Deity)...and live forever since they cannot die. It is immortality that we aspire towards in the highest sense, not just 'aionios life' (which is the reward of life for a given age or dispensation). It is only when we put on immortality, that we become partakers of the divine nature in the fullest sense (truly godlike).

Yea right. Sounds like he knows it all. Hahahaha


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[marhig]

I was working with a man years ago whose only son worked for the same company with us. He found out my wife was pregnant with our fifth child and he was angered by that. He asked me how I was ever going to afford to send them to college. I said that didn't matter to me. I had to work to pay my own way, although I never finished. I asked him if his son ever went to college and he said that did not matter either. I knew his son had not been to college which made his whole argument silly.

I made a mistake the other day when I said I had 25 or 26 grandkids. The correct number is 27.

That's great, I bet he'd think a lot worse of me then! I'm one of 6, and my mum has nearly 30 grandkids with 2 on the way, we didn't have much growing up. But we are all close. None of us went to college but we're all fine. I had children young too, and my biggest regret is that I didn't have more! I have three, and they are all close to us and all live within walking distance from me. And my seventh grandchild is due in a few weeks, I became a nana in m my 30s, I'm not 50 yet! We haven't got loads of money, but I don't care, and I don't care what others think either. I only care what God thinks, and I don't think God worries about whether we go to college or not but more likely that we bring up our children right before him and that they know about him.

I think having 5 kids is great, you are blessed. My auntie has 9 children and around 100 grandchildren and great-grandchildren she's nearly 80, and I'll tell you what, she's never lonely, nor is my mum. Because we all live close by

Money isn't everything, I think that love is the most important thing, because that's what holds a family together. And if Gods love is in the heart, then that bond is even stronger. Thanks for sharing

 

[Cross Reference]

You missed that souls die, that they can be destroyed by God, they can even be slain with the sword, it is a synonym for life. (Job 33:18, Psalm 22:20). The bible never says the soul is immortal or cannot die or cannot be destroyed, it says the complete opposite.

You missed that there are people who would much rather live separated from God.

Then eternal Hell is their destination. The will live a 'never ending' dying death.

And to answer your question, will the angels that are cast into hell with the devil ever die? If you mean "wicked angels" thus "devils" then Justin Martyr certainly thought so. See his Second Apology to the Greeks, http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0127.htm

Why? He is entitled to his opinion. I have the same scriptures that have left me with mine..

The Bible also never says the fire of hell is EVER extinguished. What feeds it that is never extinguished in the sense of there is no more to be consumed by it? What feeds it that is never consumed by it as the "worm, [in that same fire], never dies"?

All mortals live forever either reconciled to God, by the Blood of Jesus, to live where He is forever, or live unreconciled to Him by rejecting His "so great salvation" that will place them forever in the extreme opposite location of where He lives. A place where He isn't. A place where love CANNOT ever be found. God, in His Holy absoluteness, is Light. In Him can be found no darkness.

Question re the issue of hell being eternal:

If, as you say you believe, "the soul that sins shall/will die in hell", how long do you believe it will take the flames to consumed him?

 

[Timotheos]

Yes! Inherently so.




Only insofar as your soul cannot die. However, if Hell cannot have its effect upon your neither can heaven that you would live forever. The immortal soul is immortal. God cannot kill it anymore than a King can cancel His own decree. Souls, apart from the rest of creation, are created in His image and likeness in an absolute non-destruct fashion made so to guarntee their eternal existence.



Not according to me. However, If you were to truly believe that then heaven be out of the question as well. It would be meanless. Why get saved?

Question for you: How come angels can't die? . . . and Satan?

According to the Bible, the wages of sin is death. We lost immortality when we so sinned. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. The only way to receive eternal life is through repentance and faith in God. Then we inherit eternal life. Those who reject Christ will perish. You need to rethink your false doctrine.

 

[Timotheos]

Some believe that the fires of hell are symbolic and/or temporal. But the following verses show that they are not.

Matt. 3:12 says, "And His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire." (See also Luke 3:17.)

Mark 9:43 says, "And if your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire."

The word "unquenchable" is asbestos in the Greek. According to the enhanced Strong's lexicon, it means "unquenchable, the eternal hell fire to punish the damned."

The following citations are from Greek dictionaries and Lexicons. They show that the word "unquenchable," which is asbestos in the Greek, (which occurs only in Matt. 3:12, Luke 3:17, and Mark 9:43) means unquenchable, without end.

"unquenchable, inextinguishable"2
"not quenched"3
"pertaining to a fire that cannot be put out" - "unquenchable."4
"unquenched, unquenchable"5
"that cannot be put out"6
"inextinguishable"7

Is hell eternal? Yes it is.
Are its fires without end? Yes they are.
Is it a pleasant doctrine to discuss? Not really.
But, hell is real. This is all the more reason to preach the gospel. Jesus said,

"And if your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into the eternal fire," (Matt. 18:8).

https://carm.org/hell-eternal

Carm is a poor reference. Matt Slick refuses to debate the issue even though I repeatedly challenged him on his false doctrine.

 

[Cross Reference]

When conversational English uses words that aren't in the bible to begin with that isn't exactly a solution. "Effective calling" for example.

You are merely picking c... out of pepper trying defend your religious bent.

 

[Cross Reference]

Second question: Did you miss that Mark 9 is quotation from Isaiah 66, and refers to physical destruction of corpses, not torment of living souls? Carcasses are dead people, not living and aware folk.

A corpse is not a soul.

 

[Cross Reference]

Two thoughts. First of all, God did not make souls and put them in human flesh. It says that he made human flesh and breathed in spirit, and that resulting combination formed a human soul. See Genesis 2:7, man is not a creature that can consist of a soul without a body.

Genesis 2:7 KJV
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

1. God did not MAKE souls! The body of Adam BECAME a living INDEPENDENT OF GOD being with an eternal soul after God breathed eternal life into its nostrils. That breath of God, taken into the body of Adam, caused Adam to become an eternal being. A being that can never die. In innocense was "Life eternal" his. When he transgressed, "death eternal" 'happened'. No sin can stand in the presence of God. Is not a transgression in and of itself a "death sentence" to a relationship? Why not ask yourself the question: "Why didn't God just kill Adam and start over", just to see where that will take you in your thinking this through?

Second of all, were you aware that of their differing opinions, King James, John Calvin, and Martin Luther all were able to agree that the "ghost of Samuel" (that you reference, 1 Samuel 28:12) was a demonic apparition? They each had their separate reasons. King James said that the dead were plainly dead until the resurrection and that devils were known to lie and appear as angels of light, John Calvin said it was inconceivable that God would allow a witch to disturb the saints.

Yes, well aware of it. So what?

Question for you: when someone attempts to use necromancy to summon spirits of the departed, and you get something that comes back and claims to be it, for what reason would you assume this apparition to be telling the truth?

What words from 'Samuel' would you declare were NOT of God?

Why are you so quick to forget that God said "I create evil"? Why would God choose to do that except to use it for His purposes.