Is the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment biblical or not?

[Arthur Brain]

so says scripture. God is merciful. He is the judge, not me. Why be concerned about something you either have no knowledge of, nor are the judge? We can only be assured of what scripture states.

Scripture says God is love, twice if I'm not mistaken? Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Going by the biblical definition of love it does no harm, unlike your own idea that God's love actually harms those in a state where they can't do anything but apparently be tormented by it and have no chance to embrace it - much like the 'loving' parent who locks their child in a basement for failing a test.

Your statements do not even reflect the reality around you. I must assume you are not in some back country, and if in the US you really have a false view of reality. I know a lot of people who know what scripture says, know the consequences of rejecting Christ, but still do reject Him. Maybe they are like you, and think that God is not cruel and won't send such a good person to hell, when it is not about God at all but man. Some blow it off as a myth, some like Marx, for example, thought it was a panacea for the common man. I think some people rationalize it, tries to minimize it, some just ignore it and don't want to speak about it. Why do you think man has developed so many ways to be saved. They don't like the Truth.

Ah, does your 'reality' revolve around your own perceptions regarding what people think of a doctrine that espouses that which you declare to be the 'truth'? You presume a great deal quite frankly, though you're correct in regards to my thinking a loving God wouldn't be cruel. You do? How about you explain to those who are bereaved or suffered appalling losses that their loved ones are going to be 'loved' through eternity even though they'll be suffering throughout? I think you're the one who needs a reality check here.

its not even about me. It is what scripture states regarding man's responsibility to God. God created us for a purpose. We either fulfill the purpose or we don't.
He has a judgement. Very straightforward.

So you do take some credit for your own sparing from the "hellish love" of God then? Noted.

If the Gospel understanding has not changed from the beginning as the Apostles taught it to the early Church, my faith is such that I must believe it as the Truth. Would the Holy Spirit trick us? Would He lie to us?

If you don't believe it as Truth, that is also your choice. What revelation would you have that is different and could be the Truth?

It is quite evident that in the sola scriptura milieu man has created many different versions of how to be saved. Different theories, ideas, what Paul calls fables. Man prefers to develop a very benign, comfortable, fuzzy psychological idealogy of how he would like to be saved, is apparently overwhelming for a lot of people.

Most of the early church schools of thought, with the original translations of the Greek/Hebrew texts etc didn't hold to eternal suffering at all apparently. Who's to say you haven't been misled into thinking there's a God who would leave people in such a state for eternity instead of reconciling everything? Is it easier to sit in judgment on your fellow humans while actually being one yourself?

 

[Rightglory]

Scripture says God is love, twice if I'm not mistaken? Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Going by the biblical definition of love it does no harm, unlike your own idea that God's love actually harms those in a state where they can't do anything but apparently be tormented by it and have no chance to embrace it - much like the 'loving' parent who locks their child in a basement for failing a test.

It is NOT about God. It is about man and how He perceives that love. Your perspective in incorrect.

Ah, does your 'reality' revolve around your own perceptions regarding what people think of a doctrine that espouses that which you declare to be the 'truth'? You presume a great deal quite frankly, though you're correct in regards to my thinking a loving God wouldn't be cruel. You do? How about you explain to those who are bereaved or suffered appalling losses that their loved ones are going to be 'loved' through eternity even though they'll be suffering throughout? I think you're the one who needs a reality check here.

Why do you think I or any one else has the power of judgement over the state of anyone else?
Why do I need to think God is cruel because He loves all mankind, even those in hell. But man has rejected God. Is that God's fault? You seem to want to put God on the defensive here and proclaim that no one should be judged to hell, because God loves those that even reject Him.

So you do take some credit for your own sparing from the "hellish love" of God then? Noted.

I cannot judge myself either. I have assurance now, but my life is not over as yet. A lot could happen that I do not know. besides that, in the end, all I can say is Lord have mercy upon me.

Most of the early church schools of thought, with the original translations of the Greek/Hebrew texts etc didn't hold to eternal suffering at all apparently. Who's to say you haven't been misled into thinking there's a God who would leave people in such a state for eternity instead of reconciling everything? Is it easier to sit in judgment on your fellow humans while actually being one yourself?

So you are a Universalist? Seems logical. A view that was condemned by the Church way back some 1500 years ago at the 5th Ecumenical Council. Just because a few men may have written about it, does not mean the Church has ever held it as a teaching.

 

[Arthur Brain]

It is NOT about God. It is about man and how He perceives that love. Your perspective in incorrect.

Love is described in the bible. Do you need it explaining any clearer than that? If God is love, and I note you don't take issue with how the bible twice describes God as being, then just what about my perspective is apparently incorrect?

Why do you think I or any one else has the power of judgement over the state of anyone else?
Why do I need to think God is cruel because He loves all mankind, even those in hell. But man has rejected God. Is that God's fault? You seem to want to put God on the defensive here and proclaim that no one should be judged to hell, because God loves those that even reject Him.

I don't think you do have that power, or anyone else, but it doesn't stop you or anyone else from attempting to do so as you've done. Look at your own posts. As usual you're a person who justifies another's suffering while trying to squirm out of taking any credit for your own avoidance and generalizing 'man' as being the 'problem'.

I cannot judge myself either. I have assurance now, but my life is not over as yet. A lot could happen that I do not know. besides that, in the end, all I can say is Lord have mercy upon me.

Well how about you apply that to your fellow 'man' and don't reduce God's love and mercy to a doctrine that expressly forbids it if it doesn't conform to it?

So you are a Universalist? Seems logical. A view that was condemned by the Church way back some 1500 years ago at the 5th Ecumenical Council. Just because a few men may have written about it, does not mean the Church has ever held it as a teaching.

I don't ascribe to any label thanks, but simply because an 'Ecumenical council' denounced such a view doesn't mean it wasn't grounded in actuality either. If that's the best you've got as counter then it ain't up to much. Heaven forbid a loving deity would actually create a world, life and all therein with the express purpose of restoring all without the need for losing any of it or having people in a state of endless 'incorruptible' suffering through 'love' eh? What heresy that must be to utter...

 

[Timotheos]

But why raise them, then sentence them to death, which is the same state they were in before they were raised. Assuming a change in Christ's Incarnation, that all men will be raised because He raised our human natures to life. It is why your theory does not fit scripture.
It denies God's purpose in creating man, and Christ redeeming mankind.
Man has a choice, eternal life or eternal death, the spiritual state.
God's purpose was not to destroy his creation, especially the creature that bears His Image.

I can see that you don't understand why God would raise someone to life, and then judge them and sentence them to death for their sins. But, you do not need to understand why, it is enough that the Bible says that is what will happen. But surely you are able to understand why. Is is just to condemn someone to death without a trial? No, it isn't. God is just so he raises all of the dead for judgment and those who have not had their sins forgiven still owe the penalty for their sins, which is death.

 

[Rightglory]

Love is described in the bible. Do you need it explaining any clearer than that? If God is love, and I note you don't take issue with how the bible twice describes God as being, then just what about my perspective is apparently incorrect?

You want a God who condones sin. You want a God to overlook sin and accept all men as equals in spite of how God has established His Kingdom. You cower behind love, but forget about God's justice. Yet it is man that has separated himself from God by his own actions. You don't like the idea that man has a responsibility in this created order.

I don't think you do have that power, or anyone else, but it doesn't stop you or anyone else from attempting to do so as you've done. Look at your own posts. As usual you're a person who justifies another's suffering while trying to squirm out of taking any credit for your own avoidance and generalizing 'man' as being the 'problem'.

Man is the problem. Are you going to say God is the problem t hat man is disobedient? If true, then I would agree with you. God has no reason to punish some men for any reason. But, alas, it is not God as scripture proclaims, but man.

Well how about you apply that to your fellow 'man' and don't reduce God's love and mercy to a doctrine that expressly forbids it if it doesn't conform to it?

You are the one creating a new perspective of scripture. You're blaming God for man's disobedience and then saying God is unjust in judging man.

I don't ascribe to any label thanks, but simply because an 'Ecumenical council' denounced such a view doesn't mean it wasn't grounded in actuality either. If that's the best you've got as counter then it ain't up to much. Heaven forbid a loving deity would actually create a world, life and all therein with the express purpose of restoring all without the need for losing any of it or having people in a state of endless 'incorruptible' suffering through 'love' eh? What heresy that must be to utter...

I can understand your problem. You don't like to be held accountable even though scripture says each of us will be held accountable to God with what we did with the Gifts He has given us. You, like a lot of modern men, think that God owes you something in spite of how you respond to HIM, including rejecting Him with no consequences.
You want to be independent of God, create your own world and purpose of existence, but still want God to honor your independence and give you the benefit of doing your own will rather than submit to His will.

If God is as you make Him, there would be no need to have His revelation. We could just live a merry existence, and be transported to some blissful existence without any knowledge since it has no relevance. You do live in a dream world. I imagine it is quite cozy and warm feeling to know that you won't be held accountable. A lot of other individuals have created their own worlds as well on every issue known in scripture. It is amazing that scripture, a relatively small Book, can create so many ways to be saved. They all make God in the image of man and call it salvation.

 

[Rightglory]

I can see that you don't understand why God would raise someone to life, and then judge them and sentence them to death for their sins. But, you do not need to understand why, it is enough that the Bible says that is what will happen. But surely you are able to understand why. Is is just to condemn someone to death without a trial? No, it isn't. God is just so he raises all of the dead for judgment and those who have not had their sins forgiven still owe the penalty for their sins, which is death.

But nothing here is actually what scripture teaches. You have misinterpreted the use of the words life and death. Proponents, purposely ignore what scripture teaches so that the false teaching becomes more valid.

The Bible does explain why. A physical death would not only be meaningless, but it denies God's purpose in creating man and giving man the free choice of being united with Him or to reject Him. Why would God create a creature in His Image with the express purpose that for those who reject Him He would actually destroy(annihilate).
Man chooses, thus man is the one who must live with the consequences. Why is that so difficult to understand?
You want to live your life as you desire but have no consequences. It's as if God does not exist, but they still want the blessedness that comes from Him for those who submit to Him, even though they reject Him.
Nice comfortable world you have created.

 

[chrysostom]

You have misinterpreted the use of the words life and death.

why would anyone think that
life means life
and
death means death

 

[Rightglory]

why would anyone think that
life means life
and
death means death

Your being a Roman Catholic I don't know how to read this, are you being honest or just sarcastic?

 

[Arthur Brain]

You want a God who condones sin. You want a God to overlook sin and accept all men as equals in spite of how God has established His Kingdom. You cower behind love, but forget about God's justice. Yet it is man that has separated himself from God by his own actions. You don't like the idea that man has a responsibility in this created order.

Not so at all. In fact I'm baffled as to how you think that my position involves God being *okay* with anything man does. All that does is show a complete misunderstanding.

Man is the problem. Are you going to say God is the problem t hat man is disobedient? If true, then I would agree with you. God has no reason to punish some men for any reason. But, alas, it is not God as scripture proclaims, but man.

I wasn't going to say that at all as it goes.

You are the one creating a new perspective of scripture. You're blaming God for man's disobedience and then saying God is unjust in judging man.

Again, I haven't said that at all.

I can understand your problem. You don't like to be held accountable even though scripture says each of us will be held accountable to God with what we did with the Gifts He has given us. You, like a lot of modern men, think that God owes you something in spite of how you respond to HIM, including rejecting Him with no consequences.
You want to be independent of God, create your own world and purpose of existence, but still want God to honor your independence and give you the benefit of doing your own will rather than submit to His will.

You don't seem to understand anything as you've just invented an imaginary point of view which certainly isn't mine or part of my position.

If God is as you make Him, there would be no need to have His revelation. We could just live a merry existence, and be transported to some blissful existence without any knowledge since it has no relevance. You do live in a dream world. I imagine it is quite cozy and warm feeling to know that you won't be held accountable. A lot of other individuals have created their own worlds as well on every issue known in scripture. It is amazing that scripture, a relatively small Book, can create so many ways to be saved. They all make God in the image of man and call it salvation.

Again, a total misunderstanding. If you equate God reconciling all with there being no accountability for anything then you're not getting it at all. If the only sort of accountability that means anything to you is for people to suffer throughout eternity then that's your stumbling block.

 

[chrysostom]

Your being a Roman Catholic I don't know how to read this, are you being honest or just sarcastic?

what do you mean by roman catholic?

 

[Rightglory]

what do you mean by roman catholic?

Is there another Catholic as in Roman Catholic?

 

[chrysostom]

Is there another Catholic as in Roman Catholic?

I don't live in rome

 

[resurrected]

Is there another Catholic as in Roman Catholic?

there's the greek orthodox guys


:think:

In addition to the Latin, or Roman, tradition, there are seven non-Latin, non-Roman ecclesial traditions: Armenian, Byzantine, Coptic, Ethiopian, East Syrian (Chaldean), West Syrian, and Maronite.

 

[chrysostom]

there is only one holy, catholic, and apostolic church

 

[resurrected]

the other guys - the Armenian, Byzantine, Coptic, Ethiopian, East Syrian (Chaldean), West Syrian, and Maronite - do they recognoize the pope as the head of the church?

 

[chrysostom]

the other guys - the Armenian, Byzantine, Coptic, Ethiopian, East Syrian (Chaldean), West Syrian, and Maronite - do they recognoize the pope as the head of the church?

they should

 

[Timotheos]

But nothing here is actually what scripture teaches.

"For the wages of sin is death" Romans 6:23
Isn't this what scripture teaches? Does Romans 6:24 say "By the way, ignore that because the wages of sin is not death, but eternal conscious torment in heck"?

You have misinterpreted the use of the words life and death.

Actually, I haven't. Life means the condition of being alive, and death means the condition of not being alive.

I'm not arguing with you, I am merely telling you what the Bible actually says. It is up to you whether you believe that or a contrary view put forth by the roman catholics.

Proponents, purposely ignore what scripture teaches so that the false teaching becomes more valid.

I haven't ignored what scripture teaches, Scripture teaches exactly what I said. You must ignore scripture to come up with the doctrine that the wages of sin is NOT death but eternal conscious torment in hell instead of death. Read Romans 6:23 and tell me what it says.

The Bible does explain why. A physical death would not only be meaningless, but it denies God's purpose in creating man and giving man the free choice of being united with Him or to reject Him.

Chapter and Verse, Please?

Why would God create a creature in His Image with the express purpose that for those who reject Him He would actually destroy(annihilate).

Because death (destruction) is what the Bible says is the penalty for sin.

Man chooses, thus man is the one who must live with the consequences. Why is that so difficult to understand?

I agree with that, and according to the Bible the consequence (or wages) of sin is death. It is not difficult to understand, but it is difficult to get you to accept this. Read Romans 6:23 and tell me what it says the penalty for sin is.

You want to live your life as you desire but have no consequences.

This is actually not true. You don't even know me, so why do you think that I want to live your life as I desire but have no consequences? Furthermore, DEATH is a HUGE consequence. Do I go around claiming that You want to live your life as you desire but have no consequences? You don't think that a man would ever die as a result of his sin. Therefore no consequences? "Surely you will not die?" Are we supposed to believe the Devil now instead of God?

It's as if God does not exist, but they still want the blessedness that comes from Him for those who submit to Him, even though they reject Him.
Nice comfortable world you have created.

Seriously? How on Earth could they enjoy "the blessedness that comes from Him" if they are stone cold dead???

You really need to rethink your arguments.
But once again, I am not arguing with you, I am merely telling you what the Bible actually says, it is up to you whether you believe it or not. The Bible says the all who believe in Jesus Christ will not perish but will have eternal life. Those who believe in Him will have eternal life, those who reject Him will not have eternal life, not in hell or anywhere else. This is the plain message of scripture, this is the gospel truth. But you are free to accept or reject it.

 

[Rightglory]

there's the greek orthodox guys


:think:

However, they are not known as Catholic, but Orthodox.

 

[Rightglory]

there is only one holy, catholic, and apostolic church

So, you are Orthodox and not Roman Catholic?

 

[Rightglory]

Timotheos,

"For the wages of sin is death" Romans 6:23
Isn't this what scripture teaches? Does Romans 6:24 say "By the way, ignore that because the wages of sin is not death, but eternal conscious torment in heck"?

Never has before and still does not.

Actually, I haven't. Life means the condition of being alive, and death means the condition of not being alive.

I'm not arguing with you, I am merely telling you what the Bible actually says. It is up to you whether you believe that or a contrary view put forth by the roman catholics.

I have believed the Gospel as it was given and has been preserved unchanged by man. That does not quality as being Roman Catholic. However, you clearly hold to a view that was resurrected by man, an heretical view for the Church which is guided and guarded by the Holy Spirit.

You can hold to such a view, but it will never be the meaning of scripture as it has been preserved by the Holy Spirit.

I haven't ignored what scripture teaches, Scripture teaches exactly what I said. You must ignore scripture to come up with the doctrine that the wages of sin is NOT death but eternal conscious torment in hell instead of death. Read Romans 6:23 and tell me what it says.

I already have explained it to you. You have not given any evidence to the contrary. Find an historical record that the death of Rom 6:23 is a physical death rather than a spiritual death. At the same time you need to show that the Church has always held this view.

You have not even come close to explaining what scripture means. You have adopted someone else's interpretation, probably with some nuances more acceptable to you. Give some evidence other than your opinion or some other modern guys opinion that scripture has always meant that death of Rom 6:23, or the Second Death, or a separation from God spiritually is always a physical death.

So, I accept the Gospel of Christ as He gave it, has preserved it, not some modern man's version of it. If I have not already mentioned it, the Church declared for the Orthodox that annihilationism is a heresy by the 5th Ecumenical Council.