Is the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment biblical or not?

[freelight]

Its all terms and definitions......

Its all terms and definitions......

I think the bible DOES support the destruction of the lost. And I don't know any ECTist that don't believe that. But the two parties appear to have a different idea of what "destruction" means. Maybe that should be our focus: to determine what "destruction" and "perish" mean.

Well, as I've shared previously,.....we have to consider what aspects of the soul are 'non-perishable' and/or 'perishable' (if such aspects exist). To do this we have to look delve into the constitution of the human person (spirit, soul, body) and see if a 'person' can truly DIE (become disintegrated, become non-existence, become expunged from conscious existence, etc.) - the school of 'conditional immortality' from a biblical perspective believes they have sufficient evidence for this from scriptures, but one has to see if all the evidence supports such a view,...of the wicked suffering a death that is 'final', 'eternal' in its conclusion.

These souls are said to DIE. - they are forever 'asleep' if you want to put it that way, and will never be resurrected. The 'spirit'(breath) and other non-perishable elements that made up that particular soul goes back to its source (and here we have different views and schools of thought on this). The Bible does not disclose or describe every minute detail in this regard, hence the partial knowledge upon which further speculations are assumed. From a duality-paradigm of 'life' or 'death',....those who choose life will have it, those who reject it....will perish. - all the details in-between are speculative. - a biblical context is limited, which is why considering also modern psychical research and other religious writings on the subject could be helpful. - and such is still related to the topic, despite your protests.

Since the Bible has ambiguous passages and terminology, further complicated by 'translation/interpretation', its limited. it is what it is,...and you see its diversity. IF you want to determine what is 'biblical' or not, well that's still subjective to how you define or determine if something is 'biblical' or not, which is somewhat arbitrary from what I've seen.

And still....you cannot convince a person of moderate intelligence to accept any concept or doctrine that violates reason, moral law or principle, or revolts the conscience, since 'God' is the source and sustainer of conscience, from which the fair standards of justice and mercy are mediated. ECT violates common sense and sanity, further disgracing God's assumed goodness.

If you could not bare to condemn your own children to ECT (add whatever imaginary concept of 'hellfire/torment' to the brew)...then how can you assume an all loving benevolent Heavenly Father could do such a thing? - and still, you can throw up any passages or challenges about something being 'biblical' or not, and it would not matter, since we still evaluate things thru our own faculties of reason and conscience, while God's laws and principles are consonant with such. So, your back to quibbling over what 'life' or 'death' means, all relative terms. Each can make a dissertation to support their case, and much is still open to research.

Since ECT is revolting, 'conditional immortality' is an alternative option since it appears only those choosing salvation "put on immortality". Some receive eternal life or immortality, others perish. Looks like 'life' or 'death' here,...not necessarily ECT. There's a lot here to consider than just a black n white equation. There is also an 'agnostic' position to hold in some areas here, where you just frankly admit "I don't know", and leave it that (or consider a proposition that is most probable or possible).

In the meantime you can frolick all you like with passages and some quest to determine if something is 'biblical' or not (not knocking this tim, but a lot of people claim 'this' or 'that' is 'biblical', so?). Not disparaging the subject (already exhausted at this point), but just saying. Its a matter of terms, definitions and assumptions here. - gather all the proof texts you can. At the end of the day, its still up for grabs, and then more passages to mull over.......then repeat. Souls being confined to a state of endless punishment to which there is no reprieve, relief, or hope of salvation ever? well, that's just insane. For a 'God' whose nature is love (and rules by divine wisdom), and is the very personal source of all justice and mercy,...this is problematic.

 

[Zeke]

Well, as I've shared previously,.....we have to consider what aspects of the soul are 'non-perishable' and/or 'perishable' (if such aspects exist). To do this we have to look delve into the constitution of the human person (spirit, soul, body) and see if a 'person' can truly DIE (become disintegrated, become non-existence, become expunged from conscious existence, etc.) - the school of 'conditional immortality' from a biblical perspective believes they have sufficient evidence for this from scriptures, but one has to see if all the evidence supports such a view,...of the wicked suffering a death that is 'final', 'eternal' in its conclusion.

These souls are said to DIE. - they are forever 'asleep' if you want to put it that way, and will never be resurrected. The 'spirit'(breath) and other non-perishable elements that made up that particular soul goes back to its source (and here we have different views and schools of thought on this). The Bible does not disclose or describe every minute detail in this regard, hence the partial knowledge upon which further speculations are assumed. From a duality-paradigm of 'life' or 'death',....those who choose life will have it, those who reject it....will perish. - all the details in-between are speculative. - a biblical context is limited, which is why considering also modern psychical research and other religious writings on the subject could be helpful. - and such is still related to the topic, despite your protests.

Since the Bible has ambiguous passages and terminology, further complicated by 'translation/interpretation', its limited. it is what it is,...and you see its diversity. IF you want to determine what is 'biblical' or not, well that's still subjective to how you define or determine if something is 'biblical' or not, which is somewhat arbitrary from what I've seen.

And still....you cannot convince a person of moderate intelligence to accept any concept or doctrine that violates reason, moral law or principle, or revolts the conscience, since 'God' is the source and sustainer of conscience, from which the fair standards of justice and mercy are mediated. ECT violates common sense and sanity, further disgracing God's assumed goodness.

If you could not bare to condemn your own children to ECT (add whatever imaginary concept of 'hellfire/torment' to the brew)...then how can you assume an all loving benevolent Heavenly Father could do such a thing? - and still, you can throw up any passages or challenges about something being 'biblical' or not, and it would not matter, since we still evaluate things thru our own faculties of reason and conscience, while God's laws and principles are consonant with such. So, your back to quibbling over what 'life' or 'death' means, all relative terms. Each can make a dissertation to support their case, and much is still open to research.

Since ECT is revolting, 'conditional immortality' is an alternative option since it appears only those choosing salvation "put on immortality". Some receive eternal life or immortality, others perish. Looks like 'life' or 'death' here,...not necessarily ECT. There's a lot here to consider than just a black n white equation. There is also an 'agnostic' position to hold in some areas here, where you just frankly admit "I don't know", and leave it that (or consider a proposition that is most probable or possible).

In the meantime you can frolick all you like with passages and some quest to determine if something is 'biblical' or not (not knocking this tim, but a lot of people claim 'this' or 'that' is 'biblical', so?). Not disparaging the subject (already exhausted at this point), but just saying. Its a matter of terms, definitions and assumptions here. - gather all the proof texts you can. At the end of the day, its still up for grabs, and then more passages to mull over.......then repeat. Souls being confined to a state of endless punishment to which there is no reprieve, relief, or hope of salvation ever? well, that's just insane. For a 'God' whose nature is love (and rules by divine wisdom), and is the very personal source of all justice and mercy,...this is problematic.

This birth rate still holds true Galatians 4:27. Lots of births/thoughts around here from the carnal minded, a witness of the hearts condition under the religious spirit of indoctrination Luke 9:54-55, Romans 8:1, A walk into the silence that puts the carnal mind to sleep while the temple of the God of the living is being constructed Luke 17:20-21.

 

[way 2 go]

Well, as I've shared previously,.....we have to consider what aspects of the soul are 'non-perishable' and/or 'perishable' (if such aspects exist). To do this we have to look delve into the constitution of the human person (spirit, soul, body) and see if a 'person' can truly DIE (become disintegrated, become non-existence, become expunged from conscious existence, etc.) - the school of 'conditional immortality' from a biblical perspective believes they have sufficient evidence for this from scriptures, but one has to see if all the evidence supports such a view,...of the wicked suffering a death that is 'final', 'eternal' in its conclusion.

'conditional immortality' :nono:

Ecc_3:11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also, he has put eternity into man's heart

people die, people perish from this life , are destroyed from this life

These souls are said to DIE. - they are forever 'asleep' if you want to put it that way, and will never be resurrected. The 'spirit'(breath) and other non-perishable elements that made up that particular soul goes back to its source (and here we have different views and schools of thought on this). The Bible does not disclose or describe every minute detail in this regard, hence the partial knowledge upon which further speculations are assumed. From a duality-paradigm of 'life' or 'death',....those who choose life will have it, those who reject it....will perish. - all the details in-between are speculative. - a biblical context is limited, which is why considering also modern psychical research and other religious writings on the subject could be helpful. - and such is still related to the topic, despite your protests.

other religious writings on the subject have blinded you to the truth
your love of darkness and for things you find palatable is leading you to hell

Since the Bible has ambiguous passages and terminology, further complicated by 'translation/interpretation', its limited. it is what it is,...and you see its diversity. IF you want to determine what is 'biblical' or not, well that's still subjective to how you define or determine if something is 'biblical' or not, which is somewhat arbitrary from what I've seen.

truth is what is is and what is not is not

Gen 2:17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."

And still....you cannot convince a person of moderate intelligence to accept any concept or doctrine that violates reason, moral law or principle, or revolts the conscience, since 'God' is the source and sustainer of conscience, from which the fair standards of justice and mercy are mediated. ECT violates common sense and sanity, further disgracing God's assumed goodness.

now you are the judge the arbiter of truth :think:

Rom 3:4 By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar, as it is written, "That you may be justified in your words, and prevail when you are judged."

karma
murder a person -1 ,fornicate have a child +1 = even

If you could not bare to condemn your own children to ECT (add whatever imaginary concept of 'hellfire/torment' to the brew)...then how can you assume an all loving benevolent Heavenly Father could do such a thing?

Rev 22:11 Let the evildoer still do evil, and the filthy still be filthy, and the righteous still do right, and the holy still be holy."
Rev 22:12 "Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done.

- and still, you can throw up any passages or challenges about something being 'biblical' or not, and it would not matter, since we still evaluate things thru our own faculties of reason and conscience, while God's laws and principles are consonant with such. So, your back to quibbling over what 'life' or 'death' means, all relative terms. Each can make a dissertation to support their case, and much is still open to research.

your not interested in the truth

Joh_14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Since ECT is revolting,

karma is revolting
eternal life is not earned it is a free gift

Rom_6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Souls being confined to a state of endless punishment to which there is no reprieve, relief, or hope of salvation ever? well, that's just insane. For a 'God' whose nature is love (and rules by divine wisdom), and is the very personal source of all justice and mercy,...this is problematic.

spiritually alive or spiritually dead
you are spending eternity with or separated from God

Dan 12:2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

 

[way 2 go]

This birth rate still holds true Galatians 4:27. Lots of births/thoughts around here from the carnal minded,

you list yourself as other

a witness of the hearts condition under the religious spirit of indoctrination Luke 9:54-55, Romans 8:1, A walk into the silence that puts the carnal mind to sleep while the temple of the God of the living is being constructed Luke 17:20-21.

 

[freelight]

I'd get over the 'labels'......

I'd get over the 'labels'......

you list yourself as other

So do I since I was a catalyst to get Knight to make another 'catagory' available, and that's what he gave us. 'Other' simply means there is not a category presently available that best describes the person's religious affiliation, so they choose 'Other' rather than any one given 'denomination'. These are just labels, words. One choosing 'Other' may indeed accept or include parts of various religious cultures or traditions in their personal 'theology'...or not.

Certainly choosing the label 'Christian' doesn't mean that person is 'Christ-like' or 'saved' for that matter, since such relative terms and definitions depend on the bias or interpretation of the viewer, subject to debate.

ECT in hellfire is still insane, no matter how many literal figurative passages you toss on the table to feed your 'golden calf' or what 'seasoning' you use to bake it. Such a 'god' will be rejected by one of a sane and rational disposition, on logic and principle alone.

 

[way 2 go]

So do I since I was a catalyst to get Knight to make another 'catagory' available, and that's what he gave us. 'Other' simply means there is not a category presently available that best describes the person's religious affiliation, so they choose 'Other' rather than any one given 'denomination'. These are just labels, words. One choosing 'Other' may indeed accept or include parts of various religious cultures or traditions in their personal 'theology'...or not.

other means not a Christian ,spiritually dead

Certainly choosing the label 'Christian' doesn't mean that person is 'Christ-like' or 'saved' for that matter, since such relative terms and definitions depend on the bias or interpretation of the viewer, subject to debate.

Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.

ECT in hellfire is still insane, no matter how many literal figurative passages you toss on the table to feed your 'golden calf' or what 'seasoning' you use to bake it. Such a 'god' will be rejected by one of a sane and rational disposition, on logic and principle alone.

spiritually alive or spiritually dead
you are spending eternity with or separated from God

 

[freelight]

Considering 'conditional immortality'.....

Considering 'conditional immortality'.....

'conditional immortality' :nono:

Conditional immortality seems to be taught in many bible passages, if you wanna get 'bibilical'. If you would look at all the evidence, begin here, a good start in getting into the 'meat' of the subject.

other religious writings on the subject have blinded you to the truth
your love of darkness and for things you find palatable is leading you to hell

Not at all, they have opened my mind and spirit to expand and explore all possibilities and probabilities, unlike one who has limited his 'scope' to only one narrow slice of reality or confined it to only one religious book. Of course, the subject here is geared to discovering what the Bible teaches on the matter.

now you are the judge the arbiter of truth :think:

When you go thru a 'life review' at the end of your present mortal life, who do you think is the 'judge' of your life experiences, and who weighs those triumphs and shortcomings, but your own conscience? Sure, 'God' and your spiritual guides/teachers also attend your counsel (God is omnipresent), but at last it is the 'light' of conscience and discernment in your own being (from God), that is the 'judge' of all, for that 'light' is 'God'.

karma
murder a person -1 ,fornicate have a child +1 = even

I think your concept/understanding of karma may be a bit skewed, but that's another subject that I make a thread upon in due time. I recommend its study from the school of Theosophy first, upon which other schools can be surveyed, but at least it is a universal law that underlies all movements, (karma means 'action', and includes all its consequences), but the 'law of equilibrium/balance' holds sway in the cosmos on many levels. Such a study of 'law' that they don't teach you in Sunday School,...such matters are of a higher esoteric nature. Even the Bible speaks of "seedtime and harvest", "sowing and reaping", "getting back measure for measure"....universal laws you see.

Rev 22:11 Let the evildoer still do evil, and the filthy still be filthy, and the righteous still do right, and the holy still be holy."
Rev 22:12 "Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done.

Just another figurative verse in Revelation. It just so happens the verse addresses a 'day of judgment', a point in time...when souls are either steeped in sin or doing righteousness.... they will be caught unaware (on that day),...BUT even so,.... Christ still judges fairly, giving to each according to their works. You see,...the law of karma still holds, seedtime and harvest. All that is sown, will be reaped, measure for measure,...such is also called the 'law of compensation'. Its just a matter of course, ....cosmic law....affecting lives individually. YEP,....the Lord's reward is with him, to give to each 'according' to what? their condition, their disposition, their deeds, etc. - you naturally harvest the kind of seeds you sow and experience the condition of your own demeanor.

your not interested in the truth

You mean you assume I'm not interested in such, but that's your 'conception' or 'caricature' of truth. Lets be careful to differentiate

Joh_14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

No problem there, since Jesus was indeed while speaking these words, attuned fully to God his Father, in spirit and truth,...so he could say in that 'condition' of 'God-consciousness'...that the life he was living/demonstrating....was expressing the God-kind of LIFE. That personal living expression is of course and nature, the way, truth and the life of 'God'. Nothing more to read into this.

karma is revolting

Not at all, its a universal law, the law of action. Actions result in consequences, as what is sown, is what is reaped,....in 'kind' and 'measure'...although some effects may not be apparent or manifest in other ways not always so noticeable. However, all ripples like a pebble being cast into a pond, have a 'ripple effect' thru-out the entire body of water. You plant a pumpkin seed, you get pumpkins, an apple seed, apples, an acorn,....an oak tree, and so on.

eternal life is not earned it is a free gift

Well,....I guess you would then agree in 'conditional immortality',...since only those who receive the gift of eternal life put on immortality. Only those receive the divine nature and Spirit of God, can partake of that same divine nature (immortality), while those who do not, do not enjoy immortality. Follow? By 'immortality' here I refer to the very divine nature of God himself, given to a soul, so that by having this 'divine nature' he cannot ever die. Remember, only 'God' has immortality inherently in his nature.

Rom_6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Very good,....see that 'sin' produces death. The 'dead' don't have life, let alone 'immortality'. Perhaps you ought to give 'conditional immortality' some more consideration, as being biblically supported. There are few hurdles first to jump over, and perhaps a few hoops as well.

spiritually alive or spiritually dead
you are spending eternity with or separated from God

Eh,.....that's where 'speculation' enters in. Its assuming that human souls are already by nature 'eternal', or 'imperishable',....or that the soul is already inherently 'immortal' (adopted from older greek or Vedic theology, also held by spiritualists/spiritists). Most holders of 'conditional immortality' from a biblical context, reject the greek concept of an 'immortal soul' since they say its NOT taught in the Bible (since souls can die or perish). If a soul can DIE, its obviously not innately immortal. Furthermore, we must see that when a soul "puts on immortality" that means it DID NOT HAVE IT BEFORE. The 'mortal' has to 'put it on'. If that immortality is not bestowed, there is no eternal life, the divine or God-kind of life. Without such a transformation of the soul into the divine nature of God, that nature transforming the mortal soul into the divine-nature condition,...its not immortal is it? A soul that dies does not have life. - it is not living.

 

[eddie17]

No it isnt,when you go to the greek,you get a diffrent story altogether.

 

[Timotheos]

No it isnt,when you go to the greek,you get a diffrent story altogether.

Thanks Eddie, I agree.

Do you read the Greek New Testament? I've been learning Greek since 2009, I read a chapter of the NT a day in Greek.

 

[Timotheos]

The only dumb thing I see if the repetition of this--->It's a stupid question and quit flooding the woodshed.

Thanks Sherman.

Okdoser has cemented my view that Eternal Conscious Torture in Hell is insane and only an insane person can believe it. It is nice to see how the ECTists stick together no matter what.

Do you have anything at all to say about the topic at hand, which is:
Is the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment biblical or not?

Peace and Joy to you,
Tim

 

[Zeke]

way 2 go;4623378]other means not a Christian ,spiritually dead

It means all things are pure in Christ Titus 1:15 meat diet of spiritual liberty 2 Cor 3:6, no carnal labels needed once one is weaned from milk mentality, Or one can use them if dealing with those yoked under them still reflecting a impure heart such as you're self and your death cult amigos.

 

[way 2 go]

Conditional immortality seems to be taught in many bible passages, if you wanna get 'bibilical'. If you would look at all the evidence, begin here, a good start in getting into the 'meat' of the subject.

I saw this verse mentioned :
Gen 2:17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."

I believe they died that day that they ate of the tree
just like I believe your a dead man walking Mat 8:22

Not at all, they have opened my mind and spirit to expand and explore all possibilities and probabilities, unlike one who has limited his 'scope' to only one narrow slice of reality or confined it to only one religious book. Of course, the subject here is geared to discovering what the Bible teaches on the matter.

you are a spiritualist relying on your spirit

Rom_8:9 ... Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.

When you go thru a 'life review' at the end of your present mortal life, who do you think is the 'judge' of your life experiences, and who weighs those triumphs and shortcomings, but your own conscience? Sure, 'God' and your spiritual guides/teachers also attend your counsel (God is omnipresent), but at last it is the 'light' of conscience and discernment in your own being (from God), that is the 'judge' of all, for that 'light' is 'God'.

Jesus Christ

Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done.

I think your concept/understanding of karma may be a bit skewed, but that's another subject that I make a thread upon in due time. I recommend its study from the school of Theosophy first, upon which other schools can be surveyed, but at least it is a universal law that underlies all movements, (karma means 'action', and includes all its consequences), but the 'law of equilibrium/balance' holds sway in the cosmos on many levels. Such a study of 'law' that they don't teach you in Sunday School,...such matters are of a higher esoteric nature. Even the Bible speaks of "seedtime and harvest", "sowing and reaping", "getting back measure for measure"....universal laws you see.

this is sowing and reaping
Mat 6:19 "Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal,
Mat 6:20 but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal.


this is sowing and reaping according to
karma
murder a person -1 ,fornicate have a child +1 = even

Just another figurative verse in Revelation. It just so happens the verse addresses a 'day of judgment', a point in time...when souls are either steeped in sin or doing righteousness.... they will be caught unaware (on that day),...BUT even so,.... Christ still judges fairly, giving to each according to their works. You see,...the law of karma still holds, seedtime and harvest. All that is sown, will be reaped, measure for measure,...such is also called the 'law of compensation'. Its just a matter of course, ....cosmic law....affecting lives individually. YEP,....the Lord's reward is with him, to give to each 'according' to what? their condition, their disposition, their deeds, etc. - you naturally harvest the kind of seeds you sow and experience the condition of your own demeanor.

eternal life is not earned it is a free gift

Rom_6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord

your works won't save you from being eternally separated
from God

You mean you assume I'm not interested in such, but that's your 'conception' or 'caricature' of truth. Lets be careful to differentiate

2Ti 3:7 always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth.

No problem there, since Jesus was indeed while speaking these words, attuned fully to God his Father, in spirit and truth,...so he could say in that 'condition' of 'God-consciousness'...that the life he was living/demonstrating....was expressing the God-kind of LIFE. That personal living expression is of course and nature, the way, truth and the life of 'God'. Nothing more to read into this.

:nono:

Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Joh 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

Not at all, its a universal law, the law of action. Actions result in consequences, as what is sown, is what is reaped,....in 'kind' and 'measure'...although some effects may not be apparent or manifest in other ways not always so noticeable. However, all ripples like a pebble being cast into a pond, have a 'ripple effect' thru-out the entire body of water. You plant a pumpkin seed, you get pumpkins, an apple seed, apples, an acorn,....an oak tree, and so on.

Luk 10:30 Jesus replied, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead.
Luk 10:31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side.

the priest left him to his karma

Well,....I guess you would then agree in 'conditional immortality',...since only those who receive the gift of eternal life put on immortality. Only those receive the divine nature and Spirit of God, can partake of that same divine nature (immortality), while those who do not, do not enjoy immortality. Follow? By 'immortality' here I refer to the very divine nature of God himself, given to a soul, so that by having this 'divine nature' he cannot ever die. Remember, only 'God' has immortality inherently in his nature.

he created us to live forever

Dan 12:2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
Ecc_3:11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also, he has put eternity into man's heart

Very good,....see that 'sin' produces death. The 'dead' don't have life, let alone 'immortality'. Perhaps you ought to give 'conditional immortality' some more consideration, as being biblically supported. There are few hurdles first to jump over, and perhaps a few hoops as well.

your dead
spiritually speaking

Eh,.....that's where 'speculation' enters in. Its assuming that human souls are already by nature 'eternal', or 'imperishable',....or that the soul is already inherently 'immortal' (adopted from older greek or Vedic theology, also held by spiritualists/spiritists). Most holders of 'conditional immortality' from a biblical context, reject the greek concept of an 'immortal soul' since they say its NOT taught in the Bible (since souls can die or perish). If a soul can DIE, its obviously not innately immortal. Furthermore, we must see that when a soul "puts on immortality" that means it DID NOT HAVE IT BEFORE. The 'mortal' has to 'put it on'. If that immortality is not bestowed, there is no eternal life, the divine or God-kind of life. Without such a transformation of the soul into the divine nature of God, that nature transforming the mortal soul into the divine-nature condition,...its not immortal is it? A soul that dies does not have life. - it is not living.

spirits live on with out bodies

Isa 14:9 The place of death is excited that you are coming. Sheol is waking the spirits of all the leaders of the earth for you. Sheol is making the kings stand up from their thrones to meet you.
Isa 14:10 They will make fun of you, saying, "Now you are as dead as we are. Now you are just like us."

physical bodies are not
immortal hence they must put on immortality

1Co 15:53 For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality.

 

[Derf]

Well, as I've shared previously,.....we have to consider what aspects of the soul are 'non-perishable' and/or 'perishable' (if such aspects exist). To do this we have to look delve into the constitution of the human person (spirit, soul, body) and see if a 'person' can truly DIE (become disintegrated, become non-existence, become expunged from conscious existence, etc.)

Begging the question a wee bit, eh?

- the school of 'conditional immortality' from a biblical perspective believes they have sufficient evidence for this from scriptures, but one has to see if all the evidence supports such a view,...of the wicked suffering a death that is 'final', 'eternal' in its conclusion.

These souls are said to DIE. - they are forever 'asleep' if you want to put it that way, and will never be resurrected. The 'spirit'(breath) and other non-perishable elements that made up that particular soul goes back to its source (and here we have different views and schools of thought on this).

So you agree that there are non-perishable elements?

The Bible does not disclose or describe every minute detail in this regard, hence the partial knowledge upon which further speculations are assumed.

Yes, valid point.

From a duality-paradigm of 'life' or 'death',....those who choose life will have it, those who reject it....will perish. - all the details in-between are speculative. - a biblical context is limited, which is why considering also modern psychical research and other religious writings on the subject could be helpful. - and such is still related to the topic, despite your protests.

The problem is with the unreliable nature of psychical research and other religious writings. Both are fraught with error.

Since the Bible has ambiguous passages and terminology, further complicated by 'translation/interpretation', its limited. it is what it is,...and you see its diversity. IF you want to determine what is 'biblical' or not, well that's still subjective to how you define or determine if something is 'biblical' or not, which is somewhat arbitrary from what I've seen.

And still....you cannot convince a person of moderate intelligence to accept any concept or doctrine that violates reason, moral law or principle, or revolts the conscience, since 'God' is the source and sustainer of conscience, from which the fair standards of justice and mercy are mediated. ECT violates common sense and sanity, further disgracing God's assumed goodness.

So you are saying that people groups who throughout history have practiced human sacrifice and cannibalism have always been of less than moderate intelligence? Really, whole societies of less than moderate intelligence? Where even their leaders, who must of been of greater than average intelligence in comparison to the rest of the population, who approved of the practices and likely ordered them? The Aztecs and Mayans were of less than moderate intelligence? And Hitler and the majority of the German people of his day were of less than moderate intelligence?

If you could not bare to condemn your own children to ECT (add whatever imaginary concept of 'hellfire/torment' to the brew)...then how can you assume an all loving benevolent Heavenly Father could do such a thing? - and still, you can throw up any passages or challenges about something being 'biblical' or not, and it would not matter,

As long as I'm throwing up passages, what do you think about the one in Deuteronomy 21:18-21? Leave alone the idea of eternal torment for a moment, do you think a loving, benevolent, earthly father could bring his son to the elders for stoning? Or is that just for those of less than moderate intelligence?

since we still evaluate things thru our own faculties of reason and conscience, while God's laws and principles are consonant with such. So, your back to quibbling over what 'life' or 'death' means, all relative terms. Each can make a dissertation to support their case, and much is still open to research.

Yes, but if you introduce more "authoritative" sources, the quibbling is not lessened, but magnified.

Since ECT is revolting, 'conditional immortality' is an alternative option since it appears only those choosing salvation "put on immortality". Some receive eternal life or immortality, others perish. Looks like 'life' or 'death' here,...not necessarily ECT. There's a lot here to consider than just a black n white equation. There is also an 'agnostic' position to hold in some areas here, where you just frankly admit "I don't know", and leave it that (or consider a proposition that is most probable or possible).

Sure--that's why we often divide topics into "majors" and "minors", where "minors" are those we can disagree on and still be brothers in Christ. "Majors" are those that separate believers from non-believers. Our general goal as Christians is to invite non-believers to believe on Jesus Christ and His sacrifice to keep us from either ECT or annihilation--whichever is the final state. Are you ready to cross that "major" line and join us in the "minor" disagreement of ECT vs annihilation?

In the meantime you can frolick all you like with passages and some quest to determine if something is 'biblical' or not (not knocking this tim, but a lot of people claim 'this' or 'that' is 'biblical', so?). Not disparaging the subject (already exhausted at this point), but just saying. Its a matter of terms, definitions and assumptions here. - gather all the proof texts you can. At the end of the day, its still up for grabs, and then more passages to mull over.......then repeat. Souls being confined to a state of endless punishment to which there is no reprieve, relief, or hope of salvation ever? well, that's just insane. For a 'God' whose nature is love (and rules by divine wisdom), and is the very personal source of all justice and mercy,...this is problematic.

Some people say it's insane to believe that a man rose from the dead 2000 years ago. What do you think?

 

[Derf]

Derf, do you agree with this assessment? Do you believe like okdoser that an infant who is killed by falling into hot molten sulfur wouldn't die as a result but would be merely tortured by the molten sulfur? And do you agree that anyone who thinks that hot molten sulfur would kill a person is a "retard"?

This is the backwards way that ECTists think.

Ignoring for the moment the infantile nature of both sides of your exchange...

How long does it take an infant to die after falling into hot sulfur? I don't know the answer, but I would guess it isn't instantaneous. So I would say the infant experiences torment for at least a little bit of time. I think that's OKDoser's point.

Is it eternal? No. How much does that matter? If God tortures an infant at all, even for a few seconds, is that morally wrong? Let me know what you think. Maybe eternal torture is more wrong than momentary torture, but if God is blameless, then even a momentary moral failure is still a moral failure.

Is it torture? Is the infant being dropped into hot sulfur on purpose? Did the mother drop the infant into the sulfur intentionally (like the sacrifices to Molech)? Or is it something the infant caused to happen (by flailing in his mother's arms, perhaps) while she was sightseeing at a volcano?

So now, if it is torment rather than torture, meaning it's not perpetrated by God, it removes the morality question. What's left is to figure out whether some aspect of the person indeed is imperishable. To what verses do we go to get this information?

 

[freelight]

theres more to it.............

theres more to it.............

The problem is with the unreliable nature of psychical research and other religious writings. Both are fraught with error.

This is an assumption. What proof do you have they are fraught with error or unreliable? Have you investigated other religious and philosophical writings on the nature and destiny of the soul? - also modern psychical research on the nature of the Afterlife, NDEs, OBEs, etc. How does one 'determine' what is 'reliable'? I draw from a collective of knowledge from various schools, while we are researching biblical passages on the matter here. I see no reason not to include in my research the totality of my studies in comprehending the total picture here. Those who use the Bible as their sole authority are divided on particulars, so I don't see 'sola scriptura' doing much for anybody really. You can use the Bible as your guide,...but must include the total breadth of knowledge from all schools on the subject, and keep progressing in knowledge and revelation.

So you agree that there are non-perishable elements?

This is an important issue if we're discussing the nature/constitution of the soul, the metaphysics of its make-up. This is also pivotal in the transformation of the soul (however it is 'transformed'.....either by a disintegration process or the soul becoming immortalized). - its back to the mechanics of 'life' and 'death'. On this count beyond the limited info. provided in the Bible I find other sources insightful about this process, which I may expand on when I see such is pertinent to discussion on any particulars. Also, I've been studying Theosophy, which presents a complex and interesting schematic on the soul's make-up, which does include aspects which are 'mortal' and 'immortal',...but this gets indepth, and includes its own terms and their descriptions. I would only touch upon these in my philosophical sharings where such 'relate' to the subject. I identify currently as an 'eclectic theosophist' as being a student of divine wisdom, and coming from an 'eclectic' approach of universal science and religion, hence the 'label' is a liberal and poetic one on my part,....part of the 'creative dialogue play' here

So you are saying that people groups who throughout history have practiced human sacrifice and cannibalism have always been of less than moderate intelligence? Really, whole societies of less than moderate intelligence? Where even their leaders, who must of been of greater than average intelligence in comparison to the rest of the population, who approved of the practices and likely ordered them? The Aztecs and Mayans were of less than moderate intelligence? And Hitler and the majority of the German people of his day were of less than moderate intelligence?

Such measures of conscience and allowance of atrocities is a 'relative' matter per every circumstance/context/time.....I was just saying that from a 'moral sense' of justice/mercy, and 'fairness',....condemning souls to an eternity of conscious suffering with no hope of relief EVER is insane. - toss as many scriptures you want at it,...its still horrendous. I wont accept something that revolts my own conscience and is utterly irrantional. 'God' help me if I did.

As long as I'm throwing up passages, what do you think about the one in Deuteronomy 21:18-21? Leave alone the idea of eternal torment for a moment, do you think a loving, benevolent, earthly father could bring his son to the elders for stoning? Or is that just for those of less than moderate intelligence?

I don't buy a lot of the OT levitical laws (made only for Jews), and neither do most modern Jews even apply or carry out the penalties of these laws today! they have modified and softened these divine mandates to kill/stone people...and now explain them away figuratively. So much for holding to the 'word of God' eh? Obviously they recognize these penalties are primitive, cruel, outdated and obsolete. ALSO,...these penalties to kill people for breaking the most minute laws DO NOT EQUATE to punishing a soul forever in hellfire. Now wiping out a soul (termination/disintegration) might be more 'merciful' than keeping them alive forever in a state of suffering. - but there we get back to ECT or 'soul-death' options for the wicked. - what does your own conscience and reason say to such? - there is also 'universalism' and other eschatologies of the soul to consider.

Yes, but if you introduce more "authoritative" sources, the quibbling is not lessened, but magnified.

I find drawing from the whole pool of human tradition and experience on these matters to be insightful. Yes here we are discussing such in a 'biblical context',....but the writers and cultures who wrote the Bible have been influenced by other cultures and traditions as well in their cultural development, philosophy and theology. If you make just one book 'authoritive', you have limited the scope to its terms alone. - and still you have quibblers. There is still the merging of religious philosophy and concepts from cross-culturing and themes/concepts that are consonant with universal truths and principles anyways,....so there is a golden thread of allegorical truth and analogies that are common to many religious traditions, naturally. There is one Infinite Intelligence/Spirit.......one divine nature,....and many ways of explaining/describing and relating to the One Universal Reality.

Sure--that's why we often divide topics into "majors" and "minors", where "minors" are those we can disagree on and still be brothers in Christ. "Majors" are those that separate believers from non-believers. Our general goal as Christians is to invite non-believers to believe on Jesus Christ and His sacrifice to keep us from either ECT or annihilation--whichever is the final state. Are you ready to cross that "major" line and join us in the "minor" disagreement of ECT vs annihilation?

The major of salvation in Christ is granted in our discussion within a biblical context, as well as the 'minors', of course. I've already been expounding on the possibilities and implications of ECT, 'conditional immortality' and universalism, and seg-ways in between and beyond those

Some people say it's insane to believe that a man rose from the dead 2000 years ago. What do you think?

[/QUOTE]

Some might, but I still do not see that such would equate the insanity of 'ECT', not even close. Miracles may happen (Praise the Lord), but eternal torture.....still insane. God does not require one to accept something illogical, irrational or insane. If a religionist does accept such, then his concept of 'God' is erroneous which works by some mirror effect, reflecting his theology.

 

[Derf]

This is an assumption. What proof do you have they are fraught with error or unreliable?

I got that from you:

I presume then that all of those other sources you're talking about are in perfect agreement with each other?

Of course not in every detail and particular, but some commonalities.

If they aren't in agreement with each other, a few "commonalities" seem like shaky ground for finding a source of truth.

Have you investigated other religious and philosophical writings on the nature and destiny of the soul? - also modern psychical research on the nature of the Afterlife, NDEs, OBEs, etc. How does one 'determine' what is 'reliable'? I draw from a collective of knowledge from various schools, while we are researching biblical passages on the matter here. I see no reason not to include in my research the totality of my studies in comprehending the total picture here. Those who use the Bible as their sole authority are divided on particulars, so I don't see 'sola scriptura' doing much for anybody really. You can use the Bible as your guide,...but must include the total breadth of knowledge from all schools on the subject, and keep progressing in knowledge and revelation.

I don't disagree that there is division even among those of us that hold to "sola scriptura". But the disagreement is <usually> about how to interpret or understand the authoritative source, rather than about which "authoritative" source is more authoritative.

Research involving sentient beings that we have little understanding of in the first place, and no real control of in the second, makes for a scientific nightmare. Thus, psychical research is still mostly in the "In Search of..." category of research; that's why it's called "paranormal" because we don't know enough about it to normalize for investigative purposes. And finding out about it from "spirit guides" leaves much to desire in terms of standard controls needed for repeatable experiments.

This is an important issue if we're discussing the nature/constitution of the soul, the metaphysics of its make-up. This is also pivotal in the transformation of the soul (however it is 'transformed'.....either by a disintegration process or the soul becoming immortalized). - its back to the mechanics of 'life' and 'death'. On this count beyond the limited info. provided in the Bible I find other sources insightful about this process, which I may expand on when I see such is pertinent to discussion on any particulars. Also, I've been studying Theosophy, which presents a complex and interesting schematic on the soul's make-up, which does include aspects which are 'mortal' and 'immortal',...but this gets indepth, and includes its own terms and their descriptions. I would only touch upon these in my philosophical sharings where such 'relate' to the subject. I identify currently as an 'eclectic theosophist' as being a student of divine wisdom, and coming from an 'eclectic' approach of universal science and religion, hence the 'label' is a liberal and poetic one on my part,....part of the 'creative dialogue play' here

Just watch out for 'creative truth' in play there.

Such measures of conscience and allowance of atrocities is a 'relative' matter per every circumstance/context/time.....I was just saying that from a 'moral sense' of justice/mercy, and 'fairness',....condemning souls to an eternity of conscious suffering with no hope of relief EVER is insane. - toss as many scriptures you want at it,...its still horrendous. I wont accept something that revolts my own conscience and is utterly irrantional. 'God' help me if I did.

I agree with you here--eternal torment is a horrendous thing. So why would you then condemn yourself to an eternity of conscious suffering? When The God that made you (not 'God') has offered to help keep you from condemning yourself in such a way?

Hoping God agrees with you is a foolhardy approach when He has given you direct revelation of His love for you through the sacrifice of His own son.

I don't buy a lot of the OT levitical laws (made only for Jews),

Not for Jews, but for those that didn't want to be Jews anymore. That's why so many of the laws talked about the perpetrators being "cutoff" from the rest of the people.

and neither do most modern Jews even apply or carry out the penalties of these laws today! they have modified and softened these divine mandates to kill/stone people...and now explain them away figuratively. So much for holding to the 'word of God' eh? Obviously they recognize these penalties are primitive, cruel, outdated and obsolete. ALSO,...these penalties to kill people for breaking the most minute laws DO NOT EQUATE to punishing a soul forever in hellfire.

Maybe they don't equate. But you seem to have the same kind of disdain for both. You "don't buy" the OT levitical laws, and say they are "primitive, cruel, outdated and obsolete". So you're saying that God was more primitive and cruel back then? So maybe God has progressed from the idea of ECT that some think He espoused in the NT, and He has now achieved a superior morality than He used to have way back then. where He might now approach your much more refined sense of morality?

Now wiping out a soul (termination/disintegration) might be more 'merciful' than keeping them alive forever in a state of suffering. - but there we get back to ECT or 'soul-death' options for the wicked. - what does your own conscience and reason say to such? - there is also 'universalism' and other eschatologies of the soul to consider.

I don't trust my own conscience and reason when it comes to my eternal salvation, or yours. I look for a much more reliable source of morals. One that doesn't become obsolete with time.

Because morals shouldn't be changing at the whimsy of human reason.

I find drawing from the whole pool of human tradition and experience on these matters to be insightful. Yes here we are discussing such in a 'biblical context',....but the writers and cultures who wrote the Bible have been influenced by other cultures and traditions as well in their cultural development, philosophy and theology. If you make just one book 'authoritive', you have limited the scope to its terms alone. - and still you have quibblers. There is still the merging of religious philosophy and concepts from cross-culturing and themes/concepts that are consonant with universal truths and principles anyways,....so there is a golden thread of allegorical truth and analogies that are common to many religious traditions, naturally. There is one Infinite Intelligence/Spirit.......one divine nature,....and many ways of explaining/describing and relating to the One Universal Reality.

How do you know that for sure? Maybe that concept will be outdated in a few years.

The major of salvation in Christ is granted in our discussion within a biblical context, as well as the 'minors', of course. I've already been expounding on the possibilities and implications of ECT, 'conditional immortality' and universalism, and seg-ways in between and beyond those

I'm not asking whether you are willing to grant it rhetorically for a shallow conversation on a forum. I'm asking whether you are ready to grant the sacrifice of Christ as universal truth and cling to Him for your eternal existence.

Some might, but I still do not see that such would equate the insanity of 'ECT', not even close. Miracles may happen (Praise the Lord), but eternal torture.....still insane. God does not require one to accept something illogical, irrational or insane. If a religionist does accept such, then his concept of 'God' is erroneous which works by some mirror effect, reflecting his theology.

If anyone decides that his own concept of morality is more reliable than God's, he is in grave danger of finding out the truth the hard way.

 

[freelight]

I agree with you here--eternal torment is a horrendous thing. So why would you then condemn yourself to an eternity of conscious suffering? When The God that made you (not 'God') has offered to help keep you from condemning yourself in such a way?

First, you're assuming ECT is true by the above proposition. I write God as 'God' for its own nuance,...the 'word' still refers to God whether you write the word as 'God' or even 'GOd' and includes all that constitutes or refers to 'Deity'. I see no proof of ECT, and have rejected it thus far in principle, moral/ethical grounds, justice/mercy issues and 'textual criticism' of the passages used to assume it.

Hoping God agrees with you is a foolhardy approach when He has given you direct revelation of His love for you through the sacrifice of His own son.

I don't hope a 'God' agrees with me, but recognize that he wont propose or do anything that is contrary to his own nature and lawful character, in that such will agree with his own law and principle in my own conscience, also using logic, reason, intelligence and spiritual discernment, appropriating some sense of what is just and merciful, the law of God bearing witness of such in my own conscience. One can learn laws or doctrines from without, but these still must be subjectively verified and proven within.

Since 'God' already always is Love by nature,.....his love is revealed by Jesus own life and service, which did end up with him giving his life, unfortunately being murdered by men. I've challenged the concept of vicarious blood-atonement elsewhere, and had my own thread on it, so needn't go into it here. Remember, God is already Love, and as the divine nature IS, so the divine nature DOES. - that's revealed in us and thru as as we love and walk in the Spirit. -living the Christ-life.

Maybe they don't equate. But you seem to have the same kind of disdain for both. You "don't buy" the OT levitical laws, and say they are "primitive, cruel, outdated and obsolete". So you're saying that God was more primitive and cruel back then? So maybe God has progressed from the idea of ECT that some think He espoused in the NT, and He has now achieved a superior morality than He used to have way back then. where He might now approach your much more refined sense of morality?

The fact is modern day Jews have moved on in their adaptation and renovation of their ancient laws and customs, no longer practicing the 'penalties' due to modern day sentiments and more refined execution of 'law' in our current age...which goes to show that such old tribal laws had their place in that cultural-context which does NOT apply now. If that was God's holy eternal law (enforcing penalties),...why have Jews now 'figuratively' interpreted those, and why aren't Christians practicing levitical laws and health codes? They seem to cherry-pick with the rest of them.

I think the issue is not God changing his character or manners from ancient times, but that the writers of such religious works and laws had a different view or perception of 'God', whereby they imposed their own 'spin' on the laws supposedly coming from 'God' adapated to their own unique circumstance and time. As time moved on however,....peoples perception of 'God' changes/evolves, which forces re-interpreting or leaving behind old rules and customs.

Anybody....'God' or whoever who imposes an eternal sentence of unending conscious torment, suffering, pain, agony, torture of any kind.....forever and ever and ever and ever....is sick. 'Insane' is being 'modest'.

I don't trust my own conscience and reason when it comes to my eternal salvation, or yours.

I'm not asking you to. I trust however that the law of God in spirit and principle is innate within my conscience as a guide and discerner, and that it would not lead me to accept what is contrary to it.

I look for a much more reliable source of morals. One that doesn't become obsolete with time.

Well of course,...the only reality that doesn't become obsolete in time, is the timeless Being itself, 'God'. What is timeless within the soul, in the depth of one's being is that, and its laws and principles are reflected in one's conscience, the law of the inner man. Endless or unjustified cruelty is not according to God's law (the nature of love). - I don't need a holy book to teach this to me.

Because morals shouldn't be changing at the whimsy of human reason.

Morals don't change,...and 'reason' still holds as a reliable guide in its own right, since God does not violate reason but encourages its use, along with wisdom.

I'm not asking whether you are willing to grant it rhetorically for a shallow conversation on a forum.

I would hope our 'creative dialogue' and research upon these subjects were not 'shallow' or else why engage them? Its the import, substance and implications of such particulars that encourage and interest us to engage spiritual living and research.

I'm asking whether you are ready to grant the sacrifice of Christ as universal truth and cling to Him for your eternal existence.

I have done such, and owe my existence to the source and sustainer of existence, as do all sentient beings. I am one with that, and non-separate from The ONE. This One is All There IS,....so there can be no separation.

If anyone decides that his own concept of morality is more reliable than God's, he is in grave danger of finding out the truth the hard way.

That's only your fear and assumption. I decide, discern, study and continue to research with all the faculties of heart, soul and spirit available to me, within and without....its a journey of learning,....discovery. 'God' would trust his own presence within every soul to lead, teach and guide,...or how else could such transpire? - all is ultimately reflected within one's own 'being' and 'consciousness',...for where else can 'God' be known?

 

[MichaelCadry]

First, you're assuming ECT is true by the above proposition. I write God as 'God' for its own nuance,...the 'word' still refers to God whether you write the word as 'God' or even 'GOd' and includes all that constitutes or refers to 'Deity'. I see no proof of ECT, and have rejected it thus far in principle, moral/ethical grounds, justice/mercy issues and 'textual criticism' of the passages used to assume it.



I don't hope a 'God' agrees with me, but recognize that he wont propose or do anything that is contrary to his own nature and lawful character, in that such will agree with his own law and principle in my own conscience, also using logic, reason, intelligence and spiritual discernment, appropriating some sense of what is just and merciful, the law of God bearing witness of such in my own conscience. One can learn laws or doctrines from without, but these still must be subjectively verified and proven within.

Since 'God' already always is Love by nature,.....his love is revealed by Jesus own life and service, which did end up with him giving his life, unfortunately being murdered by men. I've challenged the concept of vicarious blood-atonement elsewhere, and had my own thread on it, so needn't go into it here. Remember, God is already Love, and as the divine nature IS, so the divine nature DOES. - that's revealed in us and thru as as we love and walk in the Spirit. -living the Christ-life.



The fact is modern day Jews have moved on in their adaptation and renovation of their ancient laws and customs, no longer practicing the 'penalties' due to modern day sentiments and more refined execution of 'law' in our current age...which goes to show that such old tribal laws had their place in that cultural-context which does NOT apply now. If that was God's holy eternal law (enforcing penalties),...why have Jews now 'figuratively' interpreted those, and why aren't Christians practicing levitical laws and health codes? They seem to cherry-pick with the rest of them.

I think the issue is not God changing his character or manners from ancient times, but that the writers of such religious works and laws had a different view or perception of 'God', whereby they imposed their own 'spin' on the laws supposedly coming from 'God' adapated to their own unique circumstance and time. As time moved on however,....peoples perception of 'God' changes/evolves, which forces re-interpreting or leaving behind old rules and customs.

Anybody....'God' or whoever who imposes an eternal sentence of unending conscious torment, suffering, pain, agony, torture of any kind.....forever and ever and ever and ever....is sick. 'Insane' is being 'modest'.



I'm not asking you to. I trust however that the law of God in spirit and principle is innate within my conscience as a guide and discerner, and that it would not lead me to accept what is contrary to it.



Well of course,...the only reality that doesn't become obsolete in time, is the timeless Being itself, 'God'. What is timeless within the soul, in the depth of one's being is that, and its laws and principles are reflected in one's conscience, the law of the inner man. Endless or unjustified cruelty is not according to God's law (the nature of love). - I don't need a holy book to teach this to me.



Morals don't change,...and 'reason' still holds as a reliable guide in its own right, since God does not violate reason but encourages its use, along with wisdom.



I would hope our 'creative dialogue' and research upon these subjects were not 'shallow' or else why engage them? Its the import, substance and implications of such particulars that encourage and interest us to engage spiritual living and research.



I have done such, and owe my existence to the source and sustainer of existence, as do all sentient beings. I am one with that, and non-separate from The ONE. This One is All There IS,....so there can be no separation.



That's only your fear and assumption. I decide, discern, study and continue to research with all the faculties of heart, soul and spirit available to me, within and without....its a journey of learning,....discovery. 'God' would trust his own presence within every soul to lead, teach and guide,...or how else could such transpire? - all is ultimately reflected within one's own 'being' and 'consciousness',...for where else can 'God' be known?

Dear freelight,

Are you trying to defy the True God or His decisions? I'll tell you what I know about the matter. Then decide for yourself what you want. These are the days when we decide what we want: God or Satan. This is it!! There is little time left.

God created a Heaven for those of us who choose Him and who love Him and agree with Him. We can't be like the angels if we don't put God first, including what He wants from us.

The bottomless pit is Hell. I was told by an angel that hell is in the regions of the center of the Earth, where it is very hot with lava and magma. This is where Satan was to call home for awhile. The Earth has a top and a Center, but no bottom. This is, because of gravity, everyone thinks they are on Top of the Earth. Thus, symbolically, it is called the 'bottomless' pit. That is not the end of it.

Our Sun is the 'lake of fire' mentioned in Rev. 20:10,15KJV. Also in Rev. 19:20KJV. So there is a hotter place than even Hell. The Sun burns hotter by far. You have read that it is written that they shall be cast into the lake of fire and burn 'forever.' So yes, there is Eternal Conscious Torment, the words you use to describe it all, to suit your needs. To make it sound like God is a terrible Being.

Those who are sent to the lake of fire deserve it, or else the Lord God would not send them there. Do you expect them to be allowed into Heaven with those who have done the Will of God?? Well, there is an opposite place of Heaven and that is Hell. Even those in Hell will be given up and judged according to their works, so even some from Hell may make it to Heaven. But some not. God is Extremely Fair about it all.

If there were no 'lake of fire,' then everyone would go to Heaven, the good and the bad, the believers and the unbelievers, those who Love God and those who don't, those who obey God and those who don't. That's just not going to happen, freelight. You are just on your own planet hoping that it's not true because you want to believe in the Urantia book, instead of the Bible, and still go to Heaven. You are headed for disaster, freelight. I realized you were so into your Hindu and Urantia stuff so deeply, so that it why I cut off ties with you, because I gave you up to your wrong beliefs. There was no way to talk you out of those ways or talk some sense into you. So I knew I should just forget it and let God take care of it. You are definitely on the wrong road. The god you call God is not the True God that Christians and Jews believe in. OK, I will close for now. Good luck sticking with your errant beliefs. I only feel sorry for you and I regret the path that you insist on walking.

May God Change Your Mindset Soon,

Michael

 

[Timotheos]

Ignoring for the moment the infantile nature of both sides of your exchange...

How long does it take an infant to die after falling into hot sulfur? I don't know the answer, but I would guess it isn't instantaneous. So I would say the infant experiences torment for at least a little bit of time. I think that's OKDoser's point.

Is it eternal? No. How much does that matter? If God tortures an infant at all, even for a few seconds, is that morally wrong? Let me know what you think. Maybe eternal torture is more wrong than momentary torture, but if God is blameless, then even a momentary moral failure is still a moral failure.

Is it torture? Is the infant being dropped into hot sulfur on purpose? Did the mother drop the infant into the sulfur intentionally (like the sacrifices to Molech)? Or is it something the infant caused to happen (by flailing in his mother's arms, perhaps) while she was sightseeing at a volcano?

So now, if it is torment rather than torture, meaning it's not perpetrated by God, it removes the morality question. What's left is to figure out whether some aspect of the person indeed is imperishable. To what verses do we go to get this information?

You "forgot" to address the infantile insults which I (with Christian Maturity) tolerated. Do you agree with Okdoser that is is "retarded" to believe that infants dropped into molten lava will perish in that lava?

Or put another way, is it part of your own theology to call other Christians "retarded"? Or does Okdoser stand alone in this. I see that you are not above insulting people too, since you called me infantile. I don't think that namecalling has any place in a Bible Study. Do you?
I am way too mature to sink to Okdoser's level. (And yours, I would not ever call you infantile.)

It is sad that behavior like Okdoser's interferes with people studying God's Word to discover what it actually says. And it is even more sad that otherwise reasonable people side with his immaturity.

Not a single ECTist objected when Okdoser called me a retard. Not even one. It just goes to show you what is more important to some people.

 

[Derf]

You "forgot" to address the infantile insults which I (with Christian Maturity) tolerated. Do you agree with Okdoser that is is "retarded" to believe that infants dropped into molten lava will perish in that lava?

Or put another way, is it part of your own theology to call other Christians "retarded"? Or does Okdoser stand alone in this. I see that you are not above insulting people too, since you called me infantile. I don't think that namecalling has any place in a Bible Study. Do you?
I am way too mature to sink to Okdoser's level. (And yours, I would not ever call you infantile.)

It is sad that behavior like Okdoser's interferes with people studying God's Word to discover what it actually says. And it is even more sad that otherwise reasonable people side with his immaturity.

Not a single ECTist objected when Okdoser called me a retard. Not even one. It just goes to show you what is more important to some people.

I didn't actually call you infantile; I called your exchange infantile. If you decide the appellation applies to you personally, then so be it. Should Christians never call other Christians names? Jesus called some of His own people "fools", "serpents", "hypocrites", "blind guides" and "whited sepulchers". Why do you think He did that? I'd suggest He did it for their own sakes--to give a vivid picture to them of what they were doing so that they could see how bad it was.

I'm not defending Okdoser's name-calling, but it wasn't really worth the time you spent on it, nor you're running to me so that I'll tell him to stop making faces at you. That's how my kids behaved when they were younger, but they grew out of it. I'm hopeful for better things from both of you...