Is the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment biblical or not?

[Aimiel]

Aimiel,
re: "Then it's possible you're being facetious, because I underlined it. If you missed it, you can scroll up."


OK, I scrolled up and I can't find where you underlined a scriptural passage which says that folks are going to be tortured 24/7 for time everlasting. How about identifying the post number where you have done that?

Sorry, I must be thinking of a different thread...

And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

What did Homer contribute to the canon?

That jews wrote in greek does not mean they included greek myth or understanding...perhaps later false shepherds did...as you wish to do now

Let me guess... You’re a Unitarian.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

I'm not quite to the point where I've considered your aidios and aionios comparison, though I appreciate the question and will consider it.

But I have considered the thanatos question some. Do you have specific verses where "thanatos" can't mean the loss of physical life (and the breath of life, as these two concepts seem to be one) and requires "cessation of communion"?

I've looked, at least a little, and almost all the verses that use "thanatos" could be talking about loss of physical life.

Some exceptions I've found:
[Rev 20:6 YLT] Happy and holy [is] he who is having part in the first rising again; over these the second death hath not authority, but they shall be priests of God and of the Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
[Rev 20:14 YLT] and the death [thanatos] and the hades were cast to the lake of the fire -- this [is] the second death [thanatos];

This connection between lake of fire and second death is reiterated in Rev 21:
[Rev 21:8 YLT] and to fearful, and unstedfast, and abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all the liars, their part [is] in the lake that is burning with fire and brimstone, which is a second death [thanatos].'

I'm curious about why a second death is needed, and why is it important to define it so well, if it's really just another instance of death. Wasn't the first death good enough? Didn't it provide the punishment God warned of for sin?

There is both physical death and spiritual death. Though interrelated, they are not synonymous.

The second death is finality based upon whether one was resurrected unto spiritual life before physical death, or not.

Those who will not be hurt of the finality of the second death are those who were resurrected unto spiritual life during their physical life.

Cessation of communion with source and environment of origin refers to the dust of the ground (physical) and the breath of God (spiritual).

Your questions are based upon a substitute understanding where there has been a lack and void of understanding. Suspend your preconceived concepts and presuppositions. You can’t get to truth on the foundation of untruth. Unload the trailer before you try to load it, so to speak.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

What did Homer contribute to the canon?

That jews wrote in greek does not mean they included greek myth or understanding...perhaps later false shepherds did...as you wish to do now

I don’t include or promote Greek myth. You have your own myth and don’t like truth.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Hate to miss out on a challenge.

First, Since you pointed out that aidios is only used in two places, it seems like the better place to start. Here are the two verses:

[Rom 1:20 YLT] for the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world, by the things made being understood, are plainly seen, both His eternal power and Godhead -- to their being inexcusable;
[Jude 1:6 YLT] messengers also, those who did not keep their own principality, but did leave their proper dwelling, to a judgment of a great day, in bonds everlasting, under darkness He hath kept,

I like the Young's Literal Translation, sometimes at least. In this case, it uses both "eternal" and "everlasting" in place of aidios. But the connotation of both is limited. Start with the second one--"everlasting" is definitely NOT everlasting, because it is only "to judgment of a great day".

And herein lies the problem. You can’t begin with a text-to-reader presupposition that you can glean the meaning of the text by merely accessing various English translations and ignoring Greek lexicography and grammar.

If you don’t understand Greek anarthrous nouns (and few do, though many will say they do; and you’re not adept at Greek grammar at all), then you don’t understand most of scripture.

And what makes this difficult is that I can’t correct you in a way that you would readily understand, because you’re an English speaker who has a particular manner of dysfunctionality for your epistemics (the common epidemic in modernity, not just you personally).

The first, albeit less obvious, is also not "eternal", because Paul demands that the reader understand that the observer should understand God's eternity (no small task in itself) by looking at the visible world.

Not true in the least. The term aidios stands alone. It isn’t determined by English phraseology in translation. God’s power and Godhead (itself a term that few understand) are indeed aidios. The difficulty is going to remain your own corrupted epistemics when attempting to interpret and apply the terms in this verse with a text-to-reader disposition. English doesn’t determine meaning in arrears and project it upon Greek grammar and terms. This what you attempt to do, and it’s fallacious Reductionism (you’re in the almost unanimous majority, so again this isn’t personal to you).

I would propose, then, that "aidios" gives us a different meaning than "everlasting" or "eternal" in time, but more "everlasting" and "eternal" in POWER, as is actually written in Rom 1:20, and implied in Jude 6 (because the chains/bonds are unbreakable). Other suggestions for comparable English words might be "unconquerable", "unbreakable", "outlasting" (instead of everlasting).

And this would be an erroneous proposal as partialistic at the very least.

So it seems to me that the uses for "aidios" don't really mean "eternal" or "everlasting", and if they don't, nor aionios, is there anything at all that the authors could have used to mean "eternal" and "everlasting"? Was even Greek lacking such a concept? I doubt that, which leads me to think that aionios is available for the concept, even if it isn't always used in such a way.

Eternity is an INcommunicable attribute of God. It’s timelessness. God created time. Aeviternity is everlasting, and it’s created. God created everlasting as endless duration from the point of creation going forward. God Himself is apart from His creation, including all forms of what we know (in a limited chronological sense) as time. Eternity is not aeviternity.

EternAL is God’s application of His own incommunicable attribute to provide a qualitative existence for those in creation who were originally in the Imago Dei (Image of God) and fell from that estate. This qualitative everlasting existence is determined by whether one is IN Christ or not; by whether one is in the prosopon (presence) of God or in the enopion (presence) of God. The English term presence in translation is not sufficient with presuppositions.

Unfornutately for those who attempt to deduce and deconstruct and speculate and surmise by other means via their own rationality, the truth is in the depth of meaning for these words and at least a basic understanding of Greek anarthrous nouns, to begin.

I can’t even begin to convey how faulty and insufficient your English reasoning is, and this is not condescending or condemnational. It’s just that you can’t know what you don’t have a foundation to know; so anything built upon an insufficient foundation will be grossly insufficient.

The simplest summary is that all humanity has some form of qualitative everlasting existence. Salvation is God’s provision for that everlasting qualitative existence to be not only durative, but to have the very qualities of God’s own eternality. Since they cannot be “transferred” like love and other things to our innate ontology, they require the hypostatic joining to Christ that is accomplished by faith and grace for man to partake of the divine nature.

The lake of fire is the everlasting existence of man apart from the very nature of God providing the highest blessedness of the creature (zoe life) to man as his undending qualitative existence. It’s not overt punishment as something added to afflict man. It’s that which must be administered to man during physical life or man is everlastingly devoid of this blessed qualitative existence in total and complete perfect union of intitmate fellowship with God.

Like evil and sin themsselves (which few comprehend, because they are states of being), the lake of fire is a negation and privation of something as “somethinglessness”, not an addition as a something. The lake of fire is the everlasting void of not being in God’s presence (prosopon), but only in his presence (enopion).

English ain’t gonna get you there except in valid extensive translational understanding. But that seldom happens. Everyone has the entitilement that every nuance should be immediately available in English by text-to-reader expectations. One must appropriately engage in a reader-to-text translational understanding and undertake the personal responsibility to set aside corrupted epistemics and concepts to find out what the grammar and words really mean apart from Reductionist “guesses” and “seems to mes”, etc.

A final thought. The best way I can think of to look for aionios meaning forever is to find passages where it is compared directly with an opposing concept. John 3:16 comes to mind: "shall not perish, but have everlasting life." Is there a way to take "aionios" life as something other than "everlasting" life, since it is contrasted with "perish" (i.e., "being destroyed").

This is the best way YOU can think of because there is so much missing from your understanding (again, not condescending).

How about [Mar 3:29] But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation? Can it really mean that if one blasphemes the Holy Ghost, he is under judgment just for some period of time (and then would be forgiven??), especially when Jesus had just said that other blasphemies were forgivable?

No. It’s for aeviternity. For all everlasting. And apart from having intimate ontological oneness with God in His prosopon (presence), not merely in His enopion (presence).

It’s a lack. A deficiency. Something that man retains rather than attaining spiritual life in Christ by the gift of salvation. God doesn’t punish man. Man remains in a state of being because he has no salvation to be resurrected out of that void of somethinglessness.

God inflicts nothing. Man inflicts the lake of fire upon himself in spite of God’s provision for salavation as a specific qualitative existence that is everlasting life (zoe). Those without Christ cannot have that qualitativeness to their durative existence.

And even the flames in the lake of fire are God’s mercy rejoicing against judgment. But they are torment because those men’s qualitative existence means they cannot ever know God’s consuming fire. They are left with that which is not consumed BY God as a consuming fire. That is their torment. Not being IN Christ. Never resurrected unto zoe (life). So their life is as they have made it for themselves. Unredeemed. Tormented by who they must remain being rather than having that all purged from them and being given new life in Christ alone.

 

[Derf]

There is both physical death and spiritual death. Though interrelated, they are not synonymous.

The second death is finality based upon whether one was resurrected unto spiritual life before physical death, or not.

Those who will not be hurt of the finality of the second death are those who were resurrected unto spiritual life during their physical life.

Cessation of communion with source and environment of origin refers to the dust of the ground (physical) and the breath of God (spiritual).

Your questions are based upon a substitute understanding where there has been a lack and void of understanding. Suspend your preconceived concepts and presuppositions. You can’t get to truth on the foundation of untruth. Unload the trailer before you try to load it, so to speak.

Actually, my questions stem from suspending my preconceived concepts and presuppositions. Maybe you should try it.

For instance, you seem to presume that spiritual death is a separate thing from physical, yet the second death seems to require the one to assure the other. You mention the "second death" being dependent on one not being resurrected spiritually prior to physical death. But the second death seems to require a physical resurrection to implement. Why, then, if the intent of the second death is to "kill the spirit", is a second physical death necessary, and a physical death that is never final?

My question, more clearly stated, is "Why does the God of all truth and fair judge of the universe need to execute 2 <physical> deaths to effect a judgment promising only 1?"

 

[way 2 go]

Let me guess... You’re a Unitarian.

he is of "The Way International"

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

he is of "The Way International"

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, wow. Thanks. That makes sense. Good grief.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Actually, my questions stem from suspending my preconceived concepts and presuppositions. Maybe you should try it.

I did and do. I have yielded my subjective opinions to the absolute objective truth of grammar and lexicography from the inspired text.

For instance, you seem to presume that spiritual death is a separate thing from physical,

They ARE separate things. All humans are conceived in spiritual death with attendant sin as their state of being. So the very onset of physical life is accompanied by spiritual death until they are born again.

yet the second death seems to require the one to assure the other.

No, and that’s why I explicated it all above.

You mention the "second death" being dependent on one not being resurrected spiritually prior to physical death. But the second death seems to require a physical resurrection to implement.

This is because you don’t understand prolepsis OR the distinctions between physical and spiritual death; instead insisting on combining them. There is an inward resurrection of the human hypostasis, and its ontological union with Christ. Man is resurrected unto spiritual life from spiritual death in this physical life before physical death.

Why, then, if the intent of the second death is to "kill the spirit", is a second physical death necessary, and a physical death that is never final?

This is simply a wrong question based upon false presuppositions. And indepth lexicography would demonstrate what I’ve said IF you knew it. That’s why this conversation will go nowhere. You don’t understand the underlying linguistic factors that affect how you wrongly think and perceive these things based upon false concepts.

My question, more clearly stated, is "Why does the God of all truth and fair judge of the universe need to execute 2 <physical> deaths to effect a judgment promising only 1?"

He doesn’t. The second death follows the first spiritual death at conception of physical life; and the second physical death is that the unbeliever doesn’t receive a spiritual body in the manner of the redeemed.

If you don’t already understand this, I doubt this venue is sufficient for me to teach you these truths (particularly since you don’t seem to be inclined to rid yourself of your false concepts).

None of this is condescending or intended to be demeaning, BTW. None.

 

[clefty]

he is of "The Way International"

Obviously “thou shalt not bare false witness” was also not dispensed to you...

 

[clefty]

Let me guess... You’re a Unitarian.

No.

Why would rejecting your introducing greek pagan understanding of the afterlife to what is taught in scripture have you ask that?

 

[eleos]

Here are a few.

Torment in Hell ... No


Psalm 1:6 “But the way of the ungodly shall perish (singular)” (2nd death)


Psalm 37:20 “But the wicked shall perish… they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.” (consume - totally destroyed)

Perish (singular - not perishing ) suffer complete ruin or destruction.

Psalm 69:28 says that the wicked are “blotted out of the book of the living.” (they will not receive eternal life)


Ps. 34:16, 21 “evil brings death to the wicked.” (2nd death)

Psalm 92:7 “… shall be destroyed forever.” (self-explanatory)


Prov. 24:20 “the lamp of the wicked will be snuffed out.” (will not contune life)


Dan. 2:35 “the wind swept them away without leaving a trace.” (no trace of the wicked totally gone)

Isa. 1:28, 30–31 “rebels and sinners shall be destroyed together, and those who forsake the Lord shall be consumed.” (consumed - totally destroyed)

Obadiah 1:16 It will be as if the evil “had never been.“ (non-existent)


Mal 4:1 “All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble, and the day that is coming will set them on fire,” says the LORD Almighty. “Not a root or a branch will be left to them.” (they will be totally burned up - destroyed by fire)


Matthew 10:28 “Rather, fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.”

Here Jesus himself teaches against hell– saying that those who are lost experience the death of their soul. If one believes in eternal conscious hell, they believe Jesus was wrong on this point, and that souls don’t die at all, but will live forever in hell.

John 3:16 “…whosoever believeth in him should not perish (singular)” (2nd death)


Matthew 7:13: “broad is the road that leads to destruction“ (totally destroyed)


Philippians 3:19 “whose end is destruction…“ (destroyed)


2 Thessalonians 1:9 “who shall be punished with everlasting destruction …” (destroyed - never to live again)

1 Corinthians 3:17: “God will destroy that person”


2 Corinthians 2:15-16: “those that perish“ (2nd death)


Romans 6:23: “For the wages of sin is death..“ (2nd death)


James 4:12 “There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy.”


2 Peter 2:3: “Their condemnation from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.” (the unsaved in the grave will face destruction) 2nd resurrection


Revelation 20:9

(9) And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

Those who believe in eternal conscious hell don’t believe in the second death– they believe everyone is immortal, and that some will live forever in hell.

Revelation 20:14
Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death--the lake of fire.

1st Corinthians

26The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

Death is Death ... cease to exist (and the wages of sin is death). The first death (earthly death) is temporal ... the 2nd death (of the lost) is final and for eternity (cease to exist). The 1st resurrection is life with God for eternity.


Exist with God for eternity or not exist in eternity with God.

We do not have a loving God who tortures people for eternity that is contrary to His character. Yes, in the very end all the lost will be destroyed, necessary to eliminate sin and destroy death forever.

 

[way 2 go]

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, wow. Thanks. That makes sense. Good grief.

Obviously “thou shalt not bare false witness” was also not dispensed to you...

sorry , my bad got my cultist mixed up , its oatmeal that is of "the way international"

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

No.

Why would rejecting your introducing greek pagan understanding of the afterlife to what is taught in scripture have you ask that?

Being of your cultic affiliation is similar to being a heretical Unitarian, so it was a reasonable initial guess.

Being a linguist and understanding the Greek text has nothing to do with Greek pagan beliefs, so your hubris is duly noted for the rubbish it is.

Address others. I don’t spend time discussing these topics with antichrist heretics.

 

[way 2 go]

Death is Death ... cease to exist (and the wages of sin is death). The first death (earthly death) is temporal ... the 2nd death (of the lost) is final and for eternity (cease to exist). The 1st resurrection is life with God for eternity.

I read dead and standing something that your interpretation does not allow for.
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne,

Exist with God for eternity or not exist in eternity with God.

yes , everyone will exist for eternity
Mat 25:46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

We do not have a loving God who tortures people for eternity that is contrary to His character. Yes, in the very end all the lost will be destroyed, necessary to eliminate sin and destroy death forever.

not what the bible says

Rev 20:10 and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

 

[eleos]

I read dead and standing something that your interpretation does not allow for.
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne,


yes , everyone will exist for eternity -
no just the saved ... the lost will be destroyed.



Mat 25:46 And these will go away into eternal *punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
*punishment not punishing


Rev 20:10 and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

In speaking of the punishment of the wicked, the New Testament uses the terms "everlasting" and "eternal." These terms translate the Greek word aionios, and apply to God as well as to man. To avoid misunderstanding, one must remember that aionios is a relative term; its meaning is determined by the object it modifies. So when Scripture uses aionios ("everlasting," "eternal") of God, it does mean that He possesses infinite existence—for God is immortal. But when it uses this word of mortal human beings or perishable things, it means as long as the person lives or the thing exists.


Torment in Hell ... No


yes , everyone will exist for eternity - not so, just the saved ... the lost will be destroyed.



Mat 25:46 And these will go away into eternal *punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
*punishment not punishing


not what the bible says



Psalm 1:6 “But the way of the ungodly shall perish (singular)” (2nd death)


Psalm 37:20 “But the wicked shall perish… they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.” (consume - totally destroyed)

Perish (singular - not perishing ) suffer complete ruin or destruction.

Psalm 69:28 says that the wicked are “blotted out of the book of the living.” (they will not receive eternal life)


Ps. 34:16, 21 “evil brings death to the wicked.” (2nd death)

Psalm 92:7 “… shall be destroyed forever.” (self-explanatory)


Prov. 24:20 “the lamp of the wicked will be snuffed out.” (will not continue life)


Dan. 2:35 “the wind swept them away without leaving a trace.” (no trace of the wicked totally gone)

Isa. 1:28, 30–31 “rebels and sinners shall be destroyed together, and those who forsake the Lord shall be consumed.” (consumed - totally destroyed)

Obadiah 1:16 It will be as if the evil “had never been.“ (non-existent)


Mal 4:1 “All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble, and the day that is coming will set them on fire,” says the LORD Almighty. “Not a root or a branch will be left to them.” (they will be totally burned up - destroyed by fire)


Matthew 10:28 “Rather, fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.”

Here Jesus himself teaches against hell– saying that those who are lost experience the death of their soul. If one believes in eternal conscious hell, they believe Jesus was wrong on this point, and that souls don’t die at all, but will live forever in hell.

John 3:16 “…whosoever believeth in him should not perish (singular)” (2nd death)


Matthew 7:13: “broad is the road that leads to destruction“ (totally destroyed)


Philippians 3:19 “whose end is destruction…“ (destroyed)


2 Thessalonians 1:9 “who shall be punished with everlasting destruction …” (destroyed - never to live again)

1 Corinthians 3:17: “God will destroy that person”


2 Corinthians 2:15-16: “those that perish“ (2nd death)


Romans 6:23: “For the wages of sin is death..“ (2nd death)


James 4:12 “There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy.”


2 Peter 2:3: “Their condemnation from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.” (the unsaved in the grave will face destruction) 2nd resurrection


Revelation 20:9

(9) And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

Those who believe in eternal conscious hell don’t believe in the second death– they believe everyone is immortal, and that some will live forever in hell.

Revelation 20:14
Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death--the lake of fire.

1st Corinthians

26The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

Death is Death ... cease to exist (and the wages of sin is death). The first death (earthly death) is temporal ... the 2nd death (of the lost) is final and for eternity (cease to exist). The 1st resurrection is life with God for eternity.


Exist with God for eternity or not exist in eternity with God.

We do not have a loving God who tortures people for eternity that is contrary to His character. Yes, in the very end all the lost will be destroyed, necessary to eliminate sin forever ... for eternity.

 

[way 2 go]

In speaking of the punishment of the wicked, the New Testament uses the terms "everlasting" and "eternal." These terms translate the Greek word aionios, and apply to God as well as to man. To avoid misunderstanding, one must remember that aionios is a relative term; its meaning is determined by the object it modifies. So when Scripture uses aionios ("everlasting," "eternal") of God, it does mean that He possesses infinite existence—for God is immortal. But when it uses this word of mortal human beings or perishable things, it means as long as the person lives or the thing exists.

yes , everyone will exist for eternity - not so, just the saved ... the lost will be destroyed.

your argument is conjecture and you contradict yourself ,you say aionios does not apply to humans but then applies to humans


this verse is speaking about human beings whose existence will be everlasting
Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into everlasting life.

Torment in Hell ... No

lake of fire

Rev 20:14 And death and hell were thrown into the Lake of Fire. This is the second death.
Rev 20:15 And if anyone was not found having been written in the Book of Life, he was thrown into the Lake of Fire.

Mat 25:46 And these will go away into eternal *punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
*punishment not punishing

the duration of the punishment is determined by the word in front of it "eternal"

Death is Death ... cease to exist (and the wages of sin is death). The first death (earthly death) is temporal ... the 2nd death (of the lost) is final and for eternity (cease to exist). The 1st resurrection is life with God for eternity.

These people are dead and standing which you have not addressed
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne,
Mat 8:22 And Jesus said to him, "Follow me, and leave the dead to bury their own dead."

Exist with God for eternity or not exist in eternity with 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.

We do not have a loving God who tortures people for eternity that is contrary to His character.

strawman ,nobody says God is torturing anybody .

Yes, in the very end all the lost will be destroyed, necessary to eliminate sin forever ... for eternity.

the lost will be destroyed but still exist

people of Sodom destroyed but still exist
Luk 17:29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.

Mat 10:15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

 

[FineLinen]

Search= Eternal Torment=

"Your search query for 'eternal torment' did not return any results. Please modify your search query and try again."

Search= Eternal Separation=

"Your search query for 'eternal separation' did not return any results. Please modify your search query and try again."

Search= Eternal Hell=

"Your search query for 'eternal hell' did not return any results. Please modify your search query and try again."

Search= Everlasting Hell=

"Your search query for 'everlasting hell' did not return any results. Please modify your search query and try again."

Search= Everlasting death=

"Your search query for 'everlasting death' did not return any results. Please modify your search query and try again."

Search= Eternal death=

"Your search query for 'eternal death' did not return any results. Please modify your search query and try again."

Search= Everlasting Punishment =

1 entry found Matt. 25.46

Search= Everlasting Destruction=

1 entry found 2 Thess 1.9

 

[FineLinen]

Questions=

1. As we are required to love our enemies, may we not safely infer that God loves His enemies? (Matt. 5:44)

2.If God loves His enemies, will He punish them more than will be for their good?

3. Would endless punishment be for the good of any being?

4. As God loves His friends, if He loves His enemies also, are not all mankind the objects of His love?

5. If God loves those only who love Him, what better is He than the sinner? (Luke 6:32-33)

6. As "love thinketh no evil," can God design the ultimate evil of a single soul? (1 Cor. 13:5)

7. As "love worketh no ill," can God inflict, or cause, or allow to be inflicted, an endless ill? (Rom. 13:10)

8. As we are forbidden to be overcome by evil, can we safely suppose that God will be overcome by evil? (Rom. 12:21)

9. Would not the infliction of endless punishment prove that God HAD been overcome by evil?

10. If man does wrong in returning evil for evil, would not God do wrong if He was to do the same?

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Questions=

1. As we are required to love our enemies, may we not safely infer that God loves His enemies? (Matt. 5:44)

2.If God loves His enemies, will He punish them more than will be for their good?

3. Would endless punishment be for the good of any being?

4. As God loves His friends, if He loves His enemies also, are not all mankind the objects of His love?

5. If God loves those only who love Him, what better is He than the sinner? (Luke 6:32-33)

6. As "love thinketh no evil," can God design the ultimate evil of a single soul? (1 Cor. 13:5)

7. As "love worketh no ill," can God inflict, or cause, or allow to be inflicted, an endless ill? (Rom. 13:10)

8. As we are forbidden to be overcome by evil, can we safely suppose that God will be overcome by evil? (Rom. 12:21)

9. Would not the infliction of endless punishment prove that God HAD been overcome by evil?

10. If man does wrong in returning evil for evil, would not God do wrong if He was to do the same?

Reductionism. Ridiculous dialectic shenanigans.