Outer darkness: A thousand years? or for eternity?

[bearbear]

My answer:
http://nodustybunnies.blogspot.com/2...rnity-and.html

Here's another (better) answer from:
http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/lc.html

Witness Lee's Purgatory

What happens to these hypothetical non-overcoming believers?
According to Witness Lee the following verses apply to them:
Matt 8:12 But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Mt 22:13 "Then the king told the attendants, 'Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'

Mt 24:51 He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Mt 25:30 And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'

Lu 13:28 "There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out.

Heb 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

Lee comments: "This is different than suffering the second death, which is to perish in the lake of fire for eternity. Although believers cannot be lost, they may suffer some dispensational punishment for their faults. This punishment will be worse than that received by those who broke the law of letters."
In other words they will suffer a worse punishment than under the Law of Moses when people were stoned to death or burned alive.

Matt 18:34 In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.

A basic problem with the purgatory idea is that it contradicts the basic concept of the forgiveness of sins. I understand the distinction he tries to make between discipline and condemnation. But having been raised from the dead, there is no point to discipling these people. They have already been reckoned innocent by the blood of Christ, and although discipline would be helpful while they were in the flesh (as sin dwells in the flesh and they have to learn obedience), having been raised from the dead they are perfect. There's no point to discipling them. Does tormenting them make them any more perfect? Such torment would not be simply for discipline to help them learn, but as a penalty for sinning. Hasn't God saved us from such condemnation? Is this what Christ has earned for us - to be thrown into a place where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth? Is it by our good works that we escape from such a place of torment? Is this rather not the kind of judgment that unbelievers will experience:

Matt 13:42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Which Lee also agrees applies only to the unsaved.
My interpretation of the difference between the outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, and the fiery furnace where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth? I think Lee is correct that the first refers to just during the Millenial reign and the second to the final judgment. But I think that both refer to the judgement of unbelievers or mere nominal Christians and unbelieving Jews.
But consider the correlation between Matt 24:50,51 and Luke 12:46
"The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." Matt 24:50,51
"The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers." Luke 12:46

If you read the context of these parables you find that these are parallel passages. Luke is recording the same parable as Matthew. Therefore "a place with the hypocrites" in Matthew is the same as "a place with the unbelievers" in Luke. Lee says that it is the non-overcoming believers that the Matthew passage is referring to. But in reality these are merely unsaved nominal Christians, which is why they are hypocrites. They do not believe with saving faith.
Lee denies the purgatory idea in its Catholic sense when he comments on 1Cor 3:15 "If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire."

Lee comments: "Through fire surely indicates punishment. However, this is altogether not the purgatory heretically taught by Catholicism in its superstitious twisting of this verse. Nevertheless, this word should be a solemn warning to us today concerning our Christian works."

However, as I interpret this verse, it seems to me that it is not the man who is burned, but his works. God has to burn up our sins so as to forget our past sinful lives in accordance with His promise. What remains of our past are the times when we obeyed God. And for these we will be rewarded.

Isa 43:25 "I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions,
for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more."

But Lee seems to think that God will remember the sins of the believers and visits punishment upon us in the next life. This is contrary to the basic message of the gospel. Though he denies the Catholic purgatory idea, he may not realize that he may actually believe it. Or perhaps we can rename it the Protestant Purgatory. For he accepts the following verse as applying to non-overcoming saved Christians:

Matt 18:34 In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.

Notice it says "until he should pay back all he owed". Such a person is paying the penalty for his sins by being tortured. This is what many accuse Catholics of believing. The basic object of our faith is Christ's atoning work on the cross. Christ payed the penalty for our sins. In describing the benefits of righteousness by faith in Romans 4, Paul quotes David saying:

"Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him."

The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says: "This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds."Then he adds: "Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more." And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin. Hebrews 10:15-18

Throughout the history of Protestant theology, the Purgatory idea had been rejected, being relegated as heretical Catholic theology. But Lee and Nee have now attempted to reintroduce this concept into the Evangelical community and have had success to some extent. However, they have failed to show the consistency between the gospel message of grace according to traditional evangelical thought and the purgatorial idea. The contradiction between the concept of Purgatory and Biblical theology was the reason it was rejected in the first place. The leaven of this doctrine must be removed if their gospel is to be considered Biblical from the standpoint of historic Protestant thought.

[bearbear]

Bible scholars seem to disagree if outer darkness is a region outside of the kingdom, or if it's another description of the lake of fire, or just the outer regions in the lake of fire or outside it. It's because there's only four references to it in the New Testament. Regarding this I'm not sure myself and perhaps others can chime in who have done more research in this area.

However most scholars would contend that the judgment in outer darkness is for eternity. No where in scripture does it suggest that those cast into the outer darkness are offered another chance to enter into the kingdom of God. If this was so, Paul would have written "will not inherit the kingdom of God for 1000 years", however verses like Galatians 5:19-21, Ephesians 5:3-5, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 all state unequivocally that those who are mastered by the lusts of their flesh and thereby practice sin will "not inherit the kingdom of God" or "have no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God".

Ephesians 5:3-5
But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints. Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving. For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.

Paul never hints at the kingdom of God being for a thousand years, rather scripture seems to indicate that it's for eternity.

The millennial reign of Jesus describes only one stage in the Messiah's kingdom. After the millennium is over, the New Jerusalem comes down to earth and there will be a new heaven and new earth. God's reign will continue into eternity from here on out as Revelation 21 describes.

Instead of limiting the term of God's kingdom to a thousand years, many places in scripture emphasize the kingdom of God being for eternity.

2 Peter 1:11
For in this way there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Luke 1:32-33
He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.

2 Samuel 7:16
And your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me. Your throne shall be established forever.

Jesus words in Matthew 7:21-23 to those who claim him as Lord communicate that he wants nothing to do with those who profess him as Lord with their mouth but not their heart or their actions thereby living in lawlessness. No where is there an indication that Jesus will accept them back after a thousand years, instead it seems like he wants them to leave his presence forever in disgust that they and others would think that he could be associated with their works.

Matthew 7:21-23
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

In the few references to outer darkness in the gospels, it's usually described as a place of "weeping and gnashing of teeth":

Luke 13:28
In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God but you yourselves cast out.

If there were still hope of eternity with Jesus, then there would be at least some glory to look forward to. But one can probably infer that because there is no hope, all one can do is weep and gnash their teeth.

According to wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weeping...shing_of_teeth

The phrase "(there shall be) weeping and gnashing of teeth" (in the original Greek ὁ κλαυθμὸς καὶ ὁ βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων) appears seven times in the New Testament as a description of the torments of the damned in Hell. It is thought to derive from a logion in the hypothetical Q source, which yielded Matthew 8:12 and Luke 13:28. The other five occurrences are all within the context of parables and are widely held to be redactional additions by Matthew.

In fact in Matthew 13:41–42, the phrase "weeping and gnashing of teeth" is used in the context of the "fiery furnace", presumably the lake of fire!

Matthew 13
41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Lending credence to the idea that outer darkness is synonymous with the lake of fire or part of it. It's a place that's dark because there is no light, yet it is burning. This is because God is light and his presence is not there. Without God there is no light and only darkness.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by bearbear

However most scholars would contend that the judgment in outer darkness is for eternity. No where in scripture does it suggest that those cast into the outer darkness are offered another chance to enter into the kingdom of God.

But the Bible doesn't say that. Unfortunately we all can find "scholars" to say anything we want.

Matt 25.9-10 indicates that these virgins were forced to buy more oil since theirs was inadequate, and there was a way to buy more. They missed the marriage feast, but nothing indicates they burn forever in the lake of fire.

Purgatory, which comes from "place of purging," comes from I Cor 3.13-15. How can fire be a test for each one's work, with some receiving a reward and some obviously not, if we are still saved, though the fire has burnt up all our work?

Apostle Paul says a workman must rightly divide the word of God. You have not rightly divided the matter of sins and work. Most of your comments and the verses you have selected prove this.

Please do not think that the length of one's posts proves anything. Quality supersedes quantity.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Ohio

But the Bible doesn't say that. Unfortunately we all can find "scholars" to say anything we want.

Matt 25.9-10 indicates that these virgins were forced to buy more oil since theirs was inadequate, and there was a way to buy more. They missed the marriage feast, but nothing indicates they burn forever in the lake of fire.

Purgatory, which comes from "place of purging," comes from I Cor 3.13-15. How can fire be a test for each one's work, with some receiving a reward and some obviously not, if we are still saved, though the fire has burnt up all our work?

Apostle Paul says a workman must rightly divide the word of God. You have not rightly divided the matter of sins and work. Most of your comments and the verses you have selected prove this.

Please do not think that the length of one's posts proves anything. Quality supersedes quantity.

Sorry for my shoddy scholarship If I have more time later I'll pull up the references. My data for this is simply that most bible scholars come from Lordship Salvation backgrounds and not free grace. Millennial exclusion is only found in seminaries that adhere to free grace theology. It really sounds like a case of eisigesis to me. I don't think you can come up with this doctrine from a plain reading of scripture without being bound by believing in eternal security after saying the sinner's prayer.

Despite this, I think the burden of proof should be on showing that outer darkness is for a thousand years. After all this is an eternity we're talking about! I haven't been convinced by WNee and WLee's arguments. Perhaps others here including Ohio could do better? How would you respond to "weeping and gnashing of teeth" being used to describe punishment in the fiery furnace in Matthew 13:41–42?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the few references to outer darkness in the gospels, it's usually described as a place of "weeping and gnashing of teeth":

Luke 13:28
In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God but you yourselves cast out.

If there were still hope of eternity with Jesus, then there would be at least some glory to look forward to. But one can probably infer that because there is no hope, all one can do is weep and gnash their teeth.

According to wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weeping...shing_of_teeth
"The phrase "(there shall be) weeping and gnashing of teeth" (in the original Greek ὁ κλαυθμὸς καὶ ὁ βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων) appears seven times in the New Testament as a description of the torments of the damned in Hell. It is thought to derive from a logion in the hypothetical Q source, which yielded Matthew 8:12 and Luke 13:28. The other five occurrences are all within the context of parables and are widely held to be redactional additions by Matthew."

In fact in Matthew 13:41–42, the phrase "weeping and gnashing of teeth" is used in the context of the "fiery furnace", presumably the lake of fire!

Matthew 13
41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Lending credence to the idea that outer darkness is synonymous with the lake of fire or part of it. It's a place that's dark because there is no light, yet it is burning. This is because God is light and his presence is not there. Without God there is no light and only darkness.

[bearbear]

Regarding 1 Cor 3:13-15, here is my take on it:

http://nodustybunnies.blogspot.com/2...5-promise.html

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by bearbear

Despite this, I think the burden of proof should be on showing that outer darkness if for a thousand years.

How would you respond to "weeping and gnashing of teeth" being used to describe punishment in the fiery furnace in Matthew 13:41–42?

Matt 13.36-43 defines the parable of the tares to the disciples. They are sons of the evil one, sown by the Devil, they only look like the wheat, yet are different within, as the Lord describes in Matt 13.24-30, as evidenced by their fruit.

It appears that these tares are harvested by angels at the consummation of the age, and thrown in the furnace of fire. This is probably the lake of fire. It has long been my understanding that the ones who suffer outer darkness, and the ones who suffer the lake of fire will both be weeping and gnashing their teeth. But the fact that both are consumed with remorse doesn't mean they have the same destiny.

Those who are saved will have their works burnt, and then enter outer darkness. There is no mention of a fire there. The ones who are not saved with be judged for their sins, being in unbelief, and burn in an eternal fire.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by bearbear

My data for this is simply that most bible scholars come from Lordship Salvation backgrounds and not free grace. Millennial exclusion theology is only found in seminaries that adhere to free grace theology. It really sounds like a case of eisigesis to me.

Now there is as out-of-hand a dismissal as you can find.

You are defining something you call "Lordship Salvation" that is opposed to "free grace salvation" and presume that it is simply two totally diverse and internally unified camps. And your prejudice stands in the capitalization of your title for one group and simply "descriptive" lower case words for the other.

While there may be some general differences in the two general camps, there also are differences within those camps.

And most seriously ignored is the idea that salvation is a word of equivocation. Your Lordship salvation scheme is a view of the combination of what some call salvation and sanctification. Others simply use the term salvation to refer to both aspects of the Christian life (as do certain scriptures). But the only part of salvation that you ever refer to as lacking in the "free grace salvation" camp is what evangelicals often view as the line in the sand when a person first acknowledges Christ and, as is said in at least one place, passes from death to life.

While grace is always in play in our ongoing Christian lives, few take the position that sanctification is simply by grace. But then most don't recognize that grace teaches to obey (Titus?) and is not just "unmerited favor." Grace is not simply some passive activity on the part of man.

And when it comes to eisigesis, much of the same can be said for some of your interpretations. It is arguable that insisting that all references to punishment are permanent and eternal is simply reading into the verses what is wanted to be read.

Like others, you choose which verses you will read and include in your analysis and which you will ignore, or suggest that it must mean something else. For example, take Matt 18:34. "In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed." Do you ignore this verse? Or do you presume that we can never pay all that is owed, therefore the words spoken are irrelevant? It does say until all is repaid. So there is given a sense of something in the punishment that does repay, not just torture. To presume that the punishment has to be forever and is considered repayment sort of flies in the face of the word "until." And even mobsters don't often kill those who owe them because dead people cant repay. It is generally bad for business.

I find that when God wanted to say that he was putting someone into eternal perdition, he tended to be rather straightforward about it. He didn't beat around the bush and hint at a lesser sentence.

And so far I have not seen a comment on Ohio's reference to 1 Corinthians 3. There is some question as to whether this is talking to Christians in general or more specifically to the teachers of Christians, but either way, it says that there will be a fire and that those whose work burns will be saved, yet as through fire. Care to comment directly on that? While the post you linked to does very limited reference to the "yet as by fire" part of the verse, it doesn't really do much more than dismiss it and/or ignore it. The verse very clearly says "be saved, yet as by fire."

I find nothing in the unrelated passages provided to make me think that this was simply some metaphorical way of saying "your stuff just burned, but you are simply OK. . . move on." If it is that simple, then there is not a lot of teeth in the earlier warning to take care what kind of building that is undertaken. If it has no impact on you personally, then why not just do whatever you think is the thing to do and let the fire sort it all out later. It's no skin off your back.

It reminds me of Nee's simple dismissal of home churches when establishing that his church=city rule was true. He couldn't deal with the contradiction to his rule, so he declared that his rule trumped the obvious meaning of the contrary verses and moved on.

And, as Ohio has since pointed out, weeping and gnashing of teeth is not simply relegated to the lake of fire. It appears in other places with other descriptions. Do you therefore presume that the common link of the phrase "weeping and gnashing of teeth" makes the two synonymous?

Mr. Dust Bunnies does not particularly impress me with superior reasoning. More like an ability to quote a lot of verses and then make the conclusion that he wants to make without any real evidence that it is correct. I'm busy here trying to help people get out of a group I call a cult who have been hoodwinked by men who approach scripture in just such a loose way. I don't need to be taking on yet another "I've got the decoder ring" approach to emphasizing some verses over others, or some phrases over others to arrive at the conclusion that is desired. Let's stick to dealing with the screwed-up theology of the LRC. We don't need to combat yet another screwed-up version. We've had several come along over the years. A couple even had their own modern-day messiah to push.

I will be the first to say that I really do not know clearly what it all means. But it is too clear that it is not just heaven and no downside v hell to waste my time fighting yet another kind of group playing selectively with their verses to read and verses to skip, and uncompromising positions on the meaning of words when viable alternatives are available. I am not saying that the meanings may not be as are suggested. But unwillingness to actually engage in the discussion as to how it is that you/they think it is so suggests an unwillingness to come together to reason, and instead a desire to teach and direct with the certainty that it is so without another thought. I've wasted enough time with those kinds of teachers in years past. Not again.

And not with you. Unless you actually address the passages and positions that I and others write about, you will become another Lee. You will be ignored as yet another wannabe MOTA. Or his John the Baptist. "Make way for the MOTA!"

Needless to say, for all the certainty that I may seem to display, it is rather certainty in my uncertainty. I distrust those who are so certain. Who always have a proof text for their position and do not even deal with the possibility that they may not be so certain or sure. I am not as sure as I once was. But I am more comfortable in my faith as a result. I am very sure of my salvation. It is neither simply "free grace" nor "Lordship salvation." Instead, it is believe. And believe means obey because if you don't obey, you really don't believe. Don't need to force any particular meaning out of those various verses we are discussing to arrive at that.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by OBW

Mr. Dust Bunnies does not particularly impress me with superior reasoning. More like an ability to quote a lot of verses and then make the conclusion that he wants to make without any real evidence that it is correct. I'm busy here trying to help people get out of a group I call a cult who have been hoodwinked by men who approach scripture in just such a loose way. I don't need to be taking on yet another "I've got the decoder ring" approach to emphasizing some verses over others, or some phrases over others to arrive at the conclusion that is desired.

I think this describes this kind of linking verses to paint a desired picture:

Parallelomania
"In historical analysis, biblical criticism and comparative mythology parallelomania refers to a phenomenon where authors perceive apparent similarities and construct parallels and analogies without historical basis."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallelomania

[ABrotherinFaith]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Matt 25.9-10 indicates that these virgins were forced to buy more oil since theirs was inadequate, and there was a way to buy more. They missed the marriage feast, but nothing indicates they burn forever in the lake of fire.

Hello Ohio, a quick aside regarding this parable. According to WL, all 10 of the virgins were believers. The parable ends with the groom: and he answering said, Verily I say to you, I have not known you. (Matthew 25:12)

How do you understand this is light of John 10:14? " I am the good shepherd, and I know my sheep, and am known by mine" and John 10:27 "according as I said to you: My sheep my voice do hear, and I know them, and they follow me..."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ABrotherinFaith

Hello Ohio, a quick aside regarding this parable. According to WL, all 10 of the virgins were believers. The parable ends with the groom: and he answering said, Verily I say to you, I have not known you. (Matthew 25:12)

How do you understand this is light of John 10:14? " I am the good shepherd, and I know my sheep, and am known by mine" and John 10:27 "according as I said to you: My sheep my voice do hear, and I know them, and they follow me..."

First of all the Lord knows everything and everyone, including all sinners, unbelievers, unrighteous, lawless, etc., so when He says, "I never knew you," was He then lying? Or was He voicing His disapproval?

Those foolish virgins took their lamps to meet the bridegroom. The spirit of man is the lamp of the Lord. They had no oil of the Spirit in their vessels. We are vessels. These foolish ones were waiting to meet the Lord as their bridegroom, but they fell asleep, which means they died. They awoke at midnight, the end of the church day, and resurrected with all the other believers.

Since they were not prudent while alive, they must still buy oil. The Bible says little about how this will occur.

[ABrotherinFaith]

Originally Posted by Ohio

First of all the Lord knows everything and everyone, including all sinners, unbelievers, unrighteous, lawless, etc., so when He says, "I never knew you," was He then lying? Or was He voicing His disapproval?

Those foolish virgins took their lamps to meet the bridegroom. The spirit of man is the lamp of the Lord. They had no oil of the Spirit in their vessels. We are vessels. These foolish ones were waiting to meet the Lord as their bridegroom, but they fell asleep, which means they died. They awoke at midnight, the end of the church day, and resurrected with all the other believers.

Since they were not prudent while alive, they must still buy oil. The Bible says little about how this will occur.

Of course the Lord knows everyone. Of course He does. Of course He wasn't lying. Should the virgins have said then, as you have, "But Lord, you know everyone. You can't say that!" And would their protest have won over the Lord? Of course not.
Jesus was obviously making a point here. A point that is related to the verses I mentioned in John. Those verses lose their meaning if we read them as you would have us. I know my sheep and I am known by mine Nothing special if the Lord just simply knows everyone. No reason for the verse.

So, according to you, after we die if we haven't been prudent enough (and is there a cut off line for an acceptable amount of prudence or should we just keep being prudent and hope we make it?) we'll have another chance to buy oil? And who are the people who sell the oil, both in this life and after death?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by bearbear

My answer:
http://nodustybunnies.blogspot.com/2...rnity-and.html

Here's another (better) answer from:
http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/lc.html

Witness Lee's Purgatory

What happens to these hypothetical non-overcoming believers?
According to Witness Lee the following verses apply to them:
Matt 8:12 But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Mt 22:13 "Then the king told the attendants, 'Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'

Mt 24:51 He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Mt 25:30 And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'

Lu 13:28 "There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out.

Heb 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

Lee comments: "This is different than suffering the second death, which is to perish in the lake of fire for eternity. Although believers cannot be lost, they may suffer some dispensational punishment for their faults. This punishment will be worse than that received by those who broke the law of letters."
In other words they will suffer a worse punishment than under the Law of Moses when people were stoned to death or burned alive.

Matt 18:34 In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.

A basic problem with the purgatory idea is that it contradicts the basic concept of the forgiveness of sins. I understand the distinction he tries to make between discipline and condemnation. But having been raised from the dead, there is no point to discipling these people. They have already been reckoned innocent by the blood of Christ, and although discipline would be helpful while they were in the flesh (as sin dwells in the flesh and they have to learn obedience), having been raised from the dead they are perfect. There's no point to discipling them. Does tormenting them make them any more perfect? Such torment would not be simply for discipline to help them learn, but as a penalty for sinning. Hasn't God saved us from such condemnation? Is this what Christ has earned for us - to be thrown into a place where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth? Is it by our good works that we escape from such a place of torment? Is this rather not the kind of judgment that unbelievers will experience:

Matt 13:42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Which Lee also agrees applies only to the unsaved.
My interpretation of the difference between the outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, and the fiery furnace where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth? I think Lee is correct that the first refers to just during the Millenial reign and the second to the final judgment. But I think that both refer to the judgement of unbelievers or mere nominal Christians and unbelieving Jews.
But consider the correlation between Matt 24:50,51 and Luke 12:46
"The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." Matt 24:50,51
"The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers." Luke 12:46

If you read the context of these parables you find that these are parallel passages. Luke is recording the same parable as Matthew. Therefore "a place with the hypocrites" in Matthew is the same as "a place with the unbelievers" in Luke. Lee says that it is the non-overcoming believers that the Matthew passage is referring to. But in reality these are merely unsaved nominal Christians, which is why they are hypocrites. They do not believe with saving faith.
Lee denies the purgatory idea in its Catholic sense when he comments on 1Cor 3:15 "If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire."

Lee comments: "Through fire surely indicates punishment. However, this is altogether not the purgatory heretically taught by Catholicism in its superstitious twisting of this verse. Nevertheless, this word should be a solemn warning to us today concerning our Christian works."

However, as I interpret this verse, it seems to me that it is not the man who is burned, but his works. God has to burn up our sins so as to forget our past sinful lives in accordance with His promise. What remains of our past are the times when we obeyed God. And for these we will be rewarded.

Isa 43:25 "I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions,
for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more."

But Lee seems to think that God will remember the sins of the believers and visits punishment upon us in the next life. This is contrary to the basic message of the gospel. Though he denies the Catholic purgatory idea, he may not realize that he may actually believe it. Or perhaps we can rename it the Protestant Purgatory. For he accepts the following verse as applying to non-overcoming saved Christians:

Matt 18:34 In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.

Notice it says "until he should pay back all he owed". Such a person is paying the penalty for his sins by being tortured. This is what many accuse Catholics of believing. The basic object of our faith is Christ's atoning work on the cross. Christ payed the penalty for our sins. In describing the benefits of righteousness by faith in Romans 4, Paul quotes David saying:

"Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him."

The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says: "This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds."Then he adds: "Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more." And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin. Hebrews 10:15-18

Throughout the history of Protestant theology, the Purgatory idea had been rejected, being relegated as heretical Catholic theology. But Lee and Nee have now attempted to reintroduce this concept into the Evangelical community and have had success to some extent. However, they have failed to show the consistency between the gospel message of grace according to traditional evangelical thought and the purgatorial idea. The contradiction between the concept of Purgatory and Biblical theology was the reason it was rejected in the first place. The leaven of this doctrine must be removed if their gospel is to be considered Biblical from the standpoint of historic Protestant thought.

But you never answered my question.

You based your answer on "the history of Protestant theology, the Purgatory idea had been rejected, being relegated as heretical Catholic theology."

Protestants rejected purgatory because it became a money making scam for the Papists.

Since you have started a new thread, why don't you address all the scripture? Shouldn't we use the scripture to interpret the scripture? You seem to always fall back on the age-old controversies (calvin/armenian, Catholic/protestant) rather than reading the Bible for yourself, as ICA recently reminded us.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Ohio

But you never answered my question.

You based your answer on "the history of Protestant theology, the Purgatory idea had been rejected, being relegated as heretical Catholic theology."

Protestants rejected purgatory because it became a money making scam for the Papists.

Since you have started a new thread, why don't you address all the scripture? Shouldn't we use the scripture to interpret the scripture? You seem to always fall back on the age-old controversies (calvin/armenian, Catholic/protestant) rather than reading the Bible for yourself, as ICA recently reminded us.

Hi Ohio,

That's not my writing, but BCBSR's. I just added this information to set the background for the thread. Read my new post #2

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by bearbear

Hi Ohio,

That's not my writing, but BCBSR's. I just added this information to set the background for the thread. Read my new post #2

I have seen that site before, and always felt it was very sloppy scholarship.

Let the Bible answer the Bible.

Outer darkness is where all the sinners are who don't have access to the light, Jesus.

THIS WORLD is where the outer darkness is. Not some place you go to after death.

Weeping means pain and misery in this life. Gnashing of teeth means anger and frustration in this life.

It's not exactly rocket science. Just let the Bible do the interpreting instead of speculating.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Truthfinder

Let the Bible answer the Bible.

Outer darkness is where all the sinners are who don't have access to the light, Jesus.

THIS WORLD is where the outer darkness is. Not some place you go to after death.

Weeping means pain and misery in this life. Gnashing of teeth means anger and frustration in this life.

It's not exactly rocket science. Just let the Bible do the interpreting instead of speculating.

Where does the Bible say that this world is "outer" darkness?

Are you then interpreting outer darkness for this life then?

I think you have done way too much personal "speculation" and "interpretation" here.