No Place Like Hell

[manna-man]

Hell...
A very misunderstood concept.

Is Hell real or a word used to steer one's consideration to the actual truth about the seriousness of sin and its consequence?

Is hell a place of eternal torment or a word to describe one's end as being discarded like trash and a complete and total end of an era for those who reject Salvation?

I believe I hold the answer to this question but was stirred to ask because of the link at the top of the LCD main page titled:Hell Don't Go There (John Myer)

Yes...I took the bait.
I hope this discussion opens up eyes here and everywhere.

Do you believe hell is eternal torment? What do you believe?
Whatever you believe, speaks volumes of what you believe about God's character.

[SpeakersCorner]

John 3:16 poses two outcomes and neither is Hell.

[Timotheist]

Rev. poses four outcomes, and none of them are Hell.

[SpeakersCorner]

Ecclesiastes poses one outcome and it is vanity.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by manna-man

I believe I hold the answer to this question but was stirred to ask because of the link at the top of the LCD main page titled:Hell Don't Go There (John Myer)
Whatever you believe, speaks volumes of what you believe about God's character.

I think it would be fair that anyone who wants to participate in this thread actually listen to the entire message given by John Myer. You can find it here: - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxK8994T-qE

I think manna-man's quip "Whatever you believe, speaks volumes of what you believe about God's character" is really insightful, and maybe gets to the real heart of the matter.

Who are we to judge God? Who are we to question any of his ways, his choices, his actions, his character? Jesus clearly stated that Hell was a real, physical, actual place. He also clearly stated that Hell is "the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matt 25:41) Hell has a purpose, and this purpose was chosen by God long before man ever existed. Hell was not "created" for man, it was created for the devil and his angels. Yet anyone who choses the devil and his angels as their god will ultimately end up with them in the place prepared by God.

I was reminded about something I read a long time ago by Charles Spurgeon.

"Do not imagine for an instant that I pretend to be able thoroughly to elucidate the great mysteries of predestination. There are some men who claim to know all about the matter. They twist it round their fingers as easily as if it were an everyday thing; but depend upon it, he who thinks he knows all about this mystery, knows but very little."
"The truth is, neither you nor I have any right to want to know more about predestination than what God tells us. That is enough for us."
Charles Spurgeon Jacob and Esau New Park Street Pulpit January 16, 1859

Our Lord Jesus clearly and strongly warned his followers (and anyone else listening) about Hell. He also preached the Gospel of the Kingdom. Heaven and Hell are actually just two different kingdoms - each with it's own king. And each kingdom will be eternal. If you are reading this, hopefully you have been "delivered from the domain of darkness and transferred to the kingdom of his beloved Son" (Col 1:13)
-

[manna-man]

The word hell never existed until new testament times.
If there is a hell then nobody dies. Death is a joke and there will be two types of life in eternity. This cannot be so. One life enjoying eternal bliss and the other eternal torment.

The scriptures are very clear. Read Ezekiel 18. The soul who sins shall die.(period)
The soul who turns and does what is right will be rewarded with eternal life.
Genesis..."Partake and you shall surely die."
People minimize death as if it's a cheat from responsility. This couldn't be further from the truth. To be lost in death is great loss!

Now...Let's get to the meat.

In Gods foreknowledge, plan to create beings which would eventually be tormented forever and ever? I'd have to argue that even mere humans have enough intellectual wisdom to understand the cruelty of such a judgement. This is exactly 360° opposite of what we learn of Him.
I'll pipe down for a bit but first I'll ask a question.
What kind of Monster do some believe?

Ask and it shall be given, seek and ye shall find....
Judge God by no means! Question what bothers you!!!��


Peace...

[manna-man]

Eternal life is a gift/reward.

I know...Tough subject. Most people can't deal with it...kinda like death.

[SpeakersCorner]

@UntoHim

So Spurgeon once wrote "The truth is, neither you nor I have any right to want to know more about predestination than what God tells us. That is enough for us"?

Well, maybe had Job written it I'd accept it on face value. He earned it. Spurgeon ... not so much. I always reject this kind of thinking/attitude. It's a kind of authoritarianism: "'Shut up!' I'm explaining."

Nah. God wants us to look into the deepest things. Admittedly, we see through the welder's mask but we do see something and it's worth exploring. The Wise Men looked deeply into the night sky and saw a glint that led them past the Spurgeons of the day to Christ's house.

[UntoHim]

Speaker,
Sometimes I wonder if you actually read through an entire post before commenting. It seems you are intent upon finding something you can vehemently disagree with, isolate that one phrase or word, and then just let loose with both barrels. On another thread, just today, you bemoaned about the lack of "respect discourse" on the forum. Really bro?

Spurgeon: "The truth is, neither you nor I have any right to want to know more about predestination than what God tells us. (emphasis given)

Speaker's knee-jerk interpretation of Spurgeon: "Shut up!' I'm explaining."

God wants us to look into the deepest things.

So "what God tells us" is not good enough for you, my friend? Exactly where is one to find these "deepest things"?

The Wise Men looked deeply into the night sky and saw a glint that led them past the Spurgeons of the day to Christ's house.

We should be so lucky and blessed that God would provide such fantastical signs and wonders for us today. For now, I guess we're just stuck with the Bible. Just sayin...
-

PS: In my post I actually gave the reference for anyone who was really interested in knowing the full context of Spurgeon's message:
Charles Spurgeon Jacob and Esau New Park Street Pulpit January 16, 1859
-

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Eternal life is a gift/reward.

I know...Tough subject. Most people can't deal with it...kinda like death.

It is a tough subject!

Steve Gregg did a very thoughtful and well researched book on the subject called, "Hell - Three Christian views of God's final solution to the problem of sin."

3 Views of Hell Book at Amazon

Steve Gregg lecture on 3 Views of Hell

Steve Gregg Q&A on Hell (FYI - audience questions not so clear)

The 3 views of Hell presented are:
1. Traditionalism - eternal conscious torment (promoted by Augustine)
2. Annihilationism - soul is no more (possibly after a period of torment)
3. Universalism - all eventually restored (possibly after a period of torment)

Steve goes into church history quite a bit, regarding these three views, and painstakingly breaks-down scripture for each of these view. His stated goal is just to present these views and not to draw his own conclusions. I found it a very fascinating read, to say the least - I would highly recommend it for anyone wanting to really dive into what the word says on this topic, and to also get an understanding of how these views came about.

Personally, I lean toward something of a mix of these . . .

I can't say I know for sure what hell is all about, so I just tell others, "Whatever it is, the bottom-line is this - IT'S NOT GOOD and therefore is something to avoid at all costs! And the only way to do that is salvation through Jesus Christ!"

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by manna-man

The word hell never existed until new testament times.
If there is a hell then nobody dies. Death is a joke and there will be two types of life in eternity. This cannot be so. One life enjoying eternal bliss and the other eternal torment.

The scriptures are very clear. Read Ezekiel 18. The soul who sins shall die.(period)
The soul who turns and does what is right will be rewarded with eternal life.
Genesis..."Partake and you shall surely die."
People minimize death as if it's a cheat from responsility. This couldn't be further from the truth. To be lost in death is great loss!

Now...Let's get to the meat.

In Gods foreknowledge, plan to create beings which would eventually be tormented forever and ever? I'd have to argue that even mere humans have enough intellectual wisdom to understand the cruelty of such a judgement. This is exactly 360° opposite of what we learn of Him.
I'll pipe down for a bit but first I'll ask a question.
What kind of Monster do some believe?

Ask and it shall be given, seek and ye shall find....
Judge God by no means! Question what bothers you!!!��

Peace...

This is not a topic I've gotten into deeply, but have dug into just a little bit in passing. What stuck with me was reading Matthew 10:28 -

And you should not be afraid of those killing the body but not being able to kill the soul. Indeed rather you should fear the One being able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.

I assumed that the death of the body is what we all mean by death, and that the death of the soul was what the Bible means by "the second death" in Revelation 20 and Revelation 21:

Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.

But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

Obviously if both the body and soul are destroyed, and this is the fate of all those who continue on in unrepentant sin, then existence ceases......at least as I understand it. Can someone exist without even a soul? Not that I've heard.

But where did the concept of unending torture come from? As in, what verses do people use to support that thought?

Trapped

[SpeakersCorner]

@UntoHim

Actually I did read all your post. But I admit, sometimes I react ... the troll in me sometimes gets the better of me.

As for dissing Spurgeon, I don't really have much against him -- my dad, a Baptist preacher, loved him and a brother in my fellowship does as well -- but he strikes me as too much of a wordsmith. I'm not a fan of wordsmithery. Seems fake.

I do stand by my point that the Spurgeon quote you cited has a Shut Up, He Explained ring to it. I chafe whenever someone cautions me against going outside the orthodoxy. As for predestination, what the Bible says about it directly is helpful and what it implies even more so. I truly believe in contradicitons, or at least, apparent contradictions. We are predestinated, we are free. I have told fellow saints in my life this: "If you weren't predestinated, demand God do it now!" I cite the woman pestering the unrighteous judge.

One last point: you know as well as I do that the trinity is not spelled out in scripture, yet it is at the core of orthodoxy. That fact alone should soften arguments of the sort, "If the Bible says it I believe it, if it doesn't, I don't."

[SpeakersCorner]

@UntoHim

I forgot to address another point you made: "So what God tells us" is not good enough for you, my friend? Exactly where is one to find these "deepest things"?

How about the natural world? Doesn't it speak? Paul said it does in Romans. How about the church? Doesn't it speak? I hear the voice of Christ rising from the congregation.

The Wise Men vs. Scribes story that W. Lee shed great light on ("Finding Christ By the Living Star") is a repudiation of Sola Scriptura, imho. The ones with the verses not only didn't attend Christ's birth, they were complicit in the killing of hundreds of young boys related to it.

[manna-man]

If you were to find out that manna-man from before he started his membership here at LCD Tormented people in his basement even until this day, would this change your opinion on him?
Would you accept an invitation to dine with him at his home?
Crazy thought huh?
Yet some are prepared and have obviously accepted these realities of their doctrine even knowing that the RCC Et al. have had an influence on what we actually believe.
There's a parallel here, do you see it?
It's no wonder people fear or even hate God. With a rep like this who wouldn't? 😆
It's either kumbaya or else!

This kind of presentation of God is blasphemous beyond measure and needs to be dealt with. Repentance is in order.
But first an understanding on how we got here is needed.
I believe God is watching and interested in seeing exactly what it is we are willing to accept or not....

Peace like a river...

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Jesus clearly stated that Hell was a real, physical, actual place. He also clearly stated that Hell is "the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matt 25:41) Hell has a purpose, and this purpose was chosen by God long before man ever existed. Hell was not "created" for man, it was created for the devil and his angels. Yet anyone who choses the devil and his angels as their god will ultimately end up with them in the place prepared by God.
-

If we are going to rehash this topic yet once again, I think we should try to agree that much of the confusion about "Hell" is that the KJV refers to TWO PLACES as Hell:

1) "Fear Him who is able to destroy both body and soul in Hell"

2) "Hell gave up the dead in it" and "Hell was thrown into the Lake of Fire"

But there should be no confusion: the first place is 'Gehenna' and the second place is 'Hades' in the Greek texts.

To use UntoHim's words, "clearly" these are two different "places". One can destroy a soul, the other is a soul-holder for judgement day.

So can we please agree to distinguish between Hades and Gehenna when we use the word "Hell" in these discussions? For my sanity's sake, if nothing else?

I hope that we can also agree that 'Gehenna' and the 'Lake of Fire' are synonyms. The LOF is where the soul is destroyed. So Hades will be thrown into Gehenna after the final resurrection.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Our Lord Jesus clearly and strongly warned his followers (and anyone else listening) about Hell. He also preached the Gospel of the Kingdom. Heaven and Hell are actually just two different kingdoms - each with it's own king. And each kingdom will be eternal. If you are reading this, hopefully you have been "delivered from the domain of darkness and transferred to the kingdom of his beloved Son" (Col 1:13)
-

Sorry, UntoHim, but I must issue a challenge to your statement in boldface. Where does it say that Satan is either the "king" of Hades, or the "king" of Gehenna?

The scripture says that Satan is the "ruler of this world". We are currently citizens in Satan's kingdom whilst we are alive. (Unless you are referring to this world as "hell". which would be a third "place" )

One of my peeves is when I hear that the Gates of Hades (Hell in the KJV) refers to Satan's Kingdom. I suggest that Jesus ALWAYS had the keys to the gates of Hades. He did not take them away from Satan, as is commonly described in today's folklore, in which "hell" is a place where Satan tortures the souls of those he owns.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by manna-man

If you were to find out that manna-man from before he started his membership here at LCD Tormented people in his basement even until this day, would this change your opinion on him?
Would you accept an invitation to dine with him at his home?
Crazy thought huh?
Yet some are prepared and have obviously accepted these realities of their doctrine even knowing that the RCC Et al. have had an influence on what we actually believe.
There's a parallel here, do you see it?
It's no wonder people fear or even hate God. With a rep like this who wouldn't? ��
It's either kumbaya or else!

This kind of presentation of God is blasphemous beyond measure and needs to be dealt with. Repentance is in order.
But first an understanding on how we got here is needed.
I believe God is watching and interested in seeing exactly what it is we are willing to accept or not....

Peace like a river...

I'm glad to see you pursuing Christian Universalism, manna man. It speaks of your heart.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by zeek

I'm glad to see you pursuing Christian Universalism, manna man. It speaks of your heart.

LOL!
Zeek, your wisdom has bewitched you!��<smiles and giggles...

Seriously though.

Universalism sounds good and I wish it were so but I'm not convinced that it is correct because of the gospel of Christ that persuades me to take heed.

Heed of what?

The dangers of ignoring the message of sin and death and reconciliation/Propitiation. I believe that Ezekiel 18 spells it out quite clearly.
Those who sin and reject propitiation/righteousness "in" Christ shall unfortunately die. (Lose the reward to live in eternity unhindered by time.) And only God knows what He has prepared for us.��

I've grown to appreciate you brother. Are you in Ft. LAUD? If so pm me so we can meet...
If not PM me anyways.��

I think it's obvious I don't believe in eternal torment. I will expound on that in the fullness of time as The Lord leads. I'm hoping others will expound on this as this is one of the few venues I frequent and do appreciate the talent that is here even though I don't always agree with the finger pointing as we all are not perfected yet. I've been considering lately the tares and the wheat.....

Shalom.

[Timotheist]

I tend to agree with manna-man: After this world is swept away, at the final judgement, those humans who are judged will experience the second death in its completeness, having had the soul destroyed in Gehenna.

Hades, described in Luke as a fiery place of torment for the rich man, is TEMPORARY. The rich man will leave Hades and face formal judgement at his resurrection. Being a Jew, he will be saved, but "so as through fire".

Likewise, those of us who do not overcome will be "hurt by the second death".

So I consider Hades as being a cleansing fire for the slacking believers, burning away the chaff of our souls, but the soul remains.

After the resurrection, those of us believers who will be judged will be thrown into the pit, the deepest part of Hades. Again, it will be a temporary punishment.

As has been pointed out already, the LOF was prepared for the Devil and his angels. I surmise that these eternal beings cannot be killed, so they will indeed suffer everlasting torment.

But humanity, as manna-man states, will be annihilated by the LOF.

[zeek]

Eschatology is like a Rorschach test that reveals the heart.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by zeek

Eschatology is like a Rorschach test that reveals the heart.

Great point Zeek!

What heart would accept brutal eternal torture?
Even for angels.
They were created too...
Sickening even considering Gods anger would be so unquenchable!
IMHO...That's the definition of being out of control.
NOWHERE in scripture do we learn that this is a characteristic of God.

[UntoHim]

My friend manna-man,
Could you please explain to us, as clearly and succinctly as you have posted your views about hell, what was the purpose of the cross? What was the actual purpose of the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I would love to hear the same from our longtime friend zeek, but if he could be so kind as to wait for an answer from manna-man, that would be great.
-

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

My friend manna-man,
Could you please explain to us, as clearly and succinctly as you have posted your views about hell, what was the purpose of the cross? What was the actual purpose of the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I would love to hear the same from our longtime friend zeek, but if he could be so kind as to wait for an answer from manna-man, that would be great.
-

The purpose of the cross was to torment someone "to death"
It was the most cruel torture ever devised. So cruel even our Lord feared it....

The purpose of the death and resurrection of Our Dear Lord Jesus was for atonement(Blood for sin). The greatest and perfect sacrifice
redeeming/purchasing/paying the required price that God demands for sin so that we may suffer no condemnation (Death) and Live forever with Him. His death and resurrection proves His love for us and that we may be resurrected too in that great day.

UntoHim, what is it that you hope to get out of this exercise?

My hope in this thread is to see if those here have really considered what religion teaches about Hell and what it really is and isn't.
It's not a crime to question orthodoxy especially if it paints a picture opposite of a loving God and Savior.
It seems to me that many never question this and if they do usually it is suppressed and extinguished.

It also seems to me that many people have no problem with a Monster God as long as they survive their neon fashioned God.

What do you think about eternal torment my dear friend UntoHim?

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by manna-man

UntoHim, what is it that you hope to get out of this exercise?

My hope in this thread is to see if those here have really considered what religion teaches about Hell and what it really is and isn't.
It's not a crime to question orthodoxy especially if it paints a picture opposite of a loving God and Savior.
It seems to me that many never question this and if they do usually it is suppressed and extinguished.

What do you think about eternal torment my dear friend UntoHim?

I wonder that too . . .

Likewise, I didn't used to put much thought into the subject of hell either. I just basically thought it was the Lake of Fire, and all that didn't accept Christ personally in this life would spend eternity there in conscious torment. It wasn't until I heard a radio brother, Steve Gregg, speak about it numerous times over the past few years, that I began to realize that there were other views from scripture besides the traditional one I held. And these other views (two mainly - annihilationism & universalism) had a good amount in scripture to back them up. So after reading Steve's in-depth book on the topic recently, which compared these three views side-by-side, I got much clearer that dogmatically adhering to one view probably isn't advisable. By that I mean, it's another one of those things in scripture where it's hard to say specifically and precisely what will happen to unbelievers, because they don't all fit into one human "box" of thought. I've come to the conclusion that it very well may be that there are different judgments in store for unbelievers, depending on various factors.

In a conversation over lunch with a brother yesterday on this same topic, we both agreed that some people will indeed experience eternal, conscious torment, since various verses including Matthew 25:41 clearly state, "Get away from me, you who are accursed, into the eternal fire that has been prepared for the devil and his angels!" But we also agreed a righteous, loving and merciful God may have other provisions along the way before resorting to that awful, eternal torment (which could be complete annihilation of the soul, or possibly another chance to accept God's Gift).

But even if all unbelievers in this life don't go to the Lake of Fire for eternity, the other possibilities are still not a very pleasant thing either!

[SpeakersCorner]

Reading Ecclessiastes 12 flipped on a switch in my brain many years ago concerning Hell. I had long known the KJV use of the word "Hell" was indiscriminate and misleading. "Hades" and "Hell" aren't the same thing. The word "Hell," for that matter, was based on Norse mythology named after the queen of the underworld, Hel. I began to suspect a lot of the teaching of this overly-simplistic binary outcome was wrong.

So when reading that chapter in Ecc., the one which describes in metaphorical language the aging and death of a human and even the decomposition of the body in the earth, I applied my trusty old tripartite man filter to it. I could see the Body described clearly. Dust to dust. And I could see the Spirit addressed interestingly: it goes "back to God who gave it." But what of the Soul? "Vanity of vanities." [KJV] "Meaningless! Meaningless!" [NIV] Now recall in Eden it was the moment when the Spirit of God's breath entered the body of Adam that "man became a living soul." So Ecclesiastes 12 describes the reverse Genesis 2. It's the story of a meaningless human life: you were given a body, a spirit to animate it, with a living soul the result AND YOU WASTED IT!

Suddenly I began noticing many passages that were similar. John 3:16, though I knew by heart from age 6, jumped out at me: "... shall not perish but have everlasting life." Perishing vs. Everylasting life. No mention of Hell, torment. Instead, Meaninglessness vs. Meaningfulness.

So I cobbled together my own theology which is roughly annhilationist. This was so much more in line with how I view God: a God of love, not retribution. But I'm reading Job right now and, to be honest, God doesn't give a lot of credit to Job's wisdom which is much better than mine. "Where were you when ...?" So let me conclude with ...

I could be wrong.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Reading Ecclessiastes 12 flipped on a switch in my brain many years ago concerning Hell. I had long known the KJV use of the word "Hell" was indiscriminate and misleading. "Hades" and "Hell" aren't the same thing. The word "Hell," for that matter, was based on Norse mythology named after the queen of the underworld, Hel. I began to suspect a lot of the teaching of this overly-simplistic binary outcome was wrong.

So when reading that chapter in Ecc., the one which describes in metaphorical language the aging and death of a human and even the decomposition of the body in the earth, I applied my trusty old tripartite man filter to it. I could see the Body described clearly. Dust to dust. And I could see the Spirit addressed interestingly: it goes "back to God who gave it." But what of the Soul? "Vanity of vanities." [KJV] "Meaningless! Meaningless!" [NIV] Now recall in Eden it was the moment when the Spirit of God's breath entered the body of Adam that "man became a living soul." So Ecclesiastes 12 describes the reverse Genesis 2. It's the story of a meaningless human life: you were given a body, a spirit to animate it, with a living soul the result AND YOU WASTED IT!

Suddenly I began noticing many passages that were similar. John 3:16, though I knew by heart from age 6, jumped out at me: "... shall not perish but have everlasting life." Perishing vs. Everylasting life. No mention of Hell, torment. Instead, Meaninglessness vs. Meaningfulness.

So I cobbled together my own theology which is roughly annhilationist. This was so much more in line with how I view God: a God of love, not retribution. But I'm reading Job right now and, to be honest, God doesn't give a lot of credit to Job's wisdom which is much better than mine. "Where were you when ...?" So let me conclude with ...

I could be wrong.

I Love this!

Could we all have been wrong?

This is getting interesting and people are warming up to the discussion.

I'm thinking it may cross the mind of some that this discussion isn't related to LCD'S.
Actually it is incriminating for the vast writings, the great vanity and the volumes of Life Studies and yet so much isn't known on this subject.
It's an indictment to us all including myself for not having the courage to question or allowing our curiosities to be extinguished.

Peace...

[Drake]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

So I cobbled together my own theology which is roughly annhilationist. This was so much more in line with how I view God: a God of love, not retribution. But I'm reading Job right now and, to be honest, God doesn't give a lot of credit to Job's wisdom which is much better than mine. "Where were you when ...?" So let me conclude with ...

I could be wrong.

SC, manna-man, zeek, Timotheist and anyone who has similar considerations

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I too, have pondered this question... but at the end of the day all that really matters is what can be substantiated from the Bible. I may hold a personal view that God is love and loving, kind, and merciful and therefore would never cast any human into the Lake of Fire to torment them forever. Yet, that view directly contradicts Scripture:

Revelation 20:10 "And the devil who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where also the beast and the false prophet were; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

In this verse there are at least two humans who share the devil's punishment of torment forever and ever.

Is God less loving, kind, or merciful for tossing the devil and his angels into the lake of fire to be tormented forever and ever?

Is God as love diminished because He cast humans into the lake of fire alongside the devil to receive the same eternal punishment?

Not at all. He is the Lord and He is righteous. Whatever He does is righteous. Though fallen angels and humans are cast into the lake of fire, yet, He is still love, loving, kind, merciful and righteous. God could never do anything unrighteous because His ruling of the universe is based on righteousness and justice.

Psalm 89:14 "Righteousness and justice are the foundation of your throne..."

I'll join SC in that I could be wrong too but that is how I understand the Bible on this topic.

Thanks,
Drake

[manna-man]

When I ask what do you think. I mean exactly that. Not copied and pasted scripture but a heart felt thought out expression of what YOU think...Otherwise we could just simply post excerpts from the creeds. :-)

[Timotheist]

Drake,

The beast is described as emerging from the Abyss. The Abyss is a prison for fallen angels and demons. Therefore I suggest the Beast is not human.

The false prophet is described as emerging from the Earth. This one is tougher to interpret. Will he be resurrected from Hades? I dunno.

But he is also not likely to be “human” in the same sense that we are.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Drake

SC, manna-man, zeek, Timotheist and anyone who has similar considerations

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I too, have pondered this question... but at the end of the day all that really matters is what can be substantiated from the Bible. I may hold a personal view that God is love and loving, kind, and merciful and therefore would never cast any human into the Lake of Fire to torment them forever. Yet, that view directly contradicts Scripture:

Revelation 20:10 "And the devil who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where also the beast and the false prophet were; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

In this verse there are at least two humans who share the devil's punishment of torment forever and ever.

Is God less loving, kind, or merciful for tossing the devil and his angels into the lake of fire to be tormented forever and ever?

Is God as love diminished because He cast humans into the lake of fire alongside the devil to receive the same eternal punishment?

Not at all. He is the Lord and He is righteous. Whatever He does is righteous. Though fallen angels and humans are cast into the lake of fire, yet, He is still love, loving, kind, merciful and righteous. God could never do anything unrighteous because His ruling of the universe is based on righteousness and justice.

Psalm 89:14 "Righteousness and justice are the foundation of your throne..."

I'll join SC in that I could be wrong too but that is how I understand the Bible on this topic.

Thanks,
Drake

Greeting Drake,

There is an enormous difference between eternal punishment and eternal torment...
Sodom and Gomorrahs punishment had eternal consequences yet unequivocally final.
The punishment was executed and complete.
Sodom and Gomorrah doesn't burn even to this day. We have history to discern God's judgments and justice.

Are we to believe that on the Day Of The Lord the inhabitants of that city will be resurrected and punished/tormented again? Eternally?
Where is our discernment between good and evil?

This presentation is something to consider. He's a Universalist. I don't agree with that but do appreciate what this brother has to say on hell.

https://youtu.be/3tm6MHChCWQ

Peace...

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Reading Ecclessiastes 12 flipped on a switch in my brain many years ago concerning Hell. I had long known the KJV use of the word "Hell" was indiscriminate and misleading. "Hades" and "Hell" aren't the same thing. The word "Hell," for that matter, was based on Norse mythology named after the queen of the underworld, Hel. I began to suspect a lot of the teaching of this overly-simplistic binary outcome was wrong.

So when reading that chapter in Ecc., the one which describes in metaphorical language the aging and death of a human and even the decomposition of the body in the earth, I applied my trusty old tripartite man filter to it. I could see the Body described clearly. Dust to dust. And I could see the Spirit addressed interestingly: it goes "back to God who gave it." But what of the Soul? "Vanity of vanities." [KJV] "Meaningless! Meaningless!" [NIV] Now recall in Eden it was the moment when the Spirit of God's breath entered the body of Adam that "man became a living soul." So Ecclesiastes 12 describes the reverse Genesis 2. It's the story of a meaningless human life: you were given a body, a spirit to animate it, with a living soul the result AND YOU WASTED IT!

Suddenly I began noticing many passages that were similar. John 3:16, though I knew by heart from age 6, jumped out at me: "... shall not perish but have everlasting life." Perishing vs. Everylasting life. No mention of Hell, torment. Instead, Meaninglessness vs. Meaningfulness.

So I cobbled together my own theology which is roughly annhilationist. This was so much more in line with how I view God: a God of love, not retribution. But I'm reading Job right now and, to be honest, God doesn't give a lot of credit to Job's wisdom which is much better than mine. "Where were you when ...?" So let me conclude with ...

I could be wrong.

I too really liked this line of rationale! A word that jumped out at me was "BINARY." That word sums up a lot of concepts and discussions Christians have . . . we think it's either this way or that way, but we often fail to see that things can certainly be more nuanced than that. Hell certainly falls into this category.

The application of the tripartite being was interesting too . . .

And the admission that you could be wrong - I think we're all a little humbled by this topic and are realizing there's probably much more than the much traditional & greatly accepted concept of eternal, conscious torment to it. (which Augustine popularized, and the Roman Church then instituted).

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I too really liked I think we're all a little humbled by this topic and are realizing there's probably much more than the much traditional & greatly accepted concept of eternal, conscious torment to it. (which Augustine popularized, and the Roman Church then instituted).

I didn’t know Augustine [pronounce it Uh-GUS-tun or the elite will consider you a rube … at least that’s what I was told when I pronounced it AW-Gus-Teen once to a seminary student] pushed this into orthodoxy. Augustine was a giant but orthodoxy is never finalized. I remember in 1968 when Dave Fosbury jumped over the high jump bar back first, won a gold, and changed the orthodoxy forever (it took the Russians awhile to admit it. Those Russians!). It feels like we’re in an age when we need some more Dave Fosburys to look anew at the Bible.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

It feels like we’re in an age when we need some more Dave Fosburys to look anew at the Bible.

Excuse me my friend, but this is what Nee and Lee are all about...."looking anew at the Bible". And look where this got us....speaking of flops.

Seriously though, there is an inherit danger when we Christians search for further "enlightenment" or novel revelation apart from the Scriptures themselves. Yes, "the Lord hath yet more light and truth", but it must "break forth from his Word", and not from the fickle hearts and minds of even the most well-meaning of us mere mortals. May God have mercy.
-

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Excuse me my friend, but this is what Nee and Lee are all about...."looking anew at the Bible". And look where this got us....speaking of flops.

Seriously though, there is an inherit danger when we Christians search for further "enlightenment" or novel revelation apart from the Scriptures themselves. Yes, "the Lord hath yet more light and truth", but it must "break forth from his Word", and not from the fickle hearts and minds of even the most well-meaning of us mere mortals. May God have mercy.
-

Your warning, happily, doesn’t apply to my words above since it was totally Scripture-based. But I do appreciate your concern for my misguided soul.

SC

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by manna-man

UntoHim, what is it that you hope to get out of this exercise?

This is not my exercise, my friend. You were the one who started this thread with some very big propositions and questions. I'm assuming that you put forth these propositions and questions in good faith. Could you please assume the same from me and others posting here?

My hope in this thread is to see if those here have really considered what religion teaches about Hell and what it really is and isn't.

Fair enough, so long as we don't totally abandon or discount what has been taught and believed by orthodox Christians for over 2,000 years. I am NOT contending that everything that has been taught or believed is equal to the Word of God, only that we do not (should not) think that we can throw everything out and start with a clean slate without some significant risk of falling pray to a system of error.

It also seems to me that many people have no problem with a Monster God

A Monster God would be one that sends his only begotten Son to be tortured and murdered so that those who have rejected him don't have it too bad in eternity.

What do you think about eternal torment my dear friend UntoHim?

The short answer is "I don't". What I do know is that the Bible says that there is an "eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matt 25:41) and God has also prepared a glorious alternative, because he "so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."
-

[UntoHim]

Hey Speaker I just double-checked.....Nope...Dick (not Dave) Fosbury is not mentioned one time in the Bible. Nice try though!
-

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Hey Speaker I just double-checked.....Nope...Dick (not Dave) Fosbury is not mentioned one time in the Bible. Nice try though!
-

I stand corrected. It was Dick. I should have known. It takes a “Dick” sometimes to change the world.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

This is not my exercise, my friend. You were the one who started this thread with some very big propositions and questions. I'm assuming that you put forth these propositions and questions in good faith. Could you please assume the same from me and others posting here?


Fair enough, so long as we don't totally abandon or discount what has been taught and believed by orthodox Christians for over 2,000 years. I am NOT contending that everything that has been taught or believed is equal to the Word of God, only that we do not (should not) think that we can throw everything out and start with a clean slate without some significant risk of falling pray to a system of error.


A Monster God would be one that sends his only begotten Son to be tortured and murdered so that those who have rejected him don't have it too bad in eternity.


The short answer is "I don't". What I do know is that the Bible says that there is an "eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matt 25:41) and God has also prepared a glorious alternative, because he "so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."
-

Untohim,

My intent was never to rub you or anyone here wrong...at all.

Nor was it to throw all of orthodoxy out with the bathwater.

Just to question it. The eternal torment theory specifically.

The Jews and many others orthodoxy was proven wrong over the ages.

This isn't or wasn't an attack on Gods character but a defense of it.
(Not that He needs anyone to do that...)

And I do trust that everything you do here is in good faith and wouldn't question that but if I did...There wouldn't be any mystery about what I was doing.
I have a feeling that as long as the word hell is used this issue will remain unless an unveiling takes place.

You have that right not to think about it...

As stated earlier. These are hard questions but honest ones that most flee from.

Peace always my brother Untohim and all who dwell here!

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Fair enough, so long as we don't totally abandon or discount what has been taught and believed by orthodox Christians for over 2,000 years. I am NOT contending that everything that has been taught or believed is equal to the Word of God, only that we do not (should not) think that we can throw everything out and start with a clean slate without some significant risk of falling pray to a system of error.


The short answer is "I don't". What I do know is that the Bible says that there is an "eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matt 25:41) and God has also prepared a glorious alternative, because he "so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."
-

Yes, I agree, what has been orthodoxy should be considered. The problem with traditional thinking of the church is it may or may not be on the mark, ergo various RCC doctrines over two millennia. And protestants adopted a pretty good amount of things from the RCC. Many in the pre-Augustine era held other beliefs besides the eternal, conscious torment view. (But, as said, this could still be a possibility for some humans.)

Those tending toward the annihilationism view believe that "perish" here means the soul is destroyed, that is, it is no more, instead of going to the eternal Lake of Fire. The strict universalistic view is that other chances will be given by God and all will be saved. However, "all" is hard for me to accept, since we have Matt 25:41 (and other verses) which clearly state at least some of mankind will go the the Lake of Fire.

[Ohio]

I just came across this in my morning reading:

"To believe that God is all-loving or too good to create hell is to make up a nonexistent god and violate the first and second of the Ten Commandments." -- Ray Comfort

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I just came across this in my morning reading:

"To believe that God is all-loving or too good to create hell is to make up a nonexistent god and violate the first and second of the Ten Commandments." -- Ray Comfort

I love Ray's passion, courage and ambition. If he was here I'd ask him for a word study on the word hell. I believe most people don't consider this matter so deeply for many reasons. Of course that's my opinion...

I wish it were that easy to clear things up Ohio.
By the way...
Greetings brother.
It's been a long time...

While I'm at it.
Greetings to these also:
PS, SC, Igsy, Mike, Timothy, Countmeworthy! There are so many!

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I just came across this in my morning reading:

"To believe that God is all-loving or too good to create hell is to make up a nonexistent god and violate the first and second of the Ten Commandments." -- Ray Comfort

Love Ray to death but his words bring little Comfort.

[SpeakersCorner]

I chose the screenname SpeakersCorner after visiting the place in London. Ray Comfort would be absolute KING there if he went (maybe he has). He's the true master of the outdoor debate venue.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Love Ray to death but his words bring little Comfort.

Was going to say that...LOL!

[Sons to Glory!]

I've mentioned this book about the 3 views of hell (by Steve Gregg) a couple times, but no one seems interested. I'll mention it just one more time, as I really thought it did a great job of diving deep into the subject of hell. All the things we've been bringing up in this thread, and much more, are addressed. And I think he goes about it in a really rational way, parsing the various scriptures on the subject. Even though it is a thorough book, I found it a fascinating read that kept me quite engaged.

In an appendix, he does very detailed charts on the 3 views (traditional, annihilation, universalism), giving side-by-side cross-examination and rebuttal to numerous points in each view.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I've mentioned this book about the 3 views of hell (by Steve Gregg) a couple times, but no one seems interested. I'll mention it just one more time, as I really thought it did a great job of diving deep into the subject of hell. All the things we've been bringing up in this thread, and much more, are addressed. And I think he goes about it in a really rational way, parsing the various scriptures on the subject. Even though it is a thorough book, I found it a fascinating read that kept me quite engaged.

In an appendix, he does very detailed charts on the 3 views (traditional, annihilation, universalism), giving side-by-side cross-examination and rebuttal to numerous points in each view.

There's a lot out there....

I'll check it out...ok. found plenty on what Steve Gregg believes on YouTube...
Watching a video on Hell now. I'll post a link...
He uses the word seems alot yet he believes in the traditiinal doctrine on hell.
I'll dig deeper..

https://youtu.be/jBuG689nM1s

[manna-man]

STG!

I thoroughly enjoyed the whole video. I can understand where he is at and I believe anyone who watches and listens can extrapolate enough content to make a decision IMHO and not remain so ambiguous on the matter.
I realize everybody isn't the same...

I noticed your posts before but have been busy. I'm glad you didn't give up..!

[SpeakersCorner]

Sons to Glory …. I’ll check it out. Thx.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Love Ray to death but his words bring little Comfort.

His passion is to bring all men to the Comforter using the Law of God to convict them.

You would probably admit that the LC had little room for sober Evangelists like we see in the book of Acts.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by manna-man

I love Ray's passion, courage and ambition. If he was here I'd ask him for a word study on the word hell. I believe most people don't consider this matter so deeply for many reasons. Of course that's my opinion...

I wish it were that easy to clear things up Ohio.
By the way...
Greetings brother.
It's been a long time...

Greetings to you too bro.

My brother loves Ray Comfort, but I never heard him speak. I came across RC's devotional in a little Christian bookstore in Berlin, OH, the heart of Amish country. I love it.

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Ohio

His passion is to bring all men to the Comforter using the Law of God to convict them.

You would probably admit that the LC had little room for sober Evangelists like we see in the book of Acts.

Is everything a chance to stick the knife in the LC?

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Greetings to you too bro.

My brother loves Ray Comfort, but I never heard him speak. I came across RC's devotional in a little Christian bookstore in Berlin, OH, the heart of Amish country. I love it.

I've been watching Ray Comforts videos on You tube for ages. I don't buy the torment or hell scare tactics but he repeatedly says
" The wages of sin is death."
He does have a heart for the lost.

Peace...

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Is everything a chance to stick the knife in the LC?

Is everything a chance for you to defend the indefensible? The local church has lots of places for you to do what Witness Lee and his zombies have done for decades, stick the knife into all the genuine and sincere Christians of poor poor Christianity. I'm sure they would love to hear from you SpeakersCorner!!! Sorry, but this is not la la land here. We no longer believe that Witness Lee was "brilliant" (although we once did) and we no longer believe he was speaking as God's oracle on earth (although we once did). It's obvious that you still believe that Lee was a true apostle. Shame on you man. Get a grip bro.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Is everything a chance to stick the knife in the LC?

Whew! Caught me by surprise there. It was TC years ago who happened to bemoan the fact.

Apparently as Exclusivism "matures," it becomes increasingly incompatible with evangelism. Happened to the Brethren also. I came across this sad fact while reading the Foreward of The Macintosh Treasury by W.M.Smith, "A Word Concerning the Author." Take a look if you come across it some time.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Getagripbro

Is everything a chance for you to defend the indefensible? The local church has lots of places for you to do what Witness Lee and his zombies have done for decades, stick the knife into all the genuine and sincere Christians of poor poor Christianity. I'm sure they would love to hear from you SpeakersCorner!!! Sorry, but this is not la la land here. We no longer believe that Witness Lee was "brilliant" (although we once did) and we no longer believe he was speaking as God's oracle on earth (although we once did). It's obvious that you still believe that Lee was a true apostle. Shame on you man. Get a grip bro.

This is not fair bro.

You can't equate every brother with the worst that emanated from Anaheim. What makes the LCD so valuable is the ability of each to speak his/her heart based on their own walk with the Lord.

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Whew! Caught me by surprise there. It was TC years ago who happened to bemoan the fact.

Apparently as Exclusivism "matures," it becomes increasingly incompatible with evangelism. Happened to the Brethren also. I came across this sad fact while reading the Foreward of The Macintosh Treasury by W.M.Smith, "A Word Concerning the Author." Take a look if you come across it some time.

Perhaps I misread the spirit of your previous post. Mea culpa. I think it’s probably true what you’re saying. I do know that the LC I lived through was strong on evangelism, stronger than I felt comfortable with often. I did the gospel robes once. I was very uncomfortable. I did the door to door. Baptized 9 in their homes. Led many others in prayer. Had the cops called on me twice. I was always uncomfortable. But I did these things. In the end, the ones we were able to bring into our gathering almost all came from normal human relationships. Friends. Relatives. Coworkers.

Today the LCs are in such a weakened state I’m not sure how much evangelism is going on.

Sorry if I misread your post. I’ll take a look at the book, if I can find it.

[SpeakersCorner]

@Ohio: I just saw your other post. Made me chuckle. You get it coming and going. Me too.

If the shoe fits= = =

God's economy is to work Himself into us so that we may experience a metabolic process of spiritual digestion and assimilation that produces transformation as a gradual and intrinsic metabolic change in our natural life with the divine life; this is for the building up of the Body of Christ to consummate the New Jerusalem.
Brilliant!!!!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

@Ohio: I just saw your other post. Made me chuckle. You get it coming and going. Me too.

You know what they say about circular firing squads: Better not miss.

—-–

I noticed my 7 point rebuttal to @unregistered just became the “featured post.”
Now I’m really gonna get it.

……………….

Edit: The post by @unregistered, which I responded to, became the “featured post.”
I suppose I could have used a “Grammer Cop” to rescue me.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by manna-man

STG!

I thoroughly enjoyed the whole video. I can understand where he is at and I believe anyone who watches and listens can extrapolate enough content to make a decision IMHO and not remain so ambiguous on the matter.
I realize everybody isn't the same...

I noticed your posts before but have been busy. I'm glad you didn't give up..!

Glad you liked it! Hell is a nuanced topic which was another thing complicated by many inaccurate translations of the word. Then a particular view got institutionalized, as is often the case with various teachings

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Ohio

“Grammer Cop” to rescue me.

Wow, someone remembers my former occupation! Thx.

Btw, I’m not sure what I told you about that Grammar Cop venture but my partner died a few years later trying to rescue a student out of a riptide current off the coast of Costa Rica. The student survived but my friend drowned. It happened one week after I retired from teaching. Was traumatic.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Glad you liked it! Hell is a nuanced topic which was another thing complicated by many inaccurate translations of the word. Then a particular view got institutionalized, as is often the case with various teachings

I believe most Christians are/were like him. Believed the orthodoxy that was passed down by each generation and as he read and considered for himself he realized there was much more to consider and that many in the past were off...but he doesn't go super critical on them. He's more understanding than that knowing that people are in different stages in their walks.
I watched another video this morning on the tribulation. Was just as good!

Peace like a river...

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Wow, someone remembers my former occupation! Thx.

Btw, I’m not sure what I told you about that Grammar Cop venture but my partner died a few years later trying to rescue a student out of a riptide current off the coast of Costa Rica. The student survived but my friend drowned. It happened one week after I retired from teaching. Was traumatic.

God has a special love for those who sacrifice their own life in order to save another.

[manna-man]

"Hypocrisy
Having high moral standards and
falling short of them is NOT
hypocrisy. The Pharisees weren't
genuinely pious men who failed to
live up to their professed piety.
Rather, their piety was a pose, to
fool others. Hypocrisy is when this
false pose is revealed to be what it
is"
Dinesh D'souza

Great quote had to share it...

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by manna-man

I believe most Christians are/were like him. Believed the orthodoxy that was passed down by each generation and as he read and considered for himself he realized there was much more to consider and that many in the past were off...but he doesn't go super critical on them. He's more understanding than that knowing that people are in different stages in their walks.
I watched another video this morning on the tribulation. Was just as good!

Peace like a river...

Yes, I like Steve Gregg's ministry. He has a radio call-in program where he takes all questions and disagreements, and handles them quite thoroughly and with a lot of humbleness. I don't agree with him on all points he makes (good thing agreement isn't the basis of our oneness!), but on most all of the main things he is pretty good. His approach with the hell topic is most exemplary.

[gr8ful]

What is interesting to me is the message that Jesus spoke to the audiences He met. To which audience did he reveal the Ghenna of Fire? In which context did He warn of punishment, dispensational or eternal? Who did He offer hope and salvation to?

This topic makes me think of these questions.

[HERn]

Originally Posted by gr8ful

What is interesting to me is the message that Jesus spoke to the audiences He met. To which audience did he reveal the Ghenna of Fire? In which context did He warn of punishment, dispensational or eternal? Who did He offer hope and salvation to?

This topic makes me think of these questions.

Good questions! Was that a homework assignment, or are going to give us the answers? Or maybe just the scripture references?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by manna-man

"Hypocrisy
Having high moral standards and
falling short of them is NOT
hypocrisy. The Pharisees weren't
genuinely pious men who failed to
live up to their professed piety.
Rather, their piety was a pose, to
fool others. Hypocrisy is when this
false pose is revealed to be what it
is"
Dinesh D'souza

Great quote had to share it...

Note Dinesh D'souza

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by awareness

Note Dinesh D'souza

Great quote huh?
This could apply to many or to all??
Awareness,
Greetings brother long time...

[awareness]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Great quote huh?
This could apply to many or to all??
Awareness,
Greetings brother long time...

Yep, Jr. Long time. Hope all is well.

[manna-man]

References to "Hell" in the Bible
I would like to know how many references are there in the Old and New Testaments to "Hell".

Asked By:
Mary
Concepts of 'hell' in the Bible are varied and complicated.
The answer isn’t as straightforward as we would think.

Remember that the Bible was originally written in Hebrew (the Old Testament) and Greek (the New Testament) with a smattering of Aramaic mixed in. When translators try to bring those ancient languages into English (or whatever modern language) they are often faced with words that don’t have an exact equivalent in the modern language. To deal with that, they try either to use a longer phrase or to bring the original word into the modern language and let us figure it out. The word “Amen” is an example of the latter. The Hebrew word is amen and means “so be it.” But English translators decided that rather than use the longer phrase, they would just import the word, and now the word amen exists on its own in English.

That understanding can help when looking at other words and concepts in the Bible. Like, for instance, “hell.”

In the King James Version of the Bible, the English word “hell” occurs 54 times, 31 in the Old Testament and 23 in the New Testament. However, the underlying words in Hebrew and Greek do not have the same meaning. Those 54 occurrences represent four different words in the original languages and most don’t mean a place of fiery torment for the wicked. Here’s a breakdown.

1. Sheol. All 31 occurrences of the word “hell” used by the KJV in the Old Testament represent the underlying Hebrew word Sheol. That’s a word that doesn’t really have a good English equivalent, since the understanding of death and the afterlife that it represents is an ancient and not a modern idea in Jewish and Christian thought. Some other English translations just pull Sheol right into English (like with the word “amen”) for that reason, especially since the English word “hell” today conjures up a much different meaning.

I talk about the concept of Sheol in another answer on our site, which you can find here: https://www.massbible.org/exploring-...-and-afterlife. The bottom line for Sheol is that it literally meant “the grave pit” and to the degree that they thought there was any kind of afterlife at all (many didn’t) it was just a grey, shadowy existence and was the same destination for the wicked and the righteous as well as the animals. The place of fiery torment for the wicked that we conjure up when we hear the word “hell” is totally absent from the concept of Sheol.

2. Gehenna. Twelve of the NT occurrences of the word “hell” in the KJV are a translation of the Greek word, Gehenna. Those twelve places are Matt. 5:22, Matt. 5:29, Matt. 5:30, Matt. 10:28, Matt. 18:9, Matt. 23:15, Matt. 23:33, Mark 9:45, Mark 9:45, Mark 9:47, Luke 12:5, and James 3:6.

Gehenna is a physical place in this world—a valley just outside the city of Jerusalem. Here’s the Wikipedia page about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gehenna. With a history of child sacrifice in that place, it was thought of as a cursed and eventually became the trash pit for the city, which meant it was constantly burning.

As beliefs about the afterlife evolved (the main topic of that previous question I linked), the thought that God would treat the wicked differently than the righteous after death emerged; and when they searched for a way to describe what could happen to the wicked, there was a handy metaphor just outside the city gates. Throw them on the burning trash heap and let them burn just as the wicked in days gone by had burned innocent children. You might think of it as a more dramatic form of "an eye for an eye.”

So, unlike Sheol, Gehenna is only for the wicked and does represent fiery torment, taken right out of their day-to-day experience with the burning trash outside the city—a fire that never went out.

3. Hades. Ten of the NT occurrences of the word “hell” in the KJV are a translation of the Greek word Hades, which is the name of the Greek god of the underworld. Those ten places are: Matt. 11:23, Matt. 16:18, Luke 10:15, Luke 16:23, Acts 2:27, Acts 2:31, Rev. 1:18, Rev. 6:8, Rev. 20:13, Rev. 20:14. It also shows up translated as simply “grave” in 1 Cor. 15:55.

The word Hades is more like Sheol than it is like Gehenna. By New Testament times, the ideas of the afterlife include different outcomes for the righteous and the wicked so, unlike Sheol, the New Testament doesn’t think everyone goes to Hades. But Hades doesn’t contain the idea of either fire or torment. The different outcomes implied by the word Hades are that the wicked die while the righteous have eternal life. No fire involved—upon death of the body, the soul of the wicked dies too while the soul of the righteous lives.

The only passage above where fire comes in is Rev. 20:14 where both death (thanatos—the death of the physical body) and hell (hades—the death of the soul) are cast into a lake of fire—presumably to cleanse the world of all forms of death so that only life remains.

4. Tartarus. The final word translated as “hell” in the KJV is the word Tartaroo. In Greek mythology, Tartarus was both a primordial deity and a place. The only use of the word in the KJV is in 2 Peter 2:4. This is sort of a Greek equivalent to Gehenna, in that it is a place of torment, although the Greeks didn’t have the burning trash pit to reference so fire isn’t a necessary part of the equation.

Tartarus for the Greeks was deep below Hades and was a place of torment for the worst of the worst—especially those who posed a threat to the gods, although the idea of it also changed across time and the Greek and Roman ideas about it differed slightly. Here’s the Wikipedia article where you can get a sense of it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartar.../wiki/Tartarus.

All of that probably raises more questions than it answers, but it’s helpful to know that the concept of hell in the Bible evolved over time as the Israelites came into contact with (and were conquered by) other empires—especially Greece and Rome.
Author: Anne Robertson

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by manna-man

1. Sheol. All 31 occurrences of the word “hell” used by the KJV in the Old Testament represent the underlying Hebrew word Sheol. That’s a word that doesn’t really have a good English equivalent, since the understanding of death and the afterlife that it represents is an ancient and not a modern idea in Jewish and Christian thought.

All of that probably raises more questions than it answers, but it’s helpful to know that the concept of hell in the Bible evolved over time as the Israelites came into contact with (and were conquered by) other empires—especially Greece and Rome.
Author: Anne Robertson

Anne's stats about the KJV are somewhat accurate, but her interpretations are questionable, esp the bits I quoted. And she neglected to point out that not ALL uses of the word 'Sheol' were translated as "hell". Only the ones for which it was describing a bad guy's fate.

The concept of Sheol did not evolve, at least with the Pharisees. They understood that a resurrection would occur in which one was released from Sheol/Hades. This concept goes all the way back to Job, and is held up in Revelation. Jesus sided with the Pharisees on this point, and so did Paul in his epistles. And so did John.

The Sadducees, on the other hand, were Hellenized to the point where they denied the resurrection, preferring the Greek version of the afterlife, in which there was no resurrection. Only a "good place" and a "bad place".

Jumping ahead to the translation of the KJV, it seems that the Sadducees won most of the war. The English had adopted the heaven/hell model of the afterlife, and thus they conflated the terms 'Sheol/Hades' with 'Gehenna' in their translation, calling them all "hell".

So much for "2000 years of tradition". I am glad we have original texts by which the KJV model is debunked.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by manna-man

References to "Hell" in the Bible
I would like to know how many references are there in the Old and New Testaments to "Hell".

Asked By:
Mary
Concepts of 'hell' in the Bible are varied and complicated.
The answer isn’t as straightforward as we would think.

Nice rundown on hell Jr.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by awareness

Nice rundown on hell Jr.

Cultish thinking begins when people become lazy and put their trust in others that seem/appear to be smarter than themselves hence abandoning all orthodoxy for pseudo peace and comfort.

[manna-man]

For your consideration...
Gary Amirault What the hell is hell poem:

https://youtu.be/dwYLSnX-cdU

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Cultish thinking begins when people become lazy and put their trust in others that seem/appear to be smarter than themselves hence abandoning all orthodoxy for pseudo peace and comfort.

Now there's a quotable quote!

[manna-man]

“For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.”
**Romans‬ *10:10‬ *NIV‬‬

[manna-man]

When we consider this question/definition of hell we do not judge God.
We consider his character and learn more of his righteousness.

If we do not, we remain ignorant of it.

[SpeakersCorner]

My wife and I disagree on this topic of Hell. She contends there has to be more than just disappearance at death. I call it "The Hitler Conundrum." How fair would it be for Hitler to share the same fate as that wonderful old man down the street who served his country, his community, his family, etc. but failed to find Christ in this life?

I know, I know, the "Hell-inistas" here are already screaming, "Stop applying your sense of fairness to the whole situation. READ THE BIBLE!" (You guys remind me of Job's "friends," tbh. But that's a topic for another day.)

So we were out walking the other night and discussing such deep and weighty matters and I solved the whole thing! It was amazing. I'm surprised no one in church history has solved it before. Anyway, here's the solution to the puzzle: Abraham, Lazarus, and the Rich Man. Let's begin:

Luke 16:22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

Pretty stark difference in outcomes already. Lazarus gets an angel uber ride to a pleasant place, the rich man is shoveled into Sheol (the grave). It gets more interesting. The rich man can talk across the chasm that divides the two. Lazarus is sleeping. The rich man then cries out, "Help me, Father Abraham, I'm in torment. Get Lazaurs to dip his finger in water and cool my tongue!"

So here in wherever the rich man is (Sheol? Gehenna? Hades? Hell?), it's curious that 1) he wants water to cool his tongue, 2) he still think he can snap his fingers and Lazarus will have to respond, 3) he's in a "place" he says (I'm skeptical) he wants to warn his brothers about, and 4) he is tormented in "this flame." It's a great story and it has some true justice in it. Watchman Nee said, because real names are used for the characters, it's not an allegory. It's literal. Could be but there are elements that aren't very literal -- like water to cool the tongue of a dead man. At any rate, what we see is not the Lake of Fire because that hasn't even showed up yet in scripture. We see a pre-Hell of some sort. And it's a place of suffering for those who deserve it based on this life.

Lazarus is resting comfortably, awaiting the midnight hour up above when the bridegroom cometh. The rich man is spending a long, horrible, sleepless night of the soul. And Hitler, I'm happy to report, has been suffering in this place for 80 years or so.

There you have it. You're welcome.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

I know, I know, the "Hell-inistas" here are already screaming, "Stop applying your sense of fairness to the whole situation. READ THE BIBLE!" (You guys remind me of Job's "friends," tbh. But that's a topic for another day.)

Slightly off-topic, but many Christian apologists (including C.S. Lewis if I recall correctly) appeal to our innate sense of fairness as one of the moral arguments by which we can reason that a God exists. The very fact that we consider something "just" or "unjust", they would say, points to something outside of us by which justness or unjustness is measured. Even if a society considers something to be okay, say, random murder, we know that it REALLY is not okay, regardless of what that society happens to say, because of our inherent sense of justice/fairness, etc....

I've found numerous times that if something "doesn't sit right" it either means 1) it was taught to me wrong, or 2) I understood it wrong. The Christian demand that "you must forgive everyone" for example......well, obviously that's not fair at all. Anyone can do anything they want to you and YOU are on the hook to forgive them regardless? This fairness imbalance drove me to......read the Bible......and I found out that that's not what the Bible teaches. Our sense of fairness is not a voice we should drown out!

Anyway, back to the topic.

Trapped

[awareness]

Originally Posted by manna-man

When we consider this question/definition of hell we do not judge God.
We consider his character and learn more of his righteousness.

If we do not, we remain ignorant of it.

The question of hell is troubling.

First: We humans have zero standing to judge God.

Second: We can't help questioning the reality of hell. We're all gonna die. And inviably we're going some place for eternity, even with just death.

I suppose we can credit Dante -- for the widely accepted conceptions of hell.

In questioning Dante's conception of hell, it calls into question God's love. Would a loving God really burn someone for eternity, for bad deeds in a short life?

That calls into question God's character and righteousness. and brings God down ... that a all powerful deity couldn't come up with a more loving solution.

Look, I can see why we need a burning hell. Humans can certainly act evil. and we want evil doers to be punished ... some even eternally.

Isn't God love, if anything?

[Timotheist]

This is a snippet from a pretty long article I wrote some number of years ago:

The Three Degrees of Torment

The torment of Hades, the weeping in the Outer Darkness, and the eternal Lake of Fire seem to refer to similar things, but separated in time:

1. Hades -- Refers to the time between death and resurrection.

2. The Outer Darkness -- Refers to the time between the first resurrection and the final judgment after the second resurrection. Thus, this imprisonment will be during the Millennial Kingdom.

3. The Lake of Fire -- The ultimate judgment of the unsaved.

Not only is there a difference in time, but there is also a difference in the degree of punishment.

Just throwing it out there for comments/potshots

[manna-man]

Dear friends.

SpeakersCorner brings up the parable of the rich man and Lazarus.

This was just a story to teach a moral or spiritual principle. If you shop around through different versions, some use the word hell others grave.
Question:
What was the purpose of the parable? Was it to shore up the doctrine of hell or was it to make a point 180° in another direction?

Who was He speaking to and who was he exposing?
And he who's without sin cast the first stone.

Peace like a river...

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

This is a snippet from a pretty long article I wrote some number of years ago:

The Three Degrees of Torment

The torment of Hades, the weeping in the Outer Darkness, and the eternal Lake of Fire seem to refer to similar things, but separated in time:

1. Hades -- Refers to the time between death and resurrection.

2. The Outer Darkness -- Refers to the time between the first resurrection and the final judgment after the second resurrection. Thus, this imprisonment will be during the Millennial Kingdom.

3. The Lake of Fire -- The ultimate judgment of the unsaved.

Not only is there a difference in time, but there is also a difference in the degree of punishment.

Just throwing it out there for comments/potshots

Good insight. In the end, establishing the accurate timeline solves all kinds of problems. Similar to “prophetic telescoping,” the problem many OT prophets had in forseeing Messiah by mixing up the two comings of Christ.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

This is a snippet from a pretty long article I wrote some number of years ago:

The Three Degrees of Torment

The torment of Hades, the weeping in the Outer Darkness, and the eternal Lake of Fire seem to refer to similar things, but separated in time:

1. Hades -- Refers to the time between death and resurrection.

2. The Outer Darkness -- Refers to the time between the first resurrection and the final judgment after the second resurrection. Thus, this imprisonment will be during the Millennial Kingdom.

3. The Lake of Fire -- The ultimate judgment of the unsaved.

Not only is there a difference in time, but there is also a difference in the degree of punishment.

Just throwing it out there for comments/potshots

Torment:
They're many types of torment.
Imagine if you will... standing before an earthly judge for a serious crime. Everything that means anything to you. (YOUR LIFE, LIBERTY ECT...) weighs in the balance.
Until the verdict and judgment against you is made, you are exposed to mental/psychological/concerns/torment.....

Imagine if you will...Standing before God Almighty in all of his splendor knowing you are on the scales of his justice. No hiding, No spinning a false narrative. Just the plain truth and you just observed what happened to the person before you. You've never experienced clarity like you are at that moment. Yeah, you are now being tormented by the reality of the moment and as you come to realize the outcome you weep and nash your teeth in disbelief of your utter foolishness...your mind torments you as you now realize what you chose to forfeit.
Imagine...
There is no need for fire. You've lost everything and just before your lamp is extinguished you gaze at His GLORY!
WHAT A GREAT LOSS!

Ecclesiastes 9:5
King James Version
5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.

Peace like a river....

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Look, I can see why we need a burning hell. Humans can certainly act evil. and we want evil doers to be punished ... some even eternally.

Isn't God love, if anything?

It it the Law of God which judges us, placing us under the curse of the Law. God as the Judge must sentence us based on this Law. Each offense has a debt that must be paid. The love of God allowed another - the sinless Lamb of God - to pay that debt for us. Without faith connecting us to His blood, we are forced to pay our own debts. Obviously some like Hitler have a far greater debt to pay than SC’s wonderful old neighbor who cared for others.

How is the debt of sin paid? Is it by length of time spent in prison? Does pre-sentencing lockup, like the time spent by the rich man, count towards the sentence? Could the amount of pain suffered also count? Could there be other sentencing guidelines available? Would those without faith in the Blood of the Lamb ever finish their sentence, and then get released?

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Ohio

How is the debt of sin paid? Is it by length of time spent in prison? Does pre-sentencing lockup, like the time spent by the rich man, count towards the sentence? Could the amount of pain suffered also count? Could there be other sentencing guidelines available? Would those without faith in the Blood of the Lamb ever finish their sentence, and then get released?

Lotsa good questions there, Ohio. I especially like the idea that there may be a "Time Served" clause in the final judgement. You made a nice distinction too that it is the Law that judges us, not God directly, and that He made a provision not to be judged by it. Years ago when reading Revelation, I got a flash of insight that maybe, just maybe, God wouldn't judge the unbelievers against the Law but against their own words. That is, their own version of the Law. Rev. 20:12-15 triggered this thought:

12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works ... 15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.

So, the dead are judged by things written in "the books." Books? Could this be the books we all write on HOW THINGS SHOULD BE? IOW, our very own self-written Law books? If so, I need the blood of Jesus even more than if the Mosaic Law judges me because, tbh, I've laid down a lot of law on other people, especially other drivers and also Democrats, things Moses had no idea about.

Matthew 7:2 For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you.

I have not done a serious analysis of this idea so I'm sure there are a lot of contradictory verses that could be fired at me. But in terms of fairness, can you create a more just system than having a person judged by their very own standards? The Hypocrisy Law ... that's what it should be called. And isn't hypocrisy the sin Jesus rails on the most in the Sermon on the Mount and throughout the gospels?

It is also quite interesting that, after having been judged by "the books" there is still a chance to avoid the Lake of Fire: another book, the Book of Life. It's a kind of final, doublecheck.

I just finished reading Job and I am fully aware that my sense of justice lacks the big picture that God has seen from when he put the talons on the eagles and the claws on the bears. I am fully willing to be adjusted in my thinking as Job was. But I also, like Jacob, love wrestling with the Great Creator. And I enjoy giving Him my opinion.

[Ohio]

SC, lots to chew on here. In our court system, the Judge has much discretion concerning the judgment of the convicted. How can an unbelieving child with few sins who died tragically at the hands of an unbelieving and murdering psychopath both receive the same sentence — eternity in hell? Who would look at this disparity of justice and confess that God is fair?

And this highlights my basic issues with simplistic “hell theology.” I believe thoroughly, down to the bone, that God is both fair and righteous. His judgments on all will be fair.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

SC, lots to chew on here. In our court system, the Judge has much discretion concerning the judgment of the convicted. How can an unbelieving child with few sins who died tragically at the hands of an unbelieving and murdering psychopath both receive the same sentence — eternity in hell? Who would look at this disparity of justice and confess that God is fair?

And this highlights my basic issues with simplistic “hell theology.” I believe thoroughly, down to the bone, that God is both fair and righteous. His judgments on all will be fair.

To hell with hell.

A gentleman JW, before the pandemic, would knock on my door, and I would get best of him.

I was on the couch working on a computer remotely, in my underwear. I here a car pull up in my driveway. I look out and see 3 JWs coming up to my door. He was bringing a couple of big JW guns. I bust out the door in my underwear, and say, "y'all take all the fun away. You don't believe in hell, so all I can tell you is: go be nothing."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

To hell with hell.

A gentleman JW, before the pandemic, would knock on my door, and I would get best of him.

I was on the couch working on a computer remotely, in my underwear. I here a car pull up in my driveway. I look out and see 3 JWs coming up to my door. He was bringing a couple of big JW guns. I bust out the door in my underwear, and say, "y'all take all the fun away. You don't believe in hell, so all I can tell you is: go be nothing."

What a sight to behold.

Awareness busting out his front door. “My brain will always be there for you,” wearing nothing more than his overnight grungies, “Thinking. So you don’t have to.”

What a scene! Talk about making a good first impression!

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

My wife and I disagree on this topic of Hell. She contends there has to be more than just disappearance at death. I call it "The Hitler Conundrum." How fair would it be for Hitler to share the same fate as that wonderful old man down the street who served his country, his community, his family, etc. but failed to find Christ in this life?

I know, I know, the "Hell-inistas" here are already screaming, "Stop applying your sense of fairness to the whole situation. READ THE BIBLE!" (You guys remind me of Job's "friends," tbh. But that's a topic for another day.)

So we were out walking the other night and discussing such deep and weighty matters and I solved the whole thing! It was amazing. I'm surprised no one in church history has solved it before. Anyway, here's the solution to the puzzle: Abraham, Lazarus, and the Rich Man. Let's begin:

Pretty stark difference in outcomes already. Lazarus gets an angel uber ride to a pleasant place, the rich man is shoveled into Sheol (the grave). It gets more interesting. The rich man can talk across the chasm that divides the two. Lazarus is sleeping. The rich man then cries out, "Help me, Father Abraham, I'm in torment. Get Lazaurs to dip his finger in water and cool my tongue!"

So here in wherever the rich man is (Sheol? Gehenna? Hades? Hell?), it's curious that 1) he wants water to cool his tongue, 2) he still think he can snap his fingers and Lazarus will have to respond, 3) he's in a "place" he says (I'm skeptical) he wants to warn his brothers about, and 4) he is tormented in "this flame." It's a great story and it has some true justice in it. Watchman Nee said, because real names are used for the characters, it's not an allegory. It's literal. Could be but there are elements that aren't very literal -- like water to cool the tongue of a dead man. At any rate, what we see is not the Lake of Fire because that hasn't even showed up yet in scripture. We see a pre-Hell of some sort. And it's a place of suffering for those who deserve it based on this life.

Lazarus is resting comfortably, awaiting the midnight hour up above when the bridegroom cometh. The rich man is spending a long, horrible, sleepless night of the soul. And Hitler, I'm happy to report, has been suffering in this place for 80 years or so.

There you have it. You're welcome.

Ya know, I appreciated this - thanks for posting! In reading various and considering the disposition of souls after physical death a bit, this seems to sum things up best for me - whatever "hell" is, it won't be good and is to be avoided at all costs! This instance of Lazarus and the rich man is a good example of that. I often tend to pick apart scriptural stories like this trying and find some "deeper meaning." But right on the surface is perhaps the main thing - there will be just retribution and it won't be pleasant at all!

And after reading the book I mentioned before on the subject (dare I say a seminal work by Steve Gregg?), I also have a much more nuanced view of hell than the commonly held traditional view of eternal, conscious torment idea I held before. So there are passages about souls perishing that seem to suggest total annihilation, and other places where it seems there is some additional chance given, and of course places where the lake of fire is given as a final destiny. So which of these views is correct? I suspect all three may be to some degree . . . in any case I know the scriptures are true - it's just our understanding that is short of clarity.

And I do know that no one will be able to point a finger at God and accuse Him of handling souls unrighteously. So is it annihilation or universalism or eternal torment or a compination of these? Hard to say for sure, but this I know, He loves us and HE'S GOT THIS!

(BTW - I'm coming to think that total universalism is definitely taking things too far, as there are clearly at least some who wind-up in the lake of fire. And if annhilation is the final solution for some souls, what did the ones who deserve eternal torment do to receive that instead of being annhilated? This is way above my pay grade I think . . .)

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Ya know, I appreciated this - thanks for posting! In reading various and considering the disposition of souls after physical death a bit, this seems to sum things up best for me - whatever "hell" is, it won't be good and is to be avoided at all costs! This instance of Lazarus and the rich man is a good example of that. I often tend to pick apart scriptural stories like this trying and find some "deeper meaning." But right on the surface is perhaps the main thing - there will be just retribution and it won't be pleasant at all!

And after reading the book I mentioned before on the subject (dare I say a seminal work by Steve Gregg?), I also have a much more nuanced view of hell than the commonly held traditional view of eternal, conscious torment idea I held before. So there are passages about souls perishing that seem to suggest total annihilation, and other places where it seems there is some additional chance given, and of course places where the lake of fire is given as a final destiny. So which of these views is correct? I suspect all three may be to some degree . . . in any case I know the scriptures are true - it's just our understanding that is short of clarity.

And I do know that no one will be able to point a finger at God and accuse Him of handling souls unrighteously. So is it annihilation or universalism or eternal torment or a compination of these? Hard to say for sure, but this I know, He loves us and HE'S GOT THIS!

(BTW - I'm coming to think that total universalism is definitely taking things too far, as there are clearly at least some who wind-up in the lake of fire. And if annhilation is the final solution for some souls, what did the ones who deserve eternal torment do to receive that instead of being annhilated? This is way above my pay grade I think . . .)

STG,

It's not above your pay grade. That's an excuse for not making a decision. We were brave enough to make a decision on the LC and we acted on that decision and left it.
Could it be some are afraid to discern good from evil?
Are we afraid to speak what is true?
Peace to you STG!

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by manna-man

STG,

It's not above your pay grade. That's an excuse for not making a decision. We were brave enough to make a decision on the LC and we acted on that decision and left it.
Could it be some are afraid to discern good from evil?
Are we afraid to speak what is true?
Peace to you STG!

Not at all. What I was referring to was the judgment of a soul's eternal disposition. That is, I see that as unique to the Judge of all.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Not at all. What I was referring to was the judgment of a soul's eternal disposition. That is, I see that as unique to the Judge of all.

Oh. I see.

I'm only trying to help people connect the dots concerning this matter.
We find it easy to find fault on the LC and speak the truth in love and rightfully so. We have the ability to see, understand and make rightful judgements based upon experience yet are afraid to recognize and call out what is painfully obvious.

In the parable of the prodigal we learn of a wayward sons heart and the Father's heart concerning his son. The matter was that his son was lost. Now, when his son came to his senses and returned well... we know the rest of the story. His son was in danger of destruction/Annihilation. (Not minimizing death whatsoever)
If his son was in danger of eternal torment, you think that would've made the situation more desperate?
This is about God's character more than it is about anything else.
The first warning of death was early on in Genesis.
Much later on death is morphed into something more than judgement/justice.
It is morphed into cruelty which if you and I were angry, nothing could justify us being cruel. That's just a matter of fact.
Sheol/Hades is the grave it's as simple as that.
Otherwise whoever accepts eternal torment IMHO is willing to accept something less of God's character.
Making him less.
This is unacceptable.

Peace

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Sheol/Hades is the grave it's as simple as that

I disagree. Sheol is the grave but Hades is a realm of dead. In Greek mythology its lord is Hades himself. Lost souls wander in the area just outside it. Hades himself is ruler, a cold and stern ruler whose main job is to keep the dead souls in. This is not Sheol which is simply the grave.

Jesus gave Hades as a real place credence telling Peter "The gates of Hades shall not prevail against [the church]." It is possible He was merely appropriating Greek/Roman imagery but that is unlikely. I have read that when Jesus spoke these words in Caesaurea/Phillip, He was actually quite close to a place where locals believed the mouth of Hades was. (I just confirmed that with a quick google search.)

The Rich man/Lazarus story also shows Hades to be a place of activity, definitely not the dark emptiness of Sheol.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

I disagree. Sheol is the grave but Hades is a realm of dead. In Greek mythology its lord is Hades himself. Lost souls wander in the area just outside it. Hades himself is ruler, a cold and stern ruler whose main job is to keep the dead souls in. This is not Sheol which is simply the grave.

Jesus gave Hades as a real place credence telling Peter "The gates of Hades shall not prevail against [the church]." It is possible He was merely appropriating Greek/Roman imagery but that is unlikely. I have read that when Jesus spoke these words in Caesaurea/Phillip, He was actually quite close to a place where locals believed the mouth of Hades was. (I just confirmed that with a quick google search.)

The Rich man/Lazarus story also shows Hades to be a place of activity, definitely not the dark emptiness of Sheol.

The parable of the rich man/Lazarus was a story painting a picture of Israel/jews and Gentliles...

Too much credence of mythology

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Too much credence of mythology

Again, I disagree. G. H. Pember in the early parts of his book "Earth's Earliest Ages" made a very interesting point about mythology. He said the Greek myth about creation is the exact inverse of the Hebrew story. The Hebrew story is 1) God created 2) the heavens and the earth and then 3) the earth became chaotic. The Greek version of creation goes like this: 1) Chaos reigned and then 2) the heavens and earth emerged from which sprang 3) the gods.

When I first encountered that decades ago I was teaching mythology to high schoolers. I had a very religious student who objected to my even teaching it, her mother called the school, we had a meeting, the mother vs. the school (sounds like today, eh?) and the entire humanities department was there facing this strong woman. I was the only one who sympathized with her viewpoint. I remember telling her (and the group) "I understand where you're coming from. I too believe Greek mythology isn't merely fanciful stories, that they have a root in truth that is much deeper. But I think it's good to know this version of events." I didn't go full throttle on my view that these myths are Satan's version of events, Satan depicted for the most part by Zeus, the king of the gods, the rest of the Oympians being his fallen angel cohort. I was a young teacher and didn't want to be totally ostracized. We concluded the meeting by agreeing that her daughter did not need to take part in the unit I was teaching.

I have not changed my views. The Satanic way is to invert whatever God said. God's first commandment, "Be fruitful and multiply" is the first thing Satan wanted to invert. His tactic was to divide Adam from Eve, to stop procreation before it started. He failed.

So toss off Greek mythology as fanciful stories if you want: I don't. And Jesus didn't either.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Again, I disagree. G. H. Pember in the early parts of his book "Earth's Earliest Ages" made a very interesting point about mythology. He said the Greek myth about creation is the exact inverse of the Hebrew story. The Hebrew story is 1) God created 2) the heavens and the earth and then 3) the earth became chaotic. The Greek version of creation goes like this: 1) Chaos reigned and then 2) the heavens and earth emerged from which sprang 3) the gods.

Yes, I remember that from Pember's book. He went into the legends and mythologies from several ancient civilizations, showing that there were certain commonalities to most all of them. One idea present in many myths was something about a great flood or catastrophe that wiped everything out. Of course, since these myths weren't an accounting from God's word, they had a slant on them.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Ya know, I appreciated this - thanks for posting! In reading various and considering the disposition of souls after physical death a bit, this seems to sum things up best for me - whatever "hell" is, it won't be good and is to be avoided at all costs! This instance of Lazarus and the rich man is a good example of that. I often tend to pick apart scriptural stories like this trying and find some "deeper meaning." But right on the surface is perhaps the main thing - there will be just retribution and it won't be pleasant at all!

I know that most of those preaching about this story like to assure us that Lazarus was saved because he believed and the rich man suffered because he did not, BUT … that is NOT the primary message here.

As StG says, the primary takeaway, which any normal reader would ascertain at first perusal is that selfish rich people who have a good life now will “get it” later, and that poor suffering people today will get rewarded with blessings in the afterlife.

Am I wrong?

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Am I wrong?

You’re not wrong. It’s almost a karma teaching. I think Jesus was messing with the Pharisees in telling this tale, both the Pharisees of his day and ours. Also, how curious it is that Jesus names one of the dead men Lazarus. We readers know about another Lazarus who would visit the realm of the dead for four days. But Jesus’ audience then had no idea. Was Jesus setting up for that moment?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

You’re not wrong. It’s almost a karma teaching. I think Jesus was messing with the Pharisees in telling this tale, both the Pharisees of his day and ours. Also, how curious it is that Jesus names one of the dead men Lazarus. We readers know about another Lazarus who would visit the realm of the dead for four days. But Jesus’ audience then had no idea. Was Jesus setting up for that moment?

Nice find. Perhaps Lazarus (Laz-are-us?) was a forerunner in paradise (Hades?) for the coming Christ, as John the Baptist was before the ministry of Christ. Imagine the news spreading in Hades (both regions) when Lazarus suddenly disappears? We do know that the news of the resurrection of Lazarus in Jerusalem ignited the Psalm Sunday grand arrival of Jesus, the King of the Jews.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

I disagree. Sheol is the grave but Hades is a realm of dead. In Greek mythology its lord is Hades himself. Lost souls wander in the area just outside it. Hades himself is ruler, a cold and stern ruler whose main job is to keep the dead souls in. This is not Sheol which is simply the grave.

Jesus gave Hades as a real place credence telling Peter "The gates of Hades shall not prevail against [the church]." It is possible He was merely appropriating Greek/Roman imagery but that is unlikely. I have read that when Jesus spoke these words in Caesaurea/Phillip, He was actually quite close to a place where locals believed the mouth of Hades was. (I just confirmed that with a quick google search.)

Interesting backgrounder to this amazing Gospel story. I found this article which expounds on your very point.

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Nice find. Perhaps Lazarus (Laz-are-us?) was a forerunner in paradise (Hades?) for the coming Christ, as John the Baptist was before the ministry of Christ. Imagine the news spreading in Hades (both regions) when Lazarus suddenly disappears? We do know that the news of the resurrection of Lazarus in Jerusalem ignited the Psalm Sunday grand arrival of Jesus, the King of the Jews.

Hm. That's a thought worth pursuing. The lord of Hades -- that is, Hades himself -- had one main job: to keep people in Hades. Losing Lazarus (the brother of Mary and Martha) would have been a failure on his part. Zeus might've said to his brother, "I give you ONE JOB to do and you can't do it." What Zeus wouldn't realize until a bit later was the situation was about to get far worse. When Jesus resurrects, many tombs were opened and "Lazaruses" came forth.

There really is a lot of mystery which is unsolved. But I enjoy speculating. And sometimes such speculations yield food to my soul.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Hm. That's a thought worth pursuing. The lord of Hades -- that is, Hades himself -- had one main job: to keep people in Hades. Losing Lazarus (the brother of Mary and Martha) would have been a failure on his part. Zeus might've said to his brother, "I give you ONE JOB to do and you can't do it." What Zeus wouldn't realize until a bit later was the situation was about to get far worse. When Jesus resurrects, many tombs were opened and "Lazaruses" came forth.

There really is a lot of mystery which is unsolved. But I enjoy speculating. And sometimes such speculations yield food to my soul.

Agreed. In the LC I grew so weary of missing the plain words of scripture and always looking for some hidden significance, which only the "ministry" could provide. Speculations are great. I call them "hunches." I love to get a "hunch" about something, and then go digging in the Word for corroboration. Sometimes I end up on a dead end road, and sometimes I find something new. Either way, there is so much benefit just in the "digging."

I find it interesting that there is some fallen power keeping the gate of Hades. I believe one day the structured hierarchy of the kingdom of darkness may be revealed to us. Perhaps we will learn which among the principalities have been fired for failures and which ones promoted for successes. The one who recently devised "wokeness" surely got a promotion.

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Agreed. In the LC I grew so weary of missing the plain words of scripture and always looking for some hidden significance, which only the "ministry" could provide.

So, so true. I think the LC appealed to a lot of guys because men like hidden meanings more than women. We like prophecy, we like having the Big Picture view, we like answers. And to be sure, the Bible is replete with symbols, parables, allegories, cryptic passages, strange numbers with hidden significances. 666 comes to mind. The book of Lamentations has a built-in acrostic. Jesus compared himself to the manna, the bronze serpent of the OT. Nathan told David a fake story to catch him in his own "virtue." Revelations is a book of "signs."

But the Bible is also a book of poetry, history, narrative, simple teaching, regulations, epistles ... it's got it all. I came out of the Baptist camp so the LC was just another step in figuring it all out. I think (and remember, I'm a defender of W. Lee in most respects) Lee tried to avoid emphasizing this side of the Christian life, the analytical/puzzle/truth side, by adding the word "Life" to his studies. It didn't work, at least as far as I can tell. A kind of life did develop but it was as narrow and, tbh, boring as any Baptist product.

As I age (I'm approaching the big 7-0) I yearn to know Christ in a fresh, quick, living, to the point way, to semi-quote someone in the vicinity. I feel like Jacob returning to Bethel, this time with a lot of wrinkles and scars.

[Zezima]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Agreed. In the LC I grew so weary of missing the plain words of scripture and always looking for some hidden significance, which only the "ministry" could provide.

I don’t have anything to contribute to the topic of this thread, but this statement really resonated. It’s so freeing to just read the word as is.

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

I disagree. Sheol is the grave but Hades is a realm of dead. In Greek mythology its lord is Hades himself. Lost souls wander in the area just outside it. Hades himself is ruler, a cold and stern ruler whose main job is to keep the dead souls in. This is not Sheol which is simply the grave.

Jesus gave Hades as a real place credence telling Peter "The gates of Hades shall not prevail against [the church]." It is possible He was merely appropriating Greek/Roman imagery but that is unlikely. I have read that when Jesus spoke these words in Caesaurea/Phillip, He was actually quite close to a place where locals believed the mouth of Hades was. (I just confirmed that with a quick google search.)

The Rich man/Lazarus story also shows Hades to be a place of activity, definitely not the dark emptiness of Sheol.

Sheol’ in the Hebrew was translated as ‘Hades’ in the LXX.

To the reader of the LXX, Hades was Sheol. Sheol was Hades. Your assertion that they are different does not hold up given this simple fact.

The ‘gates of Sheol’ simply referred to the fact that no one leaves Sheol apart from Him who has the keys.

Mixing in Greek mythology came later. The idea that there is a ruler over Hades whose job is to keep souls is from Greek myths. Yet many of us, if not most of us, think of the Gates of Sheol as referring to Satan’s kingdom.

Yet this doctrine cannot hold up using scripture.

Earlier in this thread it was suggested that Hell was Satan’s kingdom. I challenged that statement but got no response.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

Sheol’ in the Hebrew was translated as ‘Hades’ in the LXX.

To the reader of the LXX,
Hades was Sheol. Sheol was Hades. Your assertion that they are different does not hold up given this simple fact.

The ‘gates of Sheol’ simply referred to the fact that no one leaves Sheol apart from Him who has the keys.

Mixing in Greek mythology came later. The idea that there is a ruler over Hades whose job is to keep souls is from Greek myths. Yet many of us, if not most of us, think of the Gates of Sheol as referring to Satan’s kingdom.

Yet this doctrine cannot hold up using scripture.

Earlier in this thread it was suggested that Hell was Satan’s kingdom. I challenged that statement but got no response.

Timotheist,
I love your points of view.

The Greek culture had a profound affect on the Jewish People.
It's pretty clear that Israel's rebellion created their exile and in that exile the adoption of superstitious concepts were a consequence.
Christians beware!
What's good for the goose is good for the gander...

Do people believe there are actual gates to hell? :-)

Peace

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

To the reader of the LXX, Hades was Sheol. Sheol was Hades. Your assertion that they are different does not hold up given this simple fact.

You are correct. I am recalibrating my thoughts because I mistakenly thought of sheol as merely the grave. I believe I mistook sheol for gehenna. I withdraw my original point to which you objected until I have time to rethink/research it.

Thanks for the input.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Do people believe there are actual gates to hell?

People believe all kinds of crazy things.

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Timotheist,
I love your points of view.

The Greek culture had a profound affect on the Jewish People.
It's pretty clear that Israel's rebellion created their exile and in that exile the adoption of superstitious concepts were a consequence.
Christians beware!
What's good for the goose is good for the gander...

Do people believe there are actual gates to hell? :-)

Peace

I admittedly rushed the part about the "Greek stuff coming later."

Hellenization ran rampant through Judaism for hundreds of years BC, creating all kinds of crazy variants of "scripture". The job of the canonizers was to identify and remove Greek-influenced texts from the Bible.

Did they do a perfect job? No. Ecclesiastes probably should have been discarded, along with parts of Proverbs.

And when Jesus said "Sophia is justified by her children", it makes me pause and wonder if He really said that. But, He was probably being sarcastic, and we need an emoji indicating that in the Greek.

I used to take issue with Luke's story about Lazarus and the rich man. First point: Hades is the term used for the place the rich man is in, whereas Sheol is generally described as the place where ALL the dead go until resurrection. So where did Lazarus go? Was Luke Hellenized to the point of believing in a heaven/hell afterlife apart from the resurrection?

So here is where I am at today in my research. In Revelation, at the second resurrection, it says, "The sea (Abyss) gave up the dead in it, and Death and Hades gave up the dead in them." This points to three areas containing dead things.

Luke's story also describes three areas: "Bosom of Abraham", Hades, and a gulf separating them.

OT justification of the three part Sheol? Ezekiel 31:

I6 made the nations tremble at the sound of its fall when I brought it down to the grave with those who go down to the pit. Then all the trees of Eden, the choicest and best of Lebanon, all the trees that were well-watered, were consoled in the earth below.
17
Those who lived in its shade, its allies among the nations, had also gone down to the grave with it, joining those killed by the sword.
18
"`Which of the trees of Eden can be compared with you in splendor and majesty? Yet you, too, will be brought down with the trees of Eden to the earth below; you will lie among the uncircumcised, with those killed by the sword. "`This is Pharaoh and all his hordes, declares the Sovereign LORD.'"

This passage mentions a well-watered area of comfort for some, and a place for the "uncircumcised" for the others. And there is also a "pit" mentioned.

So right now I tend toward believing that the term Sheol was subdivided into three areas, with "Hades" describing the second area instead of the whole thing. Why was this done? Maybe the answer is simple: Judea adapted to the usage of the Greek words "Hades" and "Abyss".

So going back to Luke, I have to admit that I still question Luke's description of Hades as a fiery torment. Why cannot it simply be a "dry" place, without "comfort"?

[manna-man]

Why can't they just be asleep like Lazarus?

Torment doesn't have to be literal pain. Fear is a type of torment...but still, scrub the whiteboard and go back to Genesis where we first learn of death then keep it simple unless you discover something more concrete than pseudo-faith sown into a once pure language/narrative/culture.

Peace

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

The job of the canonizers was to identify and remove Greek-influenced texts from the Bible.
Did they do a perfect job? No. Ecclesiastes probably should have been discarded, along with parts of Proverbs.

At the risk of sounding a bit flippant (UntoHim flippant...say it ain't so!) what renowned, reputable seminary or school of higher learning did you hear that "The job of the canonizers was to identify and remove Greek-influenced texts from the Bible"?

So I'm guessing you subscribe to the Thomas Jefferson view of the Scriptures....simply pull out your trusty razor and scissors and cut out the parts that you don't like. Timotheist, do you realize how dangerous this sounds? Where do you get off telling us what "probably should have been discarded"? I would expect much more cautious and temperate things from you.

Yes, some of the Jews were influenced by the Greco-Roman/Hellenistic culture and society around them, but do you really think that God would chose those who were most influenced, or those who were lest influenced to produce the Scriptures? Think about that.
-

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

At the risk of sounding a bit flippant (UntoHim flippant...say it ain't so!) what renowned, reputable seminary or school of higher learning did you hear that "The job of the canonizers was to identify and remove Greek-influenced texts from the Bible"?

So I'm guessing you subscribe to the Thomas Jefferson view of the Scriptures....simply pull out your trusty razor and scissors and cut out the parts that you don't like. Timotheist, do you realize how dangerous this sounds? Where do you get off telling us what "probably should have been discarded"? I would expect much more cautious and temperate things from you.

Yes, some of the Jews were influenced by the Greco-Roman/Hellenistic culture and society around them, but do you really think that God would chose those who were most influenced, or those who were lest influenced to produce the Scriptures? Think about that.
-

Dear brother Untohim,

It could be said that the renowned schools that you refer too and prolific teachers like Darby and others had a profound effect on the steering/teaching and adding to the gospel narrative.
(Such as the word hell and the imagery it paints on/in the brain...)

Shalom

[UntoHim]

Maybe you could refresh my memory, beloved brother manna-man, but I don't believe it was Darby or any seminary professor that brought us the following imagery:

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. Matthew 13:41,42

Are you in the school of thought that says that Jesus never said anything about the "fiery furnace"? I hope not. The actual anglicized word "hell" is not as important as the reality of what the Lord Jesus warned about in Matthew 13. Whatever anglicized word you use is of little consequence compared to the reality that there will be a final judgment. And there WILL BE weeping and there WILL BE gnashing of teeth. And those who will find themselves in this place will be without excuse, for "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life". This is the Gospel message that was preached by the Lord Jesus, the Scripture writing apostles and the earliest of Christian believers, teachers and scholars.

Shalom to you as well
-

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

At the risk of sounding a bit flippant (UntoHim flippant...say it ain't so!) what renowned, reputable seminary or school of higher learning did you hear that "The job of the canonizers was to identify and remove Greek-influenced texts from the Bible"?

-

You may not like it, but that is exactly what they did! There was lots of junk written during the Greek period, and most of that was discounted as spurious.

The Apocryphal books are "the best of the worst", and even those we do not take as canon.

But keep in mind that the writers of the NT did not have a "canon". Jude cited Apocrypha in his opening verses. So what should we do with Jude?

In the epistle of Barnabus, he used the Phoenix as proof of the resurrection, as if the Phoenix was not a myth. Thank God that book was left out of the canon.

There are numerous examples of this, so I feel VERY justified in identifying those passages.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Maybe you could refresh my memory, beloved brother manna-man, but I don't believe it was Darby or any seminary professor that brought us the following imagery:

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. Matthew 13:41,42

Are you in the school of thought that says that Jesus never said anything about the "fiery furnace"? I hope not. The actual anglicized word "hell" is not as important as the reality of what the Lord Jesus warned about in Matthew 13. Whatever anglicized word you use is of little consequence compared to the reality that there will be a final judgment. And there WILL BE weeping and there WILL BE gnashing of teeth. And those who will find themselves in this place will be without excuse, for "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life". This is the Gospel message that was preached by the Lord Jesus, the Scripture writing apostles and the earliest of Christian believers, teachers and scholars.

Shalom to you as well
-

Untohim,

Nobody ever claimed nor made an assertion that there will be no final judgment or that the elements of fire wouldn't be used ever.

My point from the beginning was always [Eternal Torment] this anglicized word i don't use but dismiss for the use of it does have MAJOR consequence and effect on those who use it and abuse it.

I hope that emotions don't get the best of us here and I also hope as well that we can remain open for the discussion/fellowship.

Peace

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Timotheist, do you realize how dangerous this sounds?

UntoHim,

Your argument for a fiery Hell is well-taken but why demean the arguments of others as "Dangerous"? Timotheist is giving his view based on what seems to be a lot of study. This isn't dangerous at all.

What is dangerous, to me anyway, is the idea that we are not permitted by the guardians of truth to use our minds. Isn't that kind of your beef with the LR anyway, UntoHim ... that WL and his cohort shut up all debate?

SC

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Nobody ever claimed nor made an assertion that there will be no final judgment or that the elements of fire wouldn't be used ever.

I didn't say, nor even faintly imply that you made such an assertion. Please read my posts a little more carefully!

My point from the beginning was always [Eternal Torment] this anglicized word i don't use but dismiss for the use of it does have MAJOR consequence and effect on those who use it and abuse it.

If you don't like the way certain words/terms have been used in the English translations then may I suggest that you go get yourself a PHD in the biblical languages, get yourself appointed to a bonafide, reputable translation team and make a difference, my man!

You know what has MAJOR consequences? When people try to change the actual words/terms used by the Lord Jesus and the Scripture writing apostles. This is dangerous. It is not a light thing to change, or even water down the Holy Scriptures to make them comport with our human sentiments. As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” Do you know that there are some "modern" translators/interpreters who want to change this to read "Jacob I loved, but Esau I have loved less". My friends, this is exactly what some have tried to do with this issue of "hell".

I hope that emotions don't get the best of us here and I also hope as well that we can remain open for the discussion/fellowship.

Agreed.
-

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Your argument for a fiery Hell is well-taken but why demean the arguments of others as "Dangerous"?

I'm not arguing for anything, much less a "fiery Hell". I simply quoted a verse, and this verse stands in stark contrast to some of the claims being made on this thread. Nothing more, nothing less.

Timotheist is giving his view based on what seems to be a lot of study. This isn't dangerous at all.

Witness Lee claimed the same thing for himself. Some of Lee's teachings are among the most dangerous out there. Nuff said on that for now.

What is dangerous, to me anyway, is the idea that we are not permitted by the guardians of truth to use our minds. Isn't that kind of your beef with the LR anyway, UntoHim ... that WL and his cohort shut up all debate?

Who has asked anyone not to use their minds? Please point me to the thread and post number and I'll deal with that pronto! In the meantime, don't look now, but I think you're debating right now! Just sayin....
-

[Sons to Glory!]

Our little group is now covering Revelation 9 & 10, and yesterday a brother spoke about the wrath of God being poured out on mankind in this section of scripture. (We believers know that Jesus took the wrath of God for us, and people just need to look to Him and accept this Free Gift to escape God's wrath.) However, after experiencing many woeful calamities - clearly sent by God - in these chapters, it says men will refuse to repent!

What struck me from that was this: if people won't repent after experiencing these things, then will will it take?! That is, what more can God do? I have to say that after considering these things in this light, the "needle" moved away from universalism or annhilationism a pretty fair degree - if people are so stiff-necked after these extremely humbling things, then God will have no choice. He already has the right to kill those who sin, but in love, He poured His wrath on His Son, and now we must accept the Lamb's sacrifice.

And even the judgments in Revelation are a mercy, as I believe many will be saved as the "heat" is turned up in tribulation. But it also shows that some will harden themselves all the more. What a dangerous thing - there is a Lake of Fire prepared for the devil and his angels, but scripture is clear that some people will wind up there. Lord Jesus! Some very unpleasant things must be done by God, and He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. (Ezekiel 18:23)

[SpeakersCorner]

The best argument to me against annihilationism is this: (read in the seductive, hoarse whispers of the serpent-inhabitor):

"Hey sinner man ... stop worrying about your sins. Go ahead, eat that entire pizza, smoke that cigarette, cheat on your wife, enjoy life. Because in the end, you die. Period. You just disappear like soap bubble meeting a pin. None of it matters. So eat, drink, and be merry. Because that's all there is."

[manna-man]

The Rich man and Lazarus
.https://youtu.be/M4a0GlVf2No

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

I'm not arguing for anything, much less a "fiery Hell" … In the meantime, don't look now, but I think you're debating right now! Just sayin....
-

Concerning the “fiery Hell” comment, I read between the lines. It’s my gift.

As for the debating bit, touché. You win that point but I’ll be back. You know I will.

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

If you don't like the way certain words/terms have been used in the English translations then may I suggest that you go get yourself a PHD in the biblical languages, get yourself appointed to a bonafide, reputable translation team and make a difference, my man!

We have two such translations that I am aware of: YLT and the NASB. There are others, but I have not studied them. They both chose to retain the names "Sheol", "Hades", and "Gehenna". The NASB has the word 'hell' in there once and only once, but it is used in place of none of these words. (that is the subject for another day).

Originally Posted by UntoHim

You know what has MAJOR consequences? When people try to change the actual words/terms used by the Lord Jesus and the Scripture writing apostles. This is dangerous. It is not a light thing to change, or even water down the Holy Scriptures to make them comport with our human sentiments. As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” Do you know that there are some "modern" translators/interpreters who want to change this to read "Jacob I loved, but Esau I have loved less". My friends, this is exactly what some have tried to do with this issue of "hell".

Originally Posted by UntoHim

And who has done this? I have not. I dare say I am sticking to the real word more than you.

And BTW, I am still waiting to hear your defense, using the scriptures, that Hell is Satan's kingdom.

Good luck.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

The best argument to me against annihilationism is this: (read in the seductive, hoarse whispers of the serpent-inhabitor):

"Hey sinner man ... stop worrying about your sins. Go ahead, eat that entire pizza, smoke that cigarette, cheat on your wife, enjoy life. Because in the end, you die. Period. You just disappear like soap bubble meeting a pin. None of it matters. So eat, drink, and be merry. Because that's all there is."

To be fair to the annilationist view, there is the thought there may be some recompense exacted before the soul is annhilated.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

The best argument to me against annihilationism is this: (read in the seductive, hoarse whispers of the serpent-inhabitor):

"Hey sinner man ... stop worrying about your sins. Go ahead, eat that entire pizza, smoke that cigarette, cheat on your wife, enjoy life. Because in the end, you die. Period. You just disappear like soap bubble meeting a pin. None of it matters. So eat, drink, and be merry. Because that's all there is."

Greetings brother SC.

Many may think they're fooling God but they'll find out they've only fooled themselves and to their horror. The weeping and nashing will not be from pain but from sorrow and horror of the the fate before them.

Why not pain? Look deeper into the phrase weeping and nashing....

Peace dear brother

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

To be fair to the annilationist view, there is the thought there may be some recompense exacted before the soul is annhilated.

Good Morning STG!

What would be fair would be getting to the bottom of whether eternal torment is actually true and if it's not exposing it for what it is.

Having said that, if eternal torment is false what could that mean? Would that mean Gods character was attacked and what would be the purpose of the deception?

Turning the good news into bad news?

If we could answer these questions, I'm sure we'd get right up on the answer.

The attack is on the good news...to make it bad news and smear God with one stone/false doctrine....

Peace beloved!

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Good Morning STG!

What would be fair would be getting to the bottom of whether eternal torment is actually true and if it's not exposing it for what it is.

As I mentioned earlier, after going over Revelation 9 where much wrath is poured out on unbelievers and they would not repent (vs 20-21), I was wondering what could possibly be done to save them? God sends His own Son to die in their place and they won't accept; so He pours out much wrath and they still won't repent. So what more can be done?! They have a free will, and God must give them over to their decision not to agree with Him.

What's left after that for God to do?

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

As I mentioned earlier, after going over Revelation 9 where much wrath is poured out on unbelievers and they would not repent (vs 20-21), I was wondering what could possibly be done to save them? God sends His own Son to die in their place and they won't accept; so He pours out much wrath and they still won't repent. So what more can be done?! They have a free will, and God must give them over to their decision not to agree with Him.

What's left after that for God to do?

The death penalty is all that's left for those who chose to forfeit their lives...
And then the New Heaven and New Earth! Hallelujah!
Sin and Death ARE NO MORE!
https://youtu.be/sREHwiffaho

[SpeakersCorner]

Mark Twain in his last work let his central character argue, IMO, Twain's argument against Christianity, God, and Hell. How would you answer him from this crucial passage:

“A God who could make good children as easily a bad, yet preferred to make bad ones; who could have made every one of them happy, yet never made a single happy one; who made them prize their bitter life, yet stingily cut it short; who gave his angels eternal happiness unearned, yet required his other children to earn it; who gave is angels painless lives, yet cursed his other children with biting miseries and maladies of mind and body; who mouths justice, and invented hell--mouths mercy, and invented hell--mouths Golden Rules and forgiveness multiplied by seventy times seven, and invented hell; who mouths morals to other people, and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, then tries to shuffle the responsibility for man's acts upon man, instead of honorably placing it where it belongs, upon himself; and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites his poor abused slave to worship him!”
― Mark Twain, The Mysterious Stranger

[Timotheist]

19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” 20 On the contrary, who are you, you foolish person, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? 21 Or does the potter not have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one object for honorable use, and another for common use? 22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with great patience objects of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon objects of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory.

posted without comment...

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Mark Twain in his last work let his central character argue, IMO, Twain's argument against Christianity, God, and Hell. How would you answer him from this crucial passage:

Matt 25.41 says that hell, really the lake of fire, was uniquely prepared for the devil and his angels. No man should go there because, since the transgression of Adam and Eve, God has prepared a Savior, His own Son, to pay the price of any and all sins committed by their descendants. Man's only requirement was to believe.

Twain's comments take on a variation of the POE, which we had discussed on this forum for several years. The POE, the Problem of Evil, is a philosophical argument designed to prove that God cannot exist. The basic argument is this: Since God is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good, evil by definition cannot exist. The logic is flawed since God has created, not "good happy robot children," but all creation with a free will, including mankind, the angelic race, etc.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” 20 On the contrary, who are you, you foolish person, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? 21 Or does the potter not have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one object for honorable use, and another for common use? 22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with great patience objects of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon objects of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory.

posted without comment...

Paul's Epistle to the Romans, chapter 9

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Twain's comments take on a variation of the POE, which we had discussed on this forum for several years. The POE, the Problem of Evil, is a philosophical argument designed to prove that God cannot exist. The basic argument is this: Since God is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good, evil by definition cannot exist. The logic is flawed since God has created, not "good happy robot children," but all creation with a free will, including mankind, the angelic race, etc.

Exactly. These kids of arguments show a basic misunderstanding of how God created man - as a free agent, but with accountability. And then there is a misunderstanding of what the fall entailed - much was delegated to man by God, but man chose unwisely. Therefore all that had been delegated to man collapsed and now we have this cesspool we live in. And with the Free Gift of grace, we can make a choice to go in the saving direction He's intended for us. Twain appears wise with this statement, but . . .

Also, I find the verses in Romans 9 interesting in that they say, "What if God [created] vessels of wrath?" Am I wrong to observe that it doesn't say He did this, but only asking the philosophical "what if?" That is, as God He has the right, but not that He actually did this. Maybe I'm off here and please correct if I am.

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” 20 On the contrary, who are you, you foolish person, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? 21 Or does the potter not have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one object for honorable use, and another for common use? 22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with great patience objects of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon objects of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory.

posted without comment...

Paul here is echoing what God said to Job. From one angle this is undeniably true: the creator can do anything he likes with his creation. A puppet-maker can make a dummy with fixed eyes that only look at the ventriloquist. This is TRUE. I AGREE TOTALLY! I WILL NOT DENY THIS! IT IS VERY TRUE THAT I, A FRAIL AND HUMBLE MAN (WELL, IN THEORY, ANYWAY) HAVE NO RIGHT, NO BUSINESS ARGUING WITH MY MAKER. So I agree with Paul here. TOTALLY.

However ... with Christ living in us, we are eternal, we are his children. We can think, speak, argue. Shakespeare understood this. His puppet, Hamlet, stated it well: "What a piece of work is a man, How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty, In form and moving how express and admirable, In action how like an Angel, In apprehension how like a god, The beauty of the world, The paragon of animals."

So there's two sides to this coin, you see? Show me side A and I am silenced, like Job in chapter 40-41. Show me side B and I am Jacob, wrestling with GOD, wrestling Him to a draw, by George.

Hamlet, by the way, saw this two-sidedness as well. He ended that above quote with "And yet to me, what is this quintessence of dust?"

[Timotheist]

ISA 66:22 "For just as the new heavens and the new earth Which I make will endure before Me," declares the LORD, "So your offspring and your name will endure.

24 "Then they will go forth and look On the corpses of the men Who have transgressed against Me. For their worm will not die And their fire will not be quenched; And they will be an abhorrence to all mankind."

Will the "objects prepared for destruction" be put on display for eternity to remind the "objects of mercy" of what a great blessing they have?

And it does say "corpses" here. The worm and the fire may endure, but are the corpses in eternal torment?

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

ISA 66:22 "For just as the new heavens and the new earth Which I make will endure before Me," declares the LORD, "So your offspring and your name will endure.

24 "Then they will go forth and look On the corpses of the men Who have transgressed against Me. For their worm will not die And their fire will not be quenched; And they will be an abhorrence to all mankind."

Will the "objects prepared for destruction" be put on display for eternity to remind the "objects of mercy" of what a great blessing they have?

And it does say "corpses" here. The worm and the fire may endure, but are the corpses in eternal torment?

Anyone have any idea what a corpse is? Seriously if you believe a corpse is feeling something, you probably have an annual pass to Disney....


Nobody wants death. We've witnessed it throughout our lifetimes. When we walk on the ashes of the dammed it will be abhorrent because we value life and comprehend the loss. Let's minimize those ashes folks for if we can be persuaded can't they? So that day will be filled with more joy and not grief.

[manna-man]

Great video concerning the false teaching of hell:
https://youtu.be/zWF6c1ksYqw

[awareness]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Great video concerning the false teaching of hell:
https://youtu.be/zWF6c1ksYqw

The two Testaments are interesting, each in its own way. The Old one gives us a picture of these people's Deity as he was before he got religion, the other one gives us a picture of him as he appeared afterward. The Old Testament is interested mainly in blood and sensuality. The New one in Salvation. Salvation by fire.

The first time the Deity came down to earth, he brought life and death; when he came the second time, he brought hell.- Mark Twain, Letters from Earth.

http://www.online-literature.com/twa...oclaimed%20it.

[Timotheist]

This article is lengthy and covers one person's view on Hell.

(manna-man, you are gonna love this one, which means you have prolly seen it already)

I am posting it here because a good part of the article covers the KJV insertion of the word 'hell' and the attempts by more recent translations to correct the text.

https://tentmaker.org/books/GatesOfHell.html

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

This article is lengthy and covers one person's view on Hell.

(manna-man, you are gonna love this one, which means you have prolly seen it already)

I am posting it here because a good part of the article covers the KJV insertion of the word 'hell' and the attempts by more recent translations to correct the text.

https://tentmaker.org/books/GatesOfHell.html

To hell with hell. There's no such thing.

Thanks Timotheist.

Harold

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

This article is lengthy and covers one person's view on Hell.

(manna-man, you are gonna love this one, which means you have prolly seen it already)

I am posting it here because a good part of the article covers the KJV insertion of the word 'hell' and the attempts by more recent translations to correct the text.

https://tentmaker.org/books/GatesOfHell.html

Yes indeed.

Here's a poem about hell from the late Gary Amirault if you didn't see it the last time I posted...
https://youtu.be/dwYLSnX-cdU

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by awareness

To hell with hell. There's no such thing.

Sorry Harold, you're in the wrong forum. This kind of speech is not welcomed here. Take your anti-Bible, anti-Christian garbage somewhere else.

Here are places that would welcome this kind of speech:
https://blog.feedspot.com/atheist_forums/
https://atheistforums.org/
https://atheistdiscussion.org/
-

[awareness]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Sorry Harold, you're in the wrong forum. This kind of speech is not welcomed here. Take your anti-Bible, anti-Christian garbage somewhere else.

Here are places that would welcome this kind of speech:
https://blog.feedspot.com/atheist_forums/
https://atheistforums.org/
https://atheistdiscussion.org/
-

You're a funny guy Untohim. You owe me a phone call, btw.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

And BTW, I am still waiting to hear your defense, using the scriptures, that Hell is Satan's kingdom.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Our Lord Jesus clearly and strongly warned his followers (and anyone else listening) about Hell. He also preached the Gospel of the Kingdom. Heaven and Hell are actually just two different kingdoms - each with it's own king. And each kingdom will be eternal. If you are reading this, hopefully you have been "delivered from the domain of darkness and transferred to the kingdom of his beloved Son" (Col 1:13)

So you want me to take some time and space to defend this somewhat anecdotal/esoteric statement? I really didn't think it was that important of a point, but if you think so....

Firstly, in the verse I cited, the Kingdom of God is compared/contrasted with "the domain of darkness". I think Paul could have easily stated it in the reverse: "Delivered from the kingdom of darkness and transferred to the domain of his beloved Son". Every kingdom needs to have a king.....else it's really not a kingdom! In any event, is there any doubt that the head/leader/king of the domain of darkness is Satan?

Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to him, “All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me." (Matt 4:8,9)
The devil could not possibly give what he does not own. The "kingdoms of the world" have to have a king, and according to this passage that king is the devil, Satan.

In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. (2 Corinthians 4:4)
"the god of this world" is Satan. I don't think it's a stretch to say that the god of this world is the king of this world. (esp when considered in the light of Matt 4:8,9.)

In the end the god of this world, together with his kingdom and those beings that have voluntarily chosen to come under the king of this kingdom, shall be thrown into the Lake of Fire. Whether or not this is an "annihilation" is not as important as the fact that God has provided an escape from this destination, for he so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believes in him shall not parish by have eternal life.

My brothers and sisters, my friends, lurkers, haters, doubters: I am here to tell you that Universalism, in any flavor, any form, makes a mockery out of the sacrifice of the cross. It makes God a liar, for his Son said "WHOSOEVER BELIEVES", but Universalism says "No worries, though you rejected my Son and the sacrifice he made, you will be treated just as though you didn't". Die as an unrepentant murderer, rapist, child abuser, human trafficker, drug dealer to kids....NO WORRIES! You just get to go to sleep for eternity!
-

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

So you want me to take some time and space to defend this somewhat anecdotal/esoteric statement? I really didn't think it was that important of a point, but if you think so....

Untohim,
I haven't heard anyone defend universalism here. However I do see certain people claiming that God is more of a tyrant than Hitler. Yes it's important very important to grasp the most important word that God has provided grace and it's just as important that defending his character by standing up to the false doctrine of eternal torment....a doctrine of demons. I'm beginning to suspect those who can't grasp this fact that their love has waxed cold as ice. Or their senses/own character.

Harold might be joking about not believing in hell. I seriously don't believe in the eternal torment version.
I believe that hades, sheol and any other word describing it is describing death or the grave.
No, I don't think it's necessary to go to college for years to learn how to translate something when I've got technology and the gumption to seek out and find the answers to my questions. Besides technology I have something even better. The Holy Spirit who teaches me all the things I need to know.

God is in control...Not out of control.

God is Love and He loves us.

Peace

[UntoHim]

Sorry manna-man, God doesn't need anyone to defend his character...he has done just fine for eternity not needing you, me or anyone else. God's character was on full display when he sent his only begotten son to make the ultimate sacrifice on the cross. I solemnly tell you that the worse doctrine of demons is to add or take away from the sacred Word he has given. The Lord Jesus' words ARE THE WORD OF GOD: "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". (Matt 13:41,42) I have studied Koine Greek for over 20 years. The proper and correct translation of κάμινος kaminos - πῦρ pyr IS FURNACE OF FIRE or FIERY FURNACE. This comports completely with the Lake of Fire in Revelation 20. This Lake of Fire burns "forever and ever". No crazy poem or rant or rave from heretical Universalists is EVER going to change what the Lord Jesus proclaimed in these verses.

manna-man you are too insistent on your private interpretation. You also insult me and others here by implying that if we don't accept your private interpretation our "love has waxed cold as ice". This is the kind of thing Witness Lee would say. Shame on you.

Yes, God is in control. Nice of you to admit that. He is also the Potter. We are all but vessels of clay. The Potter has full control over his clay:
But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump done vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory

This Gary Amirault fellow, who you have referenced twice now, is a stone-cold Universalist. Do you not understand that? His "poem" is blasphemous and belittles the sacrifice of the cross made by the Lord Jesus.
-

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Sorry manna-man, God doesn't need anyone to defend his character...

Untohim,

They say if the shoe fits wear it. I'd rather you be insulted than continue believing what you believe. I guess if anything we are both hard headed. If gods character don't need to be defended then what are you worried about? and why do we preach/share about his love?
We do not defend with our hands nor our wit.

"It's not by might nor power but by My Spirit saith The Lord."

If what you're saying is true we all should shut up, sit back and watch what happens.

So ...I quote a Universalist...So what. If what he is saying is true, it's truth.

Some here quote BroLee....
That don't make them so bad....


Some trust in Chariots...others Geek education. We trust in the name of our LORD our God.

Peace, Love and patience is a virtue...

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Firstly, in the verse I cited, the Kingdom of God is compared/contrasted with "the domain of darkness". I think Paul could have easily stated it in the reverse: "Delivered from the kingdom of darkness and transferred to the domain of his beloved Son". Every kingdom needs to have a king.....else it's really not a kingdom! In any event, is there any doubt that the head/leader/king of the domain of darkness is Satan?

This reads as if I asked you to prove that the Earth is Satan's Kingdom, for which you did an excellent job.

But my question was in response to your statement "Heaven and Hell are actually just two different kingdoms - each with it's own king."

so let me try this a different way: What are the "Gates of Hell" (KJV)? Is it referring to Satan's kingdom, who is fighting to prevent the church from being built?

If you believe this, I would like to see proof using other scripture.

Spoiler alert: there are none. This is one of the many "dangerous" (borrowing your word) aspects of the KJV. The translators bought in a Heaven/Hell model of the afterlife, with Satan replacing Pluto or Hades as the god of the underworld.

Rather, Hades (Sheol in the Hebrew) is clearly a place for dead souls to be held until resurrection. It is not an evil place, It is not a Kingdom with a King that is fighting the building of the church. This description is supported by a large number of OT passages.

So Jesus was telling Peter that not even death would stop His church from being built. Nothing more. Nothing less. The bride will be built after the resurrection from Hades. Why? Because Christ has the keys to open the Gates and call out His church! So, if Hades is a Kingdom, then Christ is the King!

The war is with the ruler of this world, not the grave.

If you share this viewpoint with me, then I apologize for singling you out.

If not, your response was nothing but a filibuster, answering a different question like a seasoned politician.

And my question had NOTHING to do with Universalism, of which I am not a believer.

[manna-man]

Interesting... found this quote from one of Matt Andersons replies to brother Mallons passing.

I can picture that perpetual grin Bill had on his face as he gave advice to Matt.

"Be sure to separate the "prescriptive" aspects of the Word of God from the "descriptive" aspects. Doctrine built on top of "descriptive" text is potentially dangerous."

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Untohim,

They say if the shoe fits wear it. I'd rather you be insulted than continue believing what you believe. I guess if anything we are both hard headed. If gods character don't need to be defended then what are you worried about? and why do we preach/share about his love?
We do not defend with our hands nor our wit.

"It's not by might nor power but by My Spirit saith The Lord."

If what you're saying is true we all should shut up, sit back and watch what happens.

So ...I quote a Universalist...So what. If what he is saying is true, it's truth.

Some here quote BroLee....
That don't make them so bad....


Some trust in Chariots...others Geek education. We trust in the name of our LORD our God.

Peace, Love and patience is a virtue...

I might add that I am not alone with this viewpoint. Many believe as I do. Including scholars of various degrees.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by manna-man

I might add that I am not alone with this viewpoint. Many believe as I do. Including scholars of various degrees.

Isn't it amazing the wide variety of things believers think!? I meet with people who hold various views on hell, dispensationalism, Calvinism, old/young earth . . . Good thing our oneness comes from the one Spirit!

And as has been said, whatever the final solution to sin looks like, needless to say it's not going to be a good thing for the people that must be dealt with accordingly! Some might think universalism lets everyone off scott-free, but from what I've read, most universalists think there will be at least some kind of retribution experienced before these ones are given the "free pass." So there's a lot of nuances to the different views.

And so we're clear (this should be obvious), whether we believe in the traditional eternal, conscious torment idea, or in universalism, or in annihilism, it's not an essential doctrine that prevents believers from freely fellowshipping in the least. We are one in our knowing that all need to be saved and avoid whatever the negative consequences await the unrepentant.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Isn't it amazing the wide variety of things believers think!? I meet with people who hold various views on hell, dispensationalism, Calvinism, old/young earth . . . Good thing our oneness comes from the one Spirit!

And as has been said, whatever the final solution to sin looks like, needless to say it's not going to be a good thing for the people that must be dealt with accordingly! Some might think universalism lets everyone off scott-free, but from what I've read, most universalists think there will be at least some kind of retribution experienced before these ones are given the "free pass." So there's a lot of nuances to the different views.

And so we're clear (this should be obvious), whether we believe in the traditional eternal, conscious torment idea, or in universalism, or in annihilism, it's not an essential doctrine that prevents believers from freely fellowshipping in the least. We are one in our knowing that all need to be saved and avoid whatever the negative consequences await the unrepentant.

Yes indeed Sonstoglory.

Think is the operative word here.

Anyone has the capacity to think as they are capable.

Think and understanding truth or not.
It is a good thing if we remain one if the unity is of the Lord.

Having said that there is a purpose to defend the truth with patience and kindness. Hopefully our experiences have sharpened our senses our endurance, patience and most importantly of all love. That we have become a little thick skinned so we aren't so easily offended.
Hopefully our experiences bear fruit that can be shared and appreciated.

Yet this is LCD. It has a mission statement and rules.

My point on this thread is a stand against the doctrine of eternal torment.
I think I've made it clear that it defames God.

Now, there is a possibility that I may be way off. I thought of this way before I ever brought it up in this forum. I sought out answers from the Lord and my prayers were answered. In my minds eye, I'm girded in truth and reality. I may have offended some here but that wasn't the intent at all but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't trying to provoke those here whom I care about into consideration of the topic.

I too can be offended. That is the risk of opening up.

I hope and pray that The Lord our God convicts everyone on this matter and I'm thankful that he will be faithful to forgive.

Peace...

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Now, there is a possibility that I may be way off. I thought of this way before I ever brought it up in this forum. I sought out answers from the Lord and my prayers were answered. In my minds eye, I'm girded in truth and reality. I may have offended some here but that wasn't the intent at all but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't trying to provoke those here whom I care about into consideration of the topic.

Yes indeed - this is a topic we may all be wrong to some degree on. That is, we get a view we are certain is from the word, and camp out there. It takes a lot often times to move us, once we get to that point. (yet He is able!)

I do know this: No one, not principalities or powers or men or any other being, will be able to point a finger at God and say, "You were unrighteous in Your judgement!" And I believe we all will probably be blown away by how far His love went, and how He handles those who were unrepentant to the very end. (even if that means some humans go into the eternal flames)

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

But my question was in response to your statement "Heaven and Hell are actually just two different kingdoms - each with it's own king."

You win Timotheist! I give up. Satan is not the king of hell.
-

[awareness]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Harold, you have been giving me hell for about 15 years now...but it seems like more, so does that count for eternal?
-

No. Cause I'm not done yet .

[manna-man]

Well what do ya know....
Borrowed from the thread:
SPIRITUAL WARFARE

"In the fullness of time!"

I believe this is pertinent to this thread. Fits like a glove...


Old 03-19-2020, 06:05 AM #17
Nell
Admin/Moderator

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,812
Default THE SPIRITUAL BELIEVER EXHORTED TO "JUDGE ALL THINGS"
The duty of this examination of spiritual things is strongly urged by the Apostle Paul, again and again. "He that is spiritual judgeth .. all things" (1 Cor. 2: 15).

The "spiritual" believer is to use his "judgment," ... showing how God Himself honours the intelligent personality of the man He re-creates in Christ, by inviting the "judging" and "examining" of His own workings by His Spirit; so that even "the things of the Spirit" are not to be received as of Him, without being examined, and "spiritually discerned" as of God.

When, therefore, it is said in connection with the supernatural, and abnormal manifestations of the present time, that it is not necessary, nor even according to the will of God, for believers to understand, or explain all the workings of God, it is out of accord with the Apostle's statement that, "he that is spiritual, judgeth all things," and consequently should reject all things which his spiritual judgment is unable to accept, until such a time as he is able to discern with clearness what are the things of God. JPL-War on the Saints, pp. 56-57.


Thank you Nell for that post and....

Hi Nell!

[Nell]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Well what do ya know....
Borrowed from the thread:
SPIRITUAL WARFARE

"In the fullness of time!"

I believe this is pertinent to this thread. Fits like a glove...


Old 03-19-2020, 06:05 AM #17
Nell
Admin/Moderator

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,812
Default THE SPIRITUAL BELIEVER EXHORTED TO "JUDGE ALL THINGS"
The duty of this examination of spiritual things is strongly urged by the Apostle Paul, again and again. "He that is spiritual judgeth .. all things" (1 Cor. 2: 15).

The "spiritual" believer is to use his "judgment," ... showing how God Himself honours the intelligent personality of the man He re-creates in Christ, by inviting the "judging" and "examining" of His own workings by His Spirit; so that even "the things of the Spirit" are not to be received as of Him, without being examined, and "spiritually discerned" as of God.

When, therefore, it is said in connection with the supernatural, and abnormal manifestations of the present time, that it is not necessary, nor even according to the will of God, for believers to understand, or explain all the workings of God, it is out of accord with the Apostle's statement that, "he that is spiritual, judgeth all things," and consequently should reject all things which his spiritual judgment is unable to accept, until such a time as he is able to discern with clearness what are the things of God. JPL-War on the Saints, pp. 56-57.


Thank you Nell for that post and....

Hi Nell!

YW. Hi MM!
Nell

[awareness]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Well what do ya know....
Borrowed from the thread:
SPIRITUAL WARFARE

"In the fullness of time!"

I believe this is pertinent to this thread. Fits like a glove...


Old 03-19-2020, 06:05 AM #17
Nell
Admin/Moderator

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,812
Default THE SPIRITUAL BELIEVER EXHORTED TO "JUDGE ALL THINGS"
The duty of this examination of spiritual things is strongly urged by the Apostle Paul, again and again. "He that is spiritual judgeth .. all things" (1 Cor. 2: 15).

The "spiritual" believer is to use his "judgment," ... showing how God Himself honours the intelligent personality of the man He re-creates in Christ, by inviting the "judging" and "examining" of His own workings by His Spirit; so that even "the things of the Spirit" are not to be received as of Him, without being examined, and "spiritually discerned" as of God.

When, therefore, it is said in connection with the supernatural, and abnormal manifestations of the present time, that it is not necessary, nor even according to the will of God, for believers to understand, or explain all the workings of God, it is out of accord with the Apostle's statement that, "he that is spiritual, judgeth all things," and consequently should reject all things which his spiritual judgment is unable to accept, until such a time as he is able to discern with clearness what are the things of God. JPL-War on the Saints, pp. 56-57.


Thank you Nell for that post and....

Hi Nell!

Spiritually judging applies also to Jessie Penn Lewis. Just simply falling for her is in violation of true Spiritual Judging. Her life, and bringing down the Welsh Revival, and Evan Roberts, plus that believers can be obsessed by the devil, tarnishes her authority of anything.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by manna-man

LOL!
Zeek, your wisdom has bewitched you!��<smiles and giggles...

Seriously though.

Universalism sounds good and I wish it were so but I'm not convinced that it is correct because of the gospel of Christ that persuades me to take heed.

Heed of what?

The dangers of ignoring the message of sin and death and reconciliation/Propitiation. I believe that Ezekiel 18 spells it out quite clearly.
Those who sin and reject propitiation/righteousness "in" Christ shall unfortunately die. (Lose the reward to live in eternity unhindered by time.) And only God knows what He has prepared for us.��

I've grown to appreciate you brother. Are you in Ft. LAUD? If so pm me so we can meet...
If not PM me anyways.��

I think it's obvious I don't believe in eternal torment. I will expound on that in the fullness of time as The Lord leads. I'm hoping others will expound on this as this is one of the few venues I frequent and do appreciate the talent that is here even though I don't always agree with the finger pointing as we all are not perfected yet. I've been considering lately the tares and the wheat.....

Shalom.

Okay. How do you define universalism and how does what you believe differ from it?

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by zeek

Okay. How do you define universalism and how does what you believe differ from it?

Universalists believe God sent Jesus but that Jesus wasn't divine. They believe God will save all humans and reject that they would be subjected to damnation.

They don't believe in the trinity.

There is a gulf between what they believe and what I believe.

First of all, I believe Jesus was sent by God. I also believe He is God. Sounds to me they don't believe that. Although I'd have to agree with them about the feeble word trinity. A word such as that creates many snares and ammo for those who created it. Who are they?
The creedal Christians?
Who are they? I think we'd all agree they were the Pharisees.
The blended Judiasers...
The blind Jesus spoke of.

Nevertheless, they are anti-Christ (Universalists) and wave off judgment and dismiss the entire gospel message.

They're against eternal torment or consequences and believe somehow God will work it all out regardless of all the warnings and woes described of in the scriptures.

They preach another Jesus I do not recognize...Another message I do not see in the sciptures.

If what they believe was true, what is God waiting for?

Ultimately, I believe he's waiting because He is merciful and as the scriptures declare he wills not that any would perish.

I also believe He is watching to see just how much we will accept or reject. To see how deep we want to be.

Peace

[zeek]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Universalists believe God sent Jesus but that Jesus wasn't divine. They believe God will save all humans and reject that they would be subjected to damnation.

They don't believe in the trinity.

There is a gulf between what they believe and what I believe.

First of all, I believe Jesus was sent by God. I also believe He is God. Sounds to me they don't believe that. Although I'd have to agree with them about the feeble word trinity. A word such as that creates many snares and ammo for those who created it. Who are they?
The creedal Christians?
Who are they? I think we'd all agree they were the Pharisees.
The blended Judiasers...
The blind Jesus spoke of.

Nevertheless, they are anti-Christ (Universalists) and wave off judgment and dismiss the entire gospel message.

They're against eternal torment or consequences and believe somehow God will work it all out regardless of all the warnings and woes described of in the scriptures.

They preach another Jesus I do not recognize...Another message I do not see in the sciptures.

If what they believe was true, what is God waiting for?

Ultimately, I believe he's waiting because He is merciful and as the scriptures declare he wills not that any would perish.

I also believe He is watching to see just how much we will accept or reject. To see how deep we want to be.

Peace

I think you are referring to the Unitarian Universalists. There are plenty of universalist trinitarians who believe Jesus is God. Here is an example of an Evangelical Universalist who thinks much like you do. https://www.amazon.com/Evangelical-U.../dp/1620322390

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by zeek

I think you are referring to the Unitarian Universalists. There are plenty of universalist trinitarians who believe Jesus is God. Here is an example of an Evangelical Universalist who thinks much like you do. https://www.amazon.com/Evangelical-U.../dp/1620322390

Nah, that's ok.

As stated earlier, my sole point was to expose the false doctrine of eternal torment not to start a Unitarian Discussion Group.

Maybe you're attempting to nurture me further down the rabbit hole or don't believe I've considered everything. Perhaps you think my thoughts are juvenile. I don't know and I'm not offended. Please expound on your motives here.
I appreciate your input and care about what you're thinking. Just wondering what's in there....

[zeek]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Nah, that's ok.

As stated earlier, my sole point was to expose the false doctrine of eternal torment not to start a Unitarian Discussion Group.

Maybe you're attempting to nurture me further down the rabbit hole or don't believe I've considered everything. Perhaps you think my thoughts are juvenile. I don't know and I'm not offended. Please expound on your motives here.
I appreciate your input and care about what you're thinking. Just wondering what's in there....

It seems to me that you are conflating universalism with Unitarian Universalism. I'm merely saying they're not necessarily the same thing, no more, no less. There's plenty of evidence to support what I'm saying. If you're not interested, fine. It seems to me that if you weren't concerned about the issue, you wouldn't have started this thread. Some people might think that the fact that there are perhaps millions of people who think like them is a good thing. You don't. No problem. I'm unaware of anything I've said that implies your thoughts are juvenile. Feel free to point out where I did that, if you like.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by zeek

It seems to me that you are conflating universalism with Unitarian Universalism. I'm merely saying they're not necessarily the same thing, no more, no less. There's plenty of evidence to support what I'm saying. If you're not interested, fine. It seems to me that if you weren't concerned about the issue, you wouldn't have started this thread. Some people might think that the fact that there are perhaps millions of people who think like them is a good thing. You don't. No problem. I'm unaware of anything I've said that implies your thoughts are juvenile. Feel free to point out where I did that, if you like.

There wasn't anything that would make me think that Zeek. Just being critical of myself making sure I'm paying attention. Shooting in the dark and looking for light in this immediate discussion...
I am interested to hear what you have to say on the topic. I'm open to ideas and deeper discussion. I'm also open to learn/grow if I'm persuaded.
Would you open up and share what's on your mind.
First of all, how am I conflating the issue?
You have my attention.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by manna-man

There wasn't anything that would make me think that Zeek. Just being critical of myself making sure I'm paying attention. Shooting in the dark and looking for light in this immediate discussion...
I am interested to hear what you have to say on the topic. I'm open to ideas and deeper discussion. I'm also open to learn/grow if I'm persuaded.
Would you open up and share what's on your mind.
First of all, how am I conflating the issue?
You have my attention.

Have you ever read George MacDonald who influenced C.S. Lewis and many other Christians? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_MacDonald

"MacDonald's oft-mentioned universalism is not the idea that everyone will automatically be saved, but is closer to Gregory of Nyssa in the view that all will ultimately repent and be restored to God.

MacDonald appears to have never felt comfortable with some aspects of Calvinist doctrine, feeling that its principles were inherently "unfair";when the doctrine of predestination was first explained to him, he burst into tears (although assured that he was one of the elect). Later novels, such as Robert Falconer and Lilith, show a distaste for the idea that God's electing love is limited to some and denied to others.

MacDonald rejected the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement as developed by John Calvin, which argues that Christ has taken the place of sinners and is punished by the wrath of God in their place, believing that in turn it raised serious questions about the character and nature of God. Instead, he taught that Christ had come to save people from their sins, and not from a Divine penalty for their sins: the problem was not the need to appease a wrathful God, but the disease of cosmic evil itself. MacDonald frequently described the atonement in terms similar to the Christus Victor theory.MacDonald posed the rhetorical question, "Did he not foil and slay evil by letting all the waves and billows of its horrid sea break upon him, go over him, and die without rebound—spend their rage, fall defeated, and cease? Verily, he made atonement!"

MacDonald was convinced that God does not punish except to amend, and that the sole end of His greatest anger is the amelioration of the guilty. As the doctor uses fire and steel in certain deep-seated diseases, so God may use hell-fire if necessary to heal the hardened sinner. MacDonald declared, "I believe that no hell will be lacking which would help the just mercy of God to redeem his children." MacDonald posed the rhetorical question, "When we say that God is Love, do we teach men that their fear of Him is groundless?" He replied, "No. As much as they were will come upon them, possibly far more. ... The wrath will consume what they call themselves; so that the selves God made shall appear."

However, true repentance, in the sense of freely chosen moral growth, is essential to this process, and, in MacDonald's optimistic view, inevitable for all beings (see universal reconciliation).

MacDonald states his theological views most distinctly in the sermon "Justice", found in the third volume of Unspoken Sermons. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_MacDonald

Here is that essay https://www.online-literature.com/ge...en-sermons/31/

Here's a link to C.S. Lewis's book about him https://www.amazon.com/George-Macdon...s%2C101&sr=1-3

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by zeek

MacDonald was convinced that God does not punish except to amend, and that the sole end of His greatest anger is the amelioration of the guilty. As the doctor uses fire and steel in certain deep-seated diseases, so God may use hell-fire if necessary to heal the hardened sinner. MacDonald declared, "I believe that no hell will be lacking which would help the just mercy of God to redeem his children." MacDonald posed the rhetorical question, "When we say that God is Love, do we teach men that their fear of Him is groundless?" He replied, "No. As much as they were will come upon them, possibly far more. ... The wrath will consume what they call themselves; so that the selves God made shall appear."

Does MacDonald include Satan and the other fallen angels as being recipients of such eventual mercy?

Just asking for a friend.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by zeek

Have you ever read George MacDonald who influenced C.S. Lewis and many other Christians? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_MacDonald

"MacDonald's oft-mentioned universalism is not the idea that everyone will automatically be saved, but is closer to Gregory of Nyssa in the view that all will ultimately repent and be restored to God.

MacDonald appears to have never felt comfortable with some aspects of Calvinist doctrine, feeling that its principles were inherently "unfair";when the doctrine of predestination was first explained to him, he burst into tears (although assured that he was one of the elect). Later novels, such as Robert Falconer and Lilith, show a distaste for the idea that God's electing love is limited to some and denied to others.

MacDonald rejected the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement as developed by John Calvin, which argues that Christ has taken the place of sinners and is punished by the wrath of God in their place, believing that in turn it raised serious questions about the character and nature of God. Instead, he taught that Christ had come to save people from their sins, and not from a Divine penalty for their sins: the problem was not the need to appease a wrathful God, but the disease of cosmic evil itself. MacDonald frequently described the atonement in terms similar to the Christus Victor theory.MacDonald posed the rhetorical question, "Did he not foil and slay evil by letting all the waves and billows of its horrid sea break upon him, go over him, and die without rebound—spend their rage, fall defeated, and cease? Verily, he made atonement!"

MacDonald was convinced that God does not punish except to amend, and that the sole end of His greatest anger is the amelioration of the guilty. As the doctor uses fire and steel in certain deep-seated diseases, so God may use hell-fire if necessary to heal the hardened sinner. MacDonald declared, "I believe that no hell will be lacking which would help the just mercy of God to redeem his children." MacDonald posed the rhetorical question, "When we say that God is Love, do we teach men that their fear of Him is groundless?" He replied, "No. As much as they were will come upon them, possibly far more. ... The wrath will consume what they call themselves; so that the selves God made shall appear."

However, true repentance, in the sense of freely chosen moral growth, is essential to this process, and, in MacDonald's optimistic view, inevitable for all beings (see universal reconciliation).

MacDonald states his theological views most distinctly in the sermon "Justice", found in the third volume of Unspoken Sermons. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_MacDonald

Here is that essay https://www.online-literature.com/ge...en-sermons/31/

Here's a link to C.S. Lewis's book about him https://www.amazon.com/George-Macdon...s%2C101&sr=1-3

No Sir. Haven't read George Macdonald. I'll check him out as well as the other references.

I think that Macdonald and Calvin may of had the trinity disphoria. Jesus is God so if there is character issues they need to narrow it down. God doesn't have character issues. We just misunderstand all the time.
So, if what George believes is true, why are we still here then?
What is God waiting for?

What do you actually believe Zeek?
You have shared much of what you have read. But haven't given a glimpse of what is behind the curtain.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

Does MacDonald include Satan and the other fallen angels as being recipients of such eventual mercy?

Just asking for a friend.

I don't know. I haven't read his complete works.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by zeek

I don't know. I haven't read his complete works.

That don't seem to fit into the narrative. If it were so, Jesus would have told the demons to hang out in the pigs until his plan was accomplished for them. NOWHERE DO WE FIND EVEN A HINT OF THIS IN SCRIPTURE...imho...

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by manna-man

That don't seem to fit into the narrative. If it were so, Jesus would have told the demons to hang out in the pigs until his plan was accomplished for them. NOWHERE DO WE FIND EVEN A HINT OF THIS IN SCRIPTURE...imho...

I have the same ho.

So it begs the question: why do we (if MacDonald is right) get such a merciful break, but the other created beings do not?

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

Why do we (if MacDonald is right) get such a merciful break, but the other created beings do not?

Because He is the Potter and we are not. He is God and we are not.
Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump done vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory. (Romans 9:21-23)

I know this offends the righteous sensibilities of us mere mortals, but God has the "right" to show his wrath and to make known his power by preparing both both vessels of wrath and vessels of mercy, and he has done so from eternity past, and it is all for his glory.

***If you are reading this and will not run away from his Word, there's a very good chance that you are a vessel of mercy. Count your blessings my dear friends!
-

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Because He is the Potter and we are not. He is God and we are not.
Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump done vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory. (Romans 9:21-23)

I know this offends the righteous sensibilities of us mere mortals, but God has the "right" to show his wrath and to make known his power by preparing both both vessels of wrath and vessels of mercy, and he has done so from eternity past, and it is all for his glory.


***If you are reading this and will not run away from his Word, there's a very good chance that you are a vessel of mercy. Count your blessings my dear friends!
-

I was speaking of "we" in the global humanity sense. MacDonald's position is that even the dishonorable pots will eventually be saved. To challenge such a position, I asked the question about angels.

[Timotheist]

I was thinking today about eternal torment for the unsaved.

It occurred to me that among the many misconceptions handed down to us from the Dark Ages is that we have an “immortal soul” that must be saved.

But where in scripture does it say the soul is immortal?

At the risk of being wrong, I suggest there is nothing in the Bible to uphold this belief that exists among the tenets of the RCC and a majority of Protestants. Rather it is the result of Hellenistic influences.

Here is what I think the Scripture is “clearly” telling us: the first death kills the body, and the second death kills the soul.

The gift of eternal life is what makes us immortal, and that immortality is triggered by the restoration of the soul with an impartation of the Holy Spirit at the second birth. Without that Spirit, the soul cannot survive a second death.

So in this I agree with manna-man in that eternal torment is NOT the destiny of the unsaved. Rather, it is a ‘merciful’ termination, putting the unsaved out of their misery.

If this is what is meant by the term ‘annihilationism’, then I will accept the label as describing what I believe.

It follows that angels are “spirits”, not “souls”, and thus run the risk of eternal torment.

This must be why it says the LOF was “prepared for the devil and his angels”.

And it was not prepared to torment souls for eternity.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

I was thinking today about eternal torment for the unsaved.

It occurred to me that among the many misconceptions handed down to us from the Dark Ages is that we have an “immortal soul” that must be saved.

But where in scripture does it say the soul is immortal?

At the risk of being wrong, I suggest there is nothing in the Bible to uphold this belief that exists among the tenets of the RCC and a majority of Protestants. Rather it is the result of Hellenistic influences.

Here is what I think the Scripture is “clearly” telling us: the first death kills the body, and the second death kills the soul.

The gift of eternal life is what makes us immortal, and that immortality is triggered by the restoration of the soul with an impartation of the Holy Spirit at the second birth. Without that Spirit, the soul cannot survive a second death.

So in this I agree with manna-man in that eternal torment is NOT the destiny of the unsaved. Rather, it is a ‘merciful’ termination, putting the unsaved out of their misery.

If this is what is meant by the term ‘annihilationism’, then I will accept the label as describing what I believe.

It follows that angels are “spirits”, not “souls”, and thus run the risk of eternal torment.

This must be why it says the LOF was “prepared for the devil and his angels”.

And it was not prepared to torment souls for eternity.

Everything not redeemable is cast into the LOF.

I have a hard time believing fallen angels will be tormented as well. If anything they are tormented now day and night knowing their doom. You see, even they value life.
Imagine, in the latter days men will go into caves and rather have the caves fall in on them to save them from what is coming.
Talk about anxiety...The demons are trembling in torment/horror.

But there is GOOD tidings!...
God has once again made provision for our peace and safety!
When I am afraid I will trust in Him! Let the weak say I am strong in the name of the LORD!

OverviewLyricsVideosListen
There's honey in the rock
Water in the stone
Manna on the ground
No matter where I go
I don't need to worry now that I know
Everything I need You've got
There's honey in the rock
Praying for a miracle
Thirsty for the living well
Only You can satisfy
Sweetness at the mercy seat
Now I've tasted, it's not hard to see
Only You can satisfy
There's honey in the rock
There's honey in the rock
There's honey in the rock
There's honey in the rock
Yeah
Freedom whеre the Spirit is
Bounty in the wildеrness
You will always satisfy, yeah
There's honey in the rock
Water in the stone
Manna on the ground
No matter where I go
I don't need to worry now that I know
Everything I need You've got
There's honey in the rock
Purpose in Your plan
Power in the blood
Healing in Your hands
Started flowing when You said it is done
Everything You did's enough
I keep looking, I keep finding
You keep giving, keep providing
I have all that I need
You are all that I need
I keep praying, You keep moving
I keep praising, You keep proving
I have all that I need
You are all that I need
I keep looking, I keep finding
You keep giving, keep providing
I have all that I need
You are all that I need
I keep praying, You keep moving
I keep praising, You keep proving
I have all that I need
You are all that I need
I have all that I need
You are all that I need, yeah
There's honey in the rock
Water in the stone
Manna on the ground
No matter where I go
I don't need to worry now that I know (I know)
Everything I need You've got
There's honey in the rock
Purpose in Your plan
Power in the blood
Healing in Your hands
Started flowing when You said it is done (Jesus)
Jesus, who You are is enough
There's honey in the rock, ooh
(There's honey in the rock, ooh)
There's honey in the rock, ooh
(There's honey in the rock)
Oh, how sweet, how sweet it is
To trust in You Jesus
Oh, how sweet, how sweet it is
To trust in You Jesus
Oh, how sweet, how sweet it is
To trust in You Jesus
https://youtu.be/2vpuNsZxmpA

[zeek]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Everything not redeemable is cast into the LOF.

I have a hard time believing fallen angels will be tormented as well.

As well you should! 1 Corinthians 15:28 says "Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all."

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

I was thinking today about eternal torment for the unsaved.

It occurred to me that among the many misconceptions handed down to us from the Dark Ages is that we have an “immortal soul” that must be saved.

But where in scripture does it say the soul is immortal?

At the risk of being wrong, I suggest there is nothing in the Bible to uphold this belief that exists among the tenets of the RCC and a majority of Protestants. Rather it is the result of Hellenistic influences.

Here is what I think the Scripture is “clearly” telling us: the first death kills the body, and the second death kills the soul.

The gift of eternal life is what makes us immortal, and that immortality is triggered by the restoration of the soul with an impartation of the Holy Spirit at the second birth. Without that Spirit, the soul cannot survive a second death.

So in this I agree with manna-man in that eternal torment is NOT the destiny of the unsaved. Rather, it is a ‘merciful’ termination, putting the unsaved out of their misery.

If this is what is meant by the term ‘annihilationism’, then I will accept the label as describing what I believe.

It follows that angels are “spirits”, not “souls”, and thus run the risk of eternal torment.<<<GOOD POINT!

This must be why it says the LOF was “prepared for the devil and his angels”.

And it was not prepared to torment souls for eternity.

In the Three Views of Hell by Steve Gregg, I believe this is exactly what he says is the annihilation view! And you came up with that on your own?! Impressive!

So then, who are the humans thrown into the eternal trash can made for the devil and his angles? (In the annihilation view, they wouldn't be unregenerated, right?)

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by zeek

As well you should! 1 Corinthians 15:28 says "Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all."

Zeek,
What is this verse saying to you?

Universalism, at least the brand I speak of (Not believe of...) believes everything including the fallen angels will be included in the redemptive work of Christ.

As I see it, they use this verse to justify that belief. Is this your point using the verse?

Specifically the " All in All" part of the verse as if some how magically it's inclusive/allowing salvation to those (The Angels) who at one time (During that time were unhindered by time and had plenty of time and clarity of mind.) consciously chose to attempt to unthrone God the Father.

No.
This verse and chapter is about the sound defense/support of the teaching of the resurrection and the consummation of God's goal of Recovering mankind. ( Those who hear, believe, recieve the truth and endure even until the end of their lives.)

The fallen angels do not get this priveledge
(Eternal Life)
It is stripped from them and as for humanity who are found willfully rejecting the offer of forgiveness, their part is with the demons in the LOF which will consume them utterly and with finality.
(Just plain old disgusting abhorrent death. No torment, No remembrance.)

God is love. This is why we are waiting and what He is waiting for. Time is running out...

Then we will go on!

imho...

Peace

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Everything not redeemable is cast into the LOF.

I have a hard time believing fallen angels will be tormented as well. If anything they are tormented now day and night knowing their doom. You see, even they value life.

Not gonna argue with you on this point of view, as I think there is enough wiggle room to allow our differences in opinion.

Nonetheless, I will try weakly to counter your point, using Timotheist logic:

1) Spirit is life. In fact spirit is God Himself dispensed into us for our animation (Gen 1:26). (See what I did there?) Spirit, being of God Himself, is eternal.

2) Jesus did not warn us to fear Him who can destroy the soul and spirit in Gehenna, because spirit cannot be killed.

3) When we die, our spirit "returns to Him who gave it". See the stoning of Stephen for one of many examples of this concept.

4) Angels are "spirits". Ergo, my reasoning suggests, they have eternal life and cannot be killed. Unless God can somehow remove His Spirit from a spirit, the angels can no sooner be killed than God can kill Himself.

When we are resurrected unto eternal life, we will be "like the angels", and like them, we will have eternal life. Not as "souls" but as "spirits", being in God's image and likeness.

(I shudder to think of what might happen if we choose to rebel after our resurrection... because "it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.”)

[zeek]

Originally Posted by manna-man

Zeek,
What is this verse saying to you?

I think the meaning of I Corinthians is perfectly clear as it stands. Who are these people who you allege quote I Corinthians 15: 28 to support a false teaching about it? Point me to them so that I can see for myself what they are saying.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

Not gonna argue with you on this point of view, as I think there is enough wiggle room to allow our differences in opinion.

Nonetheless, I will try weakly to counter your point, using Timotheist logic:

1) Spirit is life. In fact spirit is God Himself dispensed into us for our animation (Gen 1:26). (See what I did there?) Spirit, being of God Himself, is eternal.

2) Jesus did not warn us to fear Him who can destroy the soul and spirit in Gehenna, because spirit cannot be killed.

3) When we die, our spirit "returns to Him who gave it". See the stoning of Stephen for one of many examples of this concept.

4) Angels are "spirits". Ergo, my reasoning suggests, they have eternal life and cannot be killed. Unless God can somehow remove His Spirit from a spirit, the angels can no sooner be killed than God can kill Himself.

When we are resurrected unto eternal life, we will be "like the angels", and like them, we will have eternal life. Not as "souls" but as "spirits", being in God's image and likeness.

(I shudder to think of what might happen if we choose to rebel after our resurrection... because "it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.”)

We're not arguing. We're having a discussion, hopefully sharpening one another as the Spirit leads in our midst.

Point#1: Yes, God is eternal.
God can undo what he does or did otherwise God can make a rock bigger than he can pick up. NOT!


Point #2: says He can destroy soul and spirit then says spirit cannot be killed?

Point#3
Stephen was a saint.
Demons were cast down, cast into pigs and ultimately will be cast into the LOF.
Scripture doesn't teach that God needs to recycle spirit.
He saves them or destroys them. Imho...

Point #4: Refer to point 3 rebuttal.

Peace like a river my dear brother Timotheist!

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by zeek

I think the meaning of I Corinthians is perfectly clear as it stands. Who are these people who you allege quote I Corinthians 15: 28 to support a false teaching about it? Point me to them so that I can see for myself what they are saying.

The Universalists as I see them.

Are you going to share what you think about Universalists or whatever you believe on the matter? Like I asked previously, what is this verse saying to you?

Appreciate it.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by manna-man

The Universalists as I see them.

Are you going to share what you think about Universalists?

Only if you cite a reference to them so I can examine what they are saying first hand as I asked you below. Otherwise, I don't know what they're claimng in context.

Originally Posted by manna-man

or whatever you believe on the matter? Like I asked previously, what is this verse saying to you?

For me the bottom line is that "God is all and in all" as the verse says.

"Of old you laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. They will perish, but you will remain; they will all wear out like a garment. You will change them like a robe, and they will pass away, but you are the same, and your years have no end.
- Psalm 102:25-27

Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.
- James 1:17

“For I the LORD do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed.
- Malachi 3:6

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
- Hebrews 13:8



These verses are saying to me that God does not change. So if God is all and in all in I Corinthians 15:28, He must be all and in all now. If we don't see that, perhaps it is because our finite minds can't grasp it. Jesus said "Blessed are the pure in heart, For they shall see God." May the Lord purify our hearts.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by zeek

These verses are saying to me that God does not change. So if God is all and in all in I Corinthians 15:28, He must be all and in all now. If we don't see that, perhaps it is because our finite minds can't grasp it. Jesus said "Blessed are the pure in heart, For they shall see God." May the Lord purify our hearts.

Jesus said,"...the kingdom of the father is spread out upon the earth, and men
do not see it."
The Gospel of Thomas v.113
https://www.marquette.edu/maqom/Gosp...%20Lambdin.pdf

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

In the Three Views of Hell by Steve Gregg, I believe this is exactly what he says is the annihilation view! And you came up with that on your own?! Impressive!

So then, who are the humans thrown into the eternal trash can made for the devil and his angles? (In the annihilation view, they wouldn't be unregenerated, right?)

Right, although as I said in a later post, I leave room for a very sad possibility that regenerated souls could be included: those who join Satan in his final rebellion.

This was hinted at some weeks ago on another thread, and I gently bring it up again.

This would amount to a “loss af salvation”, but a willful one done in the next age.

Did Steve Gregg pick a winner among the three views of Hell?

Don’t know how impressive my post was, since it took me until age 61 to connect the dots

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

Right, although as I said in a later post, I leave room for a very sad possibility that regenerated souls could be included: those who join Satan in his final rebellion.

This was hinted at some weeks ago on another thread, and I gently bring it up again.

This would amount to a “loss of salvation”, but a willful one done in the next age.

Did Steve Gregg pick a winner among the three views of Hell?

Don’t know how impressive my post was, since it took me until age 61 to connect the dots

Well, I didn't start connecting the dots until 4+ decades in the Lord and after I read Steve's book!

Steve was very careful not to say which one he leaned toward, although he did say he had a leaning. Another brother, where I fellowship, read the book and we've been having some discussion. The bottom-line is no matter what view you hold, the final consensus is still the same - it's not very pleasant to say the least and to be avoided at ALL costs!

And there are various views within the 3 main ones. The two extremes are eternal, conscious torment and total universalism. It's interesting that even Steve Gregg said when he sees certain verses that supports one of the 3 views, he says it makes him realize that he doesn't have full confidence that the view he's landed on is 100% correct! I really appreciate that about him and his writings and find it quite refreshing.

I don't think I can go with total universalism (even after some punishment), as I just don't see that in scripture. But I also don't see the once you die without a commitment to Christ, then yer in the LOF. Period. The soul not being eternal makes sense, and instead of eternal torment for the unregenerated, the soul just goes away (dies).

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

But I also don't see the once you die without a commitment to Christ, then yer in the LOF. Period. The soul not being eternal makes sense, and instead of eternal torment for the unregenerated, the soul just goes away (dies).

You are also right on this point… I oversimplified my explanation.

There is indeed a class of people who will be saved apart from hearing and believing in today’s good news. I am trying to bring this discussion up on Nell’s thread about James and Romans, but it is lost in the noise about the title (of which I also took the bait)

[manna-man]

I'm reading The inescapable Love of God by Thomas Talbott. Interesting read to say the least.
I would recommend it for those who are brave and have the helmet of salvation firmly affixed....

What I've gleaned from it so far is that the heavy hitters/theologians from the beginning suffered from the same ailments we did in the LR.

Great Scott!
A paradox!
Orthodox History repeating itself?

[zeek]

Originally Posted by manna-man

I'm reading The inescapable Love of God by Thomas Talbott. Interesting read to say the least.
I would recommend it for those who are brave and have the helmet of salvation firmly affixed....

What I've gleaned from it so far is that the heavy hitters/theologians from the beginning suffered from the same ailments we did in the LR.

Great Scott!
A paradox!
Orthodox History repeating itself?

What ailments are you referring to exactly?

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by zeek

What ailments are you referring to exactly?

Ailments?
Thinking they were the MOTA. Forming new orthodoxy and pushing it hard. If you didn't conform your would be labeled something if not beat to death, drown or stoned just like Stephen.
Teaching exclusive high peak doctrine as if they were in the know. It wasn't all they're fault for people are sheeple. Trusting man before God.

[manna-man]

If you have to choose between love and
theology, choose love. For theology is
based on our interpretation of Scripture,
but love is based on the DNA of God
himself.
MICK MOONEY
An excerpt from the book: Meditations

[UntoHim]

Well thankfully we are never asked to choose between theology and love. It's a false dilemma, and one that Witness Lee used on his gullible followers to a T - that one must choose between life and theology, between mind and spirit, between obedience to our conscience and a "deputy authority. (just to name a few)

Mick Mooney is another Universalist (albeit along the lines of Rob Bell) Tread lightly manna-man. As you are well aware by now, I have little patience or tolerance for using up the time and space of this forum promoting heretics and their false teachings. It's a free country (for now) my man, you can read and believe anything you want - But I will not allow the promotion of, or even discussions revolving around Universalists, Universalism or any other heretical teachings on the forum.

Thanks for your understanding and cooperation.

Your brother who is unto Him.
-

[Timotheist]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Mick Mooney is another Universalist (albeit along the lines of Rob Bell) Tread lightly manna-man. As you are well aware by now, I have little patience or tolerance for using up the time and space of this forum promoting heretics and their false teachings. It's a free country (for now) my man, you can read and believe anything you want - But I will not allow the promotion of, or even discussions revolving around Universalists, Universalism or any other heretical teachings on the forum.

Thanks for your understanding and cooperation.

Your brother who is unto Him.
-

I have to comment on this, and then I will return to the outer darkness.

Manna-man does not embrace Universalism. He is an Annihilationist, along with STG and yours truly. And we have clearly demonstrated that this has scriptural basis.

You have become a little unhinged of late. manna-man made the right decision.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

Manna-man does not embrace Universalism. He is an Annihilationist, along with STG and yours truly. And we have clearly demonstrated that this has scriptural basis.

Actually I am probably not a strict annihilationist . . . I hold that at least some, it certainly appears from scripture, do make it into the LOF prepared for devil/angels. And while I see from scripture, grounds for the annihilation of unregenerate souls, they may receive some just retribution before they go into nothingness.

But universalism . . . while there's verses that seem to show that, overall I think it's a stretch too far, considering the preponderance of verses saying otherwise.

[UntoHim]

If my friend mann-man is not a Universalist then he probably should stop quoting Universalists

Annihilationist? (say that 3 times fast!) I was not aware that was an actual category of Christian believer or belief. One thing I will tell you is the only thing being annihilated around here is sound doctrine and healthy teaching. Common sense has taken quite the beating as well.

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

And while I see from scripture, grounds for the annihilation of unregenerate souls, they may receive some just retribution before they go into nothingness.

Please show me the verse(s) that speak of "nothingness". I've been reading and studying the Bible for about 60 years and have never seen a verse that even remotely indicates that anyone we spend eternity in "nothingness". Sorry to use this as an example StG, but this is where the slippery slope of denying the words of our Lord and the teaching of the apostles lead - to unbiblical and even nonsensical errors.
-

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

I have to comment on this, and then I will return to the outer darkness.

Manna-man does not embrace Universalism. He is an Annihilationist, along with STG and yours truly. And we have clearly demonstrated that this has scriptural basis.

As long as there are no “stupid” questions here, can you please describe what makes one an Annihilationist. I’m not familiar with that. Thanks.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Timotheist

I suggest you read post #175 and then tell us how Annihilationism is not "sound doctrine and healthy teaching". I am (was, anyway) trying to help you further de-Hellenize yourself. Like with your "Hell is Satan's kingdom", which is "unbiblical and nonsensical", and not in keeping with the "words of our Lord and the teaching of the apostles". Looks like you need another 60 years of reading.

Ohio, this post should also answer your question.

Yes, that post describes the position that the soul is not immortal. Lots of verses suggesting that (see second point in below article)!

I thought in response to our brother, UntoHim, I would quote an online article by a brother who says he hasn't been fully swayed by the annihilation view, but that an honest reading of several scriptures should cause an open-minded person to consider that this might be a distinct possibility. Read through this and look up the verses, and see for yourself.

Found here:Biblical Support for Annhilation

In my previous post, I said that while I am not an “Annihilationist,” I do see enough biblical support for this position to qualify it as an Evangelical option. I have not yet had the time to clear my desk to engage in prayerful, thorough, painstaking exegesis to have landed on this position. But from what I have seen, there’s a good deal of sound, biblical arguments for it.
Before we examine these, we need to know what it is we’re even talking about.

Rightly understood, the annihilation view of hell says that there will be irreversible, horrific punishment for those who don’t believe in Christ. This punishment may last for a period of time, but ultimately it will end. The wicked will pass out of existence; they will not be tormented forever and ever.

This view is usually referred to as “conditional immortality” by its proponents, since immortality is a gift given to the righteous in Christ (see below). But as statement in my previous blog, I actually prefer the term “terminal punishment” instead of conditional immortality (which is still unfamiliar to many) or annihilation (which has too many negative connotations). To be clear, annihilation (hereafter “terminal punishment”) is not a product of Jehovah’s Witness theology. While it’s true that JW’s hold to this view, this doesn’t mean that they invented the doctrine nor does it mean that those who hold to terminal punishment are Jehovah’s Witness. I’m sorry to waste your time with this basic point, but I’ve actually heard people assume I’ve become Jehovah’s Witness because I see biblical support for terminal punishment. Yikes! Does that mean that I’m also Muslim because I believe in the sovereignty of God? Or Buddhist, since I believe in nonviolence? One of the more comical assumptions was from someone on Facebook who thought I might now be an atheist because they heard that I was “an Annihilationist.”

Come on, people! We must use our brains. And our Bibles. It’s a sad day in Evangelicalism when accusations and name-calling replace authentic study of God’s inspired word.

Plus, the duration of hell is not listed in the Apostle’s Creed nor the Nicene Creed—the basic standards of orthodox Christian doctrine. And while ECT has been the dominant, though not universal, Christian view, terminal punishment has been the view of several prominent Evangelical theologians throughout history.

In any case, here are some of the strongest biblical arguments in favor of terminal punishment:

First, most of the passages in the NT that talk about the fate of the wicked use language that suggests finality. Here’s just a small sampling:

“Destruction” or “perish” (Greek: apoleia or olethros Matt 7:13; John 3:16; 17:12; Acts 8:20; Rom 9:22-23; Phil 1:28; 3:19; 2 Thess 2:3; 1 Tim 6:9; Heb 10:39; 2 Pet 2:1; 1 Thess 5:3; 2 Thess 1:9; 1 Tim 6:9).
“Death” (Greek: thanatos or apothnesko Rom 1:32; 6:21; 7:5; 8:6; 1 Cor 15:21-22; 15:56; 2 Cor 2:16; 7:10; James 1:15; 5:20; 1 John 5:16; Rev 2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8)
“End” (Greek: telos Rom 6:21-22; 2 Cor 11:15; Phil 3:19; 1 Pet 4:17)
“Disintegration/corruption” (phthora) (Gal 6:8; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:12).
We could add to this list several other images that would also suggest the cessation of life for the wicked. Images such as:

burned up chaff, trees, weeds, branches (Matt 3:12; 7:19; 13:40; John 15:6).
a destroyed house, discarded fish, uprooted plant, chopped down tree (Matt 7:27; 13:48; 15:13; Luke 13:7)
the Day of Judgment is compared to OT examples of the flood, destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, Lot’s wife turned into salt (Luke 17:27, 29, 32).
wicked compared to ground up powder or cut to pieces (Matt 21:41, 44; 24:51).
Let’s pause for a second. Look up some of these passages if you need to. Lay aside your assumptions as best you can and consider these points. These biblical points. I’m not saying you need to embrace this view—I haven’t embraced it yet. But any fair-minded, Bible-believing Christian should at least pause and say, “Huh, wow, a plain reading of those texts would suggest finality.”

In a recent debate between on the nature of hell between Al Mohler (ECT) and Chris Date (Terminal Punishment), Date kept giving exegetical argument after exegetical argument, and Mohler simply referred to Date’s arguments as “not the traditional reading” and clear evidence of “interpretive calisthenics.” Maybe I’m completely blinded, but is it “interpretive calisthenics” to say that destruction, death, perish, end, burned up chaff, and the destructive of Sodom and Gomorrah may actually suggest finality and not ongoing torment? Certainly, we’ll get to the counterarguments from the ECT position. But when we hear of someone embracing terminal punishment in light of the Scriptures, we should at the very least stop mocking the arguments without actually refuting them. You can acknowledge that a particular view has some good biblical merit without actually embracing it.

Second, the Bible says that the gift of immortality is only given to believers who are in Christ (see (1 Cor 15:21-23, 50-54; 2 Tim 1:10). That is, immortality (i.e. living forever) is not inherent to humankind. The soul is not inherently immortal, so ECT can only work if God miraculously gives a type of immortality to the wicked at their resurrection. But this is never clearly stated in Scripture. Immortality is only given to believers. And remember Genesis 2, where “living forever” was conditioned upon eating from the tree of life (which shows up again in Rev. 22).

What’s interesting is that Augustine, who was by far the most influential advocate for ECT, believed that the soul was immortal. (His view was carried over from his Platonic past.) For him, terminal punishment wasn’t even an option. The soul, which lives forever, must either live forever in heaven (or the new creation) or live forever in hell. ECT was the only real option for Augustine and his view was more or less embraced for the next 1,000 years.

Third, the language of “eternality” (aionios) doesn’t always (or usually?) convey the idea of never-ending time. Notice, for instance, some of the Septuagint uses of the Greek word aionios:

LXX Ps 24:7 “Life up your heads, O gates! And be lifted up, O aionioi (eternal) doors!”
LXX 1 Chron 15:2 “eternal priesthood”
So when we come to passages like 2 Thessalonians 1:9 where Paul talks about “eternal destruction,” this doesn’t have to mean “the ongoing, never ending act of destroying which is never final,” but it could very easily mean “a destruction characteristic of the ages.” Or even if aionios does signify never-ending time, when joined with olethron (“destruction”), it could mean that the destruction is final; that is, it will never end or be reversed.

And the same is true of Matthew 25:46. When Jesus says: “And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life,” the “eternal punishment” doesn’t have to mean the “eternal act of punishing” but could mean the never-ending duration of the punishment—the results of the verdict.

The sum up this point, the word “eternal” (or better: “everlasting”) may refer to ECT, but it could also simply refer to the finality or completeness of the destruction or to its other worldly nature—it’s a “destruction of the ages,” or “not of this world.” Either way, it does not unambiguously refer to ECT.

I know, I know. Some of you will still say that this is interpretive calisthenics. But I disagree. This is simply the possibility of the Greek language. Again, to be clear, I’m not saying that terminal punishment is the only way, or even the best way, to interpret 2 Thessalonians 1:9 or Matthew 25:46. I do think, however, that it’s a perfectly legitimate way of understanding how the Greek adjectives and nouns can function. Only those who are conditioned to read ECT into these texts will say that they can only be interpreted to mean eternal conscious torment.

I’ve got some thoughts on the “weeping and gnashing of teeth” and “undying worm” images, but why don’t we stop here. There’s a lot to digest. But stay tuned, we’ll keep talking about hell, but I promise you: This series won’t last forever. It will terminate at some point in time.

[UntoHim]

This thread is CLOSED FOR NOW. I don't see how discussions revolving around this subject can be profitable for current or former Local Church members.

Nell and I will discuss the future of this thread and decide soon if will be kept in the archives or suffer the terrible fate of ANNHILATION. - -
-