BRXII Battle talk

[logos_x]

For your amusement, Nineveh, I'll answer these questions:

The first death is the death of the body, which is the impersonal, "collective" bearer of the consequences of Adam's sin (e.g., death, human physical mortality).

If you die to yourself while living, meaning a spiritual death to selfishness and self-power which opens the door to rebirth in the Spirit, then you do not need to undergo the second death after judgment because you've already died to yourself. However, if you die physically without also dying in this deeper way, then you still have the second death before you. You still must consciously and willingly die to self in order to live in Spirit. People who have not died to themselves live in outer darkness until they realize the error of their ways and allow themselves to be purified by God's redemptive flame.

Very good :thumb:

 

[logos_x]

Yes it is that indeed the problem. Your deception leads you to completely misquote someone instead of dealing with their beliefs directly. By the way, how about those verses that say that the "Salvation of all" is the Gospel? Still haven't seen them.

Pathetic.

 

[Aimiel]

Why would someone who has died need to die a second time? Did death not do its job right the first time? Is it possible for someone who is dead to be made 'more dead?' The second death is being cast into hell. You're dead to those who are alive. You're sent to be tormented, forever. The Word of God doesn't say that the second death will be overcome. It says death. The death it is referring to is physical death: the death that will be cast into the Lake of Fire (the second death).

 

[Aimiel]

By the way, how about those verses that say that the "Salvation of all" is the Gospel? Still haven't seen them.

Pathetic.

What is pathetic is that you have yet to respond to his question, and you can't see how this is deception. You're ignoring the truth, and he's slapping you in the face with it. Hello!!! McFly!!! :Clete:

 

[logos_x]

What is pathetic is that you have yet to respond to his question, and you can't see how this is deception. You're ignoring the truth, and he's slapping you in the face with it. Hello!!! McFly!!! :Clete:

What is pathetic is I've responded to his question several times and he still can't see it.
And you are just as bad.

 

[Nineveh]

Death. The body goes to the dust, the spirit returns to God.
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
(Ecc 12:7 KJV)

Considering "Remember now your Creator in the days of your youth, Before the difficult days come, And the years draw near when you say..." is at the heading of your one verse, aren't you taking that out of context to mean "ALL"? Especially when we know that people before the resurrection went to "Sheol" of which there were two parts. "Hell" and "Abraham's Bosom"? Or, maybe you don't and we can discuss this part.

The second death is also death. The body goes to the dust, the spirit returns to God.

How is it death? What is dying?

Some suffer second death after resurrection and judgment.

How is it death, what is dying?

Later, all death is overcome. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
(1Co 15:26 KJVR)

The verse from Cor you keep citing is talking to believers about Christ conquering death, start at verse 12. "Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?" We aren't switching topics when we get to v 26.

Is it possible you are trying to make the lake into the death spoken of in Cor? Have you considered the death from Cor is the death that is thrown into the the lake (aka the second death)? Rev: "Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death." Since we know there are two different deaths we must face, we know all death is not one single thing.

They die to this world

Don't Christians spiritually "die" to this world when we become alive in Christ? Or is it that our flesh dies?

They die again to this world

How many times does one die to the same thing? That makes no sense. This is the part we will have trouble discussing because the answer isn't going to fit into your theology very nicely.

Ok.

Thank you for this reply Maybe we can have a real dialog about death now.

 

[logos_x]

Why would someone who has died need to die a second time? Did death not do its job right the first time? Is it possible for someone who is dead to be made 'more dead?'

They die a second time AFTER being raised back to life.
The reason is they are judged according to their works and their works condemn them to a second death.

The second death is being cast into hell. You're dead to those who are alive.

Correct.

You're sent to be tormented, forever. The Word of God doesn't say that the second death will be overcome. It says death. The death it is referring to is physical death: the death that will be cast into the Lake of Fire (the second death).

Wrong.
What the Bible does not say is that only the first death will be overcome. It says death.
That means all death.

Now, the ONLY source for life and immortality is God. That being the case, how is it that people can be tormented forever? If people are still "alive" in this lake of fire forever, and God is the source of that "life", then God is keeping people alive in torment forever just to keep them in torment and does so without end. If they actually are dead and remain dead forever and are never raised to life again then you have annihilationism. Both of those scenarios have God either destroying people as a result of the lake of fire or letting people be tortured in flames forever without remedy.

What is left out is the utter destruction of death itself. That all death will be swallowed up in victory. Not only that but all the works of the Devil also will be destroyed, meaning that they become of no effect ultimately. When that happens, all mankind that was swallowed up by sin and death will have been saved from them both.

What the tradition has done is confused the process with the outcome.

 

[Aimiel]

What the Bible does not say is that only the first death will be overcome. It says death. That means all death.

I hadn't thought about it that way, but now that I do, I believe that you're correct (partly, at least). The 'death' part of the punishment of all whose names aren't written in The Lamb's Book of Life will be done away with, since there will be no more dying, after all those who are sentenced there are sent there.

Now, the ONLY source for life and immortality is God.

No argument there.

That being the case, how is it that people can be tormented forever? If people are still "alive" in this lake of fire forever, and God is the source of that "life", then God is keeping people alive in torment forever just to keep them in torment and does so without end.

Is God 'keeping people alive' or are they simply (and again, we're merely speculating about a realm that we don't understand, the spirit-realm) dead (so-to-speak) due to God's Judgement (they died in their sins)? Jesus came to give us Zoe, the eternal light, life and love of God. Those in hell don't have that. They have decay. They have worms crawling in their flesh that don't die in the flames. They have eternity to suffer, whether you believe that they do or not, because they rejected God's Only Begotton Son.

Both of those scenarios have God either destroying people as a result of the lake of fire or letting people be tortured in flames forever without remedy.
What is left out is the utter destruction of death itself. That all death will be swallowed up in victory.

Punishing the guilty is victory, whether you see it as such or not. God designed creation such that those He created would have a choice: good or evil; life or death. Saying that if anyone suffers for eternity that it isn't a 'complete' victory is simply silly, and one of the biggest cop-outs universalists commit.

Not only that but all the works of the Devil also will be destroyed, meaning that they become of no effect ultimately.

Again, you're re-defining God's Word according to your own opinion and lack of understanding.

What the tradition has done is confused the process with the outcome.

No, tradition has encouraged, formulated and passed on a love of sound doctrine. What your heap-o-teachers who scratch your itchy ears have done is sour you to sound doctrine and given you false hope to share with the unsuspecting.

 

[logos_x]

Considering "Remember now your Creator in the days of your youth, Before the difficult days come, And the years draw near when you say..." is at the heading of your one verse, aren't you taking that out of context to mean "ALL"? Especially when we know that people before the resurrection went to "Sheol" of which there were two parts. "Hell" and "Abraham's Bosom"? Or, maybe you don't and we can discuss this part.

Sheol meant grave. the actual entymology of the word itself is "hidden"
So did "hell" originally when it was first used in 1611...meant "covered"

Hades is the same in the Greek of the New Testament.

As with all of the afterlife in all cultures, there are many ideas as to what is going on there.
Some say there is a consciousness and there are two "places", one bad place that has varying degrees of torments and a good place that is described as paradise. This is almost universal.

Resurrection empties sheol / hades.

How is it death? What is dying?

Balder's description was very good. The whole issue here is we die to our selfishness, and to our sinful nature resident in our members.

In the eternal torment model, nothing "dies"...they remain the same as they always were forever, under conditions that some think is literal burning flames, and this for all eternity future without end...accomplishing nothing at all. What dies?

The verse from Cor you keep citing is talking to believers about Christ conquering death, start at verse 12. "Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?" We aren't switching topics when we get to v 26.

God all in all, the whole universe in subjection, Nin.
Do you honestly believe death is meant to be a part of that? Especially when God can raise the dead and save sinners?

Come on, Nin. Only believers in eternal torment would think that Paul was only talking about the Church when He says the whole universe.

Is it possible you are trying to make the lake into the death spoken of in Cor? Have you considered the death from Cor is the death that is thrown into the the lake (aka the second death)? Rev: "Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death." Since we know there are two different deaths we must face, we know all death is not one single thing.

No...either death is destroyed, ultimately...or it isn't. Can't have it both ways.

Don't Christians spiritually "die" to this world when we become alive in Christ? Or is it that our flesh dies?

The cross changed everything. All mankind was "in christ" at the cross.
And the resurrection also.

Nin, consider that I Corinthians 15 talks about an order to resurrection and restoration. That order goes far beyond just "those that are Christ's at His return".

How many times does one die to the same thing? That makes no sense. This is the part we will have trouble discussing because the answer isn't going to fit into your theology very nicely.

Notice how specific the desciption is of those that suffer the second death is.
They are literally the scum of the earth. I'm not going to say they don't deserve to die twice.

Thank you for this reply Maybe we can have a real dialog about death now.

 

[Aimiel]

Sheol meant grave. the actual entymology of the word itself is "hidden"
So did "hell" originally when it was first used in 1611...meant "covered"

Hades is the same in the Greek of the New Testament.

Then the grave (for the lost) is torment, just as Jesus described the rich man being in, right? The problem here lies in the fact that re-defining terms to push false doctrine simply does away with common sense. Professing yourself to be wise makes you a fool.

 

[logos_x]

Then the grave (for the lost) is torment, just as Jesus described the rich man being in, right? The problem here lies in the fact that re-defining terms to push false doctrine simply does away with common sense. Professing yourself to be wise makes you a fool.

I never said they weren't. I'm only saying that it is purposefull and has a goal.

 

[Nineveh]

Sheol meant grave. the actual entymology of the word itself is "hidden"
So did "hell" originally when it was first used in 1611...meant "covered"

Hades is the same in the Greek of the New Testament.

As with all of the afterlife in all cultures, there are many ideas as to what is going on there.
Some say there is a consciousness and there are two "places", one bad place that has varying degrees of torments and a good place that is described as paradise. This is almost universal.

Then we can agree that the parable Jesus told about the rich man and Lazarus accurately describes a separation in the place called "the grave" pre resurrection. Correct?

Resurrection empties sheol / hades.

Only the Abraham's bosom side post resurrection/pre Judgement resurrection.

Balder's description was very good. The whole issue here is we die to our selfishness, and to our sinful nature resident in our members.

The first death has nothing to do with an esoteric "dying to oneself" yet still drawing breath on earth. I notice you skipped answering this same question as to the second death. Would you mind answering please?

God all in all, the whole universe in subjection, Nin.
Do you honestly believe death is meant to be a part of that? Especially when God can raise the dead and save sinners?

Please address this: The verse from Cor you keep citing is talking to believers about Christ conquering death, start at verse 12. "Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?" We aren't switching topics when we get to v 26.

Come on, Nin. Only believers in eternal torment would think that Paul was only talking about the Church when He says the whole universe.

The whole universe is what? Is subject to Him. No one is arguing that logos, let's stick to the topic at hand.

The cross changed everything. All mankind was "in christ" at the cross.
And the resurrection also.

That is not true logos. There is no Biblial basis for you to claim "all mankind was in Christ at the cross". Just as it is an error to believe all are in Christ now.

Nin, consider that I Corinthians 15 talks about an order to resurrection and restoration. That order goes far beyond just "those that are Christ's at His return".

Logos, you chose such a small part of 1 Cor 15 when the whole chapter goes against your eisegesis of one or two sentences. You really need to consider context.

Notice how specific the desciption is of those that suffer the second death is.
They are literally the scum of the earth. I'm not going to say they don't deserve to die twice.

Yet... the second death is not the first, nor is it refered to in the same way. That's why there are two spoken of. We need to discuss what the second actually is.

 

[logos_x]

Then we can agree that the parable Jesus told about the rich man and Lazarus accurately describes a separation in the place called "the grave" pre resurrection. Correct?

Perhaps.

The rich man was Ciaphas...the high priest. Everyone present at the telling of this five part parable (of which this is the last part) would recognise that Jesus was exposing the Pharisees religeous system for what it is. In this last part, Jesus takes the Pharisees beliefs about who gets in and who is out and stands them on their head. This must not be overlooked.

The Lazarus character represents everyone that the Pharisees looked down upon. The people their religious system excluded and with whom they would not associate for fear of their "uncleaness"...which they thought to be contagious. The character is leperous, with dogs licking his sores.

Jesus shocked his audience by placing the rich man in torment and the leper in Abrahams bosom.

Imagine if someone did that this Sunday in your Church!

Only the Abraham's bosom side post resurrection/pre Judgement resurrection.

At first, perhaps. But what I'm talking about is future at the time of judgement. Everyone that is in the grave will come forth and be judged.

The first death has nothing to do with an esoteric "dying to oneself" yet still drawing breath on earth. I notice you skipped answering this same question as to the second death. Would you mind answering please?

This really is getting tiresome, Nin.

Please address this: The verse from Cor you keep citing is talking to believers about Christ conquering death, start at verse 12. "Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?" We aren't switching topics when we get to v 26.

I'm not switching any topics. Neither is Paul.

The whole universe is what? Is subject to Him. No one is arguing that logos, let's stick to the topic at hand.

That IS the topic.

That is not true logos. There is no Biblial basis for you to claim "all mankind was in Christ at the cross". Just as it is an error to believe all are in Christ now.

Who was left out?

Logos, you chose such a small part of 1 Cor 15 when the whole chapter goes against your eisegesis of one or two sentences. You really need to consider context.

Paul does not pull a bait and switch, Nin.

Yet... the second death is not the first, nor is it refered to in the same way. That's why there are two spoken of. We need to discuss what the second actually is.

It really isn't complicated. They are not in the Lambs book of life...they are cast away.
The issue before us is whether they are cast away forever or not. Does the second death accomplish anything, or not. And are they kept around for any reason at all other than misery.

When death is destroyed, is it liberating to creation, or does it impose a changeless condition of immortal beings in torment forever?

That is the issue.

 

[Nineveh]

Perhaps.

This is an important point. Do you find disagreement or no?

At first, perhaps. But what I'm talking about is future at the time of judgement. Everyone that is in the grave will come forth and be judged.

At that time, yes. But I made the distinction so we could be on the same page. At one point there was Sheol (aka the grave) = (hell+Abraham's Bosom), and at this point, that being after Christ's resurrection, there is hell (same place) and heaven (the alternative to the grave aka Abraham's Bosom). And in the future we know there is a 3rd place named the lake of fire. Are we together on this so far?

This really is getting tiresome, Nin.

Yes, it is. So quit dodging this part. The rest is going fairly well so far.

I'm not switching any topics. Neither is Paul.

Yes, you are. You want to forget who Paul is speaking to in all of 1Cor 15 and believe he means "everyone will be saved" when he talks about "everything being subjected to God". But let's not go off on another tangent we both know is going to get us nowhere. In fact, from here on out when we start getting onto another topic, I'll just cut that from my reply so we can focus on our convo of death. I hope this does not offend you.

It really isn't complicated. They are not in the Lambs book of life...they are cast away. The issue before us is whether they are cast away forever or not. Does the second death accomplish anything, or not. And are they kept around for any reason at all other than misery.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. You haven't explained what the second death is yet. You keep wanting to rely on the "they are dead" thing. Now I know you know there is more to it than that. You've already started to come out of your shell a little on physical death. Let's just lay it out there so we can look at it. What is the second death?

And please logos, it's taken 2 or 3 pages to prod you into talking about this, so please, can the smarmy "that is the issue" stuff. The pompousness does not become you after 3 pages of requesting you take up this convo.

I won't be on to reply to this thread again until Sunday night or Monday. Have a pleasant weekend

 

[logos_x]

This is an important point. Do you find disagreement or no?

I do find disagreement.
It is important to understand Jesus' audiance and what they believed, and whether what certain among them believed was actually true.
The Jewish beliefs about death, IMHO, are important to consider because it was Jews that Jesus was addressing...so here is a breif synopsis of Jewish belief...

Rabbinic teachings describe several different scenarios for what happens to the soul during this period All of them rectify serious flaws in the soul’s matrix.

The Purgatory of the Grave, or the Suffering of the Grave (hibbut ha-kever).

During this time, says the Zohar, “For seven days the soul goes to and fro from his house to his grave, and from his grave to his house, mourning for the body, as it is written: ‘His flesh shall suffer pain for him, and his soul shall mourn for it’ (Job 14:22).” (Zohar I, 218b)


Perdition, or gehinnom.

In Judaism, gehinnom or perdition differs greatly from the concept of hell as described in other major religious faiths. Gehinnom is seen as an intermediary stage where the soul is purified before attaining its next level of existence or eternal reward.

The righteous skip this period entirely as do martyrs. The Jewish concept of hell actually affords an opportunity for elevation of the soul. Of course, this does not mean that hell is a cup of tea. The metaphor of hell being a “consuming fire” is common to both Judaism and Christianity.

http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/web/essays/afterlife03.html
​

Gehinnom has its foundations in an actual place where a pagan cult conducted rituals that included burning children (see the description in II Kings 23:10 and Jeremiah 7:31). It was associated by Christ with the coming judgment of Israel

At that time, yes. But I made the distinction so we could be on the same page. At one point there was Sheol (aka the grave) = (hell+Abraham's Bosom), and at this point, that being after Christ's resurrection, there is hell (same place) and heaven (the alternative to the grave aka Abraham's Bosom). And in the future we know there is a 3rd place named the lake of fire. Are we together on this so far?

Appears so.

Yes, it is. So quit dodging this part. The rest is going fairly well so far.

I'm not dodging, I answered the questions you asked based on what you asked.
If you want a different answer perhaps it would be fruitful to rephrase the question rather than continually asking the same thing and expecting a different answer.

Yes, you are. You want to forget who Paul is speaking to in all of 1Cor 15 and believe he means "everyone will be saved" when he talks about "everything being subjected to God". But let's not go off on another tangent we both know is going to get us nowhere. In fact, from here on out when we start getting onto another topic, I'll just cut that from my reply so we can focus on our convo of death. I hope this does not offend you.

I know who Paul is talking to, Nin. And those that are Christ's are mentioned as the second order to rise from the dead...what you are missing is He goes beyond that. When he says "later on, comes the END" he starts saying where the whole thing is heading...and it is headed to the whole universe being in subjection to Christ.

Your problem is, you don't recognize what it means to be in subjection to Christ. You think it means what eternal torment has taught you. And it is wrong.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. You haven't explained what the second death is yet. You keep wanting to rely on the "they are dead" thing. Now I know you know there is more to it than that. You've already started to come out of your shell a little on physical death. Let's just lay it out there so we can look at it. What is the second death?

Fire is associated with the Spirit more often than any other metephore used in scripture. It is even said that God, the Creator, IS a consuming fire.

It seems strange at first glance to our western perspective that a consuming fire creates everything that is. Fire is dangerous if not in control. But we in modern times have learned that fire is very useful when in the proper hands and in control.

Brimstone is a very interesting word in the greek, and it isn't just thrown in there with nothing to offer us I don't think. According to Thayer's Greek Definitions the word is:

θεῖον
theion
Thayer Definition:
1) brimstone
1a) divine incense, because burning brimstone was regarded as having power to purify, and to ward off disease
Part of Speech: noun neuter
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: probably of G2304 (in its original sense of flashing)

G2304
θεῖος
theios
Thayer Definition:
1) a general name of deities or divinities as used by the Greeks
2) spoken of the only and true God, trinity
2a) of Christ
2b) Holy Spirit
2c) the Father
Part of Speech: adjective
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G2316

G2316
θεός
theos
Thayer Definition:
1) a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities
2) the Godhead, trinity
2a) God the Father, the first person in the trinity
2b) Christ, the second person of the trinity
2c) Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity
3) spoken of the only and true God
3a) refers to the things of God
3b) his counsels, interests, things due to him
4) whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way
4a) God’s representative or viceregent
4a1) of magistrates and judges
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: of uncertain affinity; a deity, especially (with G3588) the supreme Divinity

I view the second death as a refiners fire, and in the control of Jesus Christ. It has purpose inline with God's goals to be all in all.
Once that purpose has accomplished what He desires no one will be in it anymore. That purpose is to purify and make new the ones thrown in it.

The metaphorical "fire and brimstone" tells us it is not just punitive, but also corrective and remedial. It therefore cannot be eternal unless it never accomplishes what is intended, which I think will be quite impossible.

And please logos, it's taken 2 or 3 pages to prod you into talking about this, so please, can the smarmy "that is the issue" stuff. The pompousness does not become you after 3 pages of requesting you take up this convo.

Me? Pompous?
Look, I'm sorry you view it like that, but honestly, Nin...you asked me the same question over and over and I answered what those questions asked. You could have rephrased the questions a little and perhaps gotten an answer that you were seeking...as it was you kept giving me a math problem with why are there "two" deaths.

I won't be on to reply to this thread again until Sunday night or Monday. Have a pleasant weekend

You, too. God bless.

 

[Aimiel]

I never said they weren't. I'm only saying that it is purposefull and has a goal.

If the torment has a goal of making the un-righteous repent, then that makes it works, instead of grace, which, our Bible tells us, isn't how anyone will be justified. Why can't you understand that?

 

[Redfin]

If the torment has a goal of making the un-righteous repent, then that makes it works, instead of grace, which, our Bible tells us, isn't how anyone will be justified. Why can't you understand that?

Biblically speaking, repentance doesn't justify anyone.

Repentance simply is a part of turning in faith to the grace that does justify.

Alleged problem solved. :think:

And, the prospect of hell has been used as a motivation to repentance ever since Jesus preached it.

 

[Aimiel]

Biblically speaking, repentance doesn't justify anyone.

Repentance simply is a part of turning in faith to the grace that does justify.

Alleged problem solved.

The fact that grace will be obtained by those who go through torment (in your imagined 'universal' scenario) makes that grace into works, whether you recognize the fact or not. :think:

And, the prospect of hell has been used as a motivation to repentance ever since Jesus preached it.

And will be, until the end of this earth.

 

[logos_x]

If the torment has a goal of making the un-righteous repent, then that makes it works, instead of grace, which, our Bible tells us, isn't how anyone will be justified. Why can't you understand that?

:think: well now, that must present a bit of a conundrum for you...since hell has been used as a motivator for repentance all along.

 

[Redfin]

The fact that grace will be obtained by those who go through torment (in your imagined 'universal' scenario) makes that grace into works, whether you recognize the fact or not.

If you are implying a scenario where the torment somehow produces the grace, then you would be right.

But that is not the Christian Universalist scenario.

Alleged problem solved. :think: