Is the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment biblical or not?

[Timotheos]

This is a concept long standing even back in Jesus time. What a parable is? A parable is the making use of simple concepts to illustrate a less obvious point. To the Jews immortal soul, hell, lake of fire, eternal torment etc. are Jewish concepts back then. Both Pharisees and Essenes held these concepts. So are the Jews in majority as they are influenced basically by the Pharisees.

From Josephus,

In this region there is a certain place set apart, as a lake of unquenchable fire, whereinto we suppose no one hath hitherto been cast; but it is prepared for a day afore-determined by God, in which one righteous sentence shall deservedly be passed upon all men; when the unjust, and those that have been disobedient to God, and have given honor to such idols as have been the vain operations of the hands of men as to God himself, shall be adjudged to this everlasting punishment, as having been the causes of defilement; while the just shall obtain an incorruptible and never-fading kingdom. These are now indeed confined in Hades, but not in the same place wherein the unjust are confined.


If there's a problem in the concept, Jesus should have corrected it instead of making parable out of them.

You have the same problem as with Matthew 25:46, "Everlasting Punishment" does not necessarily mean "Everlasting Conscious Torment". Since the punishment is a result of being thrown into a lake of fire, the everlasting punishment could as easily be being burnt to ash in the lake of fire. Josephus didn't say in the passage you quoted whether he thought the everlasting punishment consists of everlasting torment by the fire in the lake or everlasting destruction by the fire in the lake. As usual, those who believe in eternal conscious torment read their doctrine INTO the words "Everlasting Punishment".

 

[Hawkins]

You have the same problem as with Matthew 25:46, "Everlasting Punishment" does not necessarily mean "Everlasting Conscious Torment". Since the punishment is a result of being thrown into a lake of fire, the everlasting punishment could as easily be being burnt to ash in the lake of fire. Josephus didn't say in the passage you quoted whether he thought the everlasting punishment consists of everlasting torment by the fire in the lake or everlasting destruction by the fire in the lake. As usual, those who believe in eternal conscious torment read their doctrine INTO the words "Everlasting Punishment".

Are you trying to argue with Josephus.

My point is, it is already a Jewish concept back in Jesus time while Jesus never tried to correct it. What's that to do with Matthew?

 

[Timotheos]

Are you trying to argue with Josephus.

NOT at ALL. I am also not telling Josephus what it is that he believes, as you are doing. He didn't SAY eternal conscious torment so it is begging the question to claim that he believed that everlasting punishment is the same thing aa everlasting conscious torment.

My point is, it is already a Jewish concept back in Jesus time while Jesus never tried to correct it.

Well, that point would be WRONG as well, because there wasn't a monolithic "Jewish Concept" of Hell in Jesus' time. Some of the Jews believed in torment in the afterlife and some did not.

What's that to do with Matthew?

That many people try to claim that Matthew 25:46 proves that there is eternal conscious torment in hell because Matthew 25:46 contains the words "Everlasting Punishment". In BOTH cases, "Eternal Punishment" is ASSUMED to be "Eternal Conscious Torment", but it is not proven that the eternal punishment is not to be eternally dead. In both cases, those who love the doctrine of eternal conscious torment read their doctrine INTO what they are reading, rather than deriving the doctrine FROM what they read. It's pretty easy to see from the outside.

 

[Hawkins]

NOT at ALL. I am also not telling Josephus what it is that he believes, as you are doing. He didn't SAY eternal conscious torment so it is begging the question to claim that he believed that everlasting punishment is the same thing aa everlasting conscious torment.


Well, that point would be WRONG as well, because there wasn't a monolithic "Jewish Concept" of Hell in Jesus' time. Some of the Jews believed in torment in the afterlife and some did not.


That many people try to claim that Matthew 25:46 proves that there is eternal conscious torment in hell because Matthew 25:46 contains the words "Everlasting Punishment". In BOTH cases, "Eternal Punishment" is ASSUMED to be "Eternal Conscious Torment", but it is not proven that the eternal punishment is not to be eternally dead. In both cases, those who love the doctrine of eternal conscious torment read their doctrine INTO what they are reading, rather than deriving the doctrine FROM what they read. It's pretty easy to see from the outside.

Why do you have to assume that it's not conscious torment?

https://winteryknight.com/2011/12/0...elieve-in-an-eternal-hell-or-annihilationism/


As a common sense, how often when humans put up a saying that "you will suffer forever" but actually mean that "it is when you are unconscious"?

 

[Timotheos]

Why do you have to assume that it's not conscious torment?

From THAT quote? I don't assume that it's not conscious torment. I also don't assume that it is eternal death, or that it IS conscious torment. THAT quote simply does not contain the information of what the eternal punishment consists of, other than it has something to do with the lake of fire.

But if you look at many other quotes, from the Bible, you can see that the eternal punishment is death. Romans 6:23 says that the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life, John 3:16 says that we will have eternal life instead of perishing, Jesus said in Luke 13:3 that "unless you repent you will likewise perish", Jesus said in Matthew 10:28 that those in hell (Gehenna) would be destroyed, both body and soul. Psalm 37:10 says that the wicked will be no more. Psalm 37:20 says the wicked will perish. Psalm 92:6-7 says that the wicked will be destroyed, and it says it VERY WELL. You should read it. Don't assume that the eternal punishment is eternal conscious torment in hell.

I could go on to give you MANY more passages from the Bible that specifically state that the wicked will perish, be destroyed, be burnt, and will be no more, But I won't do it here because I got banned one time when I put too much of the evidence in one post, the post was too long. There is just WAY TOO MUCH evidence in the Bible to ignore the fact that the wicked will be destroyed.

 

[Timotheos]

https://winteryknight.com/2011/12/0...elieve-in-an-eternal-hell-or-annihilationism/

Let me point out something to you from your link:

From Ignatius of Antioch (110AD)

Ignatius was a student of the Apostle John, and succeeded the Apostle Peter as the Bishop of Antioch. He wrote a number of important letters to believers in churches in the area:

Corrupters of families will not inherit the kingdom of God. And if they who do these things according to the flesh suffer death. how much more if a man corrupt by evil reaching the faith of God. for the sake of which Jesus Christ was crucified? A man become so foul will depart into unquenchable fire: and so will anyone who listens to him. (Letter to the Ephesians 16:1-2)

The person who posted this quote of Ignatius posted it to "prove" that Ignatius believed in eternal conscious torment. But read the quote carefully. It doesn't actually SAY that! It says that if a person who does these things deserves DEATH, how much more for the the person corrupt by evil? Did he SAY eternal conscious torment? NO! What is "more" than death? How about "MORE DEATH"??!! Eternal Death? Yes, Eternal death. So this doesn't prove that he believed in eternal conscious torment, it also doesn't prove that he was thinking of eternal death, but I'm not the one trying to recruit Ignatius to my side.

Ignatius also says they depart into unquenchable fire, but he DOESN'T say that he thinks they will suffer alive forever in the unquenchable fire. He could as easily believe that they are burnt up by the unquenchable fire. Maybe he does and maybe he doesn't, but my point is that HE DOESN'T SAY. I don't know if Ignatius believed in the destruction of the wicked, but again, I am not trying to recruit Ignatius as a witness for my side, as the author of your webpage is trying unsuccessfully to do.

Read what the words SAY, not what you ASSUME that they say.

 

[Timotheos]

Why do you have to assume that it's not conscious torment?

https://winteryknight.com/2011/12/0...elieve-in-an-eternal-hell-or-annihilationism/


As a common sense, how often when humans put up a saying that "you will suffer forever" but actually mean that "it is when you are unconscious"?

I wouldn't assume that if someone says "You will suffer forever" they mean "it is when you are unconscious". But none of the quotes you gave actually SAID "you will suffer forever"! As common sense, if someone said "you will be destroyed by being burnt to ash" would you think that actually means "You will suffer alive forever"?

By the way, did you read the comments under the blog you attached? Wintery Knight got taken to the woodshed.

 

[way 2 go]

Romans 7:9 doesn't require a new definition of "dead" and "alive" - metaphor still describes the relationship just as well. "Dead" can be under the sentence of death" and "alive" would be "freed from the sentence of death." Can you find an example which would require a new definition?

no.

As for your question of why "Trinity" is not in the bible, it might have something to do with it not being in scripture in the first place. I've read the whole bible and for some reason "Trinity" didn't merit a mention from Genesis through Revelation. In truth it's a man-made model to attempt to explain how God could be in more than one place at a time. I'd go as far to say it's not even a good model because most people have different ideas as to what it means. My point being is that it's a "man-made" model. Last anyone checked, "Trinity" is neither referenced, defined, or even required by scripture.
I'd like to stay on topic if possible.

you addressed it and I disagree

:carryon:

On topic and scripture based is my meaning. Two years and 5000+ plus posts and this one topic still requires resolution, so let this question stand or fall on its own scriptural merit. Can you show that "spiritual death" is a *required* construct from scripture, that requires a specific definition that cannot be otherwise resolved by the normal understanding of metaphor?

that depends on whether we are in the in the pursuit of truth .

I explain, you explain, we disagree .

My favorite hard-bound bible has a quote at the front, titled The Golden Rule of Biblical Interpretation:

"When the PLAIN SENSE of Scripture makes COMMON SENSE, SEEK NO OTHER SENSE. Therefore, take EVERY WORD at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning, UNLESS the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages, and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate CLEARLY otherwise. God, in revealing his Word, neither intends nor permits the reader to be confused. He wants His children to understand."

That seems pretty sensible to me. How about you?

if you want to get it wrong & truth does not matter
God has left the door wide open for you to get it wrong

Pro 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out.

Notice Jesus never said "I am God"

For clarification:
Metaphor | Define Metaphor at Dictionary.com
www.dictionary.com/browse/metaphor
Metaphor definition, a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance, ...

For example,
Psalms 18:30 KJV
(30) As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him.

Is God a literal buckler? No.
Do we need a new definition for buckler, or a doctrine of Spiritual Bucklers? No.
Is the passage using metaphor? Yes, there is a resemblance between God's aspect of protection and the buckler.

:duh:



Paul was literally alive

 

[Timotheos]

no.

if you want to get it wrong & truth does not matter
God has left the door wide open for you to get it wrong

THAT door swings both ways pal. If YOU want to get it wrong, if you want to ignore what the Bible SAYS and insist that it MEANS something else, God has left that door wide open for you. The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life. You can say death doesn't mean death and everyone gets eternal life if you want to, and you would be wrong.

But as you say,

that depends on whether we are in the in the pursuit of truth

You aren't. You are in pursuit of any defense of the doctrine you like. Any straw to cling to, just so that you can continue to believe in eternal torture in hell. I think there is someone in your life that you want to go to hell.

 

[lifeisgood]

I am not trying to hijack this thread onto a new topic, but I know of a couple contradictions that inevitably result from hardcore Trinity enthusiasm. But I cannot tell from your response what you think this fundamental principle is so it doesn't help communication much. If, however, this principle is from the Bible then it would stand on its own if you tried to communicate it - without ever needing a word like Trinity.

I can say much of what would need to be said with Isaiah 9:6 and 1 John 5:7 etc. No creeds needed to be recited. No one needing to be burned at the stake in Geneva. If it says God was manifest in the flesh and walked among us but we knew him not, is that not sufficient?

At an airport right now thumb typing so I am not at great liberty for great detail. Regardless, let's stay on topic. If you want to start a nature of God or Trinity thread please feel free to invite me, if you wish.

Sent from my LG-D852 using TheologyOnline mobile app

What is there to clarify?
Father, Son, Holy Spirit is the Trinity.
Your body, soul, spirit is a trinity.
Why some people complicate their lives has always been a mystery to me.

 

[Rosenritter]

Way 2 Go wrote:
Notice Jesus never said "I am God"

On a sarcastic note, he didn't use that exact words because he wasn't speaking English. On a practical note he absolutely did a bunch of different ways, including "I am the first and the last" and "I will be their God." You can't get five chapters through the Gospels before Jesus declares himself as God.

As for what you just stated as fundamentals of Trinity that's missing from my Bible. Sounds more like the philosophy that Paul warned us to steer clear from. I was hoping that you were instead going to use the term to summarize a scriptural teaching spelled out by scripture.

Jesus is our God and walked among us in the flesh. Don't know why you are trying to make that more complicated. If you want complications start a new thread?

Sent from my LG-D852 using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[Rosenritter]

You have the same problem as with Matthew 25:46, "Everlasting Punishment" does not necessarily mean "Everlasting Conscious Torment". Since the punishment is a result of being thrown into a lake of fire, the everlasting punishment could as easily be being burnt to ash in the lake of fire. Josephus didn't say in the passage you quoted whether he thought the everlasting punishment consists of everlasting torment by the fire in the lake or everlasting destruction by the fire in the lake. As usual, those who believe in eternal conscious torment read their doctrine INTO the words "Everlasting Punishment".

Timotheos, earlier in my proof of eternal conscious torment I built it while stating my assumptions. One of those assumptions in my chain was "the devil hath immortality." That was a terrible misquote of the passage that states that Christ only hath immortality. I can better follow up on my promised proofs later when I have a real computer again but I am curious, why didn't you challenge my statement?

Sent from my LG-D852 using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[Rosenritter]

Are you trying to argue with Josephus.

My point is, it is already a Jewish concept back in Jesus time while Jesus never tried to correct it. What's that to do with Matthew?

Idol worship was already an Israelite concept back in the time of Moses. So if you want an argument of specifically trying to correct you need an instance where the topic would need to show where it specifically came up, like with the Sadducees and the resurrection. Otherwise your argument is weakened by speculation.

Sent from my LG-D852 using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[way 2 go]

The word 'trinity' is not; however, the fundamental principle of the doctrine of the Trinity can be found in the Bible, that is, if you want to find it.

of course you can find evidence for the trinity
you can also find evidence that the wicked suffer eternal punishment .
Oh wait the bible actually says eternal punishment so not quite the same.

Mat 25:41 "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

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


Mat 25:45 Then he will answer them, saying, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.'
Mat 25:46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

 

[way 2 go]

To me, It makes perfect sense for Jesus Christ to refer to people who will not receive eternal LIFE as "the dead". It doesn't mean that they are dead at the time that they are alive, and it doesn't NEED TO. People's confusion about "Let the dead bury the dead" means that SOME people are not ready for books that are written for grown-ups.

not future.

Paul referred to himself as having died
past tense as in not something future .

Rom 7:9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died.


Rom 7:10 The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me.

Rom 7:11 For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.


spiritual death

 

[Rosenritter]

of course you can find evidence for the trinity
you can also find evidence that the wicked suffer eternal punishment .
Oh wait the bible actually says eternal punishment so not quite the same.

Mat 25:41 "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

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


Mat 25:45 Then he will answer them, saying, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.'
Mat 25:46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

Way 2 go, I don't know of a single person on this thread that would disagree that the wicked will suffer eternal punishment. That isn't the subject of debate. When you say something like that it sounds like you aren't paying attention. If the people in this thread would responsibly focus there might be a hope of resolution.



Sent from my LG-D852 using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[Rosenritter]

not future.

Paul referred to himself as having died
past tense as in not something future .

Rom 7:9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died.


Rom 7:10 The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me.

Rom 7:11 For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.


spiritual death

You are using the word Spiritual as a synonym for Metaphorical... Unless you can biblically prove a distinction between the two and then prove metaphor as inapplicable you have no useful evidence from that angle.

Sent from my LG-D852 using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[Timotheos]

Timotheos, earlier in my proof of eternal conscious torment I built it while stating my assumptions. One of those assumptions in my chain was "the devil hath immortality." That was a terrible misquote of the passage that states that Christ only hath immortality. I can better follow up on my promised proofs later when I have a real computer again but I am curious, why didn't you challenge my statement?

Sent from my LG-D852 using TheologyOnline mobile app

I have an excellent reason for not challenging your statement that the devil hath immortality. I didn't see it. Okay, I'll challenge it now. Why don't you post the scripture that says that the devil hath immortality?

 

[Timotheos]

not future.

Paul referred to himself as having died
past tense as in not something future .

Rom 7:9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died.


Rom 7:10 The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me.

Rom 7:11 For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.


spiritual death

For the thousandth time, It doesn't SAY spiritual death, you are reading your beloved doctrine INTO scripture instead of just accepting what scripture says. Romans 6:23 even contrasts DEATH with eternal life. It simply does not mean "spiritual death and not really death at all".

 

[way 2 go]

Way 2 go, I don't know of a single person on this thread that would disagree that the wicked will suffer eternal punishment. That isn't the subject of debate. When you say something like that it sounds like you aren't paying attention. If the people in this thread would responsibly focus there might be a hope of resolution.



Sent from my LG-D852 using TheologyOnline mobile app

I am paying close attention

annihilation is not suffering eternal punishment.


duration : eternal

you need to exist to be punished

notice it is contrasted with eternal life you are going to exist in
one place or the other.


Mat 25:46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

not

Mat 25:46 And these will go away and be punished, but the righteous into eternal life."