Is the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment biblical or not?

[JudgeRightly]

I would like to mention two things. I was reading the following a few days ago, and it simply defines death:

John 21:18-19 (KJV): 18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. 19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me. 23 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?

Death is when our bodies die, we cease to breathe,

Nope.

First of all, there is no definition of death in that passage.

Second, death is defined as....

Wages.

"the wages of sin is death"

It's what you earn for sinning.

What happens when one sins?

He becomes separated from God.

He doesn't become unconscious. He doesn't fall asleep.

The natural consequence of sin is separation from God.

and contrary to what you claim, I believe that we are no longer conscious.

"I believe"

Sorry, but the Bible contradicts your beliefs, and since the Bible is God's word...

Certainly not! Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar. As it is written: “That You may be justified in Your words, And may overcome when You are judged.” - Romans 3:4 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans3:4&version=NKJV

The second thing I would like to briefly consider is the Rich Man and Lazarus. Again I suggest that this may have been already discussed in this long thread. The following are a few of the problems that I have in accepting that Jesus is relating actual events and you may like to comment on each of the following:
1.The term “Abraham’s bosom”. Is this heaven or some other place?

Two things to consider:

1) The Rich Man and Lazarus is not a parable. Jesus does not name any of the individuals in ANY of the parables that he told, except for this story. Also, even parables are not based on made up worlds, they are based on reality, which means that even if the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus WERE a parable, it would not mean that Hell is not real.

2) Abraham's Bosom was (past tense) a compartment of Hell reserved for the righteous dead who were awaiting the death of the High Priest. Post Christ's resurrection, as per Ephesians 4, Abraham's Bosom is no longer in Hell, but those who were there are now in Heaven.

2.Can those in hell see those in heaven?

No.

3.Is Jesus talking about the immortal souls of the Rich Man and Lazarus?

A soul is a person.

4.Do immortal souls have tongues and fingers?

Not when they don't have a form to dwell in.

5.Would a few drops of water on the Rich Man’s tongue cool his tongue?

Drops of water is a figure of speech which means relief from pain.

Why do I say this?

Because pain is not physical, and therefore a person does not require a physical body to experience it. Pain is simply awareness. Those in Hell do not have physical bodies, as their bodies are still on earth

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings JudgeRightly,

Nope. First of all, there is no definition of death in that passage. Second, death is defined as.... Wages. "the wages of sin is death" It's what you earn for sinning. What happens when one sins? He becomes separated from God. He doesn't become unconscious. He doesn't fall asleep. The natural consequence of sin is separation from God.

Some of your definitions above are confusing. I recommend that you reconsider John 21:18-19 as it does use the word “death” and John 21:23 uses the word “die”. Did Peter suffer the death that Jesus describes?

Two things to consider:
1) The Rich Man and Lazarus is not a parable. Jesus does not name any of the individuals in ANY of the parables that he told, except for this story. Also, even parables are not based on made up worlds, they are based on reality, which means that even if the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus WERE a parable, it would not mean that Hell is not real.

But he mentions Lazarus, who did not go to hell, but died and fell asleep, and Jesus raised him after four days.

2) Abraham's Bosom was (past tense) a compartment of Hell reserved for the righteous dead who were awaiting the death of the High Priest. Post Christ's resurrection, as per Ephesians 4, Abraham's Bosom is no longer in Hell, but those who were there are now in Heaven.

Apart from the Rich Man and Lazarus, could you prove from any other Scripture that there was a compartment in Hell reserved for the righteous dead. And why is the Hebrew word Sheol sometimes translated as “hell” and other times “the grave”? KJV translates as “grave” 31 times, “hell” 31 times, and “pit” three times.

Not when they don't have a form to dwell in.

But the Rich Man when he was in Hell speaks about his tongue and Lazarus’ finger. So are you suggesting that what he said was not real but figurative language? Similarly did Moses on the Mount of Transfiguration have a form to dwell in or was it only his immortal soul or immaterial spirit. Peter, James and John seemed to view Moses as a glorified man.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Aimiel]

I believe that Michigan is the only state where you can visit Paradise and Hell, the same day.

Paradise, Michigan

Hell, Michigan

 

[JudgeRightly]

Greetings JudgeRightly, Some of your definitions above are confusing.

That's as simple as it gets.

That you're confused by it indicates that your paradigm, your way of thinking, is flawed.

Life and death are clearly defined:

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. - Romans 6:23 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans6:23&version=NKJV

I recommend that you reconsider John 21:18-19 as it does use the word “death” and John 21:23 uses the word “die”.

And? A lot of passages use those words. Doesn't mean that those passages provide the definition of the words, whereas the verse above clearly defines both life and death.

[/QUOTE]Did Peter suffer the death that Jesus describes?[/QUOTE]

What in the world are you talking about?

Are you referring to the person Jesus was referring to, the "beloved disciple"?

Because that's not Peter.

That's John.

1) The Rich Man and Lazarus is not a parable. Jesus does not name any of the individuals in ANY of the parables that he told, except for this story. Also, even parables are not based on made up worlds, they are based on reality, which means that even if the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus WERE a parable, it would not mean that Hell is not real.

But he mentions Lazarus,

That's my point, yes, that he mentioned someone by name, whereas in all of His parables, not once does he name any of the characters.

who did not go to hell,

Saying he didn't go to hell doesn't make it so.

but died and fell asleep,

Just like Jesus' disciples, you're too dense to understand when a euphemism is being used.

Do you know what a euphemism is, Trevor?

and Jesus raised him after four days.

So which is it, Trevor, was Lazarus asleep? Or was Lazarus dead and in the grave?

Apart from the Rich Man and Lazarus, could you prove from any other Scripture that there was a compartment in Hell reserved for the righteous dead.

Numbers 35 comes to mind...

And why is the Hebrew word Sheol sometimes translated as “hell” and other times “the grave”? KJV translates as “grave” 31 times, “hell” 31 times, and “pit” three times.

Because just like in English, words in Hebrew can have multiple meaning, usually determined by the context of what is being said.

That's how languages work, Trevor.

But the Rich Man when he was in Hell speaks about his tongue and Lazarus’ finger.

And?

So are you suggesting that what he said was not real but figurative language?

Of course it was real.

AND it was figurative.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

Similarly did Moses on the Mount of Transfiguration have a form to dwell in or was it only his immortal soul or immaterial spirit.

It was Moses without his body.

Peter, James and John seemed to view Moses as a glorified man.

How is your statement not simply conjecture?

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again JudgeRightly,

That's as simple as it gets. That you're confused by it indicates that your paradigm, your way of thinking, is flawed. Life and death are clearly defined:
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. - Romans 6:23 NKJV.
And? A lot of passages use those words. Doesn't mean that those passages provide the definition of the words, whereas the verse above clearly defines both life and death.

But even in this passage we most probably differ as to its meaning. I understand death here in Romans 6:23 as the death that came as a result of Adam’s sin, when he returned to dust
Genesis 3:19 (KJV): In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
Romans 5:12 (KJV): Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Did Peter suffer the death that Jesus describes?

What in the world are you talking about? Are you referring to the person Jesus was referring to, the "beloved disciple"? Because that's not Peter. That's John.

John 21:18-19 is speaking about Peter and his anticipated death, “death”, possibly by crucifixion. John 21:23 is speaking about John “die”.

That's my point, yes, that he mentioned someone by name, whereas in all of His parables, not once does he name any of the characters.
Saying he didn't go to hell doesn't make it so.

But Jesus specifically uses the name Lazarus, and this is not a coincidence. We are not told what caused Lazarus’ death, but possibly he showed signs of his weakness and the Pharisees could have despised him and boasted of their own health and wealth. The death and resurrection of Lazarus was future to the parable, not a past event.

So which is it, Trevor, was Lazarus asleep? Or was Lazarus dead and in the grave?

Jesus clearly explains the figure of sleep, especially as it relates to Lazarus.
John 11:11-14 (KJV): 11 These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. 12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. 13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. 14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.

Numbers 35 comes to mind...

I am not sure what the cities of refuge have to do with this Hebrews 6:18.

Because just like in English, words in Hebrew can have multiple meaning, usually determined by the context of what is being said. That's how languages work, Trevor.

I suggest that the translators have attempted to force immortal soulism into many verses where “grave” should be used. For example Psalm 16:10 should be “grave” not ”hell”.

It was Moses without his body. How is your statement not simply conjecture?

What does an immortal soul look like? If you have an immortal soul have you ever seen it wandering about at night?

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

I may not be wording this as precisely as might be best; but if we’re going to entertain conversation with those who clearly and overtly oppose authentic Christian doctrine, it should be a matter of expected courtesy from them to disclose their affiliation when asked.

I’ve asked several on TOL what the name of their respective cults are, and not one will dare divulge that simple info. This is not in any kind of good faith, for there is a litany of background heresy for many of these groups that go far beyond these individual topics of areas of doctrine.

This is why I’ve stopped interacting with TrevorL and others. They are not honest and forthright in being here. They will not divulge which cult they are affiliated with and into which they are indoctrinated. This is not edifying the Body when these are obviously not the Body by their errant beliefs, etc.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again PneumaPsucheSoma,

I may not be wording this as precisely as might be best; but if we’re going to entertain conversation with those who clearly and overtly oppose authentic Christian doctrine, it should be a matter of expected courtesy from them to disclose their affiliation when asked.

I’ve asked several on TOL what the name of their respective cults are, and not one will dare divulge that simple info. This is not in any kind of good faith, for there is a litany of background heresy for many of these groups that go far beyond these individual topics of areas of doctrine.

This is why I’ve stopped interacting with TrevorL and others. They are not honest and forthright in being here. They will not divulge which cult they are affiliated with and into which they are indoctrinated. This is not edifying the Body when these are obviously not the Body by their errant beliefs, etc.

That is your choice. I will respond to you if you discuss the Scriptures. As I stated before, I am not here to advertise my particular "cult", but to discuss the Scriptures and to some extent you seem to claim authority and claim superior knowledge and avoid the Scriptures. If I disclosed my denomination then you would start quoting some marginal statements by some of our members, and as we do not produce clones in our fellowship there is a wide range and ebb and flow of people and ideas.

I suggest that even in the last post that some of my answers go against some of the things that you have stated, especially the definition of death. I consider that you do not have a clear answer to this, and would bow out with your latest post, or a claim to authority or superior knowledge.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Greetings again PneumaPsucheSoma,That is your choice. I will respond to you if you discuss the Scriptures. As I stated before, I am not here to advertise my particular "cult", but to discuss the Scriptures and to some extent you seem to claim authority and claim superior knowledge and avoid the Scriptures. If I disclosed my denomination then you would start quoting some marginal statements by some of our members, and as we do not produce clones in our fellowship there is a wide range and ebb and flow of people and ideas.

I suggest that even in the last post that some of my answers go against some of the things that you have stated, especially the definition of death. I consider that you do not have a clear answer to this, and would bow out with your latest post, or a claim to authority or superior knowledge.

Kind regards
Trevor

Yours is not a “denomination”, but an antichrist cult.

You don’t validly discuss scripture. You inject and withdraw your own contexts and concepts.

Death has been lexically defined for you. You ignore it for your own subjectivism.

I’m not taking the bait.

 

[way 2 go]

Greetings again PneumaPsucheSoma,That is your choice. I will respond to you if you discuss the Scriptures. As I stated before, I am not here to advertise my particular "cult", but to discuss the Scriptures and to some extent you seem to claim authority and claim superior knowledge and avoid the Scriptures. If I disclosed my denomination then you would start quoting some marginal statements by some of our members, and as we do not produce clones in our fellowship there is a wide range and ebb and flow of people and ideas.

I suggest that even in the last post that some of my answers go against some of the things that you have stated, especially the definition of death. I consider that you do not have a clear answer to this, and would bow out with your latest post, or a claim to authority or superior knowledge.

Kind regards
Trevor

if your denomination were Baptist that would give us some idea of your perspective BUT
if you are JW , mormon , the way , moonie those are not denominations those are cults
and they would also completely change definitions of everything in the bible to the point
where you do not understand the biblical meaning of death

 

[way 2 go]

Greetings again way 2 go, I appreciate your response. I was considering the length of this thread and I have not read much of the many posts. I imagine some of what we are now discussing has been mentioned in some of these posts. Moses and Elijah appeared in glory. Do immortal souls look similar to a man and his body? Or are they like ghosts?

soul\ spirit looks like man and his body
1Sa 28:14 And he said to her, What is his appearance? And she said, An old man is coming up, and he is covered with a robe. And Saul knew that he was Samuel. And he bowed his face to the earth, and prostrated himself.

I would like to mention two things. I was reading the following a few days ago, and it simply defines death:
John 21:18-19 (KJV): 18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. 19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me. 23 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?
Death is when our bodies die, we cease to breathe, and contrary to what you claim, I believe that we are no longer conscious.

Death when our bodies die is one kind of death in the bible
separation from God is the one we are most concerned about.

The second thing I would like to briefly consider is the Rich Man and Lazarus. Again I suggest that this may have been already discussed in this long thread. The following are a few of the problems that I have in accepting that Jesus is relating actual events and you may like to comment on each of the following:
1. The term “Abraham’s bosom”. Is this heaven or some other place?

“Abraham’s bosom” is beside the fire
Luk 16:26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed:

2. Can those in hell see those in heaven?

no. “Abraham’s bosom” is not heaven

3. Is Jesus talking about the immortal souls of the Rich Man and Lazarus?

yes .
Luk 16:22 ... the rich man also died, and was buried;

4. Do immortal souls have tongues and fingers?

yes , not physical tho
1Sa 28:14 And he said to her, What is his appearance? And she said, An old man is coming up, and he is covered with a robe. And Saul knew that he was Samuel. And he bowed his face to the earth, and prostrated himself.

5. Would a few drops of water on the Rich Man’s tongue cool his tongue?

no

Yes, Jesus the Son of God is seated at the right hand of God the Father Psalm 110:1.

no ,
Act 7:56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

When we die we await his return to raise the dead 2 Timothy 4:1,6-8. After death our next conscious moment will be with Jesus, and we will be gathered together with all the faithful Hebrews 11:39-40.

Kind regards
Trevor

you are assuming a conclusion that just isn't there.
nothing there about there being a separation from God after death
which would contradict Joh_11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again way 2 go,

if your denomination were Baptist that would give us some idea of your perspective BUT if you are JW, mormon, the way, moonie those are not denominations those are cults and they would also completely change definitions of everything in the bible to the point where you do not understand the biblical meaning of death

None of the above and I do not mind if you call us a cult, a sect or a denomination. We are a group of believers who fellowship on a common belief of the things of the Name and the things of the Kingdom of God Acts 8:5-6, 12. To become a member of our fellowship we accept those who after belief of this Gospel have been motivated to be baptised after the example of these Samaritans. We have the freedom to discuss the Bible and as a result we have a wide range of views on non-essential matters. Thus we do not produce clones.

soul\ spirit looks like man and his body
1Sa 28:14 And he said to her, What is his appearance? And she said, An old man is coming up, and he is covered with a robe. And Saul knew that he was Samuel. And he bowed his face to the earth, and prostrated himself.

This is an example of the range of views that we have. I believe that Samuel was actually there, temporarily raised from the dead by God to speak judgement against Saul. Others in our meeting suggest it was only a vision, and that Samuel was not actually there. Either way, none of us would consider this to be a proof that an immortal soul or immaterial spirit of Samuel appeared. Your respective reminds me of Tevye’s dream in the Fiddler on the Roof.

Death when our bodies die is one kind of death in the bible
separation from God is the one we are most concerned about.

I am glad that you allowed the first of these. Others seemed to deny this definition. I consider the second is figurative, based upon the first, and this is misused to deny the reality of death and return to the dust.

“Abraham’s bosom” is beside the fire
Luk 16:26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed:
no. “Abraham’s bosom” is not heaven

Does it still exists, or is it now vacant?

yes . Luk 16:22 ... the rich man also died, and was buried;
yes , not physical tho
1Sa 28:14 And he said to her, What is his appearance? And she said, An old man is coming up, and he is covered with a robe. And Saul knew that he was Samuel. And he bowed his face to the earth, and prostrated himself. No.

I consider the Rich Man and Lazarus is a parable based on the wrong teachings of the Pharisees and Samuel was raised to witness against Saul.

Act 7:56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

Other passages state that Jesus is seated. I believe that Stephen was given a vision of the start of the second coming of Jesus, to comfort him and indicate that Jesus would raise him from the dead. Another suggested view is that Jesus stood up at the death of Stephen in shock and horror and sympathy to Stephen. His death would not be ignored. One result was for Jesus to appear to Saul / Paul.

you are assuming a conclusion that just isn't there.
nothing there about there being a separation from God after death
which would contradict Joh_11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

But Peter and John died, as per your first definition. I disagree that death is defined as a separation from God. John 11:26 needs to be understood in the same sense as Romans 4:17, that they will be raised and then never die.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Greetings again way 2 go, None of the above and I do not mind if you call us a cult, a sect or a denomination. We are a group of believers who fellowship on a common belief of the things of the Name and the things of the Kingdom of God Acts 8:5-6, 12. To become a member of our fellowship we accept those who after belief of this Gospel have been motivated to be baptised after the example of these Samaritans. We have the freedom to discuss the Bible and as a result we have a wide range of views on non-essential matters. Thus we do not produce clones.
This is an example of the range of views that we have. I believe that Samuel was actually there, temporarily raised from the dead by God to speak judgement against Saul. Others in our meeting suggest it was only a vision, and that Samuel was not actually there. Either way, none of us would consider this to be a proof that an immortal soul or immaterial spirit of Samuel appeared. Your respective reminds me of Tevye’s dream in the Fiddler on the Roof.
I am glad that you allowed the first of these. Others seemed to deny this definition. I consider the second is figurative, based upon the first, and this is misused to deny the reality of death and return to the dust.
Does it still exists, or is it now vacant?
I consider the Rich Man and Lazarus is a parable based on the wrong teachings of the Pharisees and Samuel was raised to witness against Saul.
Other passages state that Jesus is seated. I believe that Stephen was given a vision of the start of the second coming of Jesus, to comfort him and indicate that Jesus would raise him from the dead. Another suggested view is that Jesus stood up at the death of Stephen in shock and horror and sympathy to Stephen. His death would not be ignored. One result was for Jesus to appear to Saul / Paul.
But Peter and John died, as per your first definition. I disagree that death is defined as a separation from God. John 11:26 needs to be understood in the same sense as Romans 4:17, that they will be raised and then never die.

Kind regards
Trevor

By adhering to several historically non-Christian major doctrines, your “group” of rogues cannot be validly considered Christian. So you are indeed a cult or sect, but definitely NOT a denomination; for the latter would indicate a Christian group.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again PneumaPsucheSoma,

Yours is not a “denomination”, but an antichrist cult. You don’t validly discuss scripture. You inject and withdraw your own contexts and concepts. Death has been lexically defined for you. You ignore it for your own subjectivism. I’m not taking the bait.

By adhering to several historically non-Christian major doctrines, your “group” of rogues cannot be validly considered Christian. So you are indeed a cult or sect, but definitely NOT a denomination; for the latter would indicate a Christian group.

I did not realise until you explained on another thread that you did not consider Luther a Protestant and that modern Lutherism or your faction of it is not Protestant but somehow claims to be the Western European Catholic Church, the One Visible Church, having superseded the Roman Catholic Church because they did not change. If I understood this correctly I suggest that your particular group is marginal and that most Protestants would not support your claims.

As far as Anti-Christ is concerned, if you claim to have received the mantle of the RCC then you also inherit the persecuting of the faithful throughout the time from the Apostles as suggested in Daniel 7, and you have already suggested that the Ebionites needed to be persecuted. I suppose you would add various other groups to the necessary list, such as Waldenses, Anabaptists, Huguenots and other non-conformists. I have read that not only Zwingli, a Protestant, but also Luther allowed some persecution of the Anabaptists.

The one thing I have noticed in your posts is that you like to use the word “cult”, and claim that you are an authority, but rarely do you discuss the Scriptures, and this seems to be like the example of earlier persecutions by the RCC. The established Church attempted to destroy or silence all opposition and would ban or burn the Bible.

I tested your “lexically defined” definition of death against the Scriptures and found your definition in conflict with the Scriptures. Before you gave your definition, I had started with the following:
Psalm 6:5 (KJV): For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks?
And I posted this in response to your grand claim to “oatmeal” after he had quoted Psalm 6:5:

You have no idea what the Hebrew and Greek words for death mean, and there are more than one in each language. Your English concepts have come from your modern cult and its shallow perusal of scripture to make it mean what they want it to mean.

It appears that “oatmeal” is also a member of a cult (possibly a different one to my “cult”) because he also believes in the mortality of man and the resurrection.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[bibleverse2]

Death is a state of being, not a state of NOT being. There is no chronological time there . . .

Note that there is chronological time for the (still-conscious) souls of the physically dead, even in heaven. For:

Revelation 6:9 . . . I saw under the altar [in heaven] the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

 

[Aimiel]

Note that there is chronological time for the (still-conscious) souls of the physically dead, even in heaven. For:

Revelation 6:9 . . . I saw under the altar [in heaven] the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

Yes, a 'little time,' which might be only a couple days' time (for them); since 1,000 years with The Lord is as a single day.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Yes, a 'little time,' which might be only a couple days' time (for them); since 1,000 years with The Lord is as a single day.

Yes, this is the problem with adamant claims based upon concepts. Chronology is a specific lapsed form of time in the created cosmos. Just because there is some form of durative existence in the intangible realms, it doesn’t mean that is equivalent to chronology in this realm.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Greetings again PneumaPsucheSoma,
I did not realise until you explained on another thread that you did not consider Luther a Protestant and that modern Lutherism or your faction of it is not Protestant but somehow claims to be the Western European Catholic Church, the One Visible Church, having superseded the Roman Catholic Church because they did not change. If I understood this correctly I suggest that your particular group is marginal and that most Protestants would not support your claims.

As far as Anti-Christ is concerned, if you claim to have received the mantle of the RCC then you also inherit the persecuting of the faithful throughout the time from the Apostles as suggested in Daniel 7, and you have already suggested that the Ebionites needed to be persecuted. I suppose you would add various other groups to the necessary list, such as Waldenses, Anabaptists, Huguenots and other non-conformists. I have read that not only Zwingli, a Protestant, but also Luther allowed some persecution of the Anabaptists.

The one thing I have noticed in your posts is that you like to use the word “cult”, and claim that you are an authority, but rarely do you discuss the Scriptures, and this seems to be like the example of earlier persecutions by the RCC. The established Church attempted to destroy or silence all opposition and would ban or burn the Bible.

I tested your “lexically defined” definition of death against the Scriptures and found your definition in conflict with the Scriptures. Before you gave your definition, I had started with the following:
Psalm 6:5 (KJV): For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks?
And I posted this in response to your grand claim to “oatmeal” after he had quoted Psalm 6:5:

It appears that “oatmeal” is also a member of a cult (possibly a different one to my “cult”) because he also believes in the mortality of man and the resurrection.

Kind regards
Trevor

This is too contorted to even attempt to respond to your caricatures of all I’ve said, much less your caricatures of doctrine and scripture itself.

The bottom line is you’re antichrist.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Note that there is chronological time for the (still-conscious) souls of the physically dead, even in heaven. For:

Revelation 6:9 . . . I saw under the altar [in heaven] the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

Are you insisting that the chronology of the cosmos in its lapsed form that is determined by the comparative movements of celestial bodies relative to spatiality is the same form of duration that is in the intangible heavenly realm?

I would hope not.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again PneumaPsucheSoma,

This is too contorted to even attempt to respond to your caricatures of all I’ve said, much less your caricatures of doctrine and scripture itself.
The bottom line is you’re antichrist.

I would be interested in how you view the Little Horn of Daniel 7. I equate this with the Papacy, the Antichrist. You seem to endorse the Papacy and the established Church in its earlier days at least.

The only book that I have read on Luther is Here I Stand – A Life of Martin Luther by Roland H Bainton 1950. I visit book sales and second hand bookshops and have also The Life and Times of Martin Luther by JH Merle D’Aubigne 1846, but I have not read this as yet. On the back cover it says “Written in the 1840s, this book has been recognised as the finest biography of Martin Luther available.”

I was interested in Bainton’s book in the chapter on The Middle Way, he says on page 200 “He rejected likewise infant baptism”. He also speaks of his contact with Muntzer who believed in direct Spirit revelation or guidance. Bainton says on page 202, “The real menace of Muntzer in Luther’s eyes was that he destroyed the uniqueness of Christian revelation in the past by his elevation of revelation in the present. Luther for himself had had absolutely no experience of any contemporary revelation, and in times of despondency the advice to rely upon the spirit was for him a counsel of despair, since within he could find only utter blackness. ... Luther freely avowed his weakness and his need of historic revelation. Therefore he would not listen to Muntzer ... At this point lies much of the difference not only between Muntzer and Luther, but between modern liberal Protestantism and the religion of the founders”. I do not know if modern Lutherism has moved away from these two commendable features.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[FineLinen]

Justice

http://www.online-literature.com/george-macdonald/unspoken-sermons/31/

Also unto thee, O Lord, belongeth mercy; for thou renderest to every man according to his work.--PSALM lxii. 12.

Some of the translators make it kindness and goodness; but I presume there is no real difference among them as to the character of the word which here, in the English Bible, is translated mercy.

The religious mind, however, educated upon the theories yet prevailing in the so-called religious world, must here recognize a departure from the presentation to which they have been accustomed: to make the psalm speak according to prevalent theoretic modes, the verse would have to be changed thus:--'To thee, O Lord, belongeth justice, for thou renderest to every man according to his work.'

Mercy=

εὐφραίνω/ euphraino

To cheer.

In the Passive Voice, signifying, "to be happy, rejoice, make merry.