Justification of Eternal Punishment

[freelight]

mofidications............

mofidications............

that is part of your problem taking everything you
disagree with and turning it to something more palatable
and pretending you have succeeded in making the
bible fit your anti-Christian belief system

you don't get everlasting punishment = pruning from
the text, you import that from your false belief system
to make it fit that system

Matt 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into everlasting life.

Already addressed the language issues with 'aion' and Matt. 25:46 here.

Also shown the moral & philosophical problems with ECT here and elsewhere. 'Conditional immortality' and 'Universalism' are also supported by various passages and represent alternative eschatologies.

About Matt. 25:46 -

The Greek form for "everlasting punishment" in Matthew 25:46 is ”kolasin aionion." Kolasin is a noun in the accusative form, singular voice, feminine gender and means "punishment, chastening, correction, to cut-off as in pruning a tree to bare more fruit." "Aionion" is the adjective form of "aion," in the singular form and means "pertaining to an eon or age, an indeterminate period of time." (Note: the two words in many, not all translations become reversed when bringing the Greek into English, that is, "kolasin aionion" literally punishment everlasting is reversed to everlasting punishment so as to make better sense in English.)

- Source

What I meant to imply is that the word 'kolasin' also has the sense of meaning 'to prune/cut/lop off as in 'pruning', besides correction or chastisement, at least its more ancient classical greek usage.

A good article covering the possible translations of 'kolasin' is here - In light of this information, I modify my statement in recognizing that the more ancient classical sense of the term implied a 'cutting off or pruning', but the term evolved into meaning 'punishment' and various forms thereof. So etymologically, the word 'kalazo' did refer to such (pruning/cutting/lopping off), but evolved its meaning to infer 'correction' or 'punishment' within a NT context.

Granted, the term 'aion' and its derivitives still refer to an 'age', a 'durational period', and we trust that 'God' who is wholly just and merciful as well, will render to each according to their works, their inherent worth and potential.

There is still the moral and philosophical problems of souls being restrained or abandoned to a state or condition of 'eternal torment or suffering' to no end, with no hope of relief or salvation. That's pure insanity. This alone is a big red flag, and no amount of sanctioning such suffering by using a 'holy book' can remedy this violation of principle.

 

[Aimiel]

Its just a parable, this has been explained to you.



You fail to recognize figurative language, taking everything 'literal'. - hence the problems associated with that.

It would be preferable to making all of God's Truth into fables. :duh:

 

[freelight]

Its a PARABLE....

Its a PARABLE....

the story of Lazarus is a true

There is more evidence against this view, since many features of it are 'parabolic' in nature, and not meant to be 'literally' true, but conveying a certain moral or philosophical truth, ideal or principle,...in this case of being charitable and serving others in need, not being 'selfish' and uncaring.

Its a parable.

See:

The Story of the Rich Man and Lazarus
What is Jesus communicating through this story?

You'll note that this idea of there being a 'gulf' (a 'wall', 'space' or 'veil') inbetween the righteous and the wicked in 'hades' (the place of the dead, the underworld) was a concept in rabbinical schools, also an idea adopted and entertained in the 'inter-testamental period' (time between OT and NT writings), being featured in some apocryphal works as well (that 'paradise' and 'hell' were 'compartments' both in 'hades' (the underworld/underground) until Jesus came and rescued the righteous dead there and took them into heaven).

The parable itself however does not prove ECT as it speaks of no duration of suffering, but employs figurative language common to the beliefs at the time in order to relate a moral lesson. This therefore is a very weak 'proof-text' to support ECT.

 

[freelight]

WRONG......

WRONG......

It would be preferable to making all of God's Truth into fables. :duh:

No, since Jesus taught much in parables and these 'stories' are being used to illustrate various moral lessons and teachings. They are 'literary devices', which are not necessarily historically accurate or 'literally' true. They are 'figurative'. If you want to hold that 'standard' to all of Jesus parables, you'll have to prove that every parable he taught is somehow a true historical account of an actual event that happened and have that verified historically from 2 or more extra-biblical to boot for credibility. Remember, a 'parable' is just a 'literary device' used to teach a lesson or moral principle, it does not have to be 'historically true', and if you claim any such parable is, the burden of proof is on you to show that it is. I see no reason to uphold such a notion, but one with an agenda to push 'biblical inerrancy' could adopt such a view.

 

[way 2 go]

Already addressed the language issues with 'aion' and Matt. 25:46
here and elsewhere.

problem with your "aion"
now you want to say Christians don't receive eternal life

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

'

Conditional immortality' and 'Universalism' are also supported by various passages and represent alternative eschatologies.

only when misquoted

What I meant to imply is that the word 'kolasin' also has the sense of meaning 'to prune/cut/lop off as in 'pruning', besides correction or chastisement, at least its more ancient classical greek usage.

kolasis
penal infliction: - punishment, torment.

A good article covering the possible translations of 'kolasin' is here - In light of this information, I modify my statement in recognizing that the more ancient classical sense of the term implied a 'cutting off or pruning', but the term evolved into meaning 'punishment' and various forms thereof. So etymologically, the word 'kalazo' did refer to such (pruning/cutting/lopping off), but evolved its meaning to infer 'correction' or 'punishment' within a NT context.

no pruning

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.
...
Rev 20:14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.
Rev 20:15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

Granted, the term 'aion' and its derivitives still refer to an 'age', a 'durational period', and we trust that 'God' who is wholly just and merciful as well, will render to each according to their works, their inherent worth and potential.

do you think just being a nice person will get someone to heaven ?

Isa_64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags;

There is still the moral and philosophical problems of souls being restrained or abandoned to a state or condition of 'eternal torment or suffering' to no end, with no hope of relief or salvation. That's pure insanity. This alone is a big red flag, and no amount of sanctioning such suffering by using a 'holy book' can remedy this violation of principle.

by using a 'holy book'

the word of God is just another in long line of books for you

violation of principle

one of your other books principles

 

[way 2 go]

There is more evidence against this view, since many features of it are 'parabolic' in nature, and not meant to be 'literally' true, but conveying a certain moral or philosophical truth, ideal or principle,...in this case of being charitable and serving others in need, not being 'selfish' and uncaring.

Its a parable.

nothing to say about the story of Lazarus only story with person named

Call Jesus a liar no such person as Lazarus

Luk 16:20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus

See:

The Story of the Rich Man and Lazarus
What is Jesus communicating through this story?

I don't click on links

You'll note that this idea of there being a 'gulf' (a 'wall', 'space' or 'veil') inbetween the righteous and the wicked in 'hades' (the place of the dead, the underworld) was a concept in rabbinical schools,

so they are in agreement with Jesus true story of Lazarus

also an idea adopted and entertained in the 'inter-testamental period' (time between OT and NT writings), being featured in some apocryphal works as well (that 'paradise' and 'hell' were 'compartments' both in 'hades' (the underworld/underground) until Jesus came and rescued the righteous dead there and took them into heaven).

The parable itself however does not prove ECT as it speaks of no duration of suffering, but employs figurative language common to the beliefs at the time in order to relate a moral lesson. This therefore is a very weak 'proof-text' to support ECT.

Jesus is consistent with the rest of the bible on
spiritually dead
and
physically dead
being true

 

[Ben Masada]

the story of Lazarus is a true

rich mans spirit is in fire

and yes Jesus preached keep the law

and Jesus raised up Paul when he cut off Israel ... sorry off topic

Merry Christmas Ben

And Paul used to claim to have been assigned as an apostle to the Gentiles. Now, can you tell me when he decided to go to the Gentiles in order to cut off Israel according to his policy of Replacement Theology? What I have is that all his life from his first station in Damascus and until his last one in Rome, he never left the Jews in peace, always in the synagogues of the Jews as if the Gentiles were to be found in the synagogues. (Acts 9:1,2 and 28:17)

 

[Ben Masada]

If we repent it is one thing, but the ONLY way sin is forgiven is through Jesus' Blood. Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins. Without Jesus taking your place on the cross, you're still dead in your sins. God cannot abide sin in His Presence.

As I can see, you prefer to keep struggling with that paradox. Paul was right when he said that Christians walk by faith and not by sight. ( II Cor. 5:7) If by sight, one walks according to his or her own understanding, it is only obvious that by faith, one walks in the dark aka blindly.

 

[Totton Linnet]

Totton Linnet,
re: "The wicked are not annihilated at the last judgement they go away into eternal punishment"

Assumptions have to be made about the meaning of certain words. There are no black and white scriptures which absolutely prove everlasting torture or that absolutely prove the everlasting cessation of being. A person has to WANT one or the other to be the case when forming an opinion about the meaning of a word.

Take the words "everlasting punishment" in Matthew 25:46 - If you interpret it to mean "everlasting torture" it must be because you want it to mean that since you could just as easily interpret it to mean something else. There is no scripture that proves the "punishment" has to mean torture. Nor is there any scripture that proves that it doesn't.

Strong's gives two definitions for kolasis - punishment and torture. Let's go with the punishment one. Webster's New World Dictionary gives a definition of punishment as : "a penalty imposed on an offender for a crime or wrongdoing". It gives as definitions for "penalty" as "a punishment fixed by law for a crime..." and "any unfortunate consequence or result of an act..."

None of those definitions preclude annhilation as the penalty for unbelievers. Why do you want to go with the eternal torture notion when you don't have to?

If you think that it is fit and proper to torture a person for eternity because during their fleeting few years of life they didn’t or couldn’t meet the supreme being's requirements nor develop or have the potential to develop the right character needed to spend eternity with this supreme being, then you will very likely interpret the word "punishment' to mean torture.

But if you think that a loving supreme being wouldn't go against His nature by eternally torturing a person because they didn’t satisfy certain requirements during a fleeting life time, why wouldn't you rather believe that a loving supreme being will simply wipe the person mercifully out of existence? Who does it benifit to do otherwise?

Because Jesus said "depart from Me ye cursed...."He didn't annihilate them, they went away into eternal punishment.

 

[chrysostom]

Because Jesus said "depart from Me ye cursed...."He didn't annihilate them, they went away into eternal punishment.

do you want eternal punishment for others?

 

[Totton Linnet]

do you want eternal punishment for others?

I am TOL's only proponent for a wider mercy [I think] I believe in a BILLIONfold wider mercy.

But and yet I say the wicked will be turned into hell...and they belong there.

 

[chrysostom]

I am TOL's only proponent for a wider mercy [I think] I believe in a BILLIONfold wider mercy.

But and yet I say the wicked will be turned into hell...and they belong there.

so you want some to suffer eternally?

 

[Prizebeatz1]

I think we fail to miss the point of Jesus's raising Lazarus from the dead. It is about reconnecting with the part of ourselves that we left behind in childhood. We were very close to the soul when we were young and as we grow older we tend to turn our back on this part of us in favor of something else. And he said: "Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." We are Lazarus when we do not know the soul because we are spiritually dead. Re-uniting with the long-lost innocence of the soul is a miraculous rebirth that refreshes us with what seems to be new life but is actually the life that has always been there. "Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again."

 

[Totton Linnet]

so you want some to suffer eternally?

I trust God's judgement rather than man's you do not see the inner man, God sees it.

What can the inner man of a child raper be like? Jesus said of such..."you would be better off if a great mill stone were tied around your neck and you were cast into the sea"


...hey that's before they did it....

 

[chrysostom]

I trust God's judgement rather than man's you do not see the inner man, God sees it.

What can the inner man of a child raper be like? Jesus said of such..."you would be better off if a great mill stone were tied around your neck and you were cast into the sea"


...hey that's before they did it....

I am asking what you want
don't you know what you want?
do you want some to suffer eternally?
please answer this question

 

[Selaphiel]

The doctrine of eternal suffering is morally abhorrent.

If creation is Gods self-revelation in love (if it is something else, it seems to suggest pure arbitrariness or God's dependence on creating), the thought of damnation in the end for even one soul is unthinkable.

If creation (from beginning to end) is God's self-revelation, then a creation that ends in eternal damnation of one or multiple souls reveals one of two possibilities:

1) God is perfectly good, but unable to reveal his goodness in the summation of self-revelatory creation. God is not God since his power of self-revelation must then be restricted by outside factors.

2) God is not perfectly good, and this is the content of self-revelatory creation of God. God is not God because his goodness is limited.

And the appeal to free will does not help. As I once heard a theologian put it, letting someone cast themselves into eternal damnation and suffering out of free will is akin to a father that would let his children stick their head into the fireplace out of respect for their autonomy.

This does not reject the possibility of consequences for our actions either. It relies on the perspective of apokatastasis found in some of the church fathers, that ultimately God will reveal his perfect goodness in perfected creation that is unified with God. It denies the reality of pure evil. Pure evil would be the same as non-existence, since existence is itself participation in God's fullness of being which is his goodness (evil is then privation of this goodness). The consequences of our actions are the purgation of our privation, the restoration of our being.

As Gregory of Nyssa puts it in his catechetical ortations:

"The Divine power in its contact with evil acts as a refining fire. Satan himself shall be purged by it and be led to acknowledge the justice and saving efficacy of the Incarnation. Then when the purifying discipline has done its work, all Creation shall send up to God a chorus of praise."

 

[way 2 go]

I trust God's judgement rather than man's you do not see the inner man, God sees it.

What can the inner man of a child raper be like? Jesus said of such..."you would be better off if a great mill stone were tied around your neck and you were cast into the sea"


...hey that's before they did it....

God will prevail when he is judged

Rom 3:4 By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar, as it is written, "That you may be justified in your words, and prevail when you are judged."

 

[Totton Linnet]

I am asking what you want
don't you know what you want?
do you want some to suffer eternally?
please answer this question

I want what God wants.

 

[way 2 go]

The doctrine of eternal suffering is morally abhorrent.

If creation is Gods self-revelation in love (if it is something else, it seems to suggest pure arbitrariness or God's dependence on creating), the thought of damnation in the end for even one soul is unthinkable.

all his ways are justice

Deu 32:4 "The Rock, his work is perfect, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness and without iniquity, just and upright is he.

Psa 11:5 The LORD tests the righteous, but his soul hates the wicked and the one who loves violence.

If creation (from beginning to end) is God's self-revelation, then a creation that ends in eternal damnation of one or multiple souls reveals one of two possibilities:

1) God is perfectly good, but unable to reveal his goodness in the summation of self-revelatory creation. God is not God since his power of self-revelation must then be restricted by outside factors.

Jesus is God
the outside factor is YOU
Joh 3:19 And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.

2) God is not perfectly good, and this is the content of self-revelatory creation of God. God is not God because his goodness is limited.

God is perfectly good & God is not limited


Pro_18:5 It is not good to be partial to the wicked or to deprive the righteous of justice.

And the appeal to free will does not help. As I once heard a theologian put it, letting someone cast themselves into eternal damnation and suffering out of free will is akin to a father that would let his children stick their head into the fireplace out of respect for their autonomy.

more like you have a choice to believe Jesus or not
accept his payment for sin or pay for your own sin.

we have been given free will for love to be love it has to be
freely given

so must the Son of Man be lifted up,
Joh 3:15 that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.
Joh 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Joh 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

This does not reject the possibility of consequences for our actions either. It relies on the perspective of apokatastasis found in some of the church fathers, that ultimately God will reveal his perfect goodness in perfected creation that is unified with God.
It denies the reality of pure evil. Pure evil would be the same as non-existence, since existence is itself participation in God's fullness of being which is his goodness (evil is then privation of this goodness). The consequences of our actions are the purgation of our privation, the restoration of our being.

As Gregory of Nyssa puts it in his catechetical ortations:

"The Divine power in its contact with evil acts as a refining fire. Satan himself shall be purged by it and be led to acknowledge the justice and saving efficacy of the Incarnation. Then when the purifying discipline has done its work, all Creation shall send up to God a chorus of praise."

lies

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.

Rev 20:14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.
Rev 20:15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

 

[way 2 go]

And Paul used to claim to have been assigned as an apostle to the Gentiles. Now, can you tell me when he decided to go to the Gentiles in order to cut off Israel according to his policy of Replacement Theology? What I have is that all his life from his first station in Damascus and until his last one in Rome, he never left the Jews in peace, always in the synagogues of the Jews as if the Gentiles were to be found in the synagogues. (Acts 9:1,2 and 28:17)

gentiles are not a replacement for Israel

Rom 11:25 Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.

Jews have been brought down to equal with gentiles
so Paul preached to everbody

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.