Posted on 07/18/2008 6:46:18 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
Actually Christ addressed this issue of heaven and hell. Read Luke 16:19-31. Jesus said it, and I believe it. If Jesus says there’s an eternal place of torment, there is.
See this thread:
The book of life contains the names those whose sins were placed on Jesus at his crucifixion. Therefore their past and future sins have already been judged when the Father put their guilt to his His Son's account and Christ's perfect righteousness to their account. Their works after salvation are judged at the judgment seat of Christ before the marriage supper of the Lamb and before the tribulation period on earth. The saints who are made righteous by virtue of God accounting their sins to His Son and their sins to His account are eternally ALIVE and are not among the DEAD who appear at the Great White Throne judgment. Notice that there are two books opened at that judgment, the book of life and another book. The names of the righteous are found in the book of life, and that signifies that they have already appeared at the judgment seat of Christ and their rewards have been given or withheld depending on the degree of their obedience and faithfulness to Christ in their earthly life after salvation. OTOH, the dead whose sins were not accounted to Christ and whose names are therefore NOT found in the book of life are judged out of another book which holds the record of their deeds in the flesh. And since all men have sinned and their sins are recorded in that book there are none in that group who are found guiltless.
I realize that much of what is recorded in the book of the Apocalypse is very difficult to follow and that there are countless "expert" opinions to be reckoned with. But there are bible commentaries available written by sound evangelical bible scholars such as Dr. John Volwoord, a former president of Dallas Theological Seminary, which I believe explain it well enough for even a dullard like me to understand, and accurately enough to present a reasonably true picture of what will occur at the end of this present age of grace. Obviously you disagree with my understanding of this chapter of the book, and I will readily concede that you MAY be right. But since the subject of our disagreement does not necessarily affect our view of what is required for us to believe in order to assure our salvation, as fellow children of God through His grace let's agree to disagree amiably on these difficult passages of a difficult book.
Thank You! That's one of the nicest compliments I've heard in a long time. :)
You must believe God's revelation to us too!
Just not historically accurate. Actually there was very little controversy involving which books were inspired. If you look up Muratonian Fragment you will get an indication of how much was already recognized as early as 170 AD. Also, early Christian theologians quoted from these writings and recognized them as genuinely inspired.
The idea that most people were illiterate also is historically inaccurate. The Bereans were praised because any new writings they received were judged by the OT Scriptures they had. Also, if the people were so illiterate how could the Essenes who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) have done this? They were a group of believers living in caves in the middle of nowhere.
The reason there was no need for any councils to resolve the Canon was because our Christian ancestors largely settled the issue in the second century. It was only in areas that had competing beliefs that any controversy emerged. It was such a settled matter that Jerome began his translation for the Roman church without any official announcement having been made about which books should be translated.
I too believe in God's love, but I believe that it transcends Christianity and all of the other beliefs.
Do you believe yourself to be a Christian?
God creates you, knowing your choice and the results of it. How is the result of that choice NOT already determined?
What does it matter if we do not know what choice we will make, if God cannot be wrong? How would we NOT be able to make that exact choice?
I ask people these questions, not God.
I have read the Book of Job, and I wonder why God put that man through all of that, when He knew exactly what Job would say and do.
So, does any of that mean Calvinists are right or wrong?
I don’t know.
You were obviously doing what God knew you were going to do when He created you. I think in God’s view, yes it was alright. In societies view, that would depend on when and where you live.
Since I believe that there is only one God, I believe that I worship God. I don’t think any religions actually have their own God, as I believe religions are man made.
I do what God has put in me to do...I’m very thankful for the way He made me.
What He expects from me, happens as per His design.
Read His Word.
I choose to believe that whoever recorded Christ's words...
"I am the Way...
...no man comes to the Father but by me."
got them right.
IF they are wrong; then I guess you can believe anything.
IF they are right; then one would reject Christ at their peril.
AMEN!
I merely READ the words to see what they say.
Not so.
You're very welcome...But what's your take on what is said?
Well, here is my take, take it for what it is worth, I am merely a novice when it comes to Biblical studies...
What I see, is that two choices are being given, the first being everlasting life and the second, being death...now many, if not most people I know, say that everlasting life, means life in Heaven with the Lord...
But taken on its own, everlasting life, means a life that goes on forever, regardless of where one winds up, Heaven or Hell...
So to me, what I get out of what was said, is that the saved and redeemed will have an everlasting life in Heaven with the Lord, while those who are unsaved and unredeemed, will die, will be blotted out...
I dont see the choice being one of everlasting life of bliss in Heaven, vs an everlasting life of torment in Hell, rather I see, the choice being offered as an everlasting life in Heaven, vs death, or complete blotting out...
Perhaps I am totally wrong, but that is just how I see it at this point...
I am sure that there is much I do not yet understand...
This seems to be the true basis of the argument. We mere mortals are less guilty and thus deserve a lesser punishment. I disagree with the conclusion and we have shown two different takes on Rev. 20.
Hmmm...I never meant that one deserves a lesser punishment. Taking that sentence out of context is what causes misunderstanding. What I wrote denies your conclusion and that it is the basis of the "argument." The basis is God's word saying that "the wages of sin is death" not life, albeit in an everlasting misery.
You say people thrown into the lake of fire die, I say they do not. Fine.
No, it's not me that says that. It is what the John was told to write by Jesus that says it. Those thrown into the lake of fire face "death"; but apparently you don't believe death means to be without life. Just what is your understanding of "death"?
How about Daniel 12:2? What is meant by ‘everlasting contempt?’
Hmmm....that requires quite a bit of exegesis to respond, but let me say something pertaining to this verse. Remember the context!
The text reads: "Many of them that sleep in the dust of the eath shall awake, some to everlasing life, and some to everlasting shame (Hebrew, cherpah - reproach) and contempt" (Hebrew, deraon - abhorrence, casting away). The text is both ambiguous and enigmatic. How manay shall awake? The text does not say all, or even most of them. It only says many shall do so, with both the redeemed and the abhorred making up that number, and with no hint as to the proportion or ratio. The best we can adduce from the text is only that some will awake to everlasting life and some to everlasting shame and contempt. While the language is best suited to the soul-sleeping concept of the interim state of the dead, it at least is a hint that the final state of the wicked will not be one of instantaneous and univesal annihilation.
...More to the point as issue is the meaning and Biblical usage of the words translated "for ever," "ever lasting," "continually," and "eternal." If for ever means endlessly, then what is the meaning of such expressions as "for ever and ever," or as the phrase is sometimes translated, "from everlasting to everlasting"?
...Unfortunately the post-apostolic church borrowed the idea of innate immortality from Greek philosophy and super-imposed the same upon the Scriptures. From the Latin Vulgate came our words "eternal," and "eternity" commonly defined as "without beginning and without end." Obviously, if that is what the Latin "aeternalis" means then it hardly can be used to describe the new life which we receive through Christ for it at least has a beginning. And unless one insists on believe the doctrine of eternal security despite all taht the Scripturees say to the contrary, that new life can also have an ending. "Eternal" is no proper translation for the Hebrew "olam" and the Greek "aion".
...That "olam" and "aion" mean one and the same thing is easily established. The Greek Septuagint (LXX) commonly renders "olam" as "aion", and the New Testament writers, when quoting Old Testament passages using the word "olam" likewise render the word "aion". For example, see Heb. 5:6, 7:17, 21, Luke 1:55, I Peter 1:25. ...From the scores of such references that can be cited (I found 408) it should be obvious that the Hebrew word "olam" does not signify "endlessness." Neither does the Greek "aion". I hope this gives you a sense of what is involved in reaching conclusions.
Yes, death is a total "separation" from God. One separated from God does not have life, be it during our present lifetime or at the judgment when the unredeemed are thown into the lake of fire, which is the second death.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.