Posted on 08/30/2016 8:04:03 AM PDT by Salvation
Daniel 12:2
Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.
What is the term used to describe when that evidence is merely waved away with an imperial flick of the wrist?
the answer is in john 3:16 and Romans 6:23. They are on the side of the equatikn that does not receive eternal life. They are on the side that perishes and dies.
Yes. What’s that got to do with whether or not they still exist? There is still a lot of contempt for Hitler, but he’s been dead quite a while.
Dogmatism.
Ive been discussing this issue for years. Rather than manually state all of the points over and over, I prefer to link people to them. And it is best to study the information from both sides. If you do it prayerfully and with an open mind, you should begin to see the truth on an issue. And often it is what you already believed, but you become a better apologist for it.
Daniel 12:2
Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.
Person A receives eternal life and person B doesn’t
Person B receives shame and Person A doesn’t.
Person B receives everlasting contempt and person A doesn’t.
This has something in common with Romans 6:23 and John 3:16. IT is a binary statement about two fates. One receives immortality and the other does not. When I listen to the bible for 2-3 hours a day for months on end, I am shocked at how often this occurs, especially in the new testament, all over scripture.
Once I gave CI serious consideration, a LOT of scripture that simply didn’t make sense suddenly came into clear focus.
The thing is, the bible is translated in English for me. That means it uses English words with actual dictionary meanings. I always had a hard time with some English words having “special meaning” for the bible only.
And one of the most interesting studies is to look at everywhere in the bible where it is translated “everlasting”, “eternal”, “forever and ever”, etc. You’ll find that in many cases it was actually describing a VERY finite event. It’s kinda like saying “Joe was a baseball player ‘forever’”, when what you mean is that the only career Joe had was being a baseball player.
I think a lot of the bible is “dog whistle” for believers, but a lot of people with an agenda have their own “dog whistles” in their interpretation. An example of the latter is when the word “death” doesn’t really mean death. And the former I believe is supported by all the scripture that discusses God confusing the wisdom of the wise, spreading His word through “fools” etc. I think of it as that old Yogi Berra comment about a certain restaurant: “Nobody goes there any more because it’s too crowded.” The “wise” person says, what a dolt. The statement is an oxymoron.” Yet you and I know exactly what Yogi was saying, because we are attuned to the frequency of the dog whistle.
Same thing with the ECT vs CI debate. I used to be ECT, but the more I read the bible, the less it meshed with the personality of the God of the bible. And when I read the very first article about CI (the one on FR in 2009 that I posted here), it caused me to further study the issue. I became an adherent to CI.
And again, what is fascinating is that when I accepted CI, suddenly everything meshed with the personality of the God of both old and new testaments.
But I’ve also become quite hostile to ECT. I believe it was created by “possibly” well meaning people a long time ago to “scare” people to God. It may be why the KJV discusses “fear” regarding our attitude toward God when a better translation would be “respect Him for who he is”. Kinda like “fearing” nuclear power or “fearing” the momentum of a fast moving truck. You don’t fear it. You respect it as quite powerful and able to do great good or great evil.
And that is another one. Evil. The KJV discussed God causing evil. But the word translated “evil” really means “bad thing happening”. So when God destroyed the two cities, He did a great “evil”, though what He did was not evil at all.
And this is also important: If you find yourself constantly returning to Revelation to get your doctrine, it may not be all that sound. It is a book steeped in symbolism. It is interesting that people think the second death is torture forever in a lake of fire, but they don’t argue that the seven churches are literal lamp stands.
And Jesus never mentioned Hell. He mentioned the garbage dump in the valley of Gehenna as an allegory of the lost essentially being “thrown away”. And his comments about the worm not dying and the fire not being quenched was to answer the idea that a lot of stuff in that dump is not totally destroyed because it’s hard to completely burn a body to where there is nothing left but ashes. Likewise the worms. But he makes it clear that in THIS case, they will do their work.
And about an unquenchable fire: It is not a fire that never goes out. Rather, it is a fire that you cannot put out. Think of a house on fire and there is no water nearby. You could call the fire unquenchable, because you can’t put it out. However, when it runs out of fuel, it will have done its job and go out on its own. Yeah, an unquenchable fire can still go out.
The biggest problem I have with ECT is that it is CRITICAL to “anti-Christians” that it is what the bible teaches. It is their biggest argument against the Christianity of a “loving” God. When you remove it, they fight bitterly so support ECT, lest they no longer can complain, effectively, of a “mean” God.
And some say, “but if death is all we are saved from, where is the incentive in following Christ.” Two things:
1. Is the message of Christ, “You’d better follow me or else!”. i.e. fear of what He’s gonna do to you. Or is the message of Christ called the good news because it is: The fate of man is the fate of Adam for eating of the fruit. Death. But I offer a better way. Follow me and receive immortality in my eternal kingdom!”
The latter is, in my opinion, the message of the whole bible.
Forgot the second thing at the end:
2. People DO fear death.
MonoSodium Glutamate RULES!
(I’m sick and I need help.) ;-)
LOL!
I don’t consider myself qualified to pronounce on your health and fitness.
Paul wasn't preaching 'against old dogmas' he was showing Jesus Christ in the OT to the Jews. The source of 'dogmas' if you aren't Catholic is the Bible. So biblical dogmatism is the highest praise. God's Word has been searched. As for this issue, the destinations of believers and non-believers has been addressed by none other than the Judge Jesus Christ in Luke 16:19-31. Lazarus is Abraham's bosom, the rich man apart in torment.
Dogmatism is the refusal to even look at evidence contrary to your own viewpoint
Definition: dog·ma·tism ˈdôɡməˌtizəm/ noun the tendency to lay down principles as incontrovertibly true, without consideration of evidence or the opinions of others.
In this case, the Bible is the source of the Savior's view of hell, Jesus should know as He will be executing the judgement. The Bible has to be the source of the things of God, His is the only opinion that matters. It isn't my opinion, it is what God records in His Word. Apparently you would not agree that the destination of man righteous or not is in the purview of God. Post resurrection, in Revelations 14:9-12 hell is described. No service is done to the unchurched or weak brethren when the scriptural consequences of unbelief are artificially softened. Doing so is also an offense to the Gospel.
Paul wasn’t preaching ‘against old dogmas’ he was showing Jesus Christ in the OT to the Jews
The source of ‘dogmas’ if you aren’t Catholic is the Bible.
the destinations of believers and non-believers has been addressed by none other than the Judge Jesus Christ in Luke 16:19-31. Lazarus is Abraham’s bosom, the rich man apart in torment.
http://www.jeremyandchristine.com/articles/lazarus.html
Post resurrection, in Revelations 14:9-12 hell is described. No service is done to the unchurched or weak brethren when the scriptural consequences of unbelief are artificially softened. Doing so is also an offense to the Gospel.
I think a great service is done when the lost are offered this choice: Choose God because you DESIRE to enjoy eternal life in the presence of your Creator who gave His very life for the remission of your sins, or choose to be the god of your life and enjoy the life God gave you as outlined in Ecclesiastes.
I call it very good news and an excellent example of allowing man to, of his own free will, choose Christ.
I think a very bad service is done when the lost are offered this choice: Choose God because you FEAR a terrible and unimaginable future where he will torture you in ways unimaginable for eon upon countless eons because of the crime of not really paying attention enough to believe he can and will do it. He will make Pol Pot and Stalin look like pikers.
I would not call that “good news”. I would call it coersion. That is not the message I see in the bible. Anywhere.
Apparently you would not agree that the destination of man righteous or not is in the purview of God. Post resurrection, in Revelations 14:9-12 hell is described.
However, both have significant meaning. So, how would a reasonable person interpret people being thrown into a lake of fire? I would interpret it as them being utterly burned up. It IS what makes sense at a human level. And the whole point of this sort of thing is to explain the spiritual at a level we humans can grasp. So he uses the example of a lake of fire and lamp stands.
So Jesus made up the torment part? Like He did when He referenced Jonah's stay in the whale?
Only by parsing the Word and not considering the whole counsel of God can you make this case. Rule #1 it is. While there seem to be conflicting passages (1Tim 2:3-4) we know from Rule #1 that many won't be saved. Both statements are true but 'can't be' to our reason. We know they are true because God has recorded them. How they are reconciled is His business. Rom 11:33-34
This 'improved' understanding is the work of Satan. Another version of his temptation in the Garden: "Did God really say?" Its promotion serves neither the unchurched or in your example the 'pew warmers' whose departure will make the Church stronger.??/? No; propagation of a lie serves none but the father of lies.
That's great, but the whole counsel of God reminds us that by himself man will never choose life. So we come from different places. I prefer the biblical stance you not as much at least where the Bible describes the difference between evil and good, light and darkness, how stark it is, how defined how final.
I would not call that “good news”. I would call it coersion. That is not the message I see in the bible. Anywhere.
Hell is Law, not Gospel. You are not rightly dividing the Word. No 'coercion' in the Bible? Elijah and the prophets of Baal. God vs Pharoah, Adam and Eve from the Garden, the jumbling of tongues on the plains of Shinar, etc.
think a very bad service is done when the lost are offered this choice: Choose God because you FEAR a terrible and unimaginable future
Fear God? Prov 9:10. The purpose of the Law, understanding of sin, basic lessons before the glory of the Gospel can be appreciated. Without sin, who needs God? Your methodology removes that fear of the Lord because the worst that will happen is I'll die, there is no afterlife, days of Noah Part deux. There's a bright tomorrow. Hope for the future. The belief in no afterlife, the dream of Satan.
So when God had the scriptures written, He was too stupid to account for sense at a human level. Couldn't just be saying what happens? You have to bend the Words of God to your understanding instead of your understanding to the Word of God. Congrats, you have successfully completed an idol in your image.
EVERLASTING must mean SOMETHING.
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.