12 reasons why hell is not eternal conscious torment

[JimParker]

You're good at insulting people. I'll give you that. Oh, and ignoring people who ask you questions. That doesn't take a high IQ.

whatever

 

[justaname]

We have modified the forum rules where insulting will not be tolerated...all who have not read them please go to the announcements section...thank you for your cooperation.

 

[OzSpen]

As one New Testament scholar put it, I find it hard to believe that the strongest words in the Greek language for death, destroy, destruction and perish can be interpreted to mean anything but what those words actually mean.

The following is a link by Edward Fudge, a New Testament scholar, writer and lecturer. I found his presentation to be educational and fair. For those of you who are interested whether you believe in the traditional concept hell, are an annihilationist or have lesser known views on Christian eschatology, spend an hour or so of your time watching it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHUPpmbTOV4

Edward Fudge is one of the most ardent promoters of annihilation. His views have been known for years. Calling him a 'New Testament scholar' is pushing the limits of NT scholarship. His doctorate is in jurisprudence (law).

There have been many down through the years who have refuted his views from a biblical perspective. Here is only one of them, Alan W Gomes, ‘Evangelicals and the Annihilation of Hell: Part Two’. Gomes takes to task evangelicals who have fallen for the annihilationist line promoted by people like Fudge.

 

[ATP]

..

When Rev 20:10 says ages of the ages, what is God's deeper meaning here. What is God's "plan of the ages" mean.

 

[Butch5]

<< kinda harsh isn't it?>>

I don't play juvenlle games. I'm to old for that baloney. It's hard enough to communicate via posts without people refusing to say what they think or mean.

<< The real question is why did the translators translate a word that mean wind or breath as spirit instead of wind or breath?>>

No, the real question is: Why do untrained people who are ignorant, as far as translation is concerned, (like myself, which is why I trust the professionals) think they are somehow smarter than literally thousands of real scholars who have consistently used the word "spirit" for the last 2000 years?

Why would anyone use the bogus translation of the word which is so highly favored by known frauds like Ellen G. White and Charles Taze Russell?

Firstly Jim,

Why assume people are playing games? When we post things they come from our understanding. Another person may not understand something the same way we do. What may seem clear to us (because we said it) may not be clear to someone else who isn't seeing it from our perspective.

To the second issue. The so called Scholars are human and just like every human they have a bias. No one comes to the Christian faith unbiased. Let me ask you this Jim, do you question the thousands of authorities that teach evolution? If so why? At one time thousands believed that the world was flat yet someone challenged that and proved the thousands wrong. Just because something is believed by a multitude doesn't make it true.

We can look at the words olam and aion that the thousands of scholars translate as for ever. They translate these words as forever when they pertain to the things that end. A thing that ends is not forever. Olam and aion are translated forever when used of the ordinances of the Mosaic Law, yet, both Jesus and Paul indicate that the Mosaic Law came to an end. So, if those thousands of scholars can mistranslate olam and aion, why shouldn't we question what they say elsewhere?

Let's also consider something else about these thousands of scholars. If they all read and understand the text so well, why are they not all of one denomination? I mean the Scriptures don't teach that it is possible and impossible to lose salvation, yet there are scholars on both sides of this subject. The Scriptures don't teach both that water baptism is essential and unessential, yet there are scholars on both sides of the issue.

That doesn't even bring into it the human factor and any who may be looking to make a name for themselves or who are in it for the money, etc.

One thing does confuse me though. You appeal to thousands of scholars yet it seems you reject their definition, how is that?

LOL....well I'm sure you would like that a lot, but THAT would be a cop out.
You broached the issue and I gave you scripture but as usual you move the goal posts when reality closes in.

No, the real issue is are you more qualified than the scholars who did translate the modern English versions the way they did?
From your responses here, we already know the answer is a resounding NO!

I am interested though to know what denomination you belong to? Are you JW?

Again your words just show what you don't understand from the actual texts but only relate to the KJV.
If it IS so fraught as you claim, then why can't you and your buddy defend it in a coherent fashion, instead of avoiding and deflecting on direct responses?
That you constantly interchange "hell" with the "lake of fire" just shows you really don't understand the overall nature of Revelation and what Jesus has said WILL happen.

LOL....well I'm sure you would like that a lot, but THAT would be a cop out.
You broached the issue and I gave you scripture but as usual you move the goal posts when reality closes in.

If I remember correctly you were going to refute my position. It's kinda hard to do that if you won't address what I say.

No, the real issue is are you more qualified than the scholars who did translate the modern English versions the way they did? From your responses here, we already know the answer is a resounding NO!

An appeal to authority is a logical fallacy. An argument's legitimacy is determined on it's merits not on who makes it. Since you won't address the argument I have to assume you have no refutation.

I am interested though to know what denomination you belong to? Are you JW?

I'm not JW. Actually, I don't claim any denomination as they divide the body and Jesus prayed that His followers would be one.

Again your words just show what you don't understand from the actual texts but only relate to the KJV.
If it IS so fraught as you claim, then why can't you and your buddy defend it in a coherent fashion, instead of avoiding and deflecting on direct responses?
That you constantly interchange "hell" with the "lake of fire" just shows you really don't understand the overall nature of Revelation and what Jesus has said WILL happen.

This is more empty rhetoric. All you have to do is refute my argument. In order to do that though you have to address it.

Also, please point out where I've avoided or deflected as you claim.

When Rev 20:10 says ages of the ages, what is God's deeper meaning here. What is God's "plan of the ages" mean.

Do you mean the overall plan from the beginning or after the Christ returns?

 

[ATP]

Do you mean the overall plan from the beginning or after the Christ returns?

Well, John uses ages of the ages in Revelation around 3-4 times, two times to describe eternity, one time to describe temporal things and I think another time. I'm hoping to understand this term better and why he uses it describe "time" in general. I know that God uses the word "age" to describe things starting and ending. I guess I'm referring to the overall plan. Does scripture state "ages of the ages" in the OT or NT aside from Revelation? Does "ages of the ages" mean eternity or simply when the age ends. Why is it used in plural tense, as in ages of the ages. - ATP

I'm not JW. Actually, I don't claim any denomination as they divide the body and Jesus prayed that His followers would be one.

Yes! You are good Butch.

 

[JimParker]

Firstly Jim,

Why assume people are playing games? When we post things they come from our understanding. Another person may not understand something the same way we do. What may seem clear to us (because we said it) may not be clear to someone else who isn't seeing it from our perspective.

To the second issue. The so called Scholars are human and just like every human they have a bias. No one comes to the Christian faith unbiased. Let me ask you this Jim, do you question the thousands of authorities that teach evolution? If so why? At one time thousands believed that the world was flat yet someone challenged that and proved the thousands wrong. Just because something is believed by a multitude doesn't make it true.

We can look at the words olam and aion that the thousands of scholars translate as for ever. They translate these words as forever when they pertain to the things that end. A thing that ends is not forever. Olam and aion are translated forever when used of the ordinances of the Mosaic Law, yet, both Jesus and Paul indicate that the Mosaic Law came to an end. So, if those thousands of scholars can mistranslate olam and aion, why shouldn't we question what they say elsewhere?

Let's also consider something else about these thousands of scholars. If they all read and understand the text so well, why are they not all of one denomination? I mean the Scriptures don't teach that it is possible and impossible to lose salvation, yet there are scholars on both sides of this subject. The Scriptures don't teach both that water baptism is essential and unessential, yet there are scholars on both sides of the issue.

That doesn't even bring into it the human factor and any who may be looking to make a name for themselves or who are in it for the money, etc.

One thing does confuse me though. You appeal to thousands of scholars yet it seems you reject their definition, how is that?

If I remember correctly you were going to refute my position. It's kinda hard to do that if you won't address what I say.

An appeal to authority is a logical fallacy. An argument's legitimacy is determined on it's merits not on who makes it. Since you won't address the argument I have to assume you have no refutation.



I'm not JW. Actually, I don't claim any denomination as they divide the body and Jesus prayed that His followers would be one.

This is more empty rhetoric. All you have to do is refute my argument. In order to do that though you have to address it.

Also, please point out where I've avoided or deflected as you claim.

Do you mean the overall plan from the beginning or after the Christ returns?

<< Why assume people are playing games?>>

By the evasive answers they post.

<< The so called Scholars are human and just like every human they have a bias.>>

That's very true. But, what so many people do is to ignore the fact that "scholars" have done the extensive research and study necessary to achieve the higher level of expertise they have while the average person in a forum like this has not. In fact, many have no concept of the amount of effort required to earn a Th.D.

Even you have shown your anti-education bias by referring to real scholars as "so-called." I seriously doubt that you have the background to critique their scholarship.

So I get a bit fed up with the grammar-school dropouts telling me what the scriptures really say because Ellen G. White "and the Holy Spirit" revealed some asinine, crackpot nonsense to them.

<< do you question the thousands of authorities that teach evolution? >>

Evolution is not a field that interests me and I have no training of any significance in that field. However, I do realize (unlike my many theologically ignorant brethren) that I am not qualified to criticize the evolving theory of evolution as the vast majority of people who post in forums like this are not qualified to do.

<<Just because something is believed by a multitude doesn't make it true.>>

Neither does being believed by a multitude make it false. (As one 7th Day Adventist assured me to be the case.) It is my experience that animosity toward those who have achieved a high level of education increases as the ignorance of the person holding the animosity increases. A second source of anti-education bias comes from frauds and hucksters who play to their audiences lack of training in theology to peddle their nonsense. (the JWs are a good example.)

<<We can look at the words olam and aion that the thousands of scholars translate as for ever.>>

What comes to mind is the question; Have you studied ancient Hebrew to have gained a better understanding than those who have made it their life's work?" If so, at what institution of higher learning?

And on what basis do you assume your understanding is more accurate than theirs since, if I have made an accurate assumption, you have not successfully completed a Ph.D. in ancient, middle eastern languages.

Your comment (unless you are an expert and authority on ancient Hebrew) illustrates the arrogance of ignorance which so pervades forums like this. (NOt that you are an ignorant person, as your command of language demonstrate that you are not, but that your knowledge of ancient Hebrew is rudimentary campared to the multitude of translators who rendered the words "for ever."

<<both Jesus and Paul indicate that the Mosaic Law came to an end.>>

Really??

What Jesus said is : "For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished." (Mat 5:18)

The last time I checked, heaven and earth had not yet passed away and "everything", including the 2nd coming and last judgment, had not been accomplished.

What Paul said is; "Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law." (Rom 3:31)

<<Let's also consider something else about these thousands of scholars. If they all read and understand the text so well, why are they not all of one denomination?>>

They are not all of the same denomination because they have different views as do the greater multitude of uneducated and under-educated folk who can rent a store-front, hang out a sign and start their own church.

Also, there are "scholars" who earned degrees from Oxford or Cambridge or Stanford or Harvard and then there are "scholars" who earned their degrees from Rhema Bible Institute or some little, denominational Bible College where they teach that specific denomination's doctrine which may not be based on good scholarship. So, not all scholarship is equal.

But the fact that they have different views does not negate the fact that they are most likely to have a better understanding of scripture than someone who had not done the study that they have done. It certainly does not mean that any grammar-school dropout with a King James Bible is their equal. They are also much less likely to hold the absurd views represented in the extreme by religious organizations like the Mormons and JWs who insist that they are the only true Christians in the world while not being Christian at all.

 

[StanJ]

We can look at the words olam and aion that the thousands of scholars translate as for ever. They translate these words as forever when they pertain to the things that end. A thing that ends is not forever. Olam and aion are translated forever when used of the ordinances of the Mosaic Law, yet, both Jesus and Paul indicate that the Mosaic Law came to an end. So, if those thousands of scholars can mistranslate olam and aion, why shouldn't we question what they say elsewhere?

Yes we can Butch, and those that KNOW, have qualified credentials, translate it using the proper context and connotation. If you would just deal with one of those examples we could move along, but you don't. You just keep bringing up the same reasoning/assertions.
Now deal with one example so we can move this along.
The sign of a cult is when they purport that everyone else is wrong and they're right. It never fails. The JWs are just one example of this.

 

[Butch5]

Yes we can Butch, and those that KNOW, have qualified credentials, translate it using the proper context and connotation. If you would just deal with one of those examples we could move along, but you don't. You just keep bringing up the same reasoning/assertions.
Now deal with one example so we can move this along.
The sign of a cult is when they purport that everyone else is wrong and they're right. It never fails. The JWs are just one example of this.

Please provide an example Stan. Maybe after I address it you could address one of the issued I've already presented to you.

Qualified credentials, huh? Did you read the rest of the post? Whose credentials would that be, the Calvinist, the Arminan, the Roman Catholic, Teh Eastern Orthodox, the Baptist, the Methodist...?

<< Why assume people are playing games?>>

By the evasive answers they post.

<< The so called Scholars are human and just like every human they have a bias.>>

That's very true. But, what so many people do is to ignore the fact that "scholars" have done the extensive research and study necessary to achieve the higher level of expertise they have while the average person in a forum like this has not. In fact, many have no concept of the amount of effort required to earn a Th.D.

Even you have shown your anti-education bias by referring to real scholars as "so-called." I seriously doubt that you have the background to critique their scholarship.

So I get a bit fed up with the grammar-school dropouts telling me what the scriptures really say because Ellen G. White "and the Holy Spirit" revealed some asinine, crackpot nonsense to them.

<< do you question the thousands of authorities that teach evolution? >>

Evolution is not a field that interests me and I have no training of any significance in that field. However, I do realize (unlike my many theologically ignorant brethren) that I am not qualified to criticize the evolving theory of evolution as the vast majority of people who post in forums like this are not qualified to do.

<<Just because something is believed by a multitude doesn't make it true.>>

Neither does being believed by a multitude make it false. (As one 7th Day Adventist assured me to be the case.) It is my experience that animosity toward those who have achieved a high level of education increases as the ignorance of the person holding the animosity increases. A second source of anti-education bias comes from frauds and hucksters who play to their audiences lack of training in theology to peddle their nonsense. (the JWs are a good example.)

<<We can look at the words olam and aion that the thousands of scholars translate as for ever.>>

What comes to mind is the question; Have you studied ancient Hebrew to have gained a better understanding than those who have made it their life's work?" If so, at what institution of higher learning?

And on what basis do you assume your understanding is more accurate than theirs since, if I have made an accurate assumption, you have not successfully completed a Ph.D. in ancient, middle eastern languages.

Your comment (unless you are an expert and authority on ancient Hebrew) illustrates the arrogance of ignorance which so pervades forums like this. (NOt that you are an ignorant person, as your command of language demonstrate that you are not, but that your knowledge of ancient Hebrew is rudimentary campared to the multitude of translators who rendered the words "for ever."

<<both Jesus and Paul indicate that the Mosaic Law came to an end.>>

Really??

What Jesus said is : "For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished." (Mat 5:18)

The last time I checked, heaven and earth had not yet passed away and "everything", including the 2nd coming and last judgment, had not been accomplished.

What Paul said is; "Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law." (Rom 3:31)

<<Let's also consider something else about these thousands of scholars. If they all read and understand the text so well, why are they not all of one denomination?>>

They are not all of the same denomination because they have different views as do the greater multitude of uneducated and under-educated folk who can rent a store-front, hang out a sign and start their own church.

Also, there are "scholars" who earned degrees from Oxford or Cambridge or Stanford or Harvard and then there are "scholars" who earned their degrees from Rhema Bible Institute or some little, denominational Bible College where they teach that specific denomination's doctrine which may not be based on good scholarship. So, not all scholarship is equal.

But the fact that they have different views does not negate the fact that they are most likely to have a better understanding of scripture than someone who had not done the study that they have done. It certainly does not mean that any grammar-school dropout with a King James Bible is their equal. They are also much less likely to hold the absurd views represented in the extreme by religious organizations like the Mormons and JWs who insist that they are the only true Christians in the world while not being Christian at all.

[SIZE=10pt][/SIZE]

By the evasive answers they post.

[SIZE=10pt]But it’s a little difficult to determine who is playing games on a forum where you cannot see the individual.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt][/SIZE]

That's very true. But, what so many people do is to ignore the fact that "scholars" have done the extensive research and study necessary to achieve the higher level of expertise they have while the average person in a forum like this has not. In fact, many have no concept of the amount of effort required to earn a Th.D.

[SIZE=10pt]Even you have shown your anti-education bias by referring to real scholars as "so-called." I seriously doubt that you have the background to critique their scholarship.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]I’m not anti-education. However, I also don’t put them on a pedestal. I agree a lot of work goes into getting a degree, however, note that seminaries produce like kinds. One can be trained extensively but that doesn’t mean they are learning the truth. There are those who have degrees in Reformed Theology and those who have degrees in Arminian Theology. They teach opposing doctrines therefore they cannot both be correct no matter how many degrees they have or how extensive their research.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]Reformed theology teaches that salvation cannot be lost, Arminian theology teaches that it can. Men on both sides have studied for years and done extensive research, however, one is wrong.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt][/SIZE]

So I get a bit fed up with the grammar-school dropouts telling me what the scriptures really say because Ellen G. White "and the Holy Spirit" revealed some asinine, crackpot nonsense to them.

[SIZE=10pt]Tying an argument to someone isn’t going to refute it. An argument should stand or fall on it’s own merits.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt][/SIZE]

Evolution is not a field that interests me and I have no training of any significance in that field. However, I do realize (unlike my many theologically ignorant brethren) that I am not qualified to criticize the evolving theory of evolution as the vast majority of people who post in forums like this are not qualified to do.

[SIZE=10pt]My question was really to the point of belief. Do you believe in evolution? If not why do you reject those authorities[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt][/SIZE]

Neither does being believed by a multitude make it false. (As one 7th Day Adventist assured me to be the case.) It is my experience that animosity toward those who have achieved a high level of education increases as the ignorance of the person holding the animosity increases. A second source of anti-education bias comes from frauds and hucksters who play to their audiences lack of training in theology to peddle their nonsense. (the JWs are a good example.)

[SIZE=10pt]That’s true, however, I am not making an appeal to the multitude. Again, I’m not anti-education. My positions on the Scriptures come from in depth study of and research in the Scriptures. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt][/quote]What comes to mind is the question; Have you studied ancient Hebrew to have gained a better understanding than those who have made it their life's work?" If so, at what institution of higher learning?[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]And on what basis do you assume your understanding is more accurate than theirs since, if I have made an accurate assumption, you have not successfully completed a Ph.D. in ancient, middle eastern languages.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]Your comment (unless you are an expert and authority on ancient Hebrew) illustrates the arrogance of ignorance which so pervades forums like this. (NOt that you are an ignorant person, as your command of language demonstrate that you are not, but that your knowledge of ancient Hebrew is rudimentary campared to the multitude of translators who rendered the words "for ever."[/quote][/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]Again, you’re appealing to education. While it is important it is not the end all. When a definition contradicts what is clearly stated in Scripture it cannot be correct. That is assuming that one accepts the Scriptures as infallible. We have English translators saying something is forever that Jesus said ended. It doesn’t take degrees in the original languages to see that this doesn’t work. Likewise, why do the translators define words in such a way as to contradict what the Scripture says? The only reason I can see is that there is a theological bias, whether it is intentional of not we don’t know but it is there. If someone was raised as a Roman Catholic attended the Catholic church and went on to get degrees in theology that background is going to influence how they see the Scriptures. That bias will also be seen in their writings. It’s what they believe the Scriptures say and thus they will translate accordingly.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]Here’s another example, The Heavenly destiny doctrine is almost universally accepted in Christianity. See if you can find a single passage of Scripture that says people go to Heaven when they die. There’s not a single passage of Scripture that says that. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt][/SIZE]

Really??

[SIZE=10pt]What Jesus said is : "[/SIZE][SIZE=10pt]For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.[/SIZE][SIZE=10pt]" (Mat 5:18http://biblia.com/bible/hcsb/Mat 5.18)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]The last time I checked, heaven and earth had not yet passed away and "everything", including the 2nd coming and last judgment, had not been accomplished.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]What Paul said is; "[/SIZE][SIZE=10pt]Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law[/SIZE][SIZE=10pt]." (Rom 3:31http://biblia.com/bible/hcsb/Rom 3.31)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]They also said the Law ended so the only logical conclusion is that it has been fulfilled. How can this be an ordinance forever when Aaron and his sons are dead?[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]KJV [/SIZE][SIZE=10pt]Exodus 28:43[/SIZE][SIZE=10pt] And they shall be upon Aaron, and upon his sons, when they come in unto the tabernacle of the congregation, or when they come near unto the altar to minister in the holy place; that they bear not iniquity, and die: it shall be a statute for ever unto him and his seed after him. (Exo 28:43 KJV)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]The priesthood in Jesus’ day was of Levi and Paul said that the priesthood changed and that now Christ is the high priest. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]KJV [/SIZE][SIZE=10pt]Hebrews 7:12[/SIZE][SIZE=10pt] For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. (Heb 7:12 KJV)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]Paul said the priesthood was changed. Therefore, the priesthood of Aaron was not forever.[/SIZE]


[SIZE=10pt][/SIZE]

They are not all of the same denomination because they have different views as do the greater multitude of uneducated and under-educated folk who can rent a store-front, hang out a sign and start their own church.

[SIZE=10pt]Also, there are "scholars" who earned degrees from Oxford or Cambridge or Stanford or Harvard and then there are "scholars" who earned their degrees from Rhema Bible Institute or some little, denominational Bible College where they teach that specific denomination's doctrine which may not be based on good scholarship. So, not all scholarship is equal.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]But the fact that they have different views does not negate the fact that they are most likely to have a better understanding of scripture than someone who had not done the study that they have done. It certainly does not mean that any grammar-school dropout with a King James Bible is their equal. They are also much less likely to hold the absurd views represented in the extreme by religious organizations like the Mormons and JWs who insist that they are the only true Christians in the world while not being Christian at all.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]It doesn’t matter how much study one has done if they don’t study the right stuff. If Reformed theology is wrong it doesn’t matter if one is the foremost authority on the subject why multiple degrees, they’d still be wrong. That’s the problem with bias, unless one is willing to set aside their bias finding the truth will be difficult. We all have preconceptions and they color our view of Scripture. Until one is wiling to put them aside as best as one can it’s hard to see anything in Scripture other than what we’ve seen all along. I know I’ve been there. I learned to set aside my preconceptions a look at an argument for its merit. It’s not easy, but it is very valuable. [/SIZE]

Well, John uses ages of the ages in Revelation around 3-4 times, two times to describe eternity, one time to describe temporal things and I think another time. I'm hoping to understand this term better and why he uses it describe "time" in general. I know that God uses the word "age" to describe things starting and ending. I guess I'm referring to the overall plan. Does scripture state "ages of the ages" in the OT or NT aside from Revelation? Does "ages of the ages" mean eternity or simply when the age ends. Why is it used in plural tense, as in ages of the ages. - ATP


Yes! You are good Butch.

The OT does use similar language. It uses phrases such as, unto the age of the age and unto the age even as far as the age.

 

[ATP]

The OT does use similar language. It uses phrases such as, unto the age of the age and unto the age even as far as the age.

Do you have the scriptures that states "unto the age of the age". That is interesting. So the Bible uses "age", "unto the age of the age" and "ages of the ages". What does it all mean, u think.
1. The Pre-Adamic Age
2. The Adamic Age
3. The Age of Israel under the Old Mosaic Covenant of the Law
4. The Age of the Church under the New Covenant of Grace
5. The Millennial Age of the Kingdom of God
6. The Lake of Fire Judgement Age
7. The Eternal Age of the Kingdom of God

 

[Butch5]

Do you have the scriptures that states "unto the age of the age". That is interesting. So the Bible uses "age", "unto the age of the age" and "ages of the ages". What does it all mean, u think.

1. The Pre-Adamic Age
2. The Adamic Age
3. The Age of Israel under the Old Mosaic Covenant of the Law
4. The Age of the Church under the New Covenant of Grace
5. The Millennial Age of the Kingdom of God
6. The Lake of Fire Judgement Age
7. The Eternal Age of the Kingdom of God

BGT 1 Chronicles 29:10 καὶ εὐλόγησεν ὁ βασιλεὺς Δαυιδ τὸν κύριον ἐνώπιον τῆς ἐκκλησίας λέγων εὐλογητὸς εἶ κύριε ὁ θεὸς Ισραηλ ὁ πατὴρ ἡμῶν ἀπὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος καὶ ἕως τοῦ αἰῶνος

KJV 1 Chronicles 29:10 Wherefore David blessed the LORD before all the congregation: and David said, Blessed be thou, LORD God of Israel our father, for ever and ever. (1Ch 29:10 KJV)

BGT Nehemiah 9:5 καὶ εἴποσαν οἱ Λευῖται Ἰησοῦς καὶ Καδμιηλ ἀνάστητε εὐλογεῖτε τὸν κύριον θεὸν ὑμῶν ἀπὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος καὶ ἕως τοῦ αἰῶνος καὶ εὐλογήσουσιν ὄνομα δόξης σου καὶ ὑψώσουσιν ἐπὶ πάσῃ εὐλογίᾳ καὶ αἰνέσει (Neh 9:5 BGT)

KJV Nehemiah 9:5 Then the Levites, Jeshua, and Kadmiel, Bani, Hashabniah, Sherebiah, Hodijah, Shebaniah, and Pethahiah, said, Stand up and bless the LORD your God for ever and ever: and blessed be thy glorious name, which is exalted above all blessing and praise. (Neh 9:5 KJV)


The bolded section reads, "from the age and as far as the age.

I think the meaning has to be determined from the context of each use. However, the LXX is translating the concept of olam. I think if we properly understand the meaning of olam it answers the question as to the meaning of, "unto the ages of the ages."

 

[StanJ]

Please provide an example Stan. Maybe after I address it you could address one of the issued I've already presented to you.

Qualified credentials, huh? Did you read the rest of the post? Whose credentials would that be, the Calvinist, the Arminan, the Roman Catholic, Teh Eastern Orthodox, the Baptist, the Methodist...?

This is exactly what I asked you to do Butch, and you wonder why I think you avoid the issue?

Yes, credentials. I'm sure you know what that means.

 

[ATP]

whatever

Job 34:14-15 NIV If it were his intention and he withdrew his spirit and breath, 15all humanity would perish together and mankind would return to the dust.

 

[Butch5]

This is exactly what I asked you to do Butch, and you wonder why I think you avoid the issue?

Yes, credentials. I'm sure you know what that means.

The funny thing is Stan, you are the one who said you were going to refute my doctrine. So, it's you who should be doing the explaining. You should be explaining how my doctrine is wrong. However, so far I've seen nothing. You posted a few passage that you claimed show that man is a spirit, yet none stated as much. That is hardly a refutation. Telling me that I am denying is not refuting what I believe.

Even in this last post you haven't addressed anything. I even gave you the opportunity to present the passages you were referring to and you didn't. So, what is your point in this discussion?

And again you didn't another issue. If we are to accept these credentials as you suggest whose do we accept. It's obvious that the "credentialed" cannot even agree among themselves. So whose do we accept? Do we just pick a doctrinal position that appeals to us and accept those who hold credentials in that theological system? Seriously, we see where that's lead. All one has to do is look at Protestantism to see the effects of that methodology. But if you like, follow the "Credentialed" you know what Jesus said to the "credentialed" and .

KJV Matthew 23:15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves. (Mat 23:15 KJV)

According to Jesus the "credentialed" and scholars were leading the people astray.

 

[StanJ]

The funny thing is Stan, you are the one who said you were going to refute my doctrine. So, it's you who should be doing the explaining. You should be explaining how my doctrine is wrong. However, so far I've seen nothing. You posted a few passage that you claimed show that man is a spirit, yet none stated as much. That is hardly a refutation. Telling me that I am denying is not refuting what I believe.

Even in this last post you haven't addressed anything. I even gave you the opportunity to present the passages you were referring to and you didn't. So, what is your point in this discussion?

And again you didn't another issue. If we are to accept these credentials as you suggest whose do we accept. It's obvious that the "credentialed" cannot even agree among themselves. So whose do we accept? Do we just pick a doctrinal position that appeals to us and accept those who hold credentials in that theological system? Seriously, we see where that's lead. All one has to do is look at Protestantism to see the effects of that methodology. But if you like, follow the "Credentialed" you know what Jesus said to the "credentialed" and .

KJV Matthew 23:15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves. (Mat 23:15 KJV)

According to Jesus the "credentialed" and scholars were leading the people astray.

as it's very apparent you are both unwilling and unable to corroborate your POV, I won't bother going any further with you in this regard. If I see anything that remotely resembles proper exegesis, I'll deal with it, but until then I'll move on.

Credentialed has to do with unbiased education in our modern academia.

 

[Butch5]

as it's very apparent you are both unwilling and unable to corroborate your POV, I won't bother going any further with you in this regard. If I see anything that remotely resembles proper exegesis, I'll deal with it, but until then I'll move on.

Credentialed has to do with unbiased education in our modern academia.

Just like I thought. Stan, I think it's apparent to everyone that you have nothing.

 

[ATP]

Like every age that has gone by, it has indeed ended. The last age is the only one that will be eternal. It is in God's eternal plan.

1. The Pre-Adamic Age
2. The Adamic Age
3. The Age of Israel under the Old Mosaic Covenant of the Law
4. The Age of the Church under the New Covenant of Grace
5. The Millennial Age of the Kingdom of God
6. The Lake of Fire Judgement Age
7. The Eternal Age of the Kingdom of God

 

[StanJ]

Just like I thought. Stan, I think it's apparent to everyone that you have nothing.

LOL...is that the same kind of apparentcy that you use to support your POV about what you call ECT?

Sadly I think you think everyone really buys this routine of yours, when in actuality they are just ignoring you or have given up on you seeing the truth. Well I'm there now so you can either live with your cognitive dissonance or break free and prove your POV.

 

[ATP]

Butch and StanJ, you guys keep putting down each other and nobody is giving it a rest. Give it a rest.

 

[Butch5]

Butch and StanJ, you guys keep putting down each other and nobody is giving it a rest. Give it a rest.

I've not put anyone down. Stan made a claim and didn't produce.