Alive or dead

[farouk]

Hi brakelite. I have to confess from the outset that I have not read all the posts here, I'm afraid I do not have the time to wade through them all. So perhaps I am covering ground you've already dealt with, sorry.
But...I do have to say, that I'm not so sure you starting premise is accurate. Just because you are the OP, does not necessarily mean you are the one who "doesn't have to prove" this idea that no thinking, rational consciousness goes on past death.
In fact, the verses that you cite, while perhaps not implicityly or explicityly saying that a spirit, when it returns to God has it's own personality or memories, it doesn't refute it either.
In fact, shouldn't, as you suggest, take the preponderance of scripture when looking at this subject? And to be honest, when looking at them all; the many promises of life and victory after death, wouldn't that suggest that for us, there is something? If our spirits were, essentially just absorbed back into God until that time when the resurrection took place and spirit and new body was reunited, then it takes away any meaning of the promises of triumph after death. Because essentially, there is nothing after death. Nothing but...a form of soul sleep, I suppose. Where is Christ's promise to the thief to be in paradise, if he is not aware of that paradise? Where is Paul's promise and longing to be in the presence of Christ, if he cannot be aware of that?
And, as I did see someone mention, there is the transfiguration. I know you think it can be 'explained' away by Moses having a pre-resurrection...but that is not in the text. If we are trying to arrive at a conclusion based solely on what we can gather from the text and the text alone, that is not an outcome that can come naturally.
Where should we also put all the 'great cloud of witnesses' in Revelation...those Christians martyred for Christ. If their spirits are taken back into God, should we even see them under the alter? I should imagine not. Should they even be crying out for justice? Again, I think not.
No...I think the weight of scripture would put the onus upon you to prove otherwise.

Wasn't soul sleep at one time regarded as 'Bullingerism'?

 

[Naomi25]

Wasn't soul sleep at one time regarded as 'Bullingerism'?

I honestly have no idea!!

 

[farouk]

I honestly have no idea!!

Seem to remember something like that, anyway...

 

[Giuliano]

John was not actually Elijah, but he did come “in the spirit and power of Elijah” to do an Elijah work for Israel (Luke 1:17) to prepare them, and to introduced them to the Lord in the flesh at the first advent.

In attempting to convert Israel and to prepare them to receive Messiah, John represented the real Elijah (the true Church), whose work has been to attempt the conversion of the world before the second advent, the coming of Messiah to the world--the spiritual Lord of glory and King of kings.

All could not receive John's testimony nor realize that he was forerunner to the King in the flesh. Had they done so, they would have been prepared thereby to receive Jesus as their Messiah. To as many of them as could and did accept John's message and receive Christ, to these John did do the Elijah work. As our Lord said to them of John (Matt.11:14), "If ye will receive it, this is the Elias which was to come"; though John and his work did not complete the predicted (work) concerning the real Elijah to come as spoken by the prophet Malachi (4:5. 6)

You do not receive it. You do not believe it.

“Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet (the true Church) before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord (the Second Advent). And he will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the earth with a curse.”

John in the spirit and power of Elijah, failed to reform Israel, and, as a consequence (Matt 17:12), Israel rejected Jesus in the flesh, and brought upon themselves a great "day of vengeance," trouble and wrath. (Luke 21:22) So, likewise, only on the larger scale, the real and greater Elijah (the true Church) has failed to convert and prepare the world to receive the King of Glory, and now, consequently, the great day of wrath (the “curse” mentioned by our Lord in Malachi’s prophecy) must come upon the world, to melt and mellow and humble and prepare all to cry out from the heart--Hosanna! Blessed is he that comes in the name of Jehovah!

It is thus seen that the Church in the flesh (the Christ in the flesh, Head and body) is the Elijah or forerunner of the Church in glory, Jehovah's Anointed. Not the nominal church, but the really consecrated Church, which on the other side of the Vail will be the great Anointed Deliverer-- these constitute the Elijah.

Lots of words but without understanding since you cannot receive it that John was Elijah.

What assumption are you referring to here?

One huge assumption is that John was not Elijah although Jesus said he was.

The scriptural fact

, that no one was begotten of the spirt (begotten to a new nature), prior to Pentecost.

The scriptural fact, that following our Lord’s faithful completion of his sacrifice and death he was highly exalted.

“And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to death, even the death of the cross. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth.” (Phil 2:8-10)

“For as the Father has life in Himself (inherent life, immortality, the divine nature), so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself.” (John 5:26)

Immortality is ascribed only to the divine nature--originally to Jehovah only, subsequently to our Lord, and finally, by promise, to the Church.

You make it sound as if God didn't exist before Jesus came.

You will forgive me if I chose to stick to the word of the Lord on the matter viz. “No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.” (John 3:13)

And it seems clear to me that while Nicodemus and Jesus understood the conversation, you did not. If you do, tell me why Ezekiel is also called son of man. Why would he travel around in the spirit? Ha, was he born of the Spirit perhaps?

John 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

The scriptures do not contradict themselves; therefore it is evident why such books as the Assumption of Moses were not included in the holy canon being as they contain passages in direct conflict with the scriptures.

Who made that decision? The Catholic Church? There are several quotes from the "Oral Torah" or Talmud in the New Testament. Paul even says Jews have a big advantage

Romans 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
.
I daresay I've met Jews who could understand Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus better than most Christians.

Sorry but we’re not really interested in Jewish traditions, we prefer to stick to the word of God on all matters.

The part about the letter is in the Bible! We also see Elijah and Moses reported as alive and well talking to Jesus.

So you’re saying that if this event had taken place after Paul’s conversion he would not had suffered any harm standing in the presence of the Lord in his full glory, this despite the word of the Lord which states that he dwells in unapproachable light whom no man can see (1 Tim 6:16)

Let's look at it:

1 Timothy 6:16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

Exodus 33:20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

Both passages are talking about the Glory of God in its fullness. Jesus can dwell in it and still live. Neither passage is about seeing Jesus in his glory.

I’m not sure what your point is and how it relates to what you quoted.

If you’re speaking of Moses and Elijah they haven’t ascended anywhere, they remain in their graves and await the completion of the Church. “God having provided something better for us, that they should not be made perfect (receive the promised of a “better resurrection”) apart from us.” (Heb 11:35, 40)

Ascended beings are not trapped by space. Jesus could appear and disappear at will after his resurrection, even in rooms with the doors closed.

If Elijah and Moses are in the graves, I wonder how Jesus was talking to them? The text does not say two "like unto" Moses and Elijah. That's a common clue that a prophet knows that what he's seeing is not exactly real but symbolic or meant for instruction.

Matthew 17:3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
4 Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.

If they were only part of a vision and not really there, why did Peter want to build three tabernacles? Was he raving mad?

Something may still remain to be made perfect for them, by the way.

 

[GodsGrace]

I will be posting the biblical support for this later.

I know it,,,you don't have to look for verses unless it's something new.

What do you think of Matthew 25:46?
I don't think you replied to this before.

 

[brakelite]

I know it,,,you don't have to look for verses unless it's something new.

What do you think of Matthew 25:46?
I don't think you replied to this before.

Yes, I think I did reference that previously...I noted that the word says they shall go away into everlasting punishment... Not punishing.
In other words, punishment, being the wages of sin... Death... The opposite to life... Without hope of resurrection... Is a punishment that lasts forever.

 

[marks]

* Though I can understand why you should think as you do, as expressed in your last paragraph, I still think you are in danger of introducing a concept which was never intended. For we do not receive our celestial bodies, or the building. of God not made with hands, until we are resurrected out from among the dead. For the building of God (or our celestial bodies) are at present in heaven awaiting that event.

Hi Chris,

Please feel free to address anything I've written. That's one of the reasons I'm here, is to put my views to the test.

And yes, one new man, borrowed from Ephesians 2.

What are your thoughts on 2 Corinthians 5 where God teaches us in a declarative sentence, we have a body not made with hands, eternal in the heavens?

We have, the Apostle writes, presently possessing. Perhaps we're more than we realize?

We are seated together in the heavenlies. Are we simply points of consciousness?

?

Much love!

 

[marks]

Yes, I think I did reference that previously...I noted that the word says they shall go away into everlasting punishment... Not punishing.
In other words, punishment, being the wages of sin... Death... The opposite to life... Without hope of resurrection... Is a punishment that lasts forever.

Hi brakelite,

The first picture above is from Matthew 25:46 from the online interlinear at Scripture4all.org.

The second is of 1 John 4:18.

In the first case, Jesus prophesies the unrighteous going into "eternal punishment", which you've defined as destruction which lasts forever, is that correct?

But if we use that definition in 1 John 4, then we have "fear has eternal destruction", that is, when you are afraid, you are eternally destroyed.

But that's not what it means. When you are afraid, it torments you. And that also is the meaning in Matthew, eternal torment.

It's a hard saying, but that's what it says.

Much love!

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes, I think I did reference that previously...I noted that the word says they shall go away into everlasting punishment... Not punishing.
In other words, punishment, being the wages of sin... Death... The opposite to life... Without hope of resurrection... Is a punishment that lasts forever.

OK,,,but if one goes into everlasting PUNISHMENT....
Why would the word EVERLASTING be there?
Doesn't everlasting mean FOREVER?

If a person just vanishes, soul, spirit and body...
HOW are they in punishment FOREVER?

Also,,,have you considered that the soul and the spirit could not die?
Even scientists will tell you that energy does not die...it can only change.

 

[brakelite]

View attachment 7114
View attachment 7115
Hi brakelite,

The first picture above is from Matthew 25:46 from the online interlinear at Scripture4all.org.

The second is of 1 John 4:18.

In the first case, Jesus prophesies the unrighteous going into "eternal punishment", which you've defined as destruction which lasts forever, is that correct?

But if we use that definition in 1 John 4, then we have "fear has eternal destruction", that is, when you are afraid, you are eternally destroyed.

But that's not what it means. When you are afraid, it torments you. And that also is the meaning in Matthew, eternal torment.

It's a hard saying, but that's what it says.

Much love!

So you have found one application that suggests that in some contexts the Greek word in one sense can mean punishment, and another, torment. But the context of one is different from the context of another. In one context the author, John, speaking of fear, says it has a tormenting allocation which is temporary because love can overcome it.
When Jesus used the same word (only He wasn't speaking Greek, but Aramaic) the author, Matthew, uses it in the context of an eternal answer to a problem, that being sin.
If however we turn elsewhere to a place where the author offers a similar context as Jesus was speaking from, that is an eternal solution to the sin problem, we find Paul agreeing with Matthew...
KJV 2 Thessalonians 1
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
One poster said we should take the whole of Scripure and find herewith the weight of evidence. I couldn't agree more. None of either the texts you quoted nor the ones I quoted contradict each other unless you view them solely from an eternal torment perspective. Otherwise, from the anhilationist perspective, they find harmony.

 

[marks]

So you have found one application that suggests that in some contexts the Greek word in one sense can mean punishment, and another, torment. But the context of one is different from the context of another. In one context the author, John, speaking of fear, says it has a tormenting allocation which is temporary because love can overcome it.
When Jesus used the same word (only He wasn't speaking Greek, but Aramaic) the author, Matthew, uses it in the context of an eternal answer to a problem, that being sin.
If however we turn elsewhere to a place where the author offers a similar context as Jesus was speaking from, that is an eternal solution to the sin problem, we find Paul agreeing with Matthew...
KJV 2 Thessalonians 1
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
One poster said we should take the whole of Scripure and find herewith the weight of evidence. I couldn't agree more. None of either the texts you quoted nor the ones I quoted contradict each other unless you view them solely from an eternal torment perspective. Otherwise, from the anhilationist perspective, they find harmony.

Actually those are the only two places where that word is used in the New Testament, so, if we are going to use Scripture to interpret Scripture, that's it. I realize that many will choose to disregard this small fact.

Regarding the language, I believe the Greek Autographs were written through divine plenary inspiration. I discuss these things first from that perspective, and that every part is fully true.

There are no contradictions. Perceived contradictions evidence a misunderstanding. There are several places in Scripture that conflict, not with other Scriptures but with the view of annihilation of the condemned.

I prefer to take things one at a time to save over-complicating things.

Much love!

 

[brakelite]

Actually those are the only two places where that word is used in the New Testament, so, if we are going to use Scripture to interpret Scripture, that's it. I realize that many will choose to disregard this small fact.

Regarding the language, I believe the Greek Autographs were written through divine plenary inspiration. I discuss these things first from that perspective, and that every part is fully true.

There are no contradictions. Perceived contradictions evidence a misunderstanding. There are several places in Scripture that conflict, not with other Scriptures but with the view of annihilation of the condemned.

I prefer to take things one at a time to save over-complicating things.

Much love!

Again, one must view that word in context. It has a wide range of meaning, from punishment, to correction...pruning to chastisement. Depending on context, we then apply our understanding. To apply continuing torment to the word in both contexts, makes no sense when the context of the event itself is considered from elsewhere in scripture. Fear hath torment contextually is a far different scenario from the sentence being imposed upon unrepentant sinners. In one context, as in fear hath torment, yes, temporary suffering until a lesson is learned may be applied. Such as chastisement, or pruning. But in the other context, where one is contemplating the final destiny of the wicked, at a time when no second chances are being offered, when chastisement has no value because repentance is no longer valid, the whole exercise can result only in further misery and suffering, therefore contextually the word must mean punishment. It need not, in fact should never mean a continuing state of punishing because it can produce nothing of value or hope of improvement in behaviour...there is no resurrection from the second death.
So to make the situation clearer we then go to other scriptures which describe the actual event, the destiny of the wicked, and base our conclusions on the weight of evidence...not on just one word that appears twice in the entire NT, giving that one word an arbitrary meaning in both instances to suit your preconceived bias. Paul states clearly that sinners go to destruction. Jesus said the same thing in direct teaching, and in parables. I think we are all, including you, familiar with those examples, as they have been quoted many times in these types of discussions. Yet because of the determination to cleave tenaciously to the eternal torment scenario, all these other examples of contrasting scriptures (contrasting with the idea, not with the scripture itself) are ignored and minimised, and a very narrow view clung to based on what in reality is very flimsy evidence.
I could cite over two dozen scriptures throughout the OT and NT that speak of death, destruction, perishing, being burnt up, being utterly removed form the earth, etc and other phrases and expressions all being applied to the fate of the wicked, and either explicitly or implicitly stating that sinners at some time after a period of suffering, do in fact cease to exist. They die. They lose their lives. The "eternal punishment" spoken of in scripture is precisely that. To imply otherwise is a gross slandering on the nature of a just God. And a complete misunderstanding of the propitiation. Jesus is not still being tormented. But He did die. Fully and completely in precisely the same manner as will unrepentant sinners. And if He had sinned in even the slightest suggestion or thought, He would not ever have been raised from the dead, and the human race in its entirety would have been lost. And God would NOT have continued the race's existence for all eternity for the sole purpose of inflicting pain and misery. And nor will He be doing that to unrepentant sinners who have not accepted the gospel.

 

[marks]

Again, one must view that word in context. It has a wide range of meaning, from punishment, to correction...pruning to chastisement..

Your sources here? Show me please. Show me that this word means what you say it means.

Context. We have only two contexts with this word in the New Testament. One context in unambiguous. The other context is debatable. So we use the clear to interpret the less clear.

The fact is, the Bible speaks of the ongoing suffering of the condemned using the exact same terminology as it speaks of the ungoing life of the redeemed.

We both know we can trade verses all day long, and we can spend hours and days discussing context, genre, possible meanings compared to meanings required by context.

It more comes to what you believe about creation, I think.

Much love!

 

[brakelite]

That's not what the theological doctrine of annihilation, as taught by the SDAs, JWs, Christadelphians, and others, means. For them, annihilation of unbelievers means they won't experience an eternity of suffering in Hades or Gehenna. Instead, their conscious life will be zapped after death. As stated by some in this thread, they move towards annihilationism because they find it obnoxious that God would send people to an eternity of conscious suffering.

This is one of the SDA statements of belief:

The punishment of the unrepentant is called the second death: After the final judgment the unrepentant receive their punishment. This punishment is called the second death. “Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire” (Rev. 20:14, 15; see also 21:8). The Bible also uses words such as “perishing” and “destruction” in speaking of the ultimate fate of the unrepentant (e.g., 
2 Peter 3:7, 9; John 3:16; Heb. 10:28; Mal. 4:1). These descriptions confirm that the second death refers to annihilation (or extinction) of the unrepentant, rather than a continual and eternal conscious torment (Waking up to Eternity).​

What about unbelievers now? The Scriptures seem to teach that they go into torment in the intermediate state in Hades at death, awaiting the final judgment. Peter described it this way:

“Then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment” (2 Peter 2:9 NIV)​

“To hold” in the Greek of this verse is a present, active infinitive, meaning that the wicked are being kept where they are, captive continuously. This verse clearly refutes annihilation of the wicked after death as there would be nothing “to hold” until the judgment day if they had no existence. Peter says the unrighteous are “continuing their punishment”, this phrase is interpreting a present, passive participle that indicates the unbelievers are being continuously tormented/punished. The Greek grammar of this text clearly states that the wicked dead are experiencing torment as they await the final judgment.

Oz

This is the first time I noticed this post. It seems you are mixing the narrative. The SDAs do not teach that the extinction of sinners takes place immediately after death. The wicked have a resurrection... The resurrection of damnation. This takes place at our before the descending of the new Jerusalem from heaven onto the earth. Already in the city are the Saints from all ages... Outside are the wicked, gathered together one last time to hear their sentence and to be justly shown precisely why they are in the predicament they are in. Good reveals to them why they are guilty, and also the numerous times He offered them an opportunity for repentance. They all, even Susan himself, finally are forced to admit that God is just, and they bow before Christ confessing He is Lord. Reluctantly. And with no love. But such a confession is forced upon them by the stark facts of reality. They then recognise, after Satan's final desperate attempt to gain the advantage, that their only hope is to surround the city and take it by force. They are then destroyed. Some more slowly (more stripes) than others according to their deeds, some with more quickly having less guilt. Satan of course the longest. But even he will in the end succumb to non existence. He is destroyed.
KJV Obadiah 1
15 For the day of the LORD is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head.
16 For as ye have drunk upon my holy mountain, so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been.

Then finally death itself is destroyed. Thus the punishing, and the punishment, is over. The universe is clean. Affliction shall not rise a second time. Nahum 1:9

 

[brakelite]

It more comes to what you believe about creation, I think.

Perhaps more about what we believe about the Creator, and His ultimate purposes for the universe. A creation marred forever by sin and sinners, all continuously blaspheming and cursing God without end? Is that really His purpose? Is He incapable of eradicating evil altogether? And if not, why not? And if He can, why not? To what purpose is endless suffering if not redemptive?

 

[marks]

A creation marred forever by sin and sinners, all continuously blaspheming and cursing God without end?

There's an interesting thought. I don't think that's what will be.

And yes, the beginning is, I believe, based on the end. God is into Truth. The people He made are the people He made, and He made them to be with Him forever, in a love relationship, so He made people who last forever, and offered them love. People choose death, He gives life, those who don't receive life, there is one other option.

Endless suffering is also prohibitory.

Much love!

 

[charity]

There's an interesting thought. I don't that that's what will be.

And yes, the beginning is, I believe, based on the end. God is into Truth. The people He made are the people He made, and He made them to be with Him forever, in a love relationship, so He made people who last forever, and offered them love. People choose death, He gives life, those who don't receive life, there is one other option.

Endless suffering is also prohibitory.

Much love!

'Which in His times He shall shew,
Who is the blessed and only Potentate,
the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
Who only hath immortality,
dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto;
Whom no man hath seen, nor can see:
to whom be honour and power everlasting.
Amen.'
(1 Timothy 6:15-16)

Hello @marks,

There is only One Who has immortality.

'Verily, verily, I say unto you,
The hour is coming, and now is,
when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God:
and they that hear shall live.
For as the Father hath life in Himself;
so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself; ... '
(John 5:25-26)

In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[VictoryinJesus]

But that's not what it means. When you are afraid, it torments you. And that also is the meaning in Matthew, eternal torment.

Yes, 1 John 4:17-18
[17] Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world. [18] There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.

Perfect love cast out fear of torment. Regarding endless suffering...something to be considered is what took place in the garden and as a result God did not allow man to eat of the tree of Life and live “endlessly” in an disobedient state. Can not see how God would allow any to be in an “endless” disobedient state since that is the very reason for Genesis 3:22 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Genesis 3:23-24
[23] Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. [24] So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

John 14:5-6
[5] Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? [6] Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

 

[OzSpen]

KJV Obadiah 1
15 For the day of the LORD is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head.
16 For as ye have drunk upon my holy mountain, so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been.

Then finally death itself is destroyed. Thus the punishing, and the punishment, is over. The universe is clean. Affliction shall not rise a second time. Nahum 1:9

brakelite,

I do wish you wouldn't impose on New Covenant Christians the teachings of the OT that applied to the Israelites and other nations.

Obadiah 1:15-16 is addressed to the nation of Edom (v.1), which were a people closely related to the Israelites, being descendants of Esau. Therefore, these 2 verses deal with the punishing of Edom and not of Christians.

We know death will be destroyed eventually because the NT confirms it: 'And the last enemy to be destroyed is death' (1 Cor 15:26 NLT).

As for Nahum 1:9, this deals with Nahum's vision against Ninevah. It has nothing to do with Christians. Please, please do not rip verses out of context and make them mean what you want them to say.

Oz

 

[quietthinker]

brakelite,

I do wish you wouldn't impose on New Covenant Christians the teachings of the OT that applied to the Israelites and other nations.

Obadiah 1:15-16 is addressed to the nation of Edom (v.1), which were a people closely related to the Israelites, being descendants of Esau. Therefore, these 2 verses deal with the punishing of Edom and not of Christians.

We know death will be destroyed eventually because the NT confirms it: 'And the last enemy to be destroyed is death' (1 Cor 15:26 NLT).

As for Nahum 1:9, this deals with Nahum's vision against Ninevah. It has nothing to do with Christians. Please, please do not rip verses out of context and make them mean what you want them to say.

Oz

OzSpen....If I might stick my head into this conversation. OT history re nations and peoples that are in conflict with God and his people are often used as analogous to the larger conflict between Christ and Satan, for example the woman Jezebel representing defiant recalcitrance or Esau (Edom) which was know for human sacrifice as opposed to Jacob. There are many examples like this throughout scripture so it is not out of order or inappropriate to use these to illustrate or highlight truths in any era.