"Hell doesn't last forever"..God is merciful

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Status
Not open for further replies.

kerwin

New Member
Aug 17, 2016
582
7
0
StanJ said:
I did indeed address this issue in Matthew 10:28 but you refused to accept it so the failure is not mine in addressing it, the failure is yours in not understanding it.
God can also move a mountain, but did he ever?
You address is flawed but you are blind to that flaw.

Jesus stated "can" because God only destroys the body and souls of the wicked in the fires of Gehenna. Without the "can" he destroys the body and souls of everyone by throwing them into the lake of fire.

Obviously Jesus was using God's ability as a reason to fear God and if it meant just destroying bodies as you claim then it would be no different than what human beings can do.

Since God has the ability to destroy a soul it follows the soul is not immortal should he choose to destroy it.

Jesus did not say "throw you in Gehenna and torments you forever".

In conclusion one should fear God because he has the ability to destroy one's body and soul by throwing it into the Lake of Fire not because he will destroy the body and torment the soul forever.
 

kerwin

New Member
Aug 17, 2016
582
7
0
StanJ said:
Jude 1:12-13 says; These men are dangerous reefs at your love feasts, feasting without reverence, feeding only themselves. They are waterless clouds, carried along by the winds; autumn trees without fruit—twice dead, uprooted; wild sea waves, spewing out the foam of their shame; wayward stars for whom the utter depths of eternal darkness have been reserved.
Where God does not exist there is no light. John 1:9-11 made this clear when Jesus came into the world that he was the light and yet he was not recognized or accepted as such. Lack of light does not mean Oblivion or Destruction, it means lack of light. Many people live today with no light in their lives and if they don't accept the light they will be consigned to total darkness, which is not destruction but just darkness.
Isaiah. 26:4 says; Trust in the Lord forever, for the Lord, the Lord himself, is the Rock eternal.
The only person dancing around this issue is you, it is definitely not the scripture.
That is a really poor interpretation of John 1:9-11. I doubt that even many of those that are knowledgeable of Scripture will go for it for after all God is all present.
 

StanJ

Lifelong student of God's Word.
May 13, 2014
4,798
111
63
70
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
kerwin said:
There are different places called Hell in the AV of KJV and perhaps translations. This is probably due to bias on the part of the translators.
The one translated from Sheol/Hades is where the Parable of the Rich man and Lazarus takes place and the wicked part is describes as a place of torment while the place of the righteous is said to be a paradise. It is a standard Jewish teaching Jewish teaching of that time and the Paradise therein is call Abraham's Bosom. It along with Death, Hypothetically a pseudonym for first century Jewish tenet about Abaddon, are thrown into Gehenna; which is the Lake of Fire. The third place is Tartarus; which may be yet another pseudonym for Abaddon.
Considering that you seem to be mixing up the description of different places.
Apparently you like being deliberately vague and when you can't actually show from scripture where you get your opinions. Where exactly do you see the words Sheol or Hades in the original text? How do you justify ALL translators being biased when you are not credentialed in Greek or Hebrew? Again I suggest you start reading a Modern English translation instead of one that's over four hundred years old. You obviously do not comprehend the Elizabethan English of the KJV.
 

junobet

Active Member
May 20, 2016
581
165
43
Germany
OzSpen said:
juno,

That's an unhelpful link as I didn't find it taking me to an explanation of the ambiguity of aiwnios.

Leading NT Greek grammarian of the 20th century, Dr A T Robertson, was able to translate aiwnios without ambiguity:
Ooops, my fault! Sorry, I linked the wrong page. Here’s the article I meant to link: http://www.tentmaker.org/books/Aion_lim.html
However, an ambiguity is mentioned right there in your very own quote of A T Robertson. How come you don’t see it? It seems even he pretty much agrees that “αιων “ doesn’t carry the exact same meaning as “eternal”. As pointed out in above link this becomes even more obvious when the word is doubled. Such a doubling would simply make no sense with our notion of eternity in mind. You can’t really add eternities up. There’s just one eternity.
So the suggested translation “ages of the ages” or “aeons of the aeons” is indeed preferable in that it stays as close to the text as possible. If we translate this with “eternal” we may be running the danger of filling the text with our own meanings rather than with those that the original author and audience had in mind.

So hell is as eternal as heaven is eternal. No ambiguity there! Same length of time for both.

Oz
I’m afraid the same ambiguity must be conceded for “eternal” life here. Eternal life is an article of faith we’ll have to get from elsewhere. And IMHO we can. Eternal punishment on the other hand seems to be an idea that is very much at odds with other statements the Bible makes about God and how/why He punishes. Here’s just from one of my favourite Psalms:

8 The Lord is compassionate and gracious,
patient, and abundantly rich in gracious love.
9 He does not maintain a dispute continuously
or remain angry for all time.

10 He neither deals with us according to our sins,
nor repays us equivalent to our iniquity.”

(Psalm 103:8-10)
 

OzSpen

Well-Known Member
Mar 30, 2015
3,728
795
113
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
spencer.gear.dyndns.org
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
kerwin said:
As a rule, most human words are ambiguous and it is a good thing. Context is what gives them a more concrete meaning but some of it is unwritten. Believers have the Spirit to teach them if they do not rebel.

Now to go on addressing this point of yours we only know that the length of the time the final penalty is in effect in the same in a general manner because of the use of an ambiguous term. It does seem reason since the topic of one part is "punishment" that there is no reprieve for the final punishment passed down from God. That is a weak case of deductive reasoning that is made stronger when synthesized with the words of Isaiah I previously cited.
So 'most human words are ambiguous and it is a good thing'. So is that the way you want me to understand all of the words in this post of yours? They are all ambiguous! There's no point in responding to anything you write if that is the case. Don't you understand the self-defeating nature of what you wrote here? :wub:
 

OzSpen

Well-Known Member
Mar 30, 2015
3,728
795
113
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
spencer.gear.dyndns.org
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
junobet said:
However, an ambiguity is mentioned right there in your very own quote of A T Robertson. How come you don’t see it? It seems even he pretty much agrees that “αιων “ doesn’t carry the exact same meaning as “eternal”. As pointed out in above link this becomes even more obvious when the word is doubled. Such a doubling would simply make no sense with our notion of eternity in mind. You can’t really add eternities up. There’s just one eternity.
So the suggested translation “ages of the ages” or “aeons of the aeons” is indeed preferable in that it stays as close to the text as possible. If we translate this with “eternal” we may be running the danger of filling the text with our own meanings rather than with those that the original author and audience had in mind.
Juno,

That's not the case. This is what Dr A T Robertson wrote in his exegesis of Matt 25:46 (ESV),

The word αιωνιος — aiōnios (from αιων — aiōn age, αεςυμ αει — aevum αιωνες των αιωνων — aei) means either without beginning or without end or both. It comes as near to the idea of eternal as the Greek can put it in one word. It is a difficult idea to put into language. Sometimes we have “ages of ages” (aiōnes tōn aiōnōn).[Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament, Matthew 24], StudyLight.org]
Robertson confirmed that aiwnios means without beginning or without end and 'comes as near to the idea of eternal as the Greek can put it in one word'.

That's not ambiguous.

Oz
 

OzSpen

Well-Known Member
Mar 30, 2015
3,728
795
113
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
spencer.gear.dyndns.org
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
junobet said:
However, an ambiguity is mentioned right there in your very own quote of A T Robertson. How come you don’t see it? It seems even he pretty much agrees that “αιων “ doesn’t carry the exact same meaning as “eternal”. As pointed out in above link this becomes even more obvious when the word is doubled. Such a doubling would simply make no sense with our notion of eternity in mind. You can’t really add eternities up. There’s just one eternity.
Juno,

Perhaps this severely disabled man can give us insight into living forever: 'Love Without Limits - with Nick Vujicic'.

Oz
 

kerwin

New Member
Aug 17, 2016
582
7
0
OzSpen said:
So 'most human words are ambiguous and it is a good thing'. So is that the way you want me to understand all of the words in this post of yours? They are all ambiguous! There's no point in responding to anything you write if that is the case. Don't you understand the self-defeating nature of what you wrote here? :wub:
I would simply like you to be honest but I do not expect as it is not the nature of human beings.

All you have to do it look at a dictionary and admit there is multiple different meaning for each word and those words are ambiguous.
 

OzSpen

Well-Known Member
Mar 30, 2015
3,728
795
113
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
spencer.gear.dyndns.org
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
kerwin said:
I would simply like you to be honest but I do not expect as it is not the nature of human beings.

All you have to do it look at a dictionary and admit there is multiple different meaning for each word and those words are ambiguous.
kerwin,

Take the word, 'dictionary' and its meaning in Oxford Dictionaries (s v dictionary). It has one main meaning and 2 sub-points that are related to the main point, #1. The sub-points would have no meaning without the main meaning. There is no ambiguity here or multiple different meanings. If that were to mean multiple meanings, then, by analogy, it would mean that automobile cannot include Ford or General Motors.

I consider that our discussion of this topic is over.

Bye, Oz :)
 

StanJ

Lifelong student of God's Word.
May 13, 2014
4,798
111
63
70
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
kerwin said:
I would simply like you to be honest but I do not expect as it is not the nature of human beings.
All you have to do it look at a dictionary and admit there is multiple different meaning for each word and those words are ambiguous.
Different connotations do not mean that a word is ambiguous. You would know that if you knew English but even in your mother language, no matter what it is, the same grammatical rule applies. The connotation in use will always be the one that fits the context. Implying that everyone else but yourself cannot be honest is about the most supercilious thing somebody can say. Congratulations.
 

kerwin

New Member
Aug 17, 2016
582
7
0
StanJ said:
Different connotations do not mean that a word is ambiguous. You would know that if you knew English but even in your mother language, no matter what it is, the same grammatical rule applies. The connotation in use will always be the one that fits the context. Implying that everyone else but yourself cannot be honest is about the most supercilious thing somebody can say. Congratulations.
In my experience dictionaries do a poor job of covering "connotations" perhaps because they are cultural based more than language based.

The correct meaning of many words depends on the context of what the word appears. Without that context a word becomes ambiguous.

There is even a name of what I am speaking of and it is called "lexical ambiguity".
 

kerwin

New Member
Aug 17, 2016
582
7
0
OzSpen said:
kerwin,

Take the word, 'dictionary' and its meaning in Oxford Dictionaries (s v dictionary). It has one main meaning and 2 sub-points that are related to the main point, #1. The sub-points would have no meaning without the main meaning. There is no ambiguity here or multiple different meanings. If that were to mean multiple meanings, then, by analogy, it would mean that automobile cannot include Ford or General Motors.

I consider that our discussion of this topic is over.

Bye, Oz :)
Some meanings are child meaning but not all. Some are equivalent. The dictionary I read does not consider "god" as in an exceptionally highly skilled individual to be a child meaning to "god" meaning one of the polytheistic deities despite it most likely being a loose application of the later. So perhaps such discussions are even cultural.

The conversation has been over since we went off topic.
 

junobet

Active Member
May 20, 2016
581
165
43
Germany
OzSpen said:
Juno,

That's not the case. This is what Dr A T Robertson wrote in his exegesis of Matt 25:46 (ESV),


Robertson confirmed that aiwnios means without beginning or without end and 'comes as near to the idea of eternal as the Greek can put it in one word'.

That's not ambiguous.

Oz
Oz, I read your quote the first time you posted it. What Robertson concedes is that there is no Greek word for eternity and that it is a difficult idea to put into language. (In fact in another discussion I noticed that “eternity” can hold very different meanings even for English-speakers: time without beginning or end vs. timelessness.)
Now, when Biblical language gets difficult we are well advised to have a look how a word that we are unsure about is used elsewhere in the Bible. I didn’t follow your entire discussion, but it seems kerwin already pointed out to you that elsewhere in the Bible “aiwnios” very clearly does not mean neverending/eternal. At greater length so does the link I provided you with.
That said: even if the meaning of the word was not ambiguous, the doctrine of eternal punishment stands on very shaky Biblical ground. To base a grave doctrine like that on just one or two verses whilst ignoring the greater Biblical context that tells us about God's love and forgiveness is rather daring , and I suspect many who cling to this doctrine do this more due to tradition than due to open-minded Bible-study.
 

OzSpen

Well-Known Member
Mar 30, 2015
3,728
795
113
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
spencer.gear.dyndns.org
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
junobet said:
Oz, I read your quote the first time you posted it. What Robertson concedes is that there is no Greek word for eternity and that it is a difficult idea to put into language. (In fact in another discussion I noticed that “eternity” can hold very different meanings even for English-speakers: time without beginning or end vs. timelessness.)
Now, when Biblical language gets difficult we are well advised to have a look how a word that we are unsure about is used elsewhere in the Bible. I didn’t follow your entire discussion, but it seems kerwin already pointed out to you that elsewhere in the Bible “aiwnios” very clearly does not mean neverending/eternal. At greater length so does the link I provided you with.
That said: even if the meaning of the word was not ambiguous, the doctrine of eternal punishment stands on very shaky Biblical ground. To base a grave doctrine like that on just one or two verses whilst ignoring the greater Biblical context that tells us about God's love and forgiveness is rather daring , and I suspect many who cling to this doctrine do this more due to tradition than due to open-minded Bible-study.
I suggest you do a study on God's attributes of eternity and infinity. Psalm 90:2 (ESV) encapsulates some dimensions of these attributes:
'Before the mountains were brought forth,
or ever you had formed the earth and the world,
from everlasting to everlasting you are God'.

I plan on being eternally with God and experiencing eternal life. That's how long eternal damnation will last (Matt 25:46 ESV).

Over more than 50 years as a Christian and student of Scripture, I've compared 'eternal' many times over and know that it has a never ending meaning. See my article: Eternal torment for unbelievers when they die

Could it be that you don't like the idea of unbelievers experiencing torment forever and ever and so you are wanting to redefine the meaning of eternal? Sure sounds like it.

Oz
 

kerwin

New Member
Aug 17, 2016
582
7
0
OzSpen said:
I suggest you do a study on God's attributes of eternity and infinity. Psalm 90:2 (ESV) encapsulates some dimensions of these attributes:
'Before the mountains were brought forth,
or ever you had formed the earth and the world,
from everlasting to everlasting you are God'.

I plan on being eternally with God and experiencing eternal life. That's how long eternal damnation will last (Matt 25:46 ESV).

Over more than 50 years as a Christian and student of Scripture, I've compared 'eternal' many times over and know that it has a never ending meaning. See my article: Eternal torment for unbelievers when they die

Could it be that you don't like the idea of unbelievers experiencing torment forever and ever and so you are wanting to redefine the meaning of eternal? Sure sounds like it.

Oz
I do not want the wicked to be destroyed and miss out on the joy but I know God is just and merciful and so I discount universal salvation.

If God has chosen them to suffer forever instead of being destroyed then he would still be just and merciful. There would simply be some reason it furthered his righteous plan.

In short it is not my call and since he is our Maker he has the right and authority to do whatever he wants. I am just glad that he is forgiving and loving.
 

junobet

Active Member
May 20, 2016
581
165
43
Germany
OzSpen said:
I suggest you do a study on God's attributes of eternity and infinity. Psalm 90:2 (ESV) encapsulates some dimensions of these attributes:
'Before the mountains were brought forth,
or ever you had formed the earth and the world,
from everlasting to everlasting you are God'.

I plan on being eternally with God and experiencing eternal life. That's how long eternal damnation will last (Matt 25:46 ESV).

Over more than 50 years as a Christian and student of Scripture, I've compared 'eternal' many times over and know that it has a never ending meaning. See my article: Eternal torment for unbelievers when they die
Well, Oz, the traditional Christian position based on Augustine is that God created everything including time. In that view God's eternity is not a rather long time without beginning or end, but no time at all, just one eternal “now”. Feel free to differ, but if so, you’ll probably run into a couple of theological dilemmas that this position easily solves.

As for theological dilemmas: while I acknowledge that nobody can fully understand God and while I will freely admit that many theological questions can’t be answered by human reason and certainly not by mine, I think the theological statements we dare make about God ought to be logically coherent and not self-contradictory.
Two theological premises I’m fully convinced of are that God is Good (and hence just) and that God is all-mighty.
The doctrine of neverending punishment for sins/unbelief committed in our temporally limited lifespan just does not make sense unless you want to assume that God Himself goes well beyond the limits of retributive justice as commended in the OT. And of course you must assume that He fully discards what Jesus said about forgiveness. If God wants us to forgive others their trespasses it stands to reason that He Himself views such forgiveness as virtuous and is capable and willing to forgive. And if He is all-mighty and “wants all people to be saved” (2 Tim. 1:4), I think we surely may hope that eventually He will save all people.
If you want to bring up the argument of human free will now ( … and try to console human free will with God being all-knowing without Augustine’s theory of time …), you may be interested in this excellent article Jürgen Moltmann wrote about “The Logic of Hell”: https://jasongoroncy.com/2006/03/06/the-logic-of-hell-by-jurgen-moltmann/
It’s very well that you ‘plan’ on experiencing eternal life and I certainly do pray that you’ll get it, but surely your salvation is neither your nor my decision to make.
Now, if we are to contemplate eternal (or even just temporal) punishment, IMHO the biggest mistake we can make is being convinced that others will be punished whereas we ourselves won’t be. If we were to do so, we would have entirely missed the points Jesus actually tried to make when talking about hell and punishment. In fact we would be just like the self-righteous Pharisee and not at all like the Tax Collector we are told of in Luke 18:9-13.
As Hans Urs von Balthasar, with whom I share the hope that hell is empty, put it:
“Hell is to be contemplated strictly as a matter which concerns me alone. As part of the spiritual life it belongs behind the 'closed door' of my own room. From the standpoint of living faith, I cannot fundamentally believe in anyone's damnation but my own; as far as my neighbor is concerned, the light of resurrection can never be so obscured that I would be allowed or obliged to stop hoping for him.”

Could it be that you don't like the idea of unbelievers experiencing torment forever and ever and so you are wanting to redefine the meaning of eternal? Sure sounds like it.

Oz

Nope, being tormented for neverending time or being tormented for a timeless eternal “now” sounds equally horrid to me. Christian compassion forbids that I like either idea.
 

OzSpen

Well-Known Member
Mar 30, 2015
3,728
795
113
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
spencer.gear.dyndns.org
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Nope, being tormented for neverending time or being tormented for a timeless eternal “now” sounds equally horrid to me. Christian compassion forbids that I like either idea.


junobet,

That's your frail human reasoning speaking, mixed with some emotional essence - with limited insight.

God has revealed more of substance in his Scriptures and it happens not to agree with your position.

Oz
 

StanJ

Lifelong student of God's Word.
May 13, 2014
4,798
111
63
70
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
kerwin said:
In my experience dictionaries do a poor job of covering "connotations" perhaps because they are cultural based more than language based.
The correct meaning of many words depends on the context of what the word appears. Without that context a word becomes ambiguous.
There is even a name of what I am speaking of and it is called "lexical ambiguity".
What exactly, is your experience? All you did here is agree with what I posted but with a lot more words and and something you clean from the internet but don't really understand. Feel free to point out any lexical ambiguity is from within the Bible. I'm sure you'll be hard-pressed to find even one. You really ought to try to learn some of this stuff instead of trying to impress us with what you don't know.
 

kerwin

New Member
Aug 17, 2016
582
7
0
StanJ said:
What exactly, is your experience? All you did here is agree with what I posted but with a lot more words and and something you clean from the internet but don't really understand. Feel free to point out any lexical ambiguity is from within the Bible. I'm sure you'll be hard-pressed to find even one. You really ought to try to learn some of this stuff instead of trying to impress us with what you don't know.
  1. There are more than one meaning for words.
  2. The context, either written or unwritten, reveals which of those meanings are correct.

Those are my main two points.

Dictionaries generally ignore connotations though some will just insert them as another meaning to a word , Ignorant is an example since it is defined as "lacking knowledge or information" but is taken as an insult due to negative connotations.

I am convinced some meanings are derived from the loose application of others.

In some way you are correct but your choice of words to express that correctness in not.
 

junobet

Active Member
May 20, 2016
581
165
43
Germany
OzSpen said:
Nope, being tormented for neverending time or being tormented for a timeless eternal “now” sounds equally horrid to me. Christian compassion forbids that I like either idea.


junobet,

That's your frail human reasoning speaking, mixed with some emotional essence - with limited insight.

God has revealed more of substance in his Scriptures and it happens not to agree with your position.

Oz
It is of course possible that your human reasoning is less frail than mine and even less frail than Moltmann’s and von Balthasar’s. But if you actually want to convince me of your superior human reasoning, you may want to come up with some arguments countering the ones I’ve given.
As for the “emotional essence – with limited insight ”: Why is it that you seem to look down on Christian compassion that does not allow us to wish hell on anybody, not even on our worst enemies? I see this as a central fruit of living faith!
IMHO, if we read Scripture with Christ at its center we’ll clearly see that God is the “father of compassions” (2 Cor. 1:3) and that we ourselves are to put on compassion and love (Col. 3:12-17). In fact Scripture clearly gives love supreme value over all else:
“If I speak in the languages of humans and angels but have no love, I have become a reverberating gong or a clashing cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can understand all secrets and every form of knowledge, and if I have absolute faith so as to move mountains but have no love, I am nothing. 3 Even if I give away everything that I have and sacrifice myself,[a] but have no love, I gain nothing. (…) Love never fails. Now if there are prophecies, they will be done away with. If there are languages, they will cease. If there is knowledge, it will be done away with. 9 For what we know is incomplete and what we prophesy is incomplete. 10 But when what is complete[c] comes, then what is incomplete will be done away with. (…) Right now three things remain: faith, hope, and love. But the greatest of these is love.” (1 Cor. 13:1-3 + 8-10 + 13)

“Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.” (1 John 4:8)
How does love operate?
She bears up under everything;
believes the best in all;
there is no limit to her hope,
and never will she fall.”

(1 Cor. 13:7)

Sadly there still seem to be very many Christians around who can muster so little love that not only have they abandoned hope for the salvation of all their fellowmen, but actually want others to roast in hell. They would not be glad but disappointed if hell was empty. Mind: If our own salvation only seems worthwhile to us as long as others aren’t saved and suffer, we are probably still a long way away from being saved ourselves. But I trust Christ will open all our hearts one day and make us complete.
Be blessed,
junobet
 
Status
Not open for further replies.