MOTB by itself does not always = LOF ??

[Davidpt]

What is accomplished by literal fire? Only physical pain.

But if the fire represents the flames of a guilty conscience tormenting a person, it means the sins committed were not transient, but were designing an eternal environment of mind-boggling regret and remorse. This would be a mental misery amplified by knowing there is no escape, no relief, no ability to become good, no opportunity to repent and be forgiven.

If you ever felt rotten about how you treated a loved one, it agonizes you as you realize more and more what you did, and now they’re dead, so you cannot apologize or treat them better, you have had a taste of this lake of fire.

You still have to get past that it is only the saved humans that can never die any more. Therefore, until you can get past that first, no matter what you argue is not valid in the meantime, the fact that for ECT to be true of humans, that when they are bodily resurrected,, it requires that they too can't die any more. Except I can't find one other Scripture that agrees with that, that comes out plainly says that the lost can't die any more either If they can't die any more, why call it the 2nd death then? Why not just call it what Revelation 20:10 calls it if one insists verse 10 equally applies to those in verses 11-15? Except John never said anywhere in verses 11-15 that they too shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. I wonder why not? Clearly, verse 10 and verses 11-15 are not the same context.

 

[Marty fox]

IMO, the fire is 100% literal fire. That changes things then if humans cast into it can never die again even though it's called the 2nd death. As to verse 10, the 2nd death is not relevant in satan's case. A 2nd death implies a first death. satan has never died, period. Thus is unable to die, thus why he shall be literally tormented day and night for ever and ever. Humans on the other hand were never created immortal, thus have the ability to die. Not only one time but two times in some cases.

I suspect the real reason why you can live with it is because you have apparently decided that the fire is not literal. But if it is, and in my view it is literal, how do you still live with it in that case? It seems to me the ones that promote ECT for humans water down their fate by insisting the fire is not literal. Except I can't do that, water things down then conclude the fire is not literal. Therefore, to be in the LOF forever in a conscious state is not as bad as it could have been had the fire been literal, per a view like yours.

The following, for one, clearly contradicts that humans cast into the LOF can never die again.

Luke 20:35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

Look what verse 36 plainly says---Neither can they die any more. In context that does not remotely also include any humans cast into the LOF. In order for ECT to be true of humans it has to mean they can't die any more. That's just common sense. Which is it then? Only humans which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, that can't die any more? Or all humans, including all the lost, can't die any more? It can't be both. It has to be one or the other. And if we make it the latter we have just contradicted the former.

Maybe some interpreters, in general, feel context is irrelevant? Except I'm not one of those interpreters.

Do you really think God would let people burn forever? Is that really God's character? That would sound like a sadist.

I think that the eternal torment of knowing that the after seeing heaven, the reason that people aren't in heaven is their doing their choice. In this scenario its on them not God. The flames are symbolic for eternal self-regret torment

 

[Marty fox]

I agree, but I explained. The reason I used the word "annihilated" is because I wished to make the distinction between fire as a means of "removal" and fire as a means of "torture."

The garbage dump of gehenna was not a means of torturing garbage. Rather, it was a means of burning up the trash to remove it and its smell.

That is the Lake of Fire--a means of removal--a complete removal from the New Earth, as I see it.

Thanks for your understanding. I don't wish to marginalize the importance of Eternal Punishment--just remove from it the horrid depiction of God as Grand Inquisitor who tortures His detractors by roasting them alive for all eternity. I wouldn't put my worst enemy through a single hour of burning like that!

But removing people completely from the New Earth into Outer Darkness. I can live with that depiction!

Hello Randy, how are you its been a while?

Check out post #65

 

[Davidpt]

Do you really think God would let people burn forever? Is that really God's character? That would sound like a sadist.

I think that the eternal torment of knowing that the after seeing heaven, the reason that people aren't in heaven is their doing their choice. In this scenario its on them not God. The flames are symbolic for eternal self-regret torment

You must not have read some of my posts. My position in regard to humans is not ECT but is annihilation eventually, But not in the same manner as @Randy Kluth uses that term. Therefore, how can I possibly think God burns humans in literal fire for ever if ECT in regard to humans is not even my position to begin with?

What I'm arguing is this. If the fire is indeed literal, can proponents of ECT still live with themselves in regard to the fate of those cast into the LOF? Except none of this should be debatable to begin with, when passages such as Luke 20:35-36 already settles the matter. It is only saved humans that can never die anymore. And if ECT is true of humans it requires that humans cast into the LOF can't die any more either. Thus contradicts Luke 20:35-36 in that case.

 

[Scott Downey]

You must not have read some of my posts. My position in regard to humans is not ECT but is annihilation eventually, But not in the same manner as @Randy Kluth uses that term. Therefore, how can I possibly think God burns humans in literal fire for ever if ECT in regard to humans is not even my position to begin with?

What I'm arguing is this. If the fire is indeed literal, can proponents of ECT still live with themselves in regard to the fate of those cast into the LOF? Except none of this should be debatable to begin with, when passages such as Luke 20:35-36 already settles the matter. It is only saved humans that can never die anymore. And if ECT is true of humans it requires that humans cast into the LOF can't die any more either.

How about demons, Satan, fallen angels then? They are all cast into the same lake of fire as people.

 

[Anchorite]

You still have to get past that it is only the saved humans that can never die any more. Therefore, until you can get past that first, no matter what you argue is not valid in the meantime, the fact that for ECT to be true of humans, that when they are bodily resurrected,, it requires that they too can't die any more. Except I can't find one other Scripture that agrees with that, that comes out plainly says that the lost can't die any more either If they can't die any more, why call it the 2nd death then? Why not just call it what Revelation 20:10 calls it if one insists verse 10 equally applies to those in verses 11-15? Except John never said anywhere in verses 11-15 that they too shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. I wonder why not? Clearly, verse 10 and verses 11-15 are not the same context.

Satan and his demons cannot die, not just saved people.

The worm never dying points to sinners not dying for eternity.

Second death means dying to the presence of God. Adam experienced this kind of death the day he ate forbidden fruit.

Doubtless, remorse of conscience and keen self-reflection are this never-dying worm. Surely it is beyond compare better to undergo all possible pain, hardship, and self-denial here, and to be happy for ever hereafter, than to enjoy all kinds of worldly pleasure for a season, and to be miserable for ever. — Matthew Henry Commentary



Revelation 20:15

And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.


Mark 9

43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:

44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

 

[Marty fox]

You must not have read some of my posts. My position in regard to humans is not ECT but is annihilation eventually, But not in the same manner as @Randy Kluth uses that term. Therefore, how can I possibly think God burns humans in literal fire for ever if ECT in regard to humans is not even my position to begin with?

What I'm arguing is this. If the fire is indeed literal, can proponents of ECT still live with themselves in regard to the fate of those cast into the LOF? Except none of this should be debatable to begin with, when passages such as Luke 20:35-36 already settles the matter. It is only saved humans that can never die anymore. And if ECT is true of humans it requires that humans cast into the LOF can't die any more either.

I believe that Luke is talking about spiritual death.

The one thing that we all know and trust is that God is just in what ever happens.

 

[Davidpt]

How about demons, Satan, fallen angels then? They are all cast into the same lake of fire as people.

I have already indicated in numerous posts, those meant in verse 10 will indeed literally be tormented for ever and ever since they are unable to die a 2nd death, the fact they never experienced a first death. Including the beast and false prophet, the fact they are cast alive into the LOF, therefore, indicating they never died any death whatsoever, let alone a first death. Therefore, per verse 10 the torment lasts forever.

But nowhere in verses 11-15 did John ever say anything about any of these being tormented forever, though. But why not if true? verse 10 and verse 11-15 are not the same context nor the same judgment scene. Nowhere in verses 11-15 do we find satan, the beast, and the fp, standing among the dead. It's obvious as to why. They are already in the LOF at that point. They have already been dealt with. In my view context determines things. In verses 11-15, per that context, it calls it the 2nd death and never calls it tormented day and night for ever and ever.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Hello Randy, how are you its been a while?

Check out post #65

I need to hear more from Marty Fox spirit. :) Been focused on another forum recently--nice people, but heavily redacted. I just gave up today. I'm fine, and have recently moved from West Coast to East Coast. But no matter, there's no distance really! :) Take care!

 

[Marty fox]

I need to hear more from Marty Fox spirit. :) Been focused on another forum recently--nice people, but heavily redacted. I just gave up today. I'm fine, and have recently moved from West Coast to East Coast. But no matter, there's no distance really! :) Take care!

Good to hear take care brother

 

[Davidpt]

I believe that Luke is talking about spiritual death.

The one thing that we all know and trust is that God is just in what ever happens.

Where are you coming up with death of any kind being the subject of Luke 20:35-36? That's not the subject. The subject is life not death None of the lost are in view in those 2 verses . Only the saved are. Are you meaning somewhere else in Luke? I was only focusing on Luke 20:35-36 in particular.

Are you perhaps spiritualing Luke 20:35-36 and applying it spiritually to the here and now? If yes, those verses don't read like that to me, not even remotely.

 

[Randy Kluth]

I have wondered if the eternal torment is actually the conscience accusing the sinner, filling it with regrets and remorse, with the realization that nothing can be done to make amends.

If the sinner suppressed his conscience, or it was seared, in hell, the conscience is suddenly re-activated and restored to full functioning.

So the sinner is torturing himself. He caused this himself, it’s not God raking him over the coals.

Their worm never dies.

Many historical and theological commentators suggest the worm is a metaphor for a guilty conscience, gnawing eternally at the memory and soul of the unrepentant individual from within.

I think that's a big part of it. I often wonder if Eternal Torment will be much like the earth is presently, with God's presence limited, causing us to feel as if God is far off at times? I've been through lots and lots of times that felt like "Hell" to me, and the anguish is as great a punishment as imaginable if taken on an eternal basis.

I agree with those of us who deny that God relishes torturing people, or is even forced to torture people by their own choice. God has absolute control and is perfectlty just. Those who don't like Him will not have Him. To those of us who love Him that is imaginable torment. For those who do not like or want God they will still miss His presence in many ways, and not particularly enjoy an eternally dark world. But I'm sure God will put them to good use in some way--it's just not our prerogative to know at this time.

 

[Davidpt]

Satan and his demons cannot die, not just saved people.

The worm never dying points to sinners not dying for eternity.

Second death means dying to the presence of God. Adam experienced this kind of death the day he ate forbidden fruit.

Doubtless, remorse of conscience and keen self-reflection are this never-dying worm. Surely it is beyond compare better to undergo all possible pain, hardship, and self-denial here, and to be happy for ever hereafter, than to enjoy all kinds of worldly pleasure for a season, and to be miserable for ever. — Matthew Henry Commentary



Revelation 20:15

And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.


Mark 9

43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:

44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

If it is impossible for even God to kill the soul, why then bring up a subject that is not even valid to begin with? The killing of the soul. That makes sense exactly how? Man can kill the body, but can't kill the soul. And even someone greater than man, God in this case, can't kill the soul either. Therefore, what is the point of bringing up something that is an impossibility to begin with, assuming ECT is the fate of all humans cast into the LOF? But in the event you argue God can and does kill the soul, that it equals ECT, that makes sense exactly how then?

The worm never dying points to sinners not dying for eternity.

That is a valid point and could indeed be the case. I at least acknowledge that.

 

[Anchorite]

Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

If it is impossible for even God to kill the soul, why then bring up a subject that is not even valid to begin with? The killing of the soul. That makes sense exactly how? Man can kill the body, but can't kill the soul. And even someone greater than man, God in this case, can't kill the soul either. Therefore, what is the point of bringing up something that is an impossibility to begin with, assuming ECT is the fate of all humans cast into the LOF?

What scripture says God cannot kill the soul?

“Destroy both soul and body in hell” does not negate eternal conscious torment.

God can do anything. If He wanted to kill a soul, nothing could stop Him. But He prefers to let every soul remain alive, either in heaven or hell. The soul in Hell is said to be destroyed because it cannot do anything productive, it just persists in ECT, being afflicted by its guilty conscience.

 

[Davidpt]

I have wondered if the eternal torment is actually the conscience accusing the sinner, filling it with regrets and remorse, with the realization that nothing can be done to make amends.

If the sinner suppressed his conscience, or it was seared, in hell, the conscience is suddenly re-activated and restored to full functioning.

So the sinner is torturing himself. He caused this himself, it’s not God raking him over the coals.

Their worm never dies.

Many historical and theological commentators suggest the worm is a metaphor for a guilty conscience, gnawing eternally at the memory and soul of the unrepentant individual from within.

In satan's case then, what would that torment consist of?

 

[Davidpt]

What scripture says God cannot kill the soul?

“Destroy both soul and body in hell” does not negate eternal conscious torment.

God can do anything. If He wanted to kill a soul, nothing could stop Him. But He prefers to let every soul remain alive, either in heaven or hell. The soul in Hell is said to be destroyed because it cannot do anything productive, it just persists in ECT, being afflicted by its guilty conscience.

I'm not arguing God can't the soul. I'm arguing that God can kill the soul and indeed does via the LOF and the 2nd death there. IT is the ECT camp that is arguing God can't kill the soul. The logic would be what I submitted below.


If God can kill the soul but never kills the soul, that does not equal God can kill the soul. Because if He could, the fact Jesus brought up the subject, indicates that He will. But if He never does, we are back to this point again. Why bring up the subject to begin with? To prove exactly what? That God can kill the soul except He never does.

If someone argues that nothing is literally impossible for God, that is an absurd argument. Can God sin? Can God count to the highest number when there is no such highest number to begin with? So on and so on.

 

[David in NJ]

Rev 20:4...and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads
Rev 14:9 ...If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
.....
An interesting point has been raised .
If a Christian takes the MOTB yet does not worship the beast/image, will said Christian go to the LOF since the verses appear to imply that BOTH take mark and worship are required

Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”

12Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.

13Then I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, “Write: ‘Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.’ ”

“Yes,” says the Spirit, “that they may rest from their labors, and their works follow them.”

 

[ewq1938]

He deceive them but its still our choice to sin, the devil can't make anyone sin its our responsibility

I don't see how those verses support that or deny how being deceived affects someone's choices.

James 1
12 Blessed is the one who perseveres under trial because, having stood the test, that person will receive the crown of life that the Lord has promised to those who love him.

13 When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14 but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. 15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

 

[ewq1938]

What scripture says the mark of the beast can be repented of?

Anyone can repent regarding any sin. It's whether or not the repentance results in forgiveness or not. The only clear unforgivable sin is blasphemy pof the HS and that followed an example of the Jewish priests attributing Jesu miracles to the devil etc. I'm not sure if being deceived or pressured into taking the mark is unforgivable.

 

[ewq1938]

The Bible does not say what the mark is.

It does say this:

Rev_14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.