What required for going to Heaven?

[brakelite]

Thank you again for caring!

Simply, one's instant of faith effected through repentance places one in the Kingdom of God, awaiting a valid water baptism rebirth.

In this way, one turns from the power of sin to the faith instead of just turning to the faith as pervasively done today.

Old Jack's opinion.

Can I clarify something Jack? My thinking is more toward our rebirth being affected by our repentance, and the valid baptism (full immersion) the outward sign of that which has already taken place inside? I agree with you about the turning away from sin. The gospel is one of power...it is an insult to the power of God to claim that sin cannot be overcome in this life. Sin shall not have dominion over you....

Those things I wrote of above are the fruit of the transaction...Christ's righteousness for my sinfulness....that Calvary makes possible. But all are requirements for entering life...without the fruit we are cut off and burned up along with the unbeliever and the sinner.

 

[shturt678]

Can I clarify something Jack? My thinking is more toward our rebirth being affected by our repentance, and the valid baptism (full immersion) the outward sign of that which has already taken place inside? I agree with you about the turning away from sin. The gospel is one of power...it is an insult to the power of God to claim that sin cannot be overcome in this life. Sin shall not have dominion over you....

Those things I wrote of above are the fruit of the transaction...Christ's righteousness for my sinfulness....that Calvary makes possible. But all are requirements for entering life...without the fruit we are cut off and burned up along with the unbeliever and the sinner.

Thank you for your response and really caring, however we're not on the same page!

"Born anew" (Jn.3:3-5), "Rebirth" strictly speaking, this repentance (contrition and faith) itself constitutes the "rebirth" in all adults, yet not apart from water baptism which as its SEAL must follow.

Yes, the 'sin power' is not to dominate us today.

Old Jack's opinion

btw I'm a 'sprinkler.'

 

[williemac]

Can I clarify something Jack? My thinking is more toward our rebirth being affected by our repentance, and the valid baptism (full immersion) the outward sign of that which has already taken place inside? I agree with you about the turning away from sin. The gospel is one of power...it is an insult to the power of God to claim that sin cannot be overcome in this life. Sin shall not have dominion over you....

Those things I wrote of above are the fruit of the transaction...Christ's righteousness for my sinfulness....that Calvary makes possible. But all are requirements for entering life...without the fruit we are cut off and burned up along with the unbeliever and the sinner.

1John 2:1..." My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous". All opinions aside, what does it say to the gospel of grace if the responsibility to overcome sin in this life rests upon the shoulders of the believer? Furthermore, what does it say to the gospel of grace if our eternal destiny rests upon our success in overcoming sin?

Here is the dilemma with all this: under the law, if a person should fail or stumble on any one point, he would be declared guilty of the whole law. The law demanded moral perfection. It required moral flawlessness. It has been thus revealed that no man ever succeeded in being justified for life by the law (Gal.3:21). The law could not bring life. No law given, as the passage says, could do that.

Therefore the role of the law was/is to inform mankind that it is absolutely impossible to satisfy the righteous requirement of the law to the end that an individual could be declared righteous and therefore justified for life. It became man's tutor, leading him to the knowledge of his need for a savior. It did this by way of showing that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

But back to the fact that no law given can give life, then why should we accept a doctrine that puts us back under the scrutiny of the law to test us for justification to life? But that is precisely what I see people doing here. Sin is transgression of law. How is it that sin can have no dominion over us? By way of the law being removed from over us. I noticed you decided to only quote part of the passage. Here is the whole sentence. " For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under the law but under grace" (Rom.6:14) . Paul is not saying sin has no dominion because we have overcome it. He is saying it has no dominion because the law can no longer be used against us in heaven's court. This is why he went on to reason with the Romans and say "shall we sin that grace may abound?"

The rest of that passage is often taken way out of proportion. Paul is giving them insight as to what kind of mindset they should have, and we should also have. This is what we should be focusing on. We need to see ourselves as righteous, made so by the new birth (Eph.4:24), so that we can put off the old man and put on the new man. But why should we put on the new man and bear fruit? So that we can be justified for life? How does this comply with Rom. 5:1?...." Therefore having been justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ". So what right does any man have to try to put us back under works for justification?

I am not going to sit here and argue whether or not it is an insult to God or His power to claim that sin cannot be overcome. That is a smoke screen, a diversion. It certainly can be overcome. However, who is going to tell me that it can be overcome 24/7, 365 days of the year for the rest of one's life in this age? Furthermore, who is going to tell us that this is what is required of us in order to have everlasting life? Are you going to? If this were true, then we are back under the same kind of unforgiving unrelenting perfection requirement that the law demanded. As well, there would be no need for an advocate with the Father. John would have been shown to be mistaken in 1John 2:1.

Are you or anyone else going to suggest we are under a wishy washy system where no one really knows for sure if they are performing well enough to satisfy God? Because if it is not flawless moral perfection that is required, then who is the one to tell us where the line is drawn, where the bar is set? You want to know how many opinions will surface over that question? Where does this put assurance and guarantee? On our backs? I was under the impression the Holy Spirit was given as our guarantee. How is that possible if we are responsible for our own assurance?

We have plenty of places in scripture that tell us to behave ourselves and to bear fruit. As well, we have been shown that we are new creations, have received everlasting life, have been made righteous, have been redeemed, have been forgiven, have been set free. But none of these things are for the purpose of putting us back under the law for justification. Lets make no mistake. If sin can cause a person to lose his life, then he is under the law. Plain and simple. There's no way around this. To claim the one is to claim the both. Sin had its dominion precisely because the people were under the law and not under grace. How is it that anyone can claim that it still has dominion? If it can kill us, it has dominion.

In fact, Paul said that if one dies, he is free from sin (Rom.6:7).. This has happened to us through faith. We are dead in Christ. We have already died for our sin through faith. The old man is declared dead, crucified with Christ. The only way we can take him off the cross is by reversing that which put him there: our faith in Christ. I leave you with 1John 5:4....." For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that HAS overcome the world----OUR FAITH"!!!!! He who has the Son has life. Amen!

 

[shturt678]

Thank you folks for caring!

Anyone simply Googling up the latest Government Census on Religions and see alllllll the diverse statements of faith where each think they have the one valid "Statement" would only rationally conclude we're all born into: "We are under a wishy washy system where..."

What is required is acquiring the "1" (ONE) valid "sttatement of faith" before one passes.

Old Jack,

btw All must bring Rom.3:19, 20 aboard, otherwise one can have an exponential "faith" to the googal plex power ending in the lake of fire for forever and ever.

 

[HymnSeeker]

My grandmother and I got into a theological discussion yesterday morning, and she told me they used to teach that not being catholic meant you were going to hell.

I was astounded at the implication, she did say that they since rescinded this teaching however.

 

[williemac]

Thank you folks for caring!

Anyone simply Googling up the latest Government Census on Religions and see alllllll the diverse statements of faith where each think they have the one valid "Statement" would only rationally conclude we're all born into: "We are under a wishy washy system where..."

What is required is acquiring the "1" (ONE) valid "sttatement of faith" before one passes.

Old Jack,

btw All must bring Rom.3:19, 20 aboard, otherwise one can have an exponential "faith" to the googal plex power ending in the lake of fire for forever and ever.

To be alive forever in the lake of fire would require that one would need to actually live forever. However, that is not the automatic fate of humankind, as seen in Gen.3:22, and John 6:50,51. Christianity has many wishy washy doctrines.

 

[shturt678]

To be alive forever in the lake of fire would require that one would need to actually live forever. However, that is not the automatic fate of humankind, as seen in Gen.3:22, and John 6:50,51. Christianity has many wishy washy doctrines.

Thank you for your response!

One thing we can take to the local bank where the deposit will clear, all (Adam forward), from one's conception, will awake one of two places to live forever thus the reason for some of these threads assuring one awakes in the right place to live forever heartfully hearing the forever warnings (God's righteous wrath and justice) as well as God's grace and mercy.

Old Jack

 

[williemac]

Thank you for your response!

One thing we can take to the local bank where the deposit will clear, all (Adam forward), from one's conception, will awake one of two places to live forever thus the reason for some of these threads assuring one awakes in the right place to live forever heartfully hearing the forever warnings (God's righteous wrath and justice) as well as God's grace and mercy.

Old Jack

I take it you do not believe what is written in the two references I gave. Or maybe you did not bother to read them. In the first death, the body dies but not the soul. For the lost, there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. But in the second death, both body and soul are destroyed (Math.10:28). As I shared from John 6:50,51, living forever is only designated to these who partake of Jesus. Read it for yourself. If everyone lives forever, then the passage is rendered false. However, the passage is a direct quote from Jesus, who apparently did not have the same information that you do. To reply to the op, which I have done dozens of times on this thread, everlasting life (living forever) is a free gift made available by the righteousness and obedience of One Man (Rom.5:15-19). It is not given to all men. To further make the point, in the most quoted passage in the bible, John 3:16, no mention of alternate locations is made. In the two possible fates, everlasting life is only one of them, not both.

The church at large has been duped into presenting a wrong scenario to the world. Many people turn away, not because of the message of God's love, but because of the message of an intolerant, angry, unmerciful God who will willingly torment a human soul forever, all the while demanding near impossible behavior to escape His wrath. This message is not the gospel.

 

[shturt678]

I take it you do not believe what is written in the two references I gave. Or maybe you did not bother to read them.

Thank you for your response and caring!

Only a head's up on this one, ie, I'm a 24/7 Christian and scrutinize all posts due to having too much respect for my brothers in Christ and the Word + enjoy these threads probably too much. Secondly, I'm the antithesis of any scholar, and could be in error at any point.



In the first death, the body dies but not the soul. For the lost, there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

We agree to agree!

But in the second death, both body and soul are destroyed (Math.10:28).

Matt.10:28b, "is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna." Maybe your correct thus let's relook at this again as I could be in error and when one passes ending in the wrong place is not tormented forever and ever? Still basic Koine stuff, ie, the 'implicatude' of the speaker (Jesus) even trumps the 'context' which normally trumps the 'grammar.' Aspect: Jesus knows that it's not enough for so many who are of little faith (redoing a previous post making sure I'm on the money sir - Matt.8:26) pointing to the lack of fear or terror of God sir. 'Contextually' Jesus must apply much stronger medicine, and by the fear or terror of God DRIVE OUT THE FEAR OR TERROR OF MEN. Again it's God who is referred to. God in His omnipotent power and His absolute RIGHTEOUS justice and wrath.

This is not childlike fear, the motive of filial obedience, but the terrifying fear and terror of God's holy, righteous, burning wrath which would have to strike us if we yielded to the fear or terror of men and denied His precious Word, and His will. I still have to hold to my position that this is the fear and terror which really belongs to the enemies of God and of Christ, the fear from which they try to hide by their self-deception, which yet will at last overwhelm them upon each passing lasting forever and ever in torments - inwardly and outwardly forever and ever sir. "Soul and body in Gehenna" again implies the bodily resurrection of the damned.

As I shared from John 6:50,51, living forever is only designated to these who partake of Jesus.

Jn.6:50, 51 must be construed with Jn.15:6, ie, thus we must agree to disagree with the rest of your views as I rescrutinized again and don't want to wall the post.

Read it for yourself. If everyone lives forever, then the passage is rendered false. However, the passage is a direct quote from Jesus, who apparently did not have the same information that you do. To reply to the op, which I have done dozens of times on this thread, everlasting life (living forever) is a free gift made available by the righteousness and obedience of One Man (Rom.5:15-19). It is not given to all men. To further make the point, in the most quoted passage in the bible, John 3:16, no mention of alternate locations is made. In the two possible fates, everlasting life is only one of them, not both.

The church at large has been duped into presenting a wrong scenario to the world. Many people turn away, not because of the message of God's love, but because of the message of an intolerant, angry, unmerciful God who will willingly torment a human soul forever, all the while demanding near impossible behavior to escape His wrath. This message is not the gospel.

Old Jack's opinion

btw God is a God of agape (You and I even have a different definition of God's agape), mercy and grace; but a God of justice and wrath forever and ever.

 

[williemac]

Jn.6:50, 51 must be construed with Jn.15:6, ie, thus we must agree to disagree with the rest of your views as I rescrutinized again and don't want to wall the post.

With all due respect, disagree all you like, but John 15:6 does not trump or even contradict what Jesus said in John 6:50,51. John 15:6 makes no mention of everlasting torment. I have discussed all my findings on this subject on another thread and am currently writing a paper on it. The doctrine of human forever conscious torment is based on assumptions that are made through association. There is no firm mention of any human after Adam suffering everlasting conscious torment. The lake of fire was created for the devil and his angels. They are eternal beings. Humans are not. Gen. 3:22 in no uncertain terms reveals that the tree of life has been denied access to from humans lest they eat of it and live forever. That passage reveals God's intention. He specifically did not want them to live forever. How is it that He has changed His mind? As I have shared, living forever is a gift that is granted only to those who partake of Jesus through faith (John 6:50,51).

As for the op, I have already shared what it takes to enter life. God gives grace to the humble. The confession of sin is a show of humility. In Luke 18:10-14, the two men praying had differing attitudes. The first one boasted on all his good works. The second one confessed his sin and asked for mercy, and was the one that Jesus said went away justified. He then declared that the proud will be abased and the humble, exalted.

This is precisely why we cannot be rewarded with life on the basis of our own works or effort. This would give cause for boasting, a direct conflict with humility. "lest anyone should boast". The original transgression, that of Lucifer, was to exalt himself to the status of God. Sin, the transgression of law, has been dealt with on Calvary's hill. However, the transgression of self exaltation was not. It is the real issue between man and God, between God and anyone with free will.

I have been in discussions with athiests on Facebook. Some are are vamping up their cause in a huge way lately. There is a movement to oppose all religion, albeit a small one, but growing. What they do by default in their cause, is that if there is no God then man becomes the highest intelligence on the planet. This is a type of the original transgression. However, another type is that of religious people who are under the belief that they must behave themselves appropriately in order to deserve everlasting life. If that is the case, then why did Jesus bother to do what Paul said in Rom.5:15-19?

In that passage, Paul confirms other places where we can see that life is a free gift, bought and paid for by the righteousness, obedience, and death of One Man, Jesus. There is only One savior. It is not our job to save ourselves, but to accept salvation. This takes humility.

The life we live as Christians will be scrutinized on the Judgment seat of Christ, for the purpose of granting or removing rewards...but NOT for the purpose of rewarding us with life. He who has the Son HAS (everlasting) life, and as Jesus promised in John 5:24, will not come under judgment (condemnation), but HAS passed from death to life.

 

[shturt678]

With all due respect, disagree all you like, but John 15:6 does not trump or even contradict what Jesus said in John 6:50,51. John 15:6 makes no mention of everlasting torment

Jn.15:6, "he is thrown out.....and is withered" being timeless construed grammatically with the following three timeless present tenses - all basic Hebrew grammar.

"And they are burned," the final kai piled upon others. The verb is not katakaiesthai, "to burn up," and affords no support for the annihilation of the wicked - the castoff branches are burning.



. I have discussed all my findings on this subject on another thread and am currently writing a paper on it. The doctrine of human forever conscious torment is based on assumptions that are made through association. There is no firm mention of any human after Adam suffering everlasting conscious torment. The lake of fire was created for the devil and his angels. They are eternal beings. Humans are not. Gen. 3:22 in no uncertain terms reveals that the tree of life has been denied access to from humans lest they eat of it and live forever. That passage reveals God's intention. He specifically did not want them to live forever. How is it that He has changed His mind? As I have shared, living forever is a gift that is granted only to those who partake of Jesus through faith (John 6:50,51).

As for the op, I have already shared what it takes to enter life. God gives grace to the humble. The confession of sin is a show of humility. In Luke 18:10-14, the two men praying had differing attitudes. The first one boasted on all his good works. The second one confessed his sin and asked for mercy, and was the one that Jesus said went away justified. He then declared that the proud will be abased and the humble, exalted.

This is precisely why we cannot be rewarded with life on the basis of our own works or effort. This would give cause for boasting, a direct conflict with humility. "lest anyone should boast". The original transgression, that of Lucifer, was to exalt himself to the status of God. Sin, the transgression of law, has been dealt with on Calvary's hill. However, the transgression of self exaltation was not. It is the real issue between man and God, between God and anyone with free will.

I have been in discussions with athiests on Facebook. Some are are vamping up their cause in a huge way lately. There is a movement to oppose all religion, albeit a small one, but growing. What they do by default in their cause, is that if there is no God then man becomes the highest intelligence on the planet. This is a type of the original transgression. However, another type is that of religious people who are under the belief that they must behave themselves appropriately in order to deserve everlasting life. If that is the case, then why did Jesus bother to do what Paul said in Rom.5:15-19?

In that passage, Paul confirms other places where we can see that life is a free gift, bought and paid for by the righteousness, obedience, and death of One Man, Jesus. There is only One savior. It is not our job to save ourselves, but to accept salvation. This takes humility.

The life we live as Christians will be scrutinized on the Judgment seat of Christ, for the purpose of granting or removing rewards...but NOT for the purpose of rewarding us with life. He who has the Son HAS (everlasting) life, and as Jesus promised in John 5:24, will not come under judgment (condemnation), but HAS passed from death to life.

I cut you some slack by not bringing aboard Matt.25:41, "into the fire, the eternal."

Old Jack

 

[williemac]

With all due respect, disagree all you like, but John 15:6 does not trump or even contradict what Jesus said in John 6:50,51. John 15:6 makes no mention of everlasting torment

Jn.15:6, "he is thrown out.....and is withered" being timeless construed grammatically with the following three timeless present tenses - all basic Hebrew grammar.

"And they are burned," the final kai piled upon others. The verb is not katakaiesthai, "to burn up," and affords no support for the annihilation of the wicked - the castoff branches are burning.



. I have discussed all my findings on this subject on another thread and am currently writing a paper on it. The doctrine of human forever conscious torment is based on assumptions that are made through association. There is no firm mention of any human after Adam suffering everlasting conscious torment. The lake of fire was created for the devil and his angels. They are eternal beings. Humans are not. Gen. 3:22 in no uncertain terms reveals that the tree of life has been denied access to from humans lest they eat of it and live forever. That passage reveals God's intention. He specifically did not want them to live forever. How is it that He has changed His mind? As I have shared, living forever is a gift that is granted only to those who partake of Jesus through faith (John 6:50,51).

As for the op, I have already shared what it takes to enter life. God gives grace to the humble. The confession of sin is a show of humility. In Luke 18:10-14, the two men praying had differing attitudes. The first one boasted on all his good works. The second one confessed his sin and asked for mercy, and was the one that Jesus said went away justified. He then declared that the proud will be abased and the humble, exalted.

This is precisely why we cannot be rewarded with life on the basis of our own works or effort. This would give cause for boasting, a direct conflict with humility. "lest anyone should boast". The original transgression, that of Lucifer, was to exalt himself to the status of God. Sin, the transgression of law, has been dealt with on Calvary's hill. However, the transgression of self exaltation was not. It is the real issue between man and God, between God and anyone with free will.

I have been in discussions with athiests on Facebook. Some are are vamping up their cause in a huge way lately. There is a movement to oppose all religion, albeit a small one, but growing. What they do by default in their cause, is that if there is no God then man becomes the highest intelligence on the planet. This is a type of the original transgression. However, another type is that of religious people who are under the belief that they must behave themselves appropriately in order to deserve everlasting life. If that is the case, then why did Jesus bother to do what Paul said in Rom.5:15-19?

In that passage, Paul confirms other places where we can see that life is a free gift, bought and paid for by the righteousness, obedience, and death of One Man, Jesus. There is only One savior. It is not our job to save ourselves, but to accept salvation. This takes humility.

The life we live as Christians will be scrutinized on the Judgment seat of Christ, for the purpose of granting or removing rewards...but NOT for the purpose of rewarding us with life. He who has the Son HAS (everlasting) life, and as Jesus promised in John 5:24, will not come under judgment (condemnation), but HAS passed from death to life.

I cut you some slack by not bringing aboard Matt.25:41, "into the fire, the eternal."

Old Jack





How does this trump the passages I shared? This is not paper covers rock. The bible doesnt play that game. In Is. 66:24, it says that men will be able to go and gaze upon the corpses of those who transgressed against God. A corpse is a dead body. Normally a corpse would decay or be eaten by maggots. If that were the case, then these corpses would eventually no longer be available for viewing. So God has decreed that this will not happen. Thus the passage also says.." for their worm does not die nor their fire quenched". This signifies a permanent state. However, the passage is not referring to anyone who is conscious, but rather a corpse. You have proved nothing by using the term 'fire eternal'. Cut me all the slack you want. But why ignore the obvious? Not everyone is automatically designated to live forever. People for some reason want to hold onto this doctrine for dear life all the while attributing things to scripture that it just isn't saying.

 

[shturt678]

How does this trump the passages I shared? This is not paper covers rock. The bible doesnt play that game. In Is. 66:24, it says that men will be able to go and gaze upon the corpses of those who transgressed against God. A corpse is a dead body. Normally a corpse would decay or be eaten by maggots. If that were the case, then these corpses would eventually no longer be available for viewing. So God has decreed that this will not happen. Thus the passage also says.." for their worm does not die nor their fire quenched". This signifies a permanent state. However, the passage is not referring to anyone who is conscious, but rather a corpse. You have proved nothing by using the term 'fire eternal'. Cut me all the slack you want. But why ignore the obvious? Not everyone is automatically designated to live forever. People for some reason want to hold onto this doctrine for dear life all the while attributing things to scripture that it just isn't saying.

Thank you for your response and caring!

Let's look at the forever death in hell in Isa.66:24 in light of Mk.9:43-48, "where the worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched." Bypssing for now Matt.18:8, "to be thrown into the everlasting fire." & Matt.25:41, "into the fire, eternal."

Mk.9:43, 48 (omit vs.44 & 46), "fire unquenchable....the fire is not quenched." We have no eternal or unquenchable fire here on earth. Mark appropriated Isa.66:24 of course. The fact that that it does not die means that its work is eternal just as the fire is not quenched and is thus eternal. Within and without torment shall be the lot of the damned forever and ever.

Old Jack

 

[williemac]

Thank you for your response and caring!

Let's look at the forever death in hell in Isa.66:24 in light of Mk.9:43-48, "where the worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched." Bypssing for now Matt.18:8, "to be thrown into the everlasting fire." & Matt.25:41, "into the fire, eternal."

Mk.9:43, 48 (omit vs.44 & 46), "fire unquenchable....the fire is not quenched." We have no eternal or unquenchable fire here on earth. Mark appropriated Isa.66:24 of course. The fact that that it does not die means that its work is eternal just as the fire is not quenched and is thus eternal. Within and without torment shall be the lot of the damned forever and ever.

Old Jack

I agree that the work of the fire is eternal. But we seem to differ as to just what that work actually is. In Jesus' day, there was a garbage dump where refuse was taken to be burned. It was called Gehenna. This is the word He used in Math.10:28, that was translated 'hell' by the translators. They understood what it meant when He said it. What he advised them was that they should not fear those who can kill the body but not the soul.

Taking this advice from Jesus, we should not fear anyone who cannot kill the soul. Since He did tell them to fear God, then we can conclude that the soul can indeed die. If it can't be killed, then we don't need to fear anyone, because no one can kill it. I plead with you to start thinking logically here, rather than to simply believe what you have been taught or told to believe.

The purpose of Gehenna was similar to that which our more recent versions of disposal places have; which is to dispose of thing thrown away. Fire in that context was meant to destroy the thing in the fire, which is the word Jesus used in Math.10:28. The point was/is to get rid of something that is no longer useful. Keeping in mind that the context of that verse is about death, we can see that Jesus did not change the subject mid way through. Whatever happens to the soul in the Lake of Fire, also happens to the body. And as I shared from Is. 66:24, the body will become a corpse; something that has no life in it.

In Hades, after the first death, the body had died but not the soul. There, the fire will become an instrument of torment for the soul. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. This is the fate of the devil and his angels, as they are eternal beings, having come from heaven in the first place. Mankind was denied this experience as we have seen in Gen.3:22. Therefore in the second death, the one when both body and soul receive the same fate, the soul dies from the fire. The fire remains eternal because the devil and his angels are still alive. They will live forever.

But as we saw in John 6:50,51, living forever is only one of the two options for a human. Getting to heaven, as the op calls it, is the fate of those who live forever in that passage; those who partake of Jesus through faith. In that context, all others will die. By logical comparison, they cannot both be living forever. In John 3:16, we can see that all unbelievers will perish. The other fate mentioned in that verse is everlasting life. Therefore perish cannot also mean everlasting life.

But the doctrine of forever human conscious torment disagrees with this verse and the one in John and Genesis, having all humans living forever, some having everlasting life in torment. This is illogical. It contradicts what the bible is presenting in the verses I have shared. And thank you for caring.

 

[shturt678]

Thank you for your response!

Matt.10:28, "is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna." From the English structure of thoughts, yes, the "soul" can be destroyed; however contextually with Gehenna as a designation of hell, the place of the damned, "soul and body in Gehenna" implies the bodily resurrection of allllll the damned where not "1" is destroyed from the ancient Greek way of looking at it.

Old Jack

 

[StanJ]

Thank you for your response!

Matt.10:28, "is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna." From the English structure of thoughts, yes, the "soul" can be destroyed; however contextually with Gehenna as a designation of hell, the place of the damned, "soul and body in Gehenna" implies the bodily resurrection of allllll the damned where not "1" is destroyed from the ancient Greek way of looking at it.

Old Jack

I might also add that God CAN do a lot but doesn't necessarily do.

 

[williemac]

I might also add that God CAN do a lot but doesn't necessarily do.

I have heard this reasoning concerning Math.10:28. So in essence, you are saying that Jesus is advising them to fear God for something Jesus apparently knew He has no intention of doing. Really? I advise you to rethink this reasoning. It is far fetched, putting it kindly.

But in regards to your interpretation of what Gehenna refers to, you are going well against the flow. It is virtually universally agreed upon that this refers to the second death, which is the lake of fire. Even the context indicates that there are two situations being mentioned by Jesus. In the first one, the body dies but not the soul (do not fear those who can kill the body but not the soul). Most will agree that when a person dies, he is either present with the Lord, or present in Hades, the place of the dead, either way, the body had died but not the soul. This is where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.
This is the situation of the rich man who was contrasted against Lazerus. Hades is the word that is taken to mean 'the place of the dead'. This is common knowledge. Concerning Gehenna, why mix the two together as though they are the same? Weak reasoning at best.

Sounds to me like you are just making stuff up without giving the texts in question all due consideration. I haven't heard any rebuttle from you concerning John 6:50,51, for starters. You are still insisting against this passage that all humans will live forever, no?

Go ahead. Hang on to the doctrine of human conscious eternal torment for dear life. Hanging with the majority may feel safe, but it doesn't assure doctrinal accuracy. If one is not open to the possibility that a doctrine may be wrong, one will seldom be correctable in it. ...with all due respect.

 

[StanJ]

My grandmother and I got into a theological discussion yesterday morning, and she told me they used to teach that not being catholic meant you were going to hell.

I was astounded at the implication, she did say that they since rescinded this teaching however.

This is true, and many RCs still believe this. They also believe that when you are baptised an as infant into the RCC, your are saved.
I left the RCC when I was 17 and got saved.

I have heard this reasoning concerning Math.10:28. So in essence, you are saying that Jesus is advising them to fear God for something Jesus apparently knew He has no intention of doing. Really? I advise you to rethink this reasoning. It is far fetched, putting it kindly.

But in regards to your interpretation of what Gehenna refers to, you are going well against the flow. It is virtually universally agreed upon that this refers to the second death, which is the lake of fire. Even the context indicates that there are two situations being mentioned by Jesus. In the first one, the body dies but not the soul (do not fear those who can kill the body but not the soul). Most will agree that when a person dies, he is either present with the Lord, or present in Hades, the place of the dead, either way, the body had died but not the soul. This is where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.
This is the situation of the rich man who was contrasted against Lazerus. Hades is the word that is taken to mean 'the place of the dead'. This is common knowledge. Concerning Gehenna, why mix the two together as though they are the same? Weak reasoning at best.

Sounds to me like you are just making stuff up without giving the texts in question all due consideration. I haven't heard any rebuttle from you concerning John 6:50,51, for starters. You are still insisting against this passage that all humans will live forever, no?

Go ahead. Hang on to the doctrine of human conscious eternal torment for dear life. Hanging with the majority may feel safe, but it doesn't assure doctrinal accuracy. If one is not open to the possibility that a doctrine may be wrong, one will seldom be correctable in it. ...with all due respect.

Stating something is COMMON knowledge requires corroboration which you have not supplied.
The Lake of Fire is depicted in Rev 20:10 and Matt 25:41
And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet are too, and they will be tormented there day and night forever and ever.

"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."

You notice no one is destroyed, but they will exist forever in torment.

What man can't do is assign a soul to eternal damnation, but God can, and as we are made to live Eternally in Christ with God in the New Earth, then yes this would be a type of destruction. Illustrations were used constantly by Jesus, for example the millstone tied around a person's neck as He stated in Matt 18:6. Can God do that...yes...will he....no. Not being able to see or understand hyperbole won't help much in reading the Bible. It has many kinds of these stories.

Gehenna is the grave, Hades is where all the dead without Christ await for His return and Paradise is where all those IN Christ wait also for His return.

I don't know what you are talking about as far as me responding to something from John 6:50-51 is concerned. Jesus IS the bread of life, and IF we endure after receiving Him as our savior, we WILL live forever. That of course only happens AFTER we die ONCE and AFTER Jesus returns.

Your understanding of eternal torment if from a physical viewpoint but torment for the spirit/soul will be mental not physical.
As Jesus said in Matt 25:46, "And these will depart into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

Eternal punishment is NOT eternal death, as death only relates to the body.

So, as you haven't really supplied any exegesis from scri0putre that would make me re-examine my understanding, I remain unrefuted.

 

[shturt678]

I have heard this reasoning concerning Math.10:28. So in essence, you are saying that Jesus is advising them to fear God for something Jesus apparently knew He has no intention of doing. Really? I advise you to rethink this reasoning. It is far fetched, putting it kindly.

Thank you for your response!

Let's take another look at Matt.10:28b contextually so you can be a little more specific where I'm in error. Jesus knows that it's not enough for so many who are of little faith (Matt.8:26) to point to the causelessness of fear; he must apply stronger medicine and by the fear of God drive out the fear of men. "He who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna" is not the devil who is just one of the foes not to be feared, but to be resisted, when also he will flee from us, IPet.5:9. It's God who is referred to. God in His omnipotent power and his absolute justice.

This is not childlike fear, the motive of filial obedience, but the terrifying fear of God's holy burning wrath whcih would have to strike us if we yielded to the fear of men and denied His Word and His will, Ps.90:11; Matt.3:7, correct so far?



But in regards to your interpretation of what Gehenna refers to, you are going well against the flow. It is virtually universally agreed upon that this refers to the second death, which is the lake of fire. Even the context indicates that there are two situations being mentioned by Jesus. In the first one, the body dies but not the soul (do not fear those who can kill the body but not the soul). Most will agree that when a person dies, he is either present with the Lord, or present in Hades, the place of the dead, either way, the body had died but not the soul. This is where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.
This is the situation of the rich man who was contrasted against Lazerus. Hades is the word that is taken to mean 'the place of the dead'. This is common knowledge. Concerning Gehenna, why mix the two together as though they are the same? Weak reasoning at best.

Sounds to me like you are just making stuff up without giving the texts in question all due consideration. I haven't heard any rebuttle from you concerning John 6:50,51, for starters. You are still insisting against this passage that all humans will live forever, no?

Go ahead. Hang on to the doctrine of human conscious eternal torment for dear life. Hanging with the majority may feel safe, but it doesn't assure doctrinal accuracy. If one is not open to the possibility that a doctrine may be wrong, one will seldom be correctable in it. ...with all due respect.

[SIZE=14.399999618530273px]Now's your chance to shoot down the corebase the doctrine is partially based upon,[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14.399999618530273px]Old can't shoot straight, Jack[/SIZE]

 

[williemac]

This is true, and many RCs still believe this. They also believe that when you are baptised an as infant into the RCC, your are saved.
I left the RCC when I was 17 and got saved.


Stating something is COMMON knowledge requires corroboration which you have not supplied.
The Lake of Fire is depicted in Rev 20:10 and Matt 25:41
And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet are too, and they will be tormented there day and night forever and ever.

"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."

You notice no one is destroyed, but they will exist forever in torment.

The passage refers to the devil, the beast, and the false prophet. As far as "no one", these are the only beings that are specifically said to be tormented forever. I have already spoken to this argument, as I said, on another thread. In it I said that the doctrine you espouse depends upon association. The lake of fire was created for the devil and his angels. They are eternal beings. Mankind is not, as the soul of man can die, be destroyed, perish. By assumption, you are concluding that the lake of fire has the same effect on humans as it does on eternal beings. But man was denied access to the tree of life..."lest he should reach out his hand, take and eat of it, and live forever" (Gen.3:22).

Your understanding of eternal torment is from a physical viewpoint but torment for the spirit/soul will be mental not physical.
As Jesus said in Matt 25:46, "And these will depart into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

Eternal punishment is NOT eternal death, as death only relates to the body.

So, as you haven't really supplied any exegesis from scri0putre that would make me re-examine my understanding, I remain unrefuted.

Him as our savior, we WILL live forever. That of course only happens AFTER we die ONCE and AFTER Jesus returns.

I understand perfectly that torment is emotional and happens at the soul level. I even made reference to it. However, in regards to the phrase 'eternal punishment', the two words together speak of the duration of the punishment. However, they do not speak of the nature of the punishment. Math.25:46 does not mention the nature of the punishment. However, Jesus did speak of it in other places with words such as death, die, perish, destroy. So lets put these together with eternal.....eternal death. If the nature of the punishment is to be put to death, and the duration of this is forever, then it would be correct to call it an eternal punishment. Again, there are assumptions being made from Math.25:46 based on pre conceived conclusions. If one did not already believe in everlasting conscious torment, one would not conclude it just from the two words; "eternal punishment". This conclusion therefore is called circular reasoning.

Your last statement that we will live forever after we die once, is ignoring two facts. The first one is that Jesus said ..."he who lives and believes in Me will never die" (John11:26). This refers to the soul. The soul of the believer will never die. The other fact is that Paul told the Corinthians that " we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed". (1Cor.15:51). conclusion: not all humans will experience physical death and no believer will experience soul death. This is my point all along. In the first death, the body dies but not the soul. This is the case with all men. In repeating this, you are not proving anything contrary to what I have been already saying.

But as for John 6:50,51, I have shown that Jesus gave two possible fates. The one fate is to live forever. The other is to die. He could not have been referring to mere physical death in that passage, as everyone He was speaking to actually did die physically. In that passage He was giving two differing fates, not two that overlapped with one another. He said that if one were to eat of His flesh he would live forever and NOT die. Did you even read the passage? It is about duration of life, not location of life. By comparison, living forever must be something other than dying, and dying must be something other than living forever. But you disagree with Jesus in saying that everyone will live forever, some in glory and some in torment. Where does this leave John 6:50,51?