The kingdom of God.

[Checkpoint]

Some seem to think it is entirely future, while others give the impression they are always thinking of it as present, and to not be looking at the future in kingdom terms at all.

Jesus had much to say about the kingdom, including this:

Luke 16:

6 The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone is being zealously urged into it.

So, where do you stand as to whether it is present, future, or has both a present and a future aspect?

On what basis?

According to which scriptures?

[tam]

Peace to you,

{We continue to disagree on the meaning of the second death/lake of fire... but we have had that discussion before (and may have it yet again, lol)... and I do not want to detract from the point of your current discussion (about the first death).}

Fair enough.

You said in your post to JW:

and all three heard and obeyed, incontrovertibly indicating that even though they had died, they all heard and obeyed, something they could not do unless they existed.

Yes! EXCELLENT point!

Do not be amazed at this, for the hour is coming when all who are in their graves will hear His voice 29and come out— those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment. John 5:28, 29

Thank you, Tammy.

You're welcome.

Yes, and it should not be lost that, as I said,

Lol, so perhaps we will have this conversation again now after all?

this also gives us some insight into what the second -- alternatively, ultimate, greater, everlasting, final... in the same vein as Christ Jesus being the second Adam -- death really is. And I'll piggyback on your quote here from Jesus in John 5:29, especially the latter part of that verse (which I've mentioned before), where unrepentant sinners "come out" -- in obedience, as Lazarus, Jairus's daughter, and the widow's son did -- are raised -- to the resurrection of judgment as opposed to the resurrection of life. This verse should be all that annihilation advocates need to clearly see the direct refutation Scripture -- Jesus Himself -- issues regarding that misunderstanding.

I don't see why anyone would think that this is some kind of refutation to utter destruction (which is the example we are given in Sodom and Gomorrah, among other things). Some are resurrected to life (those who had done good) and some are resurrected to judgment AND the the lake of fire (the second death). But the second death is clearly not the same as the first death. The first death is an unconscious state (a "sleep" from which one can be woken), and the first death is temporary. No one is woken from the second death; the second death is permanent.

The second death is the result of being on the wrong side (the left) of the final Judgment, and is a resurrection to -- clearly indicating ongoing subjection to and remaining in existence in perpetuity under -- God's final judgment.

Just because one is resurrected does not mean that one remains resurrected and alive (or that one receives eternal life). Some are resurrected to life (and this is eternal) and some are resurrected to judgment and the second DEATH. These ones have not been resurrected to life. They have been resurrected to judgment and the second death.

The direct opposite of annihilation, or extinction, and non-existence is what is in view here and is the clear and irrefutable implication.

I'm sorry, Pinseeker, but there is nothing irrefutable about what you are saying. The ones who are resurrected to judgment do not remain resurrected and alive; they receive the judgment of the second death.

Grace and peace to you and all!

Thank you and peace to you as well,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to PinSeeker in post #940]

And I'll piggyback on your quote here from Jesus in John 5:29, especially the latter part of that verse (which I've mentioned before), where unrepentant sinners "come out" -- in obedience, as Lazarus, Jairus's daughter, and the widow's son did -- are raised -- to the resurrection of judgment as opposed to the resurrection of life. This verse should be all that annihilation advocates need to clearly see the direct refutation Scripture -- Jesus Himself -- issues regarding that misunderstanding. The second death is the result of being on the wrong side (the left) of the final Judgment, and is a resurrection to -- clearly indicating ongoing subjection to and remaining in existence in perpetuity under -- God's final judgment. The direct opposite of annihilation, or extinction, and non-existence is what is in view here and is the clear and irrefutable implication.

Not so, not at all. But those conclusions, that assessment, those assumptions, are no surprise at all.

John 5:29 says absolutely nothing about any of the terms you list: annihilation, extinction, non-existence, or existence.

It is not about any of those things.

It is about resurrection, and is about judgment.

Note what the word translatedjudgment" in John 5:29 means:

Strong's Concordance:

2920. krisis: a decision, judgment
Original Word: κρίσις, εως, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: krisis
Phonetic Spelling: (kree'-sis)
Definition: a decision, judgment
Usage: judging, judgment, decision, sentence; generally: divine judgment; accusation.


HELPS Word-studies:

Cognate: 2920 krísis (a feminine noun derived from 2919 /krínō, "to separate, distinguish, judge") – judgment, emphasizing its qualitative aspect that can apply either to a positive verdict (for righteousness) – or more commonly, a "negative" verdict which condemns the nature of sin that brings it on.

Grace and peace to you.

[PinSeeker]

John 5:29 says absolutely nothing about any of the terms you list: annihilation, extinction, non-existence, or existence. It is not about any of those things. It is about resurrection, and is about judgment.

Absolutely agreed. This has been one of my chief points throughout these conversations. All are resurrected -- come out of their tombs -- to one thing or the other, and the failure to say anything remotely indicating annihilation for either group speaks volumes. So what you (and Tammy and others) are doing here -- without meaning to or even realizing it, apparently -- is adding to Scripture... or rather following after those who have. This is true of all those who believe in annihilation: reading something into it that is neither said nor implied in any way, which should not be done, not necessarily because I say so, but because Jesus Himself warns against it in Revelation 22:

"I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book..." [22:18]

So I will repeat, regarding Jesus's statement in John 5:29, that the direct opposite of annihilation, or extinction, and non-existence is what is in view and as such the clear and irrefutable implication. Tammy said it herself:

"...some are resurrected to judgment and the second DEATH."

What she can't seem to accept, and she's not alone, obviously, is that this resurrection to judgment and subsequent subjection to and dwelling in/under that judgment (this "lake of fire") is itself the death. It is much like, albeit on a much greater, eternal plane, the fact that the person sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole certainly dies and is subsequently dead to the outside world but does not cease to be. Even so, it is surely possible, unfortunately, to remain in denial of anything.

Grace and peace to all.

[Checkpoint]

John 5:29 says absolutely nothing about any of the terms you list: annihilation, extinction, non-existence, or existence. It is not about any of those things. It is about resurrection, and is about judgment.

Absolutely agreed. This has been one of my chief points throughout these conversations. All are resurrected -- come out of their tombs -- to one thing or the other, and the failure to say anything remotely indicating annihilation for either group speaks volumes. So what you (and Tammy and others) are doing here -- without meaning to or even realizing it, apparently -- is adding to Scripture... or rather following after those who have. This is true of all those who believe in annihilation: reading something into it that is neither said nor implied in any way, which should not be done, not necessarily because I say so, but because Jesus Himself warns against it in Revelation 22:

"I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book..." [22:18]

So I will repeat, regarding Jesus's statement in John 5:29, that the direct opposite of annihilation, or extinction, and non-existence is what is in view and as such the clear and irrefutable implication. Tammy said it herself:

"...some are resurrected to judgment and the second DEATH."

What she can't seem to accept, and she's not alone, obviously, is that this resurrection to judgment and subsequent subjection to and dwelling in/under that judgment (this "lake of fire") is itself the death. It is much like, albeit on a much greater, eternal plane, the fact that the person sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole certainly dies and is subsequently dead to the outside world but does not cease to be. Even so, it is surely possible, unfortunately, to remain in denial of anything.

Grace and peace to all.

Thanks for that, Pinseeker.

What you wrote so clearly illustrates how you put things together.

And the aptness of your observation, that "it is surely possible, unfortunately, to remain in denial of anything."

Grace and peace to you.

[PinSeeker]

What you wrote so clearly illustrates how you put things together.

Well, how things are "put together" so clearly for us.

And the aptness of your observation, that "it is surely possible, unfortunately, to remain in denial of anything."

<chuckles> I see what you did there... Nevertheless, yes, but annihilationists will not continue in that denial; they will turn from it eventually. Whether that happens in this life or not remains to be seen.

Grace and peace to you.

[Checkpoint]

What you wrote so clearly illustrates how you put things together.

Well, how things are "put together" so clearly for us.

And the aptness of your observation, that "it is surely possible, unfortunately, to remain in denial of anything."

<chuckles> I see what you did there... Nevertheless, yes, but annihilationists will not continue in that denial; they will turn from it eventually. Whether that happens in this life or not remains to be seen.

Grace and peace to you.

Yes, things will all get sorted out one day.

In the meantime we see only a little, and often bang into each other in our little "knowledge" patch, as we fondly imagine we have this or that all sussed.

Let us not be riding for a fall.

1 Corinthians 8:

1b We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up.
2 The one who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know.
3 But the one who loves God is known by God.

[PinSeeker]

Yes, things will all get sorted out one day.

Actually, things are already sorted out, whether we wrestle with them -- or wrestle with each other over them -- or not. And I don't mean "wrestle with" in any negative sense here, Jacob wrestled with God (Genesis 32), you know, and we should, too, regarding difficult things. Even wrestling with each other can be a good thing, as God can use that for our good, too. Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another (Proverbs 27:17), right? The problem comes when this "wrestling" crosses over from striving with (with God or with neighbor) to "contending" and thus striving against (against God or against neighbor). You see the difference, I'm sure. This can happen pretty easily and for several reasons, pride and even idolatry chief among them. As we both know, Jesus said we should love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, and mind (this is the great and first commandment), and we should love our neighbor as ourselves (Matthew 22:37-39).

In the meantime we see only a little, and often bang into each other in our little "knowledge" patch, as we fondly imagine we have this or that all sussed.

Well, sure, but even the Bible is very clear that there are differences among even us Christians. Not that anyone is a "better Christian" than anyone else, but that there are differences in "strength" among the brethren. Even so, as Paul says, even the weaker parts of the body are indispensable (1 Corinthians 12:22). And I should say, too, that in saying what I have said here, I don't necessarily mean to insinuate that anyone here is "weaker" than anyone else; we all have areas of weakness.

Let us not be riding for a fall.

I agree. Sure. God forbid.

1 Corinthians 8:1-3 "We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. The one who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know. But the one who loves God is known by God.

A good word. Yes, none of us know as we ought to know; that can encompass a lot of things. But still, some understand certain things better than others, and if so, in keeping with Jesus's commandments from Matthew 22 above, we should strive with God in proclaiming His Word and glorifying Him, and with our neighbor to build them up in the Lord rather than... well, opposite of that. As Paul goes on to say in this very passage from 1 Corinthians 8, that would constitute sinning against our brothers and wounding their conscience when it is weak and thus sinning against Christ (vv. 11-12). Paul says the same things in Romans 14. The problem is not imparting knowledge in and of itself. Imparting knowledge is a good thing; it's one of the reasons God gave us each other. The problem, rather, is imparting that knowledge in sinful ways and possibly destroying our brothers, for whom Christ also died.

Hey, you might notice the word "destroyed," as used by Paul in 1 Corinthians 8:11 above. The Greek root word used here is ἀπόλλυμι (apollymi), and it means in the context here not to be annihilated physically or wiped from existence, but rather to be brought to ruin spiritually. James uses the same word in the same way when he says "(t)here is only one Lawgiver and Judge, He who is able to save and to destroy" (4:12). Peter does the same (2 Peter 2:12), and so does Jude (1:5, 10). What we see from Paul, Peter, and even John in Revelation regarding "destruction" as rendered in English (ἀπώλεια, or apōleia, in the Greek) is very much the same, but in the form of a noun rather than a verb.

Grace and peace to you and all.

[tam]

Peace to you,

John 5:29 says absolutely nothing about any of the terms you list: annihilation, extinction, non-existence, or existence. It is not about any of those things. It is about resurrection, and is about judgment.

Absolutely agreed. This has been one of my chief points throughout these conversations. All are resurrected -- come out of their tombs -- to one thing or the other, and the failure to say anything remotely indicating annihilation for either group speaks volumes. So what you (and Tammy and others) are doing here -- without meaning to or even realizing it, apparently -- is adding to Scripture... or rather following after those who have.

Is someone using that verse alone to suggest that said people are destroyed (annihilated)?

As far as I can see, that verse simply states that some are resurrected to life, while others are resurrected to judgment. Granted, the fact that these others are not resurrected to life indicates to me that they are not resurrected to... well... life. They are resurrected to judgment (condemnation). What that judgment (condemnation) is, is not specifically spelled out in this verse.

BUT...

"...if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly..." 2 Peter 2:6


And,

"In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire." Jude 1:7

And,

And be not afraid of those killing the body, and are not able to kill the soul, but fear rather Him who is able both soul and body to destroy in gehenna. Matt 10:28


(See also Rev 20:9, because fire comes down from God from heaven and devours 'gog and magog'; and the meaning of the word translated as "devour" includes "utterly consume; destroy, by fire"... https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/le ... 2719&t=KJV)

This is true of all those who believe in annihilation: reading something into it that is neither said nor implied in any way, which should not be done, not necessarily because I say so, but because Jesus Himself warns against it in Revelation 22:

"I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book..." [22:18]

First, that warning refers to the book of Revelation (not the entire bible).

Second, if you are saying that some of us are 'adding' to what is written, then how would you not be doing the same? Because the verse in John does not state that some of the dead are resurrected to life, and some of the dead are resurrected to eternal life under judgment.

It simply states:

“Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out—those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned."




Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[PinSeeker]

Is someone using that verse alone to suggest that said people are destroyed (annihilated)?

No, but that verse even by itself implicitly says people are not annihilated. When something is proclaimed as true, we can easily infer that it's opposite is not true. For example, Jesus says people are either for or against him, and by inference we can easily say that there is no neutral position. By the same token, Jesus says some are raised to life (those on his right in Matthew 25) and others are raised to judgement (those on his left in Matthew 25). And He says all tombs, which means there is no other possibility. So all are raised, to one or the other, and we can easily infer that annihilation is not a third possibility.

As far as I can see, that verse simply states that some are resurrected to life, while others are resurrected to judgment. Granted, the fact that these others are not resurrected to life indicates to me that they are not resurrected to... well... life. They are resurrected to judgment (condemnation). What that judgment (condemnation) is, is not specifically spelled out in this verse.

Well, as far as you want to see, I think. Fair enough. But condemnation, Tammy, is just -- again, "just" -- the state of being condemned. This is the permanent result of the final Judgment for some (those on Jesus's left); they remain under this judgment, in a permanent -- eternal -- state of being condemned. Annihilation is not part of the equation.

"...if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly..." 2 Peter 2:6

"In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire." Jude 1:7

Peter and Jude both see the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah as a "type" (a diving foreshadowing) of judgment by fire on the last day. The Old Testament is filled with types and shadows of ultimate realities to come, and the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19 is one of them. The permanent and irrevocable judgment pronounced upon the people of Sodom and Gomorrah is what is foreshadowing of eternity, not the literal razing of the cities.

"And be not afraid of those killing the body, and are not able to kill the soul, but fear rather Him who is able both soul and body to destroy in gehenna." Matt 10:28

As I said to Checkpoint above, the word "destroy" is in the Greek ἀπόλλυμι (apollymi), and it means in the context here not to be annihilated physically or wiped from existence, but rather to be brought to ruin spiritually. Paul and James use the same word in the same way, and Peter and Jude, too. And what we see from Paul, Peter, and even John in Revelation regarding "destruction" as rendered in English (ἀπώλεια, or apōleia, in the Greek) is very much the same, but in the form of a noun rather than a verb.

(See also Rev 20:9, because fire comes down from God from heaven and devours 'gog and magog'; and the meaning of the word translated as "devour" includes "utterly consume; destroy, by fire"...

Yes, actually, God Himself is the consuming fire (Deuteronomy 4:24, and in Revelation 20:9, Jesus). This is talking about God's final Judgment. It is final, inescapable, irrevocable, and everlasting.

This is true of all those who believe in annihilation: reading something into it that is neither said nor implied in any way, which should not be done, not necessarily because I say so, but because Jesus Himself warns against it in Revelation 22: "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book..." [22:18]

First, that warning refers to the book of Revelation (not the entire bible).

I agree in the immediate sense, but I disagree in the ultimate sense. Moses issues similar warnings in Deuteronomy against adding to or subtracting from the Lord's commands:

• "You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you." [4:2]

• “Everything that I command you, you shall be careful to do. You shall not add to it or take from it." [12:32]

So yes, it's about Revelation immediately, but it's ultimately about all of God's Word.

Second, if you are saying that some of us are 'adding' to what is written, then how would you not be doing the same? Because the verse in John does not state that some of the dead are resurrected to life, and some of the dead are resurrected to eternal life under judgment.

But that's not what I said; you're putting words in my mouth, which is not cool. I stated nothing beyond the text. My point was that the verse says "all who are in their graves will hear His voice and come out" -- they will all rise -- and some "to be condemned," or "to the resurrection of judgment," exactly as the text reads. There is no mention of any further action against them. Of course not, because there's no need for any further action; being placed under the permanent condemnation by and judgment of God is quite enough. Annihilation is not mentioned or implied in John 5:29 (or anywhere else in the Bible) and therefore is completely a-biblical.

Grace and peace to you, Tammy.

[tam]

Peace to you,

Is someone using that verse alone to suggest that said people are destroyed (annihilated)?

No,

Then how can you say that some of us have added to what is written in that verse?

but that verse even by itself implicitly says people are not annihilated.

Must disagree for reasons stated.

When something is proclaimed as true, we can easily infer that it's opposite is not true. For example, Jesus says people are either for or against him, and by inference we can easily say that there is no neutral position. By the same token, Jesus says some are raised to life (those on his right in Matthew 25) and others are raised to judgement (those on his left in Matthew 25).

Matt 25 (specifically the parable of the sheep and goats that you are referencing here) does not speak of a resurrection at all. Or do you not believe that when He returns, there will be people on the earth who are yet living?

And He says all tombs, which means there is no other possibility. So all are raised, to one or the other, and we can easily infer that annihilation is not a third possibility.

He does say all tombs, yes. But just because a person is resurrected does not mean that a person remains in that state for all eternity. Some are resurrected to life (eternal life); and some are resurrected to judgment (condemnation).

So what are they judged/condemned TO?

As far as I can see, that verse simply states that some are resurrected to life, while others are resurrected to judgment. Granted, the fact that these others are not resurrected to life indicates to me that they are not resurrected to... well... life. They are resurrected to judgment (condemnation). What that judgment (condemnation) is, is not specifically spelled out in this verse.

Well, as far as you want to see, I think. Fair enough. But condemnation, Tammy, is just -- again, "just" -- the state of being condemned. This is the permanent result of the final Judgment for some (those on Jesus's left); they remain under this judgment, in a permanent -- eternal -- state of being condemned. Annihilation is not part of the equation.

Condemned to what?

"...if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly..." 2 Peter 2:6

"In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire." Jude 1:7

Peter and Jude both see the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah as a "type" (a diving foreshadowing) of judgment by fire on the last day. The Old Testament is filled with types and shadows of ultimate realities to come, and the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19 is one of them. The permanent and irrevocable judgment pronounced upon the people of Sodom and Gomorrah is what is foreshadowing of eternity, not the literal razing of the cities.

Pinseeker, why not both?

"And be not afraid of those killing the body, and are not able to kill the soul, but fear rather Him who is able both soul and body to destroy in gehenna." Matt 10:28

As I said to Checkpoint above, the word "destroy" is in the Greek ἀπόλλυμι (apollymi), and it means in the context here not to be annihilated physically or wiped from existence, but rather to be brought to ruin spiritually. Paul and James use the same word in the same way, and Peter and Jude, too. And what we see from Paul, Peter, and even John in Revelation regarding "destruction" as rendered in English (ἀπώλεια, or apōleia, in the Greek) is very much the same, but in the form of a noun rather than a verb.

Here is the meaning of the word; you will note that included in the meanings and usage of the word is utter destruction; abolish:

Outline of Biblical Usage [?]

to destroy

to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin

render useless

to kill

to declare that one must be put to death

metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell

to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed

to destroy

to lose

ἀπόλλυμι apóllymi, ap-ol'-loo-mee; from G575 and the base of G3639; to destroy fully (reflexively, to perish, or lose), literally or figuratively:—destroy, die, lose, mar, perish.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/le ... G622&t=KJV


So nothing that has been shared (about annihilation, destruction) conflicts with what is written.

(See also Rev 20:9, because fire comes down from God from heaven and devours 'gog and magog'; and the meaning of the word translated as "devour" includes "utterly consume; destroy, by fire"...

Yes, actually, God Himself is the consuming fire (Deuteronomy 4:24, and in Revelation 20:9, Jesus). This is talking about God's final Judgment. It is final, inescapable, irrevocable, and everlasting.

Well, utter consumption; destruction sounds irrevocable and everlasting to me.

This is true of all those who believe in annihilation: reading something into it that is neither said nor implied in any way, which should not be done, not necessarily because I say so, but because Jesus Himself warns against it in Revelation 22: "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book..." [22:18]

First, that warning refers to the book of Revelation (not the entire bible).

I agree in the immediate sense, but I disagree in the ultimate sense. Moses issues similar warnings in Deuteronomy against adding to or subtracting from the Lord's commands:

• "You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you." [4:2]

• “Everything that I command you, you shall be careful to do. You shall not add to it or take from it." [12:32]

So yes, it's about Revelation immediately, but it's ultimately about all of God's Word.

A - God's Word is Christ.

B - no one added to the verse from John (as I think you admitted at the top of this post, right?)

Second, if you are saying that some of us are 'adding' to what is written, then how would you not be doing the same? Because the verse in John does not state that some of the dead are resurrected to life, and some of the dead are resurrected to eternal life under judgment.

But that's not what I said; you're putting words in my mouth, which is not cool.

I apologize. You do not believe that that they live forever under judgment then?



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy