#3 Jesus on Hell

[Wootah]

Matthew 13
The Parable of the Weeds Explained
36 Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples came to him, saying, “Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field.” 37 He answered, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, and the good seed is the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, 39 and the enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels. 40 Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, 42 and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.

How can there be a place with weeping and gnashing teeth if all the people are dead or annihilated?

How is that not a judgement of hell that supports traditional doctrine?

#1 Jesus on hell: viewtopic.php?f=38&t=38453
#2 Jesus on hell: viewtopic.php?f=38&t=38457

[PinSeeker]

God is love. God is light. God is holy. God is Spirit. God is a consuming fire. I suggest if one is literal, all are literal. If one is figurative, all are figurative.

I'm not sure how you can make that all-or-nothing suggestion, Checkpoint. I guess what is needed is to define how one means 'literal' and 'figurative.' Or maybe 'concrete' and 'abstract' is the right way to characterize these things. For example, yes, God is literally a consuming fire, but He is spirit (John 4:24), not a literal flame like the one in your fireplace on a cold winter night, right?

However, this is not really a question of literal or figurative.

Well, it is if you understand the terms in the same way I am meaning them.

What it is about is just how God has negatively used that "power ", on those who opposed Him. And whether that is biblically reliable as a guide to how He will use His power in carrying out the Judgment's negative decisions.

Sure, immediately, in this thread. But these other things are not irrelevant, and in fact closely related.

Grace and peace to you.

[Checkpoint]

God is love. God is light. God is holy. God is Spirit. God is a consuming fire.

I suggest if one is literal, all are literal. If one is figurative, all are figurative.

I'm not sure how you can make that all-or-nothing suggestion, Checkpoint. I guess what is needed is to define how one means 'literal' and 'figurative.'

Or maybe 'concrete' and 'abstract' is the right way to characterize these things. For example, yes, God is literally a consuming fire, but He is spirit (John 4:24), not a literal flame like the one in your fireplace on a cold winter night, right?

Right, something like that seems a good way to start, at least.

However, this is not really a question of literal or figurative.

Well, it is if you understand the terms in the same way I am meaning them.

What it is about is just how God has negatively used that "power ", on those who opposed Him. And whether that is biblically reliable as a guide to how He will use His power in carrying out the Judgment's negative decisions.

Sure, immediately, in this thread. But these other things are not irrelevant, and in fact closely related.

What do you refer to as "these other things"?

=quote]Grace and peace to you.

Likewise to you.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to Wootah in post #21]

How is that not a judgement of hell that supports traditional doctrine?

That is a very good question.

However, I think that you, as the first poster of this thread, and of related other threads, owe readers and posters a summary of just what you mean by "traditional doctrine" regarding "a judgment of hell".

Please consider this request favorably.

Perhaps you could edit your summary onto each of those threads,(3 so far) as a final statement at the end of each first post.

Thanks.

[Wootah]

[Replying to Checkpoint in post #24]

Hi Checkpoint.

Hell is the place of torment where non-Christians will go for eternity because they did not believe in Jesus.

[PinSeeker]

[Replying to Checkpoint in post #24]

Hi Checkpoint.

Hell is the place of torment where non-Christians will go for eternity because they did not believe in Jesus.

As you know, Wootah, you and I are in agreement on Hell, but I think this statement, at least in a way, is more than what's needed, really. Not that I disagree, because I agree with what you say; Scripture is -- and Jesus Himself is -- very explicit in bearing this out, I think it's more than what's needed, and here's why:

• Yes, hell's residents will be in a place where they experience, internally, torment and anguish (as the rich man in Jesus's parable in Luke 16) that they did not worship God as they should have when they had the chance (which is, as Jesus puts it in Mark 9, "their worm which will not die"). They are not sent there (as I'm sure you will agree) to be tormented or anguished; that's only a consequence -- and again, internal -- of their having been sent there.

• And it's really not that they "did not believe in Jesus," at least in the primary, as they couldn't have repented and believed unless God had chosen to have mercy and compassion upon them, thereby softening their hearts and giving them new life in Christ, after which they then willingly repent of their sin and believe in Christ.

So, I think it can just be left at, "Hell is the place where unbelievers go for eternity."

Now, if someone then asks further why unbelievers are sent there, that can be left at, "Because they chose themselves and their own perceived righteousness over God and His righteousness." This was Adam's sin in the Garden of Eden. Unbelievers have chosen to -- as Paul says in Romans 1 -- suppress the truth in unrighteousness, and to worship the creature rather than the Creator. It's pride, really; unbelievers are remaining in Adam (the first, failed Adam) rather than being converted and then being in Christ, the second (perfect) Adam. They didn't "choose Hell," as is sometimes said -- because no one would ever willingly chooses a place of torment and anguish for a second, much less eternity -- but because they chose themselves over God... their own "wisdom" over God's,,, "freedom" in themselves over what they perceived as an imprisonment under God.

Grace and peace to all!

[myth-one.com]

Matthew 13
The Parable of the Weeds Explained
36 Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples came to him, saying, “Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field.” 37 He answered, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, and the good seed is the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, 39 and the enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels. 40 Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, 42 and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.

How can there be a place with weeping and gnashing teeth if all the people are dead or annihilated?

How long does the weeping and gnashing last?

Perhaps there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth until all the people are dead and annihilated.

[PinSeeker]

How long does the weeping and gnashing last?

For eternity.

Perhaps there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth until all the people are dead and annihilated.

Well, if they were annihilated, then that would be true, but they are not.

Grace and peace to you.

[myth-one.com]

How long does the weeping and gnashing last?

For eternity.

Perhaps there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth until all the people are dead and annihilated.

Well, if they were annihilated, then that would be true, but they are not.

Grace and peace to you.

So you're claiming that the wages of sin is everlasting weeping and gnashing of teeth torment in the lake of fire.

That would require the following correction to John 3:16. Let's call it Pinseeker 3:16.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not be tormented in the lake of fire eternally, but have everlasting life. (PinSeeker 3:16)

Where's the grace in that?

Under your theology, believers are no different from nonbelievers in regards to everlasting life -- as you have everyone living eternally.

Doesn't the "but have everlasting life" phrase describing believers imply that nonbelievers will not have everlasting life?

[Tcg]

Hell is the place of torment where non-Christians will go for eternity because they did not believe in Jesus.

That is yet another definition of hell you've provided. This is perhaps the third or fourth. How do reconcile these contradictory definitions?


Tcg

[Wootah]

[Replying to Tcg in post #30]

Which ones contradict? you could describe Paris or New York in a 1,000 ways. Please show contradictions or delete your post.