#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]

Tam told you what God said in His Word, in Isaiah 66 about "their worm."

Well, she quoted it, sure, but her understanding of it is quite in error.

Jesus said the same thing in Mark 9.

Yes, He referred to it, quoting it, for sure.

You changed what is there, "their worm does not die", to "eternal pain and anguish".

Well no, many words that mean the same thing can be interchangeable, right? And anything eternal does not have an end, does not "die." Surely you agree with that, no?

That is, from "it is what it is" to, effectively, "it is what it is not".

You are fully entitled to your own opinion (as are we all), but no.

God bless.

To you also, Checkpoint. Grace and peace to you.

[tam]

Peace to you,

For what reason has man decided that 'their worm does not die' = eternal pain and anguish?

Put very simply, it is what it is.

So no reason then except that "man says so".

Well, only if it weren't what God says in His Word... and what Jesus says... which is the same thing (and, as you would hopefully agree, is what really matters). And, anticipating your retort, that gets us back to the answer immediately above.

God's Word is Christ.

I suspect you might have gotten hung up on the word eternal, so I will rephrase:

Neither God's Word (Christ) or the Bible state that 'their worm does not die' = pain and anguish.

As I said, the phrase comes from a verse in Isaiah (66:24)...

Yes, I know precisely where it comes from.

Then why did you ask me:

Where do you see anything about corpses, Tammy? Aside from the fact that the word 'corpse' is not use by our Lord there, right? He talks about some possibly having "a great millstone were hung around (their) neck and (being) thrown into the sea," "going with two hands to the unquenchable fire," and "with two feet being thrown into hell." There's absolutely nothing about corpses there... although your interpretation requires that actually be the case, but it is not. It's about people, sure, but not corpses. And people can certainly feel pain (torment, anguish)...

Also because - despite people's best attempts at contorting the meaning of the word love - eternal torment is not from love.

Ah, so we are back to the real issue -- at least one of them -- which is what we think love is. And again, the torment is just the internal reaction of the unrepentant. Torment is not of God, as He, of course, does not sin.

Thankfully, for everyone's sake, God's ways are higher than man's ways.

That they are, for sure. And this is also true of love. I would argue that God's punishment of sin is most certainly part of His love; it would be unloving for God not to punish sin.

Unending punishment just for the sake of punishment? There is no point to that. There is no purpose.

No, for the sake of justice. His perfect justice... for His sake first -- His glory -- and then for ours as those who love Him. So there is a point, a purpose (as there is to everything He does) -- His -- and, as Job says, His purposes cannot be thwarted.

That is just something men say. You have never been able to demonstrate how that' is 'perfect justice'. Or that it is even required to meet God's justice.

Eternal punishment (of a conscious, existing, person) serves no purpose, produces nothing good, teaches nothing. Discipline is from love, certainly. But discipline is about teaching, refining, producing something good. Eternal punishment (of a conscious, existing, person) serves no purpose, produces nothing good, teaches nothing. So where is the love in it?

How can you (or I) make any judgment about what is eternally good or bad? You (and I) can't, because you are not (and I am not) eternal -- of eternity (yet... ). Like you said, and I wholeheartedly agree -- because God says it in Isaiah 55 -- His thoughts are not our thoughts, our ways not His. His ways are much higher than our ways, His thoughts much higher than ours. And like David says (in Psalm 139), such knowledge is too wonderful for us; it is high, and we cannot attain it.

If that is what you think, how can you possibly claim that God's perfect justice requires eternal conscious punishment?

for some reason, man thinks sin must be punished with something much worse than death.

Ah! So you admit there is a punishment much worse than annihilation!

Of course. Is that a surprise to you?

What makes you think God requires something WORSE than death, worse than annihilation? Punishment that causes the most suffering is something that man dreams up.

Well that's a step in the right direction. Yes, like I have said, speaking from our perspective -- or rather putting it in terms we can readily understand -- life imprisonment is, really, much worse than the death penalty. And, carrying it just a bit further, this punishment, life imprisonment, is a lasting torment, and those experiencing and enduring this life imprisonment are anguished.

A - see above

B - Except of course as you said that would be LIFE imprisonment. But those who receive judgment and the second death do not receive LIFE.

THEREFORE, just because Adam was made in the image of God, doesn't mean that Adam had ALL the same attributes as God.

Yeah, I'm not sure how you got off on this rabbit trail (of sorts; surely not to say that it actually is a rabbit trail... ), but I have never said or insinuated anything remotely contradictory to what you say here. Adam and Eve (and thus we, as their progeny) are God's creation -- creatures, as opposed to the Creator.

Then why do you keep saying that because man was made in the image of God, man cannot be destroyed (annihilated) and must exist forever? Especially when even you admit that being made in the image of God does not mean man (certainly not man after sin and death entered into him) has all the same attributes of God?

Luke 16 and Revelation 20 most certainly do, and you're taking John 5 in isolation from those two passages, which should not be done.

None of those passages speak of unending pain and torment.

Another opinion. They do, actually:

• Directly from Luke 16, "(t)he rich man also died and was buried, and in Hades, being in torment..." and ..."in anguish in this flame..." was told that "...between (Abraham and his progeny) and (him, who represents all the unrepentant) a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from (where Abraham is) to (where the rich man is) may not be able, and none may cross from (where the rich man is) to (where Abraham and his progeny are).

Until the resurrection of the dead, when Hades gives up the dead in it. Meaning this cannot be eternal.

(It also isn't about people being conscious and suffering in hades, but that is another discussion)

• Directly from Revelation 20, "...the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever... "...if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire."

A - that is just the devil, the beast and the false prophet who are being referred to as being tormented.

B - the beast is not an actual living being. How could it then be tormented (as in tortured)? Death and Hades are also tossed into the lake of fire. How is Hades tormented?

Eternal torment and anguish are not in view in Psalm 9:15-17

They are. Just because they are not explicitly mentioned does not mean they are not in view. If I say, "Tammy went to town," obviously, Tammy when to town for some reason. Or, well, experienced something while there...

Except that the news is just reporting that Tammy went to town.
You are adding (perhaps based on some gossip or rumor you heard from men), "Tammy went to town to rob a bank."

15 The nations have fallen into the pit they have dug;
their feet are caught in the net they have hidden.
16 The Lord is known by his acts of justice;
the wicked are ensnared by the work of their hands.
17 The wicked go down to the realm of the dead,
all the nations that forget God.

So where is it? Where is this eternal torment and anguish mentioned in Psalm 9:15-17?

It is implied in verse 17, as I said. They will experience... something... in the realm of the dead. See above.

A - You are reading that into the verse. It is not written; it is not implied.

B - Nothing is said about what they will experience going down to the realm of the dead, or even that they will experience anything at all. And elsewhere, it is written that the dead know nothing. That there is no working or knowledge in the realm of the dead. (Ecc 9:5, 10)

"For the living know that they will die,
but the dead know nothing;
they have no further reward,
and even their name is forgotten."

"... for in the realm of the dead, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom."

Christ Himself likened (the first) death to a sleep.

But sheol is not that place of judgment. The dead come OUT Of the world of the dead to stand before the throne, some being resurrected to LIFE and some being resurrected to judgment (and so, the second death). Those who receive the resurrection of judgment (and the second death) are not cast back into Sheol.

But Sheol, Tammy -- Death and Hades ultimately go into the "lake of fire" with the devil and his minions and the unrepentant.

Yes, death and hades go into the lake of fire.

Right, along with anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life, who, like the devil and the beast and the false prophet, will be tormented day and night forever and ever. Not to say that death and Hades will be tormented like the devil and his minions and the unrepentant, but death and Hades will no longer be in the presence of -- in the sense of being a possibility for -- those whose names are found in the book of life. Right now, though, even we, as Psalm 23 says, walk through the valley of the shadow of death.

Yes, death and hades go into the lake of fire. Where is it mentioned that those who are resurrected to judgment and the second death go back into Sheol?

See above.

"Above" did not answer my question. But of course the only answer to my question is that such a thing is never mentioned. No one goes back INTO Sheol (Hades), the realm of the dead.

This will take us back to your annihilation... uh, stuff... again, I'm sure. Yet again, what should be understood here is that all that -- death, Hades, the devil and his minions, and unrepentant sinners and the possibility of entering into or experiencing or being in the presence of these things are permanently removed from the new heaven and new earth of Revelation 21.

Well, annihilation is a pretty permanent removal.

So is being sent to "outer darkness."

Outer darkness... lake of fire... two different things.

Everything that occurs in Matt 25 occurs at the return of Christ (which I think you agree), but to people who are yet alive on the earth when He returns. There is no mention of a resurrection (of the dead), or the judgment, because the resurrection of the dead (from Rev 20) has not yet happened.

Yeah, we've discussed this at length, too.

We have, but no matter what order you set forth, the fact remains that there is no mention of the resurrection of the dead and judgment at the return of Christ (see Matt 25, for instance).
The reason there is no mention of it, is because it does not happen at this time (at the return of Christ).

Right, because in the context of Matthew 25:31-46, it (Christ's return) has already happened. That's the immediate point here, for goodness's sake. Christ has to return first before the resurrection and the final Judgment,

Well lets examine that:

Matt 25:31 and 32:

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.

Here we have his return and sitting on his throne... and then we have the nations gathered before him.

If there was a resurrection occurring at this time, it would be mentioned in between verses 31 and 32 (according to what you are claiming). But it is not.

Because THIS is not the judgment. This is the separation of the sheep from the goats (both being people of the nations who are yet alive on the earth when Christ returns).



Peace again to you!

[PinSeeker]

I suspect you might have gotten hung up on the word eternal...

LOL! "Hung up." No...

Neither God's Word (Christ) or the Bible state that 'their worm does not die' = pain and anguish.

Stating it explicitly is not necessary. The symbolism is clear (or should be, anyway).

You have never been able to demonstrate how that' is 'perfect justice'. Or that it is even required to meet God's justice.

Well I have; that is merely your opinion. Very well, I'll give you the golden opportunity to demonstrate it for/to yourself. We know God is perfect, right? That's a given; Jesus tells us that the Father is perfect in Matthew 5:48, and Jesus was without sin, which necessarily means He did not lie. Given that, then, God is necessarily perfect in all His attributes, justice included. As we read in Deuteronomy 32:4, "The Rock, his work is perfect, for all his ways are justice." And Psalm 89:14 says of God, "Righteousness and justice are the foundation of (His) throne." Having said that, why do you think there are there wages for sin, as in Romans 6:23? And don't get hung up here on what the wages are -- we agree that the wages are death, though we disagree on what the nature of that death is, but all of that is beside the immediate point here. Why do you suppose God demands these wages? It starts with a 'j'... His (perfect) _______ must be satisfied.

If that is what you think, how can you possibly claim that God's perfect justice requires eternal conscious punishment?

Well it requires death, which you clearly agree with. So that brings us back to the nature of death and what its result is, which has always been the central point of disagreement between us.

for some reason, man thinks sin must be punished with something much worse than death.

Ah! So you admit there is a punishment much worse than annihilation!

Of course. Is that a surprise to you?

No, actually. But it should cause you to realize something about what you have been thinking up to now.

What makes you think God requires something WORSE than death, worse than annihilation?

Actually, I think, among other things, of course, God does something more -- far more -- graceful and loving than annihilation. I mean I realize that's the argument (one of them, anyway) people like you use His attribute of love to support annihilation, but it's misused.

Punishment that causes the most suffering is something that man dreams up.

Well no, punishment that is not eternal is something that man dreams up.

...like I have said, speaking from our perspective -- or rather putting it in terms we can readily understand -- life imprisonment is, really, much worse than the death penalty. And, carrying it just a bit further, this punishment, life imprisonment, is a lasting torment, and those experiencing and enduring this life imprisonment are anguished.

Except of course as you said that would be LIFE imprisonment. But those who receive judgment and the second death do not receive LIFE.

Right, and from our perspective, those who receive this life imprisonment, don't really have life anymore, even though they exist. From our perspective, they have suffered a death; they are dead to the world; the live no longer.

THEREFORE, just because Adam was made in the image of God, doesn't mean that Adam had ALL the same attributes as God.

Yeah, I'm not sure how you got off on this rabbit trail (of sorts; surely not to say that it actually is a rabbit trail... ), but I have never said or insinuated anything remotely contradictory to what you say here. Adam and Eve (and thus we, as their progeny) are God's creation -- creatures, as opposed to the Creator.

Then why do you keep saying that because man was made in the image of God, man cannot be destroyed (annihilated) and must exist forever?

First of all, we disagree also regarding what being destroyed actually means. You know that, but you slipped it in there anyway. To be destroyed can mean something very different than being annihilated or wiped from existence, and you cannot deny that with any credibility. I say -- and Scripture (and any good dictionary) testifies to this, as I've demonstrated thoroughly (yes, I know you disagree) -- that to be destroyed means to be utterly ruined, and thus not wiped from existence, and the forever existence necessary follows from that without fail.

Luke 16 and Revelation 20 most certainly do, and you're taking John 5 in isolation from those two passages, which should not be done.

None of those passages speak of unending pain and torment.

Another opinion. They do, actually:

• Directly from Luke 16, "(t)he rich man also died and was buried, and in Hades, being in torment..." and ..."in anguish in this flame..." was told that "...between (Abraham and his progeny) and (him, who represents all the unrepentant) a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from (where Abraham is) to (where the rich man is) may not be able, and none may cross from (where the rich man is) to (where Abraham and his progeny are).

Until the resurrection of the dead, when Hades gives up the dead in it. Meaning this cannot be eternal.

LOL! No, Hades giving up the dead is a result of the Judgment, which cannot occur until after the resurrection. The resurrection (second) comes before Hades "giving up" -- surrendering -- the dead. Again, you're referring to the Judgment in Revelation 20, which occurs after the resurrection. Death and Hades (thus in the new heaven and new earth "death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away" -- Revelation 21:4) go with those on the wrong side of the Judgment, which again, occurs after the resurrection, into the "lake of fire" (which, again, is symbolic of the place of God's judgment).

• Directly from Revelation 20, "...the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever... "...if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire."

A - that is just the devil, the beast and the false prophet who are being referred to as being tormented.

Nope. All those whose name is not found in the Book of Life suffer the same fate; Revelation 20:15 is clear on that. All are thrown into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:10, 15), and it is not necessary to restate what happens there to it's occupants.

B - the beast is not an actual living being. How could it then be tormented (as in tortured)?

Well John (and thus God) clearly refers to the Beast as a living being, so I can't really say anything to this except that it is what it is.

Death and Hades are also tossed into the lake of fire. How is Hades tormented?

Answered above.

Eternal torment and anguish are not in view in Psalm 9:15-17

They are. Just because they are not explicitly mentioned does not mean they are not in view. If I say, "Tammy went to town," obviously, Tammy when to town for some reason. Or, well, experienced something while there... [/quote]

Except that the news is just reporting that Tammy went to town.

You are adding (perhaps based on some gossip or rumor you heard from men), "Tammy went to town to rob a bank."

LOL! I'm adding nothing. You're putting words in my mouth. No, I'm just saying that Tammy necessarily must have done something while there, regardless of what that something might have been. Even if Tammy did nothing, that's doing something, actually, because she was there.

So where is it? Where is this eternal torment and anguish mentioned in Psalm 9:15-17?

It is implied in verse 17, as I said. They will experience... something... in the realm of the dead. See above.

A - You are reading that into the verse. It is not written; it is not implied. [/quote]
It is implied. It is impossible to go somewhere and experience absolutely nothing.

B - Nothing is said about what they will experience going down to the realm of the dead, or even that they will experience anything at all. And elsewhere, it is written that the dead know nothing. That there is no working or knowledge in the realm of the dead. (Ecc 9:5, 10)

Again, impossible to go (or be sent) somewhere and experience nothing. And we've spoken at length about Ecclesiastes, which is only here talking about the removal of some from life under the sun (temporal life) and not about the afterlife.

Outer darkness... lake of fire... two different things.

Nope. Two descriptions of the same thing.

Right, because in the context of Matthew 25:31-46, it (Christ's return) has already happened. That's the immediate point here, for goodness's sake. Christ has to return first before the resurrection and the final Judgment,

Well lets examine that...

Sure. Yet again. Why not?

Matt 25:31 and 32: “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats." Here we have his return and sitting on his throne... and then we have the nations gathered before him." If there was a resurrection occurring at this time, it would be mentioned in between verses 31 and 32 (according to what you are claiming). But it is not.

That's not what I "claimed." Rather than "a resurrection occurring at this time," the resurrection occurs (very shortly) before the immediate setting of this entire passage. As I said before, the timeline (tweaked just a tiny bit to provide a little more detail) is as follows:
.

The resurrection of the dead has most assuredly happened at the point of the Judgment:

• The millennium or Revelation 20 stretches from Pentecost (about 2000 years ago) to Jesus's return (yet to happen).

• Those who are still alive at the time of His return go out to meet Him and usher Him in as the royalty He is (1 Thessalonians 4). In His return, He brings all the saints that have gone before with Him.

• Then the resurrection, which is general -- some resurrected to eternal life and some to judgment -- takes place.

• Then... "(b)efore Him (Jesus) will be gathered all the nations, and He will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left" (Matthew 25:31-32).

• Then the Judgment (Matthew 33-45; Revelation 20:11-13)

• Then the sending away of the unrepentant (Matthew 25:46, Revelation 20:15)

• And then... the new heaven and new earth... (Revelation 21:1-8)

NOTE: Points two and three, and possibly four above can really be considered simultaneous, but even if not, there is no substantial amount of time elapsing between them. Regardless, points two through seven are all in very short order.

Because THIS is not the judgment. This is the separation of the sheep from the goats (both being people of the nations who are yet alive on the earth when Christ returns).

THIS is the problem. Yes, this absolutely is the Judgment. To not think so would place one far, far outside mainstream, orthodox Christianity. Included are all who are yet alive when Christ returns, for sure, but also includes all those that have been resurrected. It is very much parallel to Revelation 20:11-15.

Grace and peace to you.

[tam]

Peace to you,

Neither God's Word (Christ) or the Bible state that 'their worm does not die' = pain and anguish.

Stating it explicitly is not necessary. The symbolism is clear (or should be, anyway).

Come on Pinseeker. 5 people look at the bible and see 5 different things, and all of them claim it is clear.

To BE clear though, their worm does not die is never stated to be pain and anguish. That is an implication, inference, interpretation that some are drawing.

Since it goes against what my Lord teaches me on the matter of 'the second death', I have no reason to accept that implication, inference, interpretation.

You have never been able to demonstrate how that' is 'perfect justice'. Or that it is even required to meet God's justice.

Well I have; that is merely your opinion. Very well, I'll give you the golden opportunity to demonstrate it for/to yourself. We know God is perfect, right? That's a given; Jesus tells us that the Father is perfect in Matthew 5:48, and Jesus was without sin, which necessarily means He did not lie. Given that, then, God is necessarily perfect in all His attributes, justice included. As we read in Deuteronomy 32:4, "The Rock, his work is perfect, for all his ways are justice." And Psalm 89:14 says of God, "Righteousness and justice are the foundation of (His) throne." Having said that, why do you think there are there wages for sin, as in Romans 6:23? And don't get hung up here on what the wages are -- we agree that the wages are death, though we disagree on what the nature of that death is, but all of that is beside the immediate point here. Why do you suppose God demands these wages? It starts with a 'j'... His (perfect) _______ must be satisfied.

Let me rephrase:

You have never been able to demonstrate that (punishment for the sake of punishment/eternal conscious torment that can never ceases) is required to meet God's perfect justice.

Some links to past conversations on this topic (and the failure to demonstrate that God's perfect justice requires eternal conscious torment/punishment):

viewtopic.php?p=1000541#p1000541
viewtopic.php?p=1002588#p1002588
viewtopic.php?p=1005237#p1005237
viewtopic.php?p=1005247#p1005247
viewtopic.php?p=1006985#p1006985
viewtopic.php?p=1007005#p1007005
viewtopic.php?p=1007050#p1007050
viewtopic.php?p=1007457#p1007457
viewtopic.php?p=1007658#p1007658

If that is what you think, how can you possibly claim that God's perfect justice requires eternal conscious punishment?

Well it requires death, which you clearly agree with. So that brings us back to the nature of death and what its result is, which has always been the central point of disagreement between us.

I don't see that you answered the question.

What makes you think God requires something WORSE than death, worse than annihilation?

Actually, I think, among other things, of course, God does something more -- far more -- graceful and loving than annihilation. I mean I realize that's the argument (one of them, anyway) people like you use His attribute of love to support annihilation, but it's misused.

...like I have said, speaking from our perspective -- or rather putting it in terms we can readily understand -- life imprisonment is, really, much worse than the death penalty.

So is it more loving or worse?

THEREFORE, just because Adam was made in the image of God, doesn't mean that Adam had ALL the same attributes as God.

Yeah, I'm not sure how you got off on this rabbit trail (of sorts; surely not to say that it actually is a rabbit trail... ), but I have never said or insinuated anything remotely contradictory to what you say here. Adam and Eve (and thus we, as their progeny) are God's creation -- creatures, as opposed to the Creator.

Then why do you keep saying that because man was made in the image of God, man cannot be destroyed (annihilated) and must exist forever?

First of all, we disagree also regarding what being destroyed actually means. You know that, but you slipped it in there anyway. To be destroyed can mean something very different than being annihilated or wiped from existence, and you cannot deny that with any credibility. I say -- and Scripture (and any good dictionary) testifies to this, as I've demonstrated thoroughly (yes, I know you disagree) -- that to be destroyed means to be utterly ruined, and thus not wiped from existence, and the forever existence necessary follows from that without fail.

Please note that in all of that you did not answer the question I asked. I bolded it (and underlined the pertinent part).

Luke 16 and Revelation 20 most certainly do, and you're taking John 5 in isolation from those two passages, which should not be done.

None of those passages speak of unending pain and torment.

Another opinion. They do, actually:

• Directly from Luke 16, "(t)he rich man also died and was buried, and in Hades, being in torment..." and ..."in anguish in this flame..." was told that "...between (Abraham and his progeny) and (him, who represents all the unrepentant) a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from (where Abraham is) to (where the rich man is) may not be able, and none may cross from (where the rich man is) to (where Abraham and his progeny are).

Until the resurrection of the dead, when Hades gives up the dead in it. Meaning this cannot be eternal.

LOL! No, Hades giving up the dead is a result of the Judgment, which cannot occur until after the resurrection. The resurrection (second) comes before Hades "giving up" -- surrendering -- the dead.

Um... this is the same thing. Hades gives up the dead in it BECAUSE the dead in it have been resurrected. Some are resurrected to life, some are resurrected to judgment and the second death.

The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done.

Again, you're referring to the Judgment in Revelation 20, which occurs after the resurrection.

Yes, the judgment does occur after the (second) resurrection (which is why the sea, death and hades are giving up the dead in them - those dead are being resurrected, to stand before the throne, some being resurrected to life and some being resurrected to judgment and the second death).

B - the beast is not an actual living being. How could it then be tormented (as in tortured)?

Well John (and thus God) clearly refers to the Beast as a living being, so I can't really say anything to this except that it is what it is.

Might be another topic then, but...

Death and Hades are also tossed into the lake of fire. How is Hades tormented?

Answered above.

Hades is a place... I don't know how it can even be mistaken as a living being? How can it feel pain and anguish? Places can be destroyed (as in, no longer exist), but how can it feel pain and anguish?

Eternal torment and anguish are not in view in Psalm 9:15-17

They are. Just because they are not explicitly mentioned does not mean they are not in view. If I say, "Tammy went to town," obviously, Tammy when to town for some reason. Or, well, experienced something while there...

Except that the news is just reporting that Tammy went to town.
You are adding (perhaps based on some gossip or rumor you heard from men), "Tammy went to town to rob a bank."

LOL! I'm adding nothing. You're putting words in my mouth.

EXACTLY!!

Which is exactly what you are doing with Psalm 9:15-17.

Right, because in the context of Matthew 25:31-46, it (Christ's return) has already happened. That's the immediate point here, for goodness's sake. Christ has to return first before the resurrection and the final Judgment,

Well lets examine that...

Sure. Yet again. Why not?

Matt 25:31 and 32: “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats." Here we have his return and sitting on his throne... and then we have the nations gathered before him." If there was a resurrection occurring at this time, it would be mentioned in between verses 31 and 32 (according to what you are claiming). But it is not.

That's not what I "claimed." Rather than "a resurrection occurring at this time," the resurrection occurs (very shortly) before the immediate setting of this entire passage.

Did you not say above that Christ has to return first (before) the resurrection? (I put it in pink) In which case it would have occurred between verses 31 and 32.

But now you are saying the resurrection occurs first (before) Christ returns? (I put it in orange).

I think we are misunderstanding one another on this point, or at least on what we see as the immediate setting of this passage.

As I said before, the timeline (tweaked just a tiny bit to provide a little more detail) is as follows:
.

The resurrection of the dead has most assuredly happened at the point of the Judgment:

Agreed.
The dead are resurrected - some to life and some to judgment and the second death.

• The millennium or Revelation 20 stretches from Pentecost (about 2000 years ago) to Jesus's return (yet to happen).

Must disagree.
The thousand years begins when Christ returns, gathers His own up to Him (meeting Him in the sky, along with the dead in Christ who were resurrected). Paul makes it clear that this has not happened yet.

By the word of the Lord, we declare to you that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who have fallen asleep. 16For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a loud command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will be the first to rise. 1Thess 4:16, 17

AND,

For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ the firstfruits; then at His coming, those who belong to Him. 1Corinth 15:23

THAT is this:

I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about [Jesus] and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years. Rev 20:4-6

• Those who are still alive at the time of His return go out to meet Him and usher Him in as the royalty He is (1 Thessalonians 4). In His return, He brings all the saints that have gone before with Him.

That is the first resurrection.

• Then the resurrection, which is general -- some resurrected to eternal life and some to judgment -- takes place.

If by 'then' you mean only 'after', sure (though after the thousand years).

But please note that this is not the 'general resurrection'. This is the second resurrection, the resurrection of the dead. There are not two resurrections for the same group of people; there are two resurrections for two groups of people (the first for Christians; the second for non-Christians).

• Then... "(b)efore Him (Jesus) will be gathered all the nations, and He will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left" (Matthew 25:31-32).

This occurs at the start of the thousand years. The sheep and goats are people of the nations who are alive on the earth when Christ returns. These are not those who had died and are resurrected. None of these are Christian.

• Then the Judgment (Matthew 33-45; Revelation 20:11-13)

The Judgment occurs at the end of the thousand years. Rev 20:5 (the rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended)

• Then the sending away of the unrepentant (Matthew 25:46, Revelation 20:15)

The goats are sent away outside the kingdom (the outer darkness); the people who are resurrected to judgement and the second death are cast into the lake of fire. These are two different scenarios.

Because THIS is not the judgment. This is the separation of the sheep from the goats (both being people of the nations who are yet alive on the earth when Christ returns).

THIS is the problem. Yes, this absolutely is the Judgment. To not think so would place one far, far outside mainstream, orthodox Christianity.

Mainstream, orthodox Christianity teaches a great many falsehoods and has shed a great deal of innocent blood. That cannot be from Christ.

I have no problem being far, far outside of that.

I am not part of that - I am part of Christ.

"Stop touching the unclean thing and I will take you in."




May anyone who wishes them be given ears to hear, so as to hear the truth of these matters from the TRUTH, and to hear as the Spirit and the Bride say to you, "Come!" May anyone who thirsts and anyone who wishes, "Come! Take the free gift of the water of Life."



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

[Checkpoint]

Tam told you what God said in His Word, in Isaiah 66 about "their worm."

Well, she quoted it, sure, but her understanding of it is quite in error.

Jesus said the same thing in Mark 9.

Yes, He referred to it, quoting it, for sure.

You changed what is there, "their worm does not die", to "eternal pain and anguish".

Well no, many words that mean the same thing can be interchangeable, right? And anything eternal does not have an end, does not "die." Surely you agree with that, no?

The words you have used, "pain and anguish", are in no way interchangeable with the scriptural words, "their worm".

You have a need to assume a metaphorical or non-literal interpretation. What you've come up with is a common opinion that has never been credible.

That is, from "it is what it is" to, effectively, "it is what it is not".

You are fully entitled to your own opinion (as are we all), but no.

It is not an opinion, it is a defense of exegesis rather than eisegesis, of the two passages.

God bless.

To you also, Checkpoint. Grace and peace to you.

Now that is one thing we can agree on.

[PinSeeker]

The words you have used, "pain and anguish", are in no way interchangeable with the scriptural words, "their worm".

Well, torment and anguish... and thirst, actually. They are interchangeable, in the context of Isaiah and Jesus; symbols of the real thing, by definition, are interchangeable with the real thing. Hey, Jesus said He thirsted while hanging on the cross. Do you suppose He was really thirsty? Or was He really saying that He was thirsting for the living God, Who had forsaken (abandoned, deserted) Him? Well, I would say -- accurately, I think -- that He was both literally thirsty (dehydration is one effect of crucifixion) and thirsting for the living God, in the words of David in Psalm 42.

You have a need to assume a metaphorical or non-literal interpretation.

LOL! I don't "have a need" to do anything... except maybe to call a spade a spade (symbolically speaking... ). No, a symbol (the worm, first used by Isaiah in his prophecy, which is chock-full of symbolism from beginning to end) by definition symbolizes ~ represents ~ something very literal. A symbol is, as I'm sure you well know, something that stands for or suggests or represents something else by reason of relationship, association, convention, or resemblance. So then the only question is, is that literal something symbolized abstract or concrete? In linguistic terms, it's called metonymy ~ a figure of speech consisting of the use of the name of one thing for that of another of which it is an attribute or with which it is associated. Here's another example:

• Psalm 36:5 ~ "Your steadfast love, O LORD, extends to the heavens, your faithfulness to the clouds."

Do you suppose love, even steadfast love, to actually have arms and hands that literally reach into the sky ~ and miles long at that ~ so that they actually get close to or even touch the clouds, or even outer space (the heavens)? Well no, of course not, as that's a ridiculous thought. But it does convey to us that His love, very literal, of course, is greater than seems possible ~ its incomprehensible breadth and length and height and depth, in the words of Paul in Ephesians 3:18 ~ right? He loves us more than we can imagine. Yes, so... metonymy.

What you've come up with is a common opinion that has never been credible.

I accept the "opinion" opinion... see what I did there?... and even that it is my opinion, but that has no effect on whether my opinion is correct or not. But it is not credible to say my understanding (or even opinion) has never been (or isn't, or won't be in the future) credible. All that can really be said, with any real credibility, is, "I disagree." Several of you disagree, and I'm perfectly fine with that (as if it matters whether I am "fine with it" or not).

That is, from "it is what it is" to, effectively, "it is what it is not".

Hm. No, see above (regarding symbolism and metonymy).

You are fully entitled to your own opinion (as are we all), but no.

It is not an opinion, it is a defense of exegesis rather than eisegesis, of the two passages.

Yes it is (an opinion), Checkpoint. It is an opinion of what you think is the proper exegesis of those two passages. And it precipitates the defense. We disagree. And it's a much bigger and wider disagreement than just you and me.

Grace and peace to you.

[PinSeeker]

Come on Pinseeker.

I say very much the same to you, Tammy.

To BE clear though, their worm does not die is never stated to be pain and anguish.

It is what it is. See my response to Checkpoint above.

Since it goes against what my Lord teaches me on the matter of 'the second death'...

That's only your opinion, Tammy. Mine is... ... that it most certainly does not.

You have never been able to demonstrate that (punishment for the sake of punishment/eternal conscious torment that can never ceases) is required to meet God's perfect justice.

That is absolutely, unequivocally, undeniably not what I've tried to demonstrate. You're putting words into my mouth, whether intentionally or not, whether you realize it or not. I'm not "mad" because of that, but that's what you're doing. I have never intended to demonstrate that or in any way set out to do so. What is troubling to me, Tammy, is that I've said that more than once before (to you and to others), and you continue to level that at me. To be quite honest with you, that causes me to, in my mind, question some things about you personally.

If that is what you think, how can you possibly claim that God's perfect justice requires eternal conscious punishment?

Well it requires death, which you clearly agree with. So that brings us back to the nature of death and what its result is, which has always been the central point of disagreement between us.

I don't see that you answered the question.

Well, right, because ~ as should have been evident and based on what I have said before ~ the question itself is flawed.

What makes you think God requires something WORSE than death, worse than annihilation?

Actually, I think, among other things, of course, God does something more -- far more -- graceful and loving than annihilation. I mean I realize that's the argument (one of them, anyway) people like you use His attribute of love to support annihilation, but it's misused... like I have said, speaking from our perspective -- or rather putting it in terms we can readily understand -- life imprisonment is, really, much worse than the death penalty

So is it more loving or worse?

Yes.

THEREFORE, just because Adam was made in the image of God, doesn't mean that Adam had ALL the same attributes as God.

Yeah, I'm not sure how you got off on this rabbit trail (of sorts; surely not to say that it actually is a rabbit trail... ), but I have never said or insinuated anything remotely contradictory to what you say here. Adam and Eve (and thus we, as their progeny) are God's creation -- creatures, as opposed to the Creator.

Then why do you keep saying that because man was made in the image of God, man cannot be destroyed (annihilated) and must exist forever?

First of all, we disagree also regarding what being destroyed actually means. You know that, but you slipped it in there anyway. To be destroyed can mean something very different than being annihilated or wiped from existence, and you cannot deny that with any credibility. I say -- and Scripture (and any good dictionary) testifies to this, as I've demonstrated thoroughly (yes, I know you disagree) -- that to be destroyed means to be utterly ruined, and thus not wiped from existence, and the forever existence necessary follows from that without fail.[/quote]
Please note that in all of that you did not answer the question I asked. I bolded it (and underlined the pertinent part).[/quote]
Okay, fair enough. So, among many other things...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

such as the facts that:

• we have all the same emotions, like anger, joy, happiness, and even jealousy, as God (but, unlike God, we experience them in less-than-holy ways)

• we are relational beings, as the triune Jehovah is relational among His three Persons (but unlike God's relationships, ours are flawed and sinful to some degree, at least for now)

• we want to glorify ourselves as God does (although our desires for our own glory are selfish and sinful, unlike His)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...we are all eternal. existing into eternity future (not eternity past of course, as God is; we are created) beings. This is one... well, four ... aspect(s) of being created in God's image. There are many, many more. God is infinite, after all.

Hades gives up the dead in it BECAUSE the dead in it have been resurrected. Some are resurrected to life, some are resurrected to judgment and the second death. Yes, the judgment does occur after the (second) resurrection (which is why the sea, death and hades are giving up the dead in them - those dead are being resurrected, to stand before the throne, some being resurrected to life and some being resurrected to judgment and the second death).

Good...

B - the beast is not an actual living being. How could it then be tormented (as in tortured)?

Well John (and thus God) clearly refers to the Beast as a living being, so I can't really say anything to this except that it is what it is.

Might be another topic then, but...

Fine... although I will say, here, though, that John, in Revelation, depicts Satan as an unholy trinity, in opposition to the triune God. Ohhhh... that'll probably open a can of worms... Well, not a literal can of literal worms... ... but certainly symbolic of a literal thing (topic)...

Hades is a place... I don't know how it can even be mistaken as a living being? How can it feel pain and anguish? Places can be destroyed (as in, no longer exist), but how can it feel pain and anguish?

I don't know of anybody who disagrees with that, certainly not me. When Isaiah and Jesus speak of the "worm that will not die" and who possesses it ~ "their worm" ~ Hades is not referred to in... is not included in the plurality of people referred to by... is not included in the antecedent of... the personal pronoun 'their.' That pronoun refers directly to the men who have rebelled against God... unbelievers. I feel confident you will agree with that.

Eternal torment and anguish are not in view in Psalm 9:15-17

They are. Just because they are not explicitly mentioned does not mean they are not in view. If I say, "Tammy went to town," obviously, Tammy when to town for some reason. Or, well, experienced something while there...

Except that the news is just reporting that Tammy went to town. You are adding (perhaps based on some gossip or rumor you heard from men), "Tammy went to town to rob a bank."

LOL! I'm adding nothing. You're putting words in my mouth.

EXACTLY!! Which is exactly what you are doing with Psalm 9:15-17.

Absolutely not.

Did you not say above that Christ has to return first (before) the resurrection? In which case it would have occurred between verses 31 and 32. But now you are saying the resurrection occurs first (before) Christ returns?

I don't believe these to be absolutely sequential events, but simultaneous, really, more or less. Generally speaking, Christ's return and the resurrection, even if they are not strictly simultaneous or strictly sequential, are both part of the same overarching event. And then, in very short order, all are gathered before ~ in front of ~ Christ, which is to say, as in Matthew 25:31-32, "(before Christ) sit(ing) on His glorious throne... (b)efore Him gathered all the nations... (having been by Christ) separate(d) one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats," and as in Revelation 20:11-12, "(before the) great white throne and Him seated on it, and the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and the books opened."

I think we are misunderstanding one another on this point, or at least on what we see as the immediate setting of this passage.

Yes, I think so. Or at least you're not completely understanding me, which I am willing to take even the bulk of the blame for. Hopefully, what I said immediately above makes things a bit more clear.

The millennium or Revelation 20 stretches from Pentecost (about 2000 years ago) to Jesus's return (yet to happen).

Must disagree.

Sure you do. I'm well aware of that.

The thousand years begins when Christ returns, gathers His own up to Him (meeting Him in the sky, along with the dead in Christ who were resurrected). Paul makes it clear that this has not happened yet.

Nope. Paul makes it clear (in 1 Thessalonians 4) that the second resurrection has not happened yet, his purpose being to calm the Thessalonians fear that if they are still alive when Christ returns they will be excluded. But he also makes clear in Ephesians 2:4-7 ~ as does Peter in 1 Peter 1:3 ~ that the first resurrection has happened for those who are in Christ. So does John, who also makes clear ~ all in Revelation 20:4-6 ~ that this first resurrection will continue to happen on an individual basis throughout this age, these last days (before Christ returns).

By the word of the Lord, we declare to you that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a loud command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will be the first to rise. 1Thess 4:16, 17

This is the second resurrection, not the first. Yes, I know you disagree (or at least pretty sure...). But it is what it is. Again, the first is what Paul talks about in Ephesians 2, Peter talks about in 1 Peter 1, and John talks about in Revelation 20:4-6 (not to mention what Jesus speaks of to Nicodemus in John 3).

Those who are still alive at the time of His return go out to meet Him and usher Him in as the royalty He is (1 Thessalonians 4). In His return, He brings all the saints that have gone before with Him.

That is the first resurrection.

This is His return. These people who are caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, thus going out to meet Him in His return, along with the saints that have gone before who are coming with Jesus from heaven (1 Thessalonians 4), have already, in their earthly lives:

• been born again ~ resurrected ~ of the Spirit (John 3)

• been made alive ~ resurrected ~ together (spiritually, no longer dead in sin) with Christ and raised up (resurrected) with Him and seated with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 2)

• been born again ~ resurrected ~ to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for us, who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time (1 Peter 1).

• come to life ~ been resurrected ~ and reigned with Christ for (over the course of) the "thousand years" (Revelation 20:4-6).

This is the first resurrection.

Then the resurrection, which is general -- some resurrected to eternal life and some to judgment -- takes place..

If by 'then' you mean only 'after', sure (though after the thousand years).

Yes, the second resurrection.

But please note that this is not the 'general resurrection'. This is the second resurrection, the resurrection of the dead. There are not two resurrections for the same group of people; there are two resurrections for two groups of people (the first for Christians; the second for non-Christians).

Well, two groups, sure, but it's all one resurrection, the second. It's "general" in the sense that all experience it, as opposed to the first resurrection, which only God's elect experience. 'First resurrection' and 'second resurrection' here are to be understood as a reversal of the 'first death' and the 'second death.' To explain:

• The first resurrection is spiritual and only experienced by God's elect somewhere in the course of their earthly lives, and the second resurrection is physical and experienced by everyone at Jesus's return (simultaneous with or immediately after).

• The first death is physical and experienced by everyone somewhere in the course of (at the end of) their earthly lives, and the second death is spiritual and only experienced by those who are not among God's elect (as a result of the Judgment, which occurs shortly after Jesus's return and the second resurrection.

Then... "(b)efore Him (Jesus) will be gathered all the nations, and He will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left" (Matthew 25:31-32).

This occurs at the start of the thousand years.

Nope. When the "thousand years" are ended.

The sheep and goats are people of the nations who are alive on the earth when Christ returns.

No, the whole groups of sheep and goats include those who are alive on the earth when Christ returns, but also those who have gone before ~ both those in Christ and those not in Christ. Then the Judgment occurs, which includes all, those on His right (all His sheep, both those still alive at His return and those who have gone before) and those on His left (all the goats, both those still alive at His return and those who have gone before).

The Judgment occurs at the end of the thousand years.

Agreed. I have been very clear in my agreement with this throughout this thread and others.

Then the sending away of the unrepentant (Matthew 25:46, Revelation 20:15)

The goats are sent away outside the kingdom (the outer darkness); the people who are resurrected to judgement and the second death are cast into the lake of fire. These are two different scenarios.

Nope. One and the same, depicted differently, but absolutely parallel.

Mainstream, orthodox Christianity teaches a great many falsehoods and has shed a great deal of innocent blood.

Unfortunately true ~ albeit not 'many,' but some, but by the Holy Spirit being corrected ~ but this is not one of them.

I have no problem being far, far outside of that.

Well that's a problem, in my opinion. God certainly does not tell us individually to go rogue.

I am not part of that - I am part of Christ.

Sure. That's very othodox (conforming to what is generally or traditionally accepted as right/true) of you. Very good. And all of orthodox Christianity would certainly ascribe to the same. And I do, too.

Grace and peace to you, Tammy.

[tam]

Peace to you,

Since it goes against what my Lord teaches me on the matter of 'the second death'...

That's only your opinion, Tammy. Mine is... ... that it most certainly does not.

If it was my opinion, Pinseeker, I would not say that my Lord taught it to me. Because that would then be a lie. And who cares what my opinion is? I don't even care what my opinion might be ... I can have them, but I am aware that it does not mean that they are right. I am no one; I am not the Truth; I cannot lead anyone else into all truth; I cannot even lead myself into all truth. Only Christ can do that (for me or anyone else). I can point to Him, bear witness to Him, sometimes share as I have received from Him. But as always, if anyone wishes to know the truth of these matters (if I share something or someone else does), one should always come to Christ, ask Him for the truth of the matter.

You have never been able to demonstrate that (punishment for the sake of punishment/eternal conscious torment that can never ceases) is required to meet God's perfect justice.

That is absolutely, unequivocally, undeniably not what I've tried to demonstrate. You're putting words into my mouth, whether intentionally or not, whether you realize it or not.

I misunderstood what you said backaways, sorry. I said punishment for the sake of punishment, and you said, no, for the sake of justice.

The point remains though - you have never been able to demonstrate that unending (conscious) punishment - is required to meet God's perfect justice. However you want to phrase it (eternal imprisonment, in which a person is in eternal pain and anguish, or something else).

See previous links.

In those links, annihilation satisfied all the things you claimed needed to be satisfied.

What makes you think God requires something WORSE than death, worse than annihilation?

Actually, I think, among other things, of course, God does something more -- far more -- graceful and loving than annihilation. I mean I realize that's the argument (one of them, anyway) people like you use His attribute of love to support annihilation, but it's misused... like I have said, speaking from our perspective -- or rather putting it in terms we can readily understand -- life imprisonment is, really, much worse than the death penalty

So is it more loving or worse?

Yes.

Nonsense. I do not mean that you are nonsense, I mean is that this is a nonsense response. Your two responses contradicted and instead of thinking, 'hey wait a minute, there might be something flawed in this belief', you ignore the contradiction and claim that life imprisonment is both more loving, and also worse?

Who is it more loving for? Certainly not the people who are in the Kingdom. Why would we want others to suffer for all eternity? Certainly not for the people being imprisoned and who are suffering for all eternity, since, as you said, life imprisonment is much worse than the death penalty. So who is it more loving for?

THEREFORE, just because Adam was made in the image of God, doesn't mean that Adam had ALL the same attributes as God.

Yeah, I'm not sure how you got off on this rabbit trail (of sorts; surely not to say that it actually is a rabbit trail... ), but I have never said or insinuated anything remotely contradictory to what you say here. Adam and Eve (and thus we, as their progeny) are God's creation -- creatures, as opposed to the Creator.

Then why do you keep saying that because man was made in the image of God, man cannot be destroyed (annihilated) and must exist forever?

First of all, we disagree also regarding what being destroyed actually means. You know that, but you slipped it in there anyway. To be destroyed can mean something very different than being annihilated or wiped from existence, and you cannot deny that with any credibility. I say -- and Scripture (and any good dictionary) testifies to this, as I've demonstrated thoroughly (yes, I know you disagree) -- that to be destroyed means to be utterly ruined, and thus not wiped from existence, and the forever existence necessary follows from that without fail.

Please note that in all of that you did not answer the question I asked. I bolded it (and underlined the pertinent part).

Okay, fair enough. So, among many other things...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

such as the facts that:

• we have all the same emotions, like anger, joy, happiness, and even jealousy, as God (but, unlike God, we experience them in less-than-holy ways)

• we are relational beings, as the triune Jehovah is relational among His three Persons (but unlike God's relationships, ours are flawed and sinful to some degree, at least for now)

• we want to glorify ourselves as God does (although our desires for our own glory are selfish and sinful, unlike His)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...we are all eternal. existing into eternity future (not eternity past of course, as God is; we are created) beings. This is one... well, four ... aspect(s) of being created in God's image. There are many, many more. God is infinite, after all.

[/quote][/quote]

But you agreed above that just because Adam was made in the image of God does not mean that Adam had all the same attributes of God. Right? Therefore, just because God is eternal, does not mean that we are eternal.

So what makes you claim we are all eternal?

Hades gives up the dead in it BECAUSE the dead in it have been resurrected. Some are resurrected to life, some are resurrected to judgment and the second death. Yes, the judgment does occur after the (second) resurrection (which is why the sea, death and hades are giving up the dead in them - those dead are being resurrected, to stand before the throne, some being resurrected to life and some being resurrected to judgment and the second death).

Good...

If you are agreeing with that, then you have no objection to the statement that Rich man and Lazarus can not be an example of eternal torment, because Hades (where the Rich Man is) gives up the dead in it (at the resurrection).

Did you not say above that Christ has to return first (before) the resurrection? In which case it would have occurred between verses 31 and 32. But now you are saying the resurrection occurs first (before) Christ returns?

I don't believe these to be absolutely sequential events, but simultaneous, really, more or less. Generally speaking, Christ's return and the resurrection, even if they are not strictly simultaneous or strictly sequential, are both part of the same overarching event. And then, in very short order, all are gathered before ~ in front of ~ Christ, which is to say, as in Matthew 25:31-32, "(before Christ) sit(ing) on His glorious throne... (b)efore Him gathered all the nations... (having been by Christ) separate(d) one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats," and as in Revelation 20:11-12, "(before the) great white throne and Him seated on it, and the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and the books opened."

I think we are misunderstanding one another on this point, or at least on what we see as the immediate setting of this passage.

Yes, I think so. Or at least you're not completely understanding me, which I am willing to take even the bulk of the blame for. Hopefully, what I said immediately above makes things a bit more clear.

Yes, your explanation above is what I originally thought you believed, but it threw me when you inserted an order (that clearly did not mesh with the parable of the sheep and the goats). You're still mixing two different events into one ; )... but there is not much more to add on that subject at the moment.

The thousand years begins when Christ returns, gathers His own up to Him (meeting Him in the sky, along with the dead in Christ who were resurrected). Paul makes it clear that this has not happened yet.

Nope. Paul makes it clear (in 1 Thessalonians 4) that the second resurrection has not happened yet, his purpose being to calm the Thessalonians fear that if they are still alive when Christ returns they will be excluded.

Sounds to me like he is reassuring the people about those who had died.

Brothers and sisters, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who sleep in death, so that you do not grieve like the rest of mankind, who have no hope. 14 For we believe that Jesus died and rose again, and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. 15 According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep.

But he also makes clear in Ephesians 2:4-7 ~ as does Peter in 1 Peter 1:3 ~ that the first resurrection has happened for those who are in Christ.

Paul and Peter are not talking about a resurrection. Indeed, Peter mentions the resurrection of Christ in that passage but does not mention resurrection when it comes to those who are in Christ (he mentions a new birth). Why not use the same word (resurrection) if that is what he meant? In fact, no one states that they have already been resurrected. Not one instance is that wording used by anyone, who, according to you, had received the first resurrection. Should that not give you some pause?

So does John, who also makes clear ~ all in Revelation 20:4-6 ~ that this first resurrection will continue to happen on an individual basis throughout this age, these last days (before Christ returns).

What specifically in Revelation 20:4-6, states or even indicates that the first resurrection happens on an individual basis throughout the 'thousand years'?

I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about [Jesus] and because of the word of God. They[a] had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.

Mainstream, orthodox Christianity teaches a great many falsehoods and has shed a great deal of innocent blood.

Unfortunately true ~ albeit not 'many,' but some, but by the Holy Spirit being corrected ~ but this is not one of them.

I have no problem being far, far outside of that.

Well that's a problem, in my opinion. God certainly does not tell us individually to go rogue.

He does tell us to stop touching the unclean thing though.

We are also called to "Come out of her, my people!" Why? So that we do not share in her sins.

We are also told that many will say "Lord Lord" whom Christ never knew.

We're supposed to follow and listen to Christ, and remain in Him. That is not going rogue.

I am not part of that - I am part of Christ.

Sure. That's very othodox (conforming to what is generally or traditionally accepted as right/true) of you.

Just a quick explanation, I hope you do not mind?

I do not conform to what is generally or traditionally accepted as right/true. I listen to Christ and believe what HE says is right/true. There's a big difference between the two (tradition and truth). Christ never told anyone to conform to what is generally or traditionally accepted as right/true. Take a look at some of the things "Christendom" has done and taught, the blood spilled, the inquisitions, the persecutions, the judging and condemning, etc, as well as false teachings. Those things were generally or traditionally accepted as right/true at the time... but they were never right/true, and some/many of those things were in direct conflict with what Christ taught (word and deed). Even though they were generally or traditionally accepted as right/true.

Mark 7:13 (Christ speaking on traditions of men)

Grace and peace to you, Tammy.

Thank you Pinseeker, peace also to you.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to Pinseeker in post #77]

like I have said, speaking from our perspective -- or rather putting it in terms we can readily understand -- life imprisonment is, really, much worse than the death penalty.

No Pinseeker, God is the One who has chosen which penalty to impose, not you or anyone else.

That penalty has been paid on our behalf by Jesus the Anointed One, and it was certainly not life imprisonment.

The ransom he paid was death, and that death was for three days and three nights, just as he had, beforehand, said it would be.

That is what we have to deal with as written and as intended. That is what is what it is.

We fail to begin to deal with death and hell, when we arbitrarily make significant changes we then call "putting it in terms we can readily understand".

The Lord bless and keep you.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to Wootah in post #1]

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.
vl43 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?

You have asked two questions.

My answer is to answer two other questions I now pose:

In what time frame are these events put into?

At what place do these events occur?

Jesus tells us the time. It is what he here calls the time of harvest at the end of the age, which is clearly the day of Judgment. Acts 17:31. This he pinpoints elsewhere as being"on the last day". John 12:48.

The place is before the Judgment seat in the kingdom of God court. It is thus a court scene See Romans 2:2-16.

Evidence will be considered and aired, and a penal decision announced.

That is how and when those who are rejected come to the realisation they have missed out and will not enter or inherit the kingdom. Even worse, they will also hear who are accepted and welcomed, and so do enter and inherit the kingdom.

Therefore their weeping and gnashing of teeth response is before they receive their death penalty.

At that point they are still very much alive!

The traditional doctrine assumes and teaches that the weeping and gnashing of teeth continues for eternity, doesn't it?

In fact Jesus never says that, but instead specifically states why this will happen, and when.

He also states what God will do to those rejected, beforethey are thrown into Gehenna. It is quite specific and quite clear.