Scripturess support the teaching of an eternal hell

Why would you start a new thread rather than simply interacting in the other one? I thought the discussion was civil.

Universalism" as currently conceived seems to be the view that everyone will automatically end up in heaven ---- no relation to their life or manner of living. The Universalist-Unitarian Church is probably the most liberal church in Christendom. It is filled with atheists and other humanists. Although I believe in the POSSIBILITY of the reconciliation of all things to God as stated in the New Testament, I try to avoid the appellation "universalist". Those who will be in Gehenna, the Lake of Fire, will have to repent and submit to the authority of Christ in order to be acceptable to God ---- just like the rest of us. Some Scriptures Concerning the Reconciliation of All Things to God:

Colossians 1:19,20 For in him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.

Ephesians 1:9,10 For he has made known to us in all wisdom and insight the secret of his will, according to his purpose which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fulness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.

Romans 5:18 Then as one man’s trespass [Adam’s] led to condemnation for all people, so one man’s act of righteousness [Christ’s] leads to acquittal and life for all people.

Philippians 2:9-11 Therefore God has highly exalted him [Christ] and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

I Timothy 4:10 For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.

Revelation 5:12-13 And I heard every created being in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all therein, saying, "To him who sits upon the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might into the ages of ages.

Romans 11:32 For God has consigned all people to disobedience, that he may have mercy upon all.

Philippians 3:20,21 But our commonwealth is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power which enables him even to subject all things to himself.

1 Corinthians 15:22-28 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. "For God has put all things in subjection under his feet." But when it says, "All things are put in subjection under him," it is plain that he is excepted who put all things under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one.

TMK....Why would you start a new thread rather than simply interacting in the other one?

Can't say why here, I have not followed that thread. Most forums I follow, folks do it so they can be heard louder, if they think they are not getting the response/attention they want. Again can't say why here, I have not followed it, I tend to stay away from the long drawn out ones, as they start out great, but start heading south after 50 or so replies. It's hard to have folks that can disagree with each other posts for very long, until it starts to get ugly. :)

I have to say that I put very little stock in the Historic church. What the Historic church taught me was: tithe to a pastor, raptured out of any persecution, the pastor rules, follow what you are told, don't rock the boat, say a little prayer when you are 8 and you will go to heaven, everything revolves around a building, be a good church member, baptism in the holy spirit and gifts are evil, demons are not real or are of no threat, if you don't tithe you are cursed with a curse.....and so on....

I am currently studying this for myself, which I will read opinions on both sides and spend much time letting the Holy Spirit teach me all things.

Noone wrote:

"I am currently studying this for myself, which I will read opinions on both sides and spend much time letting the Holy Spirit teach me all things"

That is awesome. I would think everyone would want to do that. I for one am overjoyed that the Bible might not actually support that hell is a place of conscious torment forever and ever. What I don't understand are those who seem to hope that it does!

In the first few hundred years of the new church the idea of universal reconciliation of all things was a prevailing if not a majority view. It was not until after Augustine that the idea of hell as a place of eternal torment gained ground. Quite frankly I don't trust the motives of the medieval Catholic Church.

just-in.....I cannot say I have ever met a born-again child of God who hopes the condemned suffer eternal torment.

by MrBillPro on 2014/3/3 11:08:48

just-in.....I cannot say I have ever met a born-again child of God who hopes the condemned suffer eternal torment.

i can say the same, know of none that are truly saved and hope for the condemned to suffer.
----
Blaine posted;The scriptures tell us now is the day of salvation. Now is the time of God's favor. Let us not fall into this lie into thinking that hell is not an eternal place of torment. Let us be about the task of evangelizing they lost so that they will not go into an eternity without Jesus Christ. And suffer eternal torment and the flames of an everlasting hell.---

i agree with this as well. hold firm to the truth the Bible tells us clearly those who reject God will suffer eternity apart from Him. for all those who reject Jesus and go on to suffer in hell they do so at their own hand and choosing.God has given the Way but men reject His way for their own and it leads them to destruction.

rdg

Bear---

I hate to have to accuse you of being purposefully obtuse but I guess I am going to have to.

You continue to state that the position of universal reconciliation is that God is only love and would never pour out his wrath on anybody.

I have repeatedly written that this is not the case so you are either not reading what I have written or you simply refuse to acknowledge it and simply keep on repeating your plain misrepresentation on what proponents of that view actually hold.

It is not possible to discuss this when you use this tactic. But perhaps that is your goal... To staunch all discussion of the issue. That is fine but I thought this was a discussion forum.

I would encourage you to visit a site like tentmaker.org which will fully explain what UR actually means. You will find very well reasoned scriptural answers for any question you might have. Of course you do not have to accept their explanations. Why not study it for yourself? What are you afraid of?

I have also repeatedly stated that I am not convinced of the truth of UR. But one thing I cannot stand is to see a view purposefully maligned and misrepresented. To summarize (once again):
1) UR states there is a hell of torment
2) unbelievers will go there and be tormented
3) hell's purpose is remedial
4). Post mortem repentance is possible and inevitable
5). God reconciles all things to himself
6) God wins, satan loses

I have not even considered the UR position, but thanks TMK for your definition of it. I will check that website out in my studies.

This 3 part series is very interesting as well concerning
Annihilationism and raises some valid points imo.

http://www.heavensfamily.org/ss/e_teachings/the-hell-debate-annihilationism

From Wikipedia:

"Straw Man
-----------
The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:
1.Person 1 has position X.
2.Person 2 disregards certain key points of X and instead presents the superficially similar position Y. The position Y is a distorted version of X and can be set up in several ways, including:
1.Presenting a misrepresentation of the opponent's position.
2.Quoting an opponent's words out of context””i.e., choosing quotations that misrepresent the opponent's actual intentions (see fallacy of quoting out of context).
3.Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, then denying that person's arguments””thus giving the appearance that every upholder of that position (and thus the position itself) has been defeated.
4.Inventing a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs which are then criticized, implying that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.
5.Oversimplifying an opponent's argument, then attacking this oversimplified version.

3.Person 2 attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This reasoning is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position does not address the actual position."
_______________

We ought not to use Straw Men when we are discussing on these forums.

Noone wrote:

"This 3 part series is very interesting as well concerning
Annihilationism and raises some valid points imo.
"

I actually lean more toward Conditional Immortality (annihilationism) than UR because I believe it has slightly more scriptural support.

Greg Boyd has written an excellent article on this topic with all the scriptural support- it can be found here:

http://reknew.org/2008/01/the-case-for-annihilationism/

I have also repeatedly stated that I am not convinced of the truth of UR. But one thing I cannot stand is to see a view purposefully maligned and misrepresented. To summarize (once again):
1) UR states there is a hell of torment
2) unbelievers will go there and be tormented
3) hell's purpose is remedial
4). Post mortem repentance is possible and inevitable
5). God reconciles all things to himself
6) God wins, satan loses

I believe that the greatest difficulty in this discussion is that those of us who study the Bible are aware of the fact that points 3-4 are a figment of someone's imagination and are simply not found in the Bible.

Any of us could dream up what appears to us to be a good and fair way for God to handle the eternal destiny of wicked people, but regardless of how good our plan sounds to human ears, we CANNOT have faith in such a plan if it cannot be validated in scripture.

We realize that the UR position includes suffering and torment ... but it is obviously the same pipe dream that some pope came up with when purgatory was invented. It is just not found in the Bible!

I actually lean more toward Conditional Immortality (annihilationism) than UR because I believe it has slightly more scriptural support.

Greg Boyd has written an excellent article on this topic with all the scriptural support- it can be found here:

http://reknew.org/2008/01/the-case-for-annihilationism/

TMK, if you are willing to base your beliefs about eternity on the works of such a misguided and uninformed "scholar" as Greg Boyd, you are to be pitied! Look at his flimsy argument against the plain reality of Rev. 14:11:

Responding to Objections
1) Tormented Day and Night. The most difficult passages for annihilationists to explain are Revelation 14:10-11 and 20:10. These passages speak of the wicked being tormented "day and night forever and ever.” However, these passages are not as decisive against the annihilationist’s view as they might initially seem. The phrase "forever and ever” can be translated "for ages upon ages” which implies an indefinite, but not necessarily unending, period of time. Even more fundamentally, it’s important to keep in mind that Revelation is a highly symbolic book. Its apocalyptic images shouldn’t be interpreted literally. This is particularly true of the phrase "forever and ever” since similar phrases are used elsewhere in Scripture in contexts where they clearly cannot literally mean "unending” (e.g. Gen 49:26; Ex 40:15; Nu 25:13; Ps 24:7).

First of all, he rejects its literal truth simply because it is in the book of Revelation "apocalyptic", while on other issues he accepts the LITERAL interpretation of passages in that apocalyptic book. He is simply picking and choosing what "shouldn't be interpreted literally"!

Than, he uses comparison examples from the ENGLISH word "forever and ever" (out of the Old Testament) to substantiate his argument (that forever does not mean forever). Anybody who knows very much about the Bible knows that the New Testament is written in Greek. The Greek word used there is:

G165
αἰών
aiōn
Thayer Definition:
1) for ever, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity
2) the worlds, universe
3) period of time, age
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from the same as G104
Citing in TDNT: 1:197, 31

He should have taken his comparison from the 129 cases (listed below) in the New Testament where that GREEK WORD was used if he wanted to retain ANY credibility with people who really study the Bible.

G165
αἰών
aiōn
Total KJV Occurrences: 129
ever, 72
Mat_6:13, Mat_21:19, Mar_11:14, Luk_1:33, Luk_1:55, Joh_6:51, Joh_6:58, Joh_8:35 (2), Joh_12:34, Joh_14:16, Rom_1:25, Rom_9:5, Rom_11:36, Rom_16:27, 2Co_9:9, Gal_1:5 (2), Phi_4:20 (2), 1Ti_1:17 (2), 2Ti_4:18 (2), Heb_1:8 (2), Heb_5:6, Heb_6:20, Heb_7:17, Heb_7:21, Heb_7:24, Heb_13:8, Heb_13:21 (2), 1Pe_1:23, 1Pe_1:25, 1Pe_5:11 (4), 2Pe_3:17-18 (2), 1Jo_2:17, 2Jo_1:2, Jud_1:13, Jud_1:25, Rev_1:6 (2), Rev_4:9-10 (4), Rev_5:13-14 (4), Rev_7:12 (2), Rev_10:6 (2), Rev_11:15 (2), Rev_14:11 (2), Rev_15:7 (2), Rev_19:3 (2), Rev_20:10 (2), Rev_22:5 (2)
world, 37
Mat_12:32, Mat_13:22, Mat_13:39-40 (2), Mat_13:49, Mat_24:3, Mat_28:20, Mar_4:19, Mar_10:30, Luk_1:70, Luk_16:8, Luk_18:30, Luk_20:34-35 (2), Joh_9:32, Act_3:21, Act_15:18, Rom_12:2, 1Co_1:20, 1Co_2:6-8 (4), 1Co_3:18, 1Co_8:13, 1Co_10:11, 2Co_4:4, Gal_1:4, Eph_1:21, Eph_3:9, Eph_3:21, Eph_6:12, 1Ti_6:17, 2Ti_4:10, Tit_2:12, Heb_6:5, Heb_9:26
never, 8
Mar_3:29, Joh_4:14, Joh_6:35, Joh_8:51-52 (2), Joh_10:28, Joh_11:26, Joh_13:8
evermore, 3
2Co_11:31, Heb_7:28, Rev_1:18
ages, 2
Eph_2:7, Col_1:26
end, 2
Eph_3:21 (2)
eternal, 2
Eph_3:11, 1Ti_1:17
worlds, 2
Heb_11:2-3 (2)
course, 1
Eph_2:2

lorddoitagain-

thanks for your posts. i would much rather see a reasoned argument than simply a reiteration of what has already been said and misrepresenting the other side's position. You have given the reasons why eternal (Aion) can mean "forever and forever." A proponent of UR simply says that it doesn't HAVE to mean forever and ever, but it can.

As for Greg Boyd's article, I certainly don't get my theology from him; I rarely visit his website. The only book I have read of his is "Letters to a Skeptic." But his article (whether you agree with it or not) is a good summary of what Annihilationism actually is and gives all the scriptural support for same. By the way, in the article he himself says he is not convinced that this view is correct but rather that it is worthy of consideration.

That being said, I am not sure how helpful it is to call a brother that we happen to disagree with on some points "misguided" or "misinformed." You can disagree with him without resorting to such terminology.

An even better and more thorough exposition of the view of Conditional Immortality (Annihilationism) is Edward Fuddge's "The Final End of the Wicked" in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society (JETS):

http://www.edwardfudge.com/JETS_final_end_wicked.pdf

TMK...That being said, I am not sure how helpful it is to call a brother that we happen to disagree with on some points "misguided" or "misinformed." You can disagree with him without resorting to such terminology.

I would even take that to another level, I think we all at some point have been in the shoes of the "misguided" or "misinformed, unless you were born with the gift of all knowledge.