The fact that nobody has succeeded in completing my Everlasting Hell Challenge doesn't necessarily prove that it can't be done, but I'm not holding my breath that someone will be able to. In the meantime, however, we may as well take a look at the passages in Scripture that are used to back up the idea of Everlasting Torment (ET).
Let's start with the Old Testament as it must be chock-full of warnings about ET:
"At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people—everyone whose name is found written in the book—will be delivered. Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever." - Daniel 12:1-3
What's that? This is the only passage in the entire Old Testament that hints at the idea of ET? That can't be right. There were about 2,000 more years between Creation and the Incarnation than between the Incarnation and today, that's double the amount of time. If ET is true then it seems that God didn't bother to warn even His chosen people, much less the rest of the world, about it until many thousands of years after the fall. If we're to take the concept of ET seriously, it seems that God decided the only people worth saving are those who came after the Incarnation since He didn't even bother to tell anyone how to avoid this horrible fate in this passage beyond "being wise" and having your name written in some book. Still, nothing about "non-believers in Christ (apart from any works) in this passage so I'm going to have to write it off as a good defence of ET for non-believers until someone can demonstrate a good exegesis of this passage that does defend the idea of non-believers in Christ going to hell forever.
Well, that was it for the Old Testament, but surely the New Testament must be full of passages that tell us that non-believers in Christ (apart from any works) go to hell forever. After all, it's such an important part of our Protestant theology. Let's take a look:
"And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come." - Matthew 12:31-32
"I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin." - Mark 3:28-29
"And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven." - Luke 12:10
That's the first statement, repeated in the three Synoptic Gospels, that a traditionalist could use from the New Testament to try to back up their belief in ET. Taken at face value it seems to say that every sin will be forgiven except the "blasphemy of the Holy Spirit" (which is, literally, to say that a work of the Holy Spirit was actually done by the devil, something that very few people have ever done or will do). Matthew also seems to tell us that after the age to come ends this sin will be forgiven, so those few people who have committed this sin might just be in luck once the next age ends, presumably after the 1,000 year Millennial Reign concludes. Since that warning only applies to those who say that the work of the Holy Spirit was actually done by the devil most of us don't need to worry too much about it, so time to move on.
If your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell." - Matthew 18:8-9
"If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, where 'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.'" - Mark 9:43-48
This is the second statement that Jesus made that might be interpreted as a warning about ET. However, if someone can interpret "non-believer in Christ (apart from any works)" out of not mutilating one's body they're a better exegete (or should I say eisegete?) than I am. This passage seems to tell us that those who go to hell are those who let parts of their body cause them to sin without amputating those parts, but it sure doesn't seem to tell us that non-believers go to hell forever. So I guess we'll have to move on to the many more warnings Jesus gave about ET:
"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 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. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. "Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.' "Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?' "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.' "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' "They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' "He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.' "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."" - Matthew 25:31-46
I've read and re-read this passage and the only thing I can get out of it, at least if taken at face value, is that those who help the helpless go to heaven forever and those who don't get punished forever. Just like the passages about bodily mutilation, I just don't get how one reads "non-believer in Christ (apart from any works)" into "those who don't feed the hungry or look after the sick," particularly since I know of many believers who don't and many non-believers who do. In fact, this passage seems to imply that more non-Christians might go to heaven than Christians and more Christians might end up in hell than Atheists. But I'm sure some good theologian out there will fill me in on why I'm reading that wrong. In the meantime let's check out all the other warnings about ET that Jesus gave us:
Wait, that was Jesus' last warning about ET in the Gospels? But I thought He spoke more about everlasting punishment in hell than He did about heaven? That was only three warnings, and none of them mention non-believers in Christ (apart from any works) at all. In fact two thirds of them seem to imply that certain works must be done to avoid everlasting damnation. Okay, well, maybe we confused Jesus with the Apostle Paul, it must have been him who gave all those warnings. Let's check them out:
"He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people and to be marveled at among all those who have believed." - 2 Thessalonians 1:8-10
Finally, a passage that seems to tell us that non-believers will go to hell forever. What? The passage doesn't even mention hell? It says destruction? Well, surely I could be forgiven for reading into that word based on all the other passages that talk about non-believers going to hell forever, a little eisegesis never hurt anyone, right? Oh, that's right, none of the other passages so far actually mentioned non-believers in Christ, they all seemed to refer to those who didn't do certain works. It seems that if we want to take this passage literally we'll have to become believers in Annihilation rather than ET. But I'm sure Paul must have given us lots of other warnings that we can use to defend the position. He didn't? That can't be right. The great evangelist to the Gentiles never once spoke of everlasting torment in hell? Not even in his sermons to the Jews or the Pagans recorded in Acts? Well there must be something else in the Bible that we can use to defend the idea. Ah, here we go:
"A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: "If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on the forehead or on the hand, he, too, will drink of the wine of God's fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. He will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of his name."" - Revelation 14:9-11
That only tells us that those who worship a certain beast (could this be a metaphor for a particular person?) will be punished forever, not that non-believers in Christ (apart from any works) will be. Of course, one would also have to justify taking the effect (the punishment) literally when we're not taking the cause (the worshipping of a beast) literally. But since this doesn't speak of non-believers we'll have to move on.
When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God's people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever. - Revelation 20:7-10
Well, this passages seems to say that Satan, the beast and the false prophet (and maybe the nations who marched with them against the city God loves depending on how you read the passage) will apparently be thrown into the lake of fire and will be tormented forever, but still nothing about non-believers in Christ (apart from any works) so let's move on to the next passage:
This can't be right, I can't find any more. But that was only 10 passages (7 if you take the fact that three of them were repeats of passages in Matthew into consideration). That was the whole foundation upon which the concept of Everlasting Torment rests? But what about all the passages that are supposed to tell us that non-believers in Christ (apart from any works) will go to hell forever, where are they? Isn't this is one of the most important teachings of the evangelical church? Well, after comparing those passages to the multitude of passages backing up the idea of Universal Reconciliation (UR) that I've referred to previously on this blog I'm going to have to go with the idea that seems to actually be backed by Scripture. If anybody wants to try to defend their beloved doctrine of ET I'd be happy to listen, but until then I'm going to have to stick with UR.
Let's start with the Old Testament as it must be chock-full of warnings about ET:
"At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people—everyone whose name is found written in the book—will be delivered. Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever." - Daniel 12:1-3
What's that? This is the only passage in the entire Old Testament that hints at the idea of ET? That can't be right. There were about 2,000 more years between Creation and the Incarnation than between the Incarnation and today, that's double the amount of time. If ET is true then it seems that God didn't bother to warn even His chosen people, much less the rest of the world, about it until many thousands of years after the fall. If we're to take the concept of ET seriously, it seems that God decided the only people worth saving are those who came after the Incarnation since He didn't even bother to tell anyone how to avoid this horrible fate in this passage beyond "being wise" and having your name written in some book. Still, nothing about "non-believers in Christ (apart from any works) in this passage so I'm going to have to write it off as a good defence of ET for non-believers until someone can demonstrate a good exegesis of this passage that does defend the idea of non-believers in Christ going to hell forever.
Well, that was it for the Old Testament, but surely the New Testament must be full of passages that tell us that non-believers in Christ (apart from any works) go to hell forever. After all, it's such an important part of our Protestant theology. Let's take a look:
"And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come." - Matthew 12:31-32
"I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin." - Mark 3:28-29
"And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven." - Luke 12:10
That's the first statement, repeated in the three Synoptic Gospels, that a traditionalist could use from the New Testament to try to back up their belief in ET. Taken at face value it seems to say that every sin will be forgiven except the "blasphemy of the Holy Spirit" (which is, literally, to say that a work of the Holy Spirit was actually done by the devil, something that very few people have ever done or will do). Matthew also seems to tell us that after the age to come ends this sin will be forgiven, so those few people who have committed this sin might just be in luck once the next age ends, presumably after the 1,000 year Millennial Reign concludes. Since that warning only applies to those who say that the work of the Holy Spirit was actually done by the devil most of us don't need to worry too much about it, so time to move on.
If your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell." - Matthew 18:8-9
"If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, where 'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.'" - Mark 9:43-48
This is the second statement that Jesus made that might be interpreted as a warning about ET. However, if someone can interpret "non-believer in Christ (apart from any works)" out of not mutilating one's body they're a better exegete (or should I say eisegete?) than I am. This passage seems to tell us that those who go to hell are those who let parts of their body cause them to sin without amputating those parts, but it sure doesn't seem to tell us that non-believers go to hell forever. So I guess we'll have to move on to the many more warnings Jesus gave about ET:
"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 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. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. "Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.' "Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?' "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.' "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' "They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' "He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.' "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."" - Matthew 25:31-46
I've read and re-read this passage and the only thing I can get out of it, at least if taken at face value, is that those who help the helpless go to heaven forever and those who don't get punished forever. Just like the passages about bodily mutilation, I just don't get how one reads "non-believer in Christ (apart from any works)" into "those who don't feed the hungry or look after the sick," particularly since I know of many believers who don't and many non-believers who do. In fact, this passage seems to imply that more non-Christians might go to heaven than Christians and more Christians might end up in hell than Atheists. But I'm sure some good theologian out there will fill me in on why I'm reading that wrong. In the meantime let's check out all the other warnings about ET that Jesus gave us:
Wait, that was Jesus' last warning about ET in the Gospels? But I thought He spoke more about everlasting punishment in hell than He did about heaven? That was only three warnings, and none of them mention non-believers in Christ (apart from any works) at all. In fact two thirds of them seem to imply that certain works must be done to avoid everlasting damnation. Okay, well, maybe we confused Jesus with the Apostle Paul, it must have been him who gave all those warnings. Let's check them out:
"He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people and to be marveled at among all those who have believed." - 2 Thessalonians 1:8-10
Finally, a passage that seems to tell us that non-believers will go to hell forever. What? The passage doesn't even mention hell? It says destruction? Well, surely I could be forgiven for reading into that word based on all the other passages that talk about non-believers going to hell forever, a little eisegesis never hurt anyone, right? Oh, that's right, none of the other passages so far actually mentioned non-believers in Christ, they all seemed to refer to those who didn't do certain works. It seems that if we want to take this passage literally we'll have to become believers in Annihilation rather than ET. But I'm sure Paul must have given us lots of other warnings that we can use to defend the position. He didn't? That can't be right. The great evangelist to the Gentiles never once spoke of everlasting torment in hell? Not even in his sermons to the Jews or the Pagans recorded in Acts? Well there must be something else in the Bible that we can use to defend the idea. Ah, here we go:
"A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: "If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on the forehead or on the hand, he, too, will drink of the wine of God's fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. He will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of his name."" - Revelation 14:9-11
That only tells us that those who worship a certain beast (could this be a metaphor for a particular person?) will be punished forever, not that non-believers in Christ (apart from any works) will be. Of course, one would also have to justify taking the effect (the punishment) literally when we're not taking the cause (the worshipping of a beast) literally. But since this doesn't speak of non-believers we'll have to move on.
When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God's people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever. - Revelation 20:7-10
Well, this passages seems to say that Satan, the beast and the false prophet (and maybe the nations who marched with them against the city God loves depending on how you read the passage) will apparently be thrown into the lake of fire and will be tormented forever, but still nothing about non-believers in Christ (apart from any works) so let's move on to the next passage:
This can't be right, I can't find any more. But that was only 10 passages (7 if you take the fact that three of them were repeats of passages in Matthew into consideration). That was the whole foundation upon which the concept of Everlasting Torment rests? But what about all the passages that are supposed to tell us that non-believers in Christ (apart from any works) will go to hell forever, where are they? Isn't this is one of the most important teachings of the evangelical church? Well, after comparing those passages to the multitude of passages backing up the idea of Universal Reconciliation (UR) that I've referred to previously on this blog I'm going to have to go with the idea that seems to actually be backed by Scripture. If anybody wants to try to defend their beloved doctrine of ET I'd be happy to listen, but until then I'm going to have to stick with UR.
Posts
13 comments:
It's not that we failed to complete your challenge but rather just simply saw it for what it was, meaningless pandering.
You don't want to truly confront the issues and when, in the past, really pressed and/or shown your error you either disengage or avoid the questions. Your entire premise is beyond reason and frankly not worth my time.
So please, for the love of all that is Holy, please don't try to act like you've accomplished something. If nothing else you've just shown your arrogance and personal pride.
Not trying to be a jerk just keeping it real.
PJ
You don't want to truly confront the issues and when, in the past, really pressed and/or shown your error you either disengage or avoid the questions.
I find it funny that anyone could say that. Nobody has ever explained to me why the 10 passages used to defend ET should be interpreted that way. The only attempts I've ever seen to show me my errors have been to point me to one of those 10 passages (or to passages that don't even talk about the duration of judgement) without any exegesis whatsoever. Until somebody actually explains to us why we should interpret those passages as defending ET for non-believers in Christ (apart from any works), why should we just blindly assume that we should be when they seem to teach something different?
I didn't see you challenge (I just stumbled across your blog). But your point concerning exegesis to back up ET is well taken. One has to go to the Bible with an ET bias to even pull out the few verses that could be construed as supporting the doctrine. But, there are so many more that clearly say that God wishes that none should perish and what God wishes, God gets.
After years of being brainwashed by ET, I couldn't believe that the Bible didn't clearly spell this out. It wasn't until I learned about the original Greek and Hebrew that I learned translators (King James jumps to mind) deliberately mistranslated many of the verses people think support the doctrine of ET.
Peace,
Brian
One has to go to the Bible with an ET bias to even pull out the few verses that could be construed as supporting the doctrine. But, there are so many more that clearly say that God wishes that none should perish and what God wishes, God gets.
Exactly. When a traditionalist even bothers to respond to points like the ones I made in this blog entry you'll notice that it's never to give an exegesis of the 10 passages used to assert ET to demonstrate why we should interpret them the way they want us to but rather it's to make condescending remarks. Yet that's it, those 10 passages are the whole foundation of the concept of ET, and while nobody can defend them they still expect us to blindly accept that these passages teach ET for non-believers in Christ (apart from any works) even when they seem to teach something completely different. They haven't seemed to have caught on to the fact that in order to make a theological assertion you have to actually do a little bit of theology first.
When I started reading verses on Universal Redemption, it was fascinating how much support was available for it -- and it wasn't just wish fufillment. One of the stumbling blocks to UR was that there were verses dealing with Eternal Torment, and so the UR verses couldn't mean what they appeared to mean. And yet the ET supporters never seem to consider that maybe the ET verses don't mean what they appear to mean.
In one UR book I read, it was pointed out that in Revelations, the gates at New Jerusalem were never closed -- so what prevented those in the lake of fire from entering, other than the impurity? Wasn't it feasible that the lake of fire would burn away the impurity, allowing them to enter?
The Christian Heretic has made valid questions that deserve to be treated with the respect in which they were asked. I too have asked these same type questions only to be attacked and called names rather to recieve answers that make sense. Thankfully there are more and more people who are asking these questions and I don't see it stopping in the near future.
Good post Christian Heritic.
Christian Heretic:
"he didnt even bother to tell anyone how to avoid this horrible fate beyond "being wise" and having your name written in some book".
Crikey. A good vignette of the whole post: Much scripture, no grasp of the context & shameful bible handling.
Daniel: simply survey the book for the word or theme of wisdom. Wisdom is a huge bible theme (eg Psalm 14, 1 Cor 1-2). You'll see it's to humble yourself before God as king, and show it in a changed life. If that is not the same gospel call as Mark 1:15, "the kingdom of God is near, repent and believe this gospel (that God is coming to rule)", I dont know what is. The fate of the wise in contrast to those who spurn God in 10-12 is thus climaxed in the ultimate judgment of God's enemies (of which Belteshazzar's in Daniel 5 is just a shadow) and vindication of God's people
(of which Daniel's through the boo. is just a shadow)
Matthew 25: what OT passage is Jesus quoting/referencing? If you can't answer that you shouldn't be teaching. Once you've read Joel you'd understand Jesus is saying the new covenant people for whom God will take vengeance is not racial connection but connection to Jesus. His family are the new covenant people, and God will repay the nations according to how they've treated them. God's vengeance on his enemies in his vindication of his people are ratcheted up from temporal to eternal categories.
Revelation:
search Revelation and you'll see only 2 groups marked out from God's p.o.v.: those who belong to (marked by) the Lamb and those who belong to (marked by) the Beast. Those who worship God as priests bought by the lamb and those who refuse to do so and worship the devil & his beasts. It's not arbitrary at all, it's outrageous rebellion.
I'll leave it there. Sometimes people dont respond not because there's no answer, but because the questioner may not be genuinely keen for an answer. I'm not accusing you of that, I'm just saying if you want answers, show that you're willing to do some work first. From a world class biblical theologian & exegete, I recommend Don Carson's excellent series on Revelation at www.atthecastle.org.uk/audio/
If you're not so interested in the biblical handling as in the doctrine itself then I recommend you read John Stott on Hell. One thing's for certain, Jesus intended to scare & shock. The future of weeping and gnashing of teeth, cast away by King Jesus himself, "away from me you evildoer, I never knew you" must be far worse than any image.
Chris,
Except CH's point in the book of Daniel is that it is the only reference to eternal torment in the entire OT. If the concept of ET is that important, why isn't it mentioned from the very start of the OT? Why is it gone for about 2/3rds of the Bible itself?
**Once you've read Joel you'd understand Jesus is saying the new covenant people for whom God will take vengeance is not racial connection but connection to Jesus. ** I think we all do understand that. What CH is saying is that belief wasn't a factor in terms of who were the sheep and who were the goats. What matters is that if you do something good for a person, you are doing something good for Jesus. Nothing is seperated, and everything is interconnected. What God wants is for people to take care of the 'least fortunate.' Nowhere in this does Jesus say, "You believed in me as Lord and Savior and did all this, so you get eternal life."
**God will repay the nations according to how they've treated them. God's vengeance on his enemies in his vindication of his people are ratcheted up from temporal to eternal categories.** Except such behavior contradicts Matthew 5:38-48. Christians will become like their Father in heaven if they love their enemies, and thus be perfect as their Father is perfect, if they love everyone, not just those who are nice/kind to them.
**One thing's for certain, Jesus intended to scare & shock. ** Then people are driven to God by fear, and love cannot be generated by fear.
What Heather said.
Good response there, thanks for your input. :)
If you really want the Truth, look at your Bible again. There are at least 100 verses that teach that all mankind, and/or all creation will eventually be redeemed. Here's a few:
"I (God) will not contend forever, neither will I always be wroth..."
Isaiah 57:16
"He (God)retaineth not His anger forever, because He delighteth in mercy."
Micah 7:18
"The Lord will not cast off forever..." Lam. 3:31-33
"We trust in the living God Who is the Savior of ALL men, especially (not exclusively) those who believe." 1 Timothy 4:10
"...good and acceptable in the sight of God Who will have ALL men to be saved." 1 Timothy 2, 3,4
"As in Adam all die, in Christ shall all be made alive." 1 Cor.22
The OT was written in Hebrew, the NT was written in Greek. This is the original Bible, inspired by God.
Firstly, the traditional Hell is not a place of torment, but merely the grave. The Hebrews had "Sheol", the Greeks had "Hades", which mean to be hidden, covered up, or the place of the dead, or the grave. Never once in all the translations does it refer to a place of punishment, much less for ever and ever.
There isn't even a word that means "eternity" in the OT.
Think about it!!
The words "eternal", "everlasting", etc. were translated from the Greek "aion", "anios", "olam" which refer to an age. The Greek "Adios" means forever, and when Jesus refers to the lost, He could have used this word, but He didn't. He used "anios".
Gehenna was merely a garbage dump outside Jerusalem. The "unquenchable fire" didn't mean that it burned forever & ever, (there is no fire now, it went out years ago), it meant that it wasn't quenched until it did it's job of purification of garbage, bodies of executed criminals, etc. which were constantly consumed by worms & fire.
The parable of the rich man & Lazarus was just that, a parable. Jesus says at the beginning of His ministry, "He spoke to the multitudes in parables, and without a parable spoke He NOT unto them." Matt. 13-34
The "Lake of Fire" in the Revelations is symbolic fire, but fire (and sulfer) was used for purification, not torment. Even Christians have to pass through the "fire", and God is also described as a "consuming fire". This, as well as Revelation, is purely symbolic.
Yes, as one of the blogs says, "It is God's will that none should perish, but ALL should come to repentance." Do you really believe that God will fail? Do you?
Better to accept Christ now, of course, but those who do not will eventually repent, although even if God's tough love lasted a thousand years, I would rather miss that!
Go to "bibletruths.com" for more info on this.
Thanks for reading & God bless; Let's just learn to love God and our neighbor as ourselves as Jesus taught.
Whoops, I should mention my name is Doug, not Anonymous. This is my first time posting.
OOPS... Here we go again. The book of Daniel was not writen by Daniel. We know from the style of writing, and the fact that it was written in Greek, not Hebrew, proves that it came into being centuries after Daniel.
...I don't know, the more I look at your blogs, the more I see.
Today, Gehenna is a garden.
and God is also described as a "consuming fire".
And God's not in the business of killing or destroying people. Otherwise, he'd be no better than Satan himself (John 10:10).
Post a Comment