If hell is eternal, then so is evil

[makesends]

makesends said:
I hold to neither [eternal conscious torment] nor annihilationism, though I tend to think of both when I read the way Scripture is written. … I know what the direct or plain Bible references to this generally sound like to me—and they are on both sides, to me—and I know what reason says, taking from other references relative to the subject.

It would be a serious claim to say that God is talking out both sides of his mouth regarding the state of the wicked after judgment—in other words, that Scripture itself teaches contradictory positions. I am therefore inclined to think the problem here, for you, is not one of scriptural clarity but of interpretation. And interpretive issues are not resolved by retreating into agnostic indeterminacy, but by further exegesis.

God 'talking out of both sides of his mouth' is not the characterization I think I have made of what I read. That it is prudent to by exegesis prefer one notion to another, or even to be convinced of one to the denying of the other, is not what I argue against here. I have no problem at all with you believing in Annihilationism. I do have a problem with those believing in it for sentiment's sake or liberal unbiblical reasons. And the same goes for those believing in ECT.

We need not suspend judgment at the point where Scripture and doctrine require adjudication. What appears in your reply is not simple humility but a recurring epistemic posture: indecision cloaked in pious reserve, a kind of agnostic retreat that refuses to let revealed categories do their work. You also continue to exhibit impatience with creaturely existence and temporal language, as though such categories were too low or crude to bear theological truth. But such a posture is difficult to square with revelation itself. God has not despised such things. The eternal Son entered the temporal order in the incarnation according to his human nature, and God has been pleased to accommodate his revelation to creaturely, temporal forms of speech.

There you say it yourself. "God has been pleased to accommodate his revelation to creaturely, temporal forms of speech". There, within the term, "accommodate", is implied a higher reality than the merely temporal and anthropomorphic. I am sorry, but if you recall me claiming in the past, several times, actually, the amazement at the word of God to use terminology that we commonly use, to convey absolute truth, you should see that I don't deny it. I only deny our ability to sound the depths of it. A certain reservation concerning our ability to understand things that extend rather obviously beyond our knowledge is indeed prudent, then. We can use the word, "death", and, "sin", but we don't know as much as apparently we think we do, to make firm conclusions as to some of the facts we profess. As I have often said, I think when we get to Heaven we will all be shown for fools, for the concepts we held as absolute by way of understanding/comprehension.

Our amazement at the wisdom of God will wash over all our notions, when we see him as he is, and understand what he has done, but that is no reason not to continue [here on earth] to pursue the truth, by way of study, exegesis, prayer and obedience.

I have not suspended judgement. I am still learning and studying. Before these last couple of threads treating with the matter I had not given Annihilationism serious consideration. I have already shown my biggest problems with it, and if I had to choose one over the other, (as though ECT was the only alternative), it would be pretty close to 50-50 at this point. But no, I don't have to decide. I continue to learn, to study, to think and wonder.

Yes, I agree God has not despised such things. But he has rebuked some for speaking beyond what they know. The simple-hearted are not rebuked for quieting their heart, like a weened child with his mother, in the face of things that are too wonderful for them.

But, as I said, I don't have a problem with you believing, and even being convinced in your mind, what you believe. And I will easily (and somewhat ashamedly) admit that I don't engage in extensive exegesis about things that I don't have as much interest in as you do. No doubts there, and kudos to you. I don't have your drive.

On matters God has addressed, the task is not to curate possibilities and imaginings but to confess what has been made known. We need not suspend judgment between named positions and fill that gap with private intuition and appeals to mystery. Rather, we must return to the text, weigh the relevant passages in their canonical and theological context, and labor toward a determinate judgment by disciplined exegesis.

It's quite a bit more than private intuition. That I admit to some degree of dot-connecting that goes beyond strong exegesis to arrive at a synthesis of what I read and study does not render it false, but only one more POV, and suspect. I see the same degree of dot-connecting in Annihilation, and mainly two big logical leaps, that apparently you deny are logical leaps. I don't say you are wrong. You may well be right. But I'm not convinced.

makesends said:
My best recourse is to step a little to the side and admit to what we DO know, that God is altogether powerful and just, and intended that there be sin that would be completely vanquished, and death put to death.

I submit that we know a good deal more than that, not because we are especially clever but because God has revealed it. He has spoken beyond first principles, revealing more than his power and justice in the abstract.

Of course. I did not mean to say nor to imply that we don't know more than what I listed! We even have trustworthy insight, the longer and closer we know him. BUT, God is not like us. Line up your systematic theology! I do the same. But I'm skeptical of myself for the same reasons as I am skeptical of others, and, I think, for good reason.

I really don't think that I disagree with you to the extent you think I do, concerning the validity of scriptural expressions that sound temporal and even anthropomorphic. My problem comes with my trust in the dot-connecting. Well, that, and human solid trust in human reasoning that lacks the full facts. Eg, that we die is not disputed, but, that word, "die", opens up facts-to-become-concepts that we don't yet have in hand. Same with sin and eternity and love and so many other things.

 

[atpollard]

Is Sodom still burning from the eternal fire? Of course not. You have to open your eyes and see....

Sodom (the city on Earth), no. However, Sodom (the residents of that city upon whom the fire fell) may still be burning. Jesus has not returned and "death and the grave" have not yet been thrown into the Lake of Fire (among the last things), so the imagery of Luke 16:23-24 [NASB] "And in Hades he raised his eyes, being in torment, and saw Abraham far away and Lazarus in his arms. And he cried out and said, 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus, so that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool off my tongue, for I am in agony in this flame.'" may yet be the reality for the people of Sodom awaiting final judgement and the Lake.

This is true whether "eternity" holds ECT or Annihilation (because we are not yet at the End).

 

[John Bauer]

Sodom (the city on Earth), no. However, Sodom (the residents of that city upon whom the fire fell) may still be burning.

Where? Not anywhere on Earth.

Since Jude said that Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighboring towns "are now displayed" as an example by suffering the punishment of eternal fire, it cannot mean immaterial souls languishing in some spiritual realm of fiery torment—because no one can see that. It must mean the towns themselves—or rather what's left of them (e.g., charred rubble).

 

[Hobie]

Sodom (the city on Earth), no. However, Sodom (the residents of that city upon whom the fire fell) may still be burning. Jesus has not returned and "death and the grave" have not yet been thrown into the Lake of Fire (among the last things), so the imagery of Luke 16:23-24 [NASB] "And in Hades he raised his eyes, being in torment, and saw Abraham far away and Lazarus in his arms. And he cried out and said, 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus, so that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool off my tongue, for I am in agony in this flame.'" may yet be the reality for the people of Sodom awaiting final judgement and the Lake.

This is true whether "eternity" holds ECT or Annihilation (because we are not yet at the End).

No one has gone to hell, they have to be judged first. We see it clearly before anyone can be cast into the Lake of Fire.
This is the place for the wicked of perdition, but it hasnt happened yet, but the Wicked will be judged and find their end at the Lake of Fire along with the instigators of the deception.

2 Corinthians 5:10
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Revelation 19:20
And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

Revelation 20:15
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Christ gives us some clues of what would be this lake of fire, which is what the bible calls, 'Hell' for sinners and those not in the book of Life.

Matthew 7:13 King James Version (KJV)
"13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:"

Matthew 10:28 King James Version (KJV)
"28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."

Matthew 13:40-42 King James Version (KJV)
"40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth."

Matthew 25:41 King James Version (KJV)
"41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:"

There is a reward of the wicked, the punishment, that will eternally destroy them and all evil. But all will be judged, as God is just and will be vindicated in His judgements.

 

[JesusFan]

I see a fault in the logic along these lines: To my thinking, sin is an infinite crime against God, because God is infinite. I'll not say that he cannot [in some sense temporally] end it, but to my mind it doesn't make sense to suppose that his infinite retribution runs out of fuel.

BTW, in this issue, I can argue both sides, and even, to some degree, agree to both sides.

The reason why only the death of Jesus can cover for all of my sins would be that the wrath of God abides forever upon those who are lost sinners, and due to Jesus being very God, his atonement covers eternal worth and judgement in full

 

[JesusFan]

We dont have to argue, just read what scripture says and ask the Holy Spirit for guidance. The wicked will be separated from God in this 'eternal fire' which will consume till there is no stubble, this is their punishment. We are not going to heaven and watch friends and family burn, for eternity, no that is not a paradise for any true believer.

Did you get this theology from Ellen White though?

 

[JesusFan]

I think our notions of eternal dying vs death of death (and my notion of both/neither by way of intensity, too, for that matter) will all look foolish when we see the facts after our resurrection.

I think that some who hold out for the lost being burnt away are basing that view upon them viewing God would be Tyrant if He was allowing them to get tortured forever, but i do not see as getting roasted alive in an oven, but being aware of living in ternal darkness and in their own 'hell" apart from god forever

 

[JesusFan]

Someone at least ACKNOWLEDGES that other verses EXIST!

Jesus made it very clear that its a terrible thing to fall into the hands of an angry God, and that was not due to them just being burnt away and cease to exist

 

[atpollard]

Where? Not anywhere on Earth.

Where was the "rich man" in the story recorded in Luke? ... There.

 

[atpollard]

Since Jude said that Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighboring towns "are now displayed" as an example by suffering the punishment of eternal fire, it cannot mean immaterial souls languishing in some spiritual realm of fiery torment—because no one can see that. It must mean the towns themselves—or rather what's left of them (e.g., charred rubble).

Are you advocating that for the men of Sodom, the events of Revelation 19 & 20 are already past tense? They have been completely destroyed?

 

[makesends]

We dont have to argue, just read what scripture says and ask the Holy Spirit for guidance. The wicked will be separated from God in this 'eternal fire' which will consume till there is no stubble, this is their punishment. We are not going to heaven and watch friends and family burn, for eternity, no that is not a paradise for any true believer.

Those aren't the only two possibilities [from a human perspective]. (I say, "from a human perspective" because in the end, only what happens was "possible", and that is what God determined to happen.)

I resent the implication that I haven't been reading what Scripture says and asking the Holy Spirit for guidance. Your tape measure will be stretched out to measure you, just like mine will do me for saying so.

 

[makesends]

No one has gone to hell, they have to be judged first. We see it clearly before anyone can be cast into the Lake of Fire.
This is the place for the wicked of perdition, but it hasnt happened yet, but the Wicked will be judged and find their end at the Lake of Fire along with the instigators of the deception.

Your reply is typical of a temporal mindset. As @John Bauer has pointed out so well, I have a certain disrespect—even disdain—for the temporal mindset. It is one thing to talk of things that are temporally described in the Scriptures. But to take those temporal things—i.e. the life and death we see from here, and the passage of time from the beginning to the coming of our Lord, when we will be raised from the dead—some to payment for their enmity and rebellion, some to life everlasting—doesn't mean it hasn't happened "yet". When it happens hasn't been seen by us in this life. That's all. For example, "Today you will be with me in Paradise" hints at the bogus thinking of 'soul sleep', as though passage of time is all there is.

That I am incapable of understanding outside the temporal mindset and incompetent at describing what little I do reason, does not render the human temporal POV valid, when it extrapolates what is in Scripture temporally described into temporal implications. As John indicated, if those temporal implications are temporally described (ECT and Annihilation are both temporally described in Scripture)—well enough—but what implications are not, but only at best sequentially described, doesn't mean that in God's having spoken them into fact, they haven't happened yet. When we are raised incorruptible, I rather imagine that we will see all time as actual, but inconsequential, but for the facts within it.

So, reasoning that the judgement hasn't happened yet, and all the other things sequenced about it, doesn't lend itself well to your vehemence and scorn and condemnation of someone else's perspective that is also drawn from Scripture. What is the "deception" you refer to here? And who are these "instigators of the deception"? I hope you don't mean to continue condemnatory language against those who differ with you on the reading of the language of Scripture.

 

[makesends]

Jesus made it very clear that its a terrible thing to fall into the hands of an angry God, and that was not due to them just being burnt away and cease to exist

Where did Jesus make that very clear? What are you referring to?

But Annihilationism doesn't claim that it is not a terrible thing. I, too, have a problem with the notion of a temporal passage of intensity of torment, that is in the end over and done with, and I have a problem with it for several reasons. But that argument (that it is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of an angry God) isn't one of them.