Kirk Cameron Rejects Eternal Conscious Torment, Embraces Conditional Immortality

[atpollard]

ECT or Annihilation does not appear critical to "orthodoxy" based on the ecumenical CREEDS.
[So, it is not a "heresy" issue.]

 

[JesusFan]

ECT or Annihilation does not appear critical to "orthodoxy" based on the ecumenical CREEDS.
[So, it is not a "heresy" issue.]

Heresy is perhaps too loose a term to be placed upon it as a doctrine, but it would and must be classified along with Universalism as twin doctines that are outside the pale of orthodox Christianity

 

[TMSO]

But they will still be alive during that time, as judgement for their sins and especially for rejecting Jesus as Messiah does not bring extinction

No, no it does not. They will face judgment. However, what their punishment will be is a mystery. How are the levels of punishment meted out, and what are the levels of punishment. Even Jesus said it would be worse for some than others. Then you have a specific woe and punishment for those who give in to the beast, and take his image. Why? The words used in Greek. They love the beast... with all their heart, soul, and mind. The conotation is that if they could continue to follow/worship the beast in their torment, they would still choose to do so.

 

[Josheb]

Lake of Fire is etrnal in duration,

Got scripture for that?

...the lost are aware of existing apart from the presense of God,

Got scripture for that?

and God sees that state as being preferred to just being snuffed out

Got scripture for that?



Answer me this question: Does death exist in the new creation? When you and I are raised incorruptible and immortal on the other side of the grave, will there be death in the new creation? It's a simple yes or no question. Please answer the question asked, and answer the question asked with a simple yes or no. Please also feel free to offer any succinct commentary you think germane, but not at the expense of never answering the question asked. I am not asking for Dr. X's teaching or Dr. Y's. I am asking you to think through what scripture, and scripture alone, teaches.

Revelation 20:14
Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.

Death suffers the second death in the lake of fire. According to Paul, the last enemy to be destroyed is death. Death is abolished, nullified, made void.... destroyed to the point existence ceases.



I, therefore, ask you: Does death exist in the new creation? Yes or no?

 

[Josheb]

It is denied by every creed and confession though

Do you believe creeds over scripture? Would that be the Arminian creeds or the Calvinist ones? Am I to read that comment to mean you are asking me to ally with creeds over scripture? Or are you making an appeal to authority? Surely you can see the problem inherent when anyone pits creeds against scripture. I am a big fan of the creeds and creedalism in general, but never at the expense of the authority of scripture.

The fact of scripture is that it uses the word "destroy" to mean the cessation of existence on multiple occasions. No matter what you post you must address that fact. Post #2 samples scripture's use of the word "destroy," and it shows where our English translations translate correctly and where they don't. There is not one single appeal to anything extra-biblical in that entire post. It's scripture and nothing but scripture. It's scripture as stated, unembellished by any additional interpretation of my doing. All I ask of anyone who disagrees with annihilation is that they look first and foremost on what scripture states. Scripture uses two basic words. One word means rot or decay, the other literally means destruction to the point existence ceases.

There was a time when Christians used to believe the world would end. This was largely due to the 17th century translations (the Douay-Rheims and the KJV), and the modern translations that favor that tradition (like the ASV). The problem is that is NOT what the Greek states. The Greek does not use the word "end," (Gk = telos) and the Greek does not use the word "world." (Gk = kosmos). What the Greek states is "consummation of the age." The Greek says "age" not world.... AND scripture never once states the world will end. The closest anyone will ever come to finding a verse that can be interpreted to say the world will end is 2 Peter 3:10. This single misinterpretation of one verse corrupted Christian eschatology for centuries. For centuries priests and pastors incorrectly taught the world was going to come to an end. But that is not what scripture actually states. It is not what scripture teaches. Even to this day we have a lot of KJVOists trying to defend the mistaken interpretation and a pile of Christians who think the God is literally going to literally destroy the literal world. And that belief in absolute destruction is very curious because those folks believe the world will be destroyed to the point of no longer existing but not sinners.​

The word "destroy" sometimes means destroy. In Greek the word for absolute destruction to the point of cessation of existence is apolesai. Look it up. Look it up and do not pit doctrine over scripture.

Matthew 10:28
And do not be afraid of those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy [apollosai] both soul and body in hell.

Scripture explicitly states both soul and body can and will be destroyed in hell to the point of no longer existing. That's not an added interpretation. That's not an extra-biblical doctrinal statement. That is the blunt fact of scripture. Look it up.


Adjust thinking, doctrine, and practice accordingly.

 

[JesusFan]

Do you believe creeds over scripture? Would that be the Arminian creeds or the Calvinist ones? Am I to read that comment to mean you are asking me to ally with creeds over scripture? Or are you making an appeal to authority? Surely you can see the problem inherent when anyone pits creeds against scripture. I am a big fan of the creeds and creedalism in general, but never at the expense of the authority of scripture.

The fact of scripture is that it uses the word "destroy" to mean the cessation of existence on multiple occasions. No matter what you post you must address that fact. Post #2 samples scripture's use of the word "destroy," and it shows where our English translations translate correctly and where they don't. There is not one single appeal to anything extra-biblical in that entire post. It's scripture and nothing but scripture. It's scripture as stated, unembellished by any additional interpretation of my doing. All I ask of anyone who disagrees with annihilation is that they look first and foremost on what scripture states. Scripture uses two basic words. One word means rot or decay, the other literally means destruction to the point existence ceases.

There was a time when Christians used to believe the world would end. This was largely due to the 17th century translations (the Douay-Rheims and the KJV), and the modern translations that favor that tradition (like the ASV). The problem is that is NOT what the Greek states. The Greek does not use the word "end," (Gk = telos) and the Greek does not use the word "world." (Gk = kosmos). What the Greek states is "consummation of the age." The Greek says "age" not world.... AND scripture never once states the world will end. The closest anyone will ever come to finding a verse that can be interpreted to say the world will end is 2 Peter 3:10. This single misinterpretation of one verse corrupted Christian eschatology for centuries. For centuries priests and pastors incorrectly taught the world was going to come to an end. But that is not what scripture actually states. It is not what scripture teaches. Even to this day we have a lot of KJVOists trying to defend the mistaken interpretation and a pile of Christians who think the God is literally going to literally destroy the literal world. And that belief in absolute destruction is very curious because those folks believe the world will be destroyed to the point of no longer existing but not sinners.​

The word "destroy" sometimes means destroy. In Greek the word for absolute destruction to the point of cessation of existence is apolesai. Look it up. Look it up and do not pit doctrine over scripture.

Matthew 10:28
And do not be afraid of those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy [apollosai] both soul and body in hell.

Scripture explicitly states both soul and body can and will be destroyed in hell to the point of no longer existing. That's not an added interpretation. That's not an extra-biblical doctrinal statement. That is the blunt fact of scripture. Look it up.


Adjust thinking, doctrine, and practice accordingly.

Word study on olethros, destroy - CARM

 

[Josheb]

Word study on olethros, destroy - CARM

Great. Did you see the flaws in that article?

 

[Josheb]

Word study on olethros, destroy - CARM

Great. Why were the questions I asked in Post 65 ignored?

Do you believe creeds over scripture? Would that be the Arminian creeds or the Calvinist ones? Am I to read that comment to mean you are asking me to ally with creeds over scripture? Or are you making an appeal to authority? Surely you can see the problem inherent when anyone pits creeds against scripture.

?????

1. Do you believe creeds over scripture?
2. Would that be the Arminian creeds or the Calvinist ones?
3. Am I to read that comment to mean you are asking me to ally with creeds over scripture?
4. Or are you making an appeal to authority?

Those are not rhetorically asked questions. I'd like to have them answered, and answered succinctly.​

 

[Josheb]

Word study on olethros, destroy - CARM

Great. Now how about a word study of apollumi and phthora that doesn't move the goalposts? Have you ever bothered to examine how Greeks of the first century used words, or do you look solely to Strong's and Greek Lexicons written by Christian authors? Try this HERE instead of Matt Slick.

Or are you following the words of whoever fits your already existing position and hoping I'll accept the confirmation bias?

 

[Hobie]

R.C. Sproul was a
staunch opponent of the annihilation doctrine, which he considered an erroneous view with no scriptural basis. He firmly held the traditional Christian position that hell is a place of conscious, unending, and eternal punishment.

Dr. James White's opinion
is firmly against the annihilationist doctrine, holding to the traditional view of eternal conscious torment (ECT) for the unsaved, seeing annihilationism as a softening of God's justice and a departure from biblical truth, though he acknowledges it's a secondary theological issue debated even within Reformed circles. He argues the Bible depicts hell as perpetual suffering, not a final cessation of existence, and emphasizes that the infinite atonement of Christ necessitates eternal punishment for sin

John MacArthur
strongly rejected annihilationism (the belief that the unsaved are completely destroyed/extinguished in hell), viewing it as a denial of Scripture that redefines "eternal" punishment; he championed the traditional doctrine of eternal conscious torment ( ECT) for the damned, arguing that the same Greek word (aionios) used for the eternal life of believers also describes the punishment of the wicked, meaning one cannot be eternal without the other, and that hell is a real, everlasting place of suffering, not extinction, citing passages like Matthew 25:46

Need to remember Romans 3:4, as man can say whatever they think they know, but that doesn't make it true so don't rely on man. God knows and He has the final word...