Kirk Cameron Rejects Eternal Conscious Torment, Embraces Conditional Immortality

[makesends]

What happens to an object when it is subjected to fire?

Which could be a rhetorical reference to the magnitude, the sheer number, of the lost.

Or the magnitude of their wages/torment.

 

[Josheb]

Or the magnitude of their wages/torment.

Yep

 

[JesusFan]

What happens to an object when it is subjected to fire?

Which could be a rhetorical reference to the magnitude, the sheer number, of the lost.

Think Jesus spoke mre about a literal and eternal hell for the lost more then he did on heaven

 

[Josheb]

Think Jesus spoke mre about a literal and eternal hell for the lost more then he did on heaven

I disagree. I do not believe God literally has a furnace into which he literally throws Christ-denying sinners' corpses. Neither do I believe God literally maintains a literal lake of literal fire into which He literally throws Christ denying sinners' corpses. He might possibly maintain a huge trash heap where Christ-denying sinners' corpses are piled up to rot and burn in decay but all three cannot be literal because all three contradict each other. Either all three are figurative indications of a very real and vilent end or none of them literally exist in contradiction to each other.

And you did NOT answer my question.

Q: What happens to an object when it is subjected to fire?
A: When an object is subjected to fire it burns up. It eventually ceases to exist.

That is literally what happens when an object is thrown into a fire. If you take Jesus words literally then you have to be an annihilationist.

Think Jesus spoke mre about a literal and eternal hell for the lost more then he did on heaven

Well then you must become an annihilationist because literal fire literally destroys everything thrown into it. The fiery lake of Rev. 20 is so violent it even destroys death and hades. This gets to one of the critical elements in the debate. Either you believe death and hades exist in the restored heavens and earth, or they don't. How restored is a new creation where sinful death and hell still exist?

So think through the content of your own posts because the minute you say the fiery furnace or fiery lake are literal you end up either committing to annihilationism or creating a self-contradictory point of view. It's not rational to have a literal fire that does not incinerate its contents.

 

[makesends]

Think Jesus spoke mre about a literal and eternal hell for the lost more then he did on heaven

I disagree, though I would agree that he did so in more obvious fashion. But the whole Bible, and the Covenant, are all about Heaven. Everything we learn about God, Christ and the Spirit of God, tells us of the nature of Heaven.

 

[JesusFan]

I disagree, though I would agree that he did so in more obvious fashion. But the whole Bible, and the Covenant, are all about Heaven. Everything we learn about God, Christ and the Spirit of God, tells us of the nature of Heaven.

And Jesus warned us just how severe Hell will be for those who rejected Him as their Lord and messiah

 

[JesusFan]

I disagree. I do not believe God literally has a furnace into which he literally throws Christ-denying sinners' corpses. Neither do I believe God literally maintains a literal lake of literal fire into which He literally throws Christ denying sinners' corpses. He might possibly maintain a huge trash heap where Christ-denying sinners' corpses are piled up to rot and burn in decay but all three cannot be literal because all three contradict each other. Either all three are figurative indications of a very real and vilent end or none of them literally exist in contradiction to each other.

And you did NOT answer my question.

Q: What happens to an object when it is subjected to fire?
A: When an object is subjected to fire it burns up. It eventually ceases to exist.

That is literally what happens when an object is thrown into a fire. If you take Jesus words literally then you have to be an annihilationist.

Well then you must become an annihilationist because literal fire literally destroys everything thrown into it. The fiery lake of Rev. 20 is so violent it even destroys death and hades. This gets to one of the critical elements in the debate. Either you believe death and hades exist in the restored heavens and earth, or they don't. How restored is a new creation where sinful death and hell still exist?

So think through the content of your own posts because the minute you say the fiery furnace or fiery lake are literal you end up either committing to annihilationism or creating a self-contradictory point of view. It's not rational to have a literal fire that does not incinerate its contents.

I see lake of Fire as being the final abode of all lost sinners ever were created, as they are in a domain that is in total darkness due to no light of Christ, nor presense of God ever being with them, as they are now just in their sin states fully realized forever more , not so much like being cast into a burning oven or something

 

[Josheb]

Think Jesus spoke mre about a literal and eternal hell for the lost more then he did on heaven

I see lake of Fire as being the final abode of all lost sinners ever were created, as they are in a domain that is in total darkness due to no light of Christ, nor presense of God ever being with them, as they are now just in their sin states fully realized forever more , not so much like being cast into a burning oven or something

Those two posts contradict one another.

If you believe what Jesus said is literal, then it cannot be figurative. A literal lake of fire is not an abode. A literal lake of fire gives off light; it is not dark due to no light. Literal fire literally destroys. There's no abiding in literal fire.

 

[JesusFan]

Those two posts contradict one another.

If you believe what Jesus said is literal, then it cannot be figurative. A literal lake of fire is not an abode. A literal lake of fire gives off light; it is not dark due to no light. Literal fire literally destroys. There's no abiding in literal fire.

I think the severe language was describing a place far worse then a literal burning of the flesh

 

[atpollard]

If you believe what Jesus said is literal, then it cannot be figurative. A literal lake of fire is not an abode. A literal lake of fire gives off light; it is not dark due to no light. Literal fire literally destroys. There's no abiding in literal fire.

I think this is a "false dichotomy" ... was the "burning bush" that Moses encountered "Literal" or "Figurative" ... was it "burning" or "not burning"? (how can you reconcile any answer you give to the burning bush with your statements about the lake of fire?)

 

[Josheb]

I think the severe language was describing a place far worse then a literal burning of the flesh

So do I but that is irrelevant to the point being made.

Don't get defensive. You posted a statement stating "....Jesus spoke more about a literal and eternal hell for the lost more [than] he did on heaven."

Think Jesus spoke mre about a literal and eternal hell for the lost more then he did on heaven

Jesus did speak more about hell than heaven but that is not the specific point with which I disagree, It's the use of the word "literal."

There is no such thing as a literal hell.

The word "hell" is a Norse term, not a Hebrew term. Hades is a Greek term. Hel and Hades were pagan gods. They were NOT the God of the Bible. They were not the God Jesus served. Jesus spoke Aramaic (and Hebrew). The word Jesus used would have been "Sheol," or "the grave."

The grave is literal.

A realm ruled by lesser gods, pagan gods, lesser pagan gods ruling an underworld full of dead people is NOT what Jesus taught. What Jesus taught is even different than the old-line teaching of Sadducean Judaism. Jewish theology held that the grave was the end. There was nothing after a person died. Their view was nihilistic. You died and you were dead. Your body rotted in the grave and that was it. The Pharisees arose during the inter-testamental period and said, "No! That is not correct! There is a resurrection! There is life after the grave." and that disagreement between the Sadducees and the Pharisees persisted all the way up to the incarnation.

Jesus set the record straight.

Jesus corrected BOTH the Sadducees and the Pharisees and he also corrected all of the pagan views, too. The Sadducees were wrong: there is life after death. "That is, in fact, the reason I (Jesus) have come. I have come to defeat sin and death." The Sadducees scoffed. No one can defeat death. Jesus rose from the grave and proved himself true and every single Sadducee a liar. Jesus also proved the Pharisees wrong because while there is life after death not everyone reaps eternal life. Not only is eternal life on the other side of the grave not an automatic given, but it is not the sole privilege of Jews, either. "A person must believe in me (Jesus) to reap eternal life." And most Pharisees did not believe. They did not receive what they taught. They did not receive what they hoped for. The died in sin, just like all the pagan Gentiles. That very notion was reprehensible to every Jews who had ever lived. Jesus also corrected the pagans. There are no gods beside God. Zeus is a myth. Jupiter is a myth. Ra, Odin, and all the other god of the gods are myths. They are lies. Not only is there no Zeus, Jupiter, Odin, or Ra, but there are no lesser gods, either. No one goes to live under the rule of Pluto or Hades. Those gods are myths. What happens is you pagan Gentiles go to stand before God, the Creator of al that exists and you stand before Him to be judged. Every single human ever made stands before the Creator to be judged and there are only two outcomes: a person either believed Jesus defeated sin and death and placed his/her existence in the work of God's only Anointed One, covered in his propitiatory blood, OR a person denied God's Anointed One and all the work the Anointed One had done and received destruction. There was no wandering around in conscious misery in the underworld.

That is what Jesus taught.

So when you use the word "literal" in reference to "Hell," you're contradicting yourself. Yes, I know the convention in Christian vernacular is to speak that way, but the convention is not accurate. The word "hell" is a Greek word the New Testament writers used to communicate to pagan converts. Or, the word "hell" is a Greek addition because our Bibles are based on Greek manuscripts, not the original writings of the apostles. Matthew's gospel was most likely written in Aramaic. Matthew knew Greek because he was a tax collector. It's assumed Mark's gospel was written in Greek but there's no proof of that. Luke was a Gentile, and an educated Gentile, so it's quite likely he wrote in Greek. John is perhaps the most informative because his Koine Greek improves as time passes. The indication is he learned Greek after Christ died, or his knowledge of Greek was rudimentary until he began having a need for it. Any way it is considered, Matthew, Mark, and John were Jews. So was Jesus. They were not Greek or Roman. They spoke (and wrote) Aramaic and Hebrew. The words "Hell," "Hades," and "Tartarus" were not normal or natural to them. Those were not real places for those Jewish men. Those places were not literal places.

If Jesus ever did use those words, then he did so as figurative references to the reality that is God's reality. He used those words as references understandable by the audience members from other cultures and lands. Jesus was nnot teaching Greek, Roman, or Norse mythology. He wasn't teaching Mesopotamian, Assyrian, or Egyptian mythology.

He taught the truth.

And he often taught the truth using imagery, figures, or speech, and symbols understood by his audiences because the reality is incomprehensible. No one can stand before God and live.

Unless s/he is covered in Christ's blood.

They tried to stone Jesus for saying that.

A fiery furnace is imagery, not the actual thing. A fiery lake is not literal. It's a figurative reference to agonizing destruction. The judgment is literal. The furnace and lake are not.

So be careful when using the word "literal."

That is my point.

If you want people to believe you then use the word "literal" correctly and wisely. It's important because we all want people to escape the final judgment alive in Christ and entering eternal life, not dead in sin headed for destruction.

And destruction is what literally happens when objects are literally thrown into literal fire. Literally.



Most of what scripture teaches about the grave got mucked up by Roman Catholicism and was carried over centuries later into the Protestant denominations.
.

 

[JesusFan]

So do I but that is irrelevant to the point being made.

Don't get defensive. You posted a statement stating "....Jesus spoke more about a literal and eternal hell for the lost more [than] he did on heaven."

Jesus did speak more about hell than heaven but that is not the specific point with which I disagree, It's the use of the word "literal."

There is no such thing as a literal hell.

The word "hell" is a Norse term, not a Hebrew term. Hades is a Greek term. Hel and Hades were pagan gods. They were NOT the God of the Bible. They were not the God Jesus served. Jesus spoke Aramaic (and Hebrew). The word Jesus used would have been "Sheol," or "the grave."

The grave is literal.

A realm ruled by lesser gods, pagan gods, lesser pagan gods ruling an underworld full of dead people is NOT what Jesus taught. What Jesus taught is even different than the old-line teaching of Sadducean Judaism. Jewish theology held that the grave was the end. There was nothing after a person died. Their view was nihilistic. You died and you were dead. Your body rotted in the grave and that was it. The Pharisees arose during the inter-testamental period and said, "No! That is not correct! There is a resurrection! There is life after the grave." and that disagreement between the Sadducees and the Pharisees persisted all the way up to the incarnation.

Jesus set the record straight.

Jesus corrected BOTH the Sadducees and the Pharisees and he also corrected all of the pagan views, too. The Sadducees were wrong: there is life after death. "That is, in fact, the reason I (Jesus) have come. I have come to defeat sin and death." The Sadducees scoffed. No one can defeat death. Jesus rose from the grave and proved himself true and every single Sadducee a liar. Jesus also proved the Pharisees wrong because while there is life after death not everyone reaps eternal life. Not only is eternal life on the other side of the grave not an automatic given, but it is not the sole privilege of Jews, either. "A person must believe in me (Jesus) to reap eternal life." And most Pharisees did not believe. They did not receive what they taught. They did not receive what they hoped for. The died in sin, just like all the pagan Gentiles. That very notion was reprehensible to every Jews who had ever lived. Jesus also corrected the pagans. There are no gods beside God. Zeus is a myth. Jupiter is a myth. Ra, Odin, and all the other god of the gods are myths. They are lies. Not only is there no Zeus, Jupiter, Odin, or Ra, but there are no lesser gods, either. No one goes to live under the rule of Pluto or Hades. Those gods are myths. What happens is you pagan Gentiles go to stand before God, the Creator of al that exists and you stand before Him to be judged. Every single human ever made stands before the Creator to be judged and there are only two outcomes: a person either believed Jesus defeated sin and death and placed his/her existence in the work of God's only Anointed One, covered in his propitiatory blood, OR a person denied God's Anointed One and all the work the Anointed One had done and received destruction. There was no wandering around in conscious misery in the underworld.

That is what Jesus taught.

So when you use the word "literal" in reference to "Hell," you're contradicting yourself. Yes, I know the convention in Christian vernacular is to speak that way, but the convention is not accurate. The word "hell" is a Greek word the New Testament writers used to communicate to pagan converts. Or, the word "hell" is a Greek addition because our Bibles are based on Greek manuscripts, not the original writings of the apostles. Matthew's gospel was most likely written in Aramaic. Matthew knew Greek because he was a tax collector. It's assumed Mark's gospel was written in Greek but there's no proof of that. Luke was a Gentile, and an educated Gentile, so it's quite likely he wrote in Greek. John is perhaps the most informative because his Koine Greek improves as time passes. The indication is he learned Greek after Christ died, or his knowledge of Greek was rudimentary until he began having a need for it. Any way it is considered, Matthew, Mark, and John were Jews. So was Jesus. They were not Greek or Roman. They spoke (and wrote) Aramaic and Hebrew. The words "Hell," "Hades," and "Tartarus" were not normal or natural to them. Those were not real places for those Jewish men. Those places were not literal places.

If Jesus ever did use those words, then he did so as figurative references to the reality that is God's reality. He used those words as references understandable by the audience members from other cultures and lands. Jesus was nnot teaching Greek, Roman, or Norse mythology. He wasn't teaching Mesopotamian, Assyrian, or Egyptian mythology.

He taught the truth.

And he often taught the truth using imagery, figures, or speech, and symbols understood by his audiences because the reality is incomprehensible. No one can stand before God and live.

Unless s/he is covered in Christ's blood.

They tried to stone Jesus for saying that.

A fiery furnace is imagery, not the actual thing. A fiery lake is not literal. It's a figurative reference to agonizing destruction. The judgment is literal. The furnace and lake are not.

So be careful when using the word "literal."

That is my point.

If you want people to believe you then use the word "literal" correctly and wisely. It's important because we all want people to escape the final judgment alive in Christ and entering eternal life, not dead in sin headed for destruction.

And destruction is what literally happens when objects are literally thrown into literal fire. Literally.



Most of what scripture teaches about the grave got mucked up by Roman Catholicism and was carried over centuries later into the Protestant denominations.
.

I am just trying to avoid when others get very upset about Hell as a literal place and literal punishment, and try to make it as though nothing really happens, as either all sinners get somehow saved, or else burnt up an forever and disappear

 

[Josheb]

I am just trying to avoid when others get very upset about Hell as a literal place and literal punishment, and try to make it as though nothing really happens, as either all sinners get somehow saved, or else burnt up an forever and disappear

Great. Thanks for the clarification. That doesn't have anything to do with my point, but I appreciate the clarification. I do not read anyone here saying, "nothing really happens." Being burned up forever is something happening. Annihilation cannot be described as "nothing really happening," especially if the annihilation is a slow, painfully agonizing, torturous experience that culminates in the loss of existence. So please do not misrepresent the nature of annihilation.

Doing so would be a strawman, and a false witness, not a rational or exegetical refutation of the position asserted in this op. One problem to be overcome is the fact most naysayers of annihilationism argue strawmen.

You said, "Think Jesus spoke mre about a literal and eternal hell for the lost more then he did on heaven."

Think Jesus spoke mre about a literal and eternal hell for the lost more then he did on heaven

We all believe something literally happens. The question is "What literally happens?" "Hell" does not literally happen because "hell" is not literal. Hell is a pagan idea, a mythology, a mythology in which a lesser god rules over dead people living in the underworld. The dead are not actually dead. They're just dead to the world above. What literally happens? Well, if the analogies Jesus used are taken literally - the analogies of a chaff-burning fire, a fiery furnace, a fiery lake, and a the fiery decomposing trash heap are taken literally then what is thrown into fire literally burns up and eventually ceases to exist. Jesus' own references teach annihilation, or the loss of existence. People have literally been burned in fire both to kill them and to destroy their corpse. Many Christians (and non-Christians) have been burned at the stale throughout history. If the fire is hot enough and burns long enough everything in the fire is destroyed. All human remains are gone. The same thing happens in a funeral pyre. Everything is destroyed. The entire corpse is gone; nothing human remains.

So, I am glad you're trying to avoid others' getting upset but that has nothing to do with what I (and others) have posted. Something literally happens when a human dies.

Galatians 6:7-8
7Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap. 8For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.

When a person dies, he receives either eternal life or eternal rotting decay. When something rots and decays it eventually ceases to exist.

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 both soul and body in hell.

What Jesus described in this verse is annihilation. The Greek word is the word used when something no longer exists. Post #2 outlines the study of scripture and includes a recommendation of comparative theology. Give the post another read. Consider giving the book a read. Re-consider your own viewpoint in light of the facts of scripture and the rationale presented here in this thread and there in that book. If nothing else, you'll learn something about God's word and the diversity of thought that exists on this matter that exists among the orthodox believers. Most of us here used to be ECTs (eternal conscious torture). It was a deeper examination of scripture that changed our minds.

 

[JesusFan]

Great. Thanks for the clarification. That doesn't have anything to do with my point, but I appreciate the clarification. I do not read anyone here saying, "nothing really happens." Being burned up forever is something happening. Annihilation cannot be described as "nothing really happening," especially if the annihilation is a slow, painfully agonizing, torturous experience that culminates in the loss of existence. So please do not misrepresent the nature of annihilation.

Doing so would be a strawman, and a false witness, not a rational or exegetical refutation of the position asserted in this op. One problem to be overcome is the fact most naysayers of annihilationism argue strawmen.

You said, "Think Jesus spoke mre about a literal and eternal hell for the lost more then he did on heaven."

​

​

​

We all believe something literally happens. The question is "What literally happens?" "Hell" does not literally happen because "hell" is not literal. Hell is a pagan idea, a mythology, a mythology in which a lesser god rules over dead people living in the underworld. The dead are not actually dead. They're just dead to the world above. What literally happens? Well, if the analogies Jesus used are taken literally - the analogies of a chaff-burning fire, a fiery furnace, a fiery lake, and a the fiery decomposing trash heap are taken literally then what is thrown into fire literally burns up and eventually ceases to exist. Jesus' own references teach annihilation, or the loss of existence. People have literally been burned in fire both to kill them and to destroy their corpse. Many Christians (and non-Christians) have been burned at the stale throughout history. If the fire is hot enough and burns long enough everything in the fire is destroyed. All human remains are gone. The same thing happens in a funeral pyre. Everything is destroyed. The entire corpse is gone; nothing human remains.

So, I am glad you're trying to avoid others' getting upset but that has nothing to do with what I (and others) have posted. Something literally happens when a human dies.

Galatians 6:7-8
7Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap. 8For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.

When a person dies, he receives either eternal life or eternal rotting decay. When something rots and decays it eventually ceases to exist.

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 both soul and body in hell.

What Jesus described in this verse is annihilation. The Greek word is the word used when something no longer exists. Post #2 outlines the study of scripture and includes a recommendation of comparative theology. Give the post another read. Consider giving the book a read. Re-consider your own viewpoint in light of the facts of scripture and the rationale presented here in this thread and there in that book. If nothing else, you'll learn something about God's word and the diversity of thought that exists on this matter that exists among the orthodox believers. Most of us here used to be ECTs (eternal conscious torture). It was a deeper examination of scripture that changed our minds.

There would be no true judgement if all lost sinners just ceased to ever exist

 

[Josheb]

There would be no true judgement if all lost sinners just ceased to ever exist

That is incorrect.

Aside from the fallacious appeal to purity, even humans regularly execute "true" judgment by causing the perpetrators of certain crime to cease to exist. It's called capital punishment. God's a big fan of it.

All the concerns you've broached have been addressed in this thread (and not just by me). Have you read through the thread?

 

[Josheb]

Got a question for you @JesusFan. As you envision the new, restored, heavens and earth, does sin exist in the new heavens and earth? How about death? In the new and restored heavens and earth, does death exist? It's a simply yes or no inquiry. I'm not interested in digression or overwrought explanations that don't actually answer the question asked.


Does sin and death exist in the new heavens and earth?

 

[makesends]

There would be no true judgement if all lost sinners just ceased to ever exist

Depending on what you mean, by "just ceased to exist", I disagree. In the annihilationist thinking, they don't "just cease to have existed". And there's the difference. If, at the end of their punishment/judgement, they are eliminated, it doesn't imply that they did not live at some point.

If they are eliminated and there is a cessation of torment because there is no longer anybody to receive that retribution and punishment, it could have been infinite punishment (fitting the infinite crime against infinite God) in some other way than unending time passage.

 

[makesends]

Got a question for you @JesusFan. As you envision the new, restored, heavens and earth, does sin exist in the new heavens and earth? How about death? In the new and restored heavens and earth, does death exist? It's a simply yes or no inquiry. I'm not interested in digression or overwrought explanations that don't actually answer the question asked.


Does sin and death exist in the new heavens and earth?

Do you line up the new heavens and earth with 'all there is' at that point. Does 'all reality' = 'new heavens and earth'?

 

[Josheb]

Do you line up the new heavens and earth with 'all there is' at that point. Does 'all reality' = 'new heavens and earth'?

Not sure I understand the question because there has always been an existence prior to the creating of creation. The heavens and the earth (whether old or new) is/are created. The reality of that creation is, likewise, created. God could create an infinite number of creations, and each creation might have its own reality that is real, real reality. Because by definition each would have its own limits/limitations, each would be different from uncreated reality. No creation is God. Therefore, no "all reality" in/of any creation equals all reality.

Therefore, the word "all" needs to be removed from the inquiry unless it is qualified to apply only to the creation in which that reality exists. Then the question becomes circular and, therefore, nonsensical. Does the new creation "line up" with all that exists in the new creation? Yes. The ambiguous "line up" must also be defined. Does the new creation's reality all there is of that creation's reality. Yes, that is the necessity of that created creation. As to my inquiry about the existence of sin and death in the new heavens and earth, the new creation, all questions about reality must pertain to that inquiry because anything outside of the inquiry is off topic. Annihilation (if that is what occurs) is an intra-creation condition, not an extra-creation one. Any and all reality existing outside the created creation is irrelevant.

 

[atpollard]

Does sin and death exist in the new heavens and earth?

No. There is no sin IN the new heavens and earth. There is no death IN the new heaven and earth.

Now, OUTSIDE OF the new heaven and earth ... that is another question.