I Have a Question About Hell and Eternity

Indeed - and in that parable Abraham literally has a lap with all the dead saints residing in his very lap as the dead in hell literally seek Abraham for his sovereign intercession on behalf of the living.

Also in the OT when the trees come to elect king the various trees are actually mentioned by the name of their various kinds.

oops - but wait a minute! That was never a bible principle for transforming parables into historic accounts! I remember now.

I think the Jews of Christ's day and the RCC join you in that hope since it shows direct intercession of the dead and for the Jews it shows Abraham sovereignly in charge of all saints with no appeal to God needed since Abraham is in full authority to make decisions and to communicate with the dead in hell over his own decisions regarding who to send to help the living.

As I said taking this parable literally makes a great case for prayers to the dead.

I have a hard time imagining all the dead sainst literally in Abraham's lap and Abraham literally in sovereign control of all dead saints, and hearing intercessionary prayers made TO HIM as one of the dead who is in charge of all other dead saints. But I think the Jews of Christ's day may have gone for that almost as fast as you have.

I have to note that Christ gave his own summary of the parable and that this parable in Luke comes in a long string of parables about which the unbelieving Jews were complaining. So Christ gave them a parable they COULD readily accept.

In Christ,

Bob

 

In the Luke 16 parable Abraham literally sees the dead in torment and is in open communication with them.

I Rev 14 1-5 we are told that the saints are WITH THE LAMB whever he goes -- then in vs 10 we are told that the wicked suffer "IN THE PRESENCE of the Lamb and of His holy ones".

Jonathan Edwards agrees fully that the saints take in the full site of their sufferring loved ones according to the very dictates of this text -- but he claims they rejoice to see their loved ones in torment. I am hoping you will agree with me that they will not rejoice over such a thing.

BTW - since you think you will be able to turn away from looking at the sight and puting that out of your mind have a great time in the presence of Christ and His Angels while the wicked are tormented right there in the presence of the Angels, Christ (and all of His Holy Ones) -- what kind of joy do you think you will be able to muster as they are screaming out in agony?? I am somewhat curious about that.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Again Bob.

The Scripture does not say the wicked will suffer in our presence. Read Revelation 14:10...

Revelation 14:10 (KJV) The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented in the presence of the holy angels with fire and brimstone , and in the presence of the Lamb:

I do not see the Child of God viewing the suffering in the above verse, only the holy angels and the Lamb of God Jesus Christ are there.

Revelation 14:11 (KJV) And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

If the wicked are completely annihilated, why are they still smoking.

Here's a thought...

Many state emphatically that the story of Lazarus and the rich man is a parable while many others state emphatically that it is a story of an actual event because of the names mentioned in it.

Revelation 21 states that anyone who maketh a lie shall not enter that heavenly city. So, some people when they give their view of Luke 16's account of the rich man and Lazarus must be lying. We can't all be right.

 

Edwards --
And if we understand the text to have respect only to a temporal execution of God's wrath on his enemies, that will not alter the case. The thing they are called upon to rejoice at, is the execution of God's wrath upon his and their enemies. [b]And if it be matter of rejoicing to them to see justice executed[/B] in part upon them, or to see the beginning of the executionof it in this world; for the same reason will they rejoice with greater joy, in beholding it fully executed. For the thing here mentioned as the foundation of their joy,[/b] is the execution of just vengeance: Rejoice, for God hath avenged you on her

It is not only the sight of God's wrath executed on those wicked men who are of the antichristian church, which will be occasion of rejoicing to the saints in glory; but also the sight of the destruction of all God's enemies: whether they have been the followers of antichrist or not, that alters not the case, if they have been the enemies of God, and of Jesus Christ. All wicked men will at last be destroyed together, as being united in the same cause and interest, as being all of Satan's[/b] army. They will all stand together at the day of judgment, [b]as being all of the same company.[/b]

 

Rev 14:1-6 declares that the saints are ALWAYS in the presence of Christ.

Rev 14:10 says that SO ALSO are the tormented wicked in the presence of Christ AND of His Holy ones!

This can not be missed.

 

Of course Jonathan Edwards is not the only one to see clearly that Rev 14 has BOTH the wicked AND the saints IN the presence of the Lamb such that the saints clearly see the torment of the wicked.

 

You DO see the child of God IN THE PRESENCE of the LAMB in Rev 14:5 and so does Jonathan Edwards, Jamieson, Fausset, Brown etc.

You DO see the WICKED also in the presence of the LAMB AND of His Holy Angels.

And that means the saints SEE the torment of the wicked as Edwards states clearly AND as Jamieson, Fausset, Brown all admit.

The wicked are "destroyed" as Matt 10:28 says clearly - the smoke ascends up forever as the OT predicts even of ground that is burned by fire and brimstone.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I think the Jews of Christ's day and the RCC join you in that hope since it shows direct intercession of the dead and for the Jews it shows Abraham sovereignly in charge of all saints with no appeal to God needed since Abraham is in full authority to make decisions and to communicate with the dead in hell over his own decisions regarding who to send to help the living.

As I said taking this parable literally makes a great case for prayers to the dead.

I have a hard time imagining all the dead sainst literally in Abraham's lap and Abraham literally in sovereign control of all dead saints, and hearing intercessionary prayers made TO HIM as one of the dead who is in charge of all other dead saints. But I think the Jews of Christ's day may have gone for that almost as fast as you have.

I have to note that Christ gave his own summary of the parable and that this parable in Luke comes in a long string of parables about which the unbelieving Jews were complaining. So Christ gave them a parable they COULD readily accept.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Since the Greek word for 'destroy' in Matthew 10:28, 'apollumi' can be translated 'mar' in that verse along with 'destroy', 'die', 'lose', and 'perish'... to emphatically say it means one will be annihilated is a wrong stance.

For, if the fires of hell are so hot to destroy completely, the rich man would not have been able to cry out to Abraham. He would have been screaming while burning to ashes, yet he was not. Abraham would not have said the rich man was tormented, he would have said 'Now you are being destroyed.'

No, my friend, the fire of hell is not the same type of fire that your natural mind is trying to conceive it as being. It is a supernatural fire that puts off no light whatsoever, that burns without consuming completely.

The fires of hell are fires of torments. It is interesting that the Word says the rich man was in torments, not a torment. There is more than one torment that that man was feeling in that eternal flame.

Every sense he had in life he retained in death.

 

It is instructive that you are trying to avoid the term "destroy" by calling it "annihilate".

First - because the NASB, NIV, KJV, NKJV, YLT, ... all use the word you seem to want to avoid.

Second - because you seem to instantly recognize that "Destroy" and "annihilate" are synonyms.

Third - because the progression from "Kill to destroy" is obvious in the text. God says NOT to fear those who merely "kill" but fear him who can DESTROY... God is telling His own followers not to fear those whose limit is the lesser damage (to kill) but fear him who is able to do that far greater damage -- not only kill but destroy.

You have to admit that when you try to get out of these glaring problems - it is truly swimming up stream against the natural flow of the inconvenient details in the text.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Since it is merely a parable those details are moot as is the detail that Abraham is sovereignly in charge of all the dead saints and the detail that all the dead saints sit in Abraham's lap.

And also the inconvenient detail that the dead can be prayed to -- seeking intercession on behalf of the living.

And also the inconvenient details that Abraham is in charge of who will get resurrected.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Certainly from Luke we get that hell is hot and that people are in torment in the flames - beyond that we are not given a lot of detail. Certainly no mention in Luke 16 of "puts off no light". Certainly no mention in Jude or anywhere else "does NOT consume completely". Rather what we have is "DESTROY" in Matt 10:28.

Since Luke 16 does not go into much detail about exactly what the fires of hell "are like" -- we instantly note that Jude does.

So no need to imagine what it must be like - lets just let scripture tell us..

Jude
7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire.

Instead of having to imagine "immortal fuel" that keeps the fire burning for eternity - we see that eternal fire actually consumes "once and for all" as in the case of the city of Sodom and all cities around it.


Whatever else it does it REALLY destroyed Sodom.

In Christ,

Bob

 

You seem to be avoiding both this passage and this question, Bob.
Is Christ lying? How did the disciples, the first century audience to whom Christ was speaking, understand the phrase "eternal fire?" They didn't have the benefit of the Book of Jude. (Neither the "benefit" of SDA theology).

 

Whatever we today or for centuries may have believed the concept of 'hell' evoked in the understanding of first century man, I cannot see in the New Testament that he did not think of literal, inextinguishable fire -- right, or wrong.

I think John (in Revelation) introduced novel ideas of what the torments of hell actually will be like. He mentions seven plagues, that co-incide with the judgments of God on the ungodly and the devil after Jesus will have come again.

 

But I believe God will create a New Earth and a New Heaven wherein NO evil dwelleth. It implies and end to hell itself and all in it -- somehow, whatever we may think the liguistic meanings of human speech me be.

 

Then DHK adds -

No. Your interpretation is wrong - but Christ's statement is perfectly understood and consistent with all of scripture.

Christ states that it is eternal fire just as God does in Jude.

Christ states that the wicked are burned there just as God does in Jude.

In Matt 10:28 Christ even states that the wicked are DESTROYED there BOTH BODY AND SOUL - just as God does in Jude showing the cities around Sodom as EXAMPLES of that destruction by eternal fire.

By taking your snippet- text-proof approach and ignoring the context and the weight of scripture you have come to your wrong interpretation. Then by attributing your wrong views to Christ you ask "is Christ lying".


I thought you already got that point from our previous exchange.

These points are continually raised and you keep ignoring the scriptures mentioned on THIS TOPIC.... hmm wonder why you need to do that sir.

It is interesting that you think Jude would have "explained it" and they did not have Jude for the full details. Do you think Jude contradicts your injected interpretation in Matthew?

It is interesting that you think that Christ's statement in Matt 10 would have been ignored by the Disciples in Matt 25 -- they would not know that the wicked are DESTROYED in the eternal fire of Matt 25 like Christ said they would be PRIOR to that - and they also would not have Jude -- in your snippet-proof-text model DHK.

Your antics here prove that you know your view does not hold up to the test of scripture -- why be so blatant about it sir?

In Christ,

Bob

 

According to the Greek, eternal means:
[SIZE=+1]

Context is important.

Matthew 25:41 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:
--Eternl and everlasting mean the same thing--forever and ever, without end; perpetual, as the definition of the word says. Words don't lie. Why do some individuals try to make them mean something else? Because they have a perverted theology!

Does this make it any clearer:
Revelation 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
--How can one be tormented day and night forever and forever, and still not have eternal punishment? It is ridiculous to deny the eternal punishment of the wicked, by trying to redefine words that are so clear in their meaning.

 

Agreed, DHK!

[SIZE=-1]The Greek meaning of aionios ("eternal," "everlasting") cannot be denied. The same Greek word that is used to describe life with Christ is also used to refer to eternal punishments

[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]

Even in Mt 25:46 the word is used twice to describe both heaven and hell. "Eternal punishment" means what it says. There is no way out of this without doing a disgrace to God's Holy Word.[/SIZE]