Only Three Are Tormented Eternally

[CoreyD]

Revelation 20 10 and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

This is literal

There is no scriptural reason for believing that is literal.
It's merely believing it, because of one's point of view.

You don't believe the beast, the heads of the beast, and the horns of the beast are literal.
All of which the angel explains their symbolic meaning... along with the symbolic meaning of the lake of fire.

So to believe the lake of fire is literal, despite it being right there in the Bible what the angel said, is like waving one's hand at Jesus angel and saying, "My intelligence is all I need. I don't need an angel to explain anything."

So it's like viewing a conversation that goes like this:

The angel says "the ten horns, they are ten kings". Revelation 17:12​

"Okay. Cool. Thank you".​

The angel says "the seven heads, they are seven mountains... also seven kings". Revelation 17:10​

"Alright, angel of my lord. Yes. I accept that".​

The angel says "the lake of fire, it is the second death". Revelation 20:14​

No it's not! It is literal fire! Don't tell me nonsense.​

Some people are going to be serious opposers of Christ. There are already many.

And so is 14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

Death and Hades aren't material things.
What then is the significance of them being thrown in to the lake of fire, if it is literal?
It would be like saying hatred, and envy are thrown into a fireplace. There is no sense or logic, to that.

Only if the fire is used figuratively, would it make sense to cast hatred and envy there, because we would understand the meaning - hatred and envy are destroyed - gone.
So it is with the lake of fire.

How do you read this, and still say the lake of fire is literal?
How does it make sense to burn up death and Hades in fire?

Just because some things are symbolic in the book of revelation, does not mean all are.

That is true.
However, that doesn't now give us the liberty of deciding whatever we want about the book of Revelation.
There are criterion to follow.
I provided you with one.

All the places where the angel explains the sign, the Greek word ἐστιν is used.
So, the reader would see that the angel is giving the explanation for what each sign is a representation of.

• Revelation 1:20 The seven stars symbolize the seven angels, and the seven lampstands symbolize the seven churches.
• Revelation 4:5 The torches of fire symbolizes the seven spirits of God.
• Revelation 6:5 The seven horns and seven eyes symbolize the seven spirits of God.
• Revelation 6:8 The seven heads symbolize seven mountains, symbolic of seven kings.
• Revelation 17:12 The ten horns symbolize ten kings.
• Revelation 17:15 The waters symbolize peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues.
• Revelation 20:14 The lake of fire symbolizes the second death.

Some people don't like that criterion, and so they choose their own... namely, go with what they believe, and maintain circular reasoning.
The choice is theirs. The consequences also.

The Greek word gehenna, translated "hell" in the KJV, is found twelve times in the scriptures, eleven of them from the lips of Jesus, with ten of those as threats of being "cast into", "destroyed", or "damned". This is not a symboliv language.

Do you accept them?
You quoted the word "destroyed". Why then do you disagree that all that are cast into the lake of fire are destroyed?

The word “hell,” coming from the Greek word Ge’enna speaks of what the book of revelation calls this “lake of fire” where people are punished and tormented forever.

That does not have to refer to a literal place and literal torment, does it.

I think we sort of comfortably distance ourselves from that reality. Certainly in general, in the church, it is looked over, passed by, ignored. There are those who claim to be preachers who don’t ever talk about hell, wouldn’t talk about hell, avoid it at all costs, when the truth of the matter is it ought to be the first thing that we talk about when we talk about the gospel. This is about salvation from hell.

Reality isn;t church doctrine that has been debunked over and over by scriptures, that people do not want to let go of.

The Greek word Ge’enna which is a word that comes from the Valley of Hinnom. The Valley of Hinnom, just east of Jerusalem and a little bit south – is the place in ancient times where the city dump was, and it was a never-extinguished burning fire. And it became the metaphor for the lake of fire, for hell. You threw whatever was useless into the trash, into the fire.

Can a person use a place as a figurative representation of something?
Sure they can. You know this.
So what is wrong with Jesus doing that?

Soul forever ruined for usefulness to God, having a spoiled, marred image is thrown into the everlasting trash heap, the burning fires of Ge’enna or hell. That’s what those words are talking about, not annihilation.

No, it's not.

You cannot make that case from Scripture.

Yes we have.

In Matthew chapter 26 Jesus is talking about Judas, and He says, “The Son of Man is to go, just as it is written of Him” – He says this at the upper room communion with his disciples – “The Son of Man is to go, just as it is written of Him; but woe to the man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born.” Why would He say that? “It would have been good for that man if he had not been born.” Why? Because of the consequences that are about to come to him. It wouldn’t matter if he was going to be annihilated, if he was going to be exterminated. Hell is eternal, conscious punishment. There is no way around this.

There is that word again - destruction.
Why are you not accepting it. Don't you see it? Destroyed; Destruction
What does destroy mean?

1. To break apart the structure of, render physically unusable, or cause to cease to exist as a distinguishable physical entity:
   The fire destroyed the library. The tumor was destroyed with a laser.
2. To put an end to; eliminate.
3. To render useless or ruin.

You use the word, yet deny it. Why?

Matthew 25:45
“These, will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” Both words “eternal” are identical. They are the same in the original language.

Eternal torment and eternal punishment are the same thing, yes.
See this post.

So, if hell isn’t eternal, then guess what? Neither is heaven. Those will go away into eternal punishment. The righteous will go into eternal life. If there is eternal life, then there is eternal punishment. Get rid of hell and you have to get rid of heaven as being forever. Was our Lord wrong about this? Are the critics right? Are the deniers of hell right, and the Lord is wrong?

The lake of fire is eternal.
That does not make it literal. No one is arguing against eternal destruction... At least not that I know of.

Did Jesus mean to teach annihilation and somehow goof it up and teach the opposite?

Jesus did not teach the opposite.
That's what church sermons do. We heard that since we were toddlers... in church. Not from Jesus.

Is that what was going on here? He meant to teach annihilation and He just messed it up? Nonsense.

I agree. That is nonsense.
No one is saying that, but you. Isn't that so.

 

[JulieB67]

Destruction has no end.
This is why when death is hurled into the lake of fire, it is forever destroyed... as the other things hurled there... including Satan.

Exactly!

 

[JulieB67]

If it is everlasting, it has no end.

Everlasting destruction has no end. There's no coming back from that.

I believe in an eternal after life.
Either in heaven or in the lake of fire.

All throughout the Bible, it's always life or death.

Even one of the most quoted verses in the Bible states this fact.

John 3;16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Only those that believe in him will have everlasting life. It doesn't state both have everlasting life.

​

​

 

[CoreyD]

That would be true, but eternal torment is not in the Greek scriptures, that's a mistranslation of the Greek into Latin. Augustine who gave us this bad idea did not read Greek but used a bad Latin translation and made sure that all the Greek speakers that were trying to correct him were silenced either with banishment or death. This is what morphed into the Catholic Church, which morphed into the Protestant reformation that also accepted the lie of eternal torment. The Greeks new that the word translated eternal, aionios or aion, should be translated of the age or pertaining to that age. God works in ages or aions and each one has its own order or rules that govern them, so when we read in most English scriptures and we read eternal punishment, to be true to the Greek original, it should be punishment of the age, it had a beginning and and end.
When referring to aionios life in Jesus because that life is in Jesus and we know Jesus is eternal, the life we have in Jesus is eternal also but it extends to all the ages as Jesus does.

I hope you don't mind my asking... and please don't take this the wrong way.
I'm just wondering why people post things on forums, and do not provide a source or reference that people can check.
I can't wrap my head around it. Is it because they expect people to search around to find information that would deny or confirm what was said?
Wouldn't it be better if the persons reading the post did not have to spend time doing that?

Again... please don't get offended. I've been pondering this for years, and would really like to hear from someone who knows the reason.
Do you know that on forums this is actually in the guidelines, that claims made without references can be dismissed?

If you do provide a reference, I'll consider it, but as it stands currently, the Bible Canon which God has allowed down to our day, says exactly what we read, and though people may not like it, for what every reason, God hasn't given us the authority to decide what belongs in his word.
He decided that, didn't he?

Yes, I agree that attempts have been made to alter Gods word, and yes, they are spurious texts in translations, but these are known, and some translations do not contain these texts, thanks to the numerous Bible manuscripts.
Right at this moment though, your claim here is proven false, for this reason.
A lot of translations used the manuscripts to produce their copy of the Bible. Which means that Augustine, who lived around 430 CE had no impact on many translation.

The earliest manuscript containing the text of the Book of Revelation is Papyrus P98 (P. IFAO inv. 237b [+a]), which contains verses from the first chapter of Revelation. It was copied circa A.D. 100-200, likely in Egypt, and was first identified as a biblical text in 1991 by Dieter Hagedorn. 2 8​

​

Another early manuscript is Papyrus 18 (18), which contains only Revelation 1–7 and is dated to the third or early fourth century. 6​

​

Papyrus 47 (47) is also significant, as it contains text from Revelation chapters 9 through 17 and is dated to the early 3rd century CE. 5​

​

Papyrus P98 does not contain Revelation chapter 20. The earliest manuscripts that contain Revelation chapter 20 are more fragmentary and date from the second to seventh centuries. These include nine papyrus manuscripts, but they are not complete and contain only portions of the text. 3​

This is why it's so important to use references in our posts, because people reading our post, can just take what we say as Gospel and run with it... agreeing wholeheartedly, even though the information is wrong.
Worst, we become guilty of misinformation.
Something we don't want to be party to, in a world ruled by a vicious liar. John 8:44; 1 John 5:19

We really need to be careful Jeff.
That's why I put the question to you, in the way I did. It's in order to help you see how serious this is.
People get offended when I try to bring to their attention bad practice, that I see commonly used on forums, but I do it to help people improve.
The back lash wears off quickly , as I know I am doing a good deed, Something Jesus would want me to do - help people improve.

So, in review, Revelation was around as far back as the second century, and that's only a few years after John wrote it. So, eternal torment is legit.
People just need to stop the bad practice of literalism.
When they do, the truth will be sweet for them, and their listeners.

 

[Mr. M]

In closing...

Second Timothy Two:
23 But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes,
knowing that they generate strife.
24 And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel
but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient,
25 in humility correcting those who are in opposition,
if God perhaps will grant them repentance,
so that they may know the truth,
26 and that they may come to their senses
and escape the snare of the devil,
having been taken captive by him to do his will.

The discussion for me concerns what we should be presenting to the lost, not to one another. I find "Repent or burn forever" as highly ineffective. For this reason, I am thinking that is what doesn't apply to us. If you also do not see this as a part of our mandate to the Gospel, then we agree.

What we choose to present to the world, and what we deem to be our mandate in presenting the Love of God to the world.
Even if we consider the possibility of ECT, that is something that must come under:
Romans 14:22 Do you have faith? Have it to yourself before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves.

This is why I have always avoided topics such as this, but the Lord pressed me in the Spirit, and now, after being obedient, I understand. We are all establishing a witness before the Lord.

Someone who is willing to come on line and voice their beliefs, then supporting them with all manner of sophomoric argument and debate, is establishing that as a witness to their obedience to scripture. What a challenge for us in this accelerating time of the present age! I hope you do not feel I set a trap for you .
2 Corinthians 12:
15 And I will very gladly spend and be spent for you; though the more abundantly
I love you, the less I be loved.
16 But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.

 

[All Becomes New]

I find "Repent or burn forever" as highly ineffective.

Don't take this the wrong way (you have been nothing but polite), but pragmatic reasons are never a means to an end in theology.

 

[Mr. M]

Don't take this the wrong way (you have been nothing but polite), but pragmatic reasons are never a means to an end in theology.

Yes, but obedience is, and what mandate is placed upon us as ministers of the Gospel.
Believers can disagree about a lot of doctrine, but if we cannot agree to what the message is to the lost, then so are we.
We have been commanded to go out and share good news. This is what the Holy Spirit convicts. If a believer established in Christ feels that their mandate is to convince other believers of something in debate or argument, we really aren't being obedient. If you have already read my previous post, my intent is laid bare, I wasn't trying to convince anybody of anything, I just wanted to present an opportunity to find out to what extent people will go to present things unnecessary and detrimental to the "great commission". These types of debate have come along too often and probably too late. What is left? Repent, and believe the Gospel.
Mark 1:
14 Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, 15 and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.”

 

[All Becomes New]

Yes, but obedience is, and what mandate is placed upon us as ministers of the Gospel.
Believers can disagree about a lot of doctrine, but if we cannot agree to what the message is to the lost, then so are we.
We have been commanded to go out and share good news. This is what the Holy Spirit convicts. If a believer established in Christ feels that their mandate is to convince other believers of something in debate or argument, we really aren't being obedient. If you have already read my previous post, my intent is laid bare, I wasn't trying to convince anybody of anything, I just wanted to present an opportunity to find out to what extent people will go to present things unnecessary and detrimental to the "great commission". These types of debate have come along too often and probably too late. What is left? Repent, and believe the Gospel.
Mark 1:
14 Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, 15 and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.”

It's good that you focus on repentance. But I was like you. I entertained annihilationism because "hell" was a hard pill for me to swallow. But then I watched the movie "Sound of Freedom," and watched an online concert called "Rock Against Traffick," which was to raise awareness against human trafficking. Then it clicked. God is not unjust in sending people to hell. Evil exists in the world that is unimaginable. Christ says, "Unless you repent of your sins, you will all likewise perish." Jesus spoke of hell (Gehenna) more than any other prophet in the Bible because he knew the reality of it. "Better to lose an arm than to spend eternity in hell." When you realize some people are unbearably wicked, you realize that it is good and just that they go to hell. We cannot let missiology distract us from the truth. If you are not at the point where you believe in ETC, that's fine, but being agnostic about it, and if your reason for that is pragmatic reasons, you are on very shaky ground. Tell people the whole Gospel, not just what they "get" out of being a Christian. Christianity is not an incentive program. It is real. The consequences are real. Speak the truth to people. Jesus did not go soft on the Pharisees. He rebuked them very sternly. These are people who did not believe in Him. Yet, he still had harsh words for them.

 

[Jeff Saunders]

I hope you don't mind my asking... and please don't take this the wrong way.
I'm just wondering why people post things on forums, and do not provide a source or reference that people can check.
I can't wrap my head around it. Is it because they expect people to search around to find information that would deny or confirm what was said?
Wouldn't it be better if the persons reading the post did not have to spend time doing that?

Again... please don't get offended. I've been pondering this for years, and would really like to hear from someone who knows the reason.
Do you know that on forums this is actually in the guidelines, that claims made without references can be dismissed?

If you do provide a reference, I'll consider it, but as it stands currently, the Bible Canon which God has allowed down to our day, says exactly what we read, and though people may not like it, for what every reason, God hasn't given us the authority to decide what belongs in his word.
He decided that, didn't he?

Yes, I agree that attempts have been made to alter Gods word, and yes, they are spurious texts in translations, but these are known, and some translations do not contain these texts, thanks to the numerous Bible manuscripts.
Right at this moment though, your claim here is proven false, for this reason.
A lot of translations used the manuscripts to produce their copy of the Bible. Which means that Augustine, who lived around 430 CE had no impact on many translation.

The earliest manuscript containing the text of the Book of Revelation is Papyrus P98 (P. IFAO inv. 237b [+a]), which contains verses from the first chapter of Revelation. It was copied circa A.D. 100-200, likely in Egypt, and was first identified as a biblical text in 1991 by Dieter Hagedorn. 2 8​

​

Another early manuscript is Papyrus 18 (18), which contains only Revelation 1–7 and is dated to the third or early fourth century. 6​

​

Papyrus 47 (47) is also significant, as it contains text from Revelation chapters 9 through 17 and is dated to the early 3rd century CE. 5​

​

Papyrus P98 does not contain Revelation chapter 20. The earliest manuscripts that contain Revelation chapter 20 are more fragmentary and date from the second to seventh centuries. These include nine papyrus manuscripts, but they are not complete and contain only portions of the text. 3​

This is why it's so important to use references in our posts, because people reading our post, can just take what we say as Gospel and run with it... agreeing wholeheartedly, even though the information is wrong.
Worst, we become guilty of misinformation.
Something we don't want to be party to, in a world ruled by a vicious liar. John 8:44; 1 John 5:19

We really need to be careful Jeff.
That's why I put the question to you, in the way I did. It's in order to help you see how serious this is.
People get offended when I try to bring to their attention bad practice, that I see commonly used on forums, but I do it to help people improve.
The back lash wears off quickly , as I know I am doing a good deed, Something Jesus would want me to do - help people improve.

So, in review, Revelation was around as far back as the second century, and that's only a few years after John wrote it. So, eternal torment is legit.
People just need to stop the bad practice of literalism.
When they do, the truth will be sweet for them, and their listeners.

I

I hope you don't mind my asking... and please don't take this the wrong way.
I'm just wondering why people post things on forums, and do not provide a source or reference that people can check.
I can't wrap my head around it. Is it because they expect people to search around to find information that would deny or confirm what was said?
Wouldn't it be better if the persons reading the post did not have to spend time doing that?

Again... please don't get offended. I've been pondering this for years, and would really like to hear from someone who knows the reason.
Do you know that on forums this is actually in the guidelines, that claims made without references can be dismissed?

If you do provide a reference, I'll consider it, but as it stands currently, the Bible Canon which God has allowed down to our day, says exactly what we read, and though people may not like it, for what every reason, God hasn't given us the authority to decide what belongs in his word.
He decided that, didn't he?

Yes, I agree that attempts have been made to alter Gods word, and yes, they are spurious texts in translations, but these are known, and some translations do not contain these texts, thanks to the numerous Bible manuscripts.
Right at this moment though, your claim here is proven false, for this reason.
A lot of translations used the manuscripts to produce their copy of the Bible. Which means that Augustine, who lived around 430 CE had no impact on many translation.

The earliest manuscript containing the text of the Book of Revelation is Papyrus P98 (P. IFAO inv. 237b [+a]), which contains verses from the first chapter of Revelation. It was copied circa A.D. 100-200, likely in Egypt, and was first identified as a biblical text in 1991 by Dieter Hagedorn. 2 8​

​

Another early manuscript is Papyrus 18 (18), which contains only Revelation 1–7 and is dated to the third or early fourth century. 6​

​

Papyrus 47 (47) is also significant, as it contains text from Revelation chapters 9 through 17 and is dated to the early 3rd century CE. 5​

​

Papyrus P98 does not contain Revelation chapter 20. The earliest manuscripts that contain Revelation chapter 20 are more fragmentary and date from the second to seventh centuries. These include nine papyrus manuscripts, but they are not complete and contain only portions of the text. 3​

This is why it's so important to use references in our posts, because people reading our post, can just take what we say as Gospel and run with it... agreeing wholeheartedly, even though the information is wrong.
Worst, we become guilty of misinformation.
Something we don't want to be party to, in a world ruled by a vicious liar. John 8:44; 1 John 5:19

We really need to be careful Jeff.
That's why I put the question to you, in the way I did. It's in order to help you see how serious this is.
People get offended when I try to bring to their attention bad practice, that I see commonly used on forums, but I do it to help people improve.
The back lash wears off quickly , as I know I am doing a good deed, Something Jesus would want me to do - help people improve.

So, in review, Revelation was around as far back as the second century, and that's only a few years after John wrote it. So, eternal torment is legit.
People just need to stop the bad practice of literalism.
When they do, the truth will be sweet for them, and their listeners.

You do realize that the Bible was first translated into English by Wyclyffe in 1380s but what most use comes from 1600s. All your dates for early manuscripts have nothing to do with the English that most use. The ideas that I put forth are from many letters from the early church fathers and documents that talk about the history of what went on in the first few hundred years of the church, its not one letter or one persons opinion. The point is that Augustine used Latin, and a bad Latin translation aion and aionios which in Greek does not mean eternal.
Have you not done the very thing you are accusing me of, by saying the Greek words aion and aionios mean eternal as translated into most English translations, where is your documentation that that is correct? Maybe it is those who believe in eternal punishment that who are leading people astray.
It is a historical fact that Augustine did not use the Greek but Latin and that was the biggest influence to Western Christianity, in some Catholic Churches the Latin mass is still used.
I rely on the Greek scholars that understand first century Greek for the information, David Bently Hart, John Wesley Hanson, Ilaria Ramelli and others, for me to go through and find each page something was written on is not feasible, that might not be how you like, I am sorry.
If people are interested there are hundreds of web sights that can be looked up and they can find out if they agree or not.
Truth is truth and someday I will stand before God and will give account, if I am wrong God will correct me.
I truly believe that a lot of the Church today is doing the same thing the Jews did in the OT, they see the written words but do not understand the character and nature of the God that aloud those words to be written, so they killed the very one who came to save them. If you teach that God will punish his beloved creation for all eternity, you do not understand Gods heart and nature and character.
If you want to dismiss this because it doesn't make your standards thats ok with me, others may not and may even investigate it on their own as I did and they can come to their own conclusions .

 

[Jeff Saunders]

It's good that you focus on repentance. But I was like you. I entertained annihilationism because "hell" was a hard pill for me to swallow. But then I watched the movie "Sound of Freedom," and watched an online concert called "Rock Against Traffick," which was to raise awareness against human trafficking. Then it clicked. God is not unjust in sending people to hell. Evil exists in the world that is unimaginable. Christ says, "Unless you repent of your sins, you will all likewise perish." Jesus spoke of hell (Gehenna) more than any other prophet in the Bible because he knew the reality of it. "Better to lose an arm than to spend eternity in hell." When you realize some people are unbearably wicked, you realize that it is good and just that they go to hell. We cannot let missiology distract us from the truth. If you are not at the point where you believe in ETC, that's fine, but being agnostic about it, and if your reason for that is pragmatic reasons, you are on very shaky ground. Tell people the whole Gospel, not just what they "get" out of being a Christian. Christianity is not an incentive program. It is real. The consequences are real. Speak the truth to people. Jesus did not go soft on the Pharisees. He rebuked them very sternly. These are people who did not believe in Him. Yet, he still had harsh words for them.

It's good that you focus on repentance. But I was like you. I entertained annihilationism because "hell" was a hard pill for me to swallow. But then I watched the movie "Sound of Freedom," and watched an online concert called "Rock Against Traffick," which was to raise awareness against human trafficking. Then it clicked. God is not unjust in sending people to hell. Evil exists in the world that is unimaginable. Christ says, "Unless you repent of your sins, you will all likewise perish." Jesus spoke of hell (Gehenna) more than any other prophet in the Bible because he knew the reality of it. "Better to lose an arm than to spend eternity in hell." When you realize some people are unbearably wicked, you realize that it is good and just that they go to hell. We cannot let missiology distract us from the truth. If you are not at the point where you believe in ETC, that's fine, but being agnostic about it, and if your reason for that is pragmatic reasons, you are on very shaky ground. Tell people the whole Gospel, not just what they "get" out of being a Christian. Christianity is not an incentive program. It is real. The consequences are real. Speak the truth to people. Jesus did not go soft on the Pharisees. He rebuked them very sternly. These are people who did not believe in Him. Yet, he still had harsh words for them.

Why do you think a finite sin must have eternal punishment? God hates unjust weights and measures, its one of the things that is directly stated in the Gospels, but you think that's ok to have a eternal punishment for a finite wrong. God is just and his punishment is for correction, thats the purpose of it, this is shown over and over in the OT, the Jews would worship idols, God raises up judges and punishment to correct them.

 

[Mr. M]

It's good that you focus on repentance. But I was like you. I entertained annihilationism because "hell" was a hard pill for me to swallow. But then I watched the movie "Sound of Freedom," and watched an online concert called "Rock Against Traffick," which was to raise awareness against human trafficking. Then it clicked. God is not unjust in sending people to hell. Evil exists in the world that is unimaginable. Christ says, "Unless you repent of your sins, you will all likewise perish." Jesus spoke of hell (Gehenna) more than any other prophet in the Bible because he knew the reality of it. "Better to lose an arm than to spend eternity in hell." When you realize some people are unbearably wicked, you realize that it is good and just that they go to hell. We cannot let missiology distract us from the truth. If you are not at the point where you believe in ETC, that's fine, but being agnostic about it, and if your reason for that is pragmatic reasons, you are on very shaky ground. Tell people the whole Gospel, not just what they "get" out of being a Christian. Christianity is not an incentive program. It is real. The consequences are real. Speak the truth to people. Jesus did not go soft on the Pharisees. He rebuked them very sternly. These are people who did not believe in Him. Yet, he still had harsh words for them.

I share your disgust with human trafficking, particularly because of the victimization of women and children. Deserves the death penalty.
Exodus Twenty-One:
16 He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death.

Basing your actions on how Jesus conducted His ministry to the lost sheep of Israel is also on shaky ground. We can never neglect the involvement of the Holy Spirit and the Spirit of Conviction by which He ministers.
Our actions are defined specifically by what the disciples were commanded to do, not what they felt was appropriate.
The sons of thunder asked, "shall we call down fire like Elijah?" and were rebuked. Jesus could do whatever He wanted consistent with what His Father told Him specifically to do. Our actions must be equally guided by the Spirit, not a reaction to a movie about wickedness. "The wicked will be destroyed" end quote. Is that what you mean by "Annihilationism?" What makes you think anyone has a birthright beyond 120 years on this earth, if they did not heed the Word "You must be born from above"?
How is eternal torment more appropriate that annihilation? Which is merciful? Is God merciful? Is not mercy seen as weakness in the world? Yes it is. Those who would be friends with the world are enemies of God.
Eternal means "to the end of the age" aionios. Not forever, and ever and ever, which isn't a thing in the realm of human consciousness, so why talk about it as if it is understood?

Second Corinthians Five:
14 For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;
15 and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.
16 Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer.
We judge thus; because we must be spiritual and speak by the Spirit.
First Corinthians Two:
9 But as it is written:

“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,
Nor have entered into the heart of man
The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”
10 But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God.
11 For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.
To hear from the Spirit, we must quiet ours. I have done this consistently for over 30 years now.
How often have you prayed the Psalms out loud, and let Anointed words pass your lips that feeds your heart and soul.
Psalm 131:
1 Lord, my heart is not haughty,
Nor my eyes lofty.
Neither do I concern myself with great matters,
Nor with things too profound for me.
2 Surely I have calmed and quieted my soul,
Like a weaned child with his mother;
Like a weaned child is my soul within me.
3 O Israel, hope in the Lord
From this time unto the end of the Age.

 

[DamianWarS]

POV is yours. Everlasting punishment is NOT eternal torment. It is a judgment that is final and without recourse.
This is made clear in the OP. Why not respond to the post, rather than change the subject.

John 3:16 shows us a reward for belief that we should not perish but have eternal life.

Perish is contrasted with and is the antithesis to eternal life. The opposite of perish would be to survive, endure, saved, live which is consistent with the reward where the opposite of eternal life would be enternal death which is not be tourment but a permanent death, one that will not be reversed or resurrected.

Had the text contrasted perish with an emotional state like eternal happiness or with a physical state of well-being like eternal healthiness then perish would take on a different meaning that contrasts the reward like eternal sadness, eternal sickness or eternal torment.

Since perish contrast life it is consistent to view perish with death over torment. Because this is an post-life context then life needs to be qualified so it is seen differently than earthly life like second life, eternal life, or a state of enduring life. Likewise for perish, a qualifier is needed to mark it differently than the death on earth like second death or eternal death, or a removed/nothing state.

The creation account shows us a state of emptiness and disorder that is transformed by light and ends in rest. So the creation account shows us a salvation metaphor. If the light is withdrawn then salvation never happens and rest never comes to fruition. it regresses back to the dark void which is of chaos, an antithesis to the rest of the 7th day. This could be used to support torment, but if we keep going backwards even the chaos disappears and nothing is left.

 

[All Becomes New]

I share your disgust with human trafficking, particularly because of the victimization of women and children. Deserves the death penalty.
Exodus Twenty-One:
16 He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death.

Basing your actions on how Jesus conducted His ministry to the lost sheep of Israel is also on shaky ground. We can never neglect the involvement of the Holy Spirit and the Spirit of Conviction by which He ministers.
Our actions are defined specifically by what the disciples were commanded to do, not what they felt was appropriate.
The sons of thunder asked, "shall we call down fire like Elijah?" and were rebuked. Jesus could do whatever He wanted consistent with what His Father told Him specifically to do. Our actions must be equally guided by the Spirit, not a reaction to a movie about wickedness. "The wicked will be destroyed" end quote. Is that what you mean by "Annihilationism?" What makes you think anyone has a birthright beyond 120 years on this earth, if they did not heed the Word "You must be born from above"?
How is eternal torment more appropriate that annihilation? Which is merciful? Is God merciful? Is not mercy seen as weakness in the world? Yes it is. Those who would be friends with the world are enemies of God.
Eternal means "to the end of the age" aionios. Not forever, and ever and ever, which isn't a thing in the realm of human consciousness, so why talk about it as if it is understood?

Second Corinthians Five:
14 For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;
15 and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.
16 Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer.
We judge thus; because we must be spiritual and speak by the Spirit.
First Corinthians Two:
9 But as it is written:

“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,
Nor have entered into the heart of man
The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”
10 But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God.
11 For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.
To hear from the Spirit, we must quiet ours. I have done this consistently for over 30 years now.
How often have you prayed the Psalms out loud, and let Anointed words pass your lips that feeds your heart and soul.
Psalm 131:
1 Lord, my heart is not haughty,
Nor my eyes lofty.
Neither do I concern myself with great matters,
Nor with things too profound for me.
2 Surely I have calmed and quieted my soul,
Like a weaned child with his mother;
Like a weaned child is my soul within me.
3 O Israel, hope in the Lord
From this time unto the end of the Age.

I only point out one thing. Revelation. That book is not "good news" to the world. It is good news to Christians, but not to the world, who is living in rebellion against the Lord.

Romans 2:6-8
"He will repay each one according to his works: eternal life to those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor, and immortality; but wrath and anger to those who are self-seeking and disobey the truth while obeying unrighteousness."

 

[Mr. M]

I only point out one thing. Revelation. That book is not "good news" to the world. It is good news to Christians, but not to the world, who is living in rebellion against the Lord.

Revelation 1:3 Blessed is he that reads, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

To keep or hold in our heart to ponder is not a mandate to teach others, which is fraught with its own peril.
Revelation 22:
18 For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book;
19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
This should give anyone pause.

Romans 2:6-8
"He will repay each one according to his works: eternal life to those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor, and immortality; but wrath and anger to those who are self-seeking and disobey the truth while obeying unrighteousness."

Being denied eternal life after the judgment and the appropriate punishment is sufficient. What is scriptural?
"each one according to his works"
You should realize that placing a blanket punishment over every unsaved soul is unscriptural.
Hebrews 2:2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast,
and every transgression and disobedience received a just retribution.

 

[All Becomes New]

You should realize that placing a blanket punishment over every unsaved soul is unscriptural.

A "blanket punishment" would be that they all receive the same fate, which would be to cease to exist. It would be equal for all who are not saved.

No, I do not believe every unbelieving person suffers the same fate. Some have more punishment, some less. Same with heaven. Not everyone in heaven will have the same rewards.

 

[Mr. M]

No, I do not believe every unbelieving person suffers the same fate. Some have more punishment, some less.

I am not sure it would matter if it never ends, but I receive your point. To me, a just punishment would have an end. Give me a choice of a toothache or a scorpion sting to endure forever. Wow, just thinking about that feels unbearable. It contradicts everything I have learned about Justice from the Bible.

 

[CoreyD]

I

You do realize that the Bible was first translated into English by Wyclyffe in 1380s

Which sources did Wycliff use to produce his Bible?
John Wycliffe used the Latin Vulgate as the primary source for his translation of the Bible into Middle English. The translation process involved several versions, including the Early Version (EV) and the Later Version (LV).

but what most use comes from 1600s.

If you are referring to what most use, that is okay.
I believe I made reference, not to what most use, but what many translators, have done, and what they use.

Perhaps you do not understand what I am saying. I'll try to go slowly from point A to Z.

Several Bible translations rely on ancient manuscripts to produce their versions of the Bible.

English Standard Version (ESV)​

Adheres to an "essentially literal" translation philosophy and attempts to translate difficult Hebrew passages as they stand in the Masoretic text rather than resorting to emendations or finding alternative readings in ancient versions.​

New American Standard Bible (NASB)​

Known for its literal approach and is often considered one of the most accurate translations in English, reflecting Hebrew and Greek grammar and style the best.​

What are the sources of some of these translations?
Hebrew
In the third and second centuries B.C.E., the Hebrew scriptures were translated into Koine Greek, known as the Septuagint version. This was the version commonly used by the writers of the Gospels.

Greek
There are approximately 5,800 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. In addition, there are 10,000 Latin manuscripts, and 9,300 manuscripts in other languages. The New Testament autographa, the manuscripts written by the original authors, are unavailable, but manuscripts have been discovered that are dated as early as the 2nd century.

Note a very telling fact.
The man responsible for the first complete Bible in English was John Wycliffe (1328–1384)
The first English translation based on the Septuagint was The Holy Bible containing the Old and New Covenant, translated by Charles Thomson in 1808.

Notice how long it took for both Wycliff and Thomas.
More than 1,000 years.
Did the Septuagint and the Greek manuscripts disappear by then?
Not at all. They are available for translators to work from, and while that is not what most do, it is the case with those I referred to.

Wycliff used Latin. Does that mean every translator used the Vulgate, and other Latin texts available? No.
Several Bible translations were produced without relying on Latin sources, focusing instead on the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts. One notable example is William Tyndale's Bible, which he completed in 1526, using Erasmus' printed Greek text for the New Testament.
Tyndale's work was significant as he translated the Bible into English directly from the original languages, aiming to make the text accessible to ordinary people.

Note that Tyndale's translation followed nearly 200 years behind Wycliff.
This shows that any translation can be produced from manuscripts prior to Augustine , and any Latin source you referred to.
I'm not referring to most that jockey off existing translations.

I hope you understand.

All your dates for early manuscripts have nothing to do with the English that most use.

That put's Tyndale in the nothing category then, in your book.

The ideas that I put forth are from many letters from the early church fathers and documents that talk about the history of what went on in the first few hundred years of the church, its not one letter or one persons opinion. The point is that Augustine used Latin, and a bad Latin translation aion and aionios which in Greek does not mean eternal.
Have you not done the very thing you are accusing me of, by saying the Greek words aion and aionios mean eternal as translated into most English translations, where is your documentation that that is correct? Maybe it is those who believe in eternal punishment that who are leading people astray.

It is a historical fact that Augustine did not use the Greek but Latin and that was the biggest influence to Western Christianity, in some Catholic Churches the Latin mass is still used.

I rely on the Greek scholars that understand first century Greek for the information, David Bently Hart, John Wesley Hanson, Ilaria Ramelli and others, for me to go through and find each page something was written on is not feasible, that might not be how you like, I am sorry.

If people are interested there are hundreds of web sights that can be looked up and they can find out if they agree or not.
Truth is truth and someday I will stand before God and will give account, if I am wrong God will correct me.
I truly believe that a lot of the Church today is doing the same thing the Jews did in the OT, they see the written words but do not understand the character and nature of the God that aloud those words to be written, so they killed the very one who came to save them. If you teach that God will punish his beloved creation for all eternity, you do not understand Gods heart and nature and character.

If you want to dismiss this because it doesn't make your standards thats ok with me, others may not and may even investigate it on their own as I did and they can come to their own conclusions .

It looks like we aren't talking about the same thing.
See sources above, and if you disagree with them, please be sure to provide a reliable source... which you have not yet done.

Yes, I do dismiss what you said, as an unsupported claim.

 

[All Becomes New]

I am not sure it would matter if it never ends, but I receive your point. To me, a just punishment would have an end. Give me a choice of a toothache or a scorpion sting to endure forever. Wow, just thinking about that feels unbearable. It contradicts everything I have learned about Justice from the Bible.

I want to share this with you, if it is all right. It is an article I wrote on holiness. My attitude is that no one knows how truly depraved they really are, which I talk about in my article "A Radical Look at Sin." This article I want to share with you is about holiness.

Here is the conclusion of the article...

"To end, it is a grace that we do not see all the sin in our lives at once as bearing the weight of our sins would most certainly put us to immense shame and perhaps death, just as it is a grace that the Holy Spirit reveals hidden sins in our lives we would otherwise have no idea that they existed and this is the evidence that the Holy Spirit is at work in sanctifying us."

And the article

A Radical Look at Holiness

This is a follow-up to my article titled, "A Radical Look at Sin."There are several texts I could go to that shows that the Christain life is not just about abounding in grace, but actually following what Jesus says such that they embody His words of "If you love me, you will keep my...

www.oldthingspassawayallbecomesnew.net

So, we are sinful... to our core. We might not "feel" sinful, but that doesn't stop us from never being able to do a perfect act in our life in action, deed, emotion, heart, and motivation.

 

[Mr. M]

I want to share this with you, if it is all right. It is an article I wrote on holiness. My attitude is that no one knows how truly depraved they really are, which I talk about in my article "A Radical Look at Sin." This article I want to share with you is about holiness.

Here is the conclusion of the article...

"To end, it is a grace that we do not see all the sin in our lives at once as bearing the weight of our sins would most certainly put us to immense shame and perhaps death, just as it is a grace that the Holy Spirit reveals hidden sins in our lives we would otherwise have no idea that they existed and this is the evidence that the Holy Spirit is at work in sanctifying us."

And the article

A Radical Look at Holiness

This is a follow-up to my article titled, "A Radical Look at Sin."There are several texts I could go to that shows that the Christain life is not just about abounding in grace, but actually following what Jesus says such that they embody His words of "If you love me, you will keep my...

www.oldthingspassawayallbecomesnew.net

So, we are sinful... to our core. We might not "feel" sinful, but that doesn't stop us from never being able to do a perfect act in our life in action, deed, emotion, heart, and motivation.

The only way I can fathom not "feeling sinful", is if I had never pursued holiness by the Way of the Lord and the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit gives us the desire, and has consistently shown me my shortcomings in His time, when the results would be growth and not despair.
Before walking with the Lord, I rarely felt sinful. What we have to learn is to distinguish the conviction of the Spirit from the voice of the enemy. The correction of the Lord is painful but necessary . All the enemy can do is lie, accuse, and impose guilt. To be confronted with our faults without guilt, but a desire for correction that leads us in the Way. That is the Holy Spirit. The problem for many in my experience is the willingness to receive correction, which is disobedience.
I will give your writings a read soon. I can assure you that I have spent enough time with the Spirit over the years wrestling with this very teaching to have it written on my heart. This is clearly the Way.
Luke 1:
67 Now his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Spirit, and prophesied, saying:
68 “Blessed is the Lord God of Israel,
For He has visited and redeemed His people,
69 And has raised up a horn of salvation for us
In the house of His servant David,
70 As He spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets,
Who have been since the world began,
71 That we should be saved from our enemies
And from the hand of all who hate us,
72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers
And to remember His holy covenant,
73 The oath which He swore to our father Abraham:
74 To grant us that we,
Being delivered from the hand of our enemies,
Might serve Him without fear,
75 In holiness and righteousness before Him all the days of our life.

Is this prophecy in your articles? Then we are definitely on the same page.

 

[All Becomes New]

I can assure you that I have spent enough time with the Spirit over the years wrestling with this very teaching to have it written on my heart.

Why do you keep bringing up your ability to hear from the Spirit (better than other people)?