Eternal punishment vs eternal life

[contratodo]

So, does the Bible teach conscious torment over an infinite period?

Yes.
".......wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever"
Jude 1:7-13

"outside are dogs and sorcerers, and whoremongers and murderers, and idolaters,
and whoever loves and practices a lie"
Revelation 22:15

"who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?"
Isaiah 33:14

I do not think it is equal torment, it is personal and based on what each person deserves.

 

[A Devil's Advocate]

New International Version, Matthew 25:


Do these two uses of "eternal" carry the same meaning? If yes, what does it mean?

They are the same Greek word in the same sentence, so I think they carry the same meaning.

Eternal life is immortal life.

The question is this: What is eternal punishment?

The term eternal punishment is the opposite of eternal life. The punishment is eternal death, i.e., annihilation or the absence of life, Revelation 20:


Conscious punishment or suffering over an infinite period of existence makes little physical sense. To be conscious, you need a life or a breadth from God (Genesis 2:7). In other words, conscious torment over an infinite time is a form of eternal 'life'.

My paraphrase:


Paul expressed a similar concept in 2 Thessalonians 1:


Strong's Greek: 3639. ὄλεθρος (olethros) — 4 Occurrences

BDAG:
① a state of destruction, destruction, ruin, death in our lit. always w. some kind of transcendent coloring, … ὄλ. αἰώνιος eternal death (TestReub 6:3) 2 Th 1:9

Pulpit Commentary:


There is some justification that eternal punishment is permanent death or annihilation of the soul.

See also Does the Bible teach conscious torment over an infinite period?.

This is just a thought, but is it not more likely that when the writers are using the word "Eternal or Eternity" they are simply using a form of hyperbole (exaggeration)?

The reason I ask is because God is the only eternal being in existence.

First off, to be eternal means, not only will you never die, but you would never have had a beginning, either. For just as you can go eternally forward, you must be able to go eternally backwards. For this reason alone, it is impossible for God to create an eternal being. Since to be created is to have a beginning.

Secondly, to be eternal, by it's very nature, means there is no potential or possibility of death. If there was, then death would simply be just a matter of time.

It is more accurate to say that we were given the potential for everlasting life. The reason I say 'potential' is because we never had everlasting life from the start. This was completely dependent upon eating from the tree of life. And, just like being eternal, to have everlasting life means there is no potential or possibility of death. So, if we had everlasting life right from the start, then sin would have been powerless to take life. This seems to be a major contradiction within mainstream christian theology.

We never had everlasting life, and sin did not bring about physical death.
This is clearly seen in Gen. 3:22. If sin ultimately leads to physical death, then it would be impossible for the tree of life to give everlasting life to a sinful being when death is the ultimate outcome.

I seem to be getting of topic.....

When we choose to believe and enter into a relationship with Jesus, we are again given the potential for everlasting life.

So......

Theoretically then, is it not possible that should you choose not to eat from the tree of life, you would simply perish? A choice given to us by God and made possible by freewill. Not that anyone would ever choose not to eat from the tree of life after having experienced the love of God. And, should you enter the afterlife having never accepted God's salvation, access to the tree of life would no longer be possible. Inevitably, leading to the second death? Which, I believe, lines up with your Pulpit Commentary.

 

[tonychanyt]

This is just a thought, but is it not more likely that when the writers are using the word "Eternal or Eternity" they are simply using a form of hyperbole (exaggeration)?

They could but not always. See Three Greek words related to eternal