ECTists like to claim that Conditionalists "cherry pick" a few scriptures to back up our case. It is very helpful to see just how extensive the scriptural case against eternal conscious torture really is. It helps to show just how much Scripture has to be ignored to believe in eternal torture. There is much much more than just what I posted, I only posted the tip of the iceberg.
Is the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment biblical or not?
- Thread starter Timotheos
- Start date
ECTists like to claim that Conditionalists "cherry pick" a few scriptures to back up our case. It is very helpful to see just how extensive the scriptural case against eternal conscious torture really is. It helps to show just how much Scripture has to be ignored to believe in eternal torture. There is much much more than just what I posted, I only posted the tip of the iceberg.
genuineoriginal
New member
I checked into this, and you are partially correct.
חֶרְפָּה cherpah, translated as shame, refers to a person or thing which is despised (Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon), specifically the scorn held for an enemy.
So, both the despising (mistranslated as shame) and the contempt are held by God towards His enemies.
There is nothing crazy about holding Dahmer in contempt.
What he did is contemptible.
When they are thrown into the lake of fire, their body and soul will be destroyed, but the memory of them will forever be despised and held in contempt.
You seem to believe that both kinds will be given everlasting life, but only one kind gets to enjoy it.
That is not what the verse states.
The verse states that only one kind gets life, the other kind is held in contempt and scorned forever.
genuineoriginal
New member
He was banned for it, but the infraction was reversed.
everready
New member
In your story Tim, the devil gets off scot-free.
to get off scot-free (to get away without penalty; to beat the rap)
everready
Last edited by a moderator:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Knight didn't feel the post was large enough for a ban, and that is his prerogative. It is his forum.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
making the most of your TOL Blog
making the most of your TOL Blog
Yes, good advice,...I often do this in my TOL Blog, write an article, commentary or list an archive of posts in a blog entry...then you can link people to it. I don't know how long a post you can make in a blog entry,...but you can give it a go
making the most of your TOL Blog
Yes, good advice,...I often do this in my TOL Blog, write an article, commentary or list an archive of posts in a blog entry...then you can link people to it. I don't know how long a post you can make in a blog entry,...but you can give it a go
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
scot free? not really......
scot free? not really......
Besides the insanity on ECT already shared here (blog post of earlier archived posts from this thread, and additional comments/links), I haven't seen anywhere where Tim lets the devil go scot free. All actions have their consequences and and such judgments are meted out in perfect fairness, justly and mercifully, if any being could repent or return to God, affording them salvation. If a being has reached a point of no return, and embraced iniquity whole-heartedly (and is beyond repentance), then the end result or fruit of such is 'death', so that 'death' is the consequence(penalty). The 'death' is final, eternal in that sense, in that the soul is disintegrated, terminated, wiped out, no more. The same powers that can create or form a soul, can also uncreate or disintegrate a soul.
scot free? not really......
Besides the insanity on ECT already shared here (blog post of earlier archived posts from this thread, and additional comments/links), I haven't seen anywhere where Tim lets the devil go scot free. All actions have their consequences and and such judgments are meted out in perfect fairness, justly and mercifully, if any being could repent or return to God, affording them salvation. If a being has reached a point of no return, and embraced iniquity whole-heartedly (and is beyond repentance), then the end result or fruit of such is 'death', so that 'death' is the consequence(penalty). The 'death' is final, eternal in that sense, in that the soul is disintegrated, terminated, wiped out, no more. The same powers that can create or form a soul, can also uncreate or disintegrate a soul.
Derf
Well-known member
Yes, context is very important. I was hoping that you would look at my post's points in context with each other. Too much to ask? I gave several instances where "death" or "destruction" don't mean "total annihilation forever". I'm not saying it can't, but it doesn't always. That weakens your case that everywhere you see "destruction" you get to replace with "total annihilation". I agree with you that the two gates are giving opposite results, and one is "life", then the other is "death". Which can be equated with "destruction". So if "death" is the opposite of life, and it is appointed unto man ONCE to die, and then comes judgment (Heb 9:27). Then your "destruction", which you say equals "death", in context allows for a judgment AFTER destruction. Thus "destruction" is not "total annihilation".
I hope you will comment on my objections and not just repeat the same things you've been repeating ad nauseum.
And, yes, I'm sure there are some real problems with my objections. I hope you won't then focus on something else besides those problems like you did above. Try not to just repeat the same thing over and over again, but respond to my objections.
Also--try reading them all first. I think it will help.
Oh, and one more thing. Try not to just repeat the same thing over and over again.
Did I mention that I think you would do better if you didn't just repeat the same thing over and over again?
(See how it feels?)
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Zeke
Well-known member
Drama Queen try outs again? you come close to winning but you still lack something that would put you over the top. Maybe its that surname and artificial persona you are living under there dead-man talking.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Context....
Context....
Still continuing from my last reflections here
Since the terms are not wholly defined in their minutest exactness and detail from various passages (I've contended the bible is not perfect in this regard), all you have are the primary terms of 'life' and 'death' to work with, while all else inbetween or in 'context' are merely 'speculative'. At best then, all you have are conjectures based on whatever passages say (by way of 'translation' then 'interpretation'), but its still just a subjective interpretation assumed, conditioned by one's own bias, opinion and preference...granted the data available and how one CHOOSES to interpret it. - then you still have your own faculties of logic, reason, conscience, intelligence to decide what is the best or most probable translation, add whatever 'inspiration' may be granted as well.
As far as heb. 9:27 goes,....I gather that's speaking of physical death, then afterwards judgment, so this doesn't refer to the 'second death'.
Context....
Still continuing from my last reflections here
Since the terms are not wholly defined in their minutest exactness and detail from various passages (I've contended the bible is not perfect in this regard), all you have are the primary terms of 'life' and 'death' to work with, while all else inbetween or in 'context' are merely 'speculative'. At best then, all you have are conjectures based on whatever passages say (by way of 'translation' then 'interpretation'), but its still just a subjective interpretation assumed, conditioned by one's own bias, opinion and preference...granted the data available and how one CHOOSES to interpret it. - then you still have your own faculties of logic, reason, conscience, intelligence to decide what is the best or most probable translation, add whatever 'inspiration' may be granted as well.
As far as heb. 9:27 goes,....I gather that's speaking of physical death, then afterwards judgment, so this doesn't refer to the 'second death'.
way 2 go
Well-known member
it says there are two kinds of people awakening
Dan 12:2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake,
some to everlasting life,
and
some to shame and everlasting contempt.
but at least you have both on the same side,
now you just have to get the fact that it is talking
about the two kinds of people awakening
or
you could just say this whole verse is about God
I am running out of crazy ideas of how to interpret this verse
Christians have shame and everlasting contempt
God has shame and everlasting contempt
every one but the sinners have shame and everlasting contempt.
Please do your homework BEFORE you object to the truth.
There is only eternal life in Christ, and nowhere else. The only way to HAVE eternal life is on the condition that you received eternal life from Christ. Therefore, Immortality is CONDITIONAL upon receiving Jesus Christ. This doctrine is called "Conditional Immortality".
This is what the Bible teaches, contrary to the ECTist doctrine that everyone receives eternal life, some in heavenly bliss and the rest in hellish torture.
I'm sorry, but you are wrong. The devil will be destroyed on the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly. I don't see how you can claim that being completely destroyed is the same thing as getting off scot-free. That doesn't make any sense whatsoever, and it simply is not true. You ECTists will claim ANYTHING to try to support your weak case, won't you? Please explain clearly how being completely destroyed is the same thing as "getting off scot-free".
You agreed that context is important, yet you still ignored the context of Matthew 7:13-14. Since one group enters LIFE through the narrow gate, the group entering DESTRUCTION through the wide does not ALSO enter life, life being tortured in hell. Therefore, although you might be able to scrape together support for the idea that destruction might not mean complete destruction in some other contexts, in THIS context it does mean complete destruction. We can look at other contexts later, right now we are dealing with the context of Matthew 7:13-14. The context does not allow the interpretation of eternal non-destruction with torture in hell.
they want the others to suffer
God doesn't
God doesn't want you to want others to suffer