Annihilationists confuse types related to eternal punishment with the reality
- Thread starter UnitedWithChrist
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
From Martyrdom of Polycarp, disciple of John:
“I have wild animals here,” the Proconsul said. “I will throw you to them if you do not repent.” “Call them,” Polycarp replied. “It is unthinkable for me to repent from what is good to turn to what is evil. I will be glad though to be changed from evil to righteousness.” “If you despise the animals, I will have you burned.” “You threaten me with fire which burns for an hour, and is then extinguished, but you know nothing of the fire of the coming judgment and eternal punishment, reserved for the ungodly. Why are you waiting? Bring on whatever you want.”
Seems like Polycarp believed in eternal conscious punishment.
“I have wild animals here,” the Proconsul said. “I will throw you to them if you do not repent.” “Call them,” Polycarp replied. “It is unthinkable for me to repent from what is good to turn to what is evil. I will be glad though to be changed from evil to righteousness.” “If you despise the animals, I will have you burned.” “You threaten me with fire which burns for an hour, and is then extinguished, but you know nothing of the fire of the coming judgment and eternal punishment, reserved for the ungodly. Why are you waiting? Bring on whatever you want.”
Seems like Polycarp believed in eternal conscious punishment.
-
4
- Show all
H
If I had a dime for every Jehovah's falsewitness that ive spoken with on the streets who says its a parable......
Usually when Jesus says a parable He says this is like that and that is like this.
In this case NOTHING of the sort.
But lets play the parable game with em, this is what I often explain to them:
Lets go to the parable in Matthew 13, Jesus here explains the parable to the disciples, when they asked LETS LOOK AT IT SHALL WE? [Quotes from KJV, PROGRAM: e-Sword its a free bible software check it out, AMAZING might I add, you can add commentaries to it and ALL THAT, you can make notes, GOOD STUFF]:
Mat 13:36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.
Mat 13:37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
Mat 13:38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
Mat 13:39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
Mat 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
Mat 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
Mat 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Pay attention now folks if you can afford it! The underlined portion: Jesus explains field is that, good seed is that........ BUT when we get to the bolded portion, Jesus does NOT explain what the FIRE is.... nor the wailing and gnashing of teeth. YOU KNOW WHY? Its because: the FIRE is FIRE. Wailing is WAILING. No need to explain that.
Hevosmies(Horseman) def. Jehovah's falsewitnesses by KO. Round 1.
Usually when Jesus says a parable He says this is like that and that is like this.
In this case NOTHING of the sort.
But lets play the parable game with em, this is what I often explain to them:
Lets go to the parable in Matthew 13, Jesus here explains the parable to the disciples, when they asked LETS LOOK AT IT SHALL WE? [Quotes from KJV, PROGRAM: e-Sword its a free bible software check it out, AMAZING might I add, you can add commentaries to it and ALL THAT, you can make notes, GOOD STUFF]:
Mat 13:36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.
Mat 13:37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
Mat 13:38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
Mat 13:39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
Mat 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
Mat 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
Mat 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Pay attention now folks if you can afford it! The underlined portion: Jesus explains field is that, good seed is that........ BUT when we get to the bolded portion, Jesus does NOT explain what the FIRE is.... nor the wailing and gnashing of teeth. YOU KNOW WHY? Its because: the FIRE is FIRE. Wailing is WAILING. No need to explain that.
Hevosmies(Horseman) def. Jehovah's falsewitnesses by KO. Round 1.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Yes looks like eisegesis to me also.
The answer to the whole series of parables at the end of the last with Lazarus . The moral . . .If they have no faith that alone comes by hearing God then neither would they beleive if one rose from the dead making the authority in believing a God, as it is written. Not by walking by sight looking at dead flesh. The prescription is without parables Christ spoke not. Not without literalizing the spiritual meaning away he spoke not.
In order for a parable to appear it does not have to be announced. . "this is a parable" start to look for the spiritual understanding hid from the lost.. That's a formula of the literalist .
The idea of slipping in a literal translation in the middle of a discourse using parables does not make interpretation sense.
The discourse began in Luke 15 the previous chapter and ended with chapters later.
Again, I don't think he snuck in a literal understanding in a series of parable beginning the chapter before. .
The beginning of the discourse…..Luke 15 King James Version (KJV) Then drew near unto him all the publicans and sinners for to hear him. And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.And he spake this parable unto them, saying,4 What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?
On a roll in another parable
Luke 15; 8 Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep the house, and seek diligently till she find it?
Continuing on in the discourse of parable as a series .
Luke 15: 11 And he said, A certain man had two sons:
Chapter 16 still speaking in parables
Luke 16 King James Version (KJV) And he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods. And the younger of them said to his father, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me.
He then spoke another in the series of parables (no sneaking in a literal translation) to throw the worshipper off
Luke 16:19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
And went immediately into another parable
Luke 17 King James Version (KJV) Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.
Why would we ignore the prescription for seeking out the spiritual understanding that teach us about faith (the unseen eternal) .
Matthew 13:34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:
Mark 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
The answer to the whole series of parables at the end of the last with Lazarus . The moral . . .If they have no faith that alone comes by hearing God then neither would they beleive if one rose from the dead making the authority in believing a God, as it is written. Not by walking by sight looking at dead flesh. The prescription is without parables Christ spoke not. Not without literalizing the spiritual meaning away he spoke not.
In order for a parable to appear it does not have to be announced. . "this is a parable" start to look for the spiritual understanding hid from the lost.. That's a formula of the literalist .
The idea of slipping in a literal translation in the middle of a discourse using parables does not make interpretation sense.
The discourse began in Luke 15 the previous chapter and ended with chapters later.
Again, I don't think he snuck in a literal understanding in a series of parable beginning the chapter before. .
The beginning of the discourse…..Luke 15 King James Version (KJV) Then drew near unto him all the publicans and sinners for to hear him. And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.And he spake this parable unto them, saying,4 What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?
On a roll in another parable
Luke 15; 8 Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep the house, and seek diligently till she find it?
Continuing on in the discourse of parable as a series .
Luke 15: 11 And he said, A certain man had two sons:
Chapter 16 still speaking in parables
Luke 16 King James Version (KJV) And he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods. And the younger of them said to his father, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me.
He then spoke another in the series of parables (no sneaking in a literal translation) to throw the worshipper off
Luke 16:19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
And went immediately into another parable
Luke 17 King James Version (KJV) Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.
Why would we ignore the prescription for seeking out the spiritual understanding that teach us about faith (the unseen eternal) .
Matthew 13:34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:
Mark 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
So then in the middle of a series of parable. Jesus sneaks in a literal interpretation?
How would that help us walk by faith... (the purpose for parables)..?
What is the spiritual meaning of that parable if not as it is written.
Is it make sure a person bring a canteen of cold water when they are buried? Or is it a faith issue and we need the proper tools for rightly dividing the parables. (2 Corinthians 4:18) ?
Luke 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
What is the moral conclusion ? Keep your tongue moist or else it will swell up and cut off oxygen?
Sola scriptura, law and the prophets seemed to be the understanding as a conclusion to all in that series of parables.
Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail
How would that help us walk by faith... (the purpose for parables)..?
What is the spiritual meaning of that parable if not as it is written.
Is it make sure a person bring a canteen of cold water when they are buried? Or is it a faith issue and we need the proper tools for rightly dividing the parables. (2 Corinthians 4:18) ?
Luke 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
What is the moral conclusion ? Keep your tongue moist or else it will swell up and cut off oxygen?
Sola scriptura, law and the prophets seemed to be the understanding as a conclusion to all in that series of parables.
Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail
A literal story in a series of parables? For what reason?
What gives you that idea? Strong evidence. . . The water or the tongue of one buried? The poor is not buried. Is it authorizing necromancy and men must seek the dead. Like Catholisicim, and the 3500 and rising patron saints?
What is the moral of the lesson that you say must be literalized seeing no man can serve two teaching masters .Parable of literal?
What gives you that idea? Strong evidence. . . The water or the tongue of one buried? The poor is not buried. Is it authorizing necromancy and men must seek the dead. Like Catholisicim, and the 3500 and rising patron saints?
What is the moral of the lesson that you say must be literalized seeing no man can serve two teaching masters .Parable of literal?
He is helping us, its why he uses parables to teach us how to walk by faith (the unseen eternal).
What do you think is the spiritual understanding of that parable? Is it the flesh does not return to the dust and the temporal corrupted spirit does not return to the father?
It would seem the word of God apposes that kind of idea.
Psalm 104:29Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled: thou takest away their breath, they die, and return to their dust.
Ecclesiastes 12:7Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
What do you think is the spiritual understanding of that parable? Is it the flesh does not return to the dust and the temporal corrupted spirit does not return to the father?
It would seem the word of God apposes that kind of idea.
Psalm 104:29Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled: thou takest away their breath, they die, and return to their dust.
Ecclesiastes 12:7Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
Noted below.
Do you revel in irrelevance, or do you think you're funny?
There is no moral of the story; it's direct teaching. The rich man doesn't "represent" anyone, and Lazarus doesn't "represent" anyone. In parables, the characters represent others, in metaphorical language. There is no clearly metaphorical language in the "Lazarus and the rich man" passage. Proper names don't appear in any non-controversial parable.
Do you revel in irrelevance, or do you think you're funny?
There is no moral of the story; it's direct teaching. The rich man doesn't "represent" anyone, and Lazarus doesn't "represent" anyone. In parables, the characters represent others, in metaphorical language. There is no clearly metaphorical language in the "Lazarus and the rich man" passage. Proper names don't appear in any non-controversial parable.
I do see the relevance of a parable in a series of parables. I would see no relevance in slipping in a literal interpretation. Do you?
I see no reason to make it literal tongue or literal water . He is the one signified as buried, his memory is gone and will never come to mind forever more. The days of his sufferings of hell as the wrath of God revealed from heaven are long gone.
Dead, not suffering . Hell is reasoned by the living suffering . Christian can cry out and be strengthened to finish the good work of God that does work in us to both will and preform His good pleasure. He says we should do so without murmuring. Its only funny when two people are laughing.
In the parallel parables working together as the last sign and wonder it reads. . . .
Jonah 2 King James Version (KJV)Then Jonah prayed unto the Lord his God out of the fish's belly, And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the Lord, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voice.
(Belly of hell heart of the earth )
Matthew 26:37-39 King James Version (KJV) And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy. Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me. And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.
Not dead sacrifices
As I said before, none of the passages that are unambiguous parables contain proper names. Jesus isn't using everyday activities that teach spiritual principles. He is simply telling what appears to be a true story. The proximity to other parables is irrelevant.
This passage mentions that the rich man died and was buried, but there is no "signified as buried" to be found. There is no suggestion that Lazarus' transport to Abraham's bosom carried any symbolic meaning.
By the way, parables don't work together as the last sign and wonder. That's just creative fiction.
This passage mentions that the rich man died and was buried, but there is no "signified as buried" to be found. There is no suggestion that Lazarus' transport to Abraham's bosom carried any symbolic meaning.
By the way, parables don't work together as the last sign and wonder. That's just creative fiction.
The order of parables seems to follow a pattern of going from less important matters to the matter of greatest importance, which is the eternal fate of the soul. BTW, what is a conditionalist? Is your salvation not conditioned on your response to the gospel?
Oh, I just looked it up. Hmmm, gee, we have people here who claim the soul is immortal. That is contrary to what Scripture states.
Oh, I just looked it up. Hmmm, gee, we have people here who claim the soul is immortal. That is contrary to what Scripture states.
-
1
- Show all