Eternal Hell Is a Logical Lie

[Kroogz]

Therefore, the real question becomes: How should passages about everlasting punishment, unquenchable fire, and eternal torment be interpreted alongside passages describing the fate of the wicked as death, destruction, perishing, ashes, and the second death? That is where the debate actually lies.

IMO, that puts the cart before the horse.

Did the Lord Jesus Christ die for ALL and for ALL sin? I believe He did. Those who do not believe will not have eternal life.

The wages of SIN is death.......His death. The sin "wage" has been paid. The dead will be resurrected, BECAUSE the wages of sin have been paid.

Since the wages of sin are paid by Christ, the final judgement is MUCH MORE for the unbeliever.

 

[OMC]

IMO, that puts the cart before the horse.

Did the Lord Jesus Christ die for ALL and for ALL sin? I believe He did. Those who do not believe will not have eternal life.

The wages of SIN is death.......His death. The sin "wage" has been paid. The dead will be resurrected, BECAUSE the wages of sin have been paid.

Since the wages of sin are paid by Christ, the final judgement is MUCH MORE for the unbeliever.

I think that's where I see it a little differently.
If Christ paid the wages of sin, and the wages of sin is death, then it seems fair to ask how that fits into our understanding of the final judgment.
I completely agree that rejecting Christ has eternal consequences.
But before I read eternal torment into passages about death, destruction, perishing, and the second death, I'd first want to understand why those words aren't being taken at face value.
That's why I tend to think this is where the discussion really starts, not ends.

 

[Kroogz]

I think that's where I see it a little differently.
If Christ paid the wages of sin, and the wages of sin is death, then it seems fair to ask how that fits into our understanding of the final judgment.

From my understanding.........The Lord Jesus Christ paid for all sin. If He did not, the dead would not be resurrected.......They would just "poof" and disappear forever.

The consequences are eternal in nature because the Lord Jesus Christ lived and died for all........All He asks is for the sinner to believe.

He died for all, all will be resurrected....either to eternal life or eternal death.


Honestly, I don't think the debate can advance to your level, if we don't truly believe the Lord Jesus Christ died for all(annihilation would be a logical conclusion.)

IMO, this is tantamount to going any further in this debate.....Did the Lord Jesus Christ die for all? His life is eternal in nature.

BTW, love your ability to push and think.

 

[John146]

I think that's where I see it a little differently.
If Christ paid the wages of sin, and the wages of sin is death, then it seems fair to ask how that fits into our understanding of the final judgment.
I completely agree that rejecting Christ has eternal consequences.
But before I read eternal torment into passages about death, destruction, perishing, and the second death, I'd first want to understand why those words aren't being taken at face value.
That's why I tend to think this is where the discussion really starts, not ends.

Is one annihilated at the first death? If not, why would one be annihilated at the second death?

 

[GWH]

Is one annihilated at the first death? If not, why would one be annihilated at the second death?

Souls are destroyed after justice is attained in hell.

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

Souls are destroyed after justice is attained in hell.

Why leave this part out?:

"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul:​

but rather fear Him Which Is Able to destroy both soul and body in hell"​

(Matthew 10:28 AV) ​

​

-------------
And, precious friend(s), Please Be Very Richly Encouraged and Edified
In The Lord Jesus Christ and In His Precious Word Of Truth, Rightly
Divided:

The Bible: The BIG Picture

Amen.

 

[Kroogz]

Is one annihilated at the first death? If not, why would one be annihilated at the second death?

I think this is a key starting point in this debate.

The scripture never talks about unbelieving John and Jane Smith from Toledo Ohio, who can stub their toe and bleed from a bad cut on the cutting board being judged in the final judgement.

These are resurrected unbelievers that are in focus.

I think we tend to put our flesh and blood (and emotions)as we know it, in the final judgement. But it is about resurrected unbelievers.

 

[Kroogz]

Souls are destroyed after justice is attained in hell.

Justice was attained on His Cross. Hell will never attain Justice. Hell is Justice served.

 

[Researcher]

Is one annihilated at the first death? If not, why would one be annihilated at the second death?

Were we annihilated before conception?

Or...

Were we the Morning Stars that sang together?

Where were you before God laid the foundations?

 

[Researcher]

You won't know where you are going until you know where you have been.

 

[OMC]

From my understanding.........The Lord Jesus Christ paid for all sin. If He did not, the dead would not be resurrected.......They would just "poof" and disappear forever.

The consequences are eternal in nature because the Lord Jesus Christ lived and died for all........All He asks is for the sinner to believe.

He died for all, all will be resurrected....either to eternal life or eternal death.


Honestly, I don't think the debate can advance to your level, if we don't truly believe the Lord Jesus Christ died for all(annihilation would be a logical conclusion.)

IMO, this is tantamount to going any further in this debate.....Did the Lord Jesus Christ die for all? His life is eternal in nature.

BTW, love your ability to push and think.

If Christ's death was truly for all, then the resurrection is also for all. Scripture says: "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive" (1 Cor. 15:22).
So I can certainly see why you connect Christ's atoning work with the universal resurrection.
Where the discussion gets interesting is what happens after that resurrection.
We both agree there are two outcomes: life and judgment.
The question is how the nature of Christ's atonement relates to the nature of that final judgment.
I also agree that we can't get very far in this discussion without first asking: Did Christ die for all, or only for some?
That's a foundational question, because many of the later conclusions flow from how we answer it.
And thank you for the kind words.
Iron sharpens iron.
Even when we disagree, thoughtful questions help us all think more carefully about what Scripture is actually saying.

 

[OMC]

Is one annihilated at the first death? If not, why would one be annihilated at the second death?

That's a good question, brother, but I'd actually turn it around.
The first death isn't final.
Scripture teaches a resurrection from it.

The second death, however, is presented as the final judgment with no subsequent resurrection described.
That's what makes it "second."
It's not merely another death of the same kind.

So the question for me isn't: "Why would someone be annihilated at the second death if they aren't annihilated at the first?"
but: "Why should I assume the two deaths function identically when Scripture treats them differently?"

The first death is followed by resurrection.
The second death is the final outcome after resurrection and judgment.
That's why I think the nature of the second death is precisely what needs to be demonstrated from the text rather than assumed from the first death.

 

[Kroogz]

We both agree there are two outcomes: life and judgment.
The question is how the nature of Christ's atonement relates to the nature of that final judgment.

We find it in Revelation.

Rev 20:12
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds.

John 5:28-29
Do not be amazed at this, for the hour is coming when all who are in their graves will hear His voice / and come out—those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.


The dead are judged according to their deeds/works......human good/evil. Sin is finished, so none are judged according to sin.

Christ atoned for sin, but not for our human good(menstrual rags.)


His atonement is completely and utterly relevant to the nature of the final judgement. If not, all unbelievers would be judged according to their SINS.

 

[OMC]

We find it in Revelation.

Rev 20:12
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds.

John 5:28-29
Do not be amazed at this, for the hour is coming when all who are in their graves will hear His voice / and come out—those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.


The dead are judged according to their deeds/works......human good/evil. Sin is finished, so none are judged according to sin.

Christ atoned for sin, but not for our human good(menstrual rags.)


His atonement is completely and utterly relevant to the nature of the final judgement. If not, all unbelievers would be judged according to their SINS.

I agree that Revelation 20 says people are judged according to their works.
What I've been wrestling with is whether works are the basis of the judgment or the evidence revealed at the judgment.
For example, if someone stands before God having rejected Christ, are their evil deeds the problem, or do those deeds simply reveal a deeper problem of unbelief and separation from God?
I can certainly see your point that Christ's atonement is what makes the resurrection of all possible.
That's a connection I hadn't considered in quite that way before.
Where I'm still thinking it through is this: if sin has been completely removed from the equation, why does Scripture continue to connect condemnation with unbelief and rejection of the Son (John 3:18, John 3:36)?
That's not me disagreeing with you.
I'm just trying to understand how those pieces fit together.
I think you're raising a good question here.

 

[Kroogz]

What I've been wrestling with is whether works are the basis of the judgment or the evidence revealed at the judgment.
For example, if someone stands before God having rejected Christ, are their evil deeds the problem, or do those deeds simply reveal a deeper problem of unbelief and separation from God?

Evidence ,in my opinion.

Based upon the character and nature of my Lord and Savior, He is not going to nit pick on the basis of our human good, but show us how it deterred us from choosing Him.

IMO, that is the torment and smoke(forever). Unbelievers are going to know who He is and know they had every opportunity to choose Him.

Matt 7:22~~Many will say to Me on that day~(Judgment day,every knee shall bow)~, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’

 

[OMC]

Evidence ,in my opinion.

Based upon the character and nature of my Lord and Savior, He is not going to nit pick on the basis of our human good, but show us how it deterred us from choosing Him.

IMO, that is the torment and smoke(forever). Unbelievers are going to know who He is and know they had every opportunity to choose Him.

Matt 7:22~~Many will say to Me on that day~(Judgment day,every knee shall bow)~, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’

I tend to agree that works function as evidence.
Matthew 7 has always stood out to me for that reason.
Those people point to everything they did: "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name...?"
Yet the issue wasn't a lack of activity.
The issue was that they never truly knew Him.
That's why I find your point interesting.
Their works revealed something deeper.
The judgment exposed the reality of their relationship to Christ.
Where I'm still thinking it through is this: if the final judgment reveals whether a person ultimately embraced or rejected Christ, then it seems unbelief remains central even when works are the evidence being examined.
In other words, I don't see works and faith as competing categories.
The works reveal the faith, or lack of it.
So I think there's probably more agreement between us here than disagreement.
The books are opened, the deeds are examined, and what is revealed is the true condition of the heart before God.

 

[Kroogz]

I agree that Revelation 20 says people are judged according to their works.
What I've been wrestling with is whether works are the basis of the judgment or the evidence revealed at the judgment.
For example, if someone stands before God having rejected Christ, are their evil deeds the problem, or do those deeds simply reveal a deeper problem of unbelief and separation from God?
I can certainly see your point that Christ's atonement is what makes the resurrection of all possible.
That's a connection I hadn't considered in quite that way before.
Where I'm still thinking it through is this: if sin has been completely removed from the equation, why does Scripture continue to connect condemnation with unbelief and rejection of the Son (John 3:18, John 3:36)?
That's not me disagreeing with you.
I'm just trying to understand how those pieces fit together.
I think you're raising a good question here.

@OMC Have you ever heard of or taught on the doctrine of the Angelic/Kingdom conflict?

 

[OMC]

@OMC Have you ever heard of or taught on the doctrine of the Angelic/Kingdom conflict?

I've heard the phrase, though different people mean different things by it.
If you're talking about the idea that there's an ongoing conflict involving God, angelic powers, Satan, and the nations, then yes, I see elements of that in passages like Daniel 10, Ephesians 6, Revelation 12, and elsewhere.
If you're referring to a more specific theological system built around the angelic conflict, I'd probably need you to define it a bit more before commenting.
The reason I ask is because some versions of the doctrine go well beyond what the text explicitly says.
I'm generally comfortable talking about spiritual warfare where Scripture discusses it, but I try to be cautious about building detailed systems from places where the biblical data is limited.
So I'd be interested in hearing how you're defining it first.
That might help me understand where you're coming from before I respond.

 

[Kroogz]

The works reveal the faith, or lack of it.

I always have to remind myself that believers go through a very similar "trial."


The bema/evaluation seat of Christ.

We can't use works as a litmus test for faith. Many believers are saved as if through fire for their lack of divine good works.

 

[OMC]

I always have to remind myself that believers go through a very similar "trial."


The bema/evaluation seat of Christ.

We can't use works as a litmus test for faith. Many believers are saved as if through fire for their lack of divine good works.

That's a fair point.
I've probably stated it too strongly.
When I say works reveal faith, I don't mean we can perfectly measure someone's salvation by counting their good works.
As you pointed out, Paul speaks of believers whose works are burned up, yet: "he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire" (1 Cor. 3:15).
So I agree the Bema Seat reminds us that believers can differ greatly in fruitfulness while still belonging to Christ.
Maybe a better way to put it is that works reveal what is in the heart, but they are not a flawless litmus test by which we can infallibly judge another person's standing before God.
That's probably why Scripture warns us both against a dead faith that produces no fruit and against assuming we can see all that God sees. Ultimately, the Lord knows those who are His.