What are you thoughts on Annihilation?

Lake of fire is not a "symbol of death". The lake of fire is a description of the environment awaiting those who are condemned by the second death (it is their final destination).

Carefully chosen imagery meant to convey its attributes. These descriptive attributes produce a reaction in those who are imprisoned there: torment, pain, weeping, wailing, gnashing of teeth.

All of this is meant to rightfully induce fear in those who refuse to give God glory, so that they might obey His command to receive his Son for remission of sins, repent of their dead works, and turn from idols to serve the living God.

Deny the words of Jesus at your peril. Annihilationism is an unbiblical heresy IMO.

Then how/why are non-living things like 'death and hell' put to death in a literal lake of fire?

Revelation 20:14
14And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Compare Daniel 12:2 with Rev 20:10.

Dan 12:2 "everlasting life.....everlasting contempt"
Rev 20:10 "lake of fire....tormented day and night for ever and ever"

As we can see this is an example the OT inspired prophecy having its realization in a flawlessly consistent pattern.

The question is not "how" the question is "if". It is practically impossible to discover "how" God is doing things from the Bible text. Furthermore making hell and death obsolete in the lake of fire is Gods problem not yours. But the nuance here is that death and hell are to be made obsolete, to be thrown in the Gehenna fire trash heap along with unredeemed humanity.

Got it. So you believe death doesn't mean death for unredeemed humanity, but death means making death and hell obsolete.

The Bible strongly disagrees with you.

1 Corinthians 15:26
26The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

Death is destroyed, utterly annihilated, via something called a lake of fire. Therefore, it stands to sound reason that anything or anyone that goes into the lake of fire is completely incinerated to nothingness.

Do you think He is a torturer at all?

who is the HE?

... but it doesn't ONLY mean that.



^ In this case, they mean "the OPPOSITE of 'taken [G3880]'"... but in the case of when Jesus was "taken" ['took' G3880] by someone (from their perspective) to "negative" ends (i.e. "arrest" and eventual "crucifixion"), it was NOT as a "companion" in the sense you've shown in your point / posts.

Let the readers see: Matt4:5,8, for example... or Matt27:27... where these are not to "chummy" ends.

Matthew 27:27 - 27 Then the soldiers of the governor took [G3880] Jesus into the common hall, and gathered unto him the whole band of soldiers. 28 And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe. 29 And when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand: and they bowed the knee before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews! 30 And they spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head. 31 And after that they had mocked him, they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to crucify him.


[as I said, it depends on WHO is DOING the taking, and TO WHAT ENDS (i.e. the reapers at the time of Jesus' Second Coming to the earth, for example)]


Not in every definition / usage of G863..

Imagine filling in the following verse with the word "rejection" [or "reject"] (as you suggest):

"Then said Jesus, Let her alone [G863]: against the day of my burying hath she kept this." John 12:7


...or this one:

"And Jesus said, Let her alone [G863]; why trouble ye her? she hath wrought a good work on me." Mark 14:6


No. These are not saying "REJECT her"

Take a clue from TDW's technique and conduct a word study on "destroyed" in that verse.

G2673 - katargeo
The sense of it is to make inoperative, annul, abolish, make obsolete. To make a person or thing have no further efficiency.

Concise deliberate word studies have inestimable merit. I am myself trying to improve my techniques by doing so. I suggest you do the same. So many times the pretensions of the ignorant are thereby struck down. And thank God for that.

Diakonos,

Yes, of course, but as I said the IMAGERY is not literal. What you said here doesn't make sense-- "Sometimes "is" is used to denote a symbol. Sometimes it is not. Therefore, it does not prove your position, regarding the lake of fire as a symbol."

This is INCORRECT. It is obvious in the text I shared because the angel says "I will explain to you the meaning."
The angel says 'This IS ThaT, These ARE ___"
In the SAME MANNER the Angel says The Lake of Fire IS the Second Death.

In some of the imagery explanations yes figurative language may be used, but it is clear by the text the Lake of Fire

represents the Second Death. Also the entire bible is replete with verses which state LITERALLY that man's end is DEATH / PERISH/ DESTRUCTION

Do a word search. Those verses are 25 to 1 of the figurative language that you and others use to support the false doctrine /pagan myth of eternal conscious torment.

Why is it false?

1) It denies that Christ paid the penalty for sin by dying on the cross
2) It negates every single verse that says DESTRUCTION is the wicked person's end
3) Worst of all it attributes evil to God

"All Fanaticism comes from the isolation of verses"

Verses from Rev 17 Which say IS /ARE Again it is clear by the verses THIS figuratively represents THAT literally

When I saw her, I was greatly astonished. 7 Then the angel said to me: “Why are you astonished? I will explain to you the mystery of the woman and of the beast she rides, which has the seven heads and ten horns.

9 “This calls for a mind with wisdom. The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman sits. 10 They are also seven kings,,,,,

11 The beast who once was, and now is not, is an eighth king.,,,

12 “The ten horns you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom...

15 Then the angel said to me, “The waters you saw, where the prostitute sits, are peoples, multitudes, nations and languages.

CV5 said: "the pretensions of the ignorant are thereby struck down." --how so?

Most of you on the 'eternal conscious torment' side spend your time cutting and pasting words from the concordance which are in nearly all instances confusing and difficult to read. Rather than supporting your positions, you and Gardenias waste your posts by being rude and condescending. I'm sorry ,but if a college professor were to read most of these posts, I think the Annihilation side would get a far better grade in so far as supporting our arguments with rational and logical arguments and using a variety of scriptures to support our position

"How oft is the candle of the wicked put out! and how oft cometh their destruction upon them! God distributeth sorrows in his anger." Job 21:17



Wouldn't this be referring to their death (i.e. the end of their existence on this earth, commencing at the time they existed on the earth)?; whereas at the GWTj point, "death" will "DELIVER UP the DEAD"...meaning (in most cases), long after they'd died... (and so will "hell/hades" likewise, btw)...

...and then, at that point, they'll be "cast into the lake of fire" (which is stated to be "unto the ages [plural] of the ages [plural]" [all 21 occurrences of this phrase mean the same thing!]).




IOW, oftentimes the word "destruction" refers to the end of their existence on this earth (they go to the grave / death), from the perspective of WHEN THEY LIVED on this earth (i.e. that is when this "destruction" commenced its purposes). But this does not mean they won't stand before God at the GWTj (Rev20:11-15), to there be "cast into the lake of fire" (the final carrying out of the sentence), see...

DW,

You are doing so much linguistic acrobatics here. The LITERAL verses say man's end is DESTRUCTION. Destruction is not a natural death--destruction comes from the outside and in reference to God it is his JUDGMENT. Do a word search for Destruction. Death, Perish. Learn to differentiate between literal and figurative language. Ask yourself, not "What do I believe the text is saying?" but instead "What does it actually say/mean?"

"And fear not them that kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear Him that is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."--Matthew 10:28

"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul"--Genesis 2:7


The most important question to ask yourself is do you believe Christ paid the penalty on our behalf by dying in our place? Eternal conscious torment denies that fact.

You had better ask yourself why Christ was sweating great drops of blood in the midst of fervent prayer to the Father, knowing that he would soon bear the WRATH OF GOD, being PUNISHED for the sins of the world.

Then ask yourself what fate is to befall the unredeemed and unjustified per:

Rom 2:5 "Storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed".

Do you have any concept of the doctrines of propitiation and substitutionary atonement?

Rom 5:9 "wrath"
Joh 3:36 "wrath"
Rom 1:8 "wrath"

Well, CV5 --I don't see your point. You either believe Christ took on the penalty of DEATH on our behalf or you don't.
There is no other way to explain why the false doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment negates Christ paying the penalty of sin by dying on the cross on our behalf--"The wages of sin is DEATH."


Wrath Judgment? Again what is your point? DESTRUCTION is the wicked's end--you are FORCING your false doctrine on the text--clearly seeing something that isn't there. You quote Romans 2:5 That talks of wrath and judgment--it says nothing about 'eternal conscious torment' I guarantee you if that was man's end, then God wouldve made it crystal clear.

Please learn the difference between literal and figurative language and please do a word search for Destruction/Death/Perish.

E]

Propitiation: turning away of the wrath of God as the just judgment of our sin by God’s own provision of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross.


Substitutionary: to take the place of another. Christ died in our place!

Well, CV5 --I don't see your point. You either believe Christ took on the penalty of DEATH on our behalf or you don't.
There is no other way to explain why the false doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment negates Christ paying the penalty of sin by dying on the cross on our behalf--"The wages of sin is DEATH."


Wrath Judgment? Again what is your point? DESTRUCTION is the wicked's end--you are FORCING your false doctrine on the text--clearly seeing something that isn't there. You quote Romans 2:5 That talks of wrath and judgment--it says nothing about 'eternal conscious torment' I guarantee you if that was man's end, then God wouldve made it crystal clear.

Please learn the difference between literal and figurative language and please do a word search for Destruction/Death/Perish. Pray God will show you His Word in Truth and not the doctrine of men.

What I think you're trying to suggest is: (something like) "...therefore they [at the 'second death'] will experience physical 'DEATH' all over again".


But I would say, "no" to that suggestion, since "death" itself will at that point also be "cast into the lake of fire" (after it had "DELIVERED UP the DEAD"), thereby being "the last enemy... DESTROYED [G2673 - rendering something inert ("completely inoperative"); i.e. being of no effect (totally without force, completely brought down) - https://biblehub.com/greek/2673.htm ]"
(no more use for it, at that point--it's put out of its job--no one will be able to experience it again).


And this agrees with how v.10 tells us that the lake of fire is "unto the ages [plural] of the ages [plural]" (in all 21 of its occurrences, this phrase always MEANS the SAME THING).



There is also no more "death" ('dying' out from it) after it.
As "death" will have been put out of its job ("rendered inoperative" - G2673 in 1Cor15:26), at that point.

According to your heretical view EVERY person is equivalent to Christ. because every person can, by their own death, pay for their own sins.

Is God WRATH satisfied by the mere death of the sinner? Why then does the sinner need to be resurrected for the GWT judgment? Has the sinner himself paid for the debt of his own sin by his own death? Why then does he need to die twice?

You do err....

Learn? From you? I have no intention of learning heresy from you or anybody else.