What are you thoughts on Annihilation?

You do realize that an appeal to majority is a logical fallacy?

Not much different than supposing Catholics must be right because they outnumber any other denomination.

No doubt the views of the other side get misrepresented often also.

You know, like being told we do not believe the Bible when the reality is we reject a man-made tradition.

A rule nobody can give us the origin of: it cannot be a parable because real people are named.

Matthew 13:34 Jesus spoke all these things to the crowd in parables; he did not say anything to them without using a parable.

Mark 4:34 He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything.

Matthew 13:13 This is why I speak to them in parables: "Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

Mark 4:10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables.

The Calvinist view puts forth that God torments forever after those who
refuse to make a choice that was never given to them to make in the
first place. How anyone can see that as loving, just, or fair is beyond me.

Consider also that Paul never mentioned the word hell and he told us to follow his example, assuring us he had given us the full council of God straight from Jesus. Paul said we should do as He did, and how many times in all his books (28% of the NT) did he preach eternal conscious torment via hellfire damnation? Did he ever even use the word hell? No, he did not. Paul, who claimed he was caught up into heaven and given the Gospel directly by Jesus, that all men would be judged according to his gospel, that he had declared to people the whole counsel of God, that he kept back nothing profitable from the people he taught, and that he was the apostle to the gentiles... never once used the word hell. Paul uses the Greek word "Hades" in 1 Corinthians 15:55, where it is translated "grave." (KJV) O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? In Galatians 1:8, he says: But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Lucy,

What arguments do you not believe? We have repeatedly used numerous literal verses that says the 'wages of sin is death", the unbelievers "perish" John 3:16, the wicked are "destroyed"

You can randomly open up the new testament from Acts onward (Jesus spoke in figurative language--by his own admisstion) and see over and over and OVER again, that DEATH and DESTRUCTION is the end of man. The old testament is replete with verses saying LITERALLY that the end of the wicked is DESTRUCTION.

Please show me just one LITERAL verse that says Eternal Conscious Torment is the end of man. IMPORTANT: It must be a literal verse, NOT figurative, e.g. 'eternal' fire/tormented day and night forever and ever...'where the worm dieth not--ALL of those use FIGURATIVE Language.

And do you not understand that you are in fact DENYING Christ paid the penalty by His death on the cross--that He died in our PLACE?

Do none of you understand this very foundational truth of the gospel?

You ARE IN FACT saying he is or will be burning for eternity if THAT is the punishment for sin.

Lucy,

What arguments do you not believe? We have repeatedly used numerous literal verses that says the 'wages of sin is death", the unbelievers "perish" John 3:16, the wicked are "destroyed"

You can randomly open up the new testament from Acts onward (Jesus spoke in figurative language--by his own admisstion) and see over and over and OVER again, that DEATH and DESTRUCTION is the end of man. The old testament is replete with verses saying LITERALLY that the end of the wicked is DESTRUCTION.

Please show me just one LITERAL verse that says Eternal Conscious Torment is the end of man. IMPORTANT: It must be a literal verse, NOT figurative, e.g. 'eternal' fire/tormented day and night forever and ever...'where the worm dieth not--ALL of those use FIGURATIVE Language.

And do you not understand that you are in fact DENYING Christ paid the penalty by His death on the cross--that He died in our PLACE?

Do none of you understand this very foundational truth of the gospel?

You ARE IN FACT saying he is or will be burning for eternity if THAT is the punishment for sin.

It's irrelevant if it contradicts the context you're pulling that verse from. Romans 5 repeatedly described physical death. The death of Adam is topologically linked to the death of Jesus. You don't believe Jesus spiritually died, do you?


Don't use quotation marks unless you are actually quoting the Bible (especially God).
This is what He said:
(Hebrew) "yom" has about 9 possible meanings. You'd have to demonstrate, contextually, how you know Moses intended "a 24-hour calendar day" when he wrote this before you can effectively use this as a premise for your position.
Also, "in" could translate as "by" (as in "on account of").

It's not really relevant...but we have no idea how old Adam was when he ate the fruit.


God can alter/bypass the natural process of death. He has the authority to take his own life, apart from the wages of sin.




Again God can bypass/alter the natural process of death by His own power. He has authority over life AND death.
Enoch and Elijah never died (Gen 5:24, 2 King 2:11), though they both sinned (Rome 3:23). So apparently the tree of life is not the way to avoid death.


It seems like a theory worth exploring. But until you have a solid Biblical explanation for that, it can't be used to support a controversial debate.
My answer, for now, is that they wouldn't be able to eat from the tree of life because “what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what harmony has Christ with Belial...what agreement has the temple of God with idols?" (2 Corinthians 6:14–16)

Consider this:
If the tree of life can give anyone eternal life (even sinners). What would happen if someone ate from the tree of life after blaspheming the Holy Spirit?
I would argue that they would not have eternal life in them because the one who blasphemes Him is guilty of an eternal sin. Eating from the tree of life would have no reversing effect. "Eternal life" is defined as "knowing God" according to John 17, not eating some fruit.

Your position has the same issue:

How is it possible for people being tortured forever to have different degrees of punishment?

It is possible. Some people are have done worse things in this life than others. God judges unbelievers according to their works in this life. The most wicked are the false Christians: "Jude 1: 12 & 13… These men are hidden reefs in your love feasts, shamelessly feasting with you but shepherding only themselves. They are clouds without water, carried along by the wind; fruitless trees in autumn, twice dead after being uprooted. They are wild waves of the sea, foaming up their own shame; wandering stars, for whom blackest darkness has been reserved forever.

It makes no sense to reserve a place "forever" if those people are to be annihilated.

I'm not going to address all of that, but you got most of that wrong.

The correct way to read the Bible is to read beyond the immediate context, factoring in numerous sources from scriptures, to contribute the the whole, well-rounded, exegesis of scriptures.

This isn't my opinion, everyone agrees with me on this.

Furthermore, it's acceptable to paraphrase. Quotes are optional, albeit unnecessary, but they alert you to the fact someone is being quoted. I cited the Bible verse in immediate proximity of my paraphrasing.

You're nitpicking at this point to protect the false and heretical doctrine of eternal torment.

If we take this literally, then the blackest darkness for a wandering star would be irrelevant since a star has it's own light source. That would make being in darkness irrelevant, hardly a punishment. Jude 1:12-13 is highly metaphorical and symbolic.

Really???

So - no one who lives during the millennium will be saved???

When will their Judgment be?

I'm not going to address all of that, but you got most of that wrong.

The correct way to read the Bible is to read beyond the immediate context, factoring in numerous sources from scriptures, to contribute the the whole, well-rounded, exegesis of scriptures.

This isn't my opinion, everyone agrees with me on this.

Furthermore, it's acceptable to paraphrase. Quotes are optional, albeit unnecessary, but they alert you to the fact someone is being quoted. I cited the Bible verse in immediate proximity of my paraphrasing.

You're nitpicking at this point to protect the false and heretical doctrine of eternal torment.

Have you not heard of black holes? Jude knew nothing about them either. They are only "wandering stars" in this life. Black holes are stars that have collapsed in on themselves. So the metaphor works. Forever.

Also, the born again are said to shine like stars. Obviously this does not apply the false believers that Jude condemns.

Man you are like crazy wrong!!!!! worships of academia!!!At least i know thaaat me like a greek seeks to know about god rather then be a part of god.Because you see the unclean eyes in us seek to be our own god.In context out context, in totlity or partialy by those that do right and those that do wrong all thing things work together.One teacher: says the scriptures that's jesus.Yes study to show that you know god,,but learn,,ok? the first tree was the devil the second is god

Have you not heard of black holes? Jude knew nothing about them either. They are only "wandering stars" in this life. Black holes are stars that have collapsed in on themselves. So the metaphor works. Forever.

Also, the born again are said to shine like stars. Obviously this does not apply the false believers that Jude condemns.

I seemed to have upset you, I apologize for that. I don't know how what I said that was offensive, nor did I intend to be offensive. I am just having a casual Bible discussion to debunk a false doctrine.

I hope you'll find a way to forgive me. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help you such as pray with you or answer any questions to better clarify my position. 🙏🏻

TheDivineWatermark said:
... 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.

That was not a negative taking.

TheDivineWatermark said:
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)]

That was not a negative taking.

he is the the first to die before the foundation of the world.

I'm not going to address all of that, but you got most of that wrong.

You're nitpicking at this point

The correct way to read the Bible is to read beyond the immediate context

Please offend but learn,Deep down people get angry for one of two reasons because the speaker is being good or because the speaker is being evil.,,,.Jesus is the devil,,,how do i know this? because he became sin also he is the the first to die before the foundation of the world.He is also the first to die to sin = pride and pride really is the love that is the worship of self even at the expense of all eles. yea i'm nciousot right with god so if it's ok with you and god fast for me.

Nope. The text states "FROM [G575 apo] the foundation of the world" (same time sin entered)... not "BEFORE [G4253 pro] the foundation of the world".

Yes, there is a difference. = )



-- https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/13-8.htm "...having been slain FROM the foundation of the world."

Jesus is the devil,,,how do i know this? because he became sin also he is the the first to die before the foundation of the world.He is also the first to die to sin = pride and pride really is the love that is the worship of self even at the expense of all eles. yea i'm not right with god so if it's ok with you and god fast for me.