Hell, Sheol, Hades...

[oyster67]

You are obviously, excessively emotionally invested in this "annihilationism" when it becomes so personal. That really is too bad.

My hope and prayer is that they won't get so upset that they shake an angry fist at God when they realize that He has not conformed to their wishes. The time is coming when the veil shall be lifted and there will be no need for further discussion.

 

[cv5]

I can only reasonably conclude that your indoctrination in this issue is a barrier to you seeing that what you have cited does nothing whatsoever to underscore your belief and that it actually supports the very point I've been making.

Bro.....you really need to do yourself a favor and seriously investigate TDW's claims. He is the best scholar on CC in my opinion.

 

[cv5]

Its eternal alright. And Jesus Himself warns of a reckoning after the body dies.

Mat 10:28
And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to "kill (G615)" the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

G615 - apokteino
1) to kill in anyway what ever

"....but are NOT able to kill the soul:"

Sounds like a pretty clear and straightforward statement of fact to me......
So at least we know for sure that men can't do it.

 

[oyster67]

But notice that it states "But the REST of the DEAD lived not again UNTIL..." (ALL "SAVED" persons are "resurrected" IN TIME for the MK age--NONE LEFT OUT; so where it says, "THE REST OF THE DEAD" it can ONLY mean the "UNSAVED [DEAD]"... but it says "the rest of the dead LIVED NOT AGAIN UNTIL..." [until the time-period which FOLLOWS His RETURN to the earth in Rev19, IS CONCLUDED--i.e. at the END of the MK age, at the GWTj time-slot--But think about why it says "lived not again UNTIL"... because THEY WILL... and these are the UNSAVED DEAD... of which "and the REMNANT / REST were SLAIN [by the sword of Him...]" of Rev19:21 are just A PART / FRACTION)

Are you referring to this verse...

Revelation 20:5
“But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.”

If these are the unsaved dead, the why is this placed under the "first resurrection"?

 

[oyster67]

G615 - apokteino
1) to kill in anyway what ever

"....but are NOT able to kill the soul:"

Sounds like a pretty clear and straightforward statement of fact to me......
So at least we know for sure that men can't do it.

This pretty much verifies that the soul does not cease to exist ("poof-away") when the body dies. This seems like common knowledge to most of us, but some actually stumble upon this. It amazes me how wishful thinking on the part of some has the power to warp their perception of reality. What is obvious to some is completely undigestible to others. Facts that are uncomfortable to swallow cannot be wished into non-facts.

 

[HeIsHere]

That's how I've understood some participating in this thread to be meaning; whereas it seems that others believe the annihilation occurs immediately upon the death of the unbelievers (iow, there will be NO point in time when unbelievers, after having died, will be delivered up [from hell/hades where they will have been since they died] to "STAND" before God at the GWTj [a 'resurrection OF JUDGMENT'] and then at that point [that is, later, AFTER having been in hell/hades] now cast into the lake of fire... that what Rev20:10 states clearly, is only figurative language since it's in the book of Revelation--it won't ACTUALLY happen... according to their viewpoint)...

... that, where Rev20:10 states that "and THEY [the beast-individual-man-aspect, and the false prophet, also human... AND Satan] SHALL BE tormented unto the ages [plural] of the ages [plural]" is only "figurative" (but really, they are [or will have been] "annihilated" instead--according to their viewpoint)

There are too many other scriptures that are not considered in this doctrine of annihilationism, along with the fact of completely taking verses out of context.

 

[oyster67]

since it's in the book of Revelation--it won't ACTUALLY happen...

This does indeed seem to be their train of thought. "Revelation = The list of things which will not happen."

 

[Mem]

Because it is a lie. It is the same tactic that Satan used on Eve in the Garden. "Don't worry, there is no consequence associated with sin. There is nothing to be 'saved' from. God is just a happy guy that is there to service you and tickle you toes."

Jesus went to extreme measures to deliver us from dire consequences. That is why we call it "Salvation". Now you know.

You make an awful god, stop pretending.

Not wise.

Says the man pretending he's god. And so I shouldn't argue against your so-called knowledge.

That comes close to blasphemy. As your brother, it is my job to warn you. God does read these posts. With children like this, God doesn't need an adversary. Painting Him black is not what Father put us here for.

Real brothers wouldn't lie to a sister to get him to see it his way nor threaten her with the charge of blasphemy if she doesn't. Disagreeing with you comes nothing near the unforgiveable sin.

 

[Mem]

Words have meaning, if you cannot understand the function of semantics to understand text I really do not know what more I can say.

I think @oyster67 gave the best example with regards to fruits and vegetables in a fridge, when an object perishes it does not become un-created, non-existent.

First Law of Thermodynamics.

What happens to the vegetables when you throw them into a lake of fire?
Oh, wait. I'll tell you. They're destroyed!

 

[Mem]

My hope and prayer is that they won't get so upset that they shake an angry fist at God when they realize that He has not conformed to their wishes. The time is coming when the veil shall be lifted and there will be no need for further discussion.

Lol, it sounds more official if you use king james english doesn't it?

 

[Mem]

If at first you don't succeed, then just demonize them. Seems to be the go-to strategy here.

 

[oyster67]

I love you, Mem.

 

[WillB]

Bro.....you really need to do yourself a favor and seriously investigate TDW's claims. He is the best scholar on CC in my opinion.

Well, given that you evidently share the views of "the best scholar" perhaps you will give a sound and reasonable rebuttal to my points by drilling down into the original meaning of the words Sheol, Hades, Hell, Gehenna and do so in the context that Revelation contains much in the way of symbolic language.

I shall look forward to your response and if you cannot make such a presentation IN YOUR VERY OWN WORDS I shall rightly conclude that you don't actually know what you claim to know.

 

[HeIsHere]

What happens to the vegetables when you throw them into a lake of fire?
Oh, wait. I'll tell you. They're destroyed!

And what is the nature of the destruction?

Destruction is a relative term so you understand that?

 

[HeIsHere]

I love you, Mem.

@oyster67 takes the higher moral ground!

 

[Mem]

And what is the nature of the destruction?

Destruction is a relative term so you understand that?

Lol, they're tortured forever. Haaa

 

[Mem]

I love you, Mem.

I love you first.

 

[HeIsHere]

As far I am concerned the narrative/doctrine of annihilation, which holds as its central tenet that God annihilates the unsaved in the Lake of Fire is so completely without scriptural evidence.

"Son of Man came to seek and to save that which is lost (destroyed)" (Luke 19:10) is the key to the meaning of apollumi.

This Bible passage refers specifically to Zacchaeus, who was lost (destroyed).

Because he was lost (destroyed), he was ready to be found and saved.

Why would God seek to save that which was annihilated?

 

[HeIsHere]

Lol, they're tortured forever. Haaa

So you have no answer.

Really it is not funny at all.

 

[Mem]

@oyster67 takes the higher moral ground!

Higher is a relative word.