Destruction cannot be permanent

[Universalist Catholic]

Properly translated, nowhere in the scriptures speaks of permanent destruction.  And it is true that the bible does talk a lot about destruction and Judgment.  But nowhere does it talk about a judgment that is final.  However there are many verses in the Old and New Testament tell us that those series of judgment end in salvation.  And we have countless passages from Abraham to Revelation clearly stating that All Mankind will recieve Salvation.  If universal Salvation were a lie, then that means death could not be destroyed, nor could Death and Hades be cast into the lake of fire.  In a sense, Annihilation could make more sense, since it fits Gods nature, fulfills the promise of a time when Evil has been destroyed, and God can still be "All in All", but it still creates a contradiction.

[Aleax]

I haven't studied the destruction words very much at all. All I know "apollymi" can not mean perished for ever. "The Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was apollymi" (Luke 19:10).

[WhiteWings]

I haven't studied the destruction words very much at all. All I know "apollymi" can not mean perished for ever. "The Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was apollymi" (Luke 19:10).

Prodical son, the coin and the sheep were all apollomi/lost

[LS]

I couldn't disagree more.  Look at the definition of the word:

G622
ἀπόλλυμι
apollumi
ap-ol'-loo-mee
From G575 and the base of G3639; to destroy fully (reflexively to perish, or lose), literally or figuratively: - destroy, die, lose, mar, perish.

Clearly, permanent destruction is one of the possible definitions.

Furthermore, the way it's used within the Bible itself indicates that the average speaker didn't believe it could "never" mean permanent destruction. The disciples feared they would be "apollumi" when their boat was tossed by the storm, and the pharisees sought to "apollumi" Jesus. I don't think you can reasonably read those passages and think that the common belief at the time was that the disciples or pharisees meant a temporary destruction when they expressed apollumi.

The only time I ever see the claim that apollumi "can't" mean permanent, is by people who are arguing for US and are trying to make the case that the Bible has been incorrectly translated for centuries.

Yes, it can be temporary; but yes, it can also be permanent, imho.

[Aleax]

Ok, I guess I should've said it does not HAVE to mean permanently lost. As I said I haven't really studied the destruction words, so maybe I shouldn't have said anything at all.  :laughing7:

As for UR'ers "trying to make the case that the Bible has been incorrectly translated for centuries", well, adherents of the ED and ET positions have to do the same thing. We claim "destruction" is not really "destruction", you claim "all" is not really "all". At face value Bible does seem to teach UR, ED and ET at the same time, so "linguistic acrobatics" are needed to make a case for any position. I hope I don't commit the unpardonable sin by saying this, but sometimes I can't help feeling like the Holy Spirit could've done a bit better job with the Bible.

[LS]

Ok, I guess I should've said it does not HAVE to mean permanently lost.

:thumbsup: I can agree with that  ... and I know what you mean; I don't think that was unpardonable  :icon_joker:

[Universalist Catholic]

I couldn't disagree more.  Look at the definition of the word:

G622
ἀπόλλυμι
apollumi
ap-ol'-loo-mee
From G575 and the base of G3639; to destroy fully (reflexively to perish, or lose), literally or figuratively: - destroy, die, lose, mar, perish.

Clearly, permanent destruction is one of the possible definitions.

Furthermore, the way it's used within the Bible itself indicates that the average speaker didn't believe it could "never" mean permanent destruction. The disciples feared they would be "apollumi" when their boat was tossed by the storm, and the pharisees sought to "apollumi" Jesus. I don't think you can reasonably read those passages and think that the common belief at the time was that the disciples or pharisees meant a temporary destruction when they expressed apollumi.

The only time I ever see the claim that apollumi "can't" mean permanent, is by people who are arguing for US and are trying to make the case that the Bible has been incorrectly translated for centuries.

Yes, it can be temporary; but yes, it can also be permanent, imho.

I think you may have misunderstood what I meant.  I was referring to absolute destruction of the person in some eternal torment or annihilation.  I was referring to the bible in its absolute context.  So destruction can be permanent, like applied to death, sin and aspects of our adamic nature.  But any loopholes allowing for ET or ED that people use are refuted in the scriptures. 

[legoman]

I agree UC.

Maybe its helpful if we look at examples we might talk about in everyday English.

A house burns down - that house is destroyed (or you might also say it is lost).  Yet the parts of the house are still there, albeit in a changed form.  Some parts of the structure may have survived.  Other parts have been converted into smoke and ash.  The original physical atoms that made up the house are still in existence somewhere - they have not been changed, just reformed in a different arrangement.

Now it may be impossible for us finite humans to put the original house back together with the exact original atoms - but we can certainly rebuild a new and better house.  And God is not limited in such a way.  God, if He wanted to, could put the house back together in the exact same arrangements with the original atoms - thus "undestroying" the destroyed house.  The destruction is permanent only in as long as the house is not rebuilt.

Another example: a forest fire destroys an entire forest.  Yet we know, in time new trees will grow, and the forest will come back stronger than ever.  In fact the forest fire was actually beneficial in that it would root out and remove disease in the forest.

[thinktank]

I think it's the other way round, that UR uses loopholes to employ salvation of all. E.g God most of the time wants to destroy the wicked, but also most of the time he changes his mind afterwards. E.g Isreal he says he will wipe them from the face of the earth, but then nevertheless has mercy, he remembers that they are flesh and blood.

I think the problem with God is that he is allways under a lot of pressure to destroy the wicked, but also his love keeps him strong and makes him have mercy. I think God's biggest battles come from withinhimself. Perhaps why the scripture says that his son was subject into bondage, that he overcame. God had to overcome evil as well and he had the victory and wan it for us, so that we too can win just like he did.

[legoman]

thinktank - your post above confused me a bit - especially the "loophole" comment.

God does destroy the wicked.  If you think UR teaches otherwise, maybe you have a different understanding of UR - that is not how I see UR.

There will be no wicked people in heaven.  They will have been destroyed.  Note how they are destroyed: by having the wickedness destroyed out of them.  Take away the wickedness from a person and what is left is righteousness.

Saul/Paul is the prime example.  Saul was wicked.  Paul was the work in progress leading to a new creation.  Saul was destroyed.  Paul was the new growth.

I guess in that sense the destruction is permanent.  Saul is not coming back.  Paul is the righteous.  Understanding of course that Saul/Paul are the same individual but it is the nature within him that have changed.

[micah7:9]

I agree UC.

Maybe its helpful if we look at examples we might talk about in everyday English.

A house burns down - that house is destroyed (or you might also say it is lost).  Yet the parts of the house are still there, albeit in a changed form.  Some parts of the structure may have survived.  Other parts have been converted into smoke and ash.  The original physical atoms that made up the house are still in existence somewhere - they have not been changed, just reformed in a different arrangement.

Now it may be impossible for us finite humans to put the original house back together with the exact original atoms - but we can certainly rebuild a new and better house.  And God is not limited in such a way.  God, if He wanted to, could put the house back together in the exact same arrangements with the original atoms - thus "undestroying" the destroyed house.  The destruction is permanent only in as long as the house is not rebuilt.

Another example: a forest fire destroys an entire forest.  Yet we know, in time new trees will grow, and the forest will come back stronger than ever.  In fact the forest fire was actually beneficial in that it would root out and remove disease in the forest.

:bigGrin: :thumbsup:

[thinktank]

thinktank - your post above confused me a bit - especially the "loophole" comment.

God does destroy the wicked.  If you think UR teaches otherwise, maybe you have a different understanding of UR - that is not how I see UR.

There will be no wicked people in heaven.  They will have been destroyed.  Note how they are destroyed: by having the wickedness destroyed out of them.  Take away the wickedness from a person and what is left is righteousness.

Saul/Paul is the prime example.  Saul was wicked.  Paul was the work in progress leading to a new creation.  Saul was destroyed.  Paul was the new growth.

I guess in that sense the destruction is permanent.  Saul is not coming back.  Paul is the righteous.  Understanding of course that Saul/Paul are the same individual but it is the nature within him that have changed.

loophole as in "if man sins for x amount of time then God becomes angry and destroys BUT if subject repents God has mercy"

The condition is that mans sin will make God angry and make him destroy man, but the loohole is that God extends his grace towards man, so that it nullifies the anger of God, kindles his anger.

In some ways God has 2 minds that are at war with each other, I think that's one reason why he stores up his anger in a winepress to be released at the time of the end.


I read that Paul said he was made an example of, that he being the worst sinner of the disciples received more grace than them all, therefore being an example of God's mercy to the people who hear his message.

[jabcat]

I couldn't disagree more.  Look at the definition of the word:

G622
ἀπόλλυμι
apollumi
ap-ol'-loo-mee
From G575 and the base of G3639; to destroy fully (reflexively to perish, or lose), literally or figuratively: - destroy, die, lose, mar, perish.

Clearly, permanent destruction is one of the possible definitions.

Furthermore, the way it's used within the Bible itself indicates that the average speaker didn't believe it could "never" mean permanent destruction. The disciples feared they would be "apollumi" when their boat was tossed by the storm, and the pharisees sought to "apollumi" Jesus. I don't think you can reasonably read those passages and think that the common belief at the time was that the disciples or pharisees meant a temporary destruction when they expressed apollumi.

The only time I ever see the claim that apollumi "can't" mean permanent, is by people who are arguing for US and are trying to make the case that the Bible has been incorrectly translated for centuries.

Yes, it can be temporary; but yes, it can also be permanent, imho.

When something is "burned up", it actually changes form;

j. preston eby -
I believe every word that the Bible says about the lake of fire; I don't believe what Rome says about it, nor what the apostate Churches say about it, nor what tradition says about it; but I certainly believe what the Bible says about it.

Because of the gross misunderstanding of almost all people concerning the lake of fire, I would like to draw your attention to three words found in the passage quoted above. "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which BURNS with FIRE and BRIMSTONE: which is the second death." The word BURN means combustion, or to consume.   To consume does not mean to annihilate, for there is no such thing as annihilation in the absolute sense.   When fire consumes a log in your fireplace it does not destroy any of the elements within the log, it merely changes their form. Combustion is the process by which chemicals combine to form new chemicals. For example: a tree might be cut down, sawed into fire wood, and burned. When the wood is burning the heat causes the chemicals of which the wood is composed to vaporize, mixing with the oxygen in the air to form new chemicals, including water and the gas carbon dioxide. So what was formerly a tree is no longer identified as the form of a tree, but the substance thereof is now simply CHANGED into a DIFFERENT FORM and exists in its new form within the atmosphere as water, carbon dioxide, etc. Thus, to bum, means to CHANGE. Furthermore, it is interesting to note that fire does not burn down; it always burns up; it seeks the highest level. And all that it consumes "goes up in smoke," to exist in a new form in a higher dimension. Even if you take a pan of water and place it over a fire, before long the water will take on the property of the fire and will begin to go up in steam. To burn means to CHANGE, and the change is always UPWARD in its motion.

FIRE is the heat and light that you feel and see when something burns. It takes heat to start a fire, but once the fire is started it produces heat that keeps the process going. Thus, fire is really HEAT and LIGHT.

In my study of the lake that burns with fire and brimstone I was very much helped and impressed by the understanding given by Charles Pridgeon and I would like to quote from his scholarly work on the subject of BRIMSTONE. He says: "The Lake of Fire and Brimstone signifies a fire burning with brimstone; the word 'brimstone' or sulphur defines the character of the fire. The Greek word THEION translated 'brimstone' is exactly the same word THEION which means 'divine.' Sulphur was sacred to the deity among the ancient Greeks; and was used to fumigate, to purify, and to cleanse and consecrate to the deity; for this purpose they burned it in their incense. In Homer's Iliad (16:228), one is spoken of as purifying a goblet with fire and brimstone. The verb derived from THEION is THEIOO, which means to hallow, to make divine, or to dedicate to a god (See Liddell and Scott Greek-English Lexicon, 1897 Edition). To any Greek, or any trained in the Greek language, a 'lake of fire and brimstone' would mean a 'lake of divine purification.' The idea of judgment need not be excluded. Divine purification and divine consecration are the plain meaning in ancient Greek. In the ordinary explanation, this fundamental meaning of the word is entirely left out, and nothing but eternal torment is associated with it" -end quote.

I realize that the above thoughts define the subject very briefly, but let us summarize the meanings thus: BURN means combustion; to change the form of. FIRE means heat and light. BRIMSTONE means divine. Putting these three together can we not see that the lake burning with fire and brimstone is, actually, DIVINE HEAT AND LIGHT PRODUCING A CHANGE! Is such a process eternal? All the laws of nature shout that it is not! More than 2500 years ago the Holy Spirit warned the wicked inhabitants of Jerusalem that God would kindle a fire at Jerusalem's gates which would devour her palaces. "But if you will not hearken unto Me ... then will I kindle a fire in the gates thereof, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem, and it shall not he quenched" (Jer. 17:27). Did not God say this fire "shall NOT BE QUENCHED?" This prophecy was fulfilled and the fire did occur a few years later and it did destroy all the houses of Jerusalem (Jer. 52:13). Since God said no person or thing would "quench" this fire, did that mean that it would burn for ever? Since it accomplished the work it was sent to do, and since it is NOT BURNING TODAY, it obviously went out by itself after accomplishing its purpose! Unquenchable fire is not eternal fire - it is simply fire that cannot be put out until it has consumed or changed everything it is possible for it to change! It then simply goes out, for there is nothing more to burn. Yet I hear the preachers ranting and raving about poor souls being cast into bell fire where "their worm dies not, and the fire is not quenched" and this, we are told, means eternal, unending torment. How foolish, illogical, and deceptive! Such a view contradicts the plain meaning of the term "unquenchable" and its use in the Word of God.

Are the judgments of God permanent? Isaiah says, "When Your judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness" (Isa. 26:9). And Mat. 12:20 says, "A bruised reed shall He not break, and smoking flax shall He not quench, till He send forth judgment unto victory." Judgment, therefore, is not an eternal condition, but it is given to produce that victory. Judgments of themselves do not save anyone, but they are used by God to bring one to one's self, to effect a change of attitude and will, to consume away the stubbornness and rebellion of men. Punishment by fire is a beneficent one. "Our GOD is a consuming fire" (Heb. 12:29). The basic purpose of this divine fire of God is to cleanse, purify, purge, temper and change. It is to rid of impurities, of filth, of undesirable elements. There is no better way to deal with filth than to deal with it by fire.

The punishment by penal fire leads back to the beginning of things. The final work of God in this world will be the destruction of the world (order) by penal fire. That will change all things. That will melt all the elements, so that no man can tell you where his original grab was. It will burn up all the governments, institutions, systems, and fruitage of the carnal mind. It will melt all the customs, cultures, traditions, and practices of society and make of this earth a new earth wherein dwells righteousness. Every man's work will eventually be tested in this fire. The fire will try every man's work of what sort it is. If you and I build into our walls wood, hay, and stubble, that fire will find it out, and the wall will come tumbling down. When God turns on the HEAT, the BLAZING LIGHT OF HIS SPIRIT AND WORD - some things begin to change! The fire is never sent to destroy the PERSON, but to purge out all that hinders and separates him from his God, to consume the pride, arrogance, hostility, defiance, and rebellion of the flesh, the carnal mind, that He might then be wooed and drawn by the Holy Spirit unto the Father of Spirits and live.

More than three centuries ago when the Black Plague swept through London, England, more than 68,000 men, women, and children were sickened with the putrid fever, suffered nameless agonies, passed into delirium, sometimes with convulsions, and then died. Before the end of the terrible nightmare of anguish and death, what was thought to be an even greater tragedy occured. The city caught fire, the whole heavens were ablaze as the Great Fire destroyed more than 13,200 homes and 89 churches. Most of the city, which was built largely of wood, lay in ashes. Wonder of wonders! As soon as the last dying embers cooled and the smoke cleared, the inhabitants of the city discovered that the Plague had been stayed! Not another person died of the epidemic. The Plague never returned. The fire had killed the bacteria-carrying fleas and rats that caused the Plague. It took a fire to do it! Fire is a great cleanser, purifier, and changer.

We all know that a horse must be broken, that is, its will must be broken before it is of any practical use to man. God put that will in the horse, but it must be broken and made to conform to the will of man. Just as surely did God put the will in man, BUT IT MUST BE BROKEN and we will benefit by the very process of breaking. Man may do a lot of crying and wailing, but when he is broken to HIS will, what a wonderful condition it is. God may take man over some rough places, even through the lake of fire and brimstone, but the love of God will break every man to His will.

If you think the Kingdom of God is rosewater, or eau-de-cologne, you are mistaken. You cannot war on the devil with that. You cannot war on the carnal minds of men with that. You have to make war on the world, the flesh, and the devil with a sword sharper than any twoedged sword. You have to make war on the carnal mind with fire, divine fire that must burn up every inherent altar of Baal, and lick up the very dust around. Make no mistake! OUR GOD is a consuming fire! He is man's "horse breaker" and He will break you, precious friend of mine, and bring you to the foot of the cross of Jesus no matter how hot He has to build the fire around you! Even if long ages of fiery judgment and tormenting darkness fall upon you, they will last no longer than till the Great Fire of God has melted all arrogance into humility, and all that is self has died in the bloody sweat and all-saving cross of the Christ, which will never give up its redeeming power till sin and sinners have no more a name among the creatures of God.  - j. preston eby

[legoman]

thinktank - your post above confused me a bit - especially the "loophole" comment.

God does destroy the wicked.  If you think UR teaches otherwise, maybe you have a different understanding of UR - that is not how I see UR.

There will be no wicked people in heaven.  They will have been destroyed.  Note how they are destroyed: by having the wickedness destroyed out of them.  Take away the wickedness from a person and what is left is righteousness.

Saul/Paul is the prime example.  Saul was wicked.  Paul was the work in progress leading to a new creation.  Saul was destroyed.  Paul was the new growth.

I guess in that sense the destruction is permanent.  Saul is not coming back.  Paul is the righteous.  Understanding of course that Saul/Paul are the same individual but it is the nature within him that have changed.

loophole as in "if man sins for x amount of time then God becomes angry and destroys BUT if subject repents God has mercy"

The condition is that mans sin will make God angry and make him destroy man, but the loohole is that God extends his grace towards man, so that it nullifies the anger of God, kindles his anger.

So is Christ dying on the cross for all mankind a "loophole"?  :dontknow: Why is it a "loophole" for UR, but not for traditional non-UR thought?

In some ways God has 2 minds that are at war with each other, I think that's one reason why he stores up his anger in a winepress to be released at the time of the end.


I read that Paul said he was made an example of, that he being the worst sinner of the disciples received more grace than them all, therefore being an example of God's mercy to the people who hear his message.

I don't think God is double-minded or has two warring sides.  God is love.  Just because you love your child doesn't mean you won't give them a spanking sometimes.  In fact it almost guarantees it.

I think part of the issue is God is described with human attributes like jealosy and wrath and anger.  But God is not a man.  As spiritual babes, we may interpret trials of fire/judgment - ie. a "spanking" (spiritually speaking) - as anger or wrath, but it is really out of love for our own good.

God is love.  That is His essenence - holy, righteous, just - summed up in love.  Even His wrath is out of love, for His wrath serves a good and righteous purpose to correct us and bring us into His way.

[Universalist Catholic]

By loophole, I meant that there is some way to refute Universal Salvation.  For example, the Catholic Church affirms the existence of Everlasting punishment.  And to them, the Catholic Church is always right on theological matters.  And the biblical proof is when Jesus spoke to Peter about building the church on the rock and the binding and loosing of Heaven and Earth.  To a strict Catholic bias, that means that Jesus assigned Peter to be the chief shepherd of the Church, the final authority on all theological matters, and guide of the Church.  Therefore the people are bound to accept all papal statements made, and all decisions made by the Church.  So when Hell was made an article of faith, that was it.  No debate anymore.  However the scriptures do not support this kind of absolute authority system based on an absolute leader who had a say in all theological matters.  And if we look at history, the people who had the most zeal for the Church of Rome were the most like the Pharisees, and things did not turn out so well for them.  Plus the scriptures support studying the bible for yourself, instead of relying on the professionals to do the interpreting.  Like the Bereans.  Its the same with the Protestants.  Only their loopholes are based on orthodox teachings established by the educated professionals of the Church, the belief that because the scriptures have always(according to them) been understood that way, thats how they ought to be understood.  Along with the belief that their bibles are translated 100% accurately, so no need to study the original words.  And then we get more authoritarian Church systems springing up ruled by more Pharisee-like pastors.  So the loophole is their systems teach it, it must be true.  Yet that kind of system is not very scriptural, and in other places strongly condemned.

[thinktank]

So is Christ dying on the cross for all mankind a "loophole"?  :dontknow: Why is it a "loophole" for UR, but not for traditional non-UR thought?


I see a loophole as a positive thing, that cancels out the effects of the law, not a scheme.
I would describe the cross as a loophole because it cancels out the, penalty that we were supposed to pay, but God paid it for us.

Back to original statment I call Ur a loophole and not ET, because I don't see punishment as a loophole but rather an expected end for our sins. But in UR the loophole is that God is that God has provided a way of escape.


Quote

    In some ways God has 2 minds that are at war with each other, I think that's one reason why he stores up his anger in a winepress to be released at the time of the end.


    I read that Paul said he was made an example of, that he being the worst sinner of the disciples received more grace than them all, therefore being an example of God's mercy to the people who hear his message.

Lego
I don't think God is double-minded or has two warring sides.  God is love.  Just because you love your child doesn't mean you won't give them a spanking sometimes.  In fact it almost guarantees it.

Yes, but keep in mind you speak on an individual level, I am talking about the entire human race. God has to deal with the wickedness of the entire global population, that is an absoloute colossal amount of sins and evil, that it must truly test Gods patient and character on a daily basis. That's why his mercy is renewed each and every morning, he has a fresh new start with us.
TT

lego
I think part of the issue is God is described with human attributes like jealosy and wrath and anger.  But God is not a man.  As spiritual babes, we may interpret trials of fire/judgment - ie. a "spanking" (spiritually speaking) - as anger or wrath, but it is really out of love for our own good.

I think that the scriptures say "wrath" on the disobedient multiple times. I think as individuals God chastizes, But on a national level God brings destruction such as Noahs flood, Sodom and Gomorah, in future Mystery Babylon will be destroyed and many cities of Israel, that Jesus spoke of.

Lego
God is love.  That is His essenence - holy, righteous, just - summed up in love.  Even His wrath is out of love, for His wrath serves a good and righteous purpose to correct us and bring us into His way.

Yes, but noone enjoys being punished, but God tells us to endure it patiently. As for Gods wrath I don't know why he does that, but one of Pauls book talks about it and says what is the problem with this if God wants to pour his wrath on vessels of disobedience who are we to argue? But our job is to warn people to flee from the wrath to come and repent to escape it.

[legoman]

Oh - I see what you guys mean by loopholes now.  I guess I thought "loophole" carried a stigma to it - like you are "cheating" or getting around something. ie. we were all going to hell but due to a loophole got to go to heaven! LOL

Anyway I think eternal hell is a loophole because it gives you an excuse to hate people.


Regarding punishment - I don't think God punishes for punishment sake - I think it is necessary and in fact chastening or correction.

A child may think its punishment when he has to give a stolen candy bar back and pay back some time as community service - but it as actually teaching a valuable lesson.

[LS]

When something is "burned up", it actually changes form;

Hi Jabcat - your post raised a lot of questions for me. I get that matter doesnt' "disappear" but rather changes form. But that is physical, not spiritual. Is the same true of spirit? 

I couldn't help but think of this passage from my Catholic book of Wisdom:

Wis 5:9  All of them passed like a shadow and like a fleeting rumor;
Wis 5:10  Like a ship traversing the heaving water, of which, when it has passed, no trace can be found, no path of its keel in the waves.
Wis 5:11  Or like a bird flying through the air; no evidence of its course is to be found- But the fluid air, lashed by the beat of pinions, and cleft by the rushing force Of speeding wings, is traversed: and afterward no mark of passage can be found in it.
Wis 5:12  Or as, when an arrow has been shot at a mark, the parted air straightway flows together again so that none discerns the way it went through-
Wis 5:13  Even so we, once born, abruptly came to nought and held no sign of virtue to display, but were consumed in our wickedness."
Wis 5:14  Yes, the hope of the wicked is like thistledown borne on the wind, and like fine, tempest-driven foam; Like smoke scattered by the wind, and like the passing memory of the nomad camping for a single day.
Wis 5:15  But the just live forever, and in the LORD is their recompense, and the thought of them is with the Most High.

[shawn]

Ok, I guess I should've said it does not HAVE to mean permanently lost.

:thumbsup: I can agree with that  ... and I know what you mean; I don't think that was unpardonable  :icon_joker:

Agreed.  It can mean permanent and it can mean temporary.  But, one thing I do consider as strong support is it's use in the prodigal son parable.  For me, that was an eye opener.  Like I have said previously, I don't think judgment is something that we will be able to work out 100% intellectually.  Each stance, US, ED, and ET have some stumbling blocks from a shear intellectual stand point.  I believe ET has the greatest stumbling blocks on multiple levels.  Judgment is something that HAS to be Holy Spirit revealed.  I believe we are given what we need to know. 

[shawn]

When something is "burned up", it actually changes form;

Hi Jabcat - your post raised a lot of questions for me. I get that matter doesnt' "disappear" but rather changes form. But that is physical, not spiritual. Is the same true of spirit? 

I couldn't help but think of this passage from my Catholic book of Wisdom:

Wis 5:9  All of them passed like a shadow and like a fleeting rumor;
Wis 5:10  Like a ship traversing the heaving water, of which, when it has passed, no trace can be found, no path of its keel in the waves.
Wis 5:11  Or like a bird flying through the air; no evidence of its course is to be found- But the fluid air, lashed by the beat of pinions, and cleft by the rushing force Of speeding wings, is traversed: and afterward no mark of passage can be found in it.
Wis 5:12  Or as, when an arrow has been shot at a mark, the parted air straightway flows together again so that none discerns the way it went through-
Wis 5:13  Even so we, once born, abruptly came to nought and held no sign of virtue to display, but were consumed in our wickedness."
Wis 5:14  Yes, the hope of the wicked is like thistledown borne on the wind, and like fine, tempest-driven foam; Like smoke scattered by the wind, and like the passing memory of the nomad camping for a single day.
Wis 5:15  But the just live forever, and in the LORD is their recompense, and the thought of them is with the Most High.

Wonderful question.  Recently my eyes have been opened to some concepts which my spirit instantly accepted as truth.  One of which is the notion of the natural being a shadow of the spiritual.  Much like the Old Covenant being a shadow of the New Covenant.  Natural child bearing is a shadow of spiritual birthing. This is something which I have accepted as truth.  So, for someone to say the natural law of conservation of matter is a shadow of the spiritual, I would say yes that makes sense to me.  But, it's certainly not going to be intellectual proof to anyone else. 

One of the biggest stumbling blocks for ED in my mind is the Biblical support for levels of punishment.  From a justice, payment perspective...the bill has been paid in full.  I believe Jesus died for all of mankind, his payment was for everyone.  Why the further need to punish before destroying?

[shawn]

Oh - I see what you guys mean by loopholes now.  I guess I thought "loophole" carried a stigma to it - like you are "cheating" or getting around something. ie. we were all going to hell but due to a loophole got to go to heaven! LOL

Anyway I think eternal hell is a loophole because it gives you an excuse to hate people.


Regarding punishment - I don't think God punishes for punishment sake - I think it is necessary and in fact chastening or correction.

A child may think its punishment when he has to give a stolen candy bar back and pay back some time as community service - but it as actually teaching a valuable lesson.

I'm not complete sure I would agree with that.  I do believe in God's unfathomable mercy, agape love and grace.  But, I also believe he is a God of justice as well.  If not, Jesus would not have had the need to make payment for our transgressions.  With that said, I don't think we disagree on the end result.  After the death of Christ, payment was made fullness of God's nature was able to be revealed.  This would encompass what you are talking about at the end of your post. 

[shawn]

Jab, I love this section you quoted.  It's just another example of the natural shadowing the spiritual.  Being that fire is spoken of often throughout scripture, it makes sense that the natural would be a shadow of spiritual truths.

Because of the gross misunderstanding of almost all people concerning the lake of fire, I would like to draw your attention to three words found in the passage quoted above. "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which BURNS with FIRE and BRIMSTONE: which is the second death." The word BURN means combustion, or to consume.   To consume does not mean to annihilate, for there is no such thing as annihilation in the absolute sense.   When fire consumes a log in your fireplace it does not destroy any of the elements within the log, it merely changes their form. Combustion is the process by which chemicals combine to form new chemicals. For example: a tree might be cut down, sawed into fire wood, and burned. When the wood is burning the heat causes the chemicals of which the wood is composed to vaporize, mixing with the oxygen in the air to form new chemicals, including water and the gas carbon dioxide. So what was formerly a tree is no longer identified as the form of a tree, but the substance thereof is now simply CHANGED into a DIFFERENT FORM and exists in its new form within the atmosphere as water, carbon dioxide, etc. Thus, to bum, means to CHANGE. Furthermore, it is interesting to note that fire does not burn down; it always burns up; it seeks the highest level. And all that it consumes "goes up in smoke," to exist in a new form in a higher dimension. Even if you take a pan of water and place it over a fire, before long the water will take on the property of the fire and will begin to go up in steam. To burn means to CHANGE, and the change is always UPWARD in its motion.

[LS]

Wonderful question.  Recently my eyes have been opened to some concepts which my spirit instantly accepted as truth.  One of which is the notion of the natural being a shadow of the spiritual.  Much like the Old Covenant being a shadow of the New Covenant.  Natural child bearing is a shadow of spiritual birthing. This is something which I have accepted as truth.  So, for someone to say the natural law of conservation of matter is a shadow of the spiritual, I would say yes that makes sense to me.  But, it's certainly not going to be intellectual proof to anyone else. 

One of the biggest stumbling blocks for ED in my mind is the Biblical support for levels of punishment.  From a justice, payment perspective...the bill has been paid in full.  I believe Jesus died for all of mankind, his payment was for everyone.  Why the further need to punish before destroying?

Hi Shawn - I'm not sure what you mean by punish before destroying? In my mind it isn't a matter of punishing then destroying - when those whose names are not written in the Book of Life are thrown into the lake of fire, it is not to punish but to destroy.

I've been thinking about Biblical fires - has anyone done a study here at TM? I have not, so I'm asking out of interest to read, not to teach. But it seems to me that there are refining fires for believers, and destructive fires for the wicked. This passage comes to mind; we all know the imagery how just as the silversmith removes impurities through fire, we are purified through our trials.

But this passage tells me that not all silver can be purified ... if we are unwilling to let go of the wickedness He desires to purge from us, and if we cling to it by our own choice and free will, we will be rejected.

27 "I have made you a tester of metals
and my people the ore,
that you may observe
and test their ways.

28 They are all hardened rebels,
going about to slander.
They are bronze and iron;
they all act corruptly.

29 The bellows blow fiercely
to burn away the lead with fire,
but the refining goes on in vain;
the wicked are not purged out.

30 They are called rejected silver,
because the LORD has rejected them." (Jer 6)

[LS]

Hi again Shawn - I think I remember you have been reading the deuterocanonical books? Wisdom chapt. 12 speaks about how the wicked are punished little-by-little so that they might repent. That is in this life, though.

I don't know if that applies to what you mentioned or if I'm misunderstanding you; it just came to mind as I was thinking about your post.

[shawn]

Wonderful question.  Recently my eyes have been opened to some concepts which my spirit instantly accepted as truth.  One of which is the notion of the natural being a shadow of the spiritual.  Much like the Old Covenant being a shadow of the New Covenant.  Natural child bearing is a shadow of spiritual birthing. This is something which I have accepted as truth.  So, for someone to say the natural law of conservation of matter is a shadow of the spiritual, I would say yes that makes sense to me.  But, it's certainly not going to be intellectual proof to anyone else. 

One of the biggest stumbling blocks for ED in my mind is the Biblical support for levels of punishment.  From a justice, payment perspective...the bill has been paid in full.  I believe Jesus died for all of mankind, his payment was for everyone.  Why the further need to punish before destroying?

Hi Shawn - I'm not sure what you mean by punish before destroying? In my mind it isn't a matter of punishing then destroying - when those whose names are not written in the Book of Life are thrown into the lake of fire, it is not to punish but to destroy.

I've been thinking about Biblical fires - has anyone done a study here at TM? I have not, so I'm asking out of interest to read, not to teach. But it seems to me that there are refining fires for believers, and destructive fires for the wicked. This passage comes to mind; we all know the imagery how just as the silversmith removes impurities through fire, we are purified through our trials.

But this passage tells me that not all silver can be purified ... if we are unwilling to let go of the wickedness He desires to purge from us, and if we cling to it by our own choice and free will, we will be rejected.

27 "I have made you a tester of metals
and my people the ore,
that you may observe
and test their ways.

28 They are all hardened rebels,
going about to slander.
They are bronze and iron;
they all act corruptly.

29 The bellows blow fiercely
to burn away the lead with fire,
but the refining goes on in vain;
the wicked are not purged out.

30 They are called rejected silver,
because the LORD has rejected them." (Jer 6)

There is some Biblical support for the notion of degrees of punishment.

Luke 12
47 "The servant who knows the master's will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.