article on the greek of matt 25:46

[ps]

I often post about this issue.

Yes, I've seen some of the posts.

and I hate to say it but I think it is because this "aion is a period of time with a beginning and an end because Aristotle and Plato say so" has become an artifact of UR RELIGION.....

And I believe the second article I referenced strongly indicates why where the word began, is not where it was at the time of Jesus and the apostles, even in external literature, and even earlier than that in the LXX/septuagint.  It also covers 'kolasi-' as a loss in some LXX/septuagint passages, not likely corrective in nature.

Please, nobody shoot me please...... LOLOL

I find myself unlikely to be in a position to cast the first projectile. :)

[WhiteWings]

Because of the contextually relevant kingdom, since in Luke 1:33 the kingdom is spoken of as being ages without end (i.e. unending), and that kingdom is the context of the separation into life (inherit kingdom) and punishment (depart into fire).

But nowhere it states those people stay in the fire forever.
Jesus never used words like torture or punishment. He used the word correction. Never ending correction would mean the One applying correction fails.

Read the link below and you will see all the testing and stuff really is about refining gold.
Before 288BC the Greek word for torment had just one meaning: Checking the purity of gold.

As odd as it may sound "lake fire and brimstone" sounded positive in the ancient mind.
Fire was used to disinfect stuff. We also know fire can be holy -> Pentecost flames.
Brimstone was (and still is) used to purify. Back then it was used to treat skin infections, drive out pests from a house, purify a house after someone died in it.
Lake is just another word for the Temple Laver which was used to purify tools, vessels, sacrifices and priests. Some sources even state the laver was symbolically containing hyper purified gold.
So 3 words that are closely connected to purification. (Revelation contains other references to Temple rituals)

So for simplicity just assume the world ends January 1, 2022.
The holy people instantly start the eternal life and enter the kingdom.
The other people are sent to the lake. They stay there for a while and then join the holy people.
Even the saints have eternal life and it starts at the same time as the one of the holy people. That's what ET believes. They are alive but not in heaven but in hell. That should be a hint too. Kingdom and life might have a meaning that's not found in our western dictionaries.


http://radical-reaction.com/MyChristianSites/LoL/index.html

[Seth]

I don't much have a problem with the concept of kolasin as punishment. In fact, the concept that God uses sin to punish the sinner has been something I have been talking about for a while in a couple papers I have written on that. In fact, I actually think there is a strong case for "fire" as a symbol of sin, the erosion fire causes having correlation to the spiritual erosion that sin causes (Isaiah 9)

Cutting off doesn't imply eternal torment to me, though, by necessity. Moses was cut off of the Holy Land for his sin. Not every believer in universal salvation believes that judgement will be easy-peezy. I think it's a "fearful thing," However, I don't believe that aionios must mean eternal simply because the scripture refers to the Kingdom as having no end. If aionios meant "pertaining to aion-age" that could also indicate a different aspect to the kingdom than its nature of endlessness without any logical tension. It would be like saying the sky is big in one section of text and saying the sky is blue in another section. In fact, the passage in Luke 1:31-33 says that he will reign into the age AND of his kingdom there will be no end. I didn't see anything there about an endless age. The last part of that scripture could easily mean that the kingdom will continue along an endless succession of ages, not one endless age.

Paul refers to the kingdom as peace, joy and righteousness in the Holy Spirit. So, of course it has no end because the Spirit is immortal. However, there is a such thing called the Pentecostal Age. Jesus himself spoke of ages now, and ages to come, ages in succession. So, it makes sense to me that an aspect of judgement of "the goats" who reject righteousness would be lacking in peace and joy in the Holy Spirit during a certain age, making their judgment aionios and the reward for the sheep to be aionios as well, if they stay the course to the end of the age. Then they will be given immortality. So, again, the fact that the Spirit has no end, does not mean that judgment must be eternal.

[ps]

Wow - I regret this came to be so long.

As I indicate at the end, I will not carry on any likely unresolveable dispute, as that will likely not benefit anyone, though if I see I will respond to false statements similar to the one concerning one greek word used for torment and the false indication that it would only imply testing in Jesus time and usage.

With this post I've pointed out (in some cases again) the basis of what I believe is overlooked and ignored by many URers.  To carry on further, unless some additional bible verses might clarify something, is likely to only become a dispute about words, which I wish to avoid.

Because of the contextually relevant kingdom, since in Luke 1:33 the kingdom is spoken of as being ages without end (i.e. unending), and that kingdom is the context of the separation into life (inherit kingdom) and punishment (depart into fire).

But nowhere it states those people stay in the fire forever.

Similarly, I am not aware of anywhere that it states those people come out of the fire.  The actual biblical indications, what is actually written, suggest they do not.

a)The Mt 25:(31-46) parable seems to indicate it will be, minimally, for the period of the kingdom
b)Luke 1:33 seems to indicate that kingdom will be without end.

Jesus never used words like torture or punishment. He used the word correction.

First, he clearly, based on Thayer's, Mt 8:29 and synoptics, should be understood to be capable of inflicting torment, and was by the demons around the graveyard.  (Torment, not testing.  Another word, peirazo G3985, seems to be the word commonly used in NT for the notion of testing [as well as 'tempting'], rather than the (presumed)G928etc carrying that meaning anywhere in NT.)

Second, that the word kolasi-, by Jesus time, did not generally mean correction, as evidenced in the LXX (something Jesus can safely be presumed to have been familiar with), and in other external literature contemporary to Jesus time, but did mean 'punishment'.  The idea of 'correction' as part of that word had apparently 'faded away' by time of LXX, and was no longer part of its meaning in several of the Eze passages, nor in at least some contemporary literature of Jesus/disciples' time.  The primary external literature example given in the 2nd reference is related to Josephus recording of Herod's escape from a possible death sentence, apparently a possible punishment (apparently kolasi-) for crimes for which he was tried, but there are apparently others - and the septuagint we can readily read translations of for ourselves, as well as reference analyzed greek versions. 

I do not see the idea of anything I would recognize as correction in several Eze passages - the idea present is that of complete, unending loss of a)temporal life, or b)permission to enter into God's presence, relative to the application of those 'kolasi-'.

Both of those seem to me punishment, and completely non-corrective with regards to the individuals to which they were addressed.  Jude 1:7 also speaks of punishment (dike G1349) of aionio- (G166) fire (pyr G4442), of Sodom and Gomorrah.  That word dike is perhaps less prone to the confusion surrounding kolasi-, and used with the same word picture, aionio- pyr, as Mt 25:41.

As regards the torture, while perhaps not directly part of kolasi-, that would seem to be implied by that lake of fire, which is apparently the punishment to be entered into, or departed into, presumably the torment the demons in Mt 8:29 were concerned about, receiving some like form of before 'the time'.

Never ending correction would mean the One applying correction fails.

This seems to incorrectly presume at least two things,
a)that the One is applying correction to those addressed, something that does not seem to be the case.
b)that the timeframe of opportunity for correction is limitless.

Regarding (a), I've already written.

Regarding (b) - I've seen multiple references to 2 Pet 3:9, and God's will that all be saved.  But (particularly with regard to UR use) the timeframe of that passage (2Pet 3:2-15 or so) often seems to be completely overlooked - the patience, the reason for Jesus delay, that salvation might be obtained,  before his return.  There is no indication there that salvation might still be available after his return - if so then the reason given for his delay is of no meaning - there would be no reason for delay.  And there are several places that address 'all' being saved (Israel being brought out of Egypt), subsequent to which those found to be unbelieving/displeasing are destroyed from among the 'all' (those who fell in the desert), with the spiritual parallel being drawn as to that of Christ and the world/church.  1Cor 10:1-5, Heb 3:14-18 with Heb 3:7-18 indicating those who were disobedient would not enter his rest (life?), not that their entrance into that rest might be delayed.

Read the link below and you will see all the testing and stuff really is about refining gold.
Before 288BC the Greek word for torment had just one meaning: Checking the purity of gold.

There is no mention of testing in the Mt and Eze passages I've mentioned, that I see... ?  Nor of torment, it would merely seem to be implied (by 'lake of fire', and the teaching that it would be better to enter 'life' having removed limbs to obtain that 'life', than to go to the geena-fire with all limbs intact).

That aside, the statement that the greek word for torment has 'just one meaning' appears to be completely false, being contradicted by Thayer's; it lists several definitions, with the second involving torture and the third being torture, supported by 2Macc 7:-13+, reportedly written well before 288AD (the date mentioned by the LoL article when I looked), and before Jesus time as well.  (Neither you nor he mentioned a specific word, so I presume he, and you, mean basanizo, G928.)  Take a look at 2Macc 7:13 and surrounding (excerpts below), and see if you still think its use in v13 meant only testing the purity of metals.  At the least, it was testing the purity of man, not metals - but I would certainly call what the men were subjected to torture.

(I realize the site desires accepted biblical canon for doctrinal use, but assume/hope the use for language consideration is acceptable.)
2Macc 7:3...13 <deleted - decided its probably a bit graphic for this site, but if you doubt Thayer's claim, I suggest you find and read it.  It's not pretty.>

As odd as it may sound "lake fire and brimstone" sounded positive in the ancient mind.
Fire was used to disinfect stuff. We also know fire can be holy -> Pentecost flames.
Brimstone was (and still is) used to purify. Back then it was used to treat skin infections, drive out pests from a house, purify a house after someone died in it.

Yes, brimstone and fire were used on Sodom and Gomorrah.  But the cleansing/purification there seems to have been of (benefit to) the earth.  Not so much the former inhabitants.  The one found righteous (Lot) was removed, and not subjected to that 'cleansing' process.  And Lot's wife, even though making it out of the town(s), failed to obey the directive to not look back, and was turned into a pillar of salt.  (Lest someone think OT, law, note too that Lot's righteousness was not based on law, as far as the bible records - the law is not yet recorded as given.  So his righteousness must have been based on faith, as was that of Abraham.)

Lake is just another word for the Temple Laver which was used to purify tools, vessels, sacrifices and priests. Some sources even state the laver was symbolically containing hyper purified gold.
So 3 words that are closely connected to purification. (Revelation contains other references to Temple rituals)

So for simplicity just assume the world ends January 1, 2022.
The holy people instantly start the eternal life and enter the kingdom.
The other people are sent to the lake. They stay there for a while and then join the holy people.

Where is anything written that anyone sent to the 'lake of fire'/punishment comes out and/or join those in the kingdom (rest)?  Is this not going beyond what is written, warned against elsewhere, though not specifically on this topic?  And the (absolute?) denial of entry into rest is mentioned in Ps 95:11, Act 7:42, 13:18, Heb 3:11,18,  Heb 4:3,5,11, and similar displeasure with unbelievers in 1Cor 10:1-12.

Even the saints have eternal life and it starts at the same time as the one of the holy people. That's what ET believes. They are alive but not in heaven but in hell. That should be a hint too. Kingdom and life might have a meaning that's not found in our western dictionaries.


http://radical-reaction.com/MyChristianSites/LoL/index.html

I have glanced at it (at least enough to find your apparent incorrect date :) ), and don't see anything that substantively refutes what I have observed.  I do see a great deal of material but none that seems to address the timeframes that seem indicated in various bible passages, about when it is possible to repent, be purified and sanctified, and enter into life/rest.  And it covers the pruning notion again, but as with many statements on this site, seems to overlook that pruning leaves two end results, one which is to have benefited (a beneficiary), and one, which I think, can hardly be perceived to have benefited (the remaining refuse).

As far as everything else it mentions, I cannot see their pertinence to salvation beyond the timeframes that do seem to be biblically supported.  The foremost timeframe seeming to be before Jesus "coming"/return/revelation/revealing, and the start of his kingdom, which seems to fairly immediately follow.

I realize you disagree, and do not intend to enter into any ongoing dispute, should you reply.  If I see something explicitly false, as with the claim about the greek word for torment, I may attempt to address that.  (Since you have failed to indicate precisely which word, I've had to guess G928, which likely includes G929 and G931 as well, those covering most NT usage of word translated 'torment' in NASB.)

In summary
The general purpose of all my posts thus far, has been to point out what seem to be false claims regarding bible content and language used, the basic false one's addressed being that aionoi- cannot mean eternal (or unending), when it certainly seems to be true as regards the kingdom (Lk 1:33), that kolasi- means correction (not my understanding of something that does not restore its object/target and is unending within the application context, as passages in Eze and Mt 25:46 coincident with kingdom indicate), and zoe(n) in and of itself does not have any extended time-period attribute (as evidenced by at least two passages in Luke.)  I have also mentioned the timeframe apparently ignored though indicated in 2Pet3:-9+, and the false claim about one meaning for the greek word for torment in the time period in which the gospels were lived and written.  Other passages have been ref'ed along the way, but I think those are the primary points I have addressed.

[ps]

FWIW - may not make any difference to your understanding - but...

In fact, the passage in Luke 1:31-33 says that he will reign into the age AND of his kingdom there will be no end. I didn't see anything there about an endless age. The last part of that scripture could easily mean that the kingdom will continue along an endless succession of ages, not one endless age.

The 'reign' (G936) and 'kingdom'(G932) are, as with kolasi-/etc, a word 'family'.  One is verb form and one is noun form.  They are referring to the same thing, repetitiously.

your observation of 'age' is not correct - it is actually a plural form, i.e. ageS.  So, there is no difference between the reign/kingdom.  The reign of ageS, is also the kingdom without end.  One is the act he performs, the other is that which he performs it over, they are for any practical purpose the same entity.

Hence, he reigns for ageS, and those ageS of the kingdom which he reigns over, is without end, unending.

Unless I am greatly mistaken.

[darryl]

Wow - I regret this came to be so long.

As I indicate at the end, I will not carry on any likely unresolveable dispute, as that will likely not benefit anyone, though if I see I will respond to false statements similar to the one concerning one greek word used for torment and the false indication that it would only imply testing in Jesus time and usage.

With this post I've pointed out (in some cases again) the basis of what I believe is overlooked and ignored by many URers.  To carry on further, unless some additional bible verses might clarify something, is likely to only become a dispute about words, which I wish to avoid.

Because of the contextually relevant kingdom, since in Luke 1:33 the kingdom is spoken of as being ages without end (i.e. unending), and that kingdom is the context of the separation into life (inherit kingdom) and punishment (depart into fire).

But nowhere it states those people stay in the fire forever.

Similarly, I am not aware of anywhere that it states those people come out of the fire.  The actual biblical indications, what is actually written, suggest they do not.

a)The Mt 25:(31-46) parable seems to indicate it will be, minimally, for the period of the kingdom
b)Luke 1:33 seems to indicate that kingdom will be without end.

Jesus never used words like torture or punishment. He used the word correction.

First, he clearly, based on Thayer's, Mt 8:29 and synoptics, should be understood to be capable of inflicting torment, and was by the demons around the graveyard.  (Torment, not testing.  Another word, peirazo G3985, seems to be the word commonly used in NT for the notion of testing [as well as 'tempting'], rather than the (presumed)G928etc carrying that meaning anywhere in NT.)

Second, that the word kolasi-, by Jesus time, did not generally mean correction, as evidenced in the LXX (something Jesus can safely be presumed to have been familiar with), and in other external literature contemporary to Jesus time, but did mean 'punishment'.  The idea of 'correction' as part of that word had apparently 'faded away' by time of LXX, and was no longer part of its meaning in several of the Eze passages, nor in at least some contemporary literature of Jesus/disciples' time.  The primary external literature example given in the 2nd reference is related to Josephus recording of Herod's escape from a possible death sentence, apparently a possible punishment (apparently kolasi-) for crimes for which he was tried, but there are apparently others - and the septuagint we can readily read translations of for ourselves, as well as reference analyzed greek versions. 

I do not see the idea of anything I would recognize as correction in several Eze passages - the idea present is that of complete, unending loss of a)temporal life, or b)permission to enter into God's presence, relative to the application of those 'kolasi-'.

Both of those seem to me punishment, and completely non-corrective with regards to the individuals to which they were addressed.  Jude 1:7 also speaks of punishment (dike G1349) of aionio- (G166) fire (pyr G4442), of Sodom and Gomorrah.  That word dike is perhaps less prone to the confusion surrounding kolasi-, and used with the same word picture, aionio- pyr, as Mt 25:41.

As regards the torture, while perhaps not directly part of kolasi-, that would seem to be implied by that lake of fire, which is apparently the punishment to be entered into, or departed into, presumably the torment the demons in Mt 8:29 were concerned about, receiving some like form of before 'the time'.

Never ending correction would mean the One applying correction fails.

This seems to incorrectly presume at least two things,
a)that the One is applying correction to those addressed, something that does not seem to be the case.
b)that the timeframe of opportunity for correction is limitless.

Regarding (a), I've already written.

Regarding (b) - I've seen multiple references to 2 Pet 3:9, and God's will that all be saved.  But (particularly with regard to UR use) the timeframe of that passage (2Pet 3:2-15 or so) often seems to be completely overlooked - the patience, the reason for Jesus delay, that salvation might be obtained,  before his return.  There is no indication there that salvation might still be available after his return - if so then the reason given for his delay is of no meaning - there would be no reason for delay.  And there are several places that address 'all' being saved (Israel being brought out of Egypt), subsequent to which those found to be unbelieving/displeasing are destroyed from among the 'all' (those who fell in the desert), with the spiritual parallel being drawn as to that of Christ and the world/church.  1Cor 10:1-5, Heb 3:14-18 with Heb 3:7-18 indicating those who were disobedient would not enter his rest (life?), not that their entrance into that rest might be delayed.

Read the link below and you will see all the testing and stuff really is about refining gold.
Before 288BC the Greek word for torment had just one meaning: Checking the purity of gold.

There is no mention of testing in the Mt and Eze passages I've mentioned, that I see... ?  Nor of torment, it would merely seem to be implied (by 'lake of fire', and the teaching that it would be better to enter 'life' having removed limbs to obtain that 'life', than to go to the geena-fire with all limbs intact).

That aside, the statement that the greek word for torment has 'just one meaning' appears to be completely false, being contradicted by Thayer's; it lists several definitions, with the second involving torture and the third being torture, supported by 2Macc 7:-13+, reportedly written well before 288AD (the date mentioned by the LoL article when I looked), and before Jesus time as well.  (Neither you nor he mentioned a specific word, so I presume he, and you, mean basanizo, G928.)  Take a look at 2Macc 7:13 and surrounding (excerpts below), and see if you still think its use in v13 meant only testing the purity of metals.  At the least, it was testing the purity of man, not metals - but I would certainly call what the men were subjected to torture.

(I realize the site desires accepted biblical canon for doctrinal use, but assume/hope the use for language consideration is acceptable.)
2Macc 7:3...13 <deleted - decided its probably a bit graphic for this site, but if you doubt Thayer's claim, I suggest you find and read it.  It's not pretty.>

As odd as it may sound "lake fire and brimstone" sounded positive in the ancient mind.
Fire was used to disinfect stuff. We also know fire can be holy -> Pentecost flames.
Brimstone was (and still is) used to purify. Back then it was used to treat skin infections, drive out pests from a house, purify a house after someone died in it.

Yes, brimstone and fire were used on Sodom and Gomorrah.  But the cleansing/purification there seems to have been of (benefit to) the earth.  Not so much the former inhabitants.  The one found righteous (Lot) was removed, and not subjected to that 'cleansing' process.  And Lot's wife, even though making it out of the town(s), failed to obey the directive to not look back, and was turned into a pillar of salt.  (Lest someone think OT, law, note too that Lot's righteousness was not based on law, as far as the bible records - the law is not yet recorded as given.  So his righteousness must have been based on faith, as was that of Abraham.)

Lake is just another word for the Temple Laver which was used to purify tools, vessels, sacrifices and priests. Some sources even state the laver was symbolically containing hyper purified gold.
So 3 words that are closely connected to purification. (Revelation contains other references to Temple rituals)

So for simplicity just assume the world ends January 1, 2022.
The holy people instantly start the eternal life and enter the kingdom.
The other people are sent to the lake. They stay there for a while and then join the holy people.

Where is anything written that anyone sent to the 'lake of fire'/punishment comes out and/or join those in the kingdom (rest)?  Is this not going beyond what is written, warned against elsewhere, though not specifically on this topic?  And the (absolute?) denial of entry into rest is mentioned in Ps 95:11, Act 7:42, 13:18, Heb 3:11,18,  Heb 4:3,5,11, and similar displeasure with unbelievers in 1Cor 10:1-12.

Even the saints have eternal life and it starts at the same time as the one of the holy people. That's what ET believes. They are alive but not in heaven but in hell. That should be a hint too. Kingdom and life might have a meaning that's not found in our western dictionaries.


http://radical-reaction.com/MyChristianSites/LoL/index.html

I have glanced at it (at least enough to find your apparent incorrect date :) ), and don't see anything that substantively refutes what I have observed.  I do see a great deal of material but none that seems to address the timeframes that seem indicated in various bible passages, about when it is possible to repent, be purified and sanctified, and enter into life/rest.  And it covers the pruning notion again, but as with many statements on this site, seems to overlook that pruning leaves two end results, one which is to have benefited (a beneficiary), and one, which I think, can hardly be perceived to have benefited (the remaining refuse).

As far as everything else it mentions, I cannot see their pertinence to salvation beyond the timeframes that do seem to be biblically supported.  The foremost timeframe seeming to be before Jesus "coming"/return/revelation/revealing, and the start of his kingdom, which seems to fairly immediately follow.

I realize you disagree, and do not intend to enter into any ongoing dispute, should you reply.  If I see something explicitly false, as with the claim about the greek word for torment, I may attempt to address that.  (Since you have failed to indicate precisely which word, I've had to guess G928, which likely includes G929 and G931 as well, those covering most NT usage of word translated 'torment' in NASB.)

In summary
The general purpose of all my posts thus far, has been to point out what seem to be false claims regarding bible content and language used, the basic false one's addressed being that aionoi- cannot mean eternal (or unending), when it certainly seems to be true as regards the kingdom (Lk 1:33), that kolasi- means correction (not my understanding of something that does not restore its object/target and is unending within the application context, as passages in Eze and Mt 25:46 coincident with kingdom indicate), and zoe(n) in and of itself does not have any extended time-period attribute (as evidenced by at least two passages in Luke.)  I have also mentioned the timeframe apparently ignored though indicated in 2Pet3:-9+, and the false claim about one meaning for the greek word for torment in the time period in which the gospels were lived and written.  Other passages have been ref'ed along the way, but I think those are the primary points I have addressed.

we could argue the semantics and etymology all the day and night long...what it boils down to is this...would a God of love torment His creatures in hellfire forever, with no end, no cessation, without pity or any mercy at all ?...hmmm, do you believe in such a god ?...could you worship such a god?...a God who, knowing He is ultimately going to torment and torture many of His creatures, continues to create them ?..I mean seriously, do you honestly, in your heart of hearts, believe in, love, and worship such a god ?...well, regardless of your answer I KNOW God is not like that..God is not a monster..He is a good God. a loving God...at least that is how I experience Him. The God I love and worship is not capable of tormenting precious human beings forever without end.

[WhiteWings]

First of all I would like to show that Revelation not in every sense the last book of the Bible.
In 1Corinthians 15:22-28, we have:
No more rule
No more authority
No more power
No more enemies - 26 the last enemy is done away--death;
No more reigning - 24  then--the end, when he may deliver up the reign to God, even the Father, when he may have made useless all rule, and all authority and power
All subjected  - 25 For he must needs reign, until he shall put all his enemies under his feet :
No more death - 26 the last enemy is done away--death ;
All made alive, immortal (1Co 15:22) For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

In Revelation we have:
Still rule -20:6; 22:5
Son still reigns -22:1-5; 21:5
Authority -21:24-25
Power -21:24-25; 22:2
Kings -21:24-26
Saints reign -22:5
Second death still exists -21:8
The nations still mortal -22:2

Because of the contextually relevant kingdom, since in Luke 1:33 the kingdom is spoken of as being ages without end (i.e. unending), and that kingdom is the context of the separation into life (inherit kingdom) and punishment (depart into fire).

But nowhere it states those people stay in the fire forever.

Similarly, I am not aware of anywhere that it states those people come out of the fire.  The actual biblical indications, what is actually written, suggest they do not.

a)The Mt 25:(31-46) parable seems to indicate it will be, minimally, for the period of the kingdom
b)Luke 1:33 seems to indicate that kingdom will be without end.

1 Corinthians 15:24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power.

Jesus never used words like torture or punishment. He used the word correction.

First, he clearly, based on Thayer's, Mt 8:29 and synoptics, should be understood to be capable of inflicting torment, and was by the demons around the graveyard.  (Torment, not testing.  Another word, peirazo G3985, seems to be the word commonly used in NT for the notion of testing [as well as 'tempting'], rather than the (presumed)G928etc carrying that meaning anywhere in NT.)
[/quote]Testing can come with discomfort. Obviously testing gold for purity is useless if no refining is done.

The idea of 'correction' as part of that word had apparently 'faded away' by time of LXX, and was no longer part of its meaning in several of the Eze passages, nor in at least some contemporary literature of Jesus/disciples' time.

http://radical-reaction.com/MyChristianSites/LoL/Torment.html
Look for 288 AD about halfway that page.

I think you should look more at the whole context (most of the NT).
Many words, as the article I gave you in my previous message shows, are linked to purifying gold or testing coins to be genuine and similar things.
I know it's the very core of our chat, but in Revelation an other word is used that relates, or let's say potentially relates, to refining gold.
Refining is about removing impurities. Impurities=sin, bad habits, etc
We see similar removal of impurities in the form of pruning. Or God being called a launderers soap.

Never ending correction would mean the One applying correction fails.

This seems to incorrectly presume at least two things,
a)that the One is applying correction to those addressed, something that does not seem to be the case.
b)that the timeframe of opportunity for correction is limitless.

Point a has be discussed so I skip that. Point b I don't understand or find it an odd conclusion.

Correction that never ends because the time frame is limitless still means correction failed.
The only successful correction is correction that ends. Could be an hour, a day, a million years, but it has an end.
Look at it this way.
Jesus hands over the kingdom to the father after all opposition is gone, submitted.
Opposition = sin = impurities in the gold
If people are still being tormented it means they still aren't pure gold. And that means they are not (fully) submitted yet.

Regarding (b) - I've seen multiple references to 2 Pet 3:9, and God's will that all be saved.  But (particularly with regard to UR use) the timeframe of that passage (2Pet 3:2-15 or so) often seems to be completely overlooked - the patience, the reason for Jesus delay, that salvation might be obtained,  before his return.  There is no indication there that salvation might still be available after his return - if so then the reason given for his delay is of no meaning - there would be no reason for delay.

What about the people born before He was born?
What about the people born after His return?

I think you reference to
Hebrews 9: 27 And inasmuch as it is reserved to men once to die, and after this, judgment,

http://tentmaker.org/forum/bible-verses-used-to-assert-not-all-will-be-saved/hebrews-927-after-death-comes-judgement/msg122137/#msg122137

And there are several places that address 'all' being saved (Israel being brought out of Egypt), subsequent to which those found to be unbelieving/displeasing are destroyed from among the 'all' (those who fell in the desert), with the spiritual parallel being drawn as to that of Christ and the world/church.  1Cor 10:1-5, Heb 3:14-18 with Heb 3:7-18 indicating those who were disobedient would not enter his rest (life?), not that their entrance into that rest might be delayed.

Being saved as a person or as a nation is a bit different.
It's true that Israel was enslaved and man died during that period. And even who where released from slavery didn't enter the promised land. But that's on individual basis.
The nation Israel was rejected/punished/corrected/<enter your favorite word> by God.
But time after time we see God takes them back again.
The 'story' ends with olive trees being grafted in etc. But that simply means both trees are saved in the end. God won't permanently cast away nations.

That aside, the statement that the greek word for torment has 'just one meaning' appears to be completely false, being contradicted by Thayer's; it lists several definitions, with the second involving torture and the third being torture, supported by 2Macc 7:-13+, reportedly written well before 288AD (the date mentioned by the LoL article when I looked), and before Jesus time as well.

It's good that you saw that Thayer at least gives the definition I mentioned.
You mentioned several books that are written before 288AD. (I think they were all written before that time).
But you must also keep in mind that the lexicons were written long after that time. The main question, for me is, if we had a lexicon written in 100AD, what would be in it?
We both have our views on what would be in that lexicon. If it only contains testing gold then the discussion is over. If it also contains torture then context should determine which meaning is being used. I gave you mine. You gave yours. And now we are stuck I think :-)

(I realize the site desires accepted biblical canon for doctrinal use, but assume/hope the use for language consideration is acceptable.)

I'm not the site owner, but what I know about Gary is that he frequently uses "language consideration".

Yes, brimstone and fire were used on Sodom and Gomorrah.  But the cleansing/purification there seems to have been of (benefit to) the earth.

Point taken. So again we can pick two meanings. (but I think it's not that hard for the lake
But there is hope.
Ezekiel 16:53 "'However, I will restore the fortunes of Sodom and her daughters and of Samaria and her daughters, and your fortunes along with them,

Where is anything written that anyone sent to the 'lake of fire'/punishment comes out and/or join those in the kingdom (rest)?  Is this not going beyond what is written, warned against elsewhere,

It was a way of explaining how I understand Scripture.
Anyway, neither does it state they stay in it permanently.

[Seth]

your observation of 'age' is not correct - it is actually a plural form, i.e. ageS.  So, there is no difference between the reign/kingdom.  The reign of ageS, is also the kingdom without end.  One is the act he performs, the other is that which he performs it over, they are for any practical purpose the same entity.

Hence, he reigns for ageS, and those ageS of the kingdom which he reigns over, is without end, unending.
   

If you are correct about that, and that's a big if, multiple ages cannot be unending. That's like saying forever AND ever. You only need one ever. I if one age never ends, there cannot be another age after that. It would therefore make more sense to say that the kingdom continues for an unending succession of ageS, not one unending one.

I don't have a problem with the fact that the reign in the first part of the sentence is the verb form of the noun meaning they are speaking of the same kingdom.

It is a kingdom through the ages, a kingdom that will not end.

[bushy]

we could argue the semantics and etymology all the day and night long...what it boils down to is this...would a God of love torment His creatures in hellfire forever, with no end, no cessation, without pity or any mercy at all ?...hmmm, do you believe in such a god ?...could you worship such a god?...a God who, knowing He is ultimately going to torment and torture many of His creatures, continues to create them ?..I mean seriously, do you honestly, in your heart of hearts, believe in, love, and worship such a god ?...well, regardless of your answer I KNOW God is not like that..God is not a monster..He is a good God. a loving God...at least that is how I experience Him. The God I love and worship is not capable of tormenting precious human beings forever without end.

:iagree:
Are we supposed to ignore all the scripture that clearly tell of God saving the world, of being reconciled to all things in heaven and earth, because of not being able to understand for sure the meaning of a greek word?

[marie glen]

It is a kingdom through the ages, a kingdom that will not end.

And how happy we are to know that.. :thumbsup: :dsunny:

we could argue the semantics and etymology all the day and night long...what it boils down to is this...would a God of love torment His creatures in hellfire forever, with no end, no cessation, without pity or any mercy at all ?...hmmm, do you believe in such a god ?...could you worship such a god?...a God who, knowing He is ultimately going to torment and torture many of His creatures, continues to create them ?..I mean seriously, do you honestly, in your heart of hearts, believe in, love, and worship such a god ?...well, regardless of your answer I KNOW God is not like that..God is not a monster..He is a good God. a loving God...at least that is how I experience Him. The God I love and worship is not capable of tormenting precious human beings forever without end.

:iagree:
Are we supposed to ignore all the scripture that clearly tell of God saving the world, of being reconciled to all things in heaven and earth, because of not being able to understand for sure the meaning of a greek word?

Some of my favorite people are atheist.. My brother, one of my veRy favorite people is atheist. I was thinking just today, could I ever conceive of happiness, if I were to know he is somewhere writhing in torment for ever? or if he was simply 'lost' and no longer existed?

Of course the first scenario is the worse.. And, if it were to occur, could I really love a 'god' who carried out such a thing? A 'god' such as that, would sure sap a lot of joy and peace out of the "kingdom"... :faint:

:cloud9: :gsmile:

[Seth]

we could argue the semantics and etymology all the day and night long...what it boils down to is this...would a God of love torment His creatures in hellfire forever, with no end, no cessation, without pity or any mercy at all ?...hmmm, do you believe in such a god ?...could you worship such a god?...a God who, knowing He is ultimately going to torment and torture many of His creatures, continues to create them ?..I mean seriously, do you honestly, in your heart of hearts, believe in, love, and worship such a god ?...well, regardless of your answer I KNOW God is not like that..God is not a monster..He is a good God. a loving God...at least that is how I experience Him. The God I love and worship is not capable of tormenting precious human beings forever without end.

:iagree:
Are we supposed to ignore all the scripture that clearly tell of God saving the world, of being reconciled to all things in heaven and earth, because of not being able to understand for sure the meaning of a greek word?

Well, from what I have seen in this conversation, we are supposed to believe that eternal torment is LIKELY. The words "likely" and "seems" have been used often here, and I can appreciate the intellectual honesty in that. But, as for a punishment that never ends, from a God who is supposedly love, that makes for a pretty weak case for me. I would think that unending torment would deserve more of a definite warning than one based on a series of inferences.

So, to answer your question, no we should not ignore the other scriptures, but also, the argument for eternal torment based on this analysis of one greek word is fuzzy in itself. If men are to be eternally tormented, I would think God would be more clear about that in his usage of words without leaving it so open for interpretation, where we have to put puzzle pieces together an reach an opinion from it.

[micah7:9]

we could argue the semantics and etymology all the day and night long...what it boils down to is this...would a God of love torment His creatures in hellfire forever, with no end, no cessation, without pity or any mercy at all ?...hmmm, do you believe in such a god ?...could you worship such a god?...a God who, knowing He is ultimately going to torment and torture many of His creatures, continues to create them ?..I mean seriously, do you honestly, in your heart of hearts, believe in, love, and worship such a god ?...well, regardless of your answer I KNOW God is not like that..God is not a monster..He is a good God. a loving God...at least that is how I experience Him. The God I love and worship is not capable of tormenting precious human beings forever without end.

:iagree:
Are we supposed to ignore all the scripture that clearly tell of God saving the world, of being reconciled to all things in heaven and earth, because of not being able to understand for sure the meaning of a greek word?

:iagree: :dsunny:

[marie glen]

I would think that unending torment would deserve more of a definite warning than one based on a series of inferences.

:thumbsup: :banana:

[WhiteWings]

Because you repeatingly made harsh claims I'll do so too.

As I indicate at the end, I will not carry on any likely unresolveable dispute, as that will likely not benefit anyone,

It would benefit you for sure because your understanding is shallow.

though if I see I will respond to false statements similar to the one concerning one greek word used for torment and the false indication that it would only imply testing in Jesus time and usage.

You have to try harder because the only thing you proved is that you have no clue about what the NT is about and especially Revelation.
I gave you several links and you glanced over them. Your choice but a very bad choice, because you chose to keep locked up in your pagan believes and reject growth.

You see, you keep trying to zoom in on a single word but all you can com up with is out of context 'proof'. You totally ignore proof from the other side. And yes, it is proof, the most solid proof you will ever read. Just try to understand what's written with an open mind. Many words in the NT point to purification. There are two keys to Revelation and the one relevant in this discussion is the fact that Revelation follows Temple rituals. Understand that and you will understand what LoF is. Not according to your lexicon but according to God.

[eaglesway]

That's an unnecessarily aggressive way to put things WW. Lets keep things civilized please.

[eaglesway]

And I believe the second article I referenced strongly indicates why where the word began, is not where it was at the time of Jesus and the apostles, even in external literature, and even earlier than that in the LXX/septuagint.  It also covers 'kolasi-' as a loss in some LXX/septuagint passages, not likely corrective in nature.

I have to disagree with any "likely" interpretation of kolassin as not being corrective. The word only occurs twice, and whether it means "cut off" or to "prune" is largely a matter of interpretation and context.

Also, one has to look into the Hebrew mindset to understand these thoughts as they proceed from YHWH through Messiah and the prophets and apostles.

Looking at John 15:1,2 Jesus is the Vine and we are the branches. If a branch bears no fruit, it withers, is cut-off(pruned or purged- kathairei), and gathered to be burned.

So what now? Are believers to be gathered for eternal burning too?

But in 1 Corinthians 3:15-17 we see another view of a believer and fire...

12Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, 13each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work. 14If any man's work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. 15If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.


So we see here that a believer can be saved, "yet so as through fire"and the "loss" is reward, and  not a sentence of eternal damnation.

Fire is something we go "through" in order to be purged.

Behold, I am going to send My messenger, and he will clear the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple; and the messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight, behold, He is coming," says the LORD of hosts. 2"But who can endure the day of His coming? And who can stand when He appears? For He is like a refiner's fire and like fullers' soap. 3"He will sit as a smelter and purifier of silver, and He will purify the sons of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, so that they may present to the LORD offerings in righteousness.Mal 3

Those who believe are going through fire now... but Jesus said, "Every man will be salted with fire"(Mk 9 & Lk 12)

The key word in Mt 25:46 is "aionion" because no matter how we see kolassin, the key question is "how long". If torment/punishment lasts forever then the scriptures are broken because I can point to at least 8 verses that assert all will be saved.

Romans 11:32 and 36.

1 Corinthians 15:22 and 28

Ephesians 1:9-11

Colossians 1:15-21

1 John 2:1-3

Romans 5:18

Ephesians 4:7

Rev 5:13

Rev 21:5

And all those verses and more lead to Phillipians 2:9-11

Do anyone really think God is forcing all those people to bow their knee and confess His Lordship just before He throws them into eternal torment? And why?

I thought the reason they are "going to hell" in the first place is because God so respects free will that He has let them choose their horrible fate?

So why the big "force your knee down, I told you so" thing at the end?

My answer to that question is that every knee shall bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord TO THE GLORY OF GOD THE FATHER ...

and if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart He was raised from the dead you will be saved (Romans 10)

So in Phil 2:9-11 we see all being saved through the subjection, not destroyed because of it, same as in 1 Cor 15:28

28And when all things have been subjected unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subjected to him that did subject all things unto him, that God may be all in all.

And as we see in 1 Cor 15:25,26 For he must reign, till he hath put all his enemies under his feet. 26The last enemy that shall be abolished is death.

If death has been abolished, and God has become all in all, how can there be an everlasting second death?

I Cor 15 22-28 clearly shows the idea "Jesus being exalted in order to seal the damned" to be a false interpretation, as does Eph 4:7 and our Lord's own words in John 12:32

'If I am lifted up from the earth I will draw all men unto me".

The reason for Jesus being exalted over all things and receiving "all authority on heaven and earth" is so that He can draw all things into His reign of life- "death is swallowed up by immortality"

He says, "Behold I am making all things new! Write down these words, they are faithful and true!"(Rev 21)

[ps]

mostly ignoring the insult, tho' breaking my resolve, while trying to remain civil...

Because you repeatingly made harsh claims I'll do so too.

As I indicate at the end, I will not carry on any likely unresolveable dispute, as that will likely not benefit anyone,

It would benefit you for sure because your understanding is shallow.

though if I see I will respond to false statements similar to the one concerning one greek word used for torment and the false indication that it would only imply testing in Jesus time and usage.

Do you realize that the information you presented from the LoL article (regarding meaning of 'torment' word) is false?

Do you realize that the greek word (G928 presumed to be) considered there and by you, translated torment, did mean torment by Jesus and NT time-frame-of-reference?

Do you realize that you posted only *one* link (not several) prior to my previous post?

Do you understand that it can be difficult to give serious consideration to much of what an article presents if the specific material originally leading into that article is found to be false/incorrect/wrong/misleading?

Do you realize that it can be difficult to give serious consideration to what you have to say when realization occurs that you have presented false information to support your position, and more so that you don't seem to realize it is false?

Do you realize that I addressed, in my various posts, more than one word, and did not zoom in on only a single word?

Can you provide specific information about any of my presented evidence that is truly out-of-context relative to what the presentation claims?

If your answer to any of the above is "no", then we likely have little basis for further related discussion.

You have to try harder because the only thing you proved is that you have no clue about what the NT is about and especially Revelation.
I gave you several links and you glanced over them. Your choice but a very bad choice, because you chose to keep locked up in your pagan believes and reject growth.

You see, you keep trying to zoom in on a single word but all you can com up with is out of context 'proof'. You totally ignore proof from the other side. And yes, it is proof, the most solid proof you will ever read. Just try to understand what's written with an open mind. Many words in the NT point to purification. There are two keys to Revelation and the one relevant in this discussion is the fact that Revelation follows Temple rituals. Understand that and you will understand what LoF is. Not according to your lexicon but according to God.

Did purification in Temple rituals occur 
*before* priests entered into (a period of) temple service/worship
-or-
*after* priests entered into (a period of) temple service/worship
-or-
*both*
? 
(I guess a fourth possibility would be 'neither', but I'm pretty sure purification was a requirement.)

[ps]

we could argue the semantics and etymology all the day and night long...

Nope, not us.

what it boils down to is this...

what the originator of the words really meant. 
etymology and context are merely tools we use to try to understand that.
It has a specific meaning/intent, which is not determined by what we think.

[ps]

your observation of 'age' is not correct - it is actually a plural form, i.e. ageS.  So, there is no difference between the reign/kingdom.  The reign of ageS, is also the kingdom without end.  One is the act he performs, the other is that which he performs it over, they are for any practical purpose the same entity.

Hence, he reigns for ageS, and those ageS of the kingdom which he reigns over, is without end, unending.
   

If you are correct about that, and that's a big if, multiple ages cannot be unending. That's like saying forever AND ever. You only need one ever. I if one age never ends, there cannot be another age after that. It would therefore make more sense to say that the kingdom continues for an unending succession of ageS, not one unending one.

I don't have a problem with the fact that the reign in the first part of the sentence is the verb form of the noun meaning they are speaking of the same kingdom.

It is a kingdom through the ages, a kingdom that will not end.

I agree.  That was what I attempted to express, within the context of Luke 1:33.

Perhaps "he reigns for (a continuous succession of) ageS, and that succession of ageS of the kingdom which he reigns over, is without end, unending." would have been better.

[eaglesway]

mostly ignoring the insult, tho' breaking my resolve, while trying to remain civil...

Because you repeatingly made harsh claims I'll do so too.

As I indicate at the end, I will not carry on any likely unresolveable dispute, as that will likely not benefit anyone,

It would benefit you for sure because your understanding is shallow.

though if I see I will respond to false statements similar to the one concerning one greek word used for torment and the false indication that it would only imply testing in Jesus time and usage.

Do you realize that the information you presented from the LoL article (regarding meaning of 'torment' word) is false?

Do you realize that the greek word (G928 presumed to be) considered there and by you, translated torment, did mean torment by Jesus and NT time-frame-of-reference?

Do you realize that you posted only *one* link (not several) prior to my previous post?

Do you understand that it can be difficult to give serious consideration to much of what an article presents if the specific material originally leading into that article is found to be false/incorrect/wrong/misleading?

Do you realize that it can be difficult to give serious consideration to what you have to say when realization occurs that you have presented false information to support your position, and more so that you don't seem to realize it is false?

Do you realize that I addressed, in my various posts, more than one word, and did not zoom in on only a single word?

Can you provide specific information about any of my presented evidence that is truly out-of-context relative to what the presentation claims?

If your answer to any of the above is "no", then we likely have little basis for further related discussion.

You have to try harder because the only thing you proved is that you have no clue about what the NT is about and especially Revelation.
I gave you several links and you glanced over them. Your choice but a very bad choice, because you chose to keep locked up in your pagan believes and reject growth.

You see, you keep trying to zoom in on a single word but all you can com up with is out of context 'proof'. You totally ignore proof from the other side. And yes, it is proof, the most solid proof you will ever read. Just try to understand what's written with an open mind. Many words in the NT point to purification. There are two keys to Revelation and the one relevant in this discussion is the fact that Revelation follows Temple rituals. Understand that and you will understand what LoF is. Not according to your lexicon but according to God.

Did purification in Temple rituals occur 
*before* priests entered into (a period of) temple service/worship
-or-
*after* priests entered into (a period of) temple service/worship
-or-
*both*
? 
(I guess a fourth possibility would be 'neither', but I'm pretty sure purification was a requirement.)

ps

you are making a lot of "do you realize" emphatic statements, as if you were there, or what, "because you say so?".

But the issue you are making is a "straw man".

The only issue to this disagreement is...

Whether you see it as "torment" or "punishment" or "correction" -was it pointless eternal vengance? Was it eternal annihilation? Or was it for a time and a purpose. You easily ignore a ton of scripture, and as usual, you parrot the themes that support your  own view and refuse to respond at all to many scripture verses that refute it.

For instance.... 1 Corinthians 15:22-28 teaches that God will be "all in all" and death will be done away with.

If death will be destroyed, How can the second death last "forever".

Colossians 1 15-21 says "For so it pleased the Father to make al the fulness dwell in Him and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself through the blood of His cross, whether things in heaven or things on earth."

If "hell" or "the lake of fire" lasts forever, How will all things in heaven and earth be reconciled?

Ephesians 1:9 says "In all wisdom and insight 9 He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him 10 with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth."

You have no problem ignoring the testimony of these verses and repeating what you have heard and what you were taught and what you surmise from your own disposition without any objective scholarship or consideration of the points made by others, so let me ask you this...

Why are you here? This is not a debate site. It is a discussion site based in the scriptures of the prophets and apostles. This is not a place for folks to make assertions with no scriptural context or scholarly effort behind them. If you re[ly to scriptures with "Do you realize" followed by some emphatic assertion don't you think you ought to follow it with some evidence?

Unless you can address the verses I posted above and explain how they can be true in an annihilation or eternal torment perspective, you are just basicly trolling as far as I can see.

The only way to resolve a dispute between spiritual people is the scriptures. Religious ideology and philosophy, unsupported statements etc. now that's easy.  Too easy.

[eaglesway]

ps, this is a good article on what Jesus meant, and what people heard in His day and time, if you are interested.  :declare:

[ps]

good article

Where? reference missing?  Or am I overlooking some feature of the board that holds it?

[eaglesway]

oops sorry

http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/jesusteachingonhell.html

[ps]

This was originally part of a larger post.  It has been split, when I am tired, to separate out biblical content from administrative criticisms and responses to those.

This part contains the administrative.

The next part will address the bible content presented by EW.
**************************************************

ps

you are making a lot of "do you realize" emphatic statements, as if you were there, or what, "because you say so?".

Made a lot, only in one post. 
Have you looked at my others, or were you meaning to specifically call out that one post?

But the issue you are making is a "straw man".

I think not.  Did you read the article I referenced, or the other posts I have made?

Some of what you have posted, suggests to me that you have not reviewed my other posts, or do not recall them.

The only issue to this disagreement is...

Whether you see it as "torment" or "punishment" or "correction" -was it pointless eternal vengance? Was it eternal annihilation? Or was it for a time and a purpose. You easily ignore a ton of scripture, and as usual, you parrot the themes that support your  own view and refuse to respond at all to many scripture verses that refute it.

The post to which I was responding contained no bible verses. 
You criticized WW for his aggressiveness in that post, but not for his lack of bible verses. 
Nor did his original post where he made the claim regarding 'torment'.
But I suppose the new kid on the block warrants more careful watching - especially with an introduction like mine.
Just observing...

I am in the middle of responding to your other post mentioning '8 verses' with observations about the context of many of the passages you presented, and some other verses regarding what you have presented.  (I am probably not going to have time to finish that on this day.)

<snip - moved to other post>

I am addressing what I can as I have time.

I suppose I was trolled, as it were, by WW.

Not wishing to be disrespectful, but please consider...

Is my scholarship not objective, or have you merely overlooked it?

In your other post to which I'm responding, you claim only two instances regarding Kolasi- usage, and reject the possibility of it not being corrective. 

There are other instances in OT septuagint canon, and they are presented both in the article I referenced in my first post in this thread, and subsequently mentioned in later posts by me in this thread.

But, you did not address them? 
Overlooked, short of time, ignored as you accuse me of, or ...?

WW presented a claim regarding a greek word being incorrectly translated as torment, and a claim that it could not have meant that in NT context.  (And in the post where he made the claim, not one bible verse, nor any other generally accepted reference material.)

I responded with evidence to the contrary. 
Yet WW does not seem to have acknowledged that material. 
And you claim I have not supported my assertions, with reference to only one post. 
But have overlooked that his claim (perhaps you believe it?), (and that of the author he was referencing) is not substantiated by the biblical and reference resources generally available, and is actually pretty clearly contradicted by the resources available (and earlier presented.)

Regarding each of the greek words I addressed, I have provided related bible reference material that supports what I have presented.  (Bible reference in the case of torment being apochryphal - but that too was part of KJV bible until sometime in 1800s.  The apochrypha also being important enough to be part of the septuagint.)

Why are you here?

To point out some observations, as I have done, regarding some bible verses and words, and how their meaning may be other than what many here seem to think.

Fear not, I do not expect to be here much longer. :)

This is not a debate site.
It is a discussion site based in the scriptures of the prophets and apostles. This is not a place for folks to make assertions with no scriptural context or scholarly effort behind them. If you re[ly to scriptures with "Do you realize" followed by some emphatic assertion don't you think you ought to follow it with some evidence?

The evidence regarding the biblical issue of torment in that post you quoted had previously been presented.

Pretty much everything else in the post relates to the falseness of the claim made by WW regarding that meaning, which I had previously refuted with objective, scholarly evidence.  (Admittedly not all of my own original research, but all verified before I repeated it.)

Did you overlook the earlier posts?

Unless you can address the verses I posted above and explain how they can be true in an annihilation or eternal torment perspective, you are just basicly trolling as far as I can see.

Perhaps you will find my effort here (after split "there") more acceptable, as I have done that.

The only way to resolve a dispute between spiritual people is the scriptures.

Sadly, I'm doubtful that all disputes can be resolved in this lifetime, particularly given one who seeks to kill, steal, destroy, and blind.

Even sadder, the resolution for some may not be what most here seem to hope for.

Religious ideology and philosophy, unsupported statements etc. now that's easy.  Too easy.

ps

[ps]

This was originally part of a larger post.  It has been split, when I am tired, to separate out biblical content from administrative criticisms and responses to those.

The other part contains the administrative responses.

This part addresses the bible content presented by EW.
**************************************************
I will also address here the verses you have presented, with other verses.

For instance.... 1 Corinthians 15:22-28 teaches that God will be "all in all" and death will be done away with.

If death will be destroyed, How can the second death last "forever".

1 Cor 15:22-26,  Rev 20:5
Because it is the first death, the death initiated by Adam's sin 1 Cor 15:22, that is Christ's enemy and is to be destroyed, the last enemy of Christ to be fully defeated 1 Cor 15:26, in Rev 20:5 "The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed."
The second death (Rev 20:14b "This is the second death, the lake of fire.") does not come until after Christ is spoken of as having defeated death and 'all', literally by now all mankind, have either avoided (1 Cor 15:51, 1 Th 4:15) or been resurrected from the first death. 

There is no mention of the second death being an enemy of Christ, nor of it being defeated by Him.

Colossians 1 15-21 says "For so it pleased the Father to make al the fulness dwell in Him and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself through the blood of His cross, whether things in heaven or things on earth."

If "hell" or "the lake of fire" lasts forever, How will all things in heaven and earth be reconciled?

Rom 5:10 indicates being reconciled does not equate to salvation.  We have been reconciled (an even exchange, his earthly [first] death for ours) by his death, but we (separately) shall be saved by his life. "For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life."

Reconciliation already accomplished by his death, salvation yet to be ('shall be') accomplished by his life.

Heb 9:15 also makes mention, "For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance." realizing Hebrews is being written to believers, and noting those who are called cannot be other than those whom the Father has given Him, Jn 6:37-39.  And regarding those who 'have been called, 2 Pet 1:10 being addressed to believers, encourages them to "be all the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing you; for as long as you practice these things, you will never stumble;", apparently indicating it is possible to fall short of the goal, followed by v11, "for in this way the entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be abundantly supplied to you."  Heb 4:1 also indicating the possibility of coming short of the goal, "Therefore, let us fear if, while a promise remains of entering His rest, any one of you may seem to have come short of it."

Reconciliation/redemption was a necessary prerequisite to/for salvation, but is not of itself actual salvation.

Ephesians 1:9 says "In all wisdom and insight 9 He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him 10 with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth."

You stopped a bit short in v10.  In NASB, it continues "In Him, " v11, "also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined to His purpose, who works all things after the counsel of His will."

Is this passage addressed to 'all', or is it addressed to the Ephesians, and other believers, those who are to obtain the inheritance?  Presumably the same inheritance spoken of in Eph 5:5, where it states that none who are immoral, impure, or covetous have any part in that inheritance.  and Heb 4:1, where believers are warned "Therefore, let us fear if, while a promise remains of entering His rest, any one of you may seem to have come short of it.", indicating that the promise does not remain forever, that one must take advantage of the opportunity while the "promise remains". 

Additionally, Heb 12:14 encourages the readers to "Pursue ... the sanctification without which no one will see the Lord.", a 'see'ing likely to occur at the 'revelation' of Jesus Christ spoke of in 1 Pet 1:7, 1:13, 4:13, and at His 'appearing', 2 Tim 6:14, and in 1 Jn 3:2 "We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.", but unlikely to be the time when "every eye will see him, even those who pierced him" of Rev 1:7, since we know from Rev 20:5 not everyone is resurrected until after the thousand year reign.

You have no problem ignoring the testimony of these verses and repeating what you have heard and what you were taught and what you surmise from your own disposition without any objective scholarship or consideration of the points made by others, so let me ask you this...

Perhaps I have done better here.

I note, that here, you too accuse me of lack of scholarship ('shallow'ness?), but perhaps you will see in some of the above, hints that I may not be well aligned with the 'traditional' folks, in addition to not being aligned with URers - and maybe, just maybe, I actually have read the bible, and paid attention to what it has to say.  While it appears that you have many here, who do precisely what you accuse me of 'ignoring the testimony of these verses' that I have presented, 'and repeating what' they 'have heard and ... were taught' or 'surmise from ' their 'own disposition', without objectively considering all that the NT records. 

Additionally EW, even you seem guilty of that which you presume to judge me of, with your scholarship apparently having not even found that there are more than two biblical usages of kolasi-, and the weight those verses give regarding use of kolasi- as a non-corrective instrument, and more recently, ignored/overlooked posts in this thread which have pointed out their existence.

I look forward to seeing what sort of consideration you give to these points I have provided, as well as to the other verses using kolasi-, now that I have again pointed out their existence.

Take note that I neither dug the pit, nor started the stone rolling (Pr 26:27).  You can give credit for that to WW.

But I guess my answer was not soft enough to turn away your criticism.  Nor my restraint sufficient to ignore his, nor your, digs, completely.

If opportunity remains, I will yet attempt to finish my response to your '8 verses' post.

ps