What Bible Verses Support Punishment/Hell Not Being Eternal?

[rstrats]

InTheLight,

re: "Jude 7: In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire."
　
　
Is Sodom and Gomorrah still burning today? If you went to Israel today, would smoke still be going up and the flames still burning where Sodom and Gomorrah used to be? Or might their destruction be eternal as an effect of the fire?

 

[Van]

Reply to Mandym

I gave solid support. Just because you pose a question does not lend to the possibility of your assertion. Your idea is not even in view anywhere in scripture.

Here, I think is at least part of your "solid support."

"Mat 25:41 "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.


The fire is eternal, it was originally created for Satan, and those who reject Christ will be placed there. No scripture suggests that there will be removal from this condition once placed. That would be an assumption, not the other.

So what you demonstrated is no one gets out of the Lake of fire, but you did not demonstrate people are not destroyed in Gehenna after they are tormented for an undefined duration which satisfies God's justice.

And this again to demonstrate we divide the body of Christ when we take scripture too far, when we insist our assumptions are divinely inspired.

 

[rstrats]

If the supreme being has any input into the creation of a person, and if this supreme being knows beforehand that he will eventually be tossing the person into the lake of fire, whether it’s for torment or annihilation, why create the person in the first place?

 

[InTheLight]

InTheLight,

re: "Jude 7: In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire."
　
　
Is Sodom and Gomorrah still burning today? If you went to Israel today, would smoke still be going up and the flames still burning where Sodom and Gomorrah used to be? Or might their destruction be eternal as an effect of the fire?

Ah yes, the debating tactic of asking questions rather than addressing the issue. Not playing. The verse stands on its own.

 

[Van]

Reply to Rstrats

If the supreme being has any input into the creation of a person, and if this supreme being knows beforehand that he will eventually be tossing the person into the lake of fire, whether it’s for torment or annihilation, why create the person in the first place?

If we carefully side step the invitation to discuss what God knows and when He came to know it, we can discuss why God created creation in the first place.

What does the Bible actually say? Were we not created to glorify God, and do we not glorify God when we repent. Thus our autonomous ability to choose life or death is necessary to fulfill God's purpose of creation, or so I believe.

 

[westtexas]

So what you demonstrated is no one gets out of the Lake of fire, but you did not demonstrate people are not destroyed in Gehenna after they are tormented for an undefined duration which satisfies God's justice.

Nor have you demonstrated anything except in several posts to tell us what "could" happen. Several posters have asked you about Matt. 25:46 where the same Greek word is used to describe the punishment of the wicked and the reward of the righteous. Can you demonstrate why you believe the same word, in the same sentence, means two separate things? Can you quote scripture to substantiate your opinion above that the unrighteous are tormented for an undefined time until God is satisfied? Can you quote scripture to demonstrate people are destroyed in Gehenna? Looking forward to your answers.
Westtexas

 

[westtexas]

　

re: " How do you explain away words spoken by our Lord where the rich man clearly states "I am tormented in this flame..."

I don’t. The parable says what it says, and it doesn’t say how long the "torment" lasts.

This parable doesn't give a time frame. It gives a description. But scripture elsewhere does say how long this punishment will last. It says it will last as long as our reward does. Kolasin aionios- eternal punishment and zoen aionios-eternal life.
Westtexas

 

[mandym]

Here, I think is at least part of your "solid support."

"Mat 25:41 "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.


The fire is eternal, it was originally created for Satan, and those who reject Christ will be placed there. No scripture suggests that there will be removal from this condition once placed. That would be an assumption, not the other.

So what you demonstrated is no one gets out of the Lake of fire, but you did not demonstrate people are not destroyed in Gehenna after they are tormented for an undefined duration which satisfies God's justice.

And this again to demonstrate we divide the body of Christ when we take scripture too far, when we insist our assumptions are divinely inspired.

I don't need to demonstrate it. Nothing in scripture implies or supports it. Again just because you make a claim or to be fair even a suggestion does not compel anyone to give it consideration since you cannot back it up with scripture. You are welcome to call it an assumption. That's not what it is but you can call it a hot dog on a stick.

 

[rstrats]

westtexas,

re: " But scripture elsewhere does say how long this punishment will last. It says it will last as long as our reward does. Kolasin aionios- eternal punishment and zoen aionios-eternal life."
　
　
Strong gives two definitions for "kolasis" in Matthew 25:46 - punishment and torment. Webster’s New World Dictionary gives a definition of punishment as "a penalty imposed on an offender for a crime or wrongdoing." Why couldn’t the "penalty imposed" be eternal annihilation? Why wouldn’t you want to take that meaning rather than eternal torment? Just because the person didn’t meet certain requirements why do you want to torment them for eternity rather than mercifully wiping them out of existence?

 

[mandym]

westtexas,

Just because the person didn’t meet certain requirements why do you want to torment them for eternity rather than mercifully wiping them out of existence?

1. Just because the person didn’t meet certain requirements

It is much more than that. It is a refusal, a rebellion against God's standard. And no amount of effort can play that down..

2. why do you want to torment them

Why do you want to ignore God's standard?

 

[rstrats]

mandym,

re: "Why do you want to ignore God's standard?"

I don’t. How have I done that?

 

[mandym]

mandym,

re: "Why do you want to ignore God's standard?"

I don’t. How have I done that?

You reduced God's standard to "not meeting certain requirements".

 

[rstrats]

mandym,

re: "You reduced God's standard to ‘not meeting certain requirements’".
　
What does the standard consist of if it doesn’t consist of certain requirements?
　

 

[mandym]

mandym,

re: "You reduced God's standard to ‘not meeting certain requirements’".
　
What does the standard consist of if it doesn’t consist of certain requirements?
　

What it is, is a rebellion to God. Your wording works to lessen the gravity of the situation to justify your position.

 

[Van]

Reply to Westtexas

Nor have you demonstrated anything except in several posts to tell us what "could" happen. Several posters have asked you about Matt. 25:46 where the same Greek word is used to describe the punishment of the wicked and the reward of the righteous. Can you demonstrate why you believe the same word, in the same sentence, means two separate things? Can you quote scripture to substantiate your opinion above that the unrighteous are tormented for an undefined time until God is satisfied? Can you quote scripture to demonstrate people are destroyed in Gehenna? Looking forward to your answers.
Westtexas

I addressed all this in post #38. The word means the same thing. Eternal means eternal - never ending. Eternal punishment is for the same unending duration as eternal life. Therefore your charge against my view is without merit, a strawman. The issue as I expect you full well know is whether the eternal punishment is eternal confinement, separation from God in eternal darkness, or eternal torment, same as Satan gets. If eternal punishment refers to eternal confinement in the Lake of Fire plus torment for the duration required to satisfy God's justice, then eternal torment is unnecessary.

This is a completely viable alternative, and those who say it is not supported better than eternal torment have not studied the support.

 

[westtexas]

I addressed all this in post #38. The word means the same thing. Eternal means eternal - never ending. Eternal punishment is for the same unending duration as eternal life. Therefore your charge against my view is without merit, a strawman. The issue as I expect you full well know is whether the eternal punishment is eternal confinement, separation from God in eternal darkness, or eternal torment, same as Satan gets. If eternal punishment refers to eternal confinement in the Lake of Fire plus torment for the duration required to satisfy God's justice, then eternal torment is unnecessary.

This is a completely viable alternative, and those who say it is not supported better than eternal torment have not studied the support.

I went back and read post #38. There is no scriptural support for your opinion in that post or the above post either. Numerous posters have quoted scripture to you that you merely avoid and then give your opinion again. Your posts are full of "if's" and "it could mean". I'm assuming from the last sentence in this post that you have studied at least enough to give us some scriptural backing for your opinion. Since you avoid all the scripture quoted to you, maybe you'll give us the chance to counter yours. So far we've seen nothing but your opinion. Got anything????
Westtexas

 

[Van]

Reply to Westtexas,

I provided scripture and demonstrated your charges were without merit.
You said I used a word (eternal) differently and that was false.
My position is there is no actual support in scripture for the doctrine of eternal torment. But, by making assumptions, a person can take either side. And I said there is more biblical support for eternal punishment - meaning eternal confinement separated from God, and limited duration torment to satisfy God's justice then for eternal torment. I referred to scripture which says God can destroy both our body and soul in Gehenna. Destroy could mean ruin but not end of existence, or destroy could mean end of existence.

My point which has not been addressed is both views are based on assumptions. So neither should be taught as doctrine, but only as a possibility.

 

[westtexas]

Strong gives two definitions for "kolasis" in Matthew 25:46 - punishment and torment. Webster’s New World Dictionary gives a definition of punishment as "a penalty imposed on an offender for a crime or wrongdoing." Why couldn’t the "penalty imposed" be eternal annihilation? Why wouldn’t you want to take that meaning rather than eternal torment? Just because the person didn’t meet certain requirements why do you want to torment them for eternity rather than mercifully wiping them out of existence?

You have answered your own question. Scripture says "kolasin aionios-eternal punishment" Matt. 25:46. Your own research shows you there are 2 translations for the word used in scripture. Kolasin-punishment or torment. There are a number of Greek words which could have been used to substantiate your view. Thanatos- death. Aperchomai-to pass away. Unfortunately for the unrighteous, these words were not spoken, the word kolasin was used by our Lord. Punishment or torment. As for the Webster's definition, scripture is quite clear in many verses what the penalty imposed involves. Luke 16 which has already been quoted says "I am in torment"

Westtexas

 

[westtexas]

I referred to scripture which says God can destroy both our body and soul in Gehenna. Destroy could mean ruin but not end of existence, or destroy could mean end of existence.

My point which has not been addressed is both views are based on assumptions. So neither should be taught as doctrine, but only as a possibility.

:laugh::laugh: A word of advice, you need to study enough to know what YOU believe the Bible is saying and be able to tell us why, even if all of us on this forum disagree. You're going to get a sore crotch riding the fence. I won't ask any more questions of you. Id hate to see you fall of that fence.

Westtexas

 

[Van]

:laugh::laugh: A word of advice, you need to study enough to know what YOU believe the Bible is saying and be able to tell us why, even if all of us on this forum disagree. You're going to get a sore crotch riding the fence. I won't ask any more questions of you. Id hate to see you fall of that fence.

Westtexas

Thanks for stopping.

I have not straddled any fence, my position was stated in my first post and did not change. Perhaps my well studied position was not what you thought?