Matthew 10:28 and hell

[DarrenJClark]

9 hours ago, JohnD said:

Job 25:6 (AV)
6 How much less man, that is a worm? and the son of man, which is a worm?

Job 25:6 (NASB95)
6 How much less man, that maggot, And the son of man, that worm!”

Job 25:6 (NIV84)
6 how much less man, who is but a maggot— a son of man, who is only a worm!”

Job 25:6 (RSV)
6 how much less man, who is a maggot, and the son of man, who is a worm!”

 

Just quoting another verse does nothing to answer my objections to your appeal to your first verse.  The same objections apply to this one.  That verse literally does not equate worm with the human spirit.  Rhetorically it emphasizes how low a status the subject has is.  The context is different in Isaiah 66:24 and Mark 9 where the fire and the worm are instruments of their destruction.  You cannot deny that this is exactly what is intended in Matthew 3:12.

[JohnD]

18 hours ago, DarrenJClark said:

Just quoting another verse does nothing to answer my objections to your appeal to your first verse.  The same objections apply to this one.  That verse literally does not equate worm with the human spirit.  Rhetorically it emphasizes how low a status the subject has is.  The context is different in Isaiah 66:24 and Mark 9 where the fire and the worm are instruments of their destruction.  You cannot deny that this is exactly what is intended in Matthew 3:12.

Alrighty. I'll quote the Bible further and perhaps that will satisfy you.

1 Thessalonians 5:23 (RSV)
23 May the God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be kept sound and blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Matthew 10:28 (RSV)
28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

See anything missing?

The text in Mark repeatedly says:

Mark 9:43–48 (AV)
43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:
48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

THEIR worm* not THE worms is what is said which trumps every argument to the contrary about eternal suffering in the lake of fire (hell).

So, if anyone chooses to refuse to accept what is in the Bible in context can (obviously) continue to believe whatever they want to...

despite what the Bible says... then that's their (your) business.

But it's NOT they truth that they (you) are following!

And I am not going to waste more of my time proving to you or anyone else on the subject what is in the Bible.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

*  Which I also demonstrated was a prophetic idiom used to apply to man by this passage (in multiple translations):

Job 25:6 (AV)
6 How much less man, that is a worm? and the son of man, which is a worm?

Job 25:6 (NASB95)
6 How much less man, that maggot, And the son of man, that worm!”

Job 25:6 (NIV84)
6 how much less man, who is but a maggot— a son of man, who is only a worm!”

Job 25:6 (RSV)
6 how much less man, who is a maggot, and the son of man, who is a worm!”

 

[JohnD]

Our make up as unbelievers:

then as believers:

Edited March 13, 2019 by JohnD

[JohnD]

Having both a spirit and a soul seems like overkill until you consider it as a buffer between the two

drastically different natures we humans possess (of the physical realm and the spirit realm).

It also solves the threefold state of man in the disembodied sate after death.

Body perishes. Soul ceases to exist. Spirit consciously continues.

The left depicts humans in death (out of the body) and the right in life (in the body)

and the overlap / buffer is the soul:

 

[DarrenJClark]

3 hours ago, JohnD said:

Alrighty. I'll quote the Bible further and perhaps that will satisfy you.

1 Thessalonians 5:23 (RSV)
23 May the God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be kept sound and blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Matthew 10:28 (RSV)
28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

See anything missing?

The text in Mark repeatedly says:

Mark 9:43–48 (AV)
43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:
48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

THEIR worm* not THE worms is what is said which trumps every argument to the contrary about eternal suffering in the lake of fire (hell).

So, if anyone chooses to refuse to accept what is in the Bible in context can (obviously) continue to believe whatever they want to...

despite what the Bible says... then that's their (your) business.

But it's NOT they truth that they (you) are following!

And I am not going to waste more of my time proving to you or anyone else on the subject what is in the Bible.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

*  Which I also demonstrated was a prophetic idiom used to apply to man by this passage (in multiple translations):

Job 25:6 (AV)
6 How much less man, that is a worm? and the son of man, which is a worm?

Job 25:6 (NASB95)
6 How much less man, that maggot, And the son of man, that worm!”

Job 25:6 (NIV84)
6 how much less man, who is but a maggot— a son of man, who is only a worm!”

Job 25:6 (RSV)
6 how much less man, who is a maggot, and the son of man, who is a worm!”

 

Did you not read my responses to other earlier in the threads?  I read "body and soul" as a merism.  A merism is when author uses two parts of some thing to refer to the whole thing.  You see this in the very first verse of the Bible when it is said God created the heaven and the earth.  This obviously does not mean the oceans, humans, or the stars were not created just because they are not mentioned in the initial merism.  This is the same for the body and soul in Matthew 10:28.  This merism refers to the whole person and does not conflict with your tripartite view of anthropology.   You can have your interpretation of Matthew 10:28 if you like but that means your view of hell must entail the complete destruction of the body and the soul while the spirit survives.  That logically leads to the idea that hell is populated by disembodied human spirits.  That is completely foreign to the orthodox and traditional view of hell, so much so it has very little in common with it.  It is even more of an outlier than the conditionalism I hold to.

 

Again, you are not actually showing how and why "their worm" refers to their spirit.  You are still just quoting verses that do not explicitly say "the worm is the human spirit".  Even assuming your tripartite view of anthropology so Matthew 10:28 and 1 Thess 5:23 teach what you say they do you till are just assuming worm = spirit to conclude that worm = spirit.  That is called question begging and is a fallacy that undermines your argument completely.  

 

So, 

"THEIR worm* not THE worms is what is said which trumps every argument to the contrary about eternal suffering in the lake of fire (hell)."

 

No. You have not in any way demonstrated this.  Your argument is just a bald assertion.

 

And,

"So, if anyone chooses to refuse to accept what is in the Bible in context can (obviously) continue to believe whatever they want to..."

 

I do not have to accept what you only assert but cannot demonstrate has exegetical warrant.  

 

And, 

"despite what the Bible says... then that's their (your) business."

 

Your reading of the Bible is pure assumption, not following your reading I not the same as disagreeing with the Bible.  

 

And, 

"But it's NOT they truth that they (you) are following!"

 

I am not following your version of the truth.  I am ok with that.

 

And,

"And I am not going to waste more of my time proving to you or anyone else on the subject what is in the Bible."

 

Since you addressed none of my rebuttals at all, rather just moving onto the next vague proof text it might be wise to give up.  You have to address my counter arguments directly if you hope to persuade me.  I wish you well.  

 

[DarrenJClark]

3 hours ago, JohnD said:

Our make up as unbelievers:

then as believers:

I am not debating anthropology here.  This post was always about my exegesis of Matthew 10:28, which you just ignored.

[DarrenJClark]

3 hours ago, JohnD said:

Having both a spirit and a soul seems like overkill until you consider it as a buffer between the two

drastically different natures we humans possess (of the physical realm and the spirit realm).

It also solves the threefold state of man in the disembodied sate after death.

Body perishes. Soul ceases to exist. Spirit consciously continues.

The left depicts humans in death (out of the body) and the right in life (in the body)

and the overlap / buffer is the soul:

 

You have a view of hell that, as fare as I know, has no representation in any teacher in Christianity over its 2000 year history.  Your view is a complete outlier.  

[Manqur]

Maybe we should start by asking who wrote Matthew and when, and when was it first included in the canon.