Our Tri-part Make Up

[teddyv]

13 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

The words themselves are clear.  Yes, "forever and ever" can mean simply a long time.  But when a specific time is attached, such as "day and night", then it becomes literal.  This is simply obvious and common sense.

You did not answer my question, but merely asserted your same position. Again, is there scholarly support for your interpretation?

13 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

No cherry picking.  The specificity of a 24 hour time period attached to "for ever and ever" is compelling enough.  But then, annihilationists seem to have an agenda to support their own theology.

See above.

13 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Well, think about it.  Did anyone from S&G actually SEE any of Jesus' miracles?  No.  But those towns in Jesus' time DID.  And they were MORE GUILTY than those of S&G on that basis alone.  And why would Jesus LIE about this?  His words could not be "hyperbole" as they are real clear.  What He said is either true or not true.  I know what I believe. 

Clearly. But I'm not sure how this really demonstrates your point.

13 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

I think Rev 20:10 is plenty clear enough.  The mere fact that 2 humans will have been IN the LOF for 1,000 years before being joined by Satan is proof enough that humans will suffer along with the fallen angels.

I think we'll have to differ on this point.

[FreeGrace]

57 minutes ago, teddyv said:

FreeGrace said: 

The words themselves are clear.  Yes, "forever and ever" can mean simply a long time.  But when a specific time is attached, such as "day and night", then it becomes literal.  This is simply obvious and common sense.

You did not answer my question, but merely asserted your same position. Again, is there scholarly support for your interpretation?

I appealed t0 obviousn common sense.  A person can go batty reading all the scholars and seeing how much they disagree on just about everything.

If you can provide a rational and reasonable explanation of why the specific mention of a 24 hour period wouldn't make the words "for ever and ever" really mean for eternity, I would appreciate it.

Also, those who defend annihilation of the soul must be prepared to have at least 1 verse that says plainly that God has or will annihilate (destroy) souls.

57 minutes ago, teddyv said:

I think we'll have to differ on this point.

Just like all the scholars.  

[teddyv]

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

I appealed t0 obviousn common sense.  A person can go batty reading all the scholars and seeing how much they disagree on just about everything.

If you can provide a rational and reasonable explanation of why the specific mention of a 24 hour period wouldn't make the words "for ever and ever" really mean for eternity, I would appreciate it.

All I was asking for is some evidence for linguistic interpretation for what you are claiming. It appears you cannot, or are unwilling. That's fine. I'm not sold on common sense. We all think we act with common sense, but common sense is rarely that.

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

Also, those who defend annihilation of the soul must be prepared to have at least 1 verse that says plainly that God has or will annihilate (destroy) souls.

I'm not sold on annihilation, but I find it the most logical position, even if not unequivocally stated. ECT directly implies that one does not truly have a second death, that God must be sustaining the Lake of Fire for eternity. 

If ECT is true, I hope our minds are wiped in the new creation because I'm not sure having the knowledge that many I knew and cared about are conscious in unending perpetual agony, in whatever form that takes. Seems rather cruel and does not comport with the nature of God.

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

Just like all the scholars.  

I'd have to see some evidence to make that conclusion.

[Alive]

3 minutes ago, teddyv said:

I'm not sold on annihilation

I am and have been for some time.

I have studies that span the bible on relevant words dealing with this that have made it crystal clear to me. In addition, eternal conscious torture is not possible for the God I have come to know.

However, it is a topic that folks generally get pretty heated about.

[teddyv]

Just now, Alive said:

I am and have been for some time.

I have studies that span the bible on relevant words dealing with this that have made it crystal clear to me. In addition, eternal conscious torture is not possible for the God I have come to know.

However, it is a topic that folks generally get pretty heated about.

I'd say I definitely lean the annihilationist way. I am decidedly not in the ECT camp. Just too incongruous with God's nature.

[debrakay]

Since this thread also talks about the "born with sin nature" of all human beings, I cannot possibly think or believe that God the Father, God the Son or God the Holy Spirit would attach this "sin nature"onto the billions of babies and little children that have been sacrifice, murdered, killed and destroyed throughout time by others.  Their spirit and soul was in them as they were living breathing human beings but before they had a chance to make the free will choice, their lives, their bodies were destroyed. They had no free will choice.  I believe they get a free pass right to the throne of God.  Everyone else has to choose to be born again or not.

[FreeGrace]

49 minutes ago, teddyv said:

All I was asking for is some evidence for linguistic interpretation for what you are claiming. It appears you cannot, or are unwilling.

Are you asking for parsing of the verse?  Isn't the English clear enough?  Why do you ignore the plain fact that 2 human beings will have been IN the LOF for 1,000 years when joined by Satan?  Doesn't that mean anything to you?

I'll bet that doing some research on Rev 20:10 will reveal that there are many scholars on opposite sides.  

49 minutes ago, teddyv said:

That's fine. I'm not sold on common sense. We all think we act with common sense, but common sense is rarely that.

Fact:  2 human beings will have been IN the LOF for 1,000 when joined by Satan.

49 minutes ago, teddyv said:

I'm not sold on annihilation, but I find it the most logical position, even if not unequivocally stated.

The closest the Bible comes is to state that God is ABLE to destroy both body and soul.  Of course He is able.  He is Creator God.  But there is simply no evidence that He will.

And there is clear evidence that 2 human beings will have been tormented for 1,000 years when joined by Satan, and then, drum roll please:  "THEY will be tormented day and night for ever and ever".

49 minutes ago, teddyv said:

ECT directly implies that one does not truly have a second death, that God must be sustaining the Lake of Fire for eternity.

I don't follow.  ECT is eternal conscious torment.  Not sure how ECT your point about "not having a second death".  The second death is the death AGAIN (second one) of the physical body that will be resurrected so the unbelievers can appear before the GWT judgment.  Dan 12:1,2, John 5:29 and Acts 24:15 all say that the unsaved will be resurrected.  Just not in a glorified immortal body.

The LOF is properly called the second death because all who appear before the GWT WILL physically die a second time.  Literally.  But their souls will continue to exist, in torment, in the LOF "day and night, for ever and ever", just like the 2 humans; beast and FP, and Satan.

49 minutes ago, teddyv said:

If ECT is true, I hope our minds are wiped in the new creation because I'm not sure having the knowledge that many I knew and cared about are conscious in unending perpetual agony, in whatever form that takes. Seems rather cruel and does not comport with the nature of God.

I am sure that God has taken care of that.  In fact, Rev 21:4 is the verse that shows this.  And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

49 minutes ago, teddyv said:

I'd have to see some evidence to make that conclusion.

You don't believe that there is a lot of disagreement among scholars???!!!

[FreeGrace]

52 minutes ago, Alive said:

I am and have been for some time.

I have studies that span the bible on relevant words dealing with this that have made it crystal clear to me. In addition, eternal conscious torture is not possible for the God I have come to know.

However, it is a topic that folks generally get pretty heated about.

I don't get heated at all over this topic, but all unbelievers will surely get that way.

One "comforting" note is what Jesus taught about it being 'more tolerable/bearable' for some than others "at the judgment".  This refers to the GWT judgment of Rev 20:11-15.

For me, Rev 20:10 is the most convincing verse on ECT.  There will be 2 human beings IN the LOF for 1,000 years BEFORE being joined by Satan.  And then the words, "THEY (all 3 of them) shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

Immediately following is the GWT judgment, where all unbelievers and all of Hades, most probably the compartment where fallen angels have been held, will be cast into the LOF.

Now, why would only 2 humans and Satan "be tormented day and night for ever and ever" and no other human or fallen angel?  

[FreeGrace]

52 minutes ago, teddyv said:

I'd say I definitely lean the annihilationist way. I am decidedly not in the ECT camp. Just too incongruous with God's nature.

Think Judgment.  Think Fairness.  Think Accountability.

No one has any excuse.  Rom 1:20.

[FreeGrace]

29 minutes ago, debrakay said:

Since this thread also talks about the "born with sin nature" of all human beings, I cannot possibly think or believe that God the Father, God the Son or God the Holy Spirit would attach this "sin nature"onto the billions of babies and little children that have been sacrifice, murdered, killed and destroyed throughout time by others.  Their spirit and soul was in them as they were living breathing human beings but before they had a chance to make the free will choice, their lives, their bodies were destroyed. They had no free will choice.  I believe they get a free pass right to the throne of God.  Everyone else has to choose to be born again or not.

There are 2 views on this interesting point.  One is that one only becomes a sinner when they actually sin.  I have a problem with that because very small children who obviously cannot comprehend accountability, etc, still sin.  The sin nature is evident in their rebellions, etc.

My view is that the Bible is clear that Jesus Christ died for everyone.  That means everyone.  So it doesn't matter when one dies.  Christ died for them.  All of them.  I know I'll get pushback from the reformed.  So be it.  The Bible is crystal clear on all for whom Christ died.  Everyone.

Consider King David's baby born from rape (Bathsheba).  He lived 7 days and then died.  What did David say about that?

2 Sam 12:23 - But now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me.”

Seems clear that David knew where his son was (heaven) and David would be there eventually joining him.  

The key is the 'age of accountability' when a person "knows right from wrong".

Isa 7:15 -  He will be eating curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right,

This is where accountability begins.