Anihilationism

[Butch5]

Greetings again @Butch5

another avenue you might like to consider is how long is resurrection? Is it only for an age - as in, a use by date?

This gives rise also to that very point. The understanding of a word rendered as Age does not mean automatically it does have a use by date.

Looking at the age that passes or will pass or has passed, the time that has, etc,.... how long has it passed for? In other words, does it's passing last perpetually?


Chew well before swallowing


Bless you ....><>

Hi Br. Bear,

I have looked at the length of an age. An age is undefined by definition. It is the context that determines an age. However, if we go back to the beginning, age is used to define the concept of olam. Olam is that which can be seen to the horizon. It's off in the distance by only to the horizon what is beyond the horizon is unseen. This is the concept that the Jewish scholars were working with when they chose the Greek word age for it's translation. A modern phrase that we use that would be similar to olam is, for the foreseeable future. The olam was what they could see into the future or past.

 

[Butch5]

Greetings all,

maybe we ought to use a different word than 'logic'?

I see (understand) where one might find 'logic' of man to be at best, short of God's Wisdom and Way, but again, 'logic' may not be the best term to use?

However, we do need to be careful to not split hairs or atoms too much. If we find ourselves doing so, we ought to back up a little and 'fess up to the fact that any God given Wisdom or Knowledge is exactly that, God given, and if another has not the same use of language as someone else, that does not render them unable to love the LORD. We can strain at gnats but that is only a show, as they would pass without any bother!

There are some things however that we do need to be specific about and deviation from the specific can cause ruin.

Try to get back to the topic, rather than the intelect of each other's grace bestowed lives.


Bless you ....><>

Hi Br. Bear,

I wasn't making reference to anyone. I was simply pointing out that logic and intelligence are not the same thing.

 

[Br. Bear]

Hi Br. Bear,

I wasn't making reference to anyone. I was simply pointing out that logic and intelligence are not the same thing.

i realise that Brother,

hence the "Greetings all"


Bless you ....><>

 

[Brad Huber]

Sorry Brad, I don't see your argument here. Who created the world? Was it man that made it so that a glass cannot be both full and empty at the same time? Or was it God? Logic is not man made. Man simply uses logic. Logic says that something cannot be both infinite and finite at the same time. Logic is simply correct reasoning. God is the one who created that. Man didn't deiced this is how it's going to work, God did. When comparing humans to ants you're speaking of intelligence, not logic. Just like a human an ant can't be both alive and dead at the same time. God has made it that way. Is our intelligence comparable to God? Absolutely not. However, the doesn't mean logic is any different with God than man. God called on the Israelites to reason with Him. That requires logic.

18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. (Isa. 1:18 KJV)

So, God too uses logic. It seems to me that you're conflating logic and intelligence. They are not the same. A person doesn't have to be intelligent to be logical and likewise someone who is intelligent can be illogical.

You dont see the argument because you dont want to. True logic requires dictates set in stone that cannot be changed. Man's logic is based on things that are assumed unchanging, a big difference that you are unwilling to admit. I refuse to argue with robots that parrot what others have taught them and act if they are wise in doing so.

 

[Br. Bear]

Hi Br. Bear,

I have looked at the length of an age. An age is undefined by definition. It is the context that determines an age. However, if we go back to the beginning, age is used to define the concept of olam. Olam is that which can be seen to the horizon. It's off in the distance by only to the horizon what is beyond the horizon is unseen. This is the concept that the Jewish scholars were working with when they chose the Greek word age for it's translation. A modern phrase that we use that would be similar to olam is, for the foreseeable future. The olam was what they could see into the future or past.

thank you for your reply,

asking again, how long is resurrection?


Bless you ....><>

 

[Sue D.]

Annihilationism: The belief that the second death means total destruction or annihilation.
Revelation 2:11; 20:6 & 14; 21:8

Hello again @Sue D.

With respect I made no such suggestion. That is your interpretation of my remarks. I responded to the subject of the thread by saying that I did not believe in eternal conscious punishment. The punishment following the judgement of the last day is destruction. That punishment is eternal, in that it has no hope of reprieve. The destruction is permanent.

'The Rich Man and Lazarus' of Luke 16:19-31, is given with one purpose, and that is to expose the hypocrisy of Pharisaic teaching and tradition. It is not an account of an actual event. If the Lord Jesus intended this hypothetical portrayal to be intended to be taken as teaching, then He could be accused of flying in the face of the testimony of Scripture in relation to the state of the dead. For the testimony of Scripture is that there is no consciousness in death. A dead body has no ability to see, hear or speak, and the spirit (or breath of life) of man goes back to God Who gave it at the death of the body. Man ceases to be a living soul at death, and only the power of the resurrection can quicken him to life again. Only in resurrection, when body and spirit combine to become a living soul once more, can man become a living soul. For the soul is not immortal, it can, and does, die.

Thank you.
In Christ Jesus
Chris

Well -- regarding the rich man and Lazarus -- you're trying to establish that which you think. about the subject.

In the end of time -- death Is resurrected. And that person is alive and faces due punishment for eternity just like believers will enjoy their life in heaven.

I also just noticed that there are several other pages of posts. Haven't read those yet.

 

[Sue D.]

I apologize for interrupting the flow of conversation.

 

[Butch5]

You dont see the argument because you dont want to. True logic requires dictates set in stone that cannot be changed. Man's logic is based on things that are assumed unchanging, a big difference that you are unwilling to admit. I refuse to argue with robots that parrot what others have taught them and act if they are wise in doing so.

Ah, in other words you have no argument

 

[Butch5]

thank you for your reply,

asking again, how long is resurrection?


Bless you ....><>

I assume you're asking how long will those who are resurrected, live rather than how long will the process of the Resurrection will take. If I'm wrong please correct me. Jesus said those who attain the Resurrection will die no more. So, they would live forever.

 

[Butch5]

3 Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.1
4 His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish. (Ps. 146:3-4 KJV)

17 The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence.
18 But we will bless the LORD from this time forth and for evermore. Praise the LORD. (Ps. 115:17-18 KJV)

Ecclesiastes 9:10 Whatever your hand finds to do, ado it with your might, for there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol, to which you are going. (Eccl. 9:10 ESV)

Here, Solomon tells us that there is no reasoning or thought, no knowledge, and no wisdom in Shelo, or in the Greek, Hades. So many claim that Hades is a place where "ghosts," for lack of a better word, go. Many claim that the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man is an actual event. However, as we see that cannot be the case as there is no thought, reason, knowledge, or wisdom, there. If none of these exist there, then there obviously cannot be people actively conversing and carrying on activities. Surely Jesus isn't saying something contrary to Scripture. How does this play into the Annihilation argument? Well, it shows that man doesn't continue on after death. When he dies, he is dead. The only way he will live again is through resurrection. After the Resurrection we're told that the wicked will be cast into the Lake of Fire, which is the second death. We see in Isaiah that in that event it is corpses that are burning not "ghosts".

The Lake of Fire is called the "second" death. In order to have two of something they must be the same. In order to have two hammers, they must both be hammers. If you have a hammer and a screw driver you don't have two hammers. Likewise, in order to be the "second" death, it must be like the first one. The first one is a to loose one's life, therefore the "second" one must be the same. The "second" death cannot be something completely different than the first.

 

[Brad Huber]

Ah, in other words you have no argument

In your mind, that would be true.

 

[Butch5]

In your mind, that would be true.

This is the second time you've presumed to read my mind. That's the first indication that you have no argument. The second is the ad hominems in your post. The ad hominme is a logical fallacy. Your statement, "I refuse to argue with robots that parrot what others have taught them and act if they are wise in doing so" , is an ad hominem. You don't know anything about me or how I've come to the conclusions I've come to. I've not quoted anyone, so to say I'm parroting is totally unfounded. The third indication is your statement, that you refuse to argue, Your reply to my post was unsolicited, which is fine. However, when I replied that I didn't see your argument, did you explain? No, you simply launched into an personal attack. If you actually had an argument that would have been the time to clarify it. You didn't. Instead you tried to dismiss me with the claim that I am a robot and parroting. If you read through any of this thread you'd see that it's actually the opposite. I've laid out sound arguments based on Scripture. If answered questions that others have posed. I've addressed passages of Scripture that others have posed. That's hardly parroting.

Regarding the rest of your post, "True logic requires dictates set in stone that cannot be changed. Man's logic is based on things that are assumed unchanging, a big difference that you are unwilling to admit", I'm not aware of anything called "true" logic. There is just logic. By adding "true" you're creating a division that doesn't exist. There is only logic. I agree that logic is a set of dictates that cannot be changed. God did that in the creation. However, you contrast, "man's logic", I don't acknowledge. I see nothing in creation that would support that idea. It seems to me that you're conflating logic with man's reasoning and calling it "man's logic". Man's reasoning is not logic. Man's reasoning can be logical, or it can illogical, but in and of itself, it is not logic.

 

[Sue D.]

@Butch5 -- since this Is an open Forum -- anyone can inteject their thoughts -- I've been following this conversation. 'we' only know what you've shared on Forum. You're a very intelligent person, that's obvious. But you apparently are relying on your intellect to be your 'salvation'. Hopefully, at some point, all of the 'intellect' will reach your Heart. When various other posters have tried to share another view of Scripture -- you tend to go into the world of logical fallousies.

Your concept of the real meaning of the account of the rich man and Lazarus -- you completely miss the main , more important aspect. It seems that the concept of a person being conscious in eternity and feeling all those negatives -- really bothers you. You'd Rather find some other way to interpret it. Your interpretation of really baffles me. I don't want any further explanation. But rather that You would seriously consider that the rich man was indeed very conscious of his environment and God's Word wants Everyone to realize that.

And Scripture being totally logical -- well -- it Isn't. There is nothing Logical about the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. Biology tells us that both egg and ***** have to be put together to create a baby. Yet, Scripture tells us that the Holy Spirit came upon Mary and she conceived. And the Christ child / a Jewish baby / was the product. And He, Jesus Christ was born to show us to the Father. God the Father -- gave us salvation possible only through His Son. The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ on the 3rd day is not logical. But it happened.

The talking donkey and the burning bush of the Old Testament were not Logical , but they happened. Daniel in the lion's den // the three men being thrown into the fiery furnace was not logical or actually possible without God's intervention. They came out of that fiery furnace totally okay. No burns, nothing. And That had a tremendous effect on the king. He became a believer. He highly encouraged everyone else to believe as well.

That which God's Word Is showing us is that there is something greater than we are that is in control. That "In the beginning God...... " And that Entity / God / has provided a way / the Only way / for mankind to go from being a hopeless sinful person to a New creation in Christ Jesus.

The alternative is Not becoming a new creation in Christ -- but continuing in the darkness of non-spiritual life. And That 'life' continues on through-out eternity. It never really ceases to exist. That would be too easy. Without a heart's acceptance, a person is doomed to endure the same eternal punishment that satan will be enduring. As well as the beast and false prophet. Satan knows what is waiting for him and he wants as much company as he can trick into joining him. And once a person Is there and discovers how he / she has been deceived -- there will be No turning back.

'we' have Now to come to God through Jesus Christ. And God Wants to have real fellowship with Him. Just like was the case with Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden and will be again in heaven.

 

[Hekuran]

And Scripture being totally logical -- well -- it Isn't. There is nothing Logical about the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. Biology tells us that both egg and ***** have to be put together to create a baby. Yet, Scripture tells us that the Holy Spirit came upon Mary and she conceived. And the Christ child / a Jewish baby / was the product. And He, Jesus Christ was born to show us to the Father. God the Father -- gave us salvation possible only through His Son. The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ on the 3rd day is not logical. But it happened.

Actually those things don't defy logic. Logic is the foundation of our reasoning with laws such as the law of non-contradiction. We can use logic to reason that there cannot be a four-sided triangle, but it's not that the Red Sea could not part before Moses or for that Balaam couldn't have a conversation with a donkey.

It's fair to say that God's wisdom is beyond man's wisdom. The closing chapters of the Book of Job make this point very clearly. Human wisdom might say love your friends and hate your enemies; Jesus shows us a better way. But again, this does not confound the laws of logic.

I don't know Butch5 personally, but there's nothing he's written that indicates to me that he's depending on his intellect for salvation. I hope that, like me, his salvation is in holding on to the promises of Jesus Christ.

 

[Butch5]

@Butch5 -- since this Is an open Forum -- anyone can inteject their thoughts -- I've been following this conversation. 'we' only know what you've shared on Forum. You're a very intelligent person, that's obvious. But you apparently are relying on your intellect to be your 'salvation'. Hopefully, at some point, all of the 'intellect' will reach your Heart. When various other posters have tried to share another view of Scripture -- you tend to go into the world of logical fallousies.

Your concept of the real meaning of the account of the rich man and Lazarus -- you completely miss the main , more important aspect. It seems that the concept of a person being conscious in eternity and feeling all those negatives -- really bothers you. You'd Rather find some other way to interpret it. Your interpretation of really baffles me. I don't want any further explanation. But rather that You would seriously consider that the rich man was indeed very conscious of his environment and God's Word wants Everyone to realize that.

And Scripture being totally logical -- well -- it Isn't. There is nothing Logical about the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. Biology tells us that both egg and ***** have to be put together to create a baby. Yet, Scripture tells us that the Holy Spirit came upon Mary and she conceived. And the Christ child / a Jewish baby / was the product. And He, Jesus Christ was born to show us to the Father. God the Father -- gave us salvation possible only through His Son. The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ on the 3rd day is not logical. But it happened.

The talking donkey and the burning bush of the Old Testament were not Logical , but they happened. Daniel in the lion's den // the three men being thrown into the fiery furnace was not logical or actually possible without God's intervention. They came out of that fiery furnace totally okay. No burns, nothing. And That had a tremendous effect on the king. He became a believer. He highly encouraged everyone else to believe as well.

That which God's Word Is showing us is that there is something greater than we are that is in control. That "In the beginning God...... " And that Entity / God / has provided a way / the Only way / for mankind to go from being a hopeless sinful person to a New creation in Christ Jesus.

The alternative is Not becoming a new creation in Christ -- but continuing in the darkness of non-spiritual life. And That 'life' continues on through-out eternity. It never really ceases to exist. That would be too easy. Without a heart's acceptance, a person is doomed to endure the same eternal punishment that satan will be enduring. As well as the beast and false prophet. Satan knows what is waiting for him and he wants as much company as he can trick into joining him. And once a person Is there and discovers how he / she has been deceived -- there will be No turning back.

'we' have Now to come to God through Jesus Christ. And God Wants to have real fellowship with Him. Just like was the case with Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden and will be again in heaven.

Hi Sue,

Please don't take offense to anything here as I mean no wrong. You're reply has no argument. It's simply how you feel about things. Firstly, yes, it's an open forum and anyone can reply which is why I said his unsolicited reply was fine. However, what's not fine is to attack a person who says they don't see your argument. A simple explanation would have been fine. You're statement that I'm relying on intelligence for salvation has no basis. It's an opinion. Yes, I rely on logic, proper reasoning. There is only proper and improper reasoning. If one isn't reasoning properly what does that mean? I would encourage you to investigate logic as the examples you gave of things that aren't logical are not examples of logic. If a person rejects logic they have absolutely no basis to know that anything they believe is true. You spoke of others trying to share another view of Scripture. I used to hold that view. I know it very well. I also know where the errors are. I've seen the errors, they must be acknowledged if one is every going to rid themselves of them. You mentioned the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man. The view that this is about the afterlife and that they are actually alive contradicts passage, after passage, after passage, of Scripture. Back to proper reasoning, Logic, it dictates that two opposing things can't both be true at the same time. God's created order dictates that. Those who hold this view are required to either accept the contradiction or attempt to somehow dismiss or reword those passages of Scripture. The usual way is to say that those passages are talking about the body. However, this "defense" is based on a false premise. So, they're just digging themselves deeper and deeper in a hole. This is what happens when people reject proper reasoning. When we reject proper reasoning we get dictionaries that say a word has opposing meanings, that it means finite and infinite.

What's funny is that while you condemn my use of logic you yourself use logic in your arguments. It's just a matter of whether or not we use it properly. In the end, logic is the "ONLY" way a person can know that what they believe is correct. If one rejects it, there is no basis for their beliefs other than, it's what the believe.

 

[Dave M]

cant help but think how does God keep his word of torment,, if we no longer exist??

 

[Sue D.]

@Butch5 -- it appears that as long as a person agrees with your proper use Of logic -- all is fine. But when they Don't , then 'they' are in the wrong and you are in the Right.

Those 'errors' are only errors in your mind because you don't want to accept anything other Than what you agree with.

Lazarus and the rich man -- God is letting the rest of mankind that there Is Indeed life after death. Back in the day -- the Sadducees were 'sad' because their belief system said that life ceases upon death. They were sad because they thought that upon the death of people they knew , that they'd never see them ever again.

When a close friend of Jesus -- Lazarus died. He waited those several days to make sure the people knew For Sure that Lazarus was very dead. He'd been buried -- Jesus wept. But He Also called out his name and commanded him to rise. And he Did. That's found in Luke 11. His sister, Mary, warned Jesus that he'd been dead and in the tomb for 4 days and that he 'stinketh'. But, yet, Jesus Christ wanted them to see that there was indeed resurrection.

And in Matthew 9 -- a ruler came to worship and said that his daughter had just died. He asked Jesus to go to her and lay his hand on her that she might live. So in vs. 24 and 25 -- the daughter is brought back to life.

Going back to Lazarus and the rich man -- you're saying that many Scripture contradict that so that's You says it can't happen and so your version Must be right. I would suggest that you aren't accepting Scripture as God's infallable Word. God gave us that account because it's the truth.

Obviously our human concept of 'death' is different from God's. God has all knowledge, we certainly don't.

Brad Huber disagrees with you , so, therefore , he's being argumentative and , therefore, he's in the wrong. Which suggests that he's wrong and you're right.

You're responses suggest that you're putting your intellectualism above God's Word. You're sort of using God's Word Against itself.

You'd Rather believe in Annihiationism than accept that people will be in torment forever in the lake of fire and brimstone. That God could not possibly be that horrific towards people that He created. But, looking back at Genesis flood. God saw how horrible the people had become on a continual basis. Not just once in a while -- but Continually. The only people righteous were Noah and his family. God created, God can destroy. God's Word Also tells us that the lake of fire and brimstone is not meant for people. He gives us His one and only Way to stay Out. So -- do we accept God's Word as our final authority or try to find a way to wiggle out of it or around it.

 

[complete]

@Butch5 -- it appears that as long as a person agrees with your proper use Of logic -- all is fine. But when they Don't , then 'they' are in the wrong and you are in the Right.

Those 'errors' are only errors in your mind because you don't want to accept anything other Than what you agree with.

Lazarus and the rich man -- God is letting the rest of mankind that there Is Indeed life after death. Back in the day -- the Sadducees were 'sad' because their belief system said that life ceases upon death. They were sad because they thought that upon the death of people they knew , that they'd never see them ever again.

When a close friend of Jesus -- Lazarus died. He waited those several days to make sure the people knew For Sure that Lazarus was very dead. He'd been buried -- Jesus wept. But He Also called out his name and commanded him to rise. And he Did. That's found in Luke 11. His sister, Mary, warned Jesus that he'd been dead and in the tomb for 4 days and that he 'stinketh'. But, yet, Jesus Christ wanted them to see that there was indeed resurrection.

And in Matthew 9 -- a ruler came to worship and said that his daughter had just died. He asked Jesus to go to her and lay his hand on her that she might live. So in vs. 24 and 25 -- the daughter is brought back to life.

Going back to Lazarus and the rich man -- you're saying that many Scripture contradict that so that's You says it can't happen and so your version Must be right. I would suggest that you aren't accepting Scripture as God's infallable Word. God gave us that account because it's the truth.

Obviously our human concept of 'death' is different from God's. God has all knowledge, we certainly don't.

Brad Huber disagrees with you , so, therefore , he's being argumentative and , therefore, he's in the wrong. Which suggests that he's wrong and you're right.

You're responses suggest that you're putting your intellectualism above God's Word. You're sort of using God's Word Against itself.

You'd Rather believe in Annihiationism than accept that people will be in torment forever in the lake of fire and brimstone. That God could not possibly be that horrific towards people that He created. But, looking back at Genesis flood. God saw how horrible the people had become on a continual basis. Not just once in a while -- but Continually. The only people righteous were Noah and his family. God created, God can destroy. God's Word Also tells us that the lake of fire and brimstone is not meant for people. He gives us His one and only Way to stay Out. So -- do we accept God's Word as our final authority or try to find a way to wiggle out of it or around it.

Hello @Sue D,

I find your judgment of a fellow member like this regrettable.

In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[Sue D.]

@complete -- why is that. Please explain.

 

[Brad Huber]

Ah, in other words you have no argument

This quote by you means I wasnt reading your mind, I was just "logically" stating what you just said. Your logic seems flawed even in simple things.