[Homer]

Wootloops, on 01 November 2009 - 01:04 PM, said:

If this is the case, then what of these verses which state explicitly or strongly imply that Hell exists and lasts forever:

Matthew 18:8-9
If thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.

Matthew 25:41, 46
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. ... And these shall go away into everlasting punishment.

Mark 9:43-48
... into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

John 5:28-29
The hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Revelation 20:10
And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Revelation 14:10-11
The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever.

Although Mr Walker accurately touched upon this subject, I just want to input a little detail.
You provided too many verses to respond to adequately, but I will review one that you provided and one that you didn’t provide.
First one you didn’t provide. Lets look at the very famous verse of John 3:16
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.(NASB)
I underlined 'perish' and 'eternal' for emphasis.
Perish is Strong’s#622 and is the Greek word apollumi.
Definition:
1) to destroy
1a) to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin
1b) render useless
1c) to kill
1d) to declare that one must be put to death
1e) metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell
1f) to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed
2) to destroy
2a) to lose
Most uses in the Greek NT use the word for ‘destroy’ or ‘kill’.
Eternal is Strong’s#166 and is the Greek word aionios.
Definition:
1) without beginning and end, that which always has been and
always will be
2) without beginning
3) without end, never to cease, everlasting.
In this verse, its clear eternal is only used for the promise of those that believe in Him.

Let’s look more closely at a verse you provided. Matthew 25:46 is the only place in the bible where ‘eternal’ is used for both the reward and the punishment in the same verse.
Matthew 25:46 "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."(NASB)
This time I underlined 'punishment' and 'life' for emphasis.
One could argue how could the reward be eternal life if the punishment isn’t eternal punishment, and this is a valid question.
If you notice, only the righteous in this verse have life(eternal life). The opposite of life is death.
Revelation 21:8 "But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."(NASB)
For those that don’t get the reward of eternal life will die a second death. They will be killed/destroyed/annihilated after a period of suffering in the lake of fire. They will cease to exist. This non-existence is eternal. If you’re suffering for eternity, you would still be alive for eternity. Eternal punishment vs eternal life.
Let’s look at it again
Matthew 25:46 "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."(NASB)
Punishment=second death(Rev 21:8)=kill/destroy/annihilate. This second death is eternal, not the torment/suffering.

Wootloops, on 01 November 2009 - 01:04 PM, said:

And with regards to the second death being destruction of the soul, then what of this verse:

Revelation 20:14-15
And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

In earlier verses the lake of fire is spoken of as a place of eternal torture, and so it is not the ceasing of existence, it is eternal torture. It seems to be speaking of Hell and the lake of fire as two different places, Hell just being the devil's prison, and the lake of fire being where he, and everyone who wasn't in the book of life, go to be burned forever.

Let us look one verse prior:

Revelation 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds.
(NASB)
If they are all judged according to their deeds, and we all have different deeds, than how can there be a cookie-cutter type punishment(eternal torment) for everyone not saved?

[litewave]

Bluefinger, on 06 November 2009 - 01:43 PM, said:

However, in order for justice to exist, there must be free will. You can't say something is wrong if the person who did wrong could not help it.

I conclude that both are true: We cannot control our circumstances nor can we help who we are, but we are ever so responsible for it.

Actually, you can say that something is wrong even though the person who did it could not help it. For example if someone injures or kills someone else unwittingly/by accident it's obvious he couldn't help it but it is wrong when someone gets injured or killed. And all our actions are such that we can't help it, only it may be less obvious.

Responsibility is a social concept that has a motivating/educating value because it discourages people from doing wrong things and motivates them to do right things, through the prospect or implementation of punishments and rewards (justice).

[litewave]

IamsSon, on 06 November 2009 - 02:39 PM, said:

He should have grown up to be an abusive parent and an alcoholic, most of his siblings did, but he decided that he was going to be a different type of person.

Why would he do it?

[IamsSon]

litewave, on 07 November 2009 - 03:12 AM, said:

Why would he do it?

Why would he do what?

[litewave]

IamsSon, on 07 November 2009 - 03:39 PM, said:

Why would he do what?

Why would he decide to be a different type of person?

[IamsSon]

litewave, on 07 November 2009 - 09:40 AM, said:

Why would he decide to be a different type of person?

Because even at the age of 12 he could tell this was not a good household and he decided he was going to be the type of father he wanted to have. He decided. Despite his environment, and despite his genes, he decided.

[litewave]

IamsSon, on 07 November 2009 - 04:54 PM, said:

Because even at the age of 12 he could tell this was not a good household and he decided he was going to be the type of father he wanted to have. He decided. Despite his environment, and despite his genes, he decided.

Good luck for him that he had the desire and discernment. Those were the reasons that compelled him to action. Others may not be so lucky.

[IamsSon]

litewave, on 07 November 2009 - 11:21 AM, said:

Good luck for him that he had the desire and discernment. Those were the reasons that compelled him to action. Others may not be so lucky.

The point is, although environment and genetics have varying levels of influence on us, we decide.

[litewave]

IamsSon, on 07 November 2009 - 07:49 PM, said:

The point is, although environment and genetics have varying levels of influence on us, we decide.

Don't you think that desires and abilities influence us too?

[IamsSon]

litewave, on 07 November 2009 - 04:07 PM, said:

Don't you think that desires and abilities influence us too?

I'm sure there are countless things which influence us. But that is all: influence. We are still the ones who decide.

[downwardspiralproductions]

no human action can be random, no natural action can be random either, there is always a cause for something, what is reffered to as random is actually just erratic, or unexpected, but all things have a cause

[ShaunZero]

This talk about justice is idiotic due to the first premise of no one being able to control their actions to begin with. It's silly. You can't judge me for punishing someone for doing something I consider wrong, because I couldn't do anything else, remember? I couldn't choose NOT to punish said person. So, we might as well live as if determinism does not exist. If we put criminals in jails and let them suffer, so what? It's not our faults, we couldn't do anything else. You could try to tell me that I simply choose to be ignorant and punish this person, but could I really? No, I couldn't. Well, that's assuming that I chose to punish said person.

This post has been edited by ShaunZero: 08 November 2009 - 03:09 AM

[litewave]

IamsSon, on 08 November 2009 - 03:35 AM, said:

I'm sure there are countless things which influence us. But that is all: influence. We are still the ones who decide.

And why would we decide? Our actions are fully explained by influences, and if not then to the extent they are not explained by influences they are unintentional.

[litewave]

downwardspiralproductions, on 08 November 2009 - 03:59 AM, said:

no human action can be random, no natural action can be random either, there is always a cause for something, what is reffered to as random is actually just erratic, or unexpected, but all things have a cause

Actually randomness (actions without cause) is an essential feature of our universe, at the deepest level of matter. Causality is a secondary phenomenon that appears after randomly generated things start to interact with each other.

[litewave]

ShaunZero, on 08 November 2009 - 04:08 AM, said:

This talk about justice is idiotic due to the first premise of no one being able to control their actions to begin with. It's silly. You can't judge me for punishing someone for doing something I consider wrong, because I couldn't do anything else, remember? I couldn't choose NOT to punish said person. So, we might as well live as if determinism does not exist. If we put criminals in jails and let them suffer, so what? It's not our faults, we couldn't do anything else. You could try to tell me that I simply choose to be ignorant and punish this person, but could I really? No, I couldn't. Well, that's assuming that I chose to punish said person.

You can punish the person in order to teach them that their action was wrong (harmful, undesirable). Thus a punishment can be an action of love. I know it's rather unusual to think like that because people usually associate punishment with free will or revenge.