I would like to post a thread concerning eternal damnation in a literal lake of fire. I would like to expose the inaccurate translations that lead to such a false doctrine. Then I would like to hear the comments or rebuttles. I would love to do a one on one debate with a believer of eternal damnation as I am a believer in the total redemption of all mankind in all history and I bleive I can offer absolute scriptural proof to back up everything I say.
Here I will start off with the translation of the Greek noun "aion and it adjective "aionios". Both of these Greek words were translated into Latin and English words of timelessness. I believe this is where the doctrine of eternal damnation stems from
Now, If it can be proved that these words were never meant to imply timelessness but rather a duration or succession of ages or the english equivelent "eon" or "eonios", than my detractors must concede that eternal damnation is a false theology based on translation errors.
Once this has been accompled I wish to move on to proving that scripture declares the salvation of all mankind in three distinct steps.
1: We are saved - Justified
2: We are being saved - Cleansed and sanctified
3: We will be saved - Glorified
These three stages of salvation are the stages which are spoken of in scripture that Christian doctrine has ignored and taken it upon themselves to compile all three as one single happening which is false.
So before we move to that I would like to give my proof.
Lets first look at the definitions of the words "aion" and "aionios' in Strongs exhaustive concordance. I will quote from L Ray Smith bible-truths.com in blue.
A dictionary or lexicon is not the most authoritative place to find the true definition of a word. Especially if the word in question makes or breaks a particular controversial doctrine, such as, is punishment of the wicked for a period of time that ends, or for eternity.
In many Bibles the Greek word: "aion" is translated as "forever," and "aionios" is translated, "everlasting," or "eternal."
Strong's Greek Dictionary defines "aion" as follows: "an age, perpetuity, the world, a Messianic period, course, eternal, forever, evermore, without end."
Strong's defines the adjective aionios as follows: "perpetual, eternal, forever, everlasting."
Are these definitions good scholarship or religious bias?
Imagine defining the word "white" like this: "white, WHITE LIGHT, bright, maximum lightness, brilliant, blanch, off-white, shaded, light gray, dark gray, between light and dark, dark gray, dark, COAL BLACK."
Does anyone see a problem with my definition of "white?" Does anyone see a problem with Strong's definition of "aion/aionios?"
The best way to determine a definition is by usage and I will also prove that the usage of these words as timelessness in alot of places is utterly foolish and not only foolish because it adds to the meaning, but, it also takes away true understanding of what the text is really saying.
Now, this should end the debate right here but of course I will wait for the square circle theological double talk to begin to explain this away.
I have much much more evidence than this. I feel that this is the root of the problem so we'll start here.
God Bless, Dave
Full Version: Is eternal damnation of Christianity true?
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Spirituality, Religion and Beliefs
I also believe that forever when used by the ancients was much like when we say in American English " Where have you been? I have been waiting here for you forever!"
It simply means a very long time, often linked with strong emotion such as frustration, fear, anger, or longing.
It simply means a very long time, often linked with strong emotion such as frustration, fear, anger, or longing.
QUOTE (Bella-Angelique @ Mar 15 2008, 07:34 AM) 
I also believe that forever when used by the ancients was much like when we say in American English " Where have you been? I have been waiting here for you forever!"
It simply means a very long time, often linked with strong emotion such as frustration, fear, anger, or longing.
It simply means a very long time, often linked with strong emotion such as frustration, fear, anger, or longing.
Actually These ancient languages were void of any ONE WORD to define as timelessness. When they spoke of timelessness they said such things as "before the ages" and "the consumation of the ages". For example, aion does not have a plural but when it is written in scripture to multiply it is written "aion aion". There was two written. It is erronios for our translators to change this word into "eternity" because if it were true than the text would be stating "eternities" in the plural and how can you have more than one eternity. There is nothing longer tham eternity because eternity is outside of time and is not limited to time.
Also the word "aionios" is the adjective of the noun "aion" and an adjective should never be given a defintition that is a noun. Our translators took a noun and then changed its adjective into a noun and then changed its definition into timelessness.
You see these two ancient languages are EXACT languages unlike our american english. English is the most perverted language anywhere on earth. Anything we say in english can be taken to mean so many different things but these two ancient languages were very precise in there meanings. This is why God used these languages for His message.
God Bless, Dave
Dave, why are you focussing on the greek word "aion" ? Surely the christian New Testament was not translated from Greek source documents, but from .. well.. various langauges pertaining to the middle east ? What is the Greek connection here ? The Greecian haylacon days had long since subsided by the time Jesus plonked his size-9 sandals on the shores of Galilee ?
Meow Purr.
Meow Purr.
QUOTE (ships-cat @ Mar 16 2008, 01:26 AM)
Dave, why are you focussing on the greek word "aion" ? Surely the christian New Testament was not translated from Greek source documents, but from .. well.. various langauges pertaining to the middle east ? What is the Greek connection here ? The Greecian haylacon days had long since subsided by the time Jesus plonked his size-9 sandals on the shores of Galilee ?
Meow Purr.
Meow Purr.
None the less, particularly if educated, among romans greek was the language used by scholars and writers. Possibly because the roman empire looked up to the greek model and saw anything classically greek as having significance and authority.
QUOTE (ships-cat @ Mar 15 2008, 10:56 AM)
Dave, why are you focussing on the greek word "aion" ? Surely the christian New Testament was not translated from Greek source documents, but from .. well.. various langauges pertaining to the middle east ? What is the Greek connection here ? The Greecian haylacon days had long since subsided by the time Jesus plonked his size-9 sandals on the shores of Galilee ?
Meow Purr.
Meow Purr.
the OT is a mix of Aramaic and Hebrew and the NT in Greek.
the problem is we don't know the intent behind a word translated. one word could have various meanings and some of those meanings lost to us.
if it were so cut and dry people wouldn't call it interpretation since it would be clear for all so no interpretation would be needed.
The NT was translated from Greek ? Well, it surely wouldn't have been WRITTEN in Greek originaly, would it ? It would have been written in the language of whoever first wrote it... Asyyrian perhaps ?
So it's been translated multiple times before we see it in English. Hmmmm......
Meow Purr.
So it's been translated multiple times before we see it in English. Hmmmm......
Meow Purr.
QUOTE (ships-cat @ Mar 16 2008, 04:09 AM)
The NT was translated from Greek ? Well, it surely wouldn't have been WRITTEN in Greek originaly, would it ? It would have been written in the language of whoever first wrote it... Asyyrian perhaps ?
So it's been translated multiple times before we see it in English. Hmmmm......
Meow Purr.
So it's been translated multiple times before we see it in English. Hmmmm......
Meow Purr.
the first written account - greek. but remember it's been tweaked ,added too and edited to death.
then there is the The Syriac Bible
The earliest Syriac books were biblical translations, and it has been debated whether one or more of the Four Gospels was originally composed in Syriac. The Pesh**ta or 'simple' version became the official translation used by Syriac Churches in the fifth century.
http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/sacredtexts/syriacbib.html
QUOTE (Lt_Ripley @ Mar 15 2008, 11:16 PM)
the OT is a mix of Aramaic and Hebrew and the NT in Greek.
the problem is we don't know the intent behind a word translated. one word could have various meanings and some of those meanings lost to us.
if it were so cut and dry people wouldn't call it interpretation since it would be clear for all so no interpretation would be needed.
the problem is we don't know the intent behind a word translated. one word could have various meanings and some of those meanings lost to us.
if it were so cut and dry people wouldn't call it interpretation since it would be clear for all so no interpretation would be needed.
We can know the intent behind any word translated and the method to do this is by seeking usage and etymology.
It is clear by usage and etymology that the definitions given in most of our english translations is wrong. These words carry no hint of eternality. They are words of limited duration.
As for interpretation that is where everyone has issues. Interpretations are usaully biased. I myself was biased about there being a place reserved for the lost to burn them for all eternity but I had to mature and honestly ask myself if this could be when I first came to this light of understanding that there is no such thing.
This doctrine is the strong delusion that God said He was going to send into the world. This strong delusion keeps those who believe it stuck in a lie and they are so bent on never letting it go no matter how much evidence you throw at them. As this discussion progresses you will notice that any believer of this sick doctrine must change even fundimental Christian understanding of many scriptures in order to defend it. I thank God that He made me realize that this was the case if I were to continue to defend it when I once believed it. It was that revelation that caused me to see the error of such a false portrayal of scripture and a Holy, Omniscient, Almighty, Creator who should know exactly what method of salvation would be needed in order to save the whole of His creation and not merely a fraction of it.
I would like to post some issues with the doctrine that popular orthodox christianity misuses and twists in order to justify such a monsterous portrayal of God and His word.
Does Orthodox Christianity teach that Jesus is the Savior of the world?.........Yes!
Do they teach that He will save the world?........No!
Do they believe the first part of 1Cor 15:22 "for as in Adam all die"?......Yes!
Do they believe the second part of that same verse "even so (even so, implying that the same all who die in Adam will be made alive in Christ) in Christ shall all be made alive."?.......No!
Do they believe that Gods will is that none parish?.....Yes!
Do they believe in the sovereignty of Gods will over mans that insures none parish? .....No!
I can go on all day with this but it is evident that the doctrine of eternal torment teaches those who believe it that all scripture cannot be accepted if you wish to hold to such a false doctrine.
God Bless, Dave
QUOTE (TRUTH101 @ Mar 15 2008, 08:09 AM)
I would like to post a thread concerning eternal damnation in a literal lake of fire. I would like to expose the inaccurate translations that lead to such a false doctrine. Then I would like to hear the comments or rebuttles. I would love to do a one on one debate with a believer of eternal damnation as I am a believer in the total redemption of all mankind in all history and I bleive I can offer absolute scriptural proof to back up everything I say.
Here I will start off with the translation of the Greek noun "aion and it adjective "aionios". Both of these Greek words were translated into Latin and English words of timelessness. I believe this is where the doctrine of eternal damnation stems from
Now, If it can be proved that these words were never meant to imply timelessness but rather a duration or succession of ages or the english equivelent "eon" or "eonios", than my detractors must concede that eternal damnation is a false theology based on translation errors.
Once this has been accompled I wish to move on to proving that scripture declares the salvation of all mankind in three distinct steps.
1: We are saved - Justified
2: We are being saved - Cleansed and sanctified
3: We will be saved - Glorified
These three stages of salvation are the stages which are spoken of in scripture that Christian doctrine has ignored and taken it upon themselves to compile all three as one single happening which is false.
So before we move to that I would like to give my proof.
Lets first look at the definitions of the words "aion" and "aionios' in Strongs exhaustive concordance. I will quote from L Ray Smith bible-truths.com in blue.
A dictionary or lexicon is not the most authoritative place to find the true definition of a word. Especially if the word in question makes or breaks a particular controversial doctrine, such as, is punishment of the wicked for a period of time that ends, or for eternity.
In many Bibles the Greek word: "aion" is translated as "forever," and "aionios" is translated, "everlasting," or "eternal."
Strong's Greek Dictionary defines "aion" as follows: "an age, perpetuity, the world, a Messianic period, course, eternal, forever, evermore, without end."
Strong's defines the adjective aionios as follows: "perpetual, eternal, forever, everlasting."
Are these definitions good scholarship or religious bias?
Imagine defining the word "white" like this: "white, WHITE LIGHT, bright, maximum lightness, brilliant, blanch, off-white, shaded, light gray, dark gray, between light and dark, dark gray, dark, COAL BLACK."
Does anyone see a problem with my definition of "white?" Does anyone see a problem with Strong's definition of "aion/aionios?"
The best way to determine a definition is by usage and I will also prove that the usage of these words as timelessness in alot of places is utterly foolish and not only foolish because it adds to the meaning, but, it also takes away true understanding of what the text is really saying.
Now, this should end the debate right here but of course I will wait for the square circle theological double talk to begin to explain this away.
I have much much more evidence than this. I feel that this is the root of the problem so we'll start here.
God Bless, Dave
Here I will start off with the translation of the Greek noun "aion and it adjective "aionios". Both of these Greek words were translated into Latin and English words of timelessness. I believe this is where the doctrine of eternal damnation stems from
Now, If it can be proved that these words were never meant to imply timelessness but rather a duration or succession of ages or the english equivelent "eon" or "eonios", than my detractors must concede that eternal damnation is a false theology based on translation errors.
Once this has been accompled I wish to move on to proving that scripture declares the salvation of all mankind in three distinct steps.
1: We are saved - Justified
2: We are being saved - Cleansed and sanctified
3: We will be saved - Glorified
These three stages of salvation are the stages which are spoken of in scripture that Christian doctrine has ignored and taken it upon themselves to compile all three as one single happening which is false.
So before we move to that I would like to give my proof.
Lets first look at the definitions of the words "aion" and "aionios' in Strongs exhaustive concordance. I will quote from L Ray Smith bible-truths.com in blue.
A dictionary or lexicon is not the most authoritative place to find the true definition of a word. Especially if the word in question makes or breaks a particular controversial doctrine, such as, is punishment of the wicked for a period of time that ends, or for eternity.
In many Bibles the Greek word: "aion" is translated as "forever," and "aionios" is translated, "everlasting," or "eternal."
Strong's Greek Dictionary defines "aion" as follows: "an age, perpetuity, the world, a Messianic period, course, eternal, forever, evermore, without end."
Strong's defines the adjective aionios as follows: "perpetual, eternal, forever, everlasting."
Are these definitions good scholarship or religious bias?
Imagine defining the word "white" like this: "white, WHITE LIGHT, bright, maximum lightness, brilliant, blanch, off-white, shaded, light gray, dark gray, between light and dark, dark gray, dark, COAL BLACK."
Does anyone see a problem with my definition of "white?" Does anyone see a problem with Strong's definition of "aion/aionios?"
The best way to determine a definition is by usage and I will also prove that the usage of these words as timelessness in alot of places is utterly foolish and not only foolish because it adds to the meaning, but, it also takes away true understanding of what the text is really saying.
Now, this should end the debate right here but of course I will wait for the square circle theological double talk to begin to explain this away.
I have much much more evidence than this. I feel that this is the root of the problem so we'll start here.
God Bless, Dave
I believe the word is pointing toward 'timeless' in the effect of death, but not that of a life of torment. The Lake of Fire and aeonic torment is figurative speech for the absolute destruction and death. Its playing off the concept that men are dead until they are resurrected. Then the great judgment will determine whether they live forever or are dead forever. Somethings completely burn up in fire and you would never know it existed. This, I believe, is the concept of the Lake of Fire. As for salvation: The Bible is clear about salvation: John 3:16. For God SO LOVED the world that He gave His ONLY BEGOTTEN SON so that those WHO BELIEVED ON HIM WOULD NOT PERISH (Lake of Fire) BUT HAVE ETERNAL LIFE. This is clear and concise. The Salvation is rooted in Jesus Christ. After one makes that conscious response to Christ, then begins a new life in which the believer grows in Christ in His relationship with the Father. Mistakes will be made and rebellions may happen, but they are forever God's children who are washed clean by the blood of Jesus. Now there is such thing as apostasy, but it is likely that apostates never really cared for Christ in the first place, but remained stagnant in their walk with God.
QUOTE (TRUTH101 @ Mar 15 2008, 02:09 PM)
I would like to post a thread concerning eternal damnation in a literal lake of fire. I would like to expose the inaccurate translations that lead to such a false doctrine. Then I would like to hear the comments or rebuttles. I would love to do a one on one debate with a believer of eternal damnation as I am a believer in the total redemption of all mankind in all history and I bleive I can offer absolute scriptural proof to back up everything I say.
Here I will start off with the translation of the Greek noun "aion and it adjective "aionios". Both of these Greek words were translated into Latin and English words of timelessness. I believe this is where the doctrine of eternal damnation stems from
Now, If it can be proved that these words were never meant to imply timelessness but rather a duration or succession of ages or the english equivelent "eon" or "eonios", than my detractors must concede that eternal damnation is a false theology based on translation errors.
Once this has been accompled I wish to move on to proving that scripture declares the salvation of all mankind in three distinct steps.
1: We are saved - Justified
2: We are being saved - Cleansed and sanctified
3: We will be saved - Glorified
These three stages of salvation are the stages which are spoken of in scripture that Christian doctrine has ignored and taken it upon themselves to compile all three as one single happening which is false.
So before we move to that I would like to give my proof.
Lets first look at the definitions of the words "aion" and "aionios' in Strongs exhaustive concordance. I will quote from L Ray Smith bible-truths.com in blue.
A dictionary or lexicon is not the most authoritative place to find the true definition of a word. Especially if the word in question makes or breaks a particular controversial doctrine, such as, is punishment of the wicked for a period of time that ends, or for eternity.
In many Bibles the Greek word: "aion" is translated as "forever," and "aionios" is translated, "everlasting," or "eternal."
Strong's Greek Dictionary defines "aion" as follows: "an age, perpetuity, the world, a Messianic period, course, eternal, forever, evermore, without end."
Strong's defines the adjective aionios as follows: "perpetual, eternal, forever, everlasting."
Are these definitions good scholarship or religious bias?
Imagine defining the word "white" like this: "white, WHITE LIGHT, bright, maximum lightness, brilliant, blanch, off-white, shaded, light gray, dark gray, between light and dark, dark gray, dark, COAL BLACK."
Does anyone see a problem with my definition of "white?" Does anyone see a problem with Strong's definition of "aion/aionios?"
The best way to determine a definition is by usage and I will also prove that the usage of these words as timelessness in alot of places is utterly foolish and not only foolish because it adds to the meaning, but, it also takes away true understanding of what the text is really saying.
Now, this should end the debate right here but of course I will wait for the square circle theological double talk to begin to explain this away.
I have much much more evidence than this. I feel that this is the root of the problem so we'll start here.
God Bless, Dave
Here I will start off with the translation of the Greek noun "aion and it adjective "aionios". Both of these Greek words were translated into Latin and English words of timelessness. I believe this is where the doctrine of eternal damnation stems from
Now, If it can be proved that these words were never meant to imply timelessness but rather a duration or succession of ages or the english equivelent "eon" or "eonios", than my detractors must concede that eternal damnation is a false theology based on translation errors.
Once this has been accompled I wish to move on to proving that scripture declares the salvation of all mankind in three distinct steps.
1: We are saved - Justified
2: We are being saved - Cleansed and sanctified
3: We will be saved - Glorified
These three stages of salvation are the stages which are spoken of in scripture that Christian doctrine has ignored and taken it upon themselves to compile all three as one single happening which is false.
So before we move to that I would like to give my proof.
Lets first look at the definitions of the words "aion" and "aionios' in Strongs exhaustive concordance. I will quote from L Ray Smith bible-truths.com in blue.
A dictionary or lexicon is not the most authoritative place to find the true definition of a word. Especially if the word in question makes or breaks a particular controversial doctrine, such as, is punishment of the wicked for a period of time that ends, or for eternity.
In many Bibles the Greek word: "aion" is translated as "forever," and "aionios" is translated, "everlasting," or "eternal."
Strong's Greek Dictionary defines "aion" as follows: "an age, perpetuity, the world, a Messianic period, course, eternal, forever, evermore, without end."
Strong's defines the adjective aionios as follows: "perpetual, eternal, forever, everlasting."
Are these definitions good scholarship or religious bias?
Imagine defining the word "white" like this: "white, WHITE LIGHT, bright, maximum lightness, brilliant, blanch, off-white, shaded, light gray, dark gray, between light and dark, dark gray, dark, COAL BLACK."
Does anyone see a problem with my definition of "white?" Does anyone see a problem with Strong's definition of "aion/aionios?"
The best way to determine a definition is by usage and I will also prove that the usage of these words as timelessness in alot of places is utterly foolish and not only foolish because it adds to the meaning, but, it also takes away true understanding of what the text is really saying.
Now, this should end the debate right here but of course I will wait for the square circle theological double talk to begin to explain this away.
I have much much more evidence than this. I feel that this is the root of the problem so we'll start here.
God Bless, Dave
nice. lets be honest, what type of god would physically burn us forever? I think of "lake of fire" more as an allegory. expressing the sting of self-indulgent "hell".
Hi Skim Milky,
Actually its kinda crazy but even the word hell is not what the world believes it is whether Christian or Athiest or everything in between. The world hell is not a place of torment and it is also not some geological location whether spiritual or literal.
The Word hell is nothing more than a Latin definition of Heb; Sheol and the Grk; Hades originally meaning "the unseen, impercievable", which was latins equivelent for "grave". This unseen or impercievable place was in death. Plain and simple. When a person dies they go to a grave (hell). The Hebrew word sheol and the Greek word Hades are nothing more than "grave".
Now, after many years of teaching the erronious doctrine of eternal damnation even the dictionaries changed the meaning of the word hell. Up until 400 years ago it was simply defined as "the unseen or impercievable" then it was modified into a common belief with the influence of Orthodox leaders and defined as "the abode of the damned where the devil and his angels preside over the lost souls blaah, blaah, blaah, etc, etc. You can check any dictionary now to see the change.
Bottom line the word hell and its definition at one time was an acceptable translation from the Latin but was perverted verbally for hundreds of years until finally being officially changed in dictionaries. I cannot remember the dictionary last using the old definitions but if anyone needs it I can do a search for it again. I had the info at one time but its not a big deal because any detailed internet search should bring it up quite easily. It was roughly changed four hundred years ago. A fellow brother of mine has the actually dictionary that contained the old definitions thats why I know this to be fact.
With this being said not all bibles are this erroniously translated. Even with these errors we can still seek out the scriptures but it is not as simple as merely reading and accepting all words read. Many false translations still exist that need to be understood before accepting anything in stone.
So yes, the lake of fire is symbolic but it has nothing to do with "sheol", "hades" (hell). Sheol and Hades is the grave and the elect are resurrected first from the grave and the lost are raised in the second resurrection and go THROUGH the lake of fire which is a time of correction. Infact when all scripture is rightly devided and we accept the symbolic language we understand that the lake of fire is nothing more than Christ and His elect judgeing the rest of the world. This judgment teaches righteousness and ultimately completes the work of salvation in these lost. Fire is always for the purpose of purification in scripture. It is never an eternal suffering. Notice in the book of Revelation we also have a SEA of glass? This sea of glass is the lost that are being purified by the elect who are standing on this sea of glass. Gods judgements are part of th work of salvation not the alternative to it.
Symbolism is the key to understanding the whole of scripture. Understand this and you cannot be in error or be decieved.
God bless, Dave
QUOTE
nice. lets be honest, what type of god would physically burn us forever? I think of "lake of fire" more as an allegory. expressing the sting of self-indulgent "hell".
Actually its kinda crazy but even the word hell is not what the world believes it is whether Christian or Athiest or everything in between. The world hell is not a place of torment and it is also not some geological location whether spiritual or literal.
The Word hell is nothing more than a Latin definition of Heb; Sheol and the Grk; Hades originally meaning "the unseen, impercievable", which was latins equivelent for "grave". This unseen or impercievable place was in death. Plain and simple. When a person dies they go to a grave (hell). The Hebrew word sheol and the Greek word Hades are nothing more than "grave".
Now, after many years of teaching the erronious doctrine of eternal damnation even the dictionaries changed the meaning of the word hell. Up until 400 years ago it was simply defined as "the unseen or impercievable" then it was modified into a common belief with the influence of Orthodox leaders and defined as "the abode of the damned where the devil and his angels preside over the lost souls blaah, blaah, blaah, etc, etc. You can check any dictionary now to see the change.
Bottom line the word hell and its definition at one time was an acceptable translation from the Latin but was perverted verbally for hundreds of years until finally being officially changed in dictionaries. I cannot remember the dictionary last using the old definitions but if anyone needs it I can do a search for it again. I had the info at one time but its not a big deal because any detailed internet search should bring it up quite easily. It was roughly changed four hundred years ago. A fellow brother of mine has the actually dictionary that contained the old definitions thats why I know this to be fact.
With this being said not all bibles are this erroniously translated. Even with these errors we can still seek out the scriptures but it is not as simple as merely reading and accepting all words read. Many false translations still exist that need to be understood before accepting anything in stone.
So yes, the lake of fire is symbolic but it has nothing to do with "sheol", "hades" (hell). Sheol and Hades is the grave and the elect are resurrected first from the grave and the lost are raised in the second resurrection and go THROUGH the lake of fire which is a time of correction. Infact when all scripture is rightly devided and we accept the symbolic language we understand that the lake of fire is nothing more than Christ and His elect judgeing the rest of the world. This judgment teaches righteousness and ultimately completes the work of salvation in these lost. Fire is always for the purpose of purification in scripture. It is never an eternal suffering. Notice in the book of Revelation we also have a SEA of glass? This sea of glass is the lost that are being purified by the elect who are standing on this sea of glass. Gods judgements are part of th work of salvation not the alternative to it.
Symbolism is the key to understanding the whole of scripture. Understand this and you cannot be in error or be decieved.
God bless, Dave
Hi bluefinger,
I see absolutely no evidence for this. Infact I see a fast amount of scriptural evidence to the contrary. Whether we are seeing eternal torment or annihilation we are left with many, many, problems with ignoring much of scripture. Paul was one disciple that focused a great deal on the work of salvation and I am hard pressed to see any words of limitation regarding Christ being the Savior of the world and nothing short of that. 1Cor 15:22 is very clear about the salvation of all mankind. listen to the words, "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
Both these words "all" used here ar ethe Greek word "pas" which are expressing all. You must concede that nothing short of ALL men are under the curse of death through Adam right? Now if that is true we have a direct understanding here that Paul left no room for error. After he states that in Adam ALL die, the very next words show the power of the second "all" in this verse. It states "EVEN SO", some translations say "likewise". These words signify that how ever many are affected by the first statement will be directly affected by the second. So, as all mankind dies in Adam, all mankind will be make alive in Christ. This is accomplished in the elect now in this life and the non elect lost through the lake of fire. Lets see,
1Co 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
There is only ONE foundation and that foundation is Christ. No man can build another foundation. We can build on this foundation but we cannot build another foundation. This goes for the elect or lost. We see this because it warns everyone to take heed what they build on it.
1Co 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Self explanitory.
1Co 3:12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
You see we can build gold, silver, precious stones which are good to lay on the foundation but we all build also wood, hay and stubble which is what is what is burned off.
1Co 3:13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
You see it is the works that are burned. The person is judged according to what he has built on this foundation but it is not the person who is destroyed or has parished but the wood, hay and stubble that is consummed.
1Co 3:14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
1Co 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
You cannot literally burn anything to the point of nothingness. There is always a remnant of residue. Therefore you can always determine it existed. As I quoted above, What is thrown in the fire is not completely consummed. Only the impurities are consummed. This is scripture, this is not my opinion or biased theology. We are given numerous alegories dealing with gold being tried in the fire, not once do we hear of the entire chunk of gold being consummed.
You cannot tell me that there is one person in existance or ever was that never had one good work to show in there lives. Even Hitler must have loved his mother or someone and done something good for them. That is a good work and as you see in the scriptures above all work whether bad or good is done in our temple (body) which is the temple of God and it is in Christ because He is the only foundation and no other faoundation can be layed than that which is already layed.
The lake of fire is not a permanent structure (symbolically). Is serves a purpose. Christ and His elect are the lake of fire. I hear Orthodox believers talking about judgeing angels but they cannot point out in scripture where exactly that happens. This is where is happens, in the lake. Christ and His elect symbolically become this lake of fire (fire being judgement). The lost world and the fallen angels are thrown into this judgment. Now the lake of fire and its purpose are not eternal because Christ and His elect complete that task and then we have the SEA od glass. This is the world and all those who came our of the lake purified and washed so clean they are like glass. So our lake now has a sea as well.
Consider the scripture above I gave. You will notice that in revelation the elect have recieved their reward upon there ressurection because God has already cleansed them through there life by His judgments. The trials and tribulations they endured were their judgements while in the body. This is why we are told in scripture that judgment must first begin with the house of God. That judgment brought righteoudness to the elect and their reward is ruling and reigning with Christ for a thousand years. The lost are not raised until the end of the thousand years and they then recieve their judgment but not by trials and tribulations but wrath and indignation. The result is the same (salvation, sanctification) but the method is alot more concentrated. This is done by pressure cooking so to speak. They suffer loss whereas the elect are rewarded but "they themselves shall be save, as through fire".
Its really quite simple if the false doctrine of eternal torment or anihilation is extinguished. And yes scripture is very clear on salvation but what is not clear is the Orthodox explaination of it.
John 3:16. For God SO LOVED the world that He gave His ONLY BEGOTTEN SON so that those WHO BELIEVED ON HIM WOULD NOT PERISH (Lake of Fire) BUT HAVE ETERNAL LIFE. This is clear and concise. The Salvation is rooted in Jesus Christ. After one makes that conscious response to Christ, then begins a new life in which the believer grows in Christ in His relationship with the Father. Mistakes will be made and rebellions may happen, but they are forever God's children who are washed clean by the blood of Jesus. Now there is such thing as apostasy, but it is likely that apostates never really cared for Christ in the first place, but remained stagnant in their walk with God.
No doubt, but this in no way holds any evidence for either dieing eternally or being tormented for eternity. Either one holds God as a failure and incompetant to save His entire creation. It raises the will of man higher than the sovereignty of God. Gods will is that none parish. God sent Jesus into the world to save the world. Now if mans will is above Gods will in that it can thwrat the will and plan and purpose of God than God is not sovereign because He will always be at the mercy of mans will. Thats very unscriptural. 1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
Salvation is very clear. Jesus came to undo the works of the devil, well, those works had there root in the garden where deat came upon ALL men and "EVEN SO" ALL men will be made alive in Christ. 1Co 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
1Ti 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
So Jesus came to undo the works of the devil by saving the world, who gave Himself a ransom for all, every man in his own order, to be testified in due time.
I can quote scripture all day that make grand declaration as this but this honestly should be enough to see that there is a problem with the doctrine of eternal torment or anihilation.
God Bless, Dave
QUOTE
I believe the word is pointing toward 'timeless' in the effect of death, but not that of a life of torment. The Lake of Fire and aeonic torment is figurative speech for the absolute destruction and death. Its playing off the concept that men are dead until they are resurrected.
I see absolutely no evidence for this. Infact I see a fast amount of scriptural evidence to the contrary. Whether we are seeing eternal torment or annihilation we are left with many, many, problems with ignoring much of scripture. Paul was one disciple that focused a great deal on the work of salvation and I am hard pressed to see any words of limitation regarding Christ being the Savior of the world and nothing short of that. 1Cor 15:22 is very clear about the salvation of all mankind. listen to the words, "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
Both these words "all" used here ar ethe Greek word "pas" which are expressing all. You must concede that nothing short of ALL men are under the curse of death through Adam right? Now if that is true we have a direct understanding here that Paul left no room for error. After he states that in Adam ALL die, the very next words show the power of the second "all" in this verse. It states "EVEN SO", some translations say "likewise". These words signify that how ever many are affected by the first statement will be directly affected by the second. So, as all mankind dies in Adam, all mankind will be make alive in Christ. This is accomplished in the elect now in this life and the non elect lost through the lake of fire. Lets see,
1Co 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
There is only ONE foundation and that foundation is Christ. No man can build another foundation. We can build on this foundation but we cannot build another foundation. This goes for the elect or lost. We see this because it warns everyone to take heed what they build on it.
1Co 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Self explanitory.
1Co 3:12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
You see we can build gold, silver, precious stones which are good to lay on the foundation but we all build also wood, hay and stubble which is what is what is burned off.
1Co 3:13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
You see it is the works that are burned. The person is judged according to what he has built on this foundation but it is not the person who is destroyed or has parished but the wood, hay and stubble that is consummed.
1Co 3:14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
1Co 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
QUOTE
Then the great judgment will determine whether they live forever or are dead forever. Somethings completely burn up in fire and you would never know it existed.
You cannot literally burn anything to the point of nothingness. There is always a remnant of residue. Therefore you can always determine it existed. As I quoted above, What is thrown in the fire is not completely consummed. Only the impurities are consummed. This is scripture, this is not my opinion or biased theology. We are given numerous alegories dealing with gold being tried in the fire, not once do we hear of the entire chunk of gold being consummed.
You cannot tell me that there is one person in existance or ever was that never had one good work to show in there lives. Even Hitler must have loved his mother or someone and done something good for them. That is a good work and as you see in the scriptures above all work whether bad or good is done in our temple (body) which is the temple of God and it is in Christ because He is the only foundation and no other faoundation can be layed than that which is already layed.
QUOTE
This, I believe, is the concept of the Lake of Fire. As for salvation: The Bible is clear about salvation:
The lake of fire is not a permanent structure (symbolically). Is serves a purpose. Christ and His elect are the lake of fire. I hear Orthodox believers talking about judgeing angels but they cannot point out in scripture where exactly that happens. This is where is happens, in the lake. Christ and His elect symbolically become this lake of fire (fire being judgement). The lost world and the fallen angels are thrown into this judgment. Now the lake of fire and its purpose are not eternal because Christ and His elect complete that task and then we have the SEA od glass. This is the world and all those who came our of the lake purified and washed so clean they are like glass. So our lake now has a sea as well.
Consider the scripture above I gave. You will notice that in revelation the elect have recieved their reward upon there ressurection because God has already cleansed them through there life by His judgments. The trials and tribulations they endured were their judgements while in the body. This is why we are told in scripture that judgment must first begin with the house of God. That judgment brought righteoudness to the elect and their reward is ruling and reigning with Christ for a thousand years. The lost are not raised until the end of the thousand years and they then recieve their judgment but not by trials and tribulations but wrath and indignation. The result is the same (salvation, sanctification) but the method is alot more concentrated. This is done by pressure cooking so to speak. They suffer loss whereas the elect are rewarded but "they themselves shall be save, as through fire".
Its really quite simple if the false doctrine of eternal torment or anihilation is extinguished. And yes scripture is very clear on salvation but what is not clear is the Orthodox explaination of it.
John 3:16. For God SO LOVED the world that He gave His ONLY BEGOTTEN SON so that those WHO BELIEVED ON HIM WOULD NOT PERISH (Lake of Fire) BUT HAVE ETERNAL LIFE. This is clear and concise. The Salvation is rooted in Jesus Christ. After one makes that conscious response to Christ, then begins a new life in which the believer grows in Christ in His relationship with the Father. Mistakes will be made and rebellions may happen, but they are forever God's children who are washed clean by the blood of Jesus. Now there is such thing as apostasy, but it is likely that apostates never really cared for Christ in the first place, but remained stagnant in their walk with God.
No doubt, but this in no way holds any evidence for either dieing eternally or being tormented for eternity. Either one holds God as a failure and incompetant to save His entire creation. It raises the will of man higher than the sovereignty of God. Gods will is that none parish. God sent Jesus into the world to save the world. Now if mans will is above Gods will in that it can thwrat the will and plan and purpose of God than God is not sovereign because He will always be at the mercy of mans will. Thats very unscriptural. 1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
Salvation is very clear. Jesus came to undo the works of the devil, well, those works had there root in the garden where deat came upon ALL men and "EVEN SO" ALL men will be made alive in Christ. 1Co 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
1Ti 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
So Jesus came to undo the works of the devil by saving the world, who gave Himself a ransom for all, every man in his own order, to be testified in due time.
I can quote scripture all day that make grand declaration as this but this honestly should be enough to see that there is a problem with the doctrine of eternal torment or anihilation.
God Bless, Dave
QUOTE (TRUTH101 @ Mar 15 2008, 02:09 PM)
I would like to post a thread concerning eternal damnation in a literal lake of fire. I would like to expose the inaccurate translations that lead to such a false doctrine. Then I would like to hear the comments or rebuttles. I would love to do a one on one debate with a believer of eternal damnation as I am a believer in the total redemption of all mankind in all history and I bleive I can offer absolute scriptural proof to back up everything I say.
Here I will start off with the translation of the Greek noun "aion and it adjective "aionios". Both of these Greek words were translated into Latin and English words of timelessness. I believe this is where the doctrine of eternal damnation stems from
Now, If it can be proved that these words were never meant to imply timelessness but rather a duration or succession of ages or the english equivelent "eon" or "eonios", than my detractors must concede that eternal damnation is a false theology based on translation errors.
Once this has been accompled I wish to move on to proving that scripture declares the salvation of all mankind in three distinct steps.
1: We are saved - Justified
2: We are being saved - Cleansed and sanctified
3: We will be saved - Glorified
These three stages of salvation are the stages which are spoken of in scripture that Christian doctrine has ignored and taken it upon themselves to compile all three as one single happening which is false.
So before we move to that I would like to give my proof.
Lets first look at the definitions of the words "aion" and "aionios' in Strongs exhaustive concordance. I will quote from L Ray Smith bible-truths.com in blue.
A dictionary or lexicon is not the most authoritative place to find the true definition of a word. Especially if the word in question makes or breaks a particular controversial doctrine, such as, is punishment of the wicked for a period of time that ends, or for eternity.
In many Bibles the Greek word: "aion" is translated as "forever," and "aionios" is translated, "everlasting," or "eternal."
Strong's Greek Dictionary defines "aion" as follows: "an age, perpetuity, the world, a Messianic period, course, eternal, forever, evermore, without end."
Strong's defines the adjective aionios as follows: "perpetual, eternal, forever, everlasting."
Are these definitions good scholarship or religious bias?
Imagine defining the word "white" like this: "white, WHITE LIGHT, bright, maximum lightness, brilliant, blanch, off-white, shaded, light gray, dark gray, between light and dark, dark gray, dark, COAL BLACK."
Does anyone see a problem with my definition of "white?" Does anyone see a problem with Strong's definition of "aion/aionios?"
The best way to determine a definition is by usage and I will also prove that the usage of these words as timelessness in alot of places is utterly foolish and not only foolish because it adds to the meaning, but, it also takes away true understanding of what the text is really saying.
Now, this should end the debate right here but of course I will wait for the square circle theological double talk to begin to explain this away.
I have much much more evidence than this. I feel that this is the root of the problem so we'll start here.
God Bless, Dave
Here I will start off with the translation of the Greek noun "aion and it adjective "aionios". Both of these Greek words were translated into Latin and English words of timelessness. I believe this is where the doctrine of eternal damnation stems from
Now, If it can be proved that these words were never meant to imply timelessness but rather a duration or succession of ages or the english equivelent "eon" or "eonios", than my detractors must concede that eternal damnation is a false theology based on translation errors.
Once this has been accompled I wish to move on to proving that scripture declares the salvation of all mankind in three distinct steps.
1: We are saved - Justified
2: We are being saved - Cleansed and sanctified
3: We will be saved - Glorified
These three stages of salvation are the stages which are spoken of in scripture that Christian doctrine has ignored and taken it upon themselves to compile all three as one single happening which is false.
So before we move to that I would like to give my proof.
Lets first look at the definitions of the words "aion" and "aionios' in Strongs exhaustive concordance. I will quote from L Ray Smith bible-truths.com in blue.
A dictionary or lexicon is not the most authoritative place to find the true definition of a word. Especially if the word in question makes or breaks a particular controversial doctrine, such as, is punishment of the wicked for a period of time that ends, or for eternity.
In many Bibles the Greek word: "aion" is translated as "forever," and "aionios" is translated, "everlasting," or "eternal."
Strong's Greek Dictionary defines "aion" as follows: "an age, perpetuity, the world, a Messianic period, course, eternal, forever, evermore, without end."
Strong's defines the adjective aionios as follows: "perpetual, eternal, forever, everlasting."
Are these definitions good scholarship or religious bias?
Imagine defining the word "white" like this: "white, WHITE LIGHT, bright, maximum lightness, brilliant, blanch, off-white, shaded, light gray, dark gray, between light and dark, dark gray, dark, COAL BLACK."
Does anyone see a problem with my definition of "white?" Does anyone see a problem with Strong's definition of "aion/aionios?"
The best way to determine a definition is by usage and I will also prove that the usage of these words as timelessness in alot of places is utterly foolish and not only foolish because it adds to the meaning, but, it also takes away true understanding of what the text is really saying.
Now, this should end the debate right here but of course I will wait for the square circle theological double talk to begin to explain this away.
I have much much more evidence than this. I feel that this is the root of the problem so we'll start here.
God Bless, Dave
i agree, since the greek translation is the closest we have to the original, i agree with the translation too. when i read the greek version fo the bible, i came across this and other mistranslations since then, but i wont go in to them now. The bible refers to time in hell for eons, not eternally, as god is only eternal. Its the same in Islam, the time in hell or heaven will be for eons, not eternal, as we are creation and limited.
Hi Ozi,
Exactly. There are many mistranslations and improper punctuations which change the meaning of text drastically creating a whole different religion altogether.
Take for instance the words of Christ to the thief. I have heard many use this verse to prove that when one dies they are alive albeit in a different geographical location in either hell or paradise. Lets look at it for a moment.
Luk 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.
Notice the comma after the word "thee"? When you take into account all the rest of scripture we see that this was an error. The commoa should be after the word "today". Notice how it reads now.
And Jesus said unto him, "Verily I say unto thee Today, thou shalt be with me in paradise.
He was saying 'today I am telling you, you WILL be in paradise with me".
It makes no sense in light of the rest of scripture if the thief would be with Christ in paradise that day. For one we are told that the dead know not anything that they are dead and at rest in death. Also we are told of 2 ressurections, the first and the second and will both cover many people at one time each. 2 ressurections not trillions.
What is the point of having a first and second ressurection if all are alive anyways? What exactly is ressurected?
Its amazing what theology is adopted due to little errors such as this. Then we have huge errors of words being entered into the bible which have no business being there at all such as eternity, eternal, everlasting, and evermore, not to mention my favorite, forever AND ever, as if you can add another ever to forever. If forever is eternal how can you possibly add anything to it such as another ever?
The reason I seem to come after Christian doctrine the most is because I believe the scriptures but I see these errors in the bible and in CHristian theology and it is obviously error and the scriptures call on us to "expose those who contradict". This is in no way judgment of the person but of the doctrine. Sometimes it exposes those who deliberately teach such heresy and know better or at the very least ignore sound logic and reason for financial gain.
Anyways I appreciate your words and I am glad to see someone can see these erronious mistakes.
God Bless, Dave
QUOTE
i agree, since the greek translation is the closest we have to the original, i agree with the translation too. when i read the greek version fo the bible, i came across this and other mistranslations since then, but i wont go in to them now. The bible refers to time in hell for eons, not eternally, as god is only eternal. Its the same in Islam, the time in hell or heaven will be for eons, not eternal, as we are creation and limited.
Exactly. There are many mistranslations and improper punctuations which change the meaning of text drastically creating a whole different religion altogether.
Take for instance the words of Christ to the thief. I have heard many use this verse to prove that when one dies they are alive albeit in a different geographical location in either hell or paradise. Lets look at it for a moment.
Luk 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.
Notice the comma after the word "thee"? When you take into account all the rest of scripture we see that this was an error. The commoa should be after the word "today". Notice how it reads now.
And Jesus said unto him, "Verily I say unto thee Today, thou shalt be with me in paradise.
He was saying 'today I am telling you, you WILL be in paradise with me".
It makes no sense in light of the rest of scripture if the thief would be with Christ in paradise that day. For one we are told that the dead know not anything that they are dead and at rest in death. Also we are told of 2 ressurections, the first and the second and will both cover many people at one time each. 2 ressurections not trillions.
What is the point of having a first and second ressurection if all are alive anyways? What exactly is ressurected?
Its amazing what theology is adopted due to little errors such as this. Then we have huge errors of words being entered into the bible which have no business being there at all such as eternity, eternal, everlasting, and evermore, not to mention my favorite, forever AND ever, as if you can add another ever to forever. If forever is eternal how can you possibly add anything to it such as another ever?
The reason I seem to come after Christian doctrine the most is because I believe the scriptures but I see these errors in the bible and in CHristian theology and it is obviously error and the scriptures call on us to "expose those who contradict". This is in no way judgment of the person but of the doctrine. Sometimes it exposes those who deliberately teach such heresy and know better or at the very least ignore sound logic and reason for financial gain.
Anyways I appreciate your words and I am glad to see someone can see these erronious mistakes.
God Bless, Dave
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.